Cities with great freeway setup

[webny99]

Which cities have the most convenient and accessible freeway network, such that you are never to far from a freeway, and congestion is not out of control?

[Scott5114]

Oklahoma City has a fairly good setup. The bulk of the city are served by freeways, with expressways bringing in traffic from outlying areas.

[ColossalBlocks]

St Louis has a good setup in my opinion. You got I-270 that takes you to the suburbs surrounding St Louis, you got I-44, I-70, I-55, and I-64 leading you to the downtown area, and you have I-255 to bypass the metropolitan area.

[paulthemapguy]

The Twin Cities, with their robust and comprehensive freeway network, make Chicagoland look like a festering pile of smoldering garbage that reeks of onion breath.  Which it is. 

[pianocello]

Detroit should get a nod here, since MDOT is able to get away with shutting down an entire freeway for long-term construction with minor repercussions.

[hotdogPi]

Detroit should get a nod here, since MDOT is able to get away with shutting down an entire freeway for long-term construction with minor repercussions.

That's not their freeway setup; it's their arterial setup.

[kphoger]

The Twin Cities, with their robust and comprehensive freeway network, make Chicagoland look like a festering pile of smoldering garbage that reeks of onion breath.  Which it is. 

+1 for the Twin Cities.

Although I have limited experience, I also nominate San Antonio.

[sparker]

Of all the West Coast major metro areas, San Diego has, IMO, the most effective freeway network; they've been able to maintain a basic "grid pattern" with E-W routings (54,94,8,52) and connect them N-S with the two "follow the coastline trajectory" routes of I-5 and I-805, augmented by 15, 163, and 125 on a more direct N-S basis.  Given the regional topography, the system seems to function as well as can be expected given the exponential growth of the region, particularly to the north along the I-15 corridor.  Once north of San Diego proper, the scheme breaks down somewhat, with CA 56 serving more as a connector than a cross-regional arterial, and CA 78 being regularly overwhelmed -- generally due to fiscal shortfalls truncating projects while growth seems to continue unabated. 

[jwolfer]

Some cities have good freeway networks but they are limited in the number of lanes.

Chicago looks reaaly decent on the map. But not enough lanes. I eas there last weekend and i was surprised how the Eisenhower was backed up all day Saturday and Sunday

LGMS428

[ET21]

Twin Cities.

Chicago has the right idea with routing, but lacks capacity and a functional DOT (excluding the Tollway)

[AsphaltPlanet]

Chicago has so much potential... It's too bad there isn't a freeway that cuts from the west suburbs diagonally through the suburbs towards the southeast.  It would cut the corner off the triangle and fix everything.

[Max Rockatansky]

Phoenix is pretty good with all the loop beltways and major downtown freeways.  Really the only omission would have been the "Camelback Freeway" which on paper would have allowed more direct east/west connections between I-10 and the Loop 101.  Really traffic in Phoenix always tends to constantly flow even on the worst days for congestion.  The freeway network is expanding also with the 303 and 24 along with the potential I-11 in addition to AZ 30 bring.

[Revive 755]

St Louis has a good setup in my opinion. You got I-270 that takes you to the suburbs surrounding St Louis, you got I-44, I-70, I-55, and I-64 leading you to the downtown area, and you have I-255 to bypass the metropolitan area.

Strongly disagree with St. Louis:

* Too many missing movements in the downtown region, particularly to and from US 40

* I-170 needed to make it down to at least I-44, preferably I-55.  A completed I-170 down to I-55 would have made some of the missing movements to/from US 40 near downtown easier to accept

* Trying to cram too many routes over the PSB and the lack of redundancy for the PSB.  The new bridge for I-70 doesn't help traffic from I-44, I-55, and US 40 due to the missing ramps at the western end and the lack of certain ramps at the west end of the PSB.

* The lack of a good north-south route north of downtown - either the MO 367 freeway should have made it down to I-70, or a freeway facility should have been built along IL 3 south of I-270, possibly with a newer, freeway standard McKinley Bridge.

* The lack of capacity on US 40 between Skinker and at least Big Bend - there can be a good slowdown due to the lane drop WB at Skinker outside of the peak hours.

* The lack of capacity on US 40 between I-70 and Route K in St. Charles County

* The lack of a full loop/outer belt type freeway on the Missouri side west of I-270

* Lately there's also a case to be made that I-44 should have been built farther north between I-270 and Eureka away from the Meramec River

* The freeway once proposed along IL 3 between I-255 and the PSB Complex should have been completed (one of the more tolerable issues, but given the talk lately of having to do a railroad bypass for IL 3 in the Sauget . . .)

[nexus73]

SoCal circa 1975 IMO.  Lots of lanes, plenty of relatively clear alternate routes, concrete in great condition, most of the major freeways completed, Botts Dots and button copy...it has all been downhill since then!

Rick

[mgk920]

I've always liked Nashville, TN's network, nearly complete and comprehensive.  My only criticisms are a lack of lanes in the downtown loop and the short non-freeway gap between US 31E (Ellington Parkway) and I-24.  I have similar feelings regarding Knoxville, TN's network.

Elsewhere, the Houston and the DFW Metroplex are both right up there.

Mike

[JREwing78]

A shoutout to Lansing, MI - both on the freeway and arterial standpoint. I may have a biased opinion.

[Revive 755]

Some cities have good freeway networks but they are limited in the number of lanes.

Chicago looks reaaly decent on the map. But not enough lanes. I eas there last weekend and i was surprised how the Eisenhower was backed up all day Saturday and Sunday

Chicagoland does not have enough of a network given the number of square miles the metro covers.  Perhaps if many of the once-proposed routes were built such as the Crosstown, Fox Valley, North Avenue, Southwest Suburban Expressways, and an east-west route to the north of I-90

I'm going to second the nominations for Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston.

[Brandon]

Some cities have good freeway networks but they are limited in the number of lanes.

Chicago looks reaaly decent on the map. But not enough lanes. I eas there last weekend and i was surprised how the Eisenhower was backed up all day Saturday and Sunday

The Ike is routinely a parking lot.  As is the Kennedy.  Be glad you weren't there at rush hour.  Be very glad you weren't there at rush hour.

[OCGuy81]

I think Houston is laid out nicely.

Hub and spokes, and soon to be 3 beltways once the Grand Parkway is complete.

3 beltways.  That may hold the record?

[Rothman]

Detroit should get a nod here, since MDOT is able to get away with shutting down an entire freeway for long-term construction with minor repercussions.

That's not their freeway setup; it's their arterial setup.

And economic decline.

[Scott5114]

Chicago has so much potential... It's too bad there isn't a freeway that cuts from the west suburbs diagonally through the suburbs towards the southeast.  It would cut the corner off the triangle and fix everything.

Like...a hypotenuse...?

[ET21]

Chicago has so much potential... It's too bad there isn't a freeway that cuts from the west suburbs diagonally through the suburbs towards the southeast.  It would cut the corner off the triangle and fix everything.

Like...a hypotenuse...?

That'd make things worse

[hotdogPi]

Chicago has so much potential... It's too bad there isn't a freeway that cuts from the west suburbs diagonally through the suburbs towards the southeast.  It would cut the corner off the triangle and fix everything.

Like...a hypotenuse...?

That'd make things worse

It would make things slightly better for traffic. The reasons why it's being opposed are for cost reasons and destroying everything in its ROW (which far outweigh the benefits), not for traffic reasons.

[plain]

Definitely right here in the Richmond metro. Excellent network, plus freeway access into downtown from several directions (VERY controversial routings inside city limits though... Richmond didn't have the level of Freeway Revolts that Boston, Baltimore and DC had)

[GaryV]

Detroit should get a nod here, since MDOT is able to get away with shutting down an entire freeway for long-term construction with minor repercussions.

Would have been better if they'd been able to complete what was planned.  With the Davison Freeway connected to the Jeffries on the west, and to the Mound Freeway on the east.  Then Mound Freeway connected to the VanDyke Freeway on the north.

It wouldn't hurt anything if M-59 was a freeway all the way from I-94 through Pontiac and Waterford.