DOT taking away a free flow movement

[Mergingtraffic]

Has your DOT ever taken away a free flow movement?

On i-95 in West Haven, CT, they are consolidating Exit 44-45 and in the process taking away a free flow movement.

Look at the flyer pdf attached on the lower right hand corner, there is a ramp going from i-95 to the right, it is now controlled by a traffic light, for those wishing to take a right used to just merge on to the secondary road, NOW they have to make a right turn at the light.

I have a feeling if this were FL that ramp would stay, considering it's just wasted space, just leave it as is.  I have no problem with the left turn improvement, but the right turn, why take out a free flow movement?!

http://www.i95westriver.com/images/Notice-August2015.pdf

www.i95westriver.com

[jeffandnicole]

I think it happens relatively frequently, actually. 

NJDOT, when they reconstructed NJ's I-295 between Exits 17 & 23 in the 1990's, blew away every interchange. Nearly all of the ramps previously allowed one turning right to merge onto the adjoining road. In most cases, the new ramps brought everyone to a traffic light.

[Alex4897]

The I-95 / US 202 interchange reconstruction in Wilmington removed a loop ramp from I-95 SB to DE 202 SB and replaced it with a signal.

[TEG24601]

The I-5/SR-512 Interchange in South Tacoma used to be a Cloverleaf, it is now a Parclo with a traffic signal.'


I-94 in the western suburbs of Detroit used to have left exits with loops to connect to US-24 and traffic was free flowing.  The exit is now a SPUI.



I can't recall them off of the top of my head, but I recall this actually being a common occurrence with Cloverleafs being converted to Parclos, partially due to weaving issues, and partially due to traffic volumes, along with the illogical removal of some very useful left entrances/exits.

[Revive 755]

I think it happens relatively frequently, actually.

Pretty much anytime a full cloverleaf is changed one or more free-flow movements go away.

To give a rough idea how common removing free-flow movements at an interchange is, here is a rough list that is probably missing many occurences

Illinois

* I-57 at IL 13:  Full cloverleaf to SPUI
* I-57/I-70 at Fayette Avenue in Effingham:  Freeflow entrance loop to WB/SB was replaced with a left turn
* I-57 at IL 50 at Kankakee:  Loops to enter I-57 were replaced with left turns.
* I-55 at US 52:  Tight cloverleaf changed to standard diamond
* I-55/I-74 at US 150:  Full cloverleaf had exit loops from I-55/I-74 removed and replaced with signalized left turns
* I-55 at Business 51:  Full cloverleaf downgraded to folded diamond due to adding the adjacent interchange with I-39
* I-80 at US 45:  Full cloverleaf had exit loops from I-80 removed, replaced with left turns
* I-270 at IL 3:  Loop to enter EB I-270 from SB IL 3 removed, Loop from WB I-270 to SB IL 3 removed and replaced with signalized left turn
* I-90 at Barrington Road, currently under construction:  Trumpet to SPUI (SPUI will have full access, current trumpet lacks access to/from the west)
* I-90 at IL 83/Elmhurst Road, currently under construction:  Trumpet to DDI (DDI will have full access, current trumpet lacks access to/from the west)

Indiana

* I-65 at US 30:  Full cloverleaf had exit loops from I-65 removed and replaced with signalized left turns, SB exit features a triple left
* Many interchanges on I-465, particularly on the west side

Missouri

* US 40 at US 61/US 67:  Very tight cloverleaf to SPUI
* US 40 at Brentwood Boulevard:  Original full (tight?) cloverleaf to folded diamond (due to I-170 being built), then later downgraded to the west half of a split diamond
* US 40 at Hanley Road:  WB entrance loop and EB exit loop removed, interchange changed to being the eastern half of the split diamond with Brentwood
* US 40 at Big Bend Road:  Trumpet to diamond (trumpet lacked access to/from the west, diamond provides full access)
* US 40 at McCausland Avenue:  WB exit loop removed
* US 40 at Hampton Avenue:  Very tight cloverleaf to SPUI
* US 40 at Kingshighway Boulevard:  Cloverleaf to SPUI
* I-70 at Rte N/Florrisant Road:  Cloverleaf to SPUI
* I-255 at MO 231:  Full cloverleaf to diamond, but later had the NB MO 231 to WB I-255 loop put back as a two lane loop ramp
* I-270 at US 67:  EB exit loop removed and replaced with signalized left turn, were plans to do the same with the WB exit loop, whole interchange may someday become a SPUI
* The access from US 40 to/from Vandeventer Avenue used to continue east of Vandeventer to connect with Chouteau Avenue; the diamond interchange at Vandeventer was replaced with an at-grade T-intersection

Wisconsin
* I think a few loop ramps went away with the I-94 rebuild between Illinois and I-894
* I believe there were a few loops already removed with the rebuild of I-39/I-90, and will be even more going away once the rebuild is complete

[vdeane]

Over in NY, Region 4 just realigned the ramp from I-590 SB to NY 31 EB, a loop ramp which used to become a third lane on NY 31, so traffic could move without yielding or anything.  Now it comes it at a right angle (with two lanes), the third lane on NY 31 is gone, and the movement is partially controlled by a traffic light (which also regulates access to the ramp to I-590 south, which is now accessible from both directions and no longer free flow either).  This was part of a project to improve pedestrian safety on NY 31.  There were also some changes made on the NY 31 west to I-590 north ramp to reduce traffic speeds.

The one that most comes to mind, however, is the reconstruction of the US 15/PA 581 interchange, which forced people going from US 15 north to PA 581 west (basically, all the through traffic in that direction) to turn left at a traffic light instead of taking the loop ramp.

[doorknob60]

The diamond interchange between I-84 and Meridian Rd./ID-69 is being reconfigured to a SPUI. There was previously a loop ramp from southbound Meridian Rd. to Eastbound I-84 which has now been removed. The final intersection after construction is done should be vastly superior to the mess it was so I won't complain.

[tradephoric]

Full cloverleafs converted to Parclo B4s:

*I-5 / 38th Street — Tacoma, WA: 
https://www.google.com/maps/@47.22297,-122.46338,536m/data=!3m1!1e3

*SR2 / SR57 — Elyria, OH: 
https://www.google.com/maps?ll=41.40463,-82.11692&z=16&t=h

*US24 / SR7 — Basehor, KS: 
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.11576,-94.89467,1224m/data=!3m1!1e3

*I695 / US40 — Baltimore, MD: 
https://www.google.com/maps?ll=39.28630,-76.73860&z=17&t=h

[kurumi]

This has happened elsewhere in Connecticut and California; in many populated areas free-flow features indicate older interchanges.

Connecticut:
* US 5 and CT 15 at SR 517: was a cloverleaf, now 4-ramp parclo
* I-91 at Main St and CT 159: a ramp from Main St NB to I-91 SB removed many years ago
* CT 15 at CT 58: was a cloverleaf (well, Merritt Parkway style), now 4 ramps
* CT 15 at CT 110: was 4 ramps, then 7, now 5
* US 6/44 at Middle Turnpike, Manchester: was a grade-level wye, now a T-intersection
* I-384 at CT 83, was 7 ramps in plan, built as 5

South Bay Area, California:
* US 101 at Lawrence Expwy, was cloverleaf, now parclo A4
* US 101 at Trimble Road, removed a loop from 101 NB
* US 101 at Moffett Blvd, removed 4 of 8 ramps
* I-880 at CA 237: NB 880 to WB 237 is now a signalized left turn. A direct flyover was discussed, but I bet that's at least 5 years out.
* I-280 at Magdalena, NB offramp, removed channelized right turn (https://goo.gl/maps/3tCjq) by placing curbs in the way. My guess is a pedestrian got injured here.

So yeah. Cloverleafs are going away (weaving hazard); free-flow right turns are also going away (pedestrian safety)

[empirestate]

Pedestrian safety and/or traffic calming would be the most obvious reason. I definitely believe that free-flow movements ought to be eliminated in many urban and suburban interchanges (such as I-87 at Exit 11 in the Bronx). I've crossed these ramps enough to know that motorists cannot be trusted with safely navigating free-flow movements in pedestrian areas.


iPhone

[roadman65]

In Lakeland, FL on Gary Road (now defunct US 92 Business) there used to be a merge into US 92 E Bound, but it was reconfigured into a T where motorists now have to turn right.

Also not from a DOT but the City of Orlando, the turn from International Drive N Bound onto E Bound Oakridge Road use to have a free flowing right turn bypassing the intersection, but now the cut off is been filled in with landscape and motorists must pass through the signalized intersection to make the right turn from I Drive to Oakridge.

Then in New Jersey, for years US 1 & 9 Southbound in Linden was free flowing past the refinery near the I-278 merge, but since 1989 the signal that never turned red unless activated by a pedestrian now turns red when the light at the plant entrance with the I-278 traffic/ US 1 & 9 N Bound turns red to allow movements in and out of the refinery.  For years the traffic exiting the refinery would turn left onto the I-278 merge lanes to enter US 1 & 9 S Bound so US 1 & 9 Southbound lanes were never effected, and still are not to this day.  However NJDOT sees a reason to stop all motorists and from what I have seen and heard you still have to stop for the light there to this day, unless NJDOT reversed its decision and is allowing free flowing travel.

[hbelkins]

Reconstruction on I-64 eliminated the loop ramp from westbound I-64 to southbound KY 627 at Exit 96 near Winchester. Instead, there's now one ramp that includes a left turn to southbound KY 627. Not sure if it added a signal or not.

[jakeroot]

As has already been stated, transportation jurisdictions tend to remove these right turn lanes, usually called slip lanes or channelized right turns, as they are a burden on pedestrian safety. I prefer them, as they increase the flow of traffic by cutting down the amount of traffic entering the intersection and reduce the size of each crossing so there are more "refuge islands" so to speak, but the recent move towards living streets don't really allow them (usually, but they are okay if done properly, i.e. signalized). Theoretically, you could build pedestrian undercuts that are wide and well-lit, but they are expensive and not on most DOT's to-do lists (besides the fact that most people don't like tunnels under intersections).

Seattle never had a lot to begin with, so there wasn't a lot to remove (though some that I knew of, such as Valley @ Westlake, Royal Brougham @ Alaskan Way, Mercer @ Fairview, Montlake @ E Lake Washington, etc, are now gone). In fact, there are only a handful of intersections in the Seattle metro area with slip lanes all four sides (one in Tacoma -- Portland @ Puyallup; in Bothell -- Hwy 527 @ Hwy 524; in Renton -- Rainier @ Airport Way; Hwy 900 @ NE 3 St, in Kent -- Hwy 516 @ Reith Rd; and weirdly Seattle -- E Marginal @ Boeing Access Rd)....

...But, there are some new ones that have been built lately, though they are chiefly rural locations. The new Ridgefield Junction (near Ridgefield) -- I-5 @ Hwy 501, on three sides; in Tacoma -- South Tacoma Way @ Pacific (very urban); in Graham -- 176 St @ Hwy 161 (built in 2006); in Puyallup -- 37 Ave @ 5 St; and in Bonney Lake (three on S Prairie between Hwy 410 and 200 Ave).

So in summary, WSDOT doesn't really build a lot of new ones, but they don't remove very many existing ones, instead retrofitting them to make them more pedestrian friendly.

[KEK Inc.]

Montlake @ E Lake Washington

I live a mile from there.  Did this change in the last week? 

Seattle -- E Marginal @ Boeing Access Rd)....

That's in Tukwila, not Seattle.  Note the yellow traffic signals and street lights mast arms.

[jakeroot]

Montlake @ E Lake Washington

I live a mile from there.  Did this change in the last week? 

Last I went by (last Wednesday), it looked like it was about to be removed (the NB to EB slip lane). It might not be completely gone yet.

Seattle -- E Marginal @ Boeing Access Rd)....

That's in Tukwila, not Seattle.  Note the yellow traffic signals and street lights mast arms.

I figured the transverse crosswalk markings were leftover from old Seattle standards, but now I see. How silly. The zebra crossings on the north side are still confusing, however. Tukwila does not use zebra crossings for signalized crossings (AFAICT).

[KEK Inc.]

Went to a music festival in Redmond this weekend, but alas 520 was closed.  I'll check it out this Friday. 


iPhone

[vdeane]

As has already been stated, transportation jurisdictions tend to remove these right turn lanes, usually called slip lanes or channelized right turns, as they are a burden on pedestrian safety. I prefer them, as they increase the flow of traffic by cutting down the amount of traffic entering the intersection and reduce the size of each crossing so there are more "refuge islands" so to speak, but the recent move towards living streets don't really allow them (usually, but they are okay if done properly, i.e. signalized). Theoretically, you could build pedestrian undercuts that are wide and well-lit, but they are expensive and not on most DOT's to-do lists (besides the fact that most people don't like tunnels under intersections).

There's actually a newer style that is encouraged.  This style has a much tighter turning radius, forcing traffic to slow down, and allowing for pedestrians to walk in a straight path (which makes it easier for them to be seen as well as more accessible).  It retains the pork chop island and truck aprons are used for vehicles with a wide turning radius.

[jakeroot]

As has already been stated, transportation jurisdictions tend to remove these right turn lanes, usually called slip lanes or channelized right turns, as they are a burden on pedestrian safety. I prefer them, as they increase the flow of traffic by cutting down the amount of traffic entering the intersection and reduce the size of each crossing so there are more "refuge islands" so to speak, but the recent move towards living streets don't really allow them (usually, but they are okay if done properly, i.e. signalized). Theoretically, you could build pedestrian undercuts that are wide and well-lit, but they are expensive and not on most DOT's to-do lists (besides the fact that most people don't like tunnels under intersections).

There's actually a newer style that is encouraged.  This style has a much tighter turning radius, forcing traffic to slow down, and allowing for pedestrians to walk in a straight path (which makes it easier for them to be seen as well as more accessible).  It retains the pork chop island and truck aprons are used for vehicles with a wide turning radius.

I think this is what you're talking about? I can't believe I forgot about them. Australia has pioneered these but I've been seeing them in Nevada a lot.  WSDOT uses this style on occasion, but they're usually signalized (though not always). Wisconsin uses this style of slip lane on roundabouts as well.

[roadfro]

I think this is what you're talking about? I can't believe I forgot about them. Australia has pioneered these but I've been seeing them in Nevada a lot.  WSDOT uses this style on occasion, but they're usually signalized (though not always). Wisconsin uses this style of slip lane on roundabouts as well.

Channelized right turns with straight angles like this aren't incredibly common in Nevada as fast as I am aware. There may be a couple, but I can't think of any off hand.

Nevada still does channelized right turns. They tend to be with tighter radii, to encourage slightly slower speeds and better pedestrian visibility/access.

[jakeroot]

Channelized right turns with straight angles like this aren't incredibly common in Nevada as fast as I am aware. There may be a couple, but I can't think of any off hand.

Nevada still does channelized right turns. They tend to be with tighter radii, to encourage slightly slower speeds and better pedestrian visibility/access.

Not that tight of radii, necessarily. My mistake. What I was attempting to say was that Nevada tends to use asymmetric design with regards to how the slip lanes diverge and merge. I think they're more common at freeway interchanges than conventional intersections (where the more symmetric design is common, especially when a lane is being added).

Examples:

https://goo.gl/nB5TN9 (all four "corners")
https://goo.gl/SXo187 (just this side of the interchange)
>> https://goo.gl/dqzh14 (a more conventional intersection -- ignore NE slip lane) << BEST EXAMPLE

[PHLBOS]

Current MassDOT plans for the I-95/MA 9 cloverleaf interchange near Newton calls for a conversion to a parclo with signals for the new left turn movements off MA 9.

For those unfamiliar with MA 9 in this area; it's a Jersey-type arterial highway lined with businesses, shopping centers & malls with no breakdown nor median shoulders.  In short, this road is not pedestrain nor bicycle friendly at all; IIRC, MA has similar pedestrains/bicycles/horses prohibitions for these type of roads as they do for expressways/freeways... at least they used to.

IMHO, this interchange is absolutely the wrong place for such a conversion.  This stretch of MA 9 is littered with traffic lights as it is now and is very congested.  The reasoning for the conversion (this interchange is the proverbial guinea pig for the Bay State for such a conversion) is to cut down on the weaving between the ramps to I-95. 

A better solution for this location would be to widen the MA 9 overpass (it's being reconstructed/replaced anyway as part of the construction project) and provide collector-distributor roads within the interchange; such would take the weaving movements between the cloverleaf ramps away from the through-MA 9 lanes.  Yes, weaving issues would still exist; but (IMHO) such is much better than setting the stage for a potential left-turn-related collisions, which can still happen despite the presence of traffic signals and are much more dangerous than weaving-related side-swipes.

Side bar: from what I've read, there is local opposition to this interchange reconfiguration (to a parclo w/signals) as well.

In Fall River, the ongoing MA 79/138 reconstruction project eliminates at least two free-flow movements to/from I-195.

[SteveG1988]

Would removing a traffic circle count?

[roadfro]

Channelized right turns with straight angles like this aren't incredibly common in Nevada as fast as I am aware. There may be a couple, but I can't think of any off hand.

Nevada still does channelized right turns. They tend to be with tighter radii, to encourage slightly slower speeds and better pedestrian visibility/access.

Not that tight of radii, necessarily. My mistake. What I was attempting to say was that Nevada tends to use asymmetric design with regards to how the slip lanes diverge and merge. I think they're more common at freeway interchanges than conventional intersections (where the more symmetric design is common, especially when a lane is being added).

Examples:

https://goo.gl/nB5TN9 (all four "corners")
https://goo.gl/SXo187 (just this side of the interchange)
>> https://goo.gl/dqzh14 (a more conventional intersection -- ignore NE slip lane) << BEST EXAMPLE

I didn't realize how many of those types of right turn channelizations there are. I think it is a bit more common in new construction in southern Nevada, especially when there is no downstream merge lane.

[Duke87]

As has already been stated, transportation jurisdictions tend to remove these right turn lanes, usually called slip lanes or channelized right turns, as they are a burden on pedestrian safety. I prefer them, as they increase the flow of traffic by cutting down the amount of traffic entering the intersection and reduce the size of each crossing so there are more "refuge islands" so to speak, but the recent move towards living streets don't really allow them (usually, but they are okay if done properly, i.e. signalized). Theoretically, you could build pedestrian undercuts that are wide and well-lit, but they are expensive and not on most DOT's to-do lists (besides the fact that most people don't like tunnels under intersections).

There was a certain era in transportation design where the focus was on moving vehicles around as fast as possible with everything else as an afterthought. This became especially true in the 70s and 80s as crime rates in American cities skyrocketed and being out in the streets on foot was deemed too risky to one's personal safety. Pedestrians didn't matter since it was expected everyone would just drive everywhere for the sake of protecting themselves and their families.

Now that we've moved past the bad old days and it's once again safe to roam the streets, walking places has come back in vogue and is something a lot of people have a desire to do. As such transportation design and planning principles have shifted back towards accommodating pedestrians, and it's come to be recognized that free flowing movements for cars are a hazard to pedestrian safety. So, in any area where there may be pedestrian traffic (even if only a little bit), they are being designed out of roads as they are rebuilt.

They do, however, remain alive and well in rural areas where it's too far to anywhere for walking to be practical. And where space is plentiful there are some channelized turns with radii wide enough they operate almost like ramps in an interchange. Here's an example in Nebraska.