News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

Are any US routes in danger of being decommissioned?

Started by hotdogPi, February 05, 2019, 04:10:21 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Flint1979

Quote from: Eth on February 06, 2019, 10:15:06 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 06, 2019, 09:23:59 PM
Quote from: Eth on February 05, 2019, 04:36:47 PM
Not a full decommissioning, but I could plausibly see Florida deciding they no longer have a use for US 23, especially with the recent opening of the nearby FL 23 toll road that could be a potential source of confusion.
Does GA-23 cause any confusion? I think terminating US-23 in Waycross, GA would be the best place for that route to end, either there or Folkston. South of Callahan, FL that should just be a state highway.

I'm not real sure on how major of a highway US-23 is in the southern section of the route but in Michigan it's a major route.

Also keep in mind that in 1926 it originally terminated in Portsmouth, Ohio on the south end and has been extended so cutting it back makes some sense.

Except for a little piece in downtown Jacksonville, all of US 23 in Florida is also US 1. (I'm guessing you're looking at Google Maps, which does a poor job of showing the 1/23 concurrency that starts north of Alma, GA and goes all the way to Jax.) The independent portion can just revert to (the already existing, but currently unsigned) SR 139.
Well I can see where they come together north of Alma and every place I pan into has both US-1 and US-23. I guess that could be a good place to end US-23 too I really wasn't thinking about the concurrency with US-1.


Flint1979

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 06, 2019, 11:41:33 PM
Quote from: oscar on February 06, 2019, 10:25:07 PM
Quote from: Eth on February 06, 2019, 10:15:06 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 06, 2019, 09:23:59 PM
Quote from: Eth on February 05, 2019, 04:36:47 PM
Not a full decommissioning, but I could plausibly see Florida deciding they no longer have a use for US 23, especially with the recent opening of the nearby FL 23 toll road that could be a potential source of confusion.
Does GA-23 cause any confusion? I think terminating US-23 in Waycross, GA would be the best place for that route to end, either there or Folkston. South of Callahan, FL that should just be a state highway.

I'm not real sure on how major of a highway US-23 is in the southern section of the route but in Michigan it's a major route.

Also keep in mind that in 1926 it originally terminated in Portsmouth, Ohio on the south end and has been extended so cutting it back makes some sense.

Except for a little piece in downtown Jacksonville, all of US 23 in Florida is also US 1. (I'm guessing you're looking at Google Maps, which does a poor job of showing the 1/23 concurrency that starts north of Alma, GA and goes all the way to Jax.) The independent portion can just revert to (the already existing, but currently unsigned) SR 139.

While Florida has a little reason to decommission/renumber its part of US 23, there is no reason for Georgia to lift a finger to synch with Florida. And AASHTO being AASHTO, it might disapprove a decommission request made only by Florida, which would leave US 23 terminating at the state line.

And Florida never really has cared that there has been duplicate signed numbers in field.  Nobody really seems to confuse US 1 and FL A1A as the prime example.  There was a time when FL A19A touched US 19 and FL 41 was only a couple miles from US 41.
Michigan does that too. All the 2-di Interstate's have a state highway counterpart usually in a different part of the state though. M-75 and I-75 come fairly close together but not real close. M-69 is in the U.P. so it's a long ways from I-69. M-94 is also in the U.P. so also a long ways from I-94. M-96 is in the Battle Creek and Kalamazoo area not a super long ways from I-96. The U.S. highways seem to have a counterpart with a state highway in areas that use to be part of that U.S. highway like M-25 is on an old routing of US-25 and M-10 is on an old routing of US-10. M-27 is on an old routing of US-27. There's an M-45 in the Grand Rapids area to go along with US-45 in the U.P. I guess if you have them in different parts of the state it'll cause much less confusion. Although I have never confused or heard many people confuse M-24 from US-24, US-24's northern terminus is only 12 miles from M-24's southern terminus.

jp the roadgeek

Quote from: Ben114 on February 05, 2019, 04:24:08 PM
202 has a risk of truncation because of all the multiplexes.


I've already developed a plan for this in every state:

DE: Eliminate multiplexes with DE 141 and I-95.  Extend US 301 along DE 1 then duplex with US 13 into Wilmington.  Have US 301 take over US 13's route to Morrisville and route US 13 through Wilmington to DE/US 202.

PA/NJ: Rerouted US 13

NY: Yes, I know there is a NY 13, but it is far enough away so that US 13 can enter NY and end at US 9W in Haverstraw.  Concurrencies with US 9W, US 6, NY 35, and NY 22 are eliminated.  Two standalone portions in Westchester County are filled in with slight extensions of NY 116 and NY 100. 

CT: US 6, I-84, and US 7 concurrencies are eliminated.  The Federal Rd portion from US 7 to CT 25 reverts to SR 805.  CT 25 is re-extended to Canton as it was from 1963-1974. US 44 and CT 10 concurrencies eliminated.

MA: MA 10 concurrency eliminated.  New state route from Westfield to Belchertown.  MA 21 is extended over the remainder to NH.

NH: Portion south of Hillsboro becomes NH 21 to act as a continuation of MA 21.   Concurrencies with NH 9, US 3, I-393, US 4, NH 16, and NH 11 eliminated.  Standalone portion from Northwood to Rochester becomes an extended NH 43.

ME: All concurrencies with state routes elimiated.  One standalone portion in Hampden and Bangor either decommissioned or becomes a new state route. 

Wouldn't surprise me to see the US 1A's in CT and RI become state routes.


I often pictured US 209 being eliminated and becoming a part of an extended/somewhat rerouted US 44.  US 44 is essentially redundant from Arlington to its western terminus, as it is duplexed with NY 55.  Instead, it would take over NY 199 to Kingston, and US 209 to Millersburg, PA.  The portion between NY 55 in Arlington and NY 22 in Amenia would become a rerouted NY 343.  This actually simplifies things, as NY 343 can continue straight across NY 22 to the US 44 path rather than duplexing with 22 to Dover Plains and running parallel to US 44 to Millbrook.  The current 343 west of 22 would become a CR.
Interstates I've clinched: 97, 290 (MA), 291 (CT), 291 (MA), 293, 295 (DE-NJ-PA), 295 (RI-MA), 384, 391, 395 (CT-MA), 395 (MD), 495 (DE), 610 (LA), 684, 691, 695 (MD), 695 (NY), 795 (MD)

DandyDan

Quote from: Flint1979 on February 06, 2019, 06:42:49 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 05, 2019, 04:10:21 PM
I'm thinking that 46, 91, 159, 181, 211, 223, 266, and/or 311 might be at risk. (I don't see the purpose of 159 myself). Also a truncation of 85.
The purpose of US-159 is for through traffic on US 59 to bypass Atchison, Kansas and Saint Joseph, Missouri. It really doesn't make a lot of sense to me because a US highway spur route usually only connects with it's parent route once but in this case US-159 starts and ends at US-59.
One thing to keep in mind with US 159 is that before I-29 existed, US 159 crossed the Rulo, NE bridge to go into Missouri and then made a hard left turn northward to Craig, MO, as opposed to its current east-west route. Calling it a bypass makes sense if you know that. Of course, if you have driven it south of Horton, KS, you might wonder why a road which seems like a county road has a US Highway shield.
MORE FUN THAN HUMANLY THOUGHT POSSIBLE

DJ Particle

Why they decided to truncate US-61 in Wyoming, MN instead of its intersection with I-94 in St. Paul... or even its intersection with US-10 near Hastings...  I will never know.

Seriously...from St. Paul to Wyoming...CSAH that highway!

PHLBOS

Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 07, 2019, 03:14:18 AMDE: Eliminate multiplexes with DE 141 and I-95.  Extend US 301 along DE 1 then duplex with US 13 into Wilmington.  Have US 301 take over US 13's route to Morrisville and route US 13 through Wilmington to DE/US 202.
Personally, I would extend US 301 into NJ (it would run concurrent w/US 13/40 to I-295) and have it take over US 130.  If there are any button-copy US 130 shields remaining, such would involve a simple switchero of the numerals.  Yeah, I know; fictional territory.  Such would be a way of eliminating a short, intrastate US route while keeping the corridor in the system.  Plus, such would be more fitting to have a child route (US 301) end at its parent route (US 1).

Another one IMHO, that could be decommissioned would be the eastern portion of US 422 in PA.  Redesignate such as either PA 122 or 622.  Again, fictional territory.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

Henry

Quote from: dvferyance on February 05, 2019, 07:11:32 PM
The only one I think at risk would be 266.
Sure, and by that same logic, US 166. But their parent still exists, albeit as an Historic Route, so I'd keep them.

However, if any US route should be eliminated, it would be US 46, as it violates the rule that intrastate routes cannot be less than 300 miles long, and NJ doesn't have any roads near that length.
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

Roadgeekteen

Quote from: Henry on February 07, 2019, 10:19:57 AM
Quote from: dvferyance on February 05, 2019, 07:11:32 PM
The only one I think at risk would be 266.
Sure, and by that same logic, US 166. But their parent still exists, albeit as an Historic Route, so I'd keep them.

However, if any US route should be eliminated, it would be US 46, as it violates the rule that intrastate routes cannot be less than 300 miles long, and NJ doesn't have any roads near that length.
I like the x66 routes as they make the legacy of US 66 live on.
God-emperor of Alanland, king of all the goats and goat-like creatures

Current Interstate map I am making:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&mid=1PEDVyNb1skhnkPkgXi8JMaaudM2zI-Y&ll=29.05778059819179%2C-82.48856825&z=5

froggie

Quote from: DJ Particle on February 07, 2019, 06:21:19 AM
Why they decided to truncate US-61 in Wyoming, MN instead of its intersection with I-94 in St. Paul... or even its intersection with US-10 near Hastings...  I will never know.

Seriously...from St. Paul to Wyoming...CSAH that highway!

Been a long-term goal of MnDOT for years.  But they would need to A) come to an agreement with every municipality and the three counties along the segment, and B) fund any improvements the counties would want before agreeing to take it over.

hbelkins

Quote from: plain on February 06, 2019, 07:29:38 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 06, 2019, 11:44:59 AM
Quote from: hbelkinsAnd I really think the useless concurrency of US 17 with US 50 needs to be eliminated.

Or extended north replacing US 522 from Winchester.  That would be another option.

This. At least a piece of US 17 would actually be west of US 11.

And truncate it at Hancock. What through corridor does US 522 serve in Pennsylvania?


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

TheHighwayMan3561

Quote from: froggie on February 07, 2019, 01:39:09 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on February 07, 2019, 06:21:19 AM
Why they decided to truncate US-61 in Wyoming, MN instead of its intersection with I-94 in St. Paul... or even its intersection with US-10 near Hastings...  I will never know.

Seriously...from St. Paul to Wyoming...CSAH that highway!

Been a long-term goal of MnDOT for years.  But they would need to A) come to an agreement with every municipality and the three counties along the segment, and B) fund any improvements the counties would want before agreeing to take it over.

Wonder if we could see another MN x61 come into play if some of the route is ready to be axed but not all of it. I've read Wyoming at least has concerns about losing US 61.
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

kphoger

I just realized I'd neglected a significant section of stand-alone US-400, so I have updated my numbers below to be more accurate.

Quote from: kphoger on February 06, 2019, 02:56:24 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 06, 2019, 12:22:56 PM
400 should be. 90% of the route is useless.

Strongly disagree.  I get it that people don't like the number, but US-400 is a major corridor with heavy long-distance traffic.  Its number was also originally intended to be temporary, as the corridor was anticipated to be upgraded to an Interstate at some point in the future when it was first designated.  If, on the other hand, you're referring to the fact that a lot of it is duplexed, then your math is way off.  About 30% 35% of the route is not duplexed with any other route number.

Of those segments that are not duplexed, here are the AADTs:

2010-2520 – K-34 to US-54 (Mullinville)
2010-11300 – Dodge City to US-54 (Mullinville)
4000-5070 – US-54 (Haverhill) to K-99
3460-4690 – K-99 to US-75 (Neodesha)
3570-5700 – US-75 to K-171 (Pittsburg)
1570-1610 – US-69-Alt (Baxter Springs) to US-166

By way of comparison, US-54 doesn't top AADT 4500 anywhere east of El Dorado.  And commercial traffic accounts for roughly one-fourth of the traffic on US-400 for the majority of its route.

I also forgot to say that my preference would be to truncate US-400 at the western end of the Dodge City bypass.  Everything west of there is a pointless duplex with US-50.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

plain

Quote from: hbelkins on February 07, 2019, 01:53:16 PM
Quote from: plain on February 06, 2019, 07:29:38 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 06, 2019, 11:44:59 AM
Quote from: hbelkinsAnd I really think the useless concurrency of US 17 with US 50 needs to be eliminated.

Or extended north replacing US 522 from Winchester.  That would be another option.

This. At least a piece of US 17 would actually be west of US 11.

And truncate it at Hancock. What through corridor does US 522 serve in Pennsylvania?

None really. US 17 can end in Hancock and US 522 can continue from there, or become a state route. 522 in Virginia can also become a state route.
Newark born, Richmond bred

froggie

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 07, 2019, 02:23:27 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 07, 2019, 01:39:09 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on February 07, 2019, 06:21:19 AM
Why they decided to truncate US-61 in Wyoming, MN instead of its intersection with I-94 in St. Paul... or even its intersection with US-10 near Hastings...  I will never know.

Seriously...from St. Paul to Wyoming...CSAH that highway!

Been a long-term goal of MnDOT for years.  But they would need to A) come to an agreement with every municipality and the three counties along the segment, and B) fund any improvements the counties would want before agreeing to take it over.

Wonder if we could see another MN x61 come into play if some of the route is ready to be axed but not all of it. I've read Wyoming at least has concerns about losing US 61.

Not sure why they would.  They have the I-35 interchange.  And if it becomes CSAH, the city still wouldn't have to pay (much) for roadwork.

Scott5114

Quote from: kphoger on February 05, 2019, 08:57:52 PM
My plan calls for US-159 to become I-446¼.  It will extend from El Mezquital, Tamaulipas, in the south to Lake Athabasca in the north, where there will be a bridge connecting it to Uranium City and the six-lane trans-taiga superhighway (I-717).  I think this is necessary because existing roads in the area are dangerously narrow and/or seasonal, and this will provide a safe, year-round highway instead.

But if you want it to be in all 15 North American countries, the countries will be, the U.S., Mexico, Canada, Alaska, Yukon, Northwest Terrtiories, Nunavut, Quebec, Greenland, Iceland, Phogerland, Hawaii, Bermuda, Belize, and Saint Pierre and Miquelon, not central america, caribbean, or south america because i considered them other continents.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

TheHighwayMan3561

Quote from: froggie on February 07, 2019, 04:35:12 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on February 07, 2019, 02:23:27 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 07, 2019, 01:39:09 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on February 07, 2019, 06:21:19 AM
Why they decided to truncate US-61 in Wyoming, MN instead of its intersection with I-94 in St. Paul... or even its intersection with US-10 near Hastings...  I will never know.

Seriously...from St. Paul to Wyoming...CSAH that highway!

Been a long-term goal of MnDOT for years.  But they would need to A) come to an agreement with every municipality and the three counties along the segment, and B) fund any improvements the counties would want before agreeing to take it over.

Wonder if we could see another MN x61 come into play if some of the route is ready to be axed but not all of it. I've read Wyoming at least has concerns about losing US 61.
Not sure why they would.  They have the I-35 interchange.  And if it becomes CSAH, the city still wouldn't have to pay (much) for roadwork.

Probably just one of those stupid small town fears that they see 61 as some kind of status symbol. Maybe they fear it'd impact their CBD, not that Wyoming really has one; it's pretty much just a couple buildings sitting on the corner of the 61 intersection with Forest Blvd.
self-certified as the dumbest person on this board for 5 years running

usends

Quote from: kphoger on February 07, 2019, 02:45:04 PM
About 30% 35% of the route is not duplexed with any other route number.
Yeah, I figured 37%.  But if you isolate the western 2/3rds of the route, only 12% of that segment is not duplexed.
https://www.usends.com/blog/us-400-its-number-is-not-the-only-error
usends.com - US highway endpoints, photos, maps, and history

Flint1979

People saying that US-400 should be decommissioned. It perhaps should have a different number but the route is fine. Sort of like US-412 or US-425. US-400's long concurrencies with other US routes is an issue to me too, especially the one with US-50 on it's western end that makes very little sense. US-400 could very easily be a spur of US-50 or 69. US-412 could very easily be a spur of either US-51 or US-56 and US-425 could very easily be a spur of US-61, 63, 65, 79 or 84. All these highways are rather new, not quite 30 years old or right around it.

kphoger

Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

bing101

US-93 and US-95 is endangered of losing their US route status in Nevada due to the on going talks over the location of I-11.

oscar

#70
Quote from: bing101 on February 08, 2019, 08:33:13 PM
US-93 and US-95 is endangered of losing their US route status in Nevada due to the on going talks over the location of I-11.

Most of US 93 in Nevada is in the eastern part of the state, far away from any possible I-11 corridor. Part of it is multiplexed with I-11, I-15, and I-515, which would make just that part dispensable if and when Arizona replaces its part of US 93 with I-11.

Much of US 95 in Nevada is also well east, or (south of Boulder City) west, of any possible I-11 corridor. And the parts in California and Arizona, and Idaho, aren't going anywhere. So keeping US 95 in Nevada would be useful for continuity, even if some portions between Boulder City and Winnemucca would be/remain multiplexed with Interstates.
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: oscar on February 08, 2019, 09:17:10 PM
Quote from: bing101 on February 08, 2019, 08:33:13 PM
US-93 and US-95 is endangered of losing their US route status in Nevada due to the on going talks over the location of I-11.

Most of US 93 in Nevada is in the eastern part of the state, far away from any possible I-11 corridor. Part of it is multiplexed with I-11, I-15, and I-515, which would make just that part dispensable if and when Arizona replaces its part of US 93 with I-11.

Much of US 95 in Nevada is also well east, or (south of Boulder City) west, of any possible I-11 corridor. And the parts in California and Arizona, and Idaho, aren't going anywhere. So keeping US 95 in Nevada would be useful for continuity, even if some portions between Boulder City and Winnemucca would be/remain multiplexed with Interstates.

I'd argue that US 95 would still have viability even if I-11 somehow made it closer to Reno somehow in some far flung future.  US 95 serves a pretty decent corridor along the Colorado River which ends in southern Arizona at San Luis.  Even a very long multiplex of US 95 wouldn't change the corridor very much outside of extremely rural Nevada. 

NE2

pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

RobbieL2415

US 202 could be gotten rid of. Its basically an aggregation of SRS from ME to DE. Not a direct route at all.

Others:
46, 62,

Takumi

Quote from: plain on February 07, 2019, 04:23:02 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on February 07, 2019, 01:53:16 PM
Quote from: plain on February 06, 2019, 07:29:38 PM
Quote from: froggie on February 06, 2019, 11:44:59 AM
Quote from: hbelkinsAnd I really think the useless concurrency of US 17 with US 50 needs to be eliminated.

Or extended north replacing US 522 from Winchester.  That would be another option.

This. At least a piece of US 17 would actually be west of US 11.

And truncate it at Hancock. What through corridor does US 522 serve in Pennsylvania?

None really. US 17 can end in Hancock and US 522 can continue from there, or become a state route. 522 in Virginia can also become a state route.
Quote from: Rothman on July 15, 2021, 07:52:59 AM
Olive Garden must be stopped.  I must stop them.

Don't @ me. Seriously.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.