News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

Bypasses that take longer than the routes that they are bypassing

Started by Roadgeekteen, December 28, 2018, 06:35:41 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

apeman33

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.


DJ Particle

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

bing101

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.

Flint1979

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.

ftballfan

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!)

sprjus4

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.

wanderer2575

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.

Flint1979

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.

apeman33

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.

apeman33

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.

Flint1979

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.

bemybear

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 89

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.

roadman

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.
"And ninety-five is the route you were on.  It was not the speed limit sign."  - Jim Croce (from Speedball Tucker)

"My life has been a tapestry
Of years of roads and highway signs" (with apologies to Carole King and Tom Rush)

milbfan

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?

TheStranger

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.
Chris Sampang

Avalanchez71

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.

KCRoadFan

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.

sprjus4

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.

bwana39

Beltway 8 Houston
I-610 Houston
Grand Parkway Houston.

I-635 (LBJ Freeway) Dallas
I-820 Fort Worth

I-220 Shreveport



Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

zachary_amaryllis

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.
clinched:
I-64, I-80, I-76 (west), *64s in hampton roads, 225,270,180 (co, wy)

Roadgeekteen

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
God-emperor of Alanland, king of all the goats and goat-like creatures

Current Interstate map I am making:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&mid=1PEDVyNb1skhnkPkgXi8JMaaudM2zI-Y&ll=29.05778059819179%2C-82.48856825&z=5

TheGrassGuy

NJ-133 before the interchange reconstruction project? IDK
If you ever feel useless, remember that CR 504 exists.

OCGuy81

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.

Dirt Roads

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



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.