As the title implies, what interstates changed the most from when their routes were being laid out to when they actually got built? Could be on a local, state or national level. I guess for North Carolina, the biggest ones would be I-40's extension from Raleigh to Wilmington, as many in the region favored a route that utilized a fully upgraded US-421 to Wilmington instead of the route that parallels/criss-crosses US-117 that ends a few miles north of Wilmington, and the routing of I-77 north of the US-421 interchange in Elkin, with at least two different routings proposed before the Fancy Gap route was selected.....one through Lowgap and Galax, Virginia en route to Fort Chiswell, and one following US-21 up the mountain to Sparta and Speedwell, Virginia enroute to Wytheville
I-95 in New Jersey, perhaps?
I-64 across IL&IN between STL and Louisville was originally planned to follow US 50 in IL and US 150 in IN, but some lobbying by Evansville IN and Mt Vernon IL pushed the routing further south to today's route/roughly following old US 460 in IL
Quote from: ilpt4u on June 27, 2023, 07:19:09 PM
I-64 across IL&IN between STL and Louisville was originally planned to follow US 50 in IL and US 150 in IN, but some lobbying by Evansville IN and Mt Vernon IL pushed the routing further south to today's route/roughly following old US 460 in IL
I think I-64 on a national level would be the winner for interstate that changed the most from planning stage to building stage, with the US-50/150 routing in Indiana and Illinois, the proposed US-60 routing through Ansted and Rainelle to Sam Black Church in West Virginia, and the Roanoke/Lynchburg/Farmville routing en route to Richmond and Norfolk in Virginia
I-43 was supposed to be I-57 and follow the WI 57 corridor.
I-75 was to end in Tampa. I-4 was to run from St. Pete to where it is now.
The former got extended to Miami and the latter got truncated to Tampa.
I-70 west of Denver was initially planned to head to Salt Lake City (either via US 40 or US 6), before getting shifted to today's route to provide a more direct routing for Denver to Las Vegas/SoCal traffic.
Planned I-5 shifting west from US 99 onto Legislative Route Number 238 was a big one.
Quote from: 1995hoo on June 27, 2023, 07:18:40 PM
I-95 in New Jersey, perhaps?
Along with I-95 in DC and Boston.
South of Albert Lea, MN, I-35 was supposed to follow US 69 southwestward into Iowa which is reflected on some official Minnesota highway maps in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Mason City, Iowa successfully lobbied for that part of the interstate to be routed along US 65 instead so they could be closer to the route.
Quote from: Big John on June 27, 2023, 07:35:10 PM
I-43 was supposed to be I-57 and follow the WI 57 corridor.
wait why didn't that go through? that would have made a ton of sense! :hmmm: well the portion west of 94 would have to be another number for that to work though.
California ones that really shifted over time:
I-280
North end in SF completely different from pre-1968 designations (with 280 taking over former US 101/Route 82 and planned Route 87)
Segment in San Bruno shifted to follow Junipero Serra Boulevard longer southbound, instead of cutting over to Skyline earlier
South end originally used Route 17 (now I-880 north) to US 101, before the downtown SJ alignment was approved
I-680
North end along former Route 21 replaced the former north end along I-780
South segment was originally along Route 262 and then-Route 17 (now I-880), before being placed on an eastern bypass of Milpitas
I-15 south of Devore
Original southern terminus was in Colton at I-215/I-10 interchange, with I-15 and US 395 concurrent between Devore and Colton, and US 395 continuing south from I-10 to downtown San Diego at Route 75 and former US 101
1969: I-15 extended south to San Diego via today's I-215/former US 395 through Riverside and Escondido to Route 163 (1940s-1969 US 395), then along what was 1964-1969 Route 103 through Murphy Canyon but is now current I-15 to I-8 (and future I-15 to I-5 in Barrio Logan)
1974: I-15 moved between Devore and Temecula to western bypass along Route 31 and 1934-1974 Route 71 corridor, with former US 395 south of Devore (through San Bernardino and Riverside) becoming I-15E
1982: I-15E becomes I-215/Temp Route 215
I-80
Western terminus: cut back to US 101 after the cancellation of the Western Freeway
Sacramento segment: originally via US 50/Business 80 (former US 99E) through downtown and midtown Sacramento and then Arden area, rerouted in 1982 to former I-880 in Natomas due to cancellation of North Sacramento/Arden parallel freeway upgrade
I-580
- portion south of Route 132 was only created after the I-5/US 99 corridor changes of 1957-1958
- started as portion of I-5W pre-1964 then renumbered
- extended west via former Route 17 in 1984
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 28, 2023, 08:01:19 PM
Quote from: Big John on June 27, 2023, 07:35:10 PM
I-43 was supposed to be I-57 and follow the WI 57 corridor.
wait why didn't that go through? that would have made a ton of sense! :hmmm: well the portion west of 94 would have to be another number for that to work though.
IDOT didn't want to deal with giving the Cheeseheads the 55, 57, or 65 designations and therefore have to do signing work to get one or more of those designations to the Cheddar Curtain
I-96 in Detroit was to follow from the eastern end of the M-5 freeway down to I-75 roughly along Grand River, when Built, it was built along Schoolcraft Rd. to I-275.
Could you count I-89, given its original plan was to parallel US 7?
In very early maps 90 followed US 18 across Wisconsin and Iowa before being moved to the Minnesota route.
The first Interstate 39 though it's not a chargeable route ran along IL 2 IL 26 IL 89 and IL 121 including the now I 155 from Rockford to Decatur.
Then we have myths about 74 . It was going to run through either Kewanee or Monmouth neither is true it always followed the current route.
Quote from: ilpt4u on June 28, 2023, 08:23:07 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 28, 2023, 08:01:19 PM
Quote from: Big John on June 27, 2023, 07:35:10 PM
I-43 was supposed to be I-57 and follow the WI 57 corridor.
wait why didn't that go through? that would have made a ton of sense! :hmmm: well the portion west of 94 would have to be another number for that to work though.
IDOT didn't want to deal with giving the Cheeseheads the 55, 57, or 65 designations and therefore have to do signing work to get one or more of those designations to the Cheddar Curtain
So not only did IDOT oppose the use of 55/57/65 for I-41 in recent decades, but also for I-43 a few decades prior? Of course...
Quote from: SectorZ on June 29, 2023, 08:22:55 AM
Could you count I-89, given its original plan was to parallel US 7?
I don't want to pick on SectorZ here; just quoting to ask: if anyone has official docs on this, I'd love to see a copy. It's one of those things that I'd like to be true, but I can't make that call until I've seen some sources.
The closest I've seen to this are:
* VT wanted I-91 to run in the US 7 corridor instead of US 5 (there are more prominent cities there)
* there was a three-state interstate plan for US 7 that would have connected to I-89 (but didn't mention an interstate number for it)
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 27, 2023, 08:38:54 PM
I-70 west of Denver was initially planned to head to Salt Lake City (either via US 40 or US 6), before getting shifted to today's route to provide a more direct routing for Denver to Las Vegas/SoCal traffic.
Before planning began on that western extension, I-70 originally was to end in Denver.
Quote from: roadman65 on June 27, 2023, 08:28:49 PM
I-75 was to end in Tampa. I-4 was to run from St. Pete to where it is now.
The former got extended to Miami and the latter got truncated to Tampa.
Actually that was the case for many years, as I remember I-75 ending at I-4 in the 70s. There were no plans for I-75 beyond that point until they made the extension and incorporated what is now known as Everglades Parkway (then known as Alligator Alley). I guess way too many people move to the Sarasota/Port Charlotte/Fort Myers/Naples corridor that they had to put some sort of interstate there.
i've always wondered why 70 ends where it does in utah, it makes sense for it to end in SLC. was 70 always supposed to go where it is in Denver? Skirting the north side of town instead of going downtown?
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 29, 2023, 01:14:58 PM
i've always wondered why 70 ends where it does in utah, it makes sense for it to end in SLC. was 70 always supposed to go where it is in Denver? Skirting the north side of town instead of going downtown?
It ends where it does in UT because it forms part of the fastest LA-Denver corridor
Quote from: kurumi on June 29, 2023, 11:54:39 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on June 29, 2023, 08:22:55 AM
Could you count I-89, given its original plan was to parallel US 7?
I don't want to pick on SectorZ here; just quoting to ask: if anyone has official docs on this, I'd love to see a copy. It's one of those things that I'd like to be true, but I can't make that call until I've seen some sources.
The closest I've seen to this are:
* VT wanted I-91 to run in the US 7 corridor instead of US 5 (there are more prominent cities there)
* there was a three-state interstate plan for US 7 that would have connected to I-89 (but didn't mention an interstate number for it)
I've heard that about the US-7 corridor for I-91 as well. A few parts of that proposed corridor exist, but I believe only as bypasses of certain towns
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 29, 2023, 01:14:58 PM
i've always wondered why 70 ends where it does in utah, it makes sense for it to end in SLC. was 70 always supposed to go where it is in Denver? Skirting the north side of town instead of going downtown?
I don't know about original plans, but it's only about a mile and a half away from downtown, so it's not like it's far away.
Quote from: ran4sh on June 29, 2023, 11:02:29 AM
Quote from: ilpt4u on June 28, 2023, 08:23:07 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 28, 2023, 08:01:19 PM
Quote from: Big John on June 27, 2023, 07:35:10 PM
I-43 was supposed to be I-57 and follow the WI 57 corridor.
wait why didn't that go through? that would have made a ton of sense! :hmmm: well the portion west of 94 would have to be another number for that to work though.
IDOT didn't want to deal with giving the Cheeseheads the 55, 57, or 65 designations and therefore have to do signing work to get one or more of those designations to the Cheddar Curtain
So not only did IDOT oppose the use of 55/57/65 for I-41 in recent decades, but also for I-43 a few decades prior? Of course...
I think there may be some confusion over I-41 vs. I-43. 55, 57, and 65 would all have worked instead of I-41, since you'd just have to run them concurrently with 94 from their current termini (or, in I-65's case, 90 and then 94), but I don't know how you'd justify running any of them concurrently with another Interstate to Rockford.
Quote from: 3467 on June 29, 2023, 10:45:26 AM
In very early maps 90 followed US 18 across Wisconsin and Iowa before being moved to the Minnesota route.
The first Interstate 39 though it's not a chargeable route ran along IL 2 IL 26 IL 89 and IL 121 including the now I 155 from Rockford to Decatur.
Then we have myths about 74 . It was going to run through either Kewanee or Monmouth neither is true it always followed the current route.
Did not know I-90 was slated to run along US-18. Could this be why Mason City wanted I-35 closer to them?
And IIRC, there's still ghost ramps on I-72 in Decatur where I-39 would have met it
I-92. Went from the drawing table to the waste basket.
Quote from: JCinSummerfield on June 29, 2023, 02:19:01 PM
I-92. Went from the drawing table to the waste basket.
what route was this supposed to take? :hmmm:
I-78 in Lehigh Valley. It was originally to use US 22, then was proposed to run further south of Allentown, but then was constructed to concur with PA 309 as it does now.
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 29, 2023, 04:38:53 PM
Quote from: JCinSummerfield on June 29, 2023, 02:19:01 PM
I-92. Went from the drawing table to the waste basket.
what route was this supposed to take? :hmmm:
I don't think anybody really knows for sure. I've seen at least 3 different routes proposed for it
Quote from: planxtymcgillicuddy on June 29, 2023, 05:31:17 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 29, 2023, 04:38:53 PM
Quote from: JCinSummerfield on June 29, 2023, 02:19:01 PM
I-92. Went from the drawing table to the waste basket.
what route was this supposed to take? :hmmm:
I don't think anybody really knows for sure. I've seen at least 3 different routes proposed for it
I thought I-92 is what eventually became I-94 in Michigan
Quote from: skluth on June 29, 2023, 05:35:43 PM
Quote from: planxtymcgillicuddy on June 29, 2023, 05:31:17 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 29, 2023, 04:38:53 PM
Quote from: JCinSummerfield on June 29, 2023, 02:19:01 PM
I-92. Went from the drawing table to the waste basket.
what route was this supposed to take? :hmmm:
I don't think anybody really knows for sure. I've seen at least 3 different routes proposed for it
I thought I-92 is what eventually became I-94 in Michigan
Wikipedia has two "I-92" pages - one about current I-94, and this is the other one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East%E2%80%93West_Highway_(New_England)
Quote from: skluth on June 29, 2023, 05:35:43 PM
Quote from: planxtymcgillicuddy on June 29, 2023, 05:31:17 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 29, 2023, 04:38:53 PM
Quote from: JCinSummerfield on June 29, 2023, 02:19:01 PM
I-92. Went from the drawing table to the waste basket.
what route was this supposed to take? :hmmm:
I don't think anybody really knows for sure. I've seen at least 3 different routes proposed for it
I thought I-92 is what eventually became I-94 in Michigan
That's one of them, yes. See below.
But I've also read that it was the considered as the number for the proposed East-West Highway in New England. However, I haven't been able to find any official documentation to back that up.
(https://i.imgur.com/onXuDu2.png)
Quote from: kphoger on June 29, 2023, 06:00:09 PM
Quote from: skluth on June 29, 2023, 05:35:43 PM
I thought I-92 is what eventually became I-94 in Michigan
That's one of them, yes. See below.
But I've also read that it was the considered as the number for the proposed East-West Highway in New England. However, I haven't been able to find any official documentation to back that up.
(https://i.imgur.com/onXuDu2.png)
That map reminds me that I-77 went from two short stubs, one going NE out of Detroit and the other going between Cleveland and Canton (which may or may not been cosigned with I-80 & 90 between Cleveland and Toledo depending on which documents you read) to going from Cleveland to Columbia, SC.
Quote from: Life in Paradise on June 29, 2023, 12:55:25 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 27, 2023, 08:28:49 PM
I-75 was to end in Tampa. I-4 was to run from St. Pete to where it is now.
The former got extended to Miami and the latter got truncated to Tampa.
Actually that was the case for many years, as I remember I-75 ending at I-4 in the 70s. There were no plans for I-75 beyond that point until they made the extension and incorporated what is now known as Everglades Parkway (then known as Alligator Alley). I guess way too many people move to the Sarasota/Port Charlotte/Fort Myers/Naples corridor that they had to put some sort of interstate there.
Adding onto that, the section of I-275 between the Howard Frankland Bridge and Downtown Tampa has been planned or designated as I-4, I-75, and finally I-275. Not a design change but a lot of name changes.
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 29, 2023, 01:14:58 PM
i've always wondered why 70 ends where it does in utah, it makes sense for it to end in SLC. was 70 always supposed to go where it is in Denver? Skirting the north side of town instead of going downtown?
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/covefort.cfm
QuoteOn October 18, 1957, Secretary of Commerce Sinclair Weeks announced the segments designated with the expanded Interstate mileage. The additions included the western extension of I-70 to Cove Fort. An October 18 press release explained:
The route westward from Denver is a modification of one proposed by the states of Colorado and Utah. The proposal involved a route from Denver to Spanish Fork, Utah en route to Salt Lake City which would largely duplicate service provided by the designated Denver-Cheyenne-Salt Lake City route [via I-25 from Denver to Cheyenne and I-80 from Cheyenne to Salt Lake City]. By bending the western end of the route southward to provide a direct connection between Denver and southern Utah, it will be possible to serve traffic moving back and forth between Southern California and the Denver region.
The press release did not explain how the BPR had decided on a terminus at Cove Fort, other than its desire to end the route in a way that enhanced access to southern California. The FHWA's files do not explain the decision, either. However, because the mountains and forests in central Utah limited the options, the Cove Fort-Sevier road appears to have been the best choice among the few available for reaching future I-15 from Grand Junction, Colorado, by the most direct, practicable route on the way to southern California.
However...
QuoteAccording to State highway historian Ezra C. Knowlton, the news hit Utah officials "like a bombshell." The State had considered routings along U.S. 40 and U.S. 50, but had settled on the U.S. 50 routing to Spanish Fork. "No responsible local official had even suggested the so-called Salina Canyon-Cove Fort routing." Knowlton said:
This suggestion obviously pleased the people of south-central Utah but naturally aroused stormy opposition from those favoring a junction with U.S. 91 at Spanish Fork. Utah County people took the lead in demanding that the State Road Commission conduct a public hearing on the government's "arbitrary" action, threatening an injunction against the commission if this were not done. [Knowlton, Ezra C., History of Highway Development in Utah, Utah State Department of Transportation, 1967, page 597]
Governor Dewey Clyde, an engineering instructor at Utah State University who took office in 1957, joined with the State's congressional delegation in consulting with the BPR. They learned about General Yount's position that the routing to Spanish Fork could not be justified. According to Knowlton, the Governor concluded that, "Utah had no choice but to accept the Cove Fort routing, or have none at all."
The Utah State Highway Commission held a public hearing at the State Capitol prompting "spirited testimony" on both sides of the issue. Knowlton explained that, "Southern Utah people spoke in favor, and those from the north-central part of the state spoke against the newly proposed route." Nevertheless, the decision stood. A December 1957 evaluation by the Research Department of the Utah State Road Commission on the economic and traffic service of the Denver-Cove Fort routing, stated:
There was, undoubtedly, a great deal of merit in the original proposal for a Denver-Salt Lake connection; however, sight must not be lost of the fact that the Salt Lake area is already served by two major Interstate routes, one running North-South [I-15) and one East-West [I-80], and that the terminus at Cove Fort, as presently proposed, shortens the distance from Denver to Los Angeles by approximately 200 miles.
Knowlton stated that the route was important to Utah as well as Colorado because it would increase Interstate Construction funding for both States and the trans-mountain link between the two States could not come any other way. He added:
Utah's Road Commission was probably more shocked at the manner in which the news of the Washington decision on the Cove Fort route was released than they were at the decision. Surely this inadvertent news release from Washington was one of the most serious breaches of sound public relations experienced in the entire history of the federal road agency.
The commission approved the Cove Fort terminus by resolution on January 20, 1958, with the resolution describing the routing as...
Utah also had a pretty sizable shift in the proposed route of I-15 through Nephi. Originally 15 was supposed to pass directly through town or on the west side, in the vicinity of the railroad track, but ended up bypassing the town to the east.
This is perhaps most notable because this was still a gap in the early 1980s (you can still see where traffic defaulted over onto Old 91 between Mona and Nephi on satellite (https://maps.app.goo.gl/GC5huGfqjAduekts8?g_st=ic)), which was when mile-based exit numbers were first introduced. With a routing through Nephi still undecided, a guess had to be made as to how much mileage would increase over that section so that the exits north of it could be numbered appropriately. They guessed a bit too high, and for the next 20 years after the Nephi segment did open, all exits north of there, including through the high-traffic Wasatch Front region, were 3 or 4 higher than the corresponding milepost value. They were given more mileage-appropriate numbers in 2004/05.
Quote
which would largely duplicate service provided by the designated Denver-Cheyenne-Salt Lake City route [via I-25 from Denver to Cheyenne and I-80 from Cheyenne to Salt Lake City].
Meanwhile, Google Maps doesn't even suggest that as an option, instead cutting the corner via US 287. The only way to get Google to show an all-interstate route between Denver and SLC is to manually modify it yourself.
Interstate 10 was originally envisioned to go farther south between New Orleans and the Mississippi Gulf Coast, along the routing of US 90. Interstate 59 would have met I-10 in east New Orleans, along the routing of US 11. There was no Interstate 12 in the original 1957 plan. (I hate to think how much longer these routings would have been out of commission after Hurricane Katrina.)
The first mapping I saw of I-12 had it intersecting I-59 farther north and not connecting to I-10 on its east end, so it would not have been a viable bypass of New Orleans as it is now.
Quote from: planxtymcgillicuddy on June 29, 2023, 01:38:16 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 29, 2023, 01:14:58 PM
i've always wondered why 70 ends where it does in utah, it makes sense for it to end in SLC. was 70 always supposed to go where it is in Denver? Skirting the north side of town instead of going downtown?
It ends where it does in UT because it forms part of the fastest LA-Denver corridor
If I-70 didn't extend westward then driving from Denver to....well anywhere west of Colorado would have been A LOT harder. It's the only east-west route across the state. The only other option is driving up to I-80.
There were plans for 80N, now I-84(W) to eventually reach the Oregon Coast.
I-90 in Washington was originally supposed to end at US/SR 99. The Alaskan Way Viaduct even had the stubs from the time it was built. But the massive delay in completing I-90 from Bellevue to Seattle caused it to no longer be considered a viable connection, especially as even in the early 90s there was talk about replacing that section of SR 99, and they didn't want to spend the money on a connection, only to have to tear it down and figure out another solution in the future.
I have seen plans for I-82(W) to both be the Interstate over Snoqualmie Pass (now I-90), with I-90 running over Steven's Pass instead, and to have it turn West at Yakima and travel over US-12, over White Pass, and end in either Olympia or Tacoma.
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on June 29, 2023, 11:29:44 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 29, 2023, 06:00:09 PM
Quote from: skluth on June 29, 2023, 05:35:43 PM
I thought I-92 is what eventually became I-94 in Michigan
That's one of them, yes. See below.
But I've also read that it was the considered as the number for the proposed East-West Highway in New England. However, I haven't been able to find any official documentation to back that up.
(https://i.imgur.com/onXuDu2.png)
That map reminds me that I-77 went from two short stubs, one going NE out of Detroit and the other going between Cleveland and Canton (which may or may not been cosigned with I-80 & 90 between Cleveland and Toledo depending on which documents you read) to going from Cleveland to Columbia, SC.
There's one version of the initial plains map with the number 79 on the Cleveland-Canton corridor, and current I-79 not existing at all (I think it's the same map with I-80 on the PA Turnpike). The combination of both of the different I-77 and I-79s surely would've left a big gap in WV's interstate network.
When I-35 was originally proposed for its extension through downtown Duluth, the plan was for an elevated freeway rather than the tunnels (the purpose behind these vastly differing options was quite similar, which was to protect the freeway from Lake Superior's wintertime wrath). There was grave community concern for the historic buildings along E. Superior Street like the Fitger's complex, as well as popular greenspace like the Duluth rose garden and Leif Erikson Park that ultimately resulted in the tunnel choice coming to development.
Quote from: TEG24601 on September 29, 2023, 10:52:47 AM
I have seen plans for I-82(W) to both be the Interstate over Snoqualmie Pass (now I-90), with I-90 running over Steven's Pass instead, and to have it turn West at Yakima and travel over US-12, over White Pass, and end in either Olympia or Tacoma.
I've never heard of I-82 being assigned for Snoqualmie Pass. The White Pass you're thinking of was probably the Naches Pass Tunnel proposal, which was brought up in 1959 and studied in the following years, later as SR 168 (which remains on the books but unbuilt and unfunded).
Two non chargeable diverged from their original proposal in Illinois
I 39 First proposed from Rockford to Dixon to East Peoria to Lincoln to Decatur.
The current route was in the largest Interstate system but the first suggested corridor was the winding one . I 155 was built in that original corridor though.
I 88 was first aligned where US 30 is now.
The unused 64 corridor was added to the supplemental freeway system and partially built.
I-90 and I-94 were flipped in IL, IN. Also, 90 re-routed from current I-290 to NW route, by O'Hare Airport.
And, many cancelled Interstates/Freeways, nationwide.
I-40 in NC has undergone so many changes that it's impossible to keep up. Originally it ended at I-85 in Greensboro until an eastern extension came about in the 80s. First the extension was to go to Morehead City (where the planned I-42 will end eventually), but Wilmington wanted it more, so it went there instead. Then in the 90s, it was rerouted to the south of Winston-Salem, and a decade later, it was also rerouted to the south of Greensboro for several months before numerous complaints about the new route forced an about-face. (One thing to note is that the eastern half of the former reroute is currently occupied by the new alignment of I-85, so now the two 2di's converge approximately eight miles east of where they originally met.)
Quote from: jeffandnicole on June 27, 2023, 10:59:21 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on June 27, 2023, 07:18:40 PM
I-95 in New Jersey, perhaps?
Along with I-95 in DC and Boston.
And Baltimore too. That section of I-95 is the last one in MD to be completed because of major changes regarding its routing: First it was planned to run right through downtown, then it was moved to the south of downtown to cross the harbor on a high bridge (was it going to be suspension, cable-stayed or other?), but eventually good sense won out, and the Fort McHenry Tunnel was constructed under the harbor instead. As a result, the Harbor Tunnel finally got big-time relief, and even underwent a two-year reconstruction period shortly after the newer tunnel had opened to traffic.
Wasn't I-24 planned to run up Vincennes, IN then across to Saint Louis?
I remember there were several alignments proposed for 24 but not sure if the routings.
I am sure all those were West of 57. The idea of East through Carbondale was later like 1965 with the Supplemental Freeway system.
There have been multiple corridors proposed and studied there. A 4lane expressway between Murpheysboro and Pickneyville lives on.
Quote from: US20IL64 on October 02, 2023, 10:15:46 PM
I-90 and I-94 were flipped in IL, IN. Also, 90 re-routed from current I-290 to NW route, by O'Hare Airport.
And, many cancelled Interstates/Freeways, nationwide.
IMHO, I-90 just has a 'feel' of having been originally planned to use use the US 12 corridor, IL 53 and I-290 between downtown Chicago and Madison, WI, There are too many 'clues' along the way for me to think otherwise.
Mike
Quote from: Avalanchez71 on January 21, 2024, 02:03:44 AM
Wasn't I-24 planned to run up Vincennes, IN then across to Saint Louis?
Vincennes to STL was part of the original I-64 routing, which would have followed US 50 in IL and US 150 in IN for the STL-Louisville route. This is why parts of the route, especially around Vincennes, are freeways, as it was early 64 construction before the reroute
Quote from: TEG24601 on September 29, 2023, 10:52:47 AM
There were plans for 80N, now I-84(W) to eventually reach the Oregon Coast.
As far as I can tell, 80N was never intended to reach the coast. It was intended to use the non-built Mt Hood Freeway between the Marquam Bridge (I-5) and I-205, but was shifted onto the Banfield (US 30) instead.
Unbuilt I-505, however, was proposed to follow St Helens Road and along US 30 from I-405 to Clatskanie, with the only portion ever constructed was the stub freeway to Nicolai St (which itself was a realignment off the Thurman and Vaughn St proposal). Plans were drafted for a freeway facility to the St Johns Bridge (US 30Y) as a Phase 1 before the freeway revolts killed the Mt Hood, then I-505 and I-305 in Salem (repurposed into the Salem Parkway/OR 99EB)
Quote from: 3467 on January 21, 2024, 10:42:08 AM
I remember there were several alignments proposed for 24 but not sure if the routings.
I am sure all those were West of 57. The idea of East through Carbondale was later like 1965 with the Supplemental Freeway system.
There have been multiple corridors proposed and studied there. A 4lane expressway between Murpheysboro and Pickneyville lives on.
I saw what is now I-155 labeled as I-24W on an old map once.
I-69, the never to be completely built road.
Planning, building, planning, building, planning, building...
Quote from: MikieTimT on February 06, 2024, 08:34:59 AM
I-69, the never to be completely built road.
Planning, building, planning, building, planning, building...
That's what I was going to say as well.
Quote from: planxtymcgillicuddy on June 29, 2023, 01:39:05 PMQuote from: kurumi on June 29, 2023, 11:54:39 AMQuote from: SectorZ on June 29, 2023, 08:22:55 AMCould you count I-89, given its original plan was to parallel US 7?
I don't want to pick on SectorZ here; just quoting to ask: if anyone has official docs on this, I'd love to see a copy. It's one of those things that I'd like to be true, but I can't make that call until I've seen some sources.
The closest I've seen to this are:
* VT wanted I-91 to run in the US 7 corridor instead of US 5 (there are more prominent cities there)
* there was a three-state interstate plan for US 7 that would have connected to I-89 (but didn't mention an interstate number for it)
I've heard that about the US-7 corridor for I-91 as well. A few parts of that proposed corridor exist, but I believe only as bypasses of certain towns
I believe that is why CT built the US 7 partial freeway in Danbury and the one north to New Milford as well,
Quote from: roadman65 on April 08, 2024, 08:16:43 AMQuote from: planxtymcgillicuddy on June 29, 2023, 01:39:05 PMQuote from: kurumi on June 29, 2023, 11:54:39 AMQuote from: SectorZ on June 29, 2023, 08:22:55 AMCould you count I-89, given its original plan was to parallel US 7?
The closest I've seen to this are:
* VT wanted I-91 to run in the US 7 corridor instead of US 5 (there are more prominent cities there) there was a three-state interstate plan for US 7 that would have connected to I-89 (but didn't mention an interstate number for it)
I've heard that about the US-7 corridor for I-91 as well. A few parts of that proposed corridor exist, but I believe only as bypasses of certain towns
I believe that is why CT built the US 7 partial freeway in Danbury and the one north to New Milford as well,
So if 91 followed US-7, for it's entire path, where was 89 programmed? Same as today? Meaning a Boston - Montreal route?? Ending at Burlington? There are pieces of Super Two near Bennington, to best of belief. Don't know if space is reserved for an additional carriageway. Never been on that piece of US - 7.