As all us roadgeeks know, there are a great deal of 3-dis that were built to act as a bypass of a certain area. Because of suburban growth/sprawl, many of these so-called bypass routes are just as bad, and a lot of times worse, than the areas they were meant to bypass.
I thought of this on the 405 recently. At one time, 405 was probably meant to be a bypass of downtown LA, but because of sprawl it's arguably worse than taking the 5 straight through.
I think the same can be said of highways like 294 in Chicago, or perhaps 610 in Houston. Routes meant to bypass an area, but have just as bad, if not worse, traffic than the routes they were meant to alleviate.
What are your picks?
US 13 in Exmore, VA...especially going north.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on December 12, 2014, 10:34:56 AM
As all us roadgeeks know, there are a great deal of 3-dis that were built to act as a bypass of a certain area. Because of suburban growth/sprawl, many of these so-called bypass routes are just as bad, and a lot of times worse, than the areas they were meant to bypass.
I thought of this on the 405 recently. At one time, 405 was probably meant to be a bypass of downtown LA, but because of sprawl it's arguably worse than taking the 5 straight through.
I think the same can be said of highways like 294 in Chicago, or perhaps 610 in Houston. Routes meant to bypass an area, but have just as bad, if not worse, traffic than the routes they were meant to alleviate.
What are your picks?
I beg to differ on I-294 around Chicago. If you've ever had to deal with the heel of the Circle Interchange (on-peak or off-peak), I-294 is most definitely better than what it bypasses.
QuoteI beg to differ on I-294 around Chicago. If you've ever had to deal with the heel of the Circle Interchange (on-peak or off-peak), I-294 is most definitely better than what it bypasses.
Just going off personal experience from a few trips there. I think I just lucked out and made good time through Chicago recently. :D
US 231 and US 431 were rerouted to go around downtown Dothan, AL. Unfortunately, all of the traffic and businesses moved out to the bypass so it makes it quicker to go through the downtown now.
US 15 bypassing Leesburg, VA. Definitely faster to go through town most of the time.
I don't think anything can top the I-495 Capital Beltway in this category! No matter how they attempt to improve it (with HOT lanes, a wider Wilson Bridge and a better-functioning Springfield Interchange), the overall situation is still the same: traffic as horrible as it is on the freeways leading into Washington itself.
US 165 Bypass in Monroe has had a business explosion since it was built. Divided 4-lane with traffic lights, 50 mph speed limit, one railroad crossing at grade...it's better than 165 BUS., but I've seen better.
US 79 & US 82 in Magnolia, AR is worse...2 lane, 3 traffic lights and all kinds of businesses (including Wal-Mart supercenter) have located where the traffic is. It can be a headache to deal with. But now the business routes of 79 & 82 are no longer signed to take you back to the parent route, making it worse to deal with.
The original bypass surface road for US 31 in Kokomo has to rank as one of the classic examples.
Given the perpetual rush hour congestion on the Bayshore Freeway/US 101 in San Mateo County and the Nimitz Freeway/I-880 through Oakland, there are times the original surface routes (El Camino Real, East 14th Street/International Boulevard) are way more viable.
The US 30 bypass around York, PA can be pretty terrible. They dropped the ball years ago by not completing it as a freeway, even though it has freeway segments on each end.
I-405 through Bellevue, WA, is often as bad or worse than I-5 through Seattle.
I have no doubt the US 206 bypass in Hillsborough will fit this theme well.
Quote from: mtantillo on December 12, 2014, 11:24:54 AM
US 15 bypassing Leesburg, VA. Definitely faster to go through town most of the time.
Though as with other municipalities in Virginia, watch out for the Town of Leesburg Police doing speed enforcement on both U.S. 15 Business and Va. 7 Business.
QuoteI-405 through Bellevue, WA, is often as bad or worse than I-5 through Seattle.
Hmmm, that numeric designation must be cursed! Use 405, and your well intentioned bypass will become a total cluster%#ck! :crazy:
Any non-freeway bypass built in Alabama up until the 1990's.
Quote from: Henry on December 12, 2014, 11:35:41 AM
I don't think anything can top the I-495 Capital Beltway in this category! No matter how they attempt to improve it (with HOT lanes, a wider Wilson Bridge and a better-functioning Springfield Interchange), the overall situation is still the same: traffic as horrible as it is on the freeways leading into Washington itself.
As a bypass route, the Capital Beltway is
vastly better than going through the District of Columbia in nearly all cases.
The 285 in Atlanta. If I drive through the city on I-75, I get traffic half of the way, either to or from downtown depending on the time of day. If I take the 285, I get traffic the whole way around no matter what time of day.
I-635 in Dallas, Loop 1 in Austin, I-410 in San Antonio, I-610 in Houston, Sam Houston Tollway, especially the western and northern parts. Loop 1604 in San Antonio is getting up there too. I-435 in KC, especially the part in Johnson County. I-805 in San Diego perhaps.
I-270 around Columbus, notably north of I-70. Can be a nightmare at any time of day (or night) in both directions, especially in the 8-lane section.
US 17 in Myrtle Beach is on its second bypass routing and can still be a cluster, as businesses sprung up along the new route.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 12, 2014, 02:22:02 PM
Quote from: Henry on December 12, 2014, 11:35:41 AM
I don't think anything can top the I-495 Capital Beltway in this category! No matter how they attempt to improve it (with HOT lanes, a wider Wilson Bridge and a better-functioning Springfield Interchange), the overall situation is still the same: traffic as horrible as it is on the freeways leading into Washington itself.
As a bypass route, the Capital Beltway is vastly better than going through the District of Columbia in nearly all cases.
But GPS.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on December 12, 2014, 02:15:06 PM
QuoteI-405 through Bellevue, WA, is often as bad or worse than I-5 through Seattle.
Hmmm, that numeric designation must be cursed! Use 405, and your well intentioned bypass will become a total cluster%#ck! :crazy:
I-405 Oregon disagrees.
How about M25 around London?
Quote from: dfwmapper on December 12, 2014, 06:14:17 PM
I-635 in Dallas, Loop 1 in Austin, I-410 in San Antonio, I-610 in Houston, Sam Houston Tollway, especially the western and northern parts. Loop 1604 in San Antonio is getting up there too. I-435 in KC, especially the part in Johnson County. I-805 in San Diego perhaps.
Much of the northern half of of I-820 in Ft. Worth belongs on this list, too.
If we're allowing non-Interstate, the Grand Rapids belt line system. (US-131 and US-16 bypasses) East Belt Line and 28th Street are very developed, and Wilson Ave isn't much better. (The north belt line was never built, probably because it would have required a new bridge over the Grand River.) You'd probably make better time now staying on Division or Fulton / Lake Michigan Drive (depending on if you're N/S or E/W). Of course, the traffic is less on those roads through the city today because of the freeways.
In Detroit, the nominal bypasses (I-275 and I-696) are just as busy as the freeways they are "bypassing". They don't really serve as bypassing anything; rather they serve as suburb to suburb corridors.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on December 12, 2014, 10:34:56 AM
As all us roadgeeks know, there are a great deal of 3-dis that were built to act as a bypass of a certain area. Because of suburban growth/sprawl, many of these so-called bypass routes are just as bad, and a lot of times worse, than the areas they were meant to bypass.
I thought of this on the 405 recently. At one time, 405 was probably meant to be a bypass of downtown LA, but because of sprawl it's arguably worse than taking the 5 straight through.
I think the same can be said of highways like 294 in Chicago, or perhaps 610 in Houston. Routes meant to bypass an area, but have just as bad, if not worse, traffic than the routes they were meant to alleviate.
What are your picks?
I-294 was build as Toll-US41. Now days the traffic load is a lot higher.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on December 12, 2014, 10:34:56 AM
As all us roadgeeks know, there are a great deal of 3-dis that were built to act as a bypass of a certain area. Because of suburban growth/sprawl, many of these so-called bypass routes are just as bad, and a lot of times worse, than the areas they were meant to bypass.
I thought of this on the 405 recently. At one time, 405 was probably meant to be a bypass of downtown LA, but because of sprawl it's arguably worse than taking the 5 straight through.
I think the same can be said of highways like 294 in Chicago, or perhaps 610 in Houston. Routes meant to bypass an area, but have just as bad, if not worse, traffic than the routes they were meant to alleviate.
What are your picks?
I-405 in the Los Angeles area was built in an already built-up area. It is actually a lot better than taking I-5 through most of the day (peak time - any route is bad). Parts of I-405 were OPENED as State 7, until being signed as I-405 by about 1963.
I-405 in California and Washington were both built in already-developed areas on existing corridors.
LA's a crapshoot when it comes to finding a bypass. Your best possibilty is going on 138 to 15 from 5 - but that costs time - a lot of it if your going to San Diego.
405 is more efficient in spite of its traffic woes than the 5 is. the latter goes through the East LA Interchange which is extremely outdated and undersized for today's traffic (the 5 follows 1 lane or shares with the 60) and the 5 is a six-lane (though not for long) south of there to Orange County compared to the 8+1 HOV that the 405 offers. Locals obviously have figured that out, but both routes clog up easily due to the number of cars on the road on any given day combined with business in both areas.
US301 between US50 and the Potomac River. Congested, would probably perfer 95/495 due to it being a freeway, despite the increased traffic.
I'm sure there are occasions where this isn't true, but it seems to me whenever I've been through Syracuse that I-481 is a much longer bypass than I-81 through town.
Then there's the perennial discussion of whether the all-Thruway bypass of Albany is better than I-90 all the way. I have actually measured it out in the past and found the difference to be negligible time-wise, but of course I'm famous for always seeming to miss the notorious Exit 24 backups. :-D
I always hated I-469 around Ft. Wayne if you were following it as through traffic for US-24 or US-30.
Yes, it kept you moving vs. following the old highways through downtown or via Coliseum Blvd., but it took you so far out of the way. I still think you make better time just going through town on the surface streets.
And I-480 in Cleveland is such an easy target for this thread! Using the busiest freeway in Cleveland just to shunpike some tolls on I-80/Ohio Turnpike?!?!? Come on.
Quote from: thenetwork on December 13, 2014, 12:39:00 PM
And I-480 in Cleveland is such an easy target for this thread! Using I-480 just to shunpike some tolls on I-80/Ohio Turnpike?!?!? Come on.
Since when is I-480 a bypass for I-80?
Quote from: NE2 on December 13, 2014, 12:43:20 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on December 13, 2014, 12:39:00 PM
And I-480 in Cleveland is such an easy target for this thread! Using I-480 just to shunpike some tolls on I-80/Ohio Turnpike?!?!? Come on.
Since when is I-480 a bypass for I-80?
indeed it's intent is to
loop "through a city". Plus, the tolls "bypassed as he says" won't amount to much at all.
(tl;dr) this.
Quote from: NE2 on December 13, 2014, 02:10:33 AM
I-405 in California and Washington were both built in already-developed areas on existing corridors.
Hmm? I don't know about California, but the 405 route in Washington was one medium-sized bedroom community (with a small mall) at Bellevue plus a couple of other small towns with lots of rural area in between them. 405 certainly was intended as a bypass of Seattle.
Quote from: kkt on December 13, 2014, 01:15:36 PM
Quote from: NE2 on December 13, 2014, 02:10:33 AM
I-405 in California and Washington were both built in already-developed areas on existing corridors.
Hmm? I don't know about California, but the 405 route in Washington was one medium-sized bedroom community (with a small mall) at Bellevue plus a couple of other small towns with lots of rural area in between them. 405 certainly was intended as a bypass of Seattle.
Here's a 1940 map of Washington (http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~247535~5515475:Road-map-of-Washington): note how I-405 replaced 2A and a few other routes.
Quote from: empirestate on December 13, 2014, 11:54:05 AM
I'm sure there are occasions where this isn't true, but it seems to me whenever I've been through Syracuse that I-481 is a much longer bypass than I-81 through town.
Ditto. I've found I-481 to have a rather high number of cars for a four lane road, keeping traffic to 10 mph below the speed limit most of the time south of the Thruway. I-81, on the other hand, tends to move at or above the speed limit outside of rush hour. This is why I don't like the boulevard option for I-81 (that, and I like I-81's mileposts just the way they are, and save for a conversion to mile-based numbers, don't want to change the exit numbers either).
Quote from: NE2 on December 13, 2014, 01:24:19 PM
Quote from: kkt on December 13, 2014, 01:15:36 PM
Quote from: NE2 on December 13, 2014, 02:10:33 AM
I-405 in California and Washington were both built in already-developed areas on existing corridors.
Hmm? I don't know about California, but the 405 route in Washington was one medium-sized bedroom community (with a small mall) at Bellevue plus a couple of other small towns with lots of rural area in between them. 405 certainly was intended as a bypass of Seattle.
Here's a 1940 map of Washington (http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~247535~5515475:Road-map-of-Washington): note how I-405 replaced 2A and a few other routes.
Yes, so you're claiming that a freeway can't be a bypass if there was a country road in the vicinity that the freeway replaces?
No, I'm saying that it already served as a suburb-to-suburb connection in addition to a bypass.
Quote from: thenetwork on December 13, 2014, 12:39:00 PM
I always hated I-469 around Ft. Wayne if you were following it as through traffic for US-24 or US-30.
Yes, it kept you moving vs. following the old highways through downtown or via Coliseum Blvd., but it took you so far out of the way. I still think you make better time just going through town on the surface streets.
I've always thought that I-469 doesn't really help anyone unless they're looking to get to the south side of Fort Wayne or New Haven. It's not good as a bypass since it's longer than staying on the parent. At least INDOT likes it because it allows them to save mileage by routing US 24, 27, 30, and 33 around Fort Wayne instead of through it.
I-469 is part of the St. Louis to Detroit corridor.
Also, not every even 2di is meant to be a bypass - it could be a distributor/belt type route - which is the case with I-469, though that also provides access to the Fort-to-Port route (US24) and US30 - ie two bypasses forming a back-to-front C around the city.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on December 13, 2014, 10:52:28 AM
US301 between US50 and the Potomac River. Congested, would probably perfer 95/495 due to it being a freeway, despite the increased traffic.
I have used U.S. 301, not so much to avoid the I-95/I-495 section, but to avoid I-95 between I-295 (Henrico County, Va., north of Richmond) and the Springfield Interchange in Fairfax County - a section that can be congested that
entire distance, or about
102 miles, especially northbound on summertime Sundays and southbound on getaway Fridays and similar days.
I-494 and I-694 bypassing MSP are really no less congested than I-94 through TWO city centers.
QuoteUS301 between US50 and the Potomac River. Congested, would probably perfer 95/495 due to it being a freeway, despite the increased traffic.
In this case, US 301 was never built or (originally) intended as a bypass. It's a different animal entirely, though there are those who use it as a "bypass" of the DC area.
QuoteI-494 and I-694 bypassing MSP are really no less congested than I-94 through TWO city centers.
494 was never intended as a bypass for 94. You have a good point with 694, though 694 does have fewer chokepoints than 94 does.
Quote from: Brandon on December 12, 2014, 10:47:53 AM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on December 12, 2014, 10:34:56 AM
I think the same can be said of highways like 294 in Chicago...
I beg to differ on I-294 around Chicago. If you've ever had to deal with the heel of the Circle Interchange (on-peak or off-peak), I-294 is most definitely better than what it bypasses.
It depends entirely on the time of day and whatever activities are taking place downtown. I regularly visit family and friends in Michigan, and usually taking I-294 around Chicago is smoother and faster than going through downtown.
However, I occasionally can get away with following I-90 right through downtown and onto the Chicago Skyway - and when I can, that ends up being the fastest route. The Indiana Toll Road has the added bonus of a 70 mph speed limit on most of the stretch between the Skyway and I-94.
Quote from: froggie on December 13, 2014, 06:28:39 PM
QuoteUS301 between US50 and the Potomac River. Congested, would probably perfer 95/495 due to it being a freeway, despite the increased traffic.
In this case, US 301 was never built or (originally) intended as a bypass. It's a different animal entirely, though there are those who use it as a "bypass" of the DC area.
My brother always used 301 as a bypass to go from the Richmond area to NJ, but I don't care for it due to the traffic and lights north of the Potomac to US 50 and the expressway gap in Middletown, DE (until they build the freeway to DE-1 which might happen sometime before my retirement age).
Quote from: froggie on December 13, 2014, 06:28:39 PM
QuoteUS301 between US50 and the Potomac River. Congested, would probably perfer 95/495 due to it being a freeway, despite the increased traffic.
In this case, US 301 was never built or (originally) intended as a bypass. It's a different animal entirely, though there are those who use it as a "bypass" of the DC area.
I respectfully disagree.
From physical page 19 of this document (http://sha.maryland.gov/OPPEN/MDBridgeSurvey.pdf) (.pdf) is the following paragraph (
emphasis added):
QuoteGreiner also designed the Potomac River Bridge (US 301) between Charles County, Maryland and King George County, Virginia. The bridge opened in December 1940 and enabled travelers from eastern and southern Maryland heading to Virginia and points further south to bypass Washington, D.C. where they had previously crawled through along US 1. Traffic engineers predicted the bridge would carry an average of 136,000 vehicles-per-year during the first five years. During 1942, the traffic volume surpassed 171,600 vehicles; four years later, the count climbed to 453,900 annually. Traffic peaked at 3.2 million in 1964 but dropped by a third the following year after the opening of the Capital Beltway (I 495), which allowed southbound motorists to quickly travel around Washington, cross the Potomac River along the Woodrow Wilson Bridge, and continue south into Virginia (St. Mary"˜s Today 2004). In 1968, the US 301 Bridge was renamed the Harry W. Nice Memorial Bridge to honor the governor of Maryland (1935 - 1939) during whose administration the bridge was planned and built.
MD may have considered it a "DC bypass", but Virginia didn't. The Nice Bridge also replaced a ferry that had existed in that general vicinity. Also of note, Maryland intended it for "eastern and southern Maryland" travelers to avoid DC...not really for through traffic from Baltimore and points north, though they could've used Crain Hwy to connect.
Quote from: froggie on December 14, 2014, 02:14:41 PM
MD may have considered it a "DC bypass", but Virginia didn't. The Nice Bridge also replaced a ferry that had existed in that general vicinity. Also of note, Maryland intended it for "eastern and southern Maryland" travelers to avoid DC...not really for through traffic from Baltimore and points north, though they could've used Crain Hwy to connect.
Compared to U.S. 1 south from Baltimore through Elkridge, Laurel, Beltsville, College Park, Hyattsville, and the District of Columbia, U.S. 301 was a massive improvement for drivers headed south, with
many less signalized intersections.
I-894 around Milwaukee is roughly the same as its parent route.
As a bypass of philly I-295 has one flaw, it gets mixed in with I-76 traffic, causing traffic jams, that makes it almost as bad as I-95 through philly during rush hour, due to that one bottleneck. It is being fixed, so overall it may be better than I-95 but once the traffic jam starts, it isn't much better.
Quote from: Bickendan on December 12, 2014, 07:41:08 PM
How about M25 around London?
Really? I've never been there, but I thought a bypass via nine circles of hell would be faster than driving through central London?
Quote from: Bickendan on December 12, 2014, 07:41:08 PM
How about M25 around London?
Most of the M25 actually functions reasonably well, especially considering how underbuilt the rest of London's motorway/high-speed dual-carriageway system is; the parts that don't (most notably, the notorious section between the M3 and M4) are links that were supposed to have alternative options (e.g. the M31 (http://pathetic.org.uk/unbuilt/m31/)) that didn't get built due to a combination of NIMBYism and budget crises.
Quote from: JREwing78 on December 13, 2014, 11:12:02 PM
Quote from: Brandon on December 12, 2014, 10:47:53 AM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on December 12, 2014, 10:34:56 AM
I think the same can be said of highways like 294 in Chicago...
I beg to differ on I-294 around Chicago. If you've ever had to deal with the heel of the Circle Interchange (on-peak or off-peak), I-294 is most definitely better than what it bypasses.
It depends entirely on the time of day and whatever activities are taking place downtown. I regularly visit family and friends in Michigan, and usually taking I-294 around Chicago is smoother and faster than going through downtown.
However, I occasionally can get away with following I-90 right through downtown and onto the Chicago Skyway - and when I can, that ends up being the fastest route. The Indiana Toll Road has the added bonus of a 70 mph speed limit on most of the stretch between the Skyway and I-94.
I agree entirely that the Skyway/Loop route can often be faster than the Tri-State. I'm old enough to remember when this definitely was not the case. In the '60s and into the early '70s, 294 was still partly rural and traffic always moved along, except perhaps at the toll booths. It's a perfect example of what the OP asked.
If we are including non-freeway bypasses, Indiana was notorious for building them in the '50s and '60s, only to have them engulfed in suburban sprawl. The (first) Kokomo bypass was already mentioned. I'd add to that Anderson, Bloomington, Columbus, Ft. Wayne (old US 30), Marion, Plymouth (US 30), Valparaiso, and Warsaw. I'm surely forgetting some.
Quote from: jhuntin1 on December 13, 2014, 03:15:31 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on December 13, 2014, 12:39:00 PM
I always hated I-469 around Ft. Wayne if you were following it as through traffic for US-24 or US-30.
Yes, it kept you moving vs. following the old highways through downtown or via Coliseum Blvd., but it took you so far out of the way. I still think you make better time just going through town on the surface streets.
I've always thought that I-469 doesn't really help anyone unless they're looking to get to the south side of Fort Wayne or New Haven. It's not good as a bypass since it's longer than staying on the parent. At least INDOT likes it because it allows them to save mileage by routing US 24, 27, 30, and 33 around Fort Wayne instead of through it.
Doesn't 27 still go through town?
Quote from: bugo on December 17, 2014, 03:17:13 AM
Quote from: jhuntin1 on December 13, 2014, 03:15:31 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on December 13, 2014, 12:39:00 PM
I always hated I-469 around Ft. Wayne if you were following it as through traffic for US-24 or US-30.
Yes, it kept you moving vs. following the old highways through downtown or via Coliseum Blvd., but it took you so far out of the way. I still think you make better time just going through town on the surface streets.
I've always thought that I-469 doesn't really help anyone unless they're looking to get to the south side of Fort Wayne or New Haven. It's not good as a bypass since it's longer than staying on the parent. At least INDOT likes it because it allows them to save mileage by routing US 24, 27, 30, and 33 around Fort Wayne instead of through it.
Doesn't 27 still go through town?
Yes, I believe it does.
Quote from: codyg1985 on December 17, 2014, 08:10:05 AM
Quote from: bugo on December 17, 2014, 03:17:13 AM
Quote from: jhuntin1 on December 13, 2014, 03:15:31 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on December 13, 2014, 12:39:00 PM
I always hated I-469 around Ft. Wayne if you were following it as through traffic for US-24 or US-30.
Yes, it kept you moving vs. following the old highways through downtown or via Coliseum Blvd., but it took you so far out of the way. I still think you make better time just going through town on the surface streets.
I've always thought that I-469 doesn't really help anyone unless they're looking to get to the south side of Fort Wayne or New Haven. It's not good as a bypass since it's longer than staying on the parent. At least INDOT likes it because it allows them to save mileage by routing US 24, 27, 30, and 33 around Fort Wayne instead of through it.
Doesn't 27 still go through town?
Yes, I believe it does.
It's probably next on INDOT's hit list to get rubbed out. :bigass:
I-474 in Peoria fits this thread in my experience, not because of the development near it (heh, never thought I'd say that. In fact, development still hasn't made it that far southwest), but for the fact that I-74 through town isn't that bad. Time-wise, it's almost exactly the same, factoring in the lower speed limit in the city, and there's not much congestion at all. Of course, before the big construction project in the early 2000s, 474 was significantly better than taking 74.
Quote from: SteveG1988 on December 15, 2014, 09:13:43 AM
As a bypass of philly I-295 has one flaw, it gets mixed in with I-76 traffic, causing traffic jams, that makes it almost as bad as I-95 through philly during rush hour, due to that one bottleneck. It is being fixed, so overall it may be better than I-95 but once the traffic jam starts, it isn't much better.
I think that part of the idea there is that NJ would encourage people to use the turnpike and pay $$$ to bypass 295.
Quote from: realjd on December 12, 2014, 06:00:50 PM
The 285 in Atlanta. If I drive through the city on I-75, I get traffic half of the way, either to or from downtown depending on the time of day. If I take the 285, I get traffic the whole way around no matter what time of day.
Absolutely!
When I was a kid in the late-1960s/early-70s and would make the trip from Florida to Ohio with my parents, we always took I-285 which was known then as the
Atlanta Bypass". Unless it was the middle of the night, travel through the city was something to be avoided.
Nowadays (and for the past 30 years), unless I am headed to Gwinett from the south, I NEVER drive 285. And I haven't even been on the west side perimeter since the 80's.
But I know for a fact that this isn't unique to Atlanta. I-695 around Baltimore sucks, too.
Quote from: realjd on December 12, 2014, 06:00:50 PM
The 285 in Atlanta. If I drive through the city on I-75, I get traffic half of the way, either to or from downtown depending on the time of day. If I take the 285, I get traffic the whole way around no matter what time of day.
Most "bypass" routes on interstates are this way.(295 around Jacksonville is as bad as 95 in terms if traffic) A change in demographics since WWII. At the time of interstate highway planning suburb to suburb commutes, multi-car families, dual bread winners etc were not part of the culture
Quote from: jwolfer on December 21, 2014, 01:29:47 PM
Most "bypass" routes on interstates are this way.(295 around Jacksonville is as bad as 95 in terms if traffic)
Even the new east side?
Quote from: NE2 on December 21, 2014, 05:58:53 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on December 21, 2014, 01:29:47 PM
Most "bypass" routes on interstates are this way.(295 around Jacksonville is as bad as 95 in terms if traffic)
Even the new east side?
At rush hour yes. Most of it is 4 lanes.
Quote from: jwolfer on December 21, 2014, 01:29:47 PM
Quote from: realjd on December 12, 2014, 06:00:50 PM
The 285 in Atlanta. If I drive through the city on I-75, I get traffic half of the way, either to or from downtown depending on the time of day. If I take the 285, I get traffic the whole way around no matter what time of day.
Most "bypass" routes on interstates are this way.(295 around Jacksonville is as bad as 95 in terms if traffic) A change in demographics since WWII. At the time of interstate highway planning suburb to suburb commutes, multi-car families, dual bread winners etc were not part of the culture
It's interesting to think of how much less congestion we would have today if only the 50s planners could have anticipated the cultural changes that would happen. A few weeks ago the Democrat and Chronicle in Rochester published a story about the infamous "can of worms". A point was mentioned that, because planners had thought all the growth was going to be on the west side, even when the interchange was built, expected traffic volumes were already higher than the planners had though the interchange would ever have to handle in its lifetime. An engineer was even quoted as saying that there would be no ribbon cutting because they were just going to open it and then run away and hide.
Cultural changes are only part of it. There's still the funding situation. Though citizens appear to have been more open to tax increases back then than they are now, they still would have required increased revenue in order to build even the freeway plans that were proposed at the time. In my research, there have been some high-profile freeway opposition cases, yes. But lack of funding killed more freeways off than opposition did...
QuoteIt's interesting to think of how much less congestion we would have today if only the 50s planners could have anticipated the cultural changes that would happen.
That WOULD be interesting to see how different the freeway layout of a city is, if the exodus to the burbs and sprawl had been taken into consideration back in the early years of freeways. I'd say that would actually be a really cool topic to bring up in Fictional Highways. See what others think a city's system would look like if the planners knew then what we know now.
Quote from: Fred Defender on December 21, 2014, 12:08:12 PM
I-695 around Baltimore sucks, too.
The part of I-695 that runs north of town (past the two interchanges with I-83) is frequently congested.
But the south side of I-695 is usually not that bad, especially between I-97 and the northeast I-95 stack interchange near Overlea, though there is a toll to cross the F.S. Key Bridge.
Quote from: theline on December 16, 2014, 06:57:56 PM
I agree entirely that the Skyway/Loop route can often be faster than the Tri-State. I'm old enough to remember when this definitely was not the case. In the '60s and into the early '70s, 294 was still partly rural and traffic always moved along, except perhaps at the toll booths. It's a perfect example of what the OP asked.
If we are including non-freeway bypasses, Indiana was notorious for building them in the '50s and '60s, only to have them engulfed in suburban sprawl. The (first) Kokomo bypass was already mentioned. I'd add to that Anderson, Bloomington, Columbus, Ft. Wayne (old US 30), Marion, Plymouth (US 30), Valparaiso, and Warsaw. I'm surely forgetting some.
I don't agree with this and am scratching my head as to how this is even debatable. Perhaps it depends on where you're coming from and going. In my case, I live off of I-94 well north of Chicago and to get from here to the post-apocalyptic world of NW Indiana, going through Chicago is only better in the middle of the night or during a few short midday hours (if you're lucky). And, by better, I mean: better because it cuts off about 20 miles. Time saving, but never at a faster speed than 294.
Yes, the Tri-State can have some traffic issues (the daily 'mystery stop' originating in Bensenville comes to mind), but those are dwarfed by the traffic disaster that the Chicago expressways represent. It can easily take over an hour to get from O'Hare to downtown (or vice versa), and with that level of congestion, you can take a lot of delays on the Tri-State and still save time. More often that not, I can get from Gurnee to Hammond without ever slowing below 65 mph the entire way. I can't ever say that if I follow I-94 to the Skyway - even in the middle of the night.
So no, I don't see how anyone here can cite I-294 as being worse than what it bypasses. Because traffic in Chicago can be incredible, with the expressways choked in
each direction at any given time.
The Osceola Parkway is now almost as bad as US 192, the road that is supposed to bypass in Kissimmee, FL.
Soon the Baldwin Beach Express might be as bad as AL 59, as it was not built to freeway standards after being built. This allowing for future sprawl and development.
I think that IN 931 should be used as a poster item, to show what happens when you do not build the right type of bypass around a city or community. Built in the late 50's to alleviate congestion along the original routing through town, then later commercial development brought new businesses to bring the same amount of traffic to the bypass as the old route to warrant another bypass.
Quote from: roadman65 on January 01, 2015, 12:41:54 PM
Soon the Baldwin Beach Express might be as bad as AL 59, as it was not built to freeway standards after being built. This allowing for future sprawl and development.
If the bridge was to be tolled, then I don't see why building a tolled freeway facility for the Foley Beach/Baldwin Beach Express didn't occur to people. But wait, this is for ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT! :banghead:
Quote from: roadman65 on January 01, 2015, 12:41:54 PM
I think that IN 931 should be used as a poster item, to show what happens when you do not build the right type of bypass around a city or community. Built in the late 50's to alleviate congestion along the original routing through town, then later commercial development brought new businesses to bring the same amount of traffic to the bypass as the old route to warrant another bypass.
The bypass of US 78 in Jasper is a great example, too. Original route went through downtown, bypass was built in the 60
s and 70's with no access control, so it becomes a commercial nightmare. Then in mid 2000's, Future I-22 was opened as as second bypass.
Quote from: codyg1985 on January 01, 2015, 01:49:30 PM
The bypass of US 78 in Jasper is a great example, too. Original route went through downtown, bypass was built in the 60
s and 70's with no access control, so it becomes a commercial nightmare. Then in mid 2000's, Future I-22 was opened as as second bypass.
I saw a Holstein cow's severed head on the side of what was then US 78 near Jasper back in '96.
We might as well blame the Wal Marts of today, as they love to build their stores on the outside of cities or the outer reaches of the city limits. The bypasses are good candidates for all of this, as they carry the most traffic and at the same time attract the center areas of the city to shop as well.
Thus creating a second shopping district as well and making the business and the bypass roads both equal in environment.
This is a little bit cheating, but during non rush hour (and possibly during rush hour too, maybe), you're better off taking US-30 than Bypass US-30 through Portland. Granted, US-30 is multiplexed onto freeways for most of it (I-84, I-5, I-405) while Bypass US-30 is a surface street. One the one hand, Bypass US-30 doesn't make sense anymore: it should maybe be Business US-30. But on the other hand, it does bypass downtown Portland, while US-30 goes straight through downtown. I guess it's fine the way it is.
QuoteThis is a little bit cheating, but during non rush hour (and possibly during rush hour too, maybe), you're better off taking US-30 than Bypass US-30 through Portland. Granted, US-30 is multiplexed onto freeways for most of it (I-84, I-5, I-405) while Bypass US-30 is a surface street. One the one hand, Bypass US-30 doesn't make sense anymore: it should maybe be Business US-30. But on the other hand, it does bypass downtown Portland, while US-30 goes straight through downtown. I guess it's fine the way it is.
I've thought about that, but haven't driven much of BYP-30 when I've been in Portland. Curious if going across the St. Johns Bridge is easier than going over the Fremont and through the NW Industrial area.
On that note, is 205 worse during rush hour than 5? Last time I was up there, 205 was a bottleneck from the airport onramp all the way down to the I-84 WB ramp. Looked like it was still backed up heading south too. Granted, this was around 4pm on a weekday...
Quote from: freebrickproductions on December 12, 2014, 11:18:15 AM
US 231 and US 431 were rerouted to go around downtown Dothan, AL. Unfortunately, all of the traffic and businesses moved out to the bypass so it makes it quicker to go through the downtown now.
Dothan, AL is what inspired me to open this topic in the first place. What a mess that "bypass" became.
Quote from: Gnutella on January 26, 2015, 08:04:51 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on December 12, 2014, 11:18:15 AM
US 231 and US 431 were rerouted to go around downtown Dothan, AL. Unfortunately, all of the traffic and businesses moved out to the bypass so it makes it quicker to go through the downtown now.
Dothan, AL is what inspired me to open this topic in the first place. What a mess that "bypass" became.
When I was staying overnight in Dothan, I found that when a local politician was running for office at the time back in 2010, his promise to the people of Dothan was to get the bypass built! So naturally a freeway is proposed to go around it, with further study of it connecting to I-10 in Florida, but I do not know if that politician was to help out Florida though.
Nonetheless its a bypass of a good example of one that became worse than the original route as the Ross Clark Circle (the name of the Dothan Beltway) is lined with big box stores, malls, and modern day commercial development its 13 miles of length.
Elizabethtown, KY's Ring Road/KY 3005, which is pathetically slow for all of the traffic signals: http://goo.gl/maps/Ol4eq | Bypass US 31W, which is older, has only two signals and now several interchanges. It is access controlled, unlike most of Ring Road.
Richmond, KY's US 25 bypass can be fast at night, slow during the day. The southern bypass is painfully slow: http://goo.gl/maps/BCHXV
Quote from: roadman65 on January 26, 2015, 10:56:32 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on January 26, 2015, 08:04:51 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on December 12, 2014, 11:18:15 AM
US 231 and US 431 were rerouted to go around downtown Dothan, AL. Unfortunately, all of the traffic and businesses moved out to the bypass so it makes it quicker to go through the downtown now.
Dothan, AL is what inspired me to open this topic in the first place. What a mess that "bypass" became.
When I was staying overnight in Dothan, I found that when a local politician was running for office at the time back in 2010, his promise to the people of Dothan was to get the bypass built! So naturally a freeway is proposed to go around it, with further study of it connecting to I-10 in Florida, but I do not know if that politician was to help out Florida though.
Nonetheless its a bypass of a good example of one that became worse than the original route as the Ross Clark Circle (the name of the Dothan Beltway) is lined with big box stores, malls, and modern day commercial development its 13 miles of length.
The I-10 connector has been on the radar for many years. I think there was a website at one time that advocated building it close to Dothan so that Dothan wouldn't lose out on all of the sales from people passing through town.
But a lot of Alabama's "bypasses" have turned into useless, traffic signal-ridden commercial strips. The more recent bypasses aren't as bad, but it could be because there hasn't been enough time for commercial development to creep into the picture.
QuoteBut a lot of Alabama's "bypasses" have turned into useless, traffic signal-ridden commercial strips. The more recent bypasses aren't as bad, but it could be because there hasn't been enough time for commercial development to creep into the picture.
That's because Alabama doesn't understand access control or access management. Give those newer bypasses time, and they will become just as commercial-ridden as the older ones.
I forgot one that is in my own backyard. John Young Parkway, which was to be built as another route between Orlando and Kissimmee in Central Florida. It was originally built as an expressway and being that nearby US 17/92/441 was starting to develop with the many subdivisions lining that stretch south of the Florida Mall to the Osceola County Line, it you can say was a bypass of the US routes at first.
Now John Young Parkway is just as bad as the road it parallels. It has just as many signals and Lynx, Central Florida's answer to a bus system, even added the 57 route along JYP to make matters worse. Nothing like screwing up traffic when a bus has to stop in a travel lane to pick up or discharge passengers especially when it takes five minutes for the passenger to obtain the exact change to pay his fare.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on January 08, 2015, 10:21:10 AM
On that note, is 205 worse during rush hour than 5? Last time I was up there, 205 was a bottleneck from the airport onramp all the way down to the I-84 WB ramp. Looked like it was still backed up heading south too. Granted, this was around 4pm on a weekday...
In certain sections, maybe, but as a whole (as in, you're going from north of Vancouver to Wilsonville, etc.), I-205 is probably better in most cases.
Both routes are often terrible. Listen to the traffic reports...
Quote from: froggie on January 29, 2015, 09:37:52 AM
That's because Alabama doesn't understand access control or access management. Give those newer bypasses time, and they will become just as commercial-ridden as the older ones.
They occasionally get it right (Corridor X, for example), but that's the exception that proves the rule, and probably only because MDOT shamed them into building it to freeway standards from the get-go. Although the new construction parts of Corridor V and a few other recent projects (like the Centreville bypass) seem to have had better access control than past ALDOT norms. Maybe they finally learned something from Mississippi and even Georgia.
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on January 26, 2015, 11:42:05 AM
Elizabethtown, KY's Ring Road/KY 3005, which is pathetically slow for all of the traffic signals: http://goo.gl/maps/Ol4eq | Bypass US 31W, which is older, has only two signals and now several interchanges. It is access controlled, unlike most of Ring Road.
Richmond, KY's US 25 bypass can be fast at night, slow during the day. The southern bypass is painfully slow: http://goo.gl/maps/BCHXV
I've never been around Ring Road, but I was thinking of Richmond as a candidate for this thread. When I was a kid, we went through Richmond a lot and my dad always preferred going straight through downtown vs. taking KY 876. Of course I remember when 876 ended at US 25/421 and wasn't extended on over to KY 52. There's been enough development around the new US 25, with accompanying traffic lights, to become frustrating.
(I thought I posted on this one.....guess not :confused: )
The closest thing I've seen to this would have to be US 69 in McAlester, OK. I haven't had the pleasure of the original-now-BUS route, but the excuse of a bypass around downtown, for the most part, leaves me asking why. I guess the reasons that would be given would be "not enough money" and/or "we don't want to lose or miss any business" but it's just jarring to come in from the north like things will be smooth and non-stop, then suddenly redyellowgreenNOW. From the south, it's not quite as bad as you don't get too far from the BUS split when you're already having to stop after possibly getting your hopes up.
If I had a roads 'magic wand', this would be one spot where I'd wave it around.
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on January 26, 2015, 11:42:05 AM
Elizabethtown, KY's Ring Road/KY 3005, which is pathetically slow for all of the traffic signals: http://goo.gl/maps/Ol4eq | Bypass US 31W, which is older, has only two signals and now several interchanges. It is access controlled, unlike most of Ring Road.
I'm surprised that at the south end of Bypass US 31W, the more direct route along the Western Kentucky Parkway across I-65 isn't used (instead of the short connector along KY 1336).
Looking at Google's satellite view, the newest section of KY 3005 (from US 62 south to the WK) looks to be a divided, access-controlled route. Will any similar widening take place on the older portions?
Idabel, OK is the clear winner. Yes, the Goog is correct (except that there's no US 70 Biz).
Quote from: TheStranger on January 29, 2015, 07:58:48 PM
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on January 26, 2015, 11:42:05 AM
Elizabethtown, KY's Ring Road/KY 3005, which is pathetically slow for all of the traffic signals: http://goo.gl/maps/Ol4eq | Bypass US 31W, which is older, has only two signals and now several interchanges. It is access controlled, unlike most of Ring Road.
I'm surprised that at the south end of Bypass US 31W, the more direct route along the Western Kentucky Parkway across I-65 isn't used (instead of the short connector along KY 1336).
Unless something's changed Bypass 31W is indeed signed along the WK Parkway, although its official definition may extend to KY 1336.
Quote from: hbelkins on January 30, 2015, 11:26:57 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on January 29, 2015, 07:58:48 PM
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on January 26, 2015, 11:42:05 AM
Elizabethtown, KY's Ring Road/KY 3005, which is pathetically slow for all of the traffic signals: http://goo.gl/maps/Ol4eq | Bypass US 31W, which is older, has only two signals and now several interchanges. It is access controlled, unlike most of Ring Road.
I'm surprised that at the south end of Bypass US 31W, the more direct route along the Western Kentucky Parkway across I-65 isn't used (instead of the short connector along KY 1336).
Unless something's changed Bypass 31W is indeed signed along the WK Parkway, although its official definition may extend to KY 1336.
Alright, might just be Google Maps acting tricky there. OpenStreetMap and Bing Maps aren't particularly clear in that area either.
Quote from: froggie on January 29, 2015, 09:37:52 AM
QuoteBut a lot of Alabama's "bypasses" have turned into useless, traffic signal-ridden commercial strips. The more recent bypasses aren't as bad, but it could be because there hasn't been enough time for commercial development to creep into the picture.
That's because Alabama doesn't understand access control or access management. Give those newer bypasses time, and they will become just as commercial-ridden as the older ones.
Early bypasses in Britain built during the 1920s and 1930s were often lined with houses built by speculative developers soon after the road opened. This seriously compromised the function of the bypass so the Restriction of Ribbon Development Act of 1935 was imposed which placed controls on development along major roads. Perhaps the US should impose similar controls on frontage development.
Quote from: Truvelo on January 30, 2015, 11:55:39 AM
Quote from: froggie on January 29, 2015, 09:37:52 AM
QuoteBut a lot of Alabama's "bypasses" have turned into useless, traffic signal-ridden commercial strips. The more recent bypasses aren't as bad, but it could be because there hasn't been enough time for commercial development to creep into the picture.
That's because Alabama doesn't understand access control or access management. Give those newer bypasses time, and they will become just as commercial-ridden as the older ones.
Early bypasses in Britain built during the 1920s and 1930s were often lined with houses built by speculative developers soon after the road opened. This seriously compromised the function of the bypass so the Restriction of Ribbon Development Act of 1935 was imposed which placed controls on development along major roads. Perhaps the US should impose similar controls on frontage development.
There are, but the statutes can vary widely by state.
Quote from: hbelkins on January 30, 2015, 11:26:57 AM
Quote from: TheStranger on January 29, 2015, 07:58:48 PM
Quote from: Sherman Cahal on January 26, 2015, 11:42:05 AM
Elizabethtown, KY's Ring Road/KY 3005, which is pathetically slow for all of the traffic signals: http://goo.gl/maps/Ol4eq | Bypass US 31W, which is older, has only two signals and now several interchanges. It is access controlled, unlike most of Ring Road.
I'm surprised that at the south end of Bypass US 31W, the more direct route along the Western Kentucky Parkway across I-65 isn't used (instead of the short connector along KY 1336).
Unless something's changed Bypass 31W is indeed signed along the WK Parkway, although its official definition may extend to KY 1336.
Not when the Goog drove through there (July 2013). But the ramp from the southbound bip to the eastbound WK is signed as both US 31W *Truck* and to US 31W, so it's obviously intended as the through route. The truck route is also signed northbound at the beginning of the WK.
It's not an Interstate route, but U.S 51 in Illinois between Bloomington-Normal and Decatur is terrible, especially the Clinton "bypass". The corridor is an expressway with at-grade intersections and stop lights, plus an at-grade railroad crossing. It is literally hugging the town. The whole corridor should have been built to freeway/interstate-standards, but they built an expressway to save money, and now it has come back to bite them.
Took this in 2009 on KY 61 northbound as it approaches US 31W and the eastern end of the WK.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2F2009_OKC_Day_1%2FImages%2F182.jpg&hash=b6e0a45f34b8e1c867d88852904b0d8d549a5302)
See that little sign just to the right of the 70 mph sign in the photo below?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2F2009_OKC_Day_1%2FImages%2F186.jpg&hash=304b0608ee0a3d61360cbda3f66e2d3474324cc5)
This is it...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2F2009_OKC_Day_1%2FImages%2F187.jpg&hash=2a362683ade6955e150cedb1faa081467579fa21)
I bet it's also signed as beginning at KY 1136. So nerr.
(Also, the reassurance on the WK appears to be gone as of July 2013.)
Does Vasco road count? I know it was a rural road in Contra Costa County but became a county expressway that's used as a bypass to I-680. I know that some people mentioned its became the busiest county expressway at rush hour.
In Houma, LA there is LA 3040 that is supposed to be a bypass of LA 24. However the city's "New Downtown" meaning where all the modern age strip malls were later built, is now just as bad as LA 24.
Quote from: lordsutch on January 29, 2015, 05:34:58 PM
Quote from: froggie on January 29, 2015, 09:37:52 AM
That's because Alabama doesn't understand access control or access management. Give those newer bypasses time, and they will become just as commercial-ridden as the older ones.
They occasionally get it right (Corridor X, for example), but that's the exception that proves the rule, and probably only because MDOT shamed them into building it to freeway standards from the get-go. Although the new construction parts of Corridor V and a few other recent projects (like the Centreville bypass) seem to have had better access control than past ALDOT norms. Maybe they finally learned something from Mississippi and even Georgia.
Corridor V from Moulton to Decatur has begun to have a lot of traffic lights added to it. I don't see any interchanges ever being built along it, either. It is an older section, though.
Highway signs have touted the benefit of using MO-370 through St Charles, but I fail to see any real advantage.
Quote from: NE2 on December 13, 2014, 02:10:33 AM
I-405 in California and Washington were both built in already-developed areas on existing corridors.
Wasn't CA-170 supposed to make La Cinega Blvd a freeway and be an alternate to 405 in Los Angeles at one point. I know there's been a debate over the expressway portion of La Cinega for sometime if its a city road or CA-170?
Quote from: bing101 on February 06, 2015, 12:04:32 PM
Quote from: NE2 on December 13, 2014, 02:10:33 AM
I-405 in California and Washington were both built in already-developed areas on existing corridors.
Wasn't CA-170 supposed to make La Cinega Blvd a freeway and be an alternate to 405 in Los Angeles at one point. I know there's been a debate over the expressway portion of La Cinega for sometime if its a city road or CA-170?
I've heard something to that effect, but never sure why it didn't happen. My guess would be an array of NIMBY issues.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on February 06, 2015, 01:41:41 PM
I've heard something to that effect, but never sure why it didn't happen. My guess would be an array of NIMBY issues.
The planned 170 routing north of Sunset Boulevard (to today's 101/170/134 junction) would have involved plowing through Laurel Canyon.