Quote from: 1995hoo on Today at 12:03:15 PMQuote from: StogieGuy7 on Today at 11:46:32 AMQuote from: 1995hoo on April 16, 2024, 10:57:24 AMIt's no longer the case, but this thread made me think of the problem of passing through the Baltimore area up until the Fort McHenry Tunnel opened in November 1985. ....
Ah, the Harbor Tunnel! If you think that was bad, you should have seen it before the Key Bridge (RIP) was opened. ....
I almost certainly experienced the Harbor Tunnel before the bridge opened, but I don't remember any such trips because the bridge opened just over two months before my fourth birthday.
Quote from: TheStranger on Today at 01:43:59 AMQuote from: jdunlop on April 24, 2024, 08:42:15 PMFHWA requires full movement at all Interstate interchanges (with very few exceptions) hence the redundant ramps.
Is this something introduced in the last 15-20 years, in which the interstate-to-interstate connection must include direct ramps between all directions?
I ask this because I can think of many interstate-to-interstate junctions that don't have this, usually a bypass route and its parent (i.e. for a California example, I-405 and I-5 at both ends in Sylmar and Irvine respectively, in which Route 118 and Route 133 serve the missing movements nearby).
Quote from: Rothman on April 24, 2024, 07:27:28 PMWhere's George is still up and running.
Quote from: vdeane on Today at 12:43:24 PMQuote from: Rothman on Today at 06:57:08 AMOf course, that will no longer be an interstate/interstate junction at that point.Quote from: jdunlop on April 24, 2024, 08:42:15 PMQuote from: sprjus4 on April 22, 2024, 11:00:12 PMQuote from: cowboy_wilhelm on April 22, 2024, 10:19:47 PMI agree... I can understand the ramps for redundancy, but 2 lane flyovers seem a bit excessive. Well... at least they will never be congested!Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on April 11, 2024, 08:37:28 PMI don't get the need for full access at all 3 interchanges.
I was wondering this as well. Who is going from I-40 westbound to I-74 westbound or eastbound, or I-74 (either direction) to I-40 EB? There are no plans to continue the beltway south/west, right? Seems like a massive interchange for very little traffic.
FHWA requires full movement at all Interstate interchanges (with very few exceptions) hence the redundant ramps.
When I-481 is converted to I-81, its connection from I-81 SB to BL-81 NB will no longer be direct as I-481 SB to I-81 NB is now, despite BL-81 still being limited access north of the interchange.
QuoteI honestly would not be surprised if this regulation is the reason why keeping the freeway north of I-690 as a 3di was nixed (along with the plan to build the missing movements at the I-690 interchange). Still don't know why it couldn't be a state route the whole way, however. Region 3 just dodged the question when I asked.
Quote from: Rothman on Today at 06:57:08 AMOf course, that will no longer be an interstate/interstate junction at that point.Quote from: jdunlop on April 24, 2024, 08:42:15 PMQuote from: sprjus4 on April 22, 2024, 11:00:12 PMQuote from: cowboy_wilhelm on April 22, 2024, 10:19:47 PMI agree... I can understand the ramps for redundancy, but 2 lane flyovers seem a bit excessive. Well... at least they will never be congested!Quote from: ARMOURERERIC on April 11, 2024, 08:37:28 PMI don't get the need for full access at all 3 interchanges.
I was wondering this as well. Who is going from I-40 westbound to I-74 westbound or eastbound, or I-74 (either direction) to I-40 EB? There are no plans to continue the beltway south/west, right? Seems like a massive interchange for very little traffic.
FHWA requires full movement at all Interstate interchanges (with very few exceptions) hence the redundant ramps.
When I-481 is converted to I-81, its connection from I-81 SB to BL-81 NB will no longer be direct as I-481 SB to I-81 NB is now, despite BL-81 still being limited access north of the interchange.