Continuous US Routes that are not signed that way

[Mapmikey]

OTOH, US 33 and US 211 are fully signed and maintained by VDOT through Shenandoah NP.

Begs the question of whether the ROW along both routes is actually part of the park or isn't because it's owned by VDOT...

Given the existence of VA 48 as a ROW-only designation in the park my first guess would be that VDOT does own the ROW...now to see if any proof can be found

[PHLBOS]

US 1 goes into hiding for it's short concurrency with I-95 in Pawtucket, RI.  Granted it's one exit, but the BGS's on  I-95 don't mention cardinal directions at the splits nor are there any US 1 reassurance shields on I-95.

How are things in CT. I'm blanking now. The only concurrency that I regularly travel on is the Gold Star Bridge.

CTDOT has actually done a decent job in the Danbury area of marking the quadplex on I-84.  While the BGS's don't show it, there are reassurance markers for all 4 roads; I-84 and US 7 appear on one dual signpost, and US 6 and 202 appear on the other.    https://goo.gl/maps/j52QDCUPpDG2

CTDOT's general practice is not to include a US route on the BGS with an interstate route in a concurrency (both on pull-thrus and at entrances).  The only exceptions I see are in the Danbury area where US 7 gets preferential treatment by getting BGS status with I-84; and at the southern end of CT 9 where US 1 appears along with I-95 on all BGS's for the Baldwin Bridge area concurrency.   US-state concurrencies (such as US 5/CT 15) have each signed equally on BGS's and signposts, except that the new practice at the I-91 interchange in Hartford is to eliminate US 5 from overhead signage.  State-state concurrencies (such as CT 8/25) are treated as equals on all signage.   

One concurrency that doesn't seem to be signed at all along I-84 mainline (not even reassurance markers) is US 44 through Hartford, between Exits 52 and 53.

[Brandon]

US-41 along I-41 in Wisconsin - varies, but signed more for I-41.
https://goo.gl/maps/xUgtqxdkH3J2
https://goo.gl/maps/KQevHhqVDP82
https://goo.gl/maps/5TMTV8hdQTQ2
https://goo.gl/maps/8pzKuAGDxC92
https://goo.gl/maps/YWYKkBRRRXE2
https://goo.gl/maps/FhFvYZyWwd62

[kphoger]

Is US-6 still unsigned along I-70 in Colorado?

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Is US-6 still unsigned along I-70 in Colorado?

Correct, but Colorado has additionally decided US 6 does not exist anywhere it overlaps with I-70 in its logs and inventory. FHWA obviously puts it on I-70 still.

[txstateends]

* US 90 isn't signed from somewhere in the west Houston suburbs (Katy? Sealy? can't remember...) to the east loop portion of I-610 at the I-10 interchange.
* US 287 isn't signed on posts (but on many/most BGSes on intersecting freeways, it is) between where it meets I-35W in downtown Fort Worth north to its split from I-35W north of the north loop interchange with I-820.
* US 77 made a reappearance in recent months on new posts along parts of I-35E north of I-635 (Dallas) in the wake of work done on the interstate between I-635 and Denton.

It will be interesting to see once the new work on I-35E (and US 67) south of downtown Dallas is done, whether there will be any US 67 and/or US 77 "reappearances" in that area, or not.

[jp the roadgeek]

US 1 goes into hiding for it's short concurrency with I-95 in Pawtucket, RI.  Granted it's one exit, but the BGS's on  I-95 don't mention cardinal directions at the splits nor are there any US 1 reassurance shields on I-95.

How are things in CT. I'm blanking now. The only concurrency that I regularly travel on is the Gold Star Bridge.

CTDOT has actually done a decent job in the Danbury area of marking the quadplex on I-84.  While the BGS's don't show it, there are reassurance markers for all 4 roads; I-84 and US 7 appear on one dual signpost, and US 6 and 202 appear on the other.    https://goo.gl/maps/j52QDCUPpDG2

CTDOT's general practice is not to include a US route on the BGS with an interstate route in a concurrency (both on pull-thrus and at entrances).  The only exceptions I see are in the Danbury area where US 7 gets preferential treatment by getting BGS status with I-84; and at the southern end of CT 9 where US 1 appears along with I-95 on all BGS's for the Baldwin Bridge area concurrency.   US-state concurrencies (such as US 5/CT 15) have each signed equally on BGS's and signposts, except that the new practice at the I-91 interchange in Hartford is to eliminate US 5 from overhead signage.  State-state concurrencies (such as CT 8/25) are treated as equals on all signage.   

One concurrency that doesn't seem to be signed at all along I-84 mainline (not even reassurance markers) is US 44 through Hartford, between Exits 52 and 53.

Considering it's only about a quarter mile long.  There are 84/6 reassurance shields EB by the 91 south overpass about a hundred feet or so before 44 comes in from Morgan St. 

[Bickendan]

US 30 along I-84 between exits 17 and 35. ODOT's using Hist US 30 as the implied routing for mainline 30.
Bonus points that Hist US 30's still closed east of Milton Falls from the fire last year.

[bzakharin]

Very common in large cities where US routes are routed via city streets. For example US 322, 422, and 20 through Cleveland (US 6 gets more attention). US 22 in Cincinnati as well. US 13 in Philadelphia and US 1 and US 9 in Manhattan are also seldom signed, at least away from major freeways.

[US 89]

Is US-6 still unsigned along I-70 in Colorado?

Correct, but Colorado has additionally decided US 6 does not exist anywhere it overlaps with I-70 in its logs and inventory. FHWA obviously puts it on I-70 still.

It's not just US 6.  Colorado considers US 40 to exist in four separate pieces as well. This goes for any US-interstate concurrency in Colorado, which also affects routes like US 24, 36, and 85, and is also the reason Colorado has decided US 87 does not exist. The exception is US 160, which is apparently well-signed on its concurrency with I-25.

[ftballfan]

Is US-6 still unsigned along I-70 in Colorado?

Correct, but Colorado has additionally decided US 6 does not exist anywhere it overlaps with I-70 in its logs and inventory. FHWA obviously puts it on I-70 still.

It's not just US 6.  Colorado considers US 40 to exist in four separate pieces as well. This goes for any US-interstate concurrency in Colorado, which also affects routes like US 24, 36, and 85, and is also the reason Colorado has decided US 87 does not exist. The exception is US 160, which is apparently well-signed on its concurrency with I-25.

So US-87 is basically a two-part US highway (one in MT and one in NM and TX)

[US 89]

So US-87 is basically a two-part US highway (one in MT and one in NM and TX)

Wyoming does a great job of signing US concurrencies, so US 87 is signed all the way down to the Colorado border anyway. But US 87 actually leaves the interstate at least once and maybe twice in Wyoming. 87 definitely leaves I-90 for the old road near Sheridan WY. It may also leave I-25 east of Casper; there is conflicting signage as to whether US 20/26 is concurrent with mainline 87 or business 87.