Connecticut is a state of many stub ramps. I grew up in Ridgefield, and we'd use the rump Super 7 freeway pretty much whenever we went to Norwalk, although I did not know the significance of it until much later.
I went to school at UCONN. By this point my parents had moved to Massachusetts so whenever I drove to and from Storrs on the weekends, I never encountered the sad Willimantic Bypass.
And if you look at Google Maps you can find many more, and Kurumi has carefully documented them all. Cancelled freeways are not unique to Connecticut, and there are plenty of places that have more, but I think Connecticut is unique for the number of only partially finished freeways, many of which were abandoned because the state couldn't find the money.
Actually that might make a good national thread. Midwest has one on 2 lanes on 4 lane ROW. Could be one of two threads . I am curious about both.
Could separate out roads that were only proposals no land or construction.
I agree, this would make a great national thread.
From what I know about Connecticut (not much), there does seem to be a rather remarkable number of interchanges that are incomplete. I suppose that lends well to the idea that Connecticut has a significant number of incomplete freeways.
Here in WA, highways 522, 509, 167, 18, and 7 are partially freeway but not totally. All were to be freeway by now but were cancelled at some point (though all but 522 west of 405 and 7 have risen from the dead and will eventually be completed). So, only five that I can think of here in WA. I'm sure other states have many more examples.
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. For Mass I can think of 3:
2
57
146
Edit: I dropped 44 because while there were once plans for a freeway going as far as Providence, when the state passed a bond issue in 1999, it was for one terminating in Carver, which is exactly what was built.
NJ, specific to partially completed freeways:
* NJ 3, intended originally as I-280, but only built as freeway east of NJ 21. No stubs.
* NJ 15, intended to be freeway to I-80 (and, for that matter, north to US 206). Stubs unrelated to freeway completion.
* NJ 17, intended to be extended as freeway to NJ Tpk. Stub cloverleaf at NJ 3.
* NJ 18, intended to extend to NJ 34/35/70. Stub freeway at NJ 138. (Also intended to extend north as NJ 35 but no stubs.)
* NJ 19, intended as part of Paterson loop. Stubs converted to interchange at I-80.
* NJ 24, intended for westward extension. Stubs for unbuilt ramps have been removed, painted out lanes remain.
* NJ 33, eastern end of freeway completed as Super 2 only. Don't believe any stubs, just land.
* NJ 55, intended for southern extension. Southern end is a Super 2 with ghost grading.
* NJ 90, intended to extend east to I-295, no stub.
* US 206, intended to extend well north from I-80, not to mention south. No stub.
* NJ 208, intended to extend northwest from I-287. Stub has been eaten by 287.
* I-278, intended to extend northwest to I-78, stubs on both ends with clearings
* US 322, intended to extend east, which is why part of the highway remains county maintained. Ghost clearing as it narrows east of 130.
* NJ 440, intended to connect Bayonne Bridge along west side of Bayonne. Stub has been reworked on north side.
Excluding US 22, whose NJ section coming out of PA was conceived separately from PA's section.
Excluding NJ 75, which arguably exists in the form of I-78 exit 56, but arguably is just an interchange with a stub.
Excluding NJ 92, which has had so many proposed alignments that I can't count NJ 133 as part of it.
Excluding I-95/I-295, which was stubbed north of Trenton but the Somerset Freeway was a separate entity.
Excluding US 202, which is complete in NJ but stubs upon entering PA.
Excluding I-280, which was proposed for extension beyond the Turnpike but separately from what is built.
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. For Mass I can think of 4:
2
44
57
146
I'll modify my list. I-290 was a serious proposal, though.
Quote from: Alps on January 07, 2021, 02:00:28 PM
* US 322, intended to extend east, which is why part of the highway remains county maintained. Ghost clearing as it narrows east of 130.
Was this supposed to be a freeway though? The county maintained portion had been state maintained, and transferred to county jurisdiction 10/15 years ago or so, especially when the county wanted to build the bypass around Mullica Hill and widen 322 near 55, and the county didn't want to wait on the State to finally do something. Throughout the corridor, there's evidence that 322 was to be expanded with scattered drainage inlets, but that would indicate just a 4 lane local roadway, not a freeway. There have been numerous proposals over the years to create freeway-type bypasses and such, but they aren't part of an original freeway design.
At least they are widening 322 between 130 & 295, albeit with a few traffic lights (that, imo, should've been placed a little further away from both 130 & 295 for sight-distance purposes).
Quote from: Alps on January 07, 2021, 02:00:55 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. For Mass I can think of 4:
2
44
57
146
I'll modify my list. I-290 was a serious proposal, though.
Really? I can't find anything about it outside of bostonroads.com.
I'll direct you to Kurumi's map of Hartford's cancelled highways. http://kurumi.com/roads/ct/pics/art-hfd-fwy-60s.png
Now granted, some roads represented on that map weren't even attempted, such as the CT 83, CT 20 east of the river, CT 140 expressways. For other expressways, it fills in some missing pieces (such as why the short expressway of CT 187/189 in Granby), same with CT 190 in Enfield).
Quote from: shadyjay on January 07, 2021, 02:40:34 PM
I'll direct you to Kurumi's map of Hartford's cancelled highways. http://kurumi.com/roads/ct/pics/art-hfd-fwy-60s.png
Now granted, some roads represented on that map weren't even attempted, such as the CT 83, CT 20 east of the river, CT 140 expressways. For other expressways, it fills in some missing pieces (such as why the short expressway of CT 187/189 in Granby), same with CT 190 in Enfield).
All of that makes sense when you remember that in the 60s, Connecticut was planning for a population of 5 million by the year 2000.
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. ....
If I might clarify, what counts as "partially completed"? I'm thinking of "ghost ramp" situations, for example. Certainly in some of those situations there's no question that a road counts as partially completed–the abandoned Richmond Parkway interchange on I-278 on Staten Island, for example, would have led to a road whose other end was constructed for part of the way across the island, and while I-70 never made it to the ghost ramps on I-95 in Baltimore there is no question that I-70 obviously exists.
But then you have this thing in New Jersey where all you have is an overpass and the obvious outline of what would have been a cloverleaf: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7546124,-74.3832214,504m/data=!3m1!1e3
I'm wondering whether the latter sort of thing is "enough" to count as partially completed. My initial reaction would be "no."
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 07, 2021, 02:53:48 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. ....
If I might clarify, what counts as "partially completed"? I'm thinking of "ghost ramp" situations, for example. Certainly in some of those situations there's no question that a road counts as partially completed–the abandoned Richmond Parkway interchange on I-278 on Staten Island, for example, would have led to a road whose other end was constructed for part of the way across the island, and while I-70 never made it to the ghost ramps on I-95 in Baltimore there is no question that I-70 obviously exists.
But then you have this thing in New Jersey where all you have is an overpass and the obvious outline of what would have been a cloverleaf: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7546124,-74.3832214,504m/data=!3m1!1e3
I'm wondering whether the latter sort of thing is "enough" to count as partially completed. My initial reaction would be "no."
If there is no other part of the freeway that cloverleaf was intended for that is open to traffic, I'd say "no".
Thinking of California examples:
Sacramento:
244 (only the portion from I-80/Business 80 east to Auburn Boulevard)
65 (if the gap south of Rocklin/Roseville is considered)
80 (the section that became Watt/I-80 and Watt/I-80 West light rail stations - several overpasses were built further south as well)
San Francisco:
480 (now demolished)
101 along the Central Freeway
280 either along the Route 1 corridor (Junipero Serra Freeway functionally ends at Font Boulevard) or on the Southern Freeway/280 Extension corridor (originally a stub end at 4th street from about 1979-2000, now a feeder into King Street 2000-present due to the Giants ballpark)
80? (depends on how one views the Western Freeway proposal which never had ground broken on)
East Bay:
77
262 though this may change in the near future
South Bay:
237 (680 to 880 section never built, though some grading existed at one point)
North Bay:
12 within Santa Rosa
planned 251/17 (only thing built was the Sir Francis Drake ramp complex off 101)
Monterey County:
68 bypassing Salinas (only short freeway segments exist near Spreckels and near Route 1 in Monterey)
Metro Los Angeles + Ventura County
126? (middle section was never built out beyond surface road status and the eastern segment was built as as a surface road, with one flyover at Via Princessa off Route 14 as remainder of the original proposals)
118 west of 23
1 in Oxnard (a freeway-to-freeway interchange was originally built at US 101 and Oxnard Boulevard and has since been demolished, while the short segment of Pacific Coast Freeway in southern Oxnard was rerouted to feed into Rice Avenue, leaving one orphaned controlled-access intersection on Oxnard Boulevard)
710
170? (depends on how one views the La Cienega segment)
90
Not sure if Century Freeway/105 ever had definitive plans to go to I-5 - certainly not by the 1970s.
91 (due to the segment west of 110)
47?
2
Orange County
605 south extension to 1?
241
55 near the southern terminus
57 is an odd duck as it was built as originally proposed, but the Santa Ana River segment to I-405 has been bandied about in the past, though not seriously at present.
San Diego
Ramps for cancelled 252 (off 805) and 171 (off 5) exist, though not much beyond those two.
56 east of 15 has been proposed in the past, as has 125 north of 52.
54 east of 125
Since we are national . Those are good Rules
Illinois
Chicago area
Illinois 53 at lake cook. Extension just cancelled tollway and IDOT have land
IL. 390 connection West seriously studied
Not the Amstutz. It's a spur but the study recommended the arterial that exists.
South Extension of 355 was just a line.
There are the well discussed stony Island and Cermak ramps.
Almost everything else never went beyond some studies and ROW.
Quote from: 3467 on January 07, 2021, 05:07:07 PM
Since we are national . Those are good Rules
Illinois
Chicago area
Illinois 53 at lake cook. Extension just cancelled tollway and IDOT have land
IL. 390 connection West seriously studied
Not the Amstutz. It's a spur but the study recommended the arterial that exists.
South Extension of 355 was just a line.
There are the well discussed stony Island and Cermak ramps.
Almost everything else never went beyond some studies and ROW.
You forgot Lakeshore Drive, that was supposed to be turned into an interstate highway.
Downstate I am going to do a regional thread for expressways. It will match the Wisconsin one going. As expressway stubs really none they were meant to transition to a lesser design including the I 180 . It was well retconned into being built for something more. It's history is so crazy it could use a thread.
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 02:33:10 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 07, 2021, 02:00:55 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. For Mass I can think of 4:
2
44
57
146
I'll modify my list. I-290 was a serious proposal, though.
Really? I can't find anything about it outside of bostonroads.com.
Bostonroads is reputable.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 07, 2021, 02:53:48 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. ....
If I might clarify, what counts as "partially completed"? I'm thinking of "ghost ramp" situations, for example. Certainly in some of those situations there's no question that a road counts as partially completed–the abandoned Richmond Parkway interchange on I-278 on Staten Island, for example, would have led to a road whose other end was constructed for part of the way across the island, and while I-70 never made it to the ghost ramps on I-95 in Baltimore there is no question that I-70 obviously exists.
But then you have this thing in New Jersey where all you have is an overpass and the obvious outline of what would have been a cloverleaf: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7546124,-74.3832214,504m/data=!3m1!1e3
I'm wondering whether the latter sort of thing is "enough" to count as partially completed. My initial reaction would be "no."
Triborough Road wasn't a freeway at all.
Quote from: Alps on January 07, 2021, 07:48:04 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 02:33:10 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 07, 2021, 02:00:55 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. For Mass I can think of 4:
2
44
57
146
I'll modify my list. I-290 was a serious proposal, though.
Really? I can't find anything about it outside of bostonroads.com.
Bostonroads is reputable.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 07, 2021, 02:53:48 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. ....
If I might clarify, what counts as "partially completed"? I'm thinking of "ghost ramp" situations, for example. Certainly in some of those situations there's no question that a road counts as partially completed–the abandoned Richmond Parkway interchange on I-278 on Staten Island, for example, would have led to a road whose other end was constructed for part of the way across the island, and while I-70 never made it to the ghost ramps on I-95 in Baltimore there is no question that I-70 obviously exists.
But then you have this thing in New Jersey where all you have is an overpass and the obvious outline of what would have been a cloverleaf: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7546124,-74.3832214,504m/data=!3m1!1e3
I'm wondering whether the latter sort of thing is "enough" to count as partially completed. My initial reaction would be "no."
Triborough Road wasn't a freeway at all.
I know they are, but if the I-290 extension was really serious, there'd have been lots of evidence for it. People in Sudbury would tell the story of how they fought off the highway builders, there'd have been lawsuits, and angry town hall meetings like there was for Super 7 and the Somerset Freeway.
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. For Mass I can think of 4:
2
44
57
146
What was not complete with 146? The Boston Road light?
Quote from: Ben114 on January 07, 2021, 08:41:02 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. For Mass I can think of 4:
2
44
57
146
What was not complete with 146? The Boston Road light?
Yep
Since this seems like a national thread now, I'll pitch in the few I can think of for Ohio:
- OH 126/Reagan Highway: Eastern termius was planned to be at I-275, but was cut off to where it is today at US 22
- I-290: Planned as a freeway from the I-71/I-90 interchange to I-271 in Shaker Heights/Beachwood. The section between I-71/I-90 and E 55th street was built as I-490, and the section east of there cancelled.
- US 35 is almost all freeway from Dayton to Chillicothe, except for a short section between I-675 and Xenia where there are at grade intersections, with 3 of them signalized. ODOT currently has no plans to grade seperate the crossings here.
- Red Bank Expy/Red Bank Rd was planned as a freeway from I-71 to US 50. Only section built as a freeway is the approach to I-71. The rest is a surface arteral
Meanwhile, Maryland is FULL of interstate examples:
- I-70(N)
- I-70S/I-270
- I-170
- I-83
- I-95
Quote from: TheStranger on January 07, 2021, 03:34:04 PM
Thinking of California examples:
Sacramento:
244 (only the portion from I-80/Business 80 east to Auburn Boulevard)
65 (if the gap south of Rocklin/Roseville is considered)
80 (the section that became Watt/I-80 and Watt/I-80 West light rail stations - several overpasses were built further south as well)
San Francisco:
480 (now demolished)
101 along the Central Freeway
280 either along the Route 1 corridor (Junipero Serra Freeway functionally ends at Font Boulevard) or on the Southern Freeway/280 Extension corridor (originally a stub end at 4th street from about 1979-2000, now a feeder into King Street 2000-present due to the Giants ballpark)
80? (depends on how one views the Western Freeway proposal which never had ground broken on)
East Bay:
77
262 though this may change in the near future
North Bay:
12 within Santa Rosa
planned 251/17 (only thing built was the Sir Francis Drake ramp complex off 101)
Monterey County:
68 bypassing Salinas (only short freeway segments exist near Spreckels and near Route 1 in Monterey)
Metro Los Angeles + Ventura County
126? (middle section was never built out beyond surface road status and the eastern segment was built as as a surface road, with one flyover at Via Princessa off Route 14 as remainder of the original proposals)
118 west of 23
1 in Oxnard (a freeway-to-freeway interchange was originally built at US 101 and Oxnard Boulevard and has since been demolished, while the short segment of Pacific Coast Freeway in southern Oxnard was rerouted to feed into Rice Avenue, leaving one orphaned controlled-access intersection on Oxnard Boulevard)
710
170? (depends on how one views the La Cienega segment)
90
Not sure if Century Freeway/105 ever had definitive plans to go to I-5 - certainly not by the 1970s.
91 (due to the segment west of 110)
47?
2
Orange County
605 south extension to 1?
241
55 near the southern terminus
57 is an odd duck as it was built as originally proposed, but the Santa Ana River segment to I-405 has been bandied about in the past, though not seriously at present.
San Diego
Ramps for cancelled 252 (off 805) and 171 (off 5) exist, though not much beyond those two.
56 east of 15 has been proposed in the past, as has 125 north of 52.
54 east of 125
Not when they started construction, so that doesn't count.
Quote from: Alps on January 07, 2021, 07:48:04 PM
....
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 07, 2021, 02:53:48 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. ....
If I might clarify, what counts as "partially completed"? I'm thinking of "ghost ramp" situations, for example. Certainly in some of those situations there's no question that a road counts as partially completed–the abandoned Richmond Parkway interchange on I-278 on Staten Island, for example, would have led to a road whose other end was constructed for part of the way across the island, and while I-70 never made it to the ghost ramps on I-95 in Baltimore there is no question that I-70 obviously exists.
But then you have this thing in New Jersey where all you have is an overpass and the obvious outline of what would have been a cloverleaf: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7546124,-74.3832214,504m/data=!3m1!1e3
I'm wondering whether the latter sort of thing is "enough" to count as partially completed. My initial reaction would be "no."
Triborough Road wasn't a freeway at all.
I didn't know that, but it doesn't really make a difference in terms of the point I was trying to make, which was simply how much is required for a road to be "partially completed." kernals12 understood what I was getting at and clarified.
Here's all the ones I can think of in Pennsylvania following kernals12's rules:
- PA 63/Woodhaven Road in Northeast Philadelphia, intended to extend from its current stub just past Roosevelt Blvd to the intersection of Byberry Road and Philmont Avenue. PennDOT still wants to do this and does own the right-of-way, but there aren't any active plans right now.
- Depending on how unified the original freeway efforts were, US 202 between the Delaware and New Jersey state lines. Freeway segments exist between West Chester and King of Prussia and around Doylestown, but originally the entire route was meant to be a freeway. Certain segments lived on as active projects longer than others, namely the section in Montgomery County that became the US 202 Parkway, and the section south of West Chester that was cancelled in the early 2000s.
- The PA 23 Schuylkill Parkway in King of Prussia, intended to link US 422 at the Valley Forge Road interchange to US 202 at the very prominent freeway stub near Bridgeport. Like Woodhaven Road, this proposal still lives in shelved limbo and is the reason the random tight curve bottleneck still exists on Valley Forge Road where it crosses Trout Creek. If built today, it would likely be an at-grade surface expressway at best.
- PA 33, before being extended from its then-stub at US 22 down to I-78 in the early 2000s, was once intended to extend further and feed into PA 611.
- The only literal partially-completed freeway that I know of in Pennsylvania, the infamous Goat Path in Lancaster County, intended to be the first section of a PA 23 expressway from downtown Lancaster to at least US 322, with plans (though they perhaps didn't make it far enough along to qualify) to extend all the way to Phoenixville, where a PA 23 freeway spur from US 422 was definitely a serious proposal at one point.
- US 11/15 on the western shore of the Susquehanna River between I-81 and Duncannon was planned as a freeway to complement the US 22/322 freeway on the eastern shore, but only the Duncannon bypass and a short segment at the I-81 interchange was built.
- US 11/15 bypasses Selinsgrove as a freeway which abruptly ends at a stub, dumping traffic through Shamokin Dam. This is finally being completed with the CSVT Project linking it to PA 147 across the river, but I don't know if the original proposal was to just feed back into US 15 north of Shamokin Dam or continue further and bypass Lewisburg.
- The short, unnumbered Central Scranton Expressway was originally planned to go around the southwest side of downtown Scranton and connect to the North Scranton Expressway (US 11/PA 307).
- This may not count since it was ultimately completed in some form, but the PA Turnpike Northeast Extension (today I-476), only completed as far north as Clarks Summit, was originally intended to extend north along what became the I-81 alignment to upstate New York.
- I-99 unceremoniously ends at an at-grade intersection right before I-80. There are plans currently underway to build a freeway-to-freeway interchange here.
- The US 219 freeway ends at Meyersdale, where there are still plans being coordinated with Maryland to connect the freeway to I-68. It was also intended to extend north from Ebensburg to at least I-80, and ultimately all the way to Bradford at the NY state line, but I don't know if these plans have ever advanced past "vague line on a map" stage.
- PA Turnpike 43, the Mon-Fayette Expressway, is completed between the WV state line and Jefferson Hills, but the connection to I-376 in Monroeville has yet to be built. Unfortunately, the planned western spur was cancelled. It would have continued following the Monongahela River to I-376 closer to downtown Pittsburgh and would have also likely carried the Turnpike 43 designation, with the eastern spur to Monroeville being Turnpike 576.
- The planned Pittsburgh Southern Beltway, PA Turnpike 576, is only completed between I-376 at the airport and US 22, though it's under construction up to I-79. It's planned to connect to the Mon-Fayette Expressway near Finleyville and use the remainder of that road up to Monroeville as the eastern half of the beltway.
I'm probably missing a few, but there aren't nearly as many truly partially-completed freeways as there are ones that were cancelled entirely or otherwise don't qualify under kernals12's rules.
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 07, 2021, 10:35:16 PM
Here's all the ones I can think of in Pennsylvania following kernals12's rules:
- PA 63/Woodhaven Road in Northeast Philadelphia, intended to extend from its current stub just past Roosevelt Blvd to the intersection of Byberry Road and Philmont Avenue. PennDOT still wants to do this and does own the right-of-way, but there aren't any active plans right now.
- Depending on how unified the original freeway efforts were, US 202 between the Delaware and New Jersey state lines. Freeway segments exist between West Chester and King of Prussia and around Doylestown, but originally the entire route was meant to be a freeway. Certain segments lived on as active projects longer than others, namely the section in Montgomery County that became the US 202 Parkway, and the section south of West Chester that was cancelled in the early 2000s.
- The PA 23 Schuylkill Parkway in King of Prussia, intended to link US 422 at the Valley Forge Road interchange to US 202 at the very prominent freeway stub near Bridgeport. Like Woodhaven Road, this proposal still lives in shelved limbo and is the reason the random tight curve bottleneck still exists on Valley Forge Road where it crosses Trout Creek. If built today, it would likely be an at-grade surface expressway at best.
- PA 33, before being extended from its then-stub at US 22 down to I-78 in the early 2000s, was once intended to extend further and feed into PA 611.
- The only literal partially-completed freeway that I know of in Pennsylvania, the infamous Goat Path in Lancaster County, intended to be the first section of a PA 23 expressway from downtown Lancaster to at least US 322, with plans (though they perhaps didn't make it far enough along to qualify) to extend all the way to Phoenixville, where a PA 23 freeway spur from US 422 was definitely a serious proposal at one point.
- US 11/15 on the western shore of the Susquehanna River between I-81 and Duncannon was planned as a freeway to complement the US 22/322 freeway on the eastern shore, but only the Duncannon bypass and a short segment at the I-81 interchange was built.
- US 11/15 bypasses Selinsgrove as a freeway which abruptly ends at a stub, dumping traffic through Shamokin Dam. This is finally being completed with the CSVT Project linking it to PA 147 across the river, but I don't know if the original proposal was to just feed back into US 15 north of Shamokin Dam or continue further and bypass Lewisburg.
- The short, unnumbered Central Scranton Expressway was originally planned to go around the southwest side of downtown Scranton and connect to the North Scranton Expressway (US 11/PA 307).
- This may not count since it was ultimately completed in some form, but the PA Turnpike Northeast Extension (today I-476), only completed as far north as Clarks Summit, was originally intended to extend north along what became the I-81 alignment to upstate New York.
- I-99 unceremoniously ends at an at-grade intersection right before I-80. There are plans currently underway to build a freeway-to-freeway interchange here.
- The US 219 freeway ends at Meyersdale, where there are still plans being coordinated with Maryland to connect the freeway to I-68. It was also intended to extend north from Ebensburg to at least I-80, and ultimately all the way to Bradford at the NY state line, but I don't know if these plans have ever advanced past "vague line on a map" stage.
- PA Turnpike 43, the Mon-Fayette Expressway, is completed between the WV state line and Jefferson Hills, but the connection to I-376 in Monroeville has yet to be built. Unfortunately, the planned western spur was cancelled. It would have continued following the Monongahela River to I-376 closer to downtown Pittsburgh and would have also likely carried the Turnpike 43 designation, with the eastern spur to Monroeville being Turnpike 576.
- The planned Pittsburgh Southern Beltway, PA Turnpike 576, is only completed between I-376 at the airport and US 22, though it's under construction up to I-79. It's planned to connect to the Mon-Fayette Expressway near Finleyville and use the remainder of that road up to Monroeville as the eastern half of the beltway.
I'm probably missing a few, but there aren't nearly as many truly partially-completed freeways as there are ones that were cancelled entirely or otherwise don't qualify under kernals12's rules.
You forgot the Roosevelt Expressway and PA 309.
Should have been clear. The Stoney Island Feeder ramp was the Lake Shore Drive extension end and so are the skyway ramps. There used to be a BGS with all those routes on LSD. Not sure if still there.
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 07:57:08 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 07, 2021, 07:48:04 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 02:33:10 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 07, 2021, 02:00:55 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. For Mass I can think of 4:
2
44
57
146
I'll modify my list. I-290 was a serious proposal, though.
Really? I can't find anything about it outside of bostonroads.com.
Bostonroads is reputable.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 07, 2021, 02:53:48 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. ....
If I might clarify, what counts as "partially completed"? I'm thinking of "ghost ramp" situations, for example. Certainly in some of those situations there's no question that a road counts as partially completed–the abandoned Richmond Parkway interchange on I-278 on Staten Island, for example, would have led to a road whose other end was constructed for part of the way across the island, and while I-70 never made it to the ghost ramps on I-95 in Baltimore there is no question that I-70 obviously exists.
But then you have this thing in New Jersey where all you have is an overpass and the obvious outline of what would have been a cloverleaf: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7546124,-74.3832214,504m/data=!3m1!1e3
I'm wondering whether the latter sort of thing is "enough" to count as partially completed. My initial reaction would be "no."
Triborough Road wasn't a freeway at all.
I know they are, but if the I-290 extension was really serious, there'd have been lots of evidence for it. People in Sudbury would tell the story of how they fought off the highway builders, there'd have been lawsuits, and angry town hall meetings like there was for Super 7 and the Somerset Freeway.
I disagree with that method of assessment. It was serious enough to leave a stub at the eastern interchange and had plans into the 1970s actively. Not every freeway was defeated decisively. Not everything is an NJ 24 or Somerset Freeway tale. For example, NJ 18's southern 6 miles died with very little fanfare and very little in the way of public concern. It just never made it.
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 10:40:44 PM
Quote from: Roadsguy on January 07, 2021, 10:35:16 PM
*snip*
You forgot the Roosevelt Expressway and PA 309.
I left those out because I figured they were planned as entirely separate sections, though that definition is vague enough that they may count. The Roosevelt Expressway was already finished when the Northeast Expressway was being proposed, for instance.
Atlanta alone has quite a lot:
I-675 (which was to connect to GA 400 further north)
I-485 (which was to use GA 10 and connect to the Stone Mountain Freeway further east)
I-420 (which was to continue east from the I-75/I-85/GA 166 interchange and connect to I-20)
Quote from: Alps on January 08, 2021, 12:23:32 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 07:57:08 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 07, 2021, 07:48:04 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 02:33:10 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 07, 2021, 02:00:55 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. For Mass I can think of 4:
2
44
57
146
I'll modify my list. I-290 was a serious proposal, though.
Really? I can't find anything about it outside of bostonroads.com.
Bostonroads is reputable.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 07, 2021, 02:53:48 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. ....
If I might clarify, what counts as "partially completed"? I'm thinking of "ghost ramp" situations, for example. Certainly in some of those situations there's no question that a road counts as partially completed–the abandoned Richmond Parkway interchange on I-278 on Staten Island, for example, would have led to a road whose other end was constructed for part of the way across the island, and while I-70 never made it to the ghost ramps on I-95 in Baltimore there is no question that I-70 obviously exists.
But then you have this thing in New Jersey where all you have is an overpass and the obvious outline of what would have been a cloverleaf: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7546124,-74.3832214,504m/data=!3m1!1e3
I'm wondering whether the latter sort of thing is "enough" to count as partially completed. My initial reaction would be "no."
Triborough Road wasn't a freeway at all.
I know they are, but if the I-290 extension was really serious, there'd have been lots of evidence for it. People in Sudbury would tell the story of how they fought off the highway builders, there'd have been lawsuits, and angry town hall meetings like there was for Super 7 and the Somerset Freeway.
I disagree with that method of assessment. It was serious enough to leave a stub at the eastern interchange and had plans into the 1970s actively. Not every freeway was defeated decisively. Not everything is an NJ 24 or Somerset Freeway tale. For example, NJ 18's southern 6 miles died with very little fanfare and very little in the way of public concern. It just never made it.
I always thought a big factor in the death of the southern six miles of NJ-18 was a landowner who would not sell and the state either couldn't win or didn't want to go through the expense of trying to gain the land via eminent domain and they just kind of let it die? Or is that just apocrypha at this point?
Quote from: Henry on January 08, 2021, 10:18:50 AM
Atlanta alone has quite a lot:
I-675 (which was to connect to GA 400 further north)
I-485 (which was to use GA 10 and connect to the Stone Mountain Freeway further east)
I-420 (which was to continue east from the I-75/I-85/GA 166 interchange and connect to I-20)
I think they cancelled that one because the state would've gone bankrupt replacing the signs as they got stolen.
I suspect this will be a big problem for I-69.
Quote from: storm2k on January 09, 2021, 01:54:12 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 08, 2021, 12:23:32 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 07:57:08 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 07, 2021, 07:48:04 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 02:33:10 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 07, 2021, 02:00:55 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. For Mass I can think of 4:
2
44
57
146
I'll modify my list. I-290 was a serious proposal, though.
Really? I can't find anything about it outside of bostonroads.com.
Bostonroads is reputable.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 07, 2021, 02:53:48 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. ....
If I might clarify, what counts as "partially completed"? I'm thinking of "ghost ramp" situations, for example. Certainly in some of those situations there's no question that a road counts as partially completed–the abandoned Richmond Parkway interchange on I-278 on Staten Island, for example, would have led to a road whose other end was constructed for part of the way across the island, and while I-70 never made it to the ghost ramps on I-95 in Baltimore there is no question that I-70 obviously exists.
But then you have this thing in New Jersey where all you have is an overpass and the obvious outline of what would have been a cloverleaf: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7546124,-74.3832214,504m/data=!3m1!1e3
I'm wondering whether the latter sort of thing is "enough" to count as partially completed. My initial reaction would be "no."
Triborough Road wasn't a freeway at all.
I know they are, but if the I-290 extension was really serious, there'd have been lots of evidence for it. People in Sudbury would tell the story of how they fought off the highway builders, there'd have been lawsuits, and angry town hall meetings like there was for Super 7 and the Somerset Freeway.
I disagree with that method of assessment. It was serious enough to leave a stub at the eastern interchange and had plans into the 1970s actively. Not every freeway was defeated decisively. Not everything is an NJ 24 or Somerset Freeway tale. For example, NJ 18's southern 6 miles died with very little fanfare and very little in the way of public concern. It just never made it.
I always thought a big factor in the death of the southern six miles of NJ-18 was a landowner who would not sell and the state either couldn't win or didn't want to go through the expense of trying to gain the land via eminent domain and they just kind of let it die? Or is that just apocrypha at this point?
If they weren't willing to go through with eminent domain, then clearly it wasn't a big priority for them.
Quote from: 3467 on January 07, 2021, 05:07:07 PM
Since we are national . Those are good Rules
Illinois
Chicago area
Illinois 53 at lake cook. Extension just cancelled tollway and IDOT have land
Probably until sometime this year.
Quote from: 3467 on January 07, 2021, 05:07:07 PM
IL. 390 connection West seriously studied
Also had much of the ROW acquired to the connection to US 20 west of Hanover Park, and has a new study for a partial connection to County Farm Road.
Supposedly part of IL 19 I think this section (https://goo.gl/maps/Kjd62MD9FYs8Tjgf6)) was upgraded as part of the original plan to connect to the Tri-State south of O'Hare.
Quote from: 3467 on January 07, 2021, 05:07:07 PM
Not the Amstutz. It's a spur but the study recommended the arterial that exists.
The section by downtown Waukegan was supposed to connect to the "Bobby Thompson Expressway" section as a freeway.
Quote from: 3467 on January 07, 2021, 05:07:07 PM
South Extension of 355 was just a line.
There are the well discussed stony Island and Cermak ramps.
Almost everything else never went beyond some studies and ROW.
The Ohio Street feeder may count as part of the version of I-494 that was to use Lake Shore Drive.
EDIT: I've wondered if the South Street overpass on the US 14 bypass of Woodstock (https://goo.gl/maps/5Szu4JfWy7s1nws96) may be the only portion of the Evanston-Harvard corridor to be built. (
end edit)
Elsewhere in Illinois* The western I-39/US 20 interchange (https://goo.gl/maps/x152bwFec19uSep59) was built for a freeway that would have gone to downtown Rockford.
* East St. Louis has the stub for a freeway that would have gone from the PSB Complex to IL 15 at IL 163. (https://goo.gl/maps/JVvdJaTKU2GnmBhy8)
* US 50 between the cloverleaf at I-64 and IL 127. (https://goo.gl/maps/v76QZ2C42ouX49LM7) If you look at the 1988 imagery in Google Earth the east outer road at the IL 158 interchange had more of a jog that appears to indicate where the freeway would have curved east.
* The supplemental freeway that would have been an extension of I-39 south of Bloomington-Normal to Decatur got stubs, extra pavement (https://goo.gl/maps/bikwUq81o4tFh5Ws7) and space for future BGS's on I-72. (https://goo.gl/maps/8XoDpnxnk8pqAoHX7)
Missouri* MO 755, though soon the only part left will be the extra wide ramp from southbound Truman Parkway to southbound I-55. There used to be a northbound stub at the I-55 interchange, the part near US 40 is being removed, and there used to be a partially constructed section under I-70 just north of Branch Street.
* US 71/Bruce Watkins in Kansas City
* The unbuilt route that would have tied into I-70 at the Jackson Curve in Kansas City. (https://goo.gl/maps/MNjsNmwM34KY4rHS8)
Quote from: Alps on January 08, 2021, 12:23:32 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 07:57:08 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 07, 2021, 07:48:04 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 02:33:10 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 07, 2021, 02:00:55 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. For Mass I can think of 4:
2
44
57
146
I'll modify my list. I-290 was a serious proposal, though.
Really? I can't find anything about it outside of bostonroads.com.
Bostonroads is reputable.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 07, 2021, 02:53:48 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 01:44:12 PM
To set some rules: The freeway has to have been a very serious proposal, not just highway planners throwing lines on a map, so the I-290 extension to Waltham doesn't count, and to be considered partially completed, the freeway has to have been planned as one complete project, so Boston's Southwest Expressway doesn't because it was planned separately from the rest of I-95. ....
If I might clarify, what counts as "partially completed"? I'm thinking of "ghost ramp" situations, for example. Certainly in some of those situations there's no question that a road counts as partially completed–the abandoned Richmond Parkway interchange on I-278 on Staten Island, for example, would have led to a road whose other end was constructed for part of the way across the island, and while I-70 never made it to the ghost ramps on I-95 in Baltimore there is no question that I-70 obviously exists.
But then you have this thing in New Jersey where all you have is an overpass and the obvious outline of what would have been a cloverleaf: https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7546124,-74.3832214,504m/data=!3m1!1e3
I'm wondering whether the latter sort of thing is "enough" to count as partially completed. My initial reaction would be "no."
Triborough Road wasn't a freeway at all.
I know they are, but if the I-290 extension was really serious, there'd have been lots of evidence for it. People in Sudbury would tell the story of how they fought off the highway builders, there'd have been lawsuits, and angry town hall meetings like there was for Super 7 and the Somerset Freeway.
I disagree with that method of assessment. It was serious enough to leave a stub at the eastern interchange and had plans into the 1970s actively. Not every freeway was defeated decisively. Not everything is an NJ 24 or Somerset Freeway tale. For example, NJ 18's southern 6 miles died with very little fanfare and very little in the way of public concern. It just never made it.
Actually, according to bostonroads.com (http://www.bostonroads.com/roads/I-290_MA/), I-290 was originally planned to terminate at the I-90, I-495 interchange. They moved it north for a possible future extension east. So that means the unbuilt extension was planned separately from what was built, so it violates my 2nd rule. Also, let's compare it to a freeway that was planned on a relatively close alignment, the MA 2 expressway. Unlike the I-290 extension, MA 2 actually was serious, they even filed an Environmental Impact Statement, but they cancelled it because there just wasn't enough money.
Quote from: shadyjay on January 07, 2021, 02:40:34 PM
I'll direct you to Kurumi's map of Hartford's cancelled highways. http://kurumi.com/roads/ct/pics/art-hfd-fwy-60s.png
Now granted, some roads represented on that map weren't even attempted, such as the CT 83, CT 20 east of the river, CT 140 expressways. For other expressways, it fills in some missing pieces (such as why the short expressway of CT 187/189 in Granby), same with CT 190 in Enfield).
From just that map I think I count 11 partially completed freeways that obey my rules:
189, 190, 291, 84, 484, 9, 10, 72, 284, 491, 501
Then off hand from the rest of the state:
25, 34, 11, 2, 2A, 8, 32, 40, 691, 78, and I'd count 7 twice as the unfinished part from Norwalk to Danbury was planned separately from the unfinished part from Brookfield to the state line
Quote from: kernals12 on January 10, 2021, 08:59:46 AM
Actually, according to bostonroads.com (http://www.bostonroads.com/roads/I-290_MA/), I-290 was originally planned to terminate at the I-90, I-495 interchange. They moved it north for a possible future extension east. So that means the unbuilt extension was planned separately from what was built, so it violates my 2nd rule. Also, let's compare it to a freeway that was planned on a relatively close alignment, the MA 2 expressway. Unlike the I-290 extension, MA 2 actually was serious, they even filed an Environmental Impact Statement, but they cancelled it because there just wasn't enough money.
You are correct, but my interpretation is that because the alignment that was actually built is the one that was moved north, they built part of the final concept, so it's continuous. Regardless, no one's keeping a record book for this so we can feel free to have differing interpretations.
Quote from: kernals12 on January 07, 2021, 05:08:29 PM
Quote from: 3467 on January 07, 2021, 05:07:07 PM
Since we are national . Those are good Rules
Illinois
Chicago area
Illinois 53 at lake cook. Extension just cancelled tollway and IDOT have land
IL. 390 connection West seriously studied
Not the Amstutz. It's a spur but the study recommended the arterial that exists.
South Extension of 355 was just a line.
There are the well discussed stony Island and Cermak ramps.
Almost everything else never went beyond some studies and ROW.
You forgot Lakeshore Drive, that was supposed to be turned into an interstate highway.
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 09, 2021, 09:55:31 PM
The Ohio Street feeder may count as part of the version of I-494 that was to use Lake Shore Drive.
When I think of I-494, I remember it as the Crosstown Expressway, none of which was ever built. The I-494 you're referring to was actually renumbered to I-694 after new plans for the Crosstown were formed.
Yes you are right Henry. Interesting most of the Crosstown ROW is there . That's why there is still a mini crosstown kept alive by CMAP.
Although it's need keeps slipping away. Volumes on those North South arterial keep declining. Also Lake Shore Drive has been improved through the South works area.
Quote from: 3467 on January 11, 2021, 11:21:51 AM
Yes you are right Henry. Interesting most of the Crosstown ROW is there . That's why there is still a mini crosstown kept alive by CMAP.
Although it's need keeps slipping away. Volumes on those North South arterial keep declining. Also Lake Shore Drive has been improved through the South works area.
Plus, given Illinois' chronic fiscal woes...
Portland had the Mount Hood Freeway ROW bought and then cancelled it in the 70's as they shifted towards light rail. Also in PDX was the proposed I-505, a short freeway coming off I-405. A very small section of freeway as US 30 is there.
Salem was to get I-305. They wound up with the Salem Parkway. The connection with I-5 is on the north end of this city.
Maybe some other Oregon poster will come along to add more details.
Rick