News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Most Complete Freeway System

Started by theroadwayone, August 09, 2018, 05:22:42 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

theroadwayone

What city/urban area has the highest percent of it's originally freeways (interstate, state, etc.) completed?


Max Rockatansky

Going through some places I lived...   Is Fresno the only significant California City that actually had all its freeways built?   Orlando as far as I know only ever had I-4 planned as the only freeway.  Phoenix has a pretty complete network but is constantly adding and AZ 50 never got off the ground.

webny99

Yikes. A search of the fictional board will confirm that it's definitely not anything in Upstate NY.

I don't know much about the history, but from visiting/browsing maps, I'd nominate the Twin Cities. It certainly has the structure of a complete network, and through various endeavors using it, there doesn't seem to be any glaring omissions.

froggie

Quote from: webny99I don't know much about the history, but from visiting/browsing maps, I'd nominate the Twin Cities. It certainly has the structure of a complete network, and through various endeavors using it, there doesn't seem to be any glaring omissions.

Not even close...

(pardon the cobwebs on the map graphic...but the info is legit from 1960s era planning maps I've researched)

DTComposer

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 09, 2018, 05:26:34 PM
Going through some places I lived...   Is Fresno the only significant California City that actually had all its freeways built?   Orlando as far as I know only ever had I-4 planned as the only freeway.  Phoenix has a pretty complete network but is constantly adding and AZ 50 never got off the ground.

In the San Jose urban area, there are two portions of the California Freeway & Expressway System that are unconstructed:
-CA-237 between I-880 and I-680: about 1.75 miles. An earlier proposed routing north of the current route was proposed, then rescinded. The current route is unlikely to ever become a freeway.
-CA-87 between US-101 and CA-237: there's never been more than an approximate routing, let alone any sort of discussion about building it, and there's nowhere to put it in any case (you'd be going through Levi's Stadium, Great America, and lots o' major Silicon Valley campuses). Depending on where you might think it might go, it's maybe 4 miles.

Even counting CA-87, that means 114.5 miles of about 120.25 miles are constructed - about 95.2%.

(now if you're talking about the Bay Area as a whole, that's another story...)


Buffaboy

Quote from: webny99 on August 09, 2018, 08:26:04 PM
Yikes. A search of the fictional board will confirm that it's definitely not anything in Upstate NY.

I don't know much about the history, but from visiting/browsing maps, I'd nominate the Twin Cities. It certainly has the structure of a complete network, and through various endeavors using it, there doesn't seem to be any glaring omissions.

NY lacks many 4 lane divided highways...a couple that come to mind that would be nice are dividing US 20, NY 63, NY 67 between I-90 and I-87, and parts of NY 5.

Is there a rationale behind this? Better passing capabilities for traffic, somewhat safer driving with the division, less intersections if done like the midwestern states.
What's not to like about highways and bridges, intersections and interchanges, rails and planes?

My Wikipedia county SVG maps: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Buffaboy

TheStranger

Quote from: DTComposer on August 10, 2018, 12:15:44 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 09, 2018, 05:26:34 PM
Going through some places I lived...   Is Fresno the only significant California City that actually had all its freeways built?   Orlando as far as I know only ever had I-4 planned as the only freeway.  Phoenix has a pretty complete network but is constantly adding and AZ 50 never got off the ground.

In the San Jose urban area, there are two portions of the California Freeway & Expressway System that are unconstructed:
-CA-237 between I-880 and I-680: about 1.75 miles. An earlier proposed routing north of the current route was proposed, then rescinded. The current route is unlikely to ever become a freeway.
-CA-87 between US-101 and CA-237: there's never been more than an approximate routing, let alone any sort of discussion about building it, and there's nowhere to put it in any case (you'd be going through Levi's Stadium, Great America, and lots o' major Silicon Valley campuses). Depending on where you might think it might go, it's maybe 4 miles.

Even counting CA-87, that means 114.5 miles of about 120.25 miles are constructed - about 95.2%.

(now if you're talking about the Bay Area as a whole, that's another story...)



San Jose is interesting because I have read somewhere that the Santa Clara County expressways were once planned to be expanded into full freeways, only for that to be nixed in the 1970s.  Wonder how much that changes the percentages (though still certainly it's much better than most other NorCal cities).

Bakersfield might be getting close to a high percentage too, once the Centennial Corridor part of Route 58 is completed.  Still leaves a gap of Route 178 between Route 204 and Route 99 though.

San Diego should be high on the list too though not 100%: several projects were entirely canceled, notably 252, but also some obscure proposals like 171 (a connector between the 805/15 junction and the Pershing Street interchange off of I-5) and 157 (an east-west connector between the 125/54 junction and 805) that disappeared decades ago.  And multiple routes have unbuilt sections (54, 56, 125, 905) that will remain at most lines on paper.

Cities with seemingly complete freeway systems in this state have examples of proposals that did not get off the ground:
Stockton (234, 235)
Modesto (5W which morphed into a 132 rerouting, which is finally being built to some extent in the next few years, and the 108 extension south to I-5 that will never happen)
San Bernardino (18 south of 210, 81)
Salinas (there was a proposed 68 freeway that would have reached US 101 west of the current in-town surface street routing, of which one interchange was built along a surface street)
Chris Sampang

inkyatari

Certainly not Chicago.  I'd go out on a limb and state Chicago's system is the most incomplete.
I'm never wrong, just wildly inaccurate.

TXtoNJ

Quote from: inkyatari on August 10, 2018, 09:05:54 AM
Certainly not Chicago.  I'd go out on a limb and state Chicago's system is the most incomplete.

Chicago's unbuilt facilities pale in comparison to what was planned for DC.

As far as the topic question, I'd say San Antonio is up there. The entire core system plan of 1961 was built, and later unbuilt extensions were offset by additions elsewhere.

Henry

Quote from: TXtoNJ on August 10, 2018, 09:46:59 AM
Quote from: inkyatari on August 10, 2018, 09:05:54 AM
Certainly not Chicago.  I'd go out on a limb and state Chicago's system is the most incomplete.

Chicago's unbuilt facilities pale in comparison to what was planned for DC.

As far as the topic question, I'd say San Antonio is up there. The entire core system plan of 1961 was built, and later unbuilt extensions were offset by additions elsewhere.

Just about every city on the eastern seaboard (Baltimore, Philly, NYC and Boston), plus San Francisco, Detroit and Atlanta would also vie for the most incomplete freeway system.

The most complete would have to be Charlotte, with all of its freeways completed as planned; other NC cities (Raleigh, Greensboro, Asheville, etc.) are not too far behind either.
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

ftballfan

Most Michigan cities outside of Detroit had all their planned freeways built

Rothman

Quote from: Buffaboy on August 10, 2018, 01:35:47 AM
Quote from: webny99 on August 09, 2018, 08:26:04 PM
Yikes. A search of the fictional board will confirm that it's definitely not anything in Upstate NY.

I don't know much about the history, but from visiting/browsing maps, I'd nominate the Twin Cities. It certainly has the structure of a complete network, and through various endeavors using it, there doesn't seem to be any glaring omissions.

NY lacks many 4 lane divided highways...a couple that come to mind that would be nice are dividing US 20, NY 63, NY 67 between I-90 and I-87, and parts of NY 5.

Is there a rationale behind this? Better passing capabilities for traffic, somewhat safer driving with the division, less intersections if done like the midwestern states.
Preservation first.  No good reason to expand those roads when funding levels are only allowing NYSDOT to slow condition decline, let alone make improvements.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

sparker

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on August 09, 2018, 05:26:34 PM
Going through some places I lived...   Is Fresno the only significant California City that actually had all its freeways built?   Orlando as far as I know only ever had I-4 planned as the only freeway.  Phoenix has a pretty complete network but is constantly adding and AZ 50 never got off the ground.

For quite some time, Fresno planners had anticipated that the CA 65 "Eastside" freeway would complete their system by providing an outer connector between the three "radial" freeways extending out from the city center -- 180, 168, and 41 -- and essentially define the outer limits of housing development.  Back in the late '90's and early '00's -- even though there was not a defined and adopted alignment for CA 65, a plan was forwarded to identify the portion of the corridor between CA 180 and the projected eastern extension of CA 152; it would have had a more or less 45-degree diagonal trajectory east of Fresno itself, passing directly below Friant Dam, and intersecting CA 41 just north of the present CA 145 intersection.  Just NW of there, the project would turn west onto the 152 extension, building that to the present CA 99/CA 152 interchange near Chowchilla.  This would have essentially completed a northeast bypass "loop" of Fresno -- something dear to the heart of regional developers.  Of course, lack of funding intervened -- although the project remained dormant until the late '00's, when the state's housing crisis negated any pressing need for such a bypass.   As Fresno and environs are now growing at a considerably slower rate than two decades ago, it's unlikely that the CA 65-based bypass concept will be revived anytime soon.     

MantyMadTown

Forget the I-41 haters

abefroman329

I think you need to decide between "city"  or "metropolitan area."  Chicago really only had the Crosstown, whatever was to become of the expressway stub from the Dan Ryan to Chinatown, and the upgrades of portions of Lake Shore Drive to expressways (which absolutely pales in comparison to the miles of expressway planned for DC but cancelled), but if you include the metro area, you can add the Amstutz, the IL-53 extension, the westward extension of the Elfin-O'Hare, and the Fox Valley Expressway.

ilpt4u

Quote from: abefroman329 on August 11, 2018, 08:33:57 AM
I think you need to decide between "city"  or "metropolitan area."  Chicago really only had the Crosstown, whatever was to become of the expressway stub from the Dan Ryan to Chinatown, and the upgrades of portions of Lake Shore Drive to expressways (which absolutely pales in comparison to the miles of expressway planned for DC but cancelled), but if you include the metro area, you can add the Amstutz, the IL-53 extension, the westward extension of the Elfin-O'Hare, and the Fox Valley Expressway.
The Illiana, Prairie Parkway, FAP 420

hotdogPi

Now that I think about it, what is Boston missing? I can think of I-695, I-95 through Boston instead of around, MA 2 between I-95/MA 128 and I-495, and an extension of the Lowell Connector to MA 213. These four combined are about 80 miles (70 if you only count those inside I-495); I-495 and every existing freeway inside it totals about 400 miles. Several cities mentioned so far in this thread are less than half built.

I must be missing a lot of failed proposals.
Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.

abefroman329

Quote from: 1 on August 11, 2018, 03:35:38 PM
Now that I think about it, what is Boston missing? I can think of I-695, I-95 through Boston instead of around, MA 2 between I-95/MA 128 and I-495, and an extension of the Lowell Connector to MA 213. These four combined are about 80 miles (70 if you only count those inside I-495); I-495 and every existing freeway inside it totals about 400 miles. Several cities mentioned so far in this thread are less than half built.

I must be missing a lot of failed proposals.
I'm also not aware of what NYC is missing other than the Lower Manhattan, the Mid-Manhattan, and the cancelled expressway on Staten Island.

3467

I found a couple of papers on Chicago area highway planning. I will try to post those. Chicago Area Transportation study did come out with their map full of lines in 1963 and 1971. Due to objections from Chicago neither were adopted. Chicago said it would only consider the crosstown.  It started land and engineering with federal interstate money and the ditched it as soon as it could flip the money to something else.So one could argue that Cook county and Chicago completed their late 40s plan and never officially planned anything else.. ...now the suburban counties as mentioned had cancellations as mentioned.

mgk920

Quote from: abefroman329 on August 11, 2018, 04:09:36 PM
Quote from: 1 on August 11, 2018, 03:35:38 PM
Now that I think about it, what is Boston missing? I can think of I-695, I-95 through Boston instead of around, MA 2 between I-95/MA 128 and I-495, and an extension of the Lowell Connector to MA 213. These four combined are about 80 miles (70 if you only count those inside I-495); I-495 and every existing freeway inside it totals about 400 miles. Several cities mentioned so far in this thread are less than half built.

I must be missing a lot of failed proposals.
I'm also not aware of what NYC is missing other than the Lower Manhattan, the Mid-Manhattan, and the cancelled expressway on Staten Island.

There were several major cancelled expressways/freeways in the outer boroughs.  For example, the Clearview Expressway was planned to continue southward and then curve westward to pass by JFK and feed into the Lower Manhattan Expressway via the Manhattan Bridge.  The whole thing northward across the Throgs Neck Bridge to I-95 in the Bronx was to be 'I-78'.  There are other 'unbuilts' such as the rest of the Sheridan in the Bronx.

Mike

Beltway

Richmond, VA metro built all the planned Interstates and the planned state freeways VA-195, VA-76, VA-150, VA-895 and VA-288.

Battlefield historic issues blocked the direct connection of I-295 to VA-288 and I-95 at Chester, but VDOT got FHWA to approve the extension of I-295 to I-95 south of Petersburg, a net increase of 16 miles of I-295.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

abefroman329

Quote from: 3467 on August 11, 2018, 06:44:33 PM
I found a couple of papers on Chicago area highway planning. I will try to post those. Chicago Area Transportation study did come out with their map full of lines in 1963 and 1971. Due to objections from Chicago neither were adopted. Chicago said it would only consider the crosstown.  It started land and engineering with federal interstate money and the ditched it as soon as it could flip the money to something else.So one could argue that Cook county and Chicago completed their late 40s plan and never officially planned anything else.. ...now the suburban counties as mentioned had cancellations as mentioned.
Please do post them, I'd be curious to see what the original plans were.

BakoCondors

May I nominate Phoenix among the most complete? I recall seeing a planning map from 1960 that closely resembles what's been built up to this point. Missing only is what would have been the Paradise Parkway.

3467

The Chicago Area Transportation Study. Creating the First Plan 1955-1962. Andrew Plummer Google should work. Page 29. It was jealously that California had a big post Interstate plan that helped create this Chicago as well as downstate dream. The downstate one was official from 72 to 79 and then downgraded.

3467

The other one is the Regional transportation interim plan and program March 1971 Cats.  It merged the 1962 plans of other counties but on page 34 a section called Problems the city of Chicago made it clear it considers these lines nothing more than important corridors not Freeways
In IDOTs 72 plan out months after it has the downstate corridors and that included the Elgin Ohare and 355 as well as the Foxway which was cancelled and the 53 extension now under study. It also had the Amstutz extension which was studied and completed as an arterial. It shows land acquisition for the crosstown from 55 to Midway but no other action for that corridor.So in terms of a concrete so to speak plan it appears only the Foxway was cancelled since even 420 seems to be in the new 53 study.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.