I-94/I-29(and I-31!) retrospective

[kurumi]

"I-29, I-94 completed in North Dakota 40 years ago" (July 8, 2017)

...
The National Parks Trail, the precursor to I-94 in North Dakota, connected New York, Seattle and San Diego with stops in several western national parks, according to maps and newspaper stories from the era. In North Dakota, the trail followed the earlier Red Trail linking all the cities that grew up along the Northern Pacific, including Fargo-Moorhead.

The precursor to I-29 was the Meridian Road, which roughly followed the Sixth Principal Meridian, a reference line used in legal descriptions of properties. In North Dakota, the road linked cities along the Great Northern railroad north of Fargo and those along the Milwaukee railroad to the south.
...
In North Dakota, where many of the trails ran fairly straight, much of the Meridian Road was renumbered as U.S. 81 and much of the National Parks Highway was renumbered as U.S. 10.
...
In North Dakota, many towns saw their highway traffic taken away, including Fargo. Instead of going through downtown along Main Avenue as U.S. 10 did, I-94 was built on farmland south of town. Instead of following University Drive as U.S. 81 did, the north-south interstate would join I-94 two miles outside of West Fargo's then city limits, where the Main Avenue ramp is now. This interstate, called I-31, was originally going to end there and I-29 would end in Sioux Falls, S.D., leaving a 240-mile gap. Congress later set aside more funds to fill in the gap, which forced engineers to move the intersection to its present location where there was more room for an interchange structure.
...

Most of us have seen I-31 on the 1957 Interstate map (link) but this is the first article I've seen that references I-31 and talks about alignment changes.

[Revive 755]

The article is not convincing on why the alignment changed.  If there was space to do the original I-94/I-31 interchange, they couldn't keep the interchange (possibly with flipping the orientation of the trumpet, if that was the intended design) and have a brief overlap with I-94 to I-29's present route?  Unless there was a lot that was torn down and converted back to farmland, it does not appear a cloverleaf would have been hard to fit out there either.

[froggie]

If the article is correct in that where they originally planned the 31/94 interchange is today's Main Ave interchange (on I-29), then "flipping the orientation of the trumpet" would have made it run afoul of the now-BNSF tracks just to the north.  This tells me that the initial plan was to run I-94 along the existing US 10 corridor as far east as today's I-29, instead of dipping south farther west as wound up built.  Moving I-94 south sooner gave them more room to build a full cloverleaf without butting up against a major railroad.

[Revive 755]

^ Maybe I'm reading the article wrong, but to me it reads as if the "Main Avenue Ramp" is where Exit 343 is on I-94 today.  If the I-29/Main Avenue interchange (Exit 65) was really were I-31 was planned to end originally, I'm still not convinced on moving the interchange -even the interchange that was put ultimately built there seems to have issues with railroad's proximity and appears to have required a larger railroad structure.

[SD Mapman]

If the article is correct in that where they originally planned the 31/94 interchange is today's Main Ave interchange (on I-29), then "flipping the orientation of the trumpet" would have made it run afoul of the now-BNSF tracks just to the north.  This tells me that the initial plan was to run I-94 along the existing US 10 corridor as far east as today's I-29, instead of dipping south farther west as wound up built.  Moving I-94 south sooner gave them more room to build a full cloverleaf without butting up against a major railroad.

I think they mean Exit 343 on I-94. If that's the case, I don't know why there was "more room" since there's still not much out there (and no railroad).

[ilpt4u]

What about the creek? canal? drainage path? (almost looks man-made, from the path and shape) that is due South of I-94 Exit 343? That might have made a continuing South Interstate interchange more interesting, but one that doesn't continue South and instead continues as a Surface Arterial due East, doable

And I agree, the article seems to say that I-31 would hit I-94 @ Exit 343, and then continue into Fargo as the Surface Street US 10/Main?

[froggie]

I highly doubt they're referring to 94/Exit 343.  At the time there was basically nothing of Fargo west of about 25th St.  They wouldn't have put the I-31 interchange so far west with nothing in between.

Furthermore, "West Fargo" as it exists today did not exist back then.  They were referring to 2 miles west of the Fargo city limits as they existed at that time, which was around 18th St.  2 miles west of that would be close to today's 29/Main Ave interchange.

[Revive 755]

The way the article talks about the interstates bypassing towns, and then references I-94 running south of Fargo makes me think North Dakota wouldn't be adverse to running I-31 west where there would be nothing - ROW would be cheaper.  It also makes it seem they were not planning on running I-94 through town.

[froggie]

Back then, an Interstate along present-day I-29 *WAS* bypassing the town where nothing existed.

[SD Mapman]

I highly doubt they're referring to 94/Exit 343.  At the time there was basically nothing of Fargo west of about 25th St.  They wouldn't have put the I-31 interchange so far west with nothing in between.

Furthermore, "West Fargo" as it exists today did not exist back then.  They were referring to 2 miles west of the Fargo city limits as they existed at that time, which was around 18th St.  2 miles west of that would be close to today's 29/Main Ave interchange.

West Fargo was founded in 1926.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Fargo,_North_Dakota