https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cufE4dw5d0Q
In Texas 4 or 5 level stacks are as common as trees, yet for example in DC, or NYC I noticed this piece of civic engineering does not exist in the northeast, why?
Albany would beg to differ. We have 2. CT has one plus the Waterbury interchange that is 4 levels, Queens has 1. The reason is that the expressway system generally predates the use of stacks and it is quite costly to modify a cloverleaf into one.
Yeah, can't say there's none, but there's very few. Often times it just comes down to preferred methods of designing interchanges between highways.
When the 295/76/42 interchange is completed, it'll nearly be 4 levels but not in the conventional way. The lowest level is actually a tunnel from 295 South to 42 South, and not directly under the other 3 levels. And the 3rd level is simply a cross-street (Browning Road) that cuts thru the interchange without any connection to it. The 2nd level is 76/42 and the 4th level is 295, although they would appear as the 1st and 3rd levels due to the tunnel.
Topography issues, older and more-established development, and less open space play factors as well.
Terrain was probably a large reason why the two Albany stacks exist. In the 90/787 interchange, the third level is I-90, which crosses the Hudson on a high-level bridge immediately to the east of the interchange that has to have ship clearance, while I-90 Exit 6 has I-90 on the bottom in a ravine/large road cut, while US 9 is on the top level, even with ground level on both sides of the bridge. In those situations, stacks were probably much cheaper than cloverleafs. Even with I-90 being so high up at 787, the hill immediately to the west is brutal.
Quote from: longhorn on April 26, 2016, 10:09:05 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cufE4dw5d0Q
In Texas 4 or 5 level stacks are as common as trees, yet for example in DC, or NYC I noticed this piece of civic engineering does not exist in the northeast, why?
In the Northeast, there are too many NIMBYs with deep enough pockets to hold up the construction of huge freeway interchanges (and freeways in general) in court. The only interchanges that come close to a Texas-style stack interchange I know of in Connecticut is the I-84/Route 9 interchange in Farmington and the Route 8/Route 15 interchange in Trumbull. The I-84/Route 9 interchange is only half-used and the Connecticut DOT has recently started talking about removing the unused portions of the interchange since nothing will ever be built to the north of I-84. The Route 8/Route 15 interchange only half-built (missing Rt 8 S -> Rt 15 N and Rt 8 N -> Rt 15 S movements). Then you have the two Mixmaster interchanges, I-84 and Route 8 in Waterbury and I-91, I-95 and Route 34 in New Haven, but these aren't true stack interchanges.
New England just has an on-going love affair with clover-leafs, especially Massachusetts. Actually, topagraphy, land availability, funding and NIMBY's are a part of the equation too. Both I-93/95 interchanges in Canton and Woburn come to mind where it would be useful, but it will be YEARS before any of those become a reality. And one can only imagine the nightmares, once either of those projects commence. Last I've heard, they're on the books, but it will be quite sometime.
Quote from: ATLRedSoxFan on April 26, 2016, 12:40:40 PM
Both I-93/95 interchanges in Canton and Waltham
I-93 in Waltham?
I did mean Woburn. :nod:
Where would you build the multi-level stack interchanges, longhorn?
Quote from: ATLRedSoxFan on April 26, 2016, 12:40:40 PM
...topography, land availability, funding and NIMBY's are a part of the equation too.
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 26, 2016, 11:48:02 AM
In the Northeast, there are too many NIMBYs with deep enough pockets to hold up the construction of huge freeway interchanges (and freeways in general) in court.
How much say do
NIMBY's really have? I have a really hard time believing that locals have any say in the design of an interchange. Their input is accepted, of course, but I would
guess that it's largely ignored.
Quote from: jakeroot on April 26, 2016, 05:45:47 PM
Quote from: ATLRedSoxFan on April 26, 2016, 12:40:40 PM
...topography, land availability, funding and NIMBY's are a part of the equation too.
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 26, 2016, 11:48:02 AM
In the Northeast, there are too many NIMBYs with deep enough pockets to hold up the construction of huge freeway interchanges (and freeways in general) in court.
How much say do NIMBY's really have? I have a really hard time believing that locals have any say in the design of an interchange. Their input is accepted, of course, but I would guess that it's largely ignored.
Yeah. Because I-95 wasn't built thru NJ because NJDOT deemed it a waste of time and money. :meh:
Depends on the state. In NJ, it is absolutely valuable. NJDOT will not do a project if it doesn't have the support of the towns in which are impacted.
In all honesty, all you have to do is read the threads found throughout the Northeast forum, and you'll encounter a nearly endless stream of highways that were never built, or scaled down, at least in part due to NIMBYism.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 26, 2016, 06:18:52 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 26, 2016, 05:45:47 PM
Quote from: ATLRedSoxFan on April 26, 2016, 12:40:40 PM
...topography, land availability, funding and NIMBY's are a part of the equation too.
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 26, 2016, 11:48:02 AM
In the Northeast, there are too many NIMBYs with deep enough pockets to hold up the construction of huge freeway interchanges (and freeways in general) in court.
How much say do NIMBY's really have? I have a really hard time believing that locals have any say in the design of an interchange. Their input is accepted, of course, but I would guess that it's largely ignored.
Yeah. Because I-95 wasn't built thru NJ because NJDOT deemed it a waste of time and money. :meh:
Depends on the state. In NJ, it is absolutely valuable. NJDOT will not do a project if it doesn't have the support of the towns in which are impacted.
In all honesty, all you have to do is read the threads found throughout the Northeast forum, and you'll encounter a nearly endless stream of highways that were never built, or scaled down, at least in part due to NIMBYism.
I didn't say anything about the highways themselves. I'm speaking purely about interchanges...you know, the topic of this thread?
I will ask again: How
much say do NIMBY's really have...in the design of an interchange? My immediate guess is little to none. Projects which acquire more ROW generally have higher amounts of public input, because more land is taken, and it affects more people. But new interchanges seldom take any additional land (and if they do, it's to increase the size of a loop, or build C/D lanes), so the only people who it stands to affect are those who can see the junction from their back porch.
In all honesty, all you have to do is read the threads found throughout the Northeast forum, and you'll encounter a nearly endless stream of interchanges that were never built, or scaled down, at least in part due to NIMBYism.
They have a shocking amount of input. The NIMBYs went crazy when NYSDOT thought about rebuilding a couple interchanges in Buffalo, they went crazy over the exits on the Northway that have been rebuilt (or are currently in the plans). One of the reasons I-87 Exit 6 is a SPUI instead of something better for NY 7 through traffic is NIMBYism. NYSDOT and NYSTA wanted to build a couple diamond interchanges on the Thruway east of Buffalo as part of the now-cancelled plan to move the toll booths (all stopped by NIMBYs). There's even NIMBYism for stuff that remains within the confines of the current interchange. NIMBYism is quite rampant in these parts.
Here's a very short list of the New York interchanges I know of that were not built/toned down due to NIMBYism (and these don't include cancelled freeways):
-I-87 (Northway) Exit 3 (the more-recent plan that added an interchange and moved Exit 4 north)
-I-87 (Northway) Exit 6 (some of the original plans were grander)
-I-90 exit(s) between Exits 48A and 49
-I-290 Exit 3 (plans to do major modifications were abandoned)
There are probably a bunch more in this state and tons more throughout the northeast.
Another potential factor: the relative prevalence of ticketed toll roads in the northeast. Whenever two freeways cross and one of them is a ticketed toll road, the interchange between them is probably going to be a double trumpet or something similar because of the necessity of forcing all traffic changing roads at the interchange to pass through a single toll plaza.
But yes, it is definitely true that we tend to be less grandiose with our freeway construction up in this part of the country. So you can end up with interchanges like this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1572009,-77.6782986,1119m/data=!3m1!1e3) or this one (http://this%20one) which are stack-esque but lower capacity, not as tall, not as high speed, and not as safe given the left exits and entrances.
You also get interchanges like this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.237311,-73.1526611,1154m/data=!3m1!1e3) which are even more stack-esque but incomplete. In this particular case, of the three missing movements, two of them would be redundant because they can be made using route 25 shortly to the west, but the lack of a direct ramp from route 8 south to route 15 north (east on the compass here) is because of NIMBY opposition to this interchange having a fourth level. People complained it would be too big and not fit in with the character of the Merritt Parkway. So the state removed that ramp from the plans to make the interchange smaller.
You also have things like the Albany Circle Stack out here that, while performing the same function as a stack (and with similar advisory speeds to the local stacks), but fit better in a cramped urban environment. Interchanges like the Bruckner are 4 levels, but they definitely aren't stacks. Key reason is that the infrastructure tends to be older and had to snake through dense environments.
The toll road thing is major: of the locations where two expressways cross in the northeast, several of the most major examples involve toll roads (I-87/I-90, I-87/I-84, I-81/I-90, I-90/I-91/US 5, I-90/I-95, I-95/I-78, etc.). In fact, I can only think of 8 locations in the northeast where 2 2DIs cross without a concurrency that don't involve a toll booth. 3 of those are in PA and 3 are in very dense urban environments.
NJDOT's engineers seemed to have an evasion to building stacks even in areas they would fit. For some reason they seemed very concerned about minimizing the amount of bridges used in an interchange, or even anything that might be 3 levels. So ones gets complex messes like I-78/I-287.
Two more points I didn't see in the thread.
1) Right of way. Stacks take up more right of way if designed to modern standards. The ones here in Texas are enormous, and were built well before development filled in around them. The Northeast was already developed, so interchanges had to take up the least room possible. Politics often played a role in where ramps could and could not go.
2) Ice. Bridges freeze before roadway surfaces. We know the sign. Well, tall ramp bridges freeze first, and that's just not a problem in the South like it is in the North.
Even Delaware, where DelDOT can seemingly do anything it pleases, keeps its interchanges to a minimum height. 2 of the biggest interchanges in the state: 95/295/495 and 95/1 are both 2 levels. I'm sure if I thought long and hard about it I'll find one that's 3 levels, but nothing off the top of my head.
In PA, the 95/Betsy Ross Bridge interchange approaches 4 levels, but I don't know if it ever gets there. The 95/PA Turnpike Interchange is going to be 2 levels at most whenever that project is completed (maybe it's 3...I'm not glancing at the plans right now).
Some of the 295/76/42 designs included a stack of 295 North over 295 South over Browning Rd over 76/42, but community opposition was against that design...even taking into account fewer homes/businesses would need to be taken.
The 295/42 missing move ramps have been delayed over 10 years now because of a single developer. Not too much NIMBYism, but it shows how much NJDOT values community and municipal input. In the end, the developer isn't going to get what he wanted, but it still delayed the project a minimum of 11 years now.
When NJDOT wanted to remove the Marlton Circle (NJ Routes 70/73), there was a lot of opposition to an interchange there, including within the state and municipality. Eventually, everyone decided that was going to be the best option. Well, everyone except for a small group of 100 or so people, that insisted on an intersection using advanced technology (which was simply loop detectors in the road...technology that's been around for decades). NJDOT and the town gave them a LOT of time to discuss their plans, although it was very apparent they weren't going to work.
I believe the US-7/CT-15 interchange would have been stack-ish but NIMBYs complained and the CT DOT even catered to them by trying to rush in a cloverleaf...a NEW cloverleaf. I was at the public meeting. Thank god, another set of NIMBYs said the cloverleaf would've taken more space than a stack-ish interchange. Now the proposal is going to be flyunder ramps rather than flyover ramps. We shall see.
NIMBYs have ton of say around here. It's all about being politically correct no matter how crazy it sounds. Bikes and Peds have priority around here. Again, b/c of the PC movement. Most drivers want roads but never speak up b/c are busy with everyday life. But the NIMBYs are the ones that go to the meetings and such.
CT seems to have been engineered by one dude back in the 50s and 60s. It's all trumpets or cloverleafs or left exits that drop a lane in between the left exit and left entrance. It's that way all over the state.
Although, there's a new stack on the books. The I-84/CT-8 mixmaster plans to be rebuilt as a stack. Again, we shall see.
The stacks that were built, aren't fully used. I-84/CT-9 in Farmington.
Without responding to everyone, I do see all of your points. Several of them just don't seem to apply to where I'm from (keep reading for an explanation), hence my original curiosity and confusion.
There is a new freeway here in the Seattle area that will begin construction in a few years. One of the interchanges will be with I-5 just east of Tacoma. I've gone to a couple open houses, and barring the occasional question regarding ROW acquisition, there wasn't really a lot opposition to the highway; in fact, nearly all neighboring councils are for it: http://goo.gl/GppWFN.
Here's a picture of one of the new interchanges. I'm guessing something like this wouldn't be received very warmly back east?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsdot.wa.gov%2FNR%2Frdonlyres%2FE4606C12-7CD4-4B58-B6ED-8255DEF01DFB%2F0%2FI5_DVB_08.jpg&hash=146f6004df19cfdedda65d53faeaa29268c8449d) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsdot.wa.gov%2FNR%2Frdonlyres%2FBBA727A2-B92A-4048-AE02-8AF021C18FB9%2F0%2FI5_DVA_08.jpg&hash=30a5ff8f7f7a62459a4cd5820d6f15caa4e5bfd0)
I understand historic reasons for freeway revolts. Highways were often plowed through city centers, displacing thousands. I'm not for that. I am for rebuilding junctions to meet higher demand, and new highways, where needed, that don't conflict too much with what already exists. This new freeway will displace dozens of households, but the benefits far outweigh the the drawbacks, even when considering the displaced households: several of the homes are in areas that aren't exceptionally desirable, and it gives many of the homeowners a chance to "get out" and start new.
Anyways, my point is that, even here in the Cascadia "bioregion", new highways are still perfectly acceptable. Four or five level junctions, where needed, presumably in the middle of nowhere, just don't strike me as propositions that would be received so negatively.
Quote from: jakeroot on April 26, 2016, 11:54:35 PM
I'm guessing something like this wouldn't be received very warmly back east?
Holy moly no it would not. I see at least a dozen houses being demolished to make way for this. That alone would make this an unfeasible proposal in the northeast. It would have to be redesigned to preserve as many existing structures as possible if it were to be built at all.
And yes, you'd get every other typical argument pulled out against it as well. "Why are we spending so much money to build something so huge, it's wasteful". "Why are we building more infrastructure for cars, oh my god global warming". "This is going to destroy our community and wreck everyone's property values". "It's going to be noisy and I don't like the noise". "My little Timmy has asthma and if there's a highway near us it will get worse". "What about the endangered racoon ticks that live around there". Etc, etc, etc.
And the fact of the matter is that most northeastern states would not have the budgetary fortitude to be able to afford building something like this these days anyway.
That said, it is specifically the northeast. The southeast (traditionally known as simply "the south") is much more welcoming of new freeway construction than the northeast is.
NIMBYs do have an impact on not only interchange location but design. The original CA 85/17 interchange would have had higher, indirect ramps and fewer loops. But Los Gatos, California is not a place you can just Robert Moses your way through. It's a wealthy area.
MergingTraffic is correct: the circa-2005 7/15 interchange design was sort of a half-stack incorporating the existing half-cloverleaf. But the original 1970s design was a full stack -- one of only 2 that I know of statewide.
I-91 at CT 9 would have been a natural place for a stack, but maybe the layout of the land precluded that.
One thing about Buffalo is that we have a lack of criss-crossing freeways. The only 3 that we have are I-190/NY-5, NY-33/I-90, and I-190/Lasalle Exp.
The first wouldn't warrant a stack of 4-5 levels and probably wouldn't warrant a stack at all. The Skyway ends at Chrich St (although I saw an old master planning map that had it continuing behind City Hall along Delaware to NY-425, which is practically impossible in every way).
The second is the best candidate for a stack of any kind. 4-5 levels I'm not sure though.
The third has a geometry that isn't really stack friendly.
Another thing not mentioned yet: much of the Northeast (specifically the three states of northern New England) just doesn't have the traffic volumes to warrant a full stack interchange. Not even I-293/NH 101/Merritt outside Manchester, which really only has one big turning movement at it. Nor at I-95/NH 101, which has a lot of volume on I-95 but not enough turning volume to warrant such an interchange (nevermind that I-95 is a toll road with a mainline booth right at NH 101).
Thanks for the replies, but aren't cloverleafs more dangerous than a stack? Clover leafs require dangerous lane changes as the merging traffic has to cross traffic trying to exit.
And what is a Trumpet interchange?
We have NIMBYs to in Texas, they are all in Austin,Tx. The reason why the fastest growing city in the US rather spend money on bike paths than expanding I-35. Its to be expected for the masses to leave their airconditioned cars in August and jump on a bike and head to work in a business suit or dress...........But I digress.
QuoteThanks for the replies, but aren't cloverleafs more dangerous than a stack? Clover leafs require dangerous lane changes as the merging traffic has to cross traffic trying to exit.
No different than other weaving movements, including some that exist associated with older stacks (between where a stack ramp merges/diverges and the adjacent on/off ramp if the distance is short enough). In lower traffic situations, cloverleafs are far more economical than stacks.
QuoteAnd what is a Trumpet interchange?
A 3-way interchange (http://www.kurumi.com/roads/interchanges/trumpet.html) where one ramp is a loop. In the Metroplex, the interchange on I-30 to access TX 360 and Six Flags is an example. The I-30/LOOP 12 interchange closer to Dallas is an example of a double-trumpet.
QuoteThe reason why the fastest growing city in the US rather spend money on bike paths than expanding I-35.
I'm not going to argue priorities, but I'd like to point out that the cost of bike infrastructure in a city is effectively a rounding error compared to the cost of a major interchange or widening project in that same city. Yeah, the Texas heat is a concern, but shower facilities at the workplace (which many employers are offering these days) can alleviate that, and it's a lot less likely to get "stuck in traffic" on a bike than it is in a car.
Almost all freeways in the northeast start at a Trumpet or Directional-T. Most of those that aren't either of those simply split off the parent highway in one direction only. Many freeway-freeway junctions are cloverleafs. There are some large freeway-freeway junctions (especially in, but most of these are of some sort of unique design (Bruckner interchange, I-90/93, I-78/95, I-84/91).
Quote from: cl94 on April 26, 2016, 07:04:52 PM
-I-87 (Northway) Exit 6 (some of the original plans were grander)
Interesting... makes me wonder what I would be commuting through if the SPUI wasn't chosen.
Quote from: vdeane on April 27, 2016, 02:33:54 PM
Quote from: cl94 on April 26, 2016, 07:04:52 PM
-I-87 (Northway) Exit 6 (some of the original plans were grander)
Interesting... makes me wonder what I would be commuting through if the SPUI wasn't chosen.
The study (don't know where it is) had at least 10 alternatives. Various partial cloverleafs were thought up, as well as an alternative that involved a long flyover from EB to NB, allowing through traffic to bypass the intersections at the interchange.
Quote from: longhorn on April 26, 2016, 10:09:05 AM
In Texas 4 or 5 level stacks are as common as trees, yet for example in DC, or NYC I noticed this piece of civic engineering does not exist in the northeast, why?
D.C.? Perhaps the District of Columbia, yes.
But have you heard of the Springfield Interchange (junction of I-95, I-395, I-495 and Va. 644) in Fairfax County. Not a classic-looking stack, but
plenty tall, especially the soaring ramps that carry I-95 through the interchange.
The Maryland suburbs of D.C. do not have any stacks (the closest in terms of high ramps are at I-95/I-495 (Capital Beltway) and U.S. 50 (unsigned I-595, John Hanson Highway) in Prince George's County and at Md. 200 (ICC) and U.S. 29 in Montgomery County (which is a three level stack, built that way in part because there was not enough land for a "real" cloverleaf (and besides, Maryland SHA has actively discouraged the construction of cloverleaf interchanges over the past several decades)).
The Baltimore metropolitan area has two - a "classic" stack at I-695 (Baltimore Beltway) and the eastern end of I-70 in Woodlawn, and an older "braided" interchange that is in the process of being completely converted to a modern stack at I-95 (JFK Highway) and I-695 in the Rossville or Overlea area (both are in Baltimore County).
Quote from: froggie on April 26, 2016, 10:26:50 AM
Topography issues, older and more-established development, and less open space play factors as well.
This is the answer so far that has been the most on-point in my opinion...New England's infrastructure is rooted in much older development patterns. Simply put, an area laid out based on 1787 standards is going to be less automobile-conscious than an area laid out in 1947. This leads the Northeast to be an unfriendly landscape for tall stack interchanges due to a lack of available ROW. In order to build large grandiose interchanges, you need lots of ROW. Regulations on uphill and downhill grades mean that a certain amount of roadway length is required to achieve the height you need to build any flyover ramp over another traffic way. With limited space, it's hard to build any interchange that doesn't have loop ramps and short weaving sections. In a more general sense, building the Interstates largely took off in the '60s, and more urbanized development had occurred on the East Coast compared to most anywhere. Texas has space. New England doesn't.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on April 27, 2016, 05:26:41 PM
Quote from: froggie on April 26, 2016, 10:26:50 AM
Topography issues, older and more-established development, and less open space play factors as well.
This is the answer so far that has been the most on-point in my opinion...New England's infrastructure is rooted in much older development patterns. Simply put, an area laid out based on 1787 standards is going to be less automobile-conscious than an area laid out in 1947. This leads the Northeast to be an unfriendly landscape for tall stack interchanges due to a lack of available ROW. In order to build large grandiose interchanges, you need lots of ROW. Regulations on uphill and downhill grades mean that a certain amount of roadway length is required to achieve the height you need to build any flyover ramp over another traffic way. With limited space, it's hard to build any interchange that doesn't have loop ramps and short weaving sections. In a more general sense, building the Interstates largely took off in the '60s, and more urbanized development had occurred on the East Coast compared to most anywhere. Texas has space. New England doesn't.
Even bigger point: much of the network out here predates the Interstate system. Most of New York's expressways and parkways predate the mid-50s, as does 128 in Boston and just about every current/former toll road. What was built as part of the Interstate system often dates to no later than the mid 60s. That is well before infrastructure was constructed in the rest of the country excluding California, which has some of the same ROW issues.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on April 27, 2016, 04:38:21 PM
Quote from: longhorn on April 26, 2016, 10:09:05 AM
In Texas 4 or 5 level stacks are as common as trees, yet for example in DC, or NYC I noticed this piece of civic engineering does not exist in the northeast, why?
D.C.? Perhaps the District of Columbia, yes.
But have you heard of the Springfield Interchange (junction of I-95, I-395, I-495 and Va. 644) in Fairfax County. Not a classic-looking stack, but plenty tall, especially the soaring ramps that carry I-95 through the interchange.
The Maryland suburbs of D.C. do not have any stacks (the closest in terms of high ramps are at I-95/I-495 (Capital Beltway) and U.S. 50 (unsigned I-595, John Hanson Highway) in Prince George's County and at Md. 200 (ICC) and U.S. 29 in Montgomery County (which is a three level stack, built that way in part because there was not enough land for a "real" cloverleaf (and besides, Maryland SHA has actively discouraged the construction of cloverleaf interchanges over the past several decades)).
The Baltimore metropolitan area has two - a "classic" stack at I-695 (Baltimore Beltway) and the eastern end of I-70 in Woodlawn, and an older "braided" interchange that is in the process of being completely converted to a modern stack at I-95 (JFK Highway) and I-695 in the Rossville or Overlea area (both are in Baltimore County).
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.79102,-77.1760375,878m/data=!3m1!1e3
If you are referring to this, yes I am familiar with it. I have family that leave near this intersection and saw it rebuilt over the years. It was this intersection that got me wandering why there were not more stacks (though it a low level affair) like this one in the northeast. The posts have been educational to the reason why , some NIMBY, and ROW issues.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on April 27, 2016, 05:26:41 PM
Quote from: froggie on April 26, 2016, 10:26:50 AM
Topography issues, older and more-established development, and less open space play factors as well.
This is the answer so far that has been the most on-point in my opinion...New England's infrastructure is rooted in much older development patterns. Simply put, an area laid out based on 1787 standards is going to be less automobile-conscious than an area laid out in 1947. This leads the Northeast to be an unfriendly landscape for tall stack interchanges due to a lack of available ROW. In order to build large grandiose interchanges, you need lots of ROW. Regulations on uphill and downhill grades mean that a certain amount of roadway length is required to achieve the height you need to build any flyover ramp over another traffic way. With limited space, it's hard to build any interchange that doesn't have loop ramps and short weaving sections. In a more general sense, building the Interstates largely took off in the '60s, and more urbanized development had occurred on the East Coast compared to most anywhere. Texas has space. New England doesn't.
I understand what you are stating, but we have examples in Texas where stacks were built on land with limited ROW, example the 410/280 interchange where before there were NOT an interchange, not even a cloverleaf (long story, and it involved NIMBYs when originally built).
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.5201989,-98.4828026,3a,75y,100.65h,83.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjWsSjGNlS8Jr3Jm9LbrhRg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
It involved long, very long onramps to gain the necessary elevation to work. However, as some posts here have stated, I do not think Northeasterners would stand for such a sight near their homes, no matter how ethically pleasing one tries to make a stack look.
There is no wrong or right viewpoint, I just find it interesting the difference in cultures.
What makes the Springfield Interchange so crazy is the presence of HOT lanes that have a full set of movements. If it were a stack, it would be at least 5 levels.
wasnt there some really crazy double decker stack interchange type thing on I-195 in Falls River?
Quote from: mariethefoxy on April 28, 2016, 12:53:31 AM
wasnt there some really crazy double decker stack interchange type thing on I-195 in Falls River?
Yeah, there was. 4 levels in places, as the elevated double-decker expressway passed UNDER the I-195 bridge. Work started a year or two ago to get rid of it and make the area a bit less crazy.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 26, 2016, 10:51:38 PM
Even Delaware, where DelDOT can seemingly do anything it pleases, keeps its interchanges to a minimum height. 2 of the biggest interchanges in the state: 95/295/495 and 95/1 are both 2 levels. I'm sure if I thought long and hard about it I'll find one that's 3 levels, but nothing off the top of my head.
The 95/1 interchange could be considered a 3 level. You've got 1/7 on the bottom, 95 on the middle, then the flyovers on top. Granted they don't cross each other at a single point, but I don't think calling it a two level does it justice.
The Deegan/Cross-Bronx "high bridge" interchange (I-87/I-95) is technically a stack... partly BECAUSE of the lack of right of way, and the huge grade delta.
Quote from: MrDisco99 on April 28, 2016, 08:57:19 AM
The Deegan/Cross-Bronx "high bridge" interchange (I-87/I-95) is technically a stack... partly BECAUSE of the lack of right of way, and the huge grade delta.
"huge grade delta"..............Roller coaster enthusiasts would give that I-95 to I-87 north off ramp a thumbs up!
Quote from: longhorn on April 28, 2016, 09:43:26 AM
Quote from: MrDisco99 on April 28, 2016, 08:57:19 AM
The Deegan/Cross-Bronx "high bridge" interchange (I-87/I-95) is technically a stack... partly BECAUSE of the lack of right of way, and the huge grade delta.
"huge grade delta"..............Roller coaster enthusiasts would give that I-95 to I-87 north off ramp a thumbs up!
Somewhere Robert Moses is smiling.
ixnay
Quote from: longhorn on April 27, 2016, 06:00:44 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on April 27, 2016, 05:26:41 PM
Quote from: froggie on April 26, 2016, 10:26:50 AM
Topography issues, older and more-established development, and less open space play factors as well.
This is the answer so far that has been the most on-point in my opinion...New England's infrastructure is rooted in much older development patterns. Simply put, an area laid out based on 1787 standards is going to be less automobile-conscious than an area laid out in 1947. This leads the Northeast to be an unfriendly landscape for tall stack interchanges due to a lack of available ROW. In order to build large grandiose interchanges, you need lots of ROW. Regulations on uphill and downhill grades mean that a certain amount of roadway length is required to achieve the height you need to build any flyover ramp over another traffic way. With limited space, it's hard to build any interchange that doesn't have loop ramps and short weaving sections. In a more general sense, building the Interstates largely took off in the '60s, and more urbanized development had occurred on the East Coast compared to most anywhere. Texas has space. New England doesn't.
I understand what you are stating, but we have examples in Texas where stacks were built on land with limited ROW, example the 410/280 interchange where before there were NOT an interchange, not even a cloverleaf (long story, and it involved NIMBYs when originally built).
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.5201989,-98.4828026,3a,75y,100.65h,83.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjWsSjGNlS8Jr3Jm9LbrhRg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
It involved long, very long onramps to gain the necessary elevation to work. However, as some posts here have stated, I do not think Northeasterners would stand for such a sight near their homes, no matter how ethically pleasing one tries to make a stack look.
There is no wrong or right viewpoint, I just find it interesting the difference in cultures.
Limited ROW or not, that interchange still looks very Texan. High Five South, although it's only 4 levels.
ixnay
Quote from: cl94 on April 28, 2016, 01:01:33 AM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on April 28, 2016, 12:53:31 AM
wasnt there some really crazy double decker stack interchange type thing on I-195 in Falls River?
Yeah, there was. 4 levels in places, as the elevated double-decker expressway passed UNDER the I-195 bridge. Work started a year or two ago to get rid of it and make the area a bit less crazy.
http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/route79project/Home.aspx
PennDOT has built a couple of three-level stacks: one at the junction of I-279 and I-579 in Pittsburgh, and one the junction of I-81 and I-84 in Scranton. One highway ends at both of those interchanges, though, so they're only three levels. The junction of I-79 and I-376 in Pittsburgh is a three-level "cloverstack." Loop ramps are still used for movements from I-79 north to I-376 west, and I-79 south to I-376 east, and it's likely to stay that way since traffic volumes on those ramps aren't heavy enough to justify flyovers. They're also about to rebuild the junction of I-83 and I-283 in Harrisburg, and that one could end up as a four-level stack since it also serves U.S. 322.
To expand on Gnutella's comments on PA, the I-81/US 22/322 interchange north of Harrisburg is almost a four level stack (if a single flyover ramp counts as a level).
Also, something else I have not seen mentioned regarding design in the northeast vs places like Texas: Frontage roads. Not very prominent around these parts, but they're always incorporated in to interchanges in TX.
Quote from: CentralPAguy on April 29, 2016, 07:39:00 PM
To expand on Gnutella's comments on PA, the I-81/US 22/322 interchange north of Harrisburg is almost a four level stack (if a single flyover ramp counts as a level).
Also, something else I have not seen mentioned regarding design in the northeast vs places like Texas: Frontage roads. Not very prominent around these parts, but they're always incorporated in to interchanges in TX.
Texas is one of the only places I've seen that has frontage roads everywhere.
And as far as frontage roads in the northeast, downstate New York. Several of the expressways and parkways have them. One in Buffalo has them as well.
NY 104 has a couple sets of frontage roads. But yeah, they're not nearly as common here as they are out west, and nowhere does them as much as Texas.
Albany has one that is close at I-90 and US 9.
Elizabeth, NJ has one at 3 levels at US 1 & 9 and NJ 81.
Newark, NJ has one on I-78 at Exit 58A.
You have to remember that the expressways and freeways in some areas were built in the 30's and 40's when a clloverleaf did indeed work well. Now to change it would require displacing businesses as NJ is so built up with so much at almost the curb of the highways now.
That is my guess to why it never got to be. Heck SPUIS are not even that common in the Northeast either, although my home state did install one on NJ 33 in East Windsor as part of the 6-9 widening of the NJ Turnpike project. A lot of other interchange designs could have used them and could be considered for it for those that are planned for the future. The one at US 9 at Ernston Road at the Sayreville and Old Bridge Border which has a folded diamond could have had that done as it would have required less land to obtain as folded diamonds do use more acres than an SPUI as most of the interchange is underneath the free flowing road.
Quote from: roadman65 on April 30, 2016, 08:51:06 AM
Albany has one that is close at I-90 and US 9.
Elizabeth, NJ has one at 3 levels at US 1 & 9 and NJ 81.
Newark, NJ has one on I-78 at Exit 58A.
You have to remember that the expressways and freeways in some areas were built in the 30's and 40's when a clloverleaf did indeed work well. Now to change it would require displacing businesses as NJ is so built up with so much at almost the curb of the highways now.
That is my guess to why it never got to be. Heck SPUIS are not even that common in the Northeast either, although my home state did install one on NJ 33 in East Windsor as part of the 6-9 widening of the NJ Turnpike project. A lot of other interchange designs could have used them and could be considered for it for those that are planned for the future. The one at US 9 at Ernston Road at the Sayreville and Old Bridge Border which has a folded diamond could have had that done as it would have required less land to obtain as folded diamonds do use more acres than an SPUI as most of the interchange is underneath the free flowing road.
Not many SPUI in New Jersey because of the love affair with jughandles. They use them where( IMHO as a non engineer) they make no sense
I mentioned the Albany stacks pretty early on. Both are traditional Maltese cross 4-levels. I-90 at US 9 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6699881,-73.7499596,1069m/data=!3m1!1e3) is pretty spread out, with I-90 running in a deep ravine and road cut (this being the reaso8n for the design). The merge onto SB US 9 is staggered because of the long bridge carrying US 9 over the ravine and Amtrak tracks. I-90 at I-787 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6672095,-73.7331296,1310m/data=!3m1!1e3), less than a mile to the east, is much more compact, having to fit between the Hudson river and several industries. I-90's high-level Patroon Island Bridge over the Hudson is immediately to the east of the interchange. The presence of the high-level bridge and the small amount of space not directly adjacent to the mainlines forced the stack interchange.
As far as jughandles, while annoying, the idea is to reduce the number of signal phases. This allows 2-3+ through lanes on the main route on a tight ROW. Businesses are often located inside the jughandles at this point and, as previously mentioned, modifying anything in Jersey would likely have a huge impact on businesses.
SPUIs are becoming more common in the northeast, at least in New York. As of now, we have 5, all being in very logical locations. In the rare case where an interchange is rebuilt in this state, a SPUI or DDI is typically considered nowadays.
Quote from: longhorn on April 27, 2016, 06:00:44 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on April 27, 2016, 05:26:41 PM
Quote from: froggie on April 26, 2016, 10:26:50 AM
Topography issues, older and more-established development, and less open space play factors as well.
This is the answer so far that has been the most on-point in my opinion...New England's infrastructure is rooted in much older development patterns. Simply put, an area laid out based on 1787 standards is going to be less automobile-conscious than an area laid out in 1947. This leads the Northeast to be an unfriendly landscape for tall stack interchanges due to a lack of available ROW. In order to build large grandiose interchanges, you need lots of ROW. Regulations on uphill and downhill grades mean that a certain amount of roadway length is required to achieve the height you need to build any flyover ramp over another traffic way. With limited space, it's hard to build any interchange that doesn't have loop ramps and short weaving sections. In a more general sense, building the Interstates largely took off in the '60s, and more urbanized development had occurred on the East Coast compared to most anywhere. Texas has space. New England doesn't.
I understand what you are stating, but we have examples in Texas where stacks were built on land with limited ROW, example the 410/280 interchange where before there were NOT an interchange, not even a cloverleaf (long story, and it involved NIMBYs when originally built).
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.5201989,-98.4828026,3a,75y,100.65h,83.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjWsSjGNlS8Jr3Jm9LbrhRg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
It involved long, very long onramps to gain the necessary elevation to work. However, as some posts here have stated, I do not think Northeasterners would stand for such a sight near their homes, no matter how ethically pleasing one tries to make a stack look.
There is no wrong or right viewpoint, I just find it interesting the difference in cultures.
Another factor that probably plays into it is the relative dominance of local governments in New England and the Northeast. In New England, the town is the basic unit of government and the affairs of the populace are centered largely around this, with the state taking a more limited role and the county very little (and often none whatsoever) in general-purpose government. In the northern Mid-Atlantic (NY, NJ, PA), you still have comparatively powerful local governments with the addition of relatively strong counties; in short, there are more layers of government with more home-rule power than in places like Texas.
That said, another 4-level stack that I think would have existed is at I-590 and I-390, had the Genesee Expressway not been cancelled.
^ The relative prominence of local governments
So THAT'S why the Northeast is a NIMBY's paradise.
We've been spendin' most our lives livin' in a NIMBY's paradise
Killin' plans when they arise, livin' in a NIMBY's paradise
We got dismal travel times, livin' in a NIMBY's paradise
Everybody hates to drive, livin' in a NIMBY's paradise.
Quote from: empirestate on April 30, 2016, 03:34:40 PM
Quote from: longhorn on April 27, 2016, 06:00:44 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on April 27, 2016, 05:26:41 PM
Quote from: froggie on April 26, 2016, 10:26:50 AM
Topography issues, older and more-established development, and less open space play factors as well.
This is the answer so far that has been the most on-point in my opinion...New England's infrastructure is rooted in much older development patterns. Simply put, an area laid out based on 1787 standards is going to be less automobile-conscious than an area laid out in 1947. This leads the Northeast to be an unfriendly landscape for tall stack interchanges due to a lack of available ROW. In order to build large grandiose interchanges, you need lots of ROW. Regulations on uphill and downhill grades mean that a certain amount of roadway length is required to achieve the height you need to build any flyover ramp over another traffic way. With limited space, it's hard to build any interchange that doesn't have loop ramps and short weaving sections. In a more general sense, building the Interstates largely took off in the '60s, and more urbanized development had occurred on the East Coast compared to most anywhere. Texas has space. New England doesn't.
I understand what you are stating, but we have examples in Texas where stacks were built on land with limited ROW, example the 410/280 interchange where before there were NOT an interchange, not even a cloverleaf (long story, and it involved NIMBYs when originally built).
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.5201989,-98.4828026,3a,75y,100.65h,83.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjWsSjGNlS8Jr3Jm9LbrhRg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
It involved long, very long onramps to gain the necessary elevation to work. However, as some posts here have stated, I do not think Northeasterners would stand for such a sight near their homes, no matter how ethically pleasing one tries to make a stack look.
There is no wrong or right viewpoint, I just find it interesting the difference in cultures.
Another factor that probably plays into it is the relative dominance of local governments in New England and the Northeast. In New England, the town is the basic unit of government and the affairs of the populace are centered largely around this, with the state taking a more limited role and the county very little (and often none whatsoever) in general-purpose government. In the northern Mid-Atlantic (NY, NJ, PA), you still have comparatively powerful local governments with the addition of relatively strong counties; in short, there are more layers of government with more home-rule power than in places like Texas.
That said, another 4-level stack that I think would have existed is at I-590 and I-390, had the Genesee Expressway not been cancelled.
I agree with all of your points. Even in New York, the prominence of the town is really dependent on where in the state you are. In Western New York, counties are relatively powerful, but towns in eastern parts of New York are very similar to their New England counterparts. In many counties out here, services are limited to not much more than police and highway maintenance (with relatively few county highways in relation to total road mileage). The county I grew up in (Warren County) does little more than provide a countywide police force (that all but one municipality uses) and maintenance of the most major roads that aren't state-maintained. Towns provide all services. Nassau County, from what my father tells me, is pretty similar, with a countywide police force and towns providing all the services. At the other extreme, Erie County is quite powerful, maintaining virtually every road in rural areas, providing a countywide water and sewer system, and many more services.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on April 30, 2016, 03:41:06 PM
^ The relative prominence of local governments
So THAT'S why the Northeast is a NIMBY's paradise.
Well, if by that you mean that the people have an opportunity to participate directly in their local affairs (the town meeting form of government is often cited as the most pure form of direct democracy in use today), then I suppose so.
I try not to use terms and buzzwords like "NIMBY" because it tends to obscure the intent of my meaning. (Same reason I try to avoid mentioning politicians' names; I find myself agreeing with a lot more people if we don't know who each other thinks the enemy is.)
Quote from: cl94 on April 29, 2016, 07:40:45 PM
Quote from: CentralPAguy on April 29, 2016, 07:39:00 PM
To expand on Gnutella's comments on PA, the I-81/US 22/322 interchange north of Harrisburg is almost a four level stack (if a single flyover ramp counts as a level).
Also, something else I have not seen mentioned regarding design in the northeast vs places like Texas: Frontage roads. Not very prominent around these parts, but they're always incorporated in to interchanges in TX.
Texas is one of the only places I've seen that has frontage roads everywhere.
And as far as frontage roads in the northeast, downstate New York. Several of the expressways and parkways have them. One in Buffalo has them as well.
Missouri seems to have a lot of frontage roads as well.
I figured it's just a design norm that stretches all the way back to the early parkways. They tend to like hiding their expressways in the Northeast, using more environmentally-integrative design. Stacks impose their will on the environment, so they shy away from them up there.
Quote from: longhorn on April 27, 2016, 05:52:44 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.79102,-77.1760375,878m/data=!3m1!1e3
If you are referring to this, yes I am familiar with it. I have family that leave near this intersection and saw it rebuilt over the years. It was this intersection that got me wandering why there were not more stacks (though it a low level affair) like this one in the northeast. The posts have been educational to the reason why , some NIMBY, and ROW issues.
Yes, that would be the Springfield Interchange.
Here are the others I mentioned earlier.
I-95/I-495 (Capital Beltway) and U.S. 50/"secret" I-595, New Carrollton, Md. (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Landover,+Greater+Landover,+MD+20784/@38.9459149,-76.8603227,803m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x89b7c090def20fd9:0x19556cd711dc0546!8m2!3d38.9340002!4d-76.8966397) (not a stack, more of a "turbine" interchange, though some of the ramps are reasonably tall)
Md. 200 (ICC toll road) and U.S. 29, Silver Spring, Md. (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Silver+Spring,+MD+20904/@39.0774513,-76.9549245,799m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x89b7c53c2de460c3:0x7a7216413ba1b0ba!8m2!3d39.0533891!4d-76.9758274) (three-level stack)
I-70 and I-695 (Baltimore Beltway), Woodlawn, Md. (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Woodlawn,+MD/@39.3072139,-76.7502691,1596m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x89c8195fe5ff8d3b:0x1a4fd0a670afafcf!8m2!3d39.3228841!4d-76.7280277) (classic four-level stack)
I-95 (JFK Highway) and I-695 Rossville or Overlea, Md. (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Rossville,+MD/@39.3513407,-76.5009101,1597m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x89c80809909e594b:0x630a53af79f437da!8m2!3d39.34922!4d-76.4852265) (formerly a "braided" interchange, now everything has been converted to a modern four-level stack, except that the I-695 roadway is still in the process of being un-braided).
Speaking of SPUIs in NY, the Big Apple has one on Northern Blivd. at the BQE. That one, I have to say, is a smart move as no major construction was needed there. Basically new signal heads and the aim for left turns just needed to be altered.
As far as good ole NJ goes, it took almost three decades to reconfigure the Ford Avenue intersection as well as make improvements as lane widenings from the US 9 split to I-287. That needed attention back in the mid 70's and finally got done this in the late 2000s. Even so, I think that grade separations would have been better at Ford Avenue than the double jughandles and long blocks. Yes they do cut down on the signal phases as that signal had three originally and now its down to two. Yes making a u turn requires a reverse jughandle on US 1 NB and Ford Avenue NB to get back the other way. Going SB on US 1 it takes a long drive around as there is no jughandles. You take a ramp past Ford Avenue over to the next block and double back to Ford Avenue and cross US 1 as no left turns are allowed there and one block over to Lafayette Avenue then take a right onto it, before going to the next cross street over and turn right again into a RIRO with NB US 1. However, shorter wait times and much more efficiency at that intersection.
Also at Grand Avenue further down the severing of Lafayette Avenue there and eliminating the small circle there, made that intersection's operational efficiency much better, and at Parsonage Road where a normal jughandle was replaced with a reverse jughandle which now allows 2 phases over 3 as well, because the Parsonage Road to NB US 1 now does not turn left but also goes around the jughandle as well so it and turning traffic from US 1 NB to Parsonage cross the highway simultaneously.
Maybe some more SPUIs may come to the Garden State someday like at NJ 35 and NJ 36 in Eatontown or at US 1 & 9 and NJ 439 in Elizabeth as those intersections could use them badly.
Quote
Maybe some more SPUIs may come to the Garden State someday like at NJ 35 and NJ 36 in Eatontown...
Being they reconstructed the intersection just 2 years ago, you're gonna be waiting a half century to see that reconstructed again!