AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Northwest => Topic started by: Bruce on July 29, 2020, 12:16:38 AM

Title: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on July 29, 2020, 12:16:38 AM
I figure I should start a separate thread for these historic newspaper snippets that I find.

Today's is about an alternative to SR 522 that would have linked Duvall to Skykomish on the way to Stevens Pass. King County lobbied for it in 1952 but were unsuccessful because of its impact on the Tolt River watershed (where Seattle sourced some of its water).

(https://i.imgur.com/YgSE2zj.png)

Source: The Seattle Times (June 15, 1952)
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: nexus73 on July 29, 2020, 06:52:31 PM
I-82 was originally planned to go to Seattle.  I always wondered about the backstory on that one.

Rick
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: Rothman on July 29, 2020, 08:13:43 PM
I-82 was originally planned to go to Seattle.  I always wondered about the backstory on that one.

Rick
Or the routing?
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: Bruce on July 29, 2020, 09:17:13 PM
I-82 was originally planned to go to Seattle.  I always wondered about the backstory on that one.

Rick

The original plan was Ellensburg to Pendelton, but Washington wanted to add the rest of the US 410 corridor to Tacoma and ultimately Aberdeen in 1959 (see this news report (https://cdm16977.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16977coll1/id/3285)). A key part of the plan would have been a tunnel under Naches Pass, which obviously didn't pan out.

Similarly, Oregon threw out proposals to have I-80N (later I-84) extend up to Astoria.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: Bruce on July 30, 2020, 02:01:06 AM
I totally forgot that we had an existing topic for this.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=23146.0
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: Bickendan on July 30, 2020, 05:42:57 AM
I-82 was originally planned to go to Seattle.  I always wondered about the backstory on that one.

Rick

The original plan was Ellensburg to Pendelton, but Washington wanted to add the rest of the US 410 corridor to Tacoma and ultimately Aberdeen in 1959 (see this news report (https://cdm16977.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16977coll1/id/3285)). A key part of the plan would have been a tunnel under Naches Pass, which obviously didn't pan out.

Similarly, Oregon threw out proposals to have I-80N (later I-84) extend up to Astoria.
Was that part of the 505 to Clatskanie idea? If so, it would have been 505, not 80N/84.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: TEG24601 on July 30, 2020, 01:09:57 PM
I-82 was originally planned to go to Seattle.  I always wondered about the backstory on that one.

Rick

The original plan was Ellensburg to Pendelton, but Washington wanted to add the rest of the US 410 corridor to Tacoma and ultimately Aberdeen in 1959 (see this news report (https://cdm16977.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16977coll1/id/3285)). A key part of the plan would have been a tunnel under Naches Pass, which obviously didn't pan out.

Similarly, Oregon threw out proposals to have I-80N (later I-84) extend up to Astoria.


When I was in middle school, the library had been donated an old, leather bound, road atlas from the 1960s. In it, the road over Snoqualmie Pass was designated I-82.  I also recall seeing images of plans to convert US-12, to I-82, all the way to Aberdeen.


It is too bad that Oregon doesn't have a safe way to get to the coast, as all the routes are massively undersized for the traffic that uses them.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: KEK Inc. on August 05, 2020, 07:40:36 PM
I wonder if there ever were plans for I-82 through Stampede Pass. 

Currently, the Green River Watershed seems to only be occupied by Bonneville Power Administration and the main railroad artery east of the Seattle metro area.

Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: TEG24601 on August 06, 2020, 01:16:07 PM
Thinking about unbuild highways, there is the missing piece(s) of SR 501.


There is also SR 109 from Taholah to Queets.


And there is the fact that every ferry route that the state took over in 1953 was supposed to be supplanted by state funded bridges.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: OCGuy81 on March 23, 2021, 12:34:25 PM
Thinking about unbuild highways, there is the missing piece(s) of SR 501.


There is also SR 109 from Taholah to Queets.


And there is the fact that every ferry route that the state took over in 1953 was supposed to be supplanted by state funded bridges.

Was 501 intended to be connected?
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: Bickendan on March 24, 2021, 03:18:12 AM
Thinking about unbuild highways, there is the missing piece(s) of SR 501.


There is also SR 109 from Taholah to Queets.


And there is the fact that every ferry route that the state took over in 1953 was supposed to be supplanted by state funded bridges.

Was 501 intended to be connected?
Yes, though it's not clear whether it was via the main Columbia River shore routing or the Spur 501 routing along Lake Vancouver.
But with mainline 501 getting cut back because of erosion, the Vancouver and the Ridgefield segments will never be connected.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: kkt on March 24, 2021, 02:19:28 PM
And there is the fact that every ferry route that the state took over in 1953 was supposed to be supplanted by state funded bridges.

Really?  I thought it was for safety after well-publicized accidents on the mosquito fleet and the hopes that the state would be a safer operator.

Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 25, 2021, 09:23:57 PM
I doubt there was ever a proposal to extend Interstate 82 northward to the Canadian border. If such a proposal had been made, would it have been possible to build such an extension (perhaps following existing US 97 to the border, and possibly terminating at BC 97 north of Osoyoos), or would insufficient traffic counts and difficult terrain have derailed such a proposal?
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: Bruce on March 25, 2021, 09:56:40 PM
I doubt there was ever a proposal to extend Interstate 82 northward to the Canadian border. If such a proposal had been made, would it have been possible to build such an extension (perhaps following existing US 97 to the border, and possibly terminating at BC 97 north of Osoyoos), or would insufficient traffic counts and difficult terrain have derailed such a proposal?

The mountainous terrain north of Ellensburg would make it difficult, and there's not enough traffic beyond Wenatchee to justify even a four-lane highway. Wenatchee did want to study upgrading SR 28 and SR 281 into a freeway in the early 2000s, but couldn't find the funds.

The majority of I-82 traffic is heading across the Cascades to the Seattle area anyway, so the route functions just fine in its current form.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: 1 on March 26, 2021, 11:37:48 AM
Kelowna BC is growing rapidly. Could there be a Spokane-Kelowna-Kamloops freeway connection in the near future?
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: SkyPesos on March 26, 2021, 11:47:39 AM
I-82 was originally planned to go to Seattle.  I always wondered about the backstory on that one.

Rick
Not sure from who or when the idea came around, but I-82 into Seattle sounds almost FritzOwlish to me. I-90 is a slight NW-SE diagonal between Seattle and I-82, which fits I-82's alignment perfectly for E-W travel. And a southern alignment to I-90 through the Cascades get pretty close to Mount Rainier, whether you're paralleling US 12 or WA 410 on a new tunnel alignment.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: TEG24601 on March 26, 2021, 12:24:22 PM
And there is the fact that every ferry route that the state took over in 1953 was supposed to be supplanted by state funded bridges.

Really?  I thought it was for safety after well-publicized accidents on the mosquito fleet and the hopes that the state would be a safer operator.


From my understanding, the State took over the Black Ball line due to a strike.  At the time, the Black Ball had to get state permission to raise tolls, to pay the demands of the workers.  They state refused.  The strike caused such a problem that the state took over the Black Ball, broke the union or met their demands (the take over and resolution are not well enumerated).  They then started the process of replacing several vessels, and planning for toll bridges to replace all routes, including the San Juans by 2000.  In reality, only 2 routes were replaced, the Tacoma Narrows, and Hood Canal.  But the rest were not removed from the operational mission of the Highway Department until the 80s.  I believe some of the Super Class Ferries still have "Washington State Toll Bridge Authority" as the signatory agency on their dedication plaques.  I know at least the Elwa did.  Replacing the ferries with bridges would be a disaster for the west side of the sound, as there would be unobstructed access to the city, likely turning the entire sound into a single metroplex.  It would also destroy the peace and quiet on Whidbey Island, where most people live to be close enough to access the city without too much hassle, but far enough away that the negative elements and traffic are not something they have to deal with.  I could never imagine bridges through the San Juans, as that is some deep water and steep shores.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: Bruce on March 26, 2021, 06:05:11 PM
Kelowna BC is growing rapidly. Could there be a Spokane-Kelowna-Kamloops freeway connection in the near future?

BC Hwy 5 is already an expressway up to Merritt, so I don't think an inland-only freeway would be necessary at all.

I-82 was originally planned to go to Seattle.  I always wondered about the backstory on that one.

Rick
Not sure from who or when the idea came around, but I-82 into Seattle sounds almost FritzOwlish to me. I-90 is a slight NW-SE diagonal between Seattle and I-82, which fits I-82's alignment perfectly for E-W travel. And a southern alignment to I-90 through the Cascades get pretty close to Mount Rainier, whether you're paralleling US 12 or WA 410 on a new tunnel alignment.

The plan was to replace US 410 (now SR 410 and US 12) with a new all-weather route along Naches Pass to serve Tacoma.

(https://i.imgur.com/2wexyGH.png)
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: kkt on March 26, 2021, 07:34:34 PM
All the way to Aberdeen!  heh.  Well, they did do some work on US 101 from Olympia to junction with WA 8 making it a freeway, and they made WA 8 into 4-lane expressway.  But US 12 has had only small improvements.  Now the harvestable timber is about gone and the jobs with it.  There's still some fishing and tourism.

Naches Pass tunnel.  Right.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: Bruce on March 26, 2021, 09:19:34 PM
And given that Oregon was never able to push through an I-84 extension to Astoria, there are no Interstates that reach the actual Pacific Coast north of San Francisco.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: SkyPesos on March 26, 2021, 09:24:31 PM
And given that Oregon was never able to push through an I-84 extension to Astoria, there are no Interstates that reach the actual Pacific Coast north of San Francisco.
Is there enough traffic west of Portland for a full interstate extension to the Pacific Ocean. I know US 26 is a freeway from Portland to a point west of Hillsboro, but beyond that, you’re out of the Portland metro area.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: OCGuy81 on March 26, 2021, 09:36:03 PM
And given that Oregon was never able to push through an I-84 extension to Astoria, there are no Interstates that reach the actual Pacific Coast north of San Francisco.
Is there enough traffic west of Portland for a full interstate extension to the Pacific Ocean. I know US 26 is a freeway from Portland to a point west of Hillsboro, but beyond that, you’re out of the Portland metro area.

On the weekends during the summer? Yes.

The entire Oregon and Washington coast don't have any freeways to get inland.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: TEG24601 on March 27, 2021, 05:26:15 PM
And given that Oregon was never able to push through an I-84 extension to Astoria, there are no Interstates that reach the actual Pacific Coast north of San Francisco.
Is there enough traffic west of Portland for a full interstate extension to the Pacific Ocean. I know US 26 is a freeway from Portland to a point west of Hillsboro, but beyond that, you’re out of the Portland metro area.

On the weekends during the summer? Yes.

The entire Oregon and Washington coast don't have any freeways to get inland.


This.  Given that the Interstates were envisioned as a national defense system, it seems short sighted to not have them reach the coast north of San Francisco (and arguably, they don't reach north of LA), if for no other reason than to provide a means of evacuation in the event of Tsunami or other costal disaster, or to allow the movement of defense forces if someone get a wild hair and wants to invade the Pacific coast.  And with the elimination of the costal railroads, there isn't even alternative means of moving goods to and from, or along the coast.


Washington has at least been trying with their upgrades to US 12, and Oregon has the right-of-way and bridges build for expansing OR 18 (among others), but a actual numbered interstate to the coast in both states would good for those reasons. Of course, I would also love to see both states work together to expand the Cascades system to cover the coasts and the inland communities, but that is also a pie-in-the-sky idea.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: OCGuy81 on March 27, 2021, 11:35:40 PM
And given that Oregon was never able to push through an I-84 extension to Astoria, there are no Interstates that reach the actual Pacific Coast north of San Francisco.
Is there enough traffic west of Portland for a full interstate extension to the Pacific Ocean. I know US 26 is a freeway from Portland to a point west of Hillsboro, but beyond that, you’re out of the Portland metro area.

On the weekends during the summer? Yes.

The entire Oregon and Washington coast don't have any freeways to get inland.


This.  Given that the Interstates were envisioned as a national defense system, it seems short sighted to not have them reach the coast north of San Francisco (and arguably, they don't reach north of LA), if for no other reason than to provide a means of evacuation in the event of Tsunami or other costal disaster, or to allow the movement of defense forces if someone get a wild hair and wants to invade the Pacific coast.  And with the elimination of the costal railroads, there isn't even alternative means of moving goods to and from, or along the coast.


Washington has at least been trying with their upgrades to US 12, and Oregon has the right-of-way and bridges build for expansing OR 18 (among others), but a actual numbered interstate to the coast in both states would good for those reasons. Of course, I would also love to see both states work together to expand the Cascades system to cover the coasts and the inland communities, but that is also a pie-in-the-sky idea.

Exactly! In the event of tsunami or other disaster anywhere on hundreds of mikes of coastline, the quickest way to get there is a very limited number of two lane highways.

On a side note, I don't believe there's any commercial flights to coastal areas north of SF.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: SkyPesos on March 27, 2021, 11:44:38 PM
On a side note, I don't believe there's any commercial flights to coastal areas north of SF.
OTH (at Coos Bay) have United service to SFO, and seasonal to DEN. It's the only airport on the Oregon coast with passenger service.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: kkt on March 28, 2021, 12:00:37 AM
This.  Given that the Interstates were envisioned as a national defense system, it seems short sighted to not have them reach the coast north of San Francisco (and arguably, they don't reach north of LA), if for no other reason than to provide a means of evacuation in the event of Tsunami or other costal disaster, or to allow the movement of defense forces if someone get a wild hair and wants to invade the Pacific coast.  And with the elimination of the costal railroads, there isn't even alternative means of moving goods to and from, or along the coast.

You can see why, though.  No major cities + no major defense installations.  The tsunami danger wasn't appreciated in the 50s when the interstates were laid out, and probably the best thing would be abundant roads perpendicular to the coast leading over the first range of hills.  I don't think we have to worry too much about an invasion - land forces aside, we do still have a navy and air force.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: Bruce on March 28, 2021, 05:36:13 AM
Exactly! In the event of tsunami or other disaster anywhere on hundreds of mikes of coastline, the quickest way to get there is a very limited number of two lane highways.

Trying to force tsunami evacuations on a single corridor will trap people in their cars. Realistically, most evacuation will be on foot to the nearest high point (hopefully well-signed) or an appropriate built shelter like those slowly being added on the coast. Remember, roads might not be passable due to earthquake damage before the tsunami strikes.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: SkyPesos on March 28, 2021, 12:41:22 PM
With evacuations, I assume tsunami evacuations are different from hurricane evacuations because with the former, an earthquake likely would've occurred too, so it may be more difficult to use the roads.

Compared to Oregon and Washington, points east of I-95 in the Carolinas, Virginia and NJ are well-served by freeways, probably because of the much higher population. You have I-26 to Charleston, I-40 to Wilmington, I-64 to the Hampton Roads and the ACE and I-195 to Coastal NJ.  For US route expressways, there's 76/501, 74, 70, 64 and 58. Though for mass hurricane evacuation, a 4 lane freeway with contraflow lanes on may not be enough.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: jakeroot on March 28, 2021, 05:23:02 PM
Some thoughts on the Naches Pass Interstate:


I think an interstate to Aberdeen would have been excellent, but only as justification for removing the awful two-way arterial on the eastern edge of Aberdeen (where Hornsby Way merges with Wishkah St) that's literally the cause of all seaside travel backups into/through Aberdeen. Well, and perhaps the merge from the 101-Chehalis River Bridge. Okay, jokes aside, the current route (101 to 8 to 12) is actually pretty decent; with some additional grade separation and interchange reconstruction, perhaps funded federally, it could be made into I-105 ("Aberdeen Spur" or perhaps "Aberdeen-Olympic Freeway" as a play on the current "Olympic Hwy" name). The dreams of a cross-pass interstate are likely dead, however.

Looking at the current divided highway: it would likely need to bypass Central Park, although I don't know where exactly given the terrain is not favorable for a northern bypass, and there's just tons of homes to the south. After that, hopefully demolish most of those fast food joints in East Aberdeen, tying directly into the one-way system.


The interstate would have been 167 miles long; Hwy 167 partially took over this route. Coincidence? I think NOT.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: kkt on March 28, 2021, 07:14:29 PM
167 not a coincidence.  :)

Through or around Aberdeen would be a problem... could punt and decide Fleet Street on the east side of downtown is the end of I-105.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: SkyPesos on March 28, 2021, 08:59:38 PM
167 not a coincidence.  :)

Through or around Aberdeen would be a problem... could punt and decide Fleet Street on the east side of downtown is the end of I-105.
Could end 'I-105' at Montesano if a bypass around Central Park is an issue.

Though in reality, I doubt it will get an interstate designation at all, and will stay as US 12/WA 8/US 101.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 28, 2021, 10:06:41 PM
How likely is a conversion to full freeway standards along the US 12/WA 8/US 101 corridor? I would say unlikely and I've never been to Washington State.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: ErmineNotyours on March 28, 2021, 10:26:12 PM
Proposed Oregon & Washington inland freeway: Interstate 11!

Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: kkt on March 28, 2021, 10:54:51 PM
I don't find the video persuasive.  It just puts a line on a map without any justification in vehicle traffic or upgrades needed for trucks or anything.  Kinda like Fritzowl.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: SkyPesos on March 28, 2021, 10:58:17 PM
Proposed Oregon & Washington inland freeway: Interstate 11!

At this rate, we'll be lucky to get I-11 from Vegas to Reno, let alone Oregon or Washington.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: Bruce on March 29, 2021, 12:57:16 AM
Trying to build through Hanford and add a few unnecessary bridges on the Columbia is too far even for FritzOwl.

This belongs in Fictional Highways anyway. We should keep discussing real-but-cancelled proposals here.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: SkyPesos on March 29, 2021, 01:19:46 AM
Another supposidely cancelled freeway project: 'I-605' Seattle outer eastern loop. This idea seemed like it has come and gone as a proposal a couple of times, without that much done past the drawing board. There's no way WA 203 north of I-90 would get constructed anytime soon. For the part south of I-90, WA 18 is a freeway between I-5 near Federal and the southern edge of Tiger Mountain, which is 7 miles southwest of I-90. The non-freeway section is mostly a divided roadway with 1 lane on one side and 2 lanes on the other. I checked the AADT of that section, which is 27k both directions in 2019. I think that's high enough for 2 lanes on each side. Is there any plans for widening in that section to 4 lanes total?
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: Bruce on March 29, 2021, 01:43:20 AM
The current plan (https://wsdot.wa.gov/projects/sr18/issaquah-raging-river-br/home) is to widen it to 4 lanes with some truck climbing lanes, but there is no construction funding available yet for the widening. A separate project to rebuild the I-90/SR 18 interchange into a DDI is funded and planned to be finished in 2024.

The "I-605" moniker has been used for three different corridors between I-405 and the Cascades over the decades, so it's always been vaporware of some sort. The first attempts were in eastern Bellevue (roughly following 148th Avenue), the second try was on the east shore of Lake Sammamish, and the third was the Snoqualmie Valley corridor.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: kkt on March 29, 2021, 02:03:17 AM
But none of them have ever been serious enough to start putting together a right of way.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: jakeroot on March 29, 2021, 01:07:40 PM
This belongs in Fictional Highways anyway. We should keep discussing real-but-cancelled proposals here.

Indeed it does.

I've created a thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=28912.0) for anyone interested in further discussion of an Interstate to Aberdeen.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: Alps on March 29, 2021, 06:20:17 PM
With evacuations, I assume tsunami evacuations are different from hurricane evacuations because with the former, an earthquake likely would've occurred too, so it may be more difficult to use the roads.

Compared to Oregon and Washington, points east of I-95 in the Carolinas, Virginia and NJ are well-served by freeways, probably because of the much higher population. You have I-26 to Charleston, I-40 to Wilmington, I-64 to the Hampton Roads and the ACE and I-195 to Coastal NJ.  For US route expressways, there's 76/501, 74, 70, 64 and 58. Though for mass hurricane evacuation, a 4 lane freeway with contraflow lanes on may not be enough.
The Eastern shore is also a lot flatter, warmer, and sandier than the Western shore, so it's a lot more attractive destination and thus has more places to visit.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: sparker on March 31, 2021, 09:00:21 PM
With evacuations, I assume tsunami evacuations are different from hurricane evacuations because with the former, an earthquake likely would've occurred too, so it may be more difficult to use the roads.

Compared to Oregon and Washington, points east of I-95 in the Carolinas, Virginia and NJ are well-served by freeways, probably because of the much higher population. You have I-26 to Charleston, I-40 to Wilmington, I-64 to the Hampton Roads and the ACE and I-195 to Coastal NJ.  For US route expressways, there's 76/501, 74, 70, 64 and 58. Though for mass hurricane evacuation, a 4 lane freeway with contraflow lanes on may not be enough.
The Eastern shore is also a lot flatter, warmer, and sandier than the Western shore, so it's a lot more attractive destination and thus has more places to visit.

Well.....that all depends upon what one considers to constitute a shoreline visitation.  If you're looking for warmer ocean temperature and wider and "sandier" beaches, then nothing beats the eastern seaboard, particularly from Hampton Roads south through Key West.  But the scenery itself is pretty consistent along that shoreline (although it periodically gets better in South Florida over spring break -- at least in non-COVID years).  But if one is looking for raw scenery rather than flopping down on the beach itself, the West Coast serves up a greater helping of that!  You do get the opportunity for the "beach experience" out west, especially south of San Francisco -- but in reality that's only good for a few hours each day, even in summer -- otherwise, you'll freeze your ass off even without going into the water, which is several degrees cooler than over on the Atlantic shore.  But from Malibu north, the coastline -- when you can access it -- generally has more raw scenery and interesting topology in one mile than the Eastern Seaboard has in twenty!  CA 1 north of San Luis Obispo (when it isn't closed due to Mother Nature) is spectacular; north of S.F. is less visited but no less dramatic (cliffs, bridges -- but keep your eye on the road!).  But for sheer visual pleasure, interrupted by pleasant towns and impressive bridges, IMO US 101 up the Oregon coast is one of the best drives -- and destinations -- in the country.  Haven't been up there in a few years, but that's something way overdue!   
Apologies if I'm sounding like a commercial, but I couldn't let the "more attractive destination" comment go unremarked.   
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: kkt on March 31, 2021, 09:10:42 PM
Seconded, Sparker.  Althought if I'm actually going in the water, it should be south of Monterey to be warm enough.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: Bruce on March 31, 2021, 10:09:40 PM
Swimming beaches are more common around lakes around these parts, especially in urban areas.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: kkt on April 01, 2021, 12:35:47 AM
Yep.  And rivers.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on April 01, 2021, 03:46:13 AM
Decided to expand the scope of this thread so that we can include our neighbors down south.

Here's a model of Portland showing the never-finished connections to the Mount Hood Freeway off the Marquam Bridge:

(https://i.redd.it/4nqe76ytys131.jpg)

(Source on Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/Portland/comments/bvp0ft/heres_an_oldschool_model_showing_what_the_mount/))
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bickendan on April 01, 2021, 06:13:06 AM
Is that a Water Ave/Stark St -> Morrison Bridge ramp I see weaving under the I-5 S -> Morrison/Belmont ramps?
Looks like the Mt Hood was meant to be a Cyprus/Embarcadero/Alaskan style double deck facility out to about 11th and 12th Avenues. While I like the Marquam Bridge's aesthetics as is, I can't say it would have been served well with the Mt Hood structure.

Note Front Ave (now Naito Pkwy): Southbound was forced onto Jefferson St or onto the Hawthorne Bridge; Front looks like a northbound only one-way south of there to where US 99W split off onto Harbor Dr over the Stadium Freeway.
Interesting ramp braiding on Harbor between Market/Clay and the northernmost reach of the Baldock Freeway.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 01, 2021, 11:37:56 AM
The Mount Hood Freeway was to have had a drawbridge across the Willamette River? Depending on how often the drawbridge was opened, I'm sure that would have caused traffic jams.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: stevashe on April 01, 2021, 12:41:27 PM
The Mount Hood Freeway was to have had a drawbridge across the Willamette River? Depending on how often the drawbridge was opened, I'm sure that would have caused traffic jams.

No, that's the Morrison Street Bridge, which was actually built (probably already existed even when this model was made). The Mount Hood Freeway is the double deck structure running off to the upper left of the image.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: sparker on April 01, 2021, 04:46:57 PM
Seconded, Sparker.  Althought if I'm actually going in the water, it should be south of Monterey to be warm enough.


Actually, some of the beaches a few miles up the coast from Santa Cruz (Bonny Doon or Panther, both near Davenport) have several hours of nice warm sun from mid-spring to mid-fall.   The fact that they're facing SSW helps a lot in that regard.  But I will concede that the water is still pretty cold; from my experience, the warm water seems to dissipate north of San Luis Obispo -- except for the crowd in Santa Cruz, even most area surfers wear upper-body wet suits.   But lately there have been numerous shark sightings, so going out past waist-deep in the water may not be the safest swimming plan (not that surfers really give a rat's ass about such things!).
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on April 05, 2021, 03:52:09 AM
Another, better quality map of Portland's 1960s ambitions.

Source: The Oregonian (September 25, 1966)

(https://i.imgur.com/uw5pYAT.png)
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: kkt on April 05, 2021, 04:27:49 PM
Wow, that's a lot of freeways.  Every 2-4 miles!
Title: Re: Never-built highways of Washington
Post by: HighwayStar on April 05, 2021, 04:34:07 PM
This.  Given that the Interstates were envisioned as a national defense system, it seems short sighted to not have them reach the coast north of San Francisco (and arguably, they don't reach north of LA), if for no other reason than to provide a means of evacuation in the event of Tsunami or other costal disaster, or to allow the movement of defense forces if someone get a wild hair and wants to invade the Pacific coast.  And with the elimination of the costal railroads, there isn't even alternative means of moving goods to and from, or along the coast.

You can see why, though.  No major cities + no major defense installations.  The tsunami danger wasn't appreciated in the 50s when the interstates were laid out, and probably the best thing would be abundant roads perpendicular to the coast leading over the first range of hills.  I don't think we have to worry too much about an invasion - land forces aside, we do still have a navy and air force.

Frankly it does not matter, you still want ready access to the coast for defense purposes. And that may change with time anyway. A complete civil defense highway network would leave nothing to "its someone else's job."
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on April 05, 2021, 05:41:15 PM
This.  Given that the Interstates were envisioned as a national defense system, it seems short sighted to not have them reach the coast north of San Francisco (and arguably, they don't reach north of LA), if for no other reason than to provide a means of evacuation in the event of Tsunami or other costal disaster, or to allow the movement of defense forces if someone get a wild hair and wants to invade the Pacific coast.  And with the elimination of the costal railroads, there isn't even alternative means of moving goods to and from, or along the coast.

You can see why, though.  No major cities + no major defense installations.  The tsunami danger wasn't appreciated in the 50s when the interstates were laid out, and probably the best thing would be abundant roads perpendicular to the coast leading over the first range of hills.  I don't think we have to worry too much about an invasion - land forces aside, we do still have a navy and air force.

Frankly it does not matter, you still want ready access to the coast for defense purposes. And that may change with time anyway. A complete civil defense highway network would leave nothing to "its someone else's job."

The best coastal defense is to not overpopulate it.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: HighwayStar on April 05, 2021, 05:43:35 PM
This.  Given that the Interstates were envisioned as a national defense system, it seems short sighted to not have them reach the coast north of San Francisco (and arguably, they don't reach north of LA), if for no other reason than to provide a means of evacuation in the event of Tsunami or other costal disaster, or to allow the movement of defense forces if someone get a wild hair and wants to invade the Pacific coast.  And with the elimination of the costal railroads, there isn't even alternative means of moving goods to and from, or along the coast.

You can see why, though.  No major cities + no major defense installations.  The tsunami danger wasn't appreciated in the 50s when the interstates were laid out, and probably the best thing would be abundant roads perpendicular to the coast leading over the first range of hills.  I don't think we have to worry too much about an invasion - land forces aside, we do still have a navy and air force.

Frankly it does not matter, you still want ready access to the coast for defense purposes. And that may change with time anyway. A complete civil defense highway network would leave nothing to "its someone else's job."

The best coastal defense is to not overpopulate it.

There is some validity in that, but it is really separate from being able to move units there if needed. Populated or not it is still of strategic importance.
Incidentally, that is one of the great advantages of suburbanization as well, a diffusion of the population making aerial attack less effective.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on April 05, 2021, 06:10:32 PM
We have a navy and they're fairly easy to deploy from the Puget Sound basin to the Cascadian coast.

Our over-suburbanization would make it harder to render aid in the event of a natural disaster or military attack anyway. A scenario where tens of thousands of suburban residents are stranded in their far-flung workplaces and have no means to return home is very possible.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: HighwayStar on April 05, 2021, 06:26:49 PM
We have a navy and they're fairly easy to deploy from the Puget Sound basin to the Cascadian coast.

Our over-suburbanization would make it harder to render aid in the event of a natural disaster or military attack anyway. A scenario where tens of thousands of suburban residents are stranded in their far-flung workplaces and have no means to return home is very possible.

It does not matter if Puget Sound is easy to deploy from for the Navy in peacetime. In wartime there are innumerable other factors that come into play, and the versatility of being able to transport to the coast, for whatever reason, is never going to be a bad thing. The sound could be mined, under attack from the air, etc. and having the flexibility to reach the actual coastline (including harbor cities like Aberdeen WA) is part of being well prepared. Coastal air defense as well is GREATLY enhanced by having good transportation close to the coast, thereby enhancing the strike range of land based aircraft by minimizing their flight over land.

The actual experience of bombing in the Second World War proved very much the opposite, it was FAR better to have the population and industry dispersed over a wide area making a hard to hit target in the first place rather than have everything built together. In most cases major aid had to come from outside the city anyway, and it did little or no good having everyone close together during the actual attack. The ability to "return to home" is a minor consideration in an air attack, far more important is how many casualties are inflicted, how much hosing is destroyed, how much industry is damaged, etc. Road transport is one of the easiest things to put back together in the aftermath of an attack, housing, heavy industry, and lives are not. This was certainly one reason that the government encouraged suburbanization in the Cold War.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: kkt on April 05, 2021, 09:16:51 PM
An actual attack on the U.S. mainland today would be met with massive air retaliation on the homeland of whoever attacked.  You know that, right?  Improving interstate access to the redwood country is pretty irrelevant to defense.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: HighwayStar on April 05, 2021, 09:38:08 PM
An actual attack on the U.S. mainland today would be met with massive air retaliation on the homeland of whoever attacked.  You know that, right?  Improving interstate access to the redwood country is pretty irrelevant to defense.

You greatly overestimate the primacy of the US armed forces, they are not all powerful. And for that matter, striking another nation's homeland will not spare your own. The lesson of WWII was that the bomber will always get through, projection of your power against another nation's soil is not a defense, it is purely an offense.
Interstate access to both coasts is fundamental to any real defensive strategy, and if you cannot see that you have not read enough military history. Air power has been promoted as supreme for a century, but it has failed to decide any major conflict.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on April 06, 2021, 03:17:44 AM
I think most people in the Pacific Northwest are more concerned about coastal tsunami risk than the possibility of an amphibious assault from a foreign enemy. And even then there's not enough, given a few bond measures to fortify local schools and hospitals against tsunami inundation have failed.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: OCGuy81 on April 12, 2021, 01:09:30 PM
Wow, that's a lot of freeways.  Every 2-4 miles!


I would love to show that map to Portland's city council today. I think they'd have a coronary
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: HighwayStar on April 12, 2021, 01:46:08 PM
Wow, that's a lot of freeways.  Every 2-4 miles!


I would love to show that map to Portland's city council today. I think they'd have a coronary

Probably. The idea of people actually being able to drive where they want to go is enough to send them right over the edge.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: OCGuy81 on April 12, 2021, 06:22:17 PM
Wow, that's a lot of freeways.  Every 2-4 miles!


I would love to show that map to Portland's city council today. I think they'd have a coronary

Probably. The idea of people actually being able to drive where they want to go is enough to send them right over the edge.

A friend of mine who lives there (technically Camas, WA just across the river) says Portland is doing everything they can to make it as difficult as possible to drive a car there.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: jakeroot on April 12, 2021, 06:31:28 PM
Many urban areas are modifying their street grids to favor "alternative" modes of transportation. Portland's strategy is not remarkable in this way.

That said, these projects may seem quite radical to someone visiting from a car-dependent suburb like Camas, where walking is primarily a workout rather than a transportation mode.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on April 12, 2021, 06:46:37 PM
Wow, that's a lot of freeways.  Every 2-4 miles!


I would love to show that map to Portland's city council today. I think they'd have a coronary

Probably. The idea of people actually being able to drive where they want to go is enough to send them right over the edge.

You can still drive where you want in Portland, just at a reasonable speed while sharing the ROW with the rest of the public on different modes. Shockingly, a city does not have to bow down to the almighty car.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Alps on April 12, 2021, 07:30:52 PM
Wow, that's a lot of freeways.  Every 2-4 miles!


I would love to show that map to Portland's city council today. I think they'd have a coronary

Probably. The idea of people actually being able to drive where they want to go is enough to send them right over the edge.

You can still drive where you want in Portland, just it'll take you forever as every other mode gets in your way. Shockingly, a city does not have to be reasonable to the almighty car.
FTFY
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: jakeroot on April 12, 2021, 07:58:08 PM
Quote from: Bruce but actually Alps
You can still drive where you want in Portland, just it'll take you forever as every other mode gets in your way.

Are high average vehicle speeds a good indicator of transportation accessibility in an urban area?
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: HighwayStar on April 12, 2021, 09:09:59 PM
Quote from: Bruce but actually Alps
You can still drive where you want in Portland, just it'll take you forever as every other mode gets in your way.

Are high average vehicle speeds a good indicator of transportation accessibility in an urban area?

Yes. Because travel in a vehicle is inherently superior to all other forms. Ride on a nasty bus next to the homeless drug user that has not bathed in a year 5 days a week and you will quickly decide a nice Town Car is the way to go.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Alps on April 12, 2021, 09:24:55 PM
Quote from: Bruce but actually Alps
You can still drive where you want in Portland, just it'll take you forever as every other mode gets in your way.

Are high average vehicle speeds a good indicator of transportation accessibility in an urban area?
Not at all. Low average delays are a much better indicator, for all modes.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on April 12, 2021, 10:24:16 PM
Quote from: Bruce but actually Alps
You can still drive where you want in Portland, just it'll take you forever as every other mode gets in your way.

Are high average vehicle speeds a good indicator of transportation accessibility in an urban area?

Yes. Because travel in a vehicle is inherently superior to all other forms. Ride on a nasty bus next to the homeless drug user that has not bathed in a year 5 days a week and you will quickly decide a nice Town Car is the way to go.

Not everyone can drive. Not everyone can afford a car (including upkeep).

A proper transit system allows you to change cars or vehicles (with only a few minutes of waiting) if there's an unpleasant encounter. Most drivers won't let someone who is visibly not-all-there onto the bus anyway.

Maybe it's different in Philadelphia, but Portland does have a functional transit system (though it needs improvements).
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: SkyPesos on April 12, 2021, 11:00:38 PM
Quote from: Bruce but actually Alps
You can still drive where you want in Portland, just it'll take you forever as every other mode gets in your way.

Are high average vehicle speeds a good indicator of transportation accessibility in an urban area?

Yes. Because travel in a vehicle is inherently superior to all other forms. Ride on a nasty bus next to the homeless drug user that has not bathed in a year 5 days a week and you will quickly decide a nice Town Car is the way to go.
That sounds so like what kernals12's would say.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: sparker on April 13, 2021, 05:33:11 AM
Quote from: Bruce but actually Alps
You can still drive where you want in Portland, just it'll take you forever as every other mode gets in your way.

Are high average vehicle speeds a good indicator of transportation accessibility in an urban area?

Yes. Because travel in a vehicle is inherently superior to all other forms. Ride on a nasty bus next to the homeless drug user that has not bathed in a year 5 days a week and you will quickly decide a nice Town Car is the way to go.

Not everyone can drive. Not everyone can afford a car (including upkeep).

A proper transit system allows you to change cars or vehicles (with only a few minutes of waiting) if there's an unpleasant encounter. Most drivers won't let someone who is visibly not-all-there onto the bus anyway.

Maybe it's different in Philadelphia, but Portland does have a functional transit system (though it needs improvements).

Portland's transit system generally works well on a purely radial basis, with LR handling the trunks to the burbs reasonably well and the trolley system serving downtown, PSU, and the near east side.  It does leave something to be desired in regards to bus service; while downtown and the east side have at least adequate service (the presence of a usable grid pattern east of the Willamette certainly helps), it seems that to the west they've simply all but given up; outside of the main radial arterials and the Hillsboro LR line there's little attempt to serve the various neighborhoods up in the hills between downtown and the Beaverton flatlands.  When I lived up there in the early/mid '90's, I had occasion to travel from my home in SW to an auto dealership in Beaverton where my car was being repaired for a warranty issue; that necessitated heading into downtown and then catching another bus west -- no lateral connectors to speak of.  Now -- that was about 27 years ago; it's possible that things have improved -- but in my experience (and conversing with Metro planners as part of my academic activities back then) the transit focus was geared toward radial movements focusing on downtown; avoiding anything that may encourage activity in the suburban areas east (Gresham and vicinity) and west (the Beaverton/Hillsboro valley) was well up on their priority list circa 1994.   
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: HighwayStar on April 13, 2021, 10:33:58 AM
Quote from: Bruce but actually Alps
You can still drive where you want in Portland, just it'll take you forever as every other mode gets in your way.

Are high average vehicle speeds a good indicator of transportation accessibility in an urban area?

Yes. Because travel in a vehicle is inherently superior to all other forms. Ride on a nasty bus next to the homeless drug user that has not bathed in a year 5 days a week and you will quickly decide a nice Town Car is the way to go.

Not everyone can drive. Not everyone can afford a car (including upkeep).

A proper transit system allows you to change cars or vehicles (with only a few minutes of waiting) if there's an unpleasant encounter. Most drivers won't let someone who is visibly not-all-there onto the bus anyway.

Maybe it's different in Philadelphia, but Portland does have a functional transit system (though it needs improvements).

Of course not everyone can drive, but everyone should aspire to drive. I spent my time riding public transit when I had no other choice, it was a good motivation to do something else in life so I did not have to do that crap anymore. Philadelphia's transit system rivals that of Portland, as does DC, but no matter how many trains and buses you put there you will never fix the fundamental issues with public transit, which include some amount of foot travel in adverse conditions, dealing with other riders, and transporting goods and luggage, all of which are solved with a car.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bickendan on April 14, 2021, 12:00:23 AM
Quote from: Bruce but actually Alps
You can still drive where you want in Portland, just it'll take you forever as every other mode gets in your way.

Are high average vehicle speeds a good indicator of transportation accessibility in an urban area?

Yes. Because travel in a vehicle is inherently superior to all other forms. Ride on a nasty bus next to the homeless drug user that has not bathed in a year 5 days a week and you will quickly decide a nice Town Car is the way to go.

Not everyone can drive. Not everyone can afford a car (including upkeep).

A proper transit system allows you to change cars or vehicles (with only a few minutes of waiting) if there's an unpleasant encounter. Most drivers won't let someone who is visibly not-all-there onto the bus anyway.
Eh... up until the pandemic, Trimet drivers didn't really have a choice but to let them on.
While I've never experienced it myself whenever I've needed to take Trimet, I've heard stories from drivers, and having attempted to and nearly gone all the way through the process to become a driver for Trimet (finishing university was a reason I pulled out just before training, arguably a mistake), they made it clear that it was more important to let someone on than keep them off the bus.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: jakeroot on April 14, 2021, 01:21:25 AM
Of course not everyone can drive, but everyone should aspire to drive. I spent my time riding public transit when I had no other choice, it was a good motivation to do something else in life so I did not have to do that crap anymore. Philadelphia's transit system rivals that of Portland, as does DC, but no matter how many trains and buses you put there you will never fix the fundamental issues with public transit, which include some amount of foot travel in adverse conditions, dealing with other riders, and transporting goods and luggage, all of which are solved with a car.

But driving is an aspiration because of how expensive it is. It should be no wonder that cities like to invest in public transit, as it is an accessible mode of transportation for people of all backgrounds, abilities, and income. Not everyone can drive, but everyone can take the bus.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: sparker on April 14, 2021, 05:37:50 AM
Of course not everyone can drive, but everyone should aspire to drive. I spent my time riding public transit when I had no other choice, it was a good motivation to do something else in life so I did not have to do that crap anymore. Philadelphia's transit system rivals that of Portland, as does DC, but no matter how many trains and buses you put there you will never fix the fundamental issues with public transit, which include some amount of foot travel in adverse conditions, dealing with other riders, and transporting goods and luggage, all of which are solved with a car.

But driving is an aspiration because of how expensive it is. It should be no wonder that cities like to invest in public transit, as it is an accessible mode of transportation for people of all backgrounds, abilities, and income. Not everyone can drive, but everyone can take the bus.
Of course not everyone can drive, but everyone should aspire to drive. I spent my time riding public transit when I had no other choice, it was a good motivation to do something else in life so I did not have to do that crap anymore. Philadelphia's transit system rivals that of Portland, as does DC, but no matter how many trains and buses you put there you will never fix the fundamental issues with public transit, which include some amount of foot travel in adverse conditions, dealing with other riders, and transporting goods and luggage, all of which are solved with a car.

But driving is an aspiration because of how expensive it is. It should be no wonder that cities like to invest in public transit, as it is an accessible mode of transportation for people of all backgrounds, abilities, and income. Not everyone can drive, but everyone can take the bus.

All well and good, provided the bus network goes where you need it to (see reply #71 above) rather than where planners think you should be going.  And it's not just Portland; San Jose's LR was structured around local planners' concepts of downtown housing serving, via the LR network, employment centers in outflung areas of town.   Unfortunately, back in the '80's during the planning process, the likelihood of hyper-gentrification of that same downtown area drove housing prices up, especially the densely-placed condominium/townhouse developments near downtown; leaving most of the lower-income residents who would most benefit from LR lines largely distant from the system branches.   By trying to cater to a particular user profile (tech employees), VTA (transit provider) missed the opportunity to deploy their system where it would be most useful.   
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: jakeroot on April 14, 2021, 11:28:18 AM
All well and good, provided the bus network goes where you need it to (see reply #71 above) rather than where planners think you should be going.  And it's not just Portland; San Jose's LR was structured around local planners' concepts of downtown housing serving, via the LR network, employment centers in outflung areas of town.   Unfortunately, back in the '80's during the planning process, the likelihood of hyper-gentrification of that same downtown area drove housing prices up, especially the densely-placed condominium/townhouse developments near downtown; leaving most of the lower-income residents who would most benefit from LR lines largely distant from the system branches.   By trying to cater to a particular user profile (tech employees), VTA (transit provider) missed the opportunity to deploy their system where it would be most useful.   

Absolutely a legitimate problem. And without the local metropolitan planning committee stepping in to say "at least x-number of these units must be 'affordable'", you end up with a line serving high-income people who probably only use the line occasionally. As opposed to bus lines through lower income areas, where ridership is likely quite consistent, and the only real issue is either a long walk to the bus stop, or frequency. At the very least, robust bus-to-rail transfers should be in place (assuming affordable or free transfers!), assuming we can't just go and build dozens of metro lines simultaneously, enough to throw off land speculators.

Anyways, I think we might be a wee off topic.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: HighwayStar on April 14, 2021, 06:45:24 PM
Of course not everyone can drive, but everyone should aspire to drive. I spent my time riding public transit when I had no other choice, it was a good motivation to do something else in life so I did not have to do that crap anymore. Philadelphia's transit system rivals that of Portland, as does DC, but no matter how many trains and buses you put there you will never fix the fundamental issues with public transit, which include some amount of foot travel in adverse conditions, dealing with other riders, and transporting goods and luggage, all of which are solved with a car.

But driving is an aspiration because of how expensive it is. It should be no wonder that cities like to invest in public transit, as it is an accessible mode of transportation for people of all backgrounds, abilities, and income. Not everyone can drive, but everyone can take the bus.
Of course not everyone can drive, but everyone should aspire to drive. I spent my time riding public transit when I had no other choice, it was a good motivation to do something else in life so I did not have to do that crap anymore. Philadelphia's transit system rivals that of Portland, as does DC, but no matter how many trains and buses you put there you will never fix the fundamental issues with public transit, which include some amount of foot travel in adverse conditions, dealing with other riders, and transporting goods and luggage, all of which are solved with a car.

But driving is an aspiration because of how expensive it is. It should be no wonder that cities like to invest in public transit, as it is an accessible mode of transportation for people of all backgrounds, abilities, and income. Not everyone can drive, but everyone can take the bus.

All well and good, provided the bus network goes where you need it to (see reply #71 above) rather than where planners think you should be going.  And it's not just Portland; San Jose's LR was structured around local planners' concepts of downtown housing serving, via the LR network, employment centers in outflung areas of town.   Unfortunately, back in the '80's during the planning process, the likelihood of hyper-gentrification of that same downtown area drove housing prices up, especially the densely-placed condominium/townhouse developments near downtown; leaving most of the lower-income residents who would most benefit from LR lines largely distant from the system branches.   By trying to cater to a particular user profile (tech employees), VTA (transit provider) missed the opportunity to deploy their system where it would be most useful.   

The US is not a 3rd world country, we should be able to make driving accessible for every working American man.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: 1 on April 14, 2021, 06:48:48 PM
The US is not a 3rd world country, we should be able to make driving accessible for every working American man.

Only about 64% (slightly lower during COVID) of American adults are in the labor force (I'm not one of them, since I'm a college student), and only half of them are male.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on April 14, 2021, 07:04:34 PM
Can we not derail this thread with anti-transit zealots from outside the Northwest?

Back on topic: a few proposed routings for the "third" Lake Washington floating bridge that quietly died in the 1970s:

(https://i.imgur.com/VQV7btu.png)

(By this time, the options still included twinning the Evergreen Point Bridge, which would've made the modern replacement extremely difficult)
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: HighwayStar on April 14, 2021, 07:42:15 PM
The US is not a 3rd world country, we should be able to make driving accessible for every working American man.

Only about 64% (slightly lower during COVID) of American adults are in the labor force (I'm not one of them, since I'm a college student), and only half of them are male.

Children can't drive cars, old people are retired, so they worked and should be able to drive (at least while they are still with it, sometimes grandma does need the keys taken away). So that should be much more than 64%. And many people were recently working so would be included to. I was a college student too once, I also worked thus I drove.
The point of the above, for those of us that don't read strings as literally as Python does, is that driving should be accessible to working Americans, ie. everyone but those who are work shy.

To paraphrase an older saying, A bucket of fried chicken on every table and two cars in every garage!
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: kkt on April 14, 2021, 07:43:35 PM
One of the interesting things about that map is 30th [Ave.] NE.  That's not a major street now, 25th Ave. and 35th Ave. NE are the major streets.  I wonder if the city was thinking about making 30th a major arterial back then.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: SkyPesos on April 14, 2021, 07:52:53 PM
Is the dashed line labeled with ‘Thomson’ on that above map a cancelled freeway too?
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: kkt on April 14, 2021, 07:58:59 PM
Is the dashed line labeled with ‘Thomson’ on that above map a cancelled freeway too?

Yes, that's the Thomson Expressway which was never built.  Some stub ramps from its proposed interchange with WA 520 remained until the 520 bridge was rebuilt over the last few years.  I have trouble imagining how the Thomson Expressway could have been built - densely built and very expensive residential real estate, even back then, north of NE 45th St. and south of 520.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on April 14, 2021, 08:09:03 PM
One of the interesting things about that map is 30th [Ave.] NE.  That's not a major street now, 25th Ave. and 35th Ave. NE are the major streets.  I wonder if the city was thinking about making 30th a major arterial back then.


I think the map (from The Seattle Times) mislabeled 35th Avenue as 30th. It lines up more with 35th based on where it intersects SR 513 and where the Thomson Expressway would have gone.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: NE2 on April 14, 2021, 08:10:59 PM
Cuck fars.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: sparker on April 14, 2021, 08:51:07 PM
Is the dashed line labeled with ‘Thomson’ on that above map a cancelled freeway too?

Yes, that's the Thomson Expressway which was never built.  Some stub ramps from its proposed interchange with WA 520 remained until the 520 bridge was rebuilt over the last few years.  I have trouble imagining how the Thomson Expressway could have been built - densely built and very expensive residential real estate, even back then, north of NE 45th St. and south of 520.


Yeah -- I can't imagine UW or the community based there being silent about a freeway bisecting its neighborhood -- that alone would probably have doomed any prospective area corridor.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on April 14, 2021, 09:26:10 PM
Is the dashed line labeled with ‘Thomson’ on that above map a cancelled freeway too?

Yes, that's the Thomson Expressway which was never built.  Some stub ramps from its proposed interchange with WA 520 remained until the 520 bridge was rebuilt over the last few years.  I have trouble imagining how the Thomson Expressway could have been built - densely built and very expensive residential real estate, even back then, north of NE 45th St. and south of 520.


Yeah -- I can't imagine UW or the community based there being silent about a freeway bisecting its neighborhood -- that alone would probably have doomed any prospective area corridor.

At the time, the flats along Union Bay were used as a landfill. A good chunk of the stronger opposition came from the Montlake area, who wanted to preserve the arboretum, and a coalition from the Central District who wanted to save their neighborhood.

I'm in the middle of researching the Thomson Expressway for a project on Wikipedia, but I'll have to check and see if UW supported the project.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bickendan on April 14, 2021, 10:28:53 PM
That curved crossing from Sand Point to Kirkland looks to have been needlessly costly. Were there bathymetry considerations for that proposal?
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on April 15, 2021, 02:27:23 AM
That curved crossing from Sand Point to Kirkland looks to have been needlessly costly. Were there bathymetry considerations for that proposal?

I'll have to check, but the WSDOT Library does have two documents with tons of proposals: Second Lake Washington Bridge Proposals from 1957 (https://cdm16977.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16977coll6/id/8473/rec/1) and a Legislative Reconnaissance from 1958 (https://cdm16977.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16977coll6/id/8660/rec/16).

The second document shows that it was supposed to be a floating tunnel ("Corridor E"), which would explain the curves. It also has this map that includes the first iteration of I-605, the Thomson Expressway, and the Bothell Freeway (replacing SR 522):

(https://i.imgur.com/wHqV9de.png)
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on April 15, 2021, 02:43:21 AM
Another fun one: a bridge to replace the Mukilteo-Clinton ferry, as studied in 1968 (https://cdm16977.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16977coll2/id/36732) (and found to be infeasible even with tolling).

The most "feasible" route would go over Hat Island to Everett in order to avoid a 620-foot depth and instead only need to deal with a 500-foot drop. All at a cost of $160 million in 1968 dollars.

(https://i.imgur.com/wHBPe0p.png)
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: sparker on April 15, 2021, 04:34:30 AM
Another fun one: a bridge to replace the Mukilteo-Clinton ferry, as studied in 1968 (https://cdm16977.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16977coll2/id/36732) (and found to be infeasible even with tolling).

The most "feasible" route would go over Hat Island to Everett in order to avoid a 620-foot depth and instead only need to deal with a 500-foot drop. All at a cost of $160 million in 1968 dollars.

(https://i.imgur.com/wHBPe0p.png)

Since the Hat Island alternative crossed two channels, it would be likely that the portion over the deep/navigable channel would likely have included a suspension span across the depths (likely as lengthy as the Golden Gate or Verrazano ones to clear the 500'+ deep channel); the other longer bridge to the east could have been done as a simple viaduct with one raised section to clear the deeper portion for navigability purposes.  Nevertheless, it's better that no bridge was built; Whidbey certainly doesn't need any more casual traffic -- and the idea of a bridge today wouldn't likely get out of the starting blocks -- although the shorter high-clearance bridge might have been done today with a cable-stay span, a type that didn't see favor until around 1980.   But since the east end of the bridge would have been in Everett, there's a chance that it may have been considered to be a US 2 extension that would utilize the Port Townsend ferry to get to a US 101 terminus. 
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: HighwayStar on April 15, 2021, 05:38:03 PM
Another fun one: a bridge to replace the Mukilteo-Clinton ferry, as studied in 1968 (https://cdm16977.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16977coll2/id/36732) (and found to be infeasible even with tolling).

The most "feasible" route would go over Hat Island to Everett in order to avoid a 620-foot depth and instead only need to deal with a 500-foot drop. All at a cost of $160 million in 1968 dollars.

(https://i.imgur.com/wHBPe0p.png)

Since the Hat Island alternative crossed two channels, it would be likely that the portion over the deep/navigable channel would likely have included a suspension span across the depths (likely as lengthy as the Golden Gate or Verrazano ones to clear the 500'+ deep channel); the other longer bridge to the east could have been done as a simple viaduct with one raised section to clear the deeper portion for navigability purposes.  Nevertheless, it's better that no bridge was built; Whidbey certainly doesn't need any more casual traffic -- and the idea of a bridge today wouldn't likely get out of the starting blocks -- although the shorter high-clearance bridge might have been done today with a cable-stay span, a type that didn't see favor until around 1980.   But since the east end of the bridge would have been in Everett, there's a chance that it may have been considered to be a US 2 extension that would utilize the Port Townsend ferry to get to a US 101 terminus.

I would hardly say it is "better" that no bridge was built, it would provide a vastly superior routing to what is currently available. Building it today would have course fall prey to the usual problems with NIMBYs, special interest groups, activists, etc.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: NE2 on April 15, 2021, 05:48:12 PM
I would hardly say it is "better" that no bridge was built, it would provide a vastly superior routing to what is currently available. Building it today would have course fall prey to the usual problems with NIMBYs, special interest groups, activists, etc.
Seems like being able to drive directly from Whidbey southeast to the mainland without a ferry is a special interest.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: HighwayStar on April 15, 2021, 05:54:25 PM
I would hardly say it is "better" that no bridge was built, it would provide a vastly superior routing to what is currently available. Building it today would have course fall prey to the usual problems with NIMBYs, special interest groups, activists, etc.
Seems like being able to drive directly from Whidbey southeast to the mainland without a ferry is a special interest.

Hardly, special interests are groups that seek to exercise undue influence over projects for the public good. Wanting adequate infrastructure to get around is very mainstream.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Alps on April 15, 2021, 06:01:41 PM
Another fun one: a bridge to replace the Mukilteo-Clinton ferry, as studied in 1968 (https://cdm16977.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16977coll2/id/36732) (and found to be infeasible even with tolling).

The most "feasible" route would go over Hat Island to Everett in order to avoid a 620-foot depth and instead only need to deal with a 500-foot drop. All at a cost of $160 million in 1968 dollars.
There are now bridges with main spans over 1 mile, as opposed to 50 years ago. More feasible.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: jakeroot on April 15, 2021, 06:09:50 PM
I would hardly say it is "better" that no bridge was built, it would provide a vastly superior routing to what is currently available. Building it today would have course fall prey to the usual problems with NIMBYs, special interest groups, activists, etc.
Seems like being able to drive directly from Whidbey southeast to the mainland without a ferry is a special interest.

Hardly, special interests are groups that seek to exercise undue influence over projects for the public good. Wanting adequate infrastructure to get around is very mainstream.

Are you implying that ferries are, by comparison, inadequate? Perhaps to move two identical versions of Seattle between each other, but not Whidbey/Vashon/Bainbridge to the mainland. Those municipalities specifically did not want bridges because high capacity roads would have adversely affected land use. Instead of the quaint, recreation/tourism-focused islands we have now, they could have easily become suburban landscapes like the Eastside or South Hill. And that would have been fine -- we wouldn't have known any better -- but the Seattle metro area does not need those islands for housing at this point.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: kkt on April 15, 2021, 07:13:58 PM
Right, influence should be exerted by the Chamber of Commerce types and the Mayor playing golf with the Department of Highways officials and making sure the new freeway doesn't plow through any of their neighborhoods.  That way the public interest is served. 
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: HighwayStar on April 15, 2021, 07:39:28 PM
Right, influence should be exerted by the Chamber of Commerce types and the Mayor playing golf with the Department of Highways officials and making sure the new freeway doesn't plow through any of their neighborhoods.  That way the public interest is served.

Did you read my comment? I hate ALL forms of NIMBYism including the golfing with the mayor kind. Let the military, the engineers, and the economists plan the highways and leave the politicians, activists, protesters, NIMBYs and the like out of the process.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: JasonOfORoads on April 15, 2021, 08:24:01 PM
To bring this back on the focus of specific never-built highways in the Northwest, here's an interesting map I came across while researching the history of the Sunset Highway. It's from from The Oregonian on January 25, 1931, and it shows various proposed alignments of the "short road to the sea" from Portland:

(https://i.imgur.com/yzMg7LK.jpg)

In order of preference, the engineers recommended:


I don't know the full story yet, but eventually the Ridge Route was moved northward and built along the present-day Sunset Highway between 1932 and 1948. Most of the Wilson River Route was built as OR-6 around that same time. This map I mocked up shows the proposed routings above next to what was actually built, with US-26/Sunset Highway in red and OR-6/Wilson River Highway in green:

(https://i.imgur.com/6v1I3D0.jpg)
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: TEG24601 on April 16, 2021, 05:45:14 PM
Another fun one: a bridge to replace the Mukilteo-Clinton ferry, as studied in 1968 (https://cdm16977.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16977coll2/id/36732) (and found to be infeasible even with tolling).

The most "feasible" route would go over Hat Island to Everett in order to avoid a 620-foot depth and instead only need to deal with a 500-foot drop. All at a cost of $160 million in 1968 dollars.

(https://i.imgur.com/wHBPe0p.png)

Since the Hat Island alternative crossed two channels, it would be likely that the portion over the deep/navigable channel would likely have included a suspension span across the depths (likely as lengthy as the Golden Gate or Verrazano ones to clear the 500'+ deep channel); the other longer bridge to the east could have been done as a simple viaduct with one raised section to clear the deeper portion for navigability purposes.  Nevertheless, it's better that no bridge was built; Whidbey certainly doesn't need any more casual traffic -- and the idea of a bridge today wouldn't likely get out of the starting blocks -- although the shorter high-clearance bridge might have been done today with a cable-stay span, a type that didn't see favor until around 1980.   But since the east end of the bridge would have been in Everett, there's a chance that it may have been considered to be a US 2 extension that would utilize the Port Townsend ferry to get to a US 101 terminus.

I would hardly say it is "better" that no bridge was built, it would provide a vastly superior routing to what is currently available. Building it today would have course fall prey to the usual problems with NIMBYs, special interest groups, activists, etc.


I totally understand why they wanted to build the bridges.  I could also get behind some of those ideas, back in the day.  However, today, with the Naval Base in Everett, there are few viable options, and the most logical one actually goes from Harbour Pointe to Possession Pt.


That being said, I like being isolated from the crap that goes on in Everett, I just wish I could convince my fellow Islanders, that we need to try to be more self sufficient, with adequate housing, employment, industry, and medical services.  And maybe a grocery store that is open until midnight, like they were 30 years ago.


Of course, on the north end, an alternate to Deception Pass is sorely needed.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: jakeroot on May 06, 2021, 08:31:13 PM
On the Valley Freeway (WA-167), there was originally planned to be an interchange with 32nd St in Sumner, but it was dropped in the 70s when funds ran short. There was an intersection here originally, before the freeway was finished in the late 80s. The Sumner interchange was later built slightly to the north, at 24th, and as a partial cloverleaf instead.

You can still see the outline of where the diamond interchange was to be built; the state still owns the land: https://goo.gl/maps/cKfPz24FDGYptRBA7

Here is the News Tribune article:

(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51163218819_e5c1ffa02f_o.jpg)
Original 32nd St Interchange Plans (https://flic.kr/p/2kX7Ssp) by Jake Root (https://www.flickr.com/photos/62537709@N03/), on Flickr
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: ErmineNotyours on May 12, 2021, 01:24:40 PM
I have an undated Kroll Atlas of South Seattle, though judging from the railroad infrastructure it must have come out shortly after the Burlington Northern merger of 1970.  Here they show the area of a 509 southern extension through Des Moines as if it were a done deal.  They are only now maybe making an extension that turns quickly to I-5 and runs on either side of that to Kent-Des Moines Road.  Parts of the right-of-way have turned into nature parks.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51175368834_5a2351866e_n.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kYc9eq)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51174576871_5807aee2c2_n.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kY85NT)(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51173901642_58d00056c2_n.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kY4C61)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51173900887_35e3f539c6_n.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kY4BRZ)(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51173901267_a0b302778a_n.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kY4BYx)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51174575426_e7e98d48fa_n.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kY85nY)
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: jakeroot on May 12, 2021, 02:15:00 PM
Great scans Arthur. Thanks for sharing.

It's interesting that, apart from this short on-ramp stub (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.4389498,-122.3228169,133m/data=!3m1!1e3) and visible ROW (definitely diamond-shaped, which I never noticed before!), there really is no evidence at Des Moines Memorial Drive that 509 was to ever go further south.

I am curious to know when they changed the design of that southern 509 interchange into a trumpet. Clearly it's superior to a diamond, which would have had two left turns rather than all-right turns as we have now. Still, most stubs usually take the design the original design, as they are meant to be finished eventually.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: compdude787 on May 12, 2021, 06:18:38 PM
Interestingly enough, if you look at the aerial view in Google maps, you can see there actually is ROW for the SR 509 freeway cleared all the way down to SR 516.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: ErmineNotyours on May 12, 2021, 11:38:28 PM
I looked at the map more closely and noticed my school, Earlington Elementary School, is on the map.  That opened in 1972, so that helps contain the date.  The date stamped onto the Des Moines Memorial Drive overcrossing is 1979 (https://goo.gl/maps/ojvJNnxMQ865Nk856), so they had a few years to think about it.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on May 13, 2021, 12:11:22 AM
That's a great find. I never realized that original SR 509 plan was to swing even further south...perhaps the connection with I-5 would have happened at the Midway Landfill then?
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: ErmineNotyours on May 14, 2021, 12:41:21 AM
It might have bypassed I-5 entirely and headed straight for the Port of Tacoma.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: ErmineNotyours on May 14, 2021, 01:01:05 AM
Hey, you were right, it was planned to swing through the landfill.  Then later at Federal Way it was to tap on to the end of SR 18.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51178498559_827c36a9c6_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kYtbAc)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51177706901_ef52590a8b_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kYp8fV)
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: jakeroot on May 14, 2021, 01:57:23 AM
Woah, more cool maps!

I'm not sure I've ever seen a map showing the 509-18 connection. I've always heard that 509 was meant to traverse then-rural King County to an interchange with 18 at I-5; seems development simply occurred too quickly for them to capitalise on the open land.

I see from this document (https://leg.wa.gov/CodeReviser/documents/sessionlaw/1987c199.pdf?cite=1987%20c%20199%20%C2%A7%206) that the beginning of 18 was officially amended from 509 to 99 in the late 80s, yet I recall some discussion of that freeway still being built even into the 90s. Nevertheless, I still cannot picture how it would have descended down to port level. That's a hell of a drop.

EDIT: the top scan also shows a one-way couplet through downtown Des Moines. I don't recall that ever happening either. But I'll be more than happy to be proven wrong.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: ErmineNotyours on May 31, 2021, 07:57:39 PM
I'm surprised these haven't been posted before:


(The second one counts because of the never-built northern extension of Harbor Drive.)
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: ErmineNotyours on June 01, 2021, 12:29:26 AM
And here's the book shown in the two videos:

Portland Improvement, by Robert Moses (https://www.portlandmercury.com/images/blogimages/2009/09/30/1254339381-portland_improvement_-_robert_moses_1943.pdf) (PDF)
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bickendan on June 01, 2021, 06:08:56 AM
I found both of those to be very well presented and as objective as possible in a topic that can get very very subjective.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Stephane Dumas on June 08, 2021, 09:55:56 AM
I don't know if we could include this one, since it's far northwest in Alaska, the Highway to Highway aka H2H project who was supposed to link the freeways portions of Glenn Hwy with Seward Hwy. Is it still dormant or being cancelled?  I also found the old project site on the Wayback Machine. https://web.archive.org/web/20090114130517/http://www.highway2highway.com/
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: dmuzika on June 18, 2021, 01:15:15 AM
Less grand than some of the cancelled freeway proposals, but I saw something that Washington considered rerouting US 395 to WA-25 north of Kettle Falls. If completed, it would have linked US 395 to Trail and Castlegar, as opposed ending at BC-3 2.5 miles north of the border.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on June 18, 2021, 02:32:02 AM
Less grand than some of the cancelled freeway proposals, but I saw something that Washington considered rerouting US 395 to WA-25 north of Kettle Falls. If completed, it would have linked US 395 to Trail and Castlegar, as opposed ending at BC-3 2.5 miles north of the border.

It went even further than that: a few other non-SR 25 corridors were proposed.

This newspaper clipping has a map of them: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/79780710/highway-395-plan-controversial/

(https://i.imgur.com/Wdeo2Ys.png)
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: sparker on June 18, 2021, 04:50:04 AM
Less grand than some of the cancelled freeway proposals, but I saw something that Washington considered rerouting US 395 to WA-25 north of Kettle Falls. If completed, it would have linked US 395 to Trail and Castlegar, as opposed ending at BC-3 2.5 miles north of the border.

It went even further than that: a few other non-SR 25 corridors were proposed.

This newspaper clipping has a map of them: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/79780710/highway-395-plan-controversial/

(https://i.imgur.com/Wdeo2Ys.png)

When was this reroute proposed; was it a WashDOT proposal or floated elsewhere; and what was the stated rationale behind the concept?  One would think that BC interests might have propagated the notion to put US 395's border crossing considerably closer to the resort/populated areas (i.e. Trail, Castlegar, and Nelson) in the Columbia watershed than the current crossing to the west. 
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: dmuzika on June 29, 2021, 03:49:31 PM
Does anyone have any insight as to why that alignment and border crossing was originally chosen?
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: KEK Inc. on June 30, 2021, 05:47:44 PM
Kelowna BC is growing rapidly. Could there be a Spokane-Kelowna-Kamloops freeway connection in the near future?
Chelan and Wenatchee are growing; however, I don’t see blewitt pass getting a freeway or expressway.

International travel in Osoyoos is still not justified.  Omak and okonagen are still tiny towns.  I could see an upgrade to US-97 alt between Wenatchee and chelan in the next few decades, and upgrades to WA-28 and a better link to I-90 in Grant county might happen.


iPhone
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: dmuzika on July 02, 2021, 04:24:21 PM
Kelowna BC is growing rapidly. Could there be a Spokane-Kelowna-Kamloops freeway connection in the near future?

Maybe the first step could be a more direct two lane highway between Kelowna and Castlegar, from there traffic could head south to Spokane. I don't think the demand would be there for a 4 lane highway between the two cities.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: sparker on July 02, 2021, 09:48:21 PM
Kelowna BC is growing rapidly. Could there be a Spokane-Kelowna-Kamloops freeway connection in the near future?

Maybe the first step could be a more direct two lane highway between Kelowna and Castlegar, from there traffic could head south to Spokane. I don't think the demand would be there for a 4 lane highway between the two cities.

Aside from some regional deliveries, including cross-border runs, US 395 north of Spokane isn't much of an interregional commercial corridor; the closest to that would be US 95 over in Idaho, which features more long-haul traffic, particularly from Seattle/Tacoma ports to Calgary and Edmonton.  There's a lot of LCL (less-than-carload) merchandise traffic that goes direct truck rather than a rail transfer, including a lot of higher-ticket electronics and other consumer merchandise (it tends to get to its destination sooner rather than dwell in a railyard); and 95/93 to either BC/AL 3 or even TC-1 over to Calgary (then up AL 2 to Edmonton as needed) is considerably shorter than schlepping through Montana.  There's a reason ID is gradually improving US 95 north of I-90, and it's cross-border commercial traffic.  Spokane isn't a major distribution hub at present; so there aren't too many large trucks heading NNW up US 395 to the smaller inland BC cities and towns.  A 4-lane facility probably isn't warranted there, and unlikely to be in the near term.  While Kelowna may be growing, it is likely to be adquately commercially served from the Vancouver distribution hub; traffic south to E. WA will be primarily recreational or incidental, which doesn't portend well for significant capacity increases.     
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on September 14, 2021, 01:03:45 AM
A new one I just unearthed while digging around newspaper archives in Lewiston: Will new bridge link highways, or streets? (https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=XMFeAAAAIBAJ&sjid=mjEMAAAAIBAJ&pg=5335%2C1886062) (Oct. 20, 1979)

The Washington Legislative Transportation Committee considered creating a "SR 130" for the road leading to the Southway Bridge between Clarkston and Lewiston. It describes a new road that would follow what is now Fleshman Way and then cut across to US 12.

Despite the number, it wouldn't be too far-fetched as a US 12 spur, as SR 131 was designated in 1991.

Bonus find: a relic of Idaho's attempted conversion to metric in 1977: Metrics: The conversion will be 'hard' indeed (https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=ipRfAAAAIBAJ&sjid=EjEMAAAAIBAJ&pg=4074%2C8054930) (May 22, 1977).

(https://i.imgur.com/OaqnNBW.png)
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Quillz on September 14, 2021, 03:37:40 AM
I-82 was originally planned to go to Seattle.  I always wondered about the backstory on that one.

Rick

The original plan was Ellensburg to Pendelton, but Washington wanted to add the rest of the US 410 corridor to Tacoma and ultimately Aberdeen in 1959 (see this news report (https://cdm16977.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16977coll1/id/3285)). A key part of the plan would have been a tunnel under Naches Pass, which obviously didn't pan out.

Similarly, Oregon threw out proposals to have I-80N (later I-84) extend up to Astoria.


When I was in middle school, the library had been donated an old, leather bound, road atlas from the 1960s. In it, the road over Snoqualmie Pass was designated I-82.  I also recall seeing images of plans to convert US-12, to I-82, all the way to Aberdeen.


It is too bad that Oregon doesn't have a safe way to get to the coast, as all the routes are massively undersized for the traffic that uses them.
I vacation to Oregon a lot, I don't live there, but US-20 seems pretty adequate to me. I just drove it a couple weeks ago and it's four lanes all the way to Philomath, and the speed limit is generally 55-60 or so. Compared to other crossings such as OR-126 or OR-34, it seems a lot better. But I'm barely seeing any real traffic patterns because I'm usually on there for a couple weeks at a time.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bickendan on September 14, 2021, 03:47:55 AM
I-82 was originally planned to go to Seattle.  I always wondered about the backstory on that one.

Rick

The original plan was Ellensburg to Pendelton, but Washington wanted to add the rest of the US 410 corridor to Tacoma and ultimately Aberdeen in 1959 (see this news report (https://cdm16977.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16977coll1/id/3285)). A key part of the plan would have been a tunnel under Naches Pass, which obviously didn't pan out.

Similarly, Oregon threw out proposals to have I-80N (later I-84) extend up to Astoria.


When I was in middle school, the library had been donated an old, leather bound, road atlas from the 1960s. In it, the road over Snoqualmie Pass was designated I-82.  I also recall seeing images of plans to convert US-12, to I-82, all the way to Aberdeen.


It is too bad that Oregon doesn't have a safe way to get to the coast, as all the routes are massively undersized for the traffic that uses them.
I vacation to Oregon a lot, I don't live there, but US-20 seems pretty adequate to me. I just drove it a couple weeks ago and it's four lanes all the way to Philomath, and the speed limit is generally 55-60 or so. Compared to other crossings such as OR-126 or OR-34, it seems a lot better. But I'm barely seeing any real traffic patterns because I'm usually on there for a couple weeks at a time.
I like OR 126... once you clear Veneta. That's not a difficult Coastal crossing, in terms of driving or traffic. US 20 is better now with the Crystal Creek Loop bypass, but it's also busier.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Alps on September 14, 2021, 07:41:05 PM
A new one I just unearthed while digging around newspaper archives in Lewiston: Will new bridge link highways, or streets? (https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=XMFeAAAAIBAJ&sjid=mjEMAAAAIBAJ&pg=5335%2C1886062) (Oct. 20, 1979)

The Washington Legislative Transportation Committee considered creating a "SR 130" for the road leading to the Southway Bridge between Clarkston and Lewiston. It describes a new road that would follow what is now Fleshman Way and then cut across to US 12.

Despite the number, it wouldn't be too far-fetched as a US 12 spur, as SR 131 was designated in 1991.

Bonus find: a relic of Idaho's attempted conversion to metric in 1977: Metrics: The conversion will be 'hard' indeed (https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=ipRfAAAAIBAJ&sjid=EjEMAAAAIBAJ&pg=4074%2C8054930) (May 22, 1977).

(https://i.imgur.com/OaqnNBW.png)
k/h? We don't talk about 40 m/h.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: US 89 on September 15, 2021, 12:38:14 AM
k/h? We don't talk about 40 m/h.

I'm sure some of the Vision Zero anti-car new urbanists would if you gave them a chance.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on October 06, 2021, 11:33:12 PM
A good map of the North Seattle/North Eastside plans of the late 1960s, found in a report on the Kenmore-Swamp Creek Freeway (https://cdm16977.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16977coll20/id/3237/rec/3) (which was also never built).

(https://i.imgur.com/dmaPQ7C.png)
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on October 17, 2021, 05:18:31 AM
And from Portland: the 1964 plan for I-205, which would have been closer to the city and cut through Lake Oswego (who strongly opposed it).

(https://i.imgur.com/wKONFnh.jpeg)

Source: The Oregonian, June 11, 1964
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Alps on October 17, 2021, 01:10:06 PM
And from Portland: the 1964 plan for I-205, which would have been closer to the city and cut through Lake Oswego (who strongly opposed it).

Looks like that tied directly into the end of OR 217?
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bruce on October 17, 2021, 03:36:23 PM
And from Portland: the 1964 plan for I-205, which would have been closer to the city and cut through Lake Oswego (who strongly opposed it).

Looks like that tied directly into the end of OR 217?

Not quite. The southern terminus would have been at where I-5 crosses under Bonita Road, just south of the OR 217 ramps.
Title: Re: Never-built highways of the Northwest
Post by: Bickendan on October 17, 2021, 08:03:07 PM
Ah, the Laurelhurst Freeway alignment.