Topic: Baltimore (Read 16932 times)

V'Ger · « **on:** January 20, 2009, 06:30:21 PM »

What a mess of a freeway system...Originally they wanted to build I-83 all the way down to 95, and they wanted to build I-70, but it got turned into a park and ride, along with a stretch of the U.S. 40 freeway. How would they have actually been able to build those two freeways if they were given the chance? I look at baltimore maps and I just don't see how it was possible to even try building them through there.

Alex · « **Reply #1 on:** January 20, 2009, 06:33:06 PM »

There are more abandoned plans then those too, like Interstate 795 continuing southeast to Wabash Boulevard.

The Winless Freeway, Maryland 702 continuing further southeast, Maryland 43 was to go further. I have a great old Esso map showing all of the east side freeways in storage somewhere that I'd like to scan someday.

Furthermore there is the mystery behind the Maryland 10 stub at Interstate 695.

agentsteel53 · « **Reply #2 on:** January 20, 2009, 06:34:12 PM »

Quote from: aaroads on January 20, 2009, 06:33:06 PM

The Winless Freeway

I think just about every freeway in Baltimore meets that description.

treichard · « **Reply #3 on:** January 20, 2009, 08:14:20 PM »

The I-95 ghost ramps at the unbuilt I-70 interchange are easily visible if you know to look for them, just east of the Caton Ave. interchange. If you're heading NB on I-95, take the Caton Ave. C/D lane and don't exit.

I've had a harder time seeing the I-95 ghost ramps to unbuilt I-83, even though they appear on satellite imagery at Google and Yahoo Maps.

On MLK Blvd. NB @ US 40, you can see a green guide sign that used to have the I-170 shield on it. A shield-shaped area has a different shade of green than the rest of the sign. Even though the mile-long freeway doesn't seem to last long when you take it, it's a nice break from the series of traffic lights on US 40 everywhere else in the city.

I have yet to hear why the MD 10 & I-695 interchange was configured in a way that would allow all the ramps from a northward-extended MD 10 to fit in.

agentsteel53 · « **Reply #4 on:** January 20, 2009, 08:22:39 PM »

Here is a phantom 170 shield; probably the same one treichard saw.

an unbuilt on-ramp to the 170... the sign bridge is there, though.

who says roadgeeking isn't lucrative? Yep, found that on the ground while walking the abandoned on-ramp.

V'Ger · « **Reply #5 on:** January 20, 2009, 08:45:46 PM »

You have some good luck!

Wow, I've never seen a freeway onramp that looked liked that before...definitely odd looking, too bad the freeway was never built.

Alex · « **Reply #6 on:** January 20, 2009, 09:12:23 PM »

There was a Baltimore photo book at a book store in Normal Heights (San Diego) that Andy and I found that had black and white photos of the freeway with Interstate 170 shields on some of these signs.

akotchi · « **Reply #7 on:** January 20, 2009, 10:50:25 PM »

Where did the ghost ramps intend to go at the I-95 interchange with Moravia Road (Exit 60), north of the Fort McHenry Tunnel?

Alex · « **Reply #8 on:** January 20, 2009, 11:24:40 PM »

Eastward to the Windlass Freeway portion of Interstate 695 (where Interstate 695 makes the 90 degree turn southward).

John · « **Reply #9 on:** January 21, 2009, 12:28:04 AM »

Really, I think some of the freeways would be useful, like 83 down to 95 or maybe making I-70 connecting to the half-built US-40 thing.

froggie · « **Reply #10 on:** January 22, 2009, 06:11:55 PM »

According to the 1964 BMATS plan, What is now MD 10 would have continued northward, passing near or over the Papatsco Ave/Pennington Ave intersection, crossing I-895 between Shell Rd and Hanover St, then parallel (just to the west) the Hanover St corridor north, meeting today's I-95 between I-395 and MD 2/Hanover St.

The same 1964 BMATS plan had the Northwest Freeway (I-795) coming inward from the Beltway, then turning south through Gwynns Falls to meet I-95 near Caton Ave. At the time, I-70N was planned to continue east from Leakin Park to downtown along the aborted I-170 corridor. Later on, the Northwest Freeway inside the Beltway was cancelled (as was a freeway ring around downtown Baltimore), and the Gwynns Falls to I-95 portion became part of the I-70 proposal.

The I-95 ramps at Moravia Rd would have not only served the Windlass Freeway, but the southern part of Moravia Rd itself would have been part of the BMATS-propsed "Cold Spring Freeway", which would have headed northwestward along or parallel to today's Moravia Rd, then turn west along Cold Spring Ln to meet the Northwest Freeway.

One more BMATS-proposed freeway within the city: the Northeast Connector. From the curve on I-83 near Guilford Ave, it would have headed northeastward, meeting what got built as Perring Pkwy (MD 41), which itself would have been freeway inside the Beltway, then at-grade expressway outside the Beltway and extending into Harford County.

Last one: White Marsh Blvd (MD 43) was propsed in 1964 as a freeway between I-695 and US 40. Of course, it got built as an at-grade arterial instead.

njroadhorse · « **Reply #11 on:** January 24, 2009, 01:05:24 PM »

83 would definitely help things in downtown

travelinmiles · « **Reply #12 on:** January 26, 2009, 07:14:56 PM »

It seems like it would take much to get I-70 to the US 40 stub.

John · « **Reply #13 on:** January 26, 2009, 07:17:58 PM »

There wouldn't have to be a ton of demolishing, but the enviromentalists would go crazy because a 70/40 connector would have to go through a big park. That same park is what got the original I-70 stopped.

74/171FAN · « **Reply #14 on:** February 14, 2009, 11:08:14 PM »

About I-70 and I-83 has Maryland ever considered possibly extending I-83 along I-695 to I-95 northeast of Baltimore or I-70 along I-695 to I-95 or even farther east following I-695 and I-97 to US 50/301 near Annapolis? I-83 in Downtown Baltimore could be an x-83(I would prefer an x-95 so it would not have to multiplex with I-695 for about a mile but all of the x-95s in Maryland are used up except for I-995(yes I-595 exists along US 50/301 but it is not signed).

Steve · « **Reply #15 on:** March 14, 2009, 07:15:30 PM »

Quote from: 74/171FAN on February 14, 2009, 11:08:14 PM

About I-70 and I-83 has Maryland ever considered possibly extending I-83 along I-695 to I-95 northeast of Baltimore or I-70 along I-695 to I-95 or even farther east following I-695 and I-97 to US 50/301 near Annapolis?

We love to discuss it, but once 83 and 70 died inside Baltimore, there was no further consideration actually given to them. Only in our heads.

mefailenglish · « **Reply #16 on:** June 22, 2009, 04:48:36 PM »

A story about drag racing on that stub of I-70 between the Baltimore Beltway and the Park 'n' Ride.

http://www.wtopnews.com/?sid=1701466&nid=25

Seems like I do see one of Maryland's finest patrolling (or firing radar/laser) in that area quite frequently.

treichard · « **Reply #17 on:** June 22, 2009, 09:23:03 PM »

Eastbound in the last mile of I-70, the speed limit drops to 55, then 40, then 25. It's one of the few pieces of Interstate-quality highway where it is safe (and illegal) to drive at speeds three times the speed limit (for a short distance), and with light traffic.

I've seen cops sitting on the EB inside shoulder. Approaching that location, you pass over the I-695 interchange, then there is a gentle curve right followed by a gentle curve left, perfect for hiding on that shoulder ready to pounce on a speeder.

Hellfighter · « **Reply #18 on:** June 23, 2009, 03:46:28 PM »

Maybe they should tunnel I-70 under the park like Caltrans wants to do with I-710.

doofy103 · « **Reply #19 on:** June 23, 2009, 04:30:03 PM »

an unbuilt on-ramp to the 170... the sign bridge is there, though.

Do you have an up close photo of the sign bridge and what lays just beyond it?

I find US 40 facinating!

Alex · « **Reply #20 on:** June 23, 2009, 05:40:27 PM »

Quote from: doofy103 on June 23, 2009, 04:30:03 PM

an unbuilt on-ramp to the 170... the sign bridge is there, though.

Do you have an up close photo of the sign bridge and what lays just beyond it?

I find US 40 facinating!

I have a number of photos posted at http://www.aaroads.com/mid-atlantic/i-170_md.html

There are a few more in my queue too.

Steve · « **Reply #21 on:** June 23, 2009, 07:18:22 PM »

Quote from: doofy103 on June 23, 2009, 04:30:03 PM

an unbuilt on-ramp to the 170... the sign bridge is there, though.

Do you have an up close photo of the sign bridge and what lays just beyond it?

I find US 40 facinating!

You can also see http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/md/us_40/170.html for a flurry of I-170 related photos.

agentsteel53 · « **Reply #22 on:** June 23, 2009, 08:08:48 PM »

Quote from: doofy103 on June 23, 2009, 04:30:03 PM

an unbuilt on-ramp to the 170... the sign bridge is there, though.

Do you have an up close photo of the sign bridge and what lays just beyond it?

I find US 40 facinating!

here's what the next sign bridge looks like:

froggie · « **Reply #23 on:** June 26, 2009, 10:32:32 AM »

In other Baltimore news, according to WTOP radio, two more ramps at the I-95/695 interchange on the northeast side were to open this morning...the ramps from SB I-95 to either direction on I-695. This will eliminate one of the left-side ramps that previously existed.

Alex · « **Reply #24 on:** July 01, 2009, 02:35:26 PM »

Just had this sent to me today:

Attention E-ZPass® customers!!

As part of the I-95 Express Toll LanesSM Project, on or about July 12th, 2009, a major change to the current traffic pattern on southbound I-95 at the I-895 split north of Baltimore will go into effect that may impact your ride.

Currently, southbound I-95 traffic exits to the right while I-895 traffic uses the left lanes. The new traffic pattern will now have I-95 traffic continuing in the left lanes and I-895 traffic exiting on the right.

Southbound I-95 travelers will no longer need to move right to reach their destinations. The left three lanes will continue to Baltimore and points south. Those heading to points south via I-895 will use the two right lanes to access I-895.

Click here for details.

News:

Author Topic: Baltimore (Read 16932 times)