An absolutely absurd "$18,000" solution to absolutely absurd I-880/US-101 mess

[michravera]

I have an absolutely absurd ""Eighteen Thousand Dollar" solution to the absolutely absurd US-101/I-880 mess.

One afternoon, just ahead of commute hour, a truck dumped a load of manure on one of the ramps. I believe it was Northbound US-101 onto Southbound I-880. The ramp was closed for a few hours and traffic on both I-880 and US-101 has never run so smoothly before or since. It seems to me that we could put up a couple of steel rails and switch up a few signs including "NB I-880 use Brokaw Rd" -- maybe even restripe Brokaw Road for 5 lanes in each direction and the problem would fix itself in about an hour (as it did on the day that the ramp was closed). It may not be the ideal solution (we'd need to discover a pile of gold somewhere to afford the properly engineered solution of a 4-level stack interchange), but, it seems to me that, if a pile of manure can outthink CalTrans engineers in this instance, we should consider listening to it. In other cases, I will bet on the CalTrans engineers.

[TheStranger]

It may not be the ideal solution (we'd need to discover a pile of gold somewhere to afford the properly engineered solution of a 4-level stack interchange), but, it seems to me that, if a pile of manure can outthink CalTrans engineers in this instance, we should consider listening to it. In other cases, I will bet on the CalTrans engineers.

I'm not sure the interchange could even be upgraded much given its proximity to San Jose International Airport. 

[Plutonic Panda]

It may not be the ideal solution (we'd need to discover a pile of gold somewhere to afford the properly engineered solution of a 4-level stack interchange), but, it seems to me that, if a pile of manure can outthink CalTrans engineers in this instance, we should consider listening to it. In other cases, I will bet on the CalTrans engineers.

I'm not sure the interchange could even be upgraded much given its proximity to San Jose International Airport.

tunnels?

[michravera]

It may not be the ideal solution (we'd need to discover a pile of gold somewhere to afford the properly engineered solution of a 4-level stack interchange), but, it seems to me that, if a pile of manure can outthink CalTrans engineers in this instance, we should consider listening to it. In other cases, I will bet on the CalTrans engineers.

I'm not sure the interchange could even be upgraded much given its proximity to San Jose International Airport.

tunnels?

My BART procurement friends says "At Grade costs 1 unit. Bridges cost two units. Tunnels Cost four Units. Underwater Tunnels cost 8 units."

[mrsman]

It definitely sounds like a major weaving problem on that interchange.  using streets as the connection might be the way to go but it will cause other problems like inducing traffic onto residential areas.

Nexus 5X

[michravera]

It definitely sounds like a major weaving problem on that interchange.  using streets as the connection might be the way to go but it will cause other problems like inducing traffic onto residential areas.

Nexus 5X

The streets there aren't residential and one or two of the eight movements are already done using streets and none of them with anywhere near the capacity of Brokaw, even with its current 4 lanes in each direction.

I won't say that the movement that I suggest being closed is unnecessary, but people from farther out heading further south will likely have taken CASR-85 or I-280. I am not sure that people in the know who would regularly use this movement at commute hour don't already have a better way.

[Occidental Tourist]

I don't think it's an $18,000 solution, but changeable message signs and moveable lane barriers to block off the northwest to southwest and southeast to northeast movements during peak hours could be implemented fairly inexpensively.

[DTComposer]

It may not be the ideal solution (we'd need to discover a pile of gold somewhere to afford the properly engineered solution of a 4-level stack interchange), but, it seems to me that, if a pile of manure can outthink CalTrans engineers in this instance, we should consider listening to it. In other cases, I will bet on the CalTrans engineers.

I'm not sure the interchange could even be upgraded much given its proximity to San Jose International Airport. 

I've heard this before, and I don't understand it. The interchange is 3/4 mile to the east and isn't on the flight path. There's a bunch of 8-10 story buildings immediately adjacent to the airport, which I would think would be taller than a flyover. And at LAX, the I-405/I-105 interchange is a similar distance from their runways and has two flyover ramps.

In my experience, the following things would help:
-Take the NW corner of the I-880/1st Street interchange (movements to and from SB I-880) and flip it to the SW corner (would require taking houses), and make the whole thing a true folded diamond (so the NB 1st Street to NB I-880 ramp is also removed), so that the entrance/exit is moved another ~1/2 mile from I-880/US-101.
-Removing the US-101/Oakland Road interchange and shifting it down to Berryessa Road/Hedding Street (again, would take some houses, but would also serve the new BART station better). Make that a folded diamond as well with all ramps in the NE and SE corners of the interchange.
-Eliminate the NB I-880 to Gish Road and Gish Road to SB I-880 ramps.
-Flyover from SB I-880 to SB US-101 (or, if height really is an issue, you could treat it like CA-17/CA-85, depress US-101 and do a fly-under ramp).

[michravera]

I don't think it's an $18,000 solution, but changeable message signs and moveable lane barriers to block off the northwest to southwest and southeast to northeast movements during peak hours could be implemented fairly inexpensively.

What I had in mind was a permanent closure. All we need is some greenout for the exit distances, some "Ramp Closed" signs and some aluminum gates. Don't tear down the ramps. Leave them for emergencies.

[wriddle082]

Was wondering if CalTrans really does have plans to upgrade this ridiculous interchange at this time.  I've been staying near it for work for the past couple of weeks and I think it's absolutely ridiculous that the loop movements haven't been upgraded in any way whatsoever.

[michravera]

Was wondering if CalTrans really does have plans to upgrade this ridiculous interchange at this time.  I've been staying near it for work for the past couple of weeks and I think it's absolutely ridiculous that the loop movements haven't been upgraded in any way whatsoever.

To do it right would require discovery of a large pile of gold and road closures during the work would be, to say the least, terrible. As far as I know, there are no plans whatever even to make minor fixes.

[Northcoast707]

The Norman Mineta (San Jose) Airport has been a "thorn" in the US 101/I-880 interchange's side since it was completed in 1960.  Would an upgrade look like the spaghetti-like mess of the I-80/I-580/I-880 interchange in Emeryville?  Who knows.

[bing101]

I place one if US-101 and I-880 were to have an Improved interchange it would have to have a spaghetti-like mess like the one in Emeryville and Los Angeles with the East LA interchange. [/size]

[kkt]

I looked at the allowed heights some years ago and remember finding the allowed height would have been ample for a stack interchange.  A tall stack would still be unpopular, but not because of the airport.

Construction would be painful, but could be mitigated somewhat by posting detours via I-280 and I-680.

I'd hope someone at Caltrans at least thought about the problem, so just in case a pile o' money did appear they could take advantage of it.

The Norman Mineta (San Jose) Airport has been a "thorn" in the US 101/I-880 interchange's side since it was completed in 1960.  Would an upgrade look like the spaghetti-like mess of the I-80/I-580/I-880 interchange in Emeryville?  Who knows.

A US 101 to I-880 stack interchange should not be as bad as Emeryville because 101-880 is only two interstates meeting, not three.

101-880 is possibly the worst interchange in northern California.  Chronically backed up, short merges, bad weaves, you name it, it's got it.  But I think a solution is going to cost a lot more than $18,000.  Trying to solve it with $18,000 would just be a waste of $18,000.

[Plutonic Panda]

I thought they were planning a stack interchange here.

[michravera]

I looked at the allowed heights some years ago and remember finding the allowed height would have been ample for a stack interchange.  A tall stack would still be unpopular, but not because of the airport.

Construction would be painful, but could be mitigated somewhat by posting detours via I-280 and I-680.

I'd hope someone at Caltrans at least thought about the problem, so just in case a pile o' money did appear they could take advantage of it.

The Norman Mineta (San Jose) Airport has been a "thorn" in the US 101/I-880 interchange's side since it was completed in 1960.  Would an upgrade look like the spaghetti-like mess of the I-80/I-580/I-880 interchange in Emeryville?  Who knows.

A US 101 to I-880 stack interchange should not be as bad as Emeryville because 101-880 is only two interstates meeting, not three.

101-880 is possibly the worst interchange in northern California.  Chronically backed up, short merges, bad weaves, you name it, it's got it.  But I think a solution is going to cost a lot more than $18,000.  Trying to solve it with $18,000 would just be a waste of $18,000.

My point in the OP is that two of the movements (the counterintuitive ones, as it happens), when blocked off, made the traffic flow smoother. Brokaw can be used for those movements. It's already striped for 4-5 lanes each way. The "$18,000" is simply to put a closed gate on the movements and erect helpful signs giving notice thereof and helpful suggestions as to the alternative. With those movement closed, the weaving becomes unnecessary and those who have no choice but to make the now closed movements could use Brokaw (likely saving themselves and everyone else time and trouble). Some of those whose business isn't as close to the closed movements, but who use them out of habit, would  find better alternatives (CASR-87, I-280, etc). I'm pretty sure that routing software avoids these movements anyway (except during the barest trough times).