Talk:List of future Interstate Highways

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Lists of Interstate Highways which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 19:34, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

"Interstate 50" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Interstate 50 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 April 21 § Interstate 50 until a consensus is reached. TheAuroraBorealis (u/t/c) 20:02, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

I-47 Bill

There has been a bill submitted to the US Senate proposing a future I-47 along most of what is currently US-287, intentionally named after President Donald J Trump. Since this is a bill and not signed into law, I would not advise adding it to the list at the current moment unless further consensus deems otherwise. If it becomes an issue regarding vandalism, would this be grounds for requesting temporary semi-protection?

https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/4484/text Interstate24 (talk) 16:07, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Why not add it? Proposed bills have been posted on here regardless of adoption. – The Grid (talk) 17:13, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

@Hurricanehink: See , it might happen ~2026-48504-13 (talk) 15:08, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

I removed my comment because I don’t see any progress toward it happening. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 15:19, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

New "List of proposed interstate highways" page for removed routes (67, 99, etc.)

While many of the routes removed from this page will likely never be built, their proposals were at least brought up in some capacity and are therefore still part of the interstate system's history. I think that these should be put up in a new article exclusively for proposed routes that never came to fruition. A likely issue with such an article would be confusion with this article, especially since "Proposed interstate highways" currently redirects to this article. So the opening section would have to be very clear on the difference. What is everyone else's opinion on this? Jerry Is Bored (talk) 03:37, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

On one hand, all of the future Interstates are proposed, so putting the confirmed,* but cancelled ones back here and adjusting the name from "future" to "proposed" would be appropriate. That would also eliminate duplication, at least in the sense of having another article. (*I mean this as "confirmed" in the sense that a responsible unit of government actually proposed the number or the routing, it was included in an official map, etc. A proposal by a random chamber of commerce without any governmental buy-in should not count anymore than I could propose the creation of a new Interstate.) On the other hand, those examples are not "future" anymore because of their cancellation, so they shouldn't appear here as long as "future" is the descriptor in the title.

If there is a separate article, perhaps it should be for "cancelled" Interstates, no matter how far off the drawing board they may have gotten. Just thoughts. Imzadi 1979 → 17:21, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

An article for cancelled interstates could be a good home for short articles such as Interstate 895 (New Jersey–Pennsylvania), Interstate 605 (Washington), and other cancelled interstates that have articles (and probably won't ever be able to be full-fledged articles). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:35, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

All great ideas. Some of the proposals that were removed from this page were sparsely cited (if at all), so they would likely not be included. I think a new "cancelled" page would be a good idea save for a couple of things: 1) some cancelled interstate projects would already be mentioned on other pages, such as the freeway removal or freeway revolts article, and 2) while some projects (I'll again use I-67 as an example) were cancelled out of the interstate system, corridor upgrades are still taking place under other names, such as the Mid-States Corridor along US 231 in Southern Indiana (which was part of Kentucky's I-67 proposal).

On another note, should a "Corridor Extensions" section be added to this page for future interstates that have sections active already (e.g. I-73 and I-74) but are/were planned to be extended in the future? If there's any interest in that question a new topic should be made for it as to not derail this one. Jerry Is Bored (talk) 03:01, 10 August 2026 (UTC)

I know it's been a month, but I also wanted to share some thoughts.

I think a separate article about canceled Interstate Highways, or just expanding the scope of this one is a good idea. I do feel that this particular article is really growing thin by all the new Interstates that had their first segments open in recent years (hence why the auxiliary Interstates were added). I do admittedly feel torn about entries being completely removed after the very first segments of them open up. I have also considered restoring the inclusion of future extensions of existing Interstates. At some point, that information was included, but later removed. Personally, leaving them off kind of feels to me like omission and a bit of a disservice to the spirit of the article.

As for those other proposals that were removed, to address them;

• I-3 basically died after that 2012 FHWA report concluded that it wasn't viable at all, so it was dead for years.
• I-61 had only one source to it, which was dead, but my impression was that it was never an actual proposal by anyone but a misinterpretation of the source in which locals were aspiring for US 61 to become an Interstate.
• The Indiana proposal for I-67 was basically a very brief proposal by the Indiana Senate to look into upgrading US 31 into an Interstate, but it was pretty quickly found to be unviable. The Kentucky proposal was the brainchild of a local business and civic advocacy org and was never formally adopted by anyone in government.
• I-92 has basically been proposed by locals multiple times and never really went anywhere.
• I-98 is similar to I-92, and they actually got some local officials on board with the idea in 2009, but it also didn't go anywhere.
• I-99/101 basically died within months after it was conceived in that initial study in 2006.

The benchmark for including a proposal should be that it's actually been concretely approved in some form and is moving forward with the government, and not just about any random grassroots proposal that sprouts up but doesn't go anywhere. The recent I-47 proposal in Texas also comes to mind, it was just a political stunt that was basically DOA (even if TxDOT is actually considering upgrading US 287 in Texas to an Interstate Highway). OrdinaryScarlett (talk) 10:36, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

@OrdinaryScarlett: good thoughts, and I largely agree. Interstate extensions are a lot more "real" than I-3/61/67/92/98/101, especially now than I-42 (W) has been built/signed. Also, I agree with titling the new article "List of cancelled Interstate Highways" (instead of proposed). That could be a good parent article for a lot of stub articles on proposed interstates that never got built (I-895 comes to mind). ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:51, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I-42

See this discussion. We need an article for the I-42 in Arkansas and proposed to extend to Oklahoma. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:27, 4 September 2026 (UTC)