Skip to main content

Paper Interchanges - The Ft. Duquesne Boulevard Interchange That Wasn't There

Image
By

This complex of interchanges connecting Bigelow Boulevard, Crosstown Boulevard (I-579), Ft. Duquesne Blvd., and I-279 was close enough to a reality that guide signs on Crosstown Boulevard included exits that were never built. (1)

As a kid, I delivered papers - The McKeesport Daily News and The Pittsburgh Press.  Walking my route, I would read both papers.  I recall reading in the Press about a guide sign on the Boulevard of the Allies ramp onto Crosstown Boulevard/Interstate 579 mentioning an interchange for Fort Duquesne Boulevard - an exit that didn't even exist. 

I was correct - in the Sunday, August 4, 1991, edition of The Pittsburgh Press, a column by Brian O'Neill went over the sign.  The error was brought to his attention by a reader, Larry Melberg.  The full length of the I-579 had been open for almost three years - yet on the ramp from the Boulevard onto 579 there was an overhead sign listing Downtown Exits.  The list included the exit for 7th Avenue (1/4 mile) and Ft. Duquesne Boulevard (1/2 mile).  However, the Fort Duquesne exit didn't exist and would never exist.  

This is the story of how a complex series of interchanges connecting Bigelow Boulevard, the North Shore, Ft. Duquesne Boulevard, and Crosstown Boulevard disappeared.

Background:

Crosstown Boulevard's origins date to 1939.  The City of Pittsburgh hired famed New York City planner Robert Moses to develop a transportation plan for the city.  In his report "Arterial Plan for Pittsburgh," Moses proposed a "Crosstown Thoroughfare" that would connect the Liberty Bridge and what is now Fort Duquesne Boulevard.

City Planners agreed to move forward with the Crosstown plan - now named Crosstown Boulevard.  Yet, during the 1950s, city, county, and state officials would continuously argue about who would be responsible for the funding and construction of the highway. (2)

By 1956, the first requests to include a bridge connecting Crosstown Boulevard over the Allegheny River to East Street had been made (3). Later that decade, Pittsburgh city leaders went to Washington requesting the highway be added to the Interstate Highway System. Their reason was to get the 90-10 federal funding vs. a 50-50 split of the costs. (4)

However, the construction of Crosstown Boulevard would fall under the 50-50 formula. Work began in 1959, and the first segment of the new highway opened on September 15, 1961, two days before the official opening of the new Civic Auditorium (Civic Arena). The next section of the highway—to Bigelow Boulevard—opened over a series of weeks in the Summer of 1964.

By 1962, an overall concept of a completed Crosstown Boulevard and Allegheny River highway crossing was in place. (5)

The 1970s - Skybus, Mayor Pete Flaherty, and the Bankrupt Penn Central:

It would take another 20 years before work to extend Crosstown Boulevard over the Allegheny River would begin.

Yet, it wasn't for a lack of trying.

By 1970, the Penn Central Railroad was bankrupt.  They agreed to sell to the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation 17 acres of land for $19.8 million. (6)  The Penn Central wanted to move rail service out of Downtown Pittsburgh.  As a result of this move, the double-decked Fort Wayne Railroad Bridge would be demolished.  The Penn Central would spend $4 million to remove the bridge.

The land acquisition and the Fort Wayne Railroad Bridge removal would allow PennDOT to continue with the extension of Crosstown Boulevard.  This extension would include the completion of the Bigelow Boulevard interchange, an interchange with Fort Duquesne Boulevard, and a new high-level highway bridge over the Allegheny River.

Penn Central's plans for abandoning its Downtown Pittsburgh Rail Service would move its passenger station from Penn Station on Liberty Avenue to Federal Street on the North Shore. (7)  This move by Penn Central was also looked upon favorably by the Port Authority of Allegheny County (PAT) as the transit company could use Penn Central's right-of-way for its planned East PATway (now East Busway). (8)  PAT also saw Penn Central's Downtown rail tunnel as an essential piece to their Skybus plans. (The tunnel would be used to connect Skybus to its planned Downtown terminus.) (9)

Enter Pittsburgh Mayor Pete Flaherty.  Flaherty was a vocal opponent of PAT's Skybus plan - taking it to court.  The mayor was also against moving passenger rail service outside the Downtown district. (10)

In 1971, the city challenged the 17-acre sale of land to PennDOT.  The U.S. 3rd Circuit of Appeals ordered a review of the sale occurring in 1972.  

Meanwhile, in May 1973, the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) approved Penn Central's plan to abandon Downtown service and the Fort Wayne Bridge.  The City of Pittsburgh filed an appeal the following month.

In 1975, the U.S. Railway Association recommended that service continue over the upper deck of the Fort Wayne Bridge while the lower deck would be abandoned. (11) This change - and the continuation of rail service through Downtown Pittsburgh - would alter PennDOT's plans.  The new Allegheny River crossing would have to move upstream. 

The Proposed Interchange(s):

When Crosstown Boulevard was extended to Bigelow Boulevard, the state was planning for the future.  In addition to grading the highway slightly beyond the northbound ramp to Bigelow Boulevard, the foundation for ramps leading to Bigelow Boulevard from the southbound freeway was put in.  The stubs of these ramps - built into the retaining wall of the Bigelow Bluff - can still be seen today.

The only remnant of the larger Bigelow Boulevard Interchange is this "ghost ramp" as you take Bigelow Boulevard out of town. (Bruce Cridlebaugh - 2001)

This "ghost ramp" was going to be part of a large conglomeration of on and off-ramps that would connect Bigelow Boulevard to Crosstown, Ft. Duquesne Blvd./10th Street Bypass, and the new highway bridge connecting to the North Shore.

The full design of the Bigelow Boulevard (Bottom), Fort Duquesne Boulevard (middle), and Full Crosstown/I-279 (East Street Valley/North Shore Expressways) and PA 28 interchanges.  Each interchange would see pieces of it removed or altogether eliminated in a 1981 cost reduction. (11)

Most of the movement for this complex pair of interchanges would occur between the north and southbound lanes of Interstate 579.  Weaving between the main travel lanes would be ramps that would allow access from inbound/westbound Bigelow Boulevard to Crosstown North and also onto Fort Duquesne Boulevard.  Outbound/Eastbound Bigelow Boulevard would also be accessible from Crosstown's Downtown/Southbound lanes and Ft. Duquesne Boulevard.  Most of these movements would include left-hand entrances and exits.

Detail of the planned I-279, I-579 (Crosstown), and PA 28 interchange on the North Shore. Cost reductions removed several ramps in this complex. (12)

Even more on the North Shore side of the bridge - the interchange with Interstate 279 (North Shore and East Street Valley Expressways) would have full access to I-279 North/South and to/from Route 28.

Slimming Down:

With Skybus' demise, the resolution of rail through Downtown Pittsburgh, and a desire to finally complete Pittsburgh's Interstate Highways, Crosstown had a new life as updated design and environmental impact studies began.  

However, the rising costs of building modern freeways would alter the overall plans.

In 1979, the state abandoned plans for a direct connection between the Parkway East (Interstate 376) and the Crosstown.  The money allocated for that project moved to extend Ohio River Boulevard to the Fort Duquesne Bridge. (13)

Crosstown's extension was considered part of a larger project for completing Crosstown and Interstate 279 (North Shore, East Street Valley, and North Hills Expressways).  Needing to reduce costs from $550 million to $400 million, PennDOT, in early 1981, removed more than a handful of exits and connections from all four projects. (1) Crosstown saw the Veterans Bridge go from two spans to one, reduced lanes, and the elimination of the Ft. Duquesne Blvd./Bigelow exits.  While those features were removed, the highway did gain the reversible High Occupancy Vehicle lanes, connecting the Lower Hill and the North Hills via Interstate 279.

Interstate 579 Southbound's entrance into Downtown Pittsburgh would look a lot different if the Ft. Duquesne Blvd./Bigelow Blvd. interchange ramps were built.  Most of the movements for the proposed interchanges would have occurred around here.  (Doug Kerr - 2003).

The I-579/279 Interchange also saw edits.  Movements to/from Crosstown to the North Shore Expressway were eliminated.  A direct ramp from Route 28 to Crosstown was also removed, requiring that connection be made via surface streets.

Also, I-279 saw the elimination of an interchange at Mt. Nebo Road and redesigns to the McKnight and Perrysville Road exits.

The Crosstown extension cost roughly $60 million to build- the two removed exits would have added another $30 million to the project.  Construction began in March 1984, with the new Crosstown Boulevard or Crosstown Expressway opening on Veterans Day 1988.

The Sign:

The incorrect Ft. Duquesne Boulevard exit sign was located here - the ramp from the Boulevard of the Allies onto I-579 North.  This is modern replacement. (Google Street View - 2008).

As for the sign that started this whole story, O'Neill asked PennDOT spokesperson Dick Skrinjar about replacing it.  Skrinjar dismissed it, "I think it's charming that only one person every two years calls and complains about it." (14)

It turns out that the sign had been up since 1984. (15)

Site Navigation:

Sources & Links:


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cajon Pass; Cajon Pass Toll Road, National Old Trails Road, US Route 66/91/395 and Interstate 15

By
This past weekend I spent some time in Cajon Pass traversing the many historic road alignments. Cajon Pass is located in San Bernardino County, California along the San Andreas Fault.  Cajon Pass  serves the boundary line between the Mojave Desert, the San Gabriel Mountains, San Bernardino Mountains and San Bernardino Valley.  Cajon Pass is historically one of the most traveled transportation corridors in American California and presently is served by four rail lines, Interstate 15 and California State Route 138. While Cajon Pass is known mostly for carrying US Route 66 it has carried numerous other signed highways that have had a significant impact on regional and national road travel.  While this is my best attempt to compile everything from the best sources I could find into one single transportation history blog regarding road travel in Cajon Pass I suspect as time goes on this article will be frequently updated.  If you have any information that you ...
1 comment
Read more

Pardee Dam Road

By
Pardee Dam is a 358-foot-high concrete structure located near Campo Seco at the Calaveras County and Amador County Line.  Pardee Dam impounds the Mokelumne River which forms the namesake Pardee Reservoir.  Pardee Dam was completed during 1929 and is part of the East Bay Municipal Utility District.  Pardee Dam is accessed by the namesake Pardee Dam Road which crosses the structure via the one-lane road seen as the blog cover photo.   Part 1; the history of Pardee Dam Road The closest community to Pardee Dam is that of Campo Seco on the Calaveras County side of the Mokelumne River.  Campo Seco was founded in 1850 by Mexican Miners who worked placer claims in Oregon Gulch during the height of the California Gold Rush.  Campo Seco would reach a population of about three hundred by 1860 spurred by the numerous mining claims in the area.  Main Street of Campo Seco flowed directly into the Campo Seco Turnpike which had been authorized by the California L...
2 comments
Read more

California State Route 82/Old US Route 101 on the El Camino Real from San Francisco to Interstate 380

By
After completing Interstate 380 I made my way northward into the City Limits of San Francisco to drive the northernmost portion of California State Route 82. CA 82 is 52 mile State Route between I-280 in San Francisco southward to Interstate 880 in San Jose.  CA 82 is significant due to it being part of the historical surface alignment of US Route 101 and the El Camino Real. The "El Camino Real" was a Spanish Highway in Las Californias and Alta California which connected the 21 Catholic Missions along the coast.  Essentially the route of the El Camino Real was plotted out in the late 1700s from two Spanish survey expeditions.  The Missions were plotted approximately 30 miles apart along the 600 mile route so that they would be a single day journey by horse.  The El Camino Real name fell into disuse after the Mexican Revolution of 1821 but was revived by American highway promoters in the 1890s and 1900s.  Today the El Camino Real is mostly associated...
2 comments
Read more