Cities which need beltways that don't have them

[ftballfan]

Detroit needs one for sure. Though US 23 is a great through route for I-75 users being freeway all the way, but I-275 should be extended north to meet I-75 again.

How is I-275 going to be extended? Detroit has a couple bypasses that aren't really considered bypasses, I-69 between Marshall and Port Huron is one, US-23 between Flint and Toledo is another one. I-275 was suppose to meet I-75 again near Davisburg but there are too many lakes and too much development between I-275's northern terminus and Davisburg that I-275 can't be built to rejoin I-75.

275 would've been tough to get through even in the 1960s as there already appeared to be significant development along the lakes then!

[Flint1979]

Detroit needs one for sure. Though US 23 is a great through route for I-75 users being freeway all the way, but I-275 should be extended north to meet I-75 again.

How is I-275 going to be extended? Detroit has a couple bypasses that aren't really considered bypasses, I-69 between Marshall and Port Huron is one, US-23 between Flint and Toledo is another one. I-275 was suppose to meet I-75 again near Davisburg but there are too many lakes and too much development between I-275's northern terminus and Davisburg that I-275 can't be built to rejoin I-75.

275 would've been tough to get through even in the 1960s as there already appeared to be significant development along the lakes then!

Yeah my guess is that the development started in the 50's when Detroit started it's long decline.

[democratic nole]

Dallas amazes me with I-635 only being a half circle, but Fort Worth gets full beltway if you count I-20 with I-820. In fact I-20 was I-820 in Fort Worth as I-20 used the old DFW Turnpike and tied into via the US 80 freeway between Terrell and Dallas.

I think that partially had to do with the presence of Loop 12. It was upgraded to a freeway on the west side of Dallas between Texas 183/35E and I-20 (via Spur 408). The PGBT now serves essentially as the final connector of I-635.

[democratic nole]

Every city with more than 400,000 people should have a beltway.

Long Beach has entered the chat

And so has residents of metro LA not realizing they live in the suburbs, not their own city. 

Every city with more than 400,000 people should have a beltway.

Or we could do this case-by-case instead of trying to stick a full beltway around Honolulu and Fresno.

Fresno kind of has one already.

Huh?  I'm not seeing it...  Or do you mean the tiny triangle around downtown?

One important thing to consider is that a full beltway doesn't always solve congestion problems within the city.

I've wondered on more than one occasion if anyone drives I-20/635 all the way around Dallas rather than using I-35E through downtown.  Likewise, I-20/820 all the way around Fort Worth rather than using I-35W through downtown.

I certainly can't imagine anyone driving the LBJ Freeway to get around Dallas. The stretch between 35E and Central Expressway arguably had the worst traffic in the county 20 years ago. Maybe Loop 820 is just as bad, but the traffic on it was always fairly light in my experience.

[Flint1979]

Dallas is a nightmare to drive through. I did it about 7 years ago and it took awhile to get through Dallas I'm talking like two hours.

[SkyPesos]

There's also I-275 in Cincinnati. Traffic levels can't compare to the Dallas freeways, but it takes you so out of the way that I don't see long distance traffic using it as a bypass for its parent highway I-75 at all. It's slightly more feasible as a bypass for I-71, but still adds a lot of miles. I have used it as a bypass for I-71 before, but only when traffic in the section of I-71 between it is pretty bad. It works well for I-74 E to I-71 N (I have done that many times), but if you're driving long distance wanting to bypass Cincinnati and end up having to use that movement, I-70 is the better bypass. And for the I-74 E to I-75 S movement, specifically Indy to Lexington, I think more drivers go through Louisville than Cincinnati for that trip because of how out of the way I-275 takes you.

[Flint1979]

There's also I-275 in Cincinnati. Traffic levels can't compare to the Dallas freeways, but it takes you so out of the way that I don't see long distance traffic using it as a bypass for its parent highway I-75 at all. It's slightly more feasible as a bypass for I-71, but still adds a lot of miles. I have used it as a bypass for I-71 before, but only when traffic in the section of I-71 between it is pretty bad. It works well for I-74 E to I-71 N (I have done that many times), but if you're driving long distance wanting to bypass Cincinnati and end up having to use that movement, I-70 is the better bypass. And for the I-74 E to I-75 S movement, specifically Indy to Lexington, I think more drivers go through Louisville than Cincinnati for that trip because of how out of the way I-275 takes you.

Kind of reminds me of my dad asking me if he should stay on 75 to go through Cincinnati or around it, same thing with Atlanta, should I stay on 75 or go around it. My answer for both was to stay on 75 and my reasoning is for Cincinnati you already mentioned it I-275 takes you too far out of the way for it to be an effective bypass of Cincinnati. Now for Atlanta you have I-285 so I answered that question with a question of my own, if you were to take I-285 what exactly are you bypassing? You're still going to be contending with a lot of traffic, it's longer in distance and of course that would mean it's going to be longer in time as well. Well he listened to me for Cincinnati but he didn't listen to me for Atlanta and all I heard about Atlanta is how fast they drive and how much traffic there is. So I was like right so taking I-285 isn't bypassing Atlanta it's just putting you in another area of the metro that you don't need to be.

[bassoon1986]

Every city with more than 400,000 people should have a beltway.

Long Beach has entered the chat

And so has residents of metro LA not realizing they live in the suburbs, not their own city. 

Every city with more than 400,000 people should have a beltway.

Or we could do this case-by-case instead of trying to stick a full beltway around Honolulu and Fresno.

Fresno kind of has one already.

Huh?  I'm not seeing it...  Or do you mean the tiny triangle around downtown?

One important thing to consider is that a full beltway doesn't always solve congestion problems within the city.

I've wondered on more than one occasion if anyone drives I-20/635 all the way around Dallas rather than using I-35E through downtown.  Likewise, I-20/820 all the way around Fort Worth rather than using I-35W through downtown.

Using Loop 12 and I-20 is a pretty good bypass for I-35E.


iPhone

[kphoger]

Using Loop 12 and I-20 is a pretty good bypass for I-35E.

Yes, and I've done that.  Unfortunately, Loop-12 can have its own traffic jams.

[OCGuy81]

Do beltways, and the development they spur, in time necessitate another beltway??

Seems to be the case in Houston. Beltway 8 was meant to be an outer beltway, and then Grand Parkway an outer outer beltway??

It's much like a bypass being just as congested as the route it was meant to relieve....or often worse (see 405 California)

[hotdogPi]

Do beltways, and the development they spur, in time necessitate another beltway??

Seems to be the case in Houston. Beltway 8 was meant to be an outer beltway, and then Grand Parkway an outer outer beltway??

It's much like a bypass being just as congested as the route it was meant to relieve....or often worse (see 405 California)

This never happened with I-495 in Massachusetts. The southern two thirds doesn't have sprawl congestion. (The northern third serves a dual purpose, connecting Lowell-Lawrence-Haverhill, so it isn't comparable to a typical outer beltway.)

[I-39]

Nashville could use a full one. There are two pseudo ones in SR 155 and I-840, but neither goes all the way around.

[SkyPesos]

Nashville could use a full one. There are two pseudo ones in SR 155 and I-840, but neither goes all the way around.

I'm looking at Nashville, and wondering why I-440 is built the way it is instead of using TN 155 south of I-40, eventually forming into a full beltway with the rest of TN 155. At their closest point, those two roads are only 1200 feet apart, and about 2200 feet apart at the I-65 junction

[I-39]

Nashville could use a full one. There are two pseudo ones in SR 155 and I-840, but neither goes all the way around.

I'm looking at Nashville, and wondering why I-440 is built the way it is instead of using TN 155 south of I-40, eventually forming into a full beltway with the rest of TN 155. At their closest point, those two roads are only 1200 feet apart, and about 2200 feet apart at the I-65 junction

That's an excellent question. Probably a lack of foresight.

[hbelkins]

And for the I-74 E to I-75 S movement, specifically Indy to Lexington, I think more drivers go through Louisville than Cincinnati for that trip because of how out of the way I-275 takes you.

Nope. I have to make a conscious decision to go through Louisville because you have to go through downtown. Every routing service I've ever used (software, AAA, Google Maps, etc.) picks 75-275-74 as the first choice over 64-65. And now that there's a toll required to cross the river on I-65, I'd think even more long-distance traffic would shunpike. Traffic, in my experience, has also been lighter on I-74 than I-65. I will automatically choose going through (around) Cincy over going through Louisville.

I used I-275 as a bypass of I-75 once. I was coming south and there was a game going on (can't remember if it was a Reds game or a Bengals game) and I knew traffic around the river would be a mess. I would rather drive and go out of my way and keep moving than sit still or barely move in traffic.

[webny99]

And for the I-74 E to I-75 S movement, specifically Indy to Lexington, I think more drivers go through Louisville than Cincinnati for that trip because of how out of the way I-275 takes you.

Nope. I have to make a conscious decision to go through Louisville because you have to go through downtown. Every routing service I've ever used (software, AAA, Google Maps, etc.) picks 75-275-74 as the first choice over 64-65. And now that there's a toll required to cross the river on I-65, I'd think even more long-distance traffic would shunpike. Traffic, in my experience, has also been lighter on I-74 than I-65. I will automatically choose going through (around) Cincy over going through Louisville.

Google, at least right now, seems to think it's basically a toss-up. If downtown Louisville is a concern, what's wrong with the Lewis and Clark Bridge? Too expensive?

[SkyPesos]

And for the I-74 E to I-75 S movement, specifically Indy to Lexington, I think more drivers go through Louisville than Cincinnati for that trip because of how out of the way I-275 takes you.

Nope. I have to make a conscious decision to go through Louisville because you have to go through downtown. Every routing service I've ever used (software, AAA, Google Maps, etc.) picks 75-275-74 as the first choice over 64-65. And now that there's a toll required to cross the river on I-65, I'd think even more long-distance traffic would shunpike. Traffic, in my experience, has also been lighter on I-74 than I-65. I will automatically choose going through (around) Cincy over going through Louisville.

Hmm... I just did a search between Indy and Lexington on Google Maps, and the Louisville routing seems to be the first choice even with the No Tolls option on (it have you use the US 31 bridge into Louisville instead of I-65), but it's only 2 minutes faster with no traffic compared to the 74-275-75 routing, so I think it's still safe to say that the Cincinnati routing is better as it's all freeway. The section of I-275 between I-74 and the airport is a pretty nice drive though, with rolling hills and little traffic.

[Avalanchez71]

Nashville could use a full one. There are two pseudo ones in SR 155 and I-840, but neither goes all the way around.

I'm looking at Nashville, and wondering why I-440 is built the way it is instead of using TN 155 south of I-40, eventually forming into a full beltway with the rest of TN 155. At their closest point, those two roads are only 1200 feet apart, and about 2200 feet apart at the I-65 junction

That's an excellent question. Probably a lack of foresight.

It wasn't lack of foresight.  It was planned that way.  The people in power did not want Nashville to be fully bypassed.

[I-39]

Nashville could use a full one. There are two pseudo ones in SR 155 and I-840, but neither goes all the way around.

I'm looking at Nashville, and wondering why I-440 is built the way it is instead of using TN 155 south of I-40, eventually forming into a full beltway with the rest of TN 155. At their closest point, those two roads are only 1200 feet apart, and about 2200 feet apart at the I-65 junction

That's an excellent question. Probably a lack of foresight.

It wasn't lack of foresight.  It was planned that way.  The people in power did not want Nashville to be fully bypassed.

And now we suffer the consequences of lack of foresight, but that's ok because Tennessee is overbuilt as it is right?

[Flint1979]

From Indy to Lexington it's roughly the same time and distance going through Cincinnati as it is Louisville.

[I-39]

From Indy to Lexington it's roughly the same time and distance going through Cincinnati as it is Louisville.

At least right now, it seems Louisville would be better as it is slightly less crowded and you don't have to deal with the Brent Spence bridge drama.

[SkyPesos]

From Indy to Lexington it's roughly the same time and distance going through Cincinnati as it is Louisville.

At least right now, it seems Louisville would be better as it is slightly less crowded and you don't have to deal with the Brent Spence bridge drama.

You use I-275 around Cincinnati with the Cincy routing and avoid downtown/Brent Spence. I don't know how I-65 between Indy and Louisville is like (as I have no reason to use it from all 3 cities I lived in) though, but as mentioned earlier, I-74 isn't that bad in terms on traffic.

[kphoger]

Probably a lack of foresight.

It wasn't lack of foresight.

And now we suffer the consequences of lack of foresight

It wasn't lack of foresight.

[Avalanchez71]

Nashville could use a full one. There are two pseudo ones in SR 155 and I-840, but neither goes all the way around.

I'm looking at Nashville, and wondering why I-440 is built the way it is instead of using TN 155 south of I-40, eventually forming into a full beltway with the rest of TN 155. At their closest point, those two roads are only 1200 feet apart, and about 2200 feet apart at the I-65 junction

That's an excellent question. Probably a lack of foresight.

It wasn't lack of foresight.  It was planned that way.  The people in power did not want Nashville to be fully bypassed.

And now we suffer the consequences of lack of foresight, but that's ok because Tennessee is overbuilt as it is right?

No way a beltway will cure your woes with Nashville traffic.  The city is not a grid layout type of city.  The terrain, environmental issues and high dollar property forces the way the roads are built in the area.

[ftballfan]

From Indy to Lexington it's roughly the same time and distance going through Cincinnati as it is Louisville.

At least right now, it seems Louisville would be better as it is slightly less crowded and you don't have to deal with the Brent Spence bridge drama.

You use I-275 around Cincinnati with the Cincy routing and avoid downtown/Brent Spence. I don't know how I-65 between Indy and Louisville is like (as I have no reason to use it from all 3 cities I lived in) though, but as mentioned earlier, I-74 isn't that bad in terms on traffic.

I-65 from Indy to Louisville is okay, but will be better when it's completely three-laned as a lot of trucks run that road. Also there's the pesky (but thankfully toll-by-plate) toll entering Kentucky