Highways you're surprised it hasn't gotten truncated/decommissioned

[Max Rockatansky]

Any of the remaining spurs in Michigan that serve state parks (M-211 and M-212 come to mind)

M-185?

M-185 is also the main highway on the island.  Most of the start Park stuff is on adjoining roadways. 

[mgk920]

Two US highways here in Wisconsin:

- US 18 east of its US 151 split by Dodgeville, WI
- US 141 south of its US 41 split ('Abrams Interchange') north of Green Bay, WI

Mike

[GaryV]

- US 141 south of its US 41 split ('Abrams Interchange') north of Green Bay, WI

BR I-41 anyone?  (The portion going thru Green Bay.)  The problem is it connects to I-41 at one end and I-43 at the other.

[vdeane]

Any of the remaining spurs in Michigan that serve state parks (M-211 and M-212 come to mind)

M-185?

M-185 is also the main highway on the island.  Most of the start Park stuff is on adjoining roadways. 

If cars can't drive on it, should it really have a state route number?  Demote it to a state bike route.

[Max Rockatansky]

Any of the remaining spurs in Michigan that serve state parks (M-211 and M-212 come to mind)

M-185?

M-185 is also the main highway on the island.  Most of the start Park stuff is on adjoining roadways. 

If cars can't drive on it, should it really have a state route number?  Demote it to a state bike route.

Cars do drive on it in the form emergency vehicles.  More so things like snowmobiles and horse drawn carriages are allowed on M-185.  Its definitely isn't "motor free" or "vehicle free"  as people think. 

[jmacswimmer]

You could make a case for MD 2 south of Sunderland (where it begins overlapping with MD 4).  It's a bit of a pointless overlap since at the other end in Solomons, 2 turns off 4 and simply runs parallel, ending here less than a quarter mile later (side question: was the end of state maintenance always here, or did 2 used to extend all the way into Solomons?).  I'm guessing it remains because 2 existed thru Calvert County before 4, and many are now familiar with that stretch as "2-4".

[vdeane]

Any of the remaining spurs in Michigan that serve state parks (M-211 and M-212 come to mind)

M-185?

M-185 is also the main highway on the island.  Most of the start Park stuff is on adjoining roadways. 

If cars can't drive on it, should it really have a state route number?  Demote it to a state bike route.

Cars do drive on it in the form emergency vehicles.  More so things like snowmobiles and horse drawn carriages are allowed on M-185.  Its definitely isn't "motor free" or "vehicle free"  as people think. 

I'd hardly consider emergency vehicles, snowmobiles, and horse drawn carriages to be in the same league as personal automobiles.  By all means, give the road a name or invent some other designation, but a signed number that's no different from the rest of the state route system is probably not appropriate.  The fact of the matter is, its very existence makes it very difficult for roadgeeks to clinch the Michigan state highway system.

[kphoger]

The fact of the matter is, its very existence makes it very difficult for roadgeeks to clinch the Michigan state highway system.

That... might not be the most convincing sentence in a letter to the DOT.

[Max Rockatansky]

Any of the remaining spurs in Michigan that serve state parks (M-211 and M-212 come to mind)

M-185?

M-185 is also the main highway on the island.  Most of the start Park stuff is on adjoining roadways. 

If cars can't drive on it, should it really have a state route number?  Demote it to a state bike route.

Cars do drive on it in the form emergency vehicles.  More so things like snowmobiles and horse drawn carriages are allowed on M-185.  Its definitely isn't "motor free" or "vehicle free"  as people think. 

I'd hardly consider emergency vehicles, snowmobiles, and horse drawn carriages to be in the same league as personal automobiles.  By all means, give the road a name or invent some other designation, but a signed number that's no different from the rest of the state route system is probably not appropriate.  The fact of the matter is, its very existence makes it very difficult for roadgeeks to clinch the Michigan state highway system.

It's actually incredibly easy, there are a ton of bike shops right off the dock as soon as you land on Mackinac Island.  I've actually found M-185 is a huge attraction on the road community, it frequently pops up on road websites.  M-185 definitely gets the same treatment in terms of maintenance as the rest of the State Trunklines whereas the rest of the roads on the island do not.  Lest we forget beyond being a State Park there is a living community on Mackinac Island as well that M-185 serves. 

[rarnold]

Truncate US 412 West at Woodward, Oklahoma. It is overlapped for the rest of its route to Springer, NM. Routes include OK 3, OK 95, OK 136, US 56, US 64, US 183, US 270, US 385.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

MN 120. They were able to offload the part south of I-94 around 20 years ago, but the rest remains despite MnDOT's active efforts to turn back as much metro surface mileage as possible. MN 5 and US 61 are going to be bigger projects than 120.

The short section of MN 27 east of Moose Lake
MN 123

[texaskdog]

The fact of the matter is, its very existence makes it very difficult for roadgeeks to clinch the Michigan state highway system.

That... might not be the most convincing sentence in a letter to the DOT.

Hey I've taken a bicycle around the island, only 9 miles

[kphoger]

Truncate US 412 West at Woodward, Oklahoma. It is overlapped for the rest of its route to Springer, NM. Routes include OK 3, OK 95, OK 136, US 56, US 64, US 183, US 270, US 385.

I'd rather truncate US-412 at US-56 (near Boise City) and truncate OK-3 at US-81 (near Okarche).

[Max Rockatansky]

The fact of the matter is, its very existence makes it very difficult for roadgeeks to clinch the Michigan state highway system.

That... might not be the most convincing sentence in a letter to the DOT.

Hey I've taken a bicycle around the island, only 9 miles

8.2 to be exact.  I've even run it a couple times, definitely gives the bike shop sticker I have more prestige. 

[webny99]

The fact of the matter is, its very existence makes it very difficult for roadgeeks to clinch the Michigan state highway system.

That... might not be the most convincing sentence in a letter to the DOT.

True, although as Max mentions, it's not that hard to take the ferry over to the island. I've done it twice, and not even with the goal of clinching M 185. It's definitely worth a visit with or without the state highway.

[Max Rockatansky]

The fact of the matter is, its very existence makes it very difficult for roadgeeks to clinch the Michigan state highway system.

That... might not be the most convincing sentence in a letter to the DOT.

True, although as Max mentions, it's not that hard to take the ferry over to the island. I've done it twice, and not even with the goal of clinching M 185. It's definitely worth a visit with or without the state highway.

Speaking of ferries, there are several in the State Trunkline System that would rank as more difficult clinches.  M-154 on Harsens Island and M-134 on Drummond Island come to mind.  The latter IMO is the most difficult Trunkline clinch in Michigan given how remote it is.

[hbelkins]

If we're talking about state routes, WV 55 is the most obvious choice I can think of. It's concurrent with another route (WV 20, WV 39, US 219, US 33, WV 28, US 220 and US 48) for most of its route, except for the westernmost few miles between US 19 and WV 41.

[vdeane]

It's actually incredibly easy, there are a ton of bike shops right off the dock as soon as you land on Mackinac Island.  I've actually found M-185 is a huge attraction on the road community, it frequently pops up on road websites.  M-185 definitely gets the same treatment in terms of maintenance as the rest of the State Trunklines whereas the rest of the roads on the island do not.  Lest we forget beyond being a State Park there is a living community on Mackinac Island as well that M-185 serves. 

Yeah, that doesn't help those who don't know how to ride a bike.  Sure, it's a state highway, but that doesn't mean it needs to be signed.  Doesn't MI have unsigned routes like many other states?  If this were NY I'd say make it a reference route.

[paulthemapguy]

I was just thinking about Illinois 129 the other day, wondering why it still exists.  The interchange to it from I-55 has been reduced to a useless right-in, right-out, and it's a stub that ends just a few miles south in Braidwood, where IL-53 and IL-113 serve the town just fine.

[Max Rockatansky]

It's actually incredibly easy, there are a ton of bike shops right off the dock as soon as you land on Mackinac Island.  I've actually found M-185 is a huge attraction on the road community, it frequently pops up on road websites.  M-185 definitely gets the same treatment in terms of maintenance as the rest of the State Trunklines whereas the rest of the roads on the island do not.  Lest we forget beyond being a State Park there is a living community on Mackinac Island as well that M-185 serves. 

Yeah, that doesn't help those who don't know how to ride a bike.  Sure, it's a state highway, but that doesn't mean it needs to be signed.  Doesn't MI have unsigned routes like many other states?  If this were NY I'd say make it a reference route.

I don't believe so, or at least I've never run into one that wasn't signed.  For reference with M-185 it has only one reassurance shield and just mile markers.  Regarding Mackinac the mileage markers are certainly a helpful reference as to where you on the island.  Just because a highway isn't oriented towards car I wouldn't say it doesn't mean it is disqualified from being one so long as it has a viable transportation purpose. 

Speaking for myself if a route isn't signed or has some weird element to it, then it's more of a draw.  We have a ton of State Routes in California that aren't signed.  Most of them have an interesting story to them which explains their oddness.

[Max Rockatansky]

Regarding M-185 the only reassurance shields are used as the double sided Mile Mark 0 reference at Marquette Place:

IMG_4445 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

The Mackinac State Park boundary is well marked from M-185:

IMG_4450 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

The typical mile marker on M-185 is double sided as well:

IMG_4461 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

So in a sense the way the signage is configured on M-185 is completely oriented for non-motorized traffic.  It resembles far more what you would see on a typical recreational trail over what one would see on any other State Trunkline.  That said, it does meet the criteria as a corridor of transportation that would typically would be subject to State Level maintenance. 

[Max Rockatansky]

Regarding Highways that really don't serve a transportation purpose, UT 900 and UT 901 certainly fit the bill.  Both routes were adoptions of primitive BLM roads that were intended to block the path a hazardous waste railroad line oriented for a nuclear waste facility that was planned for Skull Valley.  UT 196 was similarly added for the same purpose but at the very least that is an actual highway that serves the Dugway Proving Ground.

Utah also has a ton of State Park Highways, many which aren't actually even signed.  Usually if there is a gap in State Maintenance I've noticed that Utah tends not to sign the State Route in whatever park it is attached to.  Below is a reference list for Utah State Highways serving State Parks and other State Facilities:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_state_highways_serving_Utah_state_parks_and_institutions#309

[GaryV]

It's actually incredibly easy, there are a ton of bike shops right off the dock as soon as you land on Mackinac Island.  I've actually found M-185 is a huge attraction on the road community, it frequently pops up on road websites.  M-185 definitely gets the same treatment in terms of maintenance as the rest of the State Trunklines whereas the rest of the roads on the island do not.  Lest we forget beyond being a State Park there is a living community on Mackinac Island as well that M-185 serves. 

Yeah, that doesn't help those who don't know how to ride a bike.  Sure, it's a state highway, but that doesn't mean it needs to be signed.  Doesn't MI have unsigned routes like many other states?  If this were NY I'd say make it a reference route.

I don't believe so, or at least I've never run into one that wasn't signed. 

Quite a few, actually:  http://michiganhighways.org/other/unsigned.html

[Max Rockatansky]

It's actually incredibly easy, there are a ton of bike shops right off the dock as soon as you land on Mackinac Island.  I've actually found M-185 is a huge attraction on the road community, it frequently pops up on road websites.  M-185 definitely gets the same treatment in terms of maintenance as the rest of the State Trunklines whereas the rest of the roads on the island do not.  Lest we forget beyond being a State Park there is a living community on Mackinac Island as well that M-185 serves. 

Yeah, that doesn't help those who don't know how to ride a bike.  Sure, it's a state highway, but that doesn't mean it needs to be signed.  Doesn't MI have unsigned routes like many other states?  If this were NY I'd say make it a reference route.

I don't believe so, or at least I've never run into one that wasn't signed. 

Quite a few, actually:  http://michiganhighways.org/other/unsigned.html

Most of those are akin to X Routes in Arizona and U Post Mile Routes in California.  Both are essentially internal designations for an unrelinquished part of a highway that is up for being given back to a local authority.  US 60 X on Main in Mesa would be an example in Arizona.  The most famous example in California is CA 14U on Sierra Highway which oddly even has some reassurance shields. 

[sparker]

It's actually incredibly easy, there are a ton of bike shops right off the dock as soon as you land on Mackinac Island.  I've actually found M-185 is a huge attraction on the road community, it frequently pops up on road websites.  M-185 definitely gets the same treatment in terms of maintenance as the rest of the State Trunklines whereas the rest of the roads on the island do not.  Lest we forget beyond being a State Park there is a living community on Mackinac Island as well that M-185 serves. 

Yeah, that doesn't help those who don't know how to ride a bike.  Sure, it's a state highway, but that doesn't mean it needs to be signed.  Doesn't MI have unsigned routes like many other states?  If this were NY I'd say make it a reference route.

I don't believe so, or at least I've never run into one that wasn't signed. 

Quite a few, actually:  http://michiganhighways.org/other/unsigned.html

Most of those are akin to X Routes in Arizona and U Post Mile Routes in California.  Both are essentially internal designations for an unrelinquished part of a highway that is up for being given back to a local authority.  US 60 X on Main in Mesa would be an example in Arizona.  The most famous example in California is CA 14U on Sierra Highway which oddly even has some reassurance shields. 

The history of unrelinquished CA state highways has been just plain weird at times.  From what I've been able to gather, 14U is still under state maintenance as a result of the cancellation of the CA 126 freeway, the terminating ramps to CA 14 already having been partially built and now serving as the Via Princessa interchange.  D7 decided that a temporary CA 126 route was needed between that facility and the original routing on San Fernando Road in Newhall, so it kept old Sierra Highway in its inventory (this action circa 1976 or so); since then Santa Clarita has taken back much of the facility except a section that has had historic problems with slope slippage; since the original work was done under Caltrans auspices, the city has declined to accept transfer of ownership until such time as the problem is resolved -- but for one reason or another, such has never been budgeted.  So 14U actually exists; the signage was due to a bit of literalism within D7 a few decades back (we own it, we sign it), about the time CA 187 and CA 213, on city streets in metro L.A., were being signed as well (much of which is now gone).  But the grand prize has to go to CA 221 -- D4 had been trying to get rid of Soquel Ave. between CA 29 and CA 121 since CA 29/12 was rerouted over the new Napa River bridge circa 1980, but neither the City or County of Napa wanted to assume maintenance, so it sat on the books as "29U" until someone in Sacramento realized that there was an unbuilt CA 221 originally planned to cross E-W between CA 29 and 121 north of Napa itself -- and the route definition simply stated "a route between 29 and 121 near Napa"; since that was simply an unadopted corridor, the definition was transferred to the "29U" alignment, which was then postmiled as CA 221.  Nevertheless, signage for CA 221 has been decidedly minimalist, with only trailblazers from each end (at least the last time I was on it circa 2014).