AARoads Forum

National Boards => General Highway Talk => Topic started by: Some one on January 22, 2020, 09:10:52 PM

Title: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: Some one on January 22, 2020, 09:10:52 PM
Pretty simple. Two highways that run concurrent/multiplexed/whatever you call it but on separate lanes. Kinda like I-45 and I-10 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7733037,-95.3680305,1294m/data=!3m1!1e3?authuser=1),
I-69/US 59 and SH 288 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7393069,-95.3638999,1295m/data=!3m1!1e3?authuser=1), and I-85 and I-285 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6182688,-84.4726507,1242m/data=!3m1!1e3?authuser=)
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: Rothman on January 22, 2020, 09:18:34 PM
Quote from: Some one on January 22, 2020, 09:10:52 PM
Pretty simple. Two highways that run concurrent/multiplexed/whatever you call it but on separate lanes. Kinda like I-45 and I-10 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7733037,-95.3680305,1294m/data=!3m1!1e3?authuser=1),
I-69/US 59 and SH 288 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7393069,-95.3638999,1295m/data=!3m1!1e3?authuser=1), and I-85 and I-285 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6182688,-84.4726507,1242m/data=!3m1!1e3?authuser=)
I-94 and the I-35s in Minneapolis and St. Paul?
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: roadman65 on January 22, 2020, 09:20:30 PM
US 9 and the Garden State Parkway in Woodbridge, NJ.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: Big John on January 22, 2020, 09:31:47 PM
I-85 and I-286 in southwest Fulton County, Georgia.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: oscar on January 22, 2020, 09:33:41 PM
If they're on separate lanes, they might not be truly "concurrent". For example, Interstate H-1 and HI 92 have the same centerline between H-1 exits 15 and 18, but H-1 is on a long viaduct above the ground-level HI 92, and the two highways are treated by HDOT as separate, non-concurrent/multiplexed routes.

Similarly I-65/US 31 north of Louisville, Autoroute A-440/Quebec 335 north of Montreal,  and part of Autoroutes 10 and 55 (share lanes and roadway) and Quebec 112 (separate sets of non-concurrent lanes) between Magog and Sherbrooke. In those cases, the lesser highway runs along the freeway on frontage roads.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: roadman65 on January 22, 2020, 09:36:12 PM
Is NY 27 concurrent with the Belt Parkway on Long Island?  Or is it routed on the frontage roads.  I imagine the latter, but that is cause trucks are banned on NY Parkways. However, state routes do not need a truck alternate and NYSDOT could actually have a bannered one along the service roads.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: vdeane on January 22, 2020, 09:40:44 PM
NY 27 uses the frontage roads.  Regarding truck prohibitions, if I remember right, not being on a designated truck facility is the reason why NYCDOT doesn't sign the portion of NY 24 that runs through the city.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: roadman65 on January 22, 2020, 09:42:56 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 22, 2020, 09:40:44 PM
NY 27 uses the frontage roads.  Regarding truck prohibitions, if I remember right, not being on a designated truck facility is the reason why NYCDOT doesn't sign the portion of NY 24 that runs through the city.
So it counts as far as the OP is concerned if I interpret it as two routes in the same ROW but separate lanes.  I think that is what Oscar was pointing out that the title is sort of not correct to its true meaning.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: Some one on January 22, 2020, 09:57:35 PM
Yeah, sorry. I'm not really sure what to call it. As long as they're two or more highways that run along the same path (but on different lanes), then it's fine.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: sprjus4 on January 22, 2020, 10:04:37 PM
I-73 / I-85 near Greensboro, NC - I-85 runs on the inside lanes and I-73 runs on the outside lanes.

I-69E / SH-44 in Robstown, TX - I-69E runs on the inside mainline, SH-44 runs on the frontage roads.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: roadman65 on January 22, 2020, 10:05:46 PM
I suppose that I-91 and CT 15 does sort of in two places where I-91 is in the median of the CT 15 freeways.

US 92 and I-4 near Tampa is another as for almost a mile both routes run together but separate.
US 1 & 90 and I-95 do that now in Jacksonville and the US routes use a c/d roadway of the interstate.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: DJ Particle on January 23, 2020, 02:19:39 AM
Quote from: Rothman on January 22, 2020, 09:18:34 PM
Quote from: Some one on January 22, 2020, 09:10:52 PM
Pretty simple. Two highways that run concurrent/multiplexed/whatever you call it but on separate lanes. Kinda like I-45 and I-10 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7733037,-95.3680305,1294m/data=!3m1!1e3?authuser=1),
I-69/US 59 and SH 288 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7393069,-95.3638999,1295m/data=!3m1!1e3?authuser=1), and I-85 and I-285 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6182688,-84.4726507,1242m/data=!3m1!1e3?authuser=)
I-94 and the I-35s in Minneapolis and St. Paul?

I-35W and MN-62.... the "Crosstown Commons"
And if you're counting the St. Paul 94/35E concurrency... I-94 and US-61 just east of it, the I-35W/US-10 concurrency, and the I-35E/694 concurrency.

And the newest one in the Cities...  MN-610 and CSAH-81

And do we count US-169/CSAH-1 in southern Bloomington?
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: Mapmikey on January 23, 2020, 06:25:30 AM
I-85 and US 74 Kings Mtn NC
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: GaryV on January 23, 2020, 08:26:35 AM
I-696 and M-10:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4883892,-83.2836656,15z?hl=en
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: Henry on January 23, 2020, 08:59:09 AM
I-83 and I-695 fits this description. While I-695 uses the inner mainline, I-83 goes on the outer lanes, and both ends are exit only.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: kphoger on January 23, 2020, 09:58:22 AM
Are you talking about separate roadways?  Lanes are the spaces between painted lines on the same bit of pavement.  Roadways are the traveled portions of a highway between shoulders/berms/barriers/etc.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: webny99 on January 23, 2020, 10:26:21 AM
Would the Thruway and I-790 in Utica count?

I think NY 7 and I-87 near Albany count as half, since northbound shares a roadway while southbound is grade-separated, as seen here (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7579286,-73.76506,3a,75y,235.95h,72.73t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sPFkqG2550MkaSWWRc0B-qQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DPFkqG2550MkaSWWRc0B-qQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D115.04404%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656).
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: interstate73 on January 23, 2020, 02:06:41 PM
The recent reconstruction of the I-80/29 intersection in Council Bluffs, IA created a "dual divided freeway" where the two routes had previously run on the same roadway, although the inner lanes are signed as I-80 Express and the outer lanes are signed as I-29/I-80 Local, so I guess it's a partial concurrency :hmmm: (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcouncilbluffsinterstate.iowadot.gov%2Ffiles%2F5215%2F6571%2F7001%2FI-80EB_I-29SB_DDF-DecisionPoints_20190812a.jpg&hash=4f59adce7212d2f867043423d2ef3830b0bf9bfe)
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: SSR_317 on January 24, 2020, 12:49:21 PM
I-65 and 38th Street (not a numbered route, but a major arterial) on the NW side of Indy just north of Speedway.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 24, 2020, 12:55:21 PM
I-76/NJ42 and I-295 in NJ.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on January 24, 2020, 04:12:35 PM
Quote from: SSR_317 on January 24, 2020, 12:49:21 PM
I-65 and 38th Street (not a numbered route, but a major arterial) on the NW side of Indy just north of Speedway.
Also want to add I-465 at Shadeland Avenue (also not a numbered route) on the East side of Indy.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: Thing 342 on January 24, 2020, 04:53:30 PM
The Dulles Toll Road (VA 267) is officially a separate designation from the free Dulles Access Road (VA 90004) which runs inside its median from Dulles to VA-123.
I-66 runs within the median of US-29 for a short distance in Arlington.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: jp the roadgeek on January 27, 2020, 01:07:28 AM
I-84 and CT 72 do for about a half mile in Plainville.  The left 2 lanes EB and the right 2 lanes WB are CT 72 lanes.  It turns into a slalom course with all the weaves between lanes to switch roadways. 
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: woodpusher on January 28, 2020, 03:57:49 AM
Quote from: Some one on January 22, 2020, 09:10:52 PM
Pretty simple. Two highways that run concurrent/multiplexed/whatever you call it but on separate lanes. Kinda like I-45 and I-10 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7733037,-95.3680305,1294m/data=!3m1!1e3?authuser=1),
I-69/US 59 and SH 288 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7393069,-95.3638999,1295m/data=!3m1!1e3?authuser=1), and I-85 and I-285 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6182688,-84.4726507,1242m/data=!3m1!1e3?authuser=)

Should google maps be the arbiter of this question?  I'd want to do some digging into TIGER files to really know.  I'll admit I've taken some shortcuts myself when it comes to placing highway shields on GIS maps.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: US 89 on January 28, 2020, 07:40:16 AM
I guess I-15 and US 89 north of Salt Lake City (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8258368,-111.9166101,15z) might qualify, but I've never thought of that segment as a concurrency in the same way as something like 85/285.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: TheGrassGuy on January 28, 2020, 01:43:28 PM
US-22 and GSP in Union, NJ
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: cbeach40 on February 03, 2020, 02:56:45 PM
In Windsor, ON, Highway 401 shares right-of-way with both Highway 3 and the EC Row Expressway.
https://www.google.ca/maps/@42.251671,-83.0447198,13.88z?hl=en
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: bzakharin on February 03, 2020, 03:22:03 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 24, 2020, 12:55:21 PM
I-76/NJ42 and I-295 in NJ.
These haven't been concurrent since the barriers went up between them years ago.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: webny99 on February 03, 2020, 03:23:58 PM
Quote from: bzakharin on February 03, 2020, 03:22:03 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 24, 2020, 12:55:21 PM
I-76/NJ42 and I-295 in NJ.
These haven't been concurrent since the barriers went up between them years ago.

But the barriers are likely the reason it qualifies for this thread in the first place.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: sprjus4 on February 03, 2020, 04:57:31 PM
Quote from: bzakharin on February 03, 2020, 03:22:03 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 24, 2020, 12:55:21 PM
I-76/NJ42 and I-295 in NJ.
These haven't been concurrent since the barriers went up between them years ago.
Hence the reason it was posted in this thread.

Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: BrianP on February 03, 2020, 05:46:07 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 03, 2020, 04:57:31 PM
Quote from: bzakharin on February 03, 2020, 03:22:03 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 24, 2020, 12:55:21 PM
I-76/NJ42 and I-295 in NJ.
These haven't been concurrent since the barriers went up between them years ago.
Hence the reason it was posted in this thread.

Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Then it's not a concurrency.  Since that requires that they be on the same roadway. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concurrency_(road)
QuoteA concurrency in a road network is an instance of one physical roadway bearing two or more different route numbers.

These instead are braided or inner/outer highways. But the route numbers do not share a roadway so they are not a concurrency.

This thread subject is an oxymoron. It's asking for something which can't occur.

My interpretation is that it is effectively asking for two highways that do not form a concurrency but do share the same ROW.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: sprjus4 on February 03, 2020, 05:51:46 PM
Quote from: BrianP on February 03, 2020, 05:46:07 PM
Then it's not a concurrency.  Since that requires that they be on the same roadway. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concurrency_(road)
QuoteA concurrency in a road network is an instance of one physical roadway bearing two or more different route numbers.

These instead are braided or inner/outer highways. But the route numbers do not share a roadway so they are not a concurrency.

This thread subject is an oxymoron. It's asking for something which can't occur.

My interpretation is that it is effectively asking for two highways that do not form a concurrency but do share the same ROW.
No need to get technical. You understand the point of the thread. Same ROW.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: BrianP on February 03, 2020, 06:13:23 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 03, 2020, 05:51:46 PM
Quote from: BrianP on February 03, 2020, 05:46:07 PM
Then it's not a concurrency.  Since that requires that they be on the same roadway. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concurrency_(road)
QuoteA concurrency in a road network is an instance of one physical roadway bearing two or more different route numbers.

These instead are braided or inner/outer highways. But the route numbers do not share a roadway so they are not a concurrency.

This thread subject is an oxymoron. It's asking for something which can't occur.

My interpretation is that it is effectively asking for two highways that do not form a concurrency but do share the same ROW.
No need to get technical. You understand the point of the thread. Same ROW.
I'd say there's a need since there seems to be some confusion from the incongruous subject. Which could be why there's one example given in the thread that's incorrect (I-695/I-83) and the confusion regarding I-76/NJ42 and I-295. Which that one could be unique in that it wasn't on the list in the past (due to the concurrency), is on the list now,  but will not be on list in the future (with no concurrency).   
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: TheGrassGuy on February 03, 2020, 06:28:56 PM
Quote from: BrianP on February 03, 2020, 06:13:23 PM
I'd say there's a need since there seems to be some confusion from the incongruous subject. Which could be why there's one example given in the thread that's incorrect (I-695/I-83) and the confusion regarding I-76/NJ42 and I-295. Which that one could be unique in that it wasn't on the list in the past (due to the concurrency), is on the list now,  but will not be on list in the future (with no concurrency).   
How long ago is "the past"? All of the GSV images of that location I have been able to find show a barrier.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: kphoger on February 03, 2020, 09:09:58 PM
Replace the concrete barrier with a wide paved neutral space–or even just a fat white line–and you would indeed have a true concurrency running on separate lanes.  I find it hard to believe we can't come up with an example somewhere in the world.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: cbeach40 on February 04, 2020, 10:56:15 AM
Quote from: kphoger on February 03, 2020, 09:09:58 PM
Replace the concrete barrier with a wide paved neutral space–or even just a fat white line–and you would indeed have a true concurrency running on separate lanes.  I find it hard to believe we can't come up with an example somewhere in the world.

What advantage would there be to designate a road as like, "left lanes are route A, right lanes are route B" instead of just "all lanes are route a/b" ?
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: vdeane on February 04, 2020, 12:47:04 PM
Quote from: kphoger on February 03, 2020, 09:09:58 PM
Replace the concrete barrier with a wide paved neutral space–or even just a fat white line–and you would indeed have a true concurrency running on separate lanes.  I find it hard to believe we can't come up with an example somewhere in the world.
Or even just regular striped lanes situated in such a way that through traffic for each road is separate.  The northbound I-87/NY 7 overlap does this; two lanes for NY 7 enter at exit 6, stay as auxiliary lanes for a short distance, and then leave at exit 7.  At no point does thru traffic for either road have to interact with thru traffic from the other; only traffic switching routes has to merge.  The two groups of lane are separated by the thick dotted line normally used for denoting exit/entrance lanes throughout.

Similar story for I-90/I-87, though there is an intermediate exit ramp eastbound/northbound, and the toll barrier complicates things here.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: kphoger on February 04, 2020, 01:15:32 PM
Quote from: vdeane on February 04, 2020, 12:47:04 PM

Quote from: kphoger on February 03, 2020, 09:09:58 PM
Replace the concrete barrier with a wide paved neutral space–or even just a fat white line–and you would indeed have a true concurrency running on separate lanes.  I find it hard to believe we can't come up with an example somewhere in the world.

Or even just regular striped lanes situated in such a way that through traffic for each road is separate.  The northbound I-87/NY 7 overlap does this; two lanes for NY 7 enter at exit 6, stay as auxiliary lanes for a short distance, and then leave at exit 7.  At no point does thru traffic for either road have to interact with thru traffic from the other; only traffic switching routes has to merge.  The two groups of lane are separated by the thick dotted line normally used for denoting exit/entrance lanes throughout.

That's a decent example.  I was imagining a big, thick, solid white line;  but the dotted line is similar.

(https://i.imgur.com/IsWCvoi.png)
(What's up with the H&R Block bubble?)

Quote from: cbeach40 on February 04, 2020, 10:56:15 AM
What advantage would there be to designate a road as like, "left lanes are route A, right lanes are route B" instead of just "all lanes are route a/b" ?

Well, as shown above, traffic might already be channelized in that way.  Why build an expensive barrier, if some pavement stripes will basically do the same thing.  In the example above, of course, interchanging between "halves" of the highway are possible–but the theoretical separation does exist.  The three left lanes start out as I-87 and then, at the next exit, continue on as I-87.  The two right lanes start out as NY-7 and then, at the next exit, continue on as NY-7.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: jeffandnicole on February 04, 2020, 01:25:15 PM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on February 03, 2020, 06:28:56 PM
Quote from: BrianP on February 03, 2020, 06:13:23 PM
I'd say there's a need since there seems to be some confusion from the incongruous subject. Which could be why there's one example given in the thread that's incorrect (I-695/I-83) and the confusion regarding I-76/NJ42 and I-295. Which that one could be unique in that it wasn't on the list in the past (due to the concurrency), is on the list now,  but will not be on list in the future (with no concurrency).   
How long ago is "the past"? All of the GSV images of that location I have been able to find show a barrier.

Somewhere around Dec., 2013.

Now, there's a little trickery involved here.  This GSV should show it fairly clearly:  https://goo.gl/maps/mH1Zo3rAwPUJu2bMA .  There's always been a barrier in the general area.  However, previously, it separated the I-76 Express Lanes from the I-76 Local Lanes and I-295.  Eventually they did away with the Express/Local lane division, and combined those lanes, but then separated I-295's carriageway from I-76.  So prior to December, 2013, you'll see the old setup, and after that date you'll see the current setup.

Quote from: BrianP on February 03, 2020, 05:46:07 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on February 03, 2020, 04:57:31 PM
Quote from: bzakharin on February 03, 2020, 03:22:03 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 24, 2020, 12:55:21 PM
I-76/NJ42 and I-295 in NJ.
These haven't been concurrent since the barriers went up between them years ago.
Hence the reason it was posted in this thread.

Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Then it's not a concurrency.  Since that requires that they be on the same roadway. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concurrency_(road)
QuoteA concurrency in a road network is an instance of one physical roadway bearing two or more different route numbers.

These instead are braided or inner/outer highways. But the route numbers do not share a roadway so they are not a concurrency.

This thread subject is an oxymoron. It's asking for something which can't occur.

My interpretation is that it is effectively asking for two highways that do not form a concurrency but do share the same ROW.

Which is why there's a bit of confusion here.  They definitely are on the same ROW.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: 1995hoo on February 04, 2020, 01:47:49 PM
The I-83/I-695 scenario mentioned further up the thread (as quoted below) seems very similar to the example vdeane and kphoger are discussing. The short skip lines denoting an exit extend the full distance between the concurrency's endpoints (roughly a mile).

Quote from: Henry on January 23, 2020, 08:59:09 AM
I-83 and I-695 fits this description. While I-695 uses the inner mainline, I-83 goes on the outer lanes, and both ends are exit only.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: StogieGuy7 on February 04, 2020, 02:00:40 PM
Interstates 88 and 355 near Downers Grove, IL share the same ROW and are intertwined (but separate) for close to a mile before going their separate ways.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: kphoger on February 04, 2020, 02:35:58 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 04, 2020, 01:47:49 PM
The I-83/I-695 scenario mentioned further up the thread (as quoted below) seems very similar to the example vdeane and kphoger are discussing. The short skip lines denoting an exit extend the full distance between the concurrency's endpoints (roughly a mile).

Quote from: Henry on January 23, 2020, 08:59:09 AM
I-83 and I-695 fits this description. While I-695 uses the inner mainline, I-83 goes on the outer lanes, and both ends are exit only.


Yep.  Check it out.

(https://i.imgur.com/poGkXuQ.png)
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: TheStranger on February 04, 2020, 02:57:56 PM
Would Route 84 east and I-680 north in Sunol count?

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sunol,+CA/@37.5900716,-121.8730277,1028m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x808fc23398d75b01:0x4494cb0395e64a97!8m2!3d37.5940369!4d-121.8884812

Route 84 east uses an auxiliary lane along 680 for about a half mile between Paloma Way and Vallecitos Road.  (Route 84 west stays on its own right of way and never actually runs on 680)
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: kphoger on February 04, 2020, 03:18:15 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on February 04, 2020, 02:57:56 PM
Would Route 84 east and I-680 north in Sunol count?

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sunol,+CA/@37.5900716,-121.8730277,1028m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x808fc23398d75b01:0x4494cb0395e64a97!8m2!3d37.5940369!4d-121.8884812

Route 84 east uses an auxiliary lane along 680 for about a half mile between Paloma Way and Vallecitos Road.  (Route 84 west stays on its own right of way and never actually runs on 680)

That might qualify for the original intent of the thread.  That interchange kind of reminds me of Hillsboro, TX, but without the number continuity.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: TheGrassGuy on February 04, 2020, 03:24:18 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on February 04, 2020, 02:57:56 PM
Would Route 84 east and I-680 north in Sunol count?

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sunol,+CA/@37.5900716,-121.8730277,1028m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x808fc23398d75b01:0x4494cb0395e64a97!8m2!3d37.5940369!4d-121.8884812

Route 84 east uses an auxiliary lane along 680 for about a half mile between Paloma Way and Vallecitos Road.  (Route 84 west stays on its own right of way and never actually runs on 680)
I looked it up on GSV and saw a bit of construction on the right-hand side. Is that just an extra-wide cordoned-off shoulder, or a totally separate lane?
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: 1995hoo on February 04, 2020, 03:34:45 PM
I wonder whether the brief stretch of Business US-70 that runs adjacent to I-85 just west of Durham, NC, fits the intent of this thread. The only thing separating Business US-70 (which is a two-lane road with two-way traffic) from the northbound lanes of I-85 is a jersey wall.

Satellite image: https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0307068,-78.9610694,624m/data=!3m1!1e3

Street View: https://goo.gl/maps/7uKQhjRMzmkwQu9b6
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: Hwy 61 Revisited on February 04, 2020, 03:41:24 PM
I-81 runs within I-690 in Syracuse.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: TheGrassGuy on February 04, 2020, 03:51:07 PM
Are the lower and upper levels on I-10 in San Antonio (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.4571543,-98.5156892,3a,75y,168.75h,88.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDCyVC_x-NDHPSLIxEG3sMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) considered the same or separate highways?
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: TheStranger on February 04, 2020, 04:11:46 PM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on February 04, 2020, 03:24:18 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on February 04, 2020, 02:57:56 PM
Would Route 84 east and I-680 north in Sunol count?

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sunol,+CA/@37.5900716,-121.8730277,1028m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x808fc23398d75b01:0x4494cb0395e64a97!8m2!3d37.5940369!4d-121.8884812

Route 84 east uses an auxiliary lane along 680 for about a half mile between Paloma Way and Vallecitos Road.  (Route 84 west stays on its own right of way and never actually runs on 680)
I looked it up on GSV and saw a bit of construction on the right-hand side. Is that just an extra-wide cordoned-off shoulder, or a totally separate lane?

Cordoned off shoulder; the lane that extends from the onramp from Paloma Road (the segment of 84 going west to the town of Sunol) north to the offramp from 680 to the Vallecitos Road segment of 84 is one extended auxiliary lane on its own.

Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: TheGrassGuy on February 04, 2020, 04:24:37 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on February 04, 2020, 04:11:46 PM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on February 04, 2020, 03:24:18 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on February 04, 2020, 02:57:56 PM
Would Route 84 east and I-680 north in Sunol count?

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sunol,+CA/@37.5900716,-121.8730277,1028m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x808fc23398d75b01:0x4494cb0395e64a97!8m2!3d37.5940369!4d-121.8884812

Route 84 east uses an auxiliary lane along 680 for about a half mile between Paloma Way and Vallecitos Road.  (Route 84 west stays on its own right of way and never actually runs on 680)
I looked it up on GSV and saw a bit of construction on the right-hand side. Is that just an extra-wide cordoned-off shoulder, or a totally separate lane?

Cordoned off shoulder; the lane that extends from the onramp from Paloma Road (the segment of 84 going west to the town of Sunol) north to the offramp from 680 to the Vallecitos Road segment of 84 is one extended auxiliary lane on its own.
Sorry for not clarifying; I was referring to the EB side.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: kphoger on February 04, 2020, 04:36:22 PM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on February 04, 2020, 03:51:07 PM
Are the lower and upper levels on I-10 in San Antonio (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.4571543,-98.5156892,3a,75y,168.75h,88.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDCyVC_x-NDHPSLIxEG3sMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) considered the same or separate highways?

It's all I-10–similar to express/local setups elsewhere.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: Some one on February 04, 2020, 06:33:18 PM
Quote from: TheGrassGuy on February 04, 2020, 03:51:07 PM
Are the lower and upper levels on I-10 in San Antonio (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.4571543,-98.5156892,3a,75y,168.75h,88.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDCyVC_x-NDHPSLIxEG3sMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) considered the same or separate highways?
I would say a better example would be I-35 and I-10/US 87, since I-35 takes the lower level and I-10 takes the upper level.
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.4181891,-98.5022465,3a,75y,189.55h,97.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3IAUpjgas3fsMoKtb7C18w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: Bickendan on February 04, 2020, 08:26:33 PM
No one's mentioned AP-7/E-15 and B-30 outside of Barcelona?
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: kphoger on February 05, 2020, 01:09:51 PM
Quote from: Some one on February 04, 2020, 06:33:18 PM

Quote from: TheGrassGuy on February 04, 2020, 03:51:07 PM
Are the lower and upper levels on I-10 in San Antonio (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.4571543,-98.5156892,3a,75y,168.75h,88.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDCyVC_x-NDHPSLIxEG3sMg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) considered the same or separate highways?

I would say a better example would be I-35 and I-10/US 87, since I-35 takes the lower level and I-10 takes the upper level.
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.4181891,-98.5022465,3a,75y,189.55h,97.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3IAUpjgas3fsMoKtb7C18w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I've always thought that setup was screwy.  You can take either upper or lower level for either route.  It just takes some quick lane changes if you take the "wrong one".  For example, I've personally driven the upper level northbound (signed for I-10) while following I-35.  No problem.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: TheGrassGuy on February 07, 2020, 05:06:54 PM
Quote from: Bickendan on February 04, 2020, 08:26:33 PM
No one's mentioned AP-7/E-15 and B-30 outside of Barcelona?
B-30's status as a separate highway (as opposed to merely local lanes for AP-7) is kind of confusing.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: CNGL-Leudimin on February 07, 2020, 05:53:39 PM
Quote from: Bickendan on February 04, 2020, 08:26:33 PM
No one's mentioned AP-7/E-15 and B-30 outside of Barcelona?

Not even me. I don't even consider two highways running on parallel separate lanes to be concurrent. I consider a concurrency to happen only when a single piece of pavement is assigned to two different highways.
Title: Re: Highway concurrencies that run on separate lanes
Post by: sprjus4 on February 07, 2020, 05:56:53 PM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on February 07, 2020, 05:53:39 PM
Quote from: Bickendan on February 04, 2020, 08:26:33 PM
No one's mentioned AP-7/E-15 and B-30 outside of Barcelona?

Not even me. I don't even consider two highways running on parallel separate lanes to be concurrent. I consider a concurrency to happen only when a single piece of pavement is assigned to two different highways.
If you've read anything above, the OP is referring to same right of way, but specifically barrier separated.