Skip to main content

The planned Panhandle Freeway of San Francisco (Interstate 80)

By

The Panhandle Freeway was an approximately two-mile limited access corridor which was once proposed in the city of San Francisco.  The Panhandle Freeway conceptually would have connected US Route 101 at the Central Freeway west to the planned Interstate 280 freeway by way of Panhandle Park.  The concept of the Panhandle Freeway was added to the State Highway System as Legislative Route Number 223 during 1947.  The adopted alignment of the Panhandle Freeway corridor rescinded in 1955 and was never reestablished.  Between 1964-1968 the Panhandle Freeway was planned as Interstate 80 and later as the second iteration of California State Route 241 circa 1968-1972. 


The history of the planned Panhandle Freeway

The beginnings of the Panhandle Freeway and Central Freeway being added to the State Highway System came with the addition of LRN 223 by way of 1947 Legislative Chapter 11.  LRN 223 was defined as "a point on LRN 2 near Division Street to LRN 56." 

LRN 223 appears as a proposed highway for the first time on the 1948 Division of Highways Map.



The 1948 Transportation Plan for San Francisco included the concept for the Panhandle Freeway.  The Panhandle Freeway as originally conceived began at the Central Freeway.  The corridor was located through Panhandle Park between Haight Street and McAllister Street.  Upon reaching Golden Gate Park the Panhandle Freeway terminated and split into couplets.  The couplets are displayed as Richmond Freeway and Sunset Freeway.


The September/October 1953 California Highways & Public Works announced a leg of the Central Freeway was submitted as a recommended project during September 1954 California Highway Commission meeting.  The article notes the first Central Freeway segment was 0.9 miles long extending from 13th/Mission Street to vicinity of Turk Street.  The Central Freeway/Panhandle Freeway combined corridor is noted to be part of LRN 223 and LRN 2.  The article depicts the Bayshore Freeway designation as being planned to end at Mission Street.  The Panhandle Freeway is described as a 2.3-mile limited access corridor which would connect LRN 2 at the Central Freeway to LRN 56 (California State Route 1).  The purpose of the Panhandle Freeway was to act as a bypass for traffic more easily access the Golden Gate Bridge in addition to serving the neighborhoods of Richmond and Sunset.    





The 1954 Division of Highways Map depicts the newly completed segment of the Bayshore Freeway to Bryant Street in San Francisco.  Mainline US Route 101 is shown relocated from Potrero Avenue onto the new freeway segment to Bryant Street.  US Route 101 was carried to 10th Street via the Bryant Street ramp.  Part of LRN 223 is shown connecting the extending from the constructed part of the Bayshore Freeway west to Mission Street.  The Panhandle Freeway west to LRN 56 is shown with a more defined alignment following Lincoln Way. 


During 1955 the Panhandle Freeway corridor adoption was deleted from the San Francisco trafficways plan.  The corridor was noted to be "deleted, pending further study." 

The completed Bayshore Freeway, Central Freeway and San Francisco Skyline interchange was featured on the cover of the March/April 1955 California Highways & Public Works.  US Route 101 transitioned from the northern of the Bayshore Freeway onto the Central Freeway towards Mission Street.  The beginning of the San Francisco Skyline carried US Route 40 and US Route 50 towards the Bay Bridge.  It isn't fully clear when the Central Freeway designation was extended beyond Mission Street to the Bayshore Freeway/San Francisco Skyway junction. 


The July/August 1955 California Highways & Public Works noted the Central Freeway opened from the Bayshore Freeway to Mission Street on March 1, 1955.  The Bayshore Freeway is noted to have been opened from Alemany Boulevard to 3rd Street on March 30, 1955.  The San Francisco Skyway from the Bayshore Freeway to the Bay Bridge is noted to have opened on June 14, 1955.  






The 1956 Division of Highways Map displayed the completed Bayshore Freeway, Central Freeway and San Francisco Skyway interchange.  US Route 101 is shown to be realigned from the end of the Bayshore Freeway onto the Central Freeway and Mission Street towards Van Ness Avenue.  The Central Freeway is shown to be fully a component of LRN 2.  The Panhandle Freeway is shown reverted to a proposed highway with an undetermined routing. 


The Panhandle Freeway was rebranded as the "Western Freeway" in 1956.  Planners proposed an elevated iteration of the Western Freeway during said year which would branch from LRN 56 at 19th Avenue.  The elevated proposal was ultimately rejected by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in an 8-3 vote.  

The Division of Highways proposed a depressed iteration of the Western Freeway in 1960.  The corridor was again rejected by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors in a 6-5 vote in 1962. 

As part of the 1964 State Highway Renumbering the Legislative Route Numbers were dropped in favor of Sign Route designations.  LRN 223 and the planned Western Freeway were consolidated into the legislative corridor of Interstate 80.  The Western Freeway corridor appears as planned Interstate 80 on the 1964 Division of Highways Map.  



The May/June 1964 California Highway & Public Works provided an update to the now rebranded "Panhandle Parkway" in San Francisco.  A public hearing was held on April 6, 1964, resulted in the city requesting a study alternative for a Crosstown Tunnel under Panhandle Park.  



The May/June 1965 California Highways & Public Works provided an update regarding the status of the Panhandle Parkway.  The latest corridor presented by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors had been rejected during October 1964 by a 6-5 vote.  The Board of Supervisors fully objected to the prospect of constructing the corridor through the proposed Crosstown Tunnel.  Following the rejection the California Highway Commission decided against adopting an alignment.


The San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted against the Panhandle Parkway 6-5 for a final time on March 21, 1966.  1968 Legislative Chapter 282 transferred the planned Panhandle Parkway from Interstate 80 to the second iteration of California State Route 241.  The corridor appears as planned California State Route 241 on the 1969 Division of Highways Map.  



1972 Legislative Chapter 1216 deleted California State Route 241 and by proxy the planned Panhandle Parkway.  The corridor does not appear on the 1975 Caltrans Map.  


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

2018 Mojave Road Trip Part 2; The deadly desert highway (California State Route 127 and Nevada State Route 373)

By
After leaving Barstow via Old Highway 58 my next destination was in Death Valley.  To access Death Valley from rural San Bernardino County required a trek on north on Interstate 15 to California State Route 127 which becomes Nevada State Route 373 at the state line. Along I-15 I encountered the road sign oddity that is Zzyzx Road about eight miles south of Baker.   Zzyzx Road is a four mile road that used to go to the Zzyzx Mineral Springs and Health Spa.   The spa was founded in the 1940s and the owner made up the name "Zzyzx" to claim it was the last word in the English Language.  The spa has been shut down since the 1970s and is now part of a Desert Studies Center for California State University. The southern terminus of CA 127 in Baker is located at I-15 exit 246.  CA 127 is a 91 mile north/south highway which runs to the Nevada State Line in Inyo County.  CA 127 is called Death Valley Road from I-15 northward.  South of CA 127 ...
4 comments
Read more

Finding the Pre-Emption Road of New York State

By
  The Pre-Emption Road (or rather a series of roads named Pre-Emption Road) follows a survey line called the Pre-Emption Line, drawn in the early days of the United States. The story begins with Massachusetts and New York having competing land claims to modern day Western New York State that have their roots in colonial charters granted by the British. After the Revolutionary War ended, this land became the frontier of the nation and its settlement became a priority for the new American government. During this era, there were a lot of competing land claims that needed to be settled. It was no different with the land claims between New York State and Massachusetts. On November 30, 1786, Massachusetts and New York sent representatives to Hartford, Connecticut to resolve their competing land claims. In less than three weeks, the representatives had reached a compromise. Massachusetts would receive pre-emption rights, meaning the right to sell the land after the Indian title ...
Post a Comment
Read more

What's In a Name?: When the Roads Really Do Tell a Story

By
  Our tagline on the Gribblenation blog is "because every road tells a story". Some roads tell different stories than others. Along our travels, we may see historic markers that tell us a little story about the roads we travel or the places we pass by. Some historic markers are more general, as to telling us who lived where or what old trail traversed between two towns. During my travels across New York State and other states or provinces, I pass by many historic markers, some with interesting or amusing references to roads. I wanted to highlight a few of the markers I've seen along my travels around the Empire State and help tell their stories. Those stories may be as specific as explaining the tales of a tree that was used to help measure a distance of eight miles from Bath to Avoca in Steuben County, as referenced on the Eight Mile Tree historical marker above. They may also help point the way along historical roads first used centuries ago, or may help tell a local l...
Post a Comment
Read more