This is something I've kinda realized over the past 17+ years of me driving, but I've finally started to acknowledge it. I love all sorts of highways, but there's something about freeways (especially outside of my home state of Michigan) that are not Interstates that intrigues me.
I guess my logic is that it's a given that, 99.99999 percent of the time, we know that every Interstate is a freeway. Nothing terribly exciting with that. I guess it's the fact that U.S., state, and county highways can be any type of road - including freeways. I guess I just like freeways in general and want to drive on every non-Interstate freeway in the U.S. I'm particularly intrigued by Kentucky's network of limited-access "parkways".
What got me thinking about this was the fact that I got to drive on some freeway sections of U.S. 35 and U.S. 52 in Ohio on my way to the Ashland KY road meet a few weeks ago. They were pretty fun.
Non-interstate freeways/tollways and non-interstate freeway/tollway networks are interesting. Some states seem to have freeway=interstate for the most part (Nebraska and the Dakotas come to mind) while others have built extensive non-interstate freeway networks (California, Michigan). Some states built non-interstate freeways and tollways and renumbered them to interstates (yes, that'd be Illinois). Ones in the latter category I can think of off-hand include:
I-39 - built as US-51
I-72 west of Springfield - built as US-36
I-172 - built as IL-336
I-88 - built as the East-West Tollway, then became IL-190 and then IL-5
I-155 - started as IL-121
I-355 (Army Trail Rd to I-290) - built as IL-53
Then again, any road can be interesting. I, for one, am glad that someone appreciates the fact that not every freeway needs an Interstate shield attached to it.
Yeah like I-99! I really did not think that needed to be an interstate as it was fine as a US route from the beginning, not so much the Bud Schuster thing with the number being out of place and written into law. I always like the fact that Pennsylvania like to build a network of freeways that were not part of or attached to the interstate system. This was part of that as well as US 219 further to the west.
Quote from: Henry on April 23, 2013, 01:28:29 PM
I, for one, am glad that someone appreciates the fact that not every freeway needs an Interstate shield attached to it.
Amen! I'm still annoyed by the concept that a freeway MUST be an Interstate. I wish Wisconsin would leave U.S. 41 alone and not waste money converting it to an Interstate.
I still don't understand why an Interstate freeway is superior to a non-Interstate freeway.
California's got plenty of non-interstate freeways for your enjoyment. we've even got a few unnumbered ones!
Quote from: A.J. Bertin on April 23, 2013, 02:04:25 PM
I still don't understand why an Interstate freeway is superior to a non-Interstate freeway.
Because maps suck. LOL
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=28.504902,-81.340027&spn=2.201136,4.22699&gl=us&t=m&z=9
Quote from: A.J. Bertin on April 23, 2013, 02:04:25 PM
Quote from: Henry on April 23, 2013, 01:28:29 PM
I, for one, am glad that someone appreciates the fact that not every freeway needs an Interstate shield attached to it.
Amen! I'm still annoyed by the concept that a freeway MUST be an Interstate. I wish Wisconsin would leave U.S. 41 alone and not waste money converting it to an Interstate.
I still don't understand why an Interstate freeway is superior to a non-Interstate freeway.
Or better yet, does NY 17 really need to be I-86? It was fine for years, as plain ole Route 17 even with a few at grade intersections. Although the latter I can see, as you cannot have any speed limits higher than 55 mph on non freeways in NYS as well as most states east of the Mississippi.
^^ 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.
Quote from: A.J. Bertin on April 23, 2013, 02:04:25 PM
Quote from: Henry on April 23, 2013, 01:28:29 PM
I, for one, am glad that someone appreciates the fact that not every freeway needs an Interstate shield attached to it.
Amen! I'm still annoyed by the concept that a freeway MUST be an Interstate. I wish Wisconsin would leave U.S. 41 alone and not waste money converting it to an Interstate.
I still don't understand why an Interstate freeway is superior to a non-Interstate freeway.
Neither do I. There was nothing wrong with IL-5 or US-51, or even US-220 for that matter. Freeway does not have to equal interstate. M-14 is just as fine as I-80 for a freeway.
I wish more states would accept that just because a freeway is not an Interstate does not automatically mean it must have a lower speed limit than the state allows on Interstates. I can think of any number of non-Interstate freeways that are better roads than many Interstates I've driven and that can easily take a higher speed.
Quote from: Brandon on April 23, 2013, 03:13:28 PM
Quote from: A.J. Bertin on April 23, 2013, 02:04:25 PM
Quote from: Henry on April 23, 2013, 01:28:29 PM
I, for one, am glad that someone appreciates the fact that not every freeway needs an Interstate shield attached to it.
Amen! I'm still annoyed by the concept that a freeway MUST be an Interstate. I wish Wisconsin would leave U.S. 41 alone and not waste money converting it to an Interstate.
I still don't understand why an Interstate freeway is superior to a non-Interstate freeway.
Neither do I. There was nothing wrong with IL-5 or US-51, or even US-220 for that matter. Freeway does not have to equal interstate. M-14 is just as fine as I-80 for a freeway.
Or look at the freeways in the Phoenix area that aren't interstates, such as US 60, Arizona 51, and the Loop routes (101, 202 and the under-construction 303). All beautiful stretches of freeway in better condition than most of the freeways in Los Angeles, whether interstate or not.
Quote from: hm insulators on April 23, 2013, 03:42:42 PM
Or look at the freeways in the Phoenix area that aren't interstates, such as US 60, Arizona 51, and the Loop routes (101, 202 and the under-construction 303). All beautiful stretches of freeway in better condition than most of the freeways in Los Angeles, whether interstate or not.
Let's be honest, there are roads in Moldova that are in better condition than some Los Angeles area interstates.
You're probably right. California really has let their freeway system go to pot.
Quote from: NE2 on April 23, 2013, 02:14:37 PM
Quote from: A.J. Bertin on April 23, 2013, 02:04:25 PM
I still don't understand why an Interstate freeway is superior to a non-Interstate freeway.
Because maps suck. LOL
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=28.504902,-81.340027&spn=2.201136,4.22699&gl=us&t=m&z=9
L@FF
Quote from: Brandon on April 23, 2013, 03:13:28 PM
Quote from: A.J. Bertin on April 23, 2013, 02:04:25 PM
Quote from: Henry on April 23, 2013, 01:28:29 PM
I, for one, am glad that someone appreciates the fact that not every freeway needs an Interstate shield attached to it.
Amen! I'm still annoyed by the concept that a freeway MUST be an Interstate. I wish Wisconsin would leave U.S. 41 alone and not waste money converting it to an Interstate.
I still don't understand why an Interstate freeway is superior to a non-Interstate freeway.
Neither do I. There was nothing wrong with IL-5 or US-51, or even US-220 for that matter. Freeway does not have to equal interstate. M-14 is just as fine as I-80 for a freeway.
At that time (1987-1995), only rural interstates were allowed to be 65 MPH, thus states pushing for interstate designations at that time
Quote from: hm insulators on April 23, 2013, 03:42:42 PM
beautiful stretches of freeway
that might be stretching it. no matter which Phoenix-area freeway you take, you're still gonna be in Phoenix - a city that is effectively an overgrown suburb of itself, complete with subdivision after subdivision and no real urban character, resulting in a concrete blight in the middle of spectacular desert scenery.
the only positive thing about Phoenix is that it isn't Tucson, which is basically the same except with more 1070 nutters.
Quote from: Big John on April 23, 2013, 02:20:10 PM
^^ 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.
– I get off early next Friday, and I was thinking we could take a little trip somewhere.
– Oh, that sounds great! I could use a mini vacation right about now.
– One of my coworkers was talking about the Hard Rock casino in Tulsa. You wanna check that out? We haven't been to that one, and Tulsa's only a few hours away. I've never been to Tulsa before, have you?
– I don't know, hon. I'm looking at the map and it looks like, once you get off I-35, it's not an Interstate. "Cimarron Turnpike" doesn't sound like the kind of road I want to drive on. And what kind of number is 412, anyway? Sounds shady.
– Oh, yeah, you're right. I didn't notice that. Oh, well, let's just go to Kansas City instead.
– That sounds better. Screw Oklahoma!Yeah, I'm thinking that doesn't really happen.
Isn't it more about federal funding than anything else?
Quote from: spmkam on April 23, 2013, 06:04:12 PM
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.
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.
Illinois went wild Interstating because the speed limits were first raised only on interstates and the Toll Authority didn't want to lose out on traffic because of that
There is still US 34 Illinois tried for 174. It had to try several times for 72
There is Illinois 255 the Alton by pass.
Everything else is pretty much a stub or a sort section of a by-pass
US 51 Decatur
US 67 Jacksonville bypass
IL 6 North Peoria bypass
IL 92 Rock Island
US 20 Rockford and Elgin and Freeport bypass
Illinois 53 north
Amstutz
IL 56 Parts of IL 83 171 and IL 394 Chicago area
and the Elgin -Ohare
Currently planned are the IL 53 extension and Elgin Ohare extension. And maybe the Algonquin by pass qualifies
Post Merge: April 23, 2013, 07:39:52 PM
Oh and LSD
Quote from: 3467 on April 23, 2013, 07:22:55 PM
Illinois went wild Interstating because the speed limits were first raised only on interstates and the Toll Authority didn't want to lose out on traffic because of that
There is still US 34 Illinois tried for 174. It had to try several times for 72
There is Illinois 255 the Alton by pass.
Everything else is pretty much a stub or a sort section of a by-pass
US 51 Decatur
US 67 Jacksonville bypass
IL 6 North Peoria bypass
IL 92 Rock Island
US 20 Rockford and Elgin and Freeport bypass
Illinois 53 north
Amstutz
IL 56 Parts of IL 83 171 and IL 394 Chicago area
and the Elgin -Ohare
Currently planned are the IL 53 extension and Elgin Ohare extension. And maybe the Algonquin by pass qualifies
Other stubs are US 50 and Illinois 394.
Missed those Can you list IN? the 50 stub crosses the boarder.
Non Interstate Freeways that are....Interstate!
There can be more design variation on non interstates. Il 92 has a very short median that would never pass interstate muster.
Quote from: 3467 on April 23, 2013, 07:39:50 PM
Missed those Can you list IN? the 50 stub crosses the boarder.
Non Interstate Freeways that are....Interstate!
There can be more design variation on non interstates. Il 92 has a very short median that would never pass interstate muster.
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
I-469 started as IN-469.
The urban areas of Texas have pretty impressive non interstate freeways.
Quote from: Brandon on April 23, 2013, 07:49:26 PM
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
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, ....
Quote from: kphoger on April 23, 2013, 05:54:31 PM
Quote from: Big John on April 23, 2013, 02:20:10 PM
^^ 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.
Quote from: Duke87 on April 23, 2013, 09:27:12 PM
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?
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.
Quote from: kphoger on April 23, 2013, 09:50:50 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on April 23, 2013, 09:27:12 PM
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
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 23, 2013, 10:39:22 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 23, 2013, 09:50:50 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on April 23, 2013, 09:27:12 PM
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??? :)
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
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.
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
Quote from: wxfree on April 23, 2013, 11:56:29 PM
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).
Quote from: briantroutman on April 24, 2013, 12:22:49 AM
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.
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.
Quote from: spmkam on April 23, 2013, 07:10:05 PM
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.
Quote from: Brandon on April 23, 2013, 07:07:42 PM
Quote from: spmkam on April 23, 2013, 06:04:12 PM
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.
Quote from: kphoger on April 24, 2013, 08:13:26 AM
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.
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 24, 2013, 11:44:57 AM
Quote from: spmkam on April 23, 2013, 07:10:05 PM
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!
Quote from: vdeane on April 24, 2013, 11:47:13 AM
Quote from: kphoger on April 24, 2013, 08:13:26 AM
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.
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 24, 2013, 11:44:57 AM
Quote from: Brandon on April 23, 2013, 07:07:42 PM
Quote from: spmkam on April 23, 2013, 06:04:12 PM
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.
Quote from: A.J. Bertin on April 23, 2013, 02:04:25 PM
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.
Quote from: kphoger on April 24, 2013, 08:13:26 AM
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.
Quote from: Brandon on April 24, 2013, 01:52:23 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 24, 2013, 11:44:57 AM
Quote from: Brandon on April 23, 2013, 07:07:42 PM
Quote from: spmkam on April 23, 2013, 06:04:12 PM
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.
Quote from: Duke87 on April 24, 2013, 08:38:28 PM
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
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.
Quote from: NE2 on April 24, 2013, 08:57:20 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on April 24, 2013, 08:38:28 PM
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).
Quote from: hobsini2 on April 24, 2013, 08:55:54 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 24, 2013, 01:52:23 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 24, 2013, 11:44:57 AM
Quote from: Brandon on April 23, 2013, 07:07:42 PM
Quote from: spmkam on April 23, 2013, 06:04:12 PM
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.
Quote from: Brandon on April 24, 2013, 09:45:27 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on April 24, 2013, 08:38:28 PMthere 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."
QuoteCalifornia's got plenty of non-interstate freeways for your enjoyment. we've even got a few unnumbered ones!
Word! (probably dating myself a bit there!) A lot of California's state freeways, especially in OC and SD County seem to be in a lot better shape than a lot of full fledged interstates (I'm looking at you I-5 in Portland, for an example!)
Quote from: swbrotha100 on April 23, 2013, 08:09:09 PM
The urban areas of Texas have pretty impressive non interstate freeways.
Dallas has several, both free and tolled, which carry a bunch of traffic. US 75 north into Oklahoma may be the busiest non-interstate truck route in the country.
I like city and county freeways the best.
Quote from: Steve on April 24, 2013, 11:42:31 PM
Quote from: Brandon on April 24, 2013, 09:45:27 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on April 24, 2013, 08:38:28 PMthere 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."
Thank you so much for the logical parallel! Here's another one:
– All state highways are paved.
– Huh? There are several gravel state highways. For example, part of Minnesota 74.
– But a good many of them are paved. My point stands.
Quote from: Road Hog on April 25, 2013, 01:50:51 AMUS 75 north into Oklahoma may be the busiest non-interstate truck route in the country.
more than CA-99? that would be my candidate.
Quote from: briantroutman on April 24, 2013, 12:22:49 AM
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
But the downside would be running out of 3DIs which would be the case in California. The following are either entirely freeways or have freeway segments...
* US Routes: 101, 50
* California State Routes: 1, 2, 4, 12, 13, 14, 17, 20, 22, 24, 29, 44, 47, 52, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 60, 65, 71, 73, 78, 84, 85, 87, 91, 92, 99, 103, 110, 118, 120, 125, 126, 133, 134, 163, 168, 170, 180, 237, 241, 242, 261, 330. (I may have missed a few but you get the point)
Many of these routes don't intersect a current 2DI (5, 8, 10, 15, 40, 80) so giving them a 3DI is impossible.
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 25, 2013, 02:50:15 PM
But the downside would be running out of 3DIs which would be the case in California. The following are either entirely freeways or have freeway segments...
I completely agree–and I meant that freeways should be included where they fit. So if there's no 2DI, the freeway certainly wouldn't work as a 3DI.
That said, many of the ones you listed would fit as 3DIs if any of I-3, I-7/I-9, extended I-40, etc. designations ever came into being–of which clearly the I-7/I-9 would be the most likely and impact a large number of spur routes.
Quote from: NE2 on April 24, 2013, 08:57:20 PM
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
Huh.
Well then, that makes the situation over there worse. At least our freeways show up on maps as freeways even if they aren't interstates.
The question then is, why is that particular road not classified as a motorway?
Anyways, this is why determining line color based solely on classification is stupid unless you've compulsively matched classification with level of improvement.
I agree with the OP: I'm a big fan of non-Interstate freeways, and I think it's really cool for a freeway to be part of an all-purpose route system. Not every freeway needs to be an Interstate, and it often makes more sense for a freeway to be a US Route, state route, or even a county route than an Interstate.
Quote from: 3467 on April 23, 2013, 07:39:50 PM
Missed those Can you list IN? the 50 stub crosses the boarder.
Non Interstate Freeways that are....Interstate!
Based on a
cursory examination of my 2011 Rand McNally and Google Maps, I have found that nationwide there are 27 non-Interstate freeways that cross state lines. 26 of these exist in two states, and 1 exists in three states (US 22 in PA, WV, and OH). NY/NJ 440 is unusual, in that it originates in New Jersey, crosses into New York, and then crosses back into New Jersey. As near as I can tell the Merritt Parkway/Hutchinson River Parkway couplet is the oldest, with the interstate connection built around 1938, predating the Interstates by two decades.
Below is the full list of the 25. If there's any freeway I missed please point it out:
US 80: Georgia-Alabama
Merritt Parkway/Hutchinson River Parkway: New York-Connecticut
US 50: Indiana-Illinois
US 24: Indiana-Ohio
US 31: Michigan-Indiana
US 151: Iowa-Wisconsin
US 50: DC-Maryland
US 3: New Hampshire-Massachusetts
MA 24/RI 24: Massachusetts-Rhode Island
MA 146/RI 146: Massachusetts-Rhode Island
US 23: Michigan-Ohio
US 78: Alabama-Mississippi
NY 440/NJ 440: New York-New Jersey-New York
NJ 444/NY 982L (Garden State Parkway): New Jersey-New York
NJ 445/NY 987C (Palisades Interstate Parkway): New Jersey-New York
US 29: Virginia-North Carolina
US 22: Ohio-West Virginia-Pennsylvania
US 50: Ohio-West Virginia
US 75: Texas-Oklahoma
PA 43/WV 43: Pennsylvania-West Virginia
US 15: Pennsylvania-New York
US 202: Pennsylvania-New Jersey
US 1: Pennsylvania-New Jersey
PA 90/NJ 90: Pennsylvania-New Jersey
US 322: Pennsylvania-New Jersey
KY 9003/US 45E (Purchase Parkway): Kentucky-Tennessee
US 35: Ohio-West Virginia
We'd have to go to the videotape (or Google or Bing aerial imagery) to determine if these should qualify:
1.) US 51/Purchase Parkway to US 45E, KY-TN. There's a continuous four-lane here, but it switches from US 51 to US 45E. Off the top of my head, I can't remember how far south 45E remains a full freeway.
2.) US 35, WV-OH. I'm pretty sure it's a full freeway north of the Ohio River, but I can't remember how far south of the WV 2 interchange it remains a freeway.
Quote from: Duke87 on April 26, 2013, 10:12:40 PMWell then, that makes the situation over there worse. At least our freeways show up on maps as freeways even if they aren't interstates.
That would drive me mad if applied here. It works over there as all signs are green. But to have green-signed roads shown in blue just as it is a freeway, would really bug me.
We have a system, you have a system - just because our system is different to your doesn't mean that ours doesn't work.
UK mapping gets round this 'problem' you cite with either white/yellow/red/green/blue dots (depending on road colour) to mark interchanges or showing all sliproads. It is quite clear from UK mapping which roads are freeway-esque and which are not.
QuoteThe question then is, why is that particular road not classified as a motorway?
Cross-section, vertical and horizontal curvature, nature of junctions (tight slip roads) - exactly the same reasons why it wouldn't be an interstate.
OK, that is a bit of a red herring, as motorway is a legal status, not a set of design standards. It is not a motorway because it is not a special road limited to Classes I and II, but rather a right of way. To make it a motorway, you'd need to create an alternate route for Tractors, Cyclists, etc (as the right of way is a right that cannot be unbroken: to make a track on your land private there needs to be a gate that is locked at least 1 day a year to prove that it isn't open-access. If people have had access for 25 years, it becomes a legally enshrined right of way that you cannot deny access to. Special roads are the only ungated roads that are not right of ways) and a legal order declaring it such. The A38 was online upgrades and short bypasses, so a parallel local access road would have been needed between the villages to maintain the right of way.
QuoteAnyways, this is why determining line color based solely on classification is stupid unless you've compulsively matched classification with level of improvement.
So the fact that map colours (well green and blue) match sign colours is stupid unless the sign colours are about road standards, rather than route importance and legal rights of access respectively?
I'd rather have important routes signed and mapped in green and blue (with the difference being rights of access) than have routes coloured solely by quality - there's other ways of doing that (thickness, etc) which UK maps do (French Michelin does it best, but their colour scheme means that UK map-lovers don't have much love for them due to that - though as they are excellently drawn, clear and at least they have the same distinctions in colour (even though different colours) there isn't the hate there is for Google's ugly and hard-to-use maps).
We navigate differently, we are not stupid for doing so: to think that our way of navigating is stupid is stupid and cultural imperialism to boot.
Quote from: hbelkins on September 25, 2013, 08:20:36 PM
We'd have to go to the videotape (or Google or Bing aerial imagery) to determine if these should qualify:
1.) US 51/Purchase Parkway to US 45E, KY-TN. There's a continuous four-lane here, but it switches from US 51 to US 45E. Off the top of my head, I can't remember how far south 45E remains a full freeway.
Checking with Google Earth, the Purchase Parkway continues into Tennessee as US 45E for half a mile before its first at-grade intersection. In addition, there is a freeway interchange in Tennessee. That's indisputably a freeway, and I'll add that one to the list.
Quote2.) US 35, WV-OH. I'm pretty sure it's a full freeway north of the Ohio River, but I can't remember how far south of the WV 2 interchange it remains a freeway.
In US 35's case there are interchanges on both sides of the border and it continues for a mile into West Virginia before the first at-grade intersection in West Virginia. So it counts too.
Quote from: english si on September 25, 2013, 08:21:49 PMQuote from: Duke87 on April 26, 2013, 10:12:40 PMWell then, that makes the situation over there worse. At least our freeways show up on maps as freeways even if they aren't interstates.
That would drive me mad if applied here. It works over there as all signs are green. But to have green-signed roads shown in blue just as it is a freeway, would really bug me.
Why should the color of the lines have anything to do with the sign colors? Signs on Interstates in the U.S. are green but the most popular road atlases mark them as blue lines, along with all other freeways. Rand McNally uses green only for tolled freeways. I personally would prefer blue for freeways, purple for tolled freeways, and green for expressways.
QuoteCross-section, vertical and horizontal curvature, nature of junctions (tight slip roads) - exactly the same reasons why it wouldn't be an interstate.
OK, that is a bit of a red herring, as motorway is a legal status, not a set of design standards. It is not a motorway because it is not a special road limited to Classes I and II, but rather a right of way. To make it a motorway, you'd need to create an alternate route for Tractors, Cyclists, etc (as the right of way is a right that cannot be unbroken: to make a track on your land private there needs to be a gate that is locked at least 1 day a year to prove that it isn't open-access. If people have had access for 25 years, it becomes a legally enshrined right of way that you cannot deny access to. Special roads are the only ungated roads that are not right of ways) and a legal order declaring it such. The A38 was online upgrades and short bypasses, so a parallel local access road would have been needed between the villages to maintain the right of way.
The way I get it, motorway status in the U.K. is contingent on whether the road has what we would call "freeway restrictions" rather than the road being a freeway of a certain standard. In the U.S. any road that meets the standards can become an Interstate - whether it actually becomes an Interstate is another matter, and that's where it starts to get really interesting.
QuoteWe have a system, you have a system - just because our system is different to your doesn't mean that ours doesn't work.
Your system works, but as a very American roadgeek I'd argue the American mapping system is better. The degree varies, but "a freeway is a freeway is a freeway" is standard operating procedure in the U.S. In the most widespread atlases, the shield the road carries is irrelevant - the only thing that matters is the type of roadway it is. I do admit American classifications have as many if not more quirks than British classifications. Interstate 587 in Kingston, New York is part of the Interstate system but could easily masquerade as an arterial road, whereas Sam Cooper Boulevard in Memphis, Tennessee is a much bigger freeway but is unshielded and maintained by the city.
EDIT: In the list so far, the state with the most of these routes is Pennsylvania with 7, followed by New Jersey with 6, New York and Ohio with 5, and West Virginia with 4.
Some notes and additional, arranged by route number:
- Although not shown as a freeway on maps, US 1/25/78/278 at Augusta, GA shows some freeway characteristics in the field.
- US 15 MD/PA comes close...depending on how far into a state you consider.
- US 25 SC/NC comes close...freeway on the NC side, but I don't remember where the first at-grade is.
- US 25E KY/TN under Cumberland Gap could arguably be called a yes, as it's controlled-access through the park and tunnel, anchored by interchanges on each end.
- Does US 30 OH/WV count?
- US 34 IA/IL.
- US 36 KS/MO.
- Although not at present, the bridge is under construction that'll add MN 36/WI 64 to the list in a few years.
- As with US 15 above, an argument could be made for US 45 MS/TN...the first at-grade is about a half-mile north of the state line.
- An argument could be made for the new US 93 bridge near Hoover Dam (AZ/NV).
- US 151 IA/WI also includes US 61.
- Although not shown very well on maps, US 271 OK/AR would apply.
- DC 295/MD 201 (yes, it's officially MD 201 until Kenilworth Ave splits off and the Baltimore-Washington Pkwy begins at the US 50 interchange).
- US 395 NV/CA north of Reno either is or comes pretty darn close.
Although not being counted on this list, there are two Super-2s that would otherwise qualify: US 52 WV/OH, and VT 279/NY-whatever-the-reference-route-is.
NJ/NY 495. US 22 PA-NJ. PA 611-NJ 94. Several crossings of GW Parkway and VA 27 across the Boundary Channel between Virginia and DC (though an at-grade ped crossing northbound may disqualify one or more), as well as US 50 (the merge with I-66 happens on the DC side of the line). The Peace Bridge, US-bound only. US 78 TN-MS (making this a three-state until I-22). World Trade International Bridge (trucks only?). CA 905 (until I-905). US 2 MN-WI, maybe. West Entrance Road MT-WY, according to the Henries at the Goog. LOL
Quote from: 31E on September 25, 2013, 09:15:27 PMWhy should the color of the lines have anything to do with the sign colors?
But why should they not in the UK, where sign colours are a key navigational feature telling you the importance of the road? Sure, in the US and other places, every road will be green, which is silly, but we were talking UK.
And why should the colour of the lines have anything to do with route quality? Why can't line style tell you that, freeing up colour to mark route importance as happens in Europe?
QuoteSigns on Interstates in the U.S. are green but the most popular road atlases mark them as blue lines, along with all other freeways.
Yes, but almost all signs are green in the US (as I said). You missed my point here - in the US, sign colour is unrelated to importance or quality of the road so is irrelevant for mapping, however in the UK it signifies importance (and often quality).
QuoteI personally would prefer ... purple for tolled freeways
like the toll-specific signs...
Purple is a better colour for toll routes than green - though to scupper your love of it, UK maps often show the M6Toll with some element of purple (normally a thin middle line in the thick blue one to make it stand out as unique, not as there's purple signs).
QuoteYour system works, but as a very American roadgeek I'd argue the American mapping system is better.
For America, yes it is. I didn't say otherwise - my only mentions of the American network were to say that you don't have the sign thing, and that the design standards for interstates thing.
But, for Britain (the main subject of where we are talking about), the British system is better and to declare the American way is better in the way you have is "American Fuck Yeah!" cultural bigotry.
QuoteThe degree varies, but "a freeway is a freeway is a freeway" is standard operating procedure in the U.S.
But it isn't in the UK, so perhaps instead of going "why aren't they like us" perhaps try and understand how we operate, rather than saying that the American way is better and complaining that we aren't like you, poo-pooing explanations as to why we aren't.
Quote from: english si on September 26, 2013, 07:52:18 AM
But, for Britain (the main subject of where we are talking about), the British system is better and to declare the American way is better in the way you have is "American Fuck Yeah!" cultural bigotry.QuoteThe degree varies, but "a freeway is a freeway is a freeway" is standard operating procedure in the U.S.
But it isn't in the UK, so perhaps instead of going "why aren't they like us" perhaps try and understand how we operate, rather than saying that the American way is better and complaining that we aren't like you, poo-pooing explanations as to why we aren't.
It isn't cultural bigotry - I just think "a freeway is a freeway is a freeway" is more sensible from a navigational standpoint. It's also simpler and more effective for mapping purposes to have different colors denote road quality rather than different styles, and to rely on the shield placed on the line for knowing what classification the road is. However, I do appreciate the differences in mapping techniques, since it's interesting to see how different means are used to reach the same ends.
My guess is that "classification culture" is at the root of the differences. In Britain important roads are numbered nationally and motorway status is of paramount importance, whereas in the U.S. the numbering system is more fragmented. Each state has its own system and freeways can carry any shield that exists - Interstate, US Route, state route, county route, a special shield, or even no shield at all. In some states every freeway is an Interstate and in others there are more freeways outside the Interstate system than within it; in places where non-Interstate freeways are common the shield the freeway carries is irrelevant. Are there any freeway-standard roads in Britian that carry numbers other than A or M? I've never heard of any, but if A and M are the only two types then I can see how classification would be quite relevant in Britain.
We have the OOECA expressways which I am not a big fan of the tolls, but interesting to say they are a network of freeways.
Also in NJ you do have the Garden State Parkway, the NJ 42/ACE, the NJ Turnpike (Exits 1 to 6), NJ 18, NJ 24, and NJ 21 that make a great freeway network in the Garden State. In fact I remember that someone here years ago stated that the GSP is like an interstate to defend another user from saying NJ needs more interstates. The PARKWAY to us New Jerseyans is the "Main Street" of New Jersey and not only our longest road and freeway in miles, but just as popular in culture as well.
Quote from: 31E on September 25, 2013, 06:45:51 PM
I agree with the OP: I'm a big fan of non-Interstate freeways, and I think it's really cool for a freeway to be part of an all-purpose route system. Not every freeway needs to be an Interstate, and it often makes more sense for a freeway to be a US Route, state route, or even a county route than an Interstate.
Quote from: 3467 on April 23, 2013, 07:39:50 PM
Missed those Can you list IN? the 50 stub crosses the boarder.
Non Interstate Freeways that are....Interstate!
Based on a cursory examination of my 2011 Rand McNally and Google Maps, I have found that nationwide there are 27 non-Interstate freeways that cross state lines. 26 of these exist in two states, and 1 exists in three states (US 22 in PA, WV, and OH). NY/NJ 440 is unusual, in that it originates in New Jersey, crosses into New York, and then crosses back into New Jersey. As near as I can tell the Merritt Parkway/Hutchinson River Parkway couplet is the oldest, with the interstate connection built around 1938, predating the Interstates by two decades.
Below is the full list of the 25. If there's any freeway I missed please point it out:
CT/RI 78
US 22 PA-NJ
NY 17-PA 17-NY 17 in Waverly (another case where the highway enters a state twice...used to be NY 17-PA 17-NY 17-PA 17)
I kind of like MD with its freeways designated as MD Routes. MD 10, MD 32 (although still non freeway at one point), MD 100, MD 200, and of course there was MD 46 that for some reason got changed to I-195 afterward, and also MD 43 that was supposed to be freeway that got demoted to arterial.
PA does at one point have many non interstate freeways such as the PA Turnpike non mainline toll roads excluding I-476, PA 28, US 22, US 219, US 220 if Bud Schuster did not create his brilliant I-99 plan), US 30 in some places, PA 283, US 222, US 422 (Eastern Segment) and even US 1 in Chester County.
I would have love to see NJ original freeway plan with NJ 74, NJ 75, NJ 92, NJ 90 extension to the NJ Turnpike, NJ 31 unbuilt freeway. NJ 24 to Mendham, NJ 55 southern extension, US 322 Glassboro Bypass, NJ 85, and even the planned freeway that would link NJ 10 and the never built extension of NJ 24 in Morris Township ( I do not remember the route number). That would have been so impressive it all got built and provided such a great network of freeways for NJ>
Yes, US 30 is a freeway in both Ohio and West Virginia.
Quote from: bugo on September 26, 2013, 11:24:13 AM
Yes, US 30 is a freeway in both Ohio and West Virginia.
Too bad in Pennsy that they cannot even complete the gap between Lancaster and Coatesville which has been needed for 40 years now. The Government can get eminent domain to take down an ugly observation tower in Gettysburg, PA that posed a threat to no one, yet they cannot use it to get a much needed highway built that its non construction is a threat to people.
Quote from: bugo on September 26, 2013, 11:24:13 AM
Yes, US 30 is a freeway in both Ohio and West Virginia.
Not for very long, however.
It quickly goes to two lanes after it passes the WV 2 interchange.
http://goo.gl/maps/BIUmV
Quote from: HurrMark on September 26, 2013, 10:25:12 AM
NY 17-PA 17-NY 17 in Waverly (another case where the highway enters a state twice...used to be NY 17-PA 17-NY 17-PA 17)
Judgement call here - NJ 17-NY 17 crosses the border as a freeway multiplex with I-287...does it not? (But then I guess it fails as a non-interstate freeway, so...never mind.)
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 25, 2013, 02:50:15 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on April 24, 2013, 12:22:49 AM
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
But the downside would be running out of 3DIs which would be the case in California. The following are either entirely freeways or have freeway segments...
* US Routes: 101, 50
* California State Routes: 1, 2, 4, 12, 13, 14, 17, 20, 22, 24, 29, 44, 47, 52, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 60, 65, 71, 73, 78, 84, 85, 87, 91, 92, 99, 103, 110, 118, 120, 125, 126, 133, 134, 163, 168, 170, 180, 237, 241, 242, 261, 330. (I may have missed a few but you get the point)
Many of these routes don't intersect a current 2DI (5, 8, 10, 15, 40, 80) so giving them a 3DI is impossible.
You did miss CA 90, both the Marina and Nixon Freeways (of course, these are short segments, so easily overlooked).
Does US 395 from Hallelujah Jct to the Nevada line (north of Reno) qualify?
In CO, there are some non-Interstate freeways, including US 6 in the western sections of Denver, US 285 southwest of Denver into the foothills, C-470 around the southwestern quarter of Denver (and the E-470 tollway and Northwest Parkway, which are extensions), US 24 in Colorado Springs, and CO 47 in Pueblo, at least for very short stretches.
In New England, here is a list of non-interstate freeways:
Full or almost full:
MA 3
RI 4
CT 9
RI 10
CT 11
MA/RI 24
MA 25
RI 37
CT/RI 78
RI 99
MA 128
MA 140
MA/RI 146
MA 213
CT 401
RI 403
Partial:
US 1
MA 2
CT 2
CT 3
US 3
US 6
US 7
CT 8
CT 15
NH 16
CT 20
CT 25
MA 57
CT 72
MA 79
NH 101
RI 138
Non-Interstate Freeways in Virginia:
US Routes:
13: Suffolk Bypass
15: Keysville, Warrenton, and Culpeper (partial) Bypasses
19: Lebanon and Tazewell Bypasses
23: Big Stone Gap and Norton Bypasses
29: Danville Expy, Chatham, Gretna, Altavista, Lynchburg-Amherst, Charlottesville, Culpeper (partial), and Warrenton Bypasses
29B: Lynchburg Expy
58: MLK Freeway, Danville Expy, Suffolk, Franklin, Lawrenceville, Clarksville, Martinsville, and Hillsville Bypasses
220: Roy L. Webber Expy, Martinsville and Rocky Mount Bypasses
250: Charlottesville Bypass (partial)
360: Keysville Bypass
460: Suffolk, Farmville, Lynchburg, Bedford, Christiansburg-Blacksburg, Bluefield Bypasses
501: Lynchburg Expy
VA Routes:
37: Winchester Bypass
76: Powhite Pkwy
146: Richmond Connector
164: Western Fwy
168: Chesapeake Expy
195: Downtown Expy
199: Humelsine Pkwy
262: Woodrow Wilson Pkwy (partial)
267: Dulles Toll Road/Greenway
288: Richmond Beltway
785: Danville Expy (Future Interstate Route)
895: Pocahontas Pkwy (Future/Former Interstate Route)
90004: Dulles Access Rd
90005: GW Parkway
This list is probably missing a few.
QuoteCulpeper Bypass
The southern part, yes. The northern part of the bypass still has an at-grade at SR 666.
Quote17: Warrenton Bypass, Oak Grove Connector (briefly)
Officially no for the latter. The Oak Grove Connector begins at 17 (464's old end).
Quote211: Luray Bypass
Not true. Yes, it's limited access and there's the interchange at 340, but there are at-grades on either side of that interchange within the bypass corridor.
Quote250: Charlottesville Bypass
Only the part co-located with US 29.
Quote262: Woodrow Wilson Pkwy
Only part of the southern leg, from I-64/81 to about VA 252. From VA 252 to US 250, it's "Super-2". The northern leg "northeast" of US 250 is at-grade.
For the record, my working definition of a freeway is a road that has full control of access (no driveways), at least two interchanges, and no at-grade intersections. We can debate about RIROs and the like but the definition is quite usable. Keep the entries coming.
Quote from: Mark68 on September 27, 2013, 06:58:13 PM
Does US 395 from Hallelujah Jct to the Nevada line (north of Reno) qualify?
No. There are several at-grade intersections with minor roads along US 395 from the state line north to the California 70 interchange at Hallelujah Junction. So it is expressway, not freeway (using the Caltrans definition of those two words).
Regards,
Andy
Quote from: froggie on September 26, 2013, 03:25:55 AM
- An argument could be made for the new US 93 bridge near Hoover Dam (AZ/NV).
Yes, US 93 over Hoover Dam Bypass is a freeway and carries that characteristic between Nevada and Arizona. An interchange with Nevada 172 is located at the west end of the bridge, and a local access interchange is located at the east end of the interchange. Eventually, US 93 will connect with the Boulder City Bypass freeway which is currently being planned to connect Hoover Dam Bypass with the existing US 93-95 freeway. The Arizona section of US 93 has extensive expressway/freeway segments too, but I'm not sure how far the freeway goes past that first interchange just east of the bridge.
Regards,
Andy
Looking On Google maps There are some dirt roads they can be likely easily made into RIRO with maybe some U-trun bays or just cut off use one of the wild life? overpass.
Then there is the last stop place in White Hills. But only one side has an paved shoulder.
Quote from: andy3175 on October 04, 2013, 10:21:23 PM
Quote from: froggie on September 26, 2013, 03:25:55 AM
- An argument could be made for the new US 93 bridge near Hoover Dam (AZ/NV).
Yes, US 93 over Hoover Dam Bypass is a freeway and carries that characteristic between Nevada and Arizona. An interchange with Nevada 172 is located at the west end of the bridge, and a local access interchange is located at the east end of the interchange. Eventually, US 93 will connect with the Boulder City Bypass freeway which is currently being planned to connect Hoover Dam Bypass with the existing US 93-95 freeway. The Arizona section of US 93 has extensive expressway/freeway segments too, but I'm not sure how far the freeway goes past that first interchange just east of the bridge.
Regards,
Andy
Currently US 93 from Wickenburg AZ to the south end of I-515 In NV is being upgraded in sections to 4 to 6 lane divided highway for full upgrade to I-11.
I-11 will replace I-515 and will Decertify US93 south of I-15. (Routing south of Wickenberg (W Bypass) to Tucson, AZ (W and S Bypass) and North of I-15/515-95 Junction NV Are in the long Term Planning Stages.)
I Define Freeway (West) or Expressway (East) as a complete Limited Access road open to ALL Traffic and free of tolls (With the exception of Toll Bridges or Tunnels).
I would not include:
Parkway's NY, NJ, CT
Turnpikes & Thruways NY, NJ, PA, OH, IN IL, OK, CA, DE, MA, FL
Hybrid Limited Access Highway's May Be a Exception
HOT Lanes
Tolled Express Lanes (CA91)
Quote from: mapman1071 on October 06, 2013, 06:07:52 PM
I Define Freeway (West) or Expressway (East) as a complete Limited Access road open to ALL Traffic
That's going to cut out the majority of the mileage in eastern states that don't allow bikes or peds on most freeways.
Quote from: mapman1071 on October 06, 2013, 06:07:52 PM
I Define Freeway (West) or Expressway (East) as a complete Limited Access road open to ALL Traffic and free of tolls (With the exception of Toll Bridges or Tunnels).
I would not include:
Parkway's NY, NJ, CT
Turnpikes & Thruways NY, NJ, PA, OH, IN IL, OK, CA, DE, MA, FL
Hybrid Limited Access Highway's May Be a Exception
HOT Lanes
Tolled Express Lanes (CA91)
a) No matter how you define it, there are standard definitions. That's like saying "I define cat as dog, so all dogs are cats."
b) Limited access is not the same as controlled access. Expressways are limited access but not controlled - you can have signals and side streets. Freeways are both controlled and limited access. A "Jersey Freeway" is controlled access but not limited - you can have driveways, just no median breaks.
c) I don't know what ALL TRAFFIC has to do with anything, but a freeway or expressway is defined by access control. Restrictions on trucks, farm equipment, etc. have nothing to do with the quality of the road.
d) If you want to argue that a toll plaza requiring you to stop means you're not on a freeway, I will allow that. But I am strongly considering you're not arguing that. Tolls do not disqualify something from being an expressway or freeway, especially when there are through lanes that don't require a stop. That includes the NY Thruway (there are no other tolled Thruways, despite your pluralization) and many Turnpikes, since they now have E-ZPass express lanes.
e) Plural's d'o no't requir'e apostrophe's. If that sentence looks ridiculous, so do the apostrophes. (signed, yr friendly admin)
Quote from: mapman1071 on October 06, 2013, 05:52:23 PM
Quote from: andy3175 on October 04, 2013, 10:21:23 PM
Quote from: froggie on September 26, 2013, 03:25:55 AM
- An argument could be made for the new US 93 bridge near Hoover Dam (AZ/NV).
Yes, US 93 over Hoover Dam Bypass is a freeway and carries that characteristic between Nevada and Arizona. An interchange with Nevada 172 is located at the west end of the bridge, and a local access interchange is located at the east end of the interchange. Eventually, US 93 will connect with the Boulder City Bypass freeway which is currently being planned to connect Hoover Dam Bypass with the existing US 93-95 freeway. The Arizona section of US 93 has extensive expressway/freeway segments too, but I'm not sure how far the freeway goes past that first interchange just east of the bridge.
Regards,
Andy
Currently US 93 from Wickenburg AZ to the south end of I-515 In NV is being upgraded in sections to 4 to 6 lane divided highway for full upgrade to I-11.
I-11 will replace I-515 and will Decertify US93 south of I-15. (Routing south of Wickenberg (W Bypass) to Tucson, AZ (W and S Bypass) and North of I-15/515-95 Junction NV Are in the long Term Planning Stages.)
Take it to fictional highways. This has no place here.
I still don't understand the difference between limited access and controlled access.
Quote from: 1 on October 06, 2013, 06:50:20 PM
I still don't understand the difference between limited access and controlled access.
Kentucky always defined "limited access" to mean its interstates and parkways.
West Virginia uses the terms "access fully controlled" and "access partially controlled." The former is for interstates, the latter is for routes like US 50, US 119 and US 33 (the ARC corridors) that have a mixture of at-grade intersections and grade-separated interchanges.
Fully vs. partially makes more sense and is more consistent. However, partially controlled access should logically include highways with the occasional driveway, as well as the occasional crossroad. Access control is all about buying the freedumb from landowners to built driveways out to the highway.
Quote from: NE2 on October 06, 2013, 07:26:08 PM
Fully vs. partially makes more sense and is more consistent. However, partially controlled access should logically include highways with the occasional driveway, as well as the occasional crossroad. Access control is all about buying the freedumb from landowners to built driveways out to the highway.
Does your definition include this? http://goo.gl/maps/81DN7 (http://goo.gl/maps/81DN7), a driveway largely inaccessible to civilians, probably carrying one or two vehicles per year, in the middle of an otherwise largely interstate-standard, fully-controlled access freeway?
My definition is fluid.
I'm also a fan of non-interstate, non-autoroute and non-400 freeways, but even more a fan of RIROs or Jersey freeways.
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on October 07, 2013, 12:08:30 AM
I'm also a fan of non-interstate, non-autoroute and non-400 freeways, but even more a fan of RIROs or Jersey freeways.
So no GA 400 either?
There's a whole wad of freeways around Miami that are non-Interstate, most notabily the Sawgrass (FL 869) and Palmetto (FL 826) expressways, but also the Airport Expressway (FL 112, an extension of I-195), South Dade Expressway (FL 874), East-West Expressway (FL 836, an extension of I-395) and the Gratigny Parkway (FL 924) which extends east from the terminus of I-75.
There's also FL 407 by Titusville (although that's apparently losing its fully-freeway status with the I-95 interchange reconstruction), the OOCEA toll roads (FL 408, FL 417, FL 414 extension, FL 429, and FL 528), and the Crosstown Expressway (FL 618), Veterans' Expressway (FL 589/FL 568) and Suncoast Parkway (FL 589) by Tampa.