Are there any U.S. cities that successfully managed to avoid massive freeway revolts and lawsuits, resulting in the completion of their entire freeway network as was planned in the '50s in one form or another?
I believe the entire state of North Dakota is complete, and was so (with some two-lane interstates as planned) by the mid-60s.
There are none if you go by FritzOwl's standards. :sombrero:
Possibly some of the smaller cities that didn't have much (any) planned outside of whatever Interstate mileage they received.
But it wasn't just "massive freeway revolts and lawsuits" that killed urban freeways. Many freeway proposals died simply due to a lack of funding. Then there were others (such as Olson Hwy or MN 65 North in Minneapolis) that were cancelled because it was later determined that they were not needed.
I would imagine that Wyoming is complete. As it really has no need for a massive road network and its largest city Cheyenne is fine with two interstates (yes I do not consider I-180 an interstate as its not a freeway).
Then South Dakota I do not think had any other plans for freeways other than its two primaries and the two three digit city routes.
Pensacola probably. I imagine there are many other smaller sized cities that are deemed complete.
Houston, perhaps? Not sure what their 1950s plan(s) entailed, but the hub and spoke system with two, soon three, outer loops seems pretty complete.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on August 15, 2014, 10:43:47 AM
Houston, perhaps? Not sure what their 1950s plan(s) entailed, but the hub and spoke system with two, soon three, outer loops seems pretty complete.
a related question would be: how many cities have a wholly adequate freeway network? Houston might; I don't know its traffic patterns, but I do know that the expansion of the Katy Freeway to levels well beyond what the 1950s planners imagined (9 lanes each way, IIRC) really eased the congestion in that part of the city.
Quote from: froggie on August 15, 2014, 10:07:08 AM
But it wasn't just "massive freeway revolts and lawsuits" that killed urban freeways. Many freeway proposals died simply due to a lack of funding. Then there were others (such as Olson Hwy or MN 65 North in Minneapolis) that were cancelled because it was later determined that they were not needed.
I know; I imagine folks know what I mean through context. Any reason for canceling at a later date... I don't see why you felt the need to write that.
People read context differently. The way I read your post, it looked like you were attributing all of the later freeway cancellations to protests/lawsuits.
I was going to suggest Honolulu, but then I discovered there was a proposed Interstate H-4 once upon a time.
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 15, 2014, 11:17:50 AM
I was going to suggest Honolulu, but then I discovered there was a proposed Interstate H-4 once upon a time.
wasn't H-4 supposed to be built over the water? and, if so, was that a serious proposal, or just some bizarre "the future is now!" slideshow presentation by some technology-worshipping madman?
Quotewasn't H-4 supposed to be built over the water? and, if so, was that a serious proposal, or just some bizarre "the future is now!" slideshow presentation by some technology-worshipping madman?
Please tell me it was planned to go over the water to another island that's nothing more than the volcano/base of some evil Bond type villain!
Sorry for getting off topic, but that's exactly what came to mind when you said madman! :bigass:
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 15, 2014, 11:29:18 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 15, 2014, 11:17:50 AM
I was going to suggest Honolulu, but then I discovered there was a proposed Interstate H-4 once upon a time.
wasn't H-4 supposed to be built over the water? and, if so, was that a serious proposal, or just some bizarre "the future is now!" slideshow presentation by some technology-worshipping madman?
Oscar's website says this, which at least sounds like a serious proposal:
QuoteShort-lived proposal, prepared by Hawaii DOT in October 1968, to build elevated Interstate freeway along the waterfront south of downtown Honolulu, from Keehi Interchange JN Interstate H-1 Queen Liliuokalani Freeway (H-1 exit 18) to Kapiolani Interchange JN Interstate H-1 Lunalilo Freeway (H-1 exits 25A-B); route would have roughly followed Former state route 90 Dillingham Boulevard, and State route 92 Nimitz Highway and Ala Moana Boulevard, east to Ala Moana Shopping Center, then curved northeast along the Ala Wai Canal to rejoin Interstate H-1; Hawaii DOT considered and rejected putting part of route in submerged tunnel offshore; appears to have been prepared in response to Federal legislation authorizing additional mileage for Interstate system, which gave Hawaii DOT a chance to snag some of the new Interstate miles and the additional Federal funds that would come with them; proposal appears to have died quickly, with no mention in Hawaii DOT annual reports after fiscal year 1969; unclear whether it was killed off by public opposition, or rather (more likely) lost out to various mainland projects in the competition for the new authorized Interstate system mileage
(Source: http://www.hawaiihighways.com/oahu.htm )
If Oscar sees this, maybe he can comment on whether it was really viable or just something they wrote up as a strawman-type thing.
Actually, I can only think of Flint, MI, because I have never seen any proposals for additional freeways, even with the wide spot on I-75 near Flushing Rd.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on August 15, 2014, 11:32:00 AM
Sorry for getting off topic, but that's exactly what came to mind when you said madman! :bigass:
I was thinking more someone in the Dr. Strangelove vein - not necessarily evil, but someone completely detached from humanity and unable to see the proverbial big picture.
see also: Edward Teller, who was said to be the inspiration for the character.
Houston is close, except for the canceled Harrisburg Freeway (225 extension west) that was probably the only instance of a freeway revolt in that city.
Are there any major projects that were left unconstructed in Dallas or San Antonio?
Kansas City almost qualifies but for the non-freeway portions of Watkins Drive/US 71.
For California...both San Diego and San Jose have cancelled freeway projects (252, 171, 157, and the 905 extension west of 5 for SD, 87 north of 101 for SJ) but proportionally have 90% of their proposed networks completed. Fresno might eventually have its network complete to 100% yet it covers only 4 numbered routes total (99, 180, 41, 168).
Las Vegas doesn't seem to have any notable route cancellations yet.
Does Salt Lake City have anything proposed that remains unconstructed?
Quote from: TheStranger on August 15, 2014, 11:51:58 AM
Las Vegas doesn't seem to have any notable route cancellations yet.
Does Salt Lake City have anything proposed that remains unconstructed?
Vegas and Salt Lake City cannot seem to get ahead on widening I-15 before demand is reached. through both cities, 15 is a perpetual construction zone.
I'm pretty sure all of the freeways that were planned in the Cedar Rapids-Iowa City area were built. I think the same is true for Des Moines.
Quote from: TheStranger on August 15, 2014, 11:51:58 AM
Does Salt Lake City have anything proposed that remains unconstructed?
Was SR-201 ever supposed to be upgraded west to the Salt Lake and signed as part of I-80? I know I remember seeing a proposal like that here in the forum, but I'm not sure if it was the original plan or just someone's idea.
Quote from: froggie on August 15, 2014, 11:11:44 AM
People read context differently. The way I read your post, it looked like you were attributing all of the later freeway cancellations to protests/lawsuits.
I guess I was by mistake. I really only meant for it to be an example... ah well
QuoteI'm pretty sure all of the freeways that were planned in the Cedar Rapids-Iowa City area were built.
IA 100.
Regarding I-H4, yes that was a serious proposal from 1968. There was a study report submitted, which I have seen at the state archives (when I was on a short Pearl Harbor Navy trip) and also a PDF I have.
Quote from: TheStranger on August 15, 2014, 11:51:58 AM
For California...both San Diego and San Jose have cancelled freeway projects (252, 171, 157, and the 905 extension west of 5 for SD, 87 north of 101 for SJ) but proportionally have 90% of their proposed networks completed.
However, the Santa Clara County Expressways were all (or mostly) intended to become freeways in a second phase that was lost to funding issues, so it could be argued that San Jose's freeway network is a lot less completed than planned.
I would think all of the freeways ever formally planned for Baton Rouge are complete (considering also that the proposed loop 410 evolved into the spur 110). Of course the freeway system was designed for a much smaller city so that isn't saying much.
Seattle never finished their network, which would have ruined it more than I-5 and the Alaskan Way Viaduct did:
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3401/3407349940_febb73b207_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/6c6yqL)
Arterial thoroughfare plan, 1957 (https://flic.kr/p/6c6yqL) by Seattle Municipal Archives (https://www.flickr.com/people/24256351@N04/), on Flickr
Quote from: roadman65 on August 15, 2014, 10:13:26 AM
Then South Dakota I do not think had any other plans for freeways other than its two primaries and the two three digit city routes.
I think an x90 spur to Pierre was once planned, which resulted in four-laning U.S. 83. I don't know how far the freeway proposal got to reality though.
There might have been a fanciful drawing or two out there early on, but I believe once the serious planning started, Columbus finished its plans. Took 30-some years, but it got finished.
Quote from: Urban Prairie Schooner on August 15, 2014, 09:00:22 PM
I would think all of the freeways ever formally planned for Baton Rouge are complete (considering also that the proposed loop 410 evolved into the spur 110). Of course the freeway system was designed for a much smaller city so that isn't saying much.
The original plan for I-410 was never completed per this 1961 map:
(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/baton_rouge_1961.jpg)
From what I can tell, Columbus, OH is either completed or darn close to it with the exception of I-73 (which would have just used I-270)
Quote from: TEG24601 on August 15, 2014, 11:34:54 AM
Actually, I can only think of Flint, MI, because I have never seen any proposals for additional freeways, even with the wide spot on I-75 near Flushing Rd.
I believe every city in Michigan except Detroit completed their freeways. Some places took a little longer than others and they were not completed exactly as first proposed (Lansing, I'm looking at you) but the overall functionality was completed.
Phoenix has all-but completed their system. The loop 303 will open within the next month or so and, with the exception of the South Mountain Freeway (basically Phoenix's version of the 710/South Pasadena clusterfuck), will be complete (from the original 1985 Master plan). Only outright cancelled freeway was the Paradise Parkway, which would have been a mid-town east/west freeway. Looking at the grid now, it honestly would have been great as there is IMO a big gap there, with very congested surface streets as your only east/west options there.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F1%2F19%2FPhoenix_Area_Freeways_map.svg%2F1262px-Phoenix_Area_Freeways_map.svg.png&hash=e8adb768b710d2bd7a76a58e1edc1a88caa698a8)
QuotePhoenix has all-but completed their system. The loop 303 will open within the next month or so and, with the exception of the South Mountain Freeway (basically Phoenix's version of the 710/South Pasadena clusterfuck), will be complete (from the original 1985 Master plan). Only outright cancelled freeway was the Paradise Parkway, which would have been a mid-town east/west freeway. Looking at the grid now, it honestly would have been great as there is IMO a big gap there, with very congested surface streets as your only east/west options there.
Wasn't there a plan for an I-410 at one point? I recall seeing a picture on here of a 70s era state highway map that had I-410 in Phoenix, though I can't recall how it was laid out and where.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on August 18, 2014, 12:25:02 PM
QuotePhoenix has all-but completed their system. The loop 303 will open within the next month or so and, with the exception of the South Mountain Freeway (basically Phoenix's version of the 710/South Pasadena clusterfuck), will be complete (from the original 1985 Master plan). Only outright cancelled freeway was the Paradise Parkway, which would have been a mid-town east/west freeway. Looking at the grid now, it honestly would have been great as there is IMO a big gap there, with very congested surface streets as your only east/west options there.
Wasn't there a plan for an I-410 at one point? I recall seeing a picture on here of a 70s era state highway map that had I-410 in Phoenix, though I can't recall how it was laid out and where.
Along what is now I-10 north of I-17:
(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southwest/i0410_phoenix_az_map.jpg) (//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southwest/i0410_phoenix_az_map.jpg)
there was even field signage for 410, briefly.
(//www.aaroads.com/shields/img/AZ/AZ19650101i1.jpg)
wish we had a better photo; that's all we've got ...
Wow, I didn't realize they had the signs out for it and everything. Approximately when was that on the map/signed? 70s?
I believe it was either late 60's or early 70's.
The numbers in Phoenix got kind of messed up when they changed the original plan for 10/17. Originally the east/west part of 17 was supposed to be 10, with 10 continuing west at the Durango Curve, and 17 beginning there. When 10 got rerouted through downtown and what is now the Deck Park tunnel, 17 got that extra little E/W segment on a N/S interstate.
Also, what is now the 51 was originally designated 510, and the 202 was originally 210. Not sure if either ever actually got signed, or if those were scrapped before the 1985 plan was passed by the voters.
IIRC the film still is from 1971.
Charlotte, NC (with the completion of I-485 and possibly the Independence Expressway)...and hopefully, all the other major cities in the state will follow suit.
Quote from: pianocello on August 15, 2014, 12:07:22 PM
I'm pretty sure all of the freeways that were planned in the Cedar Rapids-Iowa City area were built. I think the same is true for Des Moines.
Besides IA 100, there had been studies for a freeway for US 151 that would have passed around the south side of Downtown Cedar Rapids.
Des Moines had a north-south route cancelled between I-235 and I-35/80 , as well as an L-shaped route that was built as Martin Luther King Jr. Parkway.
As for Phoenix, this map from a document entitled "City of Phoenix Then And Now Transportation" may help:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1375.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag457%2Frevive755%2FCityofPhoenixThenAndNowTransportation_Deletions_zps1bb0b7d6.jpg&hash=123bc6a9084247ed97f6049ea22942c425bfdfc9)
And it appears Salt Lake City had a cancellation of a route that would have run eastward from the northern I-15/I-80 interchange and eventually southward to end at what was then I-415. From Volume II of Salt Lake Area Transportation Study (April 1965)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1375.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag457%2Frevive755%2FSaltLakeCityTransportationPlan_zps93715eca.jpg&hash=2cb253f009c9ad03972e75d4a3bbc79e6e8c9606)
(//)
Wilmington, DE, unless you count DE 141. Scranton looks pretty complete too.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 03, 2014, 10:46:44 PM
Wilmington, DE, unless you count DE 141. Scranton looks pretty complete too.
There is no doubt in mind Scranton is complete :-D
Quote from: Molandfreak on August 16, 2014, 01:58:34 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on August 15, 2014, 10:13:26 AM
Then South Dakota I do not think had any other plans for freeways other than its two primaries and the two three digit city routes.
I think an x90 spur to Pierre was once planned, which resulted in four-laning U.S. 83. I don't know how far the freeway proposal got to reality though.
Was/is I-229 planned to eventually circle back to I-29 north of I-90?
Mike
Quote from: Urban Prairie Schooner on August 15, 2014, 09:00:22 PM
I would think all of the freeways ever formally planned for Baton Rouge are complete (considering also that the proposed loop 410 evolved into the spur 110). Of course the freeway system was designed for a much smaller city so that isn't saying much.
Well..there is that pesky Baton Rouge Loop proposal, as well as the BUMP proposal that would incorporate that segment of Airline Highway (US 190/US 61) that would have been covered by that original I-410 proposal.
You'll probably find a lot of mid-sized cities that were too small during the Moses days to get ridiculous plans.
Going down the list of largest metro areas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_of_the_United_States) and listing those that aren't an obvious no or mentioned earlier in this thread:
Dallas (http://www.texasfreeway.com/Dallas/historic/freeway_planning_maps/freeway_planning_maps.shtml)
Denver (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7502)
Orlando (http://www.cfxway.com/Portals/0/docs/History%20Book/book_chap10.pdf)
Charlotte? there were probably more planned
Columbus? this may be the largest, but there was probably at least a plan to connect US 33 directly to I-70 in the southeast
Las Vegas? not completed yet, but have any serious proposals been canceled?
San Antonio (http://www.texashighwayman.com/hist_maps.shtml)
Raleigh (http://raleighpublicrecord.org/featured/2012/09/27/oakwood-defeated-highway-40-years-ago/)
Nashville? presumably more of SR 155 was to be freeway (and of course SR 840, but that's far outside the city)
Norfolk (http://www.virginiadot.org/projects/hamptonroads/hampton_roads_third_crossing.asp)
Greensboro? again it's not all finished yet, but was anything canceled?
Jacksonville: eastern and western extensions of the 20th Street Expressway across the St. Johns and to I-295
Louisville (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=284.msg2010982#msg2010982)
Grand Rapids?
Greenville? presumably at least I-185 and I-385 were planned to connect
Oklahoma City?
Now it's getting to smaller cities that may have never had plans other than the Interstates.
QuoteNorfolk
http://www.vahighways.com/hr-notes/1985plan-summary.htm
In short, there were several freeways planned for the Hampton Roads area that were never built. I'll cover them on the never got built (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=284.msg2011250#msg2011250) thread.
Quote from: mgk920 on October 04, 2014, 11:41:14 AM
Was/is I-229 planned to eventually circle back to I-29 north of I-90?
Looks like it may have been a possibility (judging by the design of the interchange) but I don't think anything was planned. It wouldn't get a ton of traffic and there's very little greater Sioux Falls development north of I-90, so I think it would just be a massive money waster.
Quote from: NE2 on October 04, 2014, 10:02:51 PM
Las Vegas? not completed yet, but have any serious proposals been canceled?
I believe there was an east-west facility considered south of I-515 but inside the I-215 loop in one of the Las Vegas Transportation plans (which I don't seem to have a scan of).
Since it was mentioned upthread, here is page from the 1978 Kansas City Transportation Plan that shows the evolution of the freeway/expressway system in the KC area:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1375.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fag457%2Frevive755%2FKCHighwayPlanevolution_zpsf9c9ab8b.jpg&hash=098425d18c5c7460b2b60cfe626758b898c397ea)
Quote from: NE2 on October 04, 2014, 10:02:51 PM
Columbus? this may be the largest, but there was probably at least a plan to connect US 33 directly to I-70 in the southeast
If there was, I've never seen it. All the old plans I know of have no mention of 33 at all, other than the fact there's an exit there. Part of me wonders if that was due to the weird intersection of bend-in-the-freeway, creek, and rich neighborhood to the north.
Found this (http://www.roadfan.com/1965map.jpg), which shows US 23 as a freeway outside I-270 and US 33 implicitly connecting to I-70.
Quote from: NE2 on October 04, 2014, 10:02:51 PM
Going down the list of largest metro areas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_of_the_United_States) and listing those that aren't an obvious no or mentioned earlier in this thread:
...
Las Vegas? not completed yet, but have any serious proposals been canceled?
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 05, 2014, 08:39:14 PM
I believe there was an east-west facility considered south of I-515 but inside the I-215 loop in one of the Las Vegas Transportation plans (which I don't seem to have a scan of).
I am not aware of this, and hadn't heard any mention of this until now.
If there was such a concept, I don't even know where it would have gone. My only thought is that I seem to recall an idea around the mid-late 1990s to extend the freeway-like section of Desert Inn Road (aka the Desert Inn Superarterial) beyond its east end at Paradise Road and the west end at Valley View Blvd. I don't know if that was a serious proposal, but all I can remember coming from that was a brief extension east from Paradise (sinking below the Convention Center parking/walkways) and a widening & resurfacing of a few miles of Desert Inn west of Valley View.
The only other concept that got some consideration, but never made it into a serious planning phase, was building an eastern leg of the 215 beltway to make the route a nearly full loop beltway. The price tag for right of way was going to be way too high (since it would be going through established parts of town, whereas most of the rest of the beltway was routed through still-developing areas), so that idea has been shelved for at least a decade. (It is worth noting that an eastern beltway corridor would have made a much better alternative for a potential I-11 routing than the current potential alignment alternative east of Las Vegas through Lake Mead NRA.)
One other concept that has been discussed is building an outer belt along the northern part of the valley. This was proposed when the north end of the valley was booming. This idea has lost traction (but isn't necessarily dead) due to the recession and housing market slowing down.
Instead of these ideas, I think NDOT is trying to concentrate on upgrading I-15 (Project Neon, in particular). They've removed virtually all mention of widening I-515 from their website (including widening/reconstructing the downtown viaduct)...if I-11 gets routed straight through the middle of town, NDOT will need to dust off this project.
Quote from: NE2 on October 07, 2014, 05:04:53 AM
Found this (http://www.roadfan.com/1965map.jpg), which shows US 23 as a freeway outside I-270 and US 33 implicitly connecting to I-70.
I bet the apartments to the SE of the current interchange hadn't been built yet. There probably wasn't any development at all there at the time. So they probably assumed that nothing was going to get in the way of it except maybe on the NE corner.
Quote from: GCrites80s on October 08, 2014, 08:47:47 PM
Quote from: NE2 on October 07, 2014, 05:04:53 AM
Found this (http://www.roadfan.com/1965map.jpg), which shows US 23 as a freeway outside I-270 and US 33 implicitly connecting to I-70.
I bet the apartments to the SE of the current interchange hadn't been built yet. There probably wasn't any development at all there at the time. So they probably assumed that nothing was going to get in the way of it except maybe on the NE corner.
Even though the interchange isn't freeway standard, it's nearly complete and, for the 4 freeway/expressway movements,
expressway standard. Remember: US 33 isn't freeway grade until the Lancaster bypass (unless you include the short section between SRs 104 and 317). A few at-grades remain, but an
expressway does exist south of I-70. Given the geometry and development in the area, they really can't do much more without cutting off a subdivision or tearing a bunch of stuff down. If they really wanted to, they could make all movements to and from the south freeway-grade without tearing stuff down, but it's pretty pointless to build large flyovers to make movements that the current setup handles fine. If anything, they need to improve access between James and Refugee Rds before they worry about grade separating more stuff. One bridge would do it.
That gore is massive too. It always made me wonder of there were supposed to be more roads in it.
Oklahoma City has never had any of its originally planned freeways canceled.
Quote from: cl94 on October 09, 2014, 12:09:37 AM
Quote from: GCrites80s on October 08, 2014, 08:47:47 PM
Quote from: NE2 on October 07, 2014, 05:04:53 AM
Found this (http://www.roadfan.com/1965map.jpg), which shows US 23 as a freeway outside I-270 and US 33 implicitly connecting to I-70.
I bet the apartments to the SE of the current interchange hadn't been built yet. There probably wasn't any development at all there at the time. So they probably assumed that nothing was going to get in the way of it except maybe on the NE corner.
Even though the interchange isn't freeway standard, it's nearly complete and, for the 4 freeway/expressway movements, expressway standard. Remember: US 33 isn't freeway grade until the Lancaster bypass (unless you include the short section between SRs 104 and 317). A few at-grades remain, but an expressway does exist south of I-70. Given the geometry and development in the area, they really can't do much more without cutting off a subdivision or tearing a bunch of stuff down. If they really wanted to, they could make all movements to and from the south freeway-grade without tearing stuff down, but it's pretty pointless to build large flyovers to make movements that the current setup handles fine. If anything, they need to improve access between James and Refugee Rds before they worry about grade separating more stuff. One bridge would do it.
Ugh, that weave is lame. And then people doing u-turns at the next turnaround when they miss it.
Quote from: GCrites80s on October 11, 2014, 08:47:07 PM
Quote from: cl94 on October 09, 2014, 12:09:37 AM
Quote from: GCrites80s on October 08, 2014, 08:47:47 PM
Quote from: NE2 on October 07, 2014, 05:04:53 AM
Found this (http://www.roadfan.com/1965map.jpg), which shows US 23 as a freeway outside I-270 and US 33 implicitly connecting to I-70.
I bet the apartments to the SE of the current interchange hadn't been built yet. There probably wasn't any development at all there at the time. So they probably assumed that nothing was going to get in the way of it except maybe on the NE corner.
Even though the interchange isn't freeway standard, it's nearly complete and, for the 4 freeway/expressway movements, expressway standard. Remember: US 33 isn't freeway grade until the Lancaster bypass (unless you include the short section between SRs 104 and 317). A few at-grades remain, but an expressway does exist south of I-70. Given the geometry and development in the area, they really can't do much more without cutting off a subdivision or tearing a bunch of stuff down. If they really wanted to, they could make all movements to and from the south freeway-grade without tearing stuff down, but it's pretty pointless to build large flyovers to make movements that the current setup handles fine. If anything, they need to improve access between James and Refugee Rds before they worry about grade separating more stuff. One bridge would do it.
Ugh, that weave is lame. And then people doing u-turns at the next turnaround when they miss it.
Yep. Only exists in that direction because ODOT is cheap and (still) likes to install left exits/entrances.
QuoteOklahoma City has never had any of its originally planned freeways canceled.
State highway maps from the 1970s expanded the OKC inset, and as a result showed two freeways that never got built. One, the "Sooner Freeway", was shown as a north-south proposal to the east of I-35, intersecting at the I-35/I-44/Kilpatrick Turnpike interchange and running along or near Sooner Rd to the south, crossing I-40 at Sooner Rd, meeting I-240 east of Sooner Rd, and passing east of Hall Park in Norman.
The other freeway, the "South Outer Loop", was to begin at I-40/Morgan Rd (where what became the Kilpatrick Turnpike was also to have met I-40), head south for a few miles, turn southeast near SW 59th St near Mustang, cross I-44 just south of OK 37/SW 134th St, then turn east and cross I-35 at roughly SW 27th St in Moore.
Were these two freeways never officially cancelled? Or were they were added after the OKC Interstates (and OK 74) were planned?
The 1971 official goes far enough east to show where the Sooner Freeway would be, with nothing there. But "originally planned freeways" is a bit of a copout.
Quote from: froggie on October 12, 2014, 06:38:42 PM
QuoteOklahoma City has never had any of its originally planned freeways canceled.
State highway maps from the 1970s expanded the OKC inset, and as a result showed two freeways that never got built. One, the "Sooner Freeway", was shown as a north-south proposal to the east of I-35, intersecting at the I-35/I-44/Kilpatrick Turnpike interchange and running along or near Sooner Rd to the south, crossing I-40 at Sooner Rd, meeting I-240 east of Sooner Rd, and passing east of Hall Park in Norman.
Is this why the I-35/I-44/Kilpatrick Turnpike interchange has the extra ramps tying into Sooner Road, or is that just a coincidence? Aerial photo of interchange (https://www.google.com/maps?q=oklahoma+city,+ok&hl=en&ll=35.600421,-97.421286&spn=0.014656,0.033023&sll=35.597089,-97.409334&sspn=0.029312,0.082397&hnear=Oklahoma+City,+Oklahoma+County,+Oklahoma&t=h&z=16)
I believe it was intentional.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 03, 2014, 10:46:44 PM
Wilmington, DE, unless you count DE 141. Scranton looks pretty complete too.
Considering the Wilmington metropolitan area, Delaware 141 was intended to be built as a full freeway between Delaware 2 and U.S. 202 at Blue Ball. The Pike Creek Valley Freeway was never constructed either, nor was U.S. 301 leading south from I-95 (the missing Exit 2).
What about Richmond, Virginia? I've been scoping out the Richmond area on Google Maps and Richmond appears to have a very completed freeway network. I can't find any historic freeway revolts in Richmond on the Internet.
Quote from: adventurernumber1 on November 29, 2014, 03:31:50 PM
What about Richmond, Virginia? I've been scoping out the Richmond area on Google Maps and Richmond appears to have a very completed freeway network. I can't find any historic freeway revolts in Richmond on the Internet.
John Rolfe Parkway was the original planned alignment of SR 288. Later, after SR 288 was shifted west, it was still planned to be a lower-standard freeway. But I'll give you that one. Also, SR 288 was going to go east to I-295, but they built SR 895 instead.
It would surprise me if there weren't plans to extend the SR 150 freeway.
In the entire Richmond-Petersburg area, there was a planned extension of I-295 west to I-85. I suppose there's also the US 460 toll road bull.
Is the Altoona area in PA completed or is their plans (or ever plans) to extend the US 22 freeway east of US 220 ( I will not acknowledge the I-99 as the route) to bypass Holidaysburg in the works ever to be a reality? If not then I would say that particular city has its freeways completed then.
Bay Lake, FL completed its freeways.
Quote from: GaryV on August 16, 2014, 07:06:20 PM
I believe every city in Michigan except Detroit completed their freeways. Some places took a little longer than others and they were not completed exactly as first proposed (Lansing, I'm looking at you) but the overall functionality was completed.
Quote from: NE2 on October 04, 2014, 10:02:51 PM
Grand Rapids?
I was about to say Grand Rapids never got its West Beltline, but nothing I see indicates it would have been a freeway.
The 1968 trunkline plan (http://www.michiganhighways.org/maps/trunkline_plan1968.gif) is somewhat up to interpretation, because what does "Interstate and Arterial" mean, exactly? It does appear that Lansing was supposed to get a north-south bypass east of US 127, Jackson was supposed to get more than it did, and Business US 131 through Kalamazoo was (probably) supposed to be a freeway all the way through and not just at its northern end.
I had already heard previously that, at the very least, the Business US 131 Kalamazoo freeway was going to connect to the Business Loop I-94 expressway on the east side of Kalamazoo. This is very easy to imagine as a continuous northeastern freeway bypass, especially because the eastern junction of BL-94 and M-96 looks like half of a narrow diamond interchange.
Excuse the snark for a moment, but I don't believe that any city could possibly complete their own network, nor should a city ever think that they are done.
It's true that maybe there is a city somewhere that completed a plan from the 1950's and 1960's and did not have a significant freeeway revolt. But the freeway system needs to evolve and expand as traffic grows.
Quote from: getemngo on November 29, 2014, 06:35:27 PM
Quote from: GaryV on August 16, 2014, 07:06:20 PM
I believe every city in Michigan except Detroit completed their freeways. Some places took a little longer than others and they were not completed exactly as first proposed (Lansing, I'm looking at you) but the overall functionality was completed.
Quote from: NE2 on October 04, 2014, 10:02:51 PM
Grand Rapids?
I was about to say Grand Rapids never got its West Beltline, but nothing I see indicates it would have been a freeway.
The 1968 trunkline plan (http://www.michiganhighways.org/maps/trunkline_plan1968.gif) is somewhat up to interpretation, because what does "Interstate and Arterial" mean, exactly?
Given the general location of the routes and existing infrastructure when this was planned out, I could reasonably interpret "Interstate and Arterial" to mean a freeway, while "Expanded Arterial" would mean a divided, 4-lane controlled-access highway built for later conversion to freeway.
According to that map, Benton Harbor/St. Joseph, Traverse City, and the Tri-Cities (Saginaw, Bay City, Midland) didn't get their planned freeway networks built out either.