Here's a neat map from the Connecticut Port Authority Study Commission - Final Report, dated Feb. 1972.
(https://i.imgur.com/zBBMNdO.jpg)
This was CT's understanding of its neighbors' plans around the same time. Some of the MA proposals were new to me.
"MA 202"
I'm sure the wealthy people in Weston and Wayland would be thrilled about I-290.
The one that really gets me is MA 23. I understand the road to New York, but why the eastern section?
What is this about an MA 8 freeway to the Vermont line? What crack needs to be smoked to have that next to a US 7 freeway? Western MA 9 is equally absurd - and meanwhile, no western extension of MA 2.
And am I to understand that MA 13 and 31 were both to be freeways, along with MA 12? What is this frippery?
Wait. Wait. The best part: A FREEWAY ON MARTHA'S VINEYARD
Were I-295 and MA-140 supposed to connect together, like that map suggests?
Southeast CT is a mess.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 05, 2020, 07:47:39 PM
Southeast CT is a mess.
The thin solid green lines are not freeways or intended to be freeways.
QuoteWestern MA 9 is equally absurd - and meanwhile, no western extension of MA 2.
I would disagree here. West of I-91, MA 9's traffic is consistently higher than MA 2's.
Quote from: Alps on December 05, 2020, 05:31:41 PM
Wait. Wait. The best part: A FREEWAY ON MARTHA'S VINEYARD
Perhaps it was to connect to that eastern extension at the north end of I-495 at I-95. Or was that to reconnect to the Falmouth Spur in Maine, making a bypass of the Maine Turnpike via the Atlantic Ocean?
Quote from: froggie on December 05, 2020, 09:44:07 PM
QuoteWestern MA 9 is equally absurd - and meanwhile, no western extension of MA 2.
I would disagree here. West of I-91, MA 9's traffic is consistently higher than MA 2's.
Meh. Only as far as the other side of Northampton (Williamsburg). Then, you have traffic between Pittsfield and Dalton. Very little traffic goes between Pittsfield and Northampton.
MA 2 definitely has more tourism related and college traffic west of the Pioneer Valley (Shelburne Falls, Mount Greylock, Williams College...).
Quote from: 1 on December 05, 2020, 07:57:11 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 05, 2020, 07:47:39 PM
Southeast CT is a mess.
The thin solid green lines are not freeways or intended to be freeways.
What are they meant to be then?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 05, 2020, 10:04:38 PM
Quote from: 1 on December 05, 2020, 07:57:11 PM
The thin solid green lines are not freeways or intended to be freeways.
What are they meant to be then?
Surface roads/connector roads. See CT 82 in SE CT (except a CT River crossing), CT 25 in NW CT, CT 8 north of the US 44 freeway, CT 32 in NE CT, etc.
Hold on, there's an expressway on the Vineyard? I'm usually a fan of more highways, but I'm not sure I see that one...
Quote from: shadyjay on December 05, 2020, 11:11:22 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 05, 2020, 10:04:38 PM
Quote from: 1 on December 05, 2020, 07:57:11 PM
The thin solid green lines are not freeways or intended to be freeways.
What are they meant to be then?
Surface roads/connector roads. See CT 82 in SE CT (except a CT River crossing), CT 25 in NW CT, CT 8 north of the US 44 freeway, CT 32 in NE CT, etc.
There are many more surface roads in New England...
I think there were similar plans in NY NJ and PA. From this era.
Inn the Midwest there were plans like this in IL IA MO and OH.
Quote from: Ketchup99 on December 06, 2020, 01:48:19 PM
Hold on, there's an expressway on the Vineyard? I'm usually a fan of more highways, but I'm not sure I see that one...
No but apparently there were plans for one in the EVH Rd corridor. I'd call that #1 in the list of highway projects that will never happen in ever. :-D
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 07, 2020, 12:48:12 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on December 06, 2020, 01:48:19 PM
Hold on, there's an expressway on the Vineyard? I'm usually a fan of more highways, but I'm not sure I see that one...
No but apparently there were plans for one in the EVH Rd corridor. I'd call that #1 in the list of highway projects that will never happen in ever. :-D
I have to think that this was a joke or something on the mapmakers part. It's just so damn out there. Even the plaster interstates everywhere posters on this board have never dreamed that one up.
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 07, 2020, 12:48:12 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on December 06, 2020, 01:48:19 PM
Hold on, there's an expressway on the Vineyard? I'm usually a fan of more highways, but I'm not sure I see that one...
No but apparently there were plans for one in the EVH Rd corridor. I'd call that #1 in the list of highway projects that will never happen in ever. :-D
What's the EVH rd?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 07, 2020, 08:15:08 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 07, 2020, 12:48:12 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on December 06, 2020, 01:48:19 PM
Hold on, there's an expressway on the Vineyard? I'm usually a fan of more highways, but I'm not sure I see that one...
No but apparently there were plans for one in the EVH Rd corridor. I'd call that #1 in the list of highway projects that will never happen in ever. :-D
What's the EVH rd?
Electric vehicle HOV Edgartown-Vineyard Haven
I couldn't find a newspaper article on it - it'd be interesting to see how realistic or far down the road the proposal made it.
Quote from: Rothman on December 05, 2020, 09:52:20 PM
Quote from: froggie on December 05, 2020, 09:44:07 PM
QuoteWestern MA 9 is equally absurd - and meanwhile, no western extension of MA 2.
I would disagree here. West of I-91, MA 9's traffic is consistently higher than MA 2's.
Meh. Only as far as the other side of Northampton (Williamsburg). Then, you have traffic between Pittsfield and Dalton. Very little traffic goes between Pittsfield and Northampton.
MA 2 definitely has more tourism related and college traffic west of the Pioneer Valley (Shelburne Falls, Mount Greylock, Williams College...).
I took a look at the volumes from I-91 all the way to NY. I stand by my statement. Contrary to your statement, there IS traffic between Pittsfield and Northampton (approximately twice as much as between North Adams and Greenfield).
Sure, MA 2 has tourism traffic (college traffic is more limited...the college in North Adams isn't THAT big). But it's not enough to overcome the Pittsfield-Northampton traffic.
Quote from: Alps on December 05, 2020, 05:31:41 PM
What is this about an MA 8 freeway to the Vermont line? What crack needs to be smoked to have that next to a US 7 freeway? Western MA 9 is equally absurd - and meanwhile, no western extension of MA 2.
And am I to understand that MA 13 and 31 were both to be freeways, along with MA 12? What is this frippery?
Wait. Wait. The best part: A FREEWAY ON MARTHA'S VINEYARD
Would like to point out that CT/MA/VT 8 ends at an unsuspecting intersection with VT/NH 9, Searsburg, VT.
https://goo.gl/maps/Jp8k6xBfqt195h4b8 (https://goo.gl/maps/Jp8k6xBfqt195h4b8)
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 07, 2020, 12:55:37 PM
Quote from: Alps on December 05, 2020, 05:31:41 PM
What is this about an MA 8 freeway to the Vermont line? What crack needs to be smoked to have that next to a US 7 freeway? Western MA 9 is equally absurd - and meanwhile, no western extension of MA 2.
And am I to understand that MA 13 and 31 were both to be freeways, along with MA 12? What is this frippery?
Wait. Wait. The best part: A FREEWAY ON MARTHA'S VINEYARD
Would like to point out that CT/MA/VT 8 ends at an unsuspecting intersection with VT/NH 9, Searsburg, VT.
https://goo.gl/maps/Jp8k6xBfqt195h4b8 (https://goo.gl/maps/Jp8k6xBfqt195h4b8)
Maybe the map just doesn't show Northern New England.
Quote from: froggie on December 07, 2020, 08:43:45 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 05, 2020, 09:52:20 PM
Quote from: froggie on December 05, 2020, 09:44:07 PM
QuoteWestern MA 9 is equally absurd - and meanwhile, no western extension of MA 2.
I would disagree here. West of I-91, MA 9's traffic is consistently higher than MA 2's.
Meh. Only as far as the other side of Northampton (Williamsburg). Then, you have traffic between Pittsfield and Dalton. Very little traffic goes between Pittsfield and Northampton.
MA 2 definitely has more tourism related and college traffic west of the Pioneer Valley (Shelburne Falls, Mount Greylock, Williams College...).
I took a look at the volumes from I-91 all the way to NY. I stand by my statement. Contrary to your statement, there IS traffic between Pittsfield and Northampton (approximately twice as much as between North Adams and Greenfield).
Sure, MA 2 has tourism traffic (college traffic is more limited...the college in North Adams isn't THAT big). But it's not enough to overcome the Pittsfield-Northampton traffic.
MA 2 hits 8500 just east of Shelburne Falls. MA 9 doesn't get nearly that much west of Williamsburg (3400).
The data appears to show what I described on MA 9: Larger volumes on the ends, little bit in the middle.
MA 2 has larger volumes going all the way from Greenfield to Shelburne Falls and then it tapers off to North Adams (with strangely lower numbers in the state park...it's not like there's anywhere to go :D). It's still at 5,000 west of Shelburne, still much higher than MA 9 through the hilltowns.
Quote from: Rothman on December 07, 2020, 03:16:05 PM
Quote from: froggie on December 07, 2020, 08:43:45 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 05, 2020, 09:52:20 PM
Quote from: froggie on December 05, 2020, 09:44:07 PM
QuoteWestern MA 9 is equally absurd - and meanwhile, no western extension of MA 2.
I would disagree here. West of I-91, MA 9's traffic is consistently higher than MA 2's.
Meh. Only as far as the other side of Northampton (Williamsburg). Then, you have traffic between Pittsfield and Dalton. Very little traffic goes between Pittsfield and Northampton.
MA 2 definitely has more tourism related and college traffic west of the Pioneer Valley (Shelburne Falls, Mount Greylock, Williams College...).
I took a look at the volumes from I-91 all the way to NY. I stand by my statement. Contrary to your statement, there IS traffic between Pittsfield and Northampton (approximately twice as much as between North Adams and Greenfield).
Sure, MA 2 has tourism traffic (college traffic is more limited...the college in North Adams isn't THAT big). But it's not enough to overcome the Pittsfield-Northampton traffic.
MA 2 hits 8500 just east of Shelburne Falls. MA 9 doesn't get nearly that much west of Williamsburg (3400).
The data appears to show what I described on MA 9: Larger volumes on the ends, little bit in the middle.
MA 2 has larger volumes going all the way from Greenfield to Shelburne Falls and then it tapers off to North Adams (with strangely lower numbers in the state park...it's not like there's anywhere to go :D). It's still at 5,000 west of Shelburne, still much higher than MA 9 through the hilltowns.
Regardless of traffic need, and it's been a while since I've driven those roads, I think it would be mostly physically feasible to build an expressway on MA 9. Even if you wanted to slap highways everywhere, where are the third and fourth lane going on the Mohawk Trail? In the river or on the cliffside? Do the westbound lanes get to drive off the hairpin and land on a giant cushion in North Adams?
Quote from: dkblake on December 07, 2020, 04:31:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 07, 2020, 03:16:05 PM
Quote from: froggie on December 07, 2020, 08:43:45 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 05, 2020, 09:52:20 PM
Quote from: froggie on December 05, 2020, 09:44:07 PM
QuoteWestern MA 9 is equally absurd - and meanwhile, no western extension of MA 2.
I would disagree here. West of I-91, MA 9's traffic is consistently higher than MA 2's.
Meh. Only as far as the other side of Northampton (Williamsburg). Then, you have traffic between Pittsfield and Dalton. Very little traffic goes between Pittsfield and Northampton.
MA 2 definitely has more tourism related and college traffic west of the Pioneer Valley (Shelburne Falls, Mount Greylock, Williams College...).
I took a look at the volumes from I-91 all the way to NY. I stand by my statement. Contrary to your statement, there IS traffic between Pittsfield and Northampton (approximately twice as much as between North Adams and Greenfield).
Sure, MA 2 has tourism traffic (college traffic is more limited...the college in North Adams isn't THAT big). But it's not enough to overcome the Pittsfield-Northampton traffic.
MA 2 hits 8500 just east of Shelburne Falls. MA 9 doesn't get nearly that much west of Williamsburg (3400).
The data appears to show what I described on MA 9: Larger volumes on the ends, little bit in the middle.
MA 2 has larger volumes going all the way from Greenfield to Shelburne Falls and then it tapers off to North Adams (with strangely lower numbers in the state park...it's not like there's anywhere to go :D). It's still at 5,000 west of Shelburne, still much higher than MA 9 through the hilltowns.
Regardless of traffic need, and it's been a while since I've driven those roads, I think it would be mostly physically feasible to build an expressway on MA 9. Even if you wanted to slap highways everywhere, where are the third and fourth lane going on the Mohawk Trail? In the river or on the cliffside? Do the westbound lanes get to drive off the hairpin and land on a giant cushion in North Adams?
Tunnel under river?
Quote from: dkblake on December 07, 2020, 04:31:15 PM
Regardless of traffic need, and it's been a while since I've driven those roads, I think it would be mostly physically feasible to build an expressway on MA 9. Even if you wanted to slap highways everywhere, where are the third and fourth lane going on the Mohawk Trail? In the river or on the cliffside? Do the westbound lanes get to drive off the hairpin and land on a giant cushion in North Adams?
Just like how were they ever planning to build the Green Mountain Parkway in Vermont? I've heard that was either supposed to go along what is VT 100, or go along the ridgeline. I can't fathom a road like that being built, but back in the 50s/60s, the enviornmental regs weren't a fraction of what they are today. Just wish they took the time back then, at least in CT, to get a couple roads built, like Rt 11, the suicide six bypass, and the NW quadrant of I-291.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 07, 2020, 08:15:08 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 07, 2020, 12:48:12 AM
Quote from: Ketchup99 on December 06, 2020, 01:48:19 PM
Hold on, there's an expressway on the Vineyard? I'm usually a fan of more highways, but I'm not sure I see that one...
No but apparently there were plans for one in the EVH Rd corridor. I'd call that #1 in the list of highway projects that will never happen in ever. :-D
What's the EVH rd?
Eddie Van Halen silly. Somehow in 1972 we knew what was upcoming.
Quote from: Rothman on December 07, 2020, 03:16:05 PM
Quote from: froggie on December 07, 2020, 08:43:45 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 05, 2020, 09:52:20 PM
Quote from: froggie on December 05, 2020, 09:44:07 PM
QuoteWestern MA 9 is equally absurd - and meanwhile, no western extension of MA 2.
I would disagree here. West of I-91, MA 9's traffic is consistently higher than MA 2's.
Meh. Only as far as the other side of Northampton (Williamsburg). Then, you have traffic between Pittsfield and Dalton. Very little traffic goes between Pittsfield and Northampton.
MA 2 definitely has more tourism related and college traffic west of the Pioneer Valley (Shelburne Falls, Mount Greylock, Williams College...).
I took a look at the volumes from I-91 all the way to NY. I stand by my statement. Contrary to your statement, there IS traffic between Pittsfield and Northampton (approximately twice as much as between North Adams and Greenfield).
Sure, MA 2 has tourism traffic (college traffic is more limited...the college in North Adams isn't THAT big). But it's not enough to overcome the Pittsfield-Northampton traffic.
MA 2 hits 8500 just east of Shelburne Falls. MA 9 doesn't get nearly that much west of Williamsburg (3400).
The data appears to show what I described on MA 9: Larger volumes on the ends, little bit in the middle.
MA 2 has larger volumes going all the way from Greenfield to Shelburne Falls and then it tapers off to North Adams (with strangely lower numbers in the state park...it's not like there's anywhere to go :D). It's still at 5,000 west of Shelburne, still much higher than MA 9 through the hilltowns.
Not according to 2018 volumes from MassDOT.
MA 2 barely gets out of Shelburne before it drops below 5K. It drops below 3K coming out of Charlemont (near the Deerfield River crossing), drops below 2K in the park, and doesn't pick back up above 3K until the hairpin turn near North Adams.
MA 9, meanwhile, stays above 5K until the Goshen/Cummington line, and doesn't drop below 3600 at all.
Quote from: froggie on December 08, 2020, 09:58:53 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 07, 2020, 03:16:05 PM
Quote from: froggie on December 07, 2020, 08:43:45 AM
Quote from: Rothman on December 05, 2020, 09:52:20 PM
Quote from: froggie on December 05, 2020, 09:44:07 PM
QuoteWestern MA 9 is equally absurd - and meanwhile, no western extension of MA 2.
I would disagree here. West of I-91, MA 9's traffic is consistently higher than MA 2's.
Meh. Only as far as the other side of Northampton (Williamsburg). Then, you have traffic between Pittsfield and Dalton. Very little traffic goes between Pittsfield and Northampton.
MA 2 definitely has more tourism related and college traffic west of the Pioneer Valley (Shelburne Falls, Mount Greylock, Williams College...).
I took a look at the volumes from I-91 all the way to NY. I stand by my statement. Contrary to your statement, there IS traffic between Pittsfield and Northampton (approximately twice as much as between North Adams and Greenfield).
Sure, MA 2 has tourism traffic (college traffic is more limited...the college in North Adams isn't THAT big). But it's not enough to overcome the Pittsfield-Northampton traffic.
MA 2 hits 8500 just east of Shelburne Falls. MA 9 doesn't get nearly that much west of Williamsburg (3400).
The data appears to show what I described on MA 9: Larger volumes on the ends, little bit in the middle.
MA 2 has larger volumes going all the way from Greenfield to Shelburne Falls and then it tapers off to North Adams (with strangely lower numbers in the state park...it's not like there's anywhere to go :D). It's still at 5,000 west of Shelburne, still much higher than MA 9 through the hilltowns.
Not according to 2018 volumes from MassDOT.
MA 2 barely gets out of Shelburne before it drops below 5K. It drops below 3K coming out of Charlemont (near the Deerfield River crossing), drops below 2K in the park, and doesn't pick back up above 3K until the hairpin turn near North Adams.
MA 9, meanwhile, stays above 5K until the Goshen/Cummington line, and doesn't drop below 3600 at all.
I don't think you're zooming in on the map. MA 9 definitely has counts below 3600.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50696197542_4a1cdbd97b_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2keRgiq)
I was using their 2018 shapefiles in GIS, not a website. But since that count's from 2020, it's possible that lower number is COVID-related.
Quote from: froggie on December 08, 2020, 10:38:49 PM
I was using their 2018 shapefiles in GIS, not a website. But since that count's from 2020, it's possible that lower number is COVID-related.
In this case, "a website" is straight from MassDOT. But, I doubt the data is that up to date -- there should be something of a lag between the sample and the official report. But I still think in general the data backs up what I described about MA 9 being heavy on both ends and then a paltry percentage actually going the distance (a fourth or less). MA 2 has higher volumes westward from Greenfield for a longer distance than MA 9 does, before tapering off through Charlemont and the park.
Of course, my wife does data quality checks on traffic counts in NY...her stories bring the entire system into question. And don't get me started on the NYSDOT analyst who says that he adds a multiplier to the LIE's actual delay numbers -- he says he's from Long Island and knows better than what is reported, so he boosts them to his perception...despite not having lived on Long Island for decades...
Good for MA for being honest and showing something of a decline, though. NY does everything it can to prevent reporting declining volumes -- counts outside of a narrow tolerance from previous collections are rejected, just as one example. It's considered bad news that doesn't play well.
(personal opinion emphasized)
Really not surprising . Illinois covers up a lot of bad news but not the declining traffic volumes. Downstate and Chicago arterial have been in decline . The U.S. 30 project was cancelled on that basis. Remote work is going to have an interesting affect.
Time for me to dive into this map.
1. US 44 - Connecticut. A freeway of US 44 out in northwestern Connecticut would be the only freeway in this area, and the continuation up US 7 and MA 23 could continue it into New York. Not sure if it would be needed, but cool idea.
2. US 7 and MA 8. Why does there need to be two parallel freeways in the northern Berkshires? Did too many people go to Vermont in the '60s and early '70s?
3. MA 49. A north-south freeway between I-86 (now I-84) and MA 12 connecting Connecticut to New Hampshire. Beats I-290 through Worcester at rush hour.
4. MA 56. Why, just why? This short section between Oxford and Paxton does not need to be a freeway, especially with MA 52 (now I-395) and possibly MA 49.
5. MA 123. With this, MA 140, and I-895, it looks like Providence might have wanted some extra accessibility by freeways. I-895 and MA 140 make sense, but MA 123 does not.
6. MA 228. Why? This part of road between Rockland and Hull is perfectly fine as the two lane road it is now.
7. Martha's Vineyard. No.
Takeaway: Planners in the '70s were over-ambitious about freeways.
Quote from: Ben114 on December 09, 2020, 11:20:24 PM
Time for me to dive into this map.
1. US 44 - Connecticut. A freeway of US 44 out in northwestern Connecticut would be the only freeway in this area, and the continuation up US 7 and MA 23 could continue it into New York. Not sure if it would be needed, but cool idea.
2. US 7 and MA 8. Why does there need to be two parallel freeways in the northern Berkshires? Did too many people go to Vermont in the '60s and early '70s?
3. MA 49. A north-south freeway between I-86 (now I-84) and MA 12 connecting Connecticut to New Hampshire. Beats I-290 through Worcester at rush hour.
4. MA 56. Why, just why? This short section between Oxford and Paxton does not need to be a freeway, especially with MA 52 (now I-395) and possibly MA 49.
5. MA 123. With this, MA 140, and I-895, it looks like Providence might have wanted some extra accessibility by freeways. I-895 and MA 140 make sense, but MA 123 does not.
6. MA 228. Why? This part of road between Rockland and Hull is perfectly fine as the two lane road it is now.
7. Martha's Vineyard. No.
Takeaway: Planners in the '70s were over-ambitious about freeways.
1. This would a huge help at least to CT 8.
2. US 7 was originally an Interstate corridor. That may have something to do with it.
3. This was originally conceived as an extesion of the old MA 15 from the Pike into central Mass.
7. A bridge-tunnel isn't impossible to be built between Falmouth and Vineyard Haven. Eater's mighty shallow there.
Quote from: Ben114 on December 09, 2020, 11:20:24 PM
Time for me to dive into this map.
1. US 44 - Connecticut. A freeway of US 44 out in northwestern Connecticut would be the only freeway in this area, and the continuation up US 7 and MA 23 could continue it into New York. Not sure if it would be needed, but cool idea.
2. US 7 and MA 8. Why does there need to be two parallel freeways in the northern Berkshires? Did too many people go to Vermont in the '60s and early '70s?
3. MA 49. A north-south freeway between I-86 (now I-84) and MA 12 connecting Connecticut to New Hampshire. Beats I-290 through Worcester at rush hour.
4. MA 56. Why, just why? This short section between Oxford and Paxton does not need to be a freeway, especially with MA 52 (now I-395) and possibly MA 49.
5. MA 123. With this, MA 140, and I-895, it looks like Providence might have wanted some extra accessibility by freeways. I-895 and MA 140 make sense, but MA 123 does not.
6. MA 228. Why? This part of road between Rockland and Hull is perfectly fine as the two lane road it is now.
7. Martha's Vineyard. No.
Takeaway: Planners in the '70s were over-ambitious about freeways.
Were they trying to turn Martha's Vineyard into a big suburb?
US 7 was never officially an Interstate corridor. Back during the initial planning for the system, Vermont desired it, but Massachusetts didn't...this is why what is now I-91 follows the US 5 corridor (which Mass preferred and won out over Vermont). The only semi-realistic proposal that was considered for an Interstate along the US 7 corridor was from the 1970s/early '80s for an Interstate-grade facility connecting the Mass Pike to a Pittsfield bypass. Which obviously didn't get built.
All other planning for controlled-access facilities along the US 7 corridor didn't term it an Interstate but instead "Super 7". It's still occasionally called that in Bennington County.
As for Ben's question, the 1960s and early '70s were a time of population growth for Vermont, particularly southern Vermont. A number of these incoming residents hailed from southern New England. I suspect this is why there were parallel freeways proposed for US 7 and MA 8 up to the border...planners probably expected that trend to continue.
Quote from: Ben114 on December 09, 2020, 11:20:24 PM
3. MA 49. A north-south freeway between I-86 (now I-84) and MA 12 connecting Connecticut to New Hampshire. Beats I-290 through Worcester at rush hour.
FWIW, MA 49 opened as a 2-laner circa 1972 between US 20 & MA 9. One can tell that the right-of-way along that road was sized for a (future) 4-lane divided highway.
Quote from: Ben114 on December 09, 2020, 11:20:24 PM
Takeaway: Planners in the '70s were over-ambitious about freeways.
Many of those plans were conceived prior to the 70s. In reality, it was right around this time (1972) that many long-planned proposed highways wound up being cancelled (example: the proposed segment of I-95 through Lynn and its-related connectors to Salem/Beverly and Marblehead/Swampscott).
Quote from: froggie on December 10, 2020, 11:22:25 PM
US 7 was never officially an Interstate corridor. Back during the initial planning for the system, Vermont desired it, but Massachusetts didn't...this is why what is now I-91 follows the US 5 corridor (which Mass preferred and won out over Vermont). The only semi-realistic proposal that was considered for an Interstate along the US 7 corridor was from the 1970s/early '80s for an Interstate-grade facility connecting the Mass Pike to a Pittsfield bypass. Which obviously didn't get built.
All other planning for controlled-access facilities along the US 7 corridor didn't term it an Interstate but instead "Super 7". It's still occasionally called that in Bennington County.
As for Ben's question, the 1960s and early '70s were a time of population growth for Vermont, particularly southern Vermont. A number of these incoming residents hailed from southern New England. I suspect this is why there were parallel freeways proposed for US 7 and MA 8 up to the border...planners probably expected that trend to continue.
I'm surprised no one has asked for a VT/NH 9 and NY 7 freeway.
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 11, 2020, 08:31:48 AM
Quote from: froggie on December 10, 2020, 11:22:25 PM
US 7 was never officially an Interstate corridor. Back during the initial planning for the system, Vermont desired it, but Massachusetts didn't...this is why what is now I-91 follows the US 5 corridor (which Mass preferred and won out over Vermont). The only semi-realistic proposal that was considered for an Interstate along the US 7 corridor was from the 1970s/early '80s for an Interstate-grade facility connecting the Mass Pike to a Pittsfield bypass. Which obviously didn't get built.
All other planning for controlled-access facilities along the US 7 corridor didn't term it an Interstate but instead "Super 7". It's still occasionally called that in Bennington County.
As for Ben's question, the 1960s and early '70s were a time of population growth for Vermont, particularly southern Vermont. A number of these incoming residents hailed from southern New England. I suspect this is why there were parallel freeways proposed for US 7 and MA 8 up to the border...planners probably expected that trend to continue.
I'm surprised no one has asked for a VT/NH 9 and NY 7 freeway.
Quote from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East—West_Highway_(New_England)In the early 1970s, all three northern New England states and New York proposed two new Interstate Highway corridors, both of which may have been designated as Interstate 92:
From Albany, New York, to Portsmouth, New Hampshire, incorporating the route that is now New Hampshire Route 101.
[the other one is along US 4]
If it includes NH 101, it probably includes VT 9 and part of NH 9.
Quote from: froggie on December 10, 2020, 11:22:25 PM
US 7 was never officially an Interstate corridor. Back during the initial planning for the system, Vermont desired it, but Massachusetts didn't...this is why what is now I-91 follows the US 5 corridor (which Mass preferred and won out over Vermont). The only semi-realistic proposal that was considered for an Interstate along the US 7 corridor was from the 1970s/early '80s for an Interstate-grade facility connecting the Mass Pike to a Pittsfield bypass. Which obviously didn't get built.
All other planning for controlled-access facilities along the US 7 corridor didn't term it an Interstate but instead "Super 7". It's still occasionally called that in Bennington County.
As for Ben's question, the 1960s and early '70s were a time of population growth for Vermont, particularly southern Vermont. A number of these incoming residents hailed from southern New England. I suspect this is why there were parallel freeways proposed for US 7 and MA 8 up to the border...planners probably expected that trend to continue.
Is it possible that the 8 freeway "concept" on here was for some sort of larger Bennington bypass? Otherwise 8 as a freeway dumping into VT makes zero sense. Of course, that area would need 3-5X its current population to even think about justifying something that silly.
I think some of this map as well was just plain made-up by the creator of it, so there's that possibility as well.
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 11, 2020, 08:31:48 AM
I'm surprised no one has asked for a VT/NH 9 and NY 7 freeway.
Outside the scope of this map. Was studied in the early '70s as a potential "I-92" corridor. Challenging terrain and protected lands east of Bennington helped put the stop to that.
Quote from: SectorZ on December 11, 2020, 09:03:53 AM
Is it possible that the 8 freeway "concept" on here was for some sort of larger Bennington bypass? Otherwise 8 as a freeway dumping into VT makes zero sense. Of course, that area would need 3-5X its current population to even think about justifying something that silly.
I think some of this map as well was just plain made-up by the creator of it, so there's that possibility as well.
There's already a Bennington bypass that was and still is on the books. I HIGHLY doubt a MA/VT 8 freeway was intended as a second bypass. Besides the theory I have upthread, I would also hazard a bet that regional/state planners envisioned North Adams becoming much larger than it actually did and that's why they included a MA 8 freeway.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 10, 2020, 09:55:56 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on December 09, 2020, 11:20:24 PM
Time for me to dive into this map.
...
6. MA 228. Why? This part of road between Rockland and Hull is perfectly fine as the two lane road it is now.
Takeaway: Planners in the '70s were over-ambitious about freeways.
Were they trying to turn Martha's Vineyard into a big suburb?
The then Mass DPW was freeway happy in the 1960s. The MA 228 expressway was the final proposal for a long promised bypass route of Hingham's Main, Leavitt and East Streets that had been promised almost as long as MA 128 was first signed along it in the early 1930s (it became 228 in 1967). Traffic to both Nantasket Beach and Paragon Park often backed up along the route every weekend in the summer months and the town was adamant that the existing, largely residential route could not be widened. Townspeople we generally in support of a bypass for many years, but by the time the 1960s came around it had turned into a 4-lane freeway that would cut through the newly established Wompatuck State Park and neighboring recreational areas (and would have run near my elementary school). Both Norwell, due to water supply concerns, and later Hingham both ended up voting against the proposal in 1968. Later, improvements to key intersections along with the closing of Paragon Park reduced traffic demand along the 228 corridor and ending, for a while, any thought of revisiting a bypass. However, traffic is now a problem again. This time, not from Nantasket and other attractions at the northern end of the route, but by new shopping malls and commercial areas in South Hingham that are drawing traffic from the other direction. There have been some residents who wonder whether a 228 Bypass be revisited, if so, it probably would not be in the form of a limited access freeway as envisioned in the map.
I wonder if some of these proposed expressways were proposed to be built as a Super-2 instead of a 4 lane (or greater) freeway. This may have made more sense for the more rural or far-flung proposals, such as MA 23 and that proposal on Martha's Vineyard. Plus you have some Super-2 expressways in Massachusetts that have been built.
Doesn't anybody else think they were way off-center about RI 2, and the connection to I-95 in Connecticut?
And why did the show Long Island, especially if they didn't include the East Marion-Old Saybrook Bridge?
Quote from: Dougtone on December 12, 2020, 06:25:17 AM
I wonder if some of these proposed expressways were proposed to be built as a Super-2 instead of a 4 lane (or greater) freeway. This may have made more sense for the more rural or far-flung proposals, such as MA 23 and that proposal on Martha's Vineyard. Plus you have some Super-2 expressways in Massachusetts that have been built.
Given how they show MA 88, this is entirely plausible.
Quote from: D-Dey65 on December 12, 2020, 06:40:48 AM
Doesn't anybody else think they were way off-center about RI 2, and the connection to I-95 in Connecticut?
Nope. That was actually a serious proposal. It wasn't until later that it morphed into the RI 78 Westerly bypass.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on December 05, 2020, 04:37:34 PM
I'm sure the wealthy people in Weston and Wayland would be thrilled about I-290.
Instead we in Wellesley are the ones who have to suffer under the load of people who don't want to pay tolls on the Pike.
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 11, 2020, 08:21:59 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on December 09, 2020, 11:20:24 PM
3. MA 49. A north-south freeway between I-86 (now I-84) and MA 12 connecting Connecticut to New Hampshire. Beats I-290 through Worcester at rush hour.
FWIW, MA 49 opened as a 2-laner circa 1972 between US 20 & MA 9. One can tell that the right-of-way along that road was sized for a (future) 4-lane divided highway.
Quote from: Ben114 on December 09, 2020, 11:20:24 PM
Takeaway: Planners in the '70s were over-ambitious about freeways.
Many of those plans were conceived prior to the 70s. In reality, it was right around this time (1972) that many long-planned proposed highways wound up being cancelled (example: the proposed segment of I-95 through Lynn and its-related connectors to Salem/Beverly and Marblehead/Swampscott).[/b]
Sometimes I think that highway planners in the 50s and 60s were just throwing lines against the map just to see what sticks. Seattle (https://www.reddit.com/r/Seattle/comments/2eetuh/seattles_planned_freeways_1957_with_numbers_added/), Detroit (http://www.detroittransithistory.info/AroundDetroit/ExpwyBusStops.html), Denver (https://www.coloradovirtuallibrary.org/resource-sharing/state-pubs-blog/time-machine-tuesday-denvers-highways-that-were-never-built/),Portland (https://www.reddit.com/r/Portland/comments/2e8o4j/proposed_portland_freeway_system_from_the_1960s/), and Dallas Fort Worth (https://www.reddit.com/r/Dallas/comments/hmlc0o/1967_dallasfort_worth_freeway_master_plan/) all had ridiculous master plans, many of which they did not even attempt to make into reality.
I see the Super CT 34 idea, which was to go from New Haven to Ridgefield and then cross in to New York as NY 35 continuing to Peekskill, had already been cancelled. I grew up in Ridgefield and my Dad worked in Somers, so that would've been very helpful for him.
Quote from: kernals12 on December 14, 2020, 05:02:24 PM
I see the Super CT 34 idea, which was to go from New Haven to Ridgefield and then cross in to New York as NY 35 continuing to Peekskill, had already been cancelled. I grew up in Ridgefield and my Dad worked in Somers, so that would've been very helpful for him.
I always envisioned that as an eastward extension of I-86. Except that I would love to see the engineering marvel required to negotiate Bear Mountain.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 14, 2020, 08:58:37 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on December 14, 2020, 05:02:24 PM
I see the Super CT 34 idea, which was to go from New Haven to Ridgefield and then cross in to New York as NY 35 continuing to Peekskill, had already been cancelled. I grew up in Ridgefield and my Dad worked in Somers, so that would've been very helpful for him.
I always envisioned that as an eastward extension of I-86. Except that I would love to see the engineering marvel required to negotiate Bear Mountain.
If money was no object, they could probably do something like this
https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-20341747-elevated-highway-bridge-autostrada-a18-european-road
I found the extra freeways I had seen for New York and PA. They are from the 78000 miles system and the 1970 routes. Also the routes through VT NH and ME.
Quote from: 3467 on January 11, 2021, 11:45:40 AM
I found the extra freeways I had seen for New York and PA. They are from the 78000 miles system and the 1970 routes. Also the routes through VT NH and ME.
Don't leave us hanging, show them!
On sorry
It's Map 6 . I saw PA at the NU trans library and New York in another book. But they were really close to these maps except PA had 80.
roadfan.com/intreg.html
Illinois became interstates later. Wonder if any other states ever had them in their plans.Texas is sort of like their Trunk highways. And California it looked like the map I saw in Atlas of California.
I can say Iowa Missouri Ohio Illinois and Nebraska all had more ambitious plans later and more than finished their maximum systems. Some slightly different locations. Iowa Ave of Saints not US 52
But I am guessing the Northest because it has so many in Map 6 and the West and South just didn't have the populations to be more ambitious than map 6
Love to have you prove me wrong
Wait. Kentucky the pathways went beyond this map.