Does anyone have a list of overpowered interchanges? By this, I mean directional interchanges with flyovers, etc., which lead to non-freeway arterials or surface streets, where a simple trumpet or diamond would be more appropriate.
I have two examples locally, that I pass by on a regular basis, but I am sure there are others.
Atlantic Avenue/Commerce Way off I-93 (Exit 37C) in Woburn, MA.
D. W. Highway/Hudson off F. E. Everett Turnpike (Exit 2) in Nashua, NH.
I 180
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=hennepin+il&ll=41.262517,-89.39352&spn=0.050324,0.074072&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&hnear=Hennepin,+Putnam,+Illinois&gl=us&t=h&z=14
Most Interstate to interstate interchanges around here are less powerful.
Quote from: cwm1276 on November 21, 2013, 10:22:32 AM
I 180
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=hennepin+il&ll=41.262517,-89.39352&spn=0.050324,0.074072&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&hnear=Hennepin,+Putnam,+Illinois&gl=us&t=h&z=14
Most Interstate to interstate interchanges around here are less powerful.
Tell me about it. Finding an overpowered interchange around Chicagoland is difficult, but not impossible.
I-80 at Center Street (Exit 131) (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=41.513285,-88.097799&spn=0.009271,0.021136&t=h&z=16). A 3-level stack leading to a residential street on one side (Meadow Avenue) and an arterial on the other (Center Street).
Cermak/Chinatown exit on I-55 (Exit 293A) (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=41.847378,-87.631974&spn=0.009223,0.021136&t=h&z=16). A half-Circle interchange that leads to the outbound Ryan to the south (makes sense) and to a signal on the north. Was originally meant to connect to Wacker Drive.
Exit 65 on I-94 (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=41.706946,-87.589574&spn=0.018486,0.042272&t=h&z=15). Leads to Stony Island Avenue, but originally meant to be for a connection to Lake Shore Drive as I-494. There's actually a ghost ramp (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=41.71765,-87.585416&spn=0.003267,0.005284&t=h&z=18) in the interchange for I-494.
To make sure I understand the question, you're asking for examples of interchanges that are overbuilt and provide more capacity than is reasonably necessary?
The reason I ask is that the word "overpowered" would suggest to me an interchange that is massively underbuilt and collapsing under the weight of more traffic than it can bear. You know, similar to Ed Hochuli's famous call:
Quote from: cwm1276 on November 21, 2013, 10:22:32 AM
I 180
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=hennepin+il&ll=41.262517,-89.39352&spn=0.050324,0.074072&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&hnear=Hennepin,+Putnam,+Illinois&gl=us&t=h&z=14
Most Interstate to interstate interchanges around here are less powerful.
Why was I-180 built in the first place? Was it supposed to connect to SR 6 in Peoria?
http://www.kurumi.com/roads/3di/i180.html
It was originally built in the late 60s to serve a now-defunct steel mill in Hennepin. The proposal to connect to Ill Rte 6 came later, in the early 90s.
I would think that most of the interchanges in this list are grossly 'overpowered' because they were planned to connect other freeways that were never built. A big example that I can think of offhand is I-696/Mound Rd in Warren (suburban Detroit), MI.
There are many such examples in the northeastern USA.
Mike
Quote from: US 41 on November 21, 2013, 10:43:11 AM
Quote from: cwm1276 on November 21, 2013, 10:22:32 AM
I 180
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=hennepin+il&ll=41.262517,-89.39352&spn=0.050324,0.074072&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&hnear=Hennepin,+Putnam,+Illinois&gl=us&t=h&z=14
Most Interstate to interstate interchanges around here are less powerful.
Why was I-180 built in the first place? Was it supposed to connect to SR 6 in Peoria?
I-180 was built for the steel mill in Hennepin, a defense contractor. Ideally, it should've had a branch to cross the river, but continued down to Peoria. Ah, missed opportunities.
While it does connect two Interstates, the I-70/I-695 interchange near Baltimore probably qualifies for this thread for the reason mgk920 notes–it was designed with the understanding that I-70 was supposed to connect to I-95, but when that segment was deleted it wound up being far more than was ever needed:
http://goo.gl/maps/r5vp5
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 21, 2013, 10:35:37 AM
To make sure I understand the question, you're asking for examples of interchanges that are overbuilt and provide more capacity than is reasonably necessary?
The reason I ask is that the word "overpowered" would suggest to me an interchange that is massively underbuilt and collapsing under the weight of more traffic than it can bear. You know, similar to Ed Hochuli's famous call:
Your first assumption was correct. I am talking about interchanges that are overbuilt and provide more capacity than is reasonably necessary.
Another example I can think of is I-189 in Burlington, VT. (Yes, I know it's listed as an Interstate in its own right, but from what I have seen from maps and photos, it is just a ramp complex.)
QuoteAnother example I can think of is I-189 in Burlington, VT. (Yes, I know it's listed as an Interstate in its own right, but from what I have seen from maps and photos, it is just a ramp complex.)
I-189 gets a decent amount of traffic, though...just over 40K AADT per VTrans (2nd busiest road stretch in the state behind I-89 thru Burlington). I would not consider it an "overpowered interchange".
One could make an argument that the I-91/I-93 interchange near St. Johnsbury, VT is "overpowered". But given the topography, a semi-directional stack made more sense than a trumpet.
I-280 at Cesar Chavez Street (Army Street) in San Francisco has a long flyover ramp with a stub, the only portion of the Southern Crossing project to ever be built.
https://maps.google.com/?ll=37.747881,-122.391579&spn=0.014286,0.019097&t=h&z=16
I-805 at 43rd Street in San Diego has a semi-directional Y interchange for South 43rd Street; this was to have been the eastern terminus of the cancelled Route 252 connector with I-5 and Route 15:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Beta+St+%26+S+43rd+St,+San+Diego,+CA&hl=en&ll=32.688961,-117.099173&spn=0.014429,0.019097&sll=32.689214,-117.097843&sspn=0.014429,0.019097&hnear=S+43rd+St+%26+Beta+St,+San+Diego,+San+Diego+County,+California+92113&t=h&z=16
Route 14 at Via Princessa in Santa Clarita, which was at one point considered as a possible eastern terminus for a Route 126 extension:
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Via+Princessa+%26+Sierra+Hwy,+Santa+Clarita,+CA&hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=34.404325,-118.4624&spn=0.028291,0.038195&sll=34.403511,-118.452873&sspn=0.028291,0.038195&t=h&hnear=Sierra+Hwy+%26+V%C3%ADa+Princessa,+Santa+Clarita,+Los+Angeles+County,+California+91321&z=15
Directional Y interchange between De La Cruz Boulevard and Coleman Avenue near San Jose International Airport:
https://maps.google.com/?ll=37.357835,-121.94056&spn=0.006814,0.009549&t=h&z=17
---
Here's one that no longer exists, but was around in the early 90s: a directional Y from I-15 to former US 66 & 91/current Business I-15, West Main Street. This was the original planned terminus of a Route 58 realignment away from old US 466, before a trumpet was constructed further south of town (presumably to avoid having to build a large overpass crossing the rail yard near the now-removed junction).
http://www.historicaerials.com/aerials.php?scale=4.84062793038482E-05&lat=34.8884833765449&lon=-117.058225274087&year=T1993
Perhaps this thing: http://goo.gl/maps/zt9Uc
There's these two in Albany: http://goo.gl/maps/bKzld
Given traffic counts, anything on this section of Parkway: http://goo.gl/maps/nJCas (NYSDOT even closes a section in winter to save on maintenance!)
QuoteThere's these two in Albany: http://goo.gl/maps/bKzld
To be fair, and in light of earlier comments, both of these were built for freeways that were subsequently cancelled.
Another in Massachusetts:
Exit 44 on I-95 to a rotary with US 1 and MA 129
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 21, 2013, 11:09:31 AM
While it does connect two Interstates, the I-70/I-695 interchange near Baltimore probably qualifies for this thread for the reason mgk920 notes–it was designed with the understanding that I-70 was supposed to connect to I-95, but when that segment was deleted it wound up being far more than was ever needed:
http://goo.gl/maps/r5vp5
That interchange is also underpowered due to the truncation of I-70. The movement from I-70 east to I-695 north really needs to be two lanes. The I-695 north to I-70 west movement might be that way as well. But I've never used that. They should build new flyover ramp for at least the former if not both of those movements. That would be cool to have ghost ramps in a stack interchange. Are there any like that? (new thread?)
A-25 / Souligny Ave., Montréal, QC (https://maps.google.com/?ll=45.5892,-73.5244&z=15) - Was supposed to be part of the Ville-Marie Expy. and A-20.
Hwy. 158 / A-31, Joliette, QC (https://maps.google.ca/?ll=46.01807,-73.4204&z=15) - Was supposed to be A-50.
Quote from: Janko Dialnice on November 21, 2013, 10:16:13 AMD. W. Highway/Hudson off F. E. Everett Turnpike (Exit 2) in Nashua, NH.
It's worth noting that connector was originally (as far back as the 1950s) intended to be the southern leg of a bypass freeway that never came to be. Until the EPA put the kibosh on it in 1993; the Circumferential Highway (as it was called) almost had a chance to be revived.
Quote from: 1 on November 21, 2013, 02:28:27 PM
Another in Massachusetts:
Exit 44 on I-95 to a rotary with US 1 and MA 129
Trust me, if one took away that rotary (aka Goodwin's Circle) connection, the traffic along MA 129 between there & where it interchanges w/US 1 would be absolutely unbearable.
Now, had I-95 been built inside of 128 as originally planned; that connection to Goodwin's Circle may not have been needed.
I believe (& I could be wrong) that the OP is asking for examples that are absolute overkill. Reposted below with
Bold emphasis added.
Quote from: Janko Dialnice on November 21, 2013, 10:16:13 AM
Does anyone have a list of overpowered interchanges? By this, I mean directional interchanges with flyovers, etc., which lead to non-freeway arterials or surface streets, where a simple trumpet or diamond would be more appropriate.
I'm not sure how one would do a trumpet or diamond interchange from I-95 to Goodwin's Circle (most of the connector's movements are actually in the opposite direction (from the circle to I-95 & US 1)); that would be more overkill IMHO than what's already there.
It's worth noting that the current I-95 (MA 128)/US 1 dual-trumpet interchange with the Goodwin's Circle connector was built in 1962 and replaced a much smaller & compact interchange between MA 128 & US 1 that was likely getting strangled by traffic volume or had high accident rates at the ramp merges even then.
The I-93 Commerce Way interchange (originally proposed as Exit 37.5 - no kidding here) was designed as a flyover because of the anticpated traffic volumes going to and from the Anderson RTC facility, which includes an MBTA commuter rail station, a Massport Logan Express bus pick-up/drop-off point, and a MassDOT Park and Ride lot. Plus, constructing it as a traditional diamond interchange, with the ramps going under I-93, would have been more difficult and costly from an enviromental standpoint. Given these considerations, I don't consider the current interchange to be "overpowered".
Quote from: BrianP on November 21, 2013, 03:09:15 PM
That would be cool to have ghost ramps in a stack interchange. Are there any like that? (new thread?)
I-84 at Route 9, west of Hartford. (part of a planned I-291 that was never completed in that area)
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hartford&hl=en&ll=41.72527,-72.771549&spn=0.025592,0.038195&sll=37.269174,-119.306607&sspn=13.95558,19.555664&t=h&hnear=Hartford,+Connecticut&z=15
Quote from: Brandon on November 21, 2013, 10:34:47 AM
Exit 65 on I-94 (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=41.706946,-87.589574&spn=0.018486,0.042272&t=h&z=15). Leads to Stony Island Avenue, but originally meant to be for a connection to Lake Shore Drive as I-494. There's actually a ghost ramp (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=41.71765,-87.585416&spn=0.003267,0.005284&t=h&z=18) in the interchange for I-494.
IIRC, that same interchange was later to serve I-694, as I-494 was transferred to the also-unbuilt Crosstown Expressway.
Quote from: BrianP on November 21, 2013, 03:09:15 PM
That would be cool to have ghost ramps in a stack interchange. Are there any like that? (new thread?)
I-380's western terminus (https://maps.google.com/?ll=37.627178,-122.430576&spn=0.002503,0.004128&t=h&z=19) in San Bruno.
Two California ones:
The north (https://maps.google.com/?ll=34.142676,-118.155169&spn=0.007432,0.016512&t=h&z=17) and south (https://maps.google.com/?ll=34.073857,-118.159955&spn=0.00526,0.008256&t=h&z=18) ends of the unbuilt 710 Freeway in Pasadena and El Sereno.
The western terminus (https://maps.google.com/?ll=33.983283,-118.439425&spn=0.00524,0.008256&t=h&z=18) of the Marina Freeway.
The interchange between I-795 and Owings Mills Blvd (MD 940) is definitely overpowered because it has all of these awesome ramps to a dead mall and an underused metro station. There are plans to focus growth in this area of Baltimore County (and to demolish the mall and build a "towne centre"), so it may be more useful in the future, but the original wave of development that this interchange was designed for failed to flourish 30 years ago.
https://www.google.com/maps/preview#!data=!1m4!1m3!1d7209!2d-76.7903752!3d39.4105485
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on November 21, 2013, 07:07:51 PM
Quote from: BrianP on November 21, 2013, 03:09:15 PM
That would be cool to have ghost ramps in a stack interchange. Are there any like that? (new thread?)
I-380's western terminus (https://maps.google.com/?ll=37.627178,-122.430576&spn=0.002503,0.004128&t=h&z=19) in San Bruno.
That interchange was actually planned to be a half-cloverleaf/half-directional Y hybrid:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/4483612224/in/photostream/
Is Exit 45 on I-495 (MA) overpowered? Would a normal interchange work?
I-75/85 and GA-10/Freedom Parkway in downtown Atlanta. I believe this was supposed to be for an unbuilt connector to the Stone Mountain Freeway.
The tri-level stack at US 23 and Hambley Boulevard in Pikeville, Ky.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.staticflickr.com%2F3665%2F10174038365_9ca1f85c25.jpg&hash=4fbff9f896b6cae07e4e3c1e4b7cb9ec7a5dc5d8)
Quote from: 1 on November 22, 2013, 02:55:51 PM
Is Exit 45 on I-495 (MA) overpowered? Would a normal interchange work?
Given the configuration of Marston St., Commonwealth Dr., the proximity to and the fact that the Merrimack River crossing is a double-decker structure, plus the nearby Merrimack St. interchange (Exit 44); I don't believe normal interchanges would work here. Not to mention the traffic volume this area gets now.
I-10 at Elysian Fields Ave (https://www.google.com/maps/preview#!data=!1m4!1m3!1d2994!2d-90.0579998!3d29.9806186!2m1!1e3&fid=7)
A 3-Y interchange probably wasn't necessary here, (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=loc:43.924722,-103.4425&hl=en&ll=43.924495,-103.442208&spn=0.01734,0.042272&t=h&z=15&layer=c&cbll=43.924495,-103.442208&panoid=oBfCm-VOEMG540hea5usDQ&cbp=12,296.77,,0,-3.2) but at least it's very beautiful.
Several in CT come to mind:
I-84 Exit 11 - was meant to be the northern end of the CT 25 expressway
I-84 Exit 39A - already mentioned - but overpowered mostly in the sense that its only 1/4 used.
I-91 Exit 6 - stub for the East Rock Expressway, which dead ends 1/4 mile from I-91, onto a local road.
I-91 Exit 13 - Warton Brook Connector....was planned to go further west, but dead ends at US 5.
Quote from: Mr. Matté on November 23, 2013, 02:10:49 PM
A 3-Y interchange probably wasn't necessary here, (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=loc:43.924722,-103.4425&hl=en&ll=43.924495,-103.442208&spn=0.01734,0.042272&t=h&z=15&layer=c&cbll=43.924495,-103.442208&panoid=oBfCm-VOEMG540hea5usDQ&cbp=12,296.77,,0,-3.2) but at least it's very beautiful.
Aren't these the wooden flyovers in the area close to Mount Rushmore?
Quote from: TheStranger on November 21, 2013, 05:21:28 PM
Quote from: BrianP on November 21, 2013, 03:09:15 PM
That would be cool to have ghost ramps in a stack interchange. Are there any like that? (new thread?)
I-84 at Route 9, west of Hartford. (part of a planned I-291 that was never completed in that area)
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hartford&hl=en&ll=41.72527,-72.771549&spn=0.025592,0.038195&sll=37.269174,-119.306607&sspn=13.95558,19.555664&t=h&hnear=Hartford,+Connecticut&z=15
Some of my earliest memories of family roadtrips from Massachusetts to Annapolis (and later to Williamsburg) in the mid to late 1960s are of that interchange, as well as other un-opened ones along Interstate 84 west of Hartford. I especially remember how, when first built, full overhead sign supports with blank green panels for the un-opened movements were installed at these locations.
A few free-flow interchanges that connect to city streets, and were probably never planned for more:
IL 251 and Whitman Street, Rockford (http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=42.275308,-89.08026&spn=0.012876,0.028346&gl=us&t=k&z=16)
I-80 and Center Street, Joliet (http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=41.51404,-88.096597&spn=0.013095,0.028346&gl=us&t=k&z=16)
A trumpet for a fucking high school, Tupelo (http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.230609,-88.762987&spn=0.014388,0.028346&gl=us&t=k&z=16)
Actually you could argue that most interchanges on the Blue Ridge and Natchez Trace Parkways are overpowered, but the purpose is to separate the park from the other roads.
I do not know if this was mentioned or not, but I-78 Exit 56 which is a 3 Y for Elizabeth Avenue in Newark, NJ would have been for the unbuilt NJ 75 if it had been built.https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Newark,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.712394,-74.195566&spn=0.010572,0.017853&sll=40.809197,-74.101667&sspn=0.010557,0.017853&oq=newa&t=h&hnear=Newark,+Essex,+New+Jersey&z=15
Also the directional interchange on I-280 where 3 lanes exit and enter the median of I-280 (Exit 13) while the mainline narrows to 2 lanes would have also been for NJ 75 as well. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Newark,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.751565,-74.189429&spn=0.005283,0.008926&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=6.319638,9.140625&oq=Newa&t=h&hnear=Newark,+Essex,+New+Jersey&z=16
In addition the NJ 3 & 17 interchange in Rutherford, NJ is too much for what it is. NJ 17 makes a 180 degree turn on the south side of the interchange and then narrows to an arterial to zig zag its way back to NJ 3 to become its frontage road. It was built in mind to have NJ 17 become a freeway south of there to connect with I-280 and the NJ Turnpike, but it never got off the ground. In fact originally the interchange was much simpler as NJ 17 crossed NJ 3 at a 45 degree angle just east of Orient Way and then followed Meadow Road for a bit so through NJ 17 motorists did not have to go through the tangle it is now.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Rutherford,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.809197,-74.101667&spn=0.010557,0.017853&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=6.319638,9.140625&oq=rutherf&t=h&hnear=Rutherford,+Bergen,+New+Jersey&z=15
QuoteActually you could argue that most interchanges on the Blue Ridge and Natchez Trace Parkways are overpowered, but the purpose is to separate the park from the other roads.
That most of those "interchanges" involve at-grade intersections on the parkways themselves further dilutes the argument that they're "overpowered"...
Quote from: xcellntbuy on November 23, 2013, 04:43:25 PM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on November 23, 2013, 02:10:49 PM
A 3-Y interchange probably wasn't necessary here, (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=loc:43.924722,-103.4425&hl=en&ll=43.924495,-103.442208&spn=0.01734,0.042272&t=h&z=15&layer=c&cbll=43.924495,-103.442208&panoid=oBfCm-VOEMG540hea5usDQ&cbp=12,296.77,,0,-3.2) but at least it's very beautiful.
Aren't these the wooden flyovers in the area close to Mount Rushmore?
What are the load limits and maintenance requirements of wooden highway bridges in snow country?
Quote from: NE2 on November 24, 2013, 11:00:22 AM
A trumpet for a fucking high school, Tupelo (http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.230609,-88.762987&spn=0.014388,0.028346&gl=us&t=k&z=16)
In fairness, it is a big high school, and given Cliff Gookin's purpose as the truck bypass for south/west Tupelo it sorta makes sense.
In the general area, both of US 78/I-22's interchanges with AL 118 are pretty overpowered for what they do today, although they made more sense as temporary termini. The MS 25 interchange off US 45 east of Aberdeen is awfully elaborate for what it does today (although it might attract more traffic when MS 25 is four-laned to US 78).
Quote from: roadman65 on November 24, 2013, 11:05:56 AM
I do not know if this was mentioned or not, but I-78 Exit 56 which is a 3 Y for Elizabeth Avenue in Newark, NJ would have been for the unbuilt NJ 75 if it had been built.https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Newark,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.712394,-74.195566&spn=0.010572,0.017853&sll=40.809197,-74.101667&sspn=0.010557,0.017853&oq=newa&t=h&hnear=Newark,+Essex,+New+Jersey&z=15
What I hate about these type interchanges is that it's a major interchange, multiple lanes, and NJDOT only uses small green signs off to the shoulder, rather than BGS over the roadway. This is especially true on the exit from 78 East.
Quote from: hbelkins on November 22, 2013, 03:51:16 PM
The tri-level stack at US 23 and Hambley Boulevard in Pikeville, Ky.
Hmm all of the ramps are single lane ramps. And from that view it doesn't look like you could fit a trumpet. What else would work here?
Quote from: NE2 on November 24, 2013, 11:00:22 AM
A trumpet for a f***ing high school, Tupelo (http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.230609,-88.762987&spn=0.014388,0.028346&gl=us&t=k&z=16)
Similar was done for the new Atlantic City High School that opened about a decade ago.
http://goo.gl/maps/MwJTN (http://goo.gl/maps/MwJTN)
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 25, 2013, 03:05:12 PM
Quote from: NE2 on November 24, 2013, 11:00:22 AM
A trumpet for a f***ing high school, Tupelo (http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.230609,-88.762987&spn=0.014388,0.028346&gl=us&t=k&z=16)
Similar was done for the new Altlantic City High School that opened about a decade ago.
http://goo.gl/maps/MwJTN (http://goo.gl/maps/MwJTN)
A trumpet
with U-turn ramps for a high school??
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 25, 2013, 03:05:12 PM
Quote from: NE2 on November 24, 2013, 11:00:22 AM
A trumpet for a farting high school, Tupelo (http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=34.230609,-88.762987&spn=0.014388,0.028346&gl=us&t=k&z=16)
Similar was done for the new Atlantic City High School that opened about a decade ago.
http://goo.gl/maps/MwJTN (http://goo.gl/maps/MwJTN)
I suppose you could argue that that was put in for the U-turns on a short stretch of "Jersey freeway", with the high school happening to be there. It definitely predates the high school, being used only for U-turns in 1970 with the right-turn ramps not yet open: http://www.historicaerials.com/aerials.php?scale=4&lat=39.367&lon=-74.473&year=1970
The I-75 frontage roads north of Cincinnati have similar U-turn ramps (http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=39.245432,-84.447141&spn=0.013477,0.028346&gl=us&t=k&z=16).
Quote from: BrianP on November 25, 2013, 02:30:10 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on November 22, 2013, 03:51:16 PM
The tri-level stack at US 23 and Hambley Boulevard in Pikeville, Ky.
Hmm all of the ramps are single lane ramps. And from that view it doesn't look like you could fit a trumpet. What else would work here?
A signalized intersection. There's one just out of sight of the picture on the right.
Quote from: shadyjay on November 23, 2013, 03:21:28 PM
Several in CT come to mind:
I-84 Exit 11 - was meant to be the northern end of the CT 25 expressway
I-84 Exit 39A - already mentioned - but overpowered mostly in the sense that its only 1/4 used.
I-91 Exit 6 - stub for the East Rock Expressway, which dead ends 1/4 mile from I-91, onto a local road.
I-91 Exit 13 - Warton Brook Connector....was planned to go further west, but dead ends at US 5.
Many of the left exits in the Hartford area off of I-84:
Exit 39: Screams for an extension for a Farmington Center bypass
Exit 43: Was supposed to be a connector to Farmington Ave
Exit 45 + 46: Old proposed CT 9/189 expressway. 45 would have connected to the Berlin Turnpike near the 5/15 splitoff. 46 was supposed to connect to the abandoned 187/189 middle of nowhere expressway.
Exit 56: VERY complex in that it has a connector from CT 2 and ends at a traffic light in about 1000 ft. The abandoned I-284.
Quote from: hbelkins on November 25, 2013, 08:05:03 PM
Quote from: BrianP on November 25, 2013, 02:30:10 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on November 22, 2013, 03:51:16 PM
The tri-level stack at US 23 and Hambley Boulevard in Pikeville, Ky.
Hmm all of the ramps are single lane ramps. And from that view it doesn't look like you could fit a trumpet. What else would work here?
A signalized intersection. There's one just out of sight of the picture on the right.
Or if you need an interchange, a diamond. With roundabouts, of course.
One that used to be: US-35 at Steve Whalen Blvd. in Dayton, OH. Whalen Blvd. NB used to connect to US-35 WB (and vice-versa) with two HUGE flyover ramps that included at least one straddle bent each. This was apparently built for the long-cancelled Southeast Expressway. The exit was reduced, in the 2000s, to a simple modified diamond. But note that Whalen Blvd. is still a narrow divided highway between its two T-intersection termini.
Steve Whalen was a well-liked police officer who was killed in the line of duty -- a rare event in these parts. Not sure what the road was called before it was renamed in the early '90s, or if it was named at all.
A ghost ramp may be seen where Whalen overpasses Xenia Ave.
https://www.google.com/maps/preview#!data=!1m4!1m3!1d9099!2d-84.1587309!3d39.7521922!2m1!1e3&fid=7
Did anyone mention the pretzel-like, 3-tiered interchange in Baltimore, between I-83 and Druid Park Lake Dr. (and 28th and 29th Streets on the other side)? I think a parclo would have been more efficient.
https://www.google.com/maps/preview#!data=!1m4!1m3!1d3444!2d-76.6290929!3d39.3174017!2m1!1e3&fid=7
Is it just me, or did a lot of the 50's and 60's era turnpike/toll roads make a point of having double trumpets at the exits, even if the trumpet on the local road wasn't really needed? It seems like a lot of these would have done just as well with a signalized intersection, and with lower maintenance and construction costs. Trucks have to slow down for the often-tight curves anyway. Note how, near South Bend, IN, when a railroad was abandoned under an exit ramp from the Toll Road, the ramp was eventually flattened to grade, with the trumpet interchange downgraded to a T-intersection. (A new road appears to have been built in the fourth direction)
Other examples might include highways that use cloverleafs for most or all of their interchanges with non-divided arterial roads, though these arguably end up being underpowered, what with all the weaving they bring on.
Near Altoona, PA where US 22 and PA 764 interchange it has a double trumpet connecting the freeway with the arterial just like a toll road has. This was opened to traffic in 1985, as I remember visiting Horseshoe Curve in 1984 where the US 22 freeway ended at PA 764 because the US 220 (now I-99) was not yet completed north of Claysburg. I am guessing that US 22 freeway over the Allegheny Mountain had to be opened in 1982 or 1983 as the concrete looked fresh in 84 when I was there.
This has to be be overpowering considering the era it was built.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hollidaysburg,+PA&hl=en&ll=40.441199,-78.435946&spn=0.02123,0.035706&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=6.319638,9.140625&oq=Holidaysburg,+PA&t=h&hnear=Hollidaysburg,+Blair,+Pennsylvania&z=14
http://goo.gl/maps/KNw1U
I-95 at exit 40 in Pennslyvania for SR413
Quote from: SteveG1988 on November 25, 2013, 11:50:18 PM
http://goo.gl/maps/KNw1U
I-95 at exit 40 in Pennslyvania for SR413
Currently the connection to the Turnpike, and was planned to have I-895.
Quote from: NE2 on November 26, 2013, 12:09:07 AM
Quote from: SteveG1988 on November 25, 2013, 11:50:18 PM
http://goo.gl/maps/KNw1U
I-95 at exit 40 in Pennslyvania for SR413
Currently the connection to the Turnpike, and was planned to have I-895.
It's worth noting that the fly-over ramp from I-95 South is a recent add-on from roughly a decade ago.
With regards to it being a connection to the PA Turnpike; in theory, it presenlty serves as a Breezewood of sorts; prior to NJ cancelling I-95, the connector road was originally planned to extend beyond PA 413 in a northeasterly direction and
directly connect to the Turnpike near or at the current Delaware Valley (Exit 358/US 13) interchange.
The original plan, to the surprise of many Bristol residents and businesses that were cleared out of the connector's path (right-of-way aquisitions), was dropped in favor of the current I-95/PA Turnpike interchange design due to the projected higher traffic volume counts. In PTC/PennDOT's mind, the original twin trumpets w/a connector road wouldn't have been able to handle the thru-I-95 traffic loads/movements.
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 26, 2013, 08:41:07 AM
The original plan, to the surprise of many Bristol residents and businesses that were cleared out of the connector's path (right-of-way aquisitions),
Where would it have gone? The only obvious corridor has power lines, and probably did back then.
Quote from: NE2 on November 26, 2013, 09:31:19 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 26, 2013, 08:41:07 AM
The original plan, to the surprise of many Bristol residents and businesses that were cleared out of the connector's path (right-of-way aquisitions),
Where would it have gone? The only obvious corridor has power lines, and probably did back then.
It would've likely crossed them perpendicular.
Though not ideal, highways crossing overhead power lines have done before:
I-95/MA 128 in Burlington just north of Exits 33A-B (US 3 South/MA 3A North)
http://goo.gl/maps/cTXRt (http://goo.gl/maps/cTXRt)
Should have still used that I-95/PA 413 interchange. It would save Penn DOT/PTC money instead of having to build a new interchange between I-95 and I-278.
Quote from: Strider on November 26, 2013, 12:26:26 PM
Should have still used that I-95/PA 413 interchange. It would save Penn DOT/PTC money instead of having to build a new interchange between I-95 and I-278.
I-95 & I-278 interchange ?
http://goo.gl/maps/IGFsf (http://goo.gl/maps/IGFsf)
:sombrero:
.
.
.
.
.
.
Lol, I knew you meant to say I-95 and I-27
6.
Anyway, one needs to keep in mind that the decision to go with the soon-to-be constructed-interchange design circa the mid-1980s
long predates any existence of EZ Pass. The thinking was that a toll plaza along the connector link during peak periods would have run the risk of causing traffic jams at both of the interchanges to the highways; especially if the connector is designated as part of a through-Interstate.
Quote from: Strider on November 26, 2013, 12:26:26 PM
Should have still used that I-95/PA 413 interchange. It would save Penn DOT/PTC money instead of having to build a new interchange between I-95 and I-278.
Building an interchange between PA's section of I-95 and I-278 would indeed be expensive. Fortunately, NJ already built one.
Quote from: lepidopteran on November 25, 2013, 10:33:15 PM
Did anyone mention the pretzel-like, 3-tiered interchange in Baltimore, between I-83 and Druid Park Lake Dr. (and 28th and 29th Streets on the other side)? I think a parclo would have been more efficient.
https://www.google.com/maps/preview#!data=!1m4!1m3!1d3444!2d-76.6290929!3d39.3174017!2m1!1e3&fid=7
Having the railyard there in addition to the weird angle of 29th street would make a parclo challenging. Having lived right near this interchange, I don't think it's overpowered, especially since all of the movements are pretty tight.
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 26, 2013, 10:29:27 AM
I-95/MA 128 in Burlington just north of Exits 33A-B (US 3 South/MA 3A North)
http://goo.gl/maps/cTXRt (http://goo.gl/maps/cTXRt)
Best part of that to me is the famous SOUTH 128 pull-through (http://goo.gl/maps/VekZJ). Sad that it was finally removed last year. (If you inch southbound from the link PHLBOS posted, the street view jumps to a 2012 view with the new signs on a cantilever, with no pull-through as is the new Mass style.)
Quote from: vdeane on November 26, 2013, 04:59:02 PM
Quote from: Strider on November 26, 2013, 12:26:26 PM
Should have still used that I-95/PA 413 interchange. It would save Penn DOT/PTC money instead of having to build a new interchange between I-95 and I-278.
Building an interchange between PA's section of I-95 and I-278 would indeed be expensive. Fortunately, NJ already built one.
You mean I-276! I know that everyone knows what you mean, but we have a few people in this forum that take note of these types of errors.
Quote from: PurdueBill on November 27, 2013, 03:33:51 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 26, 2013, 10:29:27 AM
I-95/MA 128 in Burlington just north of Exits 33A-B (US 3 South/MA 3A North)
http://goo.gl/maps/cTXRt (http://goo.gl/maps/cTXRt)
Best part of that to me is the famous SOUTH 128 pull-through (http://goo.gl/maps/VekZJ). Sad that it was finally removed last year. (If you inch southbound from the link PHLBOS posted, the street view jumps to a 2012 view with the new signs on a cantilever, with no pull-through as is the new Mass style.)
Actually, a cantilever was used for the new structure at this location not because the pull-through sign wasn't replaced, but because - per current electric utility safety standards - the proximity of the power lines precluded the installation of an upright in the median, even if the structure were grounded.
Quote from: TheStranger on November 21, 2013, 12:48:36 PM
I-280 at Cesar Chavez Street (Army Street) in San Francisco has a long flyover ramp with a stub, the only portion of the Southern Crossing project to ever be built.
https://maps.google.com/?ll=37.747881,-122.391579&spn=0.014286,0.019097&t=h&z=16
A better example might be the nearby US-101 / Army / Bayshore / Portero "hairball", which includes a number of flyover ramps in order to avoid a couple stoplights.
http://goo.gl/maps/Y3Agv
(I'm not sure if this overbuilt interchange was planned to be part of the Southern Crossing, but it would have been insufficient for a freeway-to-freeway connection.)
Quote from: roadman65 on November 25, 2013, 11:03:19 PM
Near Altoona, PA where US 22 and PA 764 interchange it has a double trumpet connecting the freeway with the arterial just like a toll road has. This was opened to traffic in 1985, as I remember visiting Horseshoe Curve in 1984 where the US 22 freeway ended at PA 764 because the US 220 (now I-99) was not yet completed north of Claysburg. I am guessing that US 22 freeway over the Allegheny Mountain had to be opened in 1982 or 1983 as the concrete looked fresh in 84 when I was there.
This has to be be overpowering considering the era it was built.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hollidaysburg,+PA&hl=en&ll=40.441199,-78.435946&spn=0.02123,0.035706&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=6.319638,9.140625&oq=Holidaysburg,+PA&t=h&hnear=Hollidaysburg,+Blair,+Pennsylvania&z=14
1985?!? Wow, I thought that interchange was at least ten years older than that, given what I considered to be the very poor condition of the BGS panels when I went through the area on my first visit to Horseshoe Curve in the fall of 1993.
Quote from: roadman on November 29, 2013, 06:39:05 PM
1985?!? Wow, I thought that interchange was at least ten years older than that, given what I considered to be the very poor condition of the BGS panels when I went through the area on my first visit to Horseshoe Curve in the fall of 1993.
1982 according to bridge dates.
Another here in Wisconsin is the US 151/WI 26 split on the northeast side of Waupun, WI.
http://goo.gl/maps/W73M4
Had I been designing this one, I would have built *NO* interchange there, rather a simple straight-across street bridge, instead. Much, much simpler than what WisDOT built.
I also would have eliminated WI 26 from Waupun city streets, rerouting it to follow US 151 around town.
Mike
Absolute craziness, and neither one is a freeway. Not sure if this can completely be called an interchange though.
http://goo.gl/maps/ZTsBw
QuoteAbsolute craziness, and neither one is a freeway. Not sure if this can completely be called an interchange though.
http://goo.gl/maps/ZTsBw
That one's "craziness" (and an upgrade to an old Jersey traffic circle), but I wouldn't call it overpowered, given the traffic flows geared to/from the west on US 30 towards the Ben Franklin Bridge. And yes, you could call it an interchange, with the "through route" being US 30 to the west and NJ 38 to the east.
The NJ 7 and US 1 & 9 Truck interchange from the St. Paul's Avenue Viaduct replacement project has two ramps leading US 1 & 9 T up from the surface street as seen from Google. One is a corkscrew loop counterclockwise, and the other is a straight ramp that carry the truck route up grade.
I am guessing that the corkscrew is built mainly for NJ 7 WB access as left turns are prohibited onto NJ 7 directly as well as a temporary fix while the other straight ramp was designed. Also I figure that the complete turn will be removed when the new Wittpenn Bridge opens up as from some GSV images it shows that the straight ramp was under construction from the view of NB US 1 & 9 T while traffic made the loop around.
Also, there is no access now from NB Tonelle Avenue to the Pulaski Syway. Access to NJ 7 and US 1 & 9 Truck can be made now from St. Paul's Avenue from a new ramp, but Skyway access has been denied as the new Tonnelle Circle entrance ramp has been reconfigured for SB US 1 & 9 exclusively.
Quote from: roadman65 on December 18, 2013, 05:21:11 PM
The NJ 7 and US 1 & 9 Truck interchange from the St. Paul's Avenue Viaduct replacement project has two ramps leading US 1 & 9 T up from the surface street as seen from Google. One is a corkscrew loop counterclockwise, and the other is a straight ramp that carry the truck route up grade.
I am guessing that the corkscrew is built mainly for NJ 7 WB access as left turns are prohibited onto NJ 7 directly as well as a temporary fix while the other straight ramp was designed. Also I figure that the complete turn will be removed when the new Wittpenn Bridge opens up as from some GSV images it shows that the straight ramp was under construction from the view of NB US 1 & 9 T while traffic made the loop around.
Also, there is no access now from NB Tonelle Avenue to the Pulaski Syway. Access to NJ 7 and US 1 & 9 Truck can be made now from St. Paul's Avenue from a new ramp, but Skyway access has been denied as the new Tonnelle Circle entrance ramp has been reconfigured for SB US 1 & 9 exclusively.
All of these are correct. The existing outer loop ramp will disappear and become NB-WB over the new Wittpenn Bridge, leaving the ramp to the right as the through route. There will be a couple more ramps built, allowing 7 EB traffic to get down to Tonnele Circle and the St. Pauls Ave. industrial area. Skyway access will mirror what has been happening during construction - heading NB, you will need to go around the circle to 1/9 Truck and make a right at Broadway.
I-805 at 43rd Street in San Diego. These ramps were supposed to be for a freeway that was never constructed.
I-696 and Mound Road in Warren, MI (suburban Detroit). It was built that way because the never-completed master plan called for Mound Road to eventually be rebuilt as a new M-53 freeway. In reality, Mound Road remains a county road.
http://goo.gl/maps/NGNjo (http://goo.gl/maps/NGNjo)
Quote from: Steve on December 18, 2013, 07:57:06 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 18, 2013, 05:21:11 PM
The NJ 7 and US 1 & 9 Truck interchange from the St. Paul's Avenue Viaduct replacement project has two ramps leading US 1 & 9 T up from the surface street as seen from Google. One is a corkscrew loop counterclockwise, and the other is a straight ramp that carry the truck route up grade.
I am guessing that the corkscrew is built mainly for NJ 7 WB access as left turns are prohibited onto NJ 7 directly as well as a temporary fix while the other straight ramp was designed. Also I figure that the complete turn will be removed when the new Wittpenn Bridge opens up as from some GSV images it shows that the straight ramp was under construction from the view of NB US 1 & 9 T while traffic made the loop around.
Also, there is no access now from NB Tonelle Avenue to the Pulaski Syway. Access to NJ 7 and US 1 & 9 Truck can be made now from St. Paul's Avenue from a new ramp, but Skyway access has been denied as the new Tonnelle Circle entrance ramp has been reconfigured for SB US 1 & 9 exclusively.
All of these are correct. The existing outer loop ramp will disappear and become NB-WB over the new Wittpenn Bridge, leaving the ramp to the right as the through route. There will be a couple more ramps built, allowing 7 EB traffic to get down to Tonnele Circle and the St. Pauls Ave. industrial area. Skyway access will mirror what has been happening during construction - heading NB, you will need to go around the circle to 1/9 Truck and make a right at Broadway.
The new Wittpenn Bridge mainline will connect directly to the west end of the constructed St. Pauls Ave. viaduct, eliminating the need for WB traffic to make a 360-degree movement to continue on Route 7. It was originally designed this way as a construction stage, because during design the schedules of the 1&9T and Wittpenn projects were anticipated to include an overlap.
Staging of construction dictated that the corkscrew ramp carried the 1&9T NB movement while the straight ramp was constructed, though this perk was invoked after the final configuration was defined. It is officially signed as for Route 7 from 1&9T, but does currently provide access from St. Pauls Ave. to Tonnele Ave. and the circle for trucks, without having to cross the railroad and make the left at Tonnele Ave. south of the circle. After the Wittpenn project is done, St. Pauls Ave. access to the circle and Tonnele Ave. NB (for trucks) would be via the Duffield Ave. ramp and u-turn at a new jughandle ramp at Newark Ave.
Access from NB Tonnele Ave. to the Skyway (via the circle) has been maintained from before construction. The cross-movement in the top of the circle was restored.
Quote from: Thing 342 on November 22, 2013, 03:32:26 PM
I-75/85 and GA-10/Freedom Parkway in downtown Atlanta. I believe this was supposed to be for an unbuilt connector to the Stone Mountain Freeway.
It was, originally, and was built as such per early '60's practice. I used to drive it often. The ramp from 75/85 southbound to the freeway stub was especially fun-- straight, but with a roller-coaster profile to obtain vertical clearance as it crossed over and under the other roadways. Wheee! :D
An earlier version of the current design didn't have the flyover ramps, just a split diamond serving two one-way streets. I'd say the flyovers-- both two lanes-- are overkill, and they lead to confusion as to whether the road is or isn't a freeway.
Quote from: akotchi on January 01, 2014, 10:58:54 AMThe cross-movement in the top of the circle was restored.
Was that always intended, or was that a reaction to the incredible problems its closure created?
How about...
In MD, the 3-tiered ICC interchange with US-29? I realize that there may have been fewer alternatives given the proximity to Briggs-Chaney Rd. and Fairland Rd. but it seems like the traffic count is way less than it was designed for. It seems even more overpowered when there's a traffic signal on US-29 about 500 feet away.
Near Upper Sandusky, OH, the two 3-tiered interchanges at either end of the US-23 and US-30 multiplex. They seem overpowered since US-23 is a "wishy washy 4-lane highway" (goes between freeway and arterial multiple times), and the remote part of the state where they are. I think there was a plan to make it that stretch of US-23 into I-73, which would have called for that style interchange.
Quote from: lepidopteran on January 05, 2014, 12:23:03 AM
Near Upper Sandusky, OH, the two 3-tiered interchanges at either end of the US-23 and US-30 multiplex. They seem overpowered since US-23 is a "wishy washy 4-lane highway" (goes between freeway and arterial multiple times), and the remote part of the state where they are. I think there was a plan to make it that stretch of US-23 into I-73, which would have called for that style interchange.
As a frequent user of US 30 from I-71 to I-469, I appreciate the "overpowerdness" of both of those interchanges; it's possible to follow either one through for US 30 without slowing down from 65-70 mph. :D
Historic Aerials shows that at one point, the northern one, a 3-Y, had no ramps for US 30 yet and just a very wide median in the spot where the interchange was later built. The southern interchange dates to only the past decade-plus and didn't disturb the existing US 23 carriageways' paths, so 30 EB traffic exits right and then sweeps left, but still at high speed capability. Given the fairly decent popularity of US 30 as a free alternative across the mid-northern part of the state vs. the Turnpike to the north, truck traffic has been growing, so it's a good thing that 30 doesn't have to follow any tight trumpet loops or anything at either end of the 23 overlap.
QuoteIn MD, the 3-tiered ICC interchange with US-29? I realize that there may have been fewer alternatives given the proximity to Briggs-Chaney Rd. and Fairland Rd. but it seems like the traffic count is way less than it was designed for. It seems even more overpowered when there's a traffic signal on US-29 about 500 feet away.
SHA and Montgomery County have long-term goals to get rid of the signal at Fairland Rd, so this interchange is not completely far-fetched. In fact, given long-term transportation plans, a freeway-grade US 29 north of MD 650/New Hampshire Ave is not completely out of the question. It should also be noted that US 29 carries about 60,000 AADT in that area.
Quote from: Steve on January 02, 2014, 11:38:40 PM
Quote from: akotchi on January 01, 2014, 10:58:54 AMThe cross-movement in the top of the circle was restored.
Was that always intended, or was that a reaction to the incredible problems its closure created?
It was not intended. While closing it made the circle operate better, it spread too much traffic onto the local street system. We went back and forth over that issue a few times, and finally put it back in via Change of Plan.
Quote from: froggie on January 05, 2014, 10:07:31 AM
...given long-term transportation plans, a freeway-grade US 29 north of MD 650/New Hampshire Ave is not completely out of the question.
Did you mean freeway-grade south of MD-650? I think all the remaining at-grade intersections on US-29 between there and Blackburn Rd. are on the drawing board for upgrading to interchanges.
One frequent complaint about a US-29 freeway is that it peters out south of MD-650, and there's no "freeway-to-freeway" connection to the Beltway. Someone told me there was a plan once for a connecting freeway between the Beltway at Sligo Creek Parkway and US-29 in White Oak, with an interchange near University Blvd. and Arcola (from there the highway would have followed what's now the Northwood Chesapeake Bay Trail, at least in part). It would have began at the still-extant ghost lanes on 16th St. near Georgia Ave.
QuoteDid you mean freeway-grade south of MD-650? I think all the remaining at-grade intersections on US-29 between there and Blackburn Rd. are on the drawing board for upgrading to interchanges.
Which is exactly why I said NORTH of MD 650.
QuoteOne frequent complaint about a US-29 freeway is that it peters out south of MD-650, and there's no "freeway-to-freeway" connection to the Beltway. Someone told me there was a plan once for a connecting freeway between the Beltway at Sligo Creek Parkway and US-29 in White Oak, with an interchange near University Blvd. and Arcola (from there the highway would have followed what's now the Northwood Chesapeake Bay Trail, at least in part). It would have began at the still-extant ghost lanes on 16th St. near Georgia Ave.
That was the proposed Sligo Creek Pkwy, which from the planning maps I saw, would NOT have connected back to US 29...it more or less was to continue due north from the Beltway....would've effectively replaced MD 97/Georgia Ave as a commuter route.
I live not too far from MD 650/ US 29 interchange. There is no plan to continue the US 29 freeway south of MD 650.
As a local resident, one nice thing about having a freeway that does not connect to the Beltway is that, in a perverse way, the traffic lights do limit the amount of traffic that can use the freeway. So the freeway portion of US 29 tends to be a much better way to get to Baltimore than I-95 or the B/W Parkway, even in high-traffic hours. The traffic light section is a miserable drive, but the freeway is smooth sailing.
Quote from: froggie on January 06, 2014, 07:50:37 AM
QuoteDid you mean freeway-grade south of MD-650? I think all the remaining at-grade intersections on US-29 between there and Blackburn Rd. are on the drawing board for upgrading to interchanges.
Which is exactly why I said NORTH of MD 650.
QuoteOne frequent complaint about a US-29 freeway is that it peters out south of MD-650, and there's no "freeway-to-freeway" connection to the Beltway. Someone told me there was a plan once for a connecting freeway between the Beltway at Sligo Creek Parkway and US-29 in White Oak, with an interchange near University Blvd. and Arcola (from there the highway would have followed what's now the Northwood Chesapeake Bay Trail, at least in part). It would have began at the still-extant ghost lanes on 16th St. near Georgia Ave.
That was the proposed Sligo Creek Pkwy, which from the planning maps I saw, would NOT have connected back to US 29...it more or less was to continue due north from the Beltway....would've effectively replaced MD 97/Georgia Ave as a commuter route.
Actually, Northern Parkway was to be the name. https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4671.msg2053332#msg2053332
Both names were used for that particular proposal.
The I-55 and I-155 interchange in IL Feels overpowered. Not sure the traffic count there.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on October 18, 2015, 09:56:59 AM
The I-55 and I-155 interchange in IL Feels overpowered. Not sure the traffic count there.
Tad little under 10,000 AADT. Somewhere around 8000 or 9000.
If the I-64/I-77 exit 95 to MacCorkle Ave. in West Virginia isn't overpowered, it's a little unusual. I think it's just the remnants of possibly having a toll plaza for the West Virginia turnpike there.
The interchange between I-75/I-85 and GA 154/GA 166 in Atlanta (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6972321,-84.4043204,2972m/data=!3m1!1e3) comes to mind. The road east of there was to have been an extension of I-420 before its cancellation.
I-86 Exit 10 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=post;topic=10939.75;last_msg=2101200) outside of Jamestown, NY. It is the only left exit in Region 5. The stub to the north was NY 17 before the bridge was built. AADTs through the intersection on each leg are under 10,000, with the exit legs being well under that. The half-diamond to immediately to the west gets as much traffic as the directional T.
Exit 23C on I-495 (MA) and Exit 37C on I-93 (MA) both are semi-directional T interchanges that only connect to industrial parks.
Quote from: AMLNet49 on October 30, 2015, 10:48:18 PM
Exit 23C on I-495 (MA) and Exit 37C on I-93 (MA) both are semi-directional T interchanges that only connect to industrial parks.
I
think the reason there was that would've been I-190 going up to New Hampshire.
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 31, 2015, 12:10:11 AM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on October 30, 2015, 10:48:18 PM
Exit 23C on I-495 (MA) and Exit 37C on I-93 (MA) both are semi-directional T interchanges that only connect to industrial parks.
I think the reason there was that would've been I-190 going up to New Hampshire.
Both of those interchanges are way out of the way of I-190.
Quote from: 1 on October 31, 2015, 09:00:22 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on October 31, 2015, 12:10:11 AM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on October 30, 2015, 10:48:18 PM
Exit 23C on I-495 (MA) and Exit 37C on I-93 (MA) both are semi-directional T interchanges that only connect to industrial parks.
I think the reason there was that would've been I-190 going up to New Hampshire.
Both of those interchanges are way out of the way of I-190.
Not only that, those interchanges (along I-93 & 495) are located nowhere near the NH border.
Quote from: jbnati27 on October 19, 2015, 11:58:09 AM
If the I-64/I-77 exit 95 to MacCorkle Ave. in West Virginia isn't overpowered, it's a little unusual. I think it's just the remnants of possibly having a toll plaza for the West Virginia turnpike there.
It was a standard turnpike trumpet-trumpet interchange, but the toll plaza has been removed. The WV Turnpike interchange at WV 16 near Beckley is the same way.
Quote from: Bitmapped on November 01, 2015, 09:54:52 AM
Quote from: jbnati27 on October 19, 2015, 11:58:09 AM
If the I-64/I-77 exit 95 to MacCorkle Ave. in West Virginia isn't overpowered, it's a little unusual. I think it's just the remnants of possibly having a toll plaza for the West Virginia turnpike there.
It was a standard turnpike trumpet-trumpet interchange, but the toll plaza has been removed. The WV Turnpike interchange at WV 16 near Beckley is the same way.
There are a few of these in Pennsylvania after barriers were moved around and portions of the system began using barrier tolls.
How about this 'beaut from Durango, CO.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Durango,+CO/@37.2276712,-107.8424029,884m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x873c02a6bd85fc23:0xdc2b8882a3a67e5a!6m1!1e1
It was supposed to have a rerouted US550 going into the south end of the main bridge. Now, it is in limbo and looking more than a bit out of place..
Quote from: AMLNet49 on October 30, 2015, 10:48:18 PM
Exit 23C on I-495 (MA) and Exit 37C on I-93 (MA) both are semi-directional T interchanges that only connect to industrial parks.
37C does connect to the part of the huge light-industrial area of Woburn that is along Commerce Way (shamefully not crossing the Lowell Line tracks to connect the rest), but also serves a major park-and-ride for commuter rail, Amtrak, and airport buses, and helps relieve the mess at the shopping areas at both ends of Commerce Way.
Traffic for those places would otherwise all use 95/128 Exit 36 (much of it using the 93-to-95/128 interchange as well), an already congested area.
An old thread, but... How about VA-28 (Sudley Rd.) and VA-234 (Prince William Parkway) in Manassas?
This is a very wide and impressive-looking interchange, with two of the movements being lengthy, curved elevated ramps.
https://goo.gl/maps/FJbbKjFapQw (https://goo.gl/maps/FJbbKjFapQw)
But how justified is it? PW Parkway is 4-lane divided, but it has no shortage of at-grade intersections. While Sudley Rd. is a 4-lane arterial, with driveways and signalized intersections almost up to the edge of the interchange limits.
Quote from: hbelkins on November 22, 2013, 03:51:16 PM
The tri-level stack at US 23 and Hambley Boulevard in Pikeville, Ky.
I suspect it has something to do with Hambley being the former routing of US 23 before the bypass was built. Historic Aerials has a gap in their coverage of the area with nothing between 1952 and 1995, but the 1952 aerial shows the old path:
https://historicaerials.com/location/37.47649287472636/-82.53710746765137/1952/15
At a first glance, this is classic example (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1279994,-77.4942857,625m/data=!3m1!1e3) of an overpowered interchange. It's the only interchange, on an expressway where traffic lights suffice at all the other junctions.
But when you look at what happens downstream (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1283736,-77.4844826,3a,60y,68.31h,88.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sr6MX7J69-AAd1LyGBOcP4g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), that's not the full story. The intersection at Five Mile Line Road, less than a mile away, is one of the most chronically underpowered junctions in existence. Afternoon backups of a mile or more are common, and right turn lanes (and probably additional through lanes) are badly needed. Considering the similar volumes these two junctions handle, I'm sure there's a happy-medium between the two that would work well at both. But the long term solution, at least IMO, is a full expressway or freeway bypass of Penfield. The existing commute from Walworth to Rochester is horrific, despite this single "overpowered" interchange which actually brings much needed relief to traffic flow.
The terrain might play a role in that as well, with the steep downhill grade approaching the interchange from either side on NY 441. I think NY 153 is the most major road the divided highway portion of NY 441 crosses too.
I-80 at CA-13 is some kind of 3-way turbine (is there a name for this?) leading to a 2- to 3-lane arterial.
I-5 at Mercer Street in Seattle is often congested, so it doesn't seem to be overbuilt. Was a directional T justified at the time of building, though?
Quote from: mrpablue on May 13, 2018, 05:02:25 PM
I-80 at CA-13 is some kind of 3-way turbine (is there a name for this?) leading to a 2- to 3-lane arterial.
Looking at Historicaerials, this interchange has existed as far back as 1958 or so. (Though at one point Route 13 east of there to Route 24 was planned to be upgraded to freeway, which never occurred given it would have cut right through the heart of Berkeley)
Dwyer Junction, Wyoming (https://goo.gl/maps/gqB6tNWbg8s). (I-25/US 87 and US 26)
I can't imagine there's enough traffic to warrant all direct ramps, let alone a directional T. If they didn't want a diamond, a trumpet likely would have been much cheaper.
I always questioned whether the massive multidirectional interchanges involving I-39/US 51/WIS 29 in Wausau, WI needed to be as extravagant as they were constructed. There had to be an option between the previous existing interchanges that needed to be replaced and the ungodly superstructures that WISDOT built in those locations.
I-96 at Lansing Rd (exit 98). It used to be the main interchange from I-96 to the southwest prior to I-69 being completed. Currently a full cloverleaf, I feel a SPUI or DDI would probably work fine here. MDOT downgraded the cloverleaf at the much busier exit 93 (Saginaw Hwy) to a six-ramp parclo recently
The Betsy Ross Bridge's interchange with I-95 is extremely elaborate given that one end of it leads to an arterial surface street.
Quote from: lepidopteran on May 10, 2018, 06:52:10 PM
An old thread, but... How about VA-28 (Sudley Rd.) and VA-234 (Prince William Parkway) in Manassas?
This is a very wide and impressive-looking interchange, with two of the movements being lengthy, curved elevated ramps.
https://goo.gl/maps/FJbbKjFapQw (https://goo.gl/maps/FJbbKjFapQw)
But how justified is it? PW Parkway is 4-lane divided, but it has no shortage of at-grade intersections. While Sudley Rd. is a 4-lane arterial, with driveways and signalized intersections almost up to the edge of the interchange limits.
As someone who lives relatively close to this interchange, I would argue that it is in fact justified. Both the PW Parkway and VA-28 serve high amounts of commuter traffic and already have way too many lights on them. Any more lights on either the PW Pkwy or Va-28 would be miserable. Additionally, coming from the west the interchange serves as a cool gateway into Manassas.
Quote from: ekt8750 on May 14, 2018, 03:48:52 PM
The Betsy Ross Bridge's interchange with I-95 is extremely elaborate given that one end of it leads to an arterial surface street.
That particular interchange design was based with the long-since-cancelled Tacony/Pulaski Expressway in mind.