Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Grzrd]

Here is the Freight Improvement Project Recommendations from the 2010-2050 Georgia Statewide Freight and Logistics Plan that was prepared by Cambridge Systematics for GDOT.  I was interested in their studies of alternative bypasses: Chattanooga Bypass, Four-Laning US 27, Western Bypass, Northern Bypass, and a Macon-LaGrange Connector (map at Figure 2.4, page 2-12 of document; page 24/68 of pdf).  I'm still poring through it, but thought I would go ahead and post.

[SSF]

The biggest hurdles in completing 27 north of LaGrange will be going up the mountain at Summerville and building the bridges over the lakes just north of Lagrange, the western bypass was part of that ill-conceived toll route notion that was just in the news, I would love the Macon-LaGrange connector as there is no good route currently.

[mhking]

I emailed GDOT and asked them if a timetable exists for the change.  To make a long story short, they say the city of Atlanta is causing the delay ... AASHTO has approved the transfer of the US Route designation but it was in conjunction with the State Route changes. We are currently waiting on the city of Atlanta to sign a Notice of Intent that was executed by the Georgia DOT commissioner.

I received a followup response from GDOT today.  First, all state route changes are proposed until Atlanta signs off on them.  Related to US 19 change, GA 9 will move with US 19 and both designations will be in addition to the current GA 237 designation on Piedmont and GA 13 on the Buford Highway.  Not related to US 19, there will be a redesignation involving GA 141 as it crosses over GA 400 on Buckhead Loop, as well as a removal of the GA 141 designation from parts of Peachtree Road and Roswell Road. [EDIT - Oops. 141 removed from a part of Peachtree Road northeast of Roswell Road; 141 is not currently routed along Roswell Road]

I emailed GDOT back and asked why a change has been proposed.  GDOT's response:

The City of Atlanta requested that the Department take under consideration the removal of State Route 9/US 19(Peachtree Road) through North Atlanta and Midtown area in conjunction with the Street Car Project.
State Route 141 relocation and re-designation on a more northward section of Peachtree Rd was needed in order to modify the State Route System if the removal/transfer is going to take place.

As I understand it, the Atlanta Streetcar Project is currently planned to be built well south of the proposed changes (map on page 6/12 of pdf).  Perhaps the longer term vision is to run the Streetcar farther north on Peachtree.  At any rate, there does not appear to be any immediate need to change the signage.

The long-term for the Atlanta Streetcar Project is, indeed to run up Peachtree through Midtown and toward Buckhead, but I'm talking LONGterm, as they don't have a date for that phase. So I don't know what they (city officials) are thinking.

[SSF]

I emailed GDOT and asked them if a timetable exists for the change.  To make a long story short, they say the city of Atlanta is causing the delay ... AASHTO has approved the transfer of the US Route designation but it was in conjunction with the State Route changes. We are currently waiting on the city of Atlanta to sign a Notice of Intent that was executed by the Georgia DOT commissioner.

I received a followup response from GDOT today.  First, all state route changes are proposed until Atlanta signs off on them.  Related to US 19 change, GA 9 will move with US 19 and both designations will be in addition to the current GA 237 designation on Piedmont and GA 13 on the Buford Highway.  Not related to US 19, there will be a redesignation involving GA 141 as it crosses over GA 400 on Buckhead Loop, as well as a removal of the GA 141 designation from parts of Peachtree Road and Roswell Road. [EDIT - Oops. 141 removed from a part of Peachtree Road northeast of Roswell Road; 141 is not currently routed along Roswell Road]

I emailed GDOT back and asked why a change has been proposed.  GDOT's response:

The City of Atlanta requested that the Department take under consideration the removal of State Route 9/US 19(Peachtree Road) through North Atlanta and Midtown area in conjunction with the Street Car Project.
State Route 141 relocation and re-designation on a more northward section of Peachtree Rd was needed in order to modify the State Route System if the removal/transfer is going to take place.

As I understand it, the Atlanta Streetcar Project is currently planned to be built well south of the proposed changes (map on page 6/12 of pdf).  Perhaps the longer term vision is to run the Streetcar farther north on Peachtree.  At any rate, there does not appear to be any immediate need to change the signage.

The long-term for the Atlanta Streetcar Project is, indeed to run up Peachtree through Midtown and toward Buckhead, but I'm talking LONGterm, as they don't have a date for that phase. So I don't know what they (city officials) are thinking.

they arent thinking at all,  the streetcar will be a nice(if likely impractical) complement to the existing infrastructure in getting around downtown/midtown. 

[Morriswa]

I think a much, much bigger loop should be built to COMPLETELY bypass Atlanta.

[BamaZeus]

There was talk a few years back about an "outer" loop of Atlanta, but with urban sprawl as it is there, you'd almost be to the Alabama state line on the west side to make it work.

[Morriswa]

Well, think about I-275, that goes through Indiana, Kentucky, and Ohio.

I think the new loop should still be an x85 numbered one.  Also, it should go above Chattanooga, TN, below Griffin, GA (maybe Macon?), and out to the Athens/Gainesville area.

[SSF]

Well, think about I-275, that goes through Indiana, Kentucky, and Ohio.

I think the new loop should still be an x85 numbered one.  Also, it should go above Chattanooga, TN, below Griffin, GA (maybe Macon?), and out to the Athens/Gainesville area.

ok, there is a need for an outer loop, but that loop is ridiculous, especially to go from Athens/Gainesville all the way above Chattanooga.

I suppose if there were a need for an outer loop, it could goto Calhoun at a maximum, but should be placed just south of Cartersville, down to Villa Rica/Dallas area, Griffin works on the south side, and out 20 miles east of 285 North(East side), then Gainesville/Dawsonville on the north end.

[Morriswa]

Cartersville is too close to I-285.  Shouldn't it go through Dawsonville and southeast of Conyers?

[OracleUsr]

Isn't Conyers closer to the Beltway than Cartersville?

[rickmastfan67]

We're right on the line of Fictional highway territory when talking about a route for a 2nd Atlanta Bypass.  If you want to continue talking about and defining a route for one, it would be best done in the Fictional area.

[Grzrd]

On Sunday, I noticed several covered signs near the Atlanta airport. This article indicates that, starting Wednesday, international travelers will enter the airport from I-75, while domestic travelers will continue to enter the airport from I-85.  Approximately 100 signs will be uncovered from 10:00 pm Tuesday until 4:00 am Wednesday:

After spending $1.4 billion to build an international terminal, one of the biggest concerns Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport officials have is whether international travelers will be able to find such a large building.
That's what has Balram Bheodari nervous. After two years heading up the international terminal activation team to prepare for the facility's opening Wednesday, Bheodari is worried about the shrouded highway signs across metro Atlanta, waiting for their overnight unveiling to direct travelers.
That's because the 1.2-million-square-foot Maynard H. Jackson International Terminal is on the east side of the airport, which means its entrance for all passengers boarding international flights in Atlanta is off I-75 instead of I-85, which domestic travelers will continue to use to get to the main terminal. That could affect roughly 5,000 people who daily begin their trips to foreign lands in Atlanta and would depart from the international terminal.
The risk is that rushed travelers head the wrong way and end up at a terminal where they can't check in for their flights. That could sully what airport officials hope will be a triumphant opening of the shiny new building that was still undergoing its finishing touches Monday.
So the highly orchestrated big unveiling of the highway signs is key. The plan, in cooperation with the Georgia Department of Transportation, is for as many as 40 workers to toil from 10 p.m. to 4 a.m. to uncover the signs in 100 locations. They will work in "rolling roadblocks," closing lanes to allow trucks and booms to change the signs, Bheodari said.

(bold emphasis added by me)

Many of the signs will use an airplane icon instead of the word "airport":

The new signs in some cases use an airplane icon instead of the word airport -- a shift to an international symbol that airport officials say they've been trying to get Atlantans accustomed to for several months by using it on some existing signs.

[NE2]

There's no ground transportation between the two terminals? Stupid.

[Grzrd]

There's no ground transportation between the two terminals? Stupid.

There will be ground transportation between the two terminals; it simply won't provide the quickest way to get to your flight:

Q: What if I go to the wrong terminal?
A: In some cases, you may not be able to check in for your flight or check your bag if you’re at the wrong terminal. But don’t worry, you can take a shuttle bus to get to the correct terminal. At the main terminal, the shuttle will be at the ground transportation center on the west end of the terminal. Getting from one terminal to the other will take 12 minutes. International travelers in particular may want to allow some extra time the first time they use the new terminal, just to be safe ....
Q: How can I get from the airport MARTA station [located in domestic terminal] to the international terminal?
A: A free shuttle bus will run between the airport MARTA station and the international terminal 24 hours a day.

However, if an international traveler has rented a car while in Atlanta, he or she will need to first go to the domestic terminal:

Q: How can visitors to Atlanta get to the rental car center?
A: A separate free shuttle bus will take travelers from the international terminal to the rental car center. The airport says it’s a 15-minute ride and will operate 24 hours a day. When returning a rental car before an international flight, travelers should take I-85 toward the domestic terminal to go to the rental car center, where they can catch a shuttle to the international terminal.

Atlanta-bound international travelers will not be able to access the people-mover after clearing customs; I think THAT is stupid:

Q: Will the people-mover train go to Concourse F?
A: Yes, the train and the pedestrian walkway connect Concourse F with all other concourses. However, if you’re an Atlanta-bound international passenger arriving at Hartsfield-Jackson and going through Customs, you’ll exit into the international terminal arrivals area after clearing Customs. You won’t be able to get through security to access the people-mover train to the main terminal, but you can take a shuttle to the main terminal.

[Steve]

I think the concept of having two different airport entrances is idiotic. The architects or whoever dreamed this up went for convenience and probably a few bucks saved, but the costs will far outstrip the benefits in short order.

[J N Winkler]

The arrangement sounds far from ideal, but I suspect travellers will rub along.  Difficult terminal transfers are very much the norm at international airports in the 50 million PATM class.  Somewhat similar examples include Heathrow central bus station to Terminal 4 (local bus), or O'Hare international terminal to one of the domestic terminals (a people-mover is available landside only, and the security checkpoints at the domestic terminals tend to be clogged--a person arriving on an international flight with only two hours to clear passport control, Customs, and security generally arrives at the departure gate for the connecting flight just as it is about to close).  Personally I tend to be more concerned that no security checkpoints are operated downstream of the last opportunity to replenish water bottles before boarding the plane.

[NE2]

Personally I tend to be more concerned that no security checkpoints are operated downstream of the last opportunity to replenish water bottles before boarding the plane.

If there are any such cases, a lack of bathrooms would seem to be a much bigger problem than a lack of water.

[J N Winkler]

Personally I tend to be more concerned that no security checkpoints are operated downstream of the last opportunity to replenish water bottles before boarding the plane.

If there are any such cases, a lack of bathrooms would seem to be a much bigger problem than a lack of water.

There are indeed such cases.  A number of airports (Kansas City International, Zürich Kloten, Amsterdam Schiphol, and others) have long operated their primary security checkpoints at the gate rather than in areas reasonably adjacent to the check-in desks.  The limit on liquids (which was initially a ban) was introduced in the summer of 2006 and I know from personal experience that Schiphol was still operating gate-based checkpoints in the autumn of 2007.  I would expect the operators of all airports that still operate such checkpoints to be transitioning away from them as fast as they can, but this will not be an overnight process for most of them, especially in cases involving new capital spending.

Also, a number of airports now operate secondary security inspections at the gate itself, typically involving a full-body patdown (no inspection of the crotch area in the UK since this is illegal), a full luggage search, and a scan with chemical sniffers if these are available.  I have undergone these only at Heathrow for US-bound flights, and I have never had water confiscated as part of them, but there have been reports of passengers being relieved of drinking water during similar inspections at east Asian airports like Singapore.

Generally, drinking water and bathrooms go together, so there is unlikely to be a last chance to replenish drinking water that is not also a last chance to visit the bathroom.  But in my experience, it is more critical to board the plane with an adequate supply of drinking water than with an empty bladder.  Planes have bathrooms, typically in the ratio of one bathroom per 30-40 passengers on a Boeing 777 in transatlantic revenue service, which is generally enough to accommodate multiple bathroom visits without long waits over an 8- to 12-hour flight.  But if you board the plane without your own water supply, the cabin crew becomes your sole source of drinking water, and they are very stingy with it.

[MrDisco99]

I've only ever seen the gate (or in-concourse) checkpoints at foreign airports for US-bound flights.  This is due to the more stringent security requirements for US flights.

Here in America, our airports take care of all the necessary scanning and groping up front.


Back on-topic: Is there no way to access the new terminal from I-85?  I live south of the airport so it's a bit awkward for me to loop around to I-75.  I wonder how park-and-rides and airport shuttles will handle this.

[Grzrd]

Many of the signs will use an airplane icon instead of the word "airport":

The new signs in some cases use an airplane icon instead of the word airport -- a shift to an international symbol that airport officials say they've been trying to get Atlantans accustomed to for several months by using it on some existing signs.

This USA Today blog has several photos of the new interstate signage that uses the airplane icon instead of the word "Airport".

[Grzrd]

Is there no way to access the new terminal from I-85?  I live south of the airport so it's a bit awkward for me to loop around to I-75.

This USA Today blog has several photos of the new interstate signage that uses the airplane icon instead of the word "Airport".

In the link I posted in the above quote, the bottom photo indicates that taking Loop Road from Exit 74 on I-85 South will provide you with an alternative way to get to the international terminal.  Traveling on I-85 North, I suspect that you may access Loop Road from Exit 72 (just a guess; I would need an independent field confirmation).

[J N Winkler]

I've only ever seen the gate (or in-concourse) checkpoints at foreign airports for US-bound flights.  This is due to the more stringent security requirements for US flights.

Foreign airports do have gate checkpoints and not just for US-bound flights--see this account of a traveller's experience at Munich airport, where he had to drink an entire bottle of water before the gate checkpoint because he was not allowed to carry it on the plane (admittedly, this was during a security alert):

http://www.independenttraveler.com/travel-tips/travelers-ed/airport-security-abroad-not-the-standard-mumble-and-grumble

When I went through Schiphol in 2007, the primary inspection was at the gate (i.e., there was no security checkpoint before the gate) and my flight was bound for London Gatwick.

Here in America, our airports take care of all the necessary scanning and groping up front.

No.  Not at all airports.  Kansas City still has gate checkpoints with all restroom facilities upstream of them:

http://www.airportterminalmaps.com/MCI-terminal-map.html

One change I would like to see, but consider extremely improbable, is airside transfer for international arrivals connecting to domestic flights.  In other words, exiting Customs should not dump you into the landside, where you have to go through security a second time.

[MrDisco99]

No.  Not at all airports.  Kansas City still has gate checkpoints with all restroom facilities upstream of them:

http://www.airportterminalmaps.com/MCI-terminal-map.html

One change I would like to see, but consider extremely improbable, is airside transfer for international arrivals connecting to domestic flights.  In other words, exiting Customs should not dump you into the landside, where you have to go through security a second time.

Ah, the old "drive up to the gate" terminals.  They were built back in the heady 60s and 70s before disrupting air travel became fashionable among terrorists.  JFK's famous TWA terminal was built like that, too, and the need for security made it instantly obsolete.  Not many terminals are like this anymore, but I guess they're still out there.  I've never been to MCI, so I didn't know about that one.

As for customs leaving you airside, that was actually a feature of ATL's previous international terminal.  The flip side of that, though, was the added hassle if ATL was your destination.  Once you got your bags at the international baggage claim and went through customs, you then had to drop them onto another conveyor where they went behind the wall again, then had to go through security to get airside and take the people mover to baggage claim at the opposite end of the airport and claim your bags again.  I'm guessing in the new terminal you now have the option of sending your bags behind the wall and going through security to go airside to catch your transfer (as before), or keeping your bags and going landside.

I don't think you can ever get rid of the security check from customs to airside.  You have to have your big bags with you at customs, so they have to make sure you don't bring that tube of toothpaste from your checked bag back airside.

[Tomahawkin]

Diverting Diamond Interchange debuted this Morning 15 years past due at Ashford Dunwoody and 285...We need some feedback about this there are at least 15 Interchanges in the Metro ATL Area that needed this 15 years ago. Georgia is soo Ass Backward when it comes to politics and urban planning

[golden eagle]

Diverting Diamond Interchange debuted this Morning 15 years past due at Ashford Dunwoody and 285...We need some feedback about this there are at least 15 Interchanges in the Metro ATL Area that needed this 15 years ago. Georgia is soo Ass Backward when it comes to politics and urban planning

Here's the AJC article on it:

http://www.ajc.com/news/dekalb/new-i-285-interchange-1451656.html