Unnecessary highways

[cbalducc]

Can anyone think of highways that were built although the traffic levels didn't justify it?  In other words, existing roads handled the traffic just fine and continue to do so.  God bless.

[City]

Interstate 99. Altoona isn't that big you know.

[mightyace]

So many roads, so little time! 

Here's a few.  I remember taking I-88 in NY from Binghamton to the Albany-Schenectady area in both '83 and '85.  Back then, at least, the road screamed, "BOONDOGGLE!  PORK!" as there was almost no one on it.  (That may have changed in the last 25 years.)

I would say that most of the interstate highway system was not needed when it was built.  That being said, it probably was a good thing it was built when it was because it's needed now and waiting until the need was there probably would have increased both the cost and time to completion.

[SP Cook]

Lets look at my state of WV.

North of Charleston, you have I-77, US 50-Corridor D/ and I-79 forming a triangle with Charleston, Parkersburg, and Clarksburg as the points.  If I-79 had never been built, the distance from Charleston to Clarksburg would have only increased by a few miles.  The existance of 79 makes 50 one of the least used roads in the east.  79 itself loses almost all of its through traffic to US 19-Corridor L, making its last 60 miles unneeded on a national basis.  Much better had 79 gone to Beckley.

I-68 is one of the most pointless roads in the east.  What does it do?  Morgantown nowhere to Hancock nowhere, with I-70 paralleling it only 25 miles to the north and continuing on into the Midwest. 

US 460 - Corridor Q just parallels I-77 less than three miles away.  Serves no purpose at all.

Wheeling has to be the smallest city to get an interstate bypass.  One or the other of 70 or 470 was totally unneeded.

[City]

Another one:

Interstate 95 north of Bangor, ME.

Look at how many cars are there and give me a good reason why it shouldn't be a freeway past there.

[froggie]

Interstate 99. Altoona isn't that big you know.

No, but neither was the old US 220 a quiet route.  Many deride the choice of route number for I-99, but a 4-lane corridor is well justified.

I-68 is one of the most pointless roads in the east.  What does it do?  Morgantown nowhere to Hancock nowhere, with I-70 paralleling it only 25 miles to the north and continuing on into the Midwest.

However, it's quite useful for avoiding Breezewood and the segment of I-70 you mention, which is far substandard for a freeway, let alone an Interstate.

US 460 - Corridor Q just parallels I-77 less than three miles away.  Serves no purpose at all.

However, US 460 through that segment is in the 16-20K range for average daily traffic, which is well above the threshold (typically 10K or so) for needing a 4-lane highway.

Interstate 95 north of Bangor, ME.

Look at how many cars are there and give me a good reason why it shouldn't be a freeway past there.

Several Interstate segments in the western states would be comparable.  But traffic isn't the primary reason for those.  Continuity and connectivity are the reasons.  Plus an updated rule Congress put in during the 1960s where Interstates had to be 4 lanes (prior to that, some Interstate segments were built with 2 lanes...one each way).

Going back to the original question, as a general rule, the 4-lane corridors in Mississippi are overbuilt compared to their traffic levels.  Many segments don't even hit the 5K ADT level, let alone 10K or higher.

[Revive 755]

I-68 is one of the most pointless roads in the east.  What does it do?  Morgantown nowhere to Hancock nowhere, with I-70 paralleling it only 25 miles to the north and continuing on into the Midwest. 

Maybe if I-70 didn't use an overpriced and overloaded toll road.

Better candidates:

* NE 71/Heartland Expressway between Kimball and Scottsbluff:  ADT tops out at 3070 before entering Scottsbluff, no way that route needs four laning currently.  No speed limit bonus for a four lane route in that part of Nebraska either.  An occasional passing lane would have been a more worthwhile investment.  But if in five years the ADT is up around 10,000, I'll consider it a well-planned investment.

* L55W in Lincoln, NE:  Mostly screws up the street grid.  Granted it does have a decent ADT.

[Hellfighter]

I-680 in Ohio. Youngstown is abandoned and so should I-680

[Ian]

How about I-180 in Illinois? Here is a list of my unnecessary highways:

-There are a lot of suffixes off of US 9 in NY that seem a little pointless and shouldn't be signed as routes. Those for me include NY 9R, NY 9P, and NH 9L.

-Outside of Albany in Thatcher State Park in the Helderberg Mts there is a very short NY state route, NY 157 and is the only state highway through the park. The rest are county highways. The route looks just like a county highway and IMHO, should be signed and maintained as such. And to make matters worse, there is a suffix loop off of it thats 1-2 miles, NY 157A.

I don't know of any other pointless routes at the moment, but Im sure more will come up.
Ian

[Revive 755]

I-680 in Ohio. Youngstown is abandoned and so should I-680

Although ODOT's ADT maps do show the volume dropping on I-680 since 2002, most of it still runs over 20,000 ADT, peaking at 53,450 just west of OH 193.

The OH 193/US 422/OH 7 loop in Youngstown might be unnecessary today though.

[Chris]

I do see many 4 lane divided US Highways and State Routes where traffic levels absolutely does not warrant 4 lanes, mostly on the great plains, like eastern New Mexico, western Texas, parts of Iowa, etc. 2,000 - 6,000 really doesn't need 4 lanes. It's nice, but somewhat unnecessary.

[njroadhorse]

Definitely unnecessary are:
- I-691: You have CT 72/CT 9 just a few miles north of there to avoid Hartford, and its eastern terminus just adds to the confusion where I-91 and CT 15 merge and intersect US 5.

-I-190 (Massachusetts): I really am not seeing the need for an Interstate-grade connection between I-290 and MA 2.  Maybe I'm missing something here?

[Mr_Northside]

Wheeling has to be the smallest city to get an interstate bypass.  One or the other of 70 or 470 was totally unneeded.

I'm sure that has a lot to do with the Wheeling Tunnel.  That creates restrictions for some trucks, and creates 1-thru lane sections.  Since I-470 is signed the recommended thru route for interstate traffic, they probably should've just switched the numbers... but people seem to figure it out anyway.

[Sykotyk]

How about I-180 in Illinois?

I-180 continues as IL-6 to I-474 around Peoria. Then, you can continue towards Macomb and down IL-336 towards Quincy and I-172, and then onto I-72. They're slowly upgrading it to expressway standards without stop lights/signs.

I do see many 4 lane divided US Highways and State Routes where traffic levels absolutely does not warrant 4 lanes, mostly on the great plains, like eastern New Mexico, western Texas, parts of Iowa, etc. 2,000 - 6,000 really doesn't need 4 lanes. It's nice, but somewhat unnecessary.

Sure, but with a lot of farm traffic, truck traffic, RVs, etc, it's nice to have an constant passing lane. Plus, Texas generally paves with really wide shoulders as well (generally 10'+), so they're rather large roadways to begin with. Some 2-lane roads should be 4-lanes with wide shoulders, or vice versa depending on traffic.

Athough, in Texas, the general traffic habbit is on a two-lane road with wide shoulders if you're going slow, you drive the shoulder to let people pass, acting as an auxilary lane.

Definitely unnecessary are:

-I-190 (Massachusetts): I really am not seeing the need for an Interstate-grade connection between I-290 and MA 2.  Maybe I'm missing something here?

I've driven it, it's a nice alternate from Worcester to the northeast compared to I-290 to I-495 (or worse, I-90 to I-495 with the traffic backups). Plus, MA-2 from I-190 to MA-2 is rather well traveled. Even if it is a substandard freeway (more like a parkway, small  non-existent median, horribly small I-70 in Pennsylvania-like on and off ramps, etc).

Sykotyk

[Alex]

Can't think of any really, and if we had more unnecessary highways then overly congested highways, that would be a good thing. Unfortunately many more are clogged then empty...

[Chris]

How about that rule in some states that county seats should be connected with 4 lane highways regardless of size?

[mightyace]

How about that rule in some states that county seats should be connected with 4 lane highways regardless of size?

We got that one here in Tennessee! 

[Revive 755]

I do see many 4 lane divided US Highways and State Routes where traffic levels absolutely does not warrant 4 lanes, mostly on the great plains, like eastern New Mexico, western Texas, parts of Iowa, etc. 2,000 - 6,000 really doesn't need 4 lanes. It's nice, but somewhat unnecessary.

Unfortunately Iowa is one of those states that requires an expressway to get a speed limit higher than 55.  I'd also expect to see some of the corridors increase significantly in volume when they are fully completed, such as the Burlington - Des Moines corridor (especially when US 34 is widened in Illinois), US 20 (both across Iowa and to Rockford in Illinois).  Congestion on I-80 is also likely to drive some through traffic to other corridors - I recall seeing somewhere the proposal to upgrade US 30 across the state as a relief route.

[Revive 755]

I-180 continues as IL-6 to I-474 around Peoria. Then, you can continue towards Macomb and down IL-336 towards Quincy and I-172, and then onto I-72. They're slowly upgrading it to expressway standards without stop lights/signs.

I'm not sure the spur part across the Illinois river was/is really needed.  Now if it was to be the start of a future Chicago bypass interstate via Streator, Dwight, Kankakee, and Fort Wayne . . .

[Michael]

...an updated rule Congress put in during the 1960s where Interstates had to be 4 lanes (prior to that, some Interstate segments were built with 2 lanes...one each way)....

I would like to have seen those two lane Interstates!  Anyone got pictures?

[mightyace]

...an updated rule Congress put in during the 1960s where Interstates had to be 4 lanes (prior to that, some Interstate segments were built with 2 lanes...one each way)....

I would like to have seen those two lane Interstates!  Anyone got pictures?

I wish I did!  I remember I-90 through the Badlands of South Dakota was two lanes back in 1972.

[agentsteel53]

Michael Summa photo from 1976 that shows brilliantly the two-lanedness of this road:

[thenetwork]

I-680 in Ohio. Youngstown is abandoned and so should I-680

But it does save you a little cash if you are using it to avoid  the bulk of I-76 on the Ohio Turnpike.  Coming from Pittsburgh, you now only have to shell out 50 Cents to get to Cleveland, if you don't mind using the I-279/79/76 (Tpk)/680/76(Freeway)/77 combo.

And if nobody lives/works in Youngstown anymore, why cant ODOT bump up the speed limit on 680 beyond 50 MPH???

[mightyace]

But it does save you a little cash if you are using it to avoid  the bulk of I-76 on the Ohio Turnpike.  Coming from Pittsburgh, you now only have to shell out 50 Cents to get to Cleveland, if you don't mind using the I-279/79/76 (Tpk)/680/76(Freeway)/77 combo.

I think you're a little off on your figure here.  On the route you've chosen,  you'll pass through the Gateway Toll Plaza on the PA Turnpike which is $3.75 plus the $.50 on the Ohio Tpk to I-680 which is $4.25 total.

[Chris]

I would like to have seen those two lane Interstates!  Anyone got pictures?

I-93 through Franconia Notch in northern New Hampshire is an example of a 2-lane Interstate (basically a super-two).