I-44 decommissioned between US 50 west and Lindbergh Blvd in the St Louis metr

[bugo]

I-44 has been decommissioned between the junctions with US 50.  The milemarkers still read I-44 but the signage is simply for US 50.  They still haven't taken all of the signs off of the intersecting roads, but most if not all of the I-44 signs have been removed.  Another interstate with a gap in it....

[txstateends]

Huh???? :???:

Other than an early April Fool, why on earth would this be done, and what good does it do?

Go to all the trouble to have an interstate across MO, that helped to decommission Route 66 officially, then decide later that part of it isn't necessary?

Is this solely a MODOT decision, or did the Feds have any input?

Sorry, if this is for real, it is a roadfan-shake-my-head moment right up there in the top 10.

[bugo]

Probably just idiocy by MOronDOT.  I heard that part of I-35 north of KC was also decommissioned in favor of MO fucking 110 of all things.

[getemngo]

Doesn't the FHWA AASHTO have to get involved in order for it to be decommissioned? Otherwise, it's still I-44, it merely becomes unsigned I-44. I don't know MoDOT's modus operandi, but three possibilities come to mind:

1) MoDOT decided, for some bizarre reason, that motorists only need to know about one of the highways they're on and picked US 50. 
2) You caught them in the middle of replacing signs.
3) A contractor screwed up.

[bugo]

It's possible that MOronDOT just took the I-44 signs down, but why?  This is even stupider than AHTD not signing US highways along interstates.  This has the potential to confuse the fuck out of out of staters. 

[Alex]

It sounds like the I-35 designing along the overlap with MO-110 was merely the first such project to emphasize the non-Interstate end of a freeway cosigning. Will I-55 signage be dropped in Southeast Missouri where it shares pavement with US 61?

[corco]

One thing is that the area mile markers all have I 44 shields on them, so that helps.

[bugo]

One thing is that the area mile markers all have I 44 shields on them, so that helps.

Yeah but they're tiny.  My 40 year old eyes can read them, but I doubt an average 65 year old could make them out.

[Molandfreak]

This is the same kind of crap they pulled when they "decommissioned" I-35 where concurrent with the CKC.

[bugo]

This is coming from the DOT that thinks the Death Diamond is a good idea.

[Henry]

Say it ain't so, Moe! (obviously using the pronunciation of the state abbreviation)

[NE2]

Well trolled, bugo.

[bugo]

I'm not kidding about the signs being removed.  I should have gotten a picture.

[corco]

I got some when I took 50 across the state on my way home, I'll post them tonight

[US71]

This is the same kind of crap they pulled when they "decommissioned" I-35 where concurrent with the CKC.

I wouldn't say "Decommissioned", merely de-signed.

[amroad17]

Probably because you know you are on I-44 (with the center ARTEMIS-type milemarkers) and MoDOT may be saving money by not posting an I-44 sign along with the US 50 sign.  This is also done north of Kansas City along I-35 with MoDOT simply posting US 69 and MO 110.  It seems that this is happening on concurrencies in Missouri.  Will US 40 only be posted along I-70 throughout most of the state or will the new I-64 extension go back to what was old by posting only US 40/US 61?  I sure hope not. 

Personally, I do not like this.  It is rather idiotic and tacky.  It is just MoDOT using cost cutting measures.  Usually, the concurrencies were posted on one sign anyway, so what is the big deal adding another shield and directional banner?  Do they cost that much or is MoDOT nearly out of funds?

[Molandfreak]

This is the same kind of crap they pulled when they "decommissioned" I-35 where concurrent with the CKC.

I wouldn't say "Decommissioned", merely de-signed.

There's a reason I put "quotes" around "decommissioned." Fire the "laser."

[Brandon]

This is the same kind of crap they pulled when they "decommissioned" I-35 where concurrent with the CKC.

I wouldn't say "Decommissioned", merely de-signed.

There's a reason I put "quotes" around "decommissioned." Fire the "laser."

/It had to be done.

[bugo]

How would taking down existing signs save money?

[hotdogPi]

How would taking down existing signs save money?

Two possible reasons:

1. They will reuse the signs in another part of the state.
2. They're wrong, and they think it will save them money because they're MOronDOT.

[Dougtone]

I'm not kidding about the signs being removed.  I should have gotten a picture.

It's true.  I had driven that part of I-44 in Missouri during the St. Louis meet weekend and can vouch that a number of shield assemblies had US 50 shields standing alone, while the I-44 shields were not present.

An example: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dougtone/13300026563/

[Alex]

I'm not kidding about the signs being removed.  I should have gotten a picture.

It's true.  I had driven that part of I-44 in Missouri during the St. Louis meet weekend and can vouch that a number of shield assemblies had US 50 shields standing alone, while the I-44 shields were not present.

An example: http://www.flickr.com/photos/dougtone/13300026563/

Thanks for sharing that Doug. Here is how that assembly appeared in 2012: https://www.aaroads.com/midwest/missouri044/i-044_wb_exit_269_01.jpg

What pointless concept to remove the I-44 shields along that stretch.

[Brandon]

How would taking down existing signs save money?

Two possible reasons:

1. They will reuse the signs in another part of the state.
2. They're wrong, and they think it will save them money because they're MOronDOT.

Oh good, now St Louis has both MOronDOT and IDiOT. 

[m2tbone]

Maybe they just had to borrow the I-44 signs to place on the extended I-44 segment downtown that was formerly I-70 after the new Stan Musial Veterans Memorial Bridge opened.  I'm guessing they will replace the I-44 signs once they have more made.

[codyg1985]

^ I can't remember if all of the I-44/US 50 assemblies looked like this or not, but if they did, they not only took down the I-44 shield to maybe be used somewhere else, but they also put up NEW white directional banners to match the US 50 shield. Why couldn't they have just created new I-44 shields?

This is very puzzling to me. The only thing I can think of is that maybe they will come back and post larger interstate shields on separate posts. I'm all for signing US route concurrencies with interstates, but dropping the interstate..I just don't understand.