Dumbest decommissionings

[njroadhorse]

As small an unimportant as it is, I would've liked to see US 46 cross the Delaware still.

[xonhulu]

I agree that US 99 should've been kept, at least in OR and CA.  I generally think it's pointless to change a US route to a state route with the same number, as in US/AZ 89, US/MN 61, etc. 

Also minor, but I would've liked US 126 in Oregon to remain, and even have been extended to Florence.  While it was intrastate and shorter than 300 miles, it made sense as a branch of US 26, and since the number was retained in OR 126, there was little sense for it to lose its US Highway status.

[florida]

I-170 in Baltimore. They destroyed a neighborhood to build it, at least sign it even if it doesn't go anywhere. Plus, I-278 needs some company in the Most Ill-Fated category.

[Rover_0]

Well, it's not technically a decommissioning, but one I'd nominate is US-89A in Utah.  Granted, the issue's been fixed,* and the UT-11 designation is a result of the early Utah plan, but the fact that they had to sign a separate number, UT-11, over an alternate US route is preposterous.  Methinks it's the same process, in that UDOT assigns separate route numbers to Interstate (and US-6) business loops, and any other kind of bannered route, combined with the hidden UT-11 route designation, that led to the "absence of US-89A in Utah" situation.  Combine that with the fact that US-89A is the only alternate/suffixed (not business or otherwise) route in Utah and you'll end up seeing "South UT-11, TO US-89A" signs in Kanab at one point in time.

I'll agree that the whole US-89/AZ-89 and the southern US-89A/AZ-89A decommissionings are a bit redundant, along with US-61/MN-61.

US-466, at least west of Barstow, would have been a useful US Route.  Another nomination, though in the same vein as US-89A in Utah, is US-85 in New Mexico.  Sure, I-25 and I-10 have supplanted it, but why not reroute it down NM-3 and US-54 and eliminate the oddball US-54 alignment south of Tucumcari giving it a true north-south number?  Why not go the way of Colorado and use the US Route as the business loops or other through routes?

*Signs will be posted soon; the signing dept. at UDOT said that they will overhaul the signing in Kanab (possibly the hanging wire signs, as well), and they plan to do so all at once.

[TheStranger]

US-466, at least west of Barstow, would have been a useful US Route.  Another nomination, though in the same vein as US-89A in Utah, is US-85 in New Mexico.  Sure, I-25 and I-10 have supplanted it, but why not reroute it down NM-3 and US-54 and eliminate the oddball US-54 alignment south of Tucumcari giving it a true north-south number?  Why not go the way of Colorado and use the US Route as the business loops or other through routes?

This reminds me of something I liked from Michigan's DOT: rerouting US 12 to what was then US 112 when I-94 took over the original US 12 corridor between Lake Michigan and Ypsilanti.  This doesn't work in all cases, but would be great for US 85 in New Mexico (along what you suggested).

[Rover_0]

US-466, at least west of Barstow, would have been a useful US Route.  Another nomination, though in the same vein as US-89A in Utah, is US-85 in New Mexico.  Sure, I-25 and I-10 have supplanted it, but why not reroute it down NM-3 and US-54 and eliminate the oddball US-54 alignment south of Tucumcari giving it a true north-south number?  Why not go the way of Colorado and use the US Route as the business loops or other through routes?

This reminds me of something I liked from Michigan's DOT: rerouting US 12 to what was then US 112 when I-94 took over the original US 12 corridor between Lake Michigan and Ypsilanti.  This doesn't work in all cases, but would be great for US 85 in New Mexico (along what you suggested).

Well, I got to thinking, and at the risk of turning this into a fictional-type highways discussion board, but what about duplexing US-85 with US-160 west out of Walsenburg, CO to Ft. Garland, then down CO-159/NM-522 to Taos, then down NM-68 and NM-518 to Las Vegas, then down US-84 and NM-219 to US-54 down to Patura, NM?  Or down NM-68, US-84/285, I-25 (wrong way overlay), and down NM-41 and NM-42 to US-54 at Corona (if NM-518 isn't an all-weather route)?

[sandiaman]

Oops, sorry. That is an excellent idea Rover. Bring back the old US 85 as an alternate to I-25 and eliminate the useless little routes that NM is so fond of. And it is a rather scenic alternative as well.

Use the edit button next time. And one space between words is quite sufficient. -DTP

[Tom]

A state highway in Michigan I resent being decommissioned is M-209 in the Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore.  It had the distinction of being Michigan's shortest state highway, 3/10 of a mile long and a maximum speed limit of 25 m.p.h.

[Bickendan]

I unfortunately can understand the decommissioning of that one, though I very much sympathize. Leaving it up wouldn't have hurt anything.

[Quillz]

I don't like that CA-126 now ends at I-5. It used to extend southeast to CA-14.

[national highway 1]

Speaking of decommissioned routes, where was the western terminus of CA 30?

[TheStranger]

Speaking of decommissioned routes, where was the western terminus of CA 30?

The western terminus of Route 30 was always in the San Dimas area, originally at US 66 in the 1950s, later at I-210.

I don't like that CA-126 now ends at I-5. It used to extend southeast to CA-14.

What annoys me is that the 126 corridor between 5 and 14 HAS been built as an arterial...and I want to even say (but can't say for sure) some state funds were used...but nope, not part of 126.  (The insistence on legislative/maintenance reasons for signing, instead of navigational aids, is one of my biggest pet peeves about California's state route system.)

[Michael in Philly]

As small an unimportant as it is, I would've liked to see US 46 cross the Delaware still.

I don't know what they were thinking when they downgraded NJ 24 west of I-287.  If they didn't want people to confuse it with the 24 freeway they could at least have kept it as a state highway.  Wasn't it NJ 124 for a time?

[SEWIGuy]

A bit of an unorthodox choice, but US-410. Admittedly, with US-12 existing as it does today 410 wouldn't be great, but the routing that 410 took was far more useful than the one that 12 takes today through Washington. 12 bypasses Mt Rainier National Park, doesn't serve any major cities, and goes to what...Aberdeen? Who cares about Aberdeen? That's a meth house, not a tourist area. The only good parts of the Washington coast are already served indirectly by US 101, and US 12 doesn't serve any of the cool parts. Heck, it doesn't even facilitate interstate commerce. What two significant areas are connected by the 12 corridor west of Yakima? Centralia?  Not to mention, most of the coastbound traffic that would benefit from US-12 being there comes from the Puget Sound region to the coasts, and 410-101 is a simpler way to navigate by than 101-8-12-101.

Bring back US-410! You can call it 12, I guess, but decommissioning the routing of 410 was silly.

Doesn't WA-410 close in the winter?  I think a USH should be open year round.

[njroadhorse]

As small an unimportant as it is, I would've liked to see US 46 cross the Delaware still.

I don't know what they were thinking when they downgraded NJ 24 west of I-287.  If they didn't want people to confuse it with the 24 freeway they could at least have kept it as a state highway.  Wasn't it NJ 124 for a time?

I don't know if it was 124 at one time because I never saw an NJ 124 shield along either route, but I definitely agree with you about NJ 24's decomissioning.

[N9JIG]

US 66 was a pretty stupid decommissioning. Yes, the 66 designation was redundant to 55-44-40, but when you get something with as much cultural mindshare as 66, things like that should really be looked at in a different light. I'd really like to see 66 recommissioned in some form. Hell, while they're resigning it, crank out a few hundred spare 66 shields and sell 'em off to the public to defray the costs...

Sorry for the late post, but I have been busy driving Route 66....

Back in the 70's and 80's as I-55/44/40 et al replaced US-66 the old route did not have the nostalgia value it has now, in fact had it NOT been decommissioned when its transportation value was superseded by the Interstates it would arguably not be the famous road it is today. While it certainly had reputation and fame for decades before it was replaced as a transportation asset it is likely that the road would not have near the tourism and nostalgia value it has now if it still existed as a posted US Route.

Like the art world, where the death of the artist often makes his work more valuable, it was the death of Route 66 that made it much more famous and an attractive destination.

[agentsteel53]

Back in the 70's and 80's as I-55/44/40 et al replaced US-66 the old route did not have the nostalgia value it has now, in fact had it NOT been decommissioned when its transportation value was superseded by the Interstates it would arguably not be the famous road it is today. While it certainly had reputation and fame for decades before it was replaced as a transportation asset it is likely that the road would not have near the tourism and nostalgia value it has now if it still existed as a posted US Route.

Like the art world, where the death of the artist often makes his work more valuable, it was the death of Route 66 that made it much more famous and an attractive destination.

when did it seemingly lose its cachet?  When it got knocked out of California in '74?  It seems to me that in the 40s, Route 66 was well-known enough that, hell, Bobby Troup wrote a song about it.  The Phillips 66 gas station chain was named, in part, after it.  John Steinbeck specifically chose that route to write about, even implying it went to Bakersfield to meet 99 (never mind about US-466, not interesting enough a number). 

I have seen more tourist-oriented reference materials for route 66 from the 40s, 50s, and 60s, than for every other route combined.  The occasional US-40 item comes up, and sometimes 50 and 80 make an appearance, but for the most part it's 66 all the way.

[akotchi]

As small an unimportant as it is, I would've liked to see US 46 cross the Delaware still.

I don't know what they were thinking when they downgraded NJ 24 west of I-287.  If they didn't want people to confuse it with the 24 freeway they could at least have kept it as a state highway.  Wasn't it NJ 124 for a time?

I don't know if it was 124 at one time because I never saw an NJ 124 shield along either route, but I definitely agree with you about NJ 24's decomissioning.

To my knowledge, the length of NJ 124 was NJ 24 until the freeway segments of NJ 24 opened, the last in 1992, I believe.  It is still a state highway from the Morristown Green eastward, which includes a piece west of I-287.  West of the Green was designated NJ 24 for a time, but I think not maintained by the State.  Not as sure on the history of that westerly segment, though.

[SSOWorld]

Doesn't WA-410 close in the winter?  I think a USH should be open year round.

There are several "US routes" that are closed in winter - oh wait - they don't exist in national parks

[Alps]

I don't know what they were thinking when they downgraded NJ 24 west of I-287.  If they didn't want people to confuse it with the 24 freeway they could at least have kept it as a state highway.  Wasn't it NJ 124 for a time?

I don't know if it was 124 at one time because I never saw an NJ 124 shield along either route, but I definitely agree with you about NJ 24's decomissioning.

To my knowledge, the length of NJ 124 was NJ 24 until the freeway segments of NJ 24 opened, the last in 1992, I believe.  It is still a state highway from the Morristown Green eastward, which includes a piece west of I-287.  West of the Green was designated NJ 24 for a time, but I think not maintained by the State.  Not as sure on the history of that westerly segment, though.

Hello, your friendly answer man here.  No, it was always NJ 24 west of Morristown, all the way out to Phillipsburg via NJ 57.  NJ 182 was then known as S-24, and later became NJ 57.  Post-1953, NJ 24 swapped with 57 and the state-maintained piece of 24 became 182.  NJ 24 from Hackettstown to Morristown was ALWAYS county maintained, even before the 5xx system was numbered.  That's why it was dropped upon completion of the NJ 24 freeway.  The counties still do sign NJ 24 along the roads, but I think people are starting to understand that it's not Route 24 anymore.  A lot of the signs are older, and the new signs near state highways make no reference to NJ 24 whatsoever.

[berberry]

Besides, which alignment would you choose? Each state has at least 2 or 3 different alignments 

I liked, and agreed with, all of your points except this one, which I think is rather weak.  Alignments change all the time.  If the route were to be resurrected, which I agree would be a mistake, it'd be easy enough to reestablish the last existing alignment and begin any necessary new realignments from that point.  I suppose that, for such a long route, it might not be possible to re-establish the last existing alignment in some places, owing to reconstruction that may have taken place since the decommissioning, but I seriously doubt that a reasonable alternative couldn't be easily substituted.

[Quillz]

Speaking of decommissioned routes, where was the western terminus of CA 30?

The western terminus of Route 30 was always in the San Dimas area, originally at US 66 in the 1950s, later at I-210.

I don't like that CA-126 now ends at I-5. It used to extend southeast to CA-14.

What annoys me is that the 126 corridor between 5 and 14 HAS been built as an arterial...and I want to even say (but can't say for sure) some state funds were used...but nope, not part of 126.  (The insistence on legislative/maintenance reasons for signing, instead of navigational aids, is one of my biggest pet peeves about California's state route system.)

I agree. And it's the reason why CA-2, CA-91, CA-133 and several others that apparently head towards the coast never actually touch (and terminate) at CA-1, like they probably would in any other state.

[agentsteel53]

2 is definitely signed as though it terminates at 1.  Don't remember 91 and 133 offhand.

[Quillz]

2 is definitely signed as though it terminates at 1.  Don't remember 91 and 133 offhand.

It's signed as if it does but it legally does not, and it's really annoying. And the same goes with the other routes I mentioned.

[agentsteel53]

It's signed as if it does but it legally does not, and it's really annoying. And the same goes with the other routes I mentioned.

if it is signed to terminate, then it does its job correctly.  I don't care if, legally, CA-2 exists in Santa Monica, hugs the outskirts of Bishop, jogs down three side streets in Markleeville, and even features a brief segment on an unconstructed overpass in Kuala Lumpur.

I really do not care what is written in an obscure reference manual, hidden somewhere on the basement floor of the California State Assembly, inside a locked file cabinet, behind an unused lavatory and protected by a sign that says "beware of the leopard".

If it's signed to terminate at CA-1, then by golly, it does terminate at CA-1.  Good to know that our highway sign planners have more sense than our legislature.  Now can we slap a few CA-39 shields on county route N6?