Doomed US highways

[US71]

No. Arkansas will hide it

Even though AHTD has opted to have 71 parallel route 549 rather than follow it?

Wherever 71 follows an Interstate, it's rarely posted. For now, it parallels 549/Future 49. In the future, who knows.?

[Duke87]

I dunno. I grew up thinking of pairs as being the norm (I-95 and US 1, I-93 and US 3, I-91 and US 5, I-87 and US 9, I-84 and US 6, I-80 and US 46, I-78 and US 22, etc.). I don't see how a US route is worthy of elimination simply because it follows the same corridor as an interstate. It would be weird to see all those interstates without their US partners.

The only time it really makes sense to truncate a US highway on account of an interstate being introduced is if the interstate is placed on the same highway that was formerly the US route.
On that note, if you are going to truncate US 15 to Williamsport because of I-99... you pretty much might as well truncate it to Harrisburg. Most of the route between the two is concurrent with US 11, and the short piece that isn't is unimportant enough to just become a state highway.

[Charles2]

Shouldn't US 42 be added to the list of "should be doomed" highways?  Its significance has long been replaced by I-71.  Heck, good luck finding where it ends in Louisville.

[Thing 342]

US 264, IMO. It's redundant west of Zebulon (soon to be doubly redundant with I-495), and its route is short enough to be a state route. I say replace the part between Zebulon and Greenville with an interstate designation of some sort (I-195, perhaps) and the rest (along with US-264 ALT) can become a new NC route. 

[hbelkins]

It's easy to find where US 42 ends in Louisville. I took a crapload of pictures of the end point about 14 years ago and manipulated the Louisville inset on the official Kentucky map and sent it all to Dale Sanderson to put on the US Ends site. Granted, it's not signed really well, but it's there.

[bugo]

US 15 north of Williamsport

I'm not talking about highways that parallel future interstate corridors, I'm talking about roads that could easily be decommissioned without any existing roads being built.

[bugo]

None of you are getting it.  Your posts have nothing to do with the subject I created.  Mods: please lock this thread.

[texaskdog]

All of these routes are redundant to Interstates and could be eliminated:
west of San Antonio taken over by extended US-285. TX-54 extended to cover remaider to Van Horn.

Hey 90 is important for getting to Big Bend NP.  How about 57?

[TEG24601]

US-395 in Washington, between the Tri-Cities and Ritzville is ripe for an Interstate to replace it.

[Laura]

I dunno. I grew up thinking of pairs as being the norm (I-95 and US 1, I-93 and US 3, I-91 and US 5, I-87 and US 9, I-84 and US 6, I-80 and US 46, I-78 and US 22, etc.). I don't see how a US route is worthy of elimination simply because it follows the same corridor as an interstate. It would be weird to see all those interstates without their US partners.

The only time it really makes sense to truncate a US highway on account of an interstate being introduced is if the interstate is placed on the same highway that was formerly the US route.

I agree.

I don't understand why US highways are decommissioned in the first place. States currently maintain them, so it's not like there's a change in maintenance.

I would agree with a previous post that mentioned US 113. Since it has been truncated from Dover to Milford, it doesn't currently go through any cities or major destinations.


iPhone

[texaskdog]

because once an interstate is built hardly anyone drives on the old US route.  It should be decommissioned.

[Duke87]

because once an interstate is built hardly anyone drives on the old US route.

Out west, maybe. But the examples in the northeast that I mentioned above still have plenty of traffic on the US route. In some cases the "old route" paralleling the interstate might even be well improved and a major thoroughfare in its own right.

[US71]

because once an interstate is built hardly anyone drives on the old US route.  It should be decommissioned.

In the case of US 81, it's the free alternative from Arkansas City to Wichita. It's co-signed with I-135 to Salina, but continues on after that.

Decommissioning routes would be hard in places: US 64 parallels I-40 to Conway, but US 70 parallels from Little Rock to West Memphis. 

So would you decommission portions or the whole road?