Here's an odd one I found: http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/50.6471/-119.9520&layers=Q
The missing movement is the sb BC 1 to sb BC 97.
There are numerous example of interchanges with missing movements, so exclude ones where the mainline angles preclude a couple movements (the El Toro Y, CA 170 at I-5 and I-405 in Los Angeles itself are three that fall here). Also exclude examples where a construction project was cancelled (the I-5 to/from the N Kirby Ave ramps on the Fremont Stack in Portland; the I-35W/335 interchange in Minneapolis) and examples where ramps were removed (Steel Bridge to I-84/US 30 in Portland).
Do include though partial interchanges where a ghost ramp is present, for example, the SE Water Ave ramp from nb I-5 (now part of the I-84 ramp) has a ghost ramp on the sb side for a planned-never built-now dead proposal to connect the Inner SE Industrial District to sb I-5.
(No doubt a similar thread has existed before)
The junction of Route 4 and I-80 in Hercules, CA is basically a three-level stack with no ramp from I-80 east to the westbound stub of Route 4 (as this movement is handled by an auxiliary ramp to Willow Avenue) and no ramp from I-80 west to Route 4 east (which requires an indirect surface street connection to the north).
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Hercules,+CA/@38.0154879,-122.2680856,770m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x8085672a8281e7ad:0x58fd24f5d316ba39
Further east on Route 4 in Antioch, the junction with Route 160 currently lacks a ramp from westbound Route 4 to northbound Route 160, and a ramp from Route 160 south to Route 4 east. (Until the construction of the Brentwood bypass a few years ago, Route 4 used to continue a mile north along 160 to Main Street)
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Antioch,+CA/@37.991879,-121.7571074,907m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x8085576395afa0d5:0x56a463c2c947559
Do the infamous stub ramps (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.726757,-72.7707138,1259m/data=!3m1!1e3) from the Hartford Beltway (I-291)'s cancellation count?
NJ 42 NB to I-295 SB. Thankfully that's eventually going to get corrected but that interchange bugs me to no extent.
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.8712691,-75.1098688,15z
If you're talking about ghost ramps the I-95/Betsy Ross Bridge/Aramingo Av Interchange is a classic one. The overpass that was supposed to carry the never-built Pulaski Expressway from the Betsy was never completed but the ramps to nowhere still exist.
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.996832,-75.0825849,586m/data=!3m1!1e3
San Angelo, TX
Traffic on WB US-87/Loop-306 has no direct connection to SB US-277. Instead, it is expected to use the Loop-378 exit by way of one stoplight and two stop signs. Personally, I'd just squeeze a loop ramp in the middle there.
http://goo.gl/maps/Bhq0i
Breezewood.
Should have excluded full Breezewoods. Too obvious.
I-495 and I-66 in Virginia. There's no access from westbound I-66 to northbound I-495 or from southbound I-495 to eastbound I-66. In both cases, the Dulles Access Road Extension three miles to the east/four miles to the north provides the missing moves; Route 7 (an arterial street) can also do the same. (For that matter, you can't go from the Dulles road to westbound I-66 or from eastbound I-66 to the Dulles road, again because I-495 provides the necessary connection.)
http://www.google.com/maps/@38.904733,-77.1953727,14z <----on my screen this is zoomed so you can see I-495, I-66, and the Dulles Access Road Extension, but a smaller display might require scrolling the map.
Near Montreal, access to the Pont Victoria from Autoroute 20 is incomplete: It's easy to reach the bridge from the southbound side, but from the northbound side you either have to exit in advance and go through the streets or go past it and turn around. Last time I was through there, there was no sign advising you how to reach the bridge, either; I assume they want people to use the Pont Champlain to the south.
http://www.google.com/maps/@45.4939647,-73.514229,17z
I assume this thread is supposed to revolve around missing movements that should be there versus missing movements that serve no purpose (such as BC interchange in OP).
So, without further ado, the most annoying interchange in Seattle (IMO):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYayDbT2.png&hash=739b6967c9fdfe596cfa25a85a3d43272ee45e74)
EB 18 cannot go south on 167 and NB 167 cannot go west on 18. If you're one of the many at the Outlet Centre nearby, this particular annoyance is...uh, very annoying. You can take Peasley Canyon Road nearby, but besides the roundabouts halfway up the hill, the signals at the top are killer and taking the freeway the whole way is much faster.
The Edens/Kennedy Junction in Chicago (I-90/94's northern split) can be annoying at times. The SEB->NB and SB->NWB movements aren't there, which basically shoves all O'Hare-to-Evanston traffic onto surface streets. It's not a terribly important movement, but it would cut down on travel times for Northwestern students and residents of Evanston, Skokie, and the far North Side (Edgewater, Rogers Park, etc).
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9644994,-87.7470282,16z
I-805's Exit 11 in San Diego, is basically a glorified offramp to 43rd St. It was to be part of unconstructed CA 252.
iPhone
Quote from: jakeroot on February 17, 2015, 08:12:11 PM
EB 18 cannot go south on 167 and NB 167 cannot go west on 18. If you're one of the many at the Outlet Centre nearby, this particular annoyance is...uh, very annoying. You can take Peasley Canyon Road nearby, but besides the roundabouts halfway up the hill, the signals at the top are killer and taking the freeway the whole way is much faster.
You can connect via West Valley Hwy and 15th Street; Presley Canyon Road has nothing to do with it.
(That said, I agree that it's a pain and a half anyway.)
-The aforementioned Hartford interchanges, notably the full stack on I-84.
-The never-used Korean War Veterans Parkway interchange on the Staten Island Expressway (while it still existed)
-2 interchanges on NY 440
-Eastern end of the LIE
-I-77 at Ohio SR 21 north of Akron
-The LIE at the Van Wyck in Queens- no moves to/from the east, forcing traffic to use surface streets
-I-81 at I-690 in Syracuse - no moves between the north and west
I-95 and I-395 in CT. No SB to NB movements.
NY 104/NY 590: no west-to-north or south-to-east movements.
I-84 and I-91 in Hartford. Have to use CT 15 for I-91 N/ I-84 E and I-84 W/ I-91 S movements. And then there was the pre-1989 I-84 E/ I-91 N nightmare.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 17, 2015, 11:17:01 PM
I-84 and I-91 in Hartford. Have to use CT 15 for I-91 N/ I-84 E and I-84 W/ I-91 S movements.
You say "have to" like it's a bad thing. I-91 N to I-84 E existed. It was terrible and harrowing, practically a hard right turn off the Interstate. The current situation is a "complete" high-speed movement where one didn't exist before.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 17, 2015, 11:52:38 PM
You say "have to" like it's a bad thing. I-91 N to I-84 E existed. It was terrible and harrowing, practically a hard right turn off the Interstate. The current situation is a "complete" high-speed movement where one didn't exist before.
Wasn't it actually I-91 north to Route 2 east? And the current connection via Route 15 also existed, but it was a toll bridge.
Quote from: Kacie Jane on February 17, 2015, 09:45:56 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 17, 2015, 08:12:11 PM
EB 18 cannot go south on 167 and NB 167 cannot go west on 18. If you're one of the many at the Outlet Centre nearby, this particular annoyance is...uh, very annoying. You can take Peasley Canyon Road nearby, but besides the roundabouts halfway up the hill, the signals at the top are killer and taking the freeway the whole way is much faster.
You can connect via West Valley Hwy and 15th Street; Presley Canyon Road has nothing to do with it.
(That said, I agree that it's a pain and a half anyway.)
Yes, true. But a lot of people, rather than continue onto 18, will go up Peasley Canyon and enter onto 5 from 320th. My family, for example, will take Peasley Canyon, which is very annoying to me (I go a few additional hundred feet and enter onto 18).
The I-95/Milford Parkway interchange is incomplete. There are no connections to the southbound Milford Parkway from north and south I-95. Also, northbound Milford Parkway has no connections to I-95. In a way, the connections are not needed heading southbound since the parkway ends at US 1 about 1/2 mile down.
Exit 52 in Wayne, NJ along I-80 is notable for not having access to NJ 23 in both directions. EB the interchange just serves parallel route US 46 as westbound I-80 is a complete interchange with NJ 23 for the sole purpose of serving NJ 23.
Plus all the Exit 52 on ramps are from NJ 23 as well. Even WB US 46 to do the opposite of going WB to WB, you have to exit onto NJ 23 NB to accomplish this. Only SB NJ 23 is missing movement to WB I-80, but has directional signs now directing motorists to u turn south of US 46 back to NB NJ 23 to enter WB I-80 from the other side.
With the Willowbrook Mall being just south of I-80 on NJ 23, you figure it would have been addressed and taken care of years ago as one of those two missing ramps would be serving that particular shopping mall. It is not even that hard to construct those two missing ramps (3 if you count SB NJ 23 to WB I-80) or even tie in a direct ramp from I-80 EB to the US 46 trumpet interchange leading into the mall which is directly south of I-80 just west of the NJ Transit overpass and just east of the Passaic River. Having this would directly serve the mall and access to NJ 23 could be via another ramp to US 46 EB making that a par clo intersection.
I-35E at SH 121 in Lewisville, Texas. Two movements were left off when the interchange was constructed mid-2000's; but they will be added as part of the current project.
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=33.000674,-96.960998&spn=0.012615,0.024784&t=h&z=16 (https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=33.000674,-96.960998&spn=0.012615,0.024784&t=h&z=16)
Quote from: Brian556 on February 18, 2015, 01:02:51 AM
I-35E at SH 121 in Lewisville, Texas. Two movements were left off when the interchange was constructed mid-2000's; but they will be added as part of the current project.
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=33.000674,-96.960998&spn=0.012615,0.024784&t=h&z=16 (https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=33.000674,-96.960998&spn=0.012615,0.024784&t=h&z=16)
Movements that can be made via frontage roads directly at the interchange don't really count. Better one in the Metroplex would be southbound US 287 to northbound I-35W north of Fort Worth. 3 of the 4 movements exist, but that one requires using the turnaround at the next exit. Also the south SH 121/I-820 merge/split is missing both north-to-south movements.
Quote from: dfwmapper on February 18, 2015, 01:58:58 AM
Movements that can be made via frontage roads directly at the interchange don't really count. Also the south SH 121/I-820 merge/split is missing both north-to-south movements.
Which can be made via frontage roads... (and a bit of SH 10 for I-820 north to SH 121 south)
And if frontage roads don't count, I-40 east to I-27 south.
I-880 and CA-87 in San Jose, CA has none. :bigass:
Jokes aside, just a mile up, I-880 and US-101 is an incomplete cloverleaf. You have to exit on Old Bayshore if you're SB on I-880 intending to go NB on US-101.
Also, I-205 and I-5 in Vancouver. If you're on NB 205 and plan to go on to SB I-5, you have to exit on NE 134th St. and go through about 4 lights.
Quote from: NE2 on February 18, 2015, 02:08:46 AM
Quote from: dfwmapper on February 18, 2015, 01:58:58 AM
Movements that can be made via frontage roads directly at the interchange don't really count. Also the south SH 121/I-820 merge/split is missing both north-to-south movements.
Which can be made via frontage roads... (and a bit of SH 10 for I-820 north to SH 121 south)
And if frontage roads don't count, I-40 east to I-27 south.
Specifically excluding any that can be made directly at the interchange via frontage roads, because otherwise Texas will overwhelm the list since we do love out frontage road connections. I forgot about the ramp from the SH 121 north to I-820 south frontage roads, so strike that one, but I-820 north to SH 121 south still makes the list. Your example is debatable since it doesn't require going out of the way or turning but does require crossing another street. Obviously it was never intended for much traffic to be making that movement anyway, since any non-local traffic would be using Loop 335.
Oh yes, I forgot the US 22 & US 202/206 interchange in Bridgewater, NJ. For years it had full movements with some like EB to NB and SB to EB via U turn ramps on US 202/206, but when the interchange was modernized to handle the traffic for the new Bridgewater Commons at the time, they forgot to include a EB to SB in the plans.
That interchange has it all now except for that one particular movement.
Quote from: NE2 on February 18, 2015, 12:01:28 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 17, 2015, 11:52:38 PM
You say "have to" like it's a bad thing. I-91 N to I-84 E existed. It was terrible and harrowing, practically a hard right turn off the Interstate. The current situation is a "complete" high-speed movement where one didn't exist before.
Wasn't it actually I-91 north to Route 2 east? And the current connection via Route 15 also existed, but it was a toll bridge.
Yes. Route 2 handles a cluster of movements there. I wouldn't say this made the interchange incomplete. The movement was built.
The Garden State Parkway is full of these. Just in Atlantic County:
Exit 30 for NJ 52 is a Southbound exit / Northbound entrance only (The other movements are via Exit 29 for US 9)
Exit 36 serves 3 roads, none of them fully:
*Black Horse Pike (US 40/322) only has an entrance (!) and only from Westbound to Parkway North
*Tilton Road is missing a Northbound exit
*Fire Road is missing a Southbound exit
one must use local roads to complete the other movements
Exit 37 for Washington ave. is a Northbound entrance, Southbound exit
Exit 40 for White Horse Pike (US 30) is only 30 West to Parkway East and Parkway South to 30 North
Exit 44 for CR 575 is a Northbound entrance / Southbound exit
Exit 38 (full interchange with the Atlantic City Expressway) is the only complete interchange in the county
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2109521,-74.7633766,17z) interchange involving US 1 in Trenton is missing quite a lot of movements.
The stretch of I-95 in Peabody/Danvers, MA that was built in the 1970s. Four of those interchanges (one was drastically altered from its original plan) relied on utilizing the adjacent US 1 interchanges for the missing moves.
Exit 46: Southbound exit to US 1 South/Northbound entrance from US 1 North
Originally, this interchange was planned for the opposite movements only; but such was scuttled when the decision was made not to build I-95 inside of MA 128.
Exit 47A-B (MA 114 East & West): Full northbound entry & exits/Southbound entrance only*
*Added several decades later (IMHO, a southbound exit ramp to MA 114 would've been better).
Exit 48 (Centre St.): Southbound entry & exit only.
Exit 49 (MA 62): Northbound exit/Southbound entrance.
Are these all notable?
Oh, definitely, by the logical fallacy of equivocation:
1. If something is actual, then it is also possible.
2. The interchanges above have actually been noted.
-----------------------------
3. Therefore, the interchanges above are notable.
I would think 'Notable' would be a missing movement that could be utilized by thousands of people on a daily basis. There are hundreds of interchanges that are uni-directional. They may cause an inconvenience to the locals, but most travelers won't miss them. Or, there could be another nearby interchange that makes up the difference.
For the Massachusetts examples above, there are 3 interchanges within a few miles. The volume of traffic needing to detour and the length of the detour are both pretty minor. Not very notable in my opinion.
QuoteWikipedia articles cover notable topics–those that have gained sufficiently significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time, and are not outside the scope of Wikipedia. We consider evidence from reliable independent sources to gauge this attention. The notability guideline does not determine the content of articles, but only whether the topic should have its own article.
The Garden State Parkway interchanges get quite busy during shore traffic season. US 30 and US 40 get used a lot for shunpiking reasons and because the Atlantic City Expressway backs up regularly.
US 7 at CT 15 (Merritt Parkway), Norwalk.
(Circa 1970, the plan was to build a stack interchange there -- this would have been only the second in CT)
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 18, 2015, 10:18:05 AM
Are these all notable?
If you're referring to the listed I-95 ones in MA; it's notable (IMHO) in that there's a
string of partial interchanges along this stretch; somewhat unusual for a modern Interstate in a suburban/rural (when it was built) setting.
One has to wonder had this stretch of I-95 been built further east; would three of those interchanges (MA 114, Centre St., MA 62) been full interchanges?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 18, 2015, 10:42:39 AM
I would think 'Notable' would be a missing movement that could be utilized by thousands of people on a daily basis. There are hundreds of interchanges that are uni-directional. They may cause an inconvenience to the locals, but most travelers won't miss them. Or, there could be another nearby interchange that makes up the difference.
For the Massachusetts examples above, there are 3 interchanges within a few miles. The volume of traffic needing to detour and the length of the detour are both pretty minor. Not very notable in my opinion.
See above, the stretch is notable for its
collective string of partial interchanges.
For Centre St. and MA 62 interchanges
separately, you have a point. OTOH, for the MA 114 interchange; an off-ramp from I-95 Southbound to MA 114 (Eastbound) would've been more beneficial than the recently-added on-ramp to I-95 Southbound.
MassHighway didn't do I-95 Southbounders looking for MA 114 any favors when its 90s-vintage replacement primary BGS' for Exit 50 no longer had MA 114 shields on them. A supplemental ground-mounted BGS was added sometime later due to complaints of that absence.
To this day, (do keep in mind that I'm originally from this area); I
still have to give my mother directions on how get get back on 114 from I-95 South (using US 1 South for such).
I-93 and US 1 in Charlestown, Mass. Neither one southbound connects directly to the other northbound. Those movements can be accomplished using a mile or so of Mass. 99, with several traffic lights in each direction.
Also left out of the Big Dig are ramps to the Summer Tunnel from 93 North and to the Ted Williams Tunnel from 93 South. This only makes much difference to those entering the road between the two, because few people would pass one tunnel to take the other.
The 880/980 split in downtown Oakland has never had ramps planned to connect 980 west with 880 north (and 880 south with 980 east). With the relocation of 880 away from the old Cypress alignment, having those ramps there would create an effective MacArthur Maze bypass where none exists at present.
Two that have gained local notoriety in the Twin Cities area:
- In Minneapolis, there are no direct connections from WB I-94 to NB I-35W or vice versa (SB 35W to EB 94). Traffic must use Washington Ave/Cedar Ave. Or, if they're further out, use MN 280. Direct connnections were proposed in the late 2000's, but that would require a full interchange reconstruction that MnDOT can't afford.
- In St. Paul, there are no direct connections from NB I-35E to WB I-94 or the reciprocal (EB 94 to SB 35E). Traffic must use Kellogg Blvd. Originally, longer-distance traffic was intended to use Ayd Mill Rd to make the connection, but that road was never extended to I-94.
- Not as notorious but raised questions when it was rebuilt recently: I-494/US 169 in Bloomington, MN. There are no direct ramps from SB 169 to WB 494 or EB 494 to NB 169. MnDOT required a design exemption from FHWA in order to build this as a partial interchange (intended to save money as the direct ramp movements are mostly covered by US 212). It should be noted that there is a semi-direct connection from SB 169 to WB 494, by taking the local exit ramp and then going through a roundabout to a local 494 on-ramp. But there is no way to make a similar movement from EB 494 to NB 169.
- Although currently a complete interchange, the I-64/I-564 interchange in Norfolk, VA originally lacked a connection from EB 564 to WB 64. This ramp was added ca. 1990.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.seeing-stars.com%2FLocations%2FSpeed%2FBusJump.jpg&hash=47b81937ed4ff09112ada4bbb44d9d06f926452b)
(From The Bus That Couldn't Slow Down)
Quote from: froggie on February 18, 2015, 12:25:04 PM
But there is no way to make a similar movement from EB 494 to NB 169.
There's a sign saying to use exit 10B (http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=44.859124,-93.407586&spn=0.010845,0.024784&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=44.859123,-93.411796&panoid=nQy4MV6nqcL22VP7vGPPLQ&cbp=12,110.82,,0,3.38). Then you're directed north on Washington to Valley View. There's no reason you'd make this movement unless you don't know what you're doing, because US 212.
Quote from: KEK Inc. on February 18, 2015, 02:14:41 AM
Also, I-205 and I-5 in Vancouver. If you're on NB 205 and plan to go on to SB I-5, you have to exit on NE 134th St. and go through about 4 lights.
Why would you go north on 205 to go south on 5? I don't think that's really a missing movement so much as it is an unnecessary movement.
Quote from: jakeroot on February 17, 2015, 08:12:11 PM
I assume this thread is supposed to revolve around missing movements that should be there versus missing movements that serve no purpose (such as BC interchange in OP).
It's both -- but I'd say it's questionable that the missing BC 1 south to BC 97 south movement serves no purpose since its built counterpart is there.
Quote from: jakeroot on February 17, 2015, 08:12:11 PM
So, without further ado, the most annoying interchange in Seattle (IMO):
EB 18 cannot go south on 167 and NB 167 cannot go west on 18. If you're one of the many at the Outlet Centre nearby, this particular annoyance is...uh, very annoying. You can take Peasley Canyon Road nearby, but besides the roundabouts halfway up the hill, the signals at the top are killer and taking the freeway the whole way is much faster.
It's pretty annoying all right. I don't care at all about the outlet mall, but 18 eastbound to 167 southbound would be the fastest way to Mt Rainier if the interchange was finished. The bypass on side roads to accomplish that transition is very confusing and not very well signed too. My workaround is to take 516 eastbound to 167 southbound.
Quote from: Mr. Matté on February 18, 2015, 12:32:21 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.seeing-stars.com%2FLocations%2FSpeed%2FBusJump.jpg&hash=47b81937ed4ff09112ada4bbb44d9d06f926452b)
(From The Bus That Couldn't Slow Down)
I enjoyed the fact that the front of the bus took off as if there was a ramp allowing it to do so, when there was no such ramp allowing it to do so.
Quote from: Bickendan on February 18, 2015, 01:16:41 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 17, 2015, 08:12:11 PM
I assume this thread is supposed to revolve around missing movements that should be there versus missing movements that serve no purpose (such as BC interchange in OP).
It's both -- but I'd say it's questionable that the missing BC 1 south to BC 97 south movement serves no purpose since its built counterpart is there.
I think the ramp was originally constructed as a runaway truck ramp that just so happens to serve as a ramp for general traffic.
QuoteThere's a sign saying to use exit 10B. Then you're directed north on Washington to Valley View. There's no reason you'd make this movement unless you don't know what you're doing, because US 212.
I was referring to how it's impossible to make that movement within the interchange.
The only traffic that might need to get on NB 169, that isn't already on or west of 212, is that coming from Eden Prairie Center. But that traffic can easily take County 61 or Prairie Center Dr to 212 to get to 169.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 18, 2015, 12:02:56 PMI-93 and US 1 in Charlestown, Mass. Neither one southbound connects directly to the other northbound. Those movements can be accomplished using a mile or so of Mass. 99, with several traffic lights in each direction.
IMHO, that was a dumb decision not to provide those ramps; especially since such previously existed.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 18, 2015, 12:02:56 PMAlso left out of the Big Dig are ramps to the Summer Callahan Tunnel from 93 North and to the Ted Williams Tunnel from 93 South. This only makes much difference to those entering the road between the two, because few people would pass one tunnel to take the other.
FTFY, this isn't 1960. :)
Those missing move ramps would've certainly come in handy when the ceiling collapsed on that I-90 (Liberty) tunnel and last year's Callahan Tunnel was closed for 3 months for an overhaul project.
Also, the missing moves means that one using 1A South via the Sumner Tunnel can't directly get on its US 1 South (via I-93) parent. Similarly, 1A North can't directly exit off US 1 North (again via I-93) parent to the Callahan Tunnel. Blame the 1989-90 re-route of US 1 onto I-93 (& I-95) for such.
One routing continuity solution (I know, Fictional territory here) would be to re-route MA 1A onto I-90 (via the Ted Williams Tunnel) and have the Sumner/Callahan be an extension of MA 145.
Hmm.
SB CA 57 to EB CA 60 and vice wouldn't count (because of CA 71) if there weren't signs at the northern CA 57/60 split guiding people making that movement off the Orange Freeway to the Pomona just prior to the interchange. Even with CA 71, it's debatable because CA 71 is at-grade between Mission and Rio Rancho.
Speaking of CA 71, I see a w 60 to s 71 loop, but no n 71 to e 60, not counting a jaunt down Riverside and Reservoir. No e 60 to n 71 or its counterpart, but that makes sense considering the angle (and Rio Rancho does work for this movement).
Any missing movements to/from CA 71 at the Kellogg Interchange aren't notable enough to include here.
Quote from: bing101 on February 17, 2015, 11:09:39 PM
The CA-134 interchange @ I-210 in Pasadena was supposed to have CA-710 connect to I-210.
That's a complete 5-level stack. What are you talking about?
There's the I-29/I-480/US 6 interchange in Council Bluffs, Iowa. There is no way to go east on US 6 (Broadway) from either direction of I-29, or vice versa. Then again, one could reasonably argue that it's not necessary if one is going south on I-29, since they have the 25th and 16th Street (aka Iowa 192) exits. And if one wishes to go from US 6 to NB I-29, there's those entrance ramps plus the 35th Street entrance ramp. OTOH, I think the fact there is no northbound exit ramp from I-29 to US 6 is a mistake. Now that I think of it, the Iowa 192 exit ramp is incomplete as well.
One could argue that all of I-480 in Omaha and Council Bluffs is a long series of incomplete interchanges, with the exception of the Martha Street interchange and its interchange with I-80/US 75.
Quote from: jakeroot on February 18, 2015, 01:07:44 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on February 18, 2015, 02:14:41 AM
Also, I-205 and I-5 in Vancouver. If you're on NB 205 and plan to go on to SB I-5, you have to exit on NE 134th St. and go through about 4 lights.
Why would you go north on 205 to go south on 5? I don't think that's really a missing movement so much as it is an unnecessary movement.
People in East Vancouver who wants to go to Hazel Dell. It's faster to take I-205 North to I-5 South by exiting on 134th St. rather than taking Padden Pkwy or SR-500.
This is what Google recommended for me when I commuted in High School.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FMYPILhS.png&hash=9c202d963c5ca6c10f322fe1e39160c982cb89eb)
You can shave 7 minutes if there was a ramp from I-205 NB to I-5 SB by bypassing all of the lights on 134th St.
Regardless, I'd make it in 15 minutes. :bigass:
Oh, also SR-500 has no connector to NB I-5 and vise versa. You have to take surface streets on 39th St.
One notable example near me: The interchange between US 101 and I-580 (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.9620606,-122.5080198,984m/data=!3m1!1e3) in San Rafael lacks a continuous connection for either north-to-east or west-to-south traffic. Those motorists are directed to exit onto Sir Francis Drake Blvd.
As a result, northbound 101 traffic slows to a crawl every afternoon from Marin City through Mill Valley, Corte Madera, and Larkspur–not because of Marinites, but rather from East Bay-ers slogging their way home from San Francisco via the Richmond Bridge.
The cause of the congestion isn't of the slightest doubt, either. All five northbound lanes will creep along at an average or 10 or 15 m.p.h. up to Sir Francis Drake, at which point line jumpers come to a dead stop in travel lanes and try to force their way into the single exit lane. Beyond this melee, the four lanes which continue northward carry moderate traffic accelerating back to 60.
US(I)-41/US 10/WI 441 ('Bridgeview' interchange) here in the Appleton, WI area. This freeway-to-freeway connection lacks ramps for NB US(I)-41 to WB US 10 and EB US 10 to NB US(I)-41. It is being corrected as I type this in a project that is about to enter the second year of a six year, $470M upgrade of US 10 and WI 441 through there.
Mike
Quote from: briantroutman on February 18, 2015, 08:11:57 PM
One notable example near me: The interchange between US 101 and I-580 (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.9620606,-122.5080198,984m/data=!3m1!1e3) in San Rafael lacks a continuous connection for either north-to-east or west-to-south traffic. Those motorists are directed to exit onto Sir Francis Drake Blvd.
As a result, northbound 101 traffic slows to a crawl every afternoon from Marin City through Mill Valley, Corte Madera, and Larkspur–not because of Marinites, but rather from East Bay-ers slogging their way home from San Francisco via the Richmond Bridge.
The cause of the congestion isn't of the slightest doubt, either. All five northbound lanes will creep along at an average or 10 or 15 m.p.h. up to Sir Francis Drake, at which point line jumpers come to a dead stop in travel lanes and try to force their way into the single exit lane. Beyond this melee, the four lanes which continue northward carry moderate traffic accelerating back to 60.
I'm kind of surprised they were allowed to make the Richmond Bridge an interstate without completing that interchange.
Not only that, but what does it really gain them if they're headed to the north end of the East Bay -- there aren't any movements from e I-580 to e I-80 or vice versa.
How are we defining "incomplete?" Are we talking about interchanges with one or more missing movements? (Like I-88 westbound to I-81 northbound at Binghamton?) Partial interchanges with access to/from only one direction? (Like I-65 and US 68/KY 80 north of Bowling Green?) Or interchanges where ramps simply weren't built for one reason or another?
If you're talking about interchanges that don't have ramps because the normal traffic flow wouldn't use them, there is I-64 and the Mountain Parkway in Kentucky (but that's about to be turned into a full interchange) and I-895 and I-95 south of Baltimore. And I-40 and former I-85 (now Business I-85) in Greensboro.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 18, 2015, 01:27:49 PM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on February 18, 2015, 12:32:21 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.seeing-stars.com%2FLocations%2FSpeed%2FBusJump.jpg&hash=47b81937ed4ff09112ada4bbb44d9d06f926452b)
(From The Bus That Couldn't Slow Down)
I enjoyed the fact that the front of the bus took off as if there was a ramp allowing it to do so, when there was no such ramp allowing it to do so.
Do the math, and the bus would have impacted about 4 feet below street level, killing everyone. That would have been an awesome ending: "They're all dead, GTFO" and roll credits.
Quote from: briantroutman on February 18, 2015, 08:11:57 PM
One notable example near me: The interchange between US 101 and I-580 (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.9620606,-122.5080198,984m/data=!3m1!1e3) in San Rafael lacks a continuous connection for either north-to-east or west-to-south traffic. Those motorists are directed to exit onto Sir Francis Drake Blvd.
There IS a ramp from 101 north to 580 east, though it does go through the stoplight for the diamond interchange at Bellam Boulevard.
Quote from: BickendanNot only that, but what does it really gain them if they're headed to the north end of the East Bay -- there aren't any movements from e I-580 to e I-80 or vice versa.
The Richmond Parkway is signed as a connector to handle that specific set of movements (580 east to 80 east, 80 west to 580 west). (Before the parkway was built, Cutting Boulevard was signed for this purpose)
Quote from: Bickendan on February 19, 2015, 01:39:54 AM
Not only that, but what does it really gain them if they're headed to the north end of the East Bay -- there aren't any movements from e I-580 to e I-80 or vice versa.
Well, there's the Richmond
Bypass Parkway. Even though it has eleventy-one traffic lights, at least the lights are usually timed, and if you're heading east on I-80 it saves considerable distance as well. Why was Caltrans against building it or signing it as a state route? One of the few places in the Bay Area they could build without massive local opposition, and they say no!
Quote from: kurumi on February 19, 2015, 11:43:20 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 18, 2015, 01:27:49 PM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on February 18, 2015, 12:32:21 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.seeing-stars.com%2FLocations%2FSpeed%2FBusJump.jpg&hash=47b81937ed4ff09112ada4bbb44d9d06f926452b)
(From The Bus That Couldn't Slow Down)
I enjoyed the fact that the front of the bus took off as if there was a ramp allowing it to do so, when there was no such ramp allowing it to do so.
Do the math, and the bus would have impacted about 4 feet below street level, killing everyone. That would have been an awesome ending: "They're all dead, GTFO" and roll credits.
Discovery's The Mythbusters busted this myth in 2009... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MythBusters_(2009_season)#Episode_134_.E2.80.93_.22Unarmed_and_Unharmed.22
Quote from: kurumi on February 19, 2015, 11:43:20 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 18, 2015, 01:27:49 PM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on February 18, 2015, 12:32:21 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.seeing-stars.com%2FLocations%2FSpeed%2FBusJump.jpg&hash=47b81937ed4ff09112ada4bbb44d9d06f926452b)
(From The Bus That Couldn't Slow Down)
I enjoyed the fact that the front of the bus took off as if there was a ramp allowing it to do so, when there was no such ramp allowing it to do so.
Do the math, and the bus would have impacted about 4 feet below street level, killing everyone. That would have been an awesome ending: "They're all dead, GTFO" and roll credits.
It took me a minute to figure this out. I thought, "That awful movie was a
remake?!?"
This movie is up there with Mel Gibson's "Ransom" as something I couldn't watch without yelling at stupid people in the movie.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 19, 2015, 09:58:42 PM
Quote from: kurumi on February 19, 2015, 11:43:20 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 18, 2015, 01:27:49 PM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on February 18, 2015, 12:32:21 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.seeing-stars.com%2FLocations%2FSpeed%2FBusJump.jpg&hash=47b81937ed4ff09112ada4bbb44d9d06f926452b)
(From The Bus That Couldn't Slow Down)
I enjoyed the fact that the front of the bus took off as if there was a ramp allowing it to do so, when there was no such ramp allowing it to do so.
Do the math, and the bus would have impacted about 4 feet below street level, killing everyone. That would have been an awesome ending: "They're all dead, GTFO" and roll credits.
It took me a minute to figure this out. I thought, "That awful movie was a remake?!?"
This movie is up there with Mel Gibson's "Ransom" as something I couldn't watch without yelling at stupid people in the movie.
Oh come on...fantastic performances all around, and I bet all of you were sold the whole seat but only used the edge.
Oh, and what's up with the BGS? It looks like it's facing the wrong direction.
Quote from: DandyDan on February 18, 2015, 02:49:22 PM
There's the I-29/I-480/US 6 interchange in Council Bluffs, Iowa. There is no way to go east on US 6 (Broadway) from either direction of I-29, or vice versa. Then again, one could reasonably argue that it's not necessary if one is going south on I-29, since they have the 25th and 16th Street (aka Iowa 192) exits. And if one wishes to go from US 6 to NB I-29, there's those entrance ramps plus the 35th Street entrance ramp. OTOH, I think the fact there is no northbound exit ramp from I-29 to US 6 is a mistake. Now that I think of it, the Iowa 192 exit ramp is incomplete as well.
One could argue that all of I-480 in Omaha and Council Bluffs is a long series of incomplete interchanges, with the exception of the Martha Street interchange and its interchange with I-80/US 75.
Excellent post. I was reading the thread and wondering if anyone was going to note I-480 being replete with incomplete interchanges. I'm local and grew up in the area, so I know all the ways of making up for the missing ramps, but it is annoying. I feel sorry for out of towners trying to get around and their not knowing how many incomplete interchanges there are.
The NB I-29 not being able to go east on Hwy6/Broadway is really sad, the 9th Avenue area is always busy and getting off south of the railroad overpass isn't any better. Overshooting and coming back to broadway from the north is confusing since Ave. G isn't a full interchange either.
I've even wanted a full interchange at north 16th/ I-29. With the new Wallyworld just south of there, I think the omission is going to be more noticeable to everyone. Bad enough when it was just the Hy Vee.
Quote from: jakeroot on February 19, 2015, 11:36:30 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 19, 2015, 09:58:42 PM
Quote from: kurumi on February 19, 2015, 11:43:20 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 18, 2015, 01:27:49 PM
Quote from: Mr. Matté on February 18, 2015, 12:32:21 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.seeing-stars.com%2FLocations%2FSpeed%2FBusJump.jpg&hash=47b81937ed4ff09112ada4bbb44d9d06f926452b)
(From The Bus That Couldn't Slow Down)
I enjoyed the fact that the front of the bus took off as if there was a ramp allowing it to do so, when there was no such ramp allowing it to do so.
Do the math, and the bus would have impacted about 4 feet below street level, killing everyone. That would have been an awesome ending: "They're all dead, GTFO" and roll credits.
It took me a minute to figure this out. I thought, "That awful movie was a remake?!?"
This movie is up there with Mel Gibson's "Ransom" as something I couldn't watch without yelling at stupid people in the movie.
Oh come on...fantastic performances all around, and I bet all of you were sold the whole seat but only used the edge.
Oh, and what's up with the BGS? It looks like it's facing the wrong direction.
They make me miss my roommate that used to hurl cigarette packs with all his might at stupid people on TV. That brought a certain feeling of satisfaction.
Quote from: Jardine on February 19, 2015, 11:51:03 PM
The NB I-29 not being able to go east on Hwy6/Broadway is really sad, the 9th Avenue area is always busy and getting off south of the railroad overpass isn't any better. Overshooting and coming back to broadway from the north is confusing since Ave. G isn't a full interchange either.
Functionally speaking, the 35th Street exit and entrance ramps could serve as Avenue G's NB exit and entrance ramps. It's just that the road continues on as 35th Street. I think that particular exit should have signage noting Avenue G.
35th is obviously intended as the other half of the Avenue G interchange.
Quote from: KEK Inc. on February 18, 2015, 04:38:24 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 18, 2015, 01:07:44 PM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on February 18, 2015, 02:14:41 AM
Also, I-205 and I-5 in Vancouver. If you're on NB 205 and plan to go on to SB I-5, you have to exit on NE 134th St. and go through about 4 lights.
Why would you go north on 205 to go south on 5? I don't think that's really a missing movement so much as it is an unnecessary movement.
People in East Vancouver who wants to go to Hazel Dell. It's faster to take I-205 North to I-5 South by exiting on 134th St. rather than taking Padden Pkwy or SR-500.
This is what Google recommended for me when I commuted in High School.
You can shave 7 minutes if there was a ramp from I-205 NB to I-5 SB by bypassing all of the lights on 134th St.
Regardless, I'd make it in 15 minutes. :bigass:
Oh, also SR-500 has no connector to NB I-5 and vise versa. You have to take surface streets on 39th St.
I certainly agree with the logic, and the same is true at I-405/SR-525 and I-5. You can't go from SR-525 S to I-5 N, or I-5 S, to SR-525 N. While is may be seen as a useless movement, it would provide better access to Alderwood mall and to a couple of business on 164th St SW, and cut traffic on 164th and 196th. I would also add I-5 and both Marine View Drive and SR 529, but there are no exits between the two exits, so not really useful, but still missing.
Well 525 needs to be a freeway until Mukilteo. It's humorous it is called a speedway with a 35 mph speed trap.
iPhone
Quote from: TEG24601 on February 20, 2015, 01:29:07 PM
I would also add I-5 and both Marine View Drive and SR 529, but there are no exits between the two exits, so not really useful, but still missing.
The SR 529 interchange might be slightly improved with a NB I-5 to NB SR 529 offramp (so Marysville-bound traffic can avoid crossing the BNSF mainline via SR 528) in the near future.
And the Swamp Creek (I-5/I-405/SR 525) interchange is missing something else: HOV access. A bus coming from Lynnwood Transit Center has to fight Alderwood Mall traffic in order to serve Mukilteo or I-405, which slows down a lot of commutes. With light rail terminating at Lynnwood in 2023, WSDOT needs to start planning for building an HOV ramp from I-5 to I-405. (And speaking of HOV ramps and Lynnwood, Ash Way is still missing the northern half of its direct-access ramp.)
I-495 N to I-95 S and I-95 N to I-495 S direct connections do not exist just south of the NH border.
I'm actually a little surprised GDOT was allowed to rebuild the I-75/475 split south of Macon about a decade ago without including the SB-to-NB movements. They'd actually be reasonably useful as a bypass for the traffic-light infested commercial strip on US 80.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on March 15, 2015, 10:20:30 PM
I-495 N to I-95 S and I-95 N to I-495 S direct connections do not exist just south of the NH border.
Those movements are handled by nearby MA 110; 110's interchanges with the two Interstates are less than a mile apart with only a couple sets of traffic signals along the way. GSV (at least on Google Earth) shows much of the stretch (MA 110) under construction; not sure if a road widening is part of the project.
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 16, 2015, 09:05:39 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on March 15, 2015, 10:20:30 PM
I-495 N to I-95 S and I-95 N to I-495 S direct connections do not exist just south of the NH border.
Those movements are handled by nearby MA 110; 110's interchanges with the two Interstates are less than a mile apart with only a couple sets of traffic signals along the way. GSV (at least on Google Earth) shows much of the stretch (MA 110) under construction; not sure if a road widneing is part of the project.
I was there about 1 year ago, and it seems to be complete.
Quote from: 1 on March 16, 2015, 03:21:41 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 16, 2015, 09:05:39 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on March 15, 2015, 10:20:30 PM
I-495 N to I-95 S and I-95 N to I-495 S direct connections do not exist just south of the NH border.
Those movements are handled by nearby MA 110; 110's interchanges with the two Interstates are less than a mile apart with only a couple sets of traffic signals along the way. GSV (at least on Google Earth) shows much of the stretch (MA 110) under construction; not sure if a road widneing is part of the project.
I was there about 1 year ago, and it seems to be complete.
Yeah. Google Maps shows it as 4 lanes now.
Quote from: Bickendan on February 18, 2015, 02:02:18 PM
Hmm.
SB CA 57 to EB CA 60 and vice wouldn't count (because of CA 71) if there weren't signs at the northern CA 57/60 split guiding people making that movement off the Orange Freeway to the Pomona just prior to the interchange. Even with CA 71, it's debatable because CA 71 is at-grade between Mission and Rio Rancho.
Speaking of CA 71, I see a w 60 to s 71 loop, but no n 71 to e 60, not counting a jaunt down Riverside and Reservoir. No e 60 to n 71 or its counterpart, but that makes sense considering the angle (and Rio Rancho does work for this movement).
Any missing movements to/from CA 71 at the Kellogg Interchange aren't notable enough to include here.
For many people who are originally from SoCal (myself included) we have the freeway grid more or less memorized in our heads, even in parts of the Southland that we are not terribly familiar with. So if I'm traveling on southbound 57 from the 210, I'd know that my next e-w freeways would be 10, then 60, then 91. But I probably would not know or expect that I'd have any sort of restriction on going from 57 south to 60 east, unless I was very familiar with this stretch of road. It would be a wise idea to put a sign before the 57-71 split that traffic to 60 east should use 71 and traffic to 60 west should use 57, even though that sign would be north of I-10. Or at the very least, signing the control city of 71 to be both Corona and Riverside may also give people a clue that they should use the 71 to reach Riverside, either 71 to 60 or 71 to 91.
Other missing movements in the LA area:
I-5 SB to 134 WB. 134 EB to I-5 NB.
US 101 NB to 134 EB. 134 WB to 101 SB.
US 101 SB to 170 NB. 170 SB to 101 NB.
There are also a few missing movements in the East L.A. area, but those are not terribly significant becuase there are other freeways that make the missing movements.
Quote from: pianocello on February 17, 2015, 08:47:05 PM
The Edens/Kennedy Junction in Chicago (I-90/94's northern split) can be annoying at times. The SEB->NB and SB->NWB movements aren't there, which basically shoves all O'Hare-to-Evanston traffic onto surface streets. It's not a terribly important movement, but it would cut down on travel times for Northwestern students and residents of Evanston, Skokie, and the far North Side (Edgewater, Rogers Park, etc).
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9644994,-87.7470282,16z
I've been to Chicago and had to make this very movement. And I agree that in the grand scheme of things this is really only useful for those heading to the near-north suburbs, as those going further north (like Wisconsin) have the option of taking the Tri-State from O'Hare. So I don't fault hte highway authorities for not completing this movement, but I do fault them for not adequately signing this movement. Yes, IDOT does a reasonable job of telling you where to exit, but Chicago DOT (or whoever is responsbile for local streets) does not sign this movement with big enough signs. It is very easy to get lost and missing one fo the four turns necessary (left on Lawrence, left on Cicero, right on Foster, left onto I-94).
Yes, there are red white and blue interstate shield, but how about some big green signs as well as maybe a control city. It is very easy to forget that you want I-94 WEST when you are headed for the NORTH side.
Quote from: mrsman on March 22, 2015, 11:59:20 PM
It would be a wise idea to put a sign before the 57-71 split that traffic to 60 east should use 71 and traffic to 60 west should use 57, even though that sign would be north of I-10. Or at the very least, signing the control city of 71 to be both Corona and Riverside may also give people a clue that they should use the 71 to reach Riverside, either 71 to 60 or 71 to 91.
If I'm recalling it correctly, the control city choices at the 580/205 split going eastbound serve this role (Stockton for 205 to 5 north, Los Angeles/Fresno for 580 heading towards 5 south), as a comparison.
Quote from: mrsman on March 22, 2015, 11:59:20 PM
Other missing movements in the LA area:
US 101 NB to 134 EB. 134 WB to 101 SB.
US 101 SB to 170 NB. 170 SB to 101 NB.
IIRC, some of those missing movements were slated to be built had the 170 extension to LAX through Laurel Canyon (which will never be constructed) come to fruition.
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 18, 2015, 11:00:41 AM
MassHighway didn't do I-95 Southbounders looking for MA 114 any favors when its 90s-vintage replacement primary BGS' for Exit 50 no longer had MA 114 shields on them. A supplemental ground-mounted BGS was added sometime later due to complaints of that absence.
That will be corrected shortly. The new BGSes on I-95 southbound for US 1 in Danvers/Topsfield to be installed under the current Peabody to Georgetown sign project will again have both Route 62 and Route 114 shields.
How about I-5's interchange with I-405 and WA-525 in Lynnwood? It sure would be nice if there was a ramp from I-5 SB to WA-525 NB...
Quote from: thefraze_1020 on May 17, 2015, 08:09:07 PM
How about I-5's interchange with I-405 and WA-525 in Lynnwood? It sure would be nice if there was a ramp from I-5 SB to WA-525 NB...
Particularly since the construction of the Alderwood Mall.
IIRC, 525 is coming down a decent grade there. Plus you have the presence of Maple Rd and a creek complicating things there. And given how short 525 is, one could theoretically exit SB 5 at 164th or 128th to reach that area. I'd also expect that those trying to get to Boeing or the Mukilteo ferry from the north are taking 526.
Some other ones in the Omaha area:
1. At the I-80/I-680/US 275 interchange. For I Street, there is the WB exit and EB entrance from I-80 (which can also be accessed from or has access to I-680). There is only the WB exit ramp to Q Street, with no other movements.
2. There is only an EB exit and WB entrance for 24th Street on I-80.
3. On US 75 just south of I-80, one cannot actually exit from SB US 75 to F Street, as the exit ramp is only accessible from the I-80 ramps. One could say this is the EB I-80 to 24th Street exit ramp, but this is actually quite a bit west of 24th Street.
One I seem to remember in Topeka, KS is that I-70 has an EB exit and WB entrance for Topeka Boulevard, but no WB exit or EB entrance. I thought there was another oddball arrangement there, but I can't remember it offhand.
US 11/15 at US 522 in Seinsgrove, PA (site of the as yet unbuilt Central Susquehanna valley thruway). Even when complete though, 4 movements will be missing. There was also another one that came to mind, but now I've forgotten it.