Any cases where a road was built wider or had provisions to accomodate for future widening or capacity levels and then you were actually able to see the provisions in use?
An example would be: I-95 in East Haven, CT was 4-lanes but a bridge was built for 6 lanes for future capacity. The highway was widened in 2003 and now that bridge carries 6-lanes.
or
US-7 expressway in Brookfield, CT had a temp end at a half diamond interchange but provisions for the highway to continue, such as rock blasting for future ramps for the other side of the diamond and an overpass. In 2009, the expressway was extended and now it's a full diamond.
I'm having a Rick Perry moment, but there are some spots in Kentucky where a new road was built with two lanes, but right of way was graded for two more lanes, and then they were added later. Just not able to think of them right now.
One I know of, TX 360 between TX 183 and TX 121 along the west side of DFW Airport. This part of TX 360 was a later part after an existing portion south of TX 183. When originally built, only the service roads were put in, except at the Mid-Cities Blvd. exit, when main lanes were also put in at the same time as the service roads. With this setup, it allowed space for future main lanes. According to http://www.dfwfreeways.info/pages/highwayInfo/highwayInfoHome.aspx?highway=360 , the service roads and the Mid-Cities exit opened in 1992, followed in 2005-2006 by the main lanes.
The same thing is being done for the TX 161/Bush Turnpike extension through Grand Prairie. Service roads from just north of I-30 down to the new south terminus at I-20 were built first a few years ago, now work is underway to start on main lane placement, most notably with new direct ramps at the I-20 interchange. That part just suffered a setback this past week when a crane at the worksite collapsed, severely damaging a segment of one of the higher ramps. This required extra detours and a long unscheduled cleanup; it's unknown how much this delays the project.
Other TX projects have done the service-roads-first-then-the-main-lanes-later thing, including, for example, the TX 121 bypass of Lewisville.
When US 75 was widened/modernized north of I-635 several years ago, extra space was set aside in the middle, for either new future main lanes or possible HOV lanes. They have since been taken in for HOV lanes.
Many of the overpasses on Interstate 95 between Jacksonville and Daytona Beach, Florida were rebuilt and widened to accomodate a third lane in each direction 10 years ago. Today, the entire route in that area is six lanes wide.
Much of the same overpass work has been done on the Florida's Turnpike between Exit 75 (Boca Raton) and Exit 116 (Jupiter) in preparation to widen the Turnpike from four lanes to six. Part of this section, at least from Exit 75 to Toll Plaza 88 where the ticket system begins, has already been widened to six lanes. The Turnpike overpass just south of Exit 97 (US 98) is particularly wide and may even accomodate eight lanes of carriageway.
It would be interesting to subdivide these examples of future provision into two categories:
* Those where the added capacity was provided exactly as shown in the original construction plans
* Those where the capacity was added but in a manner different from that originally visualized (often requiring some reconstruction, including regrading, of the original highway facility)
I know of no examples of the former, though I am familiar with numerous examples of the latter. In Kansas, for example, US 69 around Pleasanton was built as a Super Two freeway in the 1970's with provision for later addition of the second carriageway, but when it was built shortly after 2003, the original carriageway was reconstructed and the new carriageway was built on an alignment slightly different from that envisioned in the 1970's. To quote another example, this time from Ohio, the actual built configuration for the I-271 local/express lanes (finished in the 1990's) does not quite match the "ultimate configuration" as shown in the 1970's construction plans for the project that built what are now the local lanes.
WI-26 around Fort Atkinson, formerly super-2 with overpasses built to accomodate up to 3 lanes each way. The new SBD carraigeway was built over the past year or two.
PA 26, Bellefonte, PA. From I-80 to near PA 64. Originally built as a super-2,completed in 1972. The unbuilt southbound side was built out in 1997, pretty much as originally envisioned, ahead of 1-99 being constructed to the "near PA 64" end.
PA 147, Milton, PA. From I-80 to just south of PA 45. Originally built as a super-2, completed in 1971. Northbound side built 2004, again, pretty much as originally envisioned.
PA 581, west shore of Harrisburg area, PA. From I-81 to US 11. A directional T interchange was built on I-81 when the freeway was constructed in this area in 1976. PA 581 was completed from the interchange stub-end in 1996, just about as originally envisioned.
US 1 from Sanford to Raleigh NC was constructed as a Super-2 in stages from 1960 to 1975. The interchanges were built as full freeway interchanges. In the 1990's, the southbound carriageway was built in stages with minimal interchange work.
I-355 from I-55 to 63rd St, and from Butterfield Rd to North Ave. Originally built for 4 lanes with provision for 6 lanes. Widened 2 years after building to 6 lanes.
Mexico federal route 2 just west of Mexicali to La Rumorosa mountain pass is in the process of being converted from a super-2 to a full four-lane dual carriageway ... some overpasses were completely built years ago in anticipation of this, and only the second carriageway needs to be built. Other overpasses have been only half-built and need to be revised.
The I-291 interchange at I-84 in Farmington, CT: built 1969, not used until CT 9 was extended there in 1992. In the interim, proposals for reuse included converting it into a regional transit hub with parking for 2,000 cars (1974).
The I-25 bridge over Colorado State Route 119 was built for 6 lanes pre-2000 I think. I-25 was 6-laned fully in that area in 2009.
I continue...
US 15, Gettysburg, PA. From the MD state line to PA 94. Completed as a super-2 with full interchanges in 1963, the full buildout was completed, much as originally envisioned, in 1989.
US 15, Buttonwood, PA. From PA 184 to the Sebring interchange. Completed as a super-2 in 1976, the full buildout was completed, much as originally envisioned, in 1998.
US 15, Mansfield, PA. Mansfield Bypass, from PA 660 to PA 287. Completed as a super-2 in 1987, the full buildout was completed, much as originally envisioned, in 2003.
The astute (and even not-so-astute) reader will detect a certain theme here. PennDOT (and it's predeceasor, the PA Dept of Highways) had a fondness for initially constructing super-2s and building them out later.
One project not this category is I-476, through the western suburbs of the Philadelphia area. Known locally as The Blue Route (the name being derived from the color of the selected alternate's line on planning maps released to the public), parts of it were constructed long before the entire facility was completed. One section, from approximately Darby Rd. to Sproul Rd., sat unused and unconnected to any interchange for 21 years. Locals used to fly their model airplanes from it. This segment was shy of PA 3 at its southern end and US 30 at its northern end. (The highway didn't reach these routes and interchanges were not built.) This unused, unconnected section was built in 1970 and finally opened to traffic in 1991 when the entire freeway was completed, interchanges and all.
(Thanks to PAHighways for providing specific dates.)
Following the OP's example of citing a stub end where a road was later extended:
I-66 was always planned to run all the way into DC but when it opened in 1964 it ended at the Beltway with some stubs left as provisions for the planned extension. The Dulles Airport Access Road similarly ended at VA-123 with a stub (in a similar configuration to a few other roads that stub-end with a cloverleaf loop ramp departing to the right). After years of protests and delays, I-66 inside the Beltway was finally constructed in the late 1970s/early 1980s and opened less than a week before Christmas in 1982. The Dulles Access Road was similarly extended from VA-123 to the new portion I-66 and opened sometime in 1985 (today local traffic reporters sometimes call this short extension segment the Dulles Connector Road).
For an example of a provision for future use that was later turned into a highway but not in the anticipated way, there's the southern end of I-295 in Maryland. It stub-ended at the Beltway instead of continuing south through PG County. Later that stub-end was changed to connect the road to the nearby MD-210 via a short freeway connection to alleviate congestion caused by traffic heading between those two routes having to merge onto the Beltway for such a short stretch. So it wasn't the originally-intended design for the end of I-295, and it was later further modified by the Wilson Bridge reconstruction and the ongoing construction of the National Harbor development just south of there, but the stub provisions were finally put to use.
You can find images of both the above as they were then and as they are now on HistoricAerials.com. For those familiar with Staten Island, the configuration of the eastbound Dulles stub-end and the I-295 interchange were somewhat similar to the way the West Shore Expressway ended at the Richmond Parkway prior to the construction of the park-and-ride facility.
Quote from: JREwing78 on November 20, 2011, 05:34:28 PM
WI-26 around Fort Atkinson, formerly super-2 with overpasses built to accomodate up to 3 lanes each way. The new SBD carraigeway was built over the past year or two.
In Wisconsin:
-The US 45 West Bend Spur was originally built as an upgradable 'Super Two' freeway.
-Much of I-39 north of Portage, WI was originally built as an upgradable two-lane US 51 during the 1960s.
In other states:
-Much of I-95 in northern Maine was built as a 'Super Two' freeway.
-Ditto I-70 in central Utah and I-15 around the Idaho-Montana state line.
Mike
Quote from: doofy103 on November 20, 2011, 03:17:06 PM
Any cases where a road was built wider or had provisions to accomodate for future widening or capacity levels and then you were actually able to see the provisions in use?
There are many examples. I'll list one near here —
When the I-95 Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike was widened to 6 lanes (3 each way) 1974-78 for 22 miles between I-85 and Maury Street, the trumpet interchange with VA-150 Chippenham Parkway was upgraded to a semi-directional interchange. A 4-lane stub was built for the eventual extension of VA-150 across the James River to VA-5 and Laburnum Avenue, with the untrafficed stub extending about 800 feet eastward of the ramp connections to VA-150. This Laburnum Avenue Extension plan proposed a high-level bascule span drawbridge over the James River, with 50 feet of vertical navigational clearance when closed.
The VA-895 Pocahontas Parkway was built in this corridor, extending eastward from the I-95/VA-150 interchange, from 1998 to 2002. That stub was not utilized, as a much higher grade was needed there to reach the Route 895 James River bridge which is a fixed high level bridge with 145 feet of vertical navigational clearance. VA-150 and VA-895 form a seamless freeway.
How about the George Washington Bridge? Designed for two decks but opened with only one. Now it has two.
South (or east) of LSU and Baton Rouge, Burbank Rd (built as a relief route for Highland Rd) had two lanes built, but had a second carriageway set aside for future growth. In one of the rare instances of LaDOTD forsight, that second carriageway was actually used for highway usage and the second set of lanes was completed in 2008.
Quote from: empirestate on November 21, 2011, 07:27:59 PM
How about the George Washington Bridge? Designed for two decks but opened with only one. Now it has two.
Wasn't the lower deck originally planned for transit?
I think the section of US 33 between the bend in Eiterman Rd and Frantz/Post Rd in Dublin was originally built (in the 40s or 50s) as a two-lane at-grade highway, with plans to expand to a four-lane divided highway. In the 70s, the widening was executed, though the alignment was changed from the plans northwest of the Eiterman bend.
I-670's stub ending at Grandview Ave, with a half-built folded diamond, was eventually (2002) continued eastward, though the mainline stub was rebuilt on a different vertical alignment, and I think the existing mainline was widened a bit.
Rickenbacker Parkway West, near Lockbourne: built a few years ago as a two-lane road, with stubs of a second two-lane carriageway apparent at intersections. Full four lanes opened to traffic a couple of weeks ago.
While trying to think of more examples, I got called to work (but I said the magic word, "tired," and therefore am not working tonight) and then got distracted looking at yesterday's XKCD. I might as well hit the "post" button (and to go bed soon).
Quote from: NE2 on November 22, 2011, 01:23:37 AM
Quote from: empirestate on November 21, 2011, 07:27:59 PM
How about the George Washington Bridge? Designed for two decks but opened with only one. Now it has two.
Wasn't the lower deck originally planned for transit?
Do you happen to know or have any maps on how such transit would connect to existing routes and continue into New Jersey? I have heard that the lower deck was for transit, but I am puzzled as to how the deck would be used.
Quote from: Zmapper on November 22, 2011, 02:40:29 AM
Do you happen to know or have any maps on how such transit would connect to existing routes and continue into New Jersey? I have heard that the lower deck was for transit, but I am puzzled as to how the deck would be used.
There's a stub on the IND Eighth Avenue Line at the 174th Street Yard.
I-86 (originally PA 17 & NY 17), northwestern PA & western NY. From I-90 to NY 430. Initially constructed as a super-2 in 1988 and 1989. Built out as a full freeway as originally envisioned in 1996. (This section of PA/NY 17 was designated I-86 in 1999.)
Many stub-ends and "missing links" have existed in PA. Some were actually extended or completed. (Wonders never cease.) In no particular order...
PA 33 between Bethlehem and Easton, from US 22 to I-78. The interchange and stub-end at US 22 was completed in 1972. The freeway was completed to I-78 in 2002.
PA 60 (now I-376) in western PA between PA 51 & US 422. The stub-end at PA 51 was constructed in 1976. It was extended by the PA Turnpike Commission as a tolled highway to US 422 freeway in 1992. (Designated I-376 in 2009.)
US 15, from Williamsport to the NY state line. This portion of future I-99 was built in stages in a similar manner to the portion between the Turnpike and I-80, with various stub-ends existing for periods of time. When the segment from Mansfield to PA 487 was completed in 1978, it was constructed as a super-2 with what would be the northbound lanes being built. Where the freeway passes over an arm of the Tioga Reservoir, hammerhead-type bridge piers were built for both the northbound and the southbound lanes. The piers for the southbound lanes stood unused from 1978 until the southbound lanes were completed during the full freeway buildout on that segment in 2003.
US 222, from the Turnpike to US 422 on the west side of Reading. The freeway was completed to the stub-end just above the Turnpike in 1978. A stub-end at the interchange with US 422 was also constructed in 1978. The freeway was completed between the two stub-ends in 2006. (Hey, it only took 28 years.)
US 1 between the Oxford Valley are and Morrisville. The freeway was built to a stub-end just east of the Oxford Valley interchange in 1972 and extended to a freeway section in Morrisville in 1987.
US 220 (now I-99) between the Turnpike and State College. Constructed in stages from the 1970s to the 00s. Various stub-ends sat for years, notably the one at the Bald Eagle interchange (Intchg 52) which existed from 1976 until the freeway was completed from there to State College in 2008. (What's 32 years between friends?)
Not in PA: OH 711, Youngstown, OH. Between I-80 and US 422. The segment from I-680 to US 422 was built in hte late 1960s. The stub-end at the interchange with I-80 was constructed with that stretch of I-80. OH 711 between the two was completed in 2005.
Again, thanks to Mr. K's exhaustive detail at PA Highways for most of the dates herein.
Not sure if this counts or not...
The ramp from EB MN-610 to WB US-10/NB MN-47 has always been a tight loop. When originally constructed, ALL traffic followed this loop. Before the construction of the "new" US-10, there was just open space that would have allowed for a gentle left-turning curve rather than the tight loop that was actually built.
This was actually quite an annoyance in some quarters. When I was an undergraduate taking "Technical Writing for Engineers", our first assignment was to write up a paper on how they could get rid of the annoying loop.
Of course, once the "thru" lanes of EB MN-610 --> EB "new" US-10 were built, the loop became necessary unless they wanted to build an expensive flyover or something.
Quote from: NE2 on November 22, 2011, 01:23:37 AM
Quote from: empirestate on November 21, 2011, 07:27:59 PM
How about the George Washington Bridge? Designed for two decks but opened with only one. Now it has two.
Wasn't the lower deck originally planned for transit?
According to Steve's page, no. The median of the upper deck was, as one option (the eventual choice was additional highway lanes).
Quote from: qguy on November 22, 2011, 11:16:03 AM
Many stub-ends and "missing links" have existed in PA. Some were actually extended or completed. (Wonders never cease.) In no particular order...
The interchange between Interstate 95 and 476 sat unused for years awaiting the completion of the Mid-County Expressway to the north. It opened in 1989 IIRC as a glorified connector to MacDade Boulevard, before I-476 was finally completed (south of I-76). The unfortunate aspect of this fact is that I-95 bottlenecks to two lanes per direction at the 1970s-era interchange.
Quote from: empirestate on November 22, 2011, 12:35:19 PM
Quote from: NE2 on November 22, 2011, 01:23:37 AM
Quote from: empirestate on November 21, 2011, 07:27:59 PM
How about the George Washington Bridge? Designed for two decks but opened with only one. Now it has two.
Wasn't the lower deck originally planned for transit?
According to Steve's page, no. The median of the upper deck was, as one option (the eventual choice was additional highway lanes).
A recent book about the bridge claims that it was: http://books.google.com/books?id=GeJkxTfuo7sC&pg=PA86 (I don't know where the idea of light rail comes from, however - that term wasn't in use until much later.) And a 1931 article: http://www.google.com/search?q=%22george+washington+bridge%22+%22lower+deck%22+subway&num=100&hl=en&safe=off&gl=us&sa=X&ei=IRzMToCDOsO1tgfY6eV_&ved=0CBIQpwUoBg&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A1920%2Ccd_max%3A1940&tbm=nws
Quote from: NE2 on November 22, 2011, 05:04:16 PM
Quote from: empirestate on November 22, 2011, 12:35:19 PM
Quote from: NE2 on November 22, 2011, 01:23:37 AM
Quote from: empirestate on November 21, 2011, 07:27:59 PM
How about the George Washington Bridge? Designed for two decks but opened with only one. Now it has two.
Wasn't the lower deck originally planned for transit?
According to Steve's page, no. The median of the upper deck was, as one option (the eventual choice was additional highway lanes).
A recent book about the bridge claims that it was: http://books.google.com/books?id=GeJkxTfuo7sC&pg=PA86 (I don't know where the idea of light rail comes from, however - that term wasn't in use until much later.) And a 1931 article: http://www.google.com/search?q=%22george+washington+bridge%22+%22lower+deck%22+subway&num=100&hl=en&safe=off&gl=us&sa=X&ei=IRzMToCDOsO1tgfY6eV_&ved=0CBIQpwUoBg&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A1920%2Ccd_max%3A1940&tbm=nws
Yeah, I only sprang for the free sources. :)
I should correct myself, as well: Steve doesn't say that the lower deck was not considered for transit, only that the upper deck was. Probably, both decks were the topic of many conversations about what sorts of conveyance should use them.
As for light rail, in those days that was called "trolleys". ;-)
Quote from: empirestate on November 22, 2011, 06:40:22 PM
Quote from: NE2 on November 22, 2011, 05:04:16 PM
A recent book about the bridge claims that it was: http://books.google.com/books?id=GeJkxTfuo7sC&pg=PA86 (I don't know where the idea of light rail comes from, however - that term wasn't in use until much later.) And a 1931 article: http://www.google.com/search?q=%22george+washington+bridge%22+%22lower+deck%22+subway&num=100&hl=en&safe=off&gl=us&sa=X&ei=IRzMToCDOsO1tgfY6eV_&ved=0CBIQpwUoBg&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A1920%2Ccd_max%3A1940&tbm=nws
Yeah, I only sprang for the free sources. :)
I should correct myself, as well: Steve doesn't say that the lower deck was not considered for transit, only that the upper deck was. Probably, both decks were the topic of many conversations about what sorts of conveyance should use them.
As for light rail, in those days that was called "trolleys". ;-)
Also called "interurbans" in suburban and rural areas.
@coelacanth That one counts, considering that the "New Highway 10" was planned starting in the 1960s. Because the connection from 610 to new 10 had always been planned, the loop (or expensive flyover as an alternative) was necessary, even if drivers didn't see it that way at first.
The portions of U.S. 69 in Bourbon County north of Fort Scott were built as Super 2 with 4-lane right of way. And I believe when they recently built the new alignment from south of Fort Scott to Arma, they purchased four-lane right of way.
agentsteel53:
I'm never sure where you guys get your information, so forgive me if I don't look it up myself. Is the southern bypass of Reynosa, Tamaulipas, another example? Until recently, Google satellite images showed it as a 'butt interchange' (yes, I just made that up) similar to the Avenue of the Saints at I-35; recently, the updated view shows the continuation of the highway under construction. When was the original interchange constructed?
La. 16 north of Denham Springs to the Livingston/Saint Helena parish line had for years right-of-way set aside for future 4-lane widening. That became a reality when expansion occurred from just south of Watson to just below Amite Church Road. The remaining undeveloped right-of-way still exists.
Quote from: qguy on November 22, 2011, 11:16:03 AM
Not in PA: OH 711, Youngstown, OH. Between I-80 and US 422. The segment from I-680 to US 422 was built in hte late 1960s. The stub-end at the interchange with I-80 was constructed with that stretch of I-80. OH 711 between the two was completed in 2005.
Though it was not completed as envisioned. Before the interchange was completed, there was a ghost ramp from future 711 north to I-80 east that would have entered 80 on the right hand side. But, as that would have overlapped with the off ramp for exit 229, a new ramp exists today that is a LEFT entrance.
There are two missing movements in that interchange. I-80 EB/OH 11 NB to OH 711 SB and OH 711 NB to I-80 WB/OH 11 SB. Presumably, it was thought that those movements wouldn't be used much.
http://maps.google.com/?ll=41.149173,-80.672114&spn=0.007045,0.021136&t=h&z=16&vpsrc=6
____________________________________________________________
Also in Ohio, east of Wooster, the US 30 freeway ended at OH 3/83 with stubs running into a hillside. US 30 got on and off the highway along with US 250.
http://maps.google.com/?ll=40.798802,-81.920972&spn=0.014164,0.042272&t=h&z=15&vpsrc=6
Quote from: mightyace on December 08, 2011, 08:24:06 PM
Also in Ohio, east of Wooster, the US 30 freeway ended at OH 3/83 with stubs running into a hillside. US 30 got on and off the highway along with US 250.
http://maps.google.com/?ll=40.798802,-81.920972&spn=0.014164,0.042272&t=h&z=15&vpsrc=6
Also not quite as envisioned. I think some of the service ramps were changed a bit.
Built almost or exactly as planned:
* US 61 between Canton and La Grange, MO: The original Super-2 with overpasses for four lanes had the NB lanes added around 2003, although there wasn't much grading done originally for the future NB lanes.
* IL 255 at the I-255/I-270 interchange.
Modification:
* The Page Avenue Extension made use of the half diamond at Bennington Place that had been built many years early. The original interchange did not come with the overpass, and the actually roadway was built wider with a concrete median compared to the original grass median.
The ramps to/from I-279 in Franklin Park were built when I-79 was under construction in the early-mid 1970s but wouldn't connect to anything until 1989. There is a scan on its history page (http://www.pahighways.com/interstates/I279.html) from the 1983 topographic map of Allegheny County which shows how far they extended off 79.
The stubs on US 422 at Wayne Avenue in Indiana and at PA 66 in Kittanning would remain from the early 70s until 1995 and 2001 respectively.
The Forest St. bridge over I-95 in Peabody, Mass. was built in the 1970s but the road below didn't open until 1988. Growing up around there, we would occasionally pass over it and for a long time the bridge went over nothing but dirt trails that ended not far south of the bridge. For a time, it didn't seem certain that the bridge would actually pass over anything but dirt, but eventually they did build the road underneath.
US 425 in Arkansas.
The south end of the Hoan Bridge (I-794) in Milwaukee, WI was a stub end from when the bridge opened the early 1970s until the Lake Parkway (WI 794, originally planned to be the Lake Freeway to extend to Illinois) was opened in the late 1990s.
Mike
I nominate the SR-176/Jennings Freeway in Cleveland. It took nearly 30 years to extend that damn freeway from Denison (Harvard) Avenue south to I-480 and Brookpark Road (SR-17) -- a distance of just under 3 miles!
They pretty much had the stub ramps from I-480 from the east done way back in the 70's, when I-480 was first built and they had the mainline lanes finished up to just under the Denison overpass when they finished that stretch in the 60s.
In fact, for nearly a decade before the Jennings was completely done, there was an overhead BGS denoting southbound SR-176 (completely covered up with green patching) and that was even BEFORE they started the first bulldozing south of Denison!!! I know that because at one time, a square of the green patch fell off and you could see part of the sign that wound up being replaced before the freeway officially opened up.
I thought someone posted this but I may be missing so if it is repeat please forgive me! I-95 and I-10 near Jacksonville and Daytona Beach had overpasses and small bridges widened ~1990 to allow for 6 laning. Which came to pass 1999-2004 on I-95 and working on I-10 to the new SR23. The bridges are ready for 6 laning all the way to the Jacksonville city limit/Duval County line
The Garden State Parkway was built with a super wide median between the Asbury Park and Raritan Toll Plazas back in the early 50s. Then nearly 20 years later another freeway was built in its median.
In Altamonte Springs, FL there were stubs at the former end of FL 414 at FL 434 for an interchange that is now built for the FL 414 extension west of FL 434 to US 441. Now, of course, the John Landis Apopka Bypass extended FL 414 beyond that, but it was conceived then.
Near Gettysburg, PA, US 15 was built as a super two with rights of way for expansion to the full freeway it is now.
In Hickory, MD there was a stub at the north end of the Bel Air Bypass of US 1, but it was flattened as the formerly planned interchange there was made into intersection when the extension was finally built in 2001. Nonetheless, \original ramps are still there from when the super two freeway ended there with the stub, but one became Water Tower Boulevard (a new local street) and the other was abandoned (seen from google satelite) post intersection opening.
Mack Hatcher Pkwy on the east side of Franklin is only 2 lanes but has room for four.
There is currently construction underway to 4 lane it from US 31 on the north side to TN 96 on the east side of town.
http://maps.google.com/?ll=35.918667,-86.863918&spn=0.075766,0.181789&t=h&z=13
In Arizona
(In 1985 Freeway Plan)
Current Loop 101 From 75th Avenue to Cave Creek Road.
Beardsly Road was a 2 Lane city Street Pre 1995 then Upgraded to A 4 Lane Frontage Road (1995) with a Wide Desert Median the freeway was later placed in that median (1995 - 1998).
(In 1985 Freeway Plan, Removed and downgraded to County Maintenance, Added Back In 2005 Freeway Plan)
Current Loop 303 From Thomas Road to Grand Avenue (US 60)
Constructed 1998-2000 as 2 Lane Rural Road Centered In 1/4 Mile Wide ROW (Underpasses constructed at Clearview Blvd and Mountain View Blvd, Both span 6 Lanes, Overpass at Grand Avenue (US 60)/BNSF Railway).
Currently Upgradeing to 6 Lane Freeway From I-10 (New Interchange) To Happy Valley Parkway/Vistanica Blvd Interchange.
The only Mississippi example of this I can think of, at least at this moment, is MS-25 between Jackson and Carthage, part of the main route between Jackson and MSU @ Starkville. Hwy 25, prior to 1984, existed only from Carthage to points north. During construction of the 2-lane route running south to Jackson, provisions were made for future widening, including construction of interchanges at the busiest crossroads. People thought it was ridiculous to build those interchanges on an otherwise 2-lane highway, but I thought "Great! At least you have SOME chance to pass the slower traffic." As it happened, the road was later widened and the interchanges, which serve roads that are today much busier than they were then, were left unmodified and now seem essential to traffic flow.
Another situation that kinda sorta fits the OP's description would be the Barnett Reservoir Dam roadway, which was built in the 1960s as a 2-laner. The dam provides a major connection between two metro-Jackson counties and had become a rush-hour nightmare by the '90s. As state and local officials publicly debated what to do about the problem, one of the engineers who had worked on the original road and had later moved away was in town visiting. He heard a news report about the problem and, thank goodness, spoke up saying that provisions had been made all those years ago for additional lanes to be built below the dam structure. Construction began very soon after and the excellent 4-lane roadway has been opened for several years now.
AbE: So now I'm wondering if there are any other cases similar to the dam road I mentioned, where provision was made for a future highway upgrade, then completely forgotten about, then at a very late date suddenly remembered and utilised.
Quote from: roadman65 on January 29, 2012, 02:27:56 AM
In Hickory, MD there was a stub at the north end of the Bel Air Bypass of US 1, but it was flattened as the formerly planned interchange there was made into intersection when the extension was finally built in 2001. Nonetheless, \original ramps are still there from when the super two freeway ended there with the stub, but one became Water Tower Boulevard (a new local street) and the other was abandoned (seen from google satelite) post intersection opening.
Interesting, not the part of that road that first came to mind!
The divided part of the US 1 Bel Air Bypass was supposed to be part of the Perring Freeway, which would have been a bypass of Belair Road that extended from northeast Baltimore to Bel Air. The Baltimore section was built (it ends just north of I-695) and a bit of the Bel Air section was built, but the middle was not. (It wasn't part of any big controversy, but just not a priority when it was killed at some point in the 1970's or so.
Anyway, the part from Benson's Corner (known locally as "Jones Junction") to Winters Run was built as a divided, limited access highway. Then, it became a Super 2 up to Hickory. About 15 years or so ago, pieces of the Bel Air Bypass were upgraded to 3 and 4 lanes, but all of the upgrades were done in one carriageway. I honestly believe that the only reason they did not use the other carriageway is because there is literally one business the size of a small house blocking it, and for whatever reason, they weren't bought out/condemned. Then, in about 2000-01 the bypass was built as a dual carriageway around Hickory, reconnecting with US1 business just north of MD 543 (Fountain Green Road). So, the whole Bel Air section of the old Perring was built piecemeal, just in a different way than anticipated. Within the past year, a long-needed guardrail divider was constructed to separate the super 3 and super 4 lanes sections.
As for the partial interchange with MD 23 and US 1 Bus in Hickory, I don't remember there being a stub there begging to be extended (otherwise it would have gone through the then Bel Air Roller Rink), but the intersections there were completely reconfigured, leaving some mini abandoned grass alignments (the sharp curve in MD23, the end of Bynum Rd, and the bit of US 1 that used to stop in front of the roller rink).
In Massachusetts:
Quote from: PurdueBill on December 12, 2011, 05:08:24 PM
The Forest St. bridge over I-95 in Peabody, Mass. was built in the 1970s but the road below didn't open until 1988. Growing up around there, we would occasionally pass over it and for a long time the bridge went over nothing but dirt trails that ended not far south of the bridge. For a time, it didn't seem certain that the bridge would actually pass over anything but dirt, but eventually they did build the road underneath.
I went over there a few times myself in the early 80s. Many were using the dirt roadbed underneath as a dumping ground. I even saw an old matress there. BTW, the Forest Street overpass has a '1972' date. I guess the reasoning behind not originally building it out to 128 was due the fact that the timing coincided with the decison to cancel 95 south of 128. The originally-planned interchange would've been a modified cloverleaf w/a flyover ramp from 128 south to 95 north & south; not too much different from the original 95-128 (now 95/93/US 1) interchange in Canton.
I-95/495 interchange (Exit 6/13) in Mansfield. The full cloverleaf interchange was constructed when 495 northwest of 95 was constructed in the late 60s. The then-ghost ramps to 495 South/from 495 North wouldn't be opened until the mid-80s southern extension of 495 became reality.
Route 25 near US 6 and Route 28 in E. Wareham. Provisions were made for an eastern extension (that ultimately opened in the late 80s) when the interchange was originally built in the 60s.
I-290/495/TO 85 interchange in Shrewsbury. Entire interchange (no sure about the fly-over ramp from I-290 East to I-495 North, that might've been a later replacement for an inner-cloverleaf ramp) was built in the late 60s but the eastern connector to Route 85 opened in the 80s. Original plans called for an extension of 290 further east but never materialized.
I-93 in Somerville. Northbound entrance stub from the long-cancelled Inner belt (I-695) would be later as an access ramp from the Leverett Circle connector; courtesy of the Big Dig project.
A more recent one in Salem - a stub for Bridge Street Bypass (Route 107 Extension) was built when the new Essex Bridge (for Route 1A) was built but laid dormant for almost a decade until the Bypass was built a few years ago.
A few more for Greater Philly, PA:
I-95 in Central Philadelphia. 2 on-ramps to southbound 95 and ramp stubs for the Vine Expressway (I-676) were built in the 70s but didn't open to traffic until 1991.
I-95 in South Philadelphia. South of the Girard Point Bridge, 95 used to end at Enterprise Ave. (Exit 15). The mainline stub from that interchange wouldn't be used until the entire 'missing link' of I-95 was built and opened in 1985.
Quote from: Alex on November 22, 2011, 04:32:02 PMThe interchange between Interstate 95 and 476 sat unused for years awaiting the completion of the Mid-County Expressway to the north. It opened in 1989 IIRC as a glorified connector to MacDade Boulevard, before I-476 was finally completed (south of I-76). The unfortunate aspect of this fact is that I-95 bottlenecks to two lanes per direction at the 1970s-era interchange.
One can also add the I-76/476 interchange in W.Conshocken to that list. The mainline 476 overpass and the ramps to 476 South/from 476 North were built in the 70s but weren't opened until 1991.
Prior to that interchange opening, a 70s PennDOT-era button-copy northbound pull-through sign was erected over the then-unused section read "
476 NORTH Allentown" Ironically, the sign was taken down once the road fully-opened in 1991. Note: the sign bridge is still there today though unused - a new exit sign for 76 West was erected on a cantilever structure further back before the underpass.
On the southbound side, there was a similar sign but it just showed a blank 3di shield on the upper-left corner of the sign. The sign would've likely have read "
476 SOUTH Chester had PennDOT supplied the button-copy numerals and letters when the southern extension opened; but, again the sign was taken down when the road actually opened.
One up-and-coming: US 202 & PA 611 cloverleaf interchange in Doylestown. Ramps to 202 South/from 202 North were built in the 60s(?) but have laid unused... until the 202 Parkway (Bypass) is completed.
MD 32 in the Crownsville/Millersville area of Maryland had right-of-way for a second two-lane roadway to the west (or south) between its then-eastern terminus at MD 178 in Crownsville, extending west across Route 3 to what was then a signalized intersection at MD 175. (This goes back to the early 1980s, and details are rather fuzzy. From repetitive passage through that area, I do not remember any more what the Route 3/Route 32 intersection/interchange was originally . . .) This is now a portion of I-97 and the MD 32 freeway.
Another one in Texas that I'm surprised that everyone is missing is at the I-10/610 east interchange in Houston, ghost ramp and bridge provisions were made within that stack for a future freeway to diverve to the northeast. That freeway extension (the Crosby Freeway/US 90) opened within the past year or two.
:nod:
Mike
The western end of I-890 in Schenectady County, N.Y. had ghost ramps for the full interchange for Exit 1A (NY Route 5S) and leading up to the bridge over the Mohawk from the 70s until the mid 1990s when they completed it all.
I only see one NC reference, so I will try to add another. US 311 from Winston to High Point has been a freeway for quite a few years, and the Guilford County portion it is now officially I-74 (still referenced as "Future" in Forsyth).
US 52 south from Winston to Lexington was built to freeway (but just short of Interstate) standards back about 15 years ago, and now it is designated to be I-285 (just a bit of shoulder work is all that it needs).
Man, how could I forget this one.
In Boston, the original Central Artery/Northeast Expressway interchange. The Bi-Level interchange was built in the 1950s with stub-outs for the then-Future Inner Belt (I-695). The stub-outs would ultimately be connected w/I-93 in the early 70s.
However, the interchange had some controversy and safety issues. Controversial because its originally-intended purpose for those stub-outs were for a bypass/beltway that would diverted through-traffic AWAY from the Artery & Downtown Boston. Linking I-93 to the Artery WITHOUT the Inner Belt would mean that more traffic would be dumped on the then-already crowed Artery. Safety-wise, the distance between the interchange ramps with those of the Storrow Drive interchange was about 800 feet (?); which created a dangerous weaving situation.
One Boston Globe article commented that the I-93 connection to that interchange turned out to be a political embarassment for then-Governor Frank Sargent. When the decision was made to kill off the Inner Belt, much of the I-93 portions (including the link to the Central Artery) were already built but not yet opened to traffic; at the time, I-93 just ended in Somerville at Route 28 (McGrath Highway).
In view of that decision (nixing I-695) and concerns regarding dumping more traffic on the Central Artery, Gov. Sargent originally decided NOT to open I-93 but later relented after residents protested the state of constructing a lengthy highway and denying traffic of using it.
In the early 90s, the interchange would be partially replaced with re-routed ramps to/from the Northeast Expressway (US 1) located further north and onto the west side of I-93 as part of the Central Artery North Area (CANA) Project; the original ramps were on the east side of the Artery. This project was a precursor to the Big Dig project; the latter project would ultimately replace the entire interchange with what's currently there.
Quote from: roadman65 on January 29, 2012, 02:27:56 AM
Near Gettysburg, PA, US 15 was built as a super two with rights of way for expansion to the full freeway it is now.
Except for two underpasses which only had enough ofan opening in them for the original two lanes. When they did expand 15 they had to close the roads on the embankments that raised them above 15 so they could cut new openings in them.
back in 1987 or so I worked for a Office automation company that had a contract with PenDot. I was working on a unit in the executive suites at PenDot HQ and got to talking with one of the senior staff people and mentioned that I wish they would expand 15 (I was driving from Frederick MD to Harrisburg to support their site) and that to me it looked easy except for those two embankments. He started laughing. He said no one would admit to allowing those two to be built that way but they had been holding up the project for years. It seemed like they started doing the dualization about six months after the Office automation company went belly up and I didn't have to run up that way anymore.
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 17, 2012, 06:14:01 PM
Man, how could I forget this one.
In Boston, the original Central Artery/Northeast Expressway interchange. The Bi-Level interchange was built in the 1950s with stub-outs for the then-Future Inner Belt (I-695). The stub-outs would ultimately be connected w/I-93 in the early 70s.
However, the interchange had some controversy and safety issues. Controversial because its originally-intended purpose for those stub-outs were for a bypass/beltway that would diverted through-traffic AWAY from the Artery & Downtown Boston. Linking I-93 to the Artery WITHOUT the Inner Belt would mean that more traffic would be dumped on the then-already crowed Artery. Safety-wise, the distance between the interchange ramps with those of the Storrow Drive interchange was about 800 feet (?); which created a dangerous weaving situation.
The other upshot of a lot of traffic coming from Leverett Circle up to the northbound level was that it necessitated the lane drop northbound on the Artery, squeezing to 2 lanes what really needed more than the 3 the Artery had south of there. When that logjam was removed with the Leverett Connector opened, it's amazing what a difference there was. The same kind of dangerous weave existed northbound, albeit not quite as bad, with those coming from Leverett Circle headed for the Tobin Bridge needing to move over at least one lane within the short length of the High Bridge. What a mess.
The other stubs, those for 695 north of there on 93, did manage to get half-used when the Leverett Connector opened, which I believe was already mentioned upthread. Amazing that those old stubs sat unused for so long and that they managed to find a use for them.
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 10, 2012, 11:15:29 AMOne can also add the I-76/476 interchange in W.Conshocken to that list. The mainline 476 overpass and the ramps to 476 South/from 476 North were built in the 70s but weren't opened until 1991.
Prior to that interchange opening, a 70s PennDOT-era button-copy northbound pull-through sign was erected over the then-unused section read "476 NORTH Allentown" Ironically, the sign was taken down once the road fully-opened in 1991. Note: the sign bridge is still there today though unused - a new exit sign for 76 West was erected on a cantilever structure further back before the underpass.
On the southbound side, there was a similar sign but it just showed a blank 3di shield on the upper-left corner of the sign. The sign would've likely have read "476 SOUTH Chester had PennDOT supplied the button-copy numerals and letters when the southern extension opened; but, again the sign was taken down when the road actually opened.
The below-link: shows a distant photo of the original button-copy signs at the I-76/476/PA 23 interchange (middle photo):
http://www.pennways.com/I476_PA_WCI.html (http://www.pennways.com/I476_PA_WCI.html)