News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Atlanta

Started by Chris, January 28, 2009, 10:42:52 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Georgia Guardrail

Now that finally the Southbound ramp from SR 400 to Abernathy/Hammond Drive is open, what is left to be done for Transform 285/400?

I think they still have to finish the final alignments and opening up of Peachtree Dunwoody Road and Glenridge Drive.  That plus a final full project area repave.


Tomahawkin

Just heard that the paving will resume in the Spring through the fall. Peachtree Dunwoody is being done at a snails pace! I bleeping hate going through there!

Tom958

There's an MUTCD-defiant sign similar to this one but for GA 141 Peachtree Boulevard awaiting installation in the staging area at Spaghetti Junction. I haven't gotten a photo because I pass it before dawn on my way to work. Best I can tell, it'll replace these two existing signs when the contractor gets around to it. A full APL is being installed at the exit, and signage is up on the new ramp split, too.

Also, a GDOT press release says that, weather permitting, all lanes of Peachtree-Dunwoody under 285 will open on Monday.

74/171FAN

Quote from: Tom958 on January 12, 2024, 08:48:41 PM
There's an MUTCD-defiant sign similar to this one but for GA 141 Peachtree Boulevard awaiting installation in the staging area at Spaghetti Junction. I haven't gotten a photo because I pass it before dawn on my way to work. Best I can tell, it'll replace these two existing signs when the contractor gets around to it. A full APL is being installed at the exit, and signage is up on the new ramp split, too.

Also, a GDOT press release says that, weather permitting, all lanes of Peachtree-Dunwoody under 285 will open on Monday.

Those patches over Industrial on the existing signs really ruins the aesthetic of those signs.
I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.

ran4sh

I agree, but there wasn't really a good reason for Chamblee and Doraville to rename the street in the first place
Control cities CAN be off the route! Control cities make NO sense if signs end before the city is reached!

Travel Mapping - Most Traveled: I-40, 20, 10, 5, 95 - Longest Clinched: I-20, 85, 24, 16, NJ Tpk mainline
Champions - UGA FB '21 '22 - Atlanta Braves '95 '21 - Atlanta MLS '18

Tom958

Quote from: 74/171FAN on January 12, 2024, 08:57:07 PMThose patches over Industrial on the existing signs really ruins the aesthetic of those signs.

They'll be gone before long westbound. Eastbound will likely remain for the foreseeable future. 

Tom958

This bit of MUTCD-defiant awesomeness went up over the weekend, replacing these two signs for the former two-offramp condition. The new combined ramp has been open for a few weeks; the original signage could've been shrouded and greened out to provide accurate wayfinding, but it was still unchanged as of Friday.


sprjus4

It might go against the new MUTCD, but I genuinely don't see how that sign presents any navigational issues. It looks fine to me.

Rothman

I'm actually big fan of the white-on-green being over an option lane and the black-on-yellow over the actual exit only lane.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Tom958

Quote from: sprjus4 on January 15, 2024, 12:26:29 PM
It might go against the new MUTCD, but I genuinely don't see how that sign presents any navigational issues. It looks fine to me.

It looks fine to me, too, but the reason it was removed from the MUTCD is that a minority of drivers are so confused by this arrangement that they drive erratically, causing collisions and near misses. Just because you or I don't understand something doesn't mean there's no reason for it.

To be more specific, these drivers think that a white-on-green down arrow with no text and a black-on-yellow arrow with EXIT ONLY mean the same thing and that both lanes are exit only, leading to unnecessary and sometimes panicked lane changes. Here, the problem is more severe than usual because a fairly heavily used onramp is merging in from the right, so drivers headed onto 85 must merge, then change lanes to do so. If some thought they had to merge then change lanes twice, it could get pretty hairy. That sort of thing is why Figure 2E-46 in the MUTCD specifies leaving off the white arrow. That, IMO, is what should've been in the project plans.

Ironically, I'm a huge fan of the two-color scheme for the last sign, at the beginning of the offramp itself, with arrows that point diagonally upward. Again, referring to Figure 2E-46 in the MUTCD, there seems to be little risk from the possibility of some people misinterpreting the two-color arrows to mean exactly what the recommended two-black-arrow sign explicitly says! Moreover, I've lauded GDOT for defying the MUTCD by implementing that scheme, including one case in which they modified four (!!!) two-black-arrow signs in order to do so. This, however, was not a case where that was appropriate.

Tom958

Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2024, 12:43:46 PM
I'm actually big fan of the white-on-green being over an option lane and the black-on-yellow over the actual exit only lane.

I am, too, but only for diagonally upward arrows on the last sign. As Jonathan Winkler explained it to me, the key commandment is Thou Shalt Not put a white down arrow over an option lane. I explained why in my reply to sprjus4.

This would've been a good place for Georgia's first partial-width APL, as depicted in Figure 2E-44 in the new MUTCD. It's unfortunate that GDOT didn't foresee the possibility that it'd be adopted and plan accordingly. Or they could've bucked up and done it without waiting to see if it'd make it into the MUTCD since they opted for an MUTCD-defiant scheme anyway.  :spin:



architect77

Quote from: Tom958 on January 15, 2024, 08:11:38 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 15, 2024, 12:43:46 PM
I'm actually big fan of the white-on-green being over an option lane and the black-on-yellow over the actual exit only lane.

I am, too, but only for diagonally upward arrows on the last sign. As Jonathan Winkler explained it to me, the key commandment is Thou Shalt Not put a white down arrow over an option lane. I explained why in my reply to sprjus4.

This would've been a good place for Georgia's first partial-width APL, as depicted in Figure 2E-44 in the new MUTCD. It's unfortunate that GDOT didn't foresee the possibility that it'd be adopted and plan accordingly. Or they could've bucked up and done it without waiting to see if it'd make it into the MUTCD since they opted for an MUTCD-defiant scheme anyway.  :spin:




I also prefer the yellow EXIT ONLY to be framed in green not black. I think it is an acceptable alternate to the black on yellow frame which never looks to be part of the rest of the sign it's slapped onto.

I remember in Los Angeles they had a curved arrow to the left of the EXIT ONLY arrow that said "OK"....

to let you know that you'd have the option to exit just inside the exiting lane.

Tom958

Yesterday, for the first time in a while, I drove along eastbound I-20 to northbound I-285. My view was incomplete, but it appears that most of the columns for the new southbound-to-eastbound flyover are in, but none for the other two flyovers: westbound to southbound and northbound. Could it be that they intend to have that flyover up and running early on? Maybe the existing ramp on the original southbound roadway is too high to accommodate the new westbound-to-southbound ramp.

The biggest change between the GDOT scheme and the contractors' redesign is increased span length with fewer straddle bents and, it turns out, mostly T-shaped columns instead of the two-column bents shown in GDOT's video. I've expected the new interchange to be as aesthetically challenged as 285-400, but the contractors' bent design definitely looks better. I hope the spans will at least be curved steel plate girders instead of immensely long AASHTO beams. Some of those sexy steel tub girders that Florida uses would be entirely too much to ask. 

There's an overview of the completed interchange at 5:05 in this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJ4mNLQLlHw

Georgia

As per a comment on their January 19th post about the west 285/20 interchange, construction is now supposed to begin in late 2025 on the west interchange.  Originally, it was to have begun approximately one year after the east interchange construction started.

Tomahawkin

Another construction job delayed??? What a Shocker!

Georgia

Quote from: Tomahawkin on January 22, 2024, 04:14:55 PM
Another construction job delayed??? What a Shocker!
Correct, but this is the first written confirmation I have seen of the delayed timeframe

Tomahawkin

I wouldn't be surprised at all if the 400 toll lane project is delayed or modified. IMO they should be working now to rebuild the bridge over the Chattahoochee. The current bridge is old as dirt and it could take 2+ years to rebuild it because of all the traffic

Tom958

I didn't hear about it from anyone, but the ramp from the Roswell Road CD onto westbound 285 was restriped to two lanes from one, eliminating the former inexplicable, infuriating bottleneck there.

Tomahawkin

Good! I avoid that bottleneck. I just take the 400S ramp to Glenridge to get to Roswell Rd. That Roswell Road bridge over 285 should have been gutted while they were doing all the other work in that area. That bridge is antiquated as ####!

Georgia Guardrail

I know there are plans to convert the Roswell Road/I-285 interchange into a diverging diamond. 

Do you think they would redo the bridge when that project happens?  I kind of doubt it since one of the main advantages of diverging diamonds is that they save money by usually not reconstructing the bridges.  But sometimes it is unavoidable.

Also I recall that the bridge was slightly modified back in 2012 with a minor widening. 

Georgia

wife was happy to find the Glenridge Connector onramp to WB 285 was opened this week.
she especially loved that it was 2 turning lanes as the previous configuration frequently had turning traffic back up into the travel lanes.

Tomahawkin

Long overdue but the widening of Glenridge under IH 285 Is finally complete! The traffic flow on there and Peachtree/Dunwoody is like night and day! The rush hour traffic time from Pill Hill to 285 is going to be cut by 20-30 minutes IMO. I just wish they had gutted the Roswell Rd Bridge while that whole area was being reconfigured. 5 lanes total on busy Roswell road with Bus and Pedestrian traffic isn't going to cut it. I avoid Roswell Road like the plague. It gets really dangerous there when a MARTA Bus either stops or Breaks down. It's baffling that they didn't install designated Bus lanes at the bus stops where picking up pedestrians doesn't impede the flow of traffic

74/171FAN

Way north of Atlanta at this point, but I wonder if this stub on GA 5 BUS/GA 372 in Ball Ground was related to the long-cancelled Northern Arc.  (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10220085742694347&set=a.10220085901258311)





I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.

Tom958

Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 13, 2024, 01:07:31 PM
Way north of Atlanta at this point, but I wonder if this stub on GA 5 BUS/GA 372 in Ball Ground was related to the long-cancelled Northern Arc.

No. Believe it or not, it was part of GA 400! 400 had been envisioned to run directly through very mountainous areas to exit the state near Young Harris, headed for Hayesville, NC. When 400 construction had reached GA 306, the route was changed to hang a ninety-degree left and end up the intersection you're posting about, then proceed to the NC line via what's now GA 515. I'd like to think that there was no intention to actually build it like that, but note that the intersection of GA 372 and Bus 5 was clearly built as ramps for a diamond interchange.

The Northern Arc would've run well south of here, near GA 20.

74/171FAN

#1074
In regard to the GA 407 LOOP posting I saw during the Atlanta Meet, that seems to be rogue signage, the Georgia DOT local map I found does not show a GA 407 LOOP here (see Page 2) so I am sure it is long gone.

I will add my photo from the meet to this post when I have time at home later.

(https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10220086607435965&set=a.10220087381215309)




I am now a PennDOT employee.  My opinions/views do not necessarily reflect the opinions/views of PennDOT.



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.