News:

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

Main Menu

Your State's Most Controversial Interstate

Started by TheArkansasRoadgeek, April 09, 2018, 12:31:37 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

slorydn1

Quote from: hbelkins on April 10, 2018, 10:16:24 AM
Quote from: slorydn1 on April 10, 2018, 05:30:27 AM
I've spent pretty much my entire shift tonight trying to think of one for NC, and not counting the roadgeek opposition to I-87 I really can't think of one.

I'd nominate the I-26 expansion in Asheville and the amount of reconstruction that's going to be required at the US 19/US 23/I-240 interchange.

Yes, yes, yes. I don't know how I forgot about this, as much as I go up there every year. NCDOT has been wanting to fix this for over a decade and the locals fight it tooth and nail. They seem to like their congestion just the way it is, thank you very much.
Please Note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of any governmental agency, non-governmental agency, quasi-governmental agency or wanna be governmental agency

Counties: Counties Visited


txstateends

TX:

I'm not sure on just one.

* I-35, for its amount of traffic and reconstruction.
* I-45, for its opposition during construction.
* I-69, for the split into 3 southern ends, long time to be done, and no direct connection yet through some of its other planned states
* I-345, for its perceived barrier between downtown Dallas and its nearest eastern neighbors, and the resultant desire of some to have it torn down, despite its logical connection to any future northward extension of I-45.
\/ \/ click for a bigger image \/ \/

LM117

Quote from: slorydn1 on April 11, 2018, 03:55:22 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on April 10, 2018, 10:16:24 AM
Quote from: slorydn1 on April 10, 2018, 05:30:27 AM
I've spent pretty much my entire shift tonight trying to think of one for NC, and not counting the roadgeek opposition to I-87 I really can't think of one.

I'd nominate the I-26 expansion in Asheville and the amount of reconstruction that's going to be required at the US 19/US 23/I-240 interchange.

Yes, yes, yes. I don't know how I forgot about this, as much as I go up there every year. NCDOT has been wanting to fix this for over a decade and the locals fight it tooth and nail. They seem to like their congestion just the way it is, thank you very much.

...then they complain that NCDOT ignores them in favor of other areas of the state. Go figure.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

Henry

In IL, it would be I-355. I remember that there was a lot of opposition to its proposed routing through the wetlands, and the Sierra Club tried to alter the section that runs from Glen Ellyn to Lombard.

Closer to town, there were the I-494 Crosstown Expressway and the I-694 Stony Island Avenue/LSD upgrades, neither of which were built due to fierce opposition. Although I'm glad the latter was never built, I do wish the former had been, because it would've provided a western bypass of the Loop.
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

plain

For Virginia, I would agree with I-66 inside the beltway (definitely controversial) but I'm voting I-95 through Richmond (though it wasn't an interstate when first opened), specifically through Jackson Ward
Newark born, Richmond bred

TheArkansasRoadgeek

I thought I would add I-57 on here due to the recent politics and news surrounding it. It would be awesome to have a direct link to Chicago from NLR... All in due time, I suppose.
Well, that's just like your opinion man...

triplemultiplex

Among roadgeeks, that's gotta be I-41 for Wisconsin.

But among the 'normies' out there ( :-D ), I'd say the various improvements and attempted improvements to I-94 in Milwaukee probably make it the most controversial interstate.  To the point that the courts ordered WisDOT to pay money for transit to offset socioeconomic shortcomings of their Zoo Interchange study.
The Marquette Interchange project made for a lot of hand-wringing out there.
We have the Stadium Interchange project that was shelved. (Grrr...)
I lived there during the Mitchell Interchange reconstruction; that one was a little smoother.
The eight lane expansion to Illinois has seen its fair share of heat.  Now it's wrapped up in that whole Foxconn handout so there's a lot more opinions flying around than before.

Historically, in the ultimate F-U to mass transit, some of the East-West Freeway appropriated former rail transit right of way when it was constructed.  It also sliced through a cemetery in the one place where it deviated from said rail line.
Not quite a controversy, but it's noteworthy that construction of I-94's bridge over the St. Croix River was a bit of an engineering snafu back in the day.

Further afield, we've got cancelled expansion plans between Madison and The Dells.

I think that beats any current or former drama with I-43.  (I'm glad Wisconsin screwed up its initial attempt to build this interstate straight north from Port Washington along the WI 57 corridor.  So much more utility in having it swing by Sheboygan & Manitowoc.)
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

TheStranger

Quote from: cabiness42 on April 10, 2018, 09:36:49 AM
Quote from: Interstate 69 Fan on April 09, 2018, 01:09:09 PM
Indiana's infamous I-69 is sure up there.

It isn't designated as an interstate yet, but the Louisville East End Bridge would be up there also

And a corollary to that: the 8664 movement that wanted to remove the waterfront section of I-64 and route east-west traffic along the East End Bridge and via the north half of 265 overall.
Chris Sampang

Beltway

Quote from: plain on April 11, 2018, 10:34:50 AM
For Virginia, I would agree with I-66 inside the beltway (definitely controversial) but I'm voting I-95 through Richmond (though it wasn't an interstate when first opened), specifically through Jackson Ward

I didn't live in Virginia then, but the history I've seen about the Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike is that none of it was controversial.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

Rothman

For IL, the I-90/I-94 cave in Chicago wasn't controversial?
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Beltway

Quote from: Rothman on April 11, 2018, 08:05:56 PM
For IL, the I-90/I-94 cave in Chicago wasn't controversial?

You mean the I-494 Crosstown Expressway?

I favored it at the time, a much-needed middle belt that would have provided an alternate and relief to the I-90/I-94 overlap.  But after all the tens of thousands of residential relocations already with Chicago expressways, another 5 to 7,000 residential relocations would have been very difficult for the city to accommodate.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

ilpt4u

#61
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 11, 2018, 10:50:17 AM
I thought I would add I-57 on here due to the recent politics and news surrounding it. It would be awesome to have a direct link to Chicago from NLR... All in due time, I suppose.
Has there been any late breaking news regarding I-57?

To keep going on the thread, for Unconstructed Interstates in IL...

The IL 53/120 project (which would potentially be I-355 or I-594), and I'll throw FAP 420 on there, too

I-39 South of Bloomington/Normal to Salem

The Illiana

For a Constructed one in IL:

I-64's final Routing across Southern IL & IN was controversial...and work was done in both states on the "other"  Routing (mainly, the Freeway around Vincennes, IN, but there are sections of US 50 in IL where its clear upgrade work started, then stopped)

TheArkansasRoadgeek

Quote from: ilpt4u on April 11, 2018, 10:13:36 PM
Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 11, 2018, 10:50:17 AM
I thought I would add I-57 on here due to the recent politics and news surrounding it. It would be awesome to have a direct link to Chicago from NLR... All in due time, I suppose.
Has there been any late breaking news regarding I-57?
I just drafted an email to send tomorrow to ArDOT. We'll see!
Well, that's just like your opinion man...

Rothman

Quote from: Beltway on April 11, 2018, 09:15:07 PM
Quote from: Rothman on April 11, 2018, 08:05:56 PM
For IL, the I-90/I-94 cave in Chicago wasn't controversial?

You mean the I-494 Crosstown Expressway?

I favored it at the time, a much-needed middle belt that would have provided an alternate and relief to the I-90/I-94 overlap.  But after all the tens of thousands of residential relocations already with Chicago expressways, another 5 to 7,000 residential relocations would have been very difficult for the city to accommodate.
I was just thinking of the stretch of I-90/I-94 with all those ramps and the like.  I would have thought the building of the expressways closer to The Loop would have been more controversial at some point than I-355.

I am coming from having grown up in MA with the backlash over the Mass Pike Extension, so I just wonder if there was anything similar in Chicago's evolution.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Beltway

#64
Quote from: Rothman on April 11, 2018, 11:47:40 PM
Quote from: Beltway on April 11, 2018, 09:15:07 PM
You mean the I-494 Crosstown Expressway?
I favored it at the time, a much-needed middle belt that would have provided an alternate and relief to the I-90/I-94 overlap.  But after all the tens of thousands of residential relocations already with Chicago expressways, another 5 to 7,000 residential relocations would have been very difficult for the city to accommodate.
I was just thinking of the stretch of I-90/I-94 with all those ramps and the like.  I would have thought the building of the expressways closer to The Loop would have been more controversial at some point than I-355.
I am coming from having grown up in MA with the backlash over the Mass Pike Extension, so I just wonder if there was anything similar in Chicago's evolution.

I have read about the considerable controversy over the Mass Pike Extension from Route 128 into the downtown.

The Daley Machine (Richard J. Daley, mayor 1955-1976) made sure that the city expressways were built with a minumum of controversy.  The only big controversy was over the one that wasn't built, I-494 Crosstown.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

Bruce

Quote from: slorydn1 on April 10, 2018, 05:30:27 AM
I've spent pretty much my entire shift tonight trying to think of one for NC, and not counting the roadgeek opposition to I-87 I really can't think of one.

Pretty sure half the interstates in Charlotte qualify, in some form or another. Construction of interstates in urban areas require taking land...and it often tore through neighborhoods inhabited primarily by non-white people.

For example: I-277 passes through the historic Second Ward, once the majority-black neighborhood of Brooklyn, and left to rot under the guise of urban renewal. Hundreds of residents were displaced to less than ideal conditions on the city's west side.

TheArkansasRoadgeek

Quote from: Bruce on April 12, 2018, 03:28:12 AM
Quote from: slorydn1 on April 10, 2018, 05:30:27 AM
I've spent pretty much my entire shift tonight trying to think of one for NC, and not counting the roadgeek opposition to I-87 I really can't think of one.

Pretty sure half the interstates in Charlotte qualify, in some form or another. Construction of interstates in urban areas require taking land...and it often tore through neighborhoods inhabited primarily by non-white people.

For example: I-277 passes through the historic Second Ward, once the majority-black neighborhood of Brooklyn, and left to rot under the guise of urban renewal. Hundreds of residents were displaced to less than ideal conditions on the city's west side.
It truly is terrible when a state has to displace residents of a city just to build an Interstate. Anyone know if a state would provide some sort of accommodations?
Well, that's just like your opinion man...

bing101

Quote from: sparker on April 09, 2018, 01:52:03 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on April 09, 2018, 01:30:38 PM
California:

I-710 in South Pasadena
the former I-480 in San Francisco, now demolished
the proposed I-80 extension (Western Freeway) of the 1960s, which would have continued west (along the Panhandle park) from the 1991-2005 terminus of the Central Freeway to the unbuilt original I-280 alignment paralleling 19th Avenue in Golden Gate Park. IIRC this was the primary focus of the San Francisco freeway revolts, more than any other corridor
I-105
the unbuilt I-80 realignment along the railroad tracks in North Sacramento/Arden, parallel to today's Business 80/Route 51

And............to roadgeeks only............I-238!

And the longest running controversy is the Southern Crossing from I-238 to I-380 because it was supposed to alleviate traffic from the Bay Bridge and redirect Traffic From San Leandro to South San Francisco/San Bruno area

RobbieL2415

Any un-built Interstate.

I's 82/84, 284, 484, and 491

jp the roadgeek

Quote from: RobbieL2415 on April 12, 2018, 01:03:32 PM
Any un-built Interstate.

I's 82/84, 284, 484, and 491

Add I-291 to the list.  Took 40 years to get the part completed that was actually built, and then you have the environmentalists who killed the northwest portion and the NIMBY's who killed the Rocky-Hill New Britain portion. 
Interstates I've clinched: 97, 290 (MA), 291 (CT), 291 (MA), 293, 295 (DE-NJ-PA), 295 (RI-MA), 384, 391, 395 (CT-MA), 395 (MD), 495 (DE), 610 (LA), 684, 691, 695 (MD), 695 (NY), 795 (MD)

gonealookin

Nevada doesn't have too many candidates, but some Las Vegas politicians didn't care at all for the allegedly "unneccessary and overbuilt" I-580 link between South Reno and Washoe Valley.  They thought the money should be spent, where else, in Las Vegas.

https://lasvegassun.com/news/2012/aug/08/nevadas-most-expensive-highway-helps-politicians-s/

QuoteIt will carry an estimated 25,000 vehicles a day – less than a tenth the number of vehicles who survive the Spaghetti Bowl in Las Vegas each day.

And the cost? More than a half-billion-with-a-b dollars.

...

But to critics, the project was a boondoggle – our own "bridge to nowhere,"  as Clark County Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani called it when she was in the Assembly.

...

Some Southern Nevadans say the highway was built so Northern Nevadans could strut.

"I think it's widely acknowledged as primarily a flex pose in the mirror, designed to celebrate the political might of a couple of Washoe County legislators,"  said Las Vegas City Councilman Bob Beers, who was also a legislator as this project was approved. (The late state Sen. Bill Raggio, R-Reno, and late Gov. Kenny Guinn were both honored at the groundbreaking.)

The bypassed stretch of US 395 through Pleasant Valley was awful.  I'm not a build freeways everywhere type but thank goodness this freeway was built.  Giunchigliani is a candidate for governor in the Democratic primary this year, and I haven't forgotten the comments.

hbelkins

Quote from: TheArkansasRoadgeek on April 12, 2018, 11:45:36 AM
Quote from: Bruce on April 12, 2018, 03:28:12 AM
Quote from: slorydn1 on April 10, 2018, 05:30:27 AM
I've spent pretty much my entire shift tonight trying to think of one for NC, and not counting the roadgeek opposition to I-87 I really can't think of one.

Pretty sure half the interstates in Charlotte qualify, in some form or another. Construction of interstates in urban areas require taking land...and it often tore through neighborhoods inhabited primarily by non-white people.

For example: I-277 passes through the historic Second Ward, once the majority-black neighborhood of Brooklyn, and left to rot under the guise of urban renewal. Hundreds of residents were displaced to less than ideal conditions on the city's west side.
It truly is terrible when a state has to displace residents of a city just to build an Interstate. Anyone know if a state would provide some sort of accommodations?

Yes. States buy property that is taken under eminent domain, then they also pay relocation expenses. They also assist with relocation options for renters.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

froggie

Quote from: hbelkinsYes. States buy property that is taken under eminent domain, then they also pay relocation expenses. They also assist with relocation options for renters.

Mainly because it was forced upon them by the courts.  There was a time, back when much of the Interstate system was being built, where states did not do this.

Beltway

Quote from: froggie on April 14, 2018, 06:45:06 PM
Quote from: hbelkinsYes. States buy property that is taken under eminent domain, then they also pay relocation expenses. They also assist with relocation options for renters.
Mainly because it was forced upon them by the courts.  There was a time, back when much of the Interstate system was being built, where states did not do this.

Not my understanding.  Paying relocation expenses and assisting with relocation options long predated the Interstate system.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

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

mrcmc888

Delaware only has three, so it's likely not as controversial as some others listed, but I-295 was subject to NIMBY and problems agreeing on the route between DE, NJ, and PA.



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