Decommissioning US Highways

[Quillz]

California could post the US shields like Florida did with US 27 and US 192 in green.

If anything modern reflective vinyl really has usurped the need for green spades.  It would be pretty cool if Caltrans adopted a white design that had some flair to it similar to the originals.

Time for these to make a comeback.

[Max Rockatansky]

California could post the US shields like Florida did with US 27 and US 192 in green.

If anything modern reflective vinyl really has usurped the need for green spades.  It would be pretty cool if Caltrans adopted a white design that had some flair to it similar to the originals.

Time for these to make a comeback.

Yes with the bear somewhere in there and everything will be golden.

[cpzilliacus]

Basically for the most part US 1 is the defacto surface and/or business route.

Except between Jacksonville, Florida and Petersburg, Virginia, where U.S. 1 follows a much more inland route than I-95 (and U.S. 301 is in some parts of North Carolina and Virginia a frontage road or business road for I-95); again between Baltimore, Maryland and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (where U.S. 1 is more inland than I-95); and again between Portland, Maine and Houlton, Maine (where U.S. 1 takes a more "coastal" route and I-95 runs inland).

[Avalanchez71]

US 1 goes all the way to Raliegh, Statesville and Columbia whereas I-95 doesn't.

[kkt]

Yes with the bear somewhere in there and everything will be golden.

Heh.

[kkt]

If anything modern reflective vinyl really has usurped the need for green spades.  It would be pretty cool if Caltrans adopted a white design that had some flair to it similar to the originals.

I'm not convinced.  Black on white looks a whole lot more like wisps of fog or blowing snow than white on green.

[Max Rockatansky]

If anything modern reflective vinyl really has usurped the need for green spades.  It would be pretty cool if Caltrans adopted a white design that had some flair to it similar to the originals.

I'm not convinced.  Black on white looks a whole lot more like wisps of fog or blowing snow than white on green.

I want that when the U.S. Route system was being planned yellow was considered for those very reasons. Lol.  Hell if it stayed green and just had really sweet bear logo in there I'd be happy.  No particular reason other than I think it would look cool.  Just flatten the California and there should be space aplenty. 

[dvferyance]

why was us 460 decommissioned outside of kentucky?

What are you talking about? It still runs through Virginia and a little bit of West Virginia.

It used to go all the way to st Louis

I know but it still goes outside Kentucky to the east.

[Quillz]

If anything modern reflective vinyl really has usurped the need for green spades.  It would be pretty cool if Caltrans adopted a white design that had some flair to it similar to the originals.

I'm not convinced.  Black on white looks a whole lot more like wisps of fog or blowing snow than white on green.

I want that when the U.S. Route system was being planned yellow was considered for those very reasons. Lol.  Hell if it stayed green and just had really sweet bear logo in there I'd be happy.  No particular reason other than I think it would look cool.  Just flatten the California and there should be space aplenty. 

I don't know if those results were ever published, but I would conclude that black-on-yellow was not considered as legible as black-on-white, even in the snow. Some other states, I believe Iowa, also tried on white-on-black for the same reasons. I think what also didn't help was even in 1926, yellow was starting to be used as a code color for cautionary information.

[Max Rockatansky]

If anything modern reflective vinyl really has usurped the need for green spades.  It would be pretty cool if Caltrans adopted a white design that had some flair to it similar to the originals.

I'm not convinced.  Black on white looks a whole lot more like wisps of fog or blowing snow than white on green.

I want that when the U.S. Route system was being planned yellow was considered for those very reasons. Lol.  Hell if it stayed green and just had really sweet bear logo in there I'd be happy.  No particular reason other than I think it would look cool.  Just flatten the California and there should be space aplenty. 

I don't know if those results were ever published, but I would conclude that black-on-yellow was not considered as legible as black-on-white, even in the snow. Some other states, I believe Iowa, also tried on white-on-black for the same reasons. I think what also didn't help was even in 1926, yellow was starting to be used as a code color for cautionary information.

Even still it's funny to think that there could be a boat load of yellow embossed 16 gauge signs in favor of the white we got.  Granted we're talking the 1920s and reflective anything as far as road signage was a ways off until reflectors came to be.

[Quillz]

If anything modern reflective vinyl really has usurped the need for green spades.  It would be pretty cool if Caltrans adopted a white design that had some flair to it similar to the originals.

I'm not convinced.  Black on white looks a whole lot more like wisps of fog or blowing snow than white on green.

I want that when the U.S. Route system was being planned yellow was considered for those very reasons. Lol.  Hell if it stayed green and just had really sweet bear logo in there I'd be happy.  No particular reason other than I think it would look cool.  Just flatten the California and there should be space aplenty. 

I don't know if those results were ever published, but I would conclude that black-on-yellow was not considered as legible as black-on-white, even in the snow. Some other states, I believe Iowa, also tried on white-on-black for the same reasons. I think what also didn't help was even in 1926, yellow was starting to be used as a code color for cautionary information.

Even still it's funny to think that there could be a boat load of yellow embossed 16 gauge signs in favor of the white we got.  Granted we're talking the 1920s and reflective anything as far as road signage was a ways off until reflectors came to be.

I think realistically, either color scheme would have been fine. But I do think they were perhaps looking ahead a bit and realized it might be good to use colors for standard purposes. I think using white for general purpose and regulatory information is good, reserving yellow strictly for cautionary information. (In the same vein that purple seems to been unofficially adopted for toll information).

[Brandon]

why was us 460 decommissioned outside of kentucky?

I think I know the back story about this in Indiana.  US 460 ran on a curvy and hilly facility through southern Indiana.  The state perferred that through traffic be routed onto I-64 even though it ran well north of Evansville.  I think that renumbering it to a state route helped to move those off the roadway.

Illinois was probably happy to download the road to the various counties.

US-460 is now IL-15, IL-142, and IL-14.

[Captain Jack]

why was us 460 decommissioned outside of kentucky?

I think I know the back story about this in Indiana.  US 460 ran on a curvy and hilly facility through southern Indiana.  The state perferred that through traffic be routed onto I-64 even though it ran well north of Evansville.  I think that renumbering it to a state route helped to move those off the roadway.

Illinois was probably happy to download the road to the various counties.

That explanation probably makes the most sense on this. I always thought it was strange that US 460 got the ax so quickly by INDOT, while other totally useless ones, such as US 150, still remain. The section from Shoals to New Albany could easily be served by a state route, and the pointless multi-plexing with US 50 and 41 eliminated. I have never heard anyone refer to the US 41 section between Vincennes and Terre Haute as US 41-150.

At least if US 460 was still around, the New Harmony bridge would probably still be in operation.

[silverback1065]

why was us 460 decommissioned outside of kentucky?

I think I know the back story about this in Indiana.  US 460 ran on a curvy and hilly facility through southern Indiana.  The state perferred that through traffic be routed onto I-64 even though it ran well north of Evansville.  I think that renumbering it to a state route helped to move those off the roadway.

Illinois was probably happy to download the road to the various counties.

That explanation probably makes the most sense on this. I always thought it was strange that US 460 got the ax so quickly by INDOT, while other totally useless ones, such as US 150, still remain. The section from Shoals to New Albany could easily be served by a state route, and the pointless multi-plexing with US 50 and 41 eliminated. I have never heard anyone refer to the US 41 section between Vincennes and Terre Haute as US 41-150.

At least if US 460 was still around, the New Harmony bridge would probably still be in operation.

The reason why 150 isn't gone is likely because of Illinois and Kentucky still wanting it, but that's my guess on the matter.

Nexus 6P

[sparker]

TXDOT's approach to decommissioning of US highways seems, IMO, to be the most reasonable and measured of all the post-Interstate activities re the US highway network.  Where there is an independent section of US highway beyond the Interstate multiplex or close parallel (i.e., US 67 and I-30 or US 87 and I-27 or I-10, and US 90 and I-10), the US highway is retained.  That also pertains to sections in adjoining or ensuing states along the Interstate route; if such a state wishes to retain their US route designation, TX will follow suit.  An example of this would be US 80 west of Dallas; it continued to be signed alongside I-20 and I-10 until NM and AZ decommissioned their portions of that route, at which time TX also decommissioned that route.  "Useless/terminal" multiplexes, such as US 75 on/along I-45 south of Dallas and US 81 on I-35W and I-35 south of Fort Worth also prompt decommisioning of the US route.  Divergence of the alignments of the Interstate route and original paralleling US highway, such as US 80 and I-20 between Dallas and the LA state line have meant retention of the US route. 

It will be interesting to see the fate of US 59 in TX when and if the various I-69 iterations are fully developed, since there is no section of that highway in the state that is not slated for replacement by an Interstate facility. 

[Avalanchez71]

Texas is a termni state.  Some of this would not work in other places. US 75 could easily have been retained on the surface segments.  US 80 could stick around as well.

[sparker]

Avalanchez 71 is correct; TX is indeed a border/seaboard state, intrinsically situated for terminating routes, both Interstate and U.S.  While there are several instances of remaining parallel facilities -- Conroe to Streetman alongside I-45, currently signed as TX 75, is a prime example -- the concept of a superseded US highway multiplexing with the Interstate and then subsequently leaving for an independent parallel facility (that more often than not happened to be the original US route alignment) -- and doing so multiple times -- was apparently not considered to be terribly efficient or useful by TXDOT.  It seems they prioritized system efficiency -- and minimal multiplexing -- over the retention of US routes.  Since much of the Interstate mileage in south and west Texas was deployed right on top of the original route, particularly in rural regions or hilly terrain (similar to much of California Interstate alignments), the choice for TXDOT would have been to multiplex the US route or sign it along the frontage roads (hardly worth the signage expense!).  Also, business Interstate loops (reasonably well-signed in TX) served the cities & towns along the Interstates; there was no need to string a US route along for the ride just to serve as a de facto business route.   

[coatimundi]

Even into the early 2000's, when I still lived there, they had US 75 shields on some of the service roads on I-45 in Houston. I specifically recall them being at the Wayside intersection. Some of the old street signs in Oak Ridge North also used to either say "Dallas Highway" or "US 75".
Having dual shields is a lot of extra shields when you consider the entire former multiplexed route from Galveston to Conroe as game for it and the fact that each intersection typically has 6-8 sets of shields. And this adds absolutely no benefit for drivers. Same reason 81 was removed. I mean, the only reason 90 is still multiplexed and signed onto I-10 is because it's not on there for as long, and it would disrupt the larger route significantly to remove it.

[Avalanchez71]

Then why bother with the TX SH75 designation in that area?  They could have just left it as US 75.

[coatimundi]

Then why bother with the TX SH75 designation in that area?  They could have just left it as US 75.

If you look at the route of SH 75, it did not take over the totality of the former US 75 routing: it ends well south of Dallas, where US 75 now begins.
As for why US 75 was not just carried over on I-45 for the short distance between the northern end of SH 75 and US 75 kept on what is now SH 75, 75 south of Streetman clearly parallels I-45 and, thus, does not have a purpose in the scope of the federal system.
Meanwhile, the state would have had to relinquish the former routing to drop it from the system entirely. That would not make sense though because much of the route maintains a local importance, even now. It also provides the terminus for a number of other state-maintained routes, and Texas does not seem to like having state routes terminate at county roads.
This is just a guess though.

It's also important, I think, to keep a sense of perspective with regards to US routes. The nostalgia for these routes among the non-roadgeek public is fairly recent. Aside from 66, most people just did not care about US highways 10-20 years ago. I don't know that it's actually changed that much either.

[pianocello]

TXDOT's approach to decommissioning of US highways seems, IMO, to be the most reasonable and measured of all the post-Interstate activities re the US highway network.  Where there is an independent section of US highway beyond the Interstate multiplex or close parallel (i.e., US 67 and I-30 or US 87 and I-27 or I-10, and US 90 and I-10), the US highway is retained.  That also pertains to sections in adjoining or ensuing states along the Interstate route; if such a state wishes to retain their US route designation, TX will follow suit.  An example of this would be US 80 west of Dallas; it continued to be signed alongside I-20 and I-10 until NM and AZ decommissioned their portions of that route, at which time TX also decommissioned that route.  "Useless/terminal" multiplexes, such as US 75 on/along I-45 south of Dallas and US 81 on I-35W and I-35 south of Fort Worth also prompt decommisioning of the US route.  Divergence of the alignments of the Interstate route and original paralleling US highway, such as US 80 and I-20 between Dallas and the LA state line have meant retention of the US route. 

It will be interesting to see the fate of US 59 in TX when and if the various I-69 iterations are fully developed, since there is no section of that highway in the state that is not slated for replacement by an Interstate facility. 

Begs the question... Why have they held on to US-85? Has New Mexico not actually decommissioned it?

[sparker]

I'd take an educated guess that US 85 is still commissioned in Texas because the local political powers in the El Paso area want to retain state maintenance of Paisano Drive and the rest of 85 -- and requesting both a decommissioning of US 85 and a recommissioning as a state route would be "rocking the boat" by calling attention to the corridor, causing TXDOT to question whether the route is actually necessary for through traffic to the border crossing, given the proximity of US 54/I-110 as the primary route to the border from I-10.  As a corollary, those same El Paso figures have probably reasoned that most commercial traffic will utilize -- and thus congest -- the I-110 crossing, with local cross-border traffic diverting itself to US 85 for both convenience and efficiency.  Letting TXDOT maintain the egress to that in-city crossing likely saves El Paso a significant chunk of change!   

[usends]

I wonder if there are children routes that don't intersect their parents, but used to.

Quite a few: there is a list at the bottom of this page: http://usends.com/Admin/violations.html