Your State's Most Controversial Interstate

[Bickendan]

In Oregon the never-built Mount Hood Freeway likely takes the cake for most controversial freeway.  The latest big brouhaha was replacing the Interstate bridges on I-5 crossing the Columbia River. 

Rick

For the cancelleds, definitely I-80N along the Mount Hood.
I-505 in Northwest Portland probably qualifies.
I-205's Yellowbook alignments.

For what got built: I-205 along 95th Ave. There was some serious effort to get it cancelled.
And, of course, the Columbia River Crossing replacing the Interstate Bridge.

[SSOWorld]

I-43 in Wisconsin was built with protests of farmers as it cut through prime farmland.

That certainly seems lost in the more recent ones - I-41, I-894 (maybe)

[Scott5114]

In Oklahoma, I don't know of any real opposition to the Interstates. Some turnpikes have drawn a fair bit of opposition, but none of them were Interstates.

[slorydn1]

I've spent pretty much my entire shift tonight trying to think of one for NC, and not counting the roadgeek opposition to I-87 I really can't think of one.

The closest I can think of was the battle (if you can even call it one) between the US-70 corridor and the US-117 corridor for the final section of I-40 in the 70's and 80's but looking back on it I don't think there was much controversy in that either. The Wilmington section just wanted it more than the New Bern-Morehead City section did-and they had the political muscle in Jim Hunt to get it done. Most of the old timers that lived here during that time frame that I have talked to really didn't want a cross country Interstate coming to the Crystal Coast. Back then they were concerned that it would alter the out in the country living that they had enjoyed their whole lives.

[Eth]

Some other Georgians would have to confirm if the state's most controversial interstate is in fact I-75.

Limiting the discussion to Interstates that were actually built (otherwise I-485 would probably be the winner), I-75 is probably the best candidate, both for the reasons you mentioned and for the routing of the Downtown Connector through Atlanta, which resulted in the loss of several minority neighborhoods. In the present day, there are proposals being bandied about to "stitch" together the street grid in the northern part of downtown in the vicinity of exits 249A/B by capping the freeway.

[NWI_Irish96]

Indiana's infamous I-69 is sure up there.

It isn't designated as an interstate yet, but the Louisville East End Bridge would be up there also

[Jardine]

I-35 north of Ames, in Iowa, earned some lawsuits prior to construction for the section that angles SW-NE.  Ostensibly, the farmers were PO'd as farm fields to accommodate an Interstate not running mostly N-S or E-W are annoying to farm with all the resultant triangular shaped pieces.  As I recall, the 'real' reason had to do with communities that would have been along the Interstate (and wanted to be along it) if the diagonal bit was much further north, or if the diagonal bit was instead an E-W concurrency with I-90.

[Henry]

I'll probably say I-82, for two reasons: It's now completely north of I-84, and has more of a north-south angle than an east-west one, thus more deserving of an odd number.

[Beltway]

I've spent pretty much my entire shift tonight trying to think of one for NC, and not counting the roadgeek opposition to I-87 I really can't think of one.

Heh.  NC is ultra-pro-development and ultra-pro-growth.  Growth-control advocacy groups are/were behind nearly every freeway controversy in the U.S., and NC doesn't have any such groups of significance.

[hbelkins]

I've spent pretty much my entire shift tonight trying to think of one for NC, and not counting the roadgeek opposition to I-87 I really can't think of one.

I'd nominate the I-26 expansion in Asheville and the amount of reconstruction that's going to be required at the US 19/US 23/I-240 interchange.

[SP Cook]

As far as NIMBYs and BANANAs, WV really did not have that relative to the interstates, that was reserved for the still uncompleted Corridor H. 

The main issue in WV, historically, was we built our interstates (and corridors) roughly in reverse order of importance, mostly due to issues relating to keeping tolls on the Turnpike and the routing of I-64. 

I-64 had two controversial issues.  As it ended up being built, it zigs and zags through the Charleston area, crossing the same river four times, plus and on-off ramp that is also a bridge over the river, thus ending up on the same side of said river it started on.  This was mostly for two reasons, crossing in South Charleston to provide direct access to what was then a Union Carbide research center (since mostly broken up and a state owned white elephant) ; and then through the center of town, which was mostly "slum clearance".  Most towns of Charleston's size were simply bypassed. 

The other was the route of 64 between Charleston and Lewisburg.  Whether to follow US 60, which was the shortest route or to, as it ended up, multi-plex with I-77 (the turnpike) and push all the 64 traffic onto a toll road. 

[cl94]

NY?

I-95, Cross Bronx, the One Mile of which Caro wrote.

I-895, most likely being boulevarded

I-81 viaduct, stupid tunnel advocates wasting money on what should be a replacement of some sort.

I-278, the Gowanus.  Also see Caro.

Probably others, but it's lunch time and I am out.

I-787. The hipsters at All Over Albany want it removed south of I-90. Don't know how seriously NYSDOT is considering that one given that the entire thing has upwards of 40,000 vehicles/day.

[PHLBOS]

I've spent pretty much my entire shift tonight trying to think of one for NC, and not counting the roadgeek opposition to I-87 I really can't think of one.

That so-called opposition, like I-99 in PA and now NY, has more to do with the route number selection not the planning & construction of the highway corridor itself.

I'll probably say I-82, for two reasons: It's now completely north of I-84, and has more of a north-south angle than an east-west one, thus more deserving of an odd number.

Prior to 1980, I-84 was I-80N.

The OP is asking for the most controversial Interstate in terms of planning and/or building not so much as the route number.  That said, unless there's some local info. out there that says otherwise; I-82 doesn't meet what the OP's looking for.

[pianocello]

I-35 north of Ames, in Iowa, earned some lawsuits prior to construction for the section that angles SW-NE.  Ostensibly, the farmers were PO'd as farm fields to accommodate an Interstate not running mostly N-S or E-W are annoying to farm with all the resultant triangular shaped pieces.  As I recall, the 'real' reason had to do with communities that would have been along the Interstate (and wanted to be along it) if the diagonal bit was much further north, or if the diagonal bit was instead an E-W concurrency with I-90.

I was going to say the same thing about farmers being against diagonal interstates, but in the context of I-380 between Cedar Rapids and Waterloo (and, slightly off-topic, IA 330 NE of Des Moines). I actually wasn't aware of the opposition to the diagonal section of I-35.

[HazMatt]

I've spent pretty much my entire shift tonight trying to think of one for NC, and not counting the roadgeek opposition to I-87 I really can't think of one.

I'd nominate the I-26 expansion in Asheville and the amount of reconstruction that's going to be required at the US 19/US 23/I-240 interchange.

I can't find it now, but I remember reading about sizable protests to the Beaucatcher cut on I-240 in Asheville.

[LM117]

I've spent pretty much my entire shift tonight trying to think of one for NC, and not counting the roadgeek opposition to I-87 I really can't think of one.

That so-called opposition, like I-99 in PA and now NY, has more to do with the route number selection not the planning & construction of the highway corridor itself.

You might want to take a good look at the I-87 thread. There are vocal posters who do not think US-64/US-17 should become an interstate at ALL. The numbering issue is just the tip of the iceberg.

[cl94]

I've spent pretty much my entire shift tonight trying to think of one for NC, and not counting the roadgeek opposition to I-87 I really can't think of one.

That so-called opposition, like I-99 in PA and now NY, has more to do with the route number selection not the planning & construction of the highway corridor itself.

You might want to take a good look at the I-87 thread. There are vocal posters who do not think US-64/US-17 should become an interstate at ALL. The numbering issue is just the tip of the iceberg.

Eh, from experience, 95-58 is painful. A 70 MPH Interstate to bypass it would be nice.

[adventurernumber1]

I've spent pretty much my entire shift tonight trying to think of one for NC, and not counting the roadgeek opposition to I-87 I really can't think of one.

That so-called opposition, like I-99 in PA and now NY, has more to do with the route number selection not the planning & construction of the highway corridor itself.

You might want to take a good look at the I-87 thread. There are vocal posters who do not think US-64/US-17 should become an interstate at ALL. The numbering issue is just the tip of the iceberg.

Eh, from experience, 95-58 is painful. A 70 MPH Interstate to bypass it would be nice.

With me personally, the biggest issue is the numbering. It being an interstate corridor itself is a good idea in my opinion, but I strongly think that it should rather have been numbered I-46.

But the point, of course, is that not everybody is okay with the interstate highway itself either, as some people don't want it to be an interstate at all, as was noted.

[vdeane]

I-787. The hipsters at All Over Albany want it removed south of I-90. Don't know how seriously NYSDOT is considering that one given that the entire thing has upwards of 40,000 vehicles/day.

I'd go with I-81.  There are regularly articles and opinion pieces in the news on both sides of the issue.  I don't see the same with I-787; plus the fact that it was just rehabbed means it isn't at the forefront of the public's mind outside of the activist communities, unlike I-81.  There is no serious consideration towards removing  I-787 within the next 20-25 years.  After that, who knows.

(personal opinion)

You might want to take a good look at the I-87 thread. There are vocal posters who do not think US-64/US-17 should become an interstate at ALL. The numbering issue is just the tip of the iceberg.

Eh, from experience, 95-58 is painful. A 70 MPH Interstate to bypass it would be nice.

It's not so much opposition to the idea of having an interstate bypass of the existing routes, rather than an interstate connecting Raleigh and Norfolk should do just that in the most efficient manner possible, rather than meander through every town in northeastern NC.

[bugo]

The Creek Turnpike in Oklahoma was controversial when the section between Memorial and the Arkansas River was being planned and built. Whether the Creek Turnpike is an Interstate or not is in question. From https://www.interstate-guide.com/i-044.html:

The SAFETEA-LU of 2005 added the Creek Turnpike as a future segment of the Interstate Highway System. However, no numerical designation was assigned. The language is found in Section 1908(a)(1), INCLUSION OF CERTAIN ROUTE SEGMENTS ON INTERSTATE SYSTEM AND NHS:

CREEK TURNPIKE, OKLAHOMA.-The Secretary shall designate as part of the Interstate System (as defined in section 101 of title 23, United States Code) in accordance with section 103(c)(4) of such title the portion of the Creek Turnpike connecting Interstate Route 44 east and west of Tulsa, Oklahoma.

As such, the Creek Turnpike is signed with Joplin and Oklahoma City for long-distance travelers along I-44 headed through Tulsa. It was given the designation of SH 364 by the Oklahoma Department of Transportation on March 10, 2014. The same minutes included the numbering of SH 351 for the previously unnumbered portions of the Muskogee Turnpike from Tulsa southeast to I-40 near Webbers Falls.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

I-35 north of Ames, in Iowa, earned some lawsuits prior to construction for the section that angles SW-NE.  Ostensibly, the farmers were PO'd as farm fields to accommodate an Interstate not running mostly N-S or E-W are annoying to farm with all the resultant triangular shaped pieces.  As I recall, the 'real' reason had to do with communities that would have been along the Interstate (and wanted to be along it) if the diagonal bit was much further north, or if the diagonal bit was instead an E-W concurrency with I-90.

The original plan for I-35 was for it to angle SW from Albert Lea to the Iowa border along US 69 before turning back southward, which is also reflected in some of the late 1950s Minnesota state maps. Mason City was the one who largely pushed for I-35 to be routed along US 65 instead in northern Iowa.

[fillup420]

I've spent pretty much my entire shift tonight trying to think of one for NC, and not counting the roadgeek opposition to I-87 I really can't think of one.

I'd nominate the I-26 expansion in Asheville and the amount of reconstruction that's going to be required at the US 19/US 23/I-240 interchange.

That, along with the required construction to bring US 19/23/25/70 up to interstate standards since that section is technically "Future I-26" and has been that way for a very long time now.

[Beltway]

You might want to take a good look at the I-87 thread. There are vocal posters who do not think US-64/US-17 should become an interstate at ALL. The numbering issue is just the tip of the iceberg.

Eh, from experience, 95-58 is painful. A 70 MPH Interstate to bypass it would be nice.

Not when it would be 20 to 25 miles longer.  And I-95 has 70 mph.

[froggie]

I-35 north of Ames, in Iowa, earned some lawsuits prior to construction for the section that angles SW-NE.  Ostensibly, the farmers were PO'd as farm fields to accommodate an Interstate not running mostly N-S or E-W are annoying to farm with all the resultant triangular shaped pieces.  As I recall, the 'real' reason had to do with communities that would have been along the Interstate (and wanted to be along it) if the diagonal bit was much further north, or if the diagonal bit was instead an E-W concurrency with I-90.

The original plan for I-35 was for it to angle SW from Albert Lea to the Iowa border along US 69 before turning back southward, which is also reflected in some of the late 1950s Minnesota state maps. Mason City was the one who largely pushed for I-35 to be routed along US 65 instead in northern Iowa.

There were actually two prior plans for I-35 south of Albert Lea before the approved decision to go straight south and angle in Iowa.  The original 1957 plan (which lasted at least until 1960) had the concurrency with I-90 that Jardine noted...it would have turned south from I-90 about a mile west of MN 13.  The early 1960s plan removed the I-90 concurrency, having I-35 continuing south across Albert Lea Lake, but then turned it westward past US 65/Exit 8 and passing through the Twin Lakes before following the US 69 corridor (west of 69 proper) into Iowa.

[Bruce]

Washington:

I-90 between Seattle and Bellevue. Wasn't finished until 1993 after decades of environmental litigation, design changes, a botched bridge repair (that resulted in the sinking of the 1940 floating span), and other construction hiccups.

I-5 is a close second, given that it involved leveling a bit of the city (including part of the Chinatown area...totally not influenced by that, nope).