3DI’s that shouldn’t have an interstate designation?

[Lyon Wonder]

3DI's like I-180 in Wyoming and I-315 in Montana make me think these 3DI's aren't really worth being singed as 3DIs and should have their interstate designation removed, or at least go unsigned.  I-180 in Cheyenne should just be signed as US 85, while I-315 in Butte should just be Business I-15.  I'd even go as far to say that I-180 in IL should have it's interstate number removed since it doesn't serve as an interstate corridor and IDOT doesn't even post exit numbers on it.  Same for the glorified connecter ramp I-781 in NY.

[hotdogPi]

Another "exit ramp": I-189

Maybe I-293 or I-393 in New Hampshire: the former is a combination of two already existing routes (the Everett Turnpike and NH 101), and the latter is already US 4/202.

Edit: I-587 is like I-781, but more useless.

[cu2010]

781 is more useful than you think...it's more than a "glorified connector ramp". As someone who frequently travels that way from the North Country, it has saved a great deal of time bypassing all of the development (and the thousand lights!) on US11 near Fort Drum.

790, on the other hand...

[bing101]

I-305 in Sacramento should not have the I-305 designation because the Public only knows this freeway as US-50 and Business 80.

[tidecat]

Speaking of US 11, the 3 miles of I-359 in Alabama that are also totally concurrent with AL 69.


iPhone

[Takumi]

I-381

[NE2]

I-315 isn't "singed"...

[roadman65]

I-175 and I-375 in St Pete, FL.
I-895 in Bronx, NY.
I-587 in Kingston, NY.

[froggie]

Same for the glorified connecter ramp I-781 in NY.

781 has exit numbers (US 11 is Exit 4), and actually serves a purpose related to the original intention of the Interstates (as a network of commerce and DEFENSE highways).

[codyg1985]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned I-180 in Illinois yet.

[SectorZ]

I-195 in Maine.

[SSOWorld]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned I-180 in Illinois yet.

You did

I-894 in Milwaukee - As much as they keep the number for "Bypass" reasons, I-41 is due to usurp the entire route - making it pretty redundant.

[dgolub]

I-587 is especially useless considering that it has another route number for its entire length, although it is cool for roadgeeks.

[bassoon1986]

I-345 could be US 75
I-510 could be LA 47.

[CNGL-Leudimin]

Any 3di that is not signed. If you aren't going to sign it, don't designate it.

[Zeffy]

Any 3di that is not signed. If you aren't going to sign it, don't designate it.

*cough* I-595 in Maryland *cough*

[1995hoo]

In a general sense, I would nominate any 3di route that was given an Interstate number solely to qualify for the 65-mph speed limit back in the late 1980s. Now that federal speed limit controls are gone, such would be unnecessary, although I also recognize and concede that it'd be more problematic to remove those Interstate designations now that people are used to them.

In a more specific sense, the following strike me as unnecessary Interstate numbers:

I-695 in New York (perfectly useful highway that doesn't seem to need to carry an Interstate shield)
I-395 in Baltimore (ditto)
I-895 in New York (questionable whether the road is useful at all)
I-564 in Norfolk (yes, it serves the naval base, but why does it need an Interstate number to do that?)
I-495 in Maine (basically a glorified ramp bypassing Portland; of course, it's unsigned under the current configuration)

I-395 in Miami strikes me as a possible waste of a number except that it connects to the port and I suspect there may be some truck-related reason for posting an Interstate number, similar to how I-795 in North Carolina was given that number to make it easier for trucks to get to Goldsboro.

[hbelkins]

I'm one of those who would actually like to see more signed interstates, not less, but the only two that I have traveled that readily come to mind are I-381 in Virginia and I-587 in New York. For the former, it has no interchanges except for its terminus at I-81 and is basically a long exit ramp. For I-587, it doesn't have a direct freeway-to-freeway connection via interchange to its parent, has no interchanges, and is basically just an extension of the four-lane NY 28.

For routes I haven't driven, the obvious ones are I-180 Wyoming and I-238 California.

[Henry]

If we're going to include future routes, I-785 would be one. It's already known as US 29, and I wouldn't mind it being treated the same way as I-595 on US 50.

[1995hoo]

If we're going to include future routes, I-785 would be one. It's already known as US 29, and I wouldn't mind it being treated the same way as I-595 on US 50.

When I drove on Florida's Route 9B in December (Future I-795), I remember thinking the Interstate number seems unnecessary, even though the road will be a useful shortcut that will allow southbound traffic to avoid using the loop ramp at the I-295/I-95 junction.

[I-39]

I agree I-180 in Illinois needs to be decommissioned. It does not go anywhere. While there were plans at one time to extend the freeway south to Peoria, those are long dead, and it will only be an expressway now, if even that (IL-29 doesn't need upgrades between Peoria and Hennepin).

Also, I-190 in the O'Hare area is too short for a Interstate. I-190 should be given to the future Elgin-O'Hare West Bypass.

[OCGuy81]

Nobody has mentioned the obvious yet?  Okay, here goes.

I-238

:drops mic, walks off:

[hotdogPi]

Nobody has mentioned the obvious yet?  Okay, here goes.

I-238

:drops mic, walks off:

Not needing a number is different from needing its number changed.

[froggie]

I-564 in Norfolk (yes, it serves the naval base, but why does it need an Interstate number to do that?)

As I mentioned above with I-781, this serves a valid purpose of the original intention for the Interstates.  Nevermind that it's the biggest naval base in the world (in terms of ships and personnel)...

[OCGuy81]

Nobody has mentioned the obvious yet?  Okay, here goes.

I-238

:drops mic, walks off:

Not needing a number is different from needing its number changed.

Just going with the OP here.  A 3di that shouldn't have an interstate designation.  I think 238 fits this.  It could easily just stay CA-238.