Is there still a need for Business Routes?

[Alex]

Seeing that in recent years several Interstate Business loops have gone by the way side, can the same be said about U.S. or State Highway business loops and their usefulness? Usually a business route designation is applied to the old alignment of a state or U.S. highway after a new bypass or other improved roadway is constructed. Some instances of these routes use the Business Loop moniker, even though there really are no businesses or business district that the original alignment still serves. So standard operating procedure means business route = old alignment (and in NC alternate route = old alignment outside of built-up areas).

Will there be a time when Business Loops in general are just dropped? In Dothan, Alabama, all three U.S. highways (84, 231, 431) travel the bypass loop around the city. The business routes remain along the original alignment through the older downtown, yet all of the businesses that travelers would ever want are found on the multi-lane bypass. So is the Business Route moniker here even necessary anymore?

While wanting to acknowledge that these routes remain in the state system, could a new bannered concept be applied? Might the routes become unsigned state routes? Maybe a new concept of route classification would be devised (think of those old City U.S. highways)?

Even more so, since Business Loop Interstates are slowly fading from existence, likely because most traveler services can be found at freeway interchanges, GPS  adds more utility for the traveler to find needed services in lieu of following a designated business loop.

So will all or some of these factors hasten the retiring of the current standard of business route as we know it?

[roadfro]

I think there is still a need for business routes in some cases.

The Carson City Bypass is a good example of this. The new freeway for US 395/US 50/future I-580 traverses the eastern edges of the city, through mostly neighborhood areas of town. With the alignment and interchanges where they are, it is highly unlikely that new business districts will develop around the freeway except at locations where they already exist. The majority of the city's businesses are on Carson Street and William Street (the old highways). Local businesses were already concerned about the diverted through traffic before the route was built, which may have prompted NDOT to apply for business designations. US 395 Business has been signed along Carson Street since the first phase of the bypass opened (AASHTO granted a US 50 Business designation for William St, but NDOT has elected not to sign it at present).

With that said, I can definitely see the point with some business designations. For example, the I-80 Business Loop in Verdi, NV travels along old US 40 (SR 425) and some frontage roads adjacent to the interstate at exit 2. The only major businesses along the loop are those on the frontage roads. The business designation along the 3+ miles of SR 425 isn't really helpful and could probably be eliminated (it's not signed well off the interstate anyway).

Perhaps the old "City" designation would be better for some of these routes. Not sure if AASHTO would go for this...I read that they really only favor business, bypass, alternate and temporary banners nowadays.

[rawmustard]

Perhaps the old "City" designation would be better for some of these routes. Not sure if AASHTO would go for this...I read that they really only favor business, bypass, alternate and temporary banners nowadays.

And even then, the use of temporary banners seems to have diminished greatly compared to about 20 years ago. It could simply be that states that are currently building new routes choose not to do that anymore. (Otherwise, there would be plenty of TEMP I-69, I-73, I-49, etc. designations abound.)

To get back on to the main point of this thread, Michigan is still gung-ho on the business route concept, although a couple have been removed in recent years (BUS US-31 in Niles [although the signs have yet to be changed out for M-139, which supplanted it], BUS US-41 in Marquette), with talk of removing a few others (BUS M-32 in Hillman very shortly if it hasn't already been turned back, and Niles's other two business routes, with BUS US-12 the more likely to be removed if MDOT and the Niles government ever decide on the transfer of a few blocks of a downtown street). The Interstate and U.S. business routes seem very unlikely to be turned back unless a city absolutely wants control of those streets, which was the case in Holland. However, as of right now, there's a moratorium on any new jurisdictional transfers other than those already in discussion.

In the future, I definitely expect new business designations to be created in Kalkaska, Petoskey, and Traverse City should bypasses of those places ever get built, just as Cadillac and Manton did when the US-131 freeway was opened in that area in 2000. MDOT still sees a need for trunkline designations to provide access to downtown areas of important cities, and will use business designations to that end whenever feasible.

[Revive 755]

Perhaps the old "City" designation would be better for some of these routes. Not sure if AASHTO would go for this...I read that they really only favor business, bypass, alternate and temporary banners nowadays.

Perhaps AASHTO should be overridden or ignored if they won't cooperate.  I like the idea of bringing back the "City" designation for routes that are more of preserving an easy way to find the old downtown or other city route from the main route - though downtown loops would work just as well for interstates.

There are still plenty of cities where many of the businesses have not migrated out towards the interstate or other highway bypass and the business routes are helpful for finding them.  Off the top of my head:
* Cape Girardeau, MO
* Nebraska City, NE
* Ames, IA
* Rolla, MO (not that anyone should suffer through the traffic on this one)
* Blormal, IL

Then there are the cities that will get bypasses one of these years and will not have many businesses change from the old route to a location near the bypass very quickly:
* Jerseyville, IL
* Macomb, IL
* Hannibal, MO (US 61 bypass some decade)
* Lincoln, NE (NE 2 bypasses on the future South Lincoln Beltway)

I doubt there will come a year when the Business designation is extinct.  At least one state will probably hold on to the designation, and for some of the routes many businesses would protest the removal of the business route.

[oscar]

I doubt there will come a year when the Business designation is extinct.  At least one state will probably hold on to the designation, and for some of the routes many businesses would protest the removal of the business route.

I agree.  Also, promising to keep the old route through downtown as a business route is a cheap and reasonable bone to throw to downtown business owners (especially small businesses), to soften their opposition to building the bypass.

[roadfro]

Perhaps the old "City" designation would be better for some of these routes. Not sure if AASHTO would go for this...I read that they really only favor business, bypass, alternate and temporary banners nowadays.

And even then, the use of temporary banners seems to have diminished greatly compared to about 20 years ago. It could simply be that states that are currently building new routes choose not to do that anymore. (Otherwise, there would be plenty of TEMP I-69, I-73, I-49, etc. designations abound.)

Along these lines, NDOT applied for Temporary US 395/US 50 designations in Carson City at the same time as the business designations. The "temporary" portions of the route are simply signed as "To US 395/US 50".

Also, promising to keep the old route through downtown as a business route is a cheap and reasonable bone to throw to downtown business owners (especially small businesses), to soften their opposition to building the bypass.

As far as the Carson City situation is concerned, I'm interested to see whether the business designation will remain once the bypass is completed. NDOT is planning to turn over the former US 395 turned business route to Carson City when the freeway is finally finished--the city will narrow the street in the downtown core to make it more pedestrian/business friendly. Business routes not maintained by the state sometimes have the business designation removed from the BGSs (in the case of US 395 Business/Virginia St at I-80 in Reno) and are generally not signed well along the route itself.

[leifvanderwall]

I still the Business routes are still useful, but when gas prices spiked up to $4 a gallon, people stopped traveling longer distances. The local travelers don't need business routes because they know their way around anyways. If travelers are driving a long distance and if they need gas or a bite to eat they just stop next to the interchange; they don't go through downtown just for fuel or a Burger King. I think Business Loop 94 is useful if you're going to St. Joesph,Mi. for Vencian Festival and need to get back on I-94.

[bugo]

Perhaps the old "City" designation would be better for some of these routes. Not sure if AASHTO would go for this...I read that they really only favor business, bypass, alternate and temporary banners nowadays.

And even then, the use of temporary banners seems to have diminished greatly compared to about 20 years ago. It could simply be that states that are currently building new routes choose not to do that anymore. (Otherwise, there would be plenty of TEMP I-69, I-73, I-49, etc. designations abound.)

They need to bring back the TEMP banner and go ahead and sign the completed parts of certain Interstates, namely I-49.

[mightyace]

They need to bring back the TEMP banner and go ahead and sign the completed parts of certain Interstates, namely I-49.

Doesn't the "FUTURE" tag fulfill a similar role?

[TheStranger]

They need to bring back the TEMP banner and go ahead and sign the completed parts of certain Interstates, namely I-49.

Doesn't the "FUTURE" tag fulfill a similar role?

That makes me wonder if "FUTURE" is this generation's version of "TEMP" (just as "BUSINESS" supplanted "CITY" decades ago)...certainly it's been much more in vogue as of late.

[US71]

Arkansas has a lot of "Business" alignments. Part of it is there are still lots of businesses along the old route (except maybe Waldron, AR ) and part of it is public demand.

AR 471 was going to replace "old" US 71 in NW Arkansas but too many businesses complained that no one would know it was old 71. So, AHTD changed it to Business 71 (or 71B as Arkansas does it). There was a phase-in period with both routes, then 471 was decommissioned.

[Roadgeek Adam]

In Jersey, the only remaining business routes are 1/9 Truck, 1 Business and NJ 33 Business. The last one could be renumbered easily (186 suggested) and 1 Business should be turned into a SR. 1/9 Truck is another story

[florida]

I like bannered routes, and they do serve a purpose...though, not down here because most of our state and US routes still go through downtown areas. Our last bannered state route was decommissioned a few years ago.

[Alps]

They need to bring back the TEMP banner and go ahead and sign the completed parts of certain Interstates, namely I-49.

Doesn't the "FUTURE" tag fulfill a similar role?

That makes me wonder if "FUTURE" is this generation's version of "TEMP" (just as "BUSINESS" supplanted "CITY" decades ago)...certainly it's been much more in vogue as of late.

I've been of the impression that TEMP was used for the original Interstate system to denote gaps.  Now that it's been completed, the new Interstates no longer have gaps - it's more the reverse, that the other highway systems have bypasses.

[TheStranger]

California is infamous of course for the Business I-80 freeway just a few miles down from here in Sacramento...but outside that, the traditional old-routing surface business loops are still in vogue.  I know US 101 has had a few added in the last decade in the North Bay, and business routes in Salinas and Santa Maria (especially the latter, which mostly uses Route 135) are surprisingly well-signed.

US 395 also has a business route in Ridgecrest that is not part of the old US 395 at all, but was created to serve that community a few miles off the main route.

[roadfro]

Digressing a bit...

They need to bring back the TEMP banner and go ahead and sign the completed parts of certain Interstates, namely I-49.

Doesn't the "FUTURE" tag fulfill a similar role?

That makes me wonder if "FUTURE" is this generation's version of "TEMP" (just as "BUSINESS" supplanted "CITY" decades ago)...certainly it's been much more in vogue as of late.

"Temporary" != "Future"

"Temporary" routes are used to connect two completed portions of a highway along an uncompleted segment. Temporary designations are also used where a new alignment is being constructed and a connection needs to be temporarily made between the old and new alignments on a segment of road that was not previously, and ultimately will not be, a part of the main highway.

By contrast, "Future" banners (seemingly most often used for future Interstates) are used by some DOTs to indicate a highway corridor that will eventually become signed along part of an existing route, but have yet to be formally designated for a variety of reasons.


Temporary routes are still one of the special routes types that AASHTO will designate on the U.S. highway system. However, temporary designations may not always be signed as such. I mentioned upthread how NDOT has signed Temporary US 395/US 50 in Carson City as "TO US 395/US 50".

"Future" banners are not specifically mentioned as a special route type used by AASHTO. However, I think they have allowed some future Interstate corridors to be signed as "future" routes in some recent route numbering decisions.

[rickmastfan67]

I like bannered routes, and they do serve a purpose...though, not down here because most of our state and US routes still go through downtown areas. Our last bannered state route was decommissioned a few years ago.

What about FL-44 Bus?  Or Truck FL-14?  Both are still posted as far as I can tell via StreetView.

[Duke87]

Continuing to state-maintain the old alignment through town makes sense. What I hate, though, is the use of "BUS" as an abbreviation for the banner. It isn't a route for buses! Using "BUSN" instead would solve this problem nicely.


True, in some cases there are just as many businesses on the new route... but still, I like sticking with the "business" banner simply out of consistency. "Business route X" does not and never has meant "route X to find businesses" to me. It means "old route X through town".
...okay, maybe "City" is a better banner. But only if it's used in all such cases. Again, consistency.

[bugo]

Continuing to state-maintain the old alignment through town makes sense. What I hate, though, is the use of "BUS" as an abbreviation for the banner. It isn't a route for buses! Using "BUSN" instead would solve this problem nicely.

I like the way Arkansas handles business routes.  They simply add a B to the number.  US 71 Business = US 71B. 

[roadfro]

What I hate, though, is the use of "BUS" as an abbreviation for the banner. It isn't a route for buses!

I've never seen "BUS" posted in the field, only having seen "BUSINESS" always spelled out.  It's different for Alternate routes, where NDOT always uses the abbreviated form of "ALT" on its signs.

[hbelkins]

I've seen both "BUS" and "BUSN" used.

[bugo]

I've seen both "BUS" and "BUSN" used.

I think I saw "BUSSES" once.

[US71]

I like the way Arkansas handles business routes.  They simply add a B to the number.  US 71 Business = US 71B. 

271 in Hugo, OK is posted the same way

[citrus]

Continuing to state-maintain the old alignment through town makes sense. What I hate, though, is the use of "BUS" as an abbreviation for the banner. It isn't a route for buses! Using "BUSN" instead would solve this problem nicely.

How about "BIZ" ??

[jwags]

I agree that business routes are unneeded because most travelers on the road don't want to go through town in the first place.  Most people want to get to their destination as quickly as possible.