Which cities, in your opinion, have the least comprehensive limited access highway networks vis-a-vis their size?
In terms of lane miles per thousand population, I understand that Los Angeles, Washington, Chicago, and Boston, among other places, rank fairly low, while sprawlopoli such as Houston, D/FW, and Phoenix rank higher.
Also, this extends to the lane capacity of freeways within a metro area. Freeway facilities themselves may be plentiful within a locality, but if there are 6 and 8 lane facilities in locations where there is enough traffic demand for 10-12 lanes, this can also count as limited access highway network underdevelopment.
Thoughts?
Baton Rouge immediately comes to mind, even though the population isn't /that/ high in the grand scheme of things.
Although I've never made it up there yet, NYC strikes me as another high entry on this list.
The Fort Myers/Cape Coral (Florida) area has only one interstate, I-75. There were plans in the 1980's to build a beltway around the county but they were nixed thanks to NIMBY's. Now the county residents are regulated to use the only interstate and only a few main arterials to get around, with only four main thoroughfares that reach the interstate. There are plans to upgrade the Veterans Parkway (CR 884), Colonial Boulevard (FL 884) and Burnt Store Road (CR 765) into an expressway (http://www3.leegov.com/publicworks/DOTitle.htm), but it is only in the planning stages (30% submittal) and if it happens it will be some time before construction starts, and that will be at least two decades too late considering the current amount of traffic tie ups in the metropolitan area.
Quote from: Darkangel on January 23, 2009, 12:02:13 AM
Baton Rouge immediately comes to mind, even though the population isn't /that/ high in the grand scheme of things.
Indeed, BR may be the classic example in this case for medium sized cities.
Poway, California doesn't have any freeway networks due never happen for building a CA-56 and CA-125 freeways while Poway was rural town in 1960s to 1970s. it shown in Thomas Bros Maps since 1967 to 1980s something.
Colorado Springs, CO probably wins this one. 350,000 people and only one actual freeway going through it.
Tucson, AZ probably.
My money's on Austin, Texas. As far as interstates, all they have is I-35, and that gets pretty bogged down most of the day, regardless of what time of the day it is.
When I was a driver for Greyhound, I cringed every time I had to go to Austin.
That city needs some major help and beltways.
Spokane, WA also has a very underdeveloped freeway system.
Indianapolis could use a better system with either I-74 and I-69 extended inside I-465 or a better bypass route. Maybe an I-274 from Crawfordsville to I-70 near New Libson via Lebanon, Anderson, and Newcastle, plus a new route for future I-69 through traffic to bypass I-465.
Austin TX, Charlotte NC & Washington DC (The original plans were fine)
I'd consider Charlottes to be getting better now with the loop being almost completed...
Thunder Bay, Ontario...
We meet all interstate and 400 series highway (Ontario's interstates) standards but we still don't have a freeway. :no:
Though we have 2 controlled access expressways. Not freeways though.
Cleveland's hardly "under developed" by the standards proposed here, but it's hardly developed enough downtown to handle traffic now-a-days, especially with the Innerbelt Bridge deemed unsafe for trucks a couple months back. With it down to three lanes each way (I think) from four, traffic going into downtown Cleveland's pretty awful from all sides.
Albuquerque's is the most underdeveloped for large cities
Pittsburgh's is getting better but still dismal
I can't believe no one has said San Francisco. No freeways in the entire cities besides South of Market and the Southeast (ghetto) part.
Quote from: voyager on January 23, 2009, 10:39:03 PM
I'd consider Charlottes to be getting better now with the loop being almost completed...
I agree but the inner city freeways are really under built.
I believe it US 74 that proceeds east of Charlotte should've been a freeway. But I would say that Philadelphia, Washington, and Baltimore are underdeveloped as well as Memphis. Much of this is due to cancellations, which in some cases is good because much of these plans were overkill.
Quote from: travelinmiles on January 25, 2009, 08:04:11 PM
I believe it US 74 that proceeds east of Charlotte should've been a freeway. But I would say that Philadelphia, Washington, and Baltimore are underdeveloped as well as Memphis. Much of this is due to cancellations, which in some cases is good because much of these plans were overkill.
Overkill? Could you please elaborate?
I think Memphis could have used I-40 completed through a tunnel under Overton Park, an extension of TN 300 to a new river bridge for a rerouted I-55, and US 78 upgraded to a freeway to at least I-240, if not somehow tying into the unbuilt section of I-40 inside the I-240 loop.
Another city that comes to mind is Lexington, KY, population over 530,000 residents as of 2007. With only two interstates, I-64 and I-75, serving the north and eastern quadrants, this inland metropolis has a very underdeveloped freeway network. There is no "true" beltway to serve the residents of the city, and I don't count New Circle Road (KY 4) as it A) does not directly connect with I-64 or I-75 (as it was built before them) and B) it is not a full fledged freeway (there are still a few miles of at grade intersections in the northeast quadrant). Man-O-War Boulevard is no better as it is nothing more than a glorified arterial that has spurred sprawl over the years. And all the US Highways that spoke out from the center have also served as sprawl inducers. As far as I know, there are no current plans to extend freeway mileage in the area.
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 25, 2009, 09:52:36 PM
Quote from: travelinmiles on January 25, 2009, 08:04:11 PM
I believe it US 74 that proceeds east of Charlotte should've been a freeway. But I would say that Philadelphia, Washington, and Baltimore are underdeveloped as well as Memphis. Much of this is due to cancellations, which in some cases is good because much of these plans were overkill.
I agree with you about Memphis. I think a nice depressed or decked I-40 would have had minimal impact through the central city. I was mainly referring to the other cities.
Overkill? Could you please elaborate?
I think Memphis could have used I-40 completed through a tunnel under Overton Park, an extension of TN 300 to a new river bridge for a rerouted I-55, and US 78 upgraded to a freeway to at least I-240, if not somehow tying into the unbuilt section of I-40 inside the I-240 loop.
Fixed BBC error - DTP
I think that Modesto could really use another freeway.
Madison, WI - it has only the substandard beltine around the south and west sides which is essentially US 12 rerouted around the city,The Interstates on the east side, but nothing downtown (not like we can fit anything through there anymore) and nothing around the north side.
Quote from: travelinmiles on January 25, 2009, 08:04:11 PM
I believe it US 74 that proceeds east of Charlotte should've been a freeway. But I would say that Philadelphia, Washington, and Baltimore are underdeveloped as well as Memphis. Much of this is due to cancellations, which in some cases is good because much of these plans were overkill.
How is Baltimore underdeveloped? Even though several routes were cancelled it still has alot iof freeways, especially for a city it's size. It's the only place I think where you can be on an Interstate (I-95) and have 3 Interstate exits in a row (Exit 46 I-895, Exit 47, I-195, Exit 49 I-695), that hardly sounds underdeveloped to me.
Undeveloped: Bellingham, WA (one four-lane freeway)
I think Philadelphia doesn't have a great one. At the most, there are 3 lanes wide and only 3 expressways in the city itself. If you get stuck in traffic in Philadelphia, your doomed.
Quote from: Freewayjim on January 27, 2009, 02:29:58 PM
Quote from: travelinmiles on January 25, 2009, 08:04:11 PM
I believe it US 74 that proceeds east of Charlotte should've been a freeway. But I would say that Philadelphia, Washington, and Baltimore are underdeveloped as well as Memphis. Much of this is due to cancellations, which in some cases is good because much of these plans were overkill.
Certain things like I-70 not continuing to downtown and I-83 continuing to I-95. It's not the easiest city to cross town. However, I do realize had these two been built that the Inner Harbor may not be what we know it as. I don't find it all to easy to navigate quickly via automobile although it isn't a city built for that. But anyway, the freeway system seems to have a few "vital" missing links.
How is Baltimore underdeveloped? Even though several routes were cancelled it still has alot iof freeways, especially for a city it's size. It's the only place I think where you can be on an Interstate (I-95) and have 3 Interstate exits in a row (Exit 46 I-895, Exit 47, I-195, Exit 49 I-695), that hardly sounds underdeveloped to me.
Quote from: I.C.Ligget on January 27, 2009, 08:37:14 PM
I think Philadelphia doesn't have a great one. At the most, there are 3 lanes wide and only 3 expressways in the city itself. If you get stuck in traffic in Philadelphia, your doomed.
Isn't most of I-95 8 lanes through there?
Albany, NY and the Capital District is underdeveloped in my opinion, also considering there were about 3-4 freeway projects in the area canceled. Traffic can be a nightmare on both the Northway(I-87) and the Thruway(90/87).
And actually, even though this tweaks the subject a little, this is pretty good for New York; the most developed city in terms of freeways is Buffalo. It's just too bad the rest of the state can't follow their example. Of course, you're basically in Ohio at that point, so maybe it rubbed off a little bit ;)
Quote from: Freewayjim on January 28, 2009, 11:00:38 AM
Quote from: I.C.Ligget on January 27, 2009, 08:37:14 PM
I think Philadelphia doesn't have a great one. At the most, there are 3 lanes wide and only 3 expressways in the city itself. If you get stuck in traffic in Philadelphia, your doomed.
Isn't most of I-95 8 lanes through there?
from what I recall, no. Downtown yes. but when it crosses the Susquehanna River - its six lanes (there's more near the airport too (in a collector/distributer format). But in general its six.
Two come to mind.
1) Fresno, CA. From what I've read, it's the largest city not served at all by the Interstate system.
2) Portland, OR. Something more is needed on the westside, badly.
If I browse through the rand McNally 2009 Large Scale Atlas, the following cities appear to have a somewhat underdeveloped freeway network
Tucson, AZ only the I-10 passes by, I-19 is barely of importance for city travel.
San Francisco, CA seems to miss a through route along the western side of the city to the Golden Gate Bridge
Los Angeles, CA just too many people for the freeway network.
Tampa Bay, FL no freeways along the Largo-Clearwater-Dunedin corridor
Atlanta, GA big freeways, but not a dense network to serve this sprawling metropolis
Honolulu, HI just one freeway
Chicago, IL lacks a major bypass through the western suburbs, I heard traffic is actually worse in the suburbs than city proper.
Lexington, KY city not directly connected to the Interstate network
Boston, MA should complete a radial network to the beltway
Detroit, MI should perhaps complete a full bypass along the northern side
Las Vegas, NV might want to complete a bypass and add radial roads.
Albuquerque, NM served by just two through freeways, lacks a beltway
New York City, NY ought to complete some never-build parkways in Brooklyn and connect I-495 with the NJ freeway network under Manhattan.
Charlotte, NC might want to add one or two radial freeways to take commuters off surface streets in the eastern/southern part of the city.
Greensboro, NC ought to complete a full loop
Raleigh, NC should also complete a full loop
Portland, OR needs something on the west side
Pittsburgh, PA might need one or two extra freeways in the suburban areas of the metro
Philadelphia, PA should complete a freeway to the northern suburbs as well as one to the western suburbs via the US 1 corridor.
Chattanooga, TN might need a southern bypass from I-24 to I-75 through Georgia
Dallas, TX needs freeways in the rapidly growing northern part of the metropolitan area
El Paso, TX needs a northern bypass
Salt Lake City, UT might want to complete the I-215 loop
Washington, DC needs more radial freeways in the north.
I whole-heartily agree on Tucson. But with thousands of NIMBY's there, don't look for any anytime soon, other than the possible outer bypass to the northeast connecting the I-8/I-10 interchange with I-10 east of Tucson.
The Tampa Bay area is actually constructing portions of U.S. 19 to a freeway with grade separated interchanges and frontage roads, so that is a help. The Tampa area does lack in east-west freeways. Extending Toll FL 568 east to I-75 would help traffic-wise, other than having to pay for tolls, but that is the way nowdays.
I have already mentioned the Lexington area, so I definitely agree with you on that one as well.
The Albuquerque area have built some some freeway type roads. Paseo del Volcan is planned on being upgraded to an arterial that will loop around the northwest but will most likely have at grade intersections.
The Charlotte/Gastonia area is actually planning two toll facilities, one radiating southeastly along the U.S. 74 corridor and the Garden Parkway, a toll road on the west side of Charlotte, connecting the airport with Gaston County. Not sure how much traffic it would alleviate, but I know the U.S. 74 corridor east of Charlotte is a bear.
Raleigh will have a complete loop eventually (within the next 10-15 years?), but the southern portion will also be a toll facility.
In El Paso, there is a planned northern loop to connect I-10 inside the New Mexican border with TX 375 southeast of U.S. 54A.
Vancouver is very under-developed in terms of highways.
However, its mass-transit makes up for it. The city is continuing to expand her mass-transit networks in preparation for the 2010 Olympics next year.
-The city is also one of the best to live in the world, and the lack of a highway is one of the major reasons for this. No one wants a highway rumbling through their neighbourhoods.
Same goes with Zurich. Again, one of the best cities to live in the world and it has few highway systems.
You guys sound as if underdeveloped highways are a bad thing, where they can be a great asset to a city. I live in London, a city with nearly 400,000 people and all we have is a highway that bypasses the entire urban area. Highways are meant to be placed in rural areas, unless they are needed in some of the bigger cities like Toronto, New York, Tokyo, etc.
Quote from: haljackey on January 29, 2009, 07:58:16 PM
You guys sound as if underdeveloped highways are a bad thing, where they can be a great asset to a city. I live in London, a city with nearly 400,000 people and all we have is a highway that bypasses the entire urban area. Highways are meant to be placed in rural areas, unless they are needed in some of the bigger cities like Toronto, New York, Tokyo, etc.
Well unfortunately, except for the more heavily populated metropolises, most American cities lack any sufficient mass transit systems (buses, metro rails, light rail, etc.), so we are regulated to surface transportation, such as highways and byways. Personally I would like to see more mass transit in the United States, but in a country that thrives upon it necessity to have as many 'gasholes' on the road as possible, a significant increase in mass transit will not happen anytime soon.
Roanoke, VA seems like it would have a larger freeway system instead of just I-581.
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
If I browse through the rand McNally 2009 Large Scale Atlas, the following cities appear to have a somewhat underdeveloped freeway network
Tucson, AZ only the I-10 passes by, I-19 is barely of importance for city travel.
No doubt I agree - too many retirees there too
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
San Francisco, CA seems to miss a through route along the western side of the city to the Golden Gate Bridge
Yeah - I had the displeasure of driving US 101 and I'd rather walk it instead.
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Los Angeles, CA just too many people for the freeway network.
Heh... Nuff said about that scary city
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Tampa Bay, FL no freeways along the Largo-Clearwater-Dunedin corridor
haven't been there to know.
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Atlanta, GA big freeways, but not a dense network to serve this sprawling metropolis
Or there...
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Honolulu, HI just one freeway
Or there
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Chicago, IL lacks a major bypass through the western suburbs, I heard traffic is actually worse in the suburbs than city proper.
No doubt I agree - too many retirees there too
True for I-94 from Milwaukee, but for I-90, I-88 and I-55 traffic to go to Indiana, Madison, Quads or St Louis - take I-290, I-355 and I-80 - think of these as an outer belt of some type.
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Lexington, KY city not directly connected to the Interstate network
never left I-75
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Boston, MA should complete a radial network to the beltway
What do you mean?
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Detroit, MI should perhaps complete a full bypass along the northern side
One could just use I-69 - though it does go through other cities and it's far away from Detroit.
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Las Vegas, NV might want to complete a bypass and add radial roads.
They are working on it. It's up as an expressway for about half of it, but they're in the process of making it full freeway. Just the NE quadrant will be missing
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Albuquerque, NM served by just two through freeways, lacks a beltway
Is there a need?
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
New York City, NY ought to complete some never-build parkways in Brooklyn and connect I-495 with the NJ freeway network under Manhattan.
They tried - got shot down
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Charlotte, NC might want to add one or two radial freeways to take commuters off surface streets in the eastern/southern part of the city.
hmm...
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Greensboro, NC ought to complete a full loop
One's in the works AFAIK
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Raleigh, NC should also complete a full loop
Isn't there one already?
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Portland, OR needs something on the west side
Too much water I think
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Pittsburgh, PA might need one or two extra freeways in the suburban areas of the metro
I'll see when I visit there
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Philadelphia, PA should complete a freeway to the northern suburbs as well as one to the western suburbs via the US 1 corridor.
Heh - this one seems right for sure. but there's too much residential on US 1
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Chattanooga, TN might need a southern bypass from I-24 to I-75 through Georgia
Never been there
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Dallas, TX needs freeways in the rapidly growing northern part of the metropolitan area
yup
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
El Paso, TX needs a northern bypass
Too bad there's a military base and indian res there.
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Salt Lake City, UT might want to complete the I-215 loop
Too bad there's a mountain and a university in the way
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Washington, DC needs more radial freeways in the north.
Too much development and NIMBY
Quote from: flaroadgeek on January 29, 2009, 08:14:51 PM
Quote from: haljackey on January 29, 2009, 07:58:16 PM
You guys sound as if underdeveloped highways are a bad thing, where they can be a great asset to a city. I live in London, a city with nearly 400,000 people and all we have is a highway that bypasses the entire urban area. Highways are meant to be placed in rural areas, unless they are needed in some of the bigger cities like Toronto, New York, Tokyo, etc.
Well unfortunately, except for the more heavily populated metropolises, most American cities lack any sufficient mass transit systems (buses, metro rails, light rail, etc.), so we are regulated to surface transportation, such as highways and byways. Personally I would like to see more mass transit in the United States, but in a country that thrives upon it necessity to have as many 'gasholes' on the road as possible, a significant increase in mass transit will not happen anytime soon.
Haha - I love that one. :-D :-D :-D
Quick thought that comes to mind: the City of San Francisco (not the general Bay Area), in my opinion, has one of the least developed freeway networks because of the following:
- The 1950s freeway revolt that rejected the construction of various freeways that could have encircled the city
- The 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake that collapsed a part of the old Embarcadero Freeway (I-480)
- Various elections that people have voted upon to make European-style boulevards instead of freeways
All of those, in my opinion, have made a positive effect to San Francisco: a city that has grand avenues, great public transport modes, and a walkable city (also bike-friendly too).
I'd rather have the positive effect that I-55 brought to St. Louis: a less traveled Broadway that is easy to cross at an unsignalized intersection and can have on-street parking with no problems. There were also some ideas to take advantage of the reduced traffic the I-170 extension was going to bring to some streets around Maplewood, but never got implemented since the extension died.
Toronto had once some bigger plans of expressway network http://www.gettorontomoving.ca/history.html (http://www.gettorontomoving.ca/history.html)
Austin, Texas hands down! Nearly 800,000 city proper and 1.6 million metro and only one interstate highway (I-35).
I mentioned this in another topic, but they should complete the US 290 connecting to Houston as a full IH-standard freeway. The largest city adequately connected to the state capital makes sense to me.
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
Pittsburgh, PA might need one or two extra freeways in the suburban areas of the metro
That's an understatement, unfortunately, it won't happen aside from 43 and 576.
There were many that were supposed to be built as recommended in the 1960 transportation plan (http://pittsburgh.pahighways.com/expressways/cancelled/).
Quote from: Master son on February 02, 2009, 03:12:29 PM
Quote from: Chris on January 29, 2009, 04:41:07 PM
If I browse through the rand McNally 2009 Large Scale Atlas, the following cities appear to have a somewhat underdeveloped freeway network
(...)
Las Vegas, NV might want to complete a bypass and add radial roads.
They are working on it. It's up as an expressway for about half of it, but they're in the process of making it full freeway. Just the NE quadrant will be missing
Las Vegas isn't building a bypass, it's more of a beltway. The southern half of it is now to freeway/Interstate standards, but the north half is still mostly expressway. I believe completion of the freeway buildout is anticipated around 2013-2017 (depending, of course, on funding).
The way the highways are in the Vegas area, the main highways through town are already radial routes from the downtown area. The majority of traffic comes from the south on I-15 and US 93, and leaves that direction as well. The way the travel patterns are, and the way the town has developed, does not lend itself to creating any sort of a feasible bypass.
The closest thing that could come to a viable bypass would be if they built an eastern leg to the 215 beltway, as this would provide a decent bypass for US 93. However, no eastern leg is planned for the beltway. A feasibility study was performed on this a few years ago. The study found that an eastern beltway leg would cut through many of the most established neighborhoods in the eastern part of the area, displacing hundreds of businesses and homes. That and the $1 billion-plus price tag was enough to kill the idea.
Sarasota, FL pops into my mind pretty quickly. U.S. 41 (Tamiami Trail) is not a fun drive from Bradenton all the way south to Venice. There's not much room for a limited access roadway to be built closer to the coast either. They could really use an I-475 that parallels I-75 about four or five miles to the west.
This may not be undeveloped, but certainly needs some improvement: Jackson, MS. I-20 needs to be no less than six lane divided all the way from Clinton eastward to Brandon. And Lakeland Dr. (MS-25) northeast of town can back up pretty badly in the afternoon rush hour too. I-55 through Jackson doesn't really have any issues, especially north of town. It's gotten plenty of attention, while 20 has gotten little to none.
Two Central IL cities...
Peoria, IL
A nothern river crossing, IL 6 extention ove to Washington, then to Morton
Bloomington-Normal, IL
Should I-39 ever make it south of B-N, ther will be 3 interstates and a US HWY on the West-Plex...Mc Lean County wants a eastern by-pass and eventually a connection to U.S. 51 on the south for an eastern loop and access to CIRA.
Quote from: rmsandw on February 22, 2009, 10:59:47 PM
Peoria, IL
A nothern river crossing, IL 6 extention ove to Washington, then to Morton
Currently under study again. See http://www.easternbypass.com/ (http://www.easternbypass.com/)
I'm sure there are a select few who want to see the Madison (WI) Beltline completed to encircle the city. It also needs an upgrade to Interstate standards too.
How about Spokane?
I'll give a mention to Bakersfield, though there are plenty of proposals for belt routes/loops on the board there right now.
The two long-distance freeways in the area are Route 99 and Route 58, with Business 99/Route 204 (a former segment of US 99 and US 466) serving as a spur into downtown from the north; Route 178 has a freeway segment from downtown eastward that does not connect to much else.
Yes definitely Bakersfield! Such a huge city that doesn't have a freeway network.
A few cities that need more freeways are Tucson, Winnipeg, Vancouver, and Calgary.
Doesn't Winnipeg have no freeways at all?
I am surprised no one mentioned anything about Hartford or even Connecticut in general traveling East - West on any major road is a hassle because we object to rolling our roads unlike our neighbours which means that everyone in the general area likes to use our roads.
Quote from: Master son on February 23, 2009, 02:43:51 PM
I'm sure there are a select few who want to see the Madison (WI) Beltline completed to encircle the city. It also needs an upgrade to Interstate standards too.
Count me in, sort of. Sun Prairie to the northeast of Madison has quite a drive to get to Middleton on the west side; either you go 10 miles south to the Beltline, or keep north of the lakes by taking WI-19 and a hodgepodge of 3-digit state routes and county roads. The only problem is most of the country north of the lakes (i.e., Waunakee) is underdeveloped and isolated from the rest of the city, expressway or not.
I personally like how Madison will never be able to get a freeway anywhere near its downtown, which is situated on a narrow isthmus between two lakes with The Capital building sitting smack in the middle of it. It keeps the sprawl under control and keeps the downtown area free of imposing skyscrapers.
QuoteI'm sure there are a select few who want to see the Madison (WI) Beltline completed to encircle the city. It also needs an upgrade to Interstate standards too
Are there any at-grade crossings left on the beltline? As I recall when I went to UW (circa 2000) it was pretty much freeway from 90/39 to where 14 breaks away to the west, but I could be wrong. (There were some hazy nights in Madison! :-P)
Quote from: voyager on February 23, 2009, 07:41:31 PM
Doesn't Winnipeg have no freeways at all?
A few sections of the outer bypass is a freeway, but not much of it.
Spokane's getting better with the new US-395 bypass corridor under construction, but right now it takes forever to get from I-90 up to Wandermere on Division St (US-2/395)
there are still driveways on a ramp, but the RR Crossing was pulled completely a couple years ago - the ramps are still something to be careful of - cloverleafs with very little braking/accelerating room. These ramps will be redone to diamonds in a year or two anyway.
Spokane is slowly getting better...we need a north-south interstate though