Truncation of I-70

[bugo]

From a OCD roadgeek point of view, we should be happy about this... Interstates end at interstates. At least in theory.

You say OCD, I say anal.  Tomato, tomato, potato, potato.

Besides, to the anal road geeker, aren't 2 digit interstates not supposed to end at 3 digit interstates? 
Post Merge: June 05, 2014, 06:08:30 AM
This sucks.  Another fascinating part of our highway system is going to be lost.  They're burying another piece of history.

[froggie]

Eye of the beholder.

[Arkansastravelguy]

Besides, to the anal road geeker, aren't 2 digit interstates not supposed to end at 3 digit interstates?

Bugo for the win


iPhone

[kj3400]

This sucks.  Another fascinating part of our highway system is going to be lost.  They're burying another piece of history.

What can you do? If it was up to me, I'd finish it. But apparently it's not a priority.

[SteveG1988]

This sucks.  Another fascinating part of our highway system is going to be lost.  They're burying another piece of history.

Honestly, i think it is a waste of federal funds to maintain what is more or less a driveway to a park and ride station. downgrade it, truncate I-70 to 695.

[TheOneKEA]

This sucks.  Another fascinating part of our highway system is going to be lost.  They're burying another piece of history.

Honestly, i think it is a waste of federal funds to maintain what is more or less a driveway to a park and ride station. downgrade it, truncate I-70 to 695.

And do what with the four-level stack?

My research suggests that it was the first four-level "Maltese cross" stack in Maryland, and it shows. It has no shoulders on the ramps, tighter curves than modern stacks, and the physical fabric is alarmingly decayed in places.

If these plans are in fact accepted and I-70 is truncated, I would expect that the existing stack would be replaced with either a modern stack, or a clover-stack that used loop ramps for the WB Blvd-695 Outer and 695 Outer-EB Blvd movements. In any case something will have to be done to it within the next 5 years, or else someone will start squawking about it becoming unsafe.

In general terms, I do have mixed feelings about this truncation. After reading The Big Roads by Earl Swift I understand very well how badly West Baltimore was affected by the attempts to build I-70, and I don't like the idea of the wholesale park demolition that would have been needed to build the highway. But West Baltimore is now as badly affected by the absence of I-70 as it was by its impending presence, and I agree with those who suggest that better road access, combined with better facilities at the MARC station and the Red Line, could make a difference.

[SteveG1988]

This sucks.  Another fascinating part of our highway system is going to be lost.  They're burying another piece of history.

Honestly, i think it is a waste of federal funds to maintain what is more or less a driveway to a park and ride station. downgrade it, truncate I-70 to 695.

And do what with the four-level stack?

My research suggests that it was the first four-level "Maltese cross" stack in Maryland, and it shows. It has no shoulders on the ramps, tighter curves than modern stacks, and the physical fabric is alarmingly decayed in places.

If these plans are in fact accepted and I-70 is truncated, I would expect that the existing stack would be replaced with either a modern stack, or a clover-stack that used loop ramps for the WB Blvd-695 Outer and 695 Outer-EB Blvd movements. In any case something will have to be done to it within the next 5 years, or else someone will start squawking about it becoming unsafe.

In general terms, I do have mixed feelings about this truncation. After reading The Big Roads by Earl Swift I understand very well how badly West Baltimore was affected by the attempts to build I-70, and I don't like the idea of the wholesale park demolition that would have been needed to build the highway. But West Baltimore is now as badly affected by the absence of I-70 as it was by its impending presence, and I agree with those who suggest that better road access, combined with better facilities at the MARC station and the Red Line, could make a difference.

I would keep as much as possible of the current stack. Only real change would be requiring all traffic to merge onto one roadway. I would have it taper off to two lanes past woodlawn drive, possibly making a few at grade intersections for local roads, with the red line using the current overpasses.

Honestly, I-70 ending at 695 instead of at the park and ride is not a big loss, most traffic will not even notice the missing mile or two of interstate. It is not as big of a change as 195/295/95 changing their routing between NJ and PA, having 195 extend over 295, and connecting to 95 in PA.

[froggie]

Guys, in case you missed my comment from last week, the existing stack will remain and current I-70 will remain more or less in its current configuration west of a point about 1/2mi east of the Woodlawn Dr underpass.

[bob7374]

Honestly, I-70 ending at 695 instead of at the park and ride is not a big loss, most traffic will not even notice the missing mile or two of interstate. It is not as big of a change as 195/295/95 changing their routing between NJ and PA, having 195 extend over 295, and connecting to 95 in PA.

Has anyone, besides posters to this Forum, proposed extending I-70 south along I-695 so it ended at I-95? If only because it was supposed to originally.

[Alex4897]

Honestly, I-70 ending at 695 instead of at the park and ride is not a big loss, most traffic will not even notice the missing mile or two of interstate. It is not as big of a change as 195/295/95 changing their routing between NJ and PA, having 195 extend over 295, and connecting to 95 in PA.

Has anyone, besides posters to this Forum, proposed extending I-70 south along I-695 so it ended at I-95? If only because it was supposed to originally.

I was thinking this too, I figured it wasn't that big of a deal, more of a way to tidy things up.

[SteveG1988]

Honestly, I-70 ending at 695 instead of at the park and ride is not a big loss, most traffic will not even notice the missing mile or two of interstate. It is not as big of a change as 195/295/95 changing their routing between NJ and PA, having 195 extend over 295, and connecting to 95 in PA.

Has anyone, besides posters to this Forum, proposed extending I-70 south along I-695 so it ended at I-95? If only because it was supposed to originally.

I was thinking this too, I figured it wasn't that big of a deal, more of a way to tidy things up.

I was thinking that as well, but i came to the conclusion that extending it along 695 would be a useless project, would create more hassles since you would have to put up new signs and change all the stuff around, then figure out the exit numbers and miles, etc. Having it run along 695 is a good idea...but would just confuse people in the long run since suddenly 695 has a second route on it, I-70. But, if i were in charge, i would have it go beyond 95, have it go all the way to 97.

[Alps]

It's never a good idea to run through highways around established beltways, because people will call the beltway by its one number.
* I-95 Boston = Route 128
* I-95 Washington = 495
* I-40 Memphis = 240

* Exception: I-74 Indy = 74, even when on I-465

70 would have to replace 695, and as said herein, why bother with the expense and hassle?

[SteveG1988]

It's never a good idea to run through highways around established beltways, because people will call the beltway by its one number.
* I-95 Boston = Route 128
* I-95 Washington = 495
* I-40 Memphis = 240

* Exception: I-74 Indy = 74, even when on I-465

70 would have to replace 695, and as said herein, why bother with the expense and hassle?

I misphrased what i wanted to say.

"if i were in charge" i should have added "if i were in charge and instructed to link I-70 to a mainline interstate"

I see nothing wrong with how it stands now, I-70 has always ended at I-695, just make it official. What i think has people butt hurt about it is the mass transit use of the right of way. "tear out an interstate to just give people a rail line"

[Pete from Boston]

Do people around DC say "495," or is it just "the Beltway"?

[1995hoo]

Do people around DC say "495," or is it just "the Beltway"?

It's varied over the years. When I was a little kid, it was always just "495," and some people, including WTOP traffic reporter Bob Marbourg, continue to use that reference. "The Beltway" became more common when the numbering was split and my observation these days is that more people use that reference.

If I'm giving directions, I usually just say "the Beltway" if the person is local, but if the person is from out of the area I'll give the route numbers instead (so that I don't have to remember whether a given sign says "Capital Beltway") and I'll mention the dual-signing of I-95/I-495 (since we live off that portion).

[cpzilliacus]

Do people around DC say "495," or is it just "the Beltway"?

495 and "Beltway" are synonymous. 

This dates back to the days before I-95 between Third Street, N.W. and New York Avenue in D.C. and College Park was cancelled, and I-95 was routed around the south and east parts of the Beltway. 

Initially, the 495 signs were removed, but local elected officials demanded that they be reinstalled, and they were.

[mrsman]

Finally, something is being done about it! Too bad it had to come down to this, but that routing was just bad luck for the most part. I could see why they didn't want to trace the entire route of US 40 into the city because it runs through dense commercial and residential areas, but I never liked the fact that its proposed routing would have wiped out an entire city park, which, along with NIMBYism in the inner-city areas, caused its ultimate doom.

Still, it will be interesting what number the new Cooks Boulevard gets, if at all. I'd call it MD 666, but then there'd be the fear of sign theft, so if it were up to me, I'd just sign it as MD 970 and be done with it.

This is a good idea.  Basically, as it exists right now, the best way to connect from I-70 to I-95 is via I-695.  And the control cities at the junction show this:  Towson-New York I-695 to I-95 north or Glen Burnie-Baltimore I-695 to I-95 south.

For access to Downtown Baltimore, generally the best way is I-695 south to I-95 north.  But if the beltway is busy, there are a lot of folks who currently follow a routing from I-70 to Cooks Lane to Edmunson Avenue (US 40).  Thanks to the ex-I-170 freeway, there's about a 2 mile section where traffic lights are skipped.  It would be nice if the routing along Cooks between US 40 and I-70 were a state highway to ease the navigation.

At least with the new plans if you're coming down I-70 you don't need to turn to get to Cooks, and apparently the new routing will only add a handful of lights.  You will no longer have to turn down Ingleside or around the Park and Ride to make this connection.

[mgk920]

Besides, to the anal road geeker, aren't 2 digit interstates not supposed to end at 3 digit interstates?

Bugo for the win


iPhone

OTOH, if I-83 is ever rerouted to follow I-695 (west) to replace I-97 to . . . .





Mike

[thenetwork]

It's never a good idea to run through highways around established beltways, because people will call the beltway by its one number.
* I-95 Boston = Route 128
* I-95 Washington = 495
* I-40 Memphis = 240

* Exception: I-74 Indy = 74, even when on I-465

70 would have to replace 695, and as said herein, why bother with the expense and hassle?

It's been a while since I have listened to traffic reports in Detroit...Don't most people there refer to the I-96 stretch along I-275 as just I-96 and not I-275?

Honestly, I-70 ending at 695 instead of at the park and ride is not a big loss, most traffic will not even notice the missing mile or two of interstate. It is not as big of a change as 195/295/95 changing their routing between NJ and PA, having 195 extend over 295, and connecting to 95 in PA.

Has anyone, besides posters to this Forum, proposed extending I-70 south along I-695 so it ended at I-95? If only because it was supposed to originally.

I was thinking this too, I figured it wasn't that big of a deal, more of a way to tidy things up.

I was thinking that as well, but i came to the conclusion that extending it along 695 would be a useless project, would create more hassles since you would have to put up new signs and change all the stuff around, then figure out the exit numbers and miles, etc. Having it run along 695 is a good idea...but would just confuse people in the long run since suddenly 695 has a second route on it, I-70. But, if i were in charge, i would have it go beyond 95, have it go all the way to 97.

I like your idea of extending I-70 along I-695 and replacing I-97 (to US-50/US-301).  It frees up an interstate number and provides a single route number for those traveling from far Western Maryland to to Annapolis, far Eastern Maryland & Delaware.  Plus I-70 would, of sorts, be a complete bypass route of both Baltimore & DC proper.

The downside of extending I-70 to Annapolis is renumbering all the exits along I-695 and what was I-97, but all-in-all, it would provide less confusion for the non-local, through traffic.

Besides, to the anal road geeker, aren't 2 digit interstates not supposed to end at 3 digit interstates?

Bugo for the win


iPhone

OTOH, if I-83 is ever rerouted to follow I-695 (west) to replace I-97 to . . . .

Another decent idea...Just run I-83 along the western bypass to I-70, then multiplex it to I-95.  The old alignment of I-83 would be I-183 (a logical spur route "dead ending" downtown).

[Henry]

Of all the ideas for fixing the Baltimore Interstates, I like the I-83 reroute the best. That way, I-70 would end at a 2di, like it should have in the first place, and I-83 would intersect with I-95, albeit eight miles southwest of where it was once proposed to.

[Avalanchez71]

So what killed I-70 the NIMBY's or the econuts?

[D-Dey65]

Rotten idea. I still say I-70 and I-83 should go straight to I-95.

[Strider]

They should have multiplex I-70 with I-695 and have it end at I-95 either south or north of Baltimore. I don't understand why they didn't do that... but hey.. there are some 2dis that end at 3dis.

[froggie]

So what killed I-70 the NIMBY's or the econuts?

Both, plus a lack of money to fund the city's share (which is also what killed I-83).

Rotten idea. I still say I-70 and I-83 should go straight to I-95.

That ship has sailed.  It's over.

They should have multiplex I-70 with I-695 and have it end at I-95 either south or north of Baltimore. I don't understand why they didn't do that... but hey.. there are some 2dis that end at 3dis.

Plenty of precedent:  I-4, original (non-extended) I-69, I-76 (E), I-87, I-88 (W)...

[bugo]

So what killed I-70 the NIMBY's or the econuts?

Both, plus a lack of money to fund the city's share (which is also what killed I-83).

Rotten idea. I still say I-70 and I-83 should go straight to I-95.

That ship has sailed.  It's over.

Things change.  Folks die.  New residents move in.  Demographics change.  Never say never.