Highways we would've called implausible, impossible, or not needed

[cl94]

I-93 north of I-89. Unless 93 would have gone due north and hit an Quebec Autoroute (proposed A-65) leading directly to Quebec City,  US 3 would have done and of course you still have the 2 lane through Franconia Notch.  And taking 89 to 91 to get to St. Johnsbury isn't that much longer.

Free 90 east of I-787.  I-90 could have been duplexed with 87 from 21A to 24.  If anything, a crosstown expressway (I-387) would do now.

Free 90 is needed east of I-787 for the bridge.

[CtrlAltDel]

I-180 was definitely a waste.

[cl94]

I-180 was definitely a waste.

Which one? Illinois or Wyoming, the latter of which isn't even limited-access.

[CtrlAltDel]

I-180 in Wyoming isn't really a waste of a road, just an interstate shield.

I-180 in Illinois is the one I was talking about, currently boasting of an AADT just under 3,600 at its busiest point.

[Chris19001]

The Cross-Bronx should probably be mentioned somewhere in here.  It certainly has its use, but boy did it take some work to build.  (In many ways)

[hbelkins]

When the Mountain Parkway was first proposed in Kentucky, it sparked a feud between two Democrat governors. A former governor (I can't remember which one) criticized the proposal of Gov. Bert T. Combs, saying the Mountain Parkway was a road that started nowhere, went nowhere, and served nowhere in between. I guess he thought it was not needed.

[Walleye2013]

Interstate 490 in Ohio. As built, for now, it is essentially a glorified bridge. Had the Clark Avenue Freeway been built, this would be different, and the Opportunity Corridor is once again making it worthwhile.

[Henry]

I-73 and I-74 in NC definitely qualify for this, especially when the latter route will never connect to Cincinnati in our lifetimes.

[Max Rockatansky]

I could see CA 120, CA 108 and CA 4 qualifying for this list given all the other split routes that ground to a halt out in California.

[Rothman]

When the Mountain Parkway was first proposed in Kentucky, it sparked a feud between two Democrat governors. A former governor (I can't remember which one) criticized the proposal of Gov. Bert T. Combs, saying the Mountain Parkway was a road that started nowhere, went nowhere, and served nowhere in between. I guess he thought it was not needed.

I can't imagine what it was like to try to get to Eastern Kentucky from Lexington/Frankfort/Louisville before the Mountain Parkway.  Taking the roads down a functional class or two from where they are today must add hours to the trip (especially thinking of my mother who remembers when portions of KY 122 were simply the creek bed).

[Avalanchez71]

I would assume that many of the state routes were gravel and less than gravel.  I think to this day there are still gravel state roads out that way.  Not all homes had electricity back then either.  I am certain that there were creeks to ford as well.

[TXtoNJ]

Physical feasability:

Interstates and US Highways in the mountain west.

If you've driven there, you'd know many are actually busy enough to be needed.

Mostly truck traffic that's only there because an Interstate exists. The cargo would be on rails otherwise.

[kphoger]

I could see CA 120, CA 108 and CA 4 qualifying for this list given all the other split routes that ground to a halt out in California.

CA-4? That route gets jammed at the Concord section.

This thread is not about what highways we currently think were unnecessary.  It's about highways we would have said back when they were being planned were implausible, impossible, or not needed.

[bing101]

I could see CA 120, CA 108 and CA 4 qualifying for this list given all the other split routes that ground to a halt out in California.

CA-4? That route gets jammed at the Concord section.

This thread is not about what highways we currently think were unnecessary.  It's about highways we would have said back when they were being planned were implausible, impossible, or not needed.

CA-21 Now I-680 in Benicia looked like one such route that looks unnecessary along with CA-113 and I-505.

[Max Rockatansky]

I could see CA 120, CA 108 and CA 4 qualifying for this list given all the other split routes that ground to a halt out in California.

CA-4? That route gets jammed at the Concord section.

This thread is not about what highways we currently think were unnecessary.  It's about highways we would have said back when they were being planned were implausible, impossible, or not needed.

Right and nobody would question having seasonal mountain passes of the Sierras?   They sure would these days. 

[kphoger]

I could see CA 120, CA 108 and CA 4 qualifying for this list given all the other split routes that ground to a halt out in California.

CA-4? That route gets jammed at the Concord section.

This thread is not about what highways we currently think were unnecessary.  It's about highways we would have said back when they were being planned were implausible, impossible, or not needed.

Right and nobody would question having seasonal mountain passes of the Sierras?   They sure would these days. 

OK, but the rationale I quoted for it not being implausible, impossible, or not needed was "That route gets jammed at the Concord section".  Present tense, present-day conditions.  Are you trying to make the argument that roadgeeks in the 1930s should not have objected to the highway because they should have foreseen traffic issues eight decades into the future?

[Max Rockatansky]

I could see CA 120, CA 108 and CA 4 qualifying for this list given all the other split routes that ground to a halt out in California.

CA-4? That route gets jammed at the Concord section.

This thread is not about what highways we currently think were unnecessary.  It's about highways we would have said back when they were being planned were implausible, impossible, or not needed.

Right and nobody would question having seasonal mountain passes of the Sierras?   They sure would these days. 

OK, but the rationale I quoted for it not being implausible, impossible, or not needed was "That route gets jammed at the Concord section".  Present tense, present-day conditions.  Are you trying to make the argument that roadgeeks in the 1930s should not have objected to the highway because they should have foreseen traffic issues eight decades into the future?

Isn't the point of the thread to suppose what could consider implausible, impossible or not needed in a present sense?   I would stand by that statement and say that if those three routes didn't exist on anything but paper in 2016 that they would be challenged as not needed.  It's not just on the basis of them being seasonal but from the stand point of mountain grade maintenance and environmental red tape. The same could be said for a lot of mountain roads in general.  It was a lot easier to build things say in the 1930s than it would be today just in general.  Isn't that one of the primary reasons 168 and 190 didn't get finished?...because they weren't needed and changes in the climate of how easy it was to build a roadway changed drastically? 

[kphoger]

Isn't the point of the thread to suppose what could consider implausible, impossible or not needed in a present sense?

Nope.

I can't think of any off the top of my head, but these are routes that exist today AARoads or roadgeeks would've called unnecessary, impossible to build, not ever happening, etc before they where built.

[Max Rockatansky]

Isn't the point of the thread to suppose what could consider implausible, impossible or not needed in a present sense?

Nope.

I can't think of any off the top of my head, but these are routes that exist today AARoads or roadgeeks would've called unnecessary, impossible to build, not ever happening, etc before they where built.

Meh, that would make for a pretty boring thread if all we did was stick to that...suppose that's my error for not reading original post all that through. 

[kphoger]

The topic includes the word "would've."  Pretty big clue.

[hbelkins]

When the Mountain Parkway was first proposed in Kentucky, it sparked a feud between two Democrat governors. A former governor (I can't remember which one) criticized the proposal of Gov. Bert T. Combs, saying the Mountain Parkway was a road that started nowhere, went nowhere, and served nowhere in between. I guess he thought it was not needed.

I can't imagine what it was like to try to get to Eastern Kentucky from Lexington/Frankfort/Louisville before the Mountain Parkway.  Taking the roads down a functional class or two from where they are today must add hours to the trip (especially thinking of my mother who remembers when portions of KY 122 were simply the creek bed).

I've driven the entire "old" route from Winchester to Whitesburg along KY 15, but not in one sitting. Before the completion of the new route in the early 1960, Hazard to Jackson alone took an hour. Jackson to Campton involved a torturous mountain crossing just outside Jackson that involved some hellacious switchbacks. I'd say the trip easily took four hours.

As to getting from Winchester or Lexington to Salyersville and the "Three P's," it's feasible that through traffic might have used KY 15, KY 191 and KY 134 (the routes that most closely parallel the Mountain Parkway) but I'd say most traffic used KY 40, which later became US 460. Portions of US 460 between Mt. Sterling and West Liberty have been rebuilt, but it's still a good hour or longer drive. Then tack on the additional time to Salyersville and then over to Prestonsburg or Paintsville, then to Pikeville, and I think you're looking at about three hours. Pikeville to Winchester now can conceivably be done in two hours if you drive 60 mph on the 55 mph roads and don't hit a lot of traffic lights north of Pikeville or slow traffic along KY 114 that you can't pass.

[Max Rockatansky]

The topic includes the word "would've."  Pretty big clue.

What can I see other than "my bad?" 

[sparker]

This may be edging close to stretching the definition of the OP, but, IMO, one of the more unnecessary projects -- involving rerouting of a highway and upgrading a local road to replace it -- was the 1966 relocation of CA 79 between Radec (the old original southern terminus of CA 71) and Hemet (the old alignment is now County R3).  Totally a political animal by design -- Riverside County developers desired to expand the Temecula region into, well, what it is today -- a higher-end exurb with a secondary purpose as a tourist destination (the local wine industry).  To do this they lobbied for a redefined CA 79; within the 1964 renumbering effort it became a "split route", with the northern end of the southern section and the southern end of the northern section defined as terminating at US 395 in Temecula (now I-15, of course), effectively requiring a rerouting of the northern section to satisfy the new legislated requirement.  The object of this exercise was to funnel traffic from as many directions as possible into Temecula and environs.

The original purpose of Sign Route 79, most of which became CA 79, was to provide a continuous route skirting the west side of the San Jacinto, Santa Rosa, and Vallecito mountain ranges that separated the "Inland Empire" section of Riverside County from the low desert (Salton Sea area) between I-8 and I-10.  Even though the section between Radec and Hemet was not particularly efficient (it contained many right-angle turns to follow property and/or grant lines -- and to avoid the rocky outcroppings that characterize the region), it was no worse than other state facilities in the general area -- and it certainly did its job, providing connectivity between central Riverside County and eastern San Diego County. 

But the Temecula developers had their way.  CA 79 was multiplexed west along CA 74 from Hemet to Winchester Road, then deployed SSW along that facility to US 395 along that highway's coincidence with CA 71 at the north end of the original village of Temecula.  I first encountered this rerouting as a college freshman on a field-trip for a land-use class in the UCR geography department; the prof was well aware of the political maneuverings regarding this route, and wanted us to see how it affected the local picture.  The original road through the small town of Winchester, about two miles south of CA 74, used a series of right-angle turns to navigate the town's street system; it was being bypassed (late '67) with a broad S-curve that obviated the in-town turns.  The rest of the route into Temecula was being widened from its original 2-lane configuration with multiple passing lanes in each direction (it went over several shallow hills).  By the time we reached US 395, we had passed several newly constructed strip-malls on the roadside, with signage indicating future construction of major retail establishments.  Old Town Temecula was still quaint, with wooden sidewalks on "Old 395"; some of these remain today.  But it was a pointed lesson in just how quickly sprawl happens -- and how it can be maneuvered into existence with behind-the-scenes legislative tinkering.

Old 79 was fine as is; today, anyone following 79 in either direction must multiplex with I-15 (perpetually crowded, as Temecula's location makes it not only a viable exurb of the Riverside area but also that of greater San Diego) for about 2 miles.  The realignment was -- and is, to me, both an unnecessary bit of work as well as an interruption of a workable regional route.  To add insult to injury, the junction of present 79 and county R3 features minimal signage to indicate that it's a shortcut to the Hemet area; the last time I passed this junction around 2010 the "R3" trailblazer pentagon was faded almost beyond recognition -- might have been the one that was posted 50 years ago!     

[jp the roadgeek]

I-93 north of I-89. Unless 93 would have gone due north and hit an Quebec Autoroute (proposed A-65) leading directly to Quebec City,  US 3 would have done and of course you still have the 2 lane through Franconia Notch.  And taking 89 to 91 to get to St. Johnsbury isn't that much longer.

Free 90 east of I-787.  I-90 could have been duplexed with 87 from 21A to 24.  If anything, a crosstown expressway (I-387) would do now.

Free 90 is needed east of I-787 for the bridge.

Bridge would become NY 387 or an extended NY 43

[Rothman]

I-93 north of I-89. Unless 93 would have gone due north and hit an Quebec Autoroute (proposed A-65) leading directly to Quebec City,  US 3 would have done and of course you still have the 2 lane through Franconia Notch.  And taking 89 to 91 to get to St. Johnsbury isn't that much longer.

Free 90 east of I-787.  I-90 could have been duplexed with 87 from 21A to 24.  If anything, a crosstown expressway (I-387) would do now.

Free 90 is needed east of I-787 for the bridge.

Bridge would become NY 387 or an extended NY 43