Which cities have a freeway network that looks good on the map, regardless of how they actually function?
Portland OR, and Lansing, MI.
Madrid, Spain would be visually appealing to FritzOwl.
What's wrong with Lansing? The freeway system is perfectly adequate there, the only bottle neck point I remember ever being an issue was US 127 at I-496.
1. Los Angeles, California
2. Richmond, Virginia
3. Raleigh/Durham, North Carolina
4. Atlanta, Georgia
5. San Diego, California
I've always been partial to the Quad Cities in this regard.
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on May 31, 2017, 04:10:20 AM
Madrid, Spain would be visually appealing to FritzOwl.
I just looked at Madrid on maps and wow... they have a pretty good setup. I mean their freeways aren't that wide, but they have a lot of them. More so than I would have thought.
I like how both Kansas City and San Antonio look on a map–they're both rather similar.
Almost any configuration that maintains a consistent pattern is appealing: Boston with its "fan" system emanating from the center city (& airport) with outer connecting arcs (95/128, 495) is reasonably elegant in its simplicity, even if it doesn't go everywhere as originally planned. Detroit is much the same, except the outer arcs are "squared off". The Portland (OR) network, basically a grid-pattern (if you consider the 84/26 continuum as a single albeit partially interrupted corridor) is also elegant; Seattle's is much the same -- curiously, the south ends of their respective bypasses (205,405) take a right-angle turn to reach the parent route, while the north ends terminate at a sharp angle in the case of both metro areas. Maybe it's just a NW thing! And for an almost pure grid-pattern (elegant in its utility!) there's always Phoenix metro.
Areas where the freeway system configuration is largely dictated by geography and topography invariably seem inconsistent -- probably because the planners don't have much of a choice in the matter. L.A. is this way, as is the Bay Area. San Diego is the closest thing to a cohesive system in CA (I discussed this in another similar thread).
Quote from: webny99 on May 31, 2017, 09:00:33 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on May 31, 2017, 07:11:52 AM
What's wrong with Lansing? The freeway system is perfectly adequate there, the only bottle neck point I remember ever being an issue was US 127 at I-496.
Nothing's wrong with it. I just meant that, as a general rule for this thread, a given city's network doesn't have to function well to qualify. If it's both visually and functionally appealing (which would apply to Lansing), even better :)
Got it... With that in mind I'd say Phoenix has a pretty pleasing design. The route numbers are largely simple to follow and the freeways largely are pretty straight lines that loop around the metro area.
Nashville is more topologically pleasing than visually.
Ignore 31E (especially), the Four Forty Parkway and 155. Then 24, 40 and 65 each have an overlap with the other two, and a by-itself segment near downtown. For even better symmetry, 40 and 65 should meet at Charlotte Avenue, overlap on a new alignment WSW from there, and then split up near the Parthenon.
Quote from: webny99 on May 31, 2017, 12:25:07 AM
Which cities have a freeway setup that looks good on the map, regardless of how it actually functions?
Portland, OR, and Lansing, MI.
Philadelphia. The Schuylkill Expressway looks good on a map. I was surprised by what I found the first time I drove it, that was 1972 but it hasn't changed much since then.
......
Post 1000 -- icon was "US Highway", is now "Expressway".
Agreed on Portland, OR. I'll also throw in Eugene-Springfield, OR.
How about the Twin Cities?
I always liked Columbus, OH's freeway network it's simple, but effective. Particularly the 'kink' on I-270 around Port Columbus International.
I personally feel like Charlotte's freeway system would 'look' better without the southeast quadrant of I-485. With the full beltway, Charlotte's freeways remind me of Stan from American Dad
There's been a recent tendency to start counter-threads. I'm not interested in starting one, but if someone does, they should call it "Visually appalling freeway setups" so we can see how many users confuse the two.
One visually appealing freeway set-up on a map is the Cincinnati beltway. It looks like Snoopy's head! :nod:
Quote from: amroad17 on June 02, 2017, 01:08:46 AM
One visually appealing freeway set-up on a map is the Cincinnati beltway. It looks like Snoopy's head! :nod:
The Louisville freeway loop of I-64 and I-264 is shaped like a stomach.
Without the Hypotenuse, Chicago has a decent-looking freeway system. Same goes for Seattle.