As a rationale for building the freeway? I can't think of a single example. As a factor in where to route the freeway? Many examples from coast to coast.
City planners in the 1930s were looking at two big problems. One was older cities' shameful slum areas, often without the most basic sanitary facilities, typically built very close to polluting industry. Another was the need to accommodate and segregate medium- and long-distance vehicular traffic, not least the growing volume of truck traffic serving ports and industry.
"Good housing" advocates pushed for government to clear slums and build replacement housing units, and programs that started fitfully during the New Deal and to serve wartime defense plants gained new momentum after WWII. Suddenly there was significant federal money for slum clearance and public housing, and most big cities launched wide-ranging efforts.
Meanwhile, the engineers (mostly) had been drawing up superhighway plans, not just for intercity links but also to serve downtown and industrial areas. Suburban commuting wasn't yet a major factor in these plans, but the need to serve the heart of big cities was important to political support for the Interstate System as it moved toward passage in the 1950s. The 1955 "Yellow Book," General Location of National System of Interstate Highways Including All Additional Routes at Urban Areas, showed the very generalized routings into central cities. Several big cities already had plans for networks of local superhighways; in others it was understood that the exact routing would require extensive local study.
This is where the two strands become intertwined. Slum clearance had, in some older cities like Chicago, created vacant land that was inexpensive and easy to use for freeways—though the primary consideration for highway engineers was always finding the most direct route, not the cheapest. Slum areas frequently were adjacent to railroads, which often also marked the obvious corridors for superhighways to use in traversing topography and water crossings. Even where slum clearance wasn't already under way, engineers and planners seeking the most cost-effective route through a densely built city often chose to expropriate areas where property values were low. As might be expected, that quite often was the location of the African-American district, only starting to be freed from the discrimination ("we're not welcome in downtown stores") that had kept these insular business districts strong. The story was so similar, from Baltimore to St Paul to Oakland, that mid-1960s freeway revolts took on the charged racial politics of the era, decrying "white men's roads through black men's homes."
By the early 1970s, federal guidelines tried to ease the pain when engineers took the path of least resistance through low-rent districts, calling for relocation assistance for displaced households. Nonetheless, many tight-knit neighborhoods were divided or wiped out by the new freeways, even as they also helped make it possible for working-class families to choose to live in suburban communities.
A chapter of Alan Altshuler's 1965 book The City Planning Process describes the routing of I-94 in the Twin Cities, the route that essentially wiped out the small Rondo black community in St Paul. Robert Caro's The Power Broker extensively criticizes the decision that pushed I-95 through the South Bronx's East Tremont neighborhood.
More generally, I like Earl Swift’s The Big Roads as the most readable history of the Interstates, but Mark Rose's Interstate: Express Highway Politics 1939-1989 is the more scholarly source on the congressional machinations. A more recent book by Joseph DiMento and Cliff Ellis, Changing Lanes: Visions and Histories of Urban Freeways, recounts the history of how traffic engineers and city planners wrangled with this new force reshaping the city. David W. Jones's Mass Motorization + Mass Transit: An American History and Policy Analysis is a good recent scholarly book for those seeking to better understand the shift from public to private transport.