We know that all the DOT's of each state don't always make the smartest of choices. Point out some of the ones that you think weren't their smartest decisions.
Probably that Mid-Manhattan expressway right through midtown Manhattan. That should've been build, but as a tunnel, connecting the Long Island Expressway (I-495) with New Jersey.
Check it out on NYCroads.com (http://www.nycroads.com/roads/mid-manhattan/)
Oh...
Cypress Structure, Embarcadero Freeway, Seattle Viaduct.
On a small scale, the junction of Wash. SR 164 and SR 410 is awful.
If you're heading eastbound down SR 410, the DOT directs you down Cole St to get to SR 164, and then once you get to the intersection of Cole St and Griffin Ave where you have to turn left to continue this lovely sign presents itself:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2F164%2F410to169%2F2.JPG&hash=d48eaa1c767352356bdb3876b70381d5d47326b3)
I also drove the new Scottsbluff Nebraska bypass a couple weeks ago and was amazed to see where the new north-south bypass expressway hits the east west expressway traffic is controlled by a stop sign. This seems hilariously substandard.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Fne%2F71%2F92to26%2F4.JPG&hash=3795e62de164334c51a1755281f1453b9c3bd2a7)
The reconstruction of the I-76 PA Tpk Valley Forge Interchange. They rebuilt it with the same cloverleaf. Well the whole Schuylkill rehab, the new 202/KOP interchange is a mess with more cloverleaves. Oh boy, Philadelphia Freeways.
The decision of the town of Irondequoit to downgrade NY 590 to Sea Breeze Drive. It's not done yet, but it's as wide as it will be when finished and already it's congested. They wanted to made it easier for pedestrians, but the lack of space between cars and the replacement of traffic signals with roundabouts will make it harder for pedestrians, not easier.
The town has made bad decisions for 30 years now, all of it political based off of one bridge. The couldn't get the Irondequot Bay outlet bridge 30 years ago so they denied the ramps from NY 104 to/from NY 590 north. Now they have the bridge, but the terrain at the interchange has changed, so they can't get the ramps. Because of this they decided to downgrade NY 590.
I can only imagine that soon they'll discover that it's congested, wait 30 years, be unable to change it back to a divided highway or an expressway, and decide to tear down something else.
Quote from: travelinmiles on February 01, 2009, 04:29:36 PM
The reconstruction of the I-76 PA Tpk Valley Forge Interchange. They rebuilt it with the same cloverleaf.
Classic stupidity of favoring the mainline of the toll road over the mainline of the interstate right there.
That interchange really ought to look more like this:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg220.imageshack.us%2Fimg220%2F8702%2F76276modda9.png&hash=7932733a0dd9ed884063f8414ec1002a8e79aec2)
The truncation of U.S. 113 to Milford from Dover!!
Duke, not sure if that is physically possible! :ded:
Having traffic exit onto Sidney Marcus Boulevard from Georgia 400 South, to access I-85 North. The same goes for traffic wishing to access Georgia 400 North: drivers must exit onto Cheshire Bridge Road. Turn right on Cheshire Bridge, left onto Buford Highway (SR 13), then right onto Sidney Marcus, and then right on Georgia 400. This is maze of twists and turns and confusement (if that's a word, lol). GDOT is supposed to rectify this some time in the near future.
Be well,
Bryant
* Iowa DOT's decision to use stop signs on expressway, such as US 30 at Boone, IA (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=42.034568,-93.879955&spn=0,359.978027&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.034573,-93.880067&panoid=0g7CCOLDeYvWRswZJF-jtw&cbp=12,97.17770806357248,,0,5.525880653220147 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=42.034568,-93.879955&spn=0,359.978027&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.034573,-93.880067&panoid=0g7CCOLDeYvWRswZJF-jtw&cbp=12,97.17770806357248,,0,5.525880653220147)), US 151 at IA 13, and US 151 at IA 100.
* The western I-80/US 77 interchange at Lincoln, NE, where the ramp that seems to have the most trucks going to WB I-80 is a 25 mph loop with an inadequate acceleration lane at the bottom. That interchange should be a semi-directional T.
* Iowa DOT not redoing the eastern I-35/I-80/I-235 interchange quite right. First, they need to do something about the lousy, more pothole than pavement ramp from SB I-35 to EB I-80, but they decide to add new through lanes so I-235 doesn't have any left entrances. This also disrupts the route continuity (as defined on page 808 of the AASHTO greenbook) of NB I-35.
* MoDOT doing a somewhat poor job when rebuilding the I-44/I-270/MO 366 interchange by having traffic from WB I-44 wishing to access SB I-270 merge into traffic going from WB MO 366 to SB I-270. This causes a long back up onto I-44 in the afternoon, and probably a few accidents. MoDOT should have made the WB to SB flyover two lanes, with WB I-44 to SB I-270 traffic sharing one of the two lanes to NB I-270.
* The I-72/I-172 interchange in Illinois. I-72 should be the mainline route there, not I-172.
* MO 141 between Valley Park and Clayton Road/Rte HH in the St. Louis area. It's somewhat impressive how badly MoDOT screwed up this corridor. First they gave up on a freeway design which could have been a much needed alternative to I-270. Then they somehow manage to have the road feel like a high speed expressway, but only be posted at 45 (now up to 50 south of Helfrich Road, somehow even on the congested, many traffic signal section through Valley Park). Then there are the unneeded traffic lights. Briarhurst Drive and Broomfield Terrace, both subdivsion streets, get lights onto 141, yet both have access to Hanna Road, a north-south road parallel to MO 141. Briarhurst even has decent access to Big Bend Road, which has a SPUI with MO 141. The light providing access to the outer roads just south of the SPUI with MO 100 could have been consolidated with the light at Carman Road. Brittany Parkway, which has the first light north of the MO 100 interchange, has access to MO 100 and Weidman Road (another north-south road parallel to 141). And to make that intersection more interesting, somehow a new Wal-Mart is going in that area which requires a double left turn lane on MO 141. Next after another light for Burgandy Lane (subdivision street with access to parallel north-south collectors) there are lights for Clayworth Drive (subdivision street), a high school, and then Dutch Mill Drive (another subdivision) in quick succession. Surely these could have been consolidate down to two or one.
4 characters: I, 1, 8, and 0. Even with the steel plant they were going to build there, why build a 15 mile freeway to a town of 900 people.
I-794
Why build a freeway there? Sure it no longer stubs at Carferry Rd, but still, it still doesn't garner much traffic as it is.
Madison Beltline - There are still ramps that have driveways attached to them :crazy:
In Portland, OR-217....4 lanes the entire length, apart from the 6 lane bits between certain exits. constantly backed up. traffic lights at the junction with I-5
Having EB PA 28 narrow to one lane at the interchanges with PA 8 and the Highland Park Bridge.
The weaving required to stay on I-279 at the Fort Pit Bridge - but given the cramp quarters, I'm not sure this would be easy to fix (best I can think of is adding a second bridge for WB I-376 to WB PA 837 and vice versa, at least this would remove some of the weaving traffic).
Quote from: voyager on February 01, 2009, 06:36:39 PM
Duke, not sure if that is physically possible! :ded:
Well, something like it would be. A couple of the curves might need to be adjusted, ramps lengthened a bit for the grade to work (maybe have the west-south ramp go over the turnpike instead of under?). But it's not a precise blueprint, just a general idea. :nod:
Quote from: Revive 755 on February 02, 2009, 03:40:57 PM
Having EB PA 28 narrow to one lane at the interchanges with PA 8 and the Highland Park Bridge.
The weaving required to stay on I-279 at the Fort Pit Bridge - but given the cramp quarters, I'm not sure this would be easy to fix (best I can think of is adding a second bridge for WB I-376 to WB PA 837 and vice versa, at least this would remove some of the weaving traffic).
Yeah those suck major donkey dick, but probably the biggest monstrosity is I-280 in Newark. 4 lanes through the entire city, and a rickety drawbridge.
I-790. It's only a couple miles long and is never an independent road. They just put the number on a couple of existing freeways, one of which wasn't even a freeway until construction began for NY 49 in the 1980s.
Nalley Valley Viaduct (SR 16 in Tacoma, WA at I-5)
Finally, its getting rebuilt! :-D
I agree with you whole heartedly, that is exactly what I was thinking. It just amazes me that they would rebuild it so substandard.
The design of I-5 through Seattle, WA has to be one of the best examples of how NOT to build a freeway. From the busy corridors at Mercer Street to WA-520, a distance of about a mile, you enter the freeway on the left and exit on the right, crossing 4 lanes of heavy traffic during rush hour. This design looked so good, they duplicated it IN BOTH DIRECTIONS, northbound and southbound! Granted, geography played a factor but the talk of making things right at 2009 dollars means that this freeway should have been built right in the first place at a savings to the taxpayer. This design should have never been approved for an Interstate.
QuoteNalley Valley Viaduct (SR 16 in Tacoma, WA at I-5)
Finally, its getting rebuilt!
I really miss making that insanely short distance weave move you had to do to get from Northbound I-5 onto westbound SR 16 without exiting onto Sprague Street :-D
My ex-girlfriend who lived in Olympia refused to even make the merge and would always just get off at Sprague to get to my house by UPS even though taking Union was a ton faster
Well, the one stupid one I can think of is more of proposed stupidity . . . the planned new I-5 bridge over the Columbia River on the Oregon/Washington border. They want to spend close to $5 billion on the sucker, and since they're not going to fix the Delta Park/North Portland bottleneck, it's going to do absolutely nothing to fix traffic.
I'd also put the whole US-26/OR-10/OR-99W/OR-43/I-5 setup on the west end of the Ross Island Bridge on the list. Worst interchange ever.
The Delta Highway (a Lane County, OR-maintained facility) is also pathetically substandard--it's Eugene's equivalent of OR-217. It's impressive that a county built a freeway (they built current OR-569, too, before handing it over to ODOT), but it's not nearly wide enough to account for all the traffic trying to get between Downtown and North Eugene/Santa Clara.
-Alex (Tarkus)
In Michigan, the M-53 freeway between 34 Mile and 18 Mile Roads has at-grade intersections, but that's not the worst part. The speed limit is 70, but as you reach the intersection, MDOT forces you down to 55, but as soon as you pass the intersection, it jumps back to 70! What the hell? Lucky, there are only two of them, one at 30 Mile and the other at 32 Mile, but that still doesn't make it right. They need to make 30 mile pass over M-53 and create an interchange for 32 Mile. :banghead:
One in design is the new Mississippi River Bridge for I-70 at St. Louis. I've probably ranted on here before about this one, but here it is again. For reference, here is a map of the proposed project:
http://www.newriverbridge.org/initialphase.asp (http://www.newriverbridge.org/initialphase.asp)
Note the lack of ramps to/from the south. Thus this project fails to fix one of the main problems at the west end of the PSB: the one lane, 20 mph ramps for I-55 traffic.
Another bad idea in the making is the truck lanes on I-70 across Missouri. I don't see how having a truck merging at 60 mph - per ramp design speed, in reality they might be going faster - onto the left side of a roadway with 70, or more likely 80 mph traffic, and then proceed to weave across to exit is going to be safe.
And another bad one in Missouri in the making is having such long distances between rest areas. I think 90+ miles is a little extreme when there are no major metropolitan areas in between. Use a gas station or fast-food joint? They don't usually have weather info - which Missouri doesn't have in rest areas yet either, but should certainly add for the winter months.
Orlando not getting an interstate bypass, now fulfilled with toll roads which most just went up 25 cents this month in order to fund other toll road projects. Yay.
Another worst highway idea: Making FL 436 unlimited access. :banghead:
QuoteOne in design is the new Mississippi River Bridge for I-70 at St. Louis. I've probably ranted on here before about this one, but here it is again. For reference, here is a map of the proposed project:
http://www.newriverbridge.org/initialphase.asp (http://www.newriverbridge.org/initialphase.asp)
Note the lack of ramps to/from the south. Thus this project fails to fix one of the main problems at the west end of the PSB: the one lane, 20 mph ramps for I-55 traffic.
Interesting.
So, no more triple multiplex there. And I-70's going to get a mile or two shorter.
The building of SC 22(future I-73) as most traffic still uses the treachorous US 501
Ontario really know's what they are doing, they are by far the best Transportation Department I know.
QuoteOntario really know's what they are doing, they are by far the best Transportation Department I know.
Besides decommissioning the Gardiner, they haven't done anything dumb ever. The 401 remains the gold standard for freeway construction.
True, also maybe decommissioning almost all of the highways in 1997 was dumb to. Although that was to save money.
All of the highways that are still around are in good shape though.
The US-131 S-curve on the fringe of downtown Grand Rapids. Many accidents and lives have been lost because of this unnecessary and badly designed monstrosity. It was shut down, widened and redesigned several years ago, but it still sucks.
Also, the US-131/I-196 "corkscrew" interchange (that's what I call it) in downtown Grand Rapids. The northbound and southbound lanes on US-131 "corkscrew" under and over each other so that the oncoming traffic is actually to your right instead of to your left right at the interchange. This creates all kinds of left lane exits and entrances, which is never a good idea, but this stretch of US-131 carries 120,000 vehicles per day and some of the entering ramps are short and leave very little space to merge. You can see the S-Curve and the interchange in the pics in the following link.
http://www.photography-plus.com/image_pages/GrandRapids.htm (http://www.photography-plus.com/image_pages/GrandRapids.htm)
Even if it's duplicative, a list of my personal favorites:
RI 403. That highway will NEVER serve enough people to be worth it. A 2-3 lane surface street on that alignment would have been fine (only bypassing the part between 4 and 1).
West Side Highway. It may have been forward-thinking for its time, but whose idea was it to put up a structure and then not maintain it for 40 years until it falls apart?
I-95 Cross Bronx - The current alignment is what started the freeway revolution because Robert Moses would not compromise with the community.
VA 895. How much money was pissed away on a huge toll bridge used by so few people?
Trans Texas Corridors. I-69 and I-35 as 16-lane corridors with rail and... massive destruction. I am so glad these died.
WV's corridors and expressway "freeways". Instead of winding along the sides of mountains or using graceful narrow rock cuts as needed, WV's strategy is to blast the entire top of the mountain away. The scenery is literally destroyed in that state. In that light:
I-99 PA, Port Matilda/Big Top. First of all, who started building a highway before doing rock borings and, um, TESTING the borings? Second of all, they made the same mistakes WV did in destroying the mountains. Third of all - it's I-99. We all have our reasons to hate it.
NJ 185. Connects no one to nowhere. Was part of a larger plan, but why build the first piece unless traffic has a reason to use it? Could have applied the money to getting NJ 169 (now 440) done sooner or starting to fix I-78 Interchange 14A.
QuoteVA 895. How much money was pissed away on a huge toll bridge used by so few people?
Too much :-D Seriously more people would use this road if it wasn't tolled(everyone uses I-64 due to it being free) and besides it should be I-895(Thanks Feds :pan:). On the other hand, they have started constructing a connector road from VA 895 to Richmond Int'l Airport but I doubt that traffic volumes would go up that much. ;-)
I-240 in Oklahoma City. Used as the illustration in the Roadgeek Abridged Dictionary for the entry on weaving.
Having a railroad level crossing on the James River Freeway in Springfield, Missouri was pretty boneheaded too!
The decomissioning of SR 99 from Federal Way to SeaTac in 2004 by WSDOT...what's the point?
QuoteThe decomissioning of SR 99 from Federal Way to SeaTac in 2004 by WSDOT...what's the point?
The city of Tukwila essentially said "We want to pay to maintain and do as we please with the main road through our town," WSDOT said "That's fine since SR 99 isn't a through route anymore right there, and was barely signed anyway"
It was really no big deal; Tukwila got control over International Blvd which it wanted, and it saved WSDOT money. Tukwila is a fairly rich town with all the airport facilities, and was sick of waiting for WSDOT to maintain the road. They decided they'd rather pay to do it themselves, and WSDOT certainly didn't care. All parties won out on that.
There is a law on the books whose goal it is to provide at least a four lane divided highway to every county seat in the state regardless of whether traffic warrants it or not.
QuoteIn Portland, OR-217....4 lanes the entire length, apart from the 6 lane bits between certain exits. constantly backed up. traffic lights at the junction with I-5
Rawr, I agree with you 100% on this. There is a plan in place, according to a Portland Tribune article I posted on the West Coast section, to add a third lane.....from OR-8 to US-26, the section that needs it the least!! Once again, ODOT has proven they're incapable of thinking long term.
I think if they're hesitant to add a new lane all the way through, and the region encourages mass transit, create a CLOSED HOV lane for the entire route. That way, through traffic going from I-5 to US-26 aren't caught in the bottleneck of people using the freeway for running errands.
Quote from: 74/171FAN on April 24, 2009, 08:19:38 PM
QuoteVA 895. How much money was pissed away on a huge toll bridge used by so few people?
Too much :-D Seriously more people would use this road if it wasn't tolled(everyone uses I-64 due to it being free) and besides it should be I-895(Thanks Feds :pan:). On the other hand, they have started constructing a connector road from VA 895 to Richmond Int'l Airport but I doubt that traffic volumes would go up that much. ;-)
They won't go up much at all. I-64 isn't THAT far away from the airport, certainly not as far as Transurban might think. :P
QuoteI'd hazard a bet that they're expecting 895 to be more of a draw, especially once the airport connector is completed, for traffic coming from the south or southwest. Reason being that 95 is effectively "capped" at 6 lanes. So it's a fair assumption that traffic congestion on 95 in/near downtown (nevermind 64's sorry state east of downtown) will spur traffic to use 895, especially if they're going to/from the airport
First I've never experienced or have known of any problems on I-64/I-95 outside of rush hour and have there ever been any plans to widen the entire I-64/I-95 multiplex?
QuoteDoesn't mean it won't happen in the future. Especially if Chesterfield County continues growing like weeds...
This traffic will just take the pain of paying $2.15(as the RMA has raised tolls on VA 76 at Forest Hill Ave and VA 195) to get to free I-64 over VA 895(currently $2.75).
QuoteI wasn't referring specifically to western Chesterfield County. You have a large area of the county to where VA 76 is out of the way, and they get to slog along I-95 instead.
But most of the growth these days is definitely in western Chesterfield County ;-) I haven't heard of any new eastern Chesterfield County subdivisions in some time
QuoteI'd hazard a bet that they're expecting 895 to be more of a draw, especially once the airport connector is completed, for traffic coming from the south or southwest. Reason being that 95 is effectively "capped" at 6 lanes. So it's a fair assumption that traffic congestion on 95 in/near downtown (nevermind 64's sorry state east of downtown) will spur traffic to use 895, especially if they're going to/from the airport.
IIRC, the Airport Connector was supposed to be part of the original construction, but I think funding became an issue. The highway was to be more of a bypass from the south and southwest, as Froggie surmises. IMHO, it would probably draw more (each direction) if a direct connector from 895 to I-64 east of I-295 were also constructed.
Some of the stupidest things that LaDoTD did:
-- Putting the Audubon Bridge across the Mississippi River on the TIMED program and keeping the US 90/I-49 South upgrade out. Unless they are planning to 4-lane LA 1/LA 10 from Alexandria to New Roads and LA 10 from St. Francisville to Franklinton, then what exactly was the point??
-- Structuring the I-10/I-110 Split in Baton Rouge so that the main through traffic went between I-10 East and I-110 North, so that I-10 entering the city ends up as an exit to Washington St. Nice going, guys....way to have traffic backed up all the way across the I-10 bridge to LA 1. (Yeah, they temporarily did a fix five years ago to relieve partially the bottleneck at the I-10 "entrance" ramp, but until they get real and totally upgrade the entire section of I-10 through BR, it's still going to be a royal PITA.
-- Not building Clearview Parkway in NOLA as an elevated freeway from Earhart Expressway to I-10, and not building some form of controlled access onto US 90 through the Huey P. Long Bridge to the Westbank Expressway to begin with. With the recent rumors that LaDoTD wants to truncate I-49 South to run along I-310 west of Luling and abandon completing the Westbank Expy and upgrading US 90 east of Boutte, it's going to get mighty interesting when the Huey upgrade is completed.
-- Not completing the Inner Loop Expressway/Terry Bradshaw Passway (LA 3132) as a full southern beltway loop of I-220 in Sherveport. Or..will they wait until the Toll Fairy comes in to fund LA's portion of I-69 and build an extension there??
-- Not building a highway bridge across the Atchafalaya River for LA 10 through Melville. Come on now, folks...LA 10 goes from Leesville to Franklinton, and gets the Audubon Bridge...but you can't build a two-lane bridge through Melville???
That's all for now, at least.
Anthony
Quote from: Anthony_JK-- Not building Clearview Parkway in NOLA as an elevated freeway from Earhart Expressway to I-10, and not building some form of controlled access onto US 90 through the Huey P. Long Bridge to the Westbank Expressway to begin with. With the recent rumors that LaDoTD wants to truncate I-49 South to run along I-310 west of Luling and abandon completing the Westbank Expy and upgrading US 90 east of Boutte, it's going to get mighty interesting when the Huey upgrade is completed.
[slight sarcasm]Oh, but you would divide the neighborhood and tear down some large trees to put in an elevated freeway. Can't have that, we have to have an overloaded surface speedway that is a pain to cross instead[/slight sarcasm]
Quote from: Anthony_JK-- Not completing the Inner Loop Expressway/Terry Bradshaw Passway (LA 3132) as a full southern beltway loop of I-220 in Sherveport. Or..will they wait until the Toll Fairy comes in to fund LA's portion of I-69 and build an extension there??
Some other topic here had a map showing that the loop was going to be completed with I-69.
QuoteThe reconstruction of the I-76 PA Tpk Valley Forge Interchange. They rebuilt it with the same cloverleaf.
too bad there some importants buildings in the northwest of the trumpet, if those buildings wasn't built they could had converted this trumptet into a "cloverstack" interchange with a rerouted US-422 expressway to end there instead of US-202
ironically, Montgomery county wants to use tolls to rebuilt the US-422 expwy and funding rail extension http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4120 (http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/4120)
other well-know worst highways ideas are
-Perimeter highway in Winnipeg who have railroad crossing and traffic lights (Winnipeg don't have a single freeway and the Disraëli freeway is a sort of bad joke)
-no freeway link linking A-5 and A-50 with ONT-417 in Ottawa
-Decarie interchange in Montreal who have left exits
-A10/15/20/PQ-132 interchange to access the Champlain bridge http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=fr&ie=UTF8&ll=45.467385,-73.492677&spn=0.010158,0.02738&t=k&z=16 (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=fr&ie=UTF8&ll=45.467385,-73.492677&spn=0.010158,0.02738&t=k&z=16)
Quote from: froggie-A10/15/20/PQ-132 interchange to access the Champlain bridge http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=fr&ie=UTF8&ll=45.467385,-73.492677&spn=0.010158,0.02738&t=k&z=16
Ack!
Would it have been so hard for them to have a trumpet on the bridge approach so you didn't have two trumpets on PQ-132?
Dubuque, Iowa's Highway 946 - what is one of the sorriest excuses for an "intersection" with US 20. The hidden highway is there to connect US 151/61/52 with US 20. going south, it merges with the triplex via a half interchange, but going north, it passes two traffic lights. plus the traffic light on US 20 itself. the triplex goes under US 20 which is using the Julian Dubuque Bridge to cross the Mississippi River. US 20 also goes through at least 12 traffic lights going westward after a brief "freeway" segment, all of which you'll hit red on especially during rush hours when traffic doesn't move swiftly. :no:
Oh, and Breezewood - I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned yet :-D
Quote from: Master son on April 28, 2009, 07:15:59 PM
Oh, and Breezewood - I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned yet :-D
That's because Breezewood pretty much goes without saying. :bread:
SR 339 (WA) - Either sign south along the Vashon Hwy. to south end or be gone.
QuoteSR 339 (WA) - Either sign south along the Vashon Hwy. to south end or be gone.
I'd guess it goes away since the King County Ferry Authority is "maintaining" it now
This brilliant design for the I-80/I-180/US 34 cloverleaf at Lincoln, NE:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.863002,-96.71527&spn=0,359.997253&t=k&z=19&layer=c&cbll=40.863248,-96.715049&panoid=w9dlUPe7MImDpWQIqFpNNg&cbp=12,183.0046305075298,,0,4.296875000000003 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.863002,-96.71527&spn=0,359.997253&t=k&z=19&layer=c&cbll=40.863248,-96.715049&panoid=w9dlUPe7MImDpWQIqFpNNg&cbp=12,183.0046305075298,,0,4.296875000000003)
They can sped for the extra pavement for a C-D lane, but they can't give a weaving lane between the two loops? Or a sign warning about the lack of an acceleration lane? Or a jersey barrier so one can easily tell if a vehicle is in the C-D lane or the right mainlane of WB I-80? The current design is an accident waiting to happen, and I've seen a near miss there already. Sure, it would have been due to the vehicle on the loop failing to yield, but you normally expect some sort of acceleration lane, not to be dumped right into traffic.
MN 100 has a SB lane drop at 77th St...then gets an auxiliary lane for I-494 West right after that drop from the 77th St on-ramp. I don't think it causes too many headaches (the interchange with I-494 generates many more), but it's silly why they would do that. I-35W had a similar drop NB at I-494 West, but that was filled in recently.
Worse though is the US 169/I-494 interchange. MnDOT upgraded US 169 onto the old Hennepin CSAH 18 alignment in the late 1990s, widened the interchange, added three loops, but KEPT THE STOPLIGHTS so people can make left turns onto frontage roads. Everything north of this interchange is freeway. There's one stoplight a bit south but generally it's all freeway south of the interchange too. The backups are revolting at any time of day. WB 494-NB 169 traffic is a left turn. Why didn't they finish this interchange?
QuoteWorse though is the US 169/I-494 interchange. MnDOT upgraded US 169 onto the old Hennepin CSAH 18 alignment in the late 1990s, widened the interchange, added three loops, but KEPT THE STOPLIGHTS so people can make left turns onto frontage roads. Everything north of this interchange is freeway. There's one stoplight a bit south but generally it's all freeway south of the interchange too. The backups are revolting at any time of day. WB 494-NB 169 traffic is a left turn. Why didn't they finish this interchange?
Some clarification:
Hennepin County built the 4-lane between 494 and the river, not MnDOT. Upon completion, they then turned it over to MnDOT for the US 169 reroute.
Eden Prairie was initially opposed to a freeway. Plus all the cities involved (EP, Bloomington, and Edina) wanted to retain local 494 frontage road access to now-169....and MnDOT didn't have the money for a full freeway-to-freeway interchange there. This is why you not only have the 3 signals at 494 and Highwood Dr, but also initially had signals at Anderson Lakes Pkwy and Pioneer Trl. About 5 years ago is when MnDOT built the interchanges at the latter two.
When MnDOT added the loop ramps at 169/494, that was the best they could do with the limited funding they had available for what was the PRIMARY purpose of that project: replacing the 169 bridges over 494. Again, the local cities wanted to retain local access to 169, so the signals remained. The missing loop ramp (you probably meant EB 494 to NB 169, not WB 494) was not added because this movement is already largely covered by what is now US 212. This latter bit (US 212 cutting the corner on two movements) is why MnDOT wanted to drop two flyovers at the proposed 169/494 interchange, as I already covered in another thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=751.0).
Quote-- Putting the Audubon Bridge across the Mississippi River on the TIMED program and keeping the US 90/I-49 South upgrade out. Unless they are planning to 4-lane LA 1/LA 10 from Alexandria to New Roads and LA 10 from St. Francisville to Franklinton, then what exactly was the point??
The Zachary Taylor Parkway interests got to the trough before the I-49 South folks. There has been an interest in upgrading LA 10 in that part of the state since at least the 1970s. I don't recall any I-49 South discussion before the late 1990s, at least.
Quote-- Structuring the I-10/I-110 Split in Baton Rouge so that the main through traffic went between I-10 East and I-110 North, so that I-10 entering the city ends up as an exit to Washington St. Nice going, guys....way to have traffic backed up all the way across the I-10 bridge to LA 1. (Yeah, they temporarily did a fix five years ago to relieve partially the bottleneck at the I-10 "entrance" ramp, but until they get real and totally upgrade the entire section of I-10 through BR, it's still going to be a royal PITA.
The design was writ in history, as the I-110/10 "through" route was completed about a decade before the Miss. River bridge and its approaches. I guess the highway planners felt the through town traffic headed to the refineries and the universities would constitute the primary flows.
Quote-- Not building Clearview Parkway in NOLA as an elevated freeway from Earhart Expressway to I-10, and not building some form of controlled access onto US 90 through the Huey P. Long Bridge to the Westbank Expressway to begin with. With the recent rumors that LaDoTD wants to truncate I-49 South to run along I-310 west of Luling and abandon completing the Westbank Expy and upgrading US 90 east of Boutte, it's going to get mighty interesting when the Huey upgrade is completed.
The lack of a north-south limited access facility through East Jefferson was a major highway planning shortfall. Clearview is popular with trucks, even with I-310 as a relief route. The Elmwood business park doubtless is the destination of many freight haulers.
Quote-- Not building a highway bridge across the Atchafalaya River for LA 10 through Melville. Come on now, folks...LA 10 goes from Leesville to Franklinton, and gets the Audubon Bridge...but you can't build a two-lane bridge through Melville???
The story goes that the civic leaders of Melville were not Huey Long supporters, so the Kingfish decided to build the Atchafalaya River bridge at Krotz Springs. LA 10 through Melville was once part of US 71/old LA 1 and earlier the Jefferson Highway, so it was actually on the main highway in those days...until the Krotz Springs bridge was constructed. Even to this day, the LA 10 approach from the Morganza end is a gravel road.
I just don't see the traffic need for a fixed crossing there. There are Atchafalaya crossings at Simmesport and Krotz Springs that serve most if not all traffic needs, and the traffic diversion to reach these bridges is not substantial given the low population of the region. Most folks are headed either to the Opelousas or Alexandria areas via US 190 or LA 1. The Audubon Bridge will feed those traffic flows as well as the cross-river commuter traffic for the industries in the Pointe Coupee-West Feliciana area.
How about Arizona 153, just east of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport? The nearby Hohokam Expressway (Arizona 143) is useful for connecting Loop 202 to I-10 and the airport, but the paralleling Arizona 153 meanders uncertainly north from University Avenue only to dump traffic onto 44th Street at Washington Avenue. Total length: maybe two miles and so close to Arizona 143 that at one point, the two highways nearly touch. A totally useless piece of freeway that could've been built in a spot elsewhere where it's sorely needed, like helping to extend the southeastern end of Loop 101 to tie into I-10 perhaps at Riggs Road.
They completely rebuilt the I-80 Bay Bridge approach in San Francisco, but left the downtown entrance/exits in the almost exact same 1950s configuration.
Admittedly this was the City of SF's decision, not Caltrans, but it's still ridiculous.
the I-80 and I-81 interchange. Two major truck routes intersect in the complete dead middle of nowhere... and three out of the four possible turns are extra-tight 15mph cloverleaves.
satellite image at the link:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=scranton+pa&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=46.946584,65.039063&ie=UTF8&ll=41.04735,-76.013031&spn=0.021976,0.031757&t=k&z=15 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=scranton+pa&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=46.946584,65.039063&ie=UTF8&ll=41.04735,-76.013031&spn=0.021976,0.031757&t=k&z=15)
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 02, 2009, 02:06:21 PM
the I-80 and I-81 interchange. Two major truck routes intersect in the complete dead middle of nowhere... and three out of the four possible turns are extra-tight 15mph cloverleaves.
satellite image at the link:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=scranton+pa&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=46.946584,65.039063&ie=UTF8&ll=41.04735,-76.013031&spn=0.021976,0.031757&t=k&z=15 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=scranton+pa&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=46.946584,65.039063&ie=UTF8&ll=41.04735,-76.013031&spn=0.021976,0.031757&t=k&z=15)
And, the fourth one, from I-80 East to I-81 North is a left exit that joins I-81 on a long upgrade!
I have a few.....
1> I-670 eastbound in downtown Columbus....i dont know who at ODOT was doing what, but between Exit 3 (US 23) and Exit 6 (Leonard Dr), if you want to go straight east to the Columbus Airport, you have to jump across several lanes of traffics...and for a crucial 1/2 mile stretch, east 670 is essentially one lane (the other lane is a combined straight/left turnoff to I-71 North, which jams up traffic at rush hour as people try to merge to the straight lane and block those wanting to head north...and i drive that area 3x per week!)
2> I-95 (Connecticut Turnpike) in Connecticut from Exit 2 to Exit 70. A road that was ok in its day, but is now badly outdated...between the load of traffic that the engineers in the 1950s did not anticipate, plus the whole idea of 70 exits in 78 miles with many of the off and on-ramps inadequate for traffic flow (and local politics would prevent closing of many of the exits).....and there is hardly any room to widen the highway west of New Haven without many years of court battles over eminent domain, environmental issues, etc.. (the parallel Conn 15 (Merritt Pkwy) isnt much better but at least heavy truck traffic is banned from there....)
3> I-84 Connecticut > As Dangermoose would say, a badly engineered road from the start, and even more outdated now given its traffic flow as I-84 is the only reasonable alternate route to Boston if you want to avoid New York City. ConnDOT has tried to upgrade, but i suspect the best approach is to level the whole highway from Danbury to Sturbridge MA and redesign it again from scratch!
4> I-90/Ohio 2 in Downtown Cleveland > Malfunction Junction....'nuff said!
how's the 691? I don't remember it very well ... I just looked on my 1957 map, thinking I'd see the 84 and the 95 (Conn Turnpike) labeled, but the one I remembered as being the 84 is actually the 691 - the 84 is not yet a freeway in 1957.
691 wasnt terribly bad...just short, and ends all too soon....
remember, I-84 was supposed to head east to Providence, there was a lot of issues on both Connecticut and Rhody leading to the highway being scrubbed...only two parts of that road are open now....I-384 from I-84 to Rocky Hill, and what is now US 6 as it bypasses Willimantic (Old 6 is now Conn 66)
691 east to 91 north is a good way to avoid the numerous lane changes on 84, provided you know which lanes on 91 to be in to avoid the backups going across the river.
Conn 15 to I-91 is better.....you get to avoid I-84 in its western entirety!
the "left exit only" lanes are kind of an abomination, though. one rarely expects the option of exiting left, much less a left lane that suddenly turns into an exit lane!
Quote from: agentsteel53 on June 02, 2009, 09:52:31 PM
the "left exit only" lanes are kind of an abomination, though. one rarely expects the option of exiting left, much less a left lane that suddenly turns into an exit lane!
*cough*I-244*cough*
Quote from: hm insulators on May 28, 2009, 02:35:48 PM
How about Arizona 153, just east of Phoenix Sky Harbor Airport? The nearby Hohokam Expressway (Arizona 143) is useful for connecting Loop 202 to I-10 and the airport, but the paralleling Arizona 153 meanders uncertainly north from University Avenue only to dump traffic onto 44th Street at Washington Avenue. Total length: maybe two miles and so close to Arizona 143 that at one point, the two highways nearly touch. A totally useless piece of freeway that could've been built in a spot elsewhere where it's sorely needed, like helping to extend the southeastern end of Loop 101 to tie into I-10 perhaps at Riggs Road.
Arizona 153 (https://www.aaroads.com/west/az-153.html) was decommissioned in August 2007. One plan is to convert the highway into a city street with the building of a Peoplemover down the middle.
QuoteI-95 (Connecticut Turnpike) in Connecticut from Exit 2 to Exit 70. A road that was ok in its day, but is now badly outdated...between the load of traffic that the engineers in the 1950s did not anticipate, plus the whole idea of 70 exits in 78 miles with many of the off and on-ramps inadequate for traffic flow
The glutton of interchanges along that stretch of Interstate 95 (https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/i-095_ct.html) is partially was dooms it to traffic congestion. Unless you need to clinch the route, avoid it, and if you do need to clinch it and don't care about photographing it, take it at 0dark30!
Quote from: AARoads on June 03, 2009, 11:09:31 AM
The glutton of interchanges along that stretch of Interstate 95 (http://www.northeastroads.com/i-095_ct.html) is partially was dooms it to traffic congestion. Unless you need to clinch the route, avoid it, and if you do need to clinch it and don't care about photographing it, take it at 0dark30!
ummm, not even o-dark-30 will do it between New York and New Haven...east of New Haven, not quite so bad....
back in those days, engineers didnt think about what traffic patterns might be a few decades ahead...but that was also before urban sprawl, plus the suburbs made possible in part by the beltways...
sadly, they do now, but too much of the highway system is laid down and not that amenable to change without excessive costs, not to mention lawsuits and other fun things (like Al Gore's dirty looks....)
Quoteback in those days, engineers didnt think about what traffic patterns might be a few decades ahead..
oh, Robert Moses did... then he laughed maniacally as he bit the head off a melanin-enhanced species-mate.
M-47 between Midland Road and US-10. Less than 2 miles of freeway and it doesn't even have enough traffic! Maybe MDOT should have checked it that stretch was really going to be I-75 before wasting money on a freeway that has no use anymore.
Quote-- Not completing the Inner Loop Expressway/Terry Bradshaw Passway (LA 3132) as a full southern beltway loop of I-220 in Sherveport. Or..will they wait until the Toll Fairy comes in to fund LA's portion of I-69 and build an extension there??
If I'm right, there is one major thing that currently keeping the Inner Loop Expressway from being completed as a full southern beltway of I-220 back to I-20 and that is called Barksdale Air Force Base.
One major interchange that comes to mind as a major pain in the you-know-what is the downtown Dallas Mixmaster where I-30 and I-35E meet. With its left exits off both interstates, one well-placed accident and you can basically shut down half the freeway system of downtown Dallas.
A big one and a little one.
The big one: Partial Exits
It's a good thing that they are frowned upon in modern freeway design and they often cause headaches. Especially those half diamond interchanges.
The little one: A useless exit.
On I-80 in Pennsylvania is Exit 199 Mile Run. The road at the exit is only paved between the interstate ramps. In 40 years of driving/riding along this road, I thing have have see someone getting on or off that exit ONCE. (not counting truckers sleeping at night.)
Heh, I'd get off at Mile Run just to say I've used that exit. I always found that exit funny.
Here's one from across the pond:
http://www.cbrd.co.uk/media/photo/micklehambends/ (http://www.cbrd.co.uk/media/photo/micklehambends/)
This documents one of the most accident prone pieces of highway in the UK, and it helps if you have Google Maps/Earth open while viewing the photos.
BTW, incidentally, the above link gets you to an excellent British roads site if you're interested.
Here are a few in Huntsville, AL:
- I-565/US 231 interchange in Huntsville, AL (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=huntsville,+al&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=50.956929,79.101563&ie=UTF8&ll=34.732919,-86.596878&spn=0.006516,0.009656&t=h&z=17): Movements between US 231 NB to I-565 WB in the morning rush and I-565 EB to US 231 SB in the evening rush are often slowed to a crawl. Traffic often stacks up onto I-565 in the evening and down US 231 in the morning. As a bonus, US 231 NB to I-565 WB is a loop ramp. The space given for the interchange is not a lot to work with, but now it can be seen that the design is inadequate for the traffic volumes in the area. Planners didn't (or couldn't) think of the 110,000 AADT on US 231 just south of the I-565 interchange, with about 10,000 of that going to I-565 WB. This leads me to my next point...
- US 231/Memorial Pkwy in Huntsville, AL: This should have been constructed as a freeway with modern interchanges from the Tennessee River to Meridianville. Right now it is a pseudo-freeway with a 50 mph speed limit, service roads, and slip ramps. These days that is about all that can be built with the development surrounding the road. Again, planners couldn't have possibly imagined the amount of growth in Huntsville when they would have had the change to design something that would be more suited to the traffic it experiences today.
- I-565's eastern terminus (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=huntsville,+al&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=50.956929,79.101563&ie=UTF8&ll=34.758626,-86.56291&spn=0.013028,0.019312&t=h&z=16): For the longest time, I-565 ended at a traffic signal at US 72 northeast of downtown Huntsville. In 2004, a modern interchange was built there that extended I-565 east by about a half mile. When I-565 was being built, the scope of the work for the interstate was to connect downtown Huntsville, MSFC, and Redstone Arsenal with I-65. A huge oversight I think was not to build I-565 further east across Chapman Mountain and out of the Huntsville City Limits. Today, the US 72 stretch between I-565 and Shields Rd is notorious for wrecks, many involving 18-wheelers, that shut down the road for hours at a time. Up until this year the curve on the eastern side of Chapman mountain was banked the wrong way, which combined with speeding drivers, cars and trucks would be sent careening off the highway. Now, the road needs to be upgraded to a freeway with modern design standards at least past Shields Rd, at best to Ryland Pike a few miles to the east.
Im not sure if this is strictly highways or not, but just about every intersection in San Angelo is horrible :ded:
There aren't really any bad highway idea's in San Angelo but is think it's kind pathetic that it took 37 YEARS to build Houston Harte Expressway!
Okay, so I have a problem with this intersection (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=42.401008,-83.21903&spn=0.001175,0.003862&t=h&z=19). It's horrible, busy all the time, the lights are never timed right, and it's confusing as hell. At least cut off access to the side street.
This wonderfully screwed up intersection in Lincoln, NE, consisting of Old Cheney Road, 14th Street, and L55W:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&t=h&ll=40.756701,-96.701295&spn=0.003503,0.010986&z=17 (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&t=h&ll=40.756701,-96.701295&spn=0.003503,0.010986&z=17)
Originally, 14th Street was US 77. But some year a genius in NDOR apparently got the idea to half build the bypass for US 77 and transition US 77 back to its old alignment through this intersection. So now this screwed up intersection has an overloaded SB L55W to SB 14th Street movement that backs up badly due to the stopsign where it crosses NB L55W:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=40.757026,-96.702068&spn=0,359.978027&z=16&layer=c&cbll=40.757111,-96.702097&panoid=VhKZDXehSHwmA6p17krm0A&cbp=12,173.64,,0,8.16 (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=40.757026,-96.702068&spn=0,359.978027&z=16&layer=c&cbll=40.757111,-96.702097&panoid=VhKZDXehSHwmA6p17krm0A&cbp=12,173.64,,0,8.16)
The city of Lincoln is planning to redo the intersection with Old Cheney being realigned to transition into the southwesterly angled part of L55W:
http://www.oasites.com/14thwarlick/design.aspx (http://www.oasites.com/14thwarlick/design.aspx)
Quote from: AARoads on June 03, 2009, 11:09:31 AM
The glutton of interchanges along that stretch of Interstate 95 (http://www.northeastroads.com/i-095_ct.html) is partially was dooms it to traffic congestion.
I'd blame increasing population with an increase in "reverse commuting". It's noticeably worse now than it was ten.. fifteen years ago. I remember it being open save for at rush hour in the peak direction. Now it's reliably a bit crowded albeit moving at 55-60, and you'll sometimes just randomly hit traffic, even on saturday afternoon.
Althopugh, there is some noticeable redundancy in the exits, and it certainly doesn't help. Why do exits 12, 20, 37, and 49 even exist? Did downtown Stamford really need 8 ramps to the service road instead of just 4? Exits 24 and 25 are way too close together, as are 25 and 26. Exit 39 should not be a full cloverleaf.
What also doesn't help is the substandardness of some of the design. the southbound onramp at exit 5 is fun to access from route 1 north (sudden 180!), and the offramp is also just kinda squeezed in there. The northbound onramp and southbound offramp at exit 10 are awful, as is the southbound onramp at exit 11. Exit 13 is a mess (put the entrance
before the exit. Brilliant! :pan:), and 14 has a similar problem. Two of the ramps at 22 route you
around the service areas. The loop ramp at exit 27 is rather tight (when ConnDOT redid that interchange they should've just outright replaced the northbound ramps with flyovers). The northbound onramp at 43 shouldn't be a loop. The situation at 44/45 is just funky in general (horrible weave southbound).
And yeah, dropping to four lanes past East Haven hurts.
SR-67, aka Legacy Parkway, north of Salt Lake City is poorly executed. Originally planned to be a six-lane freeway meant to bypass the terrible congestion that I-15 suffered just north of Salt Lake, the Sierra Club and the former mayor of Salt Lake City (even though Legacy does not enter his city) got involved to rid the world of this "monstrosity," so in turn a watered-down compromise was built, more easterly than it was before due to the "sensitive wetlands."
It opened in September as a four-lane, 55 mph "parkway" (though it's still a freeway) with pseudo-landscaping every now and then and half of the route it directly parallels I-15, with railroad tracks the only things separating them (go figure). The area of severe congestion on I-15 is getting rebuilt now anyway, and Legacy Parkway dumps you onto I-215 at its southern terminus when more people are interested getting onto I-15. The 55 mph limit deters drivers as well, so as a result you'll find that even with its four lanes it's being underutilized. So for $685 million we got a pretty waste of asphalt that's a cop's dream (Utahns enjoy driving 80 on the freeways). Argh...
Quote from: CL on June 14, 2009, 06:42:35 PM
SR-67, aka Legacy Parkway, north of Salt Lake City is poorly executed. Originally planned to be a six-lane freeway meant to bypass the terrible congestion that I-15 suffered just north of Salt Lake, the Sierra Club and the former mayor of Salt Lake City (even though Legacy does not enter his city) got involved to rid the world of this "monstrosity," so in turn a watered-down compromise was built, more easterly than it was before due to the "sensitive wetlands."
It opened in September as a four-lane, 55 mph "parkway" (though it's still a freeway) with pseudo-landscaping every now and then and half of the route it directly parallels I-15, with railroad tracks the only things separating them (go figure). The area of severe congestion on I-15 is getting rebuilt now anyway, and Legacy Parkway dumps you onto I-215 at its southern terminus when more people are interested getting onto I-15. The 55 mph limit deters drivers as well, so as a result you'll find that even with its four lanes it's being underutilized. So for $685 million we got a pretty waste of asphalt that's a cop's dream (Utahns enjoy driving 80 on the freeways). Argh...
I'm guessing it hasn't had the desired impact yet? It is not even a year old, though.
LP was supposed to be a good bypass of I-15 for those wanting to get to the Airport.
I have some knowledge of the "freeway" design (before it became the parkway design). There were supposed to be connector ramps between SB LP and SB I-15 and NB I-15 and NB LP. This was to be a second-phase improvement to the I-15/I-215/LP interchange area, effectively providing the missing movements in the interchange, but I presume that was shelved with the redesign of LP.
This was a pretty dumb PennDOT idea in Pittsburgh. On PA 28 when it intersects PA 8, traffic on both sides is narrowed to one lane each way, while a substandard left exit is jutted out from PA 28 North to PA 8 North.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=62nd+Street+Bridge&sll=40.495918,-79.941963&sspn=0.005711,0.01369&ie=UTF8&z=16&iwloc=A (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=62nd+Street+Bridge&sll=40.495918,-79.941963&sspn=0.005711,0.01369&ie=UTF8&z=16&iwloc=A)
Here's street view:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=62nd+Street+Bridge&sll=40.495918,-79.941963&sspn=0.005711,0.01369&ie=UTF8&ll=40.494074,-79.942424&spn=0.011423,0.02738&z=16&layer=c&cbll=40.49424,-79.942722&panoid=NUStbHfXg1Y9_qgt-W69tA&cbp=12,64.02,,0,4.37 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=62nd+Street+Bridge&sll=40.495918,-79.941963&sspn=0.005711,0.01369&ie=UTF8&ll=40.494074,-79.942424&spn=0.011423,0.02738&z=16&layer=c&cbll=40.49424,-79.942722&panoid=NUStbHfXg1Y9_qgt-W69tA&cbp=12,64.02,,0,4.37)
How about this interchange of I-691 & I-91 in Meriden, CT complete with left exits and all. CT15 is also in this interchange. Ths should be rebuilt as a stack...but the NIMBYS won't like that I'm sure. Plus the CTDOT doesn't really think big.
http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCC&cp=41.537458~-72.764366&style=h&lvl=17&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1 (http://www.bing.com/maps/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCC&cp=41.537458~-72.764366&style=h&lvl=17&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&encType=1)
or
Route 25 which splits here from CT Route 8...ends a few miles ahead. SHould go all the way to I-84!
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=bridgeport,+ct&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=30.599615,56.25&ie=UTF8&ll=41.263872,-73.081398&spn=0,359.649811&z=12&layer=c&cbll=41.216643,-73.181586&panoid=8NwBUQFIszoJ0TpvoVCxtQ&cbp=12,27.52,,0,-2.94 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=bridgeport,+ct&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=30.599615,56.25&ie=UTF8&ll=41.263872,-73.081398&spn=0,359.649811&z=12&layer=c&cbll=41.216643,-73.181586&panoid=8NwBUQFIszoJ0TpvoVCxtQ&cbp=12,27.52,,0,-2.94)
Boulevard - Montgomery, Alabama: It's too built-up, especially East and South Boulevards.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fri1vWiB6OM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fri1vWiB6OM)
Be well,
Bryant
Quote from: akotchi on June 14, 2009, 07:22:42 PM
I'm guessing it hasn't had the desired impact yet? It is not even a year old, though.
LP was supposed to be a good bypass of I-15 for those wanting to get to the Airport.
I have some knowledge of the "freeway" design (before it became the parkway design). There were supposed to be connector ramps between SB LP and SB I-15 and NB I-15 and NB LP. This was to be a second-phase improvement to the I-15/I-215/LP interchange area, effectively providing the missing movements in the interchange, but I presume that was shelved with the redesign of LP.
Ah, thanks for the insight. Yes, the second-phase connector ramps make sense as the northern interchange of I-15/I-215 is about to be rebuilt, so I'm guessing the connector ramps were integrated in that design prior to the redesign of Legacy Parkway.
Quote from: njroadhorse on June 14, 2009, 07:40:09 PM
This was a pretty dumb PennDOT idea in Pittsburgh. On PA 28 when it intersects PA 8, traffic on both sides is narrowed to one lane each way, while a substandard left exit is jutted out from PA 28 North to PA 8 North.
This is actually being fixed right now. The one lane Rt. 28 thru lane bridge is being demolished (causing what I'm sure is an aggravating detour) and will be replaced with a 2-lane bridge. The exit to / entrance from Rt. 8 in Etna will still be left-handed though.
I don't know if there are any plans at all to reconfigure the Highland Park Br. interchange to allow for 2 thru lanes.
There are times when I think the traffic engineers in Massachusetts are unable to reason their way out of a paper bag. Best example is about a mile from my house. Back in the late 1960's, when I-93 was built, MA-128 (now concurrent with I-95 through that area) was already a major highway with frequent heavy traffic and traffic jams during rush hours. So, the interchange between the two roads was designed as (drum roll, please) a cloverleaf. Yes, you read it right. This interchange usually ends up on the state's top-5 list of accident-prone intersections every year, and has for at least the past 20 years or so.
They're also in love with lane-drops and rotaries (the rest of America calls them traffic circles), and of course Massachusetts is still the home of the flashing-green traffic signal and the red-yellow interval for pedestrians to cross an intersection (not many of those left, but it's still part of the state's motor vehicle law). Signage at rotaries formerly under the jurisdiction of the now-defunct Metropolitan District Commission is so damned confusing it's a wonder anyone from out of town knows which road spins off to where. The signs use directional arrows as if the rotary were a normal intersection (left arrows for a road that leaves the rotary??).
I think the southerly I-95 interchange with Route 128 would also have been a cloverleaf, if I-95 would have gone through to downtown.
SidS, as a fellow Mass. roadgeek - I don't suppose you remember I-86, do you?
Not extending the Earhart Expwy to the I-10/Claiborne Flyover interchange.
-The I-4/FL 408 trumpet interchange, so smart to put it in a downtown area.
-The spur of 408 (to 417 north) and mainline 408 split is not very convenient to traffic coming on and off Goldenrod Rd/SR 551.
-No center turn lanes on Lake Underhill Road from Anderson/South Streets to Goldenrod Rd.
-No signal or caution light at Cosmos Drive and Lake Underhill Road.
-The left-lane-merge on Curry Ford Road east of SR 417 where the left lane merges into the center lane (which becomes the left lane after the merge) because the right lane is NOT right turn only. This is immediately after a traffic light.
-"Running out of money" to build a connector to SR 528 for the Avalon Park neighborhood. It's more important to build up the area, congest a 2-lane road, and the only other way out is a winding road through the neighborhoods at 30-35mph, than to efficiently move traffic.
Quote from: rawr apples on February 01, 2009, 11:47:58 PM
In Portland, OR-217....4 lanes the entire length, apart from the 6 lane bits between certain exits. constantly backed up. traffic lights at the junction with I-5
ODOT's not done with the 'Traffic lights on a freeway at a freeway' blunder yet: http://www.sunrise-project.org/files/sunrise_sdeis_chapter_2.pdf (http://www.sunrise-project.org/files/sunrise_sdeis_chapter_2.pdf) (Page 15, Sunrise Freeway/OR212/224)
Quote from: Tarkus on April 24, 2009, 03:12:29 AM
Well, the one stupid one I can think of is more of proposed stupidity . . . the planned new I-5 bridge over the Columbia River on the Oregon/Washington border. They want to spend close to $5 billion on the sucker, and since they're not going to fix the Delta Park/North Portland bottleneck, it's going to do absolutely nothing to fix traffic.
The Delta Park bottle neck is currently under reconstruction and will be six lanes. It's the Eastbank Freeway bottleneck that will be the issue.
QuoteI'd also put the whole US-26/OR-10/OR-99W/OR-43/I-5 setup on the west end of the Ross Island Bridge on the list. Worst interchange ever.
Meh. It's merely a maze, easy to deal with once you know where everything goes, though the ramp from OR99W north to US 26 east and OR 43 to US 26 east are ridiculous with stop signs at the ends...
QuoteThe Delta Highway (a Lane County, OR-maintained facility) is also pathetically substandard--it's Eugene's equivalent of OR-217. It's impressive that a county built a freeway (they built current OR-569, too, before handing it over to ODOT), but it's not nearly wide enough to account for all the traffic trying to get between Downtown and North Eugene/Santa Clara.
-Alex (Tarkus)
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 08, 2009, 09:50:16 PM
SidS, as a fellow Mass. roadgeek - I don't suppose you remember I-86, do you?
Sure do. I used to spend a lot of time on it, while I was living in New Hampshire and my in-laws lived in NYC. We'd go visit every six weeks or so, and instead of taking I-91 all the way south to I-95, we'd go west on I-86 to I-684 to the Saw Mill River Parkway to get down to the Big Apple.
Of course, now NY-17 is morphing into I-86, slowly but surely, and the old I-86 is now I-84, eastern branch.
Denver = E-470/C-470/Northwest Parkway corridor.
- The majority of the 470 bypass, to the east and north of Denver is high-tolled with not much traffic using the under-used road.
- The majority of the C-470 bypass, to the south & west of Denver is mostly 2 lanes in each direction and is need of a major overhaul & expansion.
- The area of 470 that WAS to have finished the 470 loop, to the North & West of Denver -- where they desperately need a bypass the most, has fallen victim to community and political opposition, and will probably will never see the light of day.
In other words "470: Build it where they aint/Don't build it where they are!"
QuoteI think the southerly I-95 interchange with Route 128 would also have been a cloverleaf, if I-95 would have gone through to downtown.
Aerials suggest there would've been a flyover from SB 95 to "EB" 128 (now NB 93).
QuoteNot extending the Earhart Expwy to the I-10/Claiborne Flyover interchange.
That actually wasn't the original plan. Original Plan A would have created a long loop, generally parallel to the river, to tie into the cancelled Vieux Carre near where Tchoupitoulas crosses under the Westbank (BUSINESS 90). Plan B would have created a connector to the I-10/Airline (US 61) interchange, but that didn't get anywhere either.
But since you mention New Orleans, here's 2 to add to the list:
- Not upgrading Causeway Blvd to a freeway between the Causeway and I-10 when I-10 was built.
- Not building Clearview Pkwy as at least a limited-access highway (if not full freeway) between the Huey Long Bridge and I-10.
The Legacy Parkway is a joke. First, for all that money, and you still bottleneck truck traffic entering or exiting West Valley City and points west to stay on I-15 to I-215.
The low speed limit was a nuisance when I drove it. Funny the light board on I-215 nb would give estimated times to Ogden taking each route, and every time I've seen it, the times for both roads are the same.
Sykotyk
Sounds like the Legacy Parkway will indeed leave a legacy.
Three problems with the widening of US 36 in Missouri between US 63 and Hannibal:
1) The wonderful use of a dashed yellow centerline with "do not pass signs" instead of a solid double centerline on a section of the future WB lanes that are currently handling both directions of traffic.
2) The setup at the future diamond interchange at MO 151. Both directions of US 36 are routed up the northern ramps at the interchange. There is a three-way stop at the cross road, with the overpass being closed to traffic - the next closest stop sign or stop light on US 36 is either at I-35 in Cameron or in Decatur, IL. Would it have been that hard to phase it so US 36 stayed on the WB lanes and only WB traffic had access to MO 151.
3) The use of a strange Michigan left type setup near Rte E on the section of US 36 multiplexed with US 24. If there is a safety problem already to require such a setup, then an interchange should have been built to start with.
Insurance/Fire Commissioner John Oxendine's Highway Idea (http://blogs.creativeloafing.com/freshloaf/2009/09/01/inman-park-group-to-oxendine-retract-east-atlanta-highway-statement/)
I don't think it's bad idea, but it'll be too costly and it's already been tried before -- and it died a horrible death. :ded:
Be well,
Bryant
-Not building I-35 to directly feed into the four-lane MN 61 at the NE end of Duluth, MN
-WisDOT's redo of the US 12/US 53/WI 93 (Clairemont Ave/Hastings Way/London Rd) area in Eau Claire, WI. When the US 53 bypass freeway was built to the north of US 12 a few years ago, Hastings Way to the north (old US 53) should have been rerouted to feed directly into London Rd (WI 93) to the south, with the former WI 93/US 53 trumpet interchange by the dead London Square Mall abandoned completely and the new US 53/US 12 (Clairemont Ave) interchange being a simple diamond or SPUI. It would have been MUCH cheaper, simpler, more logical and better laid out than the mess of roadways that was ultimately built.
-WisDOT's recently built 'Bypasses-Lite' (ie, US 151 around Fond du Lac, US 12 around Whitewater, etc). Even though they are on fully upgradable rights of way, WisDOT cut too many corners in their initial construction designs simply to save money and they have been traffic disasters from the days that they opened.
-WI 26 between US 41 and US 151 - it should have been four lanes decades ago and still no bypass of Rosendale.
-WI 13 (Veterans Parkway) in Marshfield. It should have been a full bypass freeway, but rich NIMBYs (Marshfield sports a large and renowned medical center complex) on the city's outskirts put a kibosh on it. The boulevard street on a new through-town ROW was built instead.
-US 41 (Richfield Interchange to Fond du Lac). It should have been built parallel/adjacent to the former CNW railroad from the end of the modern-day US 45 West Bend Spur freeway to FdL's southside, where it would pick up its modern-day routing, with close-in bypasses of Kewaskum, Campbellsport and Eden. The current split US 41 and US 45 routings and freeways between those points are wastefully duplicative. The original two-lane US 41 on its modern-day ROW was laid out in the late 1940s.
-Not building the Stadium and Park-West freeways in Milwaukee.
-US 151's entrances into the Madison metro area (BOTH of 'em!).
Mike
They say that weaving is a sign of bad traffic planning... and it's pretty much an integral part of cloverleaf interchanges. So why exactly does Roanoke (Va) have 4 cloverleaf interchanges along Interstate 581/us-220? Oh but of course it's just the fact that this is Virginia... (VDOT has a bad reputation, and it's running out of money very very fast)
Another thing is the turn radius on some of the ramps. On one ramp in particular, I estimate the turn radius to be about 60 feet (hence the 15mph exit speed) - specifically it's the turn from US220-northbound to Wonju Avenue westbound. On google maps (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=roanoke+va&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=34.671324,56.513672&ie=UTF8&ll=37.252305,-79.956769&spn=0.002126,0.003449&t=k&z=18&iwloc=A)
Yet another thing is the Elm Avenue intersection in downtown, where the I-581 designation ends. This is the most crowded intersection in the city, and it's a pain to navigate - yet with as much traffic as it has to deal with, it's a plain, boring traditional diamond intersection! I think it would be much better with either a SPUI or one of those roundabouts above the highway.
On Google Maps (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=roanoke+va&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=34.671324,56.513672&ie=UTF8&ll=37.266744,-79.93706&spn=0.004252,0.006899&t=k&z=17&iwloc=A)
It's quite a pain to go from I-581SB to Orange Ave westbound, then turn left onto Gainsboro Rd. On Google Maps (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=roanoke+va&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=34.671324,56.513672&ie=UTF8&ll=37.282598,-79.938905&spn=0.004251,0.006899&t=h&z=17&iwloc=A)
And last but not least, is the unfinished trumpet next to Valley View Mall. The loop ramp that would have gone from I-581 southbound around to Valley View Blvd towards the mall was partially graded, but never completed. Even the bridge has "RAMP CLOSED" signs on that side, and it's had freeway dividers to keep traffic moving properly. I'll just let Google Maps (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=roanoke+va&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=34.671324,56.513672&ie=UTF8&ll=37.296443,-79.957895&spn=0.00425,0.006899&t=k&z=17&iwloc=A) show what it looks like.
Worst highway ideas?
Here are a few for Chicagoland off the top of my head.
*The rebuild of the I-80 and I-55 interchange. A lot of trucks use this one to go around or into Chicago, yet IDiOT rebuilt it as a slightly larger cloverleaf. :banghead:
*The lack of any interchange between the Tri-State Twy and I-57.
*The lack of any freeway or tollway in Lak County beyond the Tri-State Twy. Come on folks, build IL-53 already. We got I-355 done at our end. :sombrero:
*IDiOT's willingness to wait to add lanes or capacity until at least 20-30 years after it is needed, and they've been told about the need.
*The rebuild of IL-59. IDiOT decided to widen the road with a median. However, there are traffic signals every 1/2 to 1/4 mile now. Wouldn't compact interchnages have worked better?
I'm sure there's more.
Quote from: Insurance/Fire Commissioner John Oxendine's Highway Idea
I don't think it's bad idea, but it'll be too costly and it's already been tried before -- and it died a horrible death.
Could use someone like him to come to St. Louis and work for reviving a south extension of I-170.
As for other bad ideas around Atlanta, how about the stoplight on GA 10/Freedom Parkway at Boulevard Drive in Atlanta? Looks like there was enough space for an interchange, and why have overpasses on either side of it?
I'm also looking at the side by side section of GA 13 and I-85, and it seems a possible combination of a dual divided freeway with a Texas double deck design around the elevated section of I-85 would work better. At the least better connections between GA 13, I-85, and GA 400 could have been provided.
Quote from: Revive 755As for other bad ideas around Atlanta, how about the stoplight on GA 10/Freedom Parkway at Boulevard Drive in Atlanta? Looks like there was enough space for an interchange, and why have overpasses on either side of it?
I'm also looking at the side by side section of GA 13 and I-85, and it seems a possible combination of a dual divided freeway with a Texas double deck design around the elevated section of I-85 would work better. At the least better connections between GA 13, I-85, and GA 400 could have been provided.
It's a horribly timed light at that. It doesn't stay green long enough on the Freedom Parkway segment. Also, of course, there's a red light camera at this intersection. An interchange would be nice as Freedom Parkway's limited access from the Carter Center to where it becomes Andrew Young International Blvd., at about Piedmont Ave.
Also, GDOT had an open house about directly connecting I-85 South with S.R. 400 North and S.R. 400 South to I-85 North. I didn't get a chance to go, however.
Be well,
Bryant
The fact that I-476 narrows from 3 to 2 lanes south of exit 9 (PA 3) is the worst thing ever. Gridlock anyone??
Quote from: PennDOTFan on September 30, 2009, 09:25:47 PM
The fact that I-476 narrows from 3 to 2 lanes south of exit 9 (PA 3) is the worst thing ever. Gridlock anyone??
Let's add to that the fact that I-95 narrows to two through lanes in both directions at the southern terminus of I-476. This section was congested even before the Blue Route opened.
Though it cost a lot of money, I don't really think the Katy Freeway plan that was chosen was the best one. There is one place where it goes from five lanes, down to four, and back to five again. Creates a traffic nightmare in the evenings.
ever since I've started driving a stick-shift car I've noticed just how many completely frivolous stop signs there are in the US. The European method of putting yield signs everywhere is much, much better.
in general, multiple consecutive four-way stop signs on the through route ... very bad idea! Traffic calming should be reserved for quiet residential streets, not the main drag. Let the through traffic get through.
Strictly speaking, the "European" approach toward stop sign usage is actually British. The reason "Give Way" signs are used in Britain in contexts where stop signs would be used in the US and most continental European countries is that each stop sign in Britain requires the authorization of the Secretary of State for Transport, which is given only when there is a nonremovable sight obstruction. Another peculiarity of British road traffic law is that, for fixed permanent installations, it is actually the "Give Way" line (not the sign or the triangular pavement marking) which imposes the legal requirement to yield priority. The upright sign and triangular pavement marking are used to add emphasis.
speaking of "yield" signs, does anyone actually know how the old "priority to the right" system works at unsigned intersections? That right there is another Bad Idea; having the ancient "priority to the right" rule on the books (sometimes, but not always, using it in T-intersections too!) and leaving intersections unsigned, but luckily they tend to be in small-town back streets with very little traffic.
a lot of people assume an unsigned intersection is an all-way stop (priority to the first arrival) but it's priority to the right, so someone who approaches from the right and, correctly, does not stop, may get plowed by someone who got there first and assumed the other driver would stop too.
France, apparently, has intersections of significance still operating under this system, including some major boulevards in Paris.
I understand priority-to-the-right, and at least in Kansas it is still on the books, still taught in driver's education, and (I think) still a question on the driver's license exam. But slowing down at an unmarked crossroads is just defensive driving--you don't know whether the other driver even knows about the priority-to-right rule or comes from a jurisdiction (like Britain) which has no such priority assignment rule.
Given the rarity (even in traditional priority-to-right countries like France) of major intersections not subject to some form of explicit control through signs, markings, or signals, dealing with uncontrolled intersections is largely a problem of planning subdivisions to require a minimal number of transits through uncontrolled intersections to reach a collector or arterial.
"Priority to the right" is/was mentioned in the driver manuals for Missouri and Nebraska, but in both states it seems to rarely be observed - try to follow it often leads to a funny look given by the driver on the right.
As for another bad idea, how about the placement of ramps on I-70 between the west end of the PSB and the McKinely Bridge in St. Louis? Take a day when the I-55 entrance to the PSB is backed up to the merge with I-44 and for some reason the Memorial Drive ramp is closed. The next chance to just exit WB I-70 is near Madison Street, two miles north of the PSB. But is it possible to simply make a u-turn and head back on EB I-70 to the MLK Bridge? No, as EB I-70 also has an exit in that area, and does not have an entrance until back at the west end of the PSB. Same situation at the Branch Street exit. A simple u-turn option is not available until the Salisbury/McKinely Bridge interchange, or via a long trek via the outer roads through a really wonderful part of St. Louis.
Then how about the reversible/express lanes on I-70? Seem to be closed more than open, have the same speed limit of 55 as the regular lanes even with no access points for miles, and require a lane shift at their east end for EB I-70 traffic that renders EB I-70 unusable in the afternoon. I'm not sure whether this is a result of the US 40 closure, but right now they are also set for reverse commutes - outbound from downtown in the morning, inbound in the afternoon. And they are still extremely empty.
Then there is the maze of streets under the elevated section of I-70 downtown where a simpler one-way outer road design would work better.