Useless Multiplexes

[mightyace]

This thread was inspired by the Pointless Termini thread.

Many of the examples given there regard to extended multiplexes at one end of a route.

This is on a similar vein.  Highways were one or more of the routes in a multiplex is always multiplexed the entire route.

Some examples to start it off:

In south Akron, OH, the short I-277 is duplexed with US 224 for its entire length.  Now, the "I" designation might be needed for USG highway $$ but why not make it hidden and just sign the freeway US 224?

This one no longer exists, but in Wisconsin when the I-43 designation first appeared, it only ran from Milwaukee to Green Bay and was duplexed with US 141 the entire way.  Eventually, US 141 was decommissioned.

And, lest we not forget the infamous I-99 in PA.  It is duplexed its entire current route with US 220 and also has multiplexes with US 322 and PA 26.  The proposed extension to Painted Post, NY won't change the situation as I-99 will be multiplexed with one of more of I-80, US 220, and US 15 for the entire extension.  (unless of course they decommission US 15 north of Williamsport)

[DrZoidberg]

I-39 comes to mind, save a stretch of about 8 miles near Portage, WI.

[Alex]

U.S. 202 south from Interstate 95 (Exit 8) to Delaware 141 (Exit 5) and then Delaware 141 from Interstate 95 to U.S. 13/40, its end. No one calls it U.S. 202, and its only signed sparingly.

Iowa 27 is useless. I know that they are trying to have it follow the Avenue of the Saints Corridor, but the numbered designation to go along Interstate 380, U.S. 218, etc. is useless.

[vdeane]

NY 15 along I-390 and I-86.  Hopefully when I-99 replaces US 15 (and hopefully it will be a replacement, not another useless multiplex) it will be truncated at NY 21 in Wayland.

NY 332 and NY 21.  NY 332 ends in the multiplex at US 20/NY 5.  It use to end further north at NY 21, I'm not sure why they changed this.

And speaking of US 20/NY 5, this multiplex is just too long.  The multiplex should be eliminated with NY 5 on one of the ends renumbered to something else (not a problem since NY's state route numbers are random).  As it is now, people in the area don't even know that US 20 and NY 5 are ever separate.

[RoadWarrior56]

I think the entire proposed I-73/I-74 multiplex through West Virginia and North Carolina could be defined as useless, especially how their routes would braid together and apart for hundreds of miles.

It is going to be tough enough to get one of those routes completed, but two?  From what I have seen, they don't go thorugh or near many major cities south of the Ohio River.  No state has done anything with these routes, that I can see, north of the North Carolina line, and it takes years to get any route contructed these days, between chronic shortages of funding and the endlessly drawn out NEPA process.

Why not just stick with the I-74 extension and drop I-73 entirely, since an I-74 extension from Cincinnatti seems more feasible than the construction of an I-73 all the way to Michigan.

[Sykotyk]

WV has already said that US52 isn't going to be to interstate standards. So, if they do route I-73/I-74 anywhere, it will be east on I-64 to Charleston and south on I-77 down through Virginia to the current 'branch' of I-74 that's signed in North Carolina.

Which would create, potentially, a quadruple-plex: I-64, I-73, I-74, and I-77 from Charleston to Beckley, WV. And then a tri-plex until just north of Winston-Salem/Greensboro.

Sykotyk

[akotchi]

I-69 and I-94 multiplex approaching the Canadian border for about 5 miles.

Some still claim I-80 and I-95 multiplex for the three miles or so to the George Washington Bridge.

What about all the U.S. routes that get pulled from their downtown routes to the beltways, such as in Indianapolis and Raleigh?

[Alex]

What about all the U.S. routes that get pulled from their downtown routes to the beltways, such as in Indianapolis and Raleigh?

All of those freeway syphonings of state and U.S. highways are completely useless IMO. Look at how often U.S. 40 joins Interstate 70 on their mutual journey west to Utah. Pointless...

[DrZoidberg]

All of those freeway syphonings of state and U.S. highways are completely useless IMO. Look at how often U.S. 40 joins Interstate 70 on their mutual journey west to Utah. Pointless...

Good point.  I lost track of how many times I-10 and US 90 meet between Houston and San Antonio.

[Chris]

Why do Georgian US Highways and Interstate Highways have duplexes in the form of unsigned State Routes? It took me a while to figure those out when browsing through their (very extensive) AADT files.

[mightyace]

Tennessee has hidden state routes on its US routes as well.  I've noticed even Rand McNally will put these hidden numbers on a map.

The explanation I've heard is for state DOT planning purposes.  Still doesn't make sense to me either.  I've seen newspaper listings for highway work and especially ads for public hearings use the hidden state number.  How many people in the general public know that US 31 in TN is also TN 6?

[Truvelo]

Is it standard practice in the US to have shields for both route numbers in multiplexes? I've seen signs with two or three different route shields if they all share the same stretch of road.

Here in the UK only one number is shown with the other, normally the less imporant route, shown in brackets on the same sign. On maps only one route number is shown with the subordinate route number only appearing after both routes split.

[WillWeaverRVA]

US 301/VA 2 is probably the most useless multiplex I can think of. Just truncate VA 2 to VA 207/US 301 in Bowling Green.

[TheStranger]

Is it standard practice in the US to have shields for both route numbers in multiplexes? I've seen signs with two or three different route shields if they all share the same stretch of road.

Here in the UK only one number is shown with the other, normally the less imporant route, shown in brackets on the same sign. On maps only one route number is shown with the subordinate route number only appearing after both routes split.

In most places, the multiplex is shown with seperate shields; the one notable exception out here (if it hasn't been mentioned already) is US 1/US 9 in New Jersey. (There's also a I-55/I-70 shield somewhere in downtown St. Louis I've seen on the web somewhere...)

Now, if the multiplex involves different types of route, then seperate shields will be the default (i.e. US 50/Business 80/Route 99 in Sacramento).

[FLRoads]

Why do Georgian US Highways and Interstate Highways have duplexes in the form of unsigned State Routes? It took me a while to figure those out when browsing through their (very extensive) AADT files.

The U.S. highways in Georgia do show their state highway counterparts whereas the Interstates do not. Many map companies (including some I have worked for) try to include these "hidden" state numbers on the interstates. Mightyace is correct in that states use "hidden" routes (Florida uses them as well) as part of their planning system. I know in Florida that even the "hidden" state routes running tandem with their U.S. highway counterparts still follow the grid system the state uses for the rest of their state maintained routes. I would also assume that keeping these routes in conjunction with the U.S. highway could prove useful if ever a particular U.S. highway were truncated or eliminated all together. For example, when ALT U.S. 129 was decommissioned from the system, the state just used its "hidden" route (Florida 349) as the new main number for that portion.

[Alex]

The state highway counterparts are basically for internal use. When a project receives funding, the paperwork will refer to the state highway number rather than the U.S. or Interstate route. This is the case in Florida. Additionally, if you receive a traffic citation along Florida's Turnpike, the ticket will indicate the location along SR 91, since that is the state road number for the toll road.

For the most part these designations are relegated for internal use for the respective DOT. However in Georgia all U.S. and State highway overlaps are signed in the field. Tennessee, Florida, and Alabama all use them as well, but they are unsigned except for in a handful of places where contractors have mistakenly posted them. There are exceptions though, as Palm Beach County, Florida consistently signed the state road counterparts to its U.S. highways.

The 400 highway system in Georgia is for internal use only. Its the system that the DOT uses when referencing its Interstates. In fact a couple of years ago 400 series numbers were assigned to Interstate 516, Interstate 985, and Interstate 575, the three most recent Interstates in the state.

[Michael]

And speaking of US 20/NY 5, this multiplex is just too long.  The multiplex should be eliminated with NY 5 on one of the ends renumbered to something else (not a problem since NY's state route numbers are random).  As it is now, people in the area don't even know that US 20 and NY 5 are ever separate.

I live near Auburn, which is the location of their eastern split, so I know that!  According to Wikipedia, their duplex is 68 miles long, the longest in the state, excluding NY 17/I-86.  They actually have another duplex west of Buffalo, which is 2.84 miles long.

In my opinion, terminating NY 5 wouldn't work.

On a side note, US 11/15 are duplexed for 58 miles between Shamokin Dam, PA and Camp Hill, PA

[Bryant5493]

Quick question: I'm trying to produce a YouTube video, therefore, I need some information. Are MS-67 and MS-15 multiplexed north of I-110? Or is MS-67 over at the Woolmarket exit (I-10 exit 41)? I heard about the "new" Highway 67, but the signage is a little contradictory, I think.

I've contacted Miss. DOT, but they haven't answered me yet.


Be well,

Bryant

[DrZoidberg]

Another multiplex I think is useless is I-394/US 12 in Minnesota.  Are they signed together the entire time?  Couldn't it have been US 12 and left 394 unsigned?

[Alex]

Quick question: I'm trying to produce a YouTube video, therefore, I need some information. Are MS-67 and MS-15 multiplexed north of I-110? Or is MS-67 over at the Woolmarket exit (I-10 exit 41)? I heard about the "new" Highway 67, but the signage is a little contradictory, I think.

Darkangel snapped a photo of the new End I-110/North MS 15/67 shield assembly, so it appears that they will be cosigned:

[Bryant5493]

^^ I saw that when I was in Biloxi earlier this week, but about a few miles east of here (on I-10), exit 41 is signed MS-67 North (Woolmarket). I guess Miss. DOT just hasn't gotten around to changing the signage at that exit.

Thanks, aaroads.


Be well,

Bryant

[SSOWorld]

Another multiplex I think is useless is I-394/US 12 in Minnesota.  Are they signed together the entire time?  Couldn't it have been US 12 and left 394 unsigned?

US routes aren't even signed on Interstate concurrencies in MN. 

I-894 became "pointless now that US-45 follows it N-S and I-43 follows it E-W

I-535 is also a bit pointless - just a part of US 53.

[TheStranger]

All this talk of US highway and interstate concurrencies fascinates me here in California, where we ONLY have two (US 95 with I-40 and later with I-10)!

Technically, we have I-305 concurrent with US 50's first few miles (and Business 80) in West Sacramento/Sacramento but that is not signed and only a FHWA designation not acknowledged here at the state level.

In the 1950s and 1960s, before some US routes were truncated, interstates and US routes were co-signed very well in this state (i.e. US 101 and I-5 south of East Los Angeles, US 60/70/99 with I-10 along the San Bernardino Freeway, US 66/91/395 with I-15 through Cajon, US 40 with I-80, US 50 with I-580/previously I-5W, US 99 and I-5 along the Golden State Freeway).  Much evidence of this previous co-signing still exists in older freeway signage statewide, particularly an example of a US 50 greenout reappearing in metro Oakland two or three years ago along I-580.

(Another vestige of this is the "double-shield" practice on the largest green signs - this used to be one shield each for the two multiplexed routes, i.e. I-5/US 101, but then became two shields for the remaining route, with a new shield placed on where the decommissioned route's sign was.)

[mightyace]

However, these routes are full-fledged Interstates that were built with Interstate Construction funds.  And, of course, Interstates take precedence over U.S. routes...

Well, there are a number of "unsigned" interstates. (http://www.interstate-guide.com/unsigned.html)

The most notable of which is MD I-595.  The road is signed US 50 & 301 and the 595 is unsigned.  So, there is precedent to leave an interstate unsigned.

[Revive 755]

Iowa 27 is useless. I know that they are trying to have it follow the Avenue of the Saints Corridor, but the numbered designation to go along Interstate 380, U.S. 218, etc. is useless.

I have mixed feelings about Iowa 27.  On one hand its only independent section could have just been a relocated US 218.  On the other Iowa is somewhat poor with control cities/destination signage on the Avenue of the Saints north of Waterloo - really could use St. Paul, MN listed sooner and at the northern split of US 18/US 218.  I think they could have chosen a better number for it at least, maybe IA 53 (would make it easier for a future interstate number for the Avenue), or IA 380 (to be state highway extensions of I-380).