Saw this pop up in my Google feed, but I'm not quite sure how accurate this graphic is. Seems pretty neat for the laymen, though.
https://www.geotab.com/evolution-of-interstate/
As cool as this appears, it looks like they score 0/5 for accuracy in Utah.
It shows that I-15 was not completed in Utah until 1997, but it was substantially complete by 1980, with the last piece being built in 1990.
On the other hand, they made the opposite error with I-70, I-84, and I-215. They show I-70 being completed in 1957, but at that time there weren't even roads along the San Rafael Swell portion! The road across the Swell had been built by 1970, but the freeway was not completed for another 20 years. Regarding I-84, their map has it there from the beginning, but the final segment in Utah was not completed until 1986. As for I-215, they show it opening in 1963, but that was when the first segment was completed. 215 was not completed until 1989, mostly due to local opposition to the southeast quadrant.
Also, they mention that I-80 was completed across the country in 1986. That is true, but the map shows I-80 being completed in Utah from 1956.
For I-43, it correctly shows the section from Milwaukee to Green Bay as completed in 1981, but the section from Beloit to Milwaukee was Wis 15 until 1989, while they also showed that section as I-43 in 1981.
Quote from: US 89 on June 29, 2018, 07:33:25 PMIt shows that I-15 was not completed in Utah until 1997, but it was substantially complete by 1980, with the last piece being built in 1990.
Yeah, I remember driving I-15 in Utah in August 1997 and it looked like it had been completed for awhile.
The webpage refuses to acknowledge overlaps, like I-77/81.
Fortunately (for us), I-90 has no gap in Illinois. Unfortunately, I-94 does have one...
The crap factor is high with this one.
For Pennsylvania in 1956, they show I-70 from WV to MD (including the Turnpike section)–much of the "free" sections hadn't been built by that time–but they show none of the rest of the Turnpike or Schuylkill Expressway–which actually had been built by then.
They also list as being built in their entirety: I-78 (some portions were open or under construction, but it was far from complete), I-79 (not yet built or even designed), I-80 (other than the Delaware Water Gap bridge, unbuilt), I-81 (unbuilt), I-83 (largely built, but still about two years from completion, and I-90 which was in final design but not yet constructed).
They seem to have muddled years routes were approved, years routes were completed, and other info. For example, in California they have I-280 and I-680 in 1956 (when they were approved, but they weren't completed until the early 1970s); but they have I-8, I-405, I-210 and I-605 popping up in 1964 (they were approved in 1956, but not completed until after 1964. I imagine they might have caught these numbers with the 1964 renumbering?).
I-505 was an original approved route (as I-5W), but doesn't show up until 1977 (which would be around when construction was completed).
I-15 doesn't show up in 1956 (even though it was also one of the original approved routes), but in 1957 - and then it includes the Riverside-San Diego portion (which wasn't added until 1968).
They get I-880 and I-710 right(ish) at 1984; but put I-105 at 1982 (approved in 1968, completed in 1993).
Great concept, poor execution.
I just got a complete set of US Roadmaps for 1976 and was perusing them earlier today. One error that caught my eye is that this linked website shows I-75 completed from Tampa to Miami, Fla well before that, but it wasn't until the 1980s when that happened.
What a piece of shit.
Yeah...I-35 in MN is all kinds of no. Shown complete in 1958, but:
-I-35 wasn't continuously complete between MSP and Duluth until 1977; there was still a gap between Midway Road and Boundary Avenue on the fringes of Duluth.
-the revised path south of Albert Lea (to follow US 65 rather than US 69, spearheaded by interests in northern Iowa) wasn't approved until at least 1965.
-I-35E wasn't complete until about 1991 after years of lawsuits tied up construction.
I think they generally did get I-94 right, when the section through north Minneapolis was finished about 1985 and I-494 was finished about the same time around the US 52/MN 110 area.
They fucked Virginia all up. Seriously, I-85 was completed first, but they show both I-64 and I-95 as completed before I-85 (and in 1959 no less :pan: )
In PA, they show the Blue Route completed at the same time as the Northeast Extension, and the entire main section of I-99 opening all at once in the '90s from the Turnpike to I-80. No no no no no...
Plus it shows just one big bulk segment of I-86 opening at one time, also in the '90s.
Really? I-5 completed in CA in '74? It emptied out onto the original US 99 expressway (4-lane with no median barrier but double striped lines) between Vollmers and Castle Crags in the upper Sacramento River canyon until 1992, when the freeway was finally completed. These folks should go back to Square One, get their facts straight, and redo the whole presentation; it's an inaccurate depiction as is!
I-95 shows as complete in Florida in 1957. Proposed, maybe.
Jacksonville was the only section completed in 1960, much of it wasn't completed until 1968-1978, with the big gap not finished for another 30 years.
Notable errors: Break in I-90 near Ranchester/Sheridan, WY.
Lack of I-580 south of Reno (but I-2, 14, 69C and E make it in!).
Lack of segment openings -- notable with I-84 (then 80N) in Oregon; none of it appears until 1980.
1956: Nothing was seen in Ohio. FALSE! Parts of the Ohio Turnpike were finished and opened. The Willow Freeway and Shoreway in Cleveland (US-21 and SR-2, respectively) were done.
Quote from: 1 on June 29, 2018, 07:54:09 PM
The webpage refuses to acknowledge overlaps, like I-77/81.
Fortunately (for us), I-90 has no gap in Illinois. Unfortunately, I-94 does have one...
Some folks consider the Chicago Skyway to be a "gap" in I-90. Not I, but just sayin'...
There are errors & glaring omissions in Indiana as well. The NE portion of I-465 was the LAST section of Indy's beltway to open, not the first as depicted. I-164 (now replaced by I-69) is nowhere to be seen, as is the majority of the southern extension of I-69 (Sections 1-4 between Evansville & Bloomington) which have been open for a few years now.
While I give the creators of this interactive map a B+ for the idea and for putting it together, I have to give them an F for accuracy. Fact checking seems to be a lost art these days, unfortunately.
The majority of mistakes are caused by the webpage only going by route and state, which means not being to differentiate different segments of the same route within the same state.
They should have consulted with a public works historian or perhaps a member on this site.
Quote from: 1 on July 01, 2018, 11:27:01 AM
The majority of mistakes are caused by the webpage only going by route and state, which means not being to differentiate different segments of the same route within the same state.
Yes, and you can't even do that for "classic" I-69 in Indiana, as they have no shield to click on for it in IN.
I'm sure our community here could a great job of coming up with a construction segment timeline for every Interstate freeway in each state, both 2-DIs & 3-DIs. I've been working on that myself, on and off, over the past couple of years for Indiana's Interstates & I'm sure others have been doing the same in their areas. Perhaps with a little coordination, the powers that be here might set aside a dedicated forum for such a project so all that information could eventually be stored in one place for easy reference.
Quote from: SSR_317 on July 01, 2018, 11:57:23 AM
Yes, and you can't even do that for "classic" I-69 in Indiana, as they have no shield to click on for it in IN.
Zoom in as far as you can, then click on the route. It should work even if there isn't a shield there.
Quote from: 1 on July 01, 2018, 11:58:02 AM
Quote from: SSR_317 on July 01, 2018, 11:57:23 AM
Yes, and you can't even do that for "classic" I-69 in Indiana, as they have no shield to click on for it in IN.
Zoom in as far as you can, then click on the route. It should work even if there isn't a shield there.
Tried that, but it didn't work. But thanks anyway!
Heck, just use Google Street View to go to any part of an Interstate that goes over a bridge and you may see the year stamped right on the bridge. Doesn't take much effort to check for accuracy.
Numerous errors left and right in Alabama...too many to list.
Interesting how this map shows both I-15 and I-80 in Nevada seem to have been completed across the state immediately upon passage of the Interstate highway authorization in 1956... In reality, I-15 construction was completed circa 1974 and construction on I-80's last gap (bypassing Lovelock) started in 1981.
It's tempting to do our own. Would take some time, but could look like this:
* collaborative project in Github or similar. Each change has a source and an author; allows for tracking and correction
* individual segments of roadway defined with date and event (construction, designation change, removal)
* draw segments on Javascript canvas (US state outline backdrop)
* timeline slider
* zoom in and out
Quote from: formulanone on July 01, 2018, 12:19:58 AM
I-95 shows as complete in Florida in 1957. Proposed, maybe.
Jacksonville was the only section completed in 1960, much of it wasn't completed until 1968-1978, with the big gap not finished for another 30 years.
They also show it being completed in South Carolina in 1968, when in reality I still remember gaps from the Carolinas to Georgia in the early-1970's. I still remember crying because I-95 ended once again at US 17 before my family got to Florida.
Quote from: NE2 on June 29, 2018, 10:17:24 PM
What a piece of shit.
You can say that again!
Quote from: kurumi on July 03, 2018, 11:31:07 AMIt's tempting to do our own. Would take some time, but could look like this:
* collaborative project in Github or similar. Each change has a source and an author; allows for tracking and correction
* individual segments of roadway defined with date and event (construction, designation change, removal)
* draw segments on Javascript canvas (US state outline backdrop)
* timeline slider
* zoom in and out
I have considered something along the same lines, but covering all freeways (not just Interstates), and with the ability to force display of system state at each date that a segment opened somewhere in the country. I have even gone so far as to try to compile a listing of opening years for freeway segments in Kansas (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10097) (with considerable help from Route56).
To make things uniform, we would have to agree on a standard of completion for each stage (e.g., opening to general public traffic as a full freeway) and take account of edge cases, such as situations where the up and down carriageways of a freeway are completely built out to or even beyond a flat intersection that is later scheduled for grade separation. It would also be helpful if each completed segment could link to metadata giving source information.
Quote from: SSR_317 on July 01, 2018, 11:23:51 AM
There are errors & glaring omissions in Indiana as well. The NE portion of I-465 was the LAST section of Indy's beltway to open, not the first as depicted. I-164 (now replaced by I-69) is nowhere to be seen, as is the majority of the southern extension of I-69 (Sections 1-4 between Evansville & Bloomington) which have been open for a few years now.
While I give the creators of this interactive map a B+ for the idea and for putting it together, I have to give them an F for accuracy. Fact checking seems to be a lost art these days, unfortunately.
In addition, I-64 is shown to be completed in Southern Indiana in the late 50s. I know that the first section of the road did not open until the late 60s (with the exception of the New Albany area) with the rest of it being done in the early 70s.
Oh, and I do remember traveling through Colorado (all the way) on I-70 in the early 70s instead of not seeing I-70 completed in the 1990s as it said.
Good idea, terrible execution. I would say that it was not a truly devoted road geek that prepared that presentation.
Quote from: Life in Paradise on July 03, 2018, 07:18:47 PM
Oh, and I do remember traveling through Colorado (all the way) on I-70 in the early 70s instead of not seeing I-70 completed in the 1990s as it said.
The Glenwood Canyon section was opened to traffic in 1992.
If Alaska's I-1 and I-4 are shown, I want to see the Puerto Rican ones included.
I just checked I-40 in the Texas Panhandle which that site claims was completed in 1959, even though I saw Historic Aerial and topographical maps this morning indicating that it wasn't complete in places like Groom or Shamrock until at least the late-1980's.
I-40 is TOTALLY WRONG!! As others have said, it's absolute rubbish. smh
We could easily have over 100 posts saying "This is wrong for the state(s) I know well" or variations thereof, so I would like to ask a question. Is there even one state for which it is close to accurate?
I wondered how this interactive display came to be made, so I did a little Googling and ran across this press release:
https://www.geotab.com/press-release/evolution-of-interstate/
Geotab is apparently a Canadian company (based in Toronto) that specializes in GPS-based vehicle tracking equipment that plugs into the OBD II port. (Applications I can think of range from auto DIYers running diagnostics on their own driving, to nosy parents spying on teen drivers, to logistics companies keeping tabs on their fleets.) The Interactive Interstate Timeline has been created strictly for promotional purposes. Casual inspection of the company's website turns up no reason to believe it has special expertise in the history of Interstate development.
There is a PIO email on the press release. I frankly think any communication to the company about the errors in the timeline is more likely to result in its being taken down than in any effort being invested in fixing the mistakes.
I've been slowly piecing together my own map for the Pacific Northwest (https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1ILxw-86Y1JRTS1ZpEW0zFpF_YJ0&ll=47.67501327625314%2C-122.4064063613281&z=10), but progress has stalled due to the lack of good newspaper archives available to me online or at various local libraries. A collaborative, national map would be neat.
I wonder if segment data from the Travel Mapping database could be used in a home-brew (or community-brewed) project? With permission, I'd assume.
It's so bad, it's guaranteed to become part of a clickbait website article soon that the media will quickly swallow up as accurate.
If more states produced maps showing the completion dates by segment of their respective Interstate systems, it would be an easier task to compile a master list. Iowa did for the 50th Interstate Anniversary in 2006. I saved a copy for reference purposes on interstate-guide:
(https://www.interstate-guide.com/maps/historic_iowa_interstate_completion_map.jpg)
That Iowa map is great! Thanks for posting it.
Quote from: Alex on July 07, 2018, 08:31:42 AMIf more states produced maps showing the completion dates by segment of their respective Interstate systems, it would be an easier task to compile a master list. Iowa did for the 50th Interstate Anniversary in 2006.
I wonder if all states were required to compile completion maps at some point. The Iowa map is dated January 1, 1982, so I suspect it was compiled in the first instance not for the Interstate fiftieth anniversary, but rather for a stock-taking of the Interstate program as a whole that occurred in Reagan's first term when creation of the Interstate Maintenance fund was under discussion.
Quote from: sparker on June 30, 2018, 11:12:35 PM
Really? I-5 completed in CA in '74? It emptied out onto the original US 99 expressway (4-lane with no median barrier but double striped lines) between Vollmers and Castle Crags in the upper Sacramento River canyon until 1992, when the freeway was finally completed. These folks should go back to Square One, get their facts straight, and redo the whole presentation; it's an inaccurate depiction as is!
That segment of I-5 was posted as I-5 though. (Not "Temporary" either.) And for a long time it seemed as though Cal Trans was going to be content to just leave it that way. That segment was actually pretty cool in a lot of ways too. As for the map, it is full of errors sadly.
I'm sorry if this comes across as condescending, but how are some Interstate opening dates a mystery? Since members on the forum have old map collections, wouldn't it be possible to compile those - state by state, and year by year from 1956 onward - then list each year a segment of Interstate opens (i.e. each segment of Interstate to appear on a map)?
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 22, 2019, 03:54:20 PM
I'm sorry if this comes across as condescending, but how are some Interstate opening dates a mystery? Since members on the forum have old map collections, wouldn't it be possible to compile those - state by state, and year by year from 1956 onward - then list each year a segment of Interstate opens (i.e. each segment of Interstate to appear on a map)?
I think at least a part of the reason is that paper maps can come with a margin of error. A modern example: I-680 in Iowa is being renumbered to I-880 as we speak, but that change won't be reflected in Rand McNally road atlases until at least the 2021 edition.
Quote from: pianocello on October 22, 2019, 09:54:06 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 22, 2019, 03:54:20 PM
I'm sorry if this comes across as condescending, but how are some Interstate opening dates a mystery? Since members on the forum have old map collections, wouldn't it be possible to compile those - state by state, and year by year from 1956 onward - then list each year a segment of Interstate opens (i.e. each segment of Interstate to appear on a map)?
I think at least a part of the reason is that paper maps can come with a margin of error.
Paper maps have always been unreliable when it came to unfinished / incomplete / projected routes; it's based on some guesses, inconsistent fieldwork, and vague promises. Even a lot of new routes in more recent times are not completed in the same order, even though we would like them to be constructed that way.
Doing all that research might have taken a long time, just to get every little point and date correct, so a lot of assumptions were made, small gaps in the system were ignored for the sake of brevity, though some were not even close to end-to-end completion.
Paper maps (even official state maps) are unreliable for other reasons as well. In the early days of Interstate construction, many states did not have symbology to indicate exits. Often map features are generalized to the extent that temporary termini are difficult to locate in respect of nearby towns, let alone down to the nearest exit or mile.
And when compiling completion maps, you have to be transparent about choosing your criteria, since there are multiple options that arguably have equal validity. For example, you could argue I-335 in Kansas was completed in 1956 (as part of the original Kansas Turnpike) or in 1988 (when the designation was created to allow an increase in speed limit from 55 to 65). In many states you have situations where the road was open to traffic days, weeks, or even months before the official opening ceremony, temporary signing was in place for years before the final permanent signing was installed, etc.
Among the Indiana errors
I-69 in SW Indiana was not open to Bloomington in 1995.
I-64 in Southern Indiana was not open in 1960. That was before I was born, and I remember that work being done in the late 60s and early 70s in SW Indiana, and it took a few more years to get over to New Albany. Now the bridge across the Ohio and perhaps the road out to Georgetown was open that early, but nothing else.
Quote from: J N Winkler on October 23, 2019, 12:04:00 PM
Paper maps (even official state maps) are unreliable for other reasons as well. In the early days of Interstate construction, many states did not have symbology to indicate exits. Often map features are generalized to the extent that temporary termini are difficult to locate in respect of nearby towns, let alone down to the nearest exit or mile.
Those maps are reasonably accurate, but in a number of cases the opening year can be one or two years off from what can be gleaned from the maps. Some few cases more than that.
They are a reasonable guide but are not always accurate to the year which is what I would want.
Then what happens if you don't have every single year of that map? Missing a year or few?
Quote from: Beltway on October 23, 2019, 10:36:30 PMThen what happens if you don't have every single year of that map? Missing a year or few?
With official state maps, that is less of a concern than it used to be, because many state DOTs have scanned their old maps and put them online. There is even some online availability of old county maps as well.
When I was compiling a freeway completion list for Kansas, which was precise to the year (Kansas generally updated maps annually for most of the time Interstates were being built), my primary source was official state maps on KDOT's website. Richie Kennedy (route56) eventually finished it and included opening dates for some segments, culled from the Kansas State Historical Society's clippings file.
I looked at it again. I can tell you that I remember travelling on I-69 in 1991 when we took my aunt and cousins back to Ohio at the end of that summer. I do know that between Charlotte and Lansing that there was a Temp I-69 on Michigan state maps circa 1992 or so.
I find it hard to believe that I-94 from Milwaukee to the Twin cities was not complete until the 80's. Seems like the would have built that corridor before they built I-90 in WI.
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2019, 07:44:42 AM
I find it hard to believe that I-94 from Milwaukee to the Twin cities was not complete until the 80's. Seems like the would have built that corridor before they built I-90 in WI.
What section wasn't complete until then? What was the pre-existing highway, was it a 4-lane highway?
Two sections of I-95 in Virginia and N.C. weren't completed until the early 1980s, but the pre-existing highway segments were high-speed 4-lane highways and in the case of VA it was rural with near-freeway average speed.
Quote from: Beltway on October 24, 2019, 08:23:39 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2019, 07:44:42 AM
I find it hard to believe that I-94 from Milwaukee to the Twin cities was not complete until the 80's. Seems like the would have built that corridor before they built I-90 in WI.
What section wasn't complete until then? What was the pre-existing highway, was it a 4-lane highway?
Two sections of I-95 in Virginia and N.C. weren't completed until the early 1980s, but the pre-existing highway segments were high-speed 4-lane highways and in the case of VA it was rural with near-freeway average speed.
The two lane US-12 would have been there before I-94.
That link got the timing of MA's Interstates completely wrong. I-90, which consists of the Mass Pike, came into existence during the 1950s but the site doesn't show it until 1990.
Examples:
I-95 outside of the 128 portion largely existed since the 50s for most of the northern stretch (north of Danvers) and mid-60s for the Canton-to-RI stretch; but the site doesn't show those pieces until the mid-1970s.
I-495 north of Mansfield (I-95) was fully-completed by 1969-1970 but the site shows it along with the 1982 extension to MA 24 & the former-MA 25 portion coming into existence circa 1975.
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2019, 11:07:48 AM
Quote from: Beltway on October 24, 2019, 08:23:39 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2019, 07:44:42 AM
I find it hard to believe that I-94 from Milwaukee to the Twin cities was not complete until the 80's. Seems like the would have built that corridor before they built I-90 in WI.
What section wasn't complete until then? What was the pre-existing highway, was it a 4-lane highway?
Two sections of I-95 in Virginia and N.C. weren't completed until the early 1980s, but the pre-existing highway segments were high-speed 4-lane highways and in the case of VA it was rural with near-freeway average speed.
The two lane US-12 would have been there before I-94.
Where was that?
Quote from: Beltway on October 24, 2019, 08:23:39 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2019, 07:44:42 AM
I find it hard to believe that I-94 from Milwaukee to the Twin cities was not complete until the 80's. Seems like the would have built that corridor before they built I-90 in WI.
What section wasn't complete until then? What was the pre-existing highway, was it a 4-lane highway?
Two sections of I-95 in Virginia and N.C. weren't completed until the early 1980s, but the pre-existing highway segments were high-speed 4-lane highways and in the case of VA it was rural with near-freeway average speed.
I-64 was similar as well between Williamsburg and Richmond, 4-lane rural highway. The segment around Williamsburg was upgraded directly to I-64, then north of there was built north of the pre-existing alignment. That segment that was bypassed now often gets used as a bypass to I-64 when traffic is heavy. I've driven it a few times because of this, and there's only a few of traffic signals on the ~20-30 mile stretch. Mostly 55 mph, 45 mph in a couple areas, rural areas could reasonably be 60 mph under Virginia law.
Quote from: sprjus4 on October 24, 2019, 07:09:29 PM
Quote from: Beltway on October 24, 2019, 08:23:39 AM
Two sections of I-95 in Virginia and N.C. weren't completed until the early 1980s, but the pre-existing highway segments were high-speed 4-lane highways and in the case of VA it was rural with near-freeway average speed.
I-64 was similar as well between Williamsburg and Richmond, 4-lane rural highway. The segment around Williamsburg was upgraded directly to I-64, then north of there was built north of the pre-existing alignment.
The segments on 2-lane routing obviously had the first priority for new rural Interstate segment construction.
The rest of I-95 in Virginia was completed by 1965. The rest of I-64 between I-95 and the HRBT in 1968. Parallel HRBT in 1976.
Quote from: Beltway on October 24, 2019, 02:35:12 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2019, 11:07:48 AM
Quote from: Beltway on October 24, 2019, 08:23:39 AM
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2019, 07:44:42 AM
I find it hard to believe that I-94 from Milwaukee to the Twin cities was not complete until the 80's. Seems like the would have built that corridor before they built I-90 in WI.
What section wasn't complete until then? What was the pre-existing highway, was it a 4-lane highway?
Two sections of I-95 in Virginia and N.C. weren't completed until the early 1980s, but the pre-existing highway segments were high-speed 4-lane highways and in the case of VA it was rural with near-freeway average speed.
The two lane US-12 would have been there before I-94.
Where was that?
Between Madison and St. Paul.
Quote from: thspfc on October 25, 2019, 12:51:23 PM
Quote from: Beltway on October 24, 2019, 02:35:12 PM
Quote from: thspfc on October 24, 2019, 11:07:48 AM
Quote from: Beltway on October 24, 2019, 08:23:39 AM
What section wasn't complete until then? What was the pre-existing highway, was it a 4-lane highway?
Two sections of I-95 in Virginia and N.C. weren't completed until the early 1980s, but the pre-existing highway segments were high-speed 4-lane highways and in the case of VA it was rural with near-freeway average speed.
The two lane US-12 would have been there before I-94.
Where was that?
Between Madison and St. Paul.
That is 259 miles. How much of that wasn't completed until the 1980s?
I-94 was completely done in Wisconsin by the end of 1969.
http://www.wisconsinhighways.org/listings/WiscHwys90-99.html#I-094
Quote from: Beltway on October 25, 2019, 04:16:04 PMThat is 259 miles. How much of that wasn't completed until the 1980s?
I used HistoricAerials to check the route between Tomah (west end of I-90/I-94 overlap) and the St. Croix River crossing, a distance of about 145 miles, and as near as I can tell, more or less the entire length of it was undergoing at least rough grading by the mid- to late 1960's and was open to traffic by 1972. This does not preclude there being a few isolated segments that did not open until much later.
Unfortunately, Wisconsin DOT is one of the few state DOTs that has not yet gotten around to putting its old official state highway maps online.
Thspfc, can you cite your source for the Interstate route between Madison and St. Paul not being open until the 1980's? If it is the interactive timeline that has been cited in this thread, then it is highly likely to be inaccurate.
Edit: TripleMultiplex posted as I was composing this post.
Quote from: Beltway on October 23, 2019, 10:36:30 PM
Those maps are reasonably accurate, but in a number of cases the opening year can be one or two years off from what can be gleaned from the maps. Some few cases more than that.
They are a reasonable guide but are not always accurate to the year which is what I would want.
Then what happens if you don't have every single year of that map? Missing a year or few?
My thing with using state maps is a lot of times it's the only source. When I've done my freeway opening maps in North Carolina, Maryland, South Carolina, and Indiana (not published yet), state highway maps were a lot of the time the only source I had. Whenever possible, I tried using freeway history websites, old articles, etc, but for a lot of rural isolated segments, that's generally not available.
Regarding I-94 between the Twin Cities and Madison, the segment in question is from I-494/694 to the St. Croix River. That segment was not completed until the mid-1980s. To answer Scott's question, it was a 4-lane divided at-grade US 12 prior to upgrading.
Quote from: froggie on October 25, 2019, 05:11:31 PM
Regarding I-94 between the Twin Cities and Madison, the segment in question is from I-494/694 to the St. Croix River. That segment was not completed until the mid-1980s. To answer Scott's question, it was a 4-lane divided at-grade US 12 prior to upgrading.
That answers the question. About 9.5 miles of highway.
The whole point of my original post was to say that the graphic was probably incorrect, and it was. I'm not sure what all the confusion was about.