AARoads Forum

Today, the Birmingham Business Alliance released a 55-page document entitled "Blueprint Birmingham: A Growth Strategy For the Seven-County Region":

http://www.blueprintbirmingham.com/Blueprint_Birmingham_Communication_Plan.pdf

Only three roads are specifically mentioned (Action 12.1, page 30): assist with the timely and efficent completion of Interstate 22; maintain efforts to fund and develop the Northern Beltline as consistent with planning priorities regionally, statewide and nationally; aggressively pursue alternatives to mitigate traffic congestion on U.S. 280 through metro Birmingham.

Compared to seeking "aggressive" action on U.S. 280, it seems like a lukewarm endorsement for efforts re Northern Beltline.

Page 32 of Adobe Reader and page 30 of the document itself for those having trouble finding it.

I think the lukewarm Northern Beltline endorsement is due to the fact that it is sooo far off from happening. However, I think anything being done to 280 has little chance of occurring either.

I-65 to be rebuilt in Hoover:

http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2011/03/i-65_to_be_rebuilt_in_hoover_a.html (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2011/03/i-65_to_be_rebuilt_in_hoover_a.html)

Birmingham-bound drivers encouraged to take I-459 to avoid detour from I-20/59 N paving (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2012/04/birmingham-bound_drivers_encou.html)

QuoteBESSEMER, Alabama -- About 50,000 vehicles each day pass through Interstate 20/59 north between the Academy Drive and 19th Street exits in Bessemer, according to the Alabama Department of Transportation.

But with all the northbound lanes closed -- likely through the end of April -- for a $9.5 million repaving project, drivers are having to find alternate routes.

ALDOT is asking local traffic to exit I-20/59 N. at exit 108, Academy Drive, and take the Bessemer Superhighway to 19th Street and get back on at exit 112.

Drivers going through to Birmingham are encouraged to instead use I-459. "That will save them a whole lot of time," said Deputy Chief Mike Roper of the Bessemer Police Department.

Roper on Tuesday said the influx of additional drivers on the Superhighway has not caused too many problems.

On Monday, the first day of the 30-day project, police worked about three or four wrecks, Roper said. As of this afternoon, the department had handled one wreck.

After the northbound work is done, the southbound lanes will be shut down for up to 35 days, said ALDOT spokeswoman Linda Crockett.

The entire project is expected to be complete by early this summer.

That section of the road is in hideous shape, but if they're going to shut the entire highway down for any length of time, they ought to just widen it while they're there.  The widening is coming soon enough anyway, so they're just going to have to repave it again in a couple of years.

Quote from: BamaZeus on April 06, 2012, 12:12:33 PM
That section of the road is in hideous shape, but if they're going to shut the entire highway down for any length of time, they ought to just widen it while they're there.  The widening is coming soon enough anyway, so they're just going to have to repave it again in a couple of years.

I think the work is only for the short concrete section around Alabama Adventure Pkwy.

Further widening of I-65 south from CR 52 in Pelham to US 31 in Alabaster is planned for 2015, but everything is ready to go if the funding becomes available: http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2012/04/alabama_department_of_transpor_9.html

More interstate closures are coming for I-20 between the I-20/59 split and continues through Exit 140. ALDOT wants to rehabilitate the pavement in that stretch. I don't know how they are going to detour traffic on the part of I-20 that is outside of I-459, but I guess we will see.

A project that may start at the end of the year will replace the bridge decking for the elevated portion of I-20/59 through downtown Birmingham.

Major projects set for I-20/59 in Birmingham (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2012/05/major_projects_set_for_i2059_i.html)

I wonder just how far off the final money figure is going to be from re-decking the elevated part of 20/59 to just putting it underground and being done with it.  The article says putting it underground would cost $700 million, as of several years ago.  But, if they're rebuilding each elevated section over a 3 mile long area, that can't be cheap, I don't imagine.

They really can't widen it any between the skyscrapers on either side of the highway, unless they cantilever it over the northern side streets, get rid of the westbound ramps that are left-entrances, and shift the whole thing slightly to the north.  Or, they could conceivably double-deck it, as they have open air above, but that would likely be even uglier than what they have now.

I still think putting the whole thing underground and straightening it out is the best, but obviously most costly solution.  They could go 10 lanes wide if they needed to, and eliminate some of the tight curves and suicide crossing of lanes from Malfunction Junction to the other side of Red Mountain Expressway.

I think anything like what you are mentioning is just way too expensive to consider. And even if it were only 10% more you'd have scores of opposition from every direction to make sure that money went somewhere else, unfortunately.

Quote from: codyg1985 on May 08, 2012, 01:20:38 PM
A project that may start at the end of the year will replace the bridge decking for the elevated portion of I-20/59 through downtown Birmingham.
Major projects set for I-20/59 in Birmingham (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2012/05/major_projects_set_for_i2059_i.html)

This article (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2013/01/major_roadwork_planned_in_2013.html) discusses several major projects on tap for the Birmingham area this year, including the bridge decking replacements for the elevated portion of I-20/59 through downtown Birmingham.

I am curious how the bridge decking project on I-20/59 will be done. I wonder if parts of that interstate will be closed and traffic diverted to I-459?

The plan is indeed to shut down I-20/59 through downtown while the redecking is being carried out.  Likewise, I-20 will be shut down E of the split from I-59 to I-459 when the repaving is done on this route.  In other words, get ready for some major, major headaches driving around the 'Ham while these much needed repairs are made.  And 1st Avenue N. (U.S. 11) and Crestwood Boulevard/3rd Avenue South (U.S. 78) are going to see traffic like they haven't seen in 35 years, because there will be plenty of motorists who won't pay attention to the detour signs.

Off topic, but not necessarily so...wouldn't this be a great opportunity to permanently re-route I-20 along I-459 from Bessemer to Irondale/Leeds?  And if so, would the former I-20 between exits 130 and 136 become I-620 or I-659?  Would this divert enough non-local traffic from I-59 between exits 106 and 130 to make it worthwhile?  Knoxville did the same thing with I-75 and I-640 in the runup to the 1982 World's Fair, leading to the creation of I-275.

Quote from: Charles2 on January 20, 2013, 10:13:12 PM
The plan is indeed to shut down I-20/59 through downtown while the redecking is being carried out.  Likewise, I-20 will be shut down E of the split from I-59 to I-459 when the repaving is done on this route.  In other words, get ready for some major, major headaches driving around the 'Ham while these much needed repairs are made.  And 1st Avenue N. (U.S. 11) and Crestwood Boulevard/3rd Avenue South (U.S. 78) are going to see traffic like they haven't seen in 35 years, because there will be plenty of motorists who won't pay attention to the detour signs.

Off topic, but not necessarily so...wouldn't this be a great opportunity to permanently re-route I-20 along I-459 from Bessemer to Irondale/Leeds?  And if so, would the former I-20 between exits 130 and 136 become I-620 or I-659?  Would this divert enough non-local traffic from I-59 between exits 106 and 130 to make it worthwhile?  Knoxville did the same thing with I-75 and I-640 in the runup to the 1982 World's Fair, leading to the creation of I-275.

They need to resurface Interstate 459 leading northeast from I-65 before it defaults as the I-20 mainline. The pavement is crumbling in many places, leading to a very rough ride along the road. No wonder many stick to the left or middle lanes...

Quote from: Alex on January 22, 2013, 10:03:30 AM

Quote from: Charles2 on January 20, 2013, 10:13:12 PM
The plan is indeed to shut down I-20/59 through downtown while the redecking is being carried out.  Likewise, I-20 will be shut down E of the split from I-59 to I-459 when the repaving is done on this route.  In other words, get ready for some major, major headaches driving around the 'Ham while these much needed repairs are made.  And 1st Avenue N. (U.S. 11) and Crestwood Boulevard/3rd Avenue South (U.S. 78) are going to see traffic like they haven't seen in 35 years, because there will be plenty of motorists who won't pay attention to the detour signs.

Off topic, but not necessarily so...wouldn't this be a great opportunity to permanently re-route I-20 along I-459 from Bessemer to Irondale/Leeds?  And if so, would the former I-20 between exits 130 and 136 become I-620 or I-659?  Would this divert enough non-local traffic from I-59 between exits 106 and 130 to make it worthwhile?  Knoxville did the same thing with I-75 and I-640 in the runup to the 1982 World's Fair, leading to the creation of I-275.

They need to resurface Interstate 459 leading northeast from I-65 before it defaults as the I-20 mainline. The pavement is crumbling in many places, leading to a very rough ride along the road. No wonder many stick to the left or middle lanes...

It's supposed to be done this spring or summer, from U.S. 280 to I-20.  Stay tuned for details.  I drive that route every Sunday going to church.  It's not pretty dodging the potholes.

This Q & A blog (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2013/02/coalburg_road_patches_not_perf.html) suggests that potholes on Coalburg Road (a quasi-TEMP I-22 until the I-22/I-65 interchange is completed) will have to be endured for a while, but "there's light at the end of the tunnel":

Quote
Coalburg Road, also called County Road 77, hopscotches between Birmingham city limits and Jefferson County. This part between Daniel Payne Drive and Corridor X is definitely a city thing.
The city has done some patching recently, but driving Coalburg remains a bit of a vehicular waltz, going up-down and side-to-side while rattling through necessary artful swerves.
Coalburg existed long before Corridor X -- the future Interstate 22 -- began angling through the hills toward Interstate 65. As the last turn from the completed section of the new interstate, Coalburg is serving an added purpose that outstretches its design ....
The city will continue to patch as new craters dent the surface, Lupo said. Little comfort to the drivers who must do the daily slow traffic waltz there.
Oh, but look ahead. Lupo put it best: "There's light at the end of the tunnel."
Dream with me, for a bit. How about a nice, wide, paved Coalburg complete with a center lane to remove turning vehicle obstacles along the way?
It's coming -- or at least we're about as near to a new road as we've ever been.
Coalburg Road is on the list to get additional lanes between Daniel Payne Drive and Corridor X. The 2.3-mile-long redo is a joint effort of the city and the Alabama Department of Transportation and will cost about $8 million, ALDOT records show ....
As of right now, the state plans to seek bids on the project as early as April. If that happens it could mean construction this summer, as state road work schedules go ....

Just finish the I-22/I-65 interchange on schedule ...

Or at least get the EB 22 to SB 65 ramp open

^^ I think the project to widen Coalburg Road was brought up before Corridor X terminated there. Another road that connects to Corridor X, Hillcrest Road, is supposed to be widened at some point as well. Probably all in anticipation of economic development more than anything else.

Photo essay of the progress of the construction of the I-22/I-65 interchange, from www.al.com.  They can't get it completed soon enough.

http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2013/02/aldot_corridor_x_on_target_for.html#incart_river_default

After That Interchange is complete, ALDOT Needs to address the I-20 viaduct that is 2 lanes in each direction from Montevallo Road to The Merge with I-59, That should've been addressed 15 years ago, that drive is Hell!

Speaking of potholes.  Jefferson County can not even afford to patch any new potholes on the roads.  Many of the roads in the county are just a mess!

Quote from: Tomahawkin on February 23, 2013, 01:49:39 PM
After That Interchange is complete, ALDOT Needs to address the I-20 viaduct that is 2 lanes in each direction from Montevallo Road to The Merge with I-59, That should've been addressed 15 years ago, that drive is Hell!

That section is going to get a pavement rehab (not sure if this includes the bridge deck), but no new capacity. :(

What are the chances of an eventual I-22 extension to 20/59 by the airport? That would be much more effective than the Northern Beltline, since it won't connect to I-20 anyway.

Quote from: Bamaroadgeek on March 26, 2013, 05:43:34 PM
What are the chances of an eventual I-22 extension to 20/59 by the airport? That would be much more effective than the Northern Beltline, since it won't connect to I-20 anyway.

Ten months ago I posted, in the Interstate 22 thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=724.msg151332#msg151332), about an email reply I received from ALDOT on this topic.  To make a long story short, it would take an expensive environmental cleanup to extend I-22.  It has been a dead issue at ALDOT for approximately a decade.

That said, the enactment of MAP-21 last summer altered the ARC funding formula to allow 100% federal funding for ADHS projects, which I believe is a result that Richard Shelby helped to engineer in order to advance the Northern Beltline (aka "Corridor X-1").  I would like to see Senator Shelby have the definition of "Corridor X" be amended to include an eastern terminus at the I-20/I-59 corridor (with the I-20 viaducts specifically included in that definition).  Then, 100% federal funding could theoretically be applied to the cleanup, as well as actual construction of an extension (and a rebuild of the viaducts  :sombrero:).

My sense is that the big money support is squarely behind the Northern Beltline and might not look favorably upon a competing I-22 extension.  If the Northern Beltline completely bogs down, then the I-22 extension might be re-examined. Simply my opinion. 

ALDOT has posted materials (http://aldotapps.dot.state.al.us/I59_20/pdf/I-59%20public%20involvement%203-28-13.pdf) from their recent public involvment meeting to rebuild the I-20/59 viaduct through downtown Birmingham. The proposal (http://aldotapps.dot.state.al.us/I59_20/pdf/Proposed%20Layout.pdf) calls for eliminating exits between I-65 and US 31/280 so that the road can be widened. Access to the CBD will be provided from 11th Avenue. Ramps will be built on either end of 11th Avenue to connect to I-20/59. The new bridges will be built using segmented construction.

I like the general idea behind it.  Obviously 10 lanes would be better than 6 through downtown, and using 11th Avenue would help get rid of much of the swerving issue downtown.  I think the removal of the side exits would help traffic flow at street level, as well.  No more hard right then quick left when exiting at 17th St, or trying to go up the ramp at 22nd St and trying to get up to 55mph before the 65 split.

If you're going from say 65 South to 59 North and need to get off at the BJCC, you have to cross about 5 lanes of traffic in approximately 1/4 mile.  Now you can exit before Malfunction Junction and avoid the backup.

At first I couldn't see how one would go from the BJCC to 65 South, but now I see they're adding an access ramp to 59 at the eastern end, allowing one to cross over in an ample amount of time.

If/when the Langford Dome is ever built on the north end of the BJCC, it would be a perfect spot for a wide avenue with interstate access at either end.  It might behoove the city to also build some pedestrian bridges over 9th Avenue and 19th Street toward the parking areas.  There's always a scramble to get out of BJCC events, and it gets slowed down because pedestrians have to cross the main intersection out of there.

The only access issue I see would be trying to get to the BJCC from 65 north. I suppose you could get off at Finley and take 18th Street in.

Given that they're relocating the ramp from SB 20/59 to NB 65, they could theoretically add a new ramp from SB 65 to 11th Ave.

Optimally, they'd be burying this thing, not replacing the viaduct.  If anything, this plan will cut off the BJCC even further from the rest of downtown, since you have that much wider of a viaduct to cross under.

A VMS on 459 South was struck by a big rig this morning, and it fell into the roadway.  459 has been at a crawl all the way from I-20 to US 280 for hours now, since it's down to one lane open.

The sign in question is this one, right before the 1 mile advance sign for 280.  http://goo.gl/maps/PEDJW


About 5 months ago, the same thing happened in Tuscaloosa, on 59 South right before the 359 interchange.  Since then they've had a portable VMS at the side of the road.
http://www.myfoxal.com/story/20510364/tuscaloosa-wreck-blocks-i-59-westbou

http://www.abc3340.com/story/22529956/early-morning-traffic-problems-on-i-459-south-after-electronic-sign-hit-by-truck-lands-on-roadway

what's with truckers losing their collective intelligence the last few weeks?

From what I understand the planed bridge will use a lot less pylons then the current one and with less ramps on and off the thickness or bulkiness of it will be lessened substantially so it won't seem like the bJCC is behind a wall of concrete like it is now.

Moving it would be great but there just doesn't seem to be a will or way to do that.

Quote from: codyg1985 on April 11, 2013, 07:43:36 AM
ALDOT has posted materials (http://aldotapps.dot.state.al.us/I59_20/pdf/I-59%20public%20involvement%203-28-13.pdf) from their recent public involvment meeting to rebuild the I-20/59 viaduct through downtown Birmingham. The proposal (http://aldotapps.dot.state.al.us/I59_20/pdf/Proposed%20Layout.pdf) calls for eliminating exits between I-65 and US 31/280 so that the road can be widened. Access to the CBD will be provided from 11th Avenue. Ramps will be built on either end of 11th Avenue to connect to I-20/59. The new bridges will be built using segmented construction.

John Norquist and the CNU are now targeting the project:

http://weldbham.com/blog/2013/07/17/birminghams-choice/

Quote
"It definitely will not do anything good for Birmingham,"  Norquist declared. "Freeways attract through traffic that has no value to downtown at all. Actually, [the ALDOT plan] will hurt people – residents of the city and suburbs – who want to use the interstate to get downtown. They're looking at downtown as an obstacle to getting traffic through Birmingham, not as a destination. That's really a toxic mindset if you're interested in maintaining and adding to the vitality of the city."  ....
Asked about ALDOT's apparent out-of-hand rejection of various alternatives for I-20/59 – including making the highway through downtown a street-level boulevard similar to the Milwaukee project – Norquist said all of the arguments the department is making can be "turned right back on them."  For instance, he maintained, ALDOT's insistence that the alternatives are too expensive fly in the face of the fact that "it costs less to tear down a freeway than to replace it"  – especially an elevated highway that has reached the end of its design life. The estimated cost of rebuilding the stretch of highway Milwaukee ultimately demolished was $90 million, Norquist said; the cost of turning it into a surface street was $30 million.
Likewise with the argument that expanding I-20/59 to accommodate additional traffic will make the highway safer. ALDOT says eliminating downtown exits – another idea, Norquist said, that is "not good for businesses downtown"  – will reduce traffic accidents by doing away with the need for drivers coming onto 20/59 from I-65 South to weave across several lanes of traffic to get off the interstate. Norquist said that might be true in times of peak traffic, but ignores the larger safety impacts associated with highway expansion in general.

This blog (http://dc.streetsblog.org/2013/07/18/birmingham-to-widen-downtown-highway-while-other-cities-tear-em-down/) notes an earlier plan to sink I-20/59 below street level was deemed too expensive:

Quote
A $700 million alternative proposal to sink the highway was dismissed by state leaders as "too expensive."  Perhaps if transportation officials eliminated plans for the $4.7 billion Northern Beltline, a literal highway to nowhere, there would be more money to invest in the core of the city.

I wouldn't mind if the Northern Beltline were scrapped, I-20/59 through downtown could be the redefined Corridor X-1, and I-22 could be extended (as part of a lengthened Corridor X) to I-20/59 near the airport.  Then, use the ADHS funds for an I-20/59 sink and cover project and the I-22 extension.

Quote from: codyg1985 on April 11, 2013, 07:43:36 AM
ALDOT has posted materials (http://aldotapps.dot.state.al.us/I59_20/pdf/I-59%20public%20involvement%203-28-13.pdf) from their recent public involvment meeting to rebuild the I-20/59 viaduct through downtown Birmingham. The proposal (http://aldotapps.dot.state.al.us/I59_20/pdf/Proposed%20Layout.pdf) calls for eliminating exits between I-65 and US 31/280 so that the road can be widened. Access to the CBD will be provided from 11th Avenue. Ramps will be built on either end of 11th Avenue to connect to I-20/59. The new bridges will be built using segmented construction.

Would it really cost that much more to make the bridge a little higher so it wouldn't be as gloomy beneath?

---

Quote from: GrzrdJohn Norquist and the CNU are now targeting the project:

http://weldbham.com/blog/2013/07/17/birminghams-choice/

Another wonderfully accurate article.

1) Where is/was the protesting against removing ramps from the I-70/I-71 section of the Columbus, Ohio downtown loop?  Looks like a fairly similar project, albeit with a depressed freeway.

1) I wasn't aware WI 145 in Milwaukee had an interstate designation.

2) So having traffic that wants to go downtown encounter a stoplight at either 11th Avenue and 17th Street or 11th Avenue and 24th Street would actually be worse than having all the traffic on I-20/I-59 exiting onto 11th Avenue and probably having a nice queue to sit in for a little bit to get downtown?  Like the nice little queues one finds on the transition from the Central Freeway to Octavia Boulevard in San Francisco or on Lake Shore Drive in Chicago when entering the Loop area?

3) The removal of the WI 145 freeway in Milwaukee would be closer to Birmingham removing the US 280 freeway - which is still not really a fair comparison since the east end of the WI 145 freeway did not tie into a pair of decent sized arterials that continue onward beyond the limits of the metro area.

4) So how much would upgrading I-459 to permanently handle through traffic from a diverted I-20 and I-59 cost?

5) "Road capacity is directly linked to deaths"  I'm pretty sure it has something to do with the capacity relative to the volume using the road.  And how many pedestrian accidents are there now in the corridor versus what the number would be with a large surface street?  And look, it appears to be another speed kills argument instead of the speed differential that actually does the killing (the 65 mph car versus the 0 mph fixed object for example).

6) I-85 doesn't exactly go through the outskirts of Montgomery, nor does I-565 bypass Huntsville.

7) Google indicates that the TCH 1 freeway runs through the northeastern corner of Vancouver.

8) I'm seeing mostly depressed freeways in Detroit when I survey the aerial imagery.

QuoteWould it really cost that much more to make the bridge a little higher so it wouldn't be as gloomy beneath?

Overhead is still gloomy, regardless of how high you put the bridge.  Only way to alleviate the gloominess is to remove the bridge...whether it be depressing or (better yet) burying 20/59, or converting it into a surface boulevard as Norquist suggests.

Quote6) I-85 doesn't exactly go through the outskirts of Montgomery, nor does I-565 bypass Huntsville.

True, but neither do they cleave downtown in two like I-20/59 does with Birmingham.  Not even I-10 does that in Mobile, though it comes close.

Quote from: froggie on August 03, 2013, 09:03:07 AM

QuoteWould it really cost that much more to make the bridge a little higher so it wouldn't be as gloomy beneath?

Overhead is still gloomy, regardless of how high you put the bridge.  Only way to alleviate the gloominess is to remove the bridge...whether it be depressing or (better yet) burying 20/59, or converting it into a surface boulevard as Norquist suggests.

Personally, I'd still prefer a little bit of gloom that allows traffic to pass through and underneath than an at-grade surface road totally insufficient to handle the traffic. Plus, as is being done with I-49 in Lafayette, a lot of the "gloom" can be mitigated with CSS design and landscape/joint use upgrades.

Quote

Quote6) I-85 doesn't exactly go through the outskirts of Montgomery, nor does I-565 bypass Huntsville.

True, but neither do they cleave downtown in two like I-20/59 does with Birmingham.  Not even I-10 does that in Mobile, though it comes close.

Cut and cap can work in some areas, but doesn't work so well in others due to high water tables, utility relocations, etc.

Quote from: codyg1985 on April 11, 2013, 07:43:36 AM
ALDOT has posted materials (http://aldotapps.dot.state.al.us/I59_20/pdf/I-59%20public%20involvement%203-28-13.pdf) from their recent public involvment meeting to rebuild the I-20/59 viaduct through downtown Birmingham.

This article (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2013/08/alabama_transportation_directo.html) has ALDOT Director John Cooper commenting on the I-20/I-59 viaduct rebuild, as well as Cooper commenting on US 280, the Northern Beltline, and the I-22/I-65 interchange.

Good to read that all major projects are still rightfully on the table and moving forward. Specifically the northern belt line.

Quote from: Grzrd on March 27, 2013, 10:51:40 AM
That said, the enactment of MAP-21 last summer altered the ARC funding formula to allow 100% federal funding for ADHS projects

Well, there's the answer for building Virginia's part of Corridor H.

Quote from: Grzrd on August 10, 2013, 10:08:00 PM

Quote from: codyg1985 on April 11, 2013, 07:43:36 AM
ALDOT has posted materials (http://aldotapps.dot.state.al.us/I59_20/pdf/I-59%20public%20involvement%203-28-13.pdf) from their recent public involvment meeting to rebuild the I-20/59 viaduct through downtown Birmingham.

This article (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2013/08/alabama_transportation_directo.html) has ALDOT Director John Cooper commenting on the I-20/I-59 viaduct rebuild, as well as Cooper commenting on US 280, the Northern Beltline, and the I-22/I-65 interchange.

That doesn't need a rebuild.  The junction with I-65 does.

It most certainly does need a rebuild. It has been pushed beyond both its service life and limits. The junction needs love too but this viaduct is far more crucial.

Does Anyone know why I-20 is Closed at the SE corridor Interchange with I-459? It Took me 35 Minutes to go from 459 to I-65 to catch Daniel Payne Blvd (The Temp I-22 shortcut). Im Hoping that they are finally widening out that 2 mile long interstate 20 Viaduct that precedes its merge with 59. That Viaduct needed to be widened 20 years ago....

I've heard they are re-decking the viaduct, but not widening it.  I could be wrong on that...it's been awhile since I was on ALDOT's website (last couple times I attempted inport, it didn't work).

It is indeed redecking the viaduct without widening it, as well as concrete pavement rebuilding in the area. The eastbound lanes are done, and now they are working on the westbound lanes.

westbound lanes were great to drive over on Tuesday, I commend ALDOT for doing a fine job on it.

http://weldbham.com/blog/2013/09/27/more-changes-on-the-way-for-aldots-2059-plan/

This says there's an alternate plan out there to maybe move 20/59 along the Finley Boulevard corridor?

Quote from: BamaZeus on September 30, 2013, 12:58:40 PM
This says there's an alternate plan out there to maybe move 20/59 along the Finley Boulevard corridor?

Not a bad idea - it would mirror recent relocations in Fort Worth and Oklahoma City that moved a freeway to an industrial railroad corridor.

Quote from: Grzrd on April 15, 2012, 09:14:35 PM
This article (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2012/04/routes_for_bypassing_downtown.html) .... other "intown bypass" options ...  extending Finley Boulevard to connect with AL 79 near the airport:

Quote
A third option would be to create a downtown bypass by extending Finley Boulevard.
City planners have long considered the possibility of a secondary route that could take truck traffic from Finley's beginning near I-20/59 at Arkadelphia Road and connect it over to Alabama 79 near the airport.
The extension of Finley into Collegeville and beyond is being actively pursued, though the planned project would have a much smaller footprint than would be required for a true highway. The route also would cut across homes and potentially contaminated industrial sites.

(above quote from Birmingham Northern Beltline (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2731.msg143661#msg143661) thread)

Quote from: BamaZeus on September 30, 2013, 12:58:40 PM
http://weldbham.com/blog/2013/09/27/more-changes-on-the-way-for-aldots-2059-plan/
This says there's an alternate plan out there to maybe move 20/59 along the Finley Boulevard corridor?

Interesting. If they are now considering the conversion of Finley into an interstate-grade corridor, then it seems like it could also serve as a de facto I-22 extension overlap from I-65 to the AL 79 vicinity (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Birmingham,+AL&hl=en&ll=33.547404,-86.792679&spn=0.093566,0.209255&sll=32.678125,-83.178297&sspn=6.046251,13.392334&oq=birmingham+al&t=h&hnear=Birmingham,+Jefferson,+Alabama&z=13) that would create a more direct route for Atlanta-Memphis traffic and avoid Malfunction Junction.

Quote from: Grzrd on September 30, 2013, 01:41:40 PM

Quote from: Grzrd on April 15, 2012, 09:14:35 PM
This article (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2012/04/routes_for_bypassing_downtown.html) .... other "intown bypass" options ...  extending Finley Boulevard to connect with AL 79 near the airport:

Quote
A third option would be to create a downtown bypass by extending Finley Boulevard.
City planners have long considered the possibility of a secondary route that could take truck traffic from Finley's beginning near I-20/59 at Arkadelphia Road and connect it over to Alabama 79 near the airport.
The extension of Finley into Collegeville and beyond is being actively pursued, though the planned project would have a much smaller footprint than would be required for a true highway. The route also would cut across homes and potentially contaminated industrial sites.

(above quote from Birmingham Northern Beltline (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2731.msg143661#msg143661) thread)

Quote from: BamaZeus on September 30, 2013, 12:58:40 PM
http://weldbham.com/blog/2013/09/27/more-changes-on-the-way-for-aldots-2059-plan/
This says there's an alternate plan out there to maybe move 20/59 along the Finley Boulevard corridor?

Interesting. If they are now considering the conversion of Finley into an interstate-grade corridor, then it seems like it could also serve as a de facto I-22 extension overlap from I-65 to the AL 79 vicinity (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Birmingham,+AL&hl=en&ll=33.547404,-86.792679&spn=0.093566,0.209255&sll=32.678125,-83.178297&sspn=6.046251,13.392334&oq=birmingham+al&t=h&hnear=Birmingham,+Jefferson,+Alabama&z=13) that would create a more direct route for Atlanta-Memphis traffic and avoid Malfunction Junction.

Any chance we could see a map of the proposed reroute?

Quote from: Henry on September 30, 2013, 02:40:22 PM
Any chance we could see a map of the proposed reroute?

It's pretty obvious how it would generally run: http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Finley+Blvd,+Birmingham,+Alabama

Quote from: Henry on September 30, 2013, 02:40:22 PM
Any chance we could see a map of the proposed reroute?

No map, but this Sept. 26 article (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2013/09/aldot_modifies_interstate_2059.html) provides an ALDOT cost estimate of $1.5 billion for a Finley I-65-to-Tallapoosa Street routing and an ALDOT cost estimate of $2 billion for a Finley Arkadelphia Road-to-Tallapoosa Street routing:

Quote
ALDOT Director John Cooper ....
Rerouting the interstate: ALDOT once considered extending Interstate 22 from Interstate 65 to U.S. 31 and I-20/59 at Tallapoosa Street.
ALDOT estimates shifting I-20/59 north, roughly along Finley Boulevard toward I-65, would need about 150 acres for construction, take out about 30 homes and 30 businesses, run over an abandoned, filled quarry near I-65, open up the department to environmental justice challenges and cross old hazardous materials sites, Cooper said.
"The significance of a hazmat site is if you disturb it, then you're obligated fix it," Cooper said. "In roadbuilding, we've learned that we have to be cautious about disturbing hazmat sites."
The rerouting also would force I-65 to carry more traffic and force reconstruction of Malfunction Junction and the U.S. 31 interchange east of downtown.
The old road bed for I-20/59 along downtown would have to be rebuilt as a roadway, which would probably be a city undertaking, he said.
"Standard ALDOT estimating techniques" -- done by a contracted firm -- show the price tag would be about $1.5 billion, Cooper said.
There would be similar issues if the interstate was rerouted roughly along Finley Boulevard from Tallapoosa Street to Arkadelphia Road, with about 260 acres, more than 200 homes and more than 80 businesses claimed for a total price tag of $2 billion, he said.

However, a representative of Rethink I-20/59 maintains that a direct route from the Coosa Street area to I-65 (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Coosa+Street,+Birmingham,+AL&hl=en&ll=33.542825,-86.799288&spn=0.046786,0.104628&sll=33.54955,-86.785469&sspn=0.093564,0.209255&oq=Coosa+Street,+Birmingham,+AL&t=h&hnear=Coosa+St,+Birmingham,+Alabama&z=14) would cost less than $500 million:

Quote
Joseph Baker, with the Rethink I-20/59 group calling for changes they say are more conducive to downtown development, said that no one is advocating sinking the interstate anymore because of the project's expense and difficulty.
But Baker questions ALDOT's estimate for rerouting the interstate, saying that a direct route from the Coosa Street area to Interstate 65 would cost less than a one-quarter of ALDOT's $2 billion estimate.

Quote from: Revive 755 on August 02, 2013, 10:30:53 PM
8) I'm seeing mostly depressed freeways in Detroit when I survey the aerial imagery.

Having driven them often, I can guarantee that they are depressed, not elevated with few exceptions (Fisher Freeway over the River Rouge and Zug Island for example).  There are also many pedestrian connections bridging the freeways as well.  Detroit's problems do not stem from the freeway system, contrary to Norquist's very uninformed opinion.

An interesting idea, but there are some notable problem areas that would bring the cost closer to ALDOT's estimate than the Rethink 20/59 group's estimate:

- There are a lot of businesses, plus some homes, that have driveways directly onto Finley Blvd, and a few buildings are very close to the street.  These homes/businesses would have to all be bought out for any sort of freeway upgrade.  This is even more true if the idea is to extend it along Finley west of I-65.

- The hazmat cleanup issue cited in the article by the ALDOT representative is very real and very costly, should the route pass through a Superfund site.

- In addition to completely redoing the I-65/Finley interchange, Malfunction Junction would still need a re-do, but could be reduced in scope.

- Connecting it back to I-20/59 at Arkadelphia requires either going through a quarry or through more homes and a few businesses.

- Connecting it back via I-65 is probably doable, but would require significant widening of I-65 between Finley and Malfunction Junction that would require additional right-of-way around the 16th St N interchange.

Quote from: froggie on October 01, 2013, 01:07:22 AM
An interesting idea, but there are some notable problem areas that would bring the cost closer to ALDOT's estimate than the Rethink 20/59 group's estimate:

- There are a lot of businesses, plus some homes, that have driveways directly onto Finley Blvd, and a few buildings are very close to the street.  These homes/businesses would have to all be bought out for any sort of freeway upgrade.  This is even more true if the idea is to extend it along Finley west of I-65.

- The hazmat cleanup issue cited in the article by the ALDOT representative is very real and very costly, should the route pass through a Superfund site.

- In addition to completely redoing the I-65/Finley interchange, Malfunction Junction would still need a re-do, but could be reduced in scope.

- Connecting it back to I-20/59 at Arkadelphia requires either going through a quarry or through more homes and a few businesses.

- Connecting it back via I-65 is probably doable, but would require significant widening of I-65 between Finley and Malfunction Junction that would require additional right-of-way around the 16th St N interchange.

The other issue, more from a traffic than cost perspective, I can see is that having the I-22 and I-20/59 routes so close together could introduce some additional weaving issues for traffic, particularly if you're using a widened I-65 as a single roadway; maybe separating the two flows (much as I-85 and I-285 remain separate over their ATL overlap) would work better since you'd not have any intermediate interchanges.

And it reeks of environmental dumping, particularly if the ex-20/59 corridor through downtown becomes gentrified as a result, which presumably is the goal of the exercise.

QuoteAnd it reeks of environmental dumping, particularly if the ex-20/59 corridor through downtown becomes gentrified as a result, which presumably is the goal of the exercise.

To be fair, it would remove a significant barrier between the two parts of downtown that the 20/59 viaduct currently induces.

Quote from: froggie on October 01, 2013, 01:07:22 AM
- There are a lot of businesses, plus some homes, that have driveways directly onto Finley Blvd, and a few buildings are very close to the street.  These homes/businesses would have to all be bought out for any sort of freeway upgrade.  This is even more true if the idea is to extend it along Finley west of I-65.

It's more likely that it would be elevated over the railroad just south of Finley.

A lot of that railroad is actually rail yard, especially west of I-65.  Basically takes that option off the table.

Quote from: froggie on October 01, 2013, 01:30:08 PM
A lot of that railroad is actually rail yard, especially west of I-65.  Basically takes that option off the table.

Plus an intermodal center for BNSF.

Quote from: froggie on October 01, 2013, 01:30:08 PM
A lot of that railroad is actually rail yard, especially west of I-65.  Basically takes that option off the table.

Shouldn't keep them from building it there; just constrains where supports can go. There may not even be constraints if they put it over the truck parking at the north end of the yard, as there are many examples of parking under a freeway.

You're still dealing with a few homes/buildings at the east end of the yard.  Plus elevated is expensive and blighty, as you well know, and BNSF may well have valid reasons for it to NOT go over their truck parking.  Might as well go with a surface route along Finley.  I've already sketched one out.

In the meantime, I'm in the process of sketching out the two scenarios, one going to I-65, the other following Finley down to Arkadelphia Rd.  I'll post maps once they're completed and I'm in port.

I've got a rough outline for the 20/59 mainline, paralleling Arkadelphia Rd immediately to the west between existing 20/59 and Finely, following along the north side of Finley from Arkadelphia to just west of I-65, cutting across I-65 and just south of 24th Ave N, generally following Village Creek for a bit (following unused/wooded land as much as possible), then following what looks to be a partially abandoned Norfolk Southern line (it appears cut off at I-20/59 and Vanderbilt Rd) back to existing 20/59.  For the I-65 scenario, new "outer roadways" would be built on the outside of the I-65 mainline between Malfunction Junction and the railroad underpass at 21st Ave N.

In both scenarios, Malfunction Junction would be reconfigured as needed, and the 20/59 interchange with the Stephens Expwy (US 31/280) would be reconfigured to allow 280 to continue northeast along existing 20/59 to end at the "new" 20/59.

The existing 20/59 viaduct downtown gets rebuilt into a surface "9th Ave N Boulevard" with direct connections to the freeways on each end.  11th Ave N also gets rebuilt with partial freeway connections on each end.  This opens up several blocks of unutilized/used-for-freeway-ramps land on the east side of downtown for development.

In the "full" scenario, I redesignate existing 20/59 between Arkadelphia Rd and 9th Ave N/15th St N as "I-320".  This also serves as the connections between 20/59 West and 65 South.

One thing I've noticed so far regarding mileages.  Under the "full" scenario, the new 20/59 is almost no different in distance as the existing route through downtown (both about 4.5 miles).  Under the "I-65" scenario, the "new" 20/59 is about a half-mile longer (~3.6mi vs ~3.1mi).

In either scenario, would you create outer roadways for I-22 traffic heading to and from I-20 east? What are your ideas for interchanges along the new route?

Can't wait to see the maps!

In short, no outer roadways north of Finley.  ALDOT is already widening I-65 north of 33rd to string out auxiliary lanes for the I-22 interchange.  It wouldn't be much of a stretch to extend them down to Finley.  Plus, outer roadways there would further complicate the ramps from 65 proper to 20/59.

Interchanges would be minimal.  From the west, a directional split to existing 20/59, a half-interchange to/from the east at today's Arkadelphia/Finley intersection (access to/from the west via the existing 20/59/Arkadelphia interchange), a 3/4 interchange at 65 (access between 20/59 West and 65 South being handled by existing 20/59), perhaps a half-diamond to/from the east at 31/Carroway, and an interchange back at existing 20/59 just west of the Coosa St underpass.  Debating if I can fit in a couple local ramps near 65 to "complete" a full local access interchange in that area (the half-diamond at 31 comprising part of that local access).

Malfunction Junction gets redone...still a full interchange but with no more mainline bridging over the other direction, so no more left-side entrances/exits.  Select movements get access ramps to/from 11th Ave N.  The I-65 ramps at 6th Ave N get moved to 8th Ave N and bridged under the new Malfunction Junction ramps.  The half-diamond on I-65 at 16th remains, but due to the "new" 20/59, the existing interchange at Finley becomes a half-diamond at 25th.  Because of weaving issues, the ramps and under-the-freeway access at 32nd have to be removed, with a simple diamond interchange remaining at 33rd.

On the Stephens, the loop to 2nd Ave N gets removed, replaced by a more-direct ramp to northbound Carroway at 5th Ave N, as well as a new southbound on-ramp from 5th and Carroway.  These ramps are intended to replace the existing US 31 "through movement" ramps between the Stephens and Carroway.  Northbound access from 5th Ave and southbound access to 6th Ave remain.  As part of the new "9th Ave N Boulevard", a new northbound on-ramp from a newly-reconstituted 9th Ave N/Carroway Blvd intersection is added.  Southbound access to 9th Ave N is also provided, but must bridge over Carroway Blvd due to spacing and so it comes to grade at 25th St N.  A new southbound off-ramp direct to the 11th Ave/Carroway Blvd intersection is also added.  Due to weaving issues, the ramps to/from the south at 31st St N are removed, leaving a half-diamond to/from the northeast...same issues that ALDOT capitulated on, though under my scenario it's not hard to access the industrial area and neighborhood from Carroway...several streets cross the rail tracks to do so.

------

Under the "partial" scenario, everything along and east of I-65 is the same as described above with the following exceptions:  I WOULD add outer roadways to I-65 between Malfunction Junction and the new 20/59 in this scenario.  As the "new" 20/59/65 interchange is a 3-way semi-directional with no access to/from the west, the existing diamond interchange at Finley remains (but the ramps at 32nd still get moved to 33rd).  The half-diamond at 16th would also likely be removed, though I haven't finalized that yet.

Quote from: froggie on October 02, 2013, 02:20:08 PM
Under the "partial" scenario, everything along and east of I-65 is the same as described above with the following exceptions:  I WOULD add outer roadways to I-65 between Malfunction Junction and the new 20/59 in this scenario.  As the "new" 20/59/65 interchange is a 3-way semi-directional with no access to/from the west, the existing diamond interchange at Finley remains (but the ramps at 32nd still get moved to 33rd).  The half-diamond at 16th would also likely be removed, though I haven't finalized that yet.

I think you can safely kill the 16th half-diamond; I can't imagine it draws a lot of traffic. Plus if you reconstruct I-65 through there to add the outer roadways for 20/59, FHWA would likely insist on a full interchange anyway.

Semidirectional is definitely the way to go at the new interchange, since otherwise I-22 E to I-20/59 E could get ugly.

How about a folded diamond at 31 to provide access in both directions? That gets you local access, plus another way to/from BJCC events for northside traffic.

That railroad line is definitely gone at Vanderbilt Road according to Street View.

QuoteI think you can safely kill the 16th half-diamond; I can't imagine it draws a lot of traffic. Plus if you reconstruct I-65 through there to add the outer roadways for 20/59, FHWA would likely insist on a full interchange anyway.

If I keep the 16th half-diamond, it would be to/from the outer 20/59 roadways, and would complete a de-facto local interchange in conjunction with the half-diamond at 31/Carroway.

QuoteHow about a folded diamond at 31 to provide access in both directions?

Too close to the ramps at 65, plus trying to minimize woodland and Village Creek impacts.

Since we're straying into fictional territory, and since we pulled into port long enough for me to upload the maps, I've created a separate fictional thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10598) with the maps I created.

Quote from: froggie on October 08, 2013, 02:33:35 PM
Since we're straying into fictional territory, and since we pulled into port long enough for me to upload the maps, I've created a separate fictional thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10598) with the maps I created.

Those are good, and worth handing over to ALDOT for them to consider.

Quote from: Grzrd on September 30, 2013, 05:11:39 PM
this Sept. 26 article (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2013/09/aldot_modifies_interstate_2059.html)

Quote
ALDOT Director John Cooper ....

Quote from: Brandon on October 08, 2013, 03:18:43 PM

Quote from: froggie on October 08, 2013, 02:33:35 PM
Since we're straying into fictional territory, and since we pulled into port long enough for me to upload the maps, I've created a separate fictional thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10598) with the maps I created.

Those are good, and worth handing over to ALDOT for them to consider.

The rhetoric is heating up in Birmingham, with the I-20/59 viaduct being compared to the Berlin Wall (http://www.myfoxal.com/story/23681230/councilman-wants-to-tear-down-birminghams-berlin-wall):

Quote
It's not just an interstate, but a great divide.  That's what Birmingham city councilman Johnathan Austin says about the I-20/59 bridges downtown.  It's also why he wants them relocated.
"It would tear down the Birmingham Berlin Wall that has existed between downtown and the neighborhoods for the last fifty years," said Austin.
The councilor believes replacing the bridges is not just a matter of convenience and safety, but that there is a larger issue at stake: breaking down cultural lines.
"You stay downtown and it looks all nice and pretty, but as soon as you go on the other side of the bridge it starts looking bad.  It's just like crossing the train tracks. It's a shame!  It's a travesty!" ....
he wants ALDOT to reroute the interstate through his district, and provide downtown access somewhere along the Finley Boulevard corridor.

In addition to handing them over to ALDOT, to be fair, you might want to hand them over to Austin and Rethink I-20/59 in order to allow all of them to have an informed discussion.  :thumbsup:

This Oct. 15 video report (http://www.abc3340.com/story/23700890/birmingham-city-councilor-skeptical-about-aldots-bridge-replacement-plans-for-i-2059-bridge) about the controversy includes footage from the current I-20/59 viaduct.

It doesnt matter. ALDOT believes it would tack on another 20 years to the project to move it and they do not believe the current bridges will last that long. Buying up and moving all those homes and businesses along Finley is the time waster as well as disturbing sealed hazardous waste areas near the old Ensley Works.

I wish Austin hadnt been so dramatic in his statements but the bridges do cut off norwood from downtown and I believe it and the civic center and uptown need that neighborhood to thrive in order for Birmingham to reach its potential but I just dont see it in the cards this time around.

Here are some of the problems (http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2013/11/aldot_temporary_fix_almost_don.html) that are faced with the current I-20/59 viaduct through downtown. This is a common occurrence.

So how is the traffic in B'ham?  I'm headed thru Wednesday on 65 to Montgomery.

Quote from: msunat97 on November 25, 2013, 02:33:26 PM
So how is the traffic in B'ham?  I'm headed thru Wednesday on 65 to Montgomery.

You shouldn't have major issues.  If you're travelling south on I-65 from the north, traffic flows pretty smoothly through the construction at I-22/I-65. 

Thanks Charles.  I'm more concerned about the 65 area South of town.  Seems like it is always backed up in that area.

Quote from: BamaZeus on September 30, 2013, 12:58:40 PM
http://weldbham.com/blog/2013/09/27/more-changes-on-the-way-for-aldots-2059-plan/
This says there's an alternate plan out there to maybe move 20/59 along the Finley Boulevard corridor?

Near the end of this Nov. 21 TV video report (http://www.abc3340.com/story/24038179/aldot-presents-plan-to-rebuild-bridges-in-downtown-birmingham), the reporter notes that ALDOT is no longer seeking the "blessing" of either the mayor or the city council for its current plan to replace the bridges.

Quote from: msunat97 on November 26, 2013, 11:03:06 AM
Thanks Charles.  I'm more concerned about the 65 area South of town.  Seems like it is always backed up in that area.

In that case, you may run into some delays in Shelby County where I-65 narrows from three southbound lanes to two around Exit 242 (CR 52).  Doesn't matter the time of day, it becomes a bottleneck.

I found this from Tuesday where the ALDOT guy basically shoots down any chance of moving 20/59 from downtown to Finley.  It's a long read, but very thorough.

http://weldbham.com/blog/2013/11/26/end-of-the-road/

Looks like the plan to replace the I-20/59 bridges through downtown is still on track for 2016: http://www.myfoxal.com/story/24465129/aldot-meets-with-birmingham-leaders-over-i-2059-bridge-replacement?utm_content=buffere81cd&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

In the mayor's state of the city address he said he had decided not to fight ALDOT about it.

Another public meeting was held last night with some updated plans for replacing the I-20/59 bridge in downtown Birmingham: http://www.myfoxal.com/story/24948905/residents-updated-on-i-2059-bridge-replacement-project

At the end of the video, Brian Davis with ALDOT said that it would take 30 years to do a buried tunnel for I-20/59, and it would cost over $1B to relocate I-20/59.

He might be right on the relocation cost, but the "30 years to do a buried tunnel" is pure shenanigans...

In the last week, they announced they had more holes in one of the overhead sections of 20/59 that needed to be fixed. 

http://www.abc3340.com/video?clipId=9925581&autostart=true

More comments about plans to replace the I-20/59 viaduct in downtown Birmingham: http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2014/08/interstate_2059_fountain_heigh.html

Even more comments on replacing the I-20/59 viaduct in downtown Birmingham. The project will also include a lot of flyover ramps from the I-20/59/65 interchange to 11th Ave N, and from I-20/59 east of the viaduct from 25th St. http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2015/04/aldot_gets_earful_on_i-2059_br.html

Wonder what the plans are for the detour of 20/59 once construction (finally) begins?  Obviously, 459 is going to come into play in a major way.  What is going to be dicey is the amount of additional traffic  that will be ferried onto an already overcrowded I-65 through Hoover, Homewood and Southside.

Is it just me, or is it time to reroute I-20 onto 459 to divert some of the through traffic out of downtown?  I don't know how much it would really help, but it surely wouldn't hurt that much.  My proposal for the new route number of what is now I-20 between the I-59 split and I-459 would be either I-620 or I-659.

I'd hazard a bet that the amount of I-20 "through traffic" that could potentially be diverted is on the order of 4-digits, not 5.  Because of that, I doubt rerouting I-20 would help much.

I-20 and I-59 through traffic would most likely just use I-459 to their respective junctions. The only traffic that would have to use I-65 between I-20/59 and I-459 would be the movement between I-65 North and I-20 East (or I-59 North).

Federal lawsuit seeks halt of project to replace I-20/59 bridges through downtown Birmingham: http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2015/10/federal_lawsuit_seeks_halt_of.html

QuoteThe lawsuit asks that a judge order ALDOT and the Federal Highway Administration to take a "hard look" to all reasonable alternatives to the current project and conduct a new environmental assessment that includes a look at the economic impact it could have on Birmingham's recently revived downtown.

ALDOT is moving forward with the I-20/59 viaduct replacement. The massive project to revamp the I-20/59/65 interchange is going to bet let on January 22nd. It will be in the neighborhood of $200 million. The project will add ramps to access 11th Avenue directly from I-20/59 and I-65, as well as ramps to directly access 17th Street from both I-20/59 and I-65. It will also widen the brief stretch of I-20/59 west of I-65 where it necks down to three lanes in each direction between Arkadelphia and I-65.

It will be a huge mess, and Malfunction Junction will live up to its name even more once this is finished.

The main part of the project, which will replace the I-20/59 viaduct, is scheduled to bet let in May.

ALDOT responds to lawsuit seeking to halt I-20/59 bridge replacement: http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2016/01/highway_officials_respond_to_l.html

ALDOT should go foward with their new design. The lawsuit will likely only prolong the inevitable, and that is the reconstruction of the Interstate. Surely, they could put MOVE2059's park to the north of the freeway in between 11th Ave N and 12th Ave N.

The lawsuit would not prevent ALDOT from redecking the existing bridge, which would solve the existing structural problems.  But ALDOT doesn't want to do just that because they want to widen the bridge.  That's where the disagreement comes in.

A response from the director of ALDOT:

http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/01/aldot_director_plan_for_i-2059.html#incart_river_home

I wonder if a cut-and-cover tunnel or depressing the interstate below grade was considered?

It was.  ALDOT didn't like that option, either.

Quote from: codyg1985 on January 25, 2016, 08:03:10 AM
I wonder if a cut-and-cover tunnel or depressing the interstate below grade was considered?

Here's an old thread on the possibility of doing so:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3148.msg69511#msg69511

This September 12, 2010 article (http://blog.al.com/businessnews/2010/09/plans_to_put_i-2059_under_down.html) that was linked in the above thread indicated that depressing the interstate was feasible, but had a price tag of $700 million:

Quote
Engineers and proponents of a $700 million plan to sink Interstate 20/59 below street level through downtown Birmingham are ready for the next step in making the ambitious project come true.
More than a year ago, a feasibility study showed the plan was viable. The Alabama Department of Transportation has since made changes and agrees the plan to sink the interstate would work.
Now, New York-based engineering firm Parsons Brinckerhoff Inc. must demonstrate through actual traffic simulation models that the promise of the design on paper will be fulfilled in reality ....
The study is being funded through a $20,000 grant from the Community Foundation of Greater Birmingham, which was used to secure $80,000 in federal grants through the Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham, according to Chris Hatcher, vice president of planning at Operation New Birmingham.
"This next phase will analyze if the design truly works," Hatcher said.
Computer models will be built that replicate the engineering plans and will provide views of the proposed changes from a variety of perspectives, he said.
Hatcher said the traffic model study, which should be complete by early 2011, is another in several steps needed to move the project to a position that will get it on the federal transportation plan for funding.
"There is a lot of work to try to get done to get the project into the federal funding cycle," he said.
Bill Foisy, director of planning for the Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham, said the I-20/59 project is on the official long-term plan for the region, slated for 2035 as a "visionary" project, meaning it's a worthwhile project but does not have a source of funding.
"We as planners are in favor of the plan," Foisy said. "We want to help get to the ultimate step where you have a huge engineering study, environmental study and everything else. It's all a prelude to becoming a formal project that DOT takes on as a formal project."
Hatcher said getting the Alabama Department of Transportation to deem the plan feasible was no easy task.
"ALDOT was very skeptical going into it," he said. "After we made some changes they pointed out, they agreed the engineering is sound and the plan would work."
The engineers at Parsons Brinckerhoff already had a good idea it would, having done similar, more complex engineering for the Fort Washington Way reconfiguration project in Cincinnati. The firm also worked with similar projects in Cleveland and Columbus, Ohio, and Asheville, N.C., where cities were split by interstates built in the 1960s under looser design standards than today's.Parsons Brinkerhoff's study of the stretch of interstate through downtown Birmingham from "malfunction junction," as it is often called, agreed with the consensus traffic engineers have had for years, concluding the road has too much traffic and design flaws that require mandatory lane crossovers.
Engineers say the new plan would eliminate the problem of drivers crossing multiple lanes to reach exits on that part of the interstate. Those lane crossings require drivers to weave, brake and merge continuously through the junction. Merge lanes in the junction are too short for the amount of traffic in the interchange, according to the feasibility study.
Instead of exit ramps, local traffic would access the interstate through a series of access roads roads in the redesigned roadway. The lowered interstate system would better meet Federal Highway Administration and Alabama Department of Transportation regulations, Parsons Brinckerhoff's study said.

I have not seen any recent articles about the concept; I suppose the $700 million price tag (2010 dollars) has effectively killed the idea.

---

Quote from: codyg1985 on January 21, 2016, 08:02:59 AM
ALDOT responds to lawsuit seeking to halt I-20/59 bridge replacement: http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2016/01/highway_officials_respond_to_l.html

In responding to the lawsuit, ALDOT denies that it failed to analyze or consider a "sinking the route" alternative:

Quote
-   ALDOT denies that it failed to analyze or consider a "sinking the route" alternative to its plans for the continued elevated roadway. "ALDOT admits that both it and the city recognize that the referenced I-59/20 bridge is reaching the end of its design life, and has many vintage characteristics that do not represent current design practices and safety considerations."
Move I 20/59 has said that when ALDOT first presented its plans for the project in 2012, it was a $100 million emergency repair calling for re-decking. However, local and county officials asked that the scope of the project be expanded to address other concerns and that more than quadrupled the original cost to more than $400 million, the group states.

$400+ million cost for the project vs. $700 million for "sinking the route".  "Sinking the route"  may well be worth the extra $300 million.  What's the estimated cost for the entire Northern Beltline?

---

Quote from: Charles2 on January 24, 2016, 10:01:50 AM
A response from the director of ALDOT:
http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/01/aldot_director_plan_for_i-2059.html#incart_river_home

Interestingly, Director Cooper's letter does not address the "sinking the route" alternative.

Quote from: GrzrdWhat's the estimated cost for the entire Northern Beltline?

$5 billion and change.

Quote from: Grzrd on January 25, 2016, 11:23:56 AM
$400+ million cost for the project vs. $700 million for "sinking the route".  "Sinking the route"  may well be worth the extra $300 million.  What's the estimated cost for the entire Northern Beltline? ....

Quote from: Charles2 on January 24, 2016, 10:01:50 AM
A response from the director of ALDOT:
http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/01/aldot_director_plan_for_i-2059.html#incart_river_home

Interestingly, Director Cooper's letter does not address the "sinking the route" alternative.

Quote from: froggie on January 25, 2016, 04:35:18 PM

Quote from: GrzrdWhat's the estimated cost for the entire Northern Beltline?

$5 billion and change.

This February 10 TV video (http://abc3340.com/news/local/new-details-on-plans-for-underneath-i-5920-bridges) reports on an ALDOT "invitation only" meeting to discuss what to put in the currently fenced-off area under the I-59/20 bridges and includes interviews with Move I 20/59 officials:

Quote
New details tonight, about what could go under the Interstate 59/20 bridges downtown once the replacement project is complete.
On January 27, David Fleming, president of REV Birmingham told ABC 33/40 rumors of a "park" in that location were false. Since then, we've learned an "invitation only" meeting was held to discuss that very space.
ALDOT confirmed consultants were brought in to offer ideas. While nothing is set in stone, ABC 33/40 is told the plan is to make this area more "walkable" and "connected."
"We've had lots of conversations about the lack of connectivity," said Gail Andrews, director of the Birmingham Museum of Art.
Andrews is one of the stakeholders who attended last Thursday's meeting.
She says this question kept coming up, "What can we do to create a more welcoming presence? (And) increase our connectivity?"
Some of the other stakeholders include the Alabama School of Fine Arts, the BJCC, and the City of Birmingham.
Andrews explains, "It really is a group of us saying 'alright, this could go forward,' what are we going to do to make the situation better?"
"I wouldn't have found out about (the meeting) had it not been for another neighborhood officer who forwarded an email to me," says Darrell O'Quinn. O'Quinn is the executive director of Move I 20/59.
"(The meeting) was actually in the BJCC," O'Quinn said. "You wouldn't have been able to find it without very specific instructions."
O'Quinn is part of a federal lawsuit to stop the bridge replacement project. We asked him what he gathered from the stakeholder meeting.
"All the information gathering should have happened on the front end, with the community (involved)," said O'Quinn. "It looks like it's designed to fail."
Gail Andrews has this message for naysayers. "We have to do something. This is blocked off, it's not a good environment right now," she said. "We're wasting the space. No one is walking through. Nobody can walk through. I think we have to take advantage of every opportunity we have."
Right now, ALDOT is waiting on the consultants and stakeholders to come back with a plan that "could" go under the newly replaced Interstate 59/20 bridges.

At the risk of repeating myself, when I compare the additional $300 million cost to "sink the route" and improve the overall business and cultural climate for Birmingham in the short term, which in economic terms could dwarf the $300 million figure, to the $5 billion+ cost to build a Northern Beltline which by all appearances will do a poor job of bypass connections, even in the long term ..........  :no:

I think the park under the new bridges is a good idea. The current configuration has left entrances and exits onto the viaduct above, and the new bridges won't be any ramps to get in the way, so that will free up some space. It isn't ideal, but it is certainly better than nothing.

Here are some renderings of the interchanges with I-65 and US 31/280 will look like when the project is finished: http://abc3340.com/news/local/gallery/aldot-director-john-cooper-speaks-with-abc-3340

That's the cheeriest park-under-an-interchange I've ever seen.  Might as well make the homeless/vagrants that'll settle there comfortable.

Quote from: Rothman on February 12, 2016, 07:50:08 AM
That's the cheeriest park-under-an-interchange I've ever seen.  Might as well make the homeless/vagrants that'll settle there comfortable.

My thoughts exactly!

Quote from: Henry on February 12, 2016, 11:29:59 AM

Quote from: Rothman on February 12, 2016, 07:50:08 AM
That's the cheeriest park-under-an-interchange I've ever seen.  Might as well make the homeless/vagrants that'll settle there comfortable.

My thoughts exactly!

Actually, just heard a story today about a construction site with a ramp that was to be walled in underneath.  Contractor started it, installed the walls, but didn't enclose it fully.  On top of that, some curing blankets were left in the "enclosure."  So, homeless people went in there and...promptly started a bonfire with the blankets and then ran away horrified when the deck of the ramp actually caught fire.

Another city that could use a trip to Lafayette, Louisiana, to see how redesigning elevated freeways to match their surrounding element can be done right. #coughlafayetteconnectordotcomcough

All smack aside, though....what about the proposal to reroute I-20/I-59 to the north of downtown instead of rerouting it around I-459 or building the BNB?

Quote from: Charles2 on January 24, 2016, 10:01:50 AM
A response from the director of ALDOT:
http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/01/aldot_director_plan_for_i-2059.html#incart_river_home

Quote from: Anthony_JK on February 12, 2016, 02:19:18 PM
....what about the proposal to reroute I-20/I-59 to the north of downtown ... ?

Given current events in Lafayette (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16929.msg2124044#msg2124044), the ALDOT director's letter might provide discussion of a familiar problem:

Quote
ALDOT also explored two scenarios for re-routing I-59/20 along the Finley Boulevard Corridor, a "short" and "long" route. Both scenarios have challenges ....
under either scenario the re-route path is located in the Village Creek floodplain, portions of which contain hazardous materials and historical sites. This would require the re-routed interstate to be elevated similar to the current CBD bridges.
If pursued, the short plan would require the construction of an elevated interstate through the middle of minority and low-income neighborhoods at a total cost exceeding $1.5 billion. Even if this were feasible, it would require more than 20 years to complete. Since the width of this interstate would be wider than the current roadway, and must avoid the Burlington Northern Railroad Yard, the long route would force the demolition of nearly all the businesses along the existing Finley Corridor. This effort would take at least 28 years and cost over $2 billion.

Ah, those pesky hazardous materials .............

ALDOT didn't like a reroute to the north.  I don't believe a reroute to 459 was seriously considered.  The BNB would be 2-3 times the cost of the north-of-downtown reroutes.

Are there any updates on what will happen to the US 280 corridor, or am I behind the times and any construction projects have already been completed?

Quote from: froggie on February 12, 2016, 02:55:51 PM
ALDOT didn't like a reroute to the north.  I don't believe a reroute to 459 was seriously considered.  The BNB would be 2-3 times the cost of the north-of-downtown reroutes.

I can't imagine you could feasibly get rid of 20-59 with a route completely bypassing downtown like 459; a lot of that traffic would end up on the surface boulevard replacement anyway. And running a reroute along Finley would introduce a serious environmental justice issue, in addition to whatever Superfund sites are lurking along it.

What you could do, although it'd be horribly expensive (although probably cheaper than building X-1 west of I-65), is partially tunnel an eight-lane extension of I-22 down to existing I-20/59 southwest of the airport, and add the necessary movements at the I-22/65 interchange for access to/from the east. Do that you'd probably be able to pull down the downtown overhead with the appropriate redesignations for the through routes.

Quote from: Charles2 on January 24, 2016, 10:01:50 AM
A response from the director of ALDOT:
http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/01/aldot_director_plan_for_i-2059.html#incart_river_home

Quote from: froggie on February 12, 2016, 02:55:51 PM
I don't believe a reroute to 459 was seriously considered.

Quote from: lordsutch on February 13, 2016, 01:37:42 AM
I can't imagine you could feasibly get rid of 20-59 with a route completely bypassing downtown like 459

Although an I-459 rerouting has not been considered as a long-term solution, the above-linked ALDOT director's letter indicates that it is planned as an essential component of Phase Three of the I-20/59 project, i.e. when the mainline bridges will be taken down and replaced:

Quote
The work will be divided into three phases, the first of which is under construction. When Phase Two starts later this spring, contractors will begin constructing new ramps leading into and out of downtown Birmingham. In order to maintain access to the city during construction, all work on the new ramps will be completed before existing access points are closed. In Phase Three, the mainline bridges will be taken down and replaced, while through traffic on I-59/20 will be rerouted along I-459 and other routes until the new bridges are completed.

I suppose that the I-459 rerouting will be for a significant period of time.

I've waited all of these years for I-22 to be completed in order to give me a clear shot from Atlanta to Memphis, and now this ........................................  :-/

Oh, well, at least the I-459 to I-65 reroute will be all interstate.

Quote from: Grzrd on February 13, 2016, 11:06:07 AM
Although an I-459 rerouting has not been considered as a long-term solution, the above-linked ALDOT director's letter indicates that it is planned as an essential component of Phase Three of the I-20/59 project, i.e. when the mainline bridges will be taken down and replaced:

Quote
The work will be divided into three phases, the first of which is under construction. When Phase Two starts later this spring, contractors will begin constructing new ramps leading into and out of downtown Birmingham. In order to maintain access to the city during construction, all work on the new ramps will be completed before existing access points are closed. In Phase Three, the mainline bridges will be taken down and replaced, while through traffic on I-59/20 will be rerouted along I-459 and other routes until the new bridges are completed.

I suppose that the I-459 rerouting will be for a significant period of time.

I've waited all of these years for I-22 to be completed in order to give me a clear shot from Atlanta to Memphis, and now this ........................................  :-/

Oh, well, at least the I-459 to I-65 reroute will be all interstate.

As you have pointed out with the often delayed completion of I-22, the question to ask is how long will the reroute be in place?

When the multi-year construction of the Wilmington Viaduct was reconstructed in northern Delaware, DelDOT applied to AASHTO to have I-95 renumbered along I-495 and for the two "spurs" into the city renumbered collectively as I-595, and then separately as I-195 and I-395. Ultimately I-895 (https://www.aaroads.com/guide.php?page=i0895de) was used for the temporary reroute. Such a scenario could play out in Birmingham, though I suspect such drastic renumbering and formal applications to AASHTO are not needed in this day and age.

Quote from: lordsutch on February 13, 2016, 01:37:42 AM
What you could do, although it'd be horribly expensive (although probably cheaper than building X-1 west of I-65), is partially tunnel an eight-lane extension of I-22 down to existing I-20/59 southwest of the airport, and add the necessary movements at the I-22/65 interchange for access to/from the east. Do that you'd probably be able to pull down the downtown overhead with the appropriate redesignations for the through routes.

Depending on how much of an increase in traffic the I-22 corridor will receive when both ends are connected to the interstate system, a southeast extension to I-20/59 may need to be looked at.

However, such a rerouting would hamper access to US 31/280.

An extension of I-22 to I-20/59 was looked at about a decade ago, then dropped.  Too many Superfund sites in the way.

Quote from: codyg1985 on February 12, 2016, 07:03:44 AM
Here are some renderings of the interchanges with I-65 and US 31/280 will look like when the project is finished: http://abc3340.com/news/local/gallery/aldot-director-john-cooper-speaks-with-abc-3340

Quote(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic-56.sinclairstoryline.com%2Fresources%2Fmedia%2F7b2d8c2c-943a-437d-b635-40aaa4c737b7-CBD006.jpg&hash=09cb9833739323a0475b18ca36491c0ee8ccb066)

Man, they really seem to want to make that interchange confusing.

With those ramps added, rebuilding the interchange completely would be even more challenging. It would have been nice to get rid of those left entrances and exits, though.

I don't know, the more I look at this project, the better I think it will be.

It will reduce a bit of the weaving that takes place as people merge from Malfunction Junction to get downtown, so that will help.

There's little doubt that it'll improve traffic flow (initally, at least).  The problem is whether that's worth the cost of further ripping up the urban fabric and creating an even bigger barrier between downtown, the convention center, and Oak Hill.

Well, I'm not an engineer or urban planner. How does it create a barrier? All you have to do is drive under the interstate and 18th to 23rd streets look like they will still be open. They all connect the BJCC and Uptown to Downtown. By the way, Uptown is great. Anyone looking for some good eating, try out some of the restaurants.😀

The current bridges are old tech and have a lot of pylons that block light and they used to allow parking under them for the BJCC. That sretch of space is a jungle of old concrete and not very inviting. I do not agree that it causes a barrier real, imagined or psychological or even economical but it definitely could look better. The new bridges will be higher, use less pylons be less noisy and let in more light. It also helps that they have put Uptown there which makes more people have a reason to want to go over there which is more important.

Some accent lighting of some sort would help a little at night, too.

Quote from: Grzrd on January 25, 2016, 11:23:56 AM

Quote from: codyg1985 on January 25, 2016, 08:03:10 AM
I wonder if a cut-and-cover tunnel or depressing the interstate below grade was considered?

Here's an old thread on the possibility of doing so:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3148.msg69511#msg69511
This September 12, 2010 article (http://blog.al.com/businessnews/2010/09/plans_to_put_i-2059_under_down.html) that was linked in the above thread indicated that depressing the interstate was feasible, but had a price tag of $700 million:

Quote
More than a year ago, a feasibility study showed the plan was viable. The Alabama Department of Transportation has since made changes and agrees the plan to sink the interstate would work.
Now, New York-based engineering firm Parsons Brinckerhoff Inc. must demonstrate through actual traffic simulation models that the promise of the design on paper will be fulfilled in reality ....
Chris Hatcher, vice president of planning at Operation New Birmingham.
"This next phase will analyze if the design truly works," Hatcher said ....
Hatcher said getting the Alabama Department of Transportation to deem the plan feasible was no easy task.
"ALDOT was very skeptical going into it," he said. "After we made some changes they pointed out, they agreed the engineering is sound and the plan would work."

I am a bit puzzled by this February 4, 2016 interview with ALDOT Director John Cooper by a local publisher, Mark Kelly (http://weldbham.com/blog/2016/02/09/i-have-not-moved-john-cooper-aldot-interview/), in which Cooper asserts that no one ever asked whether "burying the interstate" was feasible:

Quote
Cooper: If the city wanted an alternative, then at the time they put [the idea of burying the interstate] in their master plan, – about 2005 or '06 – they should have come to us, or to some engineering firm, and said, "Is it feasible?"

Kelly: Would it have been feasible?

Cooper: In my opinion, no.

Interestingly, the interviewer does not pursue this line of questioning because he "understands the problems there" in burying the interstate; he then immediately transitions to the idea of moving the interstate:

Quote
Kelly: I'm not talking about burying the interstate, because I understand the problems there. But in terms of moving it...

Cooper apparently contends that the studies from six or seven years ago that demonstrated the feasibility of "sinking" I-20/59 never happened, and that it is too late to do so now.  On the other hand, the interviewer was so wedded to the notion of "moving" I-20/59 that he did not press Cooper on the issue of "sinking" I-20/59.

I still contend that "sinking" I-20/59 would be a great compromise between the ALDOT and Move I-20/59 extremes.

edit

From bhamwiki (http://www.bhamwiki.com/w/City_Center_interstate_lowering):

Quote
The Civic Center interstate-lowering project was the subject of a preliminary traffic study performed by Parsons Brinckerhoff of New York. That study determined that the project could take four years to construct, at a cost greater than $600 million. It also predicted that the city would gain substantial benefits from the undertaking, which is similar to a completed project to lower Fort Washington Way in Cincinnati, Ohio. The Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) reviewed the preliminary engineering work and, with a few changes, accepted the basic design as feasible.
A request for $2 million for additional studies was made to the state's legislative delegation, to be included in the state's application for federal funding in the Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The Community Foundation of Greater Birmingham granted the project $20,000, which helped secure another $80,000 in federal grant money to continue preliminary studies. Parsons Brinckerhoff worked with graduate students in traffic engineering at UAB to create more detailed traffic models.
In 2012 ALDOT announced they wuld proceed with replacement of the existing bridge decks in early 2013. The $700 million estimated cost of lowering the interstate had been deemed "too expensive to pursue". ....
The deck replacement proposal was ultimately approved by ALDOT and budgeted at $420 million. Director John Cooper stated at the time that his department, "has received a lot of feedback from the community, and we believe we have addressed the key concerns while exploring the best pathway forward for this project."

Did ALDOT alone make the decision that "sinking" the route was too expensive, particularly in comparison to the $420 million?  If so, what non-construction factors, if any , did ALDOT consider in making that decision?
Yes, $700 million is more expensive than $420 million, but ........
If neither ALDOT nor Move I-20/59 is really interested in the "sinking" option, then I suppose that there are not many influential people left to make the argument that it would be worth the additional $280 million.

Burying it was determined to be too expensive because of the water table and existing conduits. I do not draw the same conclusion that you do that Cooper was being evasive because there has been talk of doing that just that no one has the 1B or so it would take to do it. Nor do we have the time to wait to do it because the current bridges needed to be replaced years ago.

Quote from: Grzrd on February 25, 2016, 03:13:34 PM
I am a bit puzzled by this February 4, 2016 interview with ALDOT Director John Cooper by a local publisher, Mark Kelly (http://weldbham.com/blog/2016/02/09/i-have-not-moved-john-cooper-aldot-interview/), in which Cooper asserts that no one ever asked whether "burying the interstate" was feasible

Quote from: Tourian on February 26, 2016, 11:49:59 AM
Burying it was determined to be too expensive because of the water table and existing conduits. I do not draw the same conclusion that you do that Cooper was being evasive because there has been talk of doing that just that no one has the 1B or so it would take to do it. Nor do we have the time to wait to do it because the current bridges needed to be replaced years ago.

If Cooper had simply stated that it was too expensive instead of saying that no one had ever asked if it were feasible, then I would not be puzzled by his comments.
That said, you have raised the critical element of time.  Despite Cooper's comments, Parsons Brinckerhoff did perform preliminary studies and I am not convinced, in light of those studies, that the "sinking" alternative would consume too much time.

The current project was initially presented as a $100 million emergency repair job. However, ALDOT "found" an extra $320 million and morphed the project into a $420 million improvement project (ALDOT could probably "find" an additional $280 million if they so desired).  By incurring the extra $320 million cost for the improvements, ALDOT made it more difficult to consider either the "sinking" improvement alternative or the "moving" improvement alternative in the future.  Had it remained a basic repair job, the Birmingham community would have had time to seriously discuss an optimal long-range solution.

The Birmingham community could well decide that ALDOT's current plan is the best plan.  However, given the long-term ramifications of the newly scoped project, the Birmingham community should have the opportunity to fully consider the "sinking" alternative.

I'll have to go back and look on the projected cost but I believe another reason for not wanting to sink it was they could not make it any wider but I an not 100% on that. These bridges will allow for an additional lane on each side.

But to me the explanation given of it being too expensive was enough.

Edit: yeah, here it is...

http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2014/01/interstate_2059_do_the_work_no.html

QuoteRerouting or sinking would would cost between $1 billion and $2.5 billion and take 20 to 25 years to complete, he said.

Quote

Quote from: Tourian on February 26, 2016, 01:52:39 PM
yeah, here it is...
http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2014/01/interstate_2059_do_the_work_no.html

QuoteRerouting or sinking would would cost between $1 billion and $2.5 billion and take 20 to 25 years to complete, he said.

Tourian, thanks for the link. I would enjoy reading the ALDOT consultant's report; I assume that it is different than the Parsons Brinckerhoff report since it includes the "moving" alternative.  I would like to see the details of why it would take 20 to 25 years to "sink" the route.

edit

Quote from: Grzrd on January 25, 2016, 11:23:56 AM

Quote from: codyg1985 on January 21, 2016, 08:02:59 AM
ALDOT responds to lawsuit seeking to halt I-20/59 bridge replacement: http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2016/01/highway_officials_respond_to_l.html

In responding to the lawsuit, ALDOT denies that it failed to analyze or consider a "sinking the route" alternative:

Quote
-   ALDOT denies that it failed to analyze or consider a "sinking the route" alternative to its plans for the continued elevated roadway ....

Quote from: Charles2 on January 24, 2016, 10:01:50 AM
A response from the director of ALDOT:
http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2016/01/aldot_director_plan_for_i-2059.html#incart_river_home

Interestingly, Director Cooper's letter does not address the "sinking the route" alternative.

Director Cooper's above-linked letter does set forth specific costs and time frames for the two "moving" alternatives:

Quote
In order to fully understand all options, and in keeping with the City's request, ALDOT also explored two scenarios for re-routing I-59/20 along the Finley Boulevard Corridor, a "short" and "long" route ....
If pursued, the short plan would require the construction of an elevated interstate through the middle of minority and low-income neighborhoods at a total cost exceeding $1.5 billion. Even if this were feasible, it would require more than 20 years to complete. Since the width of this interstate would be wider than the current roadway, and must avoid the Burlington Northern Railroad Yard, the long route would force the demolition of nearly all the businesses along the existing Finley Corridor. This effort would take at least 28 years and cost over $2 billion.

I simply wish that Director Cooper would have provided a similar discussion of the challenges presented by the "sinking" alternative.

Also, the above-linked article about the response to the lawsuit reports as follows:

Quote
The Federal Highway Administration denied in its response the allegation that the I-59/20 Improvement Project will cause "significant negative socioeconomic impacts." They also deny that ALDOT ignored any issue or violated any law, or that the project's Environmental Assessment (the EA) was "defective."

Here is a link to the June 2015 Environmental Assessment ("EA") Finding of No Significant Impact ("FONSI"):

http://rp.dot.state.al.us/I59_20/pdf/Prj%20No%20IM-I059(367)%20I-59%2020%20EA%20FONSI%20APPROVED%206-25-15%20COMPLETE.pdf

Two alternatives were carried through the process as follows (pp. 329-330/619 of pdf):

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FvsjRmRB.jpg&hash=fa649328010467ba3472fb99a0a51482624cbbc2)
....
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FlO5kJ9E.jpg&hash=886dec55e0d4dbb8b2c011efa35861912c595bc2)

After an admittedly brief look at the EA, I could not find any meaningful analysis about either a "sinking" alternative or the two "moving" alternatives, other than comments from the public.  I now better understand the dissatisfaction of some members of the Birmingham community.

I suppose that the ALDOT consultant's report referenced in the January 2014 article linked by Tourian contains the analysis of the "sinking" and "moving" alternatives:

Quote
Cooper said other alternatives have drawbacks, according to a review ALDOT commissioned with a consultant ....
Sinking the interstate through downtown would require utility relocation, figuring out how to keep the roadway drained, embankments that would be too steep and interfere with foundations of nearby buildings, according to the review.

I agree they do appear to be speaking out of both sides of their heads.

My guess is that Cooper asked his boys in engineering to throw out a number on sinking it or moving it and that's what they came up with. A guess, but an educated and informed guess but still a guess. I think he figured this would be enough to snow job all the people he feels are beneath him in intelligence i.e. (the Birmingham city council, the Jefferson co council, the citizens of Birmingham) etc etc. And it worked for some time but they kept pressing him. So when cornered he says no one has or really hasn't done the study.

Probably because they haven't. A real study would take time and money and he doesn't have or want to spend any on it and neither does Birmingham. To be fair he did come back later and say moving it to Finley would violate a federal ordinance that keeps interstates from being moved to impoverished minority neighborhoods but that didnt come out until later. He should have said it up front but my guess is he really didn't care or look in to it because he never expected so much resistance to rebuilding the bridges.

As you said, they originally were just going to redeck it.

QuoteTo be fair he did come back later and say moving it to Finley would violate a federal ordinance that keeps interstates from being moved to impoverished minority neighborhoods but that didnt come out until later.

And he actually got that part wrong.  Federal law doesn't expressly prohibit such a move.  He just used it as a convenient excuse that, combined with his claimed cost, he could use to justify pushing widening the existing viaduct.

Quote from: froggie on February 27, 2016, 05:18:41 PM
And he actually got that part wrong.  Federal law doesn't expressly prohibit such a move.  He just used it as a convenient excuse that, combined with his claimed cost, he could use to justify pushing widening the existing viaduct.

I think moving a freeway into the middle of an impoverished, largely black community, especially as part of an admitted effort to gentrify downtown Birmingham, would be highly frowned upon under an environmental justice assessment. It might be legal but it would require massive remediation (see i.e. what had to be done to build I-105 in Los Angeles).

I don't disagree.  Would require significant mitigation.  But to claim that it's illegal isn't really true and is a convenient cop-out on ALDOT's part.

Maybe i misquoted him. Such a move would kill any federal assistance is probably what he said.

Quote from: Tourian on February 28, 2016, 06:15:21 PM
Maybe i misquoted him. Such a move would kill any federal assistance is probably what he said.

It's still b.s., whether the quote was as before or as you describe.

Quote from: Tourian on February 26, 2016, 11:49:59 AM
Burying it was determined to be too expensive because of the water table and existing conduits. I do not draw the same conclusion that you do that Cooper was being evasive because there has been talk of doing that just that no one has the 1B or so it would take to do it. Nor do we have the time to wait to do it because the current bridges needed to be replaced years ago.

I could see the utilities being a huge concern. They are nasty and expensive to relocate, even without the unknowns of underground utility routing. I am not familiar enough with the soil profiles of the Birmingham area, but I would think if the water table is indeed high the they could be handled with enough engineering of proper retaining walls and maintenance of pumps and clean outs. Both of those engineering challenges would have indeed been more costly and expensive to deal with, but I think it would have been better overall for the community. Redeck the existing bridges and sink the interstate later.

Oh well, maybe the underside of the interstate can be beautified somehow.

Quote from: Grzrd on February 26, 2016, 12:41:40 PM
The current project was initially presented as a $100 million emergency repair job. However, ALDOT "found" an extra $320 million and morphed the project into a $420 million improvement project (ALDOT could probably "find" an additional $280 million if they so desired).  By incurring the extra $320 million cost for the improvements, ALDOT made it more difficult to consider either the "sinking" improvement alternative or the "moving" improvement alternative in the future.  Had it remained a basic repair job, the Birmingham community would have had time to seriously discuss an optimal long-range solution.

I think that money was found by sacrificing other projects across the state for the next few years since this project was ALDOT's top priority.

Here is what he said in the latest interview I've seen.

http://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/news/2016/01/22/aldot-why-we-must-redesign-and-replace-the-i-20-59.html?full=true

QuoteMost notably, federal policy disapproves of building a roadway through a minority or low-income area while another satisfactory route is available. The practical effect of that federal policy makes it highly unlikely ALDOT would receive federal funding to relocate I-59/20 along the Finley Corridor, and insufficient state funds are available to do so without federal support.

Quote from: Tourian on February 29, 2016, 12:14:53 PM
Here is what he said in the latest interview I've seen.

http://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/news/2016/01/22/aldot-why-we-must-redesign-and-replace-the-i-20-59.html?full=true

QuoteMost notably, federal policy disapproves of building a roadway through a minority or low-income area while another satisfactory route is available. The practical effect of that federal policy makes it highly unlikely ALDOT would receive federal funding to relocate I-59/20 along the Finley Corridor, and insufficient state funds are available to do so without federal support.

It's still total baloney. If ALDOT goes through all the necessary processes and the alternative still comes out as the preferred alternative, the Feds will still pony up the funding.

That said, I can imagine there'd be a decent amount of public opposition to the routing and the Feds would want to see it addressed before signing off on it (due to being full oversight rather than state-administered), but the fact of the matter is that such things can be maneuvered through over time and by following the proper processes.

K. But the key takeaway from your post is "over time."

Finley would require at the very least the purchase of ROW. Worst case there are holdouts, superfund sites to disturb and Railroad companies that may want special consideration depending on which Finley plan you are looking at. The plan now is to use an existing road bed. One could be drawn out indefinitely the other can be started right now. Which it is. They are underway.

Quote from: Tourian on March 01, 2016, 04:25:25 PM
K. But the key takeaway from your post is "over time."

Nah.  The key takeaway is that the idea is unfounded that federal funding is threatened if you want to bulldoze through a minority or low-income area.

Quote from: Rothman on March 02, 2016, 12:12:37 PM
Nah.  The key takeaway is that the idea is unfounded that federal funding is threatened if you want to bulldoze through a minority or low-income area.

Except, um, it is. See e.g. FHWA Order 6640.23a (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/orders/664023a.cfm), which states in part that:

QuoteThe FHWA managers and staff will ensure that the programs, policies, and activities that will have disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority populations and/or low-income populations will only be carried out if further mitigation measures or alternatives that would avoid or reduce the disproportionately high and adverse effects are not practicable. In determining whether a mitigation measure or an alternative is "practicable," the social, economic (including costs) and environmental effects of avoiding or mitigating the adverse effects will be taken into account.

Since remaining within the existing ROW would avoid "the disproportionately high and adverse effects" of a Finley Blvd alignment, it would be hard for ALDOT to justify spending millions of dollars more to simultaneously gentrify one part of Birmingham and dump an 8-lane freeway in another part that was already divided by the construction of I-65.

Quote from: lordsutch on March 02, 2016, 12:21:21 PM

Quote from: Rothman on March 02, 2016, 12:12:37 PM
Nah.  The key takeaway is that the idea is unfounded that federal funding is threatened if you want to bulldoze through a minority or low-income area.

Except, um, it is. See e.g. FHWA Order 6640.23a (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/orders/664023a.cfm), which states in part that:

QuoteThe FHWA managers and staff will ensure that the programs, policies, and activities that will have disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority populations and/or low-income populations will only be carried out if further mitigation measures or alternatives that would avoid or reduce the disproportionately high and adverse effects are not practicable. In determining whether a mitigation measure or an alternative is "practicable," the social, economic (including costs) and environmental effects of avoiding or mitigating the adverse effects will be taken into account.

Since remaining within the existing ROW would avoid "the disproportionately high and adverse effects" of a Finley Blvd alignment, it would be hard for ALDOT to justify spending millions of dollars more to simultaneously gentrify one part of Birmingham and dump an 8-lane freeway in another part that was already divided by the construction of I-65.

Taking adverse effects into account is hardly making the project federal-aid ineligible altogether by decree.  Again, all a DOT needs to do is follow the processes, show the alternative is practicable and voila, project becomes federally-funded. 

I'll put it this way:  That order's a paper tiger.

Quote from: Rothman on March 02, 2016, 12:28:21 PM

Quote from: lordsutch on March 02, 2016, 12:21:21 PM

Quote from: Rothman on March 02, 2016, 12:12:37 PM
Nah.  The key takeaway is that the idea is unfounded that federal funding is threatened if you want to bulldoze through a minority or low-income area.

Except, um, it is. See e.g. FHWA Order 6640.23a (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/orders/664023a.cfm), which states in part that:

QuoteThe FHWA managers and staff will ensure that the programs, policies, and activities that will have disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority populations and/or low-income populations will only be carried out if further mitigation measures or alternatives that would avoid or reduce the disproportionately high and adverse effects are not practicable. In determining whether a mitigation measure or an alternative is "practicable," the social, economic (including costs) and environmental effects of avoiding or mitigating the adverse effects will be taken into account.

Since remaining within the existing ROW would avoid "the disproportionately high and adverse effects" of a Finley Blvd alignment, it would be hard for ALDOT to justify spending millions of dollars more to simultaneously gentrify one part of Birmingham and dump an 8-lane freeway in another part that was already divided by the construction of I-65.

Taking adverse effects into account is hardly making the project federal-aid ineligible altogether by decree.  Again, all a DOT needs to do is follow the processes, show the alternative is practicable and voila, project becomes federally-funded. 

I'll put it this way:  That order's a paper tiger.

And that's great because it is your opinion and no one can confirm or deny it but you are still arguing two different things. At least, in my opinion, you are. When you first said "baloney" or whatever you gave me the impression that no such rule existed and that Cooper was straight up lying. Now it isn't that he was lying but that the rule carries no real weight and just a matter of extra red tape. That isn't the same thing. He isn't lying and it isn't baloney.

Now you want to go further and claim in effect that his statements are disingenuous in nature because if he REALLY wanted to they could blow past that and get rubber stamp approval from the feds lickety split and that's fine - that really doesn't matter...to me.

What matters is that fed dollars or not it will cost more to move it to sink it and it will take more time. Neither of those things are in excess here.

Quote from: Tourian on March 02, 2016, 02:08:48 PM

Quote from: Rothman on March 02, 2016, 12:28:21 PM

Quote from: lordsutch on March 02, 2016, 12:21:21 PM

Quote from: Rothman on March 02, 2016, 12:12:37 PM
Nah.  The key takeaway is that the idea is unfounded that federal funding is threatened if you want to bulldoze through a minority or low-income area.

Except, um, it is. See e.g. FHWA Order 6640.23a (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/orders/664023a.cfm), which states in part that:

QuoteThe FHWA managers and staff will ensure that the programs, policies, and activities that will have disproportionately high and adverse effects on minority populations and/or low-income populations will only be carried out if further mitigation measures or alternatives that would avoid or reduce the disproportionately high and adverse effects are not practicable. In determining whether a mitigation measure or an alternative is "practicable," the social, economic (including costs) and environmental effects of avoiding or mitigating the adverse effects will be taken into account.

Since remaining within the existing ROW would avoid "the disproportionately high and adverse effects" of a Finley Blvd alignment, it would be hard for ALDOT to justify spending millions of dollars more to simultaneously gentrify one part of Birmingham and dump an 8-lane freeway in another part that was already divided by the construction of I-65.

Taking adverse effects into account is hardly making the project federal-aid ineligible altogether by decree.  Again, all a DOT needs to do is follow the processes, show the alternative is practicable and voila, project becomes federally-funded. 

I'll put it this way:  That order's a paper tiger.

And that's great because it is your opinion and no one can confirm or deny it but you are still arguing two different things. At least, in my opinion, you are. When you first said "baloney" or whatever you gave me the impression that no such rule existed and that Cooper was straight up lying. Now it isn't that he was lying but that the rule carries no real weight and just a matter of extra red tape. That isn't the same thing. He isn't lying and it isn't baloney.

Now you want to go further and claim in effect that his statements are disingenuous in nature because if he REALLY wanted to they could blow past that and get rubber stamp approval from the feds lickety split and that's fine - that really doesn't matter...to me.

What matters is that fed dollars or not it will cost more to move it to sink it and it will take more time. Neither of those things are in excess here.

Your use of hyperbole is impressive.

Actually, if you read back to your original post and then the reactions of froggie and me, we were referring to the information you provided that the claim that construction that would plow through a minority or depressed neighborhood would violate federal law if the feds funded it.  As we both pointed out and as I still stand by my own previous comments, it's just not true.

Yes, there's a regulation on the books where DOTs have to show an alternative as "practicable" as Lordsutch pointed out, but that's a far cry from a law that would be violated as described (e.g., "Thou shall not build through depressed/minority neighborhoods or you will not be reimbursed by the Feds.")  All the reg is doing is just adding an added requirement that, at least NYSDOT, deals with all the time (otherwise nothing would get done in various urban areas around the state).  Building in such a neighborhood does not violate any law as long as you follow the set process.  It is not illegal to receive federal funding for construction projects that affect such areas.

And you're right, it's only my opinion:  The opinion of someone who has been directly involved in the request of federal-aid authorizations from FHWA.

(personal opinion expressed)

I knew you'd say that.

Yes i misquoted him and admitted as much. Then i came back and corrected it. You said "baloney" both times. You could have elaborated but you didn't and thats fine. So i stand by my opinion. No one is claiming that it is illegal to do it.

Saying there is no such regulation is different from saying there is a regulation but it is a "paper tiger."

I have to weigh your claim as random anonymous internet expert vs an official I know by name who has direct jurisdiction over the city and state I live. So, let me think on who I believe...

Quote from: Tourian on March 03, 2016, 08:34:47 AM

Saying there is no such regulation is different from saying there is a regulation but it is a "paper tiger."

*sigh*

I give up.  Shine on, you crazy diamond.

More than just the 20/59 bridges, ALDOT plans to overhaul the 20/59/65 interchange and the RME interchange.

http://www.5920bridge.com/the-project/visual-gallery/

Quote from: Tourian on August 25, 2016, 05:45:14 PM
More than just the 20/59 bridges, ALDOT plans to overhaul the 20/59/65 interchange and the RME interchange.

http://www.5920bridge.com/the-project/visual-gallery/

Cobble onto it, actually. The original horrendous layout and geometry will remain intact.

Quote from: Tom958 on August 25, 2016, 07:20:17 PM

Quote from: Tourian on August 25, 2016, 05:45:14 PM
More than just the 20/59 bridges, ALDOT plans to overhaul the 20/59/65 interchange and the RME interchange.

http://www.5920bridge.com/the-project/visual-gallery/

Cobble onto it, actually. The original horrendous layout and geometry will remain intact.

Unfortunately. At least now there will be some cool flyovers to look at while driving through the interchange.

Quote from: codyg1985 on August 25, 2016, 09:18:59 PM

Quote from: Tom958 on August 25, 2016, 07:20:17 PM

Quote from: Tourian on August 25, 2016, 05:45:14 PM
More than just the 20/59 bridges, ALDOT plans to overhaul the 20/59/65 interchange and the RME interchange.

http://www.5920bridge.com/the-project/visual-gallery/

Cobble onto it, actually. The original horrendous layout and geometry will remain intact.

Unfortunately. At least now there will be some cool flyovers to look at while driving through the interchange.

♪ ♬ Malfunction Junction, what's your function? ♫ ♩

There's nothing horrendous, cobbled or unfortunate about these upgrades. They are significant and unexpected to many of us since this all started with what was just going to be some redecking of a couple of worn out bridges. The amount of changes, lane additions and rerouted exists will improve the flow in several different ways.

But for those of you who occasionally "just drive through", well... carry on.

He's referring to the fact that there will still be numerous left-side exits and entrances at Malfunction Junction, something that FHWA frowns upon these days but ALDOT either doesn't care or doesn't have the funding to remedy...though with how much they're putting into the new ramps, they easily could have addressed some of the left-side ramps instead.

Am I missing something, or will there no longer be access from I-20/59 W/S to 6th Avenue North?

You're correct.  Though I wouldn't expect a whole lot of drivers would make that movement.  Furthermore, the current movement is very unsafe, as drivers coming from WB/SB 20/59 have less than 2,000ft to weave across 3 lanes in order to make the exit ramp to 6th Ave N.

I've done that weave a zillion times.  Scares the crap out of me every time I've done it, and I've been driving it 40 years.

Quote from: froggie on August 26, 2016, 01:58:18 PM
He's referring to the fact that there will still be numerous left-side exits and entrances at Malfunction Junction, something that FHWA frowns upon these days but ALDOT either doesn't care or doesn't have the funding to remedy...though with how much they're putting into the new ramps, they easily could have addressed some of the left-side ramps instead.

What do you mean by "numerous?"

16 ramp merge/diverge points at the interchange.  Half of them are left side.  The proposed design even adds another one (SB 65 to 17th St).

Quote from: froggie on August 29, 2016, 12:55:07 PM
16 ramp merge/diverge points at the interchange.  Half of them are left side.  The proposed design even adds another one (SB 65 to 17th St).

I thought you were referring to left hand exits down to street level.

ALDOT is looking to advertise the third and final phase of the I-20/59 bridge replacement for November 4th. This will include the controversial piece of replacing the existing elevated structure with a new one.

After looking at the plans for the I-20/59 bridge replacement, there are plans to install "decorative lighting" around the bridge and a lot of streetscape to improve the area around the new bridges. The lights will be RGB lights that shine onto the bridge. At least the bridge will somewhat be decorative when it is finished.

Is there a link to the plans?

Here they are. (http://alletting.dot.state.al.us/LettingFiles_110416.htm).

The apparent low bid (http://alletting.dot.state.al.us/WEBPROPS/2016/20160122/LB012216.pdf) for the third and final phase of the I-20/59 viaduct project through downtown Birmingham came in at just over $500 million. The apparent low bidder was Granite Construction Company. It is the same contractor that is working on the second phase which involves the I-20/59/65 interchange. The second phase low bid was $208 million.

After the bids for the final phase of the I-20/59 bridge replacement through downtown came in over budget, ALDOT has went back to the drawing board. They are soliciting RFPs for a Design-Build contract (http://alletting.dot.state.al.us/WEBPROPS/2017/20170331/RFP%20CBD%20Phase%20III%201.5.17.pdf) to design and construct the project through downtown.

I believe this is the first design-build project that ALDOT has developed.

Time to bump this thread up:

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2017/05/aldot_closing_major_entryway_t.html#incart_river_home

In other words, the fun is getting ready to begin in downtown Birmingham.  So far, the construction has caused only a couple of minor inconveniences.  Now, all hell is getting ready to break out.  The good news is, 2020 is only 2-1/2 years away.

Then there was today's announcement:

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2017/05/i-2059_bridge_replacement_in_b.html#incart_river_home_pop

Looks like I'll be using AL 69 a lot more to get from here to Huntsville. That sounds like it is going to be hell living in B'ham for awhile!

It was only a matter of time before the bridge closure was going to take place. The original plans showed the official detour for traffic from I-65 north reaching I-20 east and US 31/280 South was Finley Blvd to US 31. Since this is more of a design-build contract, I am not sure what detour routes will be in place. At least the rest of the interstate movements can be accomplished with I-459, and access to downtown won't be interrupted coming from I-65 or I-20 from the west after the I-20/59/65 interchange revamp is finished. Hopefully the bridge replacement can coincide with the opening of most of those ramps to and from downtown.

The tricky thing is going to be access to downtown from I-20 east of town. The bridge replacement contract also includes the reconfiguration of ramps necessary to provide access to downtown from the east.

From al.com earlier this week:

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2017/06/it_is_going_to_be_a_nightmare.html

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2FAAAD5A12-7EFC-4624-A616-E3A289EE880B_zpsdbvpugwt.jpg&hash=5a685bce219da5a4c99c59cbb5fff3ce09f7e2b3) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/AAAD5A12-7EFC-4624-A616-E3A289EE880B_zpsdbvpugwt.jpg.html)

Snagged this pic last second of these vintage I-20/59/65 state named shields on 18th St. N today. I always forgot about them and glad I remembered to go this way today as I doubt they survive the bridge replacement project as this on ramp will be eliminated. It's possible that ALDOT will modify it with 3 new *BLUE* TO signs and straight ahead arrows to direct people to 11th Ave N for the new way out of downtown.

Quote from: Voyager75 on June 24, 2017, 11:47:13 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2FAAAD5A12-7EFC-4624-A616-E3A289EE880B_zpsdbvpugwt.jpg&hash=5a685bce219da5a4c99c59cbb5fff3ce09f7e2b3) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/AAAD5A12-7EFC-4624-A616-E3A289EE880B_zpsdbvpugwt.jpg.html)

Snagged this pic last second of these vintage I-20/59/65 state named shields on 18th St. N today. I always forgot about them and glad I remembered to go this way today as I doubt they survive the bridge replacement project as this on ramp will be eliminated. It's possible that ALDOT will modify it with 3 new *BLUE* TO signs and straight ahead arrows to direct people to 11th Ave N for the new way out of downtown.

Question:  does ALDOT ever sell/donate their old shields?  It would be a shame to see three relatively pristine (no visible fading or peeling) '57-spec state-named shields sitting in a corporate yard somewhere; they should go to a good home (I know that several posters would be delighted to procure at least one of these!). 

Quote from: sparker on June 25, 2017, 01:07:46 AM

Quote from: Voyager75 on June 24, 2017, 11:47:13 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2FAAAD5A12-7EFC-4624-A616-E3A289EE880B_zpsdbvpugwt.jpg&hash=5a685bce219da5a4c99c59cbb5fff3ce09f7e2b3) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/AAAD5A12-7EFC-4624-A616-E3A289EE880B_zpsdbvpugwt.jpg.html)

Snagged this pic last second of these vintage I-20/59/65 state named shields on 18th St. N today. I always forgot about them and glad I remembered to go this way today as I doubt they survive the bridge replacement project as this on ramp will be eliminated. It's possible that ALDOT will modify it with 3 new *BLUE* TO signs and straight ahead arrows to direct people to 11th Ave N for the new way out of downtown.

Question:  does ALDOT ever sell/donate their old shields?  It would be a shame to see three relatively pristine (no visible fading or peeling) '57-spec state-named shields sitting in a corporate yard somewhere; they should go to a good home (I know that several posters would be delighted to procure at least one of these!). 

This needs to be sent to the "Best of Road Signs" thread.

Quote from: cjk374 on June 25, 2017, 11:49:53 AM

Quote from: sparker on June 25, 2017, 01:07:46 AM

Quote from: Voyager75 on June 24, 2017, 11:47:13 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1376.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fah18%2Fbshuguley%2FMobile%2520Uploads%2FAAAD5A12-7EFC-4624-A616-E3A289EE880B_zpsdbvpugwt.jpg&hash=5a685bce219da5a4c99c59cbb5fff3ce09f7e2b3) (http://s1376.photobucket.com/user/bshuguley/media/Mobile%20Uploads/AAAD5A12-7EFC-4624-A616-E3A289EE880B_zpsdbvpugwt.jpg.html)

Snagged this pic last second of these vintage I-20/59/65 state named shields on 18th St. N today. I always forgot about them and glad I remembered to go this way today as I doubt they survive the bridge replacement project as this on ramp will be eliminated. It's possible that ALDOT will modify it with 3 new *BLUE* TO signs and straight ahead arrows to direct people to 11th Ave N for the new way out of downtown.

Question:  does ALDOT ever sell/donate their old shields?  It would be a shame to see three relatively pristine (no visible fading or peeling) '57-spec state-named shields sitting in a corporate yard somewhere; they should go to a good home (I know that several posters would be delighted to procure at least one of these!). 

This needs to be sent to the "Best of Road Signs" thread.

Already there. Posted it there last night right that after I posted this one.

I am surprised those are still there. Good that you got them when you did.

Those shields go back to 1973, when permanent signs were first erected on the sections of Birmingham's interstates that were open at the time.  Of course, at the time there was very little of 65 or 20/59 that were open.

Wonder why it took Birmingham so long to build the expressways in town? Indy was the same(but they at least built 465, before they built in town).

Quote from: ATLRedSoxFan on June 27, 2017, 01:48:27 AM
Wonder why it took Birmingham so long to build the expressways in town? Indy was the same(but they at least built 465, before they built in town).

Politics. Governor George Wallace wanted to punish city voters for not voting for him, so the interstates through larger cities were not built first.

Yeah all the interstates ending in the suburbs when I was a child was what got me interested in highways and construction. 20/59 in Fairfield, 20 east in Irondale, 65 North in Fultondale and 65 South in Hoover(I think that was the first to open all the way). I literally lived next to 20/59 in Fairfield at the point the freeway just ended past Exit 118 and dumped you out into Valley Ave.

Quote from: codyg1985 on June 27, 2017, 07:13:02 AM

Quote from: ATLRedSoxFan on June 27, 2017, 01:48:27 AM
Wonder why it took Birmingham so long to build the expressways in town? Indy was the same(but they at least built 465, before they built in town).

Politics. Governor George Wallace wanted to punish city voters for not voting for him, so the interstates through larger cities were not built first.

That's like cutting off your nose to spite your face!  Of course, urban Interstate segments were substantially more costly than rural ones due to (a) property acquisition and (b) structure costs.  Delaying construction for the sake of political payback was (and is) unconscionable from a taxpayer standpoint as well as just fucking stupid and shortsighted!  But some politicos are a breed apart when it comes to this type of bullshit!

At least out here in CA the Division of Highways had the good sense to prioritize as many urban Interstate segments as feasible; in that way they lessened inflationary effects -- as well as getting many of the in-city projects completed or at least underway prior to the onset of urban backlash. 

Welcome to old-style Southern politics.

Quote from: Charles2 on July 01, 2017, 10:15:48 PM
Welcome to old-style Southern politics.

Not so old at all -- you folks in AL almost didn't get I-22 designated because of bad blood between former senators Trent Lott (R-MS) and Bill Frist (R-TN), successive Senate majority leaders in the '90's and early '00's.  Frist attempted to keep any bill authorizing I-22 off the floor to punish Lott and MS, which hosted about 60% of the corridor; it wasn't until late 2003/early 2004 that Sen. Shelby (R-AL) threatened what amounted to open revolt against Frist if he stood in the way of the authorization, which resulted in the authorizing language (contained within the HPC-45 addition to the '04-'05 transportation funding bill) remaining intact.  Intra-party feuding from adjoining states might well have sunk one of the more useful Interstate additions! 

Quote from: sparker on July 02, 2017, 12:52:40 AM

Quote from: Charles2 on July 01, 2017, 10:15:48 PM
Welcome to old-style Southern politics.

Not so old at all -- you folks in AL almost didn't get I-22 designated because of bad blood between former senators Trent Lott (R-MS) and Bill Frist (R-TN), successive Senate majority leaders in the '90's and early '00's.  Frist attempted to keep any bill authorizing I-22 off the floor to punish Lott and MS, which hosted about 60% of the corridor; it wasn't until late 2003/early 2004 that Sen. Shelby (R-AL) threatened what amounted to open revolt against Frist if he stood in the way of the authorization, which resulted in the authorizing language (contained within the HPC-45 addition to the '04-'05 transportation funding bill) remaining intact.  Intra-party feuding from adjoining states might well have sunk one of the more useful Interstate additions! 

That's interesting, I've never heard that part of the story. These two links describe the efforts of a local business man who had to woo the Alabama legislation to not pursue the favored (at the time) MEM-HSV-ATL route because it would put most of the road in TN.

http://alabamanewscenter.com/2016/06/20/22-finally-connects-birmingham-memphis/

http://www.businessalabama.com/Business-Alabama/October-2015/Lynchpin-I-22-Nears-Completion/

Quote from: Tourian on July 08, 2017, 04:53:04 PM

Quote from: sparker on July 02, 2017, 12:52:40 AM

Quote from: Charles2 on July 01, 2017, 10:15:48 PM
Welcome to old-style Southern politics.

Not so old at all -- you folks in AL almost didn't get I-22 designated because of bad blood between former senators Trent Lott (R-MS) and Bill Frist (R-TN), successive Senate majority leaders in the '90's and early '00's.  Frist attempted to keep any bill authorizing I-22 off the floor to punish Lott and MS, which hosted about 60% of the corridor; it wasn't until late 2003/early 2004 that Sen. Shelby (R-AL) threatened what amounted to open revolt against Frist if he stood in the way of the authorization, which resulted in the authorizing language (contained within the HPC-45 addition to the '04-'05 transportation funding bill) remaining intact.  Intra-party feuding from adjoining states might well have sunk one of the more useful Interstate additions! 

That's interesting, I've never heard that part of the story. These two links describe the efforts of a local business man who had to woo the Alabama legislation to not pursue the favored (at the time) MEM-HSV-ATL route because it would put most of the road in TN.

http://alabamanewscenter.com/2016/06/20/22-finally-connects-birmingham-memphis/

http://www.businessalabama.com/Business-Alabama/October-2015/Lynchpin-I-22-Nears-Completion/

Right -- the "dust-up" among Lott, Shelby, and Frist occurred well after the decision was made to concentrate AL state efforts on Corridor X rather than a Huntsville routing (already in the AHDS as Corridor V east of Florence, AL).  It didn't affect the routing decision; rather it threatened to interrupt the funding stream to the corridor. 

Some longtime family friends hail from Jasper; one of their visits home coincided with one of my own trips to Atlanta to visit my GF's family, so I met them for lunch in Jasper -- and one of their close friends joining us was the director of the town's chamber of commerce (his name escapes me today).  During the meal the subject of the freeway came up (this was in early 2002; the then-US 78 freeway still ended at AL 129 near Winfield) and the tale of the senatorial troubles was related to myself & my friends.  When asked for my opinion regarding this potential setback; I mentioned that they may need to pull MS & Lott out of the equation and possibly assume more responsibility for the project themselves.  The C of C fellow said that he and the local congressman (who turned out to be Aderholt) had a decent working relationship, and that he'd talk to him about the situation.  I took my leave soon afterwards due to a dinner reservation in Atlanta that evening; I still had 200+ miles to go.  When I got back to CA a few weeks later, my friends from Jasper said that their friend from the Chamber had indeed talked to Aderholt, but that they didn't know what came of the conversation.  I'm presuming the outcome was somewhat positive -- since 2 years later the I-22 authorizing language got into the '04-'05 appropriations bill -- spearheaded by Aderholt in the House and Shelby in the Senate.           

Quote from: Tourian on July 08, 2017, 04:53:04 PM
That's interesting, I've never heard that part of the story. These two links describe the efforts of a local business man who had to woo the Alabama legislation to not pursue the favored (at the time) MEM-HSV-ATL route because it would put most of the road in TN.

http://alabamanewscenter.com/2016/06/20/22-finally-connects-birmingham-memphis/

http://www.businessalabama.com/Business-Alabama/October-2015/Lynchpin-I-22-Nears-Completion/

The line that most of the referenced route would be in TN is just baloney.

Birmingham booster Joe Fuller, a local insurance executive, was then serving as chair of the Chamber’s Transportation Committee. He put it in vivid perspective early on. The re-routing of Corridor X through Huntsville would’ve essentially put the vast majority of the new road within the state of Tennessee, not Alabama. At a legislative committee meeting in Montgomery where the re-routing was being favorably discussed, Joe asked, “What is this, a meeting of the Tennessee legislature?” He powerfully made his point and it was “game on.”

The route would have largely followed US 72 (and alt US 72) to Memphis. Nor was there any discussion of re-routing Corridor X. Much of the US 72 and alt US 72 is of course Corridor V. It was a fight for money between X and V.

http://www.gadsdentimes.com/article/DA/20030222/News/603217252/GT/ (http://www.gadsdentimes.com/article/DA/20030222/News/603217252/GT/)

You can look at a map and see how much of US 72 is in TN. It ain't much.

I don't know why the authors concocted such a story. I wrote to al.com to complain about their publishing this story with errors, but the response was that the story was an opinion piece and they would pass the comments along to the authors..

There were many excellent reasons to route the MEM-ATL highway through BHM. BHM needed I-22.

But the argument that routing through HSV would put most of the road in TN is nonsense.

I did notice that too (about where 72 is now) but assumed that whatever route they were planning would not overlay exactly but rather be more TN-centric. That maybe some earlier proposal favored TN more. I do realize though the plan ultimately was to upgrade 72 to interstate status like 78 was in some spots and that didnt have any significant precense in TN.

Quote from: Tourian on July 10, 2017, 03:19:53 PM
I did notice that too (about where 72 is now) but assumed that whatever route they were planning would not overlay exactly but rather be more TN-centric. That maybe some earlier proposal favored TN more. I do realize though the plan ultimately was to upgrade 72 to interstate status like 78 was in some spots and that didnt have any significant precense in TN.

There was never a route with much presence in TN, and you have only to look to I-22 for the proof. There will never be even one mile of I-22 in Tennessee - with that lack of interest on the part of the Volunteer State, how could anybody imagine that TN would be interested in US 72. The Vols four-laned US 64 through southern TN and called it a day.

Mississippi had no interest in a US 72 upgrade as they had already built up US 78 as a freeway, even if not to Interstate standards. And Georgia was maybe going to upgrade a few roads, but no new freeway.

Had the plan somehow come to fruition, it would have taken far longer than even I-422 to build in its entirety.  :bigass:

Quote from: bigdave on July 10, 2017, 05:15:04 PM
There was never a route with much presence in TN, and you have only to look to I-22 for the proof. There will never be even one mile of I-22 in Tennessee - with that lack of interest on the part of the Volunteer State, how could anybody imagine that TN would be interested in US 72. The Vols four-laned US 64 through southern TN and called it a day.

I don't see how 22 is proof of anything but what it is. I just take them for their word that upgrading Lamar is too expensive and that someday, Memphis will have an outer loop that 22 will attach too. I can't draw the conclusion that you can that any of that has anything to do with what Fuller was claiming unless I was there the day he said it or was on the planning commission from the start.

QuoteHad the plan somehow come to fruition, it would have taken far longer than even I-422 to build in its entirety.  :bigass:

Umm, okay. How long is 422 going to take?

Quote from: Tourian on July 10, 2017, 06:26:00 PMI don't see how 22 is proof of anything but what it is. I just take them for their word that upgrading Lamar is too expensive and that someday, Memphis will have an outer loop that 22 will attach too. I can't draw the conclusion that you can that any of that has anything to do with what Fuller was claiming unless I was there the day he said it or was on the planning commission from the start.

I-22 eventually will connect with I-269 in Mississippi. There will never be a mile of I-22 in the state of Tennessee.

Quote from: Tourian on July 10, 2017, 06:26:00 PM
Umm, okay. How long is 422 going to take?

2054. Thirty seven years from now - that's actually ALDoT's estimate.

http://betterbeltline.org/faqs.php (http://betterbeltline.org/faqs.php)

Projected cost now over $5.3 billion give or take. It's inheriting the Appalachian Development (APD) Highway System money.

Quote from: bigdave on July 11, 2017, 09:21:34 AM
I-22 eventually will connect with I-269 in Mississippi. There will never be a mile of I-22 in the state of Tennessee.

Right. That isn't contrary to what I said, nor do see any connection to what may have gone on through the planning stages of the MEM-HSV-ATL route. With the way it ended up there is very little of it in TN to begin with that isn't expensive unalterable Lamar.

Quote2054. Thirty seven years from now - that's actually ALDoT's estimate.

I'm aware of that site and their estimates, but from the boldness of your last post you seemed to have other more specific knowledge. Thanks, though.

Quote from: Tourian on July 11, 2017, 11:44:54 AM

I'm aware of that site and their estimates, but from the boldness of your last post you seemed to have other more specific knowledge. Thanks, though.

The "betterbeltline" site is operated by ALDoT - that should be as specific as would be available. Except road work in this state never gets done on schedule so 2054 may be optimistic.

http://rp.dot.state.al.us/BNB/ (http://rp.dot.state.al.us/BNB/)

Quote from: bigdaveIt's inheriting the Appalachian Development (APD) Highway System money.

The funny thing here is that there is no more APD highway money.  MAP-21 got rid of it.  Money for Appalachian Corridor road projects is now taken from each state's normal Federal highway funding allotment.

Quote from: froggie on July 11, 2017, 02:49:27 PM
The funny thing here is that there is no more APD highway money.  MAP-21 got rid of it.  Money for Appalachian Corridor road projects is now taken from each state's normal Federal highway funding allotment.

I looked more closely and you are correct. That makes this project even sadder, given that its primary purpose is to enrich large landowners in rural JeffCo. There are important projects in the BHM area and the rest of the state that won't happen while this beltline sucks up over $5 billion.

Where will the money come from?
Because Congress made the Appalachian Development (APD) Highway System a priority, any projects on the BNB that are authorized by September 30, 2050 are eligible for 100% Federal funding, with no requirement for matching funds from the State. The first phase of the Beltline was constructed using the remaining designated APD funds. Remaining APD projects will be funded from ALDOT's overall funding. Specific project funding is determined based upon available funding and needs assessment, among other considerations.

Quote from: bigdave on July 11, 2017, 03:05:14 PM

Quote from: froggie on July 11, 2017, 02:49:27 PM
The funny thing here is that there is no more APD highway money.  MAP-21 got rid of it.  Money for Appalachian Corridor road projects is now taken from each state's normal Federal highway funding allotment.

I looked more closely and you are correct. That makes this project even sadder, given that its primary purpose is to enrich large landowners in rural JeffCo. There are important projects in the BHM area and the rest of the state that won't happen while this beltline sucks up over $5 billion.

Where will the money come from?
Because Congress made the Appalachian Development (APD) Highway System a priority, any projects on the BNB that are authorized by September 30, 2050 are eligible for 100% Federal funding, with no requirement for matching funds from the State. The first phase of the Beltline was constructed using the remaining designated APD funds. Remaining APD projects will be funded from ALDOT's overall funding. Specific project funding is determined based upon available funding and needs assessment, among other considerations.

Instead of dumping 5 billion on a loop that will serve little to no purpose and take decades to complete, I think these things should have been considered instead (though doing all would probably exceed 5 billion):

-*Make Malfunction Junction a stack interchange

-*Eight-lane 65 from downtown to 459, include wide shoulders (AADT 120,000-140,000; really needed from a capacity and safety standpoint)

-*Six-lane 65 from Pelham/Alabaster to Prattville/Montgomery (AADT 35,000-40,000, truck route, much higher during spring break, two cities that really need a six-lane highway connector)

-Periodically six-lane 65 or widen completely to six lanes from HWY 91 to TN state line. (AADT 30,000-40,000; truck route, much higher during spring break, benefits statewide travel)

-*Widen 565 from I-65 to Alt US-72 to six lanes (AADT 50,000-60,000; Huntsville is rapidly growing, needs the extra lanes)

-Widen I-20/59 to eight lanes from I-359 to Skyland Blvd in Tuscaloosa (AADT ~52,000; lots of cars join and then exit in this section)

-Widen I-20/59 to six lanes from I-359 to Joe Mallisham Pkwy (AADT 32,000; eliminates a potentially dangerous eight-lane to four-lane transition)

-*Widen I-20/59 to six lanes from Valley Rd to 459 (AADT 40,000-60,000; should have been done decades ago)

-Periodically widen 65 to six lanes from Montgomery to Mobile (AADT 20,000-30,000; not necessary to six-lane the entire thing, but an extra lane for a few miles every 10 to 20 would really help during spring break and daily travel)

-Widen I-20 to six lanes from Oporto Madrid Blvd to I-59 (AADT ~62,000; makes I-20 six lanes from the split to I-459)

*= Most Important

Some thoughts on the list above:

1. The way things are going with the current I-20/59/65 interchange reconfiguration, I highly doubt it will ever be a symmetrical stack. More ramps are being added which should help to eliminate weaving on I-20/59 between I-65 and the viaduct at the BJCC. The ramps essentially move the decision point to enter downtown upstream to the other three approaches into the 20/50/65 interchange.

2. If this ever happens it will be in the form of a managed toll lane (perhaps elevated). It would be incredibly expensive to add a lane through there because of the mountainous terrain.

3. I think this will slowly happen over time. In the fall a project is supposed to be let to extend the widening down from the tank farm exit (Shelby CR 52) south to US 31 in Alabaster. I would take this a step further and make 65 eight lanes south to the AL 25 exit in Calera.

4. I agree with that. At one time there was a firm plan to widen I-65 north to AL 69 North I believe, but that has been put on the backburner due to funding. That stretch is currently being resurfaced. Some immediate improvements would happen if truck lanes were added on NB 65 approaching the 69 South exit and on SB 65 past the US 31 exit at Lacon.

5. Huntsville/ALDOT has that on the back burner for now. It will happen eventually. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

6. There is an auxillary lane between 359 and US 82/McFarland now which I figure will be retained when additional lanes in each direction are added. To my knowledge, I don't think the extra lane will be extended east to US 11/Skyland.

7. That is actually on the long range plan for ALDOT. Honestly I think that over time the entire corridor to the I-20/59 split in Meridian (especially west of US 80) should be six lanes eventually, but that is a low priority compared to the other items you have mentioned. It would future-proof the corridor for increased truck traffic and also be helpful during hurricane evacuations.

8. That is planned, but, as some of these other projects are, they are on the long range plan and aren't planned in the near-term.

9. It would also help during hurricane evacuations. As you mention the traffic along this portion of 65 isn't as heavy as it is north of Montgomery, but it would be a good future proof move.

10. As far as I know this isn't planned. The viaduct east of the I-20/59 split would make this rather expensive. An immediate improvement would be to make I-20 east just coming off of I-59 two through lanes. Right now there is only one through lane as you exit I-20/59 to continue east on 20. The right lane becomes a lane drop to access US 11.

Out of your list I would rank item 3 the first priority, followed by item 2 and 4. One item that isn't on your list that should be addressed is US 280 between the US/280 split in Homewood and Chelsea. There have been many plans floated over the years to either convert it to a freeway or add an elevated toll lane. Access management techniques and signal timing have been adjusted along the 280 corridor from US 31/280 to Brook Highland, but I think more needs to be done. I am not sure if a freeway is the answer here. It would be nice, but also expensive. This may be another situation where a toll lane would be the most feasible. Here and along I-65 are areas in the state where I think a managed toll lane would work well.

Quote from: codyg1985Honestly I think that over time the entire corridor to the I-20/59 split in Meridian (especially west of US 80) should be six lanes eventually, but that is a low priority compared to the other items you have mentioned. It would future-proof the corridor for increased truck traffic and also be helpful during hurricane evacuations.

I highly doubt you'll see this in our lifetimes.  Traffic on 20/59 drops off considerably west of Tuscaloosa (basically half of 20/59's traffic between McFarland and 359 exits at 359).  Current daily traffic volumes even drop below 20K on a couple stretches between Eutaw and York, and none of the corridor west of Exit 68 gets above 30K until you reach US 45.  Also, contrary to what some may believe, traffic growth has been basically flat between Meridian and Tuscaloosa...just about everything between US 45 and Eutaw has less traffic now than it did in 2006.  And if Alabama is ever successful in building their "I-85 Extension", you'd see even less of a potential increase in traffic.

Regarding hurricane evacuations....based on my own Katrina evac experience, 20/59 did not have an issue.

Is there an easy place to find these traffic counts?

TIA.

Alabama annualized daily volumes (https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/atd/default.aspx), 2015 is the most recent year.

Mississippi annualized daily volumes (http://mdot.ms.gov/applications/trafficcounters/), 2016 being the most recent year.

Quote from: bigdave on July 12, 2017, 03:19:04 PM
Is there an easy place to find these traffic counts?

TIA.

I google searched "Alabama AADT", first or second result.

ukfan758 and froggie - thank you!

David

Quote from: codyg1985 on July 12, 2017, 08:04:25 AM

Out of your list I would rank item 3 the first priority, followed by item 2 and 4. One item that isn't on your list that should be addressed is US 280 between the US/280 split in Homewood and Chelsea. There have been many plans floated over the years to either convert it to a freeway or add an elevated toll lane. Access management techniques and signal timing have been adjusted along the 280 corridor from US 31/280 to Brook Highland, but I think more needs to be done. I am not sure if a freeway is the answer here. It would be nice, but also expensive. This may be another situation where a toll lane would be the most feasible. Here and along I-65 are areas in the state where I think a managed toll lane would work well.

Heck, I don't think anything will be done to US 280, which has an AADT of over 100,000 between I-459 and the US 31 Homewood split.  The people living along that stretch have already shot down any attempt to improve the road from the elevated toll lanes to the conversion to a full freeway.  I think the only thing that can be done is to build a new freeway between I-65 and connect it to US 280 between Chelsea and Childersburg. 

It would really help the communities of Sylacauga and Alexander City which have both been struggling with job losses, especially Alex City which has lost many jobs with Russell leaving town.  And it would also serve as an alternative to people living along US 280 in southern Shelby County to get to Birmingham.

If that was to be done, I-65 MUST be widened to 6-lanes all the way through Shelby County though.

Quote from: barcncpt44 on July 13, 2017, 07:02:25 PM

Quote from: codyg1985 on July 12, 2017, 08:04:25 AM

Out of your list I would rank item 3 the first priority, followed by item 2 and 4. One item that isn't on your list that should be addressed is US 280 between the US/280 split in Homewood and Chelsea. There have been many plans floated over the years to either convert it to a freeway or add an elevated toll lane. Access management techniques and signal timing have been adjusted along the 280 corridor from US 31/280 to Brook Highland, but I think more needs to be done. I am not sure if a freeway is the answer here. It would be nice, but also expensive. This may be another situation where a toll lane would be the most feasible. Here and along I-65 are areas in the state where I think a managed toll lane would work well.

Heck, I don't think anything will be done to US 280, which has an AADT of over 100,000 between I-459 and the US 31 Homewood split.  The people living along that stretch have already shot down any attempt to improve the road from the elevated toll lanes to the conversion to a full freeway.  I think the only thing that can be done is to build a new freeway between I-65 and connect it to US 280 between Chelsea and Childersburg. 

It would really help the communities of Sylacauga and Alexander City which have both been struggling with job losses, especially Alex City which has lost many jobs with Russell leaving town.  And it would also serve as an alternative to people living along US 280 in southern Shelby County to get to Birmingham.

If that was to be done, I-65 MUST be widened to 6-lanes all the way through Shelby County though.

I would take it a step further and say that 65 would need to be a least eight lanes in Shelby County and ten lanes in Jefferson County.

The issue with the southern freeway that I could see is that I'm not sure how many people north of Double Oak Mountain would use that freeway since it would be out of the way. While Chelsea has experienced rapid growth, I don't think that the folks in Brook Highland and on the north side of Double Oak Mountain would use this new freeway. It would help somewhat with US 280 traffic, but I wonder if it would have as much of an impact.

I think another option would be a parallel route to the northeast of US 280 between 119 and I-459 near Liberty Pkwy. The issue with that is that it would be difficult to continue this route to the northwest since it would run smack dab into Cahaba Heights. At least this option would help somewhat with congestion between 459 and Double Oak Mountain.  Another potential issue with this, however, is that it would more than likely come close to Lake Purdy which is one of the main sources of drinking water for metro Birmingham. It would take a lot to prevent another US 98 in Mobile incident.

Quote from: bigdave on July 11, 2017, 02:28:12 PM

Quote from: Tourian on July 11, 2017, 11:44:54 AM

I'm aware of that site and their estimates, but from the boldness of your last post you seemed to have other more specific knowledge. Thanks, though.

The "betterbeltline" site is operated by ALDoT - that should be as specific as would be available. Except road work in this state never gets done on schedule so 2054 may be optimistic.

http://rp.dot.state.al.us/BNB/ (http://rp.dot.state.al.us/BNB/)

Yeah, I know who maintains the site. Thanks.

Get ready for another exit ramp closure...

http://5920bridge.com/11th-avenue-north-exit-ramp-closure-in-birmingham/

I'm not sure how much of an impact this closure will have, except for morning commuters coming into downtown from the eastern part of the metro.  One rarely sees a lot of traffic on this particular ramp during the day.

Quote from: Charles2 on July 15, 2017, 11:29:24 PM
Get ready for another exit ramp closure...

http://5920bridge.com/11th-avenue-north-exit-ramp-closure-in-birmingham/

I'm not sure how much of an impact this closure will have, except for morning commuters coming into downtown from the eastern part of the metro.  One rarely sees a lot of traffic on this particular ramp during the day.

The first major closure from Phase III...

Quote from: codyg1985 on July 17, 2017, 07:57:18 AM

Quote from: Charles2 on July 15, 2017, 11:29:24 PM
Get ready for another exit ramp closure...

http://5920bridge.com/11th-avenue-north-exit-ramp-closure-in-birmingham/

I'm not sure how much of an impact this closure will have, except for morning commuters coming into downtown from the eastern part of the metro.  One rarely sees a lot of traffic on this particular ramp during the day.

The first major closure from Phase III...

I can hardly wait to hear people bellyaching and griping.  What gets me is how few people who live here in Birmingham know how to get around town without using 20, 59, 65 or 459.  When I was teaching my daughter how to drive I made sure that learned the surface streets here in town.

Quote from: Charles2 on July 17, 2017, 09:00:53 PM

Quote from: codyg1985 on July 17, 2017, 07:57:18 AM

Quote from: Charles2 on July 15, 2017, 11:29:24 PM
Get ready for another exit ramp closure...

http://5920bridge.com/11th-avenue-north-exit-ramp-closure-in-birmingham/

I'm not sure how much of an impact this closure will have, except for morning commuters coming into downtown from the eastern part of the metro.  One rarely sees a lot of traffic on this particular ramp during the day.

The first major closure from Phase III...

I can hardly wait to hear people bellyaching and griping.  What gets me is how few people who live here in Birmingham know how to get around town without using 20, 59, 65 or 459.  When I was teaching my daughter how to drive I made sure that learned the surface streets here in town.

They are going to be in for a rude awakening come in a year or so for sure. Now knowing parallel surface streets to 31 and Finley will be valuable since those will be jammed once the 20/59 bridge closure is in effect.

It wont be as bad as that. It never is. Everybody knows it is coming and when it does everybody has a smartphone with NAV apps that can route you around it. Wether you live here or not you will find a way to get where you need to go. The people that live here and know all the back roads and alternates will continually do so to avoid the most popular detours.

Sure there will be complaining and whining and some early days of long delays. But there always is in everything of even the slightest implied inconvenience.

That I-20/59 project makes me feel old. I can remember going to Atlanta several times as a kid, and I remember that the whole route from Jackson to Atlanta was freeway, except through Birmingham. I think B'ham was the last large city in the South to get an Interstate freeway. And now it needs to be replaced. This is the only example of such a quick cycle from original construction to replacement of an urban interstate freeway that I can think of in a city I'm familiar with.

Quote from: berberry on July 18, 2017, 01:23:03 PM
That I-20/59 project makes me feel old. I can remember going to Atlanta several times as a kid, and I remember that the whole route from Jackson to Atlanta was freeway, except through Birmingham. I think B'ham was the last large city in the South to get an Interstate freeway.

St. Petersburg (opened 1977 north of downtown, not complete until 1983).

Pictures from the I-65/I-20-59 construction, courtesy of al.com

http://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2017/11/birmingham_malfunction_junctio.html#incart_river_home_pop?li_source=base&li_medium=default-widget

My first time in Alabama.  3 quick observations...
I-59 from the Georgia line to the Birmingham area could really use some modernization or at least some general improvements.

Going through Birmingham- I don't think I've seen so many cranes in one place at the same time. Impressive undertaking.

I-22 is great and lots of fun to drive.

SM-T230NU

Quote from: billpa on December 23, 2017, 06:45:27 AM
My first time in Alabama.  3 quick observations...
I-59 from the Georgia line to the Birmingham area could really use some modernization or at least some general improvements.

Going through Birmingham- I don't think I've seen so many cranes in one place at the same time. Impressive undertaking.

I-22 is great and lots of fun to drive.

SM-T230NU

Without knowing the exact numbers, I would have to think that I-59 from the I-24 split to Gadsden is one of the least traveled stretches of interstate highway in either Georgia or Alabama.  That said, I would agree that I-59 needs widening in St. Clair County and eastern Jefferson County---say, from the U.S. 231 interchange (Ashville/Oneonta) to Oporto-Madrid Boulevard.  Eastern Jefferson County and western St. Clair County are growing suburban areas of the Birmingham metro area, and I-59 in tandem with I-75 and I-81 is part of an important corridor connecting the Southeast with points north and northeast.

Quote from: Charles2 on December 23, 2017, 11:01:59 PM

Quote from: billpa on December 23, 2017, 06:45:27 AM
My first time in Alabama.  3 quick observations...
I-59 from the Georgia line to the Birmingham area could really use some modernization or at least some general improvements.

Going through Birmingham- I don't think I've seen so many cranes in one place at the same time. Impressive undertaking.

I-22 is great and lots of fun to drive.

SM-T230NU

Without knowing the exact numbers, I would have to think that I-59 from the I-24 split to Gadsden is one of the least traveled stretches of interstate highway in either Georgia or Alabama.  That said, I would agree that I-59 needs widening in St. Clair County and eastern Jefferson County---say, from the U.S. 231 interchange (Ashville/Oneonta) to Oporto-Madrid Boulevard.  Eastern Jefferson County and western St. Clair County are growing suburban areas of the Birmingham metro area, and I-59 in tandem with I-75 and I-81 is part of an important corridor connecting the Southeast with points north and northeast.

That was our exact route,  81 to 40, 75, 24 and then 59. We were traveling on the Friday before Christmas so traffic was quite heavy,  especially in Knoxville and Chattanooga.
I was wondering how much love 59 in Georgia gets since it really just passes in and out pretty quickly.

SM-T230NU

Quote from: billpa on December 24, 2017, 06:51:19 AM

Quote from: Charles2 on December 23, 2017, 11:01:59 PM

Quote from: billpa on December 23, 2017, 06:45:27 AM
My first time in Alabama.  3 quick observations...
I-59 from the Georgia line to the Birmingham area could really use some modernization or at least some general improvements.

Going through Birmingham- I don't think I've seen so many cranes in one place at the same time. Impressive undertaking.

I-22 is great and lots of fun to drive.

SM-T230NU

Without knowing the exact numbers, I would have to think that I-59 from the I-24 split to Gadsden is one of the least traveled stretches of interstate highway in either Georgia or Alabama.  That said, I would agree that I-59 needs widening in St. Clair County and eastern Jefferson County---say, from the U.S. 231 interchange (Ashville/Oneonta) to Oporto-Madrid Boulevard.  Eastern Jefferson County and western St. Clair County are growing suburban areas of the Birmingham metro area, and I-59 in tandem with I-75 and I-81 is part of an important corridor connecting the Southeast with points north and northeast.

That was our exact route,  81 to 40, 75, 24 and then 59. We were traveling on the Friday before Christmas so traffic was quite heavy,  especially in Knoxville and Chattanooga.
I was wondering how much love 59 in Georgia gets since it really just passes in and out pretty quickly.

SM-T230NU

59 in GA is good road. It is very rural, the traffic wasn't too terrible.

Quote from: Charles2 on December 23, 2017, 11:01:59 PM

Quote from: billpa on December 23, 2017, 06:45:27 AM
My first time in Alabama.  3 quick observations...
I-59 from the Georgia line to the Birmingham area could really use some modernization or at least some general improvements.

Going through Birmingham- I don't think I've seen so many cranes in one place at the same time. Impressive undertaking.

I-22 is great and lots of fun to drive.

SM-T230NU

Without knowing the exact numbers, I would have to think that I-59 from the I-24 split to Gadsden is one of the least traveled stretches of interstate highway in either Georgia or Alabama.  That said, I would agree that I-59 needs widening in St. Clair County and eastern Jefferson County---say, from the U.S. 231 interchange (Ashville/Oneonta) to Oporto-Madrid Boulevard.  Eastern Jefferson County and western St. Clair County are growing suburban areas of the Birmingham metro area, and I-59 in tandem with I-75 and I-81 is part of an important corridor connecting the Southeast with points north and northeast.

Excluding sections of the new I-22, I-59 near the Georgia line is indeed the lightest traveled Interstate segment in Alabama.  However, traffic volumes east of I-459 drop off quickly, so that it's below 30K vehicles a day once past Argo.  You can definitely justify widening from I-459 to the first exit east (Trussville).  But from there to Argo is questionable and definitely not once past Argo.  On a similar vein, traffic drops off in East Birmingham at the 1st Ave N exit (Exit 132) so likewise it would be a tough sell to widen between there and 459.

Just to clarify, I was not saying 59 in Northeast Alabama should be widened, just rehabilitated.

SM-T230NU

Quote from: billpa on December 24, 2017, 11:15:51 AM
Just to clarify, I was not saying 59 in Northeast Alabama should be widened, just rehabilitated.

SM-T230NU

I used to drive that route a lot heading to TRI, TN.  Believe it or not, it's gone through some reconstruction/repaving from Gadsden up through Fort Payne within the last several years.  They redid the bridge there around mm 193, where US 11 crosses underneath, and closed down one side of the interstate for a long period of time to work on the other, ca. 2010-2011.

Theoretically somewhere just past that construction zone, there was another for repaving.  I don't know if that ever really materialized -- as I started to take that route less frequently -- or if the state troopers were enjoying a 30-mile speedtrap.

Quote from: billpa on December 23, 2017, 06:45:27 AM
Going through Birmingham- I don't think I've seen so many cranes in one place at the same time. Impressive undertaking.

Agreed. It is a big monster of project that has lots going on in so many different areas at the same time, hard to see it all without at least a couple of trips through or more from several different directions.

In case anyone here doesn't know, FreewayJim (https://www.youtube.com/user/Freewayjim) has released three new Birmingham videos. The last one includes the approach to Malfunction Junction from the west on 20-59, where they're doing some questionable things with the signage. I may post about it later on, after I've put my thoughts in order.

Quote from: Tom958 on March 28, 2018, 08:05:44 PM
In case anyone here doesn't know, FreewayJim (https://www.youtube.com/user/Freewayjim) has released three new Birmingham videos. The last one includes the approach to Malfunction Junction from the west on 20-59, where they're doing some questionable things with the signage. I may post about it later on, after I've put my thoughts in order.

I went into downtown town yesterday and noticed some of the new signage in place. The new BGS installed before the junction on 20/59 North is atrocious. The 65 South shield is so small I could hardly read it. I pity a out of towner with bad eyesight. Just laziness with the sign printer as they didn't feel like resizing the shields to fit the size of the space available. Quality control is a foreign concept to ALDOT now. I assume that there will still be no indication of I-22 existing north of downtown after this project is complete.


All the new signage is being stored on a vacant lot on 16 St. North just under the 20/59 viaduct next to the Flowers bakery if any one wants to go check them out. I just caught a quick glimpse leaving town and saw the bottom half of a 65 North Huntsville section.


iPhone

At least there is some semblance of signage going up on I-20/59 and parts of I-65.

I-22 has been open for nearly two years and the lack of consistency is laughable.  Reassurance markers vary from one exit to the next: I-22, I-22/US-78, I-22/US-78/AL-4.  Control cities vary: Memphis, Tupelo, Jasper...(Jasper? give me a break).  Services signs are inconsistent (granted, there are quite a few exits with no services).  Then, there are the distance signs between exits. Hardly any mention of Birmingham on WB I-22 until one is near Jasper, no mention of Tupelo or Memphis that I can recall.  If I didn't know better I would swear that the whole project was carried out by the Hooterville Sign Company.

Some of you may have already seen, the southbound lanes and westbound lanes of 20/59 are closed till Saturday(hopefully) as one of the steel girders "˜slipped', that was being installed over the interstate at malfunction junction. I don't know for a fact but I'm assuming one of the outbound ramps under construction for 11th avenue north. Just be careful anyone going through there.

New APL, Georgian in its level of screwed-uppedness, though I think that even GDOT hasn't made this particular mistake.This is very recent- - it's a still from the last of FreewayJim's new Birmingham videos (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qgWNfnvjtU). This APL replaces a fondly-regarded slatted installation (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5208398,-86.8423161,3a,75y,88.02h,102.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIX9S3cWmBZnw7_AcnEPdDw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) with an outdated (but arguably easier to understand) design. The linked Streetview is from July 2016: the latest, from April 2017, shows no overhead at all.  :-o
(https://i.imgur.com/VTk843z.png?1)


The plot thickens: codyg1985 supplied this from the plans he'd downloaded. Correctly designed, incorrectly implemented. WTF?  :hmmm:
(https://i.imgur.com/xx2tNgK.jpg?1)

That slatted-BGS overhead was in pristine shape, too. From August 2016:

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3730/33425460225_9c072fe587_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SVGdNn)

Admittedly, while many of us like the old patchy looks of the previous signage, some of the nearby signs probably lacked anything close to current reflective standards and needed new sign gantries.

Quote from: rcm195 on April 06, 2018, 02:00:41 PM
Some of you may have already seen, the southbound lanes and westbound lanes of 20/59 are closed till Saturday(hopefully) as one of the steel girders "˜slipped', that was being installed over the interstate at malfunction junction. I don't know for a fact but I'm assuming one of the outbound ramps under construction for 11th avenue north. Just be careful anyone going through there.

The road is still closed until sometime next week. ALDOT is charging the contractor $500,000 per day for this mishap until the road reopens.

Quote from: formulanone on April 08, 2018, 10:43:42 AM
That slatted-BGS overhead was in pristine shape, too. From August 2016:

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3730/33425460225_9c072fe587_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SVGdNn)

Admittedly, while many of us like the old patchy looks of the previous signage, some of the nearby signs probably lacked anything close to current reflective standards and needed new sign gantries.

Note the change in exit numbers.  In anticipation of the new directo access to 6th Avenue North from I-20/59,the ramp to I-65 South is now Exit 124B, while the ramp to I-65 North is now Exit 125C.  The ramp to 17th Street will be re-designated as Exit 124D.  If I'm not mistaken, those will be the first exits in Alabama with C or D designations.

Quote from: Charles2 on April 08, 2018, 08:42:36 PM

Quote from: formulanone on April 08, 2018, 10:43:42 AM
That slatted-BGS overhead was in pristine shape, too. From August 2016:

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3730/33425460225_9c072fe587_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/SVGdNn)

Admittedly, while many of us like the old patchy looks of the previous signage, some of the nearby signs probably lacked anything close to current reflective standards and needed new sign gantries.

Note the change in exit numbers.  In anticipation of the new directo access to 6th Avenue North from I-20/59,the ramp to I-65 South is now Exit 124B, while the ramp to I-65 North is now Exit 125C.  The ramp to 17th Street will be re-designated as Exit 124D.  If I'm not mistaken, those will be the first exits in Alabama with C or D designations.

I-565 already has had an Exit 19C for eastbound traffic to downtown. But yea, probably the first exit to have a D designation for sure.

Looks like there's another BGS APL that isn't up to specs.

Today I was driving on I-65 SB just north of the 20/59 junction.  One of the new APL signs is up, but only the 20/59 E/N and I-65 S APL's are on the main sheet.  The 20/59 W/S sign hasn't been mounted, but it's obvious that it won't be part of the main sign.  Sorry I couldn't stop and take a picture.

Does anyone have the signage plans for WB 20/59 approaching I-65?  Are there going to be any BGS trailblazers for I-22 from at least WB 20/59 (likely deemed unnecessary from the opposite direction) -- or even NB I-65 approaching 20/59?  For a corridor that has been the regional developmental focus for the last decade, ALDOT seems, at least for the time being, to be disinterested in providing direction to I-22 from other nearby facilities.   

Quote from: sparker on April 15, 2018, 01:57:01 AM
Does anyone have the signage plans for WB 20/59 approaching I-65?  Are there going to be any BGS trailblazers for I-22 from at least WB 20/59 (likely deemed unnecessary from the opposite direction) -- or even NB I-65 approaching 20/59?  For a corridor that has been the regional developmental focus for the last decade, ALDOT seems, at least for the time being, to be disinterested in providing direction to I-22 from other nearby facilities.   

Someone mentioned a long while back on the I-22 thread that there was no official signage in the plans. ALDOT still hasn't put any mention of I-22's existence on 65N until you get 3/4 of a mile from the 65/22 junction. The most expensive interchange in the state gets laughably ignored seems like.

This gantry was put up during the construction of the junction and widening of 65. I assume a I-22 1 Mile sign was to be in place to the right of the 65 North sign.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180416/d55e1bb46db1032859a29f3d5ebad345.jpg)

Southbound 65 signage is fine for the most part except for no updates to mileage signs for I-22.


iPhone

Quote from: sparker on April 15, 2018, 01:57:01 AM
Does anyone have the signage plans for WB 20/59 approaching I-65?  Are there going to be any BGS trailblazers for I-22 from at least WB 20/59 (likely deemed unnecessary from the opposite direction) -- or even NB I-65 approaching 20/59?  For a corridor that has been the regional developmental focus for the last decade, ALDOT seems, at least for the time being, to be disinterested in providing direction to I-22 from other nearby facilities.   

The signage plans I saw made no mention of I-22, which to me sounds like a big oversight.

Signage-wise, I-22 is the red-headed step child of ALDOT.

Quote from: codyg1985 on June 01, 2018, 07:53:31 AM

Quote from: sparker on April 15, 2018, 01:57:01 AM
Does anyone have the signage plans for WB 20/59 approaching I-65?  Are there going to be any BGS trailblazers for I-22 from at least WB 20/59 (likely deemed unnecessary from the opposite direction) -- or even NB I-65 approaching 20/59?  For a corridor that has been the regional developmental focus for the last decade, ALDOT seems, at least for the time being, to be disinterested in providing direction to I-22 from other nearby facilities.   

The signage plans I saw made no mention of I-22, which to me sounds like a big oversight.

Signage-wise, I-22 is the red-headed step child of ALDOT.

That's too bad.  Considering the penultimate major push for I-22 came from within AL, with interests from the Jasper area virtually browbeating Sen. Shelby into inserting the authorizing legislation into the '04 budget (following the Trent Lott meltdown a couple of years earlier that negated any influence he had regarding the project), it's just possible that ALDOT is still wincing a bit from having a major project such as I-22 laid at their doorstep and thus draining a sizeable portion of their resources.  Probably in time there will be at least auxiliary roadside BGS's directing traffic to I-22 from the adjoining Birmingham-area interstates -- but the concentration right now seems to be getting the 20/59 revision in the rear-view mirror.  Baby steps!     

AL 378 signs posted at Finley Blvd off I-65

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180604/74acd054ab84c1e28fa556a435d18de0.jpg)

Saw no mention of AL-378 Westbound once on Finley however. No end signage either. There was a AL-378 East sign in the median just off of US-78/Arkadelphia Rd. Plenty of To AL-378 trailblazers as well off I-20/59.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180604/939cd42063ce18b9a665f74ee3ed2c7c.jpg)

Which leads me to this...

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180604/e1ea7623b38ae8e4765e0e7171ba221f.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180604/16e56c35d822e6f68c9828360029b6e6.jpg)

So I guess US-78 is still officially routed along its original alignment from I-22 in Graysville to I-20/59 since ALDOT spent money to make these new signs indicating such. The 78 signs posted along I-22 from Graysville to I-65 might supposed to have a ALT banner attached to them? Unless they have been removed recently. I didn't make it up that way today.

Also why is it signed as 78 West only when you can go 78 East as well off the exit? ALDOT just baffles me...


iPhone

Had wondered the same thing myself. What is the significance of Al-378? From what I've seen it starts at US 31 and Finley and ends at US 78? Is that it?

I don't understand really, the State of Alabama has made a bad mistake not finishing Corridor X(not I-22) all the way over to US 31. That would be the logical routing of US 78 then. Trunk them together going through North Birmingham, under 59/20, then on the Red Mountain Expressway before US 78 would exit off at the 3rd/4th avenue south exit.

Quote from: rcm195 on June 04, 2018, 11:31:12 PM
I don't understand really, the State of Alabama has made a bad mistake not finishing Corridor X(not I-22) all the way over to US 31.

They do still intend to, right? They built a clear stub, complete with unused bridges. Was it supposed to be any more complicated than a simple T intersection?

Quote from: rcm195 on June 04, 2018, 11:31:12 PM
Had wondered the same thing myself. What is the significance of Al-378? From what I've seen it starts at US 31 and Finley and ends at US 78? Is that it?

I don't understand really, the State of Alabama has made a bad mistake not finishing Corridor X(not I-22) all the way over to US 31. That would be the logical routing of US 78 then. Trunk them together going through North Birmingham, under 59/20, then on the Red Mountain Expressway before US 78 would exit off at the 3rd/4th avenue south exit.

That would be the most logical in my opinion. These new 78 West signs at Arkadelphia Rd are leading me to think that ALDOT may intend to route 78 along 20/59 to US-31/280 (Red Mtn. Expressway) once the new bridges are built through downtown. It would be similar how US-431 was re-routed along I-20 in Oxford last year.


iPhone

While I was out Friday, I noticed that a slip ramp is being constructed on I-459 Northbound @ US 280.  This should divide traffic headed for US 280 westbound from US 280 eastbound eliminating a dangerous weave for people exit I-459 southbound headed for US 280 eastbound.

Quote from: jdb1234 on June 09, 2018, 02:52:07 PM
While I was out Friday, I noticed that a slip ramp is being constructed on I-459 Northbound @ US 280.  This should divide traffic headed for US 280 westbound from US 280 eastbound eliminating a dangerous weave for people exit I-459 southbound headed for US 280 eastbound.

A rare wise decision by ALDOT here; as long as I can remember there have been horrible backups because of that merge/weave point. Especially when you factor in the massive amount of traffic that already comes through there.

Quote from: Brooks on June 09, 2018, 04:08:33 PM

Quote from: jdb1234 on June 09, 2018, 02:52:07 PM
While I was out Friday, I noticed that a slip ramp is being constructed on I-459 Northbound @ US 280.  This should divide traffic headed for US 280 westbound from US 280 eastbound eliminating a dangerous weave for people exit I-459 southbound headed for US 280 eastbound.

A rare wise decision by ALDOT here; as long as I can remember there have been horrible backups because of that merge/weave point. Especially when you factor in the massive amount of traffic that already comes through there.

Does it back up onto 459? Does it look like they're gonna do anything to lengthen the ramp, which would entail widening the bridge over Cahaba River Road? Whatever they do, it'll be interesting to see how they handle the signage from 459.

Quote from: Tom958 on June 09, 2018, 08:26:37 PM

Quote from: Brooks on June 09, 2018, 04:08:33 PM

Quote from: jdb1234 on June 09, 2018, 02:52:07 PM
While I was out Friday, I noticed that a slip ramp is being constructed on I-459 Northbound @ US 280.  This should divide traffic headed for US 280 westbound from US 280 eastbound eliminating a dangerous weave for people exit I-459 southbound headed for US 280 eastbound.

A rare wise decision by ALDOT here; as long as I can remember there have been horrible backups because of that merge/weave point. Especially when you factor in the massive amount of traffic that already comes through there.

Does it back up onto 459? Does it look like they're gonna do anything to lengthen the ramp, which would entail widening the bridge over Cahaba River Road? Whatever they do, it'll be interesting to see how they handle the signage from 459.

The ramp was lengthened and the bridge over Cahaba River Road on I-459 were widened about a decade ago.  I do not know if it back up onto I-459 but taking the ramp from I-459 Southbound to US 280 eastbound has been a pain as long as I can remember. 

Quote from: jdb1234

Quote from: Tom958 on June 09, 2018, 08:26:37 PM
Does it back up onto 459? Does it look like they're gonna do anything to lengthen the ramp, which would entail widening the bridge over Cahaba River Road? Whatever they do, it'll be interesting to see how they handle the signage from 459.

The ramp was lengthened and the bridge over Cahaba River Road on I-459 were widened about a decade ago.  I do not know if it back up onto I-459 but taking the ramp from I-459 Southbound to US 280 eastbound has been a pain as long as I can remember.

Ha, yeah. Great how I can specifically look for something and still not see it.  :crazy:

Anyway, I'll be interested to see how they do the 459 end, whether there'll be one offramp or two, and how it's signed. Thanks!

The first two new ramps from the I-20/59-I-65 junction reconstruction are now open.  Sometime after 1:00 AM this morning the new ramp from 20E/59N to 6th Avenue North, and the new ramp from 65S to 6th Avenue opened.  At the same time the old ramp from 65S to 6th Avenue was closed.  I checked out both of the new off ramps this afternoon, but since I was driving by myself I couldn't take any pictures.  My guess is that next new ramps to open will be the ones from 65N and 20E/59N leading to 17th Street.  It looks like there's still some work left before the ramp from 65S to 17th can be opened.

Just wondering if anyone had seen the article in various news outlets about the park concept to be built under the new viaducts 59/20 when they are completed? It's to be known as City Walk. Is there any examples of this in another city? It would stretch some 10 city blocks.

(https://d3926qxcw0e1bh.cloudfront.net/post_photos/a3/b3/a3b374bd1fd168463c5ababfbe09ea13.jpg.max800.jpg)

A man climbed a gantry on I-20 just east of the split yesterday, for unknown reasons.  He was finally coaxed down and brought to the hospital for evaluation.

The 11th Avenue North entrance ramps to I-65 north and southbound and I-59 south and I-20 westbound are now open according to Al.Com.

Quote from: rcm195 on August 27, 2018, 12:38:16 PM
The 11th Avenue North entrance ramps to I-65 north and southbound and I-59 south and I-20 westbound are now open according to Al.Com.

Drove on all three of the ramps yesterday.  The ramp to I-65 southbound is, um, high.

I've not had the opportunity to ride on it myself, but it reminds me of several I have driven on in Dallas Texas. Any idea how high this flyover is?

Quote from: rcm195 on August 28, 2018, 10:25:04 PM
I've not had the opportunity to ride on it myself, but it reminds me of several I have driven on in Dallas Texas. Any idea how high this flyover is?

Not sure of the exact height, but an article on al.com said that it was the highest overpass in Birmingham.  I'm not sure how it compares to the height of the AL-108 flyover on I-85, but it's got to be in the same range.  It's definitely higher than the flyover from Red Mountain Expressway onto 20W/59S.  I'm curious about the height of the flyover from 25th Street to 20E/59N that's under construction.

The 17th Street exit ramps have now officially opened. According to Al.Com only some cleanup work remains. Looks like all the guardrails that have damage are being replaced.
A big interchange just got bigger.

Signs are now posted announcing that the 22nd Street exit from 20E/59N will close on September 10th.  Still no word on the exact date that 20/59 will shut down, although a story on WBRC-6 suggested that it may not come as soon as what had been previously anticipated.  I would expect that the completion of the repaving project on I-459 between Bessemer and Hoover will determine when 20/59 will be shut down.   

The stories I've read on Al.Com and ALDOT are saying that 20/59 will not shut down until the end of the year or early 2019. My guess? If it's close to the holidays they will leave it open till the new year.

Quote from: rcm195 on September 01, 2018, 08:58:55 AM
The stories I've read on Al.Com and ALDOT are saying that 20/59 will not shut down until the end of the year or early 2019. My guess? If it's close to the holidays they will leave it open till the new year.

Probably so, given the number of people who pass through Birmingham en route to Tuscaloosa for the religious festivals held on Saturday afternoons at Bryant-Denny Stadium.  :)

And the shut down date for the 22nd Street exit has been pulled forward to September 6th.

Quote from: Charles2 on September 02, 2018, 01:00:47 AM

Quote from: rcm195 on September 01, 2018, 08:58:55 AM
The stories I've read on Al.Com and ALDOT are saying that 20/59 will not shut down until the end of the year or early 2019. My guess? If it's close to the holidays they will leave it open till the new year.

Probably so, given the number of people who pass through Birmingham en route to Tuscaloosa for the religious festivals held on Saturday afternoons at Bryant-Denny Stadium.  :)

And the shut down date for the 22nd Street exit has been pulled forward to September 6th.

The funny thing is that it doesn't stop anything around Tuscaloosa.  They just started a giant repaving/redesign project of Lurleen Wallace Blvd downtown right before football season started.  Add that to the usual 20/59 construction, and continued work at the McFarland Blvd overpass, and it's going to be a cluster from here on out.

Went up I-65 North through downtown today for lunch and snagged a few pics of the new signage for the junction.

2 mile signage...it's just difficult to look at.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181101/dc59e6250a579e04a74ce039f3f5ff89.jpg)

I do like the new median signage. But could it have killed them to stick I-22 on there as well?
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181101/0a7b195d2fe7d0a2c7647b5853dd4ebb.jpg)

1 mile signage. If you zoom in to the southbound side, you can see the back of one of the original button copy overheads that somehow survived the overhaul.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181101/6809dd56b9f1842d012bf926ae10027c.jpg)

And ALDOT has already put up the I-20/59 detour shields for when the viaducts come down. Installed from the junction to AL-378/Finley Blvd. Over half of them are crooked or about to fall on the ground so it was a rush job. Down at the traffic light on the left side, one of the shields was literally laying out in the road. Got the green light unfortunately so I couldn't get a pic. That minivan is on top of it actually.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181101/f7ed8c9065a0041392d0ee0c56959c5d.jpg)

Had to rush back to work so I didn't get anything else unfortunately. I also didn't get a pic of one of the new signs on I-20/59 north at US-78/Arkadelphia Road when I went through there last week. It merely says US-78 West/Arkadelphia.
The word Road is omitted and folks traveling through have no clue that US-78 East is a option as well. I still believe that ALDOT plans to multiplex 78 with I-20/59 to US-31/280 once the new bridges are built.


iPhone

Quote from: Voyager75I do like the new median signage. But could it have killed them to stick I-22 on there as well?

Not at that location.  That median sign is a standard next-3-exits sign.  It wouldn't be appropriate to put I-22 on such a sign until you're north of Finley.

Quote from: Voyager75 on November 01, 2018, 08:34:47 PM
Went up I-65 North through downtown today for lunch and snagged a few pics of the new signage for the junction.

2 mile signage...it's just difficult to look at.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181101/dc59e6250a579e04a74ce039f3f5ff89.jpg)

I do like the new median signage. But could it have killed them to stick I-22 on there as well?
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181101/0a7b195d2fe7d0a2c7647b5853dd4ebb.jpg)

1 mile signage. If you zoom in to the southbound side, you can see the back of one of the original button copy overheads that somehow survived the overhaul.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181101/6809dd56b9f1842d012bf926ae10027c.jpg)

And ALDOT has already put up the I-20/59 detour shields for when the viaducts come down. Installed from the junction to AL-378/Finley Blvd. Over half of them are crooked or about to fall on the ground so it was a rush job. Down at the traffic light on the left side, one of the shields was literally laying out in the road. Got the green light unfortunately so I couldn't get a pic. That minivan is on top of it actually.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181101/f7ed8c9065a0041392d0ee0c56959c5d.jpg)

Had to rush back to work so I didn't get anything else unfortunately. I also didn't get a pic of one of the new signs on I-20/59 north at US-78/Arkadelphia Road when I went through there last week. It merely says US-78 West/Arkadelphia.
The word Road is omitted and folks traveling through have no clue that US-78 East is a option as well. I still believe that ALDOT plans to multiplex 78 with I-20/59 to US-31/280 once the new bridges are built.


iPhone

An enormous BGS it appears to be.  Hope they calculated possible wind loading.  Would have considered a break up into three smaller panels.

Quote from: DJStephens on November 01, 2018, 10:51:36 PMAn enormous BGS it appears to be.  Hope they calculated possible wind loading.  Would have considered a break up into three smaller panels.

They could've reduced the height by a few feet by putting the 20 and 59 shields side by side...

Quote from: Voyager75 on November 01, 2018, 08:34:47 PM
Went up I-65 North through downtown today for lunch and snagged a few pics of the new signage for the junction.

2 mile signage...it’s just difficult to look at.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181101/dc59e6250a579e04a74ce039f3f5ff89.jpg)

Those signs aren't that bad to be honest. I've seen a lot worse. They seem a little tall like Tom958 was saying, but other than that not too bad.

^^^^^^^
Now -- if they just moved the "Huntsville" control up right under the 65 pull-through shield, they have plenty of room to place "TO I-22/Memphis" directly underneath.  But I-22 being the red-headed stepchild of the region, that's probably not going to happen in the near term!

Quote from: rcm195 on July 13, 2018, 01:23:39 PM
Just wondering if anyone had seen the article in various news outlets about the park concept to be built under the new viaducts 59/20 when they are completed? It's to be known as City Walk. Is there any examples of this in another city? It would stretch some 10 city blocks.

Orlando plans something similar under I-4: http://www.cityoforlando.net/i-4-ultimate-improvement-project/
https://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/news/2017/10/12/i-4-under-i-park-project-update-business.html

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cityoforlando.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F01%2FI4SliderRendering.jpg&hash=9d573004ba137e45bb51a851f15a6a787a3bafdb)

Quote from: sparker on November 02, 2018, 04:13:45 PM
^^^^^^^
Now -- if they just moved the "Huntsville" control up right under the 65 pull-through shield, they have plenty of room to place "TO I-22/Memphis" directly underneath.  But I-22 being the red-headed stepchild of the region, that's probably not going to happen in the near term!

There is actually enough room on the current signage to do the following:

I-65 NORTH
TO I-22

Huntsville
Memphis

Or, they could use a separate BGS on the side:

MEMPHIS VIA I-22
USE I-65 NORTH

But, then, that's only me.

^^^^^^^^
Both workable ideas; prefer the former to the latter (overhead signs get more attention and have greater impact).  It's amazing to me that both AL and MS sunk millions into I-22 only to virtually ignore its existence in regards to trailblazer signage on intersecting or nearby routes (see the I-22 and I-269 threads for more on this!).

Passed through the 20/59 interchange with 65. It looks as if it is 80-100 percent complete? Those flyovers looked nice and were 20+ years overdue. IMO

New signage at Exit 123/Arkadelphia Rd. on I-20/59 only say US-78 West as shown several pages back. Well my theory that US-78 might be rerouted onto I-20/59 to the Red Mtn Expressway after the bridges are rebuilt took a step forward.
Now I know this commercial for 5920bridge.com is locally produced and possibly just a mistake by a intern but this map has a interesting placement of a US-78 shield.

Taken from a bumper coming back from commercial break on ABC 33/40:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181210/2f8c58282b6b66b662fde7d68c454e73.jpg)

It is possible they created the graphics copying material provided by ALDOT since their seal is shown. We'll see...


iPhone

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181212/e3da5c28ab59fdb7a0b5c8bf77e91622.jpg)

Some of the new bridge pylons for westbound 20/59 have gone up. Gives a idea how much wider and taller the new viaduct will be.


iPhone

Any idea how many lanes the new viaduct will be? I'm guessing 12 total?

10, but with full shoulders.

Quote from: Voyager75 on December 12, 2018, 02:15:27 PMSome of the new bridge pylons for westbound 20/59 have gone up. Gives a idea how much wider and taller the new viaduct will be.

Not to mention having an architectural look, which is very rare for Alabama. In fact, one of the new flyovers at the 20-59-65 interchange has one unpainted concrete AASHTO beam span while the rest of the structure is green-painted plate girders. It looks bad.
(https://expo.advance.net/img/16b40c1e9e/width960/94e_dsc_2991.jpeg)

Whole article, August 2018 (https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2018/08/new_interstate_ramp_opens_in_d.html)

Let the chaos begin.  I-20/59 will close through downtown Birmingham on MLK Day. https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/2019/01/14-month-i-5920-closure-to-start-monday.html

New photos from the demolition of the I-20/59 downtown overpasses, courtesy of al.com

https://www.al.com/expo/news/g66l-2019/02/5d55c467a04948/new-photos-of-i5920-bridge-deck-demolition-in-birmingham.html

Two-plus weeks in, and the progress they have made is impressive.  I drove through the area last night and was surprised at just how much they had accomplished already.

Quote from: Tom958 on December 12, 2018, 10:19:22 PM

Quote from: Voyager75 on December 12, 2018, 02:15:27 PMSome of the new bridge pylons for westbound 20/59 have gone up. Gives a idea how much wider and taller the new viaduct will be.

Not to mention having an architectural look, which is very rare for Alabama. In fact, one of the new flyovers at the 20-59-65 interchange has one unpainted concrete AASHTO beam span while the rest of the structure is green-painted plate girders. It looks bad.
(https://expo.advance.net/img/16b40c1e9e/width960/94e_dsc_2991.jpeg)

Whole article, August 2018 (https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/index.ssf/2018/08/new_interstate_ramp_opens_in_d.html)

Far better than the busy, visual clutter of texdot interchanges. Simple and utilitarian. Shows restraint of use of public money.

Quote from: barcncpt44 on January 14, 2019, 05:46:00 PM
Let the chaos begin.  I-20/59 will close through downtown Birmingham on MLK Day. https://www.al.com/news/birmingham/2019/01/14-month-i-5920-closure-to-start-monday.html

It hasn't been very chaotic. There are so many other options through the city. Great progress so far. I wouldn't be surprised if they aren't finished much earlier than anticipated.

^ Pretty sure there are financial incentives built into the contract for the contractor to finish early (and penalties if it's delayed/late).

Quote from: froggie on February 14, 2019, 11:55:56 AM
^ Pretty sure there are financial incentives built into the contract for the contractor to finish early (and penalties if it's delayed/late).

IIRC, it's $250K/day.

Quote from: froggie on February 14, 2019, 11:55:56 AM
^ Pretty sure there are financial incentives built into the contract for the contractor to finish early (and penalties if it's delayed/late).

Let me rephrase that. Even being aware of the penalties/incentives, I believe they will be finished a lot earlier than anticipated.

Had to drive out to Pinson today so I got to snag a few pics of the 20/59(not calling them the ALDOT decreed 59/20) bridge segments being built across the interstate from the BHM Airport.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190305/7fbd997b2219f6c553eef93ffd3a50b0.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190305/52025fbe5b1f890e75325b949fd0ab13.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190305/67282b5d87a383b165b14fb06e39cd30.jpg)

Hard to make out exactly as to which pieces are what from this distance but it appears they are all just pieces of the pylons/supports

Also noticed a couple of new signs put up from the last time I came through for Exits 126 A/B. They look great...

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190305/843901de0768cd58b4dc3899a37cac21.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190305/8910f3d167ff29a84bc38f4fd86606a6.jpg)

Couldn't get pics with bumper to bumper traffic getting off the interstate at US 31/280, but the construction area at the former viaducts is going strong. Dozens of cranes everywhere and a few of the old bridge supports remain by the Sheraton, but everything else is just dirt  along with the few new supports up by the Arena.


iPhone

And then there was this news item posted on al.com today:

https://www.al.com/news/2019/03/i-5920-bridge-construction-to-start-next-week.html

It looks like AL-149 has been further truncated.  For many years the southern terminus of the route was at US-280 in Mountain Brook and the northern terminus was at US-31/280 at University Boulevard near St. Vincent's Hospital.  Some years ago northern terminus of was truncated to Oxmoor Road in Homewood.  Now it appears that the route now ends at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Green Springs Highway (CR-99).

Before I-65 was completed, AL-149 served as the signed truck route for US-31 and US-280.  Now it the route serves no redeeming purpose.  Why does ALDOT continue to maintain what's left of this route?

^ I have not seen anything on the 2nd truncation you refer to (to Lakeshore Pkwy).

The first truncation was actually to north of Valley Ave, basically at the Birmingham city limits about 1/4mi north of Valley Ave.  According to ALDOT's latest Milepost Map for Jefferson County, this change occurred in May, 2015.

My guess is that Birmingham wanted to take local control/responsibility for the portion inside the city, and so that's why ALDOT relinquished it.

^ Guide signs directing NB 149 traffic to turn onto Green Springs Highway have been removed, as have any reassurance signs on Green Springs north of Lakeshore have been removed. 

The latest update on I-20/59 through downtown Birmingham:

https://www.al.com/news/2019/06/600-i-5920-bridge-segments-installed-project-on-schedule-aldot-says.html

That construction is 65 percent complete. I hope it's done before Xmas! I wish they would redo the Atlanta interchanges like that...

I was just there on the surface streets (Arrington Blvd) this week. If you get a chance drive up close to the construction area. These segments are massive. You also get an idea how much taller this one mile segment will be vs the old one. They don't compare, completely different. I now can see how something like City Walk can be built underneath it. Oh and the engineer in charge, Dr. Leonard said a final design of City Walk would be shown next month.

https://www.al.com/news/2019/07/i-5920-bridge-project-progress-6-months-in.html

This gives a pretty good idea of how the 59/20 bridge project has progressed over the past six months.

The latest pics from the I-20/59 rebuild:

https://www.al.com/news/g66l-2019/08/0a0dedbfaf3400/latest-photos-from-the-i5920-bridge-construction-in-birmingham.html

The I-65 section south of town from Exit 242 (Co. Hwy 52) to Exit 238 (US-31) finally expanded to 3 lanes in each direction over the past 2 days. I stress that it is still very much a construction zone as the lanes are on a temp configuration until the last asphalt layer is laid down. That won't occur until April 2020....

I assume the rest of the landscaping, new lighting at each exit and some drainage work will continue through the winter.

Some of the new signage has gone up. I assume the rest will go up in stages. Only got I-65 south. Will try and get northbound on Friday. As usual for ALDOT, close but no cigar in quality control.

Off-center Saginaw...
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191003/ceb9aa639dd28228cae7557f476e3e84.jpg)

Good on this one...
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191003/76d42cf1aab2ca567ef85f3657f376ea.jpg)




iPad

Edit:
Here's the one Northbound 65 pic I snagged.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191005/1c7c478ec1e5fd3e626e9742939853fa.jpg)

As you can see with the exit only tab, the current alignments are almost a full lane off. The lane I'm in very much continues straight. Everything will shift to the left as you can see over at the barrels once the final layer is put down.

pics of the 20/59 construction from 9/30.

https://www.al.com/news/g66l-2019/10/d4a7b350ca9595/new-photos-of-the-i5920-bridge-construction-in-birmingham.html

OK...quick question.

Are there any plans still to replace Malfunction Junction (I-20/I-59/I-65 interchange) with a more traditional stack or turbine interchange?

Given the ramps they added as part of the 20/59 rebuild downtown, I'd hazard a bet the answer is "no".

I think I answered some of it, but I guess my post did not get posted or some other freak accident.  However, the signs on I-65 still show the old ramps to the left and the crossover to the other side still, so most likely as froggie says "No."

The latest photos from the I-20/59 bridge rebuild:

https://www.al.com/news/g66l-2019/11/ef89e7969d1726/new-photos-of-the-i5920-bridge-construction-in-birmingham.html

Does anyone know of a completion date of the 20/59 corridor, I'm guessing it will be around March 1st, but I'm not going to take it to the bank...

I would be willing to bet it opens before March.

That's good to know! Do you know or can speculate as to what the next big interstate project in the Birmingham area will be? I hope its improving IH 65 South of Birmingham. That route is so antiquated IMO. While Typing this, the overall 4 lane interstate 20 viaduct east of Birmingham needs to be gutted and rebuilt. I think that might have more priority??? But I'm just guessing...

Quote from: Charles2 on April 21, 2019, 08:51:33 PM
It looks like AL-149 has been further truncated.  For many years the southern terminus of the route was at US-280 in Mountain Brook and the northern terminus was at US-31/280 at University Boulevard near St. Vincent's Hospital.  Some years ago northern terminus of was truncated to Oxmoor Road in Homewood.  Now it appears that the route now ends at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Green Springs Highway (CR-99).

Before I-65 was completed, AL-149 served as the signed truck route for US-31 and US-280.  Now it the route serves no redeeming purpose.  Why does ALDOT continue to maintain what's left of this route?

Got off at the I-65/Lakeshore Drive exit last night and lo and behold new AL-149 North and South directional signs indicating that AL-149 now travels westward along Lakeshore Drive to some point. Unfortunately we were on our way to a dinner function with friends so I couldn't find out how far it now goes. Couldn't get pics either but maybe I can this weekend. The AL-149 North signs that were removed at Lakeshore and Greensprings are now back up with a arrow pointing towards I-65.


iPad

Quote from: Voyager75 on December 12, 2019, 02:55:03 PM

Quote from: Charles2 on April 21, 2019, 08:51:33 PM
It looks like AL-149 has been further truncated.  For many years the southern terminus of the route was at US-280 in Mountain Brook and the northern terminus was at US-31/280 at University Boulevard near St. Vincent's Hospital.  Some years ago northern terminus of was truncated to Oxmoor Road in Homewood.  Now it appears that the route now ends at the intersection of Lakeshore Drive and Green Springs Highway (CR-99).

Before I-65 was completed, AL-149 served as the signed truck route for US-31 and US-280.  Now it the route serves no redeeming purpose.  Why does ALDOT continue to maintain what's left of this route?

Got off at the I-65/Lakeshore Drive exit last night and lo and behold new AL-149 North and South directional signs indicating that AL-149 now travels westwardalong Lakeshore Drive to some point. Unfortunately we were on our way to a dinner function with friends so I couldn’t find out how far it now goes. Couldn’t get pics either but maybe I can this weekend. The AL-149 North signs that were removed at Lakeshore and Greensprings are now back up with a arrow pointing towards I-65.


iPad

Here is the change log from June 2019 from the ALDOT Milepost Map for Jefferson County (https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/MilepostPDF/web/co37mp.pdf):

INTERSTATE 65 @ 255.047 (COUNTY MILEAGE 6.475) AND STATE ROUTE 149 @ 3.370 (COUNTY MILEAGE 3.370) AND 4.090 (COUNTY MILEAGE 4.090) DUE TO ELIMINATION OF SEGMENT OF STATE ROUTE 149 AND ADDITION / RELOCATION OF SEGMENT OF 149 ON THE STATE SYSTEM. MAINTENANCE ASSUMED BY CITY OF HOMEWOOD.

I was going to assume AL-150 as well but that graphic indicates it ends at West Oxmoor now. Not really much use for the extension then. To AL-150 would make more sense as there is a lot of new commercial development starting around the Ross Bridge area, plus with the massive Dollar General distribution center past that.


iPad

I hope I'm right but I'm guessing that the new 20/59 viaduct will be open in 3 weeks? And after that, IH 65 south of Birmingham needs two more lanes in both directions as well as interchange improvements, IMO, its better to be proactive than reactive, even if that rebuild takes 4 year which would probably be the case with all the rock blasting, south of Birmingham...

Unfortunately I don't know of any long-term plans to widen I-65 between I-20/59 and I-459. The terrain will make that very challenging.

Honestly I'm not sure of any major projects going forward in the Birmingham metro area(I'm not including the northern belt line) past the rebuild of 59/20. My personal "next priority" ? Build the flyover for west bound 280 traffic to enter southbound 459. Any idea if this project is still on any "5 year"  plans or not?

The rework of the Valleydale/I-65 interchange will be a good one as well. That would allow the 4th lane to be opened all the way to Alabaster once that construction is completed.

The I-59/20 bridges spanning downtown Birmingham will be open to traffic on or before January 21st ALDOT announced today.
https://abc3340.com/news/local/aldot-announces-re-open-date-for-i-5920-bridges-in-birmingham

I am driving to Memphis on the 21st, god i hope i can take the bridges and not that detour through lovely industrial NE Birmingham that I have been. 

Ribbon cutting for the new 20/59 bridge through downtown Birmingham held this afternoon . . .

https://abc3340.com/news/local/ribbon-cutting-ceremony-held-for-new-700m-i-5920-bridges-in-downtown-birmingham (https://abc3340.com/news/local/ribbon-cutting-ceremony-held-for-new-700m-i-5920-bridges-in-downtown-birmingham)

I-20W/I-59S opens tonight at 9:00 p.m.  I-20E/I-59N is scheduled to open Sunday at 8:00 p..m.

iPad
[/quote]

Here is the change log from June 2019 from the ALDOT Milepost Map for Jefferson County (https://aldotgis.dot.state.al.us/MilepostPDF/web/co37mp.pdf):

INTERSTATE 65 @ 255.047 (COUNTY MILEAGE 6.475) AND STATE ROUTE 149 @ 3.370 (COUNTY MILEAGE 3.370) AND 4.090 (COUNTY MILEAGE 4.090) DUE TO ELIMINATION OF SEGMENT OF STATE ROUTE 149 AND ADDITION / RELOCATION OF SEGMENT OF 149 ON THE STATE SYSTEM. MAINTENANCE ASSUMED BY CITY OF HOMEWOOD.
[/quote]

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200118/85bdb44084504bd6effbf9e7e9cd8cb3.jpg)

The end of AL-149 is posted just past the Wildwood Circle intersection about a mile west of I-65. Kind of random. There is a North 149 sign directly across the road indicating the beginning.


iPad

Quote

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200118/85bdb44084504bd6effbf9e7e9cd8cb3.jpg)

The end of AL-149 is posted just past the Wildwood Circle intersection about a mile west of I-65. Kind of random. There is a North 149 sign directly across the road indicating the beginning.


iPad

That location is where the Homewood/Birmingham City Limits border.

East/North bound lanes of 20/59 now open through downtown Birmingham. 🥳🥳🥳🥳

god, it was so nice not to either have to divert through Uptown/new football stadium land or industrial NE B'ham today.  ALDOT did a great job with the viaducts at least, still some work on some ramps I saw going on.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200201/0be5d56ac49454afaf32471d503dc8a5.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200201/3c945a46f14a1d2ef4255572af3a2cfa.jpg)

New overhead signage was finally installed this past week at the I-65 Exit 242 and 238 exits. The exit only sign in the second pic had been up for a month but was finally adjusted to line up with the actual exit only lane. And for some reason the right side signage is in Clearview at both exits. Haven't got a pic at Exit 238 yet.
Plus I should note the overheads at the off ramps had been sitting on the side of the interstate for the past few weeks. But they were instantly put the day after a 8 car pileup last Saturday night at the US-31 Exit 238 off ramp in rainy conditions. Doubt it was coincidence and probably a little CYA from ALDOT to the contractors. I've personally witnessed several cars dart back in the 65 mainline last second at that off ramp since the lanes were expanded. The exit had been poorly marked really.


iPad

I haven't been to Birmingham since 20-59 reopened, but I saw a video that Cody posted on Facebook and... there are two major signage boogerups that I saw, both on the westbound side.

First, about 3000 feet before the US 31-280-Carraway Blvd. exit, they've placed an enormous APL-like monstrosity that bears no resemblance to anything in the MUTCD, and which is unneeded because there's not a multilane exit with an option lane there. This huge sign calls out all the Interstates and their destinations (except for I-22 and Memphis, of course) as well as US 31-280 et al. However, considering that the previous assembly calls out I-65 at the 2 mile mark, and that there are at least two perfectly legit APL's between the 31-280 interchange and I-65, all that's really needed is a conventional sign for US 31-280 et al, 1/2 mile.

Upstream from there is another mess: conventional signage with everything mounted a lane too far to the left, plus an MUTCD-noncompliant white down arrow pointing to the incorrect lane for the US 31-280 exit. Putting way too much effort into it, I figured out:

Originally there was this overhead (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5359783,-86.795631,3a,75y,212.33h,96.48t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sI-iV5_Z_QrA886tvzK1oKg!2e0!5s20150501T000000!7i13312!8i6656) Aside from its iconic slatted design, matte finish and diagrammatic arrow, the two right signs were mounted a lane too far left because the 31st Street offramp being just beyond the bridge made it infeasible to put the 31st Street arrow sign at the theoretical gore where it ideally should be. No big deal, really. Shit happens with '60's highway design.

Then, at some point, the slatted signs were cloned into modern ones, the offramp to 31st Street was lengthed greatly, and the signs were thus installed on a new gantry at the theoretical gore of the new offramp. However, when the new signs were installed there, the new offramp was barely even started, so again they placed the 31st Street arrow sign over the right mainline lane. This Streetview is from March 2017 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5371907,-86.7943345,3a,75y,215.45h,88.85t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1soOjDWO5Y9r51Yss7EGj2DA!2e0!5s20170301T000000!7i13312!8i6656).

Unsurprisingly, when the new 31st Street offramp was completed, the signs were not moved rightward to their correct location (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5371686,-86.7944028,3a,75y,206.2h,91.55t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sscvn-GxFKcxfxrBUD1UBsA!2e0!5s20190201T000000!7i16384!8i8192), probably because it wouldn't be long until the viaduct would be closed and something else would have to be done with the signs there. This Streetview is from February 2019.

Then, all of the signs were replaced, which obviously means that they were remounted. 31st Street became 31st Street, 12th Avenue and BJCC. Unfortunately, the new sign was mounted over the mainline instead of over the offramp! And, the distance legend for the US 31-280 exit was replaced by a white down arrow, which, because the signs are too far left, points to the incorrect lane! WTF? Finally, there are two conventional signs for I-65 north and south, which, other than message overload, I don't see a problem with.

New sign gantry was installed at the west end of I-459 recently. This replaced the original that was knocked down in a accident well over a year ago. The noticeable thing about it are the obvious Exit 0 tabs which may be the first I've ever seen in these parts. Also the LEFT tab may or may not be totally accurate as the lanes actually continue straight ahead as it crosses over and eventually merges in with Southbound I-20/59.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200618/57e63bec0a63c476ef6fe9ce1d12cf6a.jpg)


iPad

I always thought that exit should have been numbered zero. Did it originally have the I-20/59 exit number there or no number at all? I can't remember.

The originals have/had no exit number. This new one is the only one which has the exit tabs. ALDOT seems to be trying out new signage along I-459 with this and the new mileage signs with a 459 shield on them put out every .2 miles like Tennessee does along their interstates.

Of course when I-422 is finally built in the year 2135 they'll have to decide how to sign the exit numbers for the interchange.

iPad

I recall I-65 has an Exit 0 at I-10, but no A-B for each (like Pennsylvania).

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3869/15123793315_7e6f82244e_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/p3roRa)

Haven't harped on this for almost two years -- but do any of the sign plans for I-20/59 or I-65 in Birmingham contain I-22 trailblazer information?  Seems silly (or even a bit pathetic) not to include such at this point!

Quote from: sparker on June 20, 2020, 04:16:32 PM
Haven't harped on this for almost two years -- but do any of the sign plans for I-20/59 or I-65 in Birmingham contain I-22 trailblazer information?  Seems silly (or even a bit pathetic) not to include such at this point!

Don't think there ever was. All the new signage has gone up in the downtown area and there's zero indication of I-22 even existing. You get no I-22 signage on I-65 North until you're 3/4 of a mile from the interchange. There is a sign gantry just north of Finely Blvd with only a 65 North BGS on it that is probably supposed to have a I-22 sign on it but it was never put up or forgotten.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200620/72a96c47844fd280a35486c2d47083ca.jpg)



I-65 South is properly signed from 2 miles out inward but I would assume only about 5% of the cars traveling in that direction would even use I-22 unless it's local.

They had travel times to I-22 once on one of the VMS boards south of Birmingham but it was only once. I drove it everyday pre-pandemic and since then the boards only give times to US-31 in Hoover or I-20/59(which have been swapped back around properly from the dumb 59/20 pre-bridge build mandate). That or the social bullet points of the week.


iPad

Quote from: Voyager75 on June 20, 2020, 05:13:56 PM

Quote from: sparker on June 20, 2020, 04:16:32 PM
Haven't harped on this for almost two years -- but do any of the sign plans for I-20/59 or I-65 in Birmingham contain I-22 trailblazer information?  Seems silly (or even a bit pathetic) not to include such at this point!

Don't think there ever was. All the new signage has gone up in the downtown area and there's zero indication of I-22 even existing. You get no I-22 signage on I-65 North until you're 3/4 of a mile from the interchange. There is a sign gantry just north of Finely Blvd with only a 65 North BGS on it that is probably supposed to have a I-22 sign on it but it was never put up or forgotten.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200620/72a96c47844fd280a35486c2d47083ca.jpg)

That sign bridge is at 33rd Avenue N.  Interesting to note that it was put up when I-65 was widened through there, a few years before the interchange at I-22 started construction.

Before I-22, the interchange at Finley Blvd had a sign for Memphis.  I think it is still there with Memphis greened out.

Yeah it's still there.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200620/5f102c3194ecb33d64ec0305e04363d1.jpg)



iPad

Despite the completion of the I-20/59 viaduct project, as of last Friday there is only one advance sign for US 31/280 along the freeway northbound. Instead there are three US 280 trailblazers posted leading to the gore point for Exit 126A.

Southbound has three advance signs, but none beyond the APL ahead of 31st Street.

Was surprised to see that the three vintage overheads for I-65 with button copy shields on southbound survive.

Quote from: Alex on September 14, 2020, 10:06:59 AM
Despite the completion of the I-20/59 viaduct project, as of last Friday there is only one advance sign for US 31/280 along the freeway northbound. Instead there are three US 280 trailblazers posted leading to the gore point for Exit 126A.

Southbound has three advance signs, but none beyond the APL ahead of 31st Street.

Was surprised to see that the three vintage overheads for I-65 with button copy shields on southbound survive.

The signage for US 280 has been a issue since the viaduct reopened.  I know of people that have missed the exit for that reason. 

Quote from: jdb1234 on September 14, 2020, 10:13:31 AM

Quote from: Alex on September 14, 2020, 10:06:59 AM
Despite the completion of the I-20/59 viaduct project, as of last Friday there is only one advance sign for US 31/280 along the freeway northbound. Instead there are three US 280 trailblazers posted leading to the gore point for Exit 126A.

Southbound has three advance signs, but none beyond the APL ahead of 31st Street.

Was surprised to see that the three vintage overheads for I-65 with button copy shields on southbound survive.

The signage for US 280 has been a issue since the viaduct reopened.  I know of people that have missed the exit for that reason.

The first thing I noticed when I drove on the new bridge was the lack of a exit gantry for US-31/280. There's no warning for people unfamiliar with the new layout for the exit other than the 1 mile advanced signage. Those small trailblazer US-280 signs don't get the job done really. Those were added week or two after so the lack of signage is known by ALDOT but I doubt they do anything else about it. Those bridge pieces don't actually support sign gantries. The others are supported from the ground below so I'm not sure if the area under the exit ramp has room for supports. I would have to go down and investigate.


iPad

I came through Birmingham late Friday night and made that movement from N/E 59/20 to 280 and probably would have missed that exit had I not seen this conversation earlier this week so, thanks, guys. 

Quote from: Voyager75 on September 18, 2020, 07:18:16 PM

Quote from: jdb1234 on September 14, 2020, 10:13:31 AM

Quote from: Alex on September 14, 2020, 10:06:59 AM
Despite the completion of the I-20/59 viaduct project, as of last Friday there is only one advance sign for US 31/280 along the freeway northbound. Instead there are three US 280 trailblazers posted leading to the gore point for Exit 126A.

Southbound has three advance signs, but none beyond the APL ahead of 31st Street.

Was surprised to see that the three vintage overheads for I-65 with button copy shields on southbound survive.

The signage for US 280 has been a issue since the viaduct reopened.  I know of people that have missed the exit for that reason.

The first thing I noticed when I drove on the new bridge was the lack of a exit gantry for US-31/280. There's no warning for people unfamiliar with the new layout for the exit other than the 1 mile advanced signage. Those small trailblazer US-280 signs don't get the job done really. Those were added week or two after so the lack of signage is known by ALDOT but I doubt they do anything else about it. Those bridge pieces don't actually support sign gantries. The others are supported from the ground below so I'm not sure if the area under the exit ramp has room for supports. I would have to go down and investigate.


iPad

DO YOU GUYS COMMUNICATE ALL OF THESE ISSUES WITH THE DOT ON A REGULAR BASIS? i email my concerns to every email address i can find here in Georgia in hopes that someone will take the needed action.

Quote from: formulanone on June 19, 2020, 05:38:21 PM
I recall I-65 has an Exit 0 at I-10, but no A-B for each (like Pennsylvania).

(https://live.staticflickr.com/3869/15123793315_7e6f82244e_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/p3roRa)

Illinois used to have Exits 0A-B on I-72 when it ended at I-55 in Springfield. Now that I-72 has been extended west into Missouri, Exits 0A-B have become Exits 103A-B.

I wonder if there are any Exits 0A-B other than the ones in Pennsylvania?

Has the Interstate 22 connector between Interstate 65 and US 31 been completed yet?

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 09, 2021, 12:37:16 PM
Has the Interstate 22 connector between Interstate 65 and US 31 been completed yet?

If you are talking about the interchange of I22 & I65, then yes it is complete.  I haven't driven it, but I went thru the area on 65 and saw the roads were open.  I wasn't looking to see if I22 extended past 65 to connect with 31 however.

Quote from: msunat97 on February 09, 2021, 01:08:18 PM

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 09, 2021, 12:37:16 PM
Has the Interstate 22 connector between Interstate 65 and US 31 been completed yet?

If you are talking about the interchange of I22 & I65, then yes it is complete.  I haven't driven it, but I went thru the area on 65 and saw the roads were open.  I wasn't looking to see if I22 extended past 65 to connect with 31 however.

The stub from where I-22 ends east to US 31 has not been touched. There are not any near-term plans to do anything with it, as far as I know.

Quote from: codyg1985 on February 09, 2021, 01:38:00 PM

Quote from: msunat97 on February 09, 2021, 01:08:18 PM

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 09, 2021, 12:37:16 PM
Has the Interstate 22 connector between Interstate 65 and US 31 been completed yet?

If you are talking about the interchange of I22 & I65, then yes it is complete.  I haven't driven it, but I went thru the area on 65 and saw the roads were open.  I wasn't looking to see if I22 extended past 65 to connect with 31 however.

The stub from where I-22 ends east to US 31 has not been touched. There are not any near-term plans to do anything with it, as far as I know.

The rural planning organization report on the ALDOT website for Jefferson County says this connection to US-31 is scheduled for construction in 2025. There are also a couple other Rebuild Alabama Act projects that I found on this same report as well: 6-laning and reconstruction of I-59 from the end of the 6-lane at US-11 (1st Avenue North) to SR-75, which like the Corridor X US-31 connection is due for construction in 2025, and another add lanes and reconstruct on I-20/59 between exits 115 and 118 (includes bridge replacing bridges at exit 118 and the pair of bridges south of exit 118), construction expected in 2023 on that project. The 6-lanes on I-59 from I-459 to CR-10 are still expected to let next fiscal year.

The I-65/Lakeshore Parkway interchange conversion to a DDI project in Homewood, AL has been withdrawn from this months's letting for bid. Not sure why.

Quote from: codyg1985 on February 25, 2021, 07:25:11 PM
The I-65/Lakeshore Parkway interchange conversion to a DDI project in Homewood, AL has been withdrawn from this months's letting for bid. Not sure why.

I am unsure why it was withdrawn as well but it'll usually reappear within the next couple lettings from what I've seen on other projects let in 2020 that were withdrawn from one letting and put in another.

EDIT: The I-65/Lakeshore Parkway DDI is on the March 26, 2021 letting now, the list of projects that will be let on March 26th are now posted on the alletting website on the ALDOT website. There is also a replacement of the southbound I-65 welcome center south of the TN state line in this letting which is the only other notable project on this letting, the rest are generic maintenance projects and intersection improvements (there are a few roundabout installations in this letting as well)

they better  not take away the rocket from the southbound welcome center!!

that welcome center did need a revamp big time.

Quote from: Voyager75 on September 18, 2020, 07:18:16 PM

Quote from: jdb1234 on September 14, 2020, 10:13:31 AM

Quote from: Alex on September 14, 2020, 10:06:59 AM
Despite the completion of the I-20/59 viaduct project, as of last Friday there is only one advance sign for US 31/280 along the freeway northbound. Instead there are three US 280 trailblazers posted leading to the gore point for Exit 126A.

Southbound has three advance signs, but none beyond the APL ahead of 31st Street.

Was surprised to see that the three vintage overheads for I-65 with button copy shields on southbound survive.

The signage for US 280 has been a issue since the viaduct reopened.  I know of people that have missed the exit for that reason.

The first thing I noticed when I drove on the new bridge was the lack of a exit gantry for US-31/280. There's no warning for people unfamiliar with the new layout for the exit other than the 1 mile advanced signage. Those small trailblazer US-280 signs don't get the job done really. Those were added week or two after so the lack of signage is known by ALDOT but I doubt they do anything else about it. Those bridge pieces don't actually support sign gantries. The others are supported from the ground below so I'm not sure if the area under the exit ramp has room for supports. I would have to go down and investigate.


iPad

Was coming through downtown B'Ham last night and lo and behold...new sign gantry installed at the off ramp to US-31/280. Wasn't expecting to see that so I had to take a quick blurry pic.

https://imgur.com/a/tkTMIqt

Does anyone have a final design on the new I-20/I-59/I-65 interchange? At least the new downtown section looks better than the old one ever did. Not to mention smoother...

Hoover City Council approves $120 million interchange - Will be Exit 9 on I-459
https://www.al.com/news/2023/01/hoover-approves-120-million-plan-for-new-i-459-interchange.html (https://www.al.com/news/2023/01/hoover-approves-120-million-plan-for-new-i-459-interchange.html)

Below is a link to a previous map of the connected parkway from a Birmingham Business Journal article from 2020:
https://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/news/2020/10/22/new-details-emerge-on-potential-connector-road-in.html (https://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/news/2020/10/22/new-details-emerge-on-potential-connector-road-in.html)

Quote from: clong on January 04, 2023, 05:42:09 PM
Hoover City Council approves $120 million interchange - Will be Exit 9 on I-459
https://www.al.com/news/2023/01/hoover-approves-120-million-plan-for-new-i-459-interchange.html (https://www.al.com/news/2023/01/hoover-approves-120-million-plan-for-new-i-459-interchange.html)

Below is a link to a previous map of the connected parkway from a Birmingham Business Journal article from 2020:
https://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/news/2020/10/22/new-details-emerge-on-potential-connector-road-in.html (https://www.bizjournals.com/birmingham/news/2020/10/22/new-details-emerge-on-potential-connector-road-in.html)

From the article from the Hoover Sun, the proposed interchange will be, unsurprisingly, a DDI.  It seems that Exit 10 gets busier and busier every time I am out that way.

An interchange west of AL 150 had been kicked around for a while.  The main issue that I remember is that the South Shades Crest Road overpass is too close for an interchange there.

https://abc3340.com/news/local/aldot-plans-major-road-work-in-the-spring-on-i-65-and-red-mtn-expressway-interstate-birmingham-shelby-co-jefferson-co-red-mtn-expressway

I am unsure what this means.

QuoteModifying a ramp at I-20 and the 59 split is also a priority. Leonard explains Exit 130 will close. Exit 130A will be extended so you can turn both left and right with two lanes. This should ease the back up going out of town in the afternoon and evening hours.

SR 4 signs have been added to the US11/78 overlap, at least east of I-65: https://facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid083ntEk54X4dXwE7fWu4Ge5VDFRqwXtQopvCf8QC5LWXS3YBiLNUYALEq8Pg3gbu1l&id=100009623717629&mibextid=Nif5oz
Maybe this is a first step in moving US 78, but it seems pointless given that US 11 is also there.

I saw AL 4 shields along US 78 when I drove around Birmingham a year ago.

Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 04, 2023, 03:57:45 PM
https://abc3340.com/news/local/aldot-plans-major-road-work-in-the-spring-on-i-65-and-red-mtn-expressway-interstate-birmingham-shelby-co-jefferson-co-red-mtn-expressway

I am unsure what this means.

QuoteModifying a ramp at I-20 and the 59 split is also a priority. Leonard explains Exit 130 will close. Exit 130A will be extended so you can turn both left and right with two lanes. This should ease the back up going out of town in the afternoon and evening hours.

I think he got confused on which exit ramps are closing/being upgraded. Currently at the 20/59 split east of town, on I-20 east there is exit 130A and 130B. 130A goes to southbound US-11, and 130B goes to northbound US-11. The right lane after 130A becomes an exit only drop lane for exit 130B, which causes everyone to hurry into the left lane, therefore causing the backups at the PM rush hour. To resolve this, they will close the exit 130B loop ramp, and modify exit 130A to allow traffic to turn either left or right onto US-11 from that same exit ramp. I-20 will then have two thru lanes instead of one through this interchange, and the ramp from I-59 south will merge into the mainline from the left. This public involvement map from last year pretty much sums up what changes will be made to this interchange: https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/NH-0007/pdf/pimap.pdf

Has the Interstate 22 connection with US 31 (future Exit 95C) been completed yet? If not, does anyone know when it might be completed?

no

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 04, 2023, 06:47:53 PM
Has the Interstate 22 connection with US 31 (future Exit 95C) been completed yet? If not, does anyone know when it might be completed?

Not much to do to build it....however I doubt it ever gets built. Overhead signs were installed and covered on US 31 when I-22 was completed for the connection but ALDOT removed them about a year later implying it's been indefinitely put on hold or cancelled.

Quote from: asdfjkll on April 04, 2023, 06:37:47 PM

Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 04, 2023, 03:57:45 PM
https://abc3340.com/news/local/aldot-plans-major-road-work-in-the-spring-on-i-65-and-red-mtn-expressway-interstate-birmingham-shelby-co-jefferson-co-red-mtn-expressway

I am unsure what this means.

QuoteModifying a ramp at I-20 and the 59 split is also a priority. Leonard explains Exit 130 will close. Exit 130A will be extended so you can turn both left and right with two lanes. This should ease the back up going out of town in the afternoon and evening hours.

I think he got confused on which exit ramps are closing/being upgraded. Currently at the 20/59 split east of town, on I-20 east there is exit 130A and 130B. 130A goes to southbound US-11, and 130B goes to northbound US-11. The right lane after 130A becomes an exit only drop lane for exit 130B, which causes everyone to hurry into the left lane, therefore causing the backups at the PM rush hour. To resolve this, they will close the exit 130B loop ramp, and modify exit 130A to allow traffic to turn either left or right onto US-11 from that same exit ramp. I-20 will then have two thru lanes instead of one through this interchange, and the ramp from I-59 south will merge into the mainline from the left. This public involvement map from last year pretty much sums up what changes will be made to this interchange: https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/NH-0007/pdf/pimap.pdf

Looks pretty good to me. Eliminating that loop ramp also allows room to potentially extend the 130A exit ramp beyond First Avenue/US 11 to connect with the entry ramp to southbound I-59 with the adjacent street, making it a full split diamond interchange.

Wait, the Beltline is alive!  It was only MOSTLY dead.

https://www.wbrc.com/2023/04/12/gov-ivey-city-leaders-make-announcement-birmingham-northern-beltline/

Quote from: BamaZeus on April 12, 2023, 04:19:28 PM
Wait, the Beltline is alive!  It was only MOSTLY dead.

https://www.wbrc.com/2023/04/12/gov-ivey-city-leaders-make-announcement-birmingham-northern-beltline/

I do not understand what the below statement in the article means.  I-20, I-59, I-65, and I-459 have been around a while.

QuoteBirmingham is one of the few cities of its size in the U.S. that does not have a complete, connected interstate route to serve its metropolitan area, a deficiency the Northern Beltline will correct.

Are they really going to build any more of Interstate 422? All that exists of 422 is this: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7406867,-86.6714996,2857m/data=!3m1!1e3. If one wanted to access AL 75 or AL 79 in the vicinity, utilizing AL 151 a short distance to the south would be sufficient to access either highway.

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 12, 2023, 09:49:09 PM
Are they really going to build any more of Interstate 422? All that exists of 422 is this: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7406867,-86.6714996,2857m/data=!3m1!1e3. If one wanted to access AL 75 or AL 79 in the vicinity, utilizing AL 151 a short distance to the south would be sufficient to access either highway.

Looks like they will start at US 31 and work east towards AL 79 after finishing the portion between AL 79 and AL 75.

Quote from: codyg1985 on April 13, 2023, 08:23:39 AM

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 12, 2023, 09:49:09 PM
Are they really going to build any more of Interstate 422? All that exists of 422 is this: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7406867,-86.6714996,2857m/data=!3m1!1e3. If one wanted to access AL 75 or AL 79 in the vicinity, utilizing AL 151 a short distance to the south would be sufficient to access either highway.

Looks like they will start at US 31 and work east towards AL 79 after finishing the portion between AL 79 and AL 75.

the draft 2024-2027 STIP for Jefferson County also shows some money being put towards the I-65 interchange and the segment between I-65 and US-31.
https://cpmsapps.dot.state.al.us/OfficeEngineer/ProjectReports2/StipRpts/Hwy/37_Hwy.pdf

The Northern Beltline made an appearance at the ALDOT preconstruction conference today, and they said the first section to resume construction would be the AL-79 to AL-75 segment. While the 79-75 section is getting built, they'll resume acquiring ROW and get final design ready for the US-31 to AL-79 section. Both the US-31 -> AL-79 and AL-79 -> AL-75 will have 4 lanes on one carriageway in the initial build-out, with a temporary median barrier separating the two directions of traffic. From what I've heard the beltline will also have concrete pavement instead of asphalt. The ultimate build-out will be 6-lane dual carriageway freeway, 3 lanes on each carriageway, and a median barrier separating the two carriageways. So basically they will be pulling an ARDOT I-49 Bella Vista Bypass with the Beltline, but with 6lane ultimate/4lane initial instead of 4lane ultimate/2lane initial.

Quote from: asdfjkll on April 20, 2023, 03:39:54 PM
The Northern Beltline made an appearance at the ALDOT preconstruction conference today, and they said the first section to resume construction would be the AL-79 to AL-75 segment. While the 79-75 section is getting built, they'll resume acquiring ROW and get final design ready for the US-31 to AL-79 section. Both the US-31 -> AL-79 and AL-79 -> AL-75 will have 4 lanes on one carriageway in the initial build-out, with a temporary median barrier separating the two directions of traffic. From what I've heard the beltline will also have concrete pavement instead of asphalt. The ultimate build-out will be 6-lane dual carriageway freeway, 3 lanes on each carriageway, and a median barrier separating the two carriageways. So basically they will be pulling an ARDOT I-49 Bella Vista Bypass with the Beltline, but with 6lane ultimate/4lane initial instead of 4lane ultimate/2lane initial.

That will certainly save them money by only building the bridges for one carriageway instead of both of them, so they can stretch the money further.

Quote from: BamaZeus on April 12, 2023, 04:19:28 PM
Wait, the Beltline is alive!  It was only MOSTLY dead.

https://www.wbrc.com/2023/04/12/gov-ivey-city-leaders-make-announcement-birmingham-northern-beltline/

The Channel 6 news story claims 18,000 trucks daily will be "diverted" from downtown Birmingham.  Yet the projected 10 mile stretch only goes from US - 31 to State Route 75.  How is that possible?   Even with connection from I-65 to I-59, would those numbers be possible?   

Quote from: DJStephens on April 24, 2023, 08:40:01 PM

Quote from: BamaZeus on April 12, 2023, 04:19:28 PM
Wait, the Beltline is alive!  It was only MOSTLY dead.

https://www.wbrc.com/2023/04/12/gov-ivey-city-leaders-make-announcement-birmingham-northern-beltline/

The Channel 6 news story claims 18,000 trucks daily will be "diverted" from downtown Birmingham.  Yet the projected 10 mile stretch only goes from US - 31 to State Route 75.  How is that possible?   Even with connection from I-65 to I-59, would those numbers be possible?   

The full route certainly won't address any trucks on I-59 or I-20 that aren't bound to/from I-65 north of the junction (I-459 handles those movements and will still be shorter by about 10 miles between the ends of I-422), or anything on I-65 towards Montgomery period (as I-422 would be extremely out of the way west side to I-459).

It's probably easier to just say which movements it benefits: I-65 (Huntsville) to I-22 and I-59 (both directions), I-22 and anything but I-20 (Atlanta) and likely I-65 (Montgomery). The only way this will affect other movements is if there are some sort of restrictions set on I-459. I imagine the only thru movements allowed through downtown will be Montgomery and Atlanta to Huntsville (if any).

So yeah, there's not much left to divert when you account for the existence of I-459.

Quote from: I-55 on April 24, 2023, 09:32:35 PM

Quote from: DJStephens on April 24, 2023, 08:40:01 PM

Quote from: BamaZeus on April 12, 2023, 04:19:28 PM
Wait, the Beltline is alive!  It was only MOSTLY dead.

https://www.wbrc.com/2023/04/12/gov-ivey-city-leaders-make-announcement-birmingham-northern-beltline/

The Channel 6 news story claims 18,000 trucks daily will be "diverted" from downtown Birmingham.  Yet the projected 10 mile stretch only goes from US - 31 to State Route 75.  How is that possible?[/u]   Even with connection from I-65 to I-59, would those numbers be possible?   

The full route certainly won't address any trucks on I-59 or I-20 that aren't bound to/from I-65 north of the junction (I-459 handles those movements and will still be shorter by about 10 miles between the ends of I-422), or anything on I-65 towards Montgomery period (as I-422 would be extremely out of the way west side to I-459).

It's probably easier to just say which movements it benefits: I-65 (Huntsville) to I-22 and I-59 (both directions), I-22 and anything but I-20 (Atlanta) and likely I-65 (Montgomery). The only way this will affect other movements is if there are some sort of restrictions set on I-459. I imagine the only thru movements allowed through downtown will be Montgomery and Atlanta to Huntsville (if any).

So yeah, there's not much left to divert when you account for the existence of I-459.

Any math is possible with a mathmagician-politician.

Quote from: Voyager75 on April 09, 2023, 11:27:32 AM

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 04, 2023, 06:47:53 PM
Has the Interstate 22 connection with US 31 (future Exit 95C) been completed yet? If not, does anyone know when it might be completed?

Not much to do to build it....however I doubt it ever gets built. Overhead signs were installed and covered on US 31 when I-22 was completed for the connection but ALDOT removed them about a year later implying it's been indefinitely put on hold or cancelled.

ALDOT did put the project in the draft STIP for 2024-27 at one point, but it seems to have disappeared again.

Quote from: Anthony_JK on April 09, 2023, 12:15:13 PM

Quote from: asdfjkll on April 04, 2023, 06:37:47 PM

Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 04, 2023, 03:57:45 PM
https://abc3340.com/news/local/aldot-plans-major-road-work-in-the-spring-on-i-65-and-red-mtn-expressway-interstate-birmingham-shelby-co-jefferson-co-red-mtn-expressway

I am unsure what this means.

QuoteModifying a ramp at I-20 and the 59 split is also a priority. Leonard explains Exit 130 will close. Exit 130A will be extended so you can turn both left and right with two lanes. This should ease the back up going out of town in the afternoon and evening hours.

I think he got confused on which exit ramps are closing/being upgraded. Currently at the 20/59 split east of town, on I-20 east there is exit 130A and 130B. 130A goes to southbound US-11, and 130B goes to northbound US-11. The right lane after 130A becomes an exit only drop lane for exit 130B, which causes everyone to hurry into the left lane, therefore causing the backups at the PM rush hour. To resolve this, they will close the exit 130B loop ramp, and modify exit 130A to allow traffic to turn either left or right onto US-11 from that same exit ramp. I-20 will then have two thru lanes instead of one through this interchange, and the ramp from I-59 south will merge into the mainline from the left. This public involvement map from last year pretty much sums up what changes will be made to this interchange: https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/NH-0007/pdf/pimap.pdf

Looks pretty good to me. Eliminating that loop ramp also allows room to potentially extend the 130A exit ramp beyond First Avenue/US 11 to connect with the entry ramp to southbound I-59 with the adjacent street, making it a full split diamond interchange.

I cant wait to see it when its done

^^ The ALDOT letting for July 2023 includes the project to eliminate that loop ramp. Plans can be found here (https://alletting.dot.state.al.us/PLANPROP/20230728_Call_038_Plans.pdf).

Quote from: jaidenscott316 on July 18, 2023, 06:31:50 PM

Quote from: Anthony_JK on April 09, 2023, 12:15:13 PM

Quote from: asdfjkll on April 04, 2023, 06:37:47 PM

Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 04, 2023, 03:57:45 PM
https://abc3340.com/news/local/aldot-plans-major-road-work-in-the-spring-on-i-65-and-red-mtn-expressway-interstate-birmingham-shelby-co-jefferson-co-red-mtn-expressway

I am unsure what this means.

QuoteModifying a ramp at I-20 and the 59 split is also a priority. Leonard explains Exit 130 will close. Exit 130A will be extended so you can turn both left and right with two lanes. This should ease the back up going out of town in the afternoon and evening hours.

I think he got confused on which exit ramps are closing/being upgraded. Currently at the 20/59 split east of town, on I-20 east there is exit 130A and 130B. 130A goes to southbound US-11, and 130B goes to northbound US-11. The right lane after 130A becomes an exit only drop lane for exit 130B, which causes everyone to hurry into the left lane, therefore causing the backups at the PM rush hour. To resolve this, they will close the exit 130B loop ramp, and modify exit 130A to allow traffic to turn either left or right onto US-11 from that same exit ramp. I-20 will then have two thru lanes instead of one through this interchange, and the ramp from I-59 south will merge into the mainline from the left. This public involvement map from last year pretty much sums up what changes will be made to this interchange: https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/NH-0007/pdf/pimap.pdf

Looks pretty good to me. Eliminating that loop ramp also allows room to potentially extend the 130A exit ramp beyond First Avenue/US 11 to connect with the entry ramp to southbound I-59 with the adjacent street, making it a full split diamond interchange.

I cant wait to see it when its done

Hands down I bet we all can agree that I-20 needs to be widened from Mississippi to Georgia.

Quote from: jaidenscott316 on July 19, 2023, 04:47:35 PM

Quote from: jaidenscott316 on July 18, 2023, 06:31:50 PM

Quote from: Anthony_JK on April 09, 2023, 12:15:13 PM

Quote from: asdfjkll on April 04, 2023, 06:37:47 PM

Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 04, 2023, 03:57:45 PM
https://abc3340.com/news/local/aldot-plans-major-road-work-in-the-spring-on-i-65-and-red-mtn-expressway-interstate-birmingham-shelby-co-jefferson-co-red-mtn-expressway

I am unsure what this means.

QuoteModifying a ramp at I-20 and the 59 split is also a priority. Leonard explains Exit 130 will close. Exit 130A will be extended so you can turn both left and right with two lanes. This should ease the back up going out of town in the afternoon and evening hours.

I think he got confused on which exit ramps are closing/being upgraded. Currently at the 20/59 split east of town, on I-20 east there is exit 130A and 130B. 130A goes to southbound US-11, and 130B goes to northbound US-11. The right lane after 130A becomes an exit only drop lane for exit 130B, which causes everyone to hurry into the left lane, therefore causing the backups at the PM rush hour. To resolve this, they will close the exit 130B loop ramp, and modify exit 130A to allow traffic to turn either left or right onto US-11 from that same exit ramp. I-20 will then have two thru lanes instead of one through this interchange, and the ramp from I-59 south will merge into the mainline from the left. This public involvement map from last year pretty much sums up what changes will be made to this interchange: https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/NH-0007/pdf/pimap.pdf

Looks pretty good to me. Eliminating that loop ramp also allows room to potentially extend the 130A exit ramp beyond First Avenue/US 11 to connect with the entry ramp to southbound I-59 with the adjacent street, making it a full split diamond interchange.

I cant wait to see it when its done

Hands down I bet we all can agree that I-20 needs to be widened from Mississippi to Georgia.

West of I-359 there's really no reason to. East of there I'll agree with you.

It is very much needed between 459 on the west side of the metro to the BHM city limits at MM 119

Quote from: jaidenscott316 on July 19, 2023, 04:47:35 PM

Quote from: jaidenscott316 on July 18, 2023, 06:31:50 PM

Quote from: Anthony_JK on April 09, 2023, 12:15:13 PM

Quote from: asdfjkll on April 04, 2023, 06:37:47 PM

Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 04, 2023, 03:57:45 PM
https://abc3340.com/news/local/aldot-plans-major-road-work-in-the-spring-on-i-65-and-red-mtn-expressway-interstate-birmingham-shelby-co-jefferson-co-red-mtn-expressway

I am unsure what this means.

QuoteModifying a ramp at I-20 and the 59 split is also a priority. Leonard explains Exit 130 will close. Exit 130A will be extended so you can turn both left and right with two lanes. This should ease the back up going out of town in the afternoon and evening hours.

I think he got confused on which exit ramps are closing/being upgraded. Currently at the 20/59 split east of town, on I-20 east there is exit 130A and 130B. 130A goes to southbound US-11, and 130B goes to northbound US-11. The right lane after 130A becomes an exit only drop lane for exit 130B, which causes everyone to hurry into the left lane, therefore causing the backups at the PM rush hour. To resolve this, they will close the exit 130B loop ramp, and modify exit 130A to allow traffic to turn either left or right onto US-11 from that same exit ramp. I-20 will then have two thru lanes instead of one through this interchange, and the ramp from I-59 south will merge into the mainline from the left. This public involvement map from last year pretty much sums up what changes will be made to this interchange: https://www.dot.state.al.us/news/NH-0007/pdf/pimap.pdf

Looks pretty good to me. Eliminating that loop ramp also allows room to potentially extend the 130A exit ramp beyond First Avenue/US 11 to connect with the entry ramp to southbound I-59 with the adjacent street, making it a full split diamond interchange.

I cant wait to see it when its done

Hands down I bet we all can agree that I-20 needs to be widened from Mississippi Texas state line to Georgia.

FTFY. The traffic on I-20 in Louisiana has gotten really thick the last ten years or more. Might as well widen it all.

I wonder if ALDOT has cancelled their plans for the toddler detection software on their traffic cams now. 

and yes, 20 needs widened from Tuscaloosa to Villa Rica, GA but neither DOT has shown any inclination to do so.

Quote from: Georgia on August 01, 2023, 12:13:21 AM
I wonder if ALDOT has cancelled their plans for the toddler detection software on their traffic cams now. 

and yes, 20 needs widened from Tuscaloosa to Villa Rica, GA but neither DOT has shown any inclination to do so.

No, I-20 needs to be widened from Texas to Villa Rica, GA

Quote from: jaidenscott316 on August 08, 2023, 03:32:01 PM

Quote from: Georgia on August 01, 2023, 12:13:21 AM
I wonder if ALDOT has cancelled their plans for the toddler detection software on their traffic cams now. 

and yes, 20 needs widened from Tuscaloosa to Villa Rica, GA but neither DOT has shown any inclination to do so.

No, I-20 needs to be widened from Texas to Villa Rica, GA

I would say that the portion of I-20/59 around Meridian, MS needs widening (or bypassed) because it can be a bottleneck. You may could make a case for widening the rest of the I-20/59 multiplex in Mississippi and Alabama. With the times that I have driven I-20 between Jackson and Meridian, it hasn't been bad enough IMO to warrant widening at this time. I am not familiar enough with I-20 in Louisiana or Texas to be able to say for sure whether or not it needs widening through there.

ALDOT and GDOT should work together to fill in the six lane gaps between Birmingham and Villa Rica at a minimum.

MDOT is planning a reconstruction of I-20 through Vicksburg that includes widening along its concurrency with US 61.

Widening through Meridian (from the 20/59 split to 19/39) is warranted but would be costly due to the close proximity of the frontage roads and adjacent retail development.

Aside from those and perhaps some further work in the Jackson area (as far as Clinton and Brandon), I-20 doesn't really need any expansion in Mississippi.  It barely hits 20K in many spots between Brandon and Meridian.  And while east of Meridian has increased traffic in recent years, it's still sub-30K.

Between Vicksburg and Clinton is borderline...I would argue it's not quite there yet and that the areas I mentioned above should be higher priority.

I'm still not sure why GDOT went to all the trouble to do a full reconstruction of I-20 from US 27 to Villa Rica, including years of contraflow, and leave it at two lanes in each direction with no apparent efforts to even passively prepare for future widening with grading and bridgework and the like.

As far as Meridian is concerned, I wonder if a connection to shift I-59 through traffic to use the US 45 bypass (including whatever upgrades would be needed to US 45 and the interchange at I-20/59) would be cheaper than widening through town and divert enough traffic to make it worthwhile.

Quote from: jaidenscott316 on August 08, 2023, 03:32:01 PM

Quote from: Georgia on August 01, 2023, 12:13:21 AM
I wonder if ALDOT has cancelled their plans for the toddler detection software on their traffic cams now. 

and yes, 20 needs widened from Tuscaloosa to Villa Rica, GA but neither DOT has shown any inclination to do so.

No, I-20 needs to be widened from Texas to Villa Rica, GA

I drive I-20 in Louisiana occasionally going between Bossier City and St. Tammany Parish (sometime you just have to avoid Baton Rouge at all costs), and from what I see I can't justify widening I-20 across the entire state.  The traffic levels just aren't there.  Widening I-10 and I-12 across the state would be a higher priority as there is a lot more traffic on those highways, plus the hurricane evacuation factor.  And there's just not the money to do all the widening.

About 33 miles of I-12 is at least 3 lanes, with another 2 to 3 miles around Madisonville getting ready to start widening.  That leaves 50 miles to go.

Quote from: codyg1985 on August 08, 2023, 03:41:24 PM

Quote from: jaidenscott316 on August 08, 2023, 03:32:01 PM

Quote from: Georgia on August 01, 2023, 12:13:21 AM
I wonder if ALDOT has cancelled their plans for the toddler detection software on their traffic cams now. 

and yes, 20 needs widened from Tuscaloosa to Villa Rica, GA but neither DOT has shown any inclination to do so.

No, I-20 needs to be widened from Texas to Villa Rica, GA

I would say that the portion of I-20/59 around Meridian, MS needs widening (or bypassed) because it can be a bottleneck. You may could make a case for widening the rest of the I-20/59 multiplex in Mississippi and Alabama. With the times that I have driven I-20 between Jackson and Meridian, it hasn't been bad enough IMO to warrant widening at this time. I am not familiar enough with I-20 in Louisiana or Texas to be able to say for sure whether or not it needs widening through there.

ALDOT and GDOT should work together to fill in the six lane gaps between Birmingham and Villa Rica at a minimum.

Widening I-59 is not the answer. Building US-80 out to freeway to Montgomery is. The problem is that while Montgomery is the capitol, the power is rooted in North Alabama; Birmingham and Huntsville.  Maybe a bit along the coast.  Montgomery is like Austin without the population growth, the rest of the state could care less. It, like Jackson,  is a majority minority city.  It might be needed, but actually getting the resources allocated to do it.....

Right now it is 4-lane divided with virtually no grade separation. The part in Perry County is 2-lane.  It would require around a 150 miles of upgrades or new freeway, but it should fix most of the congestion and have minimal difference in mileage from Meridian to Atlanta.

Quote from: bwana39 on August 14, 2023, 04:45:37 AM

Quote from: codyg1985 on August 08, 2023, 03:41:24 PM

Quote from: jaidenscott316 on August 08, 2023, 03:32:01 PM

Quote from: Georgia on August 01, 2023, 12:13:21 AM
I wonder if ALDOT has cancelled their plans for the toddler detection software on their traffic cams now. 

and yes, 20 needs widened from Tuscaloosa to Villa Rica, GA but neither DOT has shown any inclination to do so.

No, I-20 needs to be widened from Texas to Villa Rica, GA

I would say that the portion of I-20/59 around Meridian, MS needs widening (or bypassed) because it can be a bottleneck. You may could make a case for widening the rest of the I-20/59 multiplex in Mississippi and Alabama. With the times that I have driven I-20 between Jackson and Meridian, it hasn't been bad enough IMO to warrant widening at this time. I am not familiar enough with I-20 in Louisiana or Texas to be able to say for sure whether or not it needs widening through there.

ALDOT and GDOT should work together to fill in the six lane gaps between Birmingham and Villa Rica at a minimum.

Widening I-59 is not the answer. Building US-80 out to freeway to Montgomery is. The problem is that while Montgomery is the capitol, the power is rooted in North Alabama; Birmingham and Huntsville.  Maybe a bit along the coast.  Montgomery is like Austin without the population growth, the rest of the state could care less. It, like Jackson,  is a majority minority city.  It might be needed, but actually getting the resources allocated to do it.....

Right now it is 4-lane divided with virtually no grade separation. The part in Perry County is 2-lane.  It would require around a 150 miles of upgrades or new freeway, but it should fix most of the congestion and have minimal difference in mileage from Meridian to Atlanta.

IIRC, the state is considering extending I-85 from the state line to Montgomery along the US-80 corridor.

^ They've given up on that...the environmental notice was rescinded.  In part because of the aforementioned money factor.  IIRC, the last estimate put the price tag at several billion dollars.

Quote from: froggie on August 14, 2023, 08:15:03 AM
^ They've given up on that...the environmental notice was rescinded.  In part because of the aforementioned money factor.  IIRC, the last estimate put the price tag at several billion dollars.

Widening I-20 wouldn't be significantly less....

Quote from: lordsutch on August 09, 2023, 03:12:38 PM
I'm still not sure why GDOT went to all the trouble to do a full reconstruction of I-20 from US 27 to Villa Rica, including years of contraflow, and leave it at two lanes in each direction with no apparent efforts to even passively prepare for future widening with grading and bridgework and the like.

I just about blew a gasket when I'd discovered the work was done, but with nothing of significance achieved...except for a dangerously narrow constriction with a tediously long speed limit drop along I-20 for 3-4 years.

Glad it wasn't my state.

Quote from: froggie on August 14, 2023, 08:15:03 AM
^ They've given up on that...the environmental notice was rescinded.  In part because of the aforementioned money factor.  IIRC, the last estimate put the price tag at several billion dollars.

Of course the Future I-14 corridor has revived the old I-85 extension concept, although it doesn't seem to be getting much traction in Alabama as of yet. Outside of Texas it seems like the only real interest is in Georgia so far, where Sen. Warnock has been pushing projects near Columbus as a priority.

I forgot about that. A Montgomery to Columbus to Macon corridor would divert truck traffic from IH 20 and out of Atlanta. This should be a priority given the expansion of the port of Savannah as well as summer traffic en route to Florida...This may not come to fruition til the end of the decade

Quote from: lordsutch on August 15, 2023, 01:31:14 PM

Of course the Future I-14 corridor has revived the old I-85 extension concept, although it doesn't seem to be getting much traction in Alabama as of yet. Outside of Texas it seems like the only real interest is in Georgia so far, where Sen. Warnock has been pushing projects near Columbus as a priority.

That is real dreaming. I-14 started as  a BRACC (Base Realignment and Closure Commission) retention point for Fort Hood (Now renamed Fort Cavazos). When Senator Rafael (Ted) Cruz needed more sponsors, he got newly elected Senator Raphael Warnock of GA to co-sponsor to get democrats onboard. 

I just do not see I-14 built outside of Texas and possibly Georgia within any of our lifetimes.  Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi,are poor states and they have decent E/W freeway corridors. For each of them, N/S for hurricane evacuation and to funnel tourists to the Gulf would seemingly hold more import: ESPECIALLY for Mississippi.

From a regional perspective, I-14 really adds little overall.  As everyone has said, the I-85 to I-20 connection between Cuba and Montgomery has significant NATIONAL import. Sadly, for the folks in Birmingham  it does little for them and absolutely NOTHING for Huntsville or Mobile.  Why "sadly"? Sadly, because the population  centers of the state don't benefit and will prefer that the more populous areas of the state get the funding.

I will add one thing, the I-10 to I-20 gap is overall SMALLER than the I-20  to I-40, I-40 to I-70, and I 80 to I-90. I-70 and I-80 are overall closer together than I-10 & I-20.

Congress could pass this stuff ad nauseum. It is the kind of thing legislators cannot vote against if it is in their region and others vote for to keep the  good will of the sponsors when it is outside your region.  It looks like free bacon. It really isn't bacon. It is just bacon you can blame someone else for not delivering.

Even an unfunded mandate makes something happen. This is kind of like the serving suggestion on packaged food. It looks awfully pretty but it wouldn't turn out like the picture even if you tried (and you usually do not even try.)

Any chance they could start upgrading existing US 80 west of Birmingham to freeway standards, even if it has to be done piece-by-piece? Doing it piecemeal will likely be less expensive than doing it all in one shebang.

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 15, 2023, 09:14:03 PM
Any chance they could start upgrading existing US 80 west of Birmingham to freeway standards, even if it has to be done piece-by-piece? Doing it piecemeal will likely be less expensive than doing it all in one shebang.

Ask the folks that Birmingham, Huntsville, and Mobile send to Montgomery (the AL state Legislature).  Note: It is almost all 4-lane divided, but....

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 15, 2023, 09:14:03 PM
Any chance they could start upgrading existing US 80 west of Birmingham to freeway standards, even if it has to be done piece-by-piece? Doing it piecemeal will likely be less expensive than doing it all in one shebang.

The more rural parts of existing US 80 (specifically Sumter County), perhaps.  But much of the corridor has development right along the roadway...this would require a significant frontage road system, buying out a lot of places, or a mix of both.  Given development, you'd most likely still need lengthy bypasses of Demopolis, Selma, and the Montgomery Airport area (tho the original plans for the Montgomery Outer Loop would take care of the latter).

And then, as bwana indicated, you have about 3 miles on either side of Uniontown that isn't even 4 lanes yet.

Quote from: froggie on August 16, 2023, 12:12:41 PM

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 15, 2023, 09:14:03 PM
Any chance they could start upgrading existing US 80 west of Birmingham to freeway standards, even if it has to be done piece-by-piece? Doing it piecemeal will likely be less expensive than doing it all in one shebang.

The more rural parts of existing US 80 (specifically Sumter County), perhaps.  But much of the corridor has development right along the roadway...this would require a significant frontage road system, buying out a lot of places, or a mix of both.  Given development, you'd most likely still need lengthy bypasses of Demopolis, Selma, and the Montgomery Airport area (tho the original plans for the Montgomery Outer Loop would take care of the latter).

And then, as bwana indicated, you have about 3 miles on either side of Uniontown that isn't even 4 lanes yet.

They could actually route it along AL-14 from Montgomery to Selma and miss a lot of the problems.

OTOH, a south western loop of Selma makes a lot of sense if you used the US-80 between them.

Routing it along 14 may miss some of the problems but creates a few large ones of its own.  Specifically, where/how to connect to 65.  You'd either have to cross the Alabama River and STILL deal with the airport development, or you feed it into Prattville and an already congested section of 65.