Cancelled freeways (esp. lesser known cities)
Michael G. Koerner
>
> On Wed, 14 Jul 1999 03:00:57 GMT, erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu <erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu> wrote:
> >Kurumi suggested
> >"Anyone up for starting a thread listing all cancelled projects in your
> >city?" Great idea. Washington, Toronto, and the northeast get a lot of
> >posts, but what about the rest of the country? I started a new post to
> >give it a proper name.
>
> I-165 in Indianapolis was cancelled. It would have extended I-69
> south into the city linking with the inner loop at the current
> I-70/I-65 north split.
I can trace possible routings for a BUNCH of never built freeways inside
I-465. How many of these 'logical' routes were actually 'officially' proposed?
> In Chicago the Crosstown Expressway was cancelled. It would have
> run along Cicero Ave. linking the Kennedy with the Stevenson and
> even beyond I believe.
IIRC, this was to connect with the Dan Ryan (I-90/94) at about the NW
end of the Skyway (I-90). Even deeper in the past was a proposed
northwestward extension of the skyway as a cross-country toll highway,
much like the highway to the east. This died when the I-system was
approved by Congress in the mid 1950s.
Also, the never built freeway along Stony Island Av to connect the
Calumet (I-94 via the current 'spur') to Lake Shore Drive at Jackson
Park, a northward extension of LSD to Evanston (and beyond) on never
built landfill, a connection between the 'Ohio/Ontario Feeder' and LSD
at the 'curve' at the south end of Lincoln Park (by Michigan Av and
LSD), and, of course, never built extensions to the 'Amstutz' highway in Waukegan.
--
____________________________________________________________________________
Regards,
Michael G. Koerner
Appleton, WI
***NOTICE*** SPAMfilter in use, please remove ALL 'i's from the return
address to reply. ***NOTICE***
____________________________________________________________________________
Michael G. Koerner
>
> And where is Los Angeles was the Hollywood Freeway planned?
The 'Hollywood Freeway' (US 101/CA 170) was completed. You MAY be
thinking of the never built 'Beverly Hills Freeway' (the name says it
all as to why it was killed), it was to extend from the end of the CA 2
'Glendale Freeway' southwest and west towards Beverly Hills and Santa
Monica (in fact, there is a VERY noticable 'ghost interchange' where it
was proposed to connect with the Hollywood Freeway).
This and the several other 'never builts' in the Los Angeles area
(mostly east-west routes, for some odd reason), would have created a
'grid' of freeways in the 'basin' very much like a 'grid' of major
streets in most other cities.
erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu
"Anyone up for starting a thread listing all cancelled projects in your
city?" Great idea. Washington, Toronto, and the northeast get a lot of
posts, but what about the rest of the country? I started a new post to
give it a proper name.
I'll report for Houston, which was quite fortunate in terms of
cancelled freeways. Only one cancelled freeway and one freeway with
part of its route cancelled.
Cancelled
Harrisburg Freeway. This would have been extension of the 225 freeway
into downtown from Loop 610. If you look at a map, you'll see that 225
extends slightly inside the loop at the southeast corner of the loop.
The route would have roughly followed Harrisburg road. No great loss
since this freeway really is not needed. It was deleted from Houston's
master plan only a few years ago.
Partially cancelled
Bay City Freeway. This freeway was slated to extend southward from the
southwest corner of loop 610 roughly along South Post Oak road. The
segment from 610 to Beltway 8 is dead, but south of Beltway 8 the
freeway is alive and now called the Fort Bend Parkway. The feeder roads
from BW8 to State highway 6 are funded for FY2000 and should be built
within a few years. The freeway is ultimately planned to extend to the
planned Grand Parkway, although main lanes are probably in the distant
future.
"Concept Freeways" (never officially pursued)
A 1968 master plan of Houston showed a freeway from Beltway 8 in west
Houston to the proposed Grand Parkway, roughly along Westpark, Alief-
Clodine, and FM 1093. This route was never adopted by the highway dept,
or given any serious consideration as far as I know. However, chances
are very good that a tollway will be built along this corridor from 610
to highway 6. The Metropolitan Transit Authority owns the railroad
right-of-way, and "negotiations" are in progress with the Harris County
Toll road authority.
Freeways that could have been canceled but are alive
Mykawa freeway (new state highway 35, running west of existing.) There
is not much need for this freeway, but the feeder roads for the first
segment were just recently completed. This segment runs just east of
the University of Houston from IH45 to Alt90. This part represented the
biggest hurdle since it cut a path through McGregor Park, but it's done
so further progress only awaits money (which won't come anytime soon.)
US 90 freeway from 610 to BW8 (extension of Crosby freeway)
This has been on Houston planning maps since the beginning of time. It
starts at the intersection of loop 610 and Interstate 10 in east
Houston and runs to the existing Crosby freeway (US 90) at its
intersection with Beltway 8 East. Funding is not yet approved but the
projects are listed in the 10-year plan.
As a final note, Freeways dating from the 1980's
Freeways plans in most cities dated from the years after WWII, and
Houston is no exception. However, the Hardy Toll Road was entirely
conceived and built in the 1980's. The aiport connector is under
construction right now and an extension into downtown is under study.
The 249 freeway in northwest Houston appeared on the 1968 planning map
but was not seriously pursued until the 1980's when Compaq fueled
explosive growth in the corridor. (The freeway now extends much further
north than Rand McNally indicates.)
The Grand Parkway (highway 99) appeared on the 1968 planning map, but
was not taken seriously until the 1980's. Only one segment (in the
west) is built, one segment is funded (in the east), and the rest of it
faces money problems.
A couple questions I have:
In New Orleans, I noticed a very wide ROW extending northward along
Pontchartrain Boulevard from the I-10/I-610 intersection. Is this the
route of a cancelled freeway?
And where is Los Angeles was the Hollywood Freeway planned?
--
Erik Slotboom
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Aaron M. Renn
>"Anyone up for starting a thread listing all cancelled projects in your
>city?" Great idea. Washington, Toronto, and the northeast get a lot of
>posts, but what about the rest of the country? I started a new post to
>give it a proper name.
I-165 in Indianapolis was cancelled. It would have extended I-69
south into the city linking with the inner loop at the current
I-70/I-65 north split.
In Chicago the Crosstown Expressway was cancelled. It would have
run along Cicero Ave. linking the Kennedy with the Stevenson and
even beyond I believe.
--
Aaron M. Renn (ar...@urbanophile.com) http://www.urbanophile.com/arenn/
Invol713
>thinking of the never built 'Beverly Hills Freeway' (the name says it
>all as to why it was killed), it was to extend from the end of the CA 2
>'Glendale Freeway' southwest and west towards Beverly Hills and Santa
>Monica (in fact, there is a VERY noticable 'ghost interchange' where it
>was proposed to connect with the Hollywood Freeway).
The "Hollywood Freeway is complete, but CA-170 isn't. It was supposed to
extend from the Hollywood freeway (U.S.101 section) due south to I-405. Notice
on a map where I-405 makes a sharp turn just north of LAX...that is where it
was supposed to end. But like you said, it was too close to Beverly Hills and
the fact that the area is really built up killed the idea. If only they could
figure a way to make it an underground freeway, it would really help relieve
traffic over the Sepulveda Pass (I-405 traffic jam 24/7 ! ).
Just a thought...
Invol
Adam Froehlig
freeways, one an Interstate. I-335 would have run between
I-94 and I-35W, roughly parallel to Broadway Ave, and
completing a loop around downtown Minneapolis. It was
cancelled in the late 70s, but evidence still exists in the
form of ghost lanes and Evil Knevil ramps on I-35W between
Hennepin and Stinson.
Of the other three, one would have been a freeway from
downtown Minneapolis to the southwest. Another would have
been east-west through south Minneapolis, roughly along
27th Street, and connect to the I-94/MN 280 interchange.
The third would have been over in St. Paul, going from the
I-94/US 10/US 61 interchange east of downtown and running
northeast to the MN 120/MN 5 East intersection (which was
to have been a folded-diamond interchange, but never got
built).
Only 3 more freeways planned in the Twin Cities. One
should be finished later this summer (US 10 between I-35W
and MN 610/MN 47), and the other two are partially under
construction. MN 610 will eventually extend west to I-94,
while the new US 212 will eventually tie into existing US
212 west of Chaska.
As far as I know, there were no cancelled freeways in
Mississippi or Alabama (northern Birmingham beltway doesn't
count because it's been resurrected). Mississippi
currently has 1 freeway under construction, 2 freeways
planned, and 4 more under study. The one under
construction is an extension of the existing US 82 freeway
in eastern Mississippi (the Starkville bypass). The two
planned freeways are a US 82 Greenville bypass and MS 304
from US 61 east then north into Tennessee (tying into the
Nonconnaugh and forming an outer loop of Memphis).
Of the 4 freeways under study, one is I-69 (of which MS 304
may become a part). Another is a possible connection
between I-69 and the US 82 Greenville Bypass. The other
two are in the Jackson area. One is called the Jackson
Metro Parkway, and would run from I-55 near High St east to
Jackson International Airport. This may be built as an
expressway instead though.
The last study is an upgrade of US 49 between I-20 and
Florence. Basically two options are being looked at:
additional lanes, or an upgrade to freeway.
Too many proposed freeways in Alabama to count (at least 7
AFAIK).
Froggie | Meridian, MS |
http://www.mississippi.net/~froggie/roads/laudcohi.htm
**** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start Here (tm) ****
D Outen
<erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu> wrote in message
news:7mguh5$60i$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Kurumi suggested
> "Anyone up for starting a thread listing all cancelled projects in your
> city?" Great idea. Washington, Toronto, and the northeast get a lot of
> posts, but what about the rest of the country? I started a new post to
> give it a proper name.
>
Metro Detroit
I-275 north from I-96 to I-75. Partially resurrected as M-5, being
constructed as a divided highway at grade from a point north of 12 Mile Rd
to Pontiac Trail. Remains to be seen if curb cuts will be allowed. Curb
cuts will tremendously increase the value of adjacent property. I expect
the developers to be heavy political contributors over the next year or so
to make sure that curb cuts are allowed.
Davison Expressway, now Freeway and designated M-8. Extension west from
I-75 to I-96. Interchange at I-96 was built to handle the now not to be
built freeway segment.
Mound Rd, probably as M-53. Extend from I-75 using Davison then north
along Mound Rd to about 18 Mile Rd. and then head east and connect to the
current M-53 Freeway. Interchange at I-696 was built to handle the now not
to be built freeway. There has been recent talk about building the
connector from Mound Rd. over to the M-53 Freeway. Mound Rd. has recently
been rebuilt as an 8 lane divided highway with Michigan U-turn lanes.
M-59 through downtown Pontiac and west to Waterford Twp.
M-59 from Utica to I-94. About a mile of freeway just built west of Utica
that connects to the east end of the current freeway segment. The rest of
the section was just built as an 8 lane divided highway with Michigan U-turn
lanes. This section has a wide, very wide median. I don't know if the
residents who opposed the freeway realize that this median is wide enough to
build an urban freeway down at some future date.
Not a freeway proposal. Extend Northwestern Hwy. out to US-23. This was
killed by the state sometime in the mid-60's. The Oakland County Road
Commission, IIRC, has an active lawsuit against the state concerning this.
There are cases where the initially proposed alignment wasn't used. I-75
in downtown Detroit, I-696 in Southfield, and I-96 through west Detroit are
the ones that I'm aware of.
Dave
Patrick L. Humphrey
>Kurumi suggested
>"Anyone up for starting a thread listing all cancelled projects in your
>city?" Great idea. Washington, Toronto, and the northeast get a lot of
>posts, but what about the rest of the country? I started a new post to
>give it a proper name.
>I'll report for Houston, which was quite fortunate in terms of
>cancelled freeways. Only one cancelled freeway and one freeway with
>part of its route cancelled.
>Cancelled
>Harrisburg Freeway. This would have been extension of the 225 freeway
>into downtown from Loop 610. If you look at a map, you'll see that 225
>extends slightly inside the loop at the southeast corner of the loop.
>The route would have roughly followed Harrisburg road. No great loss
>since this freeway really is not needed. It was deleted from Houston's
>master plan only a few years ago.
It would have followed the HB&TRR tracks, more or less, but once it got as far
as 75th Street it would have run parallel to Harrisburg, two or three blocks
south. The ghost ramps off the Eastex Freeway at the downtown end were
removed when that stretch of US 59 was rebuilt last year, and now 59 is being
massively upgraded from that point up to the current end of the reconstruction
just north of I-10.
>Partially cancelled
>Bay City Freeway. This freeway was slated to extend southward from the
>southwest corner of loop 610 roughly along South Post Oak road. The
>segment from 610 to Beltway 8 is dead, but south of Beltway 8 the
>freeway is alive and now called the Fort Bend Parkway. The feeder roads
>from BW8 to State highway 6 are funded for FY2000 and should be built
>within a few years. The freeway is ultimately planned to extend to the
>planned Grand Parkway, although main lanes are probably in the distant
>future.
The Fort Bend Tollway is showing up on the Key Maps Harris County Atlas as
Texas 122, and the construction should be starting some time around the end of
this year, with the first leg of the tollway down to Texas 6 opening in 2002.
>"Concept Freeways" (never officially pursued)
>A 1968 master plan of Houston showed a freeway from Beltway 8 in west
>Houston to the proposed Grand Parkway, roughly along Westpark, Alief-
>Clodine, and FM 1093. This route was never adopted by the highway dept,
>or given any serious consideration as far as I know. However, chances
>are very good that a tollway will be built along this corridor from 610
>to highway 6. The Metropolitan Transit Authority owns the railroad
>right-of-way, and "negotiations" are in progress with the Harris County
>Toll road authority.
I saw that 1968 map -- and the proposed freeway branched off the then-proposed
West Belt just south of Westheimer, angling west-southwest down towards the
SPRR tracks, finally reaching them at the future Texas 6 (which hadn't yet
been extended that far south). It couldn't have been too seriously
considered, mainly because Andrau Airpark (which didn't close down until just
last December) was sitting squarely in its path. Currently, Metro are looking
at the tollway plan from the Southwest Freeway at Westpark along the SPRR
corridor (which Metro bought a few years ago) out to 6, and possibly on out to
Texas 99 -- inside of the 59/Westpark interchange, there's too much developemt
too close to the freeway to allow workable access. (That's before you get to
the reconstruction of I-610 in that area, or the current reconstruction of the
59/Edloe tangle that pretty much rules out any tollway extending inward that
far.)
>Freeways that could have been canceled but are alive
>Mykawa freeway (new state highway 35, running west of existing.) There
>is not much need for this freeway, but the feeder roads for the first
>segment were just recently completed. This segment runs just east of
>the University of Houston from IH45 to Alt90. This part represented the
>biggest hurdle since it cut a path through McGregor Park, but it's done
>so further progress only awaits money (which won't come anytime soon.)
Don't be so sure -- the feeders are done currently to the Wheeler extension
east of the UH central campus, and will be open down to Old Spanish Trail (US
90A) in a few months, but Jersey walls are being stacked in large quantities
along the route between Griggs and 610. The Key Maps atlas has the planned
design already in place as far south as Dixie Drive, south of 610. (One
question I have yet to see an answer to from TxDOT, though: the Alvin Freeway
will be designated as Texas 35, but if it's signed as that and only completed
just outside of 610, how will Texas 35 be directed back over to its original
route along Telephone Road? There aren't a whole lot of suitable alternatives
in that part of Houston.)
>US 90 freeway from 610 to BW8 (extension of Crosby freeway)
>This has been on Houston planning maps since the beginning of time. It
>starts at the intersection of loop 610 and Interstate 10 in east
>Houston and runs to the existing Crosby freeway (US 90) at its
>intersection with Beltway 8 East. Funding is not yet approved but the
>projects are listed in the 10-year plan.
The ghost ramps at the I-10/610 interchange have been there since that
interchange was completed in the early 1970s -- but there appears to have been
some clearing off of the adjacent right-of-way in the last couple of months,
so could it be that construction's coming soon on at least the feeders? It
would be preferable than having to go all the way out to the Beltway via
either I-10 or US 90 and then detour down to the Northeast/Crosby Freeway.
--Patrick L. "in other words, it's business as usual -- we still can't get
there from here" Humphrey
D Outen
D Outen <AINTd...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:7mi29n$1p...@enews3.newsguy.com...
> Davison Expressway, now Freeway and designated M-8. Extension west from
> I-75 to I-96. Interchange at I-96 was built to handle the now not to be
> built freeway segment.
>
M-10 to I-96."
Dave
Michael G. Koerner
>
> The Twin Cities, to my knowledge, has had 4 cancelled
> freeways, one an Interstate. I-335 would have run between
> I-94 and I-35W, roughly parallel to Broadway Ave, and
> completing a loop around downtown Minneapolis. It was
> cancelled in the late 70s, but evidence still exists in the
> form of ghost lanes and Evil Knevil ramps on I-35W between
> Hennepin and Stinson.
>
> Of the other three, one would have been a freeway from
> downtown Minneapolis to the southwest. Another would have
> been east-west through south Minneapolis, roughly along
> 27th Street, and connect to the I-94/MN 280 interchange.
> The third would have been over in St. Paul, going from the
> I-94/US 10/US 61 interchange east of downtown and running
> northeast to the MN 120/MN 5 East intersection (which was
> to have been a folded-diamond interchange, but never got
> built).
What about the never built MN 55 freeway between DT Minneapolis and the
airport (roughly along Hiawatha Av), now being developed as a boulevard street?
Wasn't the current routing of I-35W south of DT Minneapolis a
compromise, built instead of seperate freeways along Cedar Av and
Lyndale Av between MN 62 and I-94?
I assume that the US 169 freeway from the Shakopee area will eventually
tie directly into I-494.
Also, are (or were) there any plans to upgrade the northern end of MN 280?
> Only 3 more freeways planned in the Twin Cities. One
> should be finished later this summer (US 10 between I-35W
> and MN 610/MN 47), and the other two are partially under
> construction. MN 610 will eventually extend west to I-94,
> while the new US 212 will eventually tie into existing US
> 212 west of Chaska.
>
> As far as I know, there were no cancelled freeways in
> Mississippi or Alabama (northern Birmingham beltway doesn't
> count because it's been resurrected). Mississippi
> currently has 1 freeway under construction, 2 freeways
> planned, and 4 more under study. The one under
> construction is an extension of the existing US 82 freeway
> in eastern Mississippi (the Starkville bypass). The two
> planned freeways are a US 82 Greenville bypass and MS 304
> from US 61 east then north into Tennessee (tying into the
> Nonconnaugh and forming an outer loop of Memphis).
There are several cancelled freeways in Wisconsin (outside of the metro
Milwaukee area), and several others in the hopper or downgraded to
'expressway'. US 51 was intended to be an interstate compatible all the
way to Hurley, US 53 to Superior, the 'gaps' in US 12 between Madison
and the Illinois state line, WI 29 was intended to be more than it is
being deveoped into, and so forth.
There are several 'never builts' in the Appleton area. College Av
(county 'CE') was origionally planned to be a freeway east from WI 441,
going around the south and east sides of Kaukauna and back to US 41 at
about County 'JJ' (now open as a quasi-expressway to Kaukauna's
southeast corner) and there was to be a WI 55 freeway bypassing
Kaukauna, running roughly along the west edge of Kaukauna and on Little
Chute's east side (one can easily make out the proposed routing from the
pattern of neighborhood street development south of the Fox River).
There were also serious plans plans for a 'US 45' freeway to run
northwest from the US 41 'curve' just northwest of Appleton to and
beyond New London. These were ALL cancelled in the late 1960s. Since
then, the even MORE elaborate current plans for US 10 and US 45 west of
Appleton have been developed and are now under construction.
---------------------------
Another thread idea, those highway projects that were proposed when we
were all at our youngest time of 'awareness' as to the state of the
highway system, that we NEVER thought would be built, and that we can
now (or VERY SOON) drive on.
For me it is the US 45 'West Bend Spur' in Wisconsin.
Brandon M. Gorte
: Another thread idea, those highway projects that were proposed when we
: were all at our youngest time of 'awareness' as to the state of the
: highway system, that we NEVER thought would be built, and that we can
: now (or VERY SOON) drive on.
: For me it is the US 45 'West Bend Spur' in Wisconsin.
I-69/US-27 between Charlotte and Lansing. I never thought MDOT would get
around to building it. We used to use old Lansing Road for that stretch,
and it was always busy, and the freeway south of Charlotte had been
completed for many years beforehand.
Brandon Gorte
Undergrad in Geological Engineering
Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI
<http://www.geo.mtu.edu/~bmgorte/freeway.html>
SPUI
from the 1970 plans - 528 was proposed west to Tarpon Springs - this is
still proposed from us 19 to i-75 as the bicounty thruway
a western beltway (fl 435/Lake Mary Blvd Ext) was proposed further in along
435 from 528 to 436 at the county line and then to i-4 at lake mary blvd -
never built
an outer bypass (i-4 bypass/Red Bug Lake Rd) from i-4 at cr 532 at the
osceola/polk line west of disney along the current proposed corridor to 50
at fltp, then ne crossing the other beltway and turning east along current
414 becoming red bug lake rd - this is proposed south of 50 and uc north of
50 along a new alignment further west but only to Apopka - the part back to
i-4 in Sanford is dead but may still be reincarnated - if it's not it will
extend to a new 4 lane fl 46 --- then fl 414 is surface expwy from 434 to
us 17/92, uc west to us 441, and proposed around apopka back to us 441 - the
part east of us 17/92 will never be built b/c of development in the area
an eastern beltway (Dale Rd) from fl 528 west of 15 north along 551 to north
of red bug lake rd then west paralleling 436 to the county line at the first
bypass - this is still proposed south of 15 as toll 551, but the rest has
been replaced by 417
later on, a fwy was proposed from i-4 south of 408 to 528 at 527 to connect
downtown to the airport - edgewood fought this in the late 80s/early 90s
because of the large number of houses in the path and won - toll 551 is
being built to partially serve this corridor (408 east to 551 south to oia)
but there is still no direct connection - signs say to use US 441 (OBT) to
482 east to 528 east but OBT is very busy - another plan was to build a 4
lane elevated toll fwy in the median of 436 but toll 551 was chosen
instead - 15 is also being widened from 408 to 528 to serve this corridor
tampa/st pete:
589 was proposed east to 275 at 75 (75 would have come to 275 at the curve
north of usf) but now to get to 75 north from 589 you use 597 north to us 41
north to 54 east to a new proposed interchange at the straight line of 54
and i-75
the northtown expwy was proposed from 60 on the cc cswy to i-4 just west of
i-75 1 mile north of us 92
618 was proposed east back to 60 and still is - it was also proposed west to
the airport (i-275 at 60 TO 589) and the part south of there would have been
449
618 was and still is proposed over the gandy bridge
the belcher fwy was proposed along us 19 from tarpon springs to the 693
split and then down 693 to 694 where it became the belt loop fwy, then se to
i-275 exit 7 (ghost ramps) and then back north to i-275 exit 13 - now us 19
is being freewayed (frontage roads and spuis) from 694 or so to north of
tarpon springs
pinellas expwy was proposed from 589 north of ehrlich rd west to the county
line then sw as the st pete clearwater fwy to clearwater to south along us
19a to 694 then east along 694 to 693 and se to i-275 at i-375 --- a spur,
the gandy fwy, would have stayed with 694 to the gandy bridge and may still
be proposed east of us 19 as a freewaying of 694 --- another spur, 694a,
was proposed west along 694 to 699
686 was proposed as a fwy east of the airport
sunset pt fwy - from north of clearwater paralleling 588 to safety harbor
then se to 60 at the cc cswy, connecting to the tampa northtown expwy
jacksonville:
113a/eastern bypass - east from northern i-95/295 interchange then south
crossing the st johns just west of ft caroline, then south along kernan blvd
to 202 and then sw to i-95 just north of us 1 - this is now being built
further west as fl 9a/i-295
timiquana brg - from 134 to 109 over the st johns, then the jose vedra expwy
from the curve on 109 ese to the curve on 202 (which was gonna be the jv
expwy)
20th st expwy was proposed west to i-295
i-95-75 connector from i-295 exit 5 sw to waldo then along 24 and 222 to
i-75 exit 77
miami area:
lejeune douglas expwy between 9 and 953 from us 1 at bird rd to fltp 1 mi
west of 817 then north along 817 as the univ expwy curving ne at 814 to fltp
at 869 then east as the deerfield expwy to i-95 exit 36c - and a spur (also
the univ expwy) west of us 441 along the edge of the loxahatchee nwr to us
98/441 - this is a surface street from 924 to 826 and is still proposed from
826 to 826 along the rr row - i-75 and 869 serve the general corridor from
924 to the broward/palm beach line
hialeah expwy from 997 east along nw 79th st/934 to us 1 then se to miami
beach on the beach cswy - this is a full fwy from east of 826 to east of us
27 in hialeah
opa locka expwy from fltp exit 35 along 924 to us 1 at 922 - now partially
fwy and a new 4ld surface st goes from fltp new exit 34 ne to i-75 exit 2 at
the curve
snake crk expwy - east ext of 821 (fltp homestead ext) to i-95 connecting to
the interama expwy
interama expwy - along us 1 from miami north to 856 then nw to i-95 at the
snake crk expwy
w dade expwy - 874 sw ext to 997 at 232nd st then sw and s to 9336
s dixie expwy - south ext of i-95 along us 1 to 826 then south and west to
fltp exit 9
rock island expwy - east west along 816 or 870 - not much info on this one
--
Daniel Moraseski
http://members.xoom.com/_XOOM/spui/index.html - FL and NJ roads, and also a
list of all (well, most) SPUIs
King of irrelevant info
in Orlando, FL; originally from Manalapan, NJ
erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu wrote in message
<7mguh5$60i$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
Steve Riner
Adam Froehlig wrote in message <9319573...@www.remarq.com>...
>The Twin Cities, to my knowledge, has had 4 cancelled
>freeways, one an Interstate. I-335 would have run between
>I-94 and I-35W, roughly parallel to Broadway Ave, and
>completing a loop around downtown Minneapolis. It was
>cancelled in the late 70s, but evidence still exists in the
>form of ghost lanes and Evil Knevil ramps on I-35W between
>Hennepin and Stinson.
>
>Of the other three, one would have been a freeway from
>downtown Minneapolis to the southwest. Another would have
>been east-west through south Minneapolis, roughly along
>27th Street, and connect to the I-94/MN 280 interchange.
>The third would have been over in St. Paul, going from the
>I-94/US 10/US 61 interchange east of downtown and running
>northeast to the MN 120/MN 5 East intersection (which was
>to have been a folded-diamond interchange, but never got
>built).
There were also freeways planned for Cedar Avenue (a northward continuation
to downtown of the freeway that ends at MN-62) and Hiawatha Avenue (MN-55).
Cedar was removed from the trunk highway system altogether, and 55 is
currently being upgraded to a four-lane divided road with restricted access.
--
Steve Riner
Columbia Heights MN
Explore Minnesota Highways of the past and present at:
http://www.frontiernet.net/~riner/main_hwy.htm
****************************************************************
...we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing. And what a wonderful
method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing
confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization." Gaius Petronius Arbiter, 1st
Century A.D.
****************************************************************
Steve & Jan Riner
Michael G. Koerner wrote in message <378CB395...@dataex.com>...
>Adam Froehlig wrote:
>>
>> The Twin Cities, to my knowledge, has had 4 cancelled
>> freeways, one an Interstate
>
>Wasn't the current routing of I-35W south of DT Minneapolis a
>compromise, built instead of seperate freeways along Cedar Av and
>Lyndale Av between MN 62 and I-94?
Maps from the early 60s don't show a route for 35W significantly west of
where it was built. I think the Cedar Avenue freeway was a separate issue.
>I assume that the US 169 freeway from the Shakopee area will eventually
>tie directly into I-494.
169 (old Hennepin County 18) has been reconstructed as an expressway with
signalized intersections between Old Shakopee Road (Hennepin County 1) and
I-494 (including signalized ramps at the freeway). And so it will stay. The
494 freeway interchange is being reconstructed, but there will continue to
be signals for the freeway's frontage roads.
>Also, are (or were) there any plans to upgrade the northern end of MN 280?
In the forseeable future, the signalized intersections on 280 may be
replaced. Not funded yet, though.
--
Steve Riner
Columbia Heights MN
Explore Minnesota Highways of the past and present at:
http://www.frontiernet.net/~riner/main_hwy.htm
****************************************************************
...we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing. And what a wonderful
method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing
confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization." Gaius Petronius Arbiter, 1st
Century A.D.
****************************************************************____________
____________
Adam Froehlig
>Minneapolis and the airport (roughly along Hiawatha Av),
>now being developed as a boulevard street?
Oops...forgot about that one...:o)
>Wasn't the current routing of I-35W south of DT Minneapolis
>a compromise, built instead of seperate freeways along
>Cedar Av and Lyndale Av between MN 62 and I-94?
Not quite. AFAIK, there were no separate freeways planned
along either Cedar or Lyndale. My last time home, I managed
to find a copy of the original 1957 freeway study for
Minneaplis (the city itself, not the surrounding area,
unfortunately). I-35W is built on essentially the same
routing south of 28th Street as what was originally
proposed. North of 28th Street, the original plan had I-35W
continuing straight up to I-94 instead of veering over to
4th-5th Aves. Also, what is now MN 280 was listed on a 1960
report as a possible alternative routing for I-35W.
>I assume that the US 169 freeway from the Shakopee area
>will eventually tie directly into I-494.
Eventually, perhaps. The 3 intersections between the river
and I-494 appear to be built in such a way as to allow for
future bridges and diamond interchanges, but given how
recently that section was just completed, I don't see it
happening before 2020 unless a *MAJOR* influx of cash gets
pumped in somewhere along the line.
>Also, are (or were) there any plans to upgrade the northern
>end of MN 280?
None as far as I know. Steve Riner may know of something,
but I hadn't heard anything.
Froggie | Formerly of Minneapolis, MN |
Dino Hill
Great reply Brandon. I thought I'd beat ya to the post. Great idea for
have the cancelled highway post! "Why didn't I think of that?" =]
Coming north from Charlotte, the "original" 69 routing would have had a more
northerly route, when it was proposed. It would then had turned east to
connect right into I-496. At the current 96 / 496 interchange the 496 west
to 69 south ramp was redesigned because of the new Lansing Rd 69 route. The
government had bought the property west of Lansing 496 to M100. When the
new Lansing Rd. routing was a reality many original property owner had an
opportunity to reclaim their original property.
As with Brandon, I also thought 69 would never go through. But as time went
by and the "need" of 69 improved it became a reality as will most interstate
projects.
Dino
Brandon M. Gorte wrote in message .
Dino Hill
When the future I-69 reaches Houston, wouldn't it multiplex with the current
US 59 expressways? I know it's a long way away!
Dino
Patrick L. Humphrey <pat...@io.com> wrote in message
news:szkg12r...@eris.io.com...
Michael E. Kotler
1964. You wouldn't believe what was proposed.
West of Downtown, the "Wolf Creek Freeway" was listed. This went from
around Fourth St. downtown to a place called Stillwater Junction, where
it interchanged with the "Trotwood Freeway" (this was not the same as the
"Trotwood Connector" now in the works.) This helps explain why the I-75
bridge over OH-4 is wide enough to accomodate a freeway.
You know that enormous overpass over US-35 at Linden Ave. and Steve
Whalen Blvd? That was originally intended to lead into another freeway
from there to the T-intersection of Wilmington Ave. and Shroyer Rd.
OH-444 suddenly goes from a 4-lane highway to 2-lane Valley St.
Originally, 444 was supposed to continue as a freeway until Needmore Rd
near the intersection with OH-201 (near the Meijer). This is
apparently the real reason that Needmore suddenly changes its name to
Harshman!
The half-interchange between OH-444 and Springfield Street was originally
intended to be three-way. As was the 444/444-A split.
The US-35 arc around Xenia, OH, was originally intended to go all the way
around to US-68 on the west. That's why there was (is?) a sharp right
turn to get on the bypass from US-35.
I once saw in downtown Dayton a "TEMP OH-4", suggesting a proposed
continuation of the 4 freeway?
Michael Kotler
mek...@aol.com
Steve & Jan Riner
>"Steve & Jan Riner" <ri...@frontiernet.net> wrote this:><snip>
>
>>>Also, are (or were) there any plans to upgrade the northern end of MN
280?
>>
>>
>>replaced. Not funded yet, though.
>
>the Pacal building at Broadway and houses not terribly far from 280.
>I think a more urgent priority might be improving the
>280-Hennepin/Larpenteur interchange. What a disaster.
True, but it was standard design in 1954. There were two interchanges along
Highway 36 built around the same time (Dale and Lexington) that were
constructed the same way. A cheap fix would be to close the cloverleaf loops
and construct acceleration lanes for the ramps.
RVDroz
Jacksonville from Wildwood, paralleling US 301 to the east up to US 17. The is
shown on oil company maps 1956-1958.
--
_________________________________________________________
Happy Motoring! _________
Robert V. Droz ( us...@earthlink.net ) |______|_\__
U.S. Highways : From US 1 to (US 830) |______|_|__\
http://home.earthlink.net/~us98/UShwy.htm () ()
Hawkeye Pierce
>
>
>Michael G. Koerner wrote in message <378CB395...@dataex.com>...
<snip>
>>Also, are (or were) there any plans to upgrade the northern end of MN 280?
>
>
>In the forseeable future, the signalized intersections on 280 may be
>replaced. Not funded yet, though.
Hmm . . . seems to me like that would be one *expensive* project, with
the Pacal building at Broadway and houses not terribly far from 280.
I think a more urgent priority might be improving the
280-Hennepin/Larpenteur interchange. What a disaster.
--hawk
ih...@graffiti.nyet (you know what to do)
Opinions expressed are my own, but for a small fee they can be yours also.
erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu
blackout when I called it the Hollywood freeway. I can see the problem
with the alignment (along La Cienga, I assume). Even in the 1960's,
dead on arrival may be an appropriate description.
Michael Moroney
Return-Path: <mor...@evms.zko.dec.com>
Received: from mailext03.compaq.com by world.std.com (TheWorld/Spike-2.0)
id AA03658; Wed, 14 Jul 1999 15:00:13 -0400
Received: from mailext03.compaq.com by mailext03.compaq.com
via smail with esmtp
id <m114UG9...@mailext03.compaq.com>
for <MOR...@world.std.com>; Wed, 14 Jul 99 14:00:01 -0500 (CDT)
(/\##/\ Smail3.1.30.16 #30.10 built 27-oct-98)
Received: from mail.compaq.com([not looked up])
(peer mailint01.compaq.com[207.18.199.34])
by mailext03.compaq.com with SMTP
id rcv009183; Wed, 14 Jul 1999 13:59:56 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from chobe.zko.dec.com(really [16.32.0.81]) by mail.compaq.com
via sendmail with smtp
id <m114UFP...@mail.compaq.com>
for <MOR...@world.std.com>; Wed, 14 Jul 99 13:59:15 -0500 (CDT)
(/\##/\ Smail3.1.30.16 #30.10 built 18-dec-97)
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 14:55:10 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <9907141...@evms.zko.dec.com>
From: mor...@evms.zko.dec.com (Mike Moroney)
To: MOR...@world.std.com
Subject: x
X-Vms-To: mor...@world.std.com
Status: R
I'll fill in for Albany NY area.
NY 43: From I-90 exit 8 to "Evil Knevil" ramp at US 9/20 at Dunn Memorial
Bridge (part from I-90 to existing NY 43 was done only a few years ago)
I-687: I-90 exit 5A to nonexistent Northway (I-87) exit 3.
A freeway from I-787 Thruway end to Northway's begining at US 20 (evidence
visible on both ends. Would have paralleled the Thruway line I-790
in Utica, I guess.
A freeway (?) from where NY 890 now ends to NY 50 near Burnt Hills.
(again, the NY 890 part was just built)
The last part of I-88 to be built was the east end. It was in limbo for
a while, with proposals for it to end at the eastern I-890 exit and one
other spot, besides its current end.
I've found that the freeway US 4 (poss. I-92) west from the Vermont line
never got past the proposal stage.
NY 7 (ALT 7) from Northway Exit 7 into Schenectady, hooking up with the
current expressway.
Taconic Parkway North from the Thruway to either NY 7 or NY 67 in Buskirk.
I believe there are some ghost ramps near the Thruway end.
US 9 S of the I-90 "stack" interchange (Exit 6) to the Empire State
Plaza connector and I beleive, US 9W. You can tell that something's
"wrong" since the ESP ramps/bus loop is "backwards" (facing the dead
end of the tunnel)
-Mike
erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu
pat...@io.com (Patrick L. Humphrey) wrote:
> erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu writes:
>
>
> >Partially cancelled
> >Bay City Freeway. >
> The Fort Bend Tollway is showing up on the Key Maps Harris County
Atlas as
> Texas 122, and the construction should be starting some time around
the end of
> this year, with the first leg of the tollway down to Texas 6 opening
in 2002.
Is this really going to become a tollway? The last I heard on the
subject, the toll revenue estimates were insufficient to support it. My
impression was that the real estate interests were really pushing the
freeway/tollway. Anyways, the feeder roads from BW8 to SH6 should be
more than enough to handle the traffic load for now, and as you say,
construction will begin soon.
>
> >"Concept Freeways" (never officially pursued)
> >A 1968 master plan of Houston showed a freeway from Beltway 8 in west
> >Houston to the proposed Grand Parkway, roughly along Westpark, Alief-
> >Clodine, and FM 1093.
> I saw that 1968 map -- and the proposed freeway branched off the then-
proposed
> West Belt just south of Westheimer, angling west-southwest down
towards the
> SPRR tracks, finally reaching them at the future Texas 6 (which
hadn't yet
> been extended that far south). It couldn't have been too seriously
> considered, mainly because Andrau Airpark (which didn't close down
until just
> last December) was sitting squarely in its path. Currently, Metro
are looking
> at the tollway plan from the Southwest Freeway at Westpark along the
SPRR
> corridor (which Metro bought a few years ago) out to 6, and possibly
on out to
> Texas 99 -- inside of the 59/Westpark interchange, there's too much
developemt
> too close to the freeway to allow workable access. (That's before
you get to
> the reconstruction of I-610 in that area, or the current
reconstruction of the
> 59/Edloe tangle that pretty much rules out any tollway extending
inward that
> far.)
As you probably know, Metro wanted to bundle there rail line ballot
proposition into a package that included the Westpark Tollway. Many
cried foul because, according to news reports, the Westpark Tollway is
going to happen anyways and putting on the ballot would have just made
the rail more likely to pass.
Assuming it does happen, it will be interesting to see how it is tied
into US 59 and I-610.
>
> >Freeways that could have been canceled but are alive
> >Mykawa freeway (new state highway 35, running west of existing.) >
> Don't be so sure -- the feeders are done currently to the Wheeler
extension
> east of the UH central campus, and will be open down to Old Spanish
Trail (US
> 90A) in a few months, but Jersey walls are being stacked in large
quantities
> along the route between Griggs and 610. The Key Maps atlas has the
planned
> design already in place as far south as Dixie Drive, south of 610.
(One
> question I have yet to see an answer to from TxDOT, though: the
Alvin Freeway
> will be designated as Texas 35, but if it's signed as that and only
completed
> just outside of 610, how will Texas 35 be directed back over to its
original
> route along Telephone Road? There aren't a whole lot of suitable
alternatives
> in that part of Houston.)
I reviewed the schematic for this route at the Houston TxDOT office a
couple years ago. The schematic showed a full multi-level interchange
at 610 South. The freeway extended south to beltway 8 where it became a
highway. I vaguely remember that a neighborhood is in the path, which
could definitely be a problem. Don't look for this route anytime soon.
>
> >US 90 freeway from 610 to BW8 (extension of Crosby freeway)
> The ghost ramps at the I-10/610 interchange have been there since that
> interchange was completed in the early 1970s -- but there appears to
have been
> some clearing off of the adjacent right-of-way in the last couple of
months,
> so could it be that construction's coming soon on at least the
feeders? It
> would be preferable than having to go all the way out to the Beltway
via
> either I-10 or US 90 and then detour down to the Northeast/Crosby
Freeway.
The project hasn't been listed as imminent, but it's possible since
that project should have all clearances and if money became available,
it could go to bid quickly.
>
> --Patrick L. "in other words, it's business as usual -- we still
can't get
> there from here" Humphrey
>
--
erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu
"Dino Hill" <Galva...@acd.net> wrote:
> Great info for the Houston area!
>
> When the future I-69 reaches Houston, wouldn't it multiplex with the
current
> US 59 expressways? I know it's a long way away!
>
> Dino
There is currently a feasibility study underway for the routing of I-69
in the Houston area. I went to the first public meeting a couple weeks
ago. They considered a huge number of alternatives and narrowed it down
to 10 (most of which follow existing routes), but based on their
initial scoring, it looks like the only remaining contenders are the
existing US 59 through Houston, the existing west and north segments
beltway 8/ Sam Houston Tollway, and two Grand Parkway options.
One Grand Parkway option would follow the currently proposed alignment
around the west and north sides of Houston. The other would follow SH
242 on the north, a two-lane facility that is a few years old and for
some reason does not appear on the Rand McNally Map. The route goes
from about New Caney, just north of the Woodlands, along 1488, and then
follows the proposed western alignment of the grand parkway.
I'd put my money on the Grand Parkway/242 option since the
environmentalists don't like the northern Grand Parkway alignment. I'll
post the results when they're announced.
Mark F
to LA Area Planning Maps at the bottom of my history site at:
http://members.home.net/mkpl2/hist/hist.html
-Mark
Andy P. Jung
Canal which was dug by hand by Irishmen in the 1800's, I think. Many died
from Malaria during the construction. The canal once stretched from Lake
Pontchartrain to a man made lake where The Louisiana Superdome now stands.
They filled the canal up after WWII to build I-10 over it. A very small part
of the New Basin Canal still exists at West End Harbor (just behind the
Regions Bank building). At the northern end of the "very wide row" is a new
subdivision that is being built. Just south of it is a Civil Defense
shelter. I don't know if the "very wide row" North of I-610 was ever
intended to be used as a freeway site. I've always had a pipe dream that it
should be a 3di of I-10 (maybe I-710?) that starts from the I-10/610
intersection and ends at the Civil Defense shelter.
--
Please visit my Home Page!
http://pages.prodigy.net/apjung/
Links include Night Tracks (music video show), Quantum Leap,
Louisiana Casino listing and pizza delivery driver rantings.
Andy P. Jung
Metairie, Louisiana USA
Hometown of almost House Speaker Bob Livingston
and newest Congressman David Vitter.
To reply via e-mail, change the "dotnet.com" to ".net"
from my e-mail address.
(original message, if any, is below)
erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu wrote in message
<7mguh5$60i$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>
>A couple questions I have:
>In New Orleans, I noticed a very wide ROW extending northward along
>Pontchartrain Boulevard from the I-10/I-610 intersection. Is this the
>route of a cancelled freeway?
>
>--
>Erik Slotboom
Patrick L. Humphrey
>Great info for the Houston area!
>When the future I-69 reaches Houston, wouldn't it multiplex with the current
>US 59 expressways? I know it's a long way away!
I'd hope it's not that far away -- and if it is, why would all those *&^%$#@!
"Future Interstate Corridor" signs have popped up along the Southwest and
Eastex Freeways a couple of years ago?
The I-69 signs could go up right now on US 59 from Porter all the way south to
the Harris/Ft. Bend line -- and the four miles south of that are being rebuilt
with either two or four added lanes _and_ an HOV lane.
--Patrick L. "I just want to know what exit number I live down the street
from" Humphrey
Patrick L. Humphrey
>In article <Xs9j3.112$RE1...@newsfeed.slurp.net>,
> "Dino Hill" <Galva...@acd.net> wrote:
>> Great info for the Houston area!
>>When the future I-69 reaches Houston, wouldn't it multiplex with the current
>>US 59 expressways? I know it's a long way away!
>>
>> Dino
>There is currently a feasibility study underway for the routing of I-69
>in the Houston area. I went to the first public meeting a couple weeks
>ago. They considered a huge number of alternatives and narrowed it down
>to 10 (most of which follow existing routes), but based on their
>initial scoring, it looks like the only remaining contenders are the
>existing US 59 through Houston, the existing west and north segments
>beltway 8/ Sam Houston Tollway, and two Grand Parkway options.
>One Grand Parkway option would follow the currently proposed alignment
>around the west and north sides of Houston. The other would follow SH
>242 on the north, a two-lane facility that is a few years old and for
>some reason does not appear on the Rand McNally Map. The route goes
>from about New Caney, just north of the Woodlands, along 1488, and then
>follows the proposed western alignment of the grand parkway.
Why would it be _that_ far north? The Texas 99/Grand Parkway route crosses
I-45 a good nine miles south of the 242 interchange. (As to why Rand McNally
can't find it, you got me...the Key Maps Montgomery County atlas has never had
any problem with it. Go figure.)
>I'd put my money on the Grand Parkway/242 option since the
>environmentalists don't like the northern Grand Parkway alignment. I'll
>post the results when they're announced.
Let's hope some common sense prevails -- the Texas 99/Grand Parkway options
wouldn't be built any time before 2010, the Tollway/Beltway 8 route is
basically in place, but would need some major construction at two or three
interchanges (namely, 59, Hardy Tollway, and I-45), but 59 is in the home
stretch of being finished through Harris County (once the rebuild of that last
mile between S. Shepherd and the 527 split is done in early 2002) and would
take years off the timetable for getting I-69 up and running in Texas.
--Patrick L. "not to mention it's a lot shorter than the Texas 99 detour"
Humphrey
Patrick L. Humphrey
>In article <szkg12r...@eris.io.com>,
> pat...@io.com (Patrick L. Humphrey) wrote:
>> erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu writes:
>> >Partially cancelled
>> >Bay City Freeway. >
>>The Fort Bend Tollway is showing up on the Key Maps Harris County Atlas as
>>Texas 122, and the construction should be starting some time around the end
>>of this year, with the first leg of the tollway down to Texas 6 opening
>>in 2002.
>Is this really going to become a tollway? The last I heard on the
>subject, the toll revenue estimates were insufficient to support it. My
>impression was that the real estate interests were really pushing the
>freeway/tollway. Anyways, the feeder roads from BW8 to SH6 should be
>more than enough to handle the traffic load for now, and as you say,
>construction will begin soon.
Last I saw, the tollway was still on, but that was a few months ago, so it's
possible that that plan could have been revised. As far as I know, though,
_something_ is going to be built out that way starting later this year.
>> >"Concept Freeways" (never officially pursued)
>> >A 1968 master plan of Houston showed a freeway from Beltway 8 in west
>> >Houston to the proposed Grand Parkway, roughly along Westpark, Alief-
>> >Clodine, and FM 1093.
>>I saw that 1968 map -- and the proposed freeway branched off the
>>then-proposed West Belt just south of Westheimer, angling west-southwest down
>>towards the SPRR tracks, finally reaching them at the future Texas 6 (which
>>hadn't yet been extended that far south). It couldn't have been too
>>seriously considered, mainly because Andrau Airpark (which didn't close down
>>until just last December) was sitting squarely in its path. Currently, Metro
>>are looking at the tollway plan from the Southwest Freeway at Westpark along
>>the SPRR corridor (which Metro bought a few years ago) out to 6, and possibly
>>on out to Texas 99 -- inside of the 59/Westpark interchange, there's too much
>>development too close to the freeway to allow workable access. (That's before
>>you get to the reconstruction of I-610 in that area, or the current
>>reconstruction of the 59/Edloe tangle that pretty much rules out any tollway
>>extending inward that far.)
>As you probably know, Metro wanted to bundle there rail line ballot
>proposition into a package that included the Westpark Tollway. Many
>cried foul because, according to news reports, the Westpark Tollway is
>going to happen anyways and putting on the ballot would have just made
>the rail more likely to pass.
Probably so, but now that it turns out Metro couldn't hold the rail referendum
anyway and can go ahead with whatever they want, we may get stuck with both.
The Westpark tollway would be of some use. The light-rail project along South
Main is a prime example of wasted money, since there's not that much transit
between downtown and the Dome -- people live in too many other places.
>Assuming it does happen, it will be interesting to see how it is tied
>into US 59 and I-610.
Indeed -- but I hope it's not extended inside of Westpark, because the 59/610
intersection is going to be torn up for a couple of years anyway, by the 610
reconstruction *and* the extension of the 610 feeders across 59 (which will
require some major tunneling).
>> >Freeways that could have been canceled but are alive
>> >Mykawa freeway (new state highway 35, running west of existing.) >
>>Don't be so sure -- the feeders are done currently to the Wheeler extension
>>east of the UH central campus, and will be open down to Old Spanish Trail (US
>>90A) in a few months, but Jersey walls are being stacked in large quantities
>>along the route between Griggs and 610. The Key Maps atlas has the planned
>>design already in place as far south as Dixie Drive, south of 610. (One
>>question I have yet to see an answer to from TxDOT, though: the Alvin Freeway
>>will be designated as Texas 35, but if it's signed as that and only completed
>>just outside of 610, how will Texas 35 be directed back over to its original
>>route along Telephone Road? There aren't a whole lot of suitable alternatives
>> in that part of Houston.)
>I reviewed the schematic for this route at the Houston TxDOT office a
>couple years ago. The schematic showed a full multi-level interchange
>at 610 South. The freeway extended south to beltway 8 where it became a
>highway. I vaguely remember that a neighborhood is in the path, which
>could definitely be a problem. Don't look for this route anytime soon.
Maybe, maybe not -- but there isn't much in the way of it between 610 and the
Tollway, since the routing was moved west of S. Wayside where it crosses
Bellfort.
>> >US 90 freeway from 610 to BW8 (extension of Crosby freeway)
>>The ghost ramps at the I-10/610 interchange have been there since that
>>interchange was completed in the early 1970s - but there appears to have been
>>some clearing off of the adjacent right-of-way in the last couple of months,
>>so could it be that construction's coming soon on at least the feeders? It
>>would be preferable than having to go all the way out to the Beltway via
>>either I-10 or US 90 and then detour down to the Northeast/Crosby Freeway.
>The project hasn't been listed as imminent, but it's possible since
>that project should have all clearances and if money became available,
>it could go to bid quickly.
It couldn't hurt -- of course, it would help things along even better if
Beltway 8 was actually completed up to the Crosby Freeway, instead of ending a
mile south of it. (Then again, that'd probably result in having to widen the
toll bridge across the Ship Channel, so maybe TxDOT know what they're doing in
this case.)
--Patrick L. "it was more interesting back when Westheimer was two lanes once
you got west of Chimney Rock -- now, another 12 miles from Chimney Rock will
get you to that point" Humphrey
Donald L. Wallace
expressway)
I was told years ago that the "Hamilton Connector", the limited
access road that goes between Hamilton Ave. and Wyoming Ave. in the
city's east side, was originally designed to continue south of Wyoming
Ave., through the grounds once occupied by the state hospital (now Ten
Wilmington Place), bisect the Belmont neighborhood, and somehow tie
into Wilmington Pike south of Patterson Road.
As this road presently terminates on the south, it dead ends at
Wyoming. A house at this dead end that used to be a landing site for
drivers that missed/did not pay attention to the traffic light was
removed.
Can any Dayton or Ohio area roadgeeks confirm this original plan or
shed light?
- Don
Chuck Fry
Michael G. Koerner <mgk...@dataex.com> wrote:
>The 'Hollywood Freeway' (US 101/CA 170) was completed. You MAY be
>thinking of the never built 'Beverly Hills Freeway' (the name says it
>all as to why it was killed), it was to extend from the end of the CA 2
>'Glendale Freeway' southwest and west towards Beverly Hills and Santa
>Monica (in fact, there is a VERY noticable 'ghost interchange' where it
>was proposed to connect with the Hollywood Freeway).
Oh, so *that's* the explanation for the wide median! I should have
guessed.
That stretch of US 101 was built in the early-mid '50s, wasn't it?
-- Chuck, former L.A. resident
--
Chuck Fry -- Jack of all trades, master of none
chu...@chucko.com (text only please) chuc...@home.com (MIME enabled)
Lisp bigot, mountain biker, car nut, sometime guitarist and photographer
The addresses above are real. All spammers will be reported to their ISPs.
Michael E. Kotler
says...
> You know that enormous overpass over US-35 at Linden Ave. and Steve
> Whalen Blvd? That was originally intended to lead into another freeway
> from there to the T-intersection of Wilmington Ave. and Shroyer Rd.
This must be the Hamilton Connector someone else mentioned
> The half-interchange between OH-444 and Springfield Street was originally
> intended to be three-way. As was the 444/444-A split.
Oops, I meant to say the I-675/444-A split was originally planned to be
3-way. 444/444-A is a full interchange, but it's all on one side of 444-
A with two traffic lights, because of the railroad tracks on the other
side.
Michael E. Kotler
waterfront in downtown Toledo, (Embarcadero style?). On the north side it
started at I-75 somewhere, and ended at the Anthony Wayne Trail south of
town. They did build a large interchange with the Trail, but it just
abruptly ends in city streets east of I-75. Don't know of any ghost
ramps at the north end, but there was an Evel Kneivel-style ramp on I-75
just south of I-475's northern terminus.
Going on a distant memory here, I remember seeing on a Detroit TV news
broadcast around 1976 or so, that a segment of I-675 around Saginaw was
cancelled. Anyone know for sure?
Michael Kotler
mek...@aol.com
peter_m...@ibm.net
erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu wrote:
> Kurumi suggested
> "Anyone up for starting a thread listing all cancelled projects in your
> city?" Great idea. Washington, Toronto, and the northeast get a lot of
> posts, but what about the rest of the country? I started a new post to
> give it a proper name.
I don't know if anyone has covered this yet, but San Francisco, CA was the
site of a "Freeway Revolt" in the 1950s. The Board of Supervisors
cancelled several projects that Caltrans had in mind for the City.
Some examples:
The Embarcadero Freeway (now torn down) was going to extend all the way
around the northern waterfront of the City to connect with the approachs to
the Golden Gate Bridge. I-280 would have been extended to join this
freeway on its eastern end.
In addition, there was a plan for a "Sunset Freeway" on the western side of
the city connecting the Golden Gate Bridge to I-280 in Daly City through
the Richmond, Golden Gate Park and the Sunset.
There was also a plan for an extension of US-101 up the Van Ness/Franklin
corridor to the Bay where it would connect with the Embarcadero Freeway
(see above) and the Golden Gate Bridge. There were some fanciful plans for
this extension to continue across San Francisco Bay to the Tiburon
peninsula as a second bridge to supplement the Golden Gate.
Less fanciful was the proposal for a "Southern Crossing" of the San
Francisco Bay from the southern part of the city to Oakland. Frank Lloyd
Wright designed a quite beautiful "butterfly-style" concept bridge for this
crossing.
All of these projects were essentially killed by the Board of Supervisors'
vote. In recent years, two double-decker freeways were torn down after the
Loma Prieta earthquake: the Embarcadero Freeway and part of the Central
Freeway. There are still debates going on about how and whether to replace
the Central Freeway portions. In addition, the eastern portion of the Bay
Bridge will have to be replaced in the next several years. There has been
a lot of debate, but no consensus, on what the design should be.
Mike McManus
> The US-35 arc around Xenia, OH, was originally intended to go all the
> way around to US-68 on the west. That's why there was (is?) a sharp
> right turn to get on the bypass from US-35.
>
> I once saw in downtown Dayton a "TEMP OH-4", suggesting a proposed
> continuation of the 4 freeway?
I recall traveling to the Springfield area with the Boy Scouts to
tour a peat bog (ahh... nature! ;-). On the way there we traveled a
freeway (I seem to recall it being either OH 4 or US 68, or both)
that suddenly stopped and dumped us on a two-lane road. While
touring the bog we were told the reason: the freeway, had it been
completed, would have obliterated the bog.
--
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
_/ Mike McManus _/ home: mmcm...@frontiernet.net _/
_/ Rochester, NY _/ work: mcm...@kodak.com _/
_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
Michael Moroney
William S. Riddle, IV
>Mississippi or Alabama (northern Birmingham beltway doesn't
>count because it's been resurrected). Mississippi
>currently has 1 freeway under construction, 2 freeways
>planned, and 4 more under study. The one under
>construction is an extension of the existing US 82 freeway
>in eastern Mississippi (the Starkville bypass). The two
>planned freeways are a US 82 Greenville bypass and MS 304
>from US 61 east then north into Tennessee (tying into the
>Nonconnaugh and forming an outer loop of Memphis).
The MS 304 freeway *is* under construction right in the heart of Olive
Branch! They're building a part of it from US 78 to somewhere east of Olive
Branch (I didn't try to find the end of the construction while I was
temporarily living in Memphis about a year ago). It's completely elevated
through an area near Olive Branch's CBD.
BTW, the correct spelling is Nonconnah. And if I have time this weekend,
I'll try to finish up my exit list info and send it to you.
--
/------------------------------------------------------------------\
| William Speer "Billy" Riddle, IV mailto:ridd...@mindspring.com |
| ICQ # 10324460 http://www.mindspring.com/~riddler4 |
| Tenn. Hwys. Page: http://www.mindspring.com/~riddler4/TNHwys.htm |
\------------------------------------------------------------------/
James Lin
>
> > Kurumi suggested
> > "Anyone up for starting a thread listing all cancelled projects in your
> > city?"
> I don't know if anyone has covered this yet, but San Francisco, CA was the
> site of a "Freeway Revolt" in the 1950s.
In fact, Kurumi has a good map showing all of the proposed San Francisco
freeways (kinda brings it back full circle, doesn't it), at
http://www.kurumi.com/roads/3di/sanfran.html
- Jim
--
James Lin
jl...@ugcs.caltech.edu
http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~jlin/
erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu
>
> >>When the future I-69 reaches Houston, wouldn't it multiplex with
the current
> >>US 59 expressways? I know it's a long way away!
> >>
> >> Dino
>
The study team did not have any origin-destination data for the I-69
traffic. But if they conclude that a bypass is what is needed, it seems
to me that the further out it is, the better. If you think the
West/North Grand Parkway route is inappropriate, some of the finalist
routes are much worse, including the south Grand Parkway to 288 and
then around the south and east beltway.
>
> >I'd put my money on the Grand Parkway/242 option since the
> >environmentalists don't like the northern Grand Parkway alignment.
I'll
> >post the results when they're announced.
>
> Let's hope some common sense prevails -- the Texas 99/Grand Parkway
options
> wouldn't be built any time before 2010, the Tollway/Beltway 8 route is
> basically in place, but would need some major construction at two or
three
> interchanges (namely, 59, Hardy Tollway, and I-45), but 59 is in the
home
> stretch of being finished through Harris County (once the rebuild of
that last
> mile between S. Shepherd and the 527 split is done in early 2002) and
would
> take years off the timetable for getting I-69 up and running in
Texas.
As a practical matter, the signing of the route is not particularly
meaningful. Anyone with a map will see that the existing 59 is the
shortest route and is also toll-free. Truckers definitely like the path
of least resistance.
>
> --Patrick L. "not to mention it's a lot shorter than the Texas 99
detour"
> Humphrey
>
--
erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu
"Michael G. Koerner" <mgk...@dataex.com> wrote:
> ---------------------------
> Another thread idea, those highway projects that were proposed when we
> were all at our youngest time of 'awareness' as to the state of the
> highway system, that we NEVER thought would be built, and that we can
> now (or VERY SOON) drive on.
>
> For me it is the US 45 'West Bend Spur' in Wisconsin.
I'm not a Calfornian, but it seemed to me to be a near-miracle that the
San Joaquin Hills Toll Road was built in Orange County.
erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu
erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu wrote:
> Kurumi suggested
> "Anyone up for starting a thread listing all cancelled projects in
your
> posts, but what about the rest of the country? I started a new post to
> give it a proper name.
>
Cancelled
East-West freeway. This would have extended 290 westward from I-35
along Koenig Road and then 2222. A desperately needed road, but
environmentalists flexed their muscles in 1994 and killed it. The
Regional Transporation is up for approval again later this year, so I
made a statement at Monday's meeting that it should be restored to the
plan. The commission, which is stacked with environmentalists and new-
urbanists, gave me lots of dirty looks.
Cancelled
Most of the Outer Parkway, including the western and southwestern
segments, also killed in 1994. It would have followed 620 on the west,
then going southward on a new alignment to near Bee Caves, and then
around the south of Austin. A short southern segment was built west of
Loop 1 in the 1980's, but development has been effectively banned in
that area so it is lightly travelled. A segment (about 4-5 miles, but
not all the way to 35) to the east of this existing segment will likely
be built to divert traffic out of a neigborhood. The northern segment
along route 620, south of Round Rock, across 35, and to the proposed
130 bypass will likely be built as a toll road. The east segment is
dead, but it is effectively replaced by the proposed 130 bypass.
Adam Froehlig
>heart of Olive Branch! They're building a part of it
>from US 78 to somewhere east of Olive Branch (I didn't try
>to find the end of the construction while I was
>temporarily living in Memphis about a year ago). It's
>completely elevated through an area near Olive Branch's
>CBD.
That can't be MS 304. Based on my info, MS 304 is supposed
to hit US 78 right near the DeSoto/Marshall County line. My
hunch is that you were seeing construction on MS 302 (which
is to be extended out to US 72).
Froggie | Meridian, MS |
http://www.mississippi.net/~froggie/roads/laudcohi.htm
**** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start Here (tm) ****
Patrick L. Humphrey
>In article <szkvhbl...@eris.io.com>,
> pat...@io.com (Patrick L. Humphrey) wrote:
>> erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu writes:
>>>One Grand Parkway option would follow the currently proposed alignment
>>>around the west and north sides of Houston. The other would follow SH
>>>242 on the north, a two-lane facility that is a few years old and for
>>>some reason does not appear on the Rand McNally Map. The route goes
>>>from about New Caney, just north of the Woodlands, along 1488, and then
>>>follows the proposed western alignment of the grand parkway.
>>Why would it be _that_ far north? The Texas 99/Grand Parkway route crosses
>>I-45 a good nine miles south of the 242 interchange. (As to why Rand McNally
>>can't find it, you got me...the Key Maps Montgomery County atlas has never
>>had any problem with it. Go figure.)
>The study team did not have any origin-destination data for the I-69
>traffic. But if they conclude that a bypass is what is needed, it seems
>to me that the further out it is, the better. If you think the
>West/North Grand Parkway route is inappropriate, some of the finalist
>routes are much worse, including the south Grand Parkway to 288 and
>then around the south and east beltway.
What I can't understand is why they'd want a bypass that far out of the way,
since all it would do is add as much as 75 miles to the route's length -- and
in the case of the north/west Grand Parkway option, the majority of that would
require new roads. At least if it's routed through town along US 59 or around
the north/west sides of Beltway 8, the roadway is already there.
>>>I'd put my money on the Grand Parkway/242 option since the
>>>environmentalists don't like the northern Grand Parkway alignment. I'll
>>>post the results when they're announced.
>>Let's hope some common sense prevails -- the Texas 99/Grand Parkway options
>>wouldn't be built any time before 2010, the Tollway/Beltway 8 route is
>>basically in place, but would need some major construction at two or three
>>interchanges (namely, 59, Hardy Tollway, and I-45), but 59 is in the home
>>stretch of being finished through Harris County(once the rebuild of that last
>>mile between S. Shepherd and the 527 split is done in early 2002) and would
>>take years off the timetable for getting I-69 up and running in Texas.
>As a practical matter, the signing of the route is not particularly
>meaningful. Anyone with a map will see that the existing 59 is the
>shortest route and is also toll-free. Truckers definitely like the path
>of least resistance.
Indeed -- so why the insistence on considering routings that the truckers will
ignore, when they can go for the low-cost option? :-)
--Patrick L. "common sense and pork politics don't mix, I know" Humphrey
Mike Dahmus
infinite number of monkeys to write:
>Cancelled
>East-West freeway. This would have extended 290 westward from I-35
>along Koenig Road and then 2222. A desperately needed road, but
>environmentalists flexed their muscles in 1994 and killed it. The
>Regional Transporation is up for approval again later this year, so I
>made a statement at Monday's meeting that it should be restored to the
>plan. The commission, which is stacked with environmentalists and new-
>urbanists, gave me lots of dirty looks.
Let me point out, since Mr. Slotboom doesn't feel it necessary to do so, that
the oft-proposed and oft-rejected 2222 freeway would destroy a few hundred
homes and render a few hundred more virtually uninhabitable, for the sole
benefit of suburban commuters. I don't think you'll have much luck pushing a
highway like that *anywhere* these days.
Mike Dahmus mdahmus at I O DOT COM
http://www.io.com/~mdahmus/
"No one likes a pedantic smartarse..."
Lance Purple
> East-West freeway. This would have extended 290 westward from I-35
> along Koenig Road and then 2222. A desperately needed road, but
> environmentalists flexed their muscles in 1994 and killed it. The
> Regional Transporation is up for approval again later this year, so
> I made a statement at Monday's meeting that it should be restored to
> the plan. The commission, which is stacked with environmentalists
> and new-urbanists, gave me lots of dirty looks.
I'm not surprised they were unenthusiastic. Why on earth should
they expend the money and political effort to:
- spend years battling wealthy neighborhood associations in court
- buy out hundreds of expensive yuppie homes between Lamar and Mopac
and/or spend the extra money to elevate the entire structure
- perform death-defying engineering magic along the sheer cliff-face
between Mopac and 360,
when there's ALREADY a new E-W freeway barely two miles north of there?
A similar argument applies to the proposed First Street Freeway (would
require bulldozing of skyscrapers / the new Ben White Freeway is only
two miles south).
,----------------------------.
| lpurple at netcom dot com |
'----------------------------'
erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu
mdahNO_%_SPAMmus@iNO_%_SPAMo.com (Mike Dahmus) wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 03:45:14 GMT, erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu hired
an
> infinite number of monkeys to write:
>
> >Cancelled
> >along Koenig Road and then 2222. A desperately needed road, but
> >environmentalists flexed their muscles in 1994 and killed it. The
> >Regional Transporation is up for approval again later this year, so I
> >made a statement at Monday's meeting that it should be restored to
the
> >plan. The commission, which is stacked with environmentalists and
new-
> >urbanists, gave me lots of dirty looks.
>
so, that
> the oft-proposed and oft-rejected 2222 freeway would destroy a few
hundred
> homes and render a few hundred more virtually uninhabitable, for the
sole
> benefit of suburban commuters. I don't think you'll have much luck
pushing a
> highway like that *anywhere* these days.
>
> Mike Dahmus mdahmus at I O DOT COM
> http://www.io.com/~mdahmus/
> "No one likes a pedantic smartarse..."
>
of 2222 from the end of 290 to Mopac loop1. This would not take "a few
hundred" homes. A few dozen is more like it. As you are surely aware,
most of the homes along Koenig west of Burnet have already been
converted to commercial establishments since traffic has rendered the
route less desirable for homeowners.
Living at 2222 and 360, I'm forced to cut through neighborhoods all the
time to eastward. Sometimes Allendale, sometimes Hyde Park, sometimes
along 45 street, sometimes Enfield. One way or the other, the
neighborhoods are going to get the traffic.
--
Daniel P Faigin
<mgk...@dataex.com> wrote:
>erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu wrote:
>
>>
>> And where is Los Angeles was the Hollywood Freeway planned?
>
>The 'Hollywood Freeway' (US 101/CA 170) was completed.
Well, not really, at least in terms of number. There are quite a few
Los Angeles freeways that were planned and never constructed. The
following is a list of most of them; however, some of my key maps are
on loan:
"Reseda Freeway". This was CA 14 between the current end at Route 5
and the CA 1 ("Pacific Freeway") at PCH and Sunset. It would have run
along Reseda Blvd.
"Whitnall Freeway". This was CA 64 (still on the books) from the
I-5/CA 170 junction to PCH at Malibu Canyon. This would have run E/W
across the valley along Chase, turned, and continued to PCH along
Malibu Canyon.
"Pacific Freeway". This would have run along CA 1 from the current
termination in Oxnard S to LAX, and then from Palos Verdes to Orange
County.
"Beverly Hills Freeway". CA 2, from PCH to the current start of CA 2
as freeway near US 101. Through the heart of Beverly Hills.
CA 2 Freeway. The other side of CA 2 would have also been extended, up
along Angeles Crest to Route 18.
CA 249 Freeway. In the middle of the mountains, about where Angeles
Crest Hiway meets the Angeles Forest Hiway, CA 249 would have split
off to meet CA 14.
"Laurel Canyon Freeway". CA 170, the Hollywood Freeway, was never
completed in terms of CA 170. Although CA 170 ends at the current US
101/CA 134/CA 170 junction, it would actually have picked up again to
the W at Laurel Canyon, and continued S across the canyon and LA to
the vicinity of the Airport.
CA 118. Think this one was finished? Think again. To the W, it would
have picked up from the CA 123 freeway, and continued W to US 101. To
the E, it would have picked up from the I-210, and continued E across
the hills to meet the CA 2 freeway.
CA 122. This would have run from CA 14 to CA 48 in the high desert.
CA 138. The Metropolitan Bypass, running from I-5 to I-15 across the
high desert.
CA 48. This would have been an even more northerly high-desert bypass.
CA 258. This would have run from US 101 to I-405, along approx.
Highland. I've seen one map that extended it to the CA 170/I-5
junction.
CA 90. This would have had its middle completed, running from
Inglewood to Yorba Linda.
CA 42. This would have run from I-405 to I-5 along Manchester and
Firestone. Eventually replaced by I-105 to the S.
CA 47 "Industrial Freeway". From San Pedro to Downtown LA, midway
between the current I-110 and I-710.
CA 164 Freeway. From I-210 to I-605 roughly along Whittier and
Rosemead Blvds. Note that some parts of I-605 originally had different
numbers.
CA 39 "Huntington Beach" freeway, from CA 1 to I-210 along Beach,
Whittier, and San Gabrial Canyon
CA 7. Now CA-710, this refers to the unfinished stub between I-10 and
I-210.
CA 107, between I-405 and CA 1 along Hawthorne Blvd.
CA 126 would have been freeway all the way between I-5 and US 101.
CA 34 would have been freeway between CA 118 and CA 1.
CA 232 would have been freeway between CA 118 and CA 1.
CA 257 would have run from US 101 in Ventura to CA 34.
CA 150 would have been freeway from US 101 to CA 126 through Casistas
This covers the major uncompleted LA freeways. You'll find a map at
http://www.pacificnet.net/~faigin/CA-HWYS/map-1965.html
and can get specifics on any highway by visiting
http://www.pacificnet.net/~faigin/CA-HWYS/
Daniel
W/H: fai...@aero.org/fai...@pacificnet.net http://www.pacificnet.net/~faigin/
Mod., Mail.Liberal-Judaism (.../~faigin/MLJ) Advisor, s.c.j.Parenting
Maintainer, S.C.J FAQ/RL (.../~faigin/SCJ) Daddy to Erin Shoshana
Maintainer, Calif. Highways List (.../~faigin/CA-HWYS)
Alan Hamilton
At one time, it looked like this would become a very long
list. But Phoenix is now actually building most of the freeways
proposed in the 60s, albeit 30 years late. The outer loops have been
moved a bit further out. They were proposed mostly as Interstate
spur/loop routes, but were built all as state routes.
The only major deletion is the Paradise Parkway, AZ 50. This
would have run along Camelback Rd from AZ 101 in Glendale to AZ 51 in
mid-Phoenix. There was also an idea to extend it all the way across
to AZ 101 again in Scottsdale. Neighborhood opposition sunk it. It
never got any further than a few land aquisitions. There are no ghost
interchanges.
A more minor deletion was the western Maricopa Freeway.
Coming from the west, I-10 would have curved south and connected to
the I-17 "elbow" (aka Durango curve) rather than going straight into
town. As originally constructed, there were ghost overpasses and
grades. When that area was widened, most of those features were wiped
out. The bridged areas were filled in with dirt.
Tucson, Arizona:
I-710, which would have run along Kino Parkway. There is a
big, divided highway interchange with I-10, but the road itself has
grade intersections.
--
/
/ * / Alan Hamilton
* * al...@primenet.com
Arizona Roads -- http://www.primenet.com/~alanh/road/
No ads, popups or watermarks ever
Mark H. Bickford
> > "Anyone up for starting a thread listing all cancelled projects in
> your
> > city?" Great idea. Washington, Toronto, and the northeast get a lot of
> > posts, but what about the rest of the country? I started a new post to
> > give it a proper name.
> >
I can only think of one in Portland, Maine: the so-called Westbrook
Arterial. It was to have been a four-lane route connecting downtown
Westbrook and the Maine Turnpike to I-295 at Exit 5 (Congress St.). In
fact, there is a ghost half-cloverleaf at Exit 5, to the south of the NB
off-ramp. The route was never finalized, but it would have gone through
a large area at the head of the Fore River which has since not only been
purchased by the Audobon Society as the Fore River Sanctuary, but is
something that had not been invented in 1973: "protected wetlands" (back
then, they were called "marshes" and "swamps"). I did, however, find it
interesting that the designs for the new Exit 7B on the 'Pike (which
will connect to the part of the Arterial that was built in Westbrook)
seem to leave room for an eastern connector....
Vanunu
plan to work *very* hard on it this summer.
Vanunu
Mike Dahmus
infinite number of monkeys to write:
>In article <379045d4...@news.io.com>,
> mdahNO_%_SPAMmus@iNO_%_SPAMo.com (Mike Dahmus) wrote:
>> On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 03:45:14 GMT, erik.s...@bus.utexas.edu hired
>an
>> infinite number of monkeys to write:
>>
>> Let me point out, since Mr. Slotboom doesn't feel it necessary to do
>so, that
>> the oft-proposed and oft-rejected 2222 freeway would destroy a few
>hundred
>> homes and render a few hundred more virtually uninhabitable, for the
>sole
>> benefit of suburban commuters. I don't think you'll have much luck
>pushing a
>> highway like that *anywhere* these days.
>>
>>
>I probably wasn't specific enough, but I was referring to the section
>of 2222 from the end of 290 to Mopac loop1. This would not take "a few
>hundred" homes. A few dozen is more like it. As you are surely aware,
>most of the homes along Koenig west of Burnet have already been
>converted to commercial establishments since traffic has rendered the
>route less desirable for homeowners.
I knew exactly what you were referring to, and yes, it would require the
taking of a few hundred homes, unless you're planning on building a freeway no
wider than the existing 4-lane (no center lane or median) facility.
And a few hundred more would be effectively trashed, as along the surface
streets for Mopac which were turned into frontage roads with no compensation
to the property owner whatsoever, when that road was rammed through the older
neighborhoods of Austin in the 1980s.
>Living at 2222 and 360, I'm forced to cut through neighborhoods all the
>time to eastward. Sometimes Allendale, sometimes Hyde Park, sometimes
>along 45 street, sometimes Enfield. One way or the other, the
>neighborhoods are going to get the traffic.
Another suburbanite wants to wreck inner city homes so he can get to work
quicker. What a shock.
Michael E. Kotler
says...
> [in Springfield, OH] On the way there we traveled a
> freeway (I seem to recall it being either OH 4 or US 68, or both)
> that suddenly stopped and dumped us on a two-lane road. While
> touring the bog we were told the reason: the freeway, had it been
> completed, would have obliterated the bog.
Just north of the International Harverster truck plant in that area,
there is a still-standing ghost diamond interchange for that continuation
of US-68. I've only seen it from the air.
Michael Kotler
mek...@aol.com
Bob Goudreau
: The Sunshine State Parkway was originally proposed to extend north to
: Jacksonville from Wildwood, paralleling US 301 to the east up to US
: 17. The is shown on oil company maps 1956-1958.
Too bad it got cancelled. For one thing, it would have bypassed the
little pissant speed-trap burgs of Waldo, Lawtey and Starke, one of
which (Waldo, I think?) was just recently cited by the AAA as the top
speed-trap in the US -- something like 65 percent of the municipal
revenues are derived from speeding tickets. Fortunately, I've never
gotten a ticket on US 301, but it is rather outrageous how the speed
limit drops from 65 mph all the way to 35 or even 25 mph over the
course of about two miles approaching each of these little towns.
If Florida ever builds any kind of bypass around them, they'll
probably dry up and blow away (good riddance!).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Goudreau Data General Corporation
goud...@rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive
+1 919 248 6231 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA
SPUI
--
Daniel Moraseski
http://members.xoom.com/_XOOM/spui/index.html - FL and NJ roads, and also a
list of all (well, most) SPUIs
King of irrelevant info
in Orlando, FL; originally from Manalapan, NJ
Bob Goudreau wrote in message <7mvo9p$e...@dg-rtp.dg.com>...
TexHwyMan
>Kurumi suggested "Anyone up for starting a thread listing all
>cancelled projects in your city?"
In San Antonio, I know of three cancelled freeway projects:
* Bandera Freeway: Would've run from I-10 at Culebra just NW of
downtown out Culebra to Bandera Rd., then out Bandera Rd. past I-410.
Too bad it got cancelled because it's really needed now.
* Poteet-Jourdenton Freeway: SH 16 SW of San Antonio was to be upgraded
to a freeway from I-35 to about 5 miles south of I-410. The frontage
roads are already there, but the mainlanes remain at-grade.
* SH 211: This was always on the master plan, and the first section was
built in the late '80s between US 90 and Potranco Rd. in far west Bexar
County. The next section between Culebra Rd. and SH 16 was completed
soon thereafter. Now, there's a gap between the two segments that has
yet to be completed, although it likely will be in the next decade.
The part from SH 16 to I-10 on NW Bexar County was scrapped in 1991 due
to NIMBYs and environmentalists.
--Brian Purcell
The Texas HighwayMan
San Antonio, USA
mailto:hiwa...@express-news.net
http://www.express-news.net/greengrl
Chris O'Leary
Bob Goudreau wrote:
> For one thing, it would have bypassed the
> little pissant speed-trap burgs of Waldo, Lawtey and Starke, one of
> which (Waldo, I think?) was just recently cited by the AAA as the top
> speed-trap in the US -- something like 65 percent of the municipal
> revenues are derived from speeding tickets.
Actually, I read that 73% of Waldo's revenue comes from speeding
tickets, and 51% of Lawtey's does, as well. AAA National HQ sent out a
press release two weeks ago suggesting that we shouldn't use that road
unless absolutely necessary, and instead use I-10 to I-75... which tacks
another 49 miles onto the trip, but if you were travelling at the actual
speed limit down 301, it would probably take just as long, wouldn't it?
-- Chris
rte66man
>>Kurumi suggested "Anyone up for starting a thread listing all
>>cancelled projects in your city?"
In Tulsa, OK, by far the biggest and most controversial was the cancellation
of the Riverside Freeway. On the books since the early 50's, it was to run
south from the SE interchange of the Inner Dispersal Loop to about 29th and
Riverside Drive approximately along the path of the abandoned Midland Valley
rr track. At that point, it would supplant Riverside Drive down to 96th St,
where it would turn east to Broken Arrow.
By tht time funding would have been available, the neighborhood between
downtown and the river had become yuppified and the residents mounted a
successful effort to have the project killed. The rr track was converted
into a ped/bike trail. Riverside Drive is still a huge nightmare during rush
hour; however, the land that would hve been take by a freeway has been
converted into a very popular park that is heavily used. Most traffic that
would have used the proposed freeway goes across the river on I-244, then
south along US-75, then back across the river at either 71st St or the Creek
turnpike.
IMHO, although I didn't agree with the decision at the time, it has turned
out rather well overall. I still wish some sort of connector had been built
betwee the IDL and Riverside.
rte66man
Mike Reaser
Having gone to junior high and high school in Jacksonville, and
having attended numerous music competitions in Gainesville on the
campus of the Florida Boys' School :-), I can attest to this. My
parents did both routings <<mumblety>> years ago, and it was maybe
at most 10 minutes longer doing I-10/I-75 from Jacksonville to
Gainesville than using US 301.
My feelings are simply: Waldo & Lawtey get a Big Red "Circle/Slash".
Fmtyner
<fro...@mississippi.net> writes:
>>The MS 304 freeway *is* under construction right in the
>>heart of Olive Branch! They're building a part of it
>>from US 78 to somewhere east of Olive Branch (I didn't try
>>to find the end of the construction while I was
>>temporarily living in Memphis about a year ago). It's
>>completely elevated through an area near Olive Branch's
>>CBD.
>
>That can't be MS 304. Based on my info, MS 304 is supposed
>to hit US 78 right near the DeSoto/Marshall County line. My
>hunch is that you were seeing construction on MS 302 (which
>is to be extended out to US 72).
I'm sure that's MS-302, which shouldn't be confused with MS-304. According to
the MDOT web site, the contract for the first part of MS-304 (in western DeSoto
County) will be let either this month or next month. Is the MS-302 Olive
Branch By-pass being built to freeway standards? I know the part between I-55
and US-78 is 5 lanes--hardly a major highway given the area. Based on MDOT
practice on other routes, I assume the route from Olive Branch to US-72 will be
an expressway with driveways limited to 1/3 mile intervals.
Another question: Does the Mississippi DOT really intend to sign the existing
MS-304 as MS-"304 Travel Way"? I noticed that designation on a highway system
map a while back.
Fred Tyner
Dallas, TX
Fmtyner
<fro...@mississippi.net> writes:
>As far as I know, there were no cancelled freeways in
>Mississippi or Alabama (northern Birmingham beltway doesn't
>count because it's been resurrected).
Actually, there were some cancellations, downgrades, and major re-routings in
Mississippi. These may have been purely conceptual, but AFAIK these were
genuine proposed freeways:
I-55: I've heard the interstate in Jackson was originally to have taken a
route farther west. The current route was to be US-51. The highway was
"temporarily" routed along US-51. By the 1980's, the "temporary" route had
become "permanent". This was given as part of the reason for needing the major
upgrade of the highway during that time.
"East Perimeter Road": A once proposed bypass around the east side of Jackson.
AFAIK, it would have been an eastern I-220. The proposed road was to extend
from I-55 at I-220 eastward across the Pearl River, then south across I-20 and
onward to US-49 at Florence. One map I saw showed a companion route along the
east side of the Pearl River from near the Reservoir to the I-20/US-49
interchange and an extension of Ridegewood Road to this route as part of the
"East Perimeter Road" poposal.
"Elton Road Extension": I saw this on a transportation plan from about 1980 or
the 1970's. The plan called for extending Elton Road from I-55 in south
Jackson eastward to US-49 with full control of access.
US-45: AFAIK, a freeway was planned for this corridor all the way from US-82
to the Tennessee line. Only the Tupelo and Corinth Bypasses were built as
freeways. BTW, the road was to have followed a new path between US-45 and
US-45A north of US-82. (The 4-lane route would have followed US-45 from
Brooksville to just south of US-82.)
I-59: I heard that the original routing would have passed south of Meridian
along the US-45 Bypass. I do remember seeing a "Future US-11 Connector" on an
old set of plans showing the bypass. As for I-20, I'm not sure whether it
would have followed that route or not.
>Mississippi currently has 1 freeway under construction, 2 freeways
>planned, and 4 more under study. The one under
>construction is an extension of the existing US 82 freeway
>in eastern Mississippi (the Starkville bypass). The two
>planned freeways are a US 82 Greenville bypass and MS 304
>from US 61 east then north into Tennessee (tying into the
>Nonconnaugh and forming an outer loop of Memphis).
>
First segment of MS-304 is coming soon. (See MDOT website,
'www.mdot.state.ms.us', under "business" and "bid advertisements", July.)
>Of the 4 freeways under study, one is I-69 (of which MS 304
>may become a part). Another is a possible connection
>between I-69 and the US 82 Greenville Bypass. The other
>two are in the Jackson area. One is called the Jackson
>Metro Parkway, and would run from I-55 near High St east to
>Jackson International Airport. This may be built as an
>expressway instead though.
>
It may not be to those standards. Rumor has it that the former highway
director promised local officials not to make it controlled access (i.e. plenty
of access for businesses), despite the wishes of planners. That promise may
not be binding--we'll see.
>The last study is an upgrade of US 49 between I-20 and
>Florence. Basically two options are being looked at:
>additional lanes, or an upgrade to freeway.
>
There's a lot of development along the route in Richland. If MDOT acts
quickly, they may be able to secure ROW east of the current route before it is
developed, although last time I went there, I noticed subdivisions starting to
fill in the area.
Other potential Mississippi freeway routes:
US-72 Corinth Bypass (proposed, but I'm not sure of access control)
East Harrison County Connector (see MDOT web site)
MS-67 (sometimes described as a northern extension of I-110. I expect an
expressway, minimum.)
US-45 and US-84 at Waynesboro (Under construction. Plans I saw (title sheet)
suggested freeways.)
Upgrading US-49 to a freeway from the coast to Jackson was ruled out (and never
formally proposed) due to the cost, especially ROW issues. Primarily "damage"
to properties due to loss of access and the requirement to construct frontage
roads.
Fred Tyner
Dallas, TX
Adam Froehlig
>MS-304. According to the MDOT web site, the contract for
>the first part of MS-304 (in western DeSoto County) will
>be let either this month or next month.
First contract is already let. It went out back in May or
June (May, I believe), for the stretch from west of MS 301
to Odom Road (about 2 miles west of I-55).
>Is the MS-302 Olive Branch By-pass being built to freeway
>standards?
No.
>I know the part between I-55 and US-78 is 5 lanes--hardly
>a major highway given the area. Based on MDOT practice on
>other routes, I assume the route from Olive Branch to
>US-72 will be an expressway with driveways limited to 1/3
>mile intervals.
Some sections of MS 302, especially near I-55, are 7 lanes.
And IIRC, the only 4+ lanes (excluding freeways) that MDOT
has in Desoto County are MS 302 (the completed sections), US
51 (north of MS 302) and US 61.
>Another question: Does the Mississippi DOT really intend
>to sign the existing MS-304 as MS-"304 Travel Way"? I
>noticed that designation on a highway system map a while
>back.
They probably won't, seeing how they're just using the
standard black on white oval. What I'm curious about is
what will happen to existing MS 304 once the new freeway is
built.
Froggie | Meridian, MS |
http://www.mississippi.net/~froggie/roads/laudcohi.htm
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Adam Froehlig
>major re-routings in Mississippi. These may have been
>purely conceptual, but AFAIK these were genuine proposed
>freeways:
>
>I-55: I've heard the interstate in Jackson was originally
>to have taken a route farther west. The current route was
>to be US-51. The highway was "temporarily" routed along
>US-51. By the 1980's, the "temporary" route had become
>"permanent". This was given as part of the reason for
>needing the major upgrade of the highway during that time.
Every map and routing I've seen, dating back to 1960, has
I-55 following its current route. There have been some
minor changes along the I-20/55 duplex, but I-55 wasn't
proposed to ram straight through downtown (which it would
have following US 51/State St).
>"East Perimeter Road": A once proposed bypass around the
>east side of Jackson.
>
>AFAIK, it would have been an eastern I-220. The proposed
>road was to extend from I-55 at I-220 eastward across the
>Pearl River, then south across I-20 and onward to US-49 at
>Florence. One map I saw showed a companion route along
>the east side of the Pearl River from near the Reservoir
>to the I-20/US-49 interchange and an extension of
>Ridegewood Road to this route as part of the "East
>Perimeter Road" poposal.
Some of the routings you mention above are still proposed,
although probably not as freeways. Some of them are an
"East Metro Bypass" which would bypass Brandon to the south
and the airport to the east, and tie into MS 25 at Old
Fannin Rd, an extension/rerouting of MS 468 which will tie
into the I-20/US 49 interchange, and an extension of MS 475
south to US 49 southeast of Florence.
>"Elton Road Extension": I saw this on a transportation
>plan from about 1980 or the 1970's. The plan called for
>extending Elton Road from I-55 in south Jackson eastward
>to US-49 with full control of access.
Not on the plan anymore.
>US-45: AFAIK, a freeway was planned for this corridor all
>the way from US-82 to the Tennessee line. Only the Tupelo
>and Corinth Bypasses were built as freeways. BTW, the road
>was to have followed a new path between US-45 and US-45A
>north of US-82. (The 4-lane route would have followed
>US-45 from Brooksville to just south of US-82.)
Hmmmmmmmmm...this sounds like it may have been a part of the
1972 Corridor Plan....
>I-59: I heard that the original routing would have passed
>south of Meridian along the US-45 Bypass. I do remember
>seeing a "Future US-11 Connector" on an old set of plans
>showing the bypass. As for I-20, I'm not sure whether it
>would have followed that route or not.
The I-59 routing is a negative, although I've seen
references to that "Future US 11 Connector" as well. It
would explain that wide median on the bypass between MS 145
and Causeyville Rd.
>>One is called the Jackson Metro Parkway, and would run
>>from I-55 near High St east to Jackson International
>>Airport. This may be built as an expressway instead
>>though.
>
>It may not be to those standards. Rumor has it that the
>former highway director promised local officials not to
>make it controlled access (i.e. plenty of access for
>businesses), despite the wishes of planners. That promise
>may not be binding--we'll see.
I don't have specific plans, but of what I've seen, it would
be expressway with the exception of an interchange at Tree
Top Blvd/Gulf Line Rd, which is also where the "Metro
Jackson Parkway" (as it's called) would split, one branch
continuing to Airport Rd/MS 475, the other branch meeting MS
25 north of the airport.
>>The last study is an upgrade of US 49 between I-20 and
>>Florence. Basically two options are being looked at:
>>additional lanes, or an upgrade to freeway.
>
>There's a lot of development along the route in Richland.
>If MDOT acts quickly, they may be able to secure ROW east
>of the current route before it is developed, although last
>time I went there, I noticed subdivisions starting to fill
>in the area.
I don't think a freeway would happen, though I'd like to see
one. They've included a freeway proposal in their studies,
but it looks like they're concentrating on adding additional
lanes to US 49. Where they'll put them though is a good
question, especially in Florence itself.
>Other potential Mississippi freeway routes:
>
>US-72 Corinth Bypass (proposed, but I'm not sure of access
>control) East Harrison County Connector (see MDOT web
>site) MS-67 (sometimes described as a northern extension of
>I-110. I expect an expressway, minimum.)
>US-45 and US-84 at Waynesboro (Under construction. Plans I
>saw (title sheet) suggested freeways.)
US 72 Corinth Bypass - haven't heard anything concrete yet.
E Harrison Co Connector - probably won't be a freeway. Too
much development along Popps Ferry Rd.
MS 67 - Expressway, but not freeway (though I'd like to see
a freeway along it)
US 45/US 84 - No freeways, but there will be two
interchanges, one at US 84/old US 45, and a cloverleaf at US
45/US 84 with C/D roads on US 84.
>Upgrading US-49 to a freeway from the coast to Jackson was
>ruled out (and never formally proposed) due to the cost,
>especially ROW issues. Primarily "damage" to properties
>due to loss of access and the requirement to construct
>frontage roads.
IMHO, it doesn't need to be a freeway. It DOES need to be
fixed up, though. Most of that route was built 30 years
ago. A couple more interchanges (I'm looking at MS 13 and
also MS 53) would help too.
Christopher G. Knight
>From: fmt...@aol.comXX (Fmtyner)
>Date: Sat, 24 July 1999 04:09 AM EDT
>Message-id: <19990724040953...@ngol03.aol.com>
>
>In article <9319573...@www.remarq.com>, Adam Froehlig
><fro...@mississippi.net> writes:
>
>>As far as I know, there were no cancelled freeways in
>>Mississippi or Alabama (northern Birmingham beltway doesn't
>>count because it's been resurrected).
>
>Mississippi. These may have been purely conceptual, but AFAIK these were
>genuine proposed freeways:
>
>I-55: I've heard the interstate in Jackson was originally to have taken a
>route farther west. The current route was to be US-51. The highway was
>"temporarily" routed along US-51. By the 1980's, the "temporary" route had
>become "permanent". This was given as part of the reason for needing the
>major
>upgrade of the highway during that time.
>
>Jackson.
> AFAIK, it would have been an eastern I-220. The proposed road was to extend
>from I-55 at I-220 eastward across the Pearl River, then south across I-20
>and
>onward to US-49 at Florence. One map I saw showed a companion route along
>the
>east side of the Pearl River from near the Reservoir to the I-20/US-49
>interchange and an extension of Ridegewood Road to this route as part of the
>"East Perimeter Road" poposal.
>
>or
>the 1970's. The plan called for extending Elton Road from I-55 in south
>Jackson eastward to US-49 with full control of access.
>
>to the Tennessee line. Only the Tupelo and Corinth Bypasses were built as
>freeways. BTW, the road was to have followed a new path between US-45 and
>US-45A north of US-82. (The 4-lane route would have followed US-45 from
>Brooksville to just south of US-82.)
>
>along the US-45 Bypass. I do remember seeing a "Future US-11 Connector" on
>an
>old set of plans showing the bypass. As for I-20, I'm not sure whether it
>would have followed that route or not.
>
>>planned, and 4 more under study. The one under
>>construction is an extension of the existing US 82 freeway
>>in eastern Mississippi (the Starkville bypass). The two
>>planned freeways are a US 82 Greenville bypass and MS 304
>>from US 61 east then north into Tennessee (tying into the
>>Nonconnaugh and forming an outer loop of Memphis).
>>
>First segment of MS-304 is coming soon. (See MDOT website,
>'www.mdot.state.ms.us', under "business" and "bid advertisements", July.)
>
>>Of the 4 freeways under study, one is I-69 (of which MS 304
>>may become a part). Another is a possible connection
>>between I-69 and the US 82 Greenville Bypass. The other
>>Metro Parkway, and would run from I-55 near High St east to
>>Jackson International Airport. This may be built as an
>>expressway instead though.
>>
>It may not be to those standards. Rumor has it that the former highway
>director promised local officials not to make it controlled access (i.e.
>plenty
>of access for businesses), despite the wishes of planners. That promise may
>not be binding--we'll see.
>
>>Florence. Basically two options are being looked at:
>>additional lanes, or an upgrade to freeway.
>>
>There's a lot of development along the route in Richland. If MDOT acts
>quickly, they may be able to secure ROW east of the current route before it
>is
>developed, although last time I went there, I noticed subdivisions starting
>to
>fill in the area.
>
>
>US-72 Corinth Bypass (proposed, but I'm not sure of access control)
>East Harrison County Connector (see MDOT web site)
>MS-67 (sometimes described as a northern extension of I-110. I expect an
>expressway, minimum.)
>US-45 and US-84 at Waynesboro (Under construction. Plans I saw (title
>sheet)
>suggested freeways.)
>
>never
>formally proposed) due to the cost, especially ROW issues. Primarily
>"damage"
>to properties due to loss of access and the requirement to construct frontage
>roads.
>
>Dallas, TX
>
>
I know of a Possible Cancled Freeway is The I-70 Spur running of The Jackson
Curve and Conecting to Linwood BLVD. (Old-40) and This Would have been possibly
known as BL 70.
Christopher G. Knight
Kansas City, KS
South of Sawblade (Kansas) Route 5
Slater's PR site http://www.crosswinds.net/~sawblade5/slater/
KC Exit Guides http://www.crosswinds.net/~sawblade5/index.html (New URL)
More Comming Soon
Fmtyner
<fro...@mississippi.net> writes:
>>I-55: I've heard the interstate in Jackson was originally
>>to have taken a route farther west. The current route was
>>to be US-51. The highway was "temporarily" routed along
>>US-51. By the 1980's, the "temporary" route had become
>>"permanent". This was given as part of the reason for
>>needing the major upgrade of the highway during that time.
>
>Every map and routing I've seen, dating back to 1960, has
>I-55 following its current route. There have been some
>minor changes along the I-20/55 duplex, but I-55 wasn't
>proposed to ram straight through downtown (which it would
>have following US 51/State St).
>
I don't know when this was proposed, but apparently it was dropped quickly. It
may have been a conceptual proposal during the 1950's. I've never seen it on a
map, only heard about it.
>>"East Perimeter Road": A once proposed bypass around the
>>east side of Jackson.
>>
>>AFAIK, it would have been an eastern I-220. The proposed
>>road was to extend from I-55 at I-220 eastward across the
>>Pearl River, then south across I-20 and onward to US-49 at
>>Florence. One map I saw showed a companion route along
>>the east side of the Pearl River from near the Reservoir
>>to the I-20/US-49 interchange and an extension of
>>Ridegewood Road to this route as part of the "East
>>Perimeter Road" poposal.
>
>Some of the routings you mention above are still proposed,
>although probably not as freeways. Some of them are an
>"East Metro Bypass" which would bypass Brandon to the south
>and the airport to the east, and tie into MS 25 at Old
>Fannin Rd, an extension/rerouting of MS 468 which will tie
>into the I-20/US 49 interchange, and an extension of MS 475
>south to US 49 southeast of Florence.
>
The extension of MS-475 may be a remnant of the proposal, but the "East Metro
Bypass" is a different proposal altogether. That proposal, AFAIK, is strictly
a county road project. I expect that control of access will consist of only
safety driveway regulations, with no thought of an expressway. The MS-475
rerouting in Flowood should be under construction now, but not as a controlled
access highway.
The section that is really missed is the part from I-55 eastward across the
Pearl River. Since the road was deleted, the area has been developed. There
is talk of a new bridge, but no commitment to funds. The bridge is in the
metropolitan transportation plan as an unfunded "wish list" idea. My
suggestion: use toll financing.
>>US-45: AFAIK, a freeway was planned for this corridor all
>>the way from US-82 to the Tennessee line. Only the Tupelo
>>and Corinth Bypasses were built as freeways. BTW, the road
>>was to have followed a new path between US-45 and US-45A
>>north of US-82. (The 4-lane route would have followed
>>US-45 from Brooksville to just south of US-82.)
>
>Hmmmmmmmmm...this sounds like it may have been a part of the
>1972 Corridor Plan....
>
Exactly. I saw it on a cost estimate report at the Mississippi State library.
It showed the route as controlled access and had grade seperations at every
crossing road.
>>I-59: I heard that the original routing would have passed
>>south of Meridian along the US-45 Bypass. I do remember
>>seeing a "Future US-11 Connector" on an old set of plans
>>showing the bypass. As for I-20, I'm not sure whether it
>>would have followed that route or not.
>
>The I-59 routing is a negative, although I've seen
>references to that "Future US 11 Connector" as well. It
>would explain that wide median on the bypass between MS 145
>and Causeyville Rd.
What I heard might have been a gripe. A local Meridian man told me the idea
was dropped due to opposition from Meridian businesses along the then US-11/80
bypass.
>>>The last study is an upgrade of US 49 between I-20 and
>>>Florence. Basically two options are being looked at:
>>>additional lanes, or an upgrade to freeway.
>>
>>There's a lot of development along the route in Richland.
>>If MDOT acts quickly, they may be able to secure ROW east
>>of the current route before it is developed, although last
>>time I went there, I noticed subdivisions starting to fill
>>in the area.
>
>I don't think a freeway would happen, though I'd like to see
>one. They've included a freeway proposal in their studies,
>but it looks like they're concentrating on adding additional
>lanes to US 49. Where they'll put them though is a good
>question, especially in Florence itself.
>
Florence is no problem--plenty of room. I read a while back of a Florence
Bypass idea in a letter to the editor in the newspaper. The writer complained
it would be closer to downtown than the current road. Richland, farther north,
is where the development is near the roadway. As for a freeway, that would be
best. Some might get upset over spending that much money in the Jackson area,
which, as they see it, already has enough 4-lane highways. (These people don't
like cities and don't know rush hour traffic.)
>>Upgrading US-49 to a freeway from the coast to Jackson was
>>ruled out (and never formally proposed) due to the cost,
>>especially ROW issues. Primarily "damage" to properties
>>due to loss of access and the requirement to construct
>>frontage roads.
>
>IMHO, it doesn't need to be a freeway. It DOES need to be
>fixed up, though. Most of that route was built 30 years
>ago. A couple more interchanges (I'm looking at MS 13 and
>also MS 53) would help too.
>
I would like to see the upgrade of US-49 to freeway standards all the way to
the coast as a long-term goal. The road carries roughly the same traffic as
other interstates in the state, and certainly more than I-59. The road is
undergoing major upgrades, including one side being moved into the median north
of Hattiesburg to allow the existing roadway to become a frontage road. (There
is no mandate from FHWA to make the median narrower, contrary to rumor.)
Frontage roads already exist at Magee and Collins. Maybe those sections could
be first.
Fred Tyner
Dallas, TX