I've realized I'm a big fan of non-Interstate freeways. LOL

[swbrotha100]

The urban areas of Texas have pretty impressive non interstate freeways.

[mukade]

Sam Jones Expy, US-31 and US-20 St Joseph Valley Pkwy, IN-912 Cline Ave, IN-265 (to become I-265).

New ones being built: US-31 Kokomo Bypass, US-31 South Bend to Plymouth

Keystone Parkway Carmel, US 24 Fort to Port, US 41 Vincennes, SR 641 Terre Haute, SR 3/SR 67 Muncie Bypass, SR 66 and SR 62 Lloyd Expy. Evansville, SR 49 Valpo now has 3 straight interchanges so that part counts.

US 31 in Hamilton County is being built.

If you look at the 2014 Rand McNally, they mark others i would not count like parts of US 41 near Princeton, US 231 south of I-64, and SR 25

[kphoger]

I'm actually more of a fan of non-freeway, rural, dual carriageway corridors.  Examples being US-65 between Ozark and Branson, US-36 across Missouri, US-60 across Missouri, many Mexican ones, ....

[Duke87]

^^ More to encourage visitors, as you know with an interstate shield it will be up to freeway and other standards.  Locals will know what other highways are up to those standards so those are meant to the visitors to the area.

Not buying it.  Let's play out the scenario in our heads, imagining a young couple from Kansas.

It's more subtle than how you put it. The couple isn't going to not take 412 if they've decided they're going to Tulsa, but the perceived convenience of making a trip there would be greater if it were an interstate, since it being an interstate would guarantee without having to check that you can do 75 and not hit any lights. i.e., the route seems faster if you're on an interstate, even if it isn't, because people think interstate = fast.

This is especially true of people from the northeast, where not being on a freeway tends to be a very noticeable hindrance to speed. For a while I'd been trying to convince my father that you didn't necessarily need an interstate or even a freeway to make good time. He didn't believe me. Then I dragged him down US 60 and 70 in eastern Arizona and he begrudgingly admitted I was right. But I doubt his perception of the matter has changed much.

[kphoger]

This is especially true of people from the northeast, where not being on a freeway tends to be a very noticeable hindrance to speed. For a while I'd been trying to convince my father that you didn't necessarily need an interstate or even a freeway to make good time. He didn't believe me. Then I dragged him down US 60 and 70 in eastern Arizona and he begrudgingly admitted I was right. But I doubt his perception of the matter has changed much.

But you just conflated "freeway" with "interstate", then reinforced your point with examples that are neither interstates nor freeways.  If I-684 in New York were numbered NY-22 instead, it wouldn't make the trip to Danbury any slower than it is now.  Are people in the Northeast really so dim that they don't realize a freeway is a freeway is a freeway?

[The High Plains Traveler]

It does give one an opportunity to look at a state's design standards when they're not held to Interstate standards. What comes to mind for me is the gravel shoulders along U.S. 218 in Iowa, south of I-80 where I-380 ends.

[jp the roadgeek]

This is especially true of people from the northeast, where not being on a freeway tends to be a very noticeable hindrance to speed. For a while I'd been trying to convince my father that you didn't necessarily need an interstate or even a freeway to make good time. He didn't believe me. Then I dragged him down US 60 and 70 in eastern Arizona and he begrudgingly admitted I was right. But I doubt his perception of the matter has changed much.

But you just conflated "freeway" with "interstate", then reinforced your point with examples that are neither interstates nor freeways.  If I-684 in New York were numbered NY-22 instead, it wouldn't make the trip to Danbury any slower than it is now.  Are people in the Northeast really so dim that they don't realize a freeway is a freeway is a freeway?

We people from the northeast never use the term "freeway".  If the road is a limited access divided road with 2 lanes or more in each direction with no at-grade intersections, it's called a "highway" or "expressway".  If commercial traffic is prohibited, it's a "parkway".  The at-grade stipulation doesn't necessarily apply to parkways (see the Garden State and Saw Mill). Interstate highways = brand recognition.   CT has several candidates for 3DI's if ConnDot just made 1 improvement to each.  If CT 2 connected to I-95, if CT 9 got rid of the Middletown traffic lights, it CT 8 were extended to the Mass Pike, and if Super 7 was extended to Danbury, all would be 3DI's.  They serve the same function as an interstate, but out of state travelers shy away from them because of familiarity with the Interstate System.  Makes things easier for the savvy local, though

[The High Plains Traveler]

This is especially true of people from the northeast, where not being on a freeway tends to be a very noticeable hindrance to speed. For a while I'd been trying to convince my father that you didn't necessarily need an interstate or even a freeway to make good time. He didn't believe me. Then I dragged him down US 60 and 70 in eastern Arizona and he begrudgingly admitted I was right. But I doubt his perception of the matter has changed much.

But you just conflated "freeway" with "interstate", then reinforced your point with examples that are neither interstates nor freeways.  If I-684 in New York were numbered NY-22 instead, it wouldn't make the trip to Danbury any slower than it is now.  Are people in the Northeast really so dim that they don't realize a freeway is a freeway is a freeway?

We people from the northeast never use the term "freeway".  If the road is a limited access divided road with 2 lanes or more in each direction with no at-grade intersections, it's called a "highway" or "expressway".

You mean, a whole quadrant of the country which is wrong??? 

[3467]

There is huge variability below the interstate
Iowa has no paved shoulders below the interstate. Illinois puts them on all new roads and has a 3 foot paved minimum when it reconstructs a 2 lane. Claims it makes roads last longer. IA and MO don't always have turn lanes and often incorporate the existing 2 lane with no changes
NM built a 4 lane undivided with 12 ft lanes shoulders and center turn lane. US 460 in VA is a 4 lane undivided with no shoulders and 10.5 ft lanes
All are reasons people divert to the known product. Of course there is streetview now.
There is another factor too. Many communities and DOT s feel some sort of 4 lane is needed for economic development marketing with the Interstate shield being ideal. I am sure that is why Mo calls a 2+1 a shared 4 lane
Until we get off austerity we wont be seeing many more red white and blue shields. We wont even see much 2+1

[wxfree]

As a road enthusiast, I'm fascinated by Interstates, and by other classes of roads.  It's interesting how some small towns have short freeway bypasses that are nearly empty while bigger cities have congested undivided bypasses.  These are things I would know about if I were to plan a trip, or live anywhere near the area.  I appreciate non-interstate freeways, of which we have a decent network in this area.

For most people, the only thing that matters is an easy way of knowing which are the best roads.  It's hard for most of us to imagine, but most people leave on long trips without knowing the classification and designation of every road, how many lanes they have, and other characteristics.  For people who don't prepare for a trip by memorizing every road number, every road type, every turn, and every town, etc., it's much easier to just look for the interstates and see if they'll get you to or near your destination.  As stated before, it's about brand recognition.  While people won't overtly decide against going somewhere because it isn't along the right kind of highway, many people naturally look for the roads colored like interstates.  There's a competitive advantage with the red, white, and blue shield (for those mythical areas that actually want more traffic).

It's just like chain restaurants.  You may find a better burger at a local joint, but at a chain you know what to expect.  In modern times, consistency seems more important than quality.  Likewise, the consistent nature of interstates may be more important than a somewhat more direct route of unknown characteristics.

[briantroutman]

Clearly, any non-Interstate freeway can be just as good as–if not superior to–its I-shielded brethren.

That said, I'm in favor of freeways being incorporated into the Interstate System wherever it's logical. Especially when the freeway forms a continuous route across multiple states–such as US 78 becoming I-22.

The public is pretty ignorant when it comes to matters of highways, but one thing that they do know (Wyoming's 180 notwithstanding) is that an Interstate will always always be a freeway, and usually with a reasonable complement of gas, food, lodging, and rest areas. It may be subtle, but I believe this makes a difference in many people's willingness to consider certain destinations. Especially with Google maps demoting some non-Interstate freeways to "yellow road" status, and with many print maps using a different color to indicate non-Interstate freeways, many people might think twice. Even taking freeways out of the equation, you can make just as good time on many rural free-access highways (especially in the West), but still, many people would be less likely to consider them.

But other than the roadgeeky wow factor of scoping out various states' non-Interstate freeways, what is the benefit of keeping these roads US routes or state routes? Or on the flip side, what is the negative of having designating freeways as Interstates? The costs of resigning and temporary motorist confusion are the only possibilities I can think of.

As I see it, the upside of making these freeways Interstates is that it helps keep expectations in check: I = freeway, SR/US = something less

[kphoger]

For people who don't prepare for a trip by memorizing every road number, every road type, every turn, and every town, etc., it's much easier to just look for the interstates and see if they'll get you to or near your destination.  As stated before, it's about brand recognition.  While people won't overtly decide against going somewhere because it isn't along the right kind of highway, many people naturally look for the roads colored like interstates.  There's a competitive advantage with the red, white, and blue shield (for those mythical areas that actually want more traffic).

Clearly, any non-Interstate freeway can be just as good as–if not superior to–its I-shielded brethren.

That said, I'm in favor of freeways being incorporated into the Interstate System wherever it's logical. Especially when the freeway forms a continuous route across multiple states–such as US 78 becoming I-22.

The public is pretty ignorant when it comes to matters of highways, but one thing that they do know (Wyoming's 180 notwithstanding) is that an Interstate will always always be a freeway, and usually with a reasonable complement of gas, food, lodging, and rest areas. It may be subtle, but I believe this makes a difference in many people's willingness to consider certain destinations. Especially with Google maps demoting some non-Interstate freeways to "yellow road" status, and with many print maps using a different color to indicate non-Interstate freeways, many people might think twice. Even taking freeways out of the equation, you can make just as good time on many rural free-access highways (especially in the West), but still, many people would be less likely to consider them.

It's even easier still to not look for the red and blue Interstate shield, and instead to look for the big blue or green (or whatever color your map uses for a freeway) line going across the page.  Using Rand McNally?  Red parallel lines with blue center = freeway; green lines with yellow center = toll road.  Says so right at the top of the page.  Confirmed by the presence of squares at interchanges.

Regarding Google Maps, I think you're grossly overestimating the number of non-roadgeeks who use it to map their own route in an unfamiliar area.  I'd warrant the vast majority just click on Get directions, and that feature doesn't really care what shield is on the pole.  I just mapped out NYC to Hartford, and the first five highways it routed me along were non-Interstate parkways.  In fact, it didn't have me hitting an Interstate at all for the first 97 miles–despite the fact that using Interstates all the way from the Bronx is only two miles longer with the exact same estimated drive time.

And I still remain unconvinced that people actually choose their travel destination based on this kind of thing.  I can see (maybe, but even that's a stretch for me) choosing not to go to the Outer Banks because there's no freeway to it.  But I can't see choosing not to go to Atlantic City or Dover because there's no Interstate there.

[1995hoo]

It's funny, when I was a kid on our family vacations my father often actively sought to avoid Interstates (or equivalent, such as Ontario 401) under the theory that we were on vacation so we ought to try to see something instead of taking the boring old Interstate. "Reverse brand recognition," perhaps?

Actually my wife said something similar just last night on the way home from the hockey game–I-395 was backed up for construction so I went a different way and she said it was nice to have seen some different roads for a change. Sounds like maybe I'm finally converting her!

But in a more general sense, I've known people who always favor the Interstate, will use a US Route if needed, but avoid anything less than a US Route like the plague. An example would be several people I know who say US-29 is the only road between the DC area and Charlottesville, Virginia (untrue, of course), or some people who, when going to North Myrtle Beach, would take US-501 to Myrtle Beach and then backtrack north (as opposed to taking SC-9 across from Dillon, a road I always found to be a fast route). My impression these days is that's lot of people are afraid of two-lane roads even though in rural areas you can move right along. I suspect part of that is that in many places on the East Coast it definitely has gotten harder to pass on two-lane roads due to traffic; I also suspect that many younger drivers who have never driven manual-shift cars don't have a good sense of HOW to pass on those roads.

But what I've always found a bit odd is the way so many two-lane roads have the exact same speed limit (55 mph in this part of the country) as many Interstate-grade routes that may have eight to twelve lanes and be flatter with better sight lines.

[PHLBOS]

That might attract more people to the road. There's a reason why the NJ Turnpike makes it seem like it is I-95 even though it technically isn't. It doesn't mark where I-95 leaves the road for that reason.

In that particular case, the I-95 turn-offs from the NJ Turnpike aren't marked because I-95 in NJ is still incomplete; and we're not talking about a gap for just a mere few miles as many here know.

In MA, prior to I-95 being thrown on most of 128 in the mid-70s; if one headed south along the Tobin Bridge and merged onto the southbound Artery (which was originally planned to be a part of I-95 as well); there was little or no trace of I-95 reassurance nor (TO I-95) signage until one approached the Braintree Split (current Exit 7 off I-93).  The reason being the then-pending Southwest Expressway, which would later be killed off.

Isn't it more about federal funding than anything else?

Not always.  If it were, that doesn't explain I-355 in Illinois which was toll from day one.

It's likely possible/probable that particular highway may have been planned (and constructed) as a toll road prior to it being designated an Interstate; and it received such prior to its opening.  Similar was the case for the Massachusetts Turnpike Boston Extension (I-90) when it was constructed in the mid-60s.

[vdeane]

It's even easier still to not look for the red and blue Interstate shield, and instead to look for the big blue or green (or whatever color your map uses for a freeway) line going across the page.  Using Rand McNally?  Red parallel lines with blue center = freeway; green lines with yellow center = toll road.  Says so right at the top of the page.  Confirmed by the presence of squares at interchanges.

My Hagstrom atlas of NY uses blue for interstates and red for any other freeway.

That might attract more people to the road. There's a reason why the NJ Turnpike makes it seem like it is I-95 even though it technically isn't. It doesn't mark where I-95 leaves the road for that reason.

In that particular case, the I-95 turn-offs from the NJ Turnpike aren't marked because I-95 in NJ is still incomplete; and we're not talking about a gap for just a mere few miles as many here know.

In MA, prior to I-95 being thrown on most of 128 in the mid-70s; if one headed south along the Tobin Bridge and merged onto the southbound Artery (which was originally planned to be a part of I-95 as well); there was little or no trace of I-95 reassurance nor (TO I-95) signage until one approached the Braintree Split (current Exit 7 off I-93).  The reason being the then-pending Southwest Expressway, which would later be killed off.

Yep.  The designation on the Turnpike reflects an interchange that PA won't even begin building for a few years yet (it changes to I-276 at the state border).  They're quite right not to sign it - if they did, everyone would get lost in PA!

[PHLBOS]

It's even easier still to not look for the red and blue Interstate shield, and instead to look for the big blue or green (or whatever color your map uses for a freeway) line going across the page.  Using Rand McNally?  Red parallel lines with blue center = freeway; green lines with yellow center = toll road.  Says so right at the top of the page.  Confirmed by the presence of squares at interchanges.

My Hagstrom atlas of NY uses blue for interstates and red for any other freeway.

ADC atlasses always show different colors for interstates vs. non-interstate freeways as well.  Rand McNally, AAA and Arrow Maps show no color distinction except for which limited-access highways are tolled and which ones aren't.

[Brandon]

Isn't it more about federal funding than anything else?

Not always.  If it were, that doesn't explain I-355 in Illinois which was toll from day one.

It's likely possible/probable that particular highway may have been planned (and constructed) as a toll road prior to it being designated an Interstate; and it received such prior to its opening.  Similar was the case for the Massachusetts Turnpike Boston Extension (I-90) when it was constructed in the mid-60s.

I-355 was opened in 1989 (Dec 24 of all days) and designated as a tollway and an interstate.  It was not even planned until after the 1956 act.  As I said, it's more about the red/white/blue shield than about the federal funding.

[sp_redelectric]

Amen! I'm still annoyed by the concept that a freeway MUST be an Interstate.

One of Oregon's busiest freeways is actually categorized as a "secondary state highway" - specifically, Oregon 217.  Oregon 8, 10 and 99W are actually "primary highways" and they are all surface streets.

[Duke87]

Regarding Google Maps, I think you're grossly overestimating the number of non-roadgeeks who use it to map their own route in an unfamiliar area.  I'd warrant the vast majority just click on Get directions, and that feature doesn't really care what shield is on the pole.  I just mapped out NYC to Hartford, and the first five highways it routed me along were non-Interstate parkways.  In fact, it didn't have me hitting an Interstate at all for the first 97 miles–despite the fact that using Interstates all the way from the Bronx is only two miles longer with the exact same estimated drive time.

For this reason, the distinction of interstate versus non-interstate matters less in the 21st century than it did in the 20th. When people mapped out their own routes, it had an influence on them. But it doesn't have an influence on computers and now that everyone just follows what their GPS says, the type of route a road is signed as doesn't quite matter so much anymore.

Still, it's interesting how we have freeways which are at or above interstate grade which are not signed as interstates for various (usually political) reasons. Contrast this to the UK where there is a legal definition of a motorway and there is no freeway in the country (Dartford Crossing notwithstanding) that does not have an "M" next to its number.

[hobsini2]

Isn't it more about federal funding than anything else?

Not always.  If it were, that doesn't explain I-355 in Illinois which was toll from day one.

It's likely possible/probable that particular highway may have been planned (and constructed) as a toll road prior to it being designated an Interstate; and it received such prior to its opening.  Similar was the case for the Massachusetts Turnpike Boston Extension (I-90) when it was constructed in the mid-60s.

I-355 was opened in 1989 (Dec 24 of all days) and designated as a tollway and an interstate.  It was not even planned until after the 1956 act.  As I said, it's more about the red/white/blue shield than about the federal funding.

Also of note. I-355 was actually free for the first 2 days back in 1989 it was opened as a "Christmas" present to the people of Illinois.

[NE2]

Still, it's interesting how we have freeways which are at or above interstate grade which are not signed as interstates for various (usually political) reasons. Contrast this to the UK where there is a legal definition of a motorway and there is no freeway in the country (Dartford Crossing notwithstanding) that does not have an "M" next to its number.

Er? The UK has a bunch of A-road freeways. You'd never know from a map, however.

Example: http://www.cbrd.co.uk/motorway/a38-devon

[amroad17]

Some of my favorites are:

US 35 from Xenia, OH to Richmond Dale, OH
US 127 from Jackson, MI to Lansing, MI
NY 5 around Camillus, NY (which should have been extended to Auburn back in the 1970's)

It's true that not every freeway needs to be an interstate highway.  US 23 in MI could be numbered one because it is an outer, outer bypass of Detroit.  US 127 in MI does not need one because it is a short connector from Jackson to Lansing.  In that vein, US 220 and US 15 in PA really did not need interstate numbers--they would have been fine as is.

[Brandon]

Still, it's interesting how we have freeways which are at or above interstate grade which are not signed as interstates for various (usually political) reasons. Contrast this to the UK where there is a legal definition of a motorway and there is no freeway in the country (Dartford Crossing notwithstanding) that does not have an "M" next to its number.

Er? The UK has a bunch of A-road freeways. You'd never know from a map, however.

Example: http://www.cbrd.co.uk/motorway/a38-devon

Yes, but a good number of them have the M anyway as in A1(M).

[Brandon]

Isn't it more about federal funding than anything else?

Not always.  If it were, that doesn't explain I-355 in Illinois which was toll from day one.

It's likely possible/probable that particular highway may have been planned (and constructed) as a toll road prior to it being designated an Interstate; and it received such prior to its opening.  Similar was the case for the Massachusetts Turnpike Boston Extension (I-90) when it was constructed in the mid-60s.

I-355 was opened in 1989 (Dec 24 of all days) and designated as a tollway and an interstate.  It was not even planned until after the 1956 act.  As I said, it's more about the red/white/blue shield than about the federal funding.

Also of note. I-355 was actually free for the first 2 days back in 1989 it was opened as a "Christmas" present to the people of Illinois.

I remember.  I was on it on December 24 going to/from Woodfield.  The automatic lanes were closed, and the attendants in the manual lanes were handing out Tollway maps.

[Alps]

there is no freeway in the country that does not have an "M" next to its number.

Yes, but a good number of them have the M anyway as in A1(M).

All of the freeways in California are Interstates.
"No, look, there are state highways."
"Yes, but a good number of them have I- shields."