US Route redundant concurrencies

[kramie13]

Is there a reason why in some parts of the country, US routes were moved off their original alignment and are now concurrent with an Interstate highway?

It really bugs me that US 1 in Dedham, Massachusetts turns off its original alignment and is now wrong-way concurrent with I-95 then concurrent with the southern 19 miles of I-93.  It used to follow the VFW Parkway into the West Roxbury and Jamaica Plain neighborhoods of Boston.  Moving it off an independent alignment and onto freeways that already had another route number is ridiculous and unnecessary!

Similarly, US 40 in the Indianapolis area goes around the city, sharing pavement with I-465 when the more straight-route option would be to follow E. Washington St and W. Washington St right through the heart of the city!

What gives?????

[I-55]

Is there a reason why in some parts of the country, US routes were moved off their original alignment and are now concurrent with an Interstate highway?

It really bugs me that US 1 in Dedham, Massachusetts turns off its original alignment and is now wrong-way concurrent with I-95 then concurrent with the southern 19 miles of I-93.  It used to follow the VFW Parkway into the West Roxbury and Jamaica Plain neighborhoods of Boston.  Moving it off an independent alignment and onto freeways that already had another route number is ridiculous and unnecessary!

Similarly, US 40 in the Indianapolis area goes around the city, sharing pavement with I-465 when the more straight-route option would be to follow E. Washington St and W. Washington St right through the heart of the city!

What gives?????

State DOT's moved US routes to freeway alignments so that local authorities would maintain them. In your Indiana example, INDOT removed all US/state routes from inside I-465 (except I-65/70) and turned over control to Indianapolis DPW. Less inventory and expense for the state, better control of city streets for local authorities (that want to spend money). Never underestimate INDOT's willingness to not have to maintain things anymore.

[hotdogPi]

State DOT's moved US routes to freeway alignments so that local authorities would maintain them.

In Massachusetts, numbering and state maintenance have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

[Max Rockatansky]

Why maintain both a surface highway and a freeway as a DOT if some local authority will accept a relinquishment of the former? 

[pianocello]

For the US 1 example, was the freeway built as a realignment of US 1, or was it meant to be I-93I-95 when it was built? Genuine question, as I don't know much about the freeway history in Boston.

I know in Michigan, a lot of the Interstates were built at least in part as relocations of their parallel US routes, and the Interstate number was added after the fact. I don't think there's any cases where the US Route was moved back to its original alignment, though several were decommissioned.

[pderocco]

It really bugs me that US 1 in Dedham, Massachusetts turns off its original alignment and is now wrong-way concurrent with I-95 then concurrent with the southern 19 miles of I-93.  It used to follow the VFW Parkway into the West Roxbury and Jamaica Plain neighborhoods of Boston.  Moving it off an independent alignment and onto freeways that already had another route number is ridiculous and unnecessary!

I seem to remember reading, perhaps around here, that US-1 was taken off its old alignment because trucks were prohibited from some of it.

[pderocco]

For the US 1 example, was the freeway built as a realignment of US 1, or was it meant to be I-93I-95 when it was built? Genuine question, as I don't know much about the freeway history in Boston.

The freeways (originally MA-128 and MA-3) were built decades before US-1 was routed onto them.

[Henry]

In the West, back when the Interstates were first built, so many US highways were routed onto them because there usually was no parallel alignment like the ones in the East. This was sort of a death warrant for the US highways, as they were eventually decommissioned upon the Interrstates' completion. Fortunately, some of these old routes are preserved as historical routes. We already know about US 66 and the SR 99s, but there are also some minor ones, such as US 40 going through all the downtowns that are bypassed by I-80.

[Quillz]

It might be to encourage bypasses. Long-haul traffic is going to more streamlined, faster, and safer when it doesn't have to deal with every single small town along the way. Putting US routes onto interstates as concurrencies can thus encourage long-haul traffic to do exactly that. Then when you get to the town you need to visit, there is the exit. (And oftentimes it will be a business route or spur).

It's also pointless when the US route is just an older parallel. Having it on a frontage road doesn't really accomplish much, and that's just one more road that needs to be catalogued and maintained. It makes sense to give US routes a functional purpose. (Had California retained US-99, this would be a perfect example of where it serves a considerably different role and purpose than I-5 through the Central Valley). US-50 and I-80 both travel the Sierra, but the former serves Lake Tahoe and Carson City, the latter bypasses the Tahoe area in favor of Reno. Distinct segments. Whereas keeping US-40 around didn't really accomplish anything, it would have just run right next to I-80 in most cases.

[pderocco]

It's also pointless when the US route is just an older parallel. Having it on a frontage road doesn't really accomplish much, and that's just one more road that needs to be catalogued and maintained. It makes sense to give US routes a functional purpose. (Had California retained US-99, this would be a perfect example of where it serves a considerably different role and purpose than I-5 through the Central Valley). US-50 and I-80 both travel the Sierra, but the former serves Lake Tahoe and Carson City, the latter bypasses the Tahoe area in favor of Reno. Distinct segments. Whereas keeping US-40 around didn't really accomplish anything, it would have just run right next to I-80 in most cases.

I think one useful purpose of having separate US routes is to give tourists non-freeway, less-trafficked alternatives to the nearby boring Interstates, which would be appreciated by the small towns that had been bypassed.

[Max Rockatansky]

It might be to encourage bypasses. Long-haul traffic is going to more streamlined, faster, and safer when it doesn't have to deal with every single small town along the way. Putting US routes onto interstates as concurrencies can thus encourage long-haul traffic to do exactly that. Then when you get to the town you need to visit, there is the exit. (And oftentimes it will be a business route or spur).

It's also pointless when the US route is just an older parallel. Having it on a frontage road doesn't really accomplish much, and that's just one more road that needs to be catalogued and maintained. It makes sense to give US routes a functional purpose. (Had California retained US-99, this would be a perfect example of where it serves a considerably different role and purpose than I-5 through the Central Valley). US-50 and I-80 both travel the Sierra, but the former serves Lake Tahoe and Carson City, the latter bypasses the Tahoe area in favor of Reno. Distinct segments. Whereas keeping US-40 around didn't really accomplish anything, it would have just run right next to I-80 in most cases.

Having taken every possible alternate to get past traffic backups on I-5 north of Santa Clarita it makes one wish there as a well maintained surface corridor.  The Old Ridge Route (US 99) isn't any help given it is rarely open and San Francisquito Canyon Road requires a big back backtrack.  Ridge  Route Alternate (also US 99) has a reservoir blocking thru access now.

And no, I don't consider CA 14 an alternate to Tejon Pass.

[vdeane]

It might be to encourage bypasses. Long-haul traffic is going to more streamlined, faster, and safer when it doesn't have to deal with every single small town along the way. Putting US routes onto interstates as concurrencies can thus encourage long-haul traffic to do exactly that. Then when you get to the town you need to visit, there is the exit. (And oftentimes it will be a business route or spur).

It's also pointless when the US route is just an older parallel. Having it on a frontage road doesn't really accomplish much, and that's just one more road that needs to be catalogued and maintained. It makes sense to give US routes a functional purpose. (Had California retained US-99, this would be a perfect example of where it serves a considerably different role and purpose than I-5 through the Central Valley). US-50 and I-80 both travel the Sierra, but the former serves Lake Tahoe and Carson City, the latter bypasses the Tahoe area in favor of Reno. Distinct segments. Whereas keeping US-40 around didn't really accomplish anything, it would have just run right next to I-80 in most cases.

Having numbers correspond to state-maintained sections is a California (and Ontario) quirk and this just illustrates another problem with that approach (and Ontario, not having to answer to anyone on route numbering, just left a ton of gaps in their numbers when the mass downloading of route mileage happened).

Out east, it's not like the US routes were realigned onto routes paralleling the interstate - they were just left where they were.  In many ways, US routes are state routes with a fancy shield out here.  It's enough to make me think that there might have been merits to giving the US route system the California treatment nation-wide to focus them on the really important corridors with independent utility from the interstates, allowing the systems to compliment each other rather than letting the US route "brand" become diluted.  If I see a random US route on the road (or even on a map, in many cases), I can't tell if it's actually important or not.

[ElishaGOtis]

US-221 in Perry, FL shifted to follow US-19/27, only to terminate back on US-19 (rather than continuing through downtown). https://maps.app.goo.gl/R6LgvRSQHnRVgfLv8

US-441 following US-41 in Lake City, FL, then splitting off, then joining back on, then splitting off again (again, re-routed from downtown). https://maps.app.goo.gl/cqok2Jki78XLQ2Me6
I kinda wish they fully re-routed 441 on 41 until the north split and re-designated the old 441 as business 441 or something IMHO...

[pderocco]

Having taken every possible alternate to get past traffic backups on I-5 north of Santa Clarita it makes one wish there as a well maintained surface corridor.  The Old Ridge Route (US 99) isn't any help given it is rarely open and San Francisquito Canyon Road requires a big back backtrack.  Ridge  Route Alternate (also US 99) has a reservoir blocking thru access now.

And no, I don't consider CA 14 an alternate to Tejon Pass.

There's also Lake Hughes Rd. I used to take that fairly often, when I lived in L.A.

BTW, I don't know if you ever noticed, but on SB I-5, there's a connection between the truck brake check area and Golden State Hwy (former US-99). I've used that a couple of times to get out of a major jam-up, taking Golden State to Templin Hwy to Ridge Route Rd into Castaic.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/vSFAhNEJTgEZb5u4A

[Max Rockatansky]

Having taken every possible alternate to get past traffic backups on I-5 north of Santa Clarita it makes one wish there as a well maintained surface corridor.  The Old Ridge Route (US 99) isn't any help given it is rarely open and San Francisquito Canyon Road requires a big back backtrack.  Ridge  Route Alternate (also US 99) has a reservoir blocking thru access now.

And no, I don't consider CA 14 an alternate to Tejon Pass.

There's also Lake Hughes Rd. I used to take that fairly often, when I lived in L.A.

BTW, I don't know if you ever noticed, but on SB I-5, there's a connection between the truck brake check area and Golden State Hwy (former US-99). I've used that a couple of times to get out of a major jam-up, taking Golden State to Templin Hwy to Ridge Route Rd into Castaic.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/vSFAhNEJTgEZb5u4A

Sometimes I forget Lake Hughes Road is there.  I've found that most of the time a lot of the problems on I-5 tend to resolve by Templin Highway.  That keeps the southern extent of the Ridge Route as a viable option to get through Castaic.

[jp the roadgeek]

US 6 in Danbury, Thomaston, and the Hartford, CT area enters the chat...

[Great Lakes Roads]

US 319 from Carrabelle to Apalachicola...