https://www.google.com/maps/@35.6804046,-77.9547874,16z - Can do well with just a simple diamond interchange.
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.476409,-77.4488977,16.17z - They modified it from a simple diamond to a half parclo (which has 5 ramps).
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7671095,-77.861179,15.79z - Here's another one!
I think we've already had this thread.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10939.0
Quote from: JoePCool14 on April 24, 2021, 11:48:29 PM
I think we've already had this thread.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10939.0
Unless it's too old to bump?
Quote from: tolbs17 on April 25, 2021, 12:10:45 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on April 24, 2021, 11:48:29 PM
I think we've already had this thread.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10939.0
Unless it's too old to bump?
I think 2018 threads are ok to bump provided you have content for it. I bumped threads from as early as 2015 before here.
This has been mentioned before, but every time I drive through this interchange, I can't help but wonder whether it was really necessary to build a very large, high-speed freeway-to-freeway-style interchange for K-10 and 23rd Street in Kansas: https://goo.gl/maps/kwphPRucrTkRBeZV7
Another forum member commented that a simple trumpet for the end of 23rd Street probably would have sufficed. I agree, but I'd go even further and suggest that it would have at least been worth considering whether it would have been feasible to have 23rd Street meet Noria Road at a simple four-way intersection, having 23rd Street continue as CR 442 on the other side of the intersection, and then build an interchange for Noria Road/E 1750 Road and K-10 as either a standard diamond or diverging diamond. Yeah, that would put 23rd Street traffic through a couple of extra turns and probably traffic signals, but with so much traffic using the new K-10 freeway instead, would that really be a problem? Plus, this concept would have made it easier to develop 23rd Street/CR 442 as an east-west corridor serving Lawrence and Eudora. But we're in Fictional Highways territory once again now!
The eastern I-35/US 2 interchange in Duluth that features a sweeping flyover ramp from SB 35 to EB 2. Most traffic coming from the northeast would have used I-535 to cross to Superior.
Now that said, that flyover will probably get a lot heavier use the next three years while the I-35/I-535 interchange mess is rebuilt, and probably again whenever the I-535 Blatnik Bridge is rebuilt in the next decade.
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 25, 2021, 12:28:59 AM
Quote from: tolbs17 on April 25, 2021, 12:10:45 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on April 24, 2021, 11:48:29 PM
I think we've already had this thread.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10939.0
Unless it's too old to bump?
I think 2018 threads are ok to bump provided you have content for it. I bumped threads from as early as 2015 before here.
I believe so. I think it's better to bump an old thread instead of creating a new one that covers exactly the same topic. It just ends up being redundant and covers the same beats.
Quote from: JoePCool14 on April 25, 2021, 09:42:15 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 25, 2021, 12:28:59 AM
Quote from: tolbs17 on April 25, 2021, 12:10:45 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on April 24, 2021, 11:48:29 PM
I think we've already had this thread.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10939.0
Unless it's too old to bump?
I think 2018 threads are ok to bump provided you have content for it. I bumped threads from as early as 2015 before here.
I believe so. I think it's better to bump an old thread instead of creating a new one that covers exactly the same topic. It just ends up being redundant and covers the same beats.
Then an admin should merge it I guess.
For the US 301 one, I think they do that cause most traffic there will go north. That's why they add loops.
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 25, 2021, 12:28:59 AM
Quote from: tolbs17 on April 25, 2021, 12:10:45 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on April 24, 2021, 11:48:29 PM
I think we've already had this thread.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10939.0
Unless it's too old to bump?
I think 2018 threads are ok to bump provided you have content for it. I bumped threads from as early as 2015 before here.
People bump threads here from 2009 sometimes. Anyhow, I've never seen a large interchange that didn't have a low enough traffic level to warrant it.
Quote from: epzik8 on April 26, 2021, 10:55:12 PM
I've never seen a large interchange that didn't have a low enough traffic level to warrant it.
high enough, you mean? :hmmm:
Here in Wisconsin, besides the US 151/WI 26 interchange on the NE corner of Waupun that should be a simple straight across bridge overcrossing with no highway connection that I have mentioned elsewhere, IMHO the US 12/53/WI 93 interchange complex in Eau Claire (built in the early 00s) is waaaay more complex, overpowered and expensive than it should have been. If I were the benevolent dictator there and then, I would have done a simple diamond/SPUI at US 12 and 53, favoring US 53, fed WI 93 to the south directly into 'old' US 53 (Hastings Way) to the north, curving it around the east side of the former London Square Mall, and removed the old US 12/53 (Clairemont Ave/Hastings Way) interchange, replacing it with a standard intersection.
https://goo.gl/maps/C23C3trsbXztPphq9
Mike
I-74 at I-40 when the Northern Beltway gets extended. A 3-level stack is proposed.
Quote from: mgk920 on April 29, 2021, 05:17:30 PM
Here in Wisconsin, besides the US 151/WI 26 interchange on the NE corner of Waupun that should be a simple straight across bridge overcrossing with no highway connection that I have mentioned elsewhere, IMHO the US 12/53/WI 93 interchange complex in Eau Claire (built in the early 00s) is waaaay more complex, overpowered and expensive than it should have been. If I were the benevolent dictator there and then, I would have done a simple diamond/SPUI at US 12 and 53, favoring US 53, fed WI 93 to the south directly into 'old' US 53 (Hastings Way) to the north, curving it around the east side of the former London Square Mall, and removed the old US 12/53 (Clairemont Ave/Hastings Way) interchange, replacing it with a standard intersection.
Actually, one could make a strong argument the complex was under built. When the US 53 bypass was still in the planning stage the state had wanted to build a free flow design for the Clairemont Ave interchange but it was dropped due to funding and lack of space.
With the explosive growth the area has seen in the subsequent decades (especially in Altoona) traffic frequently backs up onto the travel lanes of US 53 during peak periods. The WIS 93 flyover/ tunnel can also get crowded although not as often as US 12. It has gotten to the point WisDOT was forced to place wig-wag signs warning of said back ups and overhead VMS a few years ago: https://goo.gl/maps/xYMB1V5NFonsG9dw8, https://goo.gl/maps/sBXERu5vyKaatGrm6.
the Toronto area has a few overbuilt interchanges.
The first one is the Highway 401/Allen Road interchange. It's overbuilt because Allen Road is only a 7-km long freeway. It was supposed to be longer but public opposition led to its current length.
(https://i.imgur.com/s45uUwp.png)
Second, the interchanges of 412/401, 412/407, 418/401, and 418/407. Shown below is 418/401. The reason is that these interchanges have very low traffic volumes, yet they are fucking huge.
(https://i.imgur.com/Jd2K1a2.png)
In San Diego, the 43rd St. exit from I-805 looks seriously overbuilt at first glance:
https://goo.gl/maps/Rv8ivL9fYj3tnA1r7
Thing is, this interchange was to connect to the doomed CA 252 freeway (a victim of California's freeway revolts). But that project was still alive when I-805 was under construction. It made sense to build the interchange before I-805 was opened to traffic.
The CF Harvey Parkway. Many turn lanes, signalized and AADT is roughly 5,000.
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3128,-77.651625,3a,75y,298.08h,70.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6I6E7An0R3ph-AjN2XVrzA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Quote from: tolbs17 on June 11, 2021, 09:45:30 PM
The CF Harvey Parkway. Many turn lanes, signalized and AADT is roughly 5,000.
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3128,-77.651625,3a,75y,298.08h,70.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6I6E7An0R3ph-AjN2XVrzA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
This isn't really too overbuilt. Ramp configuration is pretty standard (folded diamond, aka parclo). Most interchanges of the same design in California would likely have the same lane setup too. I'd probably swap in a permissive left turn for the on-ramps. Otherwise I think this is fine.
Quote from: andrepoiy on June 07, 2021, 08:15:31 PM
Second, the interchanges of 412/401, 412/407, 418/401, and 418/407. Shown below is 418/401. The reason is that these interchanges have very low traffic volumes, yet they are fucking huge.
(https://i.imgur.com/Jd2K1a2.png)
The fact that 407, 412 and 418 are tolled doesn't help much.
Quote from: jakeroot on June 12, 2021, 02:16:22 AM
Quote from: tolbs17 on June 11, 2021, 09:45:30 PM
The CF Harvey Parkway. Many turn lanes, signalized and AADT is roughly 5,000.
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3128,-77.651625,3a,75y,298.08h,70.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6I6E7An0R3ph-AjN2XVrzA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
This isn't really too overbuilt. Ramp configuration is pretty standard (folded diamond, aka parclo). Most interchanges of the same design in California would likely have the same lane setup too. I'd probably swap in a permissive left turn for the on-ramps. Otherwise I think this is fine.
http://prntscr.com/156bgsa
I-84 in East Fishkill, NY at Exit 50 (Lime Kiln Rd/CR 27) is pretty overbuilt. Even on CR 27, there are long, generous turn lanes and some unnecessary protected left turns at one of the old IBM gates. Probably overbuilt since it's the closest exit to IBM East Fishkill?
Junction of NY 49 and I-790/NY 5/8/12 north of Utica, New York is way overbuilt for traffic counts
Quote from: machias on June 14, 2021, 03:31:45 PM
Junction of NY 49 and I-790/NY 5/8/12 north of Utica, New York is way overbuilt for traffic counts
Let's just all appreciate how I-790 isn't connected to I-90 directly, even though it has an interchange with a road with I-90 in the median. I'm pretty sure that is a pretty unique situation.
Quote from: jakeroot on June 12, 2021, 02:16:22 AM
Quote from: tolbs17 on June 11, 2021, 09:45:30 PM
The CF Harvey Parkway. Many turn lanes, signalized and AADT is roughly 5,000.
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3128,-77.651625,3a,75y,298.08h,70.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6I6E7An0R3ph-AjN2XVrzA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
This isn't really too overbuilt. Ramp configuration is pretty standard (folded diamond, aka parclo). Most interchanges of the same design in California would likely have the same lane setup too. I'd probably swap in a permissive left turn for the on-ramps. Otherwise I think this is fine.
It also looks like the bypass was built with further expansion in mind if you look at the interchange at the west end of the CF Harvey Parkway (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2698873,-77.6688943,3244m/data=!3m1!1e3). I don't know if there was once a plan to extend it south and east to connect to US 258 south of Kinston, but it wouldn't surprise me given North Carolina's ambitious highway planning.
Quote from: skluth on June 20, 2021, 02:10:01 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 12, 2021, 02:16:22 AM
Quote from: tolbs17 on June 11, 2021, 09:45:30 PM
The CF Harvey Parkway. Many turn lanes, signalized and AADT is roughly 5,000.
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.3128,-77.651625,3a,75y,298.08h,70.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6I6E7An0R3ph-AjN2XVrzA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
This isn't really too overbuilt. Ramp configuration is pretty standard (folded diamond, aka parclo). Most interchanges of the same design in California would likely have the same lane setup too. I'd probably swap in a permissive left turn for the on-ramps. Otherwise I think this is fine.
It also looks like the bypass was built with further expansion in mind if you look at the interchange at the west end of the CF Harvey Parkway (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2698873,-77.6688943,3244m/data=!3m1!1e3). I don't know if there was once a plan to extend it south and east to connect to US 258 south of Kinston, but it wouldn't surprise me given North Carolina's ambitious highway planning.
I think it was planned as a beltway one time but that plan was scrapped.
Here's another OVERBUILT interchange.
The movement from 64 Business East to 64 East future I-87 North only carries about 4,100 vehicles per day. It could do well with just a loop.
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.8036632,-78.4330201,15.46z
Also in reality, I don't think this signal is needed. https://www.google.com/maps/@35.8044224,-78.429979,3a,75y,251.85h,78.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTZuG851V6Ubf8s6Mk72bOA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
The Downtown Connector in Atlanta has two ridiculous intersections back-to-back:
This one at Freedom Parkway, which is a short surface-level boulevard connecting the interstate to Ponce de Leon Avenue:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/33%C2%B045'33.8%22N+84%C2%B022'45.0%22W/@33.759398,-84.3813577,748m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0xb05cf9dec0da5b2a!7e2!8m2!3d33.7593976!4d-84.3791688 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/33%C2%B045'33.8%22N+84%C2%B022'45.0%22W/@33.759398,-84.3813577,748m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0xb05cf9dec0da5b2a!7e2!8m2!3d33.7593976!4d-84.3791688)
The one to the north, which tries to incorporate multiple movements from cross-streets:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/33%C2%B046'05.1%22N+84%C2%B023'23.9%22W/@33.768085,-84.3921507,748m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x21ebbeeb58465596!7e2!8m2!3d33.768085!4d-84.3899619 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/33%C2%B046'05.1%22N+84%C2%B023'23.9%22W/@33.768085,-84.3921507,748m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x21ebbeeb58465596!7e2!8m2!3d33.768085!4d-84.3899619)
Quote from: mrcmc888 on November 17, 2021, 02:03:00 PM
The Downtown Connector in Atlanta has two ridiculous intersections back-to-back:
This one at Freedom Parkway, which is a short surface-level boulevard connecting the interstate to Ponce de Leon Avenue:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/33%C2%B045'33.8%22N+84%C2%B022'45.0%22W/@33.759398,-84.3813577,748m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0xb05cf9dec0da5b2a!7e2!8m2!3d33.7593976!4d-84.3791688 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/33%C2%B045'33.8%22N+84%C2%B022'45.0%22W/@33.759398,-84.3813577,748m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0xb05cf9dec0da5b2a!7e2!8m2!3d33.7593976!4d-84.3791688)
The one to the north, which tries to incorporate multiple movements from cross-streets:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/33%C2%B046'05.1%22N+84%C2%B023'23.9%22W/@33.768085,-84.3921507,748m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x21ebbeeb58465596!7e2!8m2!3d33.768085!4d-84.3899619 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/33%C2%B046'05.1%22N+84%C2%B023'23.9%22W/@33.768085,-84.3921507,748m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x21ebbeeb58465596!7e2!8m2!3d33.768085!4d-84.3899619)
I can't speak for the latter, but I believe the former was a victim of the Atlanta freeway revolts (an interchange with the proposed I-485 IIRC). But in any case that is definitely a ton of ramps circulating through downtown Atlanta. :-D
Quote from: oscar on June 07, 2021, 08:43:04 PM
In San Diego, the 43rd St. exit from I-805 looks seriously overbuilt at first glance:
https://goo.gl/maps/Rv8ivL9fYj3tnA1r7
Thing is, this interchange was to connect to the doomed CA 252 freeway (a victim of California's freeway revolts). But that project was still alive when I-805 was under construction. It made sense to build the interchange before I-805 was opened to traffic.
That explains a lot, as that definitely looks like a really overbuilt interchange, and when I first noticed it before looking on Google Maps I was scratching my head at the rationale. I hadn't realized that there was a proposed freeway there that had been canceled.
Quote from: adventurernumber1 on November 21, 2021, 02:31:11 AM
Quote from: mrcmc888 on November 17, 2021, 02:03:00 PM
The Downtown Connector in Atlanta has two ridiculous intersections back-to-back:
This one at Freedom Parkway, which is a short surface-level boulevard connecting the interstate to Ponce de Leon Avenue:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/33%C2%B045'33.8%22N+84%C2%B022'45.0%22W/@33.759398,-84.3813577,748m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0xb05cf9dec0da5b2a!7e2!8m2!3d33.7593976!4d-84.3791688 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/33%C2%B045'33.8%22N+84%C2%B022'45.0%22W/@33.759398,-84.3813577,748m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0xb05cf9dec0da5b2a!7e2!8m2!3d33.7593976!4d-84.3791688)
I can't speak for the latter, but I believe the former was a victim of the Atlanta freeway revolts (an interchange with the proposed I-485 IIRC). But in any case that is definitely a ton of ramps circulating through downtown Atlanta. :-D
The original scheme for this interchange, which was built as part of the Downtown Connector reconstruction in the mid eighties, was just a split diamond. There were no flyover ramps. The flyovers were added during the era when the Presidential Parkway was under development as a controlled-access highway all the way to Ponce De Leon a mile or so past Moreland. Perhaps the flyovers should've been deferred until the parkway was a done deal, which it never was.
Quote from: mrcmc888 on November 17, 2021, 02:03:00 PM
The one to the north, which tries to incorporate multiple movements from cross-streets:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/33%C2%B046'05.1%22N+84%C2%B023'23.9%22W/@33.768085,-84.3921507,748m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x21ebbeeb58465596!7e2!8m2!3d33.768085!4d-84.3899619 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/33%C2%B046'05.1%22N+84%C2%B023'23.9%22W/@33.768085,-84.3921507,748m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x21ebbeeb58465596!7e2!8m2!3d33.768085!4d-84.3899619)
There is nothing wrong with this interchange. It provides a diagonal link that allows Spring and West Peachtree north of the interchange and Ted Turner Drive and Centennial Olympic Park Drive to the south to function as a single one-way pair, greatly increasing capacity through the area. It also provides access to and from the one-way pair and to and from North Avenue in nearly every direction. I think it's rather brilliant.
So, you're driving toward Waco on little FM 2113 when you encounter this elevated onramp to I-35 (https://goo.gl/maps/F4cVKpzstJU5nDcw5) stretching as far as the eye can see. The viaduct is 2335 feet long and the entire ramp 0.8 miles. Here's the overhead view (https://www.google.com/maps/@31.4574896,-97.1739175,596m/data=!3m1!1e3). Construction of the interchange was underway in 2009 and finished in 2013, a few years before the rest of the I-35 mega-reconstruction most of the way to Austin. Oddly, despite having this one insanely long elevated ramp, it lacks the U-turn ramps for the frontage roads that are all but ubiquitous in Texas.
The flyover ramp going from the All American Freeway North to I-295 south is useless. There's like next to no traffic using it.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/35.1118541,-78.9742585/35.1105596,-78.974693/@35.1111216,-78.9747159,969m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!4m1!3e0
And the loop I circled carries the MOST traffic...
Maybe it was purposely designed this way to avoid impact to the wetlands?
This ramp also carries little to no traffic. Another useless flyover ramp.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/35.4204927,-77.9974086/35.4282185,-78.0045565/@35.4258118,-77.9971439,1405m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!4m1!3e0
Probably not the most egregious example, but an outlet mall was supposed to go in at Exit 112 at Morris IL on I-80, and dual right and left turn lanes were built on the NE exit ramp. At least IDOT got the developer to contribute before the project was scrapped.
https://tinyurl.com/2hyunn4d
all of i295 in Virginia, and maybe the 40 Winston-Salem beltway crossing
Quote from: sernum on December 16, 2021, 03:58:33 PM
all of i295 in Virginia, and maybe the 40 Winston-Salem beltway crossing
Technically I-95 was supposed to go on where I-295 is on right now and for the Winston-Salem northern beltway, what makes you say that its overbuilt?
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 15, 2021, 04:35:12 PM
The flyover ramp going from the All American Freeway North to I-295 south is useless. There's like next to no traffic using it.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/35.1118541,-78.9742585/35.1105596,-78.974693/@35.1111216,-78.9747159,969m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!4m1!3e0
And the loop I circled carries the MOST traffic...
Maybe it was purposely designed this way to avoid impact to the wetlands?
This ramp also carries little to no traffic. Another useless flyover ramp.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/35.4204927,-77.9974086/35.4282185,-78.0045565/@35.4258118,-77.9971439,1405m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!4m1!3e0
The ramps may be underutilized, but they're not useless. Without them, the interchanges would be incomplete.
NCDOT must've made a policy decision to build cloverstacks instead of four-loop interchanges with CDs even when traffic volumes don't warrant flyover ramps. Once that's done, next is deciding which two quadrants get the loop ramps. I'm sure that decision for the one at Fort Bragg was driven by weaving arrangements with the Bragg Boulevard interchange. The other one... generally, in a skewed interchange like that, the flyovers will be shorter in one direction, and that's where the designers put the flyovers. It's no great mystery.
I recall reading years ago that Texas had made a policy decision not to use loop ramps at system interchanges at all. Imagine that.
Quote from: Tom958 on December 16, 2021, 07:29:15 PM
I recall reading years ago that Texas had made a policy decision not to use loop ramps at system interchanges at all. Imagine that.
Then you may wonder why they overspend on construction when they are heavily obsessed with the frontage roads.
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 16, 2021, 07:30:53 PM
Quote from: Tom958 on December 16, 2021, 07:29:15 PM
I recall reading years ago that Texas had made a policy decision not to use loop ramps at system interchanges at all. Imagine that.
Then you may wonder why they overspend on construction when they are heavily obsessed with the frontage roads.
What do frontage roads have to do with system interchanges?
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 16, 2021, 07:33:34 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 16, 2021, 07:30:53 PM
Quote from: Tom958 on December 16, 2021, 07:29:15 PM
I recall reading years ago that Texas had made a policy decision not to use loop ramps at system interchanges at all. Imagine that.
Then you may wonder why they overspend on construction when they are heavily obsessed with the frontage roads.
What do frontage roads have to do with system interchanges?
Nothing. I mean they are like closely spaced even in a rural area like here (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.1235383,-95.7353827,607m/data=!3m1!1e3). Although they do help if there is like an accident but they are not my style to be honest. I prefer full access as opposed to an interchange designed like that which I don't like.
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 16, 2021, 07:45:15 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 16, 2021, 07:33:34 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 16, 2021, 07:30:53 PM
Quote from: Tom958 on December 16, 2021, 07:29:15 PM
I recall reading years ago that Texas had made a policy decision not to use loop ramps at system interchanges at all. Imagine that.
Then you may wonder why they overspend on construction when they are heavily obsessed with the frontage roads.
What do frontage roads have to do with system interchanges?
Nothing. I mean they are like closely spaced even in a rural area like here (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.1235383,-95.7353827,607m/data=!3m1!1e3). Although they do help if there is like an accident but they are not my style to be honest. I prefer full access as opposed to an interchange designed like that which I don't like.
That's a service interchange (i.e. it is not a freeway-to-freeway interchange), which the TxDOT policy Tom was referring to wouldn't apply to.
I-285 at GA 10 Memorial Drive near Atlanta. Starting in the late eighties, Georgia DOT started planning for its next big thing after Freeing the Freeways: a Toronto-style collector-distributor system along seventy or so miles of freeways across metro Atlanta, basically the northern half of I-285 and extending northward along I-75, I-85, and GA 400. I found out about it from a front-page newspaper article published on the twentieth anniversary of Earth Day. GDOT started incorporating provisions for the CD system into any bridge or interchange projects within those corridors.
In 1994, I went to a public information meeting for one of the projects: the complex of interchanges at I-85 and GA 120, Sugarloaf Parkway, and Old Peachtree Road. I instantly recognized what it was, and, knowing that there was nothing like that in the RTP, I personally set out to stop it.
Meanwhile, it had become obvious to various agencies that metro Atlanta's excessive levels of vehicular travel would cause it to run afoul of standards set under the Clean Air Act, so GDOT, probably with the connivance of the FHWA, simply denied that they were building the regional CD system even as they continued to do so. This rocked on until 1998, when the pressure finally got to the GDOT commissioner and he fessed up in a front-page newspaper article. I felt very good about myself that day.
Honestly, the concept never was that feasible, and after the air quality crisis, it was quietly abandoned, leaving bits of expensive detritus scattered around town (especially along I-285 in Cobb County). As it happened, GDOT decided to replace the bridge carrying US 29 Lawrenceville Highway over I-285. Finished in 2007, it was the first bridge/interchange project within the CD system corridors not to have provision for the CDs. End of story, right?
No. Shortly afterward, GDOT replaced the Memorial Drive bridge with a full-blown, CD-ready interchange! What the actual fuck? Looking back on it, it's hard to understand, but somehow I managed not to travel that section of 285 throughout the entire construction period. I didn't even know about it until it was done.
So, here it is, in all its ridiculous, wasteful glory. That towering retaining wall made room for what was supposed to be one of the three-lane CD roads, but is now the state's most expensive planter.
https://goo.gl/maps/GZaxqLxqB8vr9xkC9
Quote from: sernum on December 16, 2021, 03:58:33 PM
all of i295 in Virginia, and maybe the 40 Winston-Salem beltway crossing
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 16, 2021, 04:35:20 PM
Technically I-95 was supposed to go on where I-295 is on right now and for the Winston-Salem northern beltway, what makes you say that its overbuilt?
The proposed interchange between I-40 and the east side of the Winston-Salem Northern Beltway (I-74) is huge. That's because there's a small neighborhood off of Oak Grove Church Road that is south of I-40, plus a small lake (ergo, large pond) just west of there. The eastbound ramp off of I-40 to [northbound] I-74 is planned to run south of the pond, and the [southbound] ramp off of I-74 to eastbound I-40 will circle around way to the south of that neighborhood. Presumably, neither of these ramps will be the preferred route as the exiting routes using the Salem Parkway (US-421, formerly Green-40) and the North-South Expressway (US-52) are much shorter connections.
Here's the plan: https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/wsnb/Documents/eastern-section-6-map-1.pdf
By the way: It was cool pulling up the project overview map (PDF) on the NCDOT website. I was trying to zoom in on something of the PDF, when I realized that the area I was looking at was a "Hot Link". Sure enough, if you click there it pulled up this detailed map of Section 6.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on December 16, 2021, 09:09:08 PM
Quote from: sernum on December 16, 2021, 03:58:33 PM
all of i295 in Virginia, and maybe the 40 Winston-Salem beltway crossing
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 16, 2021, 04:35:20 PM
Technically I-95 was supposed to go on where I-295 is on right now and for the Winston-Salem northern beltway, what makes you say that its overbuilt?
The proposed interchange between I-40 and the east side of the Winston-Salem Northern Beltway (I-74) is huge. That's because there's a small neighborhood off of Oak Grove Church Road that is south of I-40, plus a small lake (ergo, large pond) just west of there. The eastbound ramp off of I-40 to [northbound] I-74 is planned to run south of the pond, and the [southbound] ramp off of I-74 to eastbound I-40 will circle around way to the south of that neighborhood. Presumably, neither of these ramps will be the preferred route as the exiting routes using the Salem Parkway (US-421, formerly Green-40) and the North-South Expressway (US-52) are much shorter connections.
Here's the plan: https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/wsnb/Documents/eastern-section-6-map-1.pdf
By the way: It was cool pulling up the project overview map (PDF) on the NCDOT website. I was trying to zoom in on something of the PDF, when I realized that the area I was looking at was a "Hot Link". Sure enough, if you click there it pulled up this detailed map of Section 6.
exactly my point, beyond stupidly big and for what?
Quote from: sernum on December 17, 2021, 12:31:50 AM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on December 16, 2021, 09:09:08 PM
Quote from: sernum on December 16, 2021, 03:58:33 PM
all of i295 in Virginia, and maybe the 40 Winston-Salem beltway crossing
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 16, 2021, 04:35:20 PM
Technically I-95 was supposed to go on where I-295 is on right now and for the Winston-Salem northern beltway, what makes you say that its overbuilt?
The proposed interchange between I-40 and the east side of the Winston-Salem Northern Beltway (I-74) is huge. That's because there's a small neighborhood off of Oak Grove Church Road that is south of I-40, plus a small lake (ergo, large pond) just west of there. The eastbound ramp off of I-40 to [northbound] I-74 is planned to run south of the pond, and the [southbound] ramp off of I-74 to eastbound I-40 will circle around way to the south of that neighborhood. Presumably, neither of these ramps will be the preferred route as the exiting routes using the Salem Parkway (US-421, formerly Green-40) and the North-South Expressway (US-52) are much shorter connections.
Here's the plan: https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/wsnb/Documents/eastern-section-6-map-1.pdf
By the way: It was cool pulling up the project overview map (PDF) on the NCDOT website. I was trying to zoom in on something of the PDF, when I realized that the area I was looking at was a "Hot Link". Sure enough, if you click there it pulled up this detailed map of Section 6.
exactly my point, beyond stupidly big and for what?
incase there is an accident i guess, lol.
In the first post and the first link, (US-301/US-117) interchange is not really overbuilt for it's time because it used to carry all US-301/US-117 southbound traffic without having to conflict with the traffic making left turns. Until the US-117 bypass (which is now I-795) opened to traffic, traffic on the US-264 (future I-587) eastbound ramp which goes down to US-301/US-117 southbound significantly declined and now it could look overbuilt for its time now. But there should be no redesign, it's fine the way it is.
Slight bump here, but I wanted to mention PA 26 at I-99 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8894659,-77.7308831,1156m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu) northeast of State College, PA. This is built as a full freeway-freeway directional-T interchange which is way overbuilt as presently constituted. At one point, it was meant to be extended southward, but that's even less likely now that US 322 will be upgraded instead. Sadly, the chance that this beautiful interchange will ever connect to anything meaningful (namely PA 144) or serve anything close to its original purpose is basically zero.
Albany has two egregious examples because they were built for roads that never came to be:
The Circle Stack in Albany, connecting I-787 to the South Mall Expressway / US 9 / US 20. The South Mall Expressway is a stub that is missing connections (to the west and east, though the Dunn Bridge is an important crossing of the Hudson), making this junction severely overkill for what it serves.
The I-90 / US 9 4-level stack in Albany. This was built for an expressway that would never come to fully be, and US 9 is a two lane road on both sides of the stack.
CA-14/Via Princessa in Santa Clarita is over designed. Has long ramps that are more like freeway flyover ramps than standard exit ramps. This is because, similar to the CA-252 scenario in San Diego, this interchange was supposed to be for a never-built freeway alignment of CA-126.