Atlanta Freeway Plans, Circa 1970

[Henry]

Here's a map I prepared that is based on the original freeway plans for the Atlanta metro area. The red line is I-420, blue is I-475 and yellow is I-485. Of course, these plans were never fully realized, and I-475 was even moved to Macon for a new bypass there!

[Mileage Mike]

Wow that I-475 route would've gone a long way towards easing congestion in the present day.  I'm sure they regret not building that one now.

[Alex]

I've only ever seen the I-420 extension west of I-285 on one other map. I think it was a highway plan Doug Kerr shared in the early or mid 2000s. Where did you get new info on it?

I revamped our Georgia 400 write-up in preparation for some new southbound photos last week. I included a map, that shows the GA 400/former I-475 proposal as well:



Also notice that this one shows ramps directly connecting I-85 to the southwest with unbuilt I-420.

[silverback1065]

Is there one major city that actually built all of its proposed interstates?  Or did the NIMBYS win at least once or twice in every city?

[TheStranger]

Is there one major city that actually built all of its proposed interstates?

San Antonio?

San Diego had all of its Interstate routes built (8, 5, 805, and 15 including the segment between Barrio Logan and I-8) though there were some state route cancellations.

Houston's one route cancellation was a state highway freeway (SH 225)

[Henry]

Wow that I-475 route would've gone a long way towards easing congestion in the present day.  I'm sure they regret not building that one now.

Well, there's the tunnel proposal that would extend I-675 north to GA 400. Although I'm not sure they will actually build that either.

[Mileage Mike]

Is there one major city that actually built all of its proposed interstates?

San Antonio?

San Diego had all of its Interstate routes built (8, 5, 805, and 15 including the segment between Barrio Logan and I-8) though there were some state route cancellations.

Houston's one route cancellation was a state highway freeway (SH 225)

Wasn't I-15 in San Diego supposed to go all the way to I-5 near downtown?

[mrsman]

Is there one major city that actually built all of its proposed interstates?

San Antonio?

San Diego had all of its Interstate routes built (8, 5, 805, and 15 including the segment between Barrio Logan and I-8) though there were some state route cancellations.

Houston's one route cancellation was a state highway freeway (SH 225)

Wasn't I-15 in San Diego supposed to go all the way to I-5 near downtown?

I-15 was supposed to follow the current CA-15 corridor. Even though the Barrio Logan segment is now completed, it was surface street for so many years after the rest of I-15 opened that I cannot consider San Diego in any way to be NIMBY-free, even for the interstate routings.

[AlexandriaVA]

Is there one major city that actually built all of its proposed interstates?  Or did the NIMBYS win at least once or twice in every city?

I would rephrase that:

Are there any cities which ignored the popular will of the electorate and forced freeways into the metropolitan areas?

[silverback1065]

Is there one major city that actually built all of its proposed interstates?  Or did the NIMBYS win at least once or twice in every city?

I would rephrase that:

Are there any cities which ignored the popular will of the electorate and forced freeways into the metropolitan areas?

Having freeways going downtown is a necessity, sure it causes people to lose property but it's for the greater good.

[jeffandnicole]

Wow that I-475 route would've gone a long way towards easing congestion in the present day.  I'm sure they regret not building that one now.

I wouldn't count on that.  When highways were first built, they also became the catalyst for housing.  Today it would've been another route to get around, but I doubt there would've been much easing in the way of congestion.

And when some highways were cancelled, it allowed the money to be used elsewhere, including allowing widening of other, existing highways.

[Tom958]

Wow that I-475 route would've gone a long way towards easing congestion in the present day.  I'm sure they regret not building that one now.

I wouldn't count on that.  When highways were first built, they also became the catalyst for housing.  Today it would've been another route to get around, but I doubt there would've been much easing in the way of congestion.

And when some highways were cancelled, it allowed the money to be used elsewhere, including allowing widening of other, existing highways.

At this point, it's nothing more than a thought exercise, good for idle musings on an overcast Sunday morning. There are a few other things to throw into the mix:

First, while the initial intent was to build these corridors as freeways, the Feds wouldn't fund them, so the revised plan was to build most them as tollways, which I suppose meant that they'd be off budget to some degree. The lynchpin of the scheme was I-485, which would've been the yellow line between the blue line and downtown and the blue line between the yellow and I-85. Looking back now, it's not obvious why that particular segment just freaking had to be a toll-free Interstate highway in order to make the funding work. The answer is that it didn't really-- it was killed because Atlanta was in the midst of a full-blown freeway revolt.

Second, there was MARTA. IIRC, MARTA was voted in in large part as a substitute for the tollways. Had the tollways not been cancelled, odds are that there would've been no MARTA rail, at least not until it became obvious that roads alone wouldn't solve Atlanta's congestion problems (and, no, I'm not saying that rail would have, either).

Third, there's the issue of the legacy freeways, which were vastly obsolete in capacity and design and which would've needed full reconstruction whether the tollways had been built or not.

[AlexandriaVA]

Is there one major city that actually built all of its proposed interstates?  Or did the NIMBYS win at least once or twice in every city?

I would rephrase that:

Are there any cities which ignored the popular will of the electorate and forced freeways into the metropolitan areas?

Having freeways going downtown is a necessity, sure it causes people to lose property but it's for the greater good.

It's not a necessity at all. It can be mitigated with a combination  of ring roads/beltways, boulevards as transition roads between freeway and city streets, and mass transit to absorb peak ridership.

Having highways that are dead except for peak commuting hours are nothing to be proud of.

[silverback1065]

Is there one major city that actually built all of its proposed interstates?  Or did the NIMBYS win at least once or twice in every city?

I would rephrase that:

Are there any cities which ignored the popular will of the electorate and forced freeways into the metropolitan areas?

Having freeways going downtown is a necessity, sure it causes people to lose property but it's for the greater good.

It's not a necessity at all. It can be mitigated with a combination  of ring roads/beltways, boulevards as transition roads between freeway and city streets, and mass transit to absorb peak ridership.

Having highways that are dead except for peak commuting hours are nothing to be proud of.

None of that is true, mass transit ridership does not fix the traffic problems of any metropolitan area, and having a beltway doesn't solve issues with getting people from the suburbs to downtown, look at every major city that has your idea and their traffic is still shit.  Building traffic light filled boulevards does not solve the problem either, it just creates an inefficient means to get downtown. Interstates don't have to ruin a city.

[silverback1065]

It is simply unrealistic and insane.

Nexus 6P

[noelbotevera]

It is simply unrealistic and insane.

Nexus 6P

Do remember, this was when freeway building was heavy. People always wanted freeways up until 1972 or so when they suddenly spited freeways and shot down each and every freeway project. But in this time, people didn't mind demolishing entire neighborhoods. For example, I could build a mega freeway in Atlanta and nobody minded since everyone wanted freeways everywhere.

[AlexandriaVA]

Is there one major city that actually built all of its proposed interstates?  Or did the NIMBYS win at least once or twice in every city?

I would rephrase that:

Are there any cities which ignored the popular will of the electorate and forced freeways into the metropolitan areas?

Having freeways going downtown is a necessity, sure it causes people to lose property but it's for the greater good.

It's not a necessity at all. It can be mitigated with a combination  of ring roads/beltways, boulevards as transition roads between freeway and city streets, and mass transit to absorb peak ridership.

Having highways that are dead except for peak commuting hours are nothing to be proud of.

None of that is true, mass transit ridership does not fix the traffic problems of any metropolitan area, and having a beltway doesn't solve issues with getting people from the suburbs to downtown, look at every major city that has your idea and their traffic is still shit.  Building traffic light filled boulevards does not solve the problem either, it just creates an inefficient means to get downtown. Interstates don't have to ruin a city.

1) Some regions value the quality of their land more than shaving 5 minutes off of their commute time.

2) It still gets you downtown. There is more to life than level-of-service charts.

[Revive 755]

Is there one major city that actually built all of its proposed interstates?  Or did the NIMBYS win at least once or twice in every city?

I certainly thought this had been discussed before, but since I can't find the thread, it would depend upon which year you considered the interstates to be proposed - are you going off of the 1950's, 1970's or considering every interstate that has ever been considered for a city?  I'm sure there will be a bunch of technicalities to discuss, but anyway:

* Kansas City (if going off of an earlier plans before I-49 was even considered for the area; many non-interstate cancelled freeways)
* St. Louis (if going off of plans before I-170 was numbered and considered for extension between US 40 and I-55 and the earlier plans for the Mississippi River bridge with a hypothetical I-564 between the relocated I-70 and the I-55/I-64 interchange in East St. Louis; many cancelled non-interstate freeways)
* Cincinnati, OH (if going off of plans before any I-74 extensions or new beltways were considered; many non-interstate freeway cancellations)
* Columbus, OH (if going off of plans before I-73 was proposed)
* Nashville, TN (if going off of plans before the 840 loop was considered)
* Knoxville, TN (if going off of plans before consideration of I-140 and the 475 bypass)
* Charlotte, NC (the only cancellation I am aware off, a US 74 freeway running eastward from I-277, was not proposed as an interstate to my knowledge)
* Jacksonville, FL
* Tulsa, OK (non-interstate cancellations)
* Oklahoma City (non-interstate cancellation)
* Dallas - Fort Worth (numerous non-interstate cancellations)
* Salt Lake City, UT (non-interstate cancellation)
* Wichita, KS (if considering before any of the I-66 proposals; non-interstate cancellations)
* Louisville, KY (non-interstate cancellations)
* Birmingham, AL (the cancelled section of the US 280 freeway was not proposed as an interstate as far as I am aware)

I'm sure there are more in the 'built the proposed interstates, cancelled non-interstate freeways' category.


The maps earlier in this thread are missing a few corridors for Atlanta as well.  From a study called "Central Atlanta Opportunities and Responses":

[Tom958]

The maps earlier in this thread are missing a few corridors for Atlanta as well.  From a study called "Central Atlanta Opportunities and Responses":

That map is nothing more than a pipe dream. The Gousha map that Alex posted is a lot more in line with what was seriously proposed. http://www.dot.ga.gov/DriveSmart/MapsData/Documents/HwyAndTransportationMaps/1969.pdf

[Mileage Mike]

Is there one major city that actually built all of its proposed interstates?  Or did the NIMBYS win at least once or twice in every city?

I would rephrase that:

Are there any cities which ignored the popular will of the electorate and forced freeways into the metropolitan areas?

Having freeways going downtown is a necessity, sure it causes people to lose property but it's for the greater good.

I agree in some instances. 495 around DC is a great example of how a belt line can't compensate for cancelled thru freeways.

[silverback1065]

Is there one major city that actually built all of its proposed interstates?  Or did the NIMBYS win at least once or twice in every city?

I would rephrase that:

Are there any cities which ignored the popular will of the electorate and forced freeways into the metropolitan areas?

Having freeways going downtown is a necessity, sure it causes people to lose property but it's for the greater good.

I agree in some instances. 495 around DC is a great example of how a belt line can't compensate for cancelled thru freeways.

That's basically what I'm saying, you need to give people choices, and to completely remove interstates downtown is stupid.  Boulevards and better mass transit as the solution is simply an argument that has no standing, having great mass transit is something every American city needs, but to think that it will solve the problem in the event of removing all downtown interstates is completely asinine, there's not a city in America you can point to that this would work in.  Try it in Atlanta and see how wonderful the traffic would be.  American cities simply cannot be compared to European cities, American cities are way too spread out for this logic to work.  Downtown interstates are not only needed, they are an integral part of the many choices a person needs to have in order to get downtown.   

[froggie]

I agree in some instances. 495 around DC is a great example of how a belt line can't compensate for cancelled thru freeways.

Though I'd disagree with your specific example.  495 bogs down not because of the lack of through freeways through DC, but because of the explosive growth that occurred along it, especially Tysons.  I'd also like to point out that the eastern leg of the Beltway (where I-95 is colocated) generally is not that bad...it slows down a bit near Old Town Alexandria and north of Largo, but not nearly to the magnitude that the western leg bogs down.

[Revive 755]

That map is nothing more than a pipe dream. The Gousha map that Alex posted is a lot more in line with what was seriously proposed. http://www.dot.ga.gov/DriveSmart/MapsData/Documents/HwyAndTransportationMaps/1969.pdf

Several of the corridors show up in other studies enough to say that they were being seriously considered, although they may have not been as far along in the planning process as the I-475, I-420, and I-485 corridors before cancellation. 

Since we are revisiting the topic,  here is an article on the unbuilt I-485 in Atlanta, and here is a similar thread from 2013 sans images.