AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Georgia  (Read 571288 times)

Tomahawkin

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 535
  • Last Login: May 21, 2022, 12:40:20 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1825 on: December 21, 2021, 09:52:16 AM »

Yes, That merge between Riverdale road and the 85 exit ramp is a cluster#### during the afternoons. I totally forgot using the exit off of Old Natty and using the C/D roads to bypass that bottleneck. I will keep that in mind when I go to Panama City in 3 months
Logged

architect77

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 486
  • Location: Atlanta
  • Last Login: May 12, 2022, 01:17:18 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1826 on: December 21, 2021, 04:13:14 PM »


I would think that trucks would be the biggest customer of managed lanes along 285's top end. A higher fee for trucks would bring in more revenue for the state, but I realize that if the sometimes elevated lanes had some steep inclines and declines like 75's express lanes supposedly do (which prevent traveling at high speeds on the tollercoaster) that it would present a problem for heavily-loaded trucks.

Regardless I believe enough people will use the express lanes on 285 to ease the general purpose lanes enoigh to help freight get through Georgia's only major corridor for [East-coast to West] freight movement.


Thru trucks on I-20 wouldn't be on the top end. Using the south side of I-285 is shorter and has much less traffic.

The truck traffic on the top end is either local, or is going between e.g. I-85 on the north and I-20 on the west, etc

You've got all the industry from the Northeast and Carolinas (60 million plus population) moving frieight to the Gulf Coast states and Texas.

They use I-85 South and more or less have no other option than Top End I-285 West bound.

Some might fare better using East 285 to I-20 then cut through the center of town, but I doubt many truckers ever consider it or do it.

If they can use the top end express lanes I'll bet they will. With restrictions on the number of hours behind the wheel, they have a reason to travel as far as possible in a given amount of time. The toll cost is probably well worth the time savings if in fact they are able to use them.

* * * * * *
BRT with inline platforms will work for GA 400, but are there enough spots along 285 that are populated enough for drop offs/ons to be successful?  Cumberland, Perimeter and Doraville. are good, beyond that I don't know.

Logged

Tom958

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1226
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Lawrenceville, GA
  • Last Login: May 21, 2022, 07:48:30 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1827 on: December 21, 2021, 04:20:36 PM »

The proposed BRT could use the express lanes mixed with paying customers right?

I haven't seen the GDOT proposal, but what you suggest is typical to plan a BRT system to utilize the express lanes of a freeway.  The classic definition of BRT suggests that buses operate over something that resembles a rapid transit system over much of the corridor (think replacing a costly LRT proposal with buses).  That does not necessarily require a dedicated busway, but there should be a number of "inline stations".  Obviously, the buses cannot stop in the middle of the express lanes, but the stations could be placed within a wide median or bus-only exits from the express lanes.

Like the Harbor Transitway, except that between 75 and 85 the roadways will usually be separate from each other and off to the sides of the mainline rather than together in the median. I understand the appeal, but what I've heard about the Harbor Transitway's ridership performance has not been encouraging.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2021, 04:27:45 PM by Tom958 »
Logged

Dirt Roads

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1556
  • Location: Central North Carolina
  • Last Login: May 21, 2022, 11:30:28 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1828 on: December 21, 2021, 07:07:39 PM »

BRT with inline platforms will work for GA 400, but are there enough spots along 285 that are populated enough for drop offs/ons to be successful?  Cumberland, Perimeter and Doraville. are good, beyond that I don't know.

Not all of the bus route needs to be BRT service.  Just the part funded by the FTA New Starts Program.  I would presume that the new BRT system would terminate at the Sandy Spring Station on the MARTA Red Line.  But it would be appropriate to continue the BRT service down Route 148 (MARTA bus route) along the Mount Vernon Highway and Powers Ferry Road.  It would also be appropriate to continue as an express bus route into downtown Atlanta.
Logged

Tomahawkin

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 535
  • Last Login: May 21, 2022, 12:40:20 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1829 on: December 21, 2021, 08:12:36 PM »

If I could take the Bus From Tucker a mile 2 miles south of Spaghetti Junction and get to the Battery in 25 minutes. I'm all in. I just we had That kind of efficient transit from Spaghetti Junction to Lake Lanier, which is a serious pipedream but the reality is that people who live in Buford and Gainesville commute to Atlanta therefore they had to be on the road at 5am in the mornings
Logged

architect77

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 486
  • Location: Atlanta
  • Last Login: May 12, 2022, 01:17:18 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1830 on: December 27, 2021, 09:23:53 AM »

i think the Feds should reduce the amount of required, standardized signage for Express Lanes. Even in other cities besides Atlanta the overall look is very cluttered and somewhat confusing because of so much to read and process.

When it's just a lane demarked from the general purpose lanes, are the LOCAL EXITS signs really necessary? I'd nix them.

Then The EXPRESS LANE price schedule signs are way too big and they're always mounted over the middle of the general purpose lanes as if more important than any other info such as upcoming major interstates, or exits,.etc.

The signs indicating the spots to enter the express lane are necessary, but I wish everything pertaining to these lanes was over to the left, closer to the lane itself, and not taking the top hierarchical spot away from the main road itself.
Logged

ran4sh

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 726
  • Age: 35
  • Location: North Georgia
  • Last Login: April 27, 2022, 03:38:14 PM
    • YouTube - mostly my Cities:Skylines live streams
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1831 on: December 27, 2021, 10:42:38 PM »


When it's just a lane demarked from the general purpose lanes, are the LOCAL EXITS signs really necessary? I'd nix them.


Without those signs, how does express lane traffic know where to exit the express lane?

Edit

Regarding the price signs, they are visible to the general lanes because the price is information that drivers use to decide whether or not to use the express lane
« Last Edit: December 27, 2021, 10:44:41 PM by ran4sh »
Logged
Atlanta Braves 2021 Champions! Georgia Bulldogs 2021-22 CFP Champions!

Georgia

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 203
  • Location: west Atlanta
  • Last Login: May 19, 2022, 12:37:25 AM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1832 on: December 27, 2021, 10:52:59 PM »


When it's just a lane demarked from the general purpose lanes, are the LOCAL EXITS signs really necessary? I'd nix them.


I mean, it isnt like GDOT/SRTA just decided, hey, you know what, lets throw up another assembly that has no purpose. as ran pointed out, it is useful for people who use the lanes who may have forgotten that you need to get out of the lanes now to get on say, Jimmy Carter.

and if i am in the general purpose lanes and I see the cost to drive the length of the 85 express lanes towards SC is 30 cents or anything under a dollar really, you bet your ass I am switching to the express lanes. 


Without those signs, how does express lane traffic know where to exit the express lane?

Edit

Regarding the price signs, they are visible to the general lanes because the price is information that drivers use to decide whether or not to use the express lane
« Last Edit: December 28, 2021, 01:07:25 PM by Georgia »
Logged

architect77

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 486
  • Location: Atlanta
  • Last Login: May 12, 2022, 01:17:18 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1833 on: December 30, 2021, 04:16:34 PM »


When it's just a lane demarked from the general purpose lanes, are the LOCAL EXITS signs really necessary? I'd nix them.


Without those signs, how does express lane traffic know where to exit the express lane?

Edit

Regarding the price signs, they are visible to the general lanes because the price is information that drivers use to decide whether or not to use the express lane

Even though we have usually wide freeways, drivers are expected to be able to see the elevated exit signs on the right shoulder.

So why duplicate the same sign on the left which of course is done with a different non-matching type size?

Smaller signs with big letters indicating entrance and exit spots for the express lane would be sufficient.

The pricing sign is way too big in my opinion.

If all Express Lane signage was grouped together more to the left over the actual lane I think it would be more accurate in the hierarchy of what you're suppoded to be reading and interpreting as you drive.

The reason the restricted lanes are 14 hours a day is because US drivers have problems reading and understanding rush hour time periods.

or everyone's safety they sort of dumb it down according to the lowest common denominator.

I think streamlining and reducing the amount of signage and not making the Express Lane info overpower everything else would be helpful and more attractive.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7521
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:12:33 AM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1834 on: December 30, 2021, 04:27:09 PM »

Even though we have usually wide freeways, drivers are expected to be able to see the elevated exit signs on the right shoulder.

So why duplicate the same sign on the left which of course is done with a different non-matching type size?
Umm... because entry / exit points from the Express Lanes are different from the regular exits?

You need to get out of the Express Lanes at least 1-2 miles prior to your actual interchange off the mainline, in order to safely switch lanes to the right... especially on a "wide freeway".
Logged

Tom958

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1226
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Lawrenceville, GA
  • Last Login: May 21, 2022, 07:48:30 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1835 on: January 02, 2022, 06:29:46 AM »

It's been under development for a decade, but I just found out about this plan for GA 9-South Atlanta Street in Roswell. It'll

widen the road from three lanes to four from the Chattahoochee to downtown, eliminating the reversible lane

trench Azalea Drive and Riverside Road under GA 9 and provide a one-quadrant interchange instead of the current intersection

add two roundabouts on South Atlanta Street

and build a new bike-ped bridge across the Chattahoochee.

There's some other stuff on the south side of the river, but it's not as exciting.

Per this AJC article, the cost is estimated at $10 million, which seems ridiculously optimistic. GDOT submitted a BUILD grant application in May of 2020 for Federal funds for project construction, but it wasn't selected for funding by USDOT. Hopefully something will come together in the near future.
Logged

architect77

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 486
  • Location: Atlanta
  • Last Login: May 12, 2022, 01:17:18 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1836 on: January 03, 2022, 11:25:36 PM »

Even though we have usually wide freeways, drivers are expected to be able to see the elevated exit signs on the right shoulder.

So why duplicate the same sign on the left which of course is done with a different non-matching type size?
Umm... because entry / exit points from the Express Lanes are different from the regular exits?

You need to get out of the Express Lanes at least 1-2 miles prior to your actual interchange off the mainline, in order to safely switch lanes to the right... especially on a "wide freeway".

That's a valid point, and you are correctabout the LOCAL EXIT signs being about .5-1 mile in advance of the regular 1 mile EXIT signs.

But this is what I think would look good for the Express Lane signage, over the lane itself, center median posts...

Or something similar.

The photo is somewhere in Hawaii. I remember the visual from seeing it many years ago.

left by Stephen Edwards, on Flickr


« Last Edit: January 03, 2022, 11:35:49 PM by architect77 »
Logged

Tom958

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1226
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Lawrenceville, GA
  • Last Login: May 21, 2022, 07:48:30 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1837 on: January 09, 2022, 06:07:05 PM »

This defies the laws of gravity.

I'd forgotten about it, but originally there were three-tube guardrails on the railroad bridge, even though by the time it was built in the mid eighties, GDOT had stopped using them. They were a generation older than the ones used into the seventies.
Logged

Tom958

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1226
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Lawrenceville, GA
  • Last Login: May 21, 2022, 07:48:30 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1838 on: February 01, 2022, 09:24:48 PM »

Crossposted to The good, the bad, and the ugly

These appeared within the last couple of weeks as the new interchange at GA 316 and Harbins Road replaced the former traffic signal there. Apologies for the poor quality, but we were facing directly into the sun and it took every bit of photo-editing power my Galaxy S10 could muster to make them this clear. It also dramatizes the fact that there are visibility issues in addition to the comprehension issues I'm about to discuss.

This sign is at the beginning of an auxiliary lane added to develop the capacity of the two-lane, two-destination offramp ahead. There's an MUTCD-compliant way to sign this condition-- as it happens, it was used a few miles up the road a couple of years ago. Nobody really likes it, though, and GDOT usually does something else, such as this or even this.

Here, though, GDOT decided to go with an MUTCD-defiant unisign, a concept that, as I understand it, proved inferior to APL's in whatever testing was done, which is why APLs are in the MUTCD and unisigns like this aren't. The divider line, rather than being placed directly above the center arrow to indicate an option lane, is located to the left of said arrow, indicating, incorrectly, that two lanes go to the offramp and only one continues on the mainline. Really, it would've been more accurate to use a conventional (MUTCD-defiant) sign like this with an arrowless pullthrough. I guess that they did it this way because they really, really wanted to inform drivers that the offramp splits later on, causing the Sugarloaf Parkway text to displace the dividing line from its proper location. Ironically and infuriatingly, the Sugarloaf Parkway branch of the offramp is closed, with Sugarloaf traffic using a temporary offramp in the vicinity of the bridge we see in the distance. 



Next comes an APL at the exit divergence. Again, the Sugarloaf Parkway text displaces the divider line to the left of its correct location. Note to designers: The dividing line on an APL ALWAYS goes in the crotch of the split arrow. Here, IMO, they would've done better to omit it altogether. Or, better, they could've gone with

Sugarloaf Pkwy
Harbins Road

and not had a problem.

Also, as I mentioned before, the Sugarloaf Parkway branch of the offramp isn't open, and drivers bound there need to stay on the mainline until the vicinity of the bridge. They should've blacked out the curved part of the split arrow, not the straight part. WTF were they thinking?

But, wait: there's more: There's no reason to encourage drivers to use both lanes of the ramp because the ramp enters a tortuous one-lane detour shortly after the not-yet-operational split. Wow.



One more thing, and this is design rather than signage: They really shouldn't have combined Sugarloaf and Harbins onto a single offramp. As you can see, it needlessly complicates signage and operations. Besides, they're separate exits in the other direction anyway.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2022, 05:43:18 AM by Tom958 »
Logged

Tomahawkin

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 535
  • Last Login: May 21, 2022, 12:40:20 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1839 on: February 01, 2022, 10:03:12 PM »

I'm amazed that they didn't just widen 316 through there at the same time of doing that construction. Passing lanes are badly needed there during rush hour, IMO
Logged

Tom958

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1226
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Lawrenceville, GA
  • Last Login: May 21, 2022, 07:48:30 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1840 on: February 04, 2022, 12:58:50 PM »

I'm amazed that they didn't just widen 316 through there at the same time of doing that construction. Passing lanes are badly needed there during rush hour, IMO

None of the projects for adding interchanges to 316 added mainline lanes. Eliminating the traffic signals adds at least as much capacity as another lane would.

I didn't mention it, but the 316 shield pointing from southbound Harbins onto the westbound 316 onramp is a Mississippi-style ellipse, not a Georgia shield. Oops.
Logged

architect77

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 486
  • Location: Atlanta
  • Last Login: May 12, 2022, 01:17:18 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1841 on: February 04, 2022, 09:19:43 PM »

Good point, I also forgot how bad the bottleneck is from 285 west to 85 south (Airport/warehouse and traffic to the southwest suburbs). One lane to get from 285 west to 85 southbound isn't going to cut it. This also should have been addressed over a decade ago

I don't see much problem with capacity there, and those of us who are in the know can bypass that ramp by taking the Old National Highway-South Fulton Parkway exit and the subsequent loop ramp to 85 south. Fun fact: for the opposite movement coming northbound, Wanda Waze always tells me to use the CD.

However, the weaving section on 285 between Riverdale Road and 85 is too short, and I don't see much of a way to deal with it due to the close proximity of the CD road terminals to the west. The obvious solution would be to eliminate access from Riverdale Road to westbound 285 and force traffic to remain on Riverdale Road to 85, or to make its way to the Old National Highway interchange instead. FHWA wouldn't be happy with that.

I would think that trucks would be the biggest customer of managed lanes along 285's top end. A higher fee for trucks would bring in more revenue for the state, but I realize that if the sometimes elevated lanes had some steep inclines and declines like 75's express lanes supposedly do (which prevent traveling at high speeds on the tollercoaster) that it would present a problem for heavily-loaded trucks.

Regardless I believe enough people will use the express lanes on 285 to ease the general purpose lanes enoigh to help freight get through Georgia's only major corridor for [East-coast to West] freight movement.


Thru trucks on I-20 wouldn't be on the top end. Using the south side of I-285 is shorter and has much less traffic.

The truck traffic on the top end is either local, or is going between e.g. I-85 on the north and I-20 on the west, etc

Trucks queue for up to 10 miles on 85 Southbound to 285 West top end to 20 West every weekday.

I doubt most from the NE states would take 285 East down to 20 through the main part of town to reach Atlanta.

Line of trucks in opposite direction waiting to transition to 285----miles and miles of trucks.

IMG_0324 by Stephen Edwards, on Flickr


Logged

Tomahawkin

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 535
  • Last Login: May 21, 2022, 12:40:20 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1842 on: February 07, 2022, 04:22:42 PM »

The 285 WB To SR 400 SB ramp/flyover will open late this month. IIRC didn't construction on this interchange start in 2014? This project could possibly not be finished til 2024, making this a 10 year project IIRC?
Logged

Georgia

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 203
  • Location: west Atlanta
  • Last Login: May 19, 2022, 12:37:25 AM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1843 on: February 07, 2022, 04:33:39 PM »

February 2017 but 2014 was close
Logged

MarcusDoT

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 75
  • hey! I'm still here!

  • Age: 22
  • Location: Georgia
  • Last Login: March 26, 2022, 11:23:36 AM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1844 on: February 07, 2022, 10:37:15 PM »

Hello!

I've recently come back to the AARoad Forums and wanted to get familiar with the Georgia board.

Just wanted to speak on projects around Savannah considering I'm closer to that area than the Atlanta area.  :sombrero:
Logged

Georgia

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 203
  • Location: west Atlanta
  • Last Login: May 19, 2022, 12:37:25 AM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1845 on: February 08, 2022, 12:17:37 AM »

i am not sure but i have heard they may be one decent sized project  going on in the Savannah area heh
Logged

adventurernumber1

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1706
  • David Carson

  • Age: 22
  • Location: Dalton, Georgia, USA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:37:36 AM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1846 on: February 08, 2022, 07:09:29 PM »

Hello!

I've recently come back to the AARoad Forums and wanted to get familiar with the Georgia board.

Just wanted to speak on projects around Savannah considering I'm closer to that area than the Atlanta area.  :sombrero:

Welcome back!  :wave:

I haven't been in the area in a few years (though may be headed that way sometime this year), but have they started work yet on the I-16/I-95 interchange project yet (if it is still on as planned)?

That'll be an interesting project, and there's plenty more interesting stuff going on already in the Savannah area such as the southwestern extension of Jimmy Deloach Parkway.

I'm also curious to see the progress on the I-75/I-16 interchange project (which has been ongoing for a few years) next time I'm headed down.
Logged
Now alternating between different highway shields for my avatar - my previous highway shield avatar for the last few years was US 76.

Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/127322363@N08/

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-vJ3qa8R-cc44Cv6ohio1g

Tom958

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1226
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Lawrenceville, GA
  • Last Login: May 21, 2022, 07:48:30 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1847 on: February 08, 2022, 07:20:35 PM »

Hello!

I've recently come back to the AARoad Forums and wanted to get familiar with the Georgia board.

Just wanted to speak on projects around Savannah considering I'm closer to that area than the Atlanta area.  :sombrero:

Welcome back!  :wave:

I haven't been in the area in a few years (though may be headed that way sometime this year), but have they started work yet on the I-16/I-95 interchange project yet (if it is still on as planned)?

That'll be an interesting project, and there's plenty more interesting stuff going on already in the Savannah area such as the southwestern extension of Jimmy Deloach Parkway.

I'm also curious to see the progress on the I-75/I-16 interchange project (which has been ongoing for a few years) next time I'm headed down.

GDOT often posts photos of 16-95 on Facebook, but rarely if ever of 16-75. With its twin flyovers, 16-95 is a  lot more photogenic.
Logged

Tom958

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1226
  • Age: 63
  • Location: Lawrenceville, GA
  • Last Login: May 21, 2022, 07:48:30 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1848 on: February 08, 2022, 09:55:16 PM »

GDOT is holding a "virtual public hearing" for the I-20 east-I-285 interchange project, "in accordance with O.C.G.A. Section 32-2-80."

https://0013915.scoutfeedback.com/

The presentation consists of e-brochures from each of the three competing project teams. As a member of the public and of the target audience for this effort, I found the presentation to be pretty impenetrable, and I don't understand how I can offer any relevant input.

However, I found one item of interest: Two of the three teams propose to eliminate the fourth level of the interchange by routing the westbound 20-to-westbound 285 ramp under the 285 mainline rather than over via a lengthy flyover. The third team pointedly did not, and included a rendering of the fourth-level flyover in their presentation.
Logged

architect77

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 486
  • Location: Atlanta
  • Last Login: May 12, 2022, 01:17:18 PM
Re: Georgia
« Reply #1849 on: February 09, 2022, 06:14:24 AM »

GDOT is holding a "virtual public hearing" for the I-20 east-I-285 interchange project, "in accordance with O.C.G.A. Section 32-2-80."

https://0013915.scoutfeedback.com/

The presentation consists of e-brochures from each of the three competing project teams. As a member of the public and of the target audience for this effort, I found the presentation to be pretty impenetrable, and I don't understand how I can offer any relevant input.

However, I found one item of interest: Two of the three teams propose to eliminate the fourth level of the interchange by routing the westbound 20-to-westbound 285 ramp under the 285 mainline rather than over via a lengthy flyover. The third team pointedly did not, and included a rendering of the fourth-level flyover in their presentation.

When I attended the first meetings for the East 285 Express Lanes, the one thing I hated and complained about was that two of the rebuilt mainline lanes would only be 11' wide.

When you're building for the next 50 years, that's awful. It's what makes I-85 through Gwinnett an unpleasant stressful drive (2 inner lanes are only 11' wide) unlike before the HOV lane was painted into existence. It used to be 5 wide, luxurious lanes and the difference from now is significant.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.