So looking at various maps and reading and thinking about all the 2dis in the system, I find myself just wondering aloud sometimes what these people are thinking when they choose where to route an interstate.
Now, I get the major 2di routes that serve as major border to border or coast to coast routes, and I get the routes that serve as bypasses or connect major population centers. But even some of those seem to be less of a need than some glaring omissions.
The route that really made me start thinking about this was Interstate 22. What a pointless looking route. It doesn't even reach Memphis or Birmingham proper...and it doesn't pass any city of any real size or importance. I mean, Tupelo? Hell, even the two cities it connects aren't exactly thriving, growing cities of the future. Neither even has a population of 1 million...and Memphis is one of the murder capitals of the USA.
I also have issue with Wisconsin getting to use Interstates 39,41, and 43...and making all of them intrastate (except 39, but it may as well be.)
Interstate 39 is pointless as a 2di...the multiplex with I 90 and I 94 should not have a third route... Interstate 39 is multiplexed with SOMETHING for almost its entire length. If it needed an interstate designation, a X-90 and x-94 number could be thrown on the sections to the north and south of the concurrency, respectively.
Interstate 41 should be an extension of Interstate 55...route it along 90/94, then send it up the I 41 route...and save that number.
I-43 is the only one I think is ok.
And what is the point of Interstates 82, 72, the Interstate 76 in Colorado, or the Interstate 86 in Idaho? Im legitimately curious as I dont know those areas and am willing to admit if im wrong..
And yet... there is no interstate route to directly connect Houston and Austin... or Denver and Dallas.. or Baton Rouge and Natchez .even our new interstate 14 seems like its in a pointless place...compoletely missing all of the major cities and instead cutting through backwater towns.
What do you guys think? Are there routes like that for you? Or do you have routes that you think are unnecessary but then discovered were much more useful than you originally had thought?
You're thinking of each interstate separately, instead of thinking it like a system, with connections to other interstates. The connections are a reason why there's some interstates mainly going through rural areas. Like I-70 west of Green River, UT would be super useless ending at Cove Fort if it's not a given that most traffic at that point will continue onto I-15 SB towards Vegas and SoCal.
Quote from: achilles765 on September 04, 2021, 07:49:13 PM
The route that really made me start thinking about this was Interstate 22. What a pointless looking route. It doesn't even reach Memphis or Birmingham proper...and it doesn't pass any city of any real size or importance. I mean, Tupelo? Hell, even the two cities it connects aren't exactly thriving, growing cities of the future. Neither even has a population of 1 million...and Memphis is one of the murder capitals of the USA.
Instead of thinking of just Memphis to Birmingham, how about Memphis to Atlanta, or Memphis to Florida? That'll make I-22 much more useful than you think.
Quote from: achilles765 on September 04, 2021, 07:49:13 PM
I also have issue with Wisconsin getting to use Interstates 39,41, and 43...and making all of them intrastate (except 39, but it may as well be.)
Interstate 39 is pointless as a 2di...the multiplex with I 90 and I 94 should not have a third route... Interstate 39 is multiplexed with SOMETHING for almost its entire length. If it needed an interstate designation, a X-90 and x-94 number could be thrown on the sections to the north and south of the concurrency, respectively.
Interstate 41 should be an extension of Interstate 55...route it along 90/94, then send it up the I 41 route...and save that number.
I-43 is the only one I think is ok.
Blame IDOT for I-39, I-41 and I-43, specifically the latter two. They don't want to extend any of the THREE N-S interstates that end in the Chicago area (I-55, 57, 65) into Wisconsin, and the reason is probably pretty childish too, but I don't know.
Quote from: achilles765 on September 04, 2021, 07:49:13 PM
And what is the point of Interstates 82, 72, the Interstate 76 in Colorado, or the Interstate 86 in Idaho? Im legitimately curious as I dont know those areas and am willing to admit if im wrong..
Look at driving directions for fastest routing between NYC and Los Angeles. You'll clinch one of the interstates you listed here on the way.
As for I-82, you're pretty much cutting off Seattle from a good chunk of US cities without it. I-90 is too far north to go towards most of the cities, so I-82 provides the connection to points southeast of Seattle.
Quote from: achilles765 on September 04, 2021, 07:49:13 PM
And yet... there is no interstate route to directly connect Houston and Austin... or Denver and Dallas.. or Baton Rouge and Natchez .even our new interstate 14 seems like its in a pointless place...compoletely missing all of the major cities and instead cutting through backwater towns.
I-10 probably could've been routed via Austin via US 290, instead of via San Antonio when the system was first planned, with I-37 extended northwest to meet I-10 at Fredericksburg, and an I-6 between Austin and Houston. It's shorter via Austin instead of dipping down to San Antonio too. I think the reason why San Antonio was chosen over Austin was because it was a much larger city in the 1950s.
I-82 is the main route from Seattle to Boise and Salt Lake City, with onward connections to quite a few regions. The Yakima Valley is also rather important, with the majority of the nation's apples and hops grown there, along with corn, pears, grapes, peppers, and other vegetables. I-82 also passes close to a few ex- and current military facilities.
I-86 is just a spur that happened to get a 2di number when it came time to retire the suffixed routes.
I-64 doesn't actually hit Evansville for some reason...
I-5 versus CA 99 in the Central Valley of California.
I-39 is a straight 306-mile Interstate-grade corridor that connects several significant cities. If you think that it should just be US-51, fine; get rid of the entire Interstate system then, because almost every Interstate was solely a US route at one point. Anti I-39 arguments are based on nothing but resistance to change, there is no logical reason why it shouldn't be an Interstate.
I-55 is IDOT's problem, not Wisconsin's. Wisconsin wanted I-55, I-57, and/or I-65 to continue north from Chicago, and Illinois refused.
I-76 in Colorado makes up a major link of a coast-to-coast journey across the middle of the country. It's part of the fastest route between NYC and LA. There's lots of truck traffic on it.
Quote from: thspfc on September 04, 2021, 09:41:38 PM
I-39 is a straight 306-mile Interstate-grade corridor that connects several significant cities. If you think that it should just be US-51, fine; get rid of the entire Interstate system then, because almost every Interstate was solely a US route at one point. Anti I-39 arguments are based on nothing but resistance to change, there is no logical reason why it shouldn't be an Interstate.
I-55 is IDOT's problem, not Wisconsin's. Wisconsin wanted I-55, I-57, and/or I-65 to continue north from Chicago, and Illinois refused.
I-76 in Colorado makes up a major link of a coast-to-coast journey across the middle of the country. It's part of the fastest route between NYC and LA. There's lots of truck traffic on it.
I-76 is the main route between Denver and Omaha, and points east of Omaha. It was formerly I-80S until they got rid of suffixed routes.
As much as I ignore I-22, I wouldn't say it's useless. But why is there a Slidell-Meridian interstate (I-59) instead of a Gulfport-Jackson interstate (US 49).
Quote from: kenarmy on September 04, 2021, 10:38:38 PM
As much as I ignore I-22, I wouldn't say it's useless. But why is there a Slidell-Meridian interstate (I-59) instead of a Gulfport-Jackson interstate (US 49).
New Orleans to points northeast.
Quote from: achilles765 on September 04, 2021, 07:49:13 PMThe route that really made me start thinking about this was Interstate 22. What a pointless looking route. It doesn't even reach Memphis or Birmingham proper...and it doesn't pass any city of any real size or importance. I mean, Tupelo? Hell, even the two cities it connects aren't exactly thriving, growing cities of the future. Neither even has a population of 1 million...and Memphis is one of the murder capitals of the USA.
Metropolitan Memphis has over 1.3 million and Metropolitan Birmingham has BARELY 1 million. And it does reach Birmingham proper. Why it does not reach Memphis proper I do not know, probably because Tennessee did not get their act together, but there is always I-269 and I-55 / I-69 around.
Indeed Memphis is a murder capital. So are Chicago, Detroit, St. Louis, and New Orleans. Although that does not make it any less important a city to the USA as a distribution center. FedEx bases their main operations in Memphis.
Think about it this way in addition. Metropolitan Atlanta has over 6 million population. Florida has over 21 million population. The fastest way for Walmart to bring their trucks from NW Arkansas to said places is via I-22. It shaves an hour and a half versus going through Chattanooga even with I-840.
I-99. Oh wait, Buddy Schuster wanted a two digit in his area. Despite it could be a three digit as well as the part north of Williamsport (two different ones anyway) signing this into law created this one.
Quote from: Daniel Fiddler on September 04, 2021, 11:20:29 PM
Quote from: achilles765 on September 04, 2021, 07:49:13 PMThe route that really made me start thinking about this was Interstate 22. What a pointless looking route. It doesn't even reach Memphis or Birmingham proper...and it doesn't pass any city of any real size or importance. I mean, Tupelo? Hell, even the two cities it connects aren't exactly thriving, growing cities of the future. Neither even has a population of 1 million...and Memphis is one of the murder capitals of the USA.
Metropolitan Memphis has over 1.3 million and Metropolitan Birmingham has BARELY 1 million. And it does reach Birmingham proper. Why it does not reach Memphis proper I do not know, probably because Tennessee did not get their act together, but there is always I-269 and I-55 / I-69 around.
Indeed Memphis is a murder capital. So are Chicago, Detroit, St. Louis, and New Orleans. Although that does not make it any less important a city to the USA as a distribution center. FedEx bases their main operations in Memphis.
Think about it this way in addition. Metropolitan Atlanta has over 6 million population. Florida has over 21 million population. The fastest way for Walmart to bring their trucks from NW Arkansas to said places is via I-22. It shaves an hour and a half versus going through Chattanooga even with I-840.
There's a significant portion of the U.S. with no native beach access, thus tourists in the center of the country flock to the Atlantic and Gulf coasts to vacation. Anytime we go to Florida, other than to the panhandle beaches, I-22 is the go-to.
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 04, 2021, 08:04:22 PM
Quote from: achilles765 on September 04, 2021, 07:49:13 PM
The route that really made me start thinking about this was Interstate 22. What a pointless looking route. It doesn't even reach Memphis or Birmingham proper...and it doesn't pass any city of any real size or importance. I mean, Tupelo? Hell, even the two cities it connects aren't exactly thriving, growing cities of the future. Neither even has a population of 1 million...and Memphis is one of the murder capitals of the USA.
Instead of thinking of just Memphis to Birmingham, how about Memphis to Atlanta, or Memphis to Florida? That'll make I-22 much more useful than you think.
You can think west and north beyond Memphis, too: I-22 is a major gateway to the southeast from central and western regions of the US. I've even clinched it as part of a straight shot from SLC to Atlanta.
Quote from: achilles765 on September 04, 2021, 07:49:13 PMquote author=achilles765 link=topic=30120.msg2657426#msg2657426 date=1630799353]
I also have issue with Wisconsin getting to use Interstates 39,41, and 43...and making all of them intrastate (except 39, but it may as well be.)
Interstate 39 is pointless as a 2di...the multiplex with I 90 and I 94 should not have a third route... Interstate 39 is multiplexed with SOMETHING for almost its entire length. If it needed an interstate designation, a X-90 and x-94 number could be thrown on the sections to the north and south of the concurrency, respectively.
Interstate 41 should be an extension of Interstate 55...route it along 90/94, then send it up the I 41 route...and save that number.
I-43 is the only one I think is ok.
Why is it not ok to multiplex I-39 with I-90 and I-94, but would be ok to multiplex I-55 with I-90 and I-94, and replace I-41 with with I-55, putting it out of sequence? I fail to see any logic here.
The pointless interstate routes are just political brownie points. Sure, build an interstate grade facility over the corridor, but it doesn't need an interstate designation.
Quote from: SeriesE on September 05, 2021, 01:27:24 AM
The pointless interstate routes are just political brownie points. Sure, build an interstate grade facility over the corridor, but it doesn't need an interstate designation.
Tell that one to NC then.
This is the reason I got for I-10 going between Houston and San Antonio and not Austin. Back in 1950 Austin only had 132,000 people, San Antonio had over 400,000 people and Houston only had 600,000 people. Houston really grew big time in the 1950's going up to almost a million people by 1960. None of these three cities have ever lost population in any census going all the way back to the 1800's they have grown with every single census.
I think today an Interstate between Houston and Austin makes sense and upgrading US-290 would make sense. That should be where I-14, the current I-14 makes little sense.
Quote from: 1 on September 04, 2021, 08:34:34 PM
I-64 doesn't actually hit Evansville for some reason...
It would have to do quite a dip coming west of Louisville or it'd have to cross the Ohio River a few times going into and out of Kentucky again. That's why I-164 was built, it's now I-69 of course.
Quote from: Terry Shea on September 05, 2021, 01:07:59 AM
Quote from: achilles765 on September 04, 2021, 07:49:13 PMquote author=achilles765 link=topic=30120.msg2657426#msg2657426 date=1630799353]
I also have issue with Wisconsin getting to use Interstates 39,41, and 43...and making all of them intrastate (except 39, but it may as well be.)
Interstate 39 is pointless as a 2di...the multiplex with I 90 and I 94 should not have a third route... Interstate 39 is multiplexed with SOMETHING for almost its entire length. If it needed an interstate designation, a X-90 and x-94 number could be thrown on the sections to the north and south of the concurrency, respectively.
Interstate 41 should be an extension of Interstate 55...route it along 90/94, then send it up the I 41 route...and save that number.
I-43 is the only one I think is ok.
Why is it not ok to multiplex I-39 with I-90 and I-94, but would be ok to multiplex I-55 with I-90 and I-94, and replace I-41 with with I-55, putting it out of sequence? I fail to see any logic here.
The sequence isn't important. But I generally agree with you. I think the only real "problem" is the long I-39 multiplex. Ideally I-39 (or a 3di) would run from I-90/94 north to Wausau and I-43 would have been extended into Illinois. But the timing of everything didn't work out, so this is what we have.
I-41 in Wisconsin is fine. It made perfect sense since the highway was "Highway 41." It just now has red, white and blue shields instead of black and white.
Quote from: SeriesE on September 05, 2021, 01:27:24 AM
The pointless interstate routes are just political brownie points. Sure, build an interstate grade facility over the corridor, but it doesn't need an interstate designation.
I disagree with this. I think interstate grade highways of significant length should have interstate designations. That's why the system as a whole is important.
Ok...now that you guys have put this a bit more into perspective for me, I can see that these routes are moire useful than I realized...
Quote from: Flint1979 on September 05, 2021, 07:37:41 AM
Quote from: 1 on September 04, 2021, 08:34:34 PM
I-64 doesn't actually hit Evansville for some reason...
It would have to do quite a dip coming west of Louisville or it'd have to cross the Ohio River a few times going into and out of Kentucky again. That's why I-164 was built, it's now I-69 of course.
I-164 was added in the 1968 additions, and it wasn't complete until around 1990. It was not apart of the original interstate system.
Why is there an interstate from Springfield, IL, to Hannibal, MO (that doesn't even connect to the interstate system on the western end) and yet no interstate along the US 219 corridor from PA north to Buffalo?
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 05, 2021, 07:49:30 AM
Quote from: SeriesE on September 05, 2021, 01:27:24 AM
The pointless interstate routes are just political brownie points. Sure, build an interstate grade facility over the corridor, but it doesn't need an interstate designation.
I disagree with this. I think interstate grade highways of significant length should have interstate designations. That's why the system as a whole is important.
They're typically in-place upgrades of existing highways, such as US routes. I fail to see how an US route number is less serviceable than an interstate number.
Quote from: SeriesE on September 05, 2021, 04:24:49 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 05, 2021, 07:49:30 AM
Quote from: SeriesE on September 05, 2021, 01:27:24 AM
The pointless interstate routes are just political brownie points. Sure, build an interstate grade facility over the corridor, but it doesn't need an interstate designation.
I disagree with this. I think interstate grade highways of significant length should have interstate designations. That's why the system as a whole is important.
They're typically in-place upgrades of existing highways, such as US routes. I fail to see how an US route number is less serviceable than an interstate number.
US routes, for better or worse, vary greatly in quality and design standard. Putting interstate shields on portions of US routes that meet interstate guidelines for a decent distance and connect to the rest of the interstate system serves as a reassurance to the public that the road they're about to get on is going to maintain freeway standard.
Take I-22 as an example, which was almost entirely an in-place upgrade of US 78. In Georgia and eastern Alabama, US 78 is largely a slow, winding, rural 2-lane road. If you live in Georgia and have that association with US 78 already, how else are you supposed to know that the Memphis-Birmingham part of 78 is actually a long-distance continuous interstate-grade freeway? If I'm in Birmingham and I get on freeway US 78, if I haven't studied a good map before, for all I know it's going to downgrade back to a typical rural 2-lane once I get out of the greater metro area. (Also note that Google Maps does not count as a "good map" for the purpose of this exercise as their current color scheme makes it rather difficult to distinguish freeways from arterials most of the time.)
Quote from: US 89 on September 05, 2021, 06:16:04 PM
Take I-22 as an example, which was almost entirely an in-place upgrade of US 78. In Georgia and eastern Alabama, US 78 is largely a slow, winding, rural 2-lane road. If you live in Georgia and have that association with US 78 already, how else are you supposed to know that the Memphis-Birmingham part of 78 is actually a long-distance continuous interstate-grade freeway? If I'm in Birmingham and I get on freeway US 78, if I haven't studied a good map before, for all I know it's going to downgrade back to a typical rural 2-lane once I get out of the greater metro area.
What does it matter? If I'm driving from Birmingham to Memphis, then I'm going to take the route whether I know it's a freeway or not.
Quote from: US 89 on September 05, 2021, 06:16:04 PM
Quote from: SeriesE on September 05, 2021, 04:24:49 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 05, 2021, 07:49:30 AM
Quote from: SeriesE on September 05, 2021, 01:27:24 AM
The pointless interstate routes are just political brownie points. Sure, build an interstate grade facility over the corridor, but it doesn't need an interstate designation.
I disagree with this. I think interstate grade highways of significant length should have interstate designations. That's why the system as a whole is important.
They're typically in-place upgrades of existing highways, such as US routes. I fail to see how an US route number is less serviceable than an interstate number.
US routes, for better or worse, vary greatly in quality and design standard. Putting interstate shields on portions of US routes that meet interstate guidelines for a decent distance and connect to the rest of the interstate system serves as a reassurance to the public that the road they're about to get on is going to maintain freeway standard.
Take I-22 as an example, which was almost entirely an in-place upgrade of US 78. In Georgia and eastern Alabama, US 78 is largely a slow, winding, rural 2-lane road. If you live in Georgia and have that association with US 78 already, how else are you supposed to know that the Memphis-Birmingham part of 78 is actually a long-distance continuous interstate-grade freeway? If I'm in Birmingham and I get on freeway US 78, if I haven't studied a good map before, for all I know it's going to downgrade back to a typical rural 2-lane once I get out of the greater metro area. (Also note that Google Maps does not count as a "good map" for the purpose of this exercise as their current color scheme makes it rather difficult to distinguish freeways from arterials most of the time.)
The general public just follows whatever the GPS tells them to go.
Even with GPS - Google Maps will usually give you multiple routings. If there are two routes that take more or less the exact same time, and one of them is interstate, all else being equal most drivers are going to take that option.
This also has applications beyond GPS usage though - if I get the sense that my 4-lane road is going to downgrade, I'm going to drive a hell of a lot more aggressively and pass as many trucks as I can... because I don't want to get stuck behind them on the 2-lane portions where passing them is going to be a bitch. If I know the freeway is going to last me all the way through, I can drive a lot more relaxed.
There is always value in giving drivers as much information as possible without being obnoxious. In the US, the interstate shield is a well-recognized marker of high quality freeways.
I know this is circular logic, but I just feel that it is important to sign interstate grade highways of significant length as interstates.
^ All of this "we shouldn't sign US highways as interstates just because they're freeways" gives me the sense that the same people saying this believe the interstate system just shouldn't exist then. Because that's exactly what you're saying.
Quote from: sprjus4 on September 06, 2021, 04:20:00 AM
^ All of this "we shouldn't sign US highways as interstates just because they're freeways" gives me the sense that the same people saying this believe the interstate system just shouldn't exist then. Because that's exactly what you're saying.
Some people just don't like change. Notice that no one ever has a problem with the "original" Interstates - it's just the ones that have been commissioned since 1980-ish that they have a problem with. It's the same reason why a lot of people on this forum don't like roundabouts, despite the overwhelming evidence that they are a safer and more efficient alternative to signalized intersections.
Quote from: thspfc on September 06, 2021, 07:37:40 AM
Notice that no one ever has a problem with the "original" Interstates - it's just the ones that have been commissioned since 1980-ish that they have a problem with.
People on this forum have been calling for I-82 to be renumbered to an odd number.
Quote from: 1 on September 06, 2021, 07:41:09 AM
Quote from: thspfc on September 06, 2021, 07:37:40 AM
Notice that no one ever has a problem with the "original" Interstates - it's just the ones that have been commissioned since 1980-ish that they have a problem with.
People on this forum have been calling for I-82 to be renumbered to an odd number.
That's a completely different discussion. I haven't seen anyone say that I-82's corridor shouldn't be an Interstate because previously existing highways could take on the number of the freeway rather than it having an Interstate designation.
I always thought it was a mistake to omit Memphis-Birmingham from the original Interstate system. Honestly, the futures of both cities looked significantly brighter in 1956 than they did later on.
As far as why I-22 doesn't connect to the other Interstates at Memphis, the reason is obvious: now, building the part in Tennessee would have to perform better in an alternatives analysis than a slew of more cost-effective alternatives. Back in the day, it wouldn't have: they just built the Interstates as freeways regardless of cost. And, of course, the cost would've been a lot less back then, before the corridor got all built up.
Of course, Memphis is infamous for the failure to complete I-40 through Overton Park and the surrounding neighborhoods. However, it wasn't a shortage of money that caused that. In fact, Tennessee completed the southern part of I-240 and the connections to I-55 and I-40 east very early on, allowing I-40 and I-55 traffic to pass through Memphis without stopping by the early sixties. IMO, if I-22 had been in the original Interstate system, the short segment in Tennessee would've been completed just as expeditiously.
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 04, 2021, 10:39:57 PM
Quote from: kenarmy on September 04, 2021, 10:38:38 PM
As much as I ignore I-22, I wouldn't say it's useless. But why is there a Slidell-Meridian interstate (I-59) instead of a Gulfport-Jackson interstate (US 49).
New Orleans to points northeast.
I could be wrong, but I believe that much of US 49 between Gulfport and Jackson had already been four-laned by the time the Interstate program was enacted, and thus wasn't in need of replacement by a new freeway. This interchange on US 49 in Hattiesburg (https://bridgehunter.com/ms/forrest/interchange/) was completed in 1946.
I might be cursed and reviled for saying this, but traffic volumes on I-59 north of Gadsden are low enough that they could've been handled by a lesser highway.
Quote from: Tom958 on September 06, 2021, 09:18:53 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 04, 2021, 10:39:57 PM
Quote from: kenarmy on September 04, 2021, 10:38:38 PM
As much as I ignore I-22, I wouldn't say it's useless. But why is there a Slidell-Meridian interstate (I-59) instead of a Gulfport-Jackson interstate (US 49).
New Orleans to points northeast.
I could be wrong, but I believe that much of US 49 between Gulfport and Jackson had already been four-laned by the time the Interstate program was enacted, and thus wasn't in need of replacement by a new freeway. This interchange on US 49 in Hattiesburg (https://bridgehunter.com/ms/forrest/interchange/) was completed in 1946.
I might be cursed and reviled for saying this, but traffic volumes on I-59 north of Gadsden are low enough that they could've been handled by a lesser highway.
From what it looks like, there are two parallel SW-NE corridors from New Orleans to the Northeast. One of them is I-59/81, which was mentioned. The other is I-65/85, and can be reached from New Orleans by going a bit east on I-10. Not sure which one is more used, but the 65/85 one hits more major cities like Atlanta and Charlotte, and dumps you at the southern end of the busy I-95 northeast corridor.
The grid is not perfect (in fact, far from it), but there will always be new additions to the system where it's warranted. Like take the Phoenix-Las Vegas gap, for example. That was one of the most notorious missing links, although it's easy to see why, given that neither city was even half the size it is now. Now I-11 will connect to both cities someday, even if it's not going to be a direct routing. We can bitch and moan about the fact that many of these gaps exist, but most of those will never be filled in due to terrain (for example, San Francisco to Vegas would have to deal with Death Valley and/or the Sierra Nevadas), opposition from various groups (the east ends of I-70 and I-270 in Baltimore and Washington, respectively) and cost (I-49 South, with the viaducts to cross over the many bayous). In other words, despite what the feds may tell you, the Interstate system will never be complete.
How could I forget? The greatest WTF original Interstate in the east had to have been I-16. Sure, it's nice to have, but even now a high-quality four-lane highway with bypasses could handle the traffic on it. Beyond that, it's highly arguable at this point that it would've been better for an Atlanta-Savannah Interstate to branch off of I-20 rather than the hopelessly-crowded I-75.
Quote from: thspfc on September 06, 2021, 07:37:40 AM
Quote from: sprjus4 on September 06, 2021, 04:20:00 AM
^ All of this "we shouldn't sign US highways as interstates just because they're freeways" gives me the sense that the same people saying this believe the interstate system just shouldn't exist then. Because that's exactly what you're saying.
Some people just don't like change. Notice that no one ever has a problem with the "original" Interstates - it's just the ones that have been commissioned since 1980-ish that they have a problem with. It's the same reason why a lot of people on this forum don't like roundabouts, despite the overwhelming evidence that they are a safer and more efficient alternative to signalized intersections.
I hate roundabouts! Especially ones built for absolutely no reason like this one. https://roundabouts.kittelson.com/Roundabouts/Details/1198# There's nothing on the off drive but an employee parking lot which typically has 3 or 4 cars parked in it and and a dumpster further down the drive. The main road, Pfeiffer Woods Dr., probably has a daily traffic count of no more than a few hundred cars. OTOH, there's a roundabout north of Detroit on an exit off from M-53 that has cars flying through it at 70 MPH or greater, bumper to bumper! If roundabouts are indeed safer, it's no doubt because people like me will do whatever is necessary to avoid these idiotic, nightmarish atrocities!
Counterpoint: roundabouts are by and large fine. Though I live in Green Bay so I drive through them pretty regularly.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 06, 2021, 09:19:39 PM
Counterpoint: roundabouts are by and large fine. Though I live in Green Bay so I drive through them pretty regularly.
Thanks for the warning. I'll avoid Green Bay. I'll never go back to Carmel, Indiana either! :)
Quote from: Tom958 on September 06, 2021, 06:11:39 PM
How could I forget? The greatest WTF original Interstate in the east had to have been I-16. Sure, it's nice to have, but even now a high-quality four-lane highway with bypasses could handle the traffic on it. Beyond that, it's highly arguable at this point that it would've been better for an Atlanta-Savannah Interstate to branch off of I-20 rather than the hopelessly-crowded I-75.
Ehh... I just drove I-16 and there was a pretty good amount of traffic on it. I suppose if it were built to a standard like GA 5/515 up north it would be passable, but I can see that getting crowded quickly. There may also be comparison bias at play here - the N/S interstates at either end (75 and 95) are two of the most notoriously crowded interstate highways in the system, so even a moderately-trafficked 16 will feel empty compared to those.
16 is also valuable for the entire GA/SC coast because it can run contraflow and evacuate people much more efficiently if a hurricane threatens the area. As far as I know, you can’t do that with a surface street.
Agreed though that today’s Savannah would have been better served by an interstate coming from 20 at Augusta than 75 at Macon. The population of Florida (and hence I-75 traffic volumes) was a lot lower back in the 50s.
Quote from: US 89 on September 07, 2021, 01:49:39 AM
Quote from: Tom958 on September 06, 2021, 06:11:39 PM
How could I forget? The greatest WTF original Interstate in the east had to have been I-16. Sure, it's nice to have, but even now a high-quality four-lane highway with bypasses could handle the traffic on it. Beyond that, it's highly arguable at this point that it would've been better for an Atlanta-Savannah Interstate to branch off of I-20 rather than the hopelessly-crowded I-75.
Ehh... I just drove I-16 and there was a pretty good amount of traffic on it. I suppose if it were built to a standard like GA 5/515 up north it would be passable, but I can see that getting crowded quickly. ...
Agreed though that today's Savannah would have been better served by an interstate coming from 20 at Augusta than 75 at Macon. The population of Florida (and hence I-75 traffic volumes) was a lot lower back in the 50s.
An Augusta-Savannah interstate route would be fine for traffic coming from Atlanta, but what about Macon, Columbus, and Montgomery? That would leave all of southern Georgia with no east/west interstates. If anything, you could probably argue for an
extension of I-16 westward along the US 80 corridor.
Quote from: webny99 on September 07, 2021, 12:29:15 PM
If anything, you could probably argue for an extension of I-16 westward along the US 80 corridor.
The proposed I-14 is doing exactly that, plus Macon-Augusta.
Quote from: sprjus4 on September 06, 2021, 04:20:00 AM
^ All of this "we shouldn't sign US highways as interstates just because they're freeways" gives me the sense that the same people saying this believe the interstate system just shouldn't exist then. Because that's exactly what you're saying.
Frankly, there's no need for two separate national numbering systems. Either discontinue the US highway system, or the US highway numbers should've been moved onto today's interstates and the substandard/not feasible to upgrade routes be downgraded to state highways.
No, as in the east they are important. Plus, US 50 in Nevada could never be an interstate without major construction and as a US Highway there it works fine as a US designation.
New to this board, but not sure why 'freeway' term is used so much? To me, it is same as expressway, highway, and opposite of 'tollway'. Seen some call tolled Interstates a 'freeway'. Chicago may have Bishop Ford Freeway, but no one calls it that locally.
Depends on Metro area whether limited access highways are called freeway or expressway. Just my 2 cents.
Quote from: US20IL64 on September 07, 2021, 11:13:49 PM
New to this board, but not sure why 'freeway' term is used so much? To me, it is same as expressway, highway, and opposite of 'tollway'. Seen some call tolled Interstates a 'freeway'. Chicago may have Bishop Ford Freeway, but no one calls it that locally.
Depends on Metro area whether limited access highways are called freeway or expressway. Just my 2 cents.
On this forum, a freeway means a completely controlled access highway, while an expressway is also a divided highway, but can also allow for some at grade intersections.
Quote from: US20IL64 on September 07, 2021, 11:13:49 PM
New to this board, but not sure why 'freeway' term is used so much? To me, it is same as expressway, highway, and opposite of 'tollway'. Seen some call tolled Interstates a 'freeway'. Chicago may have Bishop Ford Freeway, but no one calls it that locally.
Depends on Metro area whether limited access highways are called freeway or expressway. Just my 2 cents.
Freeway and expressway have distinct definitions per the MUTCD. Freeways are fully limited access (fully grade separated with no driveway access), expressways are partially limited access (at-grade intersections and driveways permitted)
^ And will add freeway means free of obstructions, no intersections, etc. It has nothing to do with comparing to whether a road is tolled or not.
Quote from: US20IL64 on September 07, 2021, 11:13:49 PM
New to this board, but not sure why 'freeway' term is used so much? To me, it is same as expressway, highway, and opposite of 'tollway'. Seen some call tolled Interstates a 'freeway'. Chicago may have Bishop Ford Freeway, but no one calls it that locally.
Depends on Metro area whether limited access highways are called freeway or expressway. Just my 2 cents.
Many people on the forum use the official terms, and in their areas the transportation departments may use them as well. But in various parts of the country, many people will use different terms.
I now can see 'freeway' meaning free from stop lights, but then some states call 2 lane highways that. Example, the 'notice, freeway' signs on state roads to prevent someone adding driveways. But, will not make a big deal of semantics, here.
Back on topic, some Interstates are added to try to 'add commerce' to remote areas, like Quincy IL getting I-172, or Hannibal MO getting 1-72 extended there.
Quote from: SeriesE on September 07, 2021, 05:15:10 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on September 06, 2021, 04:20:00 AM
^ All of this "we shouldn't sign US highways as interstates just because they're freeways" gives me the sense that the same people saying this believe the interstate system just shouldn't exist then. Because that's exactly what you're saying.
Frankly, there's no need for two separate national numbering systems. Either discontinue the US highway system, or the US highway numbers should've been moved onto today's interstates and the substandard/not feasible to upgrade routes be downgraded to state highways.
See you are just viewing this wrong. These days, US Highways are just state routes with a common numbering system. It isn't a "downgrade" to go from a US route to a state route. It's the same thing except the US route continues its number across state lines.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 07, 2021, 11:44:41 PM
Quote from: US20IL64 on September 07, 2021, 11:13:49 PM
New to this board, but not sure why 'freeway' term is used so much? To me, it is same as expressway, highway, and opposite of 'tollway'. Seen some call tolled Interstates a 'freeway'. Chicago may have Bishop Ford Freeway, but no one calls it that locally.
Depends on Metro area whether limited access highways are called freeway or expressway. Just my 2 cents.
Many people on the forum use the official terms, and in their areas the transportation departments may use them as well. But in various parts of the country, many people will use different terms.
Then in Texas you even have the prefix IH instead of I like other states use for interstates.
In New Jersey all highways regardless of intestate, state, or US are all routes before the number. When I first moved to Florida I had a hard time getting used to calling interstate 4 as I-4 because being from the Garden State we would call it Route 4.
Each end the country has its own lingo about roads.
Quote from: roadman65 on September 08, 2021, 12:34:16 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 07, 2021, 11:44:41 PM
Quote from: US20IL64 on September 07, 2021, 11:13:49 PM
New to this board, but not sure why 'freeway' term is used so much? To me, it is same as expressway, highway, and opposite of 'tollway'. Seen some call tolled Interstates a 'freeway'. Chicago may have Bishop Ford Freeway, but no one calls it that locally.
Depends on Metro area whether limited access highways are called freeway or expressway. Just my 2 cents.
Many people on the forum use the official terms, and in their areas the transportation departments may use them as well. But in various parts of the country, many people will use different terms.
Then in Texas you even have the prefix IH instead of I like other states use for interstates.
In New Jersey all highways regardless of intestate, state, or US are all routes before the number. When I first moved to Florida I had a hard time getting used to calling interstate 4 as I-4 because being from the Garden State we would call it Route 4.
Each end the country has its own lingo about roads.
I have noticed that what one calls a road often is dependent on their location. While most of us on this board use the official terms, many of us sometimes slip into the colloquial...like how I tend to refer to all Interstates as IH xx...because I have lived in Texas for 14 years and have become accustomed to Texas' style of doing things. It's why when I went to Louisiana in June for a funeral, it was odd to be on interstate 10,12, and 55 and not see frontage roads.
Back home in rural Louisiana/Mississippi people just use the term "Interstate" because usually the interstate is the only freeway anywhere near them. Even cities like Baton Rouge and Jackson only have Interstate routes as freeways. New Orleans will use the term "expressway" to refer to BUS US 90...but I have heard many people call it "the interstate" or even "Interstate 90."
When I would travel with my friends to New England, though, it seems like everything was "the highway." In Massachusetts, it was either the highway, or the turnpike for I-90. In New York, expressway was the term I always heard, and in Jersey, it was route,..unless you were talking about IH 95, then it was the turnpike.
I've seen this expressed in speech when people from one region are in another one too...Here in Houston, we have freeways and tollways but many of us just use the number, unless we are referring to a specific area that requires a term. 288 is almost always just referred to as 288 but you may hear someone say "I-10..the Katy" or "The gulf freeway...45". So it's always interesting to me when a transplant asks for a direction to "the expressway" or "the highway." It's one of the ways you can tell how long someone has been in Houston..that and whether they refer to the Easter and Southwwest Freeways as "Interstate 69" or "highway 59."
In MA, the Pike is the Pike, not the "highway."
Quote from: achilles765 on September 08, 2021, 12:55:02 PM
It's one of the ways you can tell how long someone has been in Houston..that and whether they refer to the Easter and Southwwest Freeways as "Interstate 69" or "highway 59."
Same with telling how long someone has been in St Louis, by seeing whether they refer to one freeway in the city as 40 or 64.
Quote from: roadman65 on September 08, 2021, 12:34:16 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 07, 2021, 11:44:41 PM
Quote from: US20IL64 on September 07, 2021, 11:13:49 PM
New to this board, but not sure why 'freeway' term is used so much? To me, it is same as expressway, highway, and opposite of 'tollway'. Seen some call tolled Interstates a 'freeway'. Chicago may have Bishop Ford Freeway, but no one calls it that locally.
Depends on Metro area whether limited access highways are called freeway or expressway. Just my 2 cents.
Many people on the forum use the official terms, and in their areas the transportation departments may use them as well. But in various parts of the country, many people will use different terms.
Then in Texas you even have the prefix IH instead of I like other states use for interstates.
In New Jersey all highways regardless of intestate, state, or US are all routes before the number. When I first moved to Florida I had a hard time getting used to calling interstate 4 as I-4 because being from the Garden State we would call it Route 4.
Each end the country has its own lingo about roads.
In California, you have a completely different prefix: "the".
Chris
Quote from: SEWIGuy on September 08, 2021, 12:19:52 PM
Quote from: SeriesE on September 07, 2021, 05:15:10 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on September 06, 2021, 04:20:00 AM
^ All of this "we shouldn't sign US highways as interstates just because they're freeways" gives me the sense that the same people saying this believe the interstate system just shouldn't exist then. Because that's exactly what you're saying.
Frankly, there's no need for two separate national numbering systems. Either discontinue the US highway system, or the US highway numbers should've been moved onto today's interstates and the substandard/not feasible to upgrade routes be downgraded to state highways.
See you are just viewing this wrong. These days, US Highways are just state routes with a common numbering system. It isn't a "downgrade" to go from a US route to a state route. It's the same thing except the US route continues its number across state lines.
No, I get it perfectly about the realities of the US highway system. It's that some people perceive a state highway as "lesser" than a US highway even though it's not justified.
Quote from: jayhawkco on September 08, 2021, 03:33:15 PM
In California, you have a completely different prefix: "the".
Chris
Only in southern California. Northern California says highway xx or just the number. Since California doesn't allow duplicate numbers, it all works out.
Quote from: Rothman on September 08, 2021, 03:06:33 PM
In MA, the Pike is the Pike, not the "highway."
That's what I thought I wrote. I heard people refer to everything else as the highway but the pike specifically as "the turnpike" or "the mass pike" . But I only ever really met and talked to people who either lived in Boston or in and around the area near Sturbridge/Far east CT. I used to visit the Woodstock, CT area every year.
Quote from: SeriesE on September 08, 2021, 08:06:00 PM
Only in southern California. Northern California says highway xx or just the number. Since California doesn't allow duplicate numbers, it all works out.
That seems to be the case in Ohio (another state that doesn't duplicate numbers) too. Most often, I hear either just the route number (75, 50, 4, etc) without a prefix, or the road name if there is one.
Bay Area nearly uses all #'s 1-9 for x80 routes. Posted elsewhere maybe I-238 should be 1180? 4di! :spin: