Newest System Interchange in Each State

[Beltway]

Does anyone want to place bets on when Breezewood supplants I-95/PA Turnpike as the newest one in the Keystone State?

It would cost a small fraction the cost of the I-95 ramps.  Estimate:  $40 million.

Is that official or just a guess?

One ramp and one 45 mph loop would make the connection between I-70 and the Turnpike access highway.  That is a reasonable estimate.  The PTC and PennDOT have not produced any estimate so there is no official estimate.

If you have a ticket system, you need a trumpet interchange with 4 ramps on either end.  If you have an AET interchange, you still have 4 ramps, possibly high speed.

You don't.  Two ramps will connect I-70 to westerly movements on the Turnpike access highway. 

You also need access to Breezewood itself, so you have to work that interchange into the mix.

Breezewood already has direct access to I-70 and the Turnpike access highway.

The ramps I propose would not interfere with that.

It's definitely a $100 - $300 million project.

Wrong.  Each ramp would be at most 1/3 mile long.

[jakeroot]

In British Columbia's Lower Mainland (metro Vancouver), definitely the South Fraser Perimeter Road's interchange with BC-99, seen under construction in this photo from 2011. It opened in December 2013.

In Washington State, probably 1990, when I-90 finally reached I-5 with free-flow ramps; the interchange was half-built in the 1960s, but I-90 ran on surface streets while design conflicts persisted. Three new full-service interchanges are planned for WA by the early 2030s: US-395 @ I-90, WA-509 @ I-5, and WA-167 @ I-5.

The Y-junction between current US-395 and the North Spokane Corridor opened in 2012, but not sure that's applicable on account of its simplicity.

[Ian]

Maine's newest interchange is a parclo located along I-95 at Trafton Road south of Waterville. The new exit 124 opened in July 2017.

[GenExpwy]

I took this to mean freeway-to-freeway interchanges only. Not sure what the answer is for New York. Possibly I-290/I-990 for WNY.

The most recent ones I can think of off the top of my head are I-81/I-781 and I-87/I-84 (which was a PA-style Breezewood until under a decade ago).

Can't believe I forgot about I-781!

I don't think I ever knew that I-84/I-87 got an overhaul, or that it wasn't a full connection beforehand.

An honorable mention could be the I-86 (NY 17) and I-99 (US 15) interchange in Painted Post.

Sure, 84 and 781 are newer, but they're just trumpets. Painted Post has the free-flowing, high-speed characteristics that you expect from a system interchange.

[jeffandnicole]

Does anyone want to place bets on when Breezewood supplants I-95/PA Turnpike as the newest one in the Keystone State?

It would cost a small fraction the cost of the I-95 ramps.  Estimate:  $40 million.

Is that official or just a guess?

One ramp and one 45 mph loop would make the connection between I-70 and the Turnpike access highway.  That is a reasonable estimate.  The PTC and PennDOT have not produced any estimate so there is no official estimate.

If you have a ticket system, you need a trumpet interchange with 4 ramps on either end.  If you have an AET interchange, you still have 4 ramps, possibly high speed.

You don't.  Two ramps will connect I-70 to westerly movements on the Turnpike access highway. 

You also need access to Breezewood itself, so you have to work that interchange into the mix.

Breezewood already has direct access to I-70 and the Turnpike access highway.

The ramps I propose would not interfere with that.

It's definitely a $100 - $300 million project.

Wrong.  Each ramp would be at most 1/3 mile long.

You still need I-70 to connect to the easterly PA Turnpike movements.  Single-direction interchanges should be avoided whenever possible.

Proper interchanges should be a few miles apart, so you really shouldn't have the existing interchange and the proposed new interchange practically on top of each other.  There's an interchange on I-70 just south of the PA Turnpike, along with the existing 70/76 interchange on the Turnpike.

You also need to look at the existing housing and businesses in the area and try to avoid them if at all possible.

A simple cloverleaf or diamond ramp interchange can be a 1/3 mile long.  Most flyovers, especially achieving a 45 mph or so speed limit, are nearly a mile in length.

[Beltway]

You still need I-70 to connect to the easterly PA Turnpike movements.  Single-direction interchanges should be avoided whenever possible.

It does connect to the easterly PA Turnpike movements.  The current turnpike access highway connects to mainline turnpike thru the toll plaza and a trumpet interchange that accesses both directions of the turnpike.

Proper interchanges should be a few miles apart, so you really shouldn't have the existing interchange and the proposed new interchange practically on top of each other.  There's an interchange on I-70 just south of the PA Turnpike, along with the existing 70/76 interchange on the Turnpike.

There are ample transitions and spacing between these two proposed ramps and other parts of the highways and interchanges.

[froggie]

Jeff:  Scott's idea is to locate his two ramps east of the toll plaza.  Existing 70 and the Breezewood side of the Turnpike connector would serve as the connections to Breezewood.

[NWI_Irish96]

Indiana's will probably have to be along I-69 section 5, but it isn't really a "brand new"  road, so that could be false. If your talking new road, then it would probably have to be SR 641.

Section 5 of I-69 is not a new road, but the interchanges are new so those would be the newest ones.

Sorry folks, but there are no "system" interchanges in Section 5 of I-69 (SIU #3), and the only one in Section 6 (at I-465) will not be complete (under present schedule) until 2025 or 2026. The recent conversion of the Meridian Street (US 31 North) interchange at I-465's Exit 31 in Carmel does partially qualify as a system interchange for the 3 freeway legs, but not for the south leg (Meridian St). And the closest thing SR 641 has to a system interchange, at I-70 & US 40 & SR 46, is nowhere near being a free-flowing design. So the likely "winner" for most recent ("newest") system interchange ("freeway-to-freeway") in Indiana appears to be still open for debate.

One could argue that the US 31 freeway's junction at the north terminus of Keystone Parkway might be considered to be a 3-leg system interchange with service interchanges at 146th Street & 151st Street interlaced within. If so that might qualify it for being the "newest system interchange" in the Hoosier State.

I guess I didn't understand the definition of "system interchange".  However, isn't I-465/US 31 newer than US 31/Keystone?

[J N Winkler]

I agree with Beltway--at Breezewood, basic free-flow connectivity with full access to both directions of the Turnpike can easily be provided through two ramps connecting I-70 to the Turnpike access road, which is so short that tight ramp spacing should not be an issue.

It is not for reasons of cost that Breezewood has never been eliminated.  The Bedford County planning commission is owned by the Breezewood interests, so it will never go along with a plan to cut their throats, and Pennsylvania's system of local project initiation gives them what is effectively an absolute veto.  I like C.P. Zilliacus' idea (aired occasionally on the road-related Facebook groups) of applying federal coercion by cancelling the tax-exempt status of PTC bonds if a plan to remedy Breezewood is not developed and pursued.

[roadman]

MA: Possibly US 44 and MA 3, that bypass was finished in the late 90s.

US 44 bypass and MA 3 was opened to traffic in late 2003.  So that would qualify as the newest "system to system" interchange in the state.

[jon daly]

Are you only talking about totally new interchanges on existing roads? If not, US 219 at Mud Pike in Somerset County, PA is our newest, having opened this past week. The interchanges at the north and south end of this new freeway segment already existed in their current configuration at the time of opening, albeit not fully open yet.

By that definition, RI's is exit to off of I-295 to RI-5. But it seems that people are defining this as "limited access highway -> limited access highway."

[Beltway]

I agree with Beltway--at Breezewood, basic free-flow connectivity with full access to both directions of the Turnpike can easily be provided through two ramps connecting I-70 to the Turnpike access road, which is so short that tight ramp spacing should not be an issue.

Yes indeed.  That would provide an adequate connection to the ticket-based turnpike system, and would remain usable if the turnpike went to all-electronic tolling.  Building a conventional freeway-to-freeway interchange between I-70 and the turnpike would be a much larger and more involved project, and may have to wait for a number of years to be funded after the turnpike goes to AET.

It is not for reasons of cost that Breezewood has never been eliminated.  The Bedford County planning commission is owned by the Breezewood interests, so it will never go along with a plan to cut their throats, and Pennsylvania's system of local project initiation gives them what is effectively an absolute veto.  I like C.P. Zilliacus' idea (aired occasionally on the road-related Facebook groups) of applying federal coercion by cancelling the tax-exempt status of PTC bonds if a plan to remedy Breezewood is not developed and pursued.

I like the idea also, but that would be an active measure to influence state highway policy, and I'm not sure if FHWA has ever done that before.

[hbelkins]

I noted on my recent trip to Breezewood that the local business community seems to be getting smaller and smaller. Lots of abandoned buildings and vacant lots, and many of the businesses that are there appear to be corporate locations (Starbucks, Sheetz, the two truck stops, etc.) instead of locally-owned. I can't foresee the businesses there carrying any kind of clout anymore to prevent a direct connection. Anyone who needs to stop is going to stop; there really isn't anything of significance east of Breezewood until you get to Hagerstown.

[mgk920]

Does anyone want to place bets on when Breezewood supplants I-95/PA Turnpike as the newest one in the Keystone State?

It would cost a small fraction the cost of the I-95 ramps.  Estimate:  $40 million.

Is that official or just a guess?

Breezewood would probably be at least a 9-figure fix, if not into the billions.

Not really, I fully agree with the thoughts of just adding a couple of slip ramps between the existing ticket tollgate and the I-70 south mainline.  It would be very similar in set up to the I-95 slip ramps, but in a much less congested location.  The biggest impediment there has always been local political, not cost.

The topography is also very similar to what was encountered where the new flyover ramp was recently built at I-70/79 (southeast split).

Mike

[mgk920]

As for Wisconsin, there are several 'new' system interchanges that were completed over the past 20 or so years, including US 53/WI 29 (Hallie Interchange); I-94/WI 35 southeast split (relocated Hudson Interchange); US 51/WI 29 northwest split (Wausau Interchange); US 10/US 45, both splits (Dale and Winchester Interchanges); I-41/US 45 northernmost split in Oshkosh (Algoma Interchange) and the I-39/US 10 northwest split (Marshfield Interchange).

I agree that Wisconsin's 'newest' is the I-41/WI 32 'Shawano Interchange' in the Green Bay area, it supplemented an existing street-level conventional diamond interchange that still includes WI 29.  The recently rebuilt I-41/US 10/WI 441 Bridgeview (soon to be 'Ellis'?) Interchange between Appleton and Neenah was a completely re-engineered existing system interchange.

Mike

[Beltway]

^ Perhaps if they ever get Patriot's Crossing built.  Right now it's effectively a glorified exit ramp to the marine terminal and Gate 6.

Not a full interchange anyway, easterly connections only.

[I-564 and the I-564 Intermodal Connector]

[frankenroad]

For Ohio, I believe it is probably the two interchanges of US-23 and US-30 near Upper Sandusky, at either end of their concurrency.

[triplemultiplex]

Wow I didn't expect to surprise my roadgeeks with a term I've taken for granted since I was basically a kid.

Some explanation about my attempt to sound ambiguous about the term "system interchange".  I am with the FHWA in that it is a free-flow junction between controlled access facilities.  But we all know of many places where two freeways are about to meet, but one of them 'gives up' before the junction and there are stoplights or cross traffic or some other, lower grade interchange between the major corridors.  Wisconsin had a some of these that were upgraded recently like the aforementioned US 51/WI 29 west interchange in Wausau.  It's still the junction between two major, high-capacity corridors, but it is not free-flow.  Like the existing junction between I-94 and WI 29 in Elk Mound.  I would just be open to thinking of those kinds of junctions as 'system interchanges'.

Examples:
US 52 & I-90 near Rochester, MN.
US 24 & I-469 in Ft. Wayne.
US 127 north & I-94 in Jackson, MI.
US 20 & I-15 in Idaho Falls.
Texas is the king of this, with their frontage roads; two freeways cross, but any turning movement involves traffic signals.

At each of these, a freeway/expressway is "missing" it's free flow exchange with another freeway, but I thought some may wish to still consider them "system interchanges". 

I consider US 31 & I-465 to be the newest system interchange in Indiana, by the way.  The same criteria by which I-41/WI 29 is the newest in WI.  It would have displaced I-69/IN 37 in Bloomington as newest, in my opinion.  (assuming I've got that timeline correct in my head)

<edit>
For additional clarity, a loop ramp absolutely counts as 'free flow'.  I get the impression some are assuming the ramps have to be high-speed, but no, they need only be unencumbered by cross traffic or signals.

[jakeroot]

For additional clarity, a loop ramp absolutely counts as 'free flow'.  I get the impression some are assuming the ramps have to be high-speed, but no, they need only be unencumbered by cross traffic or signals.

Wait, so signals are okay, or no?

If yes, WA's changes to Hwy 509 @ I-705 in Tacoma; the 509 was a new-build freeway, intersecting I-705 at a SPUI. It opened in 1995: https://goo.gl/CPnCCx

[MNHighwayMan]

Examples:
US 52 & I-90 near Rochester, MN.

I wouldn't even include this one in a broader definition, considering US-52 becomes a two-lane road south of the interchange.

[jakeroot]

Examples:
US 52 & I-90 near Rochester, MN.

I wouldn't even include this one in a broader definition, considering US-52 becomes a two-lane road south of the interchange.

He also gave a 👍 to US-31/I-465 in Carmel, Indiana (which includes two traffic lights as well), where US-31 becomes traffic light-infested immediately after 465.

[Eth]

Examples:
US 52 & I-90 near Rochester, MN.

I wouldn't even include this one in a broader definition, considering US-52 becomes a two-lane road south of the interchange.

He also gave a  to US-31/I-465 in Carmel, Indiana (which includes two traffic lights as well), where US-31 becomes traffic light-infested immediately after 465.

I think he's talking about the interchange on the south side of Indy, which looks more or less okay (there are a couple intersections with side streets, but they're arguably not really part of this).

EDIT: Well, the interchange itself is free-flowing, anyway, but US 31 doesn't continue as a freeway in either direction from there. Never mind, that's not it either.

[jakeroot]

EDIT: Well, the interchange itself is free-flowing, anyway, but US 31 doesn't continue as a freeway in either direction from there. Never mind, that's not it either.

I did forget about that interchange, but the bigger disqualifier is that, unlike the junction in Carmel, this one is quite old. The Carmel junction is brand new.

[J N Winkler]

Wow I didn't expect to surprise my roadgeeks with a term I've taken for granted since I was basically a kid.

I think the surprise came more from the suggestion that there was any ambiguity in the generally accepted definition.

Some explanation about my attempt to sound ambiguous about the term "system interchange".  I am with the FHWA in that it is a free-flow junction between controlled access facilities.  But we all know of many places where two freeways are about to meet, but one of them 'gives up' before the junction and there are stoplights or cross traffic or some other, lower grade interchange between the major corridors.  Wisconsin had a some of these that were upgraded recently like the aforementioned US 51/WI 29 west interchange in Wausau.  It's still the junction between two major, high-capacity corridors, but it is not free-flow.  Like the existing junction between I-94 and WI 29 in Elk Mound.  I would just be open to thinking of those kinds of junctions as 'system interchanges'.

As I see it, the biggest problem with the "most recent" aspect of your question is that interchanges with this form of phased construction are expressly excluded.  For example, K-96/US 54 is currently not a freeway-to-freeway interchange since US 54 has flat intersections on either side, but it will become Kansas' most recently built system interchange once the Kellogg freeway is extended east to K-96.  Yet it cannot count under the terms set forth in the OP, which seems to be asking for the most recently built interchange between two freeways where both facilities have been built on completely new location.

Since it can be valuable to narrow the question in this somewhat artificial way to get at which states are opening brand-new freeway corridors, and it is in any case often difficult to distinguish phased construction from reconstruction or expansion, I would expect most people to play along rather than push back against this constraint.  That is what I tried to do.

[jon daly]

Wow I didn't expect to surprise my roadgeeks with a term I've taken for granted since I was basically a kid.

I'm more of an old roadmap guy than n expert roadgeek, Were there an exam requirement to post here, I'd probably score a 64.