Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kkt]

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.

[Bruce]

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.

[SkyPesos]

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.

[jakeroot]

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.

[kkt]

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.

[SkyPesos]

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.

[The Ghostbuster]

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.

[ErmineNotyours]

Proposed Oregon & Washington inland freeway: Interstate 11!

[kkt]

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.

[SkyPesos]

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.

[Bruce]

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.

[SkyPesos]

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?

[Bruce]

The current plan 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.

[kkt]

But none of them have ever been serious enough to start putting together a right of way.

[jakeroot]

This belongs in Fictional Highways anyway. We should keep discussing real-but-cancelled proposals here.

Indeed it does.

I've created a thread for anyone interested in further discussion of an Interstate to Aberdeen.

[Alps]

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.

[sparker]

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.   

[kkt]

Seconded, Sparker.  Althought if I'm actually going in the water, it should be south of Monterey to be warm enough.

[Bruce]

Swimming beaches are more common around lakes around these parts, especially in urban areas.

[kkt]

Yep.  And rivers.

[Bruce]

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:



(Source on Reddit)

[Bickendan]

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.

[The Ghostbuster]

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.

[stevashe]

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.

[sparker]

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!).