Dumb bypass reroutes

[billtm]

With all these new bypass projects going up around the country, a phenomenon I have been noticing is the decommissioning of all routes within the city that the bypass bypasses. And when the bypass that was originally built to carry one specific route has to carry all the other routes of the city on it, the routings of the other highways sometimes end up being longer, slower, or of lower quality than the original routing. One example that immediately comes to mind it the US231 bypass in Lafayette, IN. It was built to carry US231, but INDOT decided to also route US52 onto it. In order for 52 to connect back to its original routing it had to take a slower and lower quality road. Another example is SR 38's routing around Pendleton, IN. (Its so long and inefficient! ) Do any of you know of any other examples across the country?

[gilpdawg]

38 around Pendleton is absolutely inane.

[JoePCool14]

I come from Illinois, therefore no bypass marked routes. Around Chicago I-294 is good however its a tollway the entire way.

[Alps]

US 24 in Fort Wayne just might be faster on the old route.
NC 54 around downtown Cary - definitely faster on the old straight-through route.
Many times, old NJ 10 in East Hanover is faster than modern 10, when heading eastbound. That's because the modern route has 3 lights, the old road only 2 (and the first one is often green), and everyone shops on 10. Of course, it doesn't make sense to put 10 back from a 4-lane highway to a 2-lane road.

[roadman65]

One could say that the Osceola Parkway in Kissimmee, FL is now a dumb bypass of US 192.  With the sprawl along it, the many added stop lights, and the traffic going to the new strip malls (with a new one being built again) it is no different than US 192 is now.

[txstateends]

The only one off the top that I can come up with from personal experience is US 69 'around' McAlester, OK.  At each split (N & S) you think it's going to be a nice zippy way around the edge of town.  You find out quickly otherwise.  It would have been a great reroute if it hadn't been for the signals and at-grades.

[Tom958]

When I take US 431 through Dothan, I always go though downtown. It's shorter and has roughly the same number of traffic lights, and downtown Dothan is too dead to generate much congestion. It's been awhile since I've been there-- apparently the old road is now marked as SR 1, with US 431 on the bypass. But that won't fool me. 

Just looking at the map, the bypasses of Russellville and Hopkinsville KY seem dubious. I'd guess that they were built mainly to promote sprawl, with their numbering as bypasses more of a rationale than a reason for their existence.

[DandyDan]

I personally think US 151 around Cedar Rapids, Iowa is dumb.  Granted, it's probably faster, but none of it was designed as its own road.  Whenever I'm on US 151 east of Cedar Rapids, I always take the old route through Cedar Rapids and Marion (not least because I'm probably hungry and looking for somewhere to eat, probably).

[1995hoo]

The situation in Greensboro comes to mind where I-40 was moved onto the "beltway," the old road was designated Green I-40, and then they changed it back to the old routing because the new route was so far out of the way.

Wikipedia has a pretty good animation. There have been further changes since then, but it shows the I-40 situation clearly enough.

[texaskdog]

Texas Toll 130 being the "fast alternate" around Austin. 

[froggie]

The situation in Greensboro comes to mind where I-40 was moved onto the "beltway," the old road was designated Green I-40, and then they changed it back to the old routing because the new route was so far out of the way.

Actually, they changed I-40 back because NCDOT realized they'd lose out on Interstate Maintenance funds.  The distance had nothing to do with it.

Also, whoever created that Wikipedia map is a bit off.  The I-85 portion of the Greensboro Loop opened in February, 2004.  "Future I-840" had opened previously to that, but I don't recall offhand when.  Perhaps Bob or Adam know?

[texaskdog]

and another excuse for a stupid 4xx US route

[agentsteel53]

and another excuse for a stupid 4xx US route

unless I'm not seeing something ... 421 is a legitimate branch of 21; has nothing to do with the much later 400 series.

[texaskdog]

and another excuse for a stupid 4xx US route

unless I'm not seeing something ... 421 is a legitimate branch of 21; has nothing to do with the much later 400 series.

I'm soured on all 4xxs ha ha

[1995hoo]

The situation in Greensboro comes to mind where I-40 was moved onto the "beltway," the old road was designated Green I-40, and then they changed it back to the old routing because the new route was so far out of the way.

Actually, they changed I-40 back because NCDOT realized they'd lose out on Interstate Maintenance funds.  The distance had nothing to do with it.

Also, whoever created that Wikipedia map is a bit off.  The I-85 portion of the Greensboro Loop opened in February, 2004.  "Future I-840" had opened previously to that, but I don't recall offhand when.  Perhaps Bob or Adam know?

Either way, it shows the I-40 situation clearly enough, which was the point of this thread.

[Brandon]

and another excuse for a stupid 4xx US route

unless I'm not seeing something ... 421 is a legitimate branch of 21; has nothing to do with the much later 400 series.

I'm soured on all 4xxs ha ha

No one's come up with a US-437 (the next one in order) yet.  The other US-4xxs (US-491, US-431, etc) are all related to their parent routes.  It's just US-400, US-412, and US-425 that don't fit.

[codyg1985]

US 24 in Fort Wayne just might be faster on the old route.

Which old route? It appears that US 24 was rerouted from bypassing Ft. Wayne to the south using I-69 and I-469 to bypassing it to the north using I-69 and I-469 from when I drove through there a couple of weeks ago. Does anyone know how recent of a change this is?

[sbeaver44]

US 24 in Fort Wayne just might be faster on the old route.

Which old route? It appears that US 24 was rerouted from bypassing Ft. Wayne to the south using I-69 and I-469 to bypassing it to the north using I-69 and I-469 from when I drove through there a couple of weeks ago. Does anyone know how recent of a change this is?

Apparently, October 15, 2013.  This is recent news to me as well.

Source:

http://www.in.gov/activecalendar/EventList.aspx?fromdate=10/31/2013&todate=10/31/2013&display=Day&type=public&eventidn=136047&view=EventDetails&information_id=189409&print=print

[billtm]

"The rerouting of US 24 around the north side of Fort Wayne will save motorists almost 4 miles over the current route."
-INDOT
Then why did they sign it on a longer route in the first place?!

[PurdueBill]

Taking 469 south to Lafayette Center Road and rejoining 24 at Roanoke saves more miles still. 

[theline]

I'm all for PurdueBill's suggestion, which I endorsed on another thread.

Regarding reference to the "old" route, I assume Alps was referring to the really old route, right through the middle of Ft. Wayne. I wouldn't be surprised if that is a bit faster. It's far shorter in mileage.

[TEG24601]

"The rerouting of US 24 around the north side of Fort Wayne will save motorists almost 4 miles over the current route."
-INDOT
Then why did they sign it on a longer route in the first place?!

I don't recall the route exactly, but the road that extends from the South end of 469 connect to US 24, and is even faster, which may have been the original intention.

[amroad17]

If I recall correctly, I-469 started as a US 24 bypass of Ft. Wayne.  This freeway from US 24 south to I-69 was completed around 1989 or 1990 and was first signed as US 24.  However, this may have been the start of a grander plan to have an eastern loop around Ft. Wayne.  What needed to occur was a continuation of the freeway along Lafayette Center Road (or a significant upgrade) to connect to US 24 at Roanoke.

Indiana seems to love placing US highways on I-routes around cities instead of keeping them on their original routing.  It does have something to do with "cap mileage" in the state, I believe. 

[Henry]

and another excuse for a stupid 4xx US route

unless I'm not seeing something ... 421 is a legitimate branch of 21; has nothing to do with the much later 400 series.

I'm soured on all 4xxs ha ha

No one's come up with a US-437 (the next one in order) yet.  The other US-4xxs (US-491, US-431, etc) are all related to their parent routes.  It's just US-400, US-412, and US-425 that don't fit.

The way things are going, there'd be US 450, 462, 475, 487 and 500 that will not connect to their parents. Then again, US 101 is on the opposite coast from its supposed parent, US 1, so there you go.

[Brandon]

and another excuse for a stupid 4xx US route

unless I'm not seeing something ... 421 is a legitimate branch of 21; has nothing to do with the much later 400 series.

I'm soured on all 4xxs ha ha

No one's come up with a US-437 (the next one in order) yet.  The other US-4xxs (US-491, US-431, etc) are all related to their parent routes.  It's just US-400, US-412, and US-425 that don't fit.

The way things are going, there'd be US 450, 462, 475, 487 and 500 that will not connect to their parents. Then again, US 101 is on the opposite coast from its supposed parent, US 1, so there you go.

There was a US-450, IIRC, that was related to US-50.  As for US-101, it was meant as US-10-1 and a primary route ending in "1".