What are some bypasses that don't save time at all, in fact they take longer?
I-275 around Cincinnati
Any circumferential highway (i.e. I-285 in Atlanta).
I-494: 42 miles between the I-94 junctions vs. 31 for 94 through the core cities - also, getting through two downtowns on 94 somehow has *less worse* traffic that 494 through Bloomington.
"But 494 isn't the official bypass!" Sure, but it's a thought exercise.
Quote from: abefroman329 on December 28, 2018, 08:31:52 PM
Any circumferential highway (i.e. I-285 in Atlanta).
I mean even taking traffic into account.
I-405 in the Seattle area, given that the Eastside suburbs are now highly developed.
Maryland I-695 compared to I-95
Quote from: Bruce on December 29, 2018, 01:04:17 AM
I-405 in the Seattle area, given that the Eastside suburbs are now highly developed.
I know your from the Seattle area but I've done the trip from Alderwood Mall to Tacoma before and the difference between taking I-5 through Seattle vs. taking I-405 around Seattle was only about a 2 or 3 minute difference. I think you add on something like 4 or 5 miles taking I-405.
Outside rush hour, most bypasses of downtown Kansas City end up taking longer.
Corvallis bypass if you are trying to get through downtown heading N/S instead of W/E (which is faster).
LG-TP260
In Metro Manila, EDSA was built as a bypass ring road for north-south traffic, yet from experience during most waking hours takes an hour longer to go through than simply heading straight through the City of Manila! (This difference will be exacerbated even more when the Metro Manila Skyway extension opens next year)
Don't know if more recent improvements have changed this, but US 15 Bypass of Leesburg Virginia was slower than 15 Business through town for many years...
The TX 349 bypass of Midland TX is 17 minutes longer per Google than TX 349 Business through Midland.
Quote from: Flint1979 on December 29, 2018, 01:29:11 PM
Quote from: Bruce on December 29, 2018, 01:04:17 AM
I-405 in the Seattle area, given that the Eastside suburbs are now highly developed.
I know your from the Seattle area but I've done the trip from Alderwood Mall to Tacoma before and the difference between taking I-5 through Seattle vs. taking I-405 around Seattle was only about a 2 or 3 minute difference. I think you add on something like 4 or 5 miles taking I-405.
......heh, heh.......that's (obviously) not the only I-405 "bypass" that, at least for the past couple of decades or so, takes considerably longer to traverse than its parent; of course, I'm talking about metro L.A. But in the next day or so I'll be first-hand utilizing both 5 and 405, since my itinerary on a ever-shortening trip hits the LAX area, Montebello, and Buena Park before hauling ass over Cajon up to the high desert. Finally get a chance to look at the Santa Fe Springs/Norwalk construction zone. But getting back to the thread topic -- yes, on a day-to-day basis, my own experience is that between its end points I-405 takes longer than I-5. And while it's true that I-5 is 8 miles shorter over that distance than is I-405, the former
does traverse several of the most notorious interchanges in SoCal in terms of regular congestion (CA 55, CA 22/57, I-710, ELA, CA 170 merge/NB only). But 405 has whole stretches that regularly and famously back up even in off-peak hours: Irvine/Santa Ana/CA 55, CA 73 merge, the CA 22 coincidence and the I-605 interchange, I-110, South Bay/LAX, I-10, and the all-time S.O.B., 101/405! One could surmise that because of its routing, I-405 was doomed to LOS E & F from the get-go!
Quote from: Mapmikey on December 29, 2018, 10:27:17 PM
The TX 349 bypass of Midland TX is 17 minutes longer per Google than TX 349 Business through Midland.
Wow, that is one crazy route TX-349 takes!
^ Was intended as a conduit between Lubbock and I-20 towards Odessa and El Paso. It's a spur off of the Ports-to-Plains Corridor which nominally follows US 87 through the region but has a spur that follows TX 349 and TX 158 to access Midland.
I-220 around Shreveport/Bossier takes a few minutes longer than just taking 20, but 220 is in MUCH better shape with much less traffic so it's worth it.
I-85 / I-73 around Greensboro as opposed to I-40 straight thru.
I-285 around Charlotte as opposed to I-85 or I-77 straight thru.
I-540 around Raleigh as opposed to I-40 or I-87 straight thru.
I-26 around Spartanburg as opposed to I-26 Business straight thru (plus the mainline is a construction / traffic nightmare right now, little traffic on the old route)
I-285 around Atlanta as opposed to I-20 / I-85 / I-75 straight thru.
I-405 around Los Angeles as opposed to I-5 straight thru. (though this is very debatable depending on traffic, which is all the time except between 10 PM - 6 AM)
The 85 MPH tollroad from Georgetown TX to Seguin TX. Unless you're in the middle of Austin rush hour it's longer and expensive.
Also I-840 around Nashville as opposed to I-40 straight thru.
I can't think of any others off the top of my head, but I'll leave it for others.
I-475 through Flint and I-675 through Saginaw are about two miles longer than taking I-75 around both cities.
Quote from: texaskdog on January 03, 2019, 12:51:06 AM
The 85 MPH tollroad from Georgetown TX to Seguin TX. Unless you're in the middle of Austin rush hour it's longer and expensive.
I've hit traffic nearly every time I've driven through Austin, both week-day and week-end. Plus I've hit traffic on the north end of San Antonio, especially arriving close to supper time (which was when I would commonly arrive through there). At the time I'm typing this (just after noon on a week-day), Google Maps estimates that TX-130 would take only 5 minutes more than I-35 the whole way. Those 5 minutes can easily get eaten up by thick traffic in Austin and/or San Antonio, and also by road construction or an accident. That sort of delay is much less likely along the bypass.
My preferred route from Georgetown to Pearsall is actually TX-130 → I-10 → I-410 → I-35. It tacks on another 5 minutes (according to the Goog), but it nicely avoids
all downtown areas. I cannot argue about its price tag, though...
I-278 through NYC. Unless the GW has a 2 hour wait, stay on I-95.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 04, 2019, 08:46:18 AM
I-278 through NYC. Unless the GW has a 2 hour wait, stay on I-95.
I-2
87, on the other hand...
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 04, 2019, 08:46:18 AM
I-278 through NYC. Unless the GW has a 2 hour wait, stay on I-95.
That's another non bypass. It goes though NYC.
Quote from: sparker on December 30, 2018, 02:37:31 AM
Quote from: Flint1979 on December 29, 2018, 01:29:11 PM
Quote from: Bruce on December 29, 2018, 01:04:17 AM
I-405 in the Seattle area, given that the Eastside suburbs are now highly developed.
I know your from the Seattle area but I've done the trip from Alderwood Mall to Tacoma before and the difference between taking I-5 through Seattle vs. taking I-405 around Seattle was only about a 2 or 3 minute difference. I think you add on something like 4 or 5 miles taking I-405.
......heh, heh.......that's (obviously) not the only I-405 "bypass" that, at least for the past couple of decades or so, takes considerably longer to traverse than its parent; of course, I'm talking about metro L.A. But in the next day or so I'll be first-hand utilizing both 5 and 405, since my itinerary on a ever-shortening trip hits the LAX area, Montebello, and Buena Park before hauling ass over Cajon up to the high desert. Finally get a chance to look at the Santa Fe Springs/Norwalk construction zone. But getting back to the thread topic -- yes, on a day-to-day basis, my own experience is that between its end points I-405 takes longer than I-5. And while it's true that I-5 is 8 miles shorter over that distance than is I-405, the former does traverse several of the most notorious interchanges in SoCal in terms of regular congestion (CA 55, CA 22/57, I-710, ELA, CA 170 merge/NB only). But 405 has whole stretches that regularly and famously back up even in off-peak hours: Irvine/Santa Ana/CA 55, CA 73 merge, the CA 22 coincidence and the I-605 interchange, I-110, South Bay/LAX, I-10, and the all-time S.O.B., 101/405! One could surmise that because of its routing, I-405 was doomed to LOS E & F from the get-go!
All true. If one is making a long distance drive N-S in the LA area the further east the better without backtracking. So if travelling between north of LA to south of LA: I-405 is disgusting, I-5 is horrendous, I-210 to I-605 is horrible, I-210 to CA-57 is bad, CA-138 to I-15 is meh, etc. etc.
But in all seriousness, since most of the wealth in LA County tends to be along the western and coastal areas, those areas will have more economic activity and traffic. So 405 is worse than 5. The real bypass of 5 is a combination of freeways to the east (like 210 to 605 or 57) or bypassing the whole shebang altogether.
I don't know if it actually takes longer, but to me it feels like the U.S. 400 bypass of Dodge City takes more time than just simply going through Dodge on the former business route (Wyatt Earp Boulevard). I think it's because you have to stop and wait for oncoming traffic to pass before you can turn left to get on it when it splits from U.S. 50, then stop before it joins U.S. 56, stop again when it joins U.S. 283 and are likely to have to stop again at the traffic light before you can turn to Greensburg.
I'd rather take U.S. 50 to Road 113, then go south back to the traffic light at Wyatt Earp/U.S. 56-283. It feels like it takes less time.
Sandwich Rd (US-6 Bypass) along the south side of the Cape Cod Canal. 2 lanes vs. 4. That's all you need to know :-D
Quote from: TheStranger on December 29, 2018, 10:11:16 PM
In Metro Manila, EDSA was built as a bypass ring road for north-south traffic, yet from experience during most waking hours takes an hour longer to go through than simply heading straight through the City of Manila! (This difference will be exacerbated even more when the Metro Manila Skyway extension opens next year)
I know in the Northern Half of Manila you have the South End of North Luzon Expressway getting jammed and you have the Manila Skyway construction zone in the area. The results of how much EDSA traffic would be reduced is yet to be seen.
Quote from: apeman33 on January 16, 2019, 01:00:21 AM
I don't know if it actually takes longer, but to me it feels like the U.S. 400 bypass of Dodge City takes more time than just simply going through Dodge on the former business route (Wyatt Earp Boulevard). I think it's because you have to stop and wait for oncoming traffic to pass before you can turn left to get on it when it splits from U.S. 50, then stop before it joins U.S. 56, stop again when it joins U.S. 283 and are likely to have to stop again at the traffic light before you can turn to Greensburg.
I'd rather take U.S. 50 to Road 113, then go south back to the traffic light at Wyatt Earp/U.S. 56-283. It feels like it takes less time.
To me it looks like it's about 4 miles shorter to go through town, doesn't look like a big town so you'd save maybe 2 minutes I would say. I think I'd use Trail Street, 14th Avenue and Wyatt Earp Boulevard.
Quote from: bing101 on January 17, 2019, 08:21:57 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on December 29, 2018, 10:11:16 PM
In Metro Manila, EDSA was built as a bypass ring road for north-south traffic, yet from experience during most waking hours takes an hour longer to go through than simply heading straight through the City of Manila! (This difference will be exacerbated even more when the Metro Manila Skyway extension opens next year)
I know in the Northern Half of Manila you have the South End of North Luzon Expressway getting jammed and you have the Manila Skyway construction zone in the area. The results of how much EDSA traffic would be reduced is yet to be seen.
EDSA appears to be poorly built as well with limited access control (there appears to be side streets intersecting directly with EDSA!)
Quote from: apeman33 on January 16, 2019, 01:00:21 AM
I don't know if it actually takes longer, but to me it feels like the U.S. 400 bypass of Dodge City takes more time than just simply going through Dodge on the former business route (Wyatt Earp Boulevard). I think it's because you have to stop and wait for oncoming traffic to pass before you can turn left to get on it when it splits from U.S. 50, then stop before it joins U.S. 56, stop again when it joins U.S. 283 and are likely to have to stop again at the traffic light before you can turn to Greensburg.
I'd rather take U.S. 50 to Road 113, then go south back to the traffic light at Wyatt Earp/U.S. 56-283. It feels like it takes less time.
It looks like (and I could be wrong) the U.S. 56 segment of the bypass was just U.S. 56 before, not a bypass. The little connector between U.S 56 and U.S. 400 / U.S. 50 looks like it was constructed to provide some sort of "relief route" to the town for long-distance truckers / traffic that doesn't feel like dealing with a town, slow speed limits, etc. The "bypass" is 65 MPH, where I imagine it's 25-35 MPH through the town. The little connector is a super-two freeway, whereas the rest of it (U.S. 56 / U.S. 400) is non-limited-access.
Quote from: Flint1979 on January 03, 2019, 11:50:36 AM
I-475 through Flint and I-675 through Saginaw are about two miles longer than taking I-75 around both cities.
True, but in both cases I-75 actually is the bypass and the 3di is the route through the city.
Quote from: wanderer2575 on January 20, 2019, 10:20:46 AM
Quote from: Flint1979 on January 03, 2019, 11:50:36 AM
I-475 through Flint and I-675 through Saginaw are about two miles longer than taking I-75 around both cities.
True, but in both cases I-75 actually is the bypass and the 3di is the route through the city.
I-675 was actually built to bypass the old Zilwaukee Bridge which was a drawbridge on I-75 and when it was in the up position backed traffic up so bad that I-675 had to be built. It functions as a loop route into Saginaw and has been used for I-75 through traffic several times when the current Zilwaukee Bridge has been closed.
I-475 is basically an alternate route for I-75 through the Flint area. You'd miss the split with US-23 though for traffic trying to bypass Detroit if you were to use I-475 SB which just empties into SB I-75 traffic heading towards Detroit. I-75 really seems like the bypass route but it has more traffic and is shorter than the route it's bypassing in both cases. I-496 is the same way in Lansing.
Quote from: sprjus4 on January 19, 2019, 08:18:48 PM
Quote from: apeman33 on January 16, 2019, 01:00:21 AM
I don't know if it actually takes longer, but to me it feels like the U.S. 400 bypass of Dodge City takes more time than just simply going through Dodge on the former business route (Wyatt Earp Boulevard). I think it's because you have to stop and wait for oncoming traffic to pass before you can turn left to get on it when it splits from U.S. 50, then stop before it joins U.S. 56, stop again when it joins U.S. 283 and are likely to have to stop again at the traffic light before you can turn to Greensburg.
I'd rather take U.S. 50 to Road 113, then go south back to the traffic light at Wyatt Earp/U.S. 56-283. It feels like it takes less time.
It looks like (and I could be wrong) the U.S. 56 segment of the bypass was just U.S. 56 before, not a bypass. The little connector between U.S 56 and U.S. 400 / U.S. 50 looks like it was constructed to provide some sort of "relief route" to the town for long-distance truckers / traffic that doesn't feel like dealing with a town, slow speed limits, etc. The "bypass" is 65 MPH, where I imagine it's 25-35 MPH through the town. The little connector is a super-two freeway, whereas the rest of it (U.S. 56 / U.S. 400) is non-limited-access.
In a sense, it's three bypasses. The 400 connector is the newest. Just after 400 joins U.S. 56, the roads take an alignment that replaced the former U.S. 56 (now known as McArtor Road). Then the 56-283-400 loop around the southeast side replaced the routings of 56 and 283 that used to go up Second St. and join the former routing of U.S. 50 at Wyatt Earp Blvd.
Quote from: Flint1979 on January 17, 2019, 11:08:09 AM
Quote from: apeman33 on January 16, 2019, 01:00:21 AM
I don't know if it actually takes longer, but to me it feels like the U.S. 400 bypass of Dodge City takes more time than just simply going through Dodge on the former business route (Wyatt Earp Boulevard). I think it's because you have to stop and wait for oncoming traffic to pass before you can turn left to get on it when it splits from U.S. 50, then stop before it joins U.S. 56, stop again when it joins U.S. 283 and are likely to have to stop again at the traffic light before you can turn to Greensburg.
I'd rather take U.S. 50 to Road 113, then go south back to the traffic light at Wyatt Earp/U.S. 56-283. It feels like it takes less time.
To me it looks like it's about 4 miles shorter to go through town, doesn't look like a big town so you'd save maybe 2 minutes I would say. I think I'd use Trail Street, 14th Avenue and Wyatt Earp Boulevard.
Trail St. is a two-lane narrow residential road between Second and 14th. My preference was to turn north at Second, cross the tracks and turn west onto Wyatt Earp.
What I usually do is either take U.S. 50 to 113 Road and then down as I described above or just go through Dodge City on the former U.S. 50 alignment, then turn south on the east side of town to get back to U.S. 400. I prefer to take either route over the bypass.
Quote from: apeman33 on January 21, 2019, 01:19:23 AM
Quote from: Flint1979 on January 17, 2019, 11:08:09 AM
Quote from: apeman33 on January 16, 2019, 01:00:21 AM
I don't know if it actually takes longer, but to me it feels like the U.S. 400 bypass of Dodge City takes more time than just simply going through Dodge on the former business route (Wyatt Earp Boulevard). I think it's because you have to stop and wait for oncoming traffic to pass before you can turn left to get on it when it splits from U.S. 50, then stop before it joins U.S. 56, stop again when it joins U.S. 283 and are likely to have to stop again at the traffic light before you can turn to Greensburg.
I'd rather take U.S. 50 to Road 113, then go south back to the traffic light at Wyatt Earp/U.S. 56-283. It feels like it takes less time.
To me it looks like it's about 4 miles shorter to go through town, doesn't look like a big town so you'd save maybe 2 minutes I would say. I think I'd use Trail Street, 14th Avenue and Wyatt Earp Boulevard.
Trail St. is a two-lane narrow residential road between Second and 14th. My preference was to turn north at Second, cross the tracks and turn west onto Wyatt Earp.
What I usually do is either take U.S. 50 to 113 Road and then down as I described above or just go through Dodge City on the former U.S. 50 alignment, then turn south on the east side of town to get back to U.S. 400. I prefer to take either route over the bypass.
Really? I guess looking at it on GSV is a little different than actually being there. I see the houses but it doesn't look like too narrow of a street. I guess I'd jog off at 2nd Avenue too in that case. I've never been to that part of Kansas so I'm not real familiar with it.
I think I-205 isn't really that great for bypassing Portland. Unless it's rush hour headed southbound in the morning or north in the evening, I-5 is much shorter and not necessarily much more congested.
US 17 through Myrtle Beach. I hate that road with a passion during summer tourist season, and I find it hard to believe it saves any time over the business route.
I-295 around Providence RI. Unless there's a major problem between Attleboro and Warwick, you're better off sticking to I-95 - even during rush hour.
I-64 v. I-264 in Louisville...12 mi v. 18-19 mi.
I-40 v. I-640 in Knoxville...feels longer; think it might be by a mile or two.
I-40 v. I-240 in Asheville...or maybe it only seems longer because it's a mess with all of the lane changes?
Quote from: bing101 on January 17, 2019, 08:21:57 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on December 29, 2018, 10:11:16 PM
In Metro Manila, EDSA was built as a bypass ring road for north-south traffic, yet from experience during most waking hours takes an hour longer to go through than simply heading straight through the City of Manila! (This difference will be exacerbated even more when the Metro Manila Skyway extension opens next year)
I know in the Northern Half of Manila you have the South End of North Luzon Expressway getting jammed and you have the Manila Skyway construction zone in the area. The results of how much EDSA traffic would be reduced is yet to be seen.
Seeing multiple Skyway vlogs in the last 2.5 months, generally the Magallanes-Balinawak (or reverse) drive is about 20 minutes on the new expressway.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEBBmAIFUKM
For comparison, EDSA seems to still take at least 10-15 minutes longer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZefPklcpKSs
One thing that skews things a bit in Skyway's favor is that so far, buses are not allowed on Skyway (this may change as soon as the Extension in Susana Heights is open) and most likely heavy trucks will never be allowed on Stage 3 with NLEX Connector being the designated truck route from Pandacan to Caloocan/Valenzuela. So that leaves a lot of truck traffic on SLEX to Buendia and on EDSA and C-5.
Quote from: milbfan on September 13, 2019, 11:05:40 PM
I-64 v. I-264 in Louisville...12 mi v. 18-19 mi.
I-40 v. I-640 in Knoxville...feels longer; think it might be by a mile or two.
I-40 v. I-240 in Asheville...or maybe it only seems longer because it's a mess with all of the lane changes?
I-40 is the Asheville bypass. I-240 goes to the CBD.
The first one that came to mind for me: the eastern US 63 bypass of Ottumwa, IA. It's very useful if you're going between points on IA 163 or US 63 north of town (e.g. Des Moines, Pella, Oskaloosa) and US 34 to the east (e.g. Fairfield, Mount Pleasant, Burlington). However, if you're actually following US 63 coming up from Missouri, it only takes you out of the way, considering that it goes against the trajectory the highway assumes north of Ottumwa (namely, northwest). I'm pretty familiar with that route - from experience, driving through town (on the route that US 63 used to follow before the bypass was built) doesn't really take that much longer.
Personally, I think it would be better if Iowa DOT would return US 63 to its former routing through Ottumwa; the bypass, then, could be renumbered as IA 634, to reflect the fact that it connects US 63 to US 34.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 12, 2021, 05:48:06 PM
The first one that came to mind for me: the eastern US 63 bypass of Ottumwa, IA. It's very useful if you're going between points on IA 163 or US 63 north of town (e.g. Des Moines, Pella, Oskaloosa) and US 34 to the east (e.g. Fairfield, Mount Pleasant, Burlington). However, if you're actually following US 63 coming up from Missouri, it only takes you out of the way, considering that it goes against the trajectory the highway assumes north of Ottumwa (namely, northwest). I'm pretty familiar with that route - from experience, driving through town (on the route that US 63 used to follow before the bypass was built) doesn't really take that much longer.
Personally, I think it would be better if Iowa DOT would return US 63 to its former routing through Ottumwa; the bypass, then, could be renumbered as IA 634, to reflect the fact that it connects US 63 to US 34.
It takes around the same time to use both routes, and for truck and long distance traffic, it would be much more viable to put the "official" route on a mostly four lane divided 65 mph highway that avoids the city's downtown, as opposed to a road that traverses downtown streets and a narrow rural 2 lane road north of there, then a left turn situation onto a divided highway for northbound traffic.
Beltway 8 Houston
I-610 Houston
Grand Parkway Houston.
I-635 (LBJ Freeway) Dallas
I-820 Fort Worth
I-220 Shreveport
it definitely takes longer to drive e-470 around denver than it does to go through denver unless the traffic on i-25 is seriously fusterclucked... which it probably is most days.
270 to 70 to 225 and back to 25 *might* be faster, but those roads tend to be quite bottlenecked at times.
Quote from: US 89 on August 22, 2019, 11:20:24 AM
US 17 through Myrtle Beach. I hate that road with a passion during summer tourist season, and I find it hard to believe it saves any time over the business route.
NC 31 is the real bypass
NJ-133 before the interchange reconstruction project? IDK
Dundee, OR now has a bypass of OR-18 that skips the city and spits you out on the far end of Newberg.
Traffic through Dundee on OR-99W used to be awful, especially when the town of Dundee got recognition as a wine destination.
Now the bypass sometimes has a longer travel time than going through the town since everyone uses he new route.
Quote from: US 89 on August 22, 2019, 11:20:24 AM
US 17 through Myrtle Beach. I hate that road with a passion during summer tourist season, and I find it hard to believe it saves any time over the business route.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 19, 2021, 09:07:40 AM
NC 31 is the real bypass
I thought this note about NC-31 might be a huge mistake, but indeed NCDOT is working with SCDOT to extend Carolina Bays Parkway (SC-31) up to US-17 probably near Sunset Beach. This is Project R-5876 in North Carolina (not familiar with the R-series numbers). Given the current economic situation, this probably won't occur in my lifetime, but it would certainly be a good bypass for Myrtle Beach. No mention of whether North Carolina might actually use the NC-31 designation, or work with South Carolina for a permanent relocation of US-17.
https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/carolina-bays-parkway/Pages/default.aspx
Looks like this has already been discussed here: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26680.msg2489325#msg2489325 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26680.msg2489325#msg2489325)
Quote from: Dirt Roads on March 19, 2021, 09:47:01 AM
Quote from: US 89 on August 22, 2019, 11:20:24 AM
US 17 through Myrtle Beach. I hate that road with a passion during summer tourist season, and I find it hard to believe it saves any time over the business route.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 19, 2021, 09:07:40 AM
NC 31 is the real bypass
I thought this note about NC-31 might be a huge mistake, but indeed NCDOT is working with SCDOT to extend Carolina Bays Parkway (SC-31) up to US-17 probably near Sunset Beach. This is Project R-5876 in North Carolina (not familiar with the R-series numbers). Given the current economic situation, this probably won't occur in my lifetime, but it would certainly be a good bypass for Myrtle Beach. No mention of whether North Carolina might actually use the NC-31 designation, or work with South Carolina for a permanent relocation of US-17.
https://www.ncdot.gov/projects/carolina-bays-parkway/Pages/default.aspx
Looks like this has already been discussed here: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26680.msg2489325#msg2489325 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26680.msg2489325#msg2489325)
Isn't that ultimately part of the I-74 corridor, barring an act of Congress to change the corridor to end in Wilmington?
Quote from: abefroman329 on December 28, 2018, 08:31:52 PM
Any circumferential highway (i.e. I-285 in Atlanta).
Not sure how many exceptions are there, but I-270 in St Louis is an example of a beltway bypass that is shorter than its parent.
Well, there's I-294 (Tri-State Tollway) which definitely takes longer to go from Waukegan to Gary, IN than following I-94 to the Skyway.....in the dead of night. In fact, it's a lot shorter if you can get through downtown Chicago between midnight and 5:15 (maybe 5:30) am. It would cut a good 15 to 20 minutes off of an eastbound drive for me if I hit it right. But, once the window is closed the delays go up logarithmically versus time and 294 is waaaaaaay better.
Yes, I understand how the thread is about bypasses that take longer almost all of the time. Just wanted to call this one out because without traffic I've made it from Gurnee to Gary in like 40 minutes via 90/94 (it's about an hour via 294); but with traffic you could be in for 3 hours or more if you make that mistake.
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on March 19, 2021, 03:24:05 PM
Well, there's I-294 (Tri-State Tollway) which definitely takes longer to go from Waukegan to Gary, IN than following I-94 to the Skyway.....in the dead of night. In fact, it's a lot shorter if you can get through downtown Chicago between midnight and 5:15 (maybe 5:30) am. It would cut a good 15 to 20 minutes off of an eastbound drive for me if I hit it right. But, once the window is closed the delays go up logarithmically versus time and 294 is waaaaaaay better.
Yes, I understand how the thread is about bypasses that take longer almost all of the time. Just wanted to call this one out because without traffic I've made it from Gurnee to Gary in like 40 minutes via 90/94 (it's about an hour via 294); but with traffic you could be in for 3 hours or more if you make that mistake.
The last time I was in the area, we were driving from Wichita (KS) to Lakeside (MI), arriving to Chicagoland on Friday afternoon...
Quote from: kphoger on October 01, 2018, 02:20:32 PM
We had hit the south suburbs of Chicago at rush hour; on 80/94, from the Bishop Ford to I-65, I don't think we ever went more than 25 mph. Traffic cleared up at the I-65 junction
... Going the other direction early on Sunday morning, I never dropped below 75 mph the whole way across.
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on March 19, 2021, 03:24:05 PM
Well, there's I-294 (Tri-State Tollway) which definitely takes longer to go from Waukegan to Gary, IN than following I-94 to the Skyway.....in the dead of night. In fact, it's a lot shorter if you can get through downtown Chicago between midnight and 5:15 (maybe 5:30) am. It would cut a good 15 to 20 minutes off of an eastbound drive for me if I hit it right. But, once the window is closed the delays go up logarithmically versus time and 294 is waaaaaaay better.
Yes, I understand how the thread is about bypasses that take longer almost all of the time. Just wanted to call this one out because without traffic I've made it from Gurnee to Gary in like 40 minutes via 90/94 (it's about an hour via 294); but with traffic you could be in for 3 hours or more if you make that mistake.
Is the speed limit higher on I-294?
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 19, 2021, 04:05:30 PM
Is the speed limit higher on I-294?
This is Chicago. Speed limits mean nothing.
Quote from: kphoger on March 19, 2021, 04:14:58 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 19, 2021, 04:05:30 PM
Is the speed limit higher on I-294?
This is Chicago. Speed limits mean nothing.
Also valid in Indianapolis, Louisville, Nashville, DC, Atlanta, Birmingham, Memphis, Knoxville, Jacks-Everywhere else I've been really.
Quote from: I-55 on March 19, 2021, 06:21:53 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 19, 2021, 04:14:58 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on March 19, 2021, 04:05:30 PM
Is the speed limit higher on I-294?
This is Chicago. Speed limits mean nothing.
Also valid in Indianapolis, Louisville, Nashville, DC, Atlanta, Birmingham, Memphis, Knoxville, Jacks-Everywhere else I've been really.
Any urban area essentially with a sizable amount of free-flow traffic.
Quote from: zachary_amaryllis on March 19, 2021, 09:05:42 AM
it definitely takes longer to drive e-470 around denver than it does to go through denver unless the traffic on i-25 is seriously fusterclucked... which it probably is most days.
270 to 70 to 225 and back to 25 *might* be faster, but those roads tend to be quite bottlenecked at times.
270 to 70 to 225 is 22 miles versus 17 miles via I-25 so during most times I-25 is faster (rush hour cluster not withstanding).
It's always faster around 5p to take all of E-470 and Northwest Parkway to get to my place in western Westminster even though it's nearly 60 miles versus 35 through town. The 75 mph speed limit helps, though the tolls hit the wallet pretty hard. If 225 is reasonable, I'll often use I-225 to I-70 to Peña to E-470 to avoid several toll plazas.
Quote from: SkyPesos on March 19, 2021, 01:02:03 PM
Quote from: abefroman329 on December 28, 2018, 08:31:52 PM
Any circumferential highway (i.e. I-285 in Atlanta).
Not sure how many exceptions are there, but I-270 in St Louis is an example of a beltway bypass that is shorter than its parent.
I-475 in Macon would be on that list as well.
Quote from: ftballfan on January 19, 2019, 07:30:01 PM
Quote from: bing101 on January 17, 2019, 08:21:57 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on December 29, 2018, 10:11:16 PM
In Metro Manila, EDSA was built as a bypass ring road for north-south traffic, yet from experience during most waking hours takes an hour longer to go through than simply heading straight through the City of Manila! (This difference will be exacerbated even more when the Metro Manila Skyway extension opens next year)
EDSA appears to be poorly built as well with limited access control (there appears to be side streets intersecting directly with EDSA!)
A bit of an old post, but wanted to add some background:
EDSA has existed in some form since the 1930s-1940s, and was "Highway 54" in the 1950s before that numbering system was cast aside. This particular ring road (circumfrential route C-4 in Metro Manila's ring road designations) was designed to try to get drivers away from the crowded streets of the city of Manila.
However, by the early 1960s, the poor planning decisions that turned EDSA from bypass into congested urban arterial had begun. the Araneta Center district (now known as Araneta City) in Quezon City's Cubao area was first developed, centering around Araneta Coliseum where Muhummad Ali's famous Thrilla in Manila fight actually would occur in 1975 - literal months before the capital was moved back to Manila from QC.
In Mandalyuong, factories started to sprout along the EDSA corridor.
However I've read that even in the 80s it was still a viable through route. In the late 1960s the North Luzon Expressway linked Tabang to the Balintawak Cloverleaf along EDSA in northern Quezon City, and in 1976 the South Luzon Expressway linked up to EDSA in Makati at the Magallanes Interchange. From what I've seen on other forums, there were already plans to link the two north-south expressways through Manila, but no political will or money from the 1970s until the late 90s (with the start of the Metro Manila Skyway project).
In 1984, SM North EDSA mall opened - at the time, the largest mall in the Philippines. The setup fronting EDSA directly would then be copied by multiple other malls along the way (SM Megamall, Robinsons Galleria) and would essentially turn a once-useable bypass route into a semi-suburban boulevard that has continued to struggle with traffic loads since.
There is one exception to where EDSA still has some function as a limited access-type road, and that is the portion between Tramo Street in Pasay and the Pasig River at the Makati/Mandaluyong border. There is almost full grade separation between the EDSA mainline and most cross roads, with notable exits at SLEX, Arnaiz Avenue, Ayala Avenue, Buendia Avenue/Kalayaan Avenue, and JP Rizal Extension. I've actually even created some hypothetical sign ideas for the Pasay/Makati stretch to reflect this:
https://skywaysignconcepts.blogspot.com/2021/04/edsa-signage-improvement-ideas-between.html
https://skywaysignconcepts.blogspot.com/2021/04/edsa-pasay-guadalupe-sign-ideas-route.html
Having said that, that portion of EDSA is absolutely not a bypass route at all, as the early-90s expansions to the malls in Ayala Center (Greenbelt and Glorietta) turned that into a nationally-known retail destination, and the southernmost terminus of EDSA is SM Mall of Asia in Pasay. One could argue that that stretch of road is essentially a freeway spur from SLEX/Skyway into the urban core of Makati and the tourist areas in Pasay's portion of Bay City.
US 90 mainline is longer than it's business route in NOLA. However it's a freeway verses the arterial it bypasses. So the designations should be switched in reality.
Quote from: roadman65 on April 13, 2021, 11:41:55 PM
US 90 mainline is longer than it's business route in NOLA.
Isn't that pretty common? Random example:
I-35 vs I-35-BL, Dilley, TX (https://goo.gl/maps/gk6uhY6BfXdePGmd9)
Quote from: roadman65 on April 13, 2021, 11:41:55 PM
US 90 mainline is longer than it's business route in NOLA. However it's a freeway verses the arterial it bypasses. So the designations should be switched in reality.
But does it take longer?
Quote from: kphoger on April 14, 2021, 09:19:17 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 13, 2021, 11:41:55 PM
US 90 mainline is longer than it's business route in NOLA.
Isn't that pretty common? Random example: I-35 vs I-35-BL, Dilley, TX (https://goo.gl/maps/gk6uhY6BfXdePGmd9)
And a much more egregious
I-83 vs BL-83 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9525755,-76.7028745,13z?hl=en) in York PA.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 14, 2021, 09:24:27 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 13, 2021, 11:41:55 PM
US 90 mainline is longer than it's business route in NOLA. However it's a freeway verses the arterial it bypasses. So the designations should be switched in reality.
But does it take longer?
Would think so.
Quote from: webny99 on April 14, 2021, 09:32:54 AM
Quote from: kphoger on April 14, 2021, 09:19:17 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 13, 2021, 11:41:55 PM
US 90 mainline is longer than it's business route in NOLA.
Isn't that pretty common? Random example: I-35 vs I-35-BL, Dilley, TX (https://goo.gl/maps/gk6uhY6BfXdePGmd9)
And a much more egregious I-83 vs BL-83 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9525755,-76.7028745,13z?hl=en) in York PA.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/39.9149012,-76.704398/39.9939485,-76.7350449/@40.0708314,-76.6422512,11z/data=!4m2!4m1!3e0?hl=en
remember the topic of this thread
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 14, 2021, 09:34:10 AM
Quote from: webny99 on April 14, 2021, 09:32:54 AM
Quote from: kphoger on April 14, 2021, 09:19:17 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 13, 2021, 11:41:55 PM
US 90 mainline is longer than it's business route in NOLA.
Isn't that pretty common? Random example: I-35 vs I-35-BL, Dilley, TX (https://goo.gl/maps/gk6uhY6BfXdePGmd9)
And a much more egregious I-83 vs BL-83 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9525755,-76.7028745,13z?hl=en) in York PA.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/39.9149012,-76.704398/39.9939485,-76.7350449/@40.0708314,-76.6422512,11z/data=!4m2!4m1!3e0?hl=en
remember the topic of this thread
Yes, of course the business route in York takes longer time-wise. We were replying to the specific point about US 90 mainline being longer.
Quote from: webny99 on April 14, 2021, 09:43:23 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 14, 2021, 09:34:10 AM
Quote from: webny99 on April 14, 2021, 09:32:54 AM
Quote from: kphoger on April 14, 2021, 09:19:17 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on April 13, 2021, 11:41:55 PM
US 90 mainline is longer than it's business route in NOLA.
Isn't that pretty common? Random example: I-35 vs I-35-BL, Dilley, TX (https://goo.gl/maps/gk6uhY6BfXdePGmd9)
And a much more egregious I-83 vs BL-83 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9525755,-76.7028745,13z?hl=en) in York PA.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/39.9149012,-76.704398/39.9939485,-76.7350449/@40.0708314,-76.6422512,11z/data=!4m2!4m1!3e0?hl=en
remember the topic of this thread
Yes, of course the business route takes longer in York. We were replying to the specific point about US 90 mainline being longer.
Yeah it being longer in distance is common.
I could fill out a very long list of these types of "bypasses".