Most Unnecessary Interstate

[sparker]

I suppose they don't -have- to be posted with an Interstate route number, but then again why not?

Because they're already another route, at least in some cases (I-180 WY, I-587, I-393, etc.). Something that isn't overlapped, like I-381 in Virginia, is fine, except I-375 (FL) should be US 92.

The ones I was thinking of are not overlapped.   I see on a map that it is kinda hard to see where all that US-92 goes in St. Pete.

US 92 looks like it just peters out (no pun intended!) at the corner of 4th Street North and 5th Avenue North; a block east of where I-375 terminates.  5th Avenue seems to be signed as Alternate US 19; apparently that was the original US 92 route west to its former terminus at US 19 pre-deployment of I-275 and its "children".

[Strider]

I-87 and I-587 in North Carolina. All I hear anyone say about those decisions is, "Why are they changing the number? Those roads have always been 64 and 264".

I do agree with this. I-87 and I-587 is not needed.

[vdeane]

The issue with roads like I-381 and I-395 in MD is that they're just exit ramps that happen to have an interstate number.  Should we assign an interstate number to literally every single exit in the Thruway ticket system?  They're the exact same thing!  Any interstate with no interchanges between its termini and less than two miles long is suspect.

I-175 and I-375 are fine because there are intermediate interchanges (note that I-395 doesn't technically have an exit; it just splits in two; also, I support retroceding most of DC back into MD, and there would be too many x95 numbers if that were to happen).

[sparker]

......... I support retroceding most of DC back into MD, and there would be too many x95 numbers if that were to happen).

I take it that the issue here is I-695 occurring both in MD and DC, with about 40 miles separating them.  Since there's little or no chance of actually retroceding DC to MD on a political/jurisdictional basis, the reference is to functionality in regards to Interstate numbers (essentially considering DC, for this purpose, to be just another MD city), in which case I-695 could revert to a I-295 extension, assume another number (with the only unused designation in MD being 995), or be considered a 395 "spur".  But that's not going to happen, nor is any renumbering regardless of whether or not the route in question is a glorified exit ramp.  Once it's on the books and the driving public (reinforced by traffic broadcasts) has included it in their routing idiom, it's pretty much a done deal.   

[Roadgeekteen]

All unsigned interstates should go.

[bing101]

I-705 in Washington state its a short interstate but I say it should be a state route.

[Beltway]

The issue with roads like I-381 and I-395 in MD is that they're just exit ramps that happen to have an interstate number. 

I rather disagree, they are much more than "exit ramps", they are 1 1/2 mile urban freeways that connect the mainline Interstate into urban CBD thoroughfares.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/I-395-Downtown_Baltimore.JPG
http://www.roadstothefuture.com/I381_VA_Desc.html

[kkt]

Lots of those short interstates were just as expensive as cross-state upgrades to 2-lane highways, and carry as much traffic.

Generally, if it was constructed with the 90% Federal funds, to interstate standards, it gets an interstate number.  Is that a bad thing?  Maybe they should've kept and built on the US highway route number system.

[Super Mateo]

Depends on whether "unnecessary" applies to the road or the number.

Examples:
Unnecessary Road:  I-180 IL, other freeways that lead nowhere
Unnecessary Number:  I-41 WI, I-865 IN, other cases where Interstate numbers were slapped on just because they can

[Roadgeekteen]

Depends on whether "unnecessary" applies to the road or the number.

Examples:
Unnecessary Road:  I-180 IL, other freeways that lead nowhere
Unnecessary Number:  I-41 WI, I-865 IN, other cases where Interstate numbers were slapped on just because they can

I-865 is important because having it be I-465 was confusing.

[ET21]

Depends on whether "unnecessary" applies to the road or the number.

Examples:
Unnecessary Road:  I-180 IL, other freeways that lead nowhere
Unnecessary Number:  I-41 WI, I-865 IN, other cases where Interstate numbers were slapped on just because they can

I-865 is important because having it be I-465 was confusing.

Quite right. If anything, it should have been I-165 since it's a short stub with no exits outside of both its termini

[Beltway]

Depends on whether "unnecessary" applies to the road or the number.
Examples:
Unnecessary Road:  I-180 IL, other freeways that lead nowhere
Unnecessary Number:  I-41 WI, I-865 IN, other cases where Interstate numbers were slapped on just because they can

I-865 is important because having it be I-465 was confusing.

I-180 IL was important when originally built in the 1960s to serve a major steel mill complex.  The fact that the plants later closed is not the fault of those who planned and built the highway.

[froggie]

^ One could also argue that I-180 IL was quintessential pork.  This is backed up by a GAO (Government Accounting Office) report that concluded it was "constructed to satisfy the demands of a steel company (Jones & Laughlin) looking to locate a plant in Hennepin." (per Kurumi)

"No other interstate route has been constructed primary to serve a private manufacturing company, and no other interstate spur serves an area with such a small population," the GAO said.

[Roadgeekteen]

Depends on whether "unnecessary" applies to the road or the number.
Examples:
Unnecessary Road:  I-180 IL, other freeways that lead nowhere
Unnecessary Number:  I-41 WI, I-865 IN, other cases where Interstate numbers were slapped on just because they can

I-865 is important because having it be I-465 was confusing.

I-180 IL was important when originally built in the 1960s to serve a major steel mill complex.  The fact that the plants later closed is not the fault of those who planned and built the highway.

At least it could serve a northern route to Peoria.

[vdeane]

The issue with roads like I-381 and I-395 in MD is that they're just exit ramps that happen to have an interstate number. 

I rather disagree, they are much more than "exit ramps", they are 1 1/2 mile urban freeways that connect the mainline Interstate into urban CBD thoroughfares.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/I-395-Downtown_Baltimore.JPG
http://www.roadstothefuture.com/I381_VA_Desc.html

IMO I-381 would make a lot more sense to have numbered if VA 381 were also signed.  Otherwise, having grown up in Turnpike Land, it strikes me as very similar to the trumpets that dominate most trips I take to anywhere outside of the Capital District (if I want to go south, east, or west, it's the Thruway or two lane roads).  Thanks to guide signs, guiderail in the median, and the number of lanes around the toll barriers, many of these interchanges feel like mini-freeways.

[Finrod]

Unsigned I-444 in Tulsa is pretty useless.  It's just the other two legs of the expressway square around downtown Tulsa, and it's also US 75 for its entire length.  Unless/until Tulsa gets another downtown 2di, no need for it in any form.

[cl94]

The issue with roads like I-381 and I-395 in MD is that they're just exit ramps that happen to have an interstate number. 

I rather disagree, they are much more than "exit ramps", they are 1 1/2 mile urban freeways that connect the mainline Interstate into urban CBD thoroughfares.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/I-395-Downtown_Baltimore.JPG
http://www.roadstothefuture.com/I381_VA_Desc.html

IMO I-381 would make a lot more sense to have numbered if VA 381 were also signed.  Otherwise, having grown up in Turnpike Land, it strikes me as very similar to the trumpets that dominate most trips I take to anywhere outside of the Capital District (if I want to go south, east, or west, it's the Thruway or two lane roads).  Thanks to guide signs, guiderail in the median, and the number of lanes around the toll barriers, many of these interchanges feel like mini-freeways.

I've seen trumpet ramps longer than I-381. See NJ Turnpike Exit 15X. Using the I-381 logic, that should be an Interstate as well.

[Beltway]

I rather disagree, they are much more than "exit ramps", they are 1 1/2 mile urban freeways that connect the mainline Interstate into urban CBD thoroughfares.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/I-395-Downtown_Baltimore.JPG
http://www.roadstothefuture.com/I381_VA_Desc.html

IMO I-381 would make a lot more sense to have numbered if VA 381 were also signed.  Otherwise, having grown up in Turnpike Land, it strikes me as very similar to the trumpets that dominate most trips I take to anywhere outside of the Capital District (if I want to go south, east, or west, it's the Thruway or two lane roads).  Thanks to guide signs, guiderail in the median, and the number of lanes around the toll barriers, many of these interchanges feel like mini-freeways.

VA-381 was signed with route signs for many years, best I can determine the signs were removed sometime after 2000.

I have seen lots of turnpike interchange connectors, but I don't recall any almost 3 miles long and with part built to Interstate standards.  I-81/I-381 is not a trumpet, it is a 3-level semi-directional interchange.

I suppose they could have signed the whole thing as VA-381, but having the Interstate number gives added visibility to its role as a freeway spur from I-81 into the Bristol CBD.  It was designated as such in 1961 and I don't see any real reason to change it today.

[Beltway]

I've seen trumpet ramps longer than I-381. See NJ Turnpike Exit 15X. Using the I-381 logic, that should be an Interstate as well.

What is stopping them from making it Interstate 395, 595, 795 or 995?

[Beltway]

^ One could also argue that I-180 IL was quintessential pork.  This is backed up by a GAO (Government Accounting Office) report that concluded it was "constructed to satisfy the demands of a steel company (Jones & Laughlin) looking to locate a plant in Hennepin." (per Kurumi)
"No other interstate route has been constructed primary to serve a private manufacturing company, and no other interstate spur serves an area with such a small population," the GAO said.

I didn't realize that the plant wasn't there yet when I-180 was built.  Nevertheless I would not claim that every auxiliary Interstate highway was fully justified; there may some that weren't.

[Mapmikey]

I rather disagree, they are much more than "exit ramps", they are 1 1/2 mile urban freeways that connect the mainline Interstate into urban CBD thoroughfares.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/I-395-Downtown_Baltimore.JPG
http://www.roadstothefuture.com/I381_VA_Desc.html

IMO I-381 would make a lot more sense to have numbered if VA 381 were also signed.  Otherwise, having grown up in Turnpike Land, it strikes me as very similar to the trumpets that dominate most trips I take to anywhere outside of the Capital District (if I want to go south, east, or west, it's the Thruway or two lane roads).  Thanks to guide signs, guiderail in the median, and the number of lanes around the toll barriers, many of these interchanges feel like mini-freeways.

VA-381 was signed with route signs for many years, best I can determine the signs were removed sometime after 2000.

I have seen lots of turnpike interchange connectors, but I don't recall any almost 3 miles long and with part built to Interstate standards.  I-81/I-381 is not a trumpet, it is a 3-level semi-directional interchange.

I suppose they could have signed the whole thing as VA-381, but having the Interstate number gives added visibility to its role as a freeway spur from I-81 into the Bristol CBD.  It was designated as such in 1961 and I don't see any real reason to change it today.

Oddly, when Bristol replaced their cutouts in the early 2000s, they did install regular VA 381 shields but removed them not that long after.

I-381's interchange with I-81 has had 3 configurations but none were a trumpet.

I always thought VA 381 should be I-381 Bus or US 19 (which would then also replace VA 140 in Abingdon)

[Beltway]

VA-381 was signed with route signs for many years, best I can determine the signs were removed sometime after 2000.
I have seen lots of turnpike interchange connectors, but I don't recall any almost 3 miles long and with part built to Interstate standards.  I-81/I-381 is not a trumpet, it is a 3-level semi-directional interchange.
I suppose they could have signed the whole thing as VA-381, but having the Interstate number gives added visibility to its role as a freeway spur from I-81 into the Bristol CBD.  It was designated as such in 1961 and I don't see any real reason to change it today.

Oddly, when Bristol replaced their cutouts in the early 2000s, they did install regular VA 381 shields but removed them not that long after.
I-381's interchange with I-81 has had 3 configurations but none were a trumpet.
I always thought VA 381 should be I-381 Bus or US 19 (which would then also replace VA 140 in Abingdon)

Yes, I-81 originally had a wide median for about 1/2 mile in the interchange area, and a left exit from I-81 SB to I-381.  The upgrade project for the full interchange also rebuilt SB I-81 to be alongside NB I-81 with a paved median.

Did the Interstate Business Routes get a higher percentage of federal funds than the 50% which was the maximum provided on federal-aid highway projects before the Interstate system?

One of the obvious reasons for I-381 being an Interstate highway was to fund this freeway spur with the standard 90% federal funds provided for Interstate projects, rather than having only 50% federal funds provided (at most).

I-381 was approved as part of the original 1956 Interstate Highway System.

It is in the "Yellow Book", _General Location of National System of Interstate Highways Including All Additional Routes at Urban Areas Designated in September 1955_, Bureau of Public Roads (BPR).

http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/yellowbook/bristol.jpg

As to why I-381 wasn't built all the way thru the downtown, these Yellow Book city maps showed conceptual proposals, and VA-381 was the 4-lane arterial extension that took the route to the edge of the downtown.  If they ever did consider extending the freeway all the way thru the downtown, they may have decided to utilize a less impacting alternative with the VA-381 arterial portion.

[CYoder]

I-381's interchange with I-81 has had 3 configurations but none were a trumpet.

Yes, I-81 originally had a wide median for about 1/2 mile in the interchange area, and a left exit from I-81 SB to I-381.  The upgrade project for the full interchange also rebuilt SB I-81 to be alongside NB I-81 with a paved median.

I've seen the original interchange Scott describes from historic topos, and I drive through the current interchange almost daily.  What was the third configuration Mike mentions?

[hbelkins]

I always thought VA 381 should be I-381 Bus or US 19 (which would then also replace VA 140 in Abingdon)

I always thought it a bid odd that US 58 was moved to the interstate, while US 11 and US 19 stayed on their old route.

[Mapmikey]

I've seen the original interchange Scott describes from historic topos, and I drive through the current interchange almost daily.  What was the third configuration Mike mentions?

The first configuration (per Topo maps) also had a left ramp from 81 NB curling around to the left ramp from 81 SB to 381.

I always thought it a bid odd that US 58 was moved to the interstate, while US 11 and US 19 stayed on their old route.

I can see why US 11 stays off - not a through route north of Bristol.  But US 19 is no different from US 58 through here in that regard.

I checked the CTB minutes and found no discussion on options for where the Bristol Interstate Spur would run - only that the public meeting had occurred and the option that was built was approved - to tie into existing Commonwealth Ave, which prevented it from being a freeway any further than it already is because although Euclid Ave didn't come along until the mid 1960s, Commonwealth Ave and the piece that still exists northwest of where VA 381 changes to I-381 was already there.