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

Never-built highways of the Northwest

Started by Bruce, July 29, 2020, 12:16:38 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Bruce

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).



Source: The Seattle Times (June 15, 1952)
Wikipedia - TravelMapping (100% of WA SRs)

Photos


nexus73

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

Rick
US 101 is THE backbone of the Pacific coast from Bandon OR to Willits CA.  Industry, tourism and local traffic would be gone or severely crippled without it being in functioning condition in BOTH states.

Rothman

Quote from: 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
Or the routing?
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Bruce

Quote from: 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

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). 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.
Wikipedia - TravelMapping (100% of WA SRs)

Photos

Bruce

Wikipedia - TravelMapping (100% of WA SRs)

Photos

Bickendan

Quote from: Bruce on July 29, 2020, 09:17:13 PM
Quote from: 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

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). 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.

TEG24601

Quote from: Bruce on July 29, 2020, 09:17:13 PM
Quote from: 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

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). 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.
They said take a left at the fork in the road.  I didn't think they literally meant a fork, until plain as day, there was a fork sticking out of the road at a junction.

KEK Inc.

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.

Take the road less traveled.

TEG24601

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.
They said take a left at the fork in the road.  I didn't think they literally meant a fork, until plain as day, there was a fork sticking out of the road at a junction.

OCGuy81

Quote from: 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.

Was 501 intended to be connected?

Bickendan

Quote from: OCGuy81 on March 23, 2021, 12:34:25 PM
Quote from: 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.

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.

kkt

Quote from: TEG24601 on August 06, 2020, 01:16:07 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.


The Ghostbuster

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?

Bruce

Quote from: 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?

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.
Wikipedia - TravelMapping (100% of WA SRs)

Photos

hotdogPi

Kelowna BC is growing rapidly. Could there be a Spokane-Kelowna-Kamloops freeway connection in the near future?
Clinched

Traveled, plus
US 1A, 13, 44, 50, 302
MA 22, 35, 40, 107, 109, 126, 141, 159
ME 22, 25, 26, 77, 100
NH 27, 111A(E); CA 133; NY 366; GA 42, 140; FL A1A, 7; CT 32; VT 2A, 5A; PA 3, 51, 60, QC 162, 165, 263; 🇬🇧A100, A3211, A3213, A3215, A4222; 🇫🇷95 D316

Lowest untraveled: 36

SkyPesos

Quote from: 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
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.

TEG24601

Quote from: kkt on March 24, 2021, 02:19:28 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on August 06, 2020, 01:16:07 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.
They said take a left at the fork in the road.  I didn't think they literally meant a fork, until plain as day, there was a fork sticking out of the road at a junction.

Bruce

Quote from: 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?

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

Quote from: SkyPesos on March 26, 2021, 11:47:39 AM
Quote from: 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
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.

Wikipedia - TravelMapping (100% of WA SRs)

Photos

kkt

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.

Bruce

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.
Wikipedia - TravelMapping (100% of WA SRs)

Photos

SkyPesos

Quote from: 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.
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.

OCGuy81

Quote from: SkyPesos on March 26, 2021, 09:24:31 PM
Quote from: 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.
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.

TEG24601

Quote from: OCGuy81 on March 26, 2021, 09:36:03 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on March 26, 2021, 09:24:31 PM
Quote from: 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.
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.
They said take a left at the fork in the road.  I didn't think they literally meant a fork, until plain as day, there was a fork sticking out of the road at a junction.

OCGuy81

Quote from: TEG24601 on March 27, 2021, 05:26:15 PM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on March 26, 2021, 09:36:03 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on March 26, 2021, 09:24:31 PM
Quote from: 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.
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.

SkyPesos

Quote from: OCGuy81 on March 27, 2021, 11:35:40 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.



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.