Roads with unused accommodations for expansion

[Pete from Boston]

The mention of Mass. 146 in another thread got me to thinking about its underpasses with what is clearly room for more lanes that never got built.

The Housatonic River bridge on I-84 has room for a third lane on a road that is otherwise two lanes each way in that area. 

When I was a kid and did not understand the climate of highway construction, I saw these and got excited that the bulldozers would be showing up in the near future.  However, these scenarios remain the same today.

Where else has the capacity for road widening been built in but never used? 

[1995hoo]

The new Woodrow Wilson Bridge on the Capital Beltway was (wisely, IMO) built with extra space on the inner carriageways (extra-wide left shoulder) to allow for HOV or a bus lane or some other type of transit use that is as yet TBD.

It's probably not fair in this case to say "never used" just yet because to me "never" implies it's been sitting there unused for a long time, but I think it's probably fair to list current projects built with provisions for widening in the future.

[SteveG1988]

How about when they took away the extra lanes that existed from day one?

Betsy Ross Bridge 1976-1998 or so: 8 lanes, no shoulder and no median

1998-Now: 6 lanes with right shoulders. Some of the original striping is visible through the paint they put over them.

[roadman]

Two or three of the bridges on I-93 south of Derry, NH were rebuilt in the 1990s with extra-wide decks to accommodate future travel lanes.  Although it now appears these bridges will be incorporated into the current Salem to Manchester widening project, the extra width was originally provided on the decks in anticipation of roadway changes due to the proposal for the Mall of New Hampshire being constructed off of exit 4 in Londonderry (which was the original plan) instead of at the mall's current location off of South Willow Street in Manchester.

[Pete from Boston]

The new Woodrow Wilson Bridge on the Capital Beltway was (wisely, IMO) built with extra space on the inner carriageways (extra-wide left shoulder) to allow for HOV or a bus lane or some other type of transit use that is as yet TBD.

It's probably not fair in this case to say "never used" just yet because to me "never" implies it's been sitting there unused for a long time, but I think it's probably fair to list current projects built with provisions for widening in the future.

It's not meant to exclude newer examples, although to me the older examples are more interesting in how they show a divergence of vision from how reality worked out.

[NE2]

For those who aren't familiar with Route 146, it's pretty cool:
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=42.060557,-71.65015&spn=0.011359,0.024784&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.060617,-71.650329&panoid=TV7hrPe7CfewiDc9XuYGsg&cbp=12,280.53,,0,-0.06
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=42.076438,-71.682336&spn=0.01142,0.024784&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.076505,-71.682401&panoid=WLnveVx3FdFJaltClgdAaA&cbp=12,310.89,,0,-0.56
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=42.082633,-71.689289&spn=0.011419,0.024784&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.082709,-71.689374&panoid=74ttynXiZ4lBuna3kH-rjw&cbp=12,289.7,,0,-1.68

The lower level of the GWB was apparently designed for a subway line instead of more roadway.

[sbeaver44]

US 220 south of Bedford (http://goo.gl/HLaVhU) at the Cumberland Rd overpass was clearly designed for the I-99 expansion to Cumberland that isn't happening (and isn't really needed).  In fact, the whole run up the side of the mountain until Cumberland Rd joins 220 seems designed for dual carriageways.  (http://goo.gl/t2fHOr)

[PHLBOS]

For some reason, I can't seen to get GSV (nor can I correctly view NE2's links).

When I-95 at the Philadelphia International Airport interchange was built in the 1980s, despite I-695 being cancelled years earlier; accomodations for that expressway were still built in the interchange.  Along I-95 Southbound, the flyover ramp to the Airport Arrivals roadway shows space underneath it large enough to accomodate a separate roadways (parallel I-695).  The original fly-over ramp for the Departures Roadway had similar space as well but that ramp was relocated & replaced when Terminal A-West was built in 2000-2001.

Along I-476 in Nether Providence Twp., Delaware County, PA; several overpasses (between Baltimore Pike and up to including the US 1 interchange) were built for the originally-planned 6-lane roadway but are currently striped for 4-lanes.

[nexus73]

I-5 in Eugene has three new bridges (McKenzie River, Willamette River, SR 58 interchange) that can be used as 6 laners but are currently set up as 4-laners.  ODOT has no plans to do anything until the 2030's despite the volume of traffic being high.  They did a short 6-lane section between I-105 and SR 569/Beltline Road some years ago.  To connect the two river bridges with the current 6-lane section would be child's play but once again there's that lack of urgency which has taken root in ODOT. 

Rick

[vdeane]

A pair of underpasses on NY 104 east of Rochester were built with room for a third lane each way, as was the Five Mile Line Rd overpass, so I'm guessing Region 4 at least had thoughts of widening NY 104 between Bay Rd and Hard Rd at some point.

Most Thruway overpasses/underpasses have extra space in the median.  This also comes in handy during bridge replacements as the Thruway just needs to shift the lanes over; usually closures would be needed for such a project.

[xcellntbuy]

US 209 south of Kingston, NY is two lanes but has room for four lanes which were never built.  Overpasses are "to one side."

[briantroutman]

The mention of Mass. 146 in another thread got me to thinking about its underpasses with what is clearly room for more lanes that never got built.

Was this intended for a dual-dual configuration? Those overpass spans seem bizarrely short.

In fact, the whole run up the side of the mountain until Cumberland Rd joins 220 seems designed for dual carriageways.

I wouldn't tie it in so directly with I-99, in part because that segment of 220 dates back to 1969, but also because this appears to have been standard procedure for all PA super two projects at the time. US 15 around Gettysburg and PA 147 near Milton were basically identical.

How about when they took away the extra lanes that existed from day one?

Not far away from me: The Richmond-San Rafael Bridge was designed to accommodate three lanes in each direction (upper and lower decks), but a severe drought in the late '70s required closing a lane and running a water pipeline in its place. Those third lanes never reopened, leaving only two lanes per deck and an abnormally wide shoulder.

[TheStranger]

In northeast Sacramento, then-I-880 was constructed as dual-freeway configuration (not unlike today's 805/5 junction in Sorrento Valley) in anticipation for the new I-80 alignment through North Sacramento on a railroad right of way.  After the 1979 cancellation of that project (whose funds were transferred to today's light rail system), with mainline 80 moved to 880 (and old 80, built as 40/99E, becoming today's business route), the planned alignment for 80 was instead used for that light rail system, covering three stations (Roseville Road, Watt/I-80 West, Watt/I-80) and their parking lots with a westbound left-exit (Exit 94) for the Watt/I-80 station.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Roseville+Road+Station+(WB)/@38.6442393,-121.391572,3190m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x809ad9a701bf6f75:0x2880ff036395a294

[1995hoo]

It's no longer accessible to traffic due to construction, but the tunnel under Barney Circle in Southeast DC was built to accommodate an Interstate highway. It was never built and ultimately the tunnel carried a single lane each way to provide access to and from RFK Stadium.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8785298,-76.9796486,3a,75y,240.33h,89.56t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sKZaTd_JCTymBSyQ6YxXQcg!2e0

[TheStranger]

It's no longer accessible to traffic due to construction, but the tunnel under Barney Circle in Southeast DC was built to accommodate an Interstate highway. It was never built and ultimately the tunnel carried a single lane each way to provide access to and from RFK Stadium.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8785298,-76.9796486,3a,75y,240.33h,89.56t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sKZaTd_JCTymBSyQ6YxXQcg!2e0

Something I've wondered: In the end, other than taking a less direct route, the current 11th Street/695 connector to 295 basically is as equally functional as the Barney Circle Freeway would have been, correct?  (Given how controversial the Barney Circle proposal was, I'm surprised that using the existing 11th Street right of way was not considered until much later)

[1995hoo]

It's no longer accessible to traffic due to construction, but the tunnel under Barney Circle in Southeast DC was built to accommodate an Interstate highway. It was never built and ultimately the tunnel carried a single lane each way to provide access to and from RFK Stadium.

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8785298,-76.9796486,3a,75y,240.33h,89.56t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sKZaTd_JCTymBSyQ6YxXQcg!2e0

Something I've wondered: In the end, other than taking a less direct route, the current 11th Street/695 connector to 295 basically is as equally functional as the Barney Circle Freeway would have been, correct?  (Given how controversial the Barney Circle proposal was, I'm surprised that using the existing 11th Street right of way was not considered until much later)

I don't know. In terms of access to the Southeast—Southwest Freeway from DC-295, I believe you are correct. I do not remember whether the Barney Circle Freeway would have provided southbound access to Pennsylvania Avenue. If it would have, then it would have provided something the new 11th Street Bridge system doesn't, as the access from southbound DC-295 to Pennsylvania Avenue is incomplete due to there being a missing ramp, and you can't make a "cloverleaf U-turn" there due to a missing loop ramp.

(There is a road connecting what used to be the stub end of the freeway, roughly where the camera was in the Street View link I posted, with Barney Circle–if you pan the camera around, you can see it. It's always been marked with "DO NOT ENTER" signs at each end, though I've seen people ignore those signs often enough. I don't know whether that road is now available for RFK Stadium traffic due to the closure of the eastern end of the freeway because I didn't make it to any DC United games this year and I seldom have reason to drive through that area unless I'm going to a game.)

[NE2]

The mention of Mass. 146 in another thread got me to thinking about its underpasses with what is clearly room for more lanes that never got built.

Was this intended for a dual-dual configuration? Those overpass spans seem bizarrely short.

No - Route 146 was built as two lanes, which are now the northbound side. When they widened it to four lanes, they decided to put a wider median in this area, leaving the extra space and unused bridge.

For those who aren't familiar with Route 146, it's pretty cool:
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=42.060557,-71.65015&spn=0.011359,0.024784&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.060617,-71.650329&panoid=TV7hrPe7CfewiDc9XuYGsg&cbp=12,280.53,,0,-0.06
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=42.076438,-71.682336&spn=0.01142,0.024784&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.076505,-71.682401&panoid=WLnveVx3FdFJaltClgdAaA&cbp=12,310.89,,0,-0.56
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=42.082633,-71.689289&spn=0.011419,0.024784&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.082709,-71.689374&panoid=74ttynXiZ4lBuna3kH-rjw&cbp=12,289.7,,0,-1.68

[Pete from Boston]

No - Route 146 was built as two lanes, which are now the northbound side. When they widened it to four lanes, they decided to put a wider median in this area, leaving the extra space and unused bridge.

That explains it -- this is not unused ROW, it's disused.  It's been a few years since I was down that road, but I recall the extra space and had always assumed it was a future part of the long-term upgrades to the corridor.  Live and learn.

[NE2]

It's never-used. Disused implies it was once used.

[Pete from Boston]

It's never-used. Disused implies it was once used.

Then I'm misunderstanding.  I thought you were saying that when it was widened, the now-empty parts were northbound lanes that were abandoned.

[NE2]

No. The current northbound lanes were two-way when it was built. Provisions were left for southbound lanes, but these were never used: instead the southbound lanes were built farther west.

http://www.historicaerials.com/aerials.php?scale=2&lat=42.083&lon=-71.69&year=1971

[hbelkins]

All of KY 67. Grade was excavated and filled for two carriageways, but only one was built.

There's that stretch of US 50 in Illinois that actually has the bridges built for the second set of lanes, but they are unusued.

The US 127 bypass of Jamestown, Tenn., is like this, as is a stretch of US 169 in Kansas (that was the focus of one of the "Where's Steve" photos).

[NE2]

All of KY 67. Grade was excavated and filled for two carriageways, but only one was built.

Aren't there also mounds of dirt for future overpasses?

[Alex4897]

The I-95 portion of the Delaware Turnpike was built with accommodations for a express-local type configuration.  Underpasses at DE 273 and 896 all have extra segments to cross these never built lanes and the extra wide overpass from DE 1 North to I-95 South was meant for this.

[pianocello]

Iowa DOT recently replaced the bridges on I-80 over the Cedar River, and they now have 2 lanes with room for a third on the left. However, I think this falls in the same category as the Woodrow Wilson Bridge mentioned upthread; the third lane has never been used, but it probably will be before the bridge needs to be replaced again.

If an overly wide ROW counts as an unused accommodation for a road, than there are two examples in the Quad Cities: East Kimberly Rd (US-6) in Davenport (there is a set of power lines on either side of the road that is roughly on the ROW line), and Avenue of the Cities (formerly 42nd Ave/IL-2) in East Moline. I'm pretty sure the ROW includes everything between the frontage roads.