What is the newest system interchange in each state? And by "new", I mean there was not a free-flow interchange there until one was built; I'm not looking at reconstructions of existing ones.
I'll leave the criteria for what constitutes a "system interchange" open-ended. It'll be more fun to discuss.
Wisconsin's answer is in Green Bay at I-41 and WI 29.
I-41 and US 10/WI 441 is newer, but there was a system interchange there already. It wasn't complete, though, so one could maybe argue that it's full build-out makes it "new".
Are you only talking about totally new interchanges on existing roads? If not, US 219 at Mud Pike in Somerset County, PA is our newest, having opened this past week. The interchanges at the north and south end of this new freeway segment already existed in their current configuration at the time of opening, albeit not fully open yet.
Kentucky's is the new one at Georgetown on I-75, between the existing US 62 and KY 620 exits. It was built in conjunction with a new access road to the Toyota plant.
Runner-up is probably either the new KY 3050 (Gifford Road) interchange on the Mountain Parkway in Magoffin County, built as part of the widening of the super-two section of the parkway, or Ring Road (KY 3005) and Western Kentucky Parkway at Elizabethtown.
Nevermind, if we are talking about freeway-to-freeway interchanges. In Kentucky's case, it would be the I-24/Pennyrile Parkway interchange that was built when the Pennyrile was finally completed.
The newest in California is probably Route 905 at Route 125/Route 11, though it is still not 100% complete. Next one upcoming is probably the Route 132/Route 99 semi-directional Y in Modesto that has been planned since the 1950s/1960s I-5W/I-5E concepts were in existence, followed by the proposals for a new Route 25/US 101 interchange south of Gilroy.
Other somewhat recent ones:
Route 99 in Atwater at the Atwater-Merced Expressway
Route 210 with I-15 and I-215 as part of the Foothill Freeway extension project (and all the interchanges between the two)
Route 241 south extension to Las Patrones Parkway in Las Flores
Interchanges along the Westside Parkway in Bakersfield (future Route 58)
For North Carolina, the Monroe US 74 Bypass just opened, so all of the interchanges along the bypass are new.
Indiana's will probably have to be along I-69 section 5, but it isn't really a "brand new" road, so that could be false. If your talking new road, then it would probably have to be SR 641.
Alabama's is probably I-65 @ I-22.
If we're talking about an existing highway...
I'm not going to know much about North Jersey, but in South Jersey I'd guess the newest one is Exit 7B on NJ 42, which was built (supposedly) to take pressure off an interchange a mile away...but also conveniently serves a new large outlet mall. This interchange opened in August, 2010.
Honorable mentions: Garden State Parkway Exit 41, which opened to remove an unofficial interchange that involved going thru the Parkway Service Plaza. And the GSP's Exit 9, 10 and 11 interchanges, which replaced intersections operated by traffic lights and RIROs.
Quote from: Interstate 69 Fan on November 30, 2018, 03:07:25 PM
Indiana's will probably have to be along I-69 section 5, but it isn't really a "brand new" road, so that could be false. If your talking new road, then it would probably have to be SR 641.
Section 5 of I-69 is not a new road, but the interchanges are new so those would be the newest ones.
The new I-75 express lanes in Cobb County that just opened include access to four roads that previously had no direct access (Terrell Mill Rd, GA 3 Conn, Big Shanty Rd, and Hickory Grove Rd).
If those don't count, then...maybe GA 316 at GA 20/124? I'm assuming interchanges further east on 316 don't count due to the intervening at-grades. Unless there's something in the southern half of the state that I've missed (entirely possible).
That's not counting interchanges that are currently under construction but haven't (AFAIK) opened yet, such as GA 400/GA 369.
If I define a system interchange as a free-flow freeway-to-freeway interchange, I'm pretty sure all the ones in Iowa have been that way since the freeways were constructed. I believe that would make the newest one IA 5 at I-35 in West Des Moines, built in 2002. That is, until the new interchange between US 30 and IA 100 in southwest Cedar Rapids opens soon.
If a system interchange is defined by ramp movements that were constructed to replace an intersection, then it would be the US 65/IA 330/IA 117 interchange northeast of Des Moines.
Quote from: dfilpus on November 30, 2018, 03:03:05 PM
For North Carolina, the Monroe US 74 Bypass just opened, so all of the interchanges along the bypass are new.
Yes, but the shelf life of "newest interchange" status in NC is like two weeks. :colorful:
The newest system interchange in Utah is the I-15/US 89/SR 67 interchange in Farmington (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9869588,-111.9033616,16z), which opened in 2008. However, you could argue that it was a reconstruction of a previously-existing system interchange involving only 15, 89, and SR-225. The southern terminus of Legacy (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8320506,-111.945719,16z) opened at the same time, but I don't think it qualifies as a system.
In which case, the newest would be the interchange complex involving I-80, I-215, and SR 154 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7660042,-111.969816,15z), which opened in 1986. (Both I-15/80 interchanges and the I-15/215 south interchange were reconstructed in 2001, but those already existed and so don't count.)
As fast as Utah is growing, there is definitely an aversion to building system interchanges there. Many of the newer freeways/expressways that were recently built actually end at a SPUI, such as US 40/189, SR 154, and SR 7. And don't get me started on the DDI at SR-201 and SR-154.
For Maryland it's one that I didn't realize was open yet. MD 97 @ Randolph Road. I have not seen any press release saying it's open. So I'm going by Google Maps.
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0582247,-77.0506684,18z/data=!5m1!1e1
https://www.weatherbug.com/traffic-cam/?latlng=39.057863,-77.049816
The next AFAIK will be the I-270 Exit @ Watkins Mill Road. That's slated to open in 2020.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 30, 2018, 02:33:50 PM
a free-flow interchange
↑ I think you had given the pertinent criterion up above.
↑Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 30, 2018, 02:33:50 PM
I'll leave the criteria for what constitutes a "system interchange" open-ended.
I don't consider it to be a system interchange unless every movement is free-flowing.
In Michigan:
The northern end of M-231 is a new interchange, since M-231 is new.
For existing roads with added interchanges, maybe the Larson Rd exit from I-96? (Howell area, Exit 140)
I don't see how this thread should be restricted to only new full-freeway to full-freeway interchanges, unless you consider totally new routes. Except for a few toll road examples, most intersecting freeways have full interchanges - they are added as part of the construction of the newer road.
Quote from: GaryV on November 30, 2018, 04:36:29 PM
I don't see how this thread should be restricted to only new full-freeway to full-freeway interchanges, unless you consider totally new routes. Except for a few toll road examples, most intersecting freeways have full interchanges - they are added as part of the construction of the newer road.
That only matters if you're looking for recent ones. The OP merely asked for the "newest", which is relative. Perhaps the newest one in your state is from 1995. It's still the newest.
I took this to mean freeway-to-freeway interchanges only. Not sure what the answer is for New York. Possibly I-290/I-990 for WNY.
Newest interchange I can think of in CO is I-25 at Castle Rock Pkwy in Castle Rock. That was completed in the last couple of years.
Newest freeway-to-freeway interchange is most likely the I-25/E-470/Northwest Pkwy interchange in the Thornton/Broomfield area. Although E-470 & I-70 is a work in progress (currently have to exit E-470 onto Gun Club Rd to get to EB I-70 and to get from WB I-70 to E-470, you have to take Gun Club.
CT: Probably the end of I-291 in Manchester. That was all done from scratch. I believe I-84's Exit 61 was simply skipped during the Great Widening and Renumbering.
RI: IDK, maybe RI 146 at I-295?
MA: Possibly US 44 and MA 3, that bypass was finished in the late 90s. Also might possibly be MA 57 at US 5 in Agawam, 57 was finished in the early 90s.
Quote from: triplemultiplexWhat is the newest system interchange in each state? And by "new", I mean there was not a free-flow interchange there until one was built; I'm not looking at reconstructions of existing ones.
I'll leave the criteria for what constitutes a "system interchange" open-ended. It'll be more fun to discuss.
Besides what kphoger mentioned in that you already kinda defined it already, it should be noted that FHWA defines system interchanges as interchanges between two freeway-grade facilities (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/modiv/programs/intersta/idp.cfm).
As to the question itself...
jdb1234 is correct with Alabama....I-22/I-65.
Minnesota's would be the I-94/MN 610 interchange that opened 2 years ago, though that is only a partial.
Mississippi's is clearly the new I-22/I-269 interchange that opened last year.
Due to lack of controlled-access facilities, Vermont only has 4 system interchanges in the entire state. The "newest" one would be I-91/93, completed in 1982. Though VT 279 is much newer (2004), the interchange it has with US 7 has been in use since the mid-1970s.
If freeway-to-freeway interchanges are what we're looking for, I'm pretty sure Georgia's newest one would be the south end of GA 400 at I-85, which looks like it opened in either 1994 or 1995.
Quote from: webny99 on November 30, 2018, 06:11:50 PM
I took this to mean freeway-to-freeway interchanges only. Not sure what the answer is for New York. Possibly I-290/I-990 for WNY.
The most recent ones I can think of off the top of my head are I-81/I-781 and I-87/I-84 (which was a PA-style Breezewood until under a decade ago).
So if we're talking freeway-to-freeway, then in MI it would be M-6 at I-196.
And hopefully some day it will be US-31 at I-94.
I think for Illinois it would currently be I-290 at IL 390, which will later be superseded by one of the I-490/O'Hare West Bypass interchanges. Probably IL 390 at I-490, then I-490 at I-294, with I-490 at I-90 being the last one.
For Arizona I would guess I-10/Loop 303. By late next year, it will be I-10/Loop 202 in west Phoenix.
FL 429 and FL 453 near Sorrento, FL.
The 3 new urban interchanges on US-17 Dominion Blvd. in Chesapeake VA.
Louisiana: I-49 @ I 220 in Shreveport.
Quote from: BeltwayThe 3 new urban interchanges on US-17 Dominion Blvd. in Chesapeake VA.
Those aren't system interchanges...not the way FHWA defines them or even the OP given what the OP said about "free flow".
Newest system interchange in Virginia isn't far away, though...the 264/164 interchange in Portsmouth.
It won't be open for another month or so, but 8th Street at I-49 in Bentonville, AR. Given the close proximity between 8th and 14th St (US 62E, AR 102 W) traffic will weave:
SB 49: 8th Street will exit UP the ramp from SB 49, but 14th St will exit UNDER 8th Street.
14th St to NB 49 will pass under 8th St before merging onto I-49.
Quote from: froggie on December 01, 2018, 09:05:58 AM
Quote from: BeltwayThe 3 new urban interchanges on US-17 Dominion Blvd. in Chesapeake VA.
Those aren't system interchanges...not the way FHWA defines them or even the OP given what the OP said about "free flow".
Newest system interchange in Virginia isn't far away, though...the 264/164 interchange in Portsmouth.
I-564 and the I-564 Connector?
^ Perhaps if they ever get Patriot's Crossing built. Right now it's effectively a glorified exit ramp to the marine terminal and Gate 6.
Quote from: froggie on December 01, 2018, 09:05:58 AM
Quote from: BeltwayThe 3 new urban interchanges on US-17 Dominion Blvd. in Chesapeake VA.
Those aren't system interchanges...not the way FHWA defines them or even the OP given what the OP said about "free flow".
Newest system interchange in Virginia isn't far away, though...the 264/164 interchange in Portsmouth.
The OP really wasn't clear enough, that is why I posted that. This is the first time I have seen the concept of a "system interchange" and IMO the term is too generic for denoting the type freeway-to-freeway interchange. People that know me know that I am picky about word usage in the English language!
Nevertheless, I now see that the concept of system interchange and service interchange has been defined in an FHWA publication --
"Transportation officials broadly classify interchanges based on their functionality. A system interchange carries traffic from one freeway to another via a network of ramps and connectors. A service interchange connects a freeway with local surface streets or arterials. Diamond, cloverleaf, and partial cloverleaf interchanges are typical examples of service interchanges."
Designing Complex Interchanges
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/publicroads/09novdec/01.cfm
So what do you call an interchange between two non-freeway roads? There are plenty of them in Hampton Roads and in Northern Virginia.
^ By FHWA's definition, they'd be service interchanges. Personally, I'd call some of them arterial interchanges (Northampton/Independence in Virginia Beach, for example), but I don't think FHWA further delineates beyond service or system. Nor does the Green Book IIRC.
Quote from: froggie on December 01, 2018, 12:59:51 PM
^ By FHWA's definition, they'd be service interchanges. Personally, I'd call some of them arterial interchanges (Northampton/Independence in Virginia Beach, for example), but I don't think FHWA further delineates beyond service or system. Nor does the Green Book IIRC.
I've call them arterial interchanges in the past, when the roads are all arterials or lessor. Other examples are Baileys Crossroads, Seven Corners, etc.
RI: probably RI 4 at RI 403 (c. 2006)
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on November 30, 2018, 08:28:00 PM
CT: Probably the end of I-291 in Manchester. That was all done from scratch. I believe I-84's Exit 61 was simply skipped during the Great Widening and Renumbering.
I would actually say the I-84/CT 72/CT 372 interchange in Plainville circa 2001-02. The ramps to and from CT 72 West to CT 372 (Exit 2 on 72), plus the Crooked St ramp to I-84 and CT 72 EB. Another one around that time was the completion of the Austin Rd interchange in Waterbury by adding a WB exit and EB entrance ramp.
In NJ, since I didn't list a service interchange before, maybe the 295/195/29 interchange near Trenton, and that opened roughly in 1995.
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 30, 2018, 03:54:27 PM
Quote from: Interstate 69 Fan on November 30, 2018, 03:07:25 PM
Indiana's will probably have to be along I-69 section 5, but it isn't really a "brand new" road, so that could be false. If your talking new road, then it would probably have to be SR 641.
Section 5 of I-69 is not a new road, but the interchanges are new so those would be the newest ones.
Sorry folks, but there are no "system" interchanges in Section 5 of I-69 (SIU #3), and the only one in Section 6 (at I-465) will not be complete (under present schedule) until 2025 or 2026. The recent conversion of the Meridian Street (US 31 North) interchange at I-465's Exit 31 in Carmel does partially qualify as a system interchange for the 3 freeway legs, but not for the south leg (Meridian St). And the closest thing SR 641 has to a system interchange, at I-70 & US 40 & SR 46, is nowhere near being a free-flowing design. So the likely "winner" for most recent ("newest") system interchange ("freeway-to-freeway") in Indiana appears to be still open for debate.
One could argue that the US 31 freeway's junction at the north terminus of Keystone Parkway might be considered to be a 3-leg system interchange with service interchanges at 146th Street & 151st Street interlaced within. If so that might qualify it for being the "newest system interchange" in the Hoosier State.
Oregon's are all fairly old... I'd guess I-82 @ I-84/US 30
Does anyone want to place bets on when Breezewood supplants I-95/PA Turnpike as the newest one in the Keystone State?
Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2018, 09:08:38 PM
Does anyone want to place bets on when Breezewood supplants I-95/PA Turnpike as the newest one in the Keystone State?
It would cost a small fraction the cost of the I-95 ramps. Estimate: $40 million.
In Iowa, the 100th St NW exit for I-35/80 opened in Urbandale in November.
As for Nebraska, I believe the newest interchange is US 75 and US 34 eastbound south of Bellevue. The newest one on the interstate highway system is the Kearney east interchange. in
Quote from: vdeane on November 30, 2018, 10:12:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 30, 2018, 06:11:50 PM
I took this to mean freeway-to-freeway interchanges only. Not sure what the answer is for New York. Possibly I-290/I-990 for WNY.
The most recent ones I can think of off the top of my head are I-81/I-781 and I-87/I-84 (which was a PA-style Breezewood until under a decade ago).
Can't believe I forgot about I-781!
I don't think I ever knew that I-84/I-87 got an overhaul, or that it wasn't a full connection beforehand.
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 09:27:58 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2018, 09:08:38 PM
Does anyone want to place bets on when Breezewood supplants I-95/PA Turnpike as the newest one in the Keystone State?
It would cost a small fraction the cost of the I-95 ramps. Estimate: $40 million.
Is that official or just a guess?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 08:37:40 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 09:27:58 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2018, 09:08:38 PM
Does anyone want to place bets on when Breezewood supplants I-95/PA Turnpike as the newest one in the Keystone State?
It would cost a small fraction the cost of the I-95 ramps. Estimate: $40 million.
Is that official or just a guess?
Breezewood would probably be at least a 9-figure fix, if not into the billions.
I have used the term system interchange multiple times on this forum, going back at least to 2013. Others have used it, as well as the phrase system to system interchange, which also appears in the technical literature.
As for Kansas, I suspect the most recent is either I-135/K-96 in Wichita, built circa 1987, or K-7/K-10 in metro KC, built between 1986 and 1991. Other freeways were built more recently, but these were either isolated segments (e.g. US 169 Spring Hill bypass) or plugged into the existing freeway network at locations that already existed as interchanges (e.g., US 75 south of Topeka).
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 08:37:40 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 09:27:58 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2018, 09:08:38 PM
Does anyone want to place bets on when Breezewood supplants I-95/PA Turnpike as the newest one in the Keystone State?
It would cost a small fraction the cost of the I-95 ramps. Estimate: $40 million.
Is that official or just a guess?
One ramp and one 45 mph loop would make the connection between I-70 and the Turnpike access highway. That is a reasonable estimate. The PTC and PennDOT have not produced any estimate so there is no official estimate.
Quote from: Beltway on December 02, 2018, 09:54:46 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 08:37:40 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 09:27:58 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2018, 09:08:38 PM
Does anyone want to place bets on when Breezewood supplants I-95/PA Turnpike as the newest one in the Keystone State?
It would cost a small fraction the cost of the I-95 ramps. Estimate: $40 million.
Is that official or just a guess?
One ramp and one 45 mph loop would make the connection between I-70 and the Turnpike access highway. That is a reasonable estimate. The PTC and PennDOT have not produced any estimate so there is no official estimate.
If you have a ticket system, you need a trumpet interchange with 4 ramps on either end. If you have an AET interchange, you still have 4 ramps, possibly high speed.
You also need access to Breezewood itself, so you have to work that interchange into the mix.
It's definitely a $100 - $300 million project.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 03, 2018, 12:01:31 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 02, 2018, 09:54:46 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 08:37:40 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 09:27:58 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2018, 09:08:38 PM
Does anyone want to place bets on when Breezewood supplants I-95/PA Turnpike as the newest one in the Keystone State?
It would cost a small fraction the cost of the I-95 ramps. Estimate: $40 million.
Is that official or just a guess?
One ramp and one 45 mph loop would make the connection between I-70 and the Turnpike access highway. That is a reasonable estimate. The PTC and PennDOT have not produced any estimate so there is no official estimate.
If you have a ticket system, you need a trumpet interchange with 4 ramps on either end. If you have an AET interchange, you still have 4 ramps, possibly high speed.
You don't. Two ramps will connect I-70 to westerly movements on the Turnpike access highway.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 03, 2018, 12:01:31 AM
You also need access to Breezewood itself, so you have to work that interchange into the mix.
Breezewood already has direct access to I-70 and the Turnpike access highway.
The ramps I propose would not interfere with that.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 03, 2018, 12:01:31 AM
It's definitely a $100 - $300 million project.
Wrong. Each ramp would be at most 1/3 mile long.
In British Columbia's Lower Mainland (metro Vancouver), definitely the South Fraser Perimeter Road's interchange with BC-99 (https://goo.gl/kErjda), seen under construction in this photo from 2011 (https://goo.gl/z5ZD57). It opened in December 2013 (https://goo.gl/ZPCdpR).
In Washington State, probably 1990, when I-90 finally reached I-5 (https://goo.gl/DXPWom) with free-flow ramps; the interchange was half-built in the 1960s, but I-90 ran on surface streets while design conflicts persisted. Three new full-service interchanges are planned for WA by the early 2030s: US-395 @ I-90 (https://goo.gl/Nb6VNQ), WA-509 @ I-5 (https://goo.gl/sAmyfV), and WA-167 @ I-5 (https://goo.gl/wmvfBf).
The Y-junction between current US-395 and the North Spokane Corridor (https://goo.gl/U8A335) opened in 2012, but not sure that's applicable on account of its simplicity.
Maine's newest interchange is a parclo located along I-95 at Trafton Road (https://goo.gl/maps/KGSVcmD7cAH2) south of Waterville. The new exit 124 opened in July 2017 (https://www.centralmaine.com/2017/07/14/new-trafton-road-interchange-opens-in-waterville/).
Quote from: webny99 on December 02, 2018, 03:41:42 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 30, 2018, 10:12:50 PM
Quote from: webny99 on November 30, 2018, 06:11:50 PM
I took this to mean freeway-to-freeway interchanges only. Not sure what the answer is for New York. Possibly I-290/I-990 for WNY.
The most recent ones I can think of off the top of my head are I-81/I-781 and I-87/I-84 (which was a PA-style Breezewood until under a decade ago).
Can't believe I forgot about I-781!
I don't think I ever knew that I-84/I-87 got an overhaul, or that it wasn't a full connection beforehand.
An honorable mention could be the I-86 (NY 17) and I-99 (US 15) interchange in Painted Post.
Sure, 84 and 781 are newer, but they're just trumpets. Painted Post has the free-flowing, high-speed characteristics that you expect from a
system interchange.
Quote from: Beltway on December 03, 2018, 12:33:12 AM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 03, 2018, 12:01:31 AM
Quote from: Beltway on December 02, 2018, 09:54:46 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 08:37:40 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 09:27:58 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2018, 09:08:38 PM
Does anyone want to place bets on when Breezewood supplants I-95/PA Turnpike as the newest one in the Keystone State?
It would cost a small fraction the cost of the I-95 ramps. Estimate: $40 million.
Is that official or just a guess?
One ramp and one 45 mph loop would make the connection between I-70 and the Turnpike access highway. That is a reasonable estimate. The PTC and PennDOT have not produced any estimate so there is no official estimate.
If you have a ticket system, you need a trumpet interchange with 4 ramps on either end. If you have an AET interchange, you still have 4 ramps, possibly high speed.
You don't. Two ramps will connect I-70 to westerly movements on the Turnpike access highway.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 03, 2018, 12:01:31 AM
You also need access to Breezewood itself, so you have to work that interchange into the mix.
Breezewood already has direct access to I-70 and the Turnpike access highway.
The ramps I propose would not interfere with that.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 03, 2018, 12:01:31 AM
It's definitely a $100 - $300 million project.
Wrong. Each ramp would be at most 1/3 mile long.
You still need I-70 to connect to the easterly PA Turnpike movements. Single-direction interchanges should be avoided whenever possible.
Proper interchanges should be a few miles apart, so you really shouldn't have the existing interchange and the proposed new interchange practically on top of each other. There's an interchange on I-70 just south of the PA Turnpike, along with the existing 70/76 interchange on the Turnpike.
You also need to look at the existing housing and businesses in the area and try to avoid them if at all possible.
A simple cloverleaf or diamond ramp interchange can be a 1/3 mile long. Most flyovers, especially achieving a 45 mph or so speed limit, are nearly a mile in length.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 03, 2018, 06:10:26 AM
You still need I-70 to connect to the easterly PA Turnpike movements. Single-direction interchanges should be avoided whenever possible.
It does connect to the easterly PA Turnpike movements. The current turnpike access highway connects to mainline turnpike thru the toll plaza and a trumpet interchange that accesses both directions of the turnpike.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 03, 2018, 06:10:26 AM
Proper interchanges should be a few miles apart, so you really shouldn't have the existing interchange and the proposed new interchange practically on top of each other. There's an interchange on I-70 just south of the PA Turnpike, along with the existing 70/76 interchange on the Turnpike.
There are ample transitions and spacing between these two proposed ramps and other parts of the highways and interchanges.
Jeff: Scott's idea is to locate his two ramps east of the toll plaza. Existing 70 and the Breezewood side of the Turnpike connector would serve as the connections to Breezewood.
Quote from: SSR_317 on December 01, 2018, 03:40:11 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on November 30, 2018, 03:54:27 PM
Quote from: Interstate 69 Fan on November 30, 2018, 03:07:25 PM
Indiana's will probably have to be along I-69 section 5, but it isn't really a "brand new" road, so that could be false. If your talking new road, then it would probably have to be SR 641.
Section 5 of I-69 is not a new road, but the interchanges are new so those would be the newest ones.
Sorry folks, but there are no "system" interchanges in Section 5 of I-69 (SIU #3), and the only one in Section 6 (at I-465) will not be complete (under present schedule) until 2025 or 2026. The recent conversion of the Meridian Street (US 31 North) interchange at I-465's Exit 31 in Carmel does partially qualify as a system interchange for the 3 freeway legs, but not for the south leg (Meridian St). And the closest thing SR 641 has to a system interchange, at I-70 & US 40 & SR 46, is nowhere near being a free-flowing design. So the likely "winner" for most recent ("newest") system interchange ("freeway-to-freeway") in Indiana appears to be still open for debate.
One could argue that the US 31 freeway's junction at the north terminus of Keystone Parkway might be considered to be a 3-leg system interchange with service interchanges at 146th Street & 151st Street interlaced within. If so that might qualify it for being the "newest system interchange" in the Hoosier State.
I guess I didn't understand the definition of "system interchange". However, isn't I-465/US 31 newer than US 31/Keystone?
I agree with Beltway--at Breezewood, basic free-flow connectivity with full access to both directions of the Turnpike can easily be provided through two ramps connecting I-70 to the Turnpike access road, which is so short that tight ramp spacing should not be an issue.
It is not for reasons of cost that Breezewood has never been eliminated. The Bedford County planning commission is owned by the Breezewood interests, so it will never go along with a plan to cut their throats, and Pennsylvania's system of local project initiation gives them what is effectively an absolute veto. I like C.P. Zilliacus' idea (aired occasionally on the road-related Facebook groups) of applying federal coercion by cancelling the tax-exempt status of PTC bonds if a plan to remedy Breezewood is not developed and pursued.
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on November 30, 2018, 08:28:00 PM
MA: Possibly US 44 and MA 3, that bypass was finished in the late 90s.
US 44 bypass and MA 3 was opened to traffic in late 2003. So that would qualify as the newest "system to system" interchange in the state.
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 30, 2018, 02:46:59 PM
Are you only talking about totally new interchanges on existing roads? If not, US 219 at Mud Pike in Somerset County, PA is our newest, having opened this past week. The interchanges at the north and south end of this new freeway segment already existed in their current configuration at the time of opening, albeit not fully open yet.
By that definition, RI's is exit to off of I-295 to RI-5. But it seems that people are defining this as "limited access highway -> limited access highway."
Quote from: J N Winkler on December 03, 2018, 11:19:11 AM
I agree with Beltway--at Breezewood, basic free-flow connectivity with full access to both directions of the Turnpike can easily be provided through two ramps connecting I-70 to the Turnpike access road, which is so short that tight ramp spacing should not be an issue.
Yes indeed. That would provide an adequate connection to the ticket-based turnpike system, and would remain usable if the turnpike went to all-electronic tolling. Building a conventional freeway-to-freeway interchange between I-70 and the turnpike would be a much larger and more involved project, and may have to wait for a number of years to be funded after the turnpike goes to AET.
Quote from: J N Winkler on December 03, 2018, 11:19:11 AM
It is not for reasons of cost that Breezewood has never been eliminated. The Bedford County planning commission is owned by the Breezewood interests, so it will never go along with a plan to cut their throats, and Pennsylvania's system of local project initiation gives them what is effectively an absolute veto. I like C.P. Zilliacus' idea (aired occasionally on the road-related Facebook groups) of applying federal coercion by cancelling the tax-exempt status of PTC bonds if a plan to remedy Breezewood is not developed and pursued.
I like the idea also, but that would be an active measure to influence state highway policy, and I'm not sure if FHWA has ever done that before.
I noted on my recent trip to Breezewood that the local business community seems to be getting smaller and smaller. Lots of abandoned buildings and vacant lots, and many of the businesses that are there appear to be corporate locations (Starbucks, Sheetz, the two truck stops, etc.) instead of locally-owned. I can't foresee the businesses there carrying any kind of clout anymore to prevent a direct connection. Anyone who needs to stop is going to stop; there really isn't anything of significance east of Breezewood until you get to Hagerstown.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 02, 2018, 08:42:20 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on December 02, 2018, 08:37:40 PM
Quote from: Beltway on December 01, 2018, 09:27:58 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 01, 2018, 09:08:38 PM
Does anyone want to place bets on when Breezewood supplants I-95/PA Turnpike as the newest one in the Keystone State?
It would cost a small fraction the cost of the I-95 ramps. Estimate: $40 million.
Is that official or just a guess?
Breezewood would probably be at least a 9-figure fix, if not into the billions.
Not really, I fully agree with the thoughts of just adding a couple of slip ramps between the existing ticket tollgate and the I-70 south mainline. It would be very similar in set up to the I-95 slip ramps, but in a much less congested location. The biggest impediment there has always been local political, not cost.
The topography is also very similar to what was encountered where the new flyover ramp was recently built at I-70/79 (southeast split).
Mike
As for Wisconsin, there are several 'new' system interchanges that were completed over the past 20 or so years, including US 53/WI 29 (Hallie Interchange); I-94/WI 35 southeast split (relocated Hudson Interchange); US 51/WI 29 northwest split (Wausau Interchange); US 10/US 45, both splits (Dale and Winchester Interchanges); I-41/US 45 northernmost split in Oshkosh (Algoma Interchange) and the I-39/US 10 northwest split (Marshfield Interchange).
I agree that Wisconsin's 'newest' is the I-41/WI 32 'Shawano Interchange' in the Green Bay area, it supplemented an existing street-level conventional diamond interchange that still includes WI 29. The recently rebuilt I-41/US 10/WI 441 Bridgeview (soon to be 'Ellis'?) Interchange between Appleton and Neenah was a completely re-engineered existing system interchange.
Mike
Quote from: froggie on December 01, 2018, 11:00:33 AM
^ Perhaps if they ever get Patriot's Crossing built. Right now it's effectively a glorified exit ramp to the marine terminal and Gate 6.
Not a full interchange anyway, easterly connections only.
[I-564 and the I-564 Intermodal Connector]
For Ohio, I believe it is probably the two interchanges of US-23 and US-30 near Upper Sandusky, at either end of their concurrency.
Wow I didn't expect to surprise my roadgeeks with a term I've taken for granted since I was basically a kid. :-D
Some explanation about my attempt to sound ambiguous about the term "system interchange". I am with the FHWA in that it is a free-flow junction between controlled access facilities. But we all know of many places where two freeways are about to meet, but one of them 'gives up' before the junction and there are stoplights or cross traffic or some other, lower grade interchange between the major corridors. Wisconsin had a some of these that were upgraded recently like the aforementioned US 51/WI 29 west interchange in Wausau. It's still the junction between two major, high-capacity corridors, but it is not free-flow. Like the existing junction between I-94 and WI 29 in Elk Mound. I would just be open to thinking of those kinds of junctions as 'system interchanges'.
Examples:
US 52 & I-90 near Rochester, MN.
US 24 & I-469 in Ft. Wayne.
US 127 north & I-94 in Jackson, MI.
US 20 & I-15 in Idaho Falls.
Texas is the king of this, with their frontage roads; two freeways cross, but any turning movement involves traffic signals.
At each of these, a freeway/expressway is "missing" it's free flow exchange with another freeway, but I thought some may wish to still consider them "system interchanges".
I consider US 31 & I-465 to be the newest system interchange in Indiana, by the way. The same criteria by which I-41/WI 29 is the newest in WI. It would have displaced I-69/IN 37 in Bloomington as newest, in my opinion. (assuming I've got that timeline correct in my head)
<edit>
For additional clarity, a loop ramp absolutely counts as 'free flow'. I get the impression some are assuming the ramps have to be high-speed, but no, they need only be unencumbered by cross traffic or signals.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 03, 2018, 08:34:41 PM
For additional clarity, a loop ramp absolutely counts as 'free flow'. I get the impression some are assuming the ramps have to be high-speed, but no, they need only be unencumbered by cross traffic or signals.
Wait, so signals are okay, or no?
If yes, WA's changes to Hwy 509 @ I-705 in Tacoma; the 509 was a new-build freeway, intersecting I-705 at a SPUI. It opened in 1995: https://goo.gl/CPnCCx
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 03, 2018, 08:34:41 PM
Examples:
US 52 & I-90 near Rochester, MN.
I wouldn't even include this one in a broader definition, considering US-52 becomes a two-lane road south of the interchange.
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on December 03, 2018, 08:45:00 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 03, 2018, 08:34:41 PM
Examples:
US 52 & I-90 near Rochester, MN.
I wouldn't even include this one in a broader definition, considering US-52 becomes a two-lane road south of the interchange.
He also gave a 👍 to US-31/I-465 in Carmel, Indiana (which includes two traffic lights as well), where US-31 becomes traffic light-infested immediately after 465.
Quote from: jakeroot on December 03, 2018, 08:47:17 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on December 03, 2018, 08:45:00 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 03, 2018, 08:34:41 PM
Examples:
US 52 & I-90 near Rochester, MN.
I wouldn't even include this one in a broader definition, considering US-52 becomes a two-lane road south of the interchange.
He also gave a to US-31/I-465 in Carmel, Indiana (which includes two traffic lights as well), where US-31 becomes traffic light-infested immediately after 465.
I think he's talking about the interchange on the
south side of Indy (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.6986621,-86.1496319,16.34z), which looks more or less okay (there are a couple intersections with side streets, but they're arguably not really part of this).
EDIT: Well, the interchange itself is free-flowing, anyway, but US 31 doesn't continue as a freeway in either direction from there. Never mind, that's not it either.
Quote from: Eth on December 03, 2018, 09:16:35 PM
EDIT: Well, the interchange itself is free-flowing, anyway, but US 31 doesn't continue as a freeway in either direction from there. Never mind, that's not it either.
I did forget about that interchange, but the bigger disqualifier is that, unlike the junction in Carmel, this one is quite old. The Carmel junction is brand new.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 03, 2018, 08:34:41 PMWow I didn't expect to surprise my roadgeeks with a term I've taken for granted since I was basically a kid. :-D
I think the surprise came more from the suggestion that there was any ambiguity in the generally accepted definition.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 03, 2018, 08:34:41 PMSome explanation about my attempt to sound ambiguous about the term "system interchange". I am with the FHWA in that it is a free-flow junction between controlled access facilities. But we all know of many places where two freeways are about to meet, but one of them 'gives up' before the junction and there are stoplights or cross traffic or some other, lower grade interchange between the major corridors. Wisconsin had a some of these that were upgraded recently like the aforementioned US 51/WI 29 west interchange in Wausau. It's still the junction between two major, high-capacity corridors, but it is not free-flow. Like the existing junction between I-94 and WI 29 in Elk Mound. I would just be open to thinking of those kinds of junctions as 'system interchanges'.
As I see it, the biggest problem with the "most recent" aspect of your question is that interchanges with this form of phased construction are expressly excluded. For example, K-96/US 54 is currently not a freeway-to-freeway interchange since US 54 has flat intersections on either side, but it will become Kansas' most recently built system interchange once the Kellogg freeway is extended east to K-96. Yet it cannot count under the terms set forth in the OP, which seems to be asking for the most recently built interchange between two freeways where both facilities have been built on completely new location.
Since it can be valuable to narrow the question in this somewhat artificial way to get at which states are opening brand-new freeway corridors, and it is in any case often difficult to distinguish phased construction from reconstruction or expansion, I would expect most people to play along rather than push back against this constraint. That is what I tried to do.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 03, 2018, 08:34:41 PM
Wow I didn't expect to surprise my roadgeeks with a term I've taken for granted since I was basically a kid. :-D
I'm more of an old roadmap guy than n expert roadgeek, Were there an exam requirement to post here, I'd probably score a 64.
Quote from: jon daly on December 04, 2018, 06:21:39 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 03, 2018, 08:34:41 PM
Wow I didn't expect to surprise my roadgeeks with a term I've taken for granted since I was basically a kid. :-D
I'm more of an old roadmap guy than n expert roadgeek, Were there an exam requirement to post here, I'd probably score a 64.
You're not alone. This thread is the first I'd heard of a "system interchange."
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on December 04, 2018, 07:05:52 AM
Quote from: jon daly on December 04, 2018, 06:21:39 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 03, 2018, 08:34:41 PM
Wow I didn't expect to surprise my roadgeeks with a term I've taken for granted since I was basically a kid. :-D
I'm more of an old roadmap guy than n expert roadgeek, Were there an exam requirement to post here, I'd probably score a 64.
You're not alone. This thread is the first I'd heard of a "system interchange."
Same here.
Quote from: 1 on December 04, 2018, 07:12:02 AM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on December 04, 2018, 07:05:52 AM
Quote from: jon daly on December 04, 2018, 06:21:39 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 03, 2018, 08:34:41 PM
Wow I didn't expect to surprise my roadgeeks with a term I've taken for granted since I was basically a kid. :-D
I'm more of an old roadmap guy than n expert roadgeek, Were there an exam requirement to post here, I'd probably score a 64.
You're not alone. This thread is the first I'd heard of a "system interchange."
Same here.
Same here. And worked for a state DOT for 43 years.
^ Seems that VDOT and PennDOT didn't bother with the term. But I know from personal experience that MnDOT and AASHTO (in the Green Book) do.
(EDIT): I've found some VDOT project study references that use the system/service interchange terminology, so maybe it was just Scott's unit that didn't use the terms.
Quote from: froggie on December 04, 2018, 07:33:41 AM
^ Seems that VDOT and PennDOT didn't bother with the term. But I know from personal experience that MnDOT and AASHTO (in the Green Book) do.
What makes you think that the highway material that I have been reading online for the last 20 years is restricted to two states; it has been from most states as well and FHWA and other publications. An internet search reveals relatively few cites as defined here. Like I said before, it is a poorly designed term that is too general-sounding to be meaningful to most readers.
^ You referenced your state DOT work and I recall those being the two states you worked for. No need to get all defensive.
Quote from: Eth on November 30, 2018, 10:06:34 PM
If freeway-to-freeway interchanges are what we're looking for, I'm pretty sure Georgia's newest one would be the south end of GA 400 at I-85, which looks like it opened in either 1994 or 1995.
The ramps carrying traffic from I-85 south to GA-400 north, and from GA-400 south to I-85 north, are only about a decade old.
I'm pretty sure the interchange at GA-316 and the Athens Bypass is newer than 1994 or 1995.
Quote from: froggie on December 04, 2018, 08:11:42 AM
^ You referenced your state DOT work and I recall those being the two states you worked for. No need to get all defensive.
You started posting on misc.transport.road in 1998, IIRC, and have regularly posted on various roads/highways forums since then, as I have. I don't recall the term "system interchange" ever being mentioned before this thread, as far as what is commonly referred to as a freeway-to-freeway interchange. Do you?
Granted there are so many threads on AAROADS forum that I only read a small portion of them, mainly in the areas of this part of the country.
Quote from: Beltway on December 04, 2018, 09:43:43 AM
Quote from: froggie on December 04, 2018, 08:11:42 AM
^ You referenced your state DOT work and I recall those being the two states you worked for. No need to get all defensive.
You started posting on misc.transport.road in 1998, IIRC, and have regularly posted on various roads/highways forums since then, as I have. I don't recall the term "system interchange" ever being mentioned before this thread, as far as what is commonly referred to as a freeway-to-freeway interchange. Do you?
Granted there are so many threads on AAROADS forum that I only read a small portion of them, mainly in the areas of this part of the country.
Googling site:aaroads.com/forum "system interchange" (https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=site.aaroads.com/forum+%22system+interchange%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8) (which works better than the built-in forum search) gives 112 results. For comparison, this is thread #24025.
Quote from: abefroman329 on December 04, 2018, 09:23:05 AM
Quote from: Eth on November 30, 2018, 10:06:34 PM
If freeway-to-freeway interchanges are what we're looking for, I'm pretty sure Georgia's newest one would be the south end of GA 400 at I-85, which looks like it opened in either 1994 or 1995.
The ramps carrying traffic from I-85 south to GA-400 north, and from GA-400 south to I-85 north, are only about a decade old.
Those particular ramps opened around 2014, but they were additions to the existing interchange.
Quote from: abefroman329 on December 04, 2018, 09:23:05 AM
I'm pretty sure the interchange at GA-316 and the Athens Bypass is newer than 1994 or 1995.
Not a free-flowing interchange, nor is that part of 316 a freeway.
Quote from: 1 on December 04, 2018, 09:57:53 AMGoogling site:aaroads.com/forum "system interchange" (https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=site.aaroads.com/forum+%22system+interchange%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8) (which works better than the built-in forum search) gives 112 results. For comparison, this is thread #24025.
Forum search works well enough for identifying instances of {"system interchange"} if one goes to "Home" and runs the search from there. I get four pages of results with up to 30 results per page going back to the establishment of this forum in 2009. I think a post I wrote on 2009-06-15 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1138.msg27314#msg27314) may be the oldest occurrence on this forum, but I am far from the only one to have used it. Roadfro (NV), Deathtopumpkins (VA), and Mgk920 (WI) have all used it in conversations in which I had no involvement.
It does not surprise me that the term
system interchange comes very naturally to Wisconsin-based users such as Mgk920 and Triplemultiplex. WisDOT has spent years and billions on updating old and marginally competent freeway-to-freeway interchanges that were originally built to directional designs. With the substantial completion of the Zoo Interchange expansion in Milwaukee, Wisconsin is also the newest US state with at least one Maltese cross stack. Googling {site:wisconsindot.gov "system interchange"} returns 66 hits, the top of which is a link to FDM 11-30, the section of WisDOT's facilities design manual that deals with interchanges.
^ Regarding Wisconsin and system interchanges, a quick search of MTR finds a number of references to such from both MGK and Craig Holl. Even before I did that search, I recalled MGK using the term on MTR on several occasions. There was also an MTR thread from 2002 from a "Mr Sparkle" about Interstate-to-Interstate interchanges that were not full system interchanges, though I must've missed that thread at the time because I was on deployment.
Quote from: J N Winkler on December 04, 2018, 11:12:03 AM
Quote from: 1 on December 04, 2018, 09:57:53 AMGoogling site:aaroads.com/forum "system interchange" (https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=site.aaroads.com/forum+%22system+interchange%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8) (which works better than the built-in forum search) gives 112 results. For comparison, this is thread #24025.
Forum search works well enough for identifying instances of {"system interchange"} if one goes to "Home" and runs the search from there. I get four pages of results with up to 30 results per page going back to the establishment of this forum in 2009. I think a post I wrote on 2009-06-15 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1138.msg27314#msg27314) may be the oldest occurrence on this forum, but I am far from the only one to have used it. Roadfro (NV), Deathtopumpkins (VA), and Mgk920 (WI) have all used it in conversations in which I had no involvement.
For some reason, forum search always tells me there's only a single page unless the number of results is just the slightest bit above 30. It's been that way for me since I came here.
I can't say I'd ever heard "system interchange", but it wasn't beyond my comprehension to figure out what it meant. In fact, it sounds like a term I might actually use and get funny looks from the general population (sort of like "freeway"! ;-)). I am just realizing as I type this post that I tend to use "network" instead of "system". The two are basically synonymous as far as I am concerned.
Systems are intriguing to me, and while all of the roads in a given place could be considered a system, the systems I find most intriguing are freeway systems - excluding all surface streets, anything with traffic signals, at-grade intersections, and so on. Relatedly, one freeway system I detest (and there are not many) is that of Lexington, KY. It is not visually appealing, but more importantly, it is very disjointed and incoherent, requiring surface streets to transition between freeways, and a partial beltway that must be frustrating to drive. Perhaps what is most irksome is that you cannot use those freeways to get between one part of the metro area and another. Sure, they exist, but they don't function as a complete system to provide the fastest travel times between one area and another, and don't provide that much value to the average commuter. I've had similar thoughts about some Canadian cities, including Vancouver and Winnipeg.
Quote from: webny99 on December 04, 2018, 01:07:45 PM
Systems are intriguing to me, and while all of the roads in a given place could be considered a system, the systems I find most intriguing are freeway systems - excluding all surface streets, anything with traffic signals, at-grade intersections, and so on. Relatedly, one freeway system I detest (and there are not many) is that of Lexington, KY. It is not visually appealing, but more importantly, it is very disjointed and incoherent, requiring surface streets to transition between freeways, and a partial beltway that must be frustrating to drive. Perhaps what is most irksome is that you cannot use those freeways to get between one part of the metro area and another. Sure, they exist, but they don't function as a complete system to provide the fastest travel times between one area and another, and don't provide that much value to the average commuter. I've had similar thoughts about some Canadian cities, including Vancouver and Winnipeg.
Same. I'm even the type likely to evaluate an apartment based on how useful the local freeway system would be for various trips (for example, trips to the east wouldn't use Rochester's freeway system at all if taken from an eastern exurb (NY 250/NY 104 being faster) or southern Henrietta (Thruway is closer), and even larger swaths of Buffalo and Syracuse have similar issues).
I don't understand what's going on with Vancouver. They basically have two freeway systems connected only by the SFPR, an at-grade expressway. This does seem to happen more often in Canada, probably because of an overall lower population density combined with less of a tendency towards suburban sprawl. Another one that annoys me is Ottawa/Gatineau.
For the record... I've never worked for a DOT or any other technical profession like that, yet I knew instantly what a "system interchange" was. Not really sure where I picked it up, but it was already a part of my lexicon. It may or may not have been from this forum.
Quote from: froggie on December 04, 2018, 11:30:45 AM
^ Regarding Wisconsin and system interchanges, a quick search of MTR finds a number of references to such from both MGK and Craig Holl. Even before I did that search, I recalled MGK using the term on MTR on several occasions. There was also an MTR thread from 2002 from a "Mr Sparkle" about Interstate-to-Interstate interchanges that were not full system interchanges, though I must've missed that thread at the time because I was on deployment.
I suppose I could have acted "super smart" and not indicate that I had not heard the term before... :nod: ... but part of the issue is that I initially thought "what system is referred to"? The whole highway system? One of the recognized sub-systems that are called "systems" by the DOTs? As in Interstate system, primary system, secondary system and urban system. Interchanges are not necessarily on a freeway, most are but quite a few aren't.
I was aware of the phrase "system interchange" before I knew this forum existed. I know Utah (UDOT) has used the term in various brochures, handouts, etc. In addition, I don't think anyone has mentioned the Wikipedia page...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interchange_(road)#System_interchange
Quote from: J N Winkler on December 03, 2018, 11:19:11 AM
I like C.P. Zilliacus' idea (aired occasionally on the road-related Facebook groups) of applying federal coercion by cancelling the tax-exempt status of PTC bonds if a plan to remedy Breezewood is not developed and pursued.
I also kind of wonder what would happen if, instead of that "stick", the feds used a "carrot" and said that USDOT would pay 100% of it. The 2 ramps would get built, and neither PennDOT nor the PTC would have to alter their long term/short term budget one cent.
I'm curious as to whether any local interests could still manage to derail such a tempting "carrot". Obviously, if they have cause due to the planning, they (local interests) could sue to try and stop it, but I have a feeling that the PTC & PennDOT probably wouldn't give in so easily and lose some free ramps.
Not that I'm trying to derail this thread into yet another Breezewood thread either.........
Quote from: Mr_Northside on December 04, 2018, 06:12:55 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on December 03, 2018, 11:19:11 AM
I like C.P. Zilliacus' idea (aired occasionally on the road-related Facebook groups) of applying federal coercion by cancelling the tax-exempt status of PTC bonds if a plan to remedy Breezewood is not developed and pursued.
I also kind of wonder what would happen if, instead of that "stick", the feds used a "carrot" and said that USDOT would pay 100% of it. The 2 ramps would get built, and neither PennDOT nor the PTC would have to alter their long term/short term budget one cent.
I'm curious as to whether any local interests could still manage to derail such a tempting "carrot". Obviously, if they have cause due to the planning, they (local interests) could sue to try and stop it, but I have a feeling that the PTC & PennDOT probably wouldn't give in so easily and lose some free ramps.
Not sure how tempting that alone would be... how about a twofer to really be tempting?
Offer both Breezewood and Carlisle (I-81) turnpike direct interchanges, 100% federally funded and beyond their regular FHWA funding.
Quote from: Eth on November 30, 2018, 10:06:34 PM
If freeway-to-freeway interchanges are what we're looking for, I'm pretty sure Georgia's newest one would be the south end of GA 400 at I-85, which looks like it opened in either 1994 or 1995.
The last stretch of 400, including that interchange, opened in 1993. I suppose that's the newest, unless...
...one includes Sugarloaf Parkway at GA 316, c. 2012. 316 is actually an at-grade expressway here with no driveway access and roughly a mile from the interchange to an intersection in each direction. However, the interchange is a free-flowing trumpet that's designed to remain free-flowing as 316 is converted to a freeway in the coming decades and Sugarloaf is extended as a freeway to the north.
And, I'm in the "Doesn't everyone here know what system and service interchanges are?" camp.
Quote from: vdeane on December 04, 2018, 01:33:59 PM
I'm even the type likely to evaluate an apartment based on how useful the local freeway system would be for various trips (for example, trips to the east wouldn't use Rochester's freeway system at all if taken from an eastern exurb (NY 250/NY 104 being faster) or southern Henrietta (Thruway is closer), and even larger swaths of Buffalo and Syracuse have similar issues).
Yeah, Rochester's eastern (and especially southeastern) suburbs are frustrating. NY 31 and NY 250 are among the most chronically congested/slow moving routes outside the outer loop. I don't envy anyone living or otherwise commuting to/from the Fairport area, as there is just no fast way to get
anywhere. Turning NY 441 into a full freeway to Walworth is one of my pipe dreams, as is a Victor to Webster freeway, possibly as a realigned NY 250.
QuoteI don't understand what's going on with Vancouver. They basically have two freeway systems connected only by the SFPR, an at-grade expressway. This does seem to happen more often in Canada, probably because of an overall lower population density combined with less of a tendency towards suburban sprawl.
I've been to the Vancouver area twice, and found the lack of freeways to be less of an issue getting to/from/between the suburbs, and more of an issue with the urban core itself, which is
entirely devoid of freeways. They desperately need the equivalent of a 3di connecting downtown to the TransCanada Highway. It takes
forever just to get from downtown to the freeway, and there is no alternative to passing through some pretty gritty areas.
Winnipeg, on the other hand, has no freeway network at all, aside from some upgraded segments of their perimeter highway. Basically every through road has become a six+ lane congested mess, like NY 104 in Greece and NY 78 near Buffalo.
QuoteAnother one that annoys me is Ottawa/Gatineau.
I resent that the two networks are completely separate and you must pass directly through the city center to get from one to the other. Taken on it's own, though, Ottawa's network seems to be simple and workable enough. ON 416 and ON 417 are actually some of Ontario's better freeways (IMO) and at least the latter gets close enough to downtown that it's useful to commuters.
Quote from: webny99 on December 04, 2018, 10:02:35 PM
Yeah, Rochester's eastern (and especially southeastern) suburbs are frustrating. NY 31 and NY 250 are among the most chronically congested/slow moving routes outside the outer loop. I don't envy anyone living or otherwise commuting to/from the Fairport area, as there is just no fast way to get anywhere. Turning NY 441 into a full freeway to Walworth is one of my pipe dreams, as is a Victor to Webster freeway, possibly as a realigned NY 250.
Looks like the originally proposed Pittsford-Webster Expressway.
http://nysroads.com/planned.php
Quote
I resent that the two networks are completely separate and you must pass directly through the city center to get from one to the other. Taken on it's own, though, Ottawa's network seems to be simple and workable enough. ON 416 and ON 417 are actually some of Ontario's better freeways (IMO) and at least the latter gets close enough to downtown that it's useful to commuters.
It certainly looks like each province ignored the existence of the other when building their networks. I'd love to see something connecting A-5 and ON 417 as well as an extension of A-50 to the west along QC 148.
Quote from: vdeane on December 05, 2018, 12:56:28 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 04, 2018, 10:02:35 PM
one of my pipe dreams, a Victor to Webster freeway, possibly as a realigned NY 250.
Looks like the originally proposed Pittsford-Webster Expressway.
http://nysroads.com/planned.php
Yeah, I've actually considered tying a fictional Webster-Victor freeway into I-490 just north of Eastview Mall, i.e. the southern half would head due south instead of southwest. Even
without a freeway, an extension of NY 250 to I-490 would be very handy.
Interesting that NY-286 was recommended to be a freeway corridor, while NY 441 is the busier (and more congested) of the two, carrying a lot more long distance traffic. NY 286 has its share of congestion as well, but only on the two lane segment, whereas NY-441 through Penfield is bad even with four lanes.
Quote
It certainly looks like each province ignored the existence of the other when building their networks.
Not too surprising, given the way Quebec seems to ignore the rest of Canada and do their own thing as much as possible! :-D
Quote from: webny99 on December 05, 2018, 01:06:58 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 05, 2018, 12:56:28 PM
Quote from: webny99 on December 04, 2018, 10:02:35 PM
one of my pipe dreams, a Victor to Webster freeway, possibly as a realigned NY 250.
Looks like the originally proposed Pittsford-Webster Expressway.
http://nysroads.com/planned.php
Yeah, I've actually considered tying a fictional Webster-Victor freeway into I-490 just north of Eastview Mall, i.e. the southern half would head due south instead of southwest. Even without a freeway, an extension of NY 250 to I-490 would be very handy.
Interesting that NY-286 was recommended to be a freeway corridor, while NY 441 is the busier (and more congested) of the two, carrying a lot more long distance traffic. NY 286 has its share of congestion as well, but only on the two lane segment, whereas NY-441 through Penfield is bad even with four lanes.
Given that NY 286 has the western end shown as "complete", I'm not convinced that the proposed network was entirely freeway. Looks like it curved southwest to tie into the Pittsford Bypass. I do also find it interesting that NY 441 doesn't appear at all on there.
Quote
Quote
It certainly looks like each province ignored the existence of the other when building their networks.
Not too surprising, given the way Quebec seems to ignore the rest of Canada and do their own thing as much as possible! :-D
And yet they're the one that built an autoroute to the border.
For fun I've begun compiling a map of each state's "newest system interchange." Fills, corrections and discussion welcome. Naturally, this is just a first draft and I'll make updates as time goes on.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi113.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fn208%2Ftriplemultiplex%2FHighway%2520System%2Fdraft1_zpsovbajrkl.jpg&hash=e0451a752ecce29f7219800025473a5a94c83cf1)
Tough to say for sure what year something opened in many cases since there are many interchanges where part of it opens one year, and the rest later.
I'll comment about Rhode Island right at the top. Since that interchange was so dramatically relocated, I consider it "new" rather than just another rebuild.
And yes, I know I'm getting ahead of the game on I-295. Hell, I'm not even sure that's the right answer for the Tar Heel State.
I-264 and VA-164 MLK Freeway, Portsmouth, in 2016.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 05, 2018, 10:23:31 PM
For fun I've begun compiling a map of each state's "newest system interchange." Fills, corrections and discussion welcome. Naturally, this is just a first draft and I'll make updates as time goes on.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi113.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fn208%2Ftriplemultiplex%2FHighway%2520System%2Fdraft1_zpsovbajrkl.jpg&hash=e0451a752ecce29f7219800025473a5a94c83cf1)
Tough to say for sure what year something opened in many cases since there are many interchanges where part of it opens one year, and the rest later.
I'll comment about Rhode Island right at the top. Since that interchange was so dramatically relocated, I consider it "new" rather than just another rebuild.
And yes, I know I'm getting ahead of the game on I-295. Hell, I'm not even sure that's the right answer for the Tar Heel State.
For PA, it's 95/276, not 95/476.
I suppose DE's current newest before the new 301's opening would be DE 1 and the Puncheon Run Connector, technically a distinct freeway. Otherwise, it would be whichever junction between I-95 and 495 was built later.
If the definition of a "system connector" is exclusive to full limited-access freeways, then the border-hugging CA 905/125/11 interchange cited earlier would certainly be CA's most recent -- and likely to be the last completely new one deployed until such time as the CA 58/Westside freeway connects to I-5. However, if the term could be extended to controlled-access facilities, such as expressways with local grade crossings but periodic interchanges, such as the CA 111/78/86 corridor from I-8 north to I-10 in Imperial and Riverside counties, things might be changing close to home (San Jose), thanks to the continuation of the gas tax increase. I've gone into detail about this in another thread, but there may be two system interchanges as part of the same project -- the upgrade of CA 25 to an expressway (with periodic interchanges) from Hollister north to its US 101 terminus, which will be rebuilt as a free-flowing facility -- but as a bonus (if funds allow) a 2nd interchange with a rerouted CA 152 extending east from CA 25 to the present 152/156 "split" may be at least partially constructed as part of the overall CA 25 project. The 101/25 interchange will likely be a large-radius trumpet, while a 25/152 divergence will probably, because of the proximity of the CA 156 connector from just north of Hollister to EB 152, be a directional wye. If deployed in this fashion, the section from US 101 to the 25/152 split would be co-signed with both route numbers; CA 152 would then multiplex north with US 101 to access its Hecker Pass extension west to Watsonville. The present accident-prone 2-lane segment of CA 152 from Gilroy to CA 156, where its expressway segment over Pacheco Pass begins, will be relinquished to Santa Clara County.
Need another local to confirm, but 99% sure WA is I-90/I-5 (1990), assuming "system interchange" only applies to freeway-to-freeway interchanges that have free-flow ramps.
If freeway-to-freeway is the only requirement, free-flow-be-damned, it would be WA-509/I-705 (1995).
Oklahoma's will change in the next few years to be the interchanges at either end of the Eastern Oklahoma County Turnpike, or Kilpatrick Turnpike/SH-152.
GA is I-85/GA-400 (1993).
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2018, 02:41:16 AM
If freeway-to-freeway is the only requirement, free-flow-be-damned, it would be WA-509/I-705 (1995).
I wouldn't necessarily require a "system" here to be a full freeway, but WA-509 pushes the definition of a freeway, considering there's an at-grade intersection and a level railroad crossing less than 5 miles east of I-705.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 05, 2018, 10:23:31 PM
For fun I've begun compiling a map of each state's "newest system interchange." Fills, corrections and discussion welcome. Naturally, this is just a first draft and I'll make updates as time goes on.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi113.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fn208%2Ftriplemultiplex%2FHighway%2520System%2Fdraft1_zpsovbajrkl.jpg&hash=e0451a752ecce29f7219800025473a5a94c83cf1)
Tough to say for sure what year something opened in many cases since there are many interchanges where part of it opens one year, and the rest later.
I'll comment about Rhode Island right at the top. Since that interchange was so dramatically relocated, I consider it "new" rather than just another rebuild.
And yes, I know I'm getting ahead of the game on I-295. Hell, I'm not even sure that's the right answer for the Tar Heel State.
As mentioned, for NY it's I-81/I-781 (2012).
In NJ, If we're talking about a free-flowing interchange between two freeways, The exit from the Atlantic City Expressway East to the Garden State Parkway South has just been rebuilt to be taken without slowing below 65 MPH, and having 2 lanes throughout. The other movements still don't have this, however.
Quote from: kphoger on December 06, 2018, 11:32:23 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2018, 02:41:16 AM
If freeway-to-freeway is the only requirement, free-flow-be-damned, it would be WA-509/I-705 (1995).
I wouldn't necessarily require a "system" here to be a full freeway, but WA-509 pushes the definition of a freeway, considering there's an at-grade intersection and a level railroad crossing less than 5 miles east of I-705.
Yeah, I suppose comparing the 509 to something like an Interstate, it's rather unimpressive. Some of WSDOT's newer non-Interstate freeways haven't been too impressive in terms of shoulder and lane width, interchange geometry, etc.
I usually go off two things when considering something as freeway: at least 55 speed limit, and designated as freeway on state maps. 509 is 60 MPH, and is a freeway on WSDOT's online map (https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2017/08/31/highway-map-Tacoma.pdf).
All that in mind, I would really appreciate
triplemultiplex coming in and saying exactly what the requirements are, since I'm still unsure. Freeway-to-freeway with free-flow interchange? free-flow interchange between any two roads? Freeway-to-freeway with some signalized movements?
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2018, 05:08:49 PM
I usually go off two things when considering something as freeway: at least 55 speed limit, and designated as freeway on state maps. 509 is 60 MPH, and is a freeway on WSDOT's online map (https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2017/08/31/highway-map-Tacoma.pdf).
By that standard, much of I-20 in Atlanta (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7412814,-84.4096416,3a,75y,258.32h,85.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJ26hraIMannBg9R2ac0AHA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) wouldn't be a freeway, nor would most of Hawaii's Interstates.
Quote from: Eth on December 06, 2018, 07:11:16 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2018, 05:08:49 PM
I usually go off two things when considering something as freeway: at least 55 speed limit, and designated as freeway on state maps. 509 is 60 MPH, and is a freeway on WSDOT's online map (https://www.wsdot.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2017/08/31/highway-map-Tacoma.pdf).
By that standard, much of I-20 in Atlanta (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7412814,-84.4096416,3a,75y,258.32h,85.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJ26hraIMannBg9R2ac0AHA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) wouldn't be a freeway, nor would most of Hawaii's Interstates.
Should have added "*or is an interstate" and "*in WA"...I know that a lot of eastern states post less than 55 on freeways, which is pretty rare out west.
West Virginia's is probably the I-77/I-64 interchange at Beckley. If a new interchange had been built at I-68 and the Mon-Fayette Expressway, it would count, but it doesn't. They simply modified the existing CR 857 interchange and tied the four-lane WV 43 into it.
Perhaps this map of what I consider to be "system interchanges" in Wisconsin will help.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi113.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fn208%2Ftriplemultiplex%2FHighway%2520System%2FWI%2520example_zpsu0krnj9h.jpg&hash=4de9b8b40d470272b80ba304e81f2bdfe212ec0a)
And an updated national map
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi113.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fn208%2Ftriplemultiplex%2FHighway%2520System%2Fdraft2_zpscybcegrh.jpg&hash=ffa15e49e48908304ab7786e3f9a72a1c0d84b6b)
Some of the dates for states like the Dakotas and Montana are going to be original interstate construction; perhaps even from the 60's.
I would not consider "KS 10/32nd St" (presumably K-10/23rd Street is meant) to be a system interchange in general, let alone to the specific criteria outlined in the OP that seem to be aimed at excluding phased construction. It is a three-level wye and all movements are free-flowing, but it does not connect two freeways. The SLT to the west is a simple extension of the older K-10 freeway and 23rd Street is a surface arterial.
^^ 3MX, did you miss my comment on the first page (regarding Vermont)?
For Nevada, it will depend on how picky you are with the definition...
I-15 & I-215/CC-215: Opened 1996
This was a completely new interchange built with the construction of the then-new Las Vegas Beltway.
I-215 & I-515/US 93/US 95 & SR 564: Opened 2006
When the Las Vegas Beltway was originally constructed in this area circa 1999, it was built on top of what was then SR 146/Lake Mead Drive. But I-215 and the freeway standards ended just west of Gibson Road (about a mile west of the current system interchange), so 215 beltway traffic accessed I-515/US 93/US 95 via SR 146/Lake Mead Drive (a surface arterial) at the then-existing signalized diamond interchange. NDOT completed the construction of the I-215 freeway mainline and the all the free-flow interchange ramps in 2006. So while there has been an interchange at this location since the early 1990s, everything about the current interchange and ramp configurations dates to 2006 (except for the existing I-515 mainline & 215/564 undercrossing).
If we add the ones above 48 states.
Quebec, a new Turcot interchange will replace the current one where A-20 meet A-720 and A-15.
A-30 with A-530, A-440 with A-25 when the missing gap of A-25 was finally completed.
Ontario, the newest ones are Hwy-401/412, Hwy-407/412 and soon Hwy-401/418 and Hwy-407/418.
I wouldn't consider US 23/OH 823 to be a "system interchange," given that this is a freeway that connects two surface routes at either end. There are at-grades on US 23 within close proximity to the end of the Portsmouth bypass.
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on December 08, 2018, 01:57:50 PM
If we add the ones above 48 states.
Quebec, a new Turcot interchange will replace the current one where A-20 meet A-720 and A-15.
A-30 with A-530, A-440 with A-25 when the missing gap of A-25 was finally completed.
Ontario, the newest ones are Hwy-401/412, Hwy-407/412 and soon Hwy-401/418 and Hwy-407/418.
Given that the old Turcot was already freeway-freeway, that one doesn't meet the thread criteria. Of the other Québec ones, the A-30 one is newer. I don't recall if I-30 opened in phases or not - if not, A-730, A-15, and A-930 are also contenders; of those, A-30/A-15 is the most major (albeit a partial replacement for A-930/A-15, since A-930 is former A-30, along with A-730 and A-530).
Technically ON 407/ON 418 is already "open", though I'd hardly count it in its current state, since it's acting as the through lanes of ON 407 to its temporary terminus right now.
NB - NB 11/NB 15 (2018?)
NS - ???
PEI - no freeways, but there is an interchange between TCH 1 and PE 1A
NL - ???
MB - no freeways, but MB 101/MB 59 (2018) fulfills the spirit of this thread
SK - ??? (the Regina Bypass will have one eventually)
AB - ???
BC - may have been mentioned upthread
YT/NT/NU - N/A
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 07, 2018, 12:30:26 PM
Perhaps this map of what I consider to be "system interchanges" in Wisconsin will help.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi113.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fn208%2Ftriplemultiplex%2FHighway%2520System%2FWI%2520example_zpsu0krnj9h.jpg&hash=4de9b8b40d470272b80ba304e81f2bdfe212ec0a)
And an updated national map
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi113.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fn208%2Ftriplemultiplex%2FHighway%2520System%2Fdraft2_zpscybcegrh.jpg&hash=ffa15e49e48908304ab7786e3f9a72a1c0d84b6b)
Some of the dates for states like the Dakotas and Montana are going to be original interstate construction; perhaps even from the 60's.
Technically I-41/WIS-29 is
Incorrect. WIS-29 leaves the freeway at Packerland Drive prior to the Interchange and continues under into town while WIS-32 continues on the freeway. So WIS-32 is the intersecting route. WIS 29 is still justifiably marked on I-41 due to the long distance and dominant pathing.
Quote from: frankenroad on December 03, 2018, 02:43:51 PM
For Ohio, I believe it is probably the two interchanges of US-23 and US-30 near Upper Sandusky, at either end of their concurrency.
What year did those get built? the latest ones I thought of in Ohio were I-77 at the Ohio Turnpike/I-80 in the late 90s or I-80 and SR-711 in Youngstown in 2006. Both were already opened partial intersections, but in the case of I-77/I-80 they extended the turnpike ramp from SR-21 to I-77.
See I don't think the intersecting highways need be full freeways for it to be a system interchange. For me, it's more of a description of the interchange itself, regardless of what feeds it. So I guess that means I would consider a full cloverleaf interchange between a freeway and an arterial suburban street to be "system". So a rural expressway like US 23 is certainly major enough.
Quote from: SSOWorld on December 08, 2018, 10:06:37 PM
Technically I-41/WIS-29 is Incorrect. WIS-29 leaves the freeway at Packerland Drive prior to the Interchange and continues under into town while WIS-32 continues on the freeway. So WIS-32 is the intersecting route. WIS 29 is still justifiably marked on I-41 due to the long distance and dominant pathing.
Yes, yes. But no one thinks of it as WI 32.
I also personally dislike the endlessly multiplexing route of WI 32, so I definitely think of that junction as I-41/WI 29.
Side note about WI 32; ever since they jumped on the connection to some old civil war regiment based solely on the happenstance of both having the number 32, now it feels like it would be 'sacrilegious' to break that highway up into the 3 routes it should be. I have a nagging thought of hearing, "Oh you're going to break up WI 32? Why do you hate the troops!?"
Quote from: hbelkins on December 08, 2018, 02:16:26 PM
I wouldn't consider US 23/OH 823 to be a "system interchange," given that this is a freeway that connects two surface routes at either end. There are at-grades on US 23 within close proximity to the end of the Portsmouth bypass.
What about OH 823/US 52?
52 is a freeway there....though would a partial interchange be big enough to be considered a "system interchange"?
Though at the moment neither of these is open to traffic (that will hopefully change within a week)
Quote from: thenetwork on December 09, 2018, 11:40:23 AM
Quote from: frankenroad on December 03, 2018, 02:43:51 PM
For Ohio, I believe it is probably the two interchanges of US-23 and US-30 near Upper Sandusky, at either end of their concurrency.
What year did those get built? the latest ones I thought of in Ohio were I-77 at the Ohio Turnpike/I-80 in the late 90s or I-80 and SR-711 in Youngstown in 2006. Both were already opened partial intersections, but in the case of I-77/I-80 they extended the turnpike ramp from SR-21 to I-77.
The one SE of Upper Sandusky was 2004, and the one NW of Upper Sandusky was 2008.
If we're considering things like US 23 and the Portsmouth bypass, then Kentucky's entry changes from I-24/Pennyrile to US 23-119/Future US 460 south of Pikeville.
The only new system interchanges built in NY within the past 20 years are:
I-81/781 (newest)
I-86/99
I-84/87
That's it. As mentioned before, I-84/87 was a true Breezewood that would make Pennsylvania proud and was the only real Breezewood in NY. Traffic was required to use NY 300 (and originally, NY 17K as well). That E-ZPass-only ramp coming from the NB exit ramp was the original trumpet stem. Configuration as of 2004 was this (https://www.historicaerials.com/location/41.508641572277845/-74.0714979171753/2004/15). 86/99 was that parclo below the current elevated system interchange, which the freeway south of there tied into. This was the configuration as of the early-mid-2000s (https://www.historicaerials.com/location/42.15532309451619/-77.0980167388916/2002/15). 781 didn't exist until 6 years ago, so that movement was handled by NY 342 (which is basically unaltered).
Quote from: hbelkins on December 10, 2018, 10:28:31 AM
If we're considering things like US 23 and the Portsmouth bypass, then Kentucky's entry changes from I-24/Pennyrile to US 23-119/Future US 460 south of Pikeville.
The OP gives his thumb's up to this junction. Was that 2012 or 2013?
Those look like impressive rock cuts for that trumpet to boot! Future civilizations will assume the benched hill remaining in the loop ramp is some mysterious 'pyramid'. :-D Thursday night on the "History" Channel. :ded:
Quote from: cl94 on December 10, 2018, 04:56:46 PM
The only new system interchanges built in NY within the past 20 years are:
I-81/781 (newest)
I-86/99
I-84/87
That's it. As mentioned before, I-84/87 was a true Breezewood that would make Pennsylvania proud and was the only real Breezewood in NY. Traffic was required to use NY 300 (and originally, NY 17K as well). That E-ZPass-only ramp coming from the NB exit ramp was the original trumpet stem. Configuration as of 2004 was this (https://www.historicaerials.com/location/41.508641572277845/-74.0714979171753/2004/15). 86/99 was that parclo below the current elevated system interchange, which the freeway south of there tied into. This was the configuration as of the early-mid-2000s (https://www.historicaerials.com/location/42.15532309451619/-77.0980167388916/2002/15). 781 didn't exist until 6 years ago, so that movement was handled by NY 342 (which is basically unaltered).
This makes me wonder if the old I-84 junction with I-91 in Hartford would've been considered a Breezewood. I forget exactly how it went, but Morgan Street was involved.
Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 10, 2018, 05:18:34 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on December 10, 2018, 10:28:31 AM
If we're considering things like US 23 and the Portsmouth bypass, then Kentucky's entry changes from I-24/Pennyrile to US 23-119/Future US 460 south of Pikeville.
The OP gives his thumb's up to this junction. Was that 2012 or 2013?
Those look like impressive rock cuts for that trumpet to boot! Future civilizations will assume the benched hill remaining in the loop ramp is some mysterious 'pyramid'. :-D Thursday night on the "History" Channel. :ded:
Some of the engineers in that area call those "birthday cakes."
This was part of my 2013 Pike County, Ky. meet.
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5450/10174055085_6f63c0e03a_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/gv3G7R)2013 Various KY pics July-Sept - 180 (https://flic.kr/p/gv3G7R) by H.B. Elkins (https://www.flickr.com/photos/hbelkins/), on Flickr
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5518/10174056325_1e8c08dcac_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/gv3Gue)2013 Various KY pics July-Sept - 181 (https://flic.kr/p/gv3Gue) by H.B. Elkins (https://www.flickr.com/photos/hbelkins/), on Flickr
The road opened in late 2014 and I drove it a few months later.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/hbelkins/sets/72157655767545270
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/487/19894047515_544c82d033_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/wiYcee)2015 Various KY pics Jan-June - 027 (https://flic.kr/p/wiYcee) by H.B. Elkins (https://www.flickr.com/photos/hbelkins/), on Flickr
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/263/19706229708_4ed2a04332_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/w2nzxb)2015 Various KY pics Jan-June - 203 (https://flic.kr/p/w2nzxb) by H.B. Elkins (https://www.flickr.com/photos/hbelkins/), on Flickr
There are a few of these along the newer sections of US 119 between Pikeville and the state line, as well.
I drove through the Pikeville area (as well as all of Corridor G) after the eclipse last year. The earthwork was quite stunning.
I believe Delaware's is DE-141 to I-95 completed somewhere in the mid-2000s or early 90s. However, when US-301's new alignment is complete, 301 to I-95 and DE-1 will take over it
Quote from: mrcmc888 on December 11, 2018, 03:45:48 PM
I believe Delaware's is DE-141 to I-95 completed somewhere in the mid-2000s or early 90s. However, when US-301's new alignment is complete, 301 to I-95 and DE-1 will take over it
This (https://goo.gl/maps/hYQJmM7ZfUT2) DE 141 and I-95? Historic Aerials shows it being original to I-95's construction in mostly its current form, with the Newport Freeway being built to it in the 1970s.
Quote from: hbelkins on December 11, 2018, 11:41:15 AM
Some of the engineers in that area call those "birthday cakes."
Just my opinion, but I'd steer more toward a "wedding cake" than birthday. It looks cool, either way.
Quote from: froggie on December 07, 2018, 03:46:15 PM
^^ 3MX, did you miss my comment on the first page (regarding Vermont)?
What's the chronology of that junction between US 7 and VT 279? I thought something was pretty new down there and that double trumpet situation meets my criteria.
Parts of VT 279 are new, but the double-trumpet has existed since the mid-1970s and has been in-use since that time, initially as a connector to VT 67A.
Quote from: J N Winkler on December 07, 2018, 02:37:39 PM
I would not consider "KS 10/32nd St" (presumably K-10/23rd Street is meant) to be a system interchange in general, let alone to the specific criteria outlined in the OP that seem to be aimed at excluding phased construction. It is a three-level wye and all movements are free-flowing, but it does not connect two freeways. The SLT to the west is a simple extension of the older K-10 freeway and 23rd Street is a surface arterial.
23rd Street between K-10 and Harper is more of an "expressway" than a plain surface arterial. Aside from the relatively new stoplight at O'Connell Road, it hasn't changed much since it was first constructed (which, BTW, pre-dates the K-10 freeway between Lawrence and K-7). I would consider a freeway-to-expressway connection to be within the 'system interchange' criteria.
The interchange itself was constructed as part of the east leg of the South Lawrence Trafficway, and connects the SLT to 23rd Street and the older K-10 freeway. Even though the "through" route was re-aligned (from K-10 -> 23rd Street to K-10 -> SLT) there is a new road involved; therefore, this is a new interchange.
Incidentally, "32nd Street" was the designation of the alignment of the SLT that was chosen and built (surviving a NEPA challenge in both the Circuit and Appeals Courts)