What are some major or at least significant road issues in your state or city that they will likely never fix? Either because they have explicitly said they never will or funding, etc. One example near me is the intersection of College Av. and Kessler Blvd. E Dr. in Indianapolis. This intersection is notoriously terrible during rush hour, in particular for Kessler traffic. the simple fix is to simply widen Kessler. This intersection has been studied and gets a LOS of F. Recently the Red Line BRT Line was added on College, possibly making it worse (not sure on this, the route is too new to tell). Anyway, the city has no plans on fixing this mess, what are some examples near you all?
Chicago: Hypotenuse.
Completing the interchange between I-75 and I-575 in Cobb. Currently there are no ramps from I-575 South to I-75 North or I-75 South to I-575 North, and putting them in would require some major rock blasting.
Cline Ave Bridge in East Chicago.
Seattle: Balancing of lanes on I-5 when not traveling with the express lanes
The Mercer-520-45th weave mess
The lack of a comprehensive rail system serving all corners of the region (working on it...slowly)
Saginaw: The following streets have at least some portions that need to be fixed.
Hess Street: An east side city street that becomes a country road east of Saginaw. The entire one way stretch east of the Saginaw River is chopped up pretty bad with poor pavement conditions. The I-75 overpass has a new bridge because MDOT did that during a series of bridge replacements between MM 148 and 145 as well as other ongoing projects on I-75. The two way stretch is in bad shape as well but I think the one way stretch needs to be fixed first. The one way in the other direction (Gallagher Street) is in bad shape too and they could be done at the same time. Williamson Street which crosses the two one way streets just was repaved a couple of summers ago.
Mackinaw Street: A long well known road in the area which simply becomes Mackinaw Road in the country, followed by Deep River Road in Arenac County and various names. In Saginaw though it just was repaved last summer from State Street (M-58) to Congress/Malzahn in front of Arthur Hill High School. Between Weiss and State it's still in decent shape but not the best, however between Congress/Malzahn and Hamilton it's chopped up and uneven pavement pretty much the entire way getting worse closer to Hamilton.
Fraser/Marquette and Vermont Street: The same street as Hess and Gallagher on the east side, these series of west side streets are in bad shape. I hit a pothole on Fraser Street between Fayette and Harrison just about every time I pass through there forgetting that the pothole is there.
There are more and I haven't seen a desire by Saginaw County or City to fix these roads. What's funny is Sheridan Avenue which is another street in pretty bad shape is the street that the Saginaw County Road Commission is located on, just south of Hess and Gallagher (mentioned earlier).
Indiana:
I-465 Exit 25 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9276277,-86.2583326,3a,16.4y,284.05h,90.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sElPcR7lXuRMeD8gDHwXAwA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
US-24 Red Lights in Wabash (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8153306,-85.8376505,3a,62.7y,220.33h,82.61t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1si6LdhF-_dccazbzn7b4jOw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Di6LdhF-_dccazbzn7b4jOw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D104.96335%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)
Lack of bypass around Indiana's portion of Chicagoland
The regular backup on Keystone Pkwy from the 86th St exit to I-465
Mississippi:
That stupid 4 way stop on US-82 in Mathiston. (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5404351,-89.1240358,3a,75y,258.46h,88.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOdzn3Z-q42fTPv3_cs9H6Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
The Natchez Trace (if anyone finds it useful please let me know. A speed limit raise to 55 would make it at least not a total slog).
During most times of the year, NC-86/Bus US-70 through Hillsborough NC is an all-day traffic jam and has been for more than 15 years. NCDOT has proposed north-south bypasses of downtown on several occasions, and all of the options are always opposed by the town and county officials. This will never be fixed. Trucks are virtually banned from downtown, which has steep grades and still has a little bit on-street parking. For what it's worth, there is a little used bypass to the west of town (I-85 Connector), marked as Truck NC-86, but most of the issues are east of town due to close proximity to Durham.
Hillsborough is the county seat for Orange County, which includes Chapel Hill in the southeast corner. The downtown section is surrounded by the scenic Eno River, which is a park-like setting throughout the town connected to Eno River State Park. Southeast of town is the old Occoneechee Speedway, one of the original NASCAR dirt tracks that is now a local park managed by a historical trust. Environmental opposition to roads is part of our heritage in Orange County, as the current route of US-70 was acquired for I-85 near the beginning of the Interstate era but stopped in the early 1950s because of the two river crossings.
Not only does Hillsborough need a north-south bypass to the east of town, but traffic on US-70 between Hillsborough and Durham is packed during rush hour (including the short four-lane section of I-85 between Exit 170 and the Durham city/county line). In a twist of fate, the eastern bridge over the Eno River is currently being replaced in its original location. The temporary bridge over the Eno River accidentally widens the corridor to accommodate a four-lane highway, which of course, will never be approved.
Bay Area:
These are "problems" (depending on your perspective) that I do not see being resolved at least in the next 40 years, if ever:
- Construction of an interchange between I-880 and CA-87 in San Jose
- Some sort of freeway connection through San Francisco between the Golden Gate Bridge and San Mateo County
- Freeway connection between I-880 and I-680 in Fremont or Milpitas
These are "problems" (depending on your perspective) that I could see being resolved, but not for at least 20 years:
- Improvements to substandard sections of CA-17 between Los Gatos and Santa Cruz (but not to full freeway standards)
- Freeway connection between US-101 and Dumbarton Bridge
- Freeway connection between I-80 and US-101 in the North Bay (could be CA-37 corridor or elsewhere)
- CA-152 as expressway/freeway between Gilroy and Casa de Fruta
*I added "depending on your perspective" because some of these (CA-17, freeway through SF) may not be considered a problem by a significant portion of the population.
US-412 through Siloam Springs, AR will likely never be bypassed with 4-lane divided expressway like runs out of both sides of it. They thought it best to 6 lane US-412 through town to deal with all of the through traffic. They should have done a northern bypass instead.
The New Harmony Wabash River bridge/formerly US 460 between IL and IN. I don't think it will ever be replaced, and has been closed for years
6 Laning (or more) of I-55 around Springfield, IL
Quote from: DTComposer on October 02, 2020, 05:41:55 PM
Bay Area:
- Freeway connection between I-880 and I-680 in Fremont or Milpitas
I take it you mean a fully grade-separated route. I've used the Mission Blvd. extension (California SR 262?) and that works, to a point, but it is not a true freeway.
Kentucky
4 lane US 25 between Georgetown Ky and Lexington
4 Lane US 27 between Lancaster and Somerset
Extend Cumberland Parkway to I-75
Eastbound exit to I-64 from the Mountain Parkway
4 Lane US 62 from Georgetown to Mount Sterling
Indiana
4 Lane IN 1 from I-70 to Connersville
Extend I-865 to I-74
SM-G950U
Missouri:
Completing the MO-21 freeway south of Hillsboro
Expanding Highway 40 to 4 lanes each direction through Richmond Heights
Eliminating left exits at the 170/70 interchange (the geometry is super wonky)
Bypassing some medium-sized towns (Macon, Owensville, Jackson, Kennett)
Completing some bypasses (Mexico, Branson). The latter in particular, named the Ozark Mountain Highroad along Route 465-turned-76, was completed through rough terrain (https://www.constructionequipmentguide.com/MoDOT-Tackles-Tough-Terrain-on-Ozark-Highroad-Job/406/) in 2003 and MoDOT has no plans (https://www.ky3.com/content/news/The-future-of-Ozark-Mountain-Highroad-MoDOT-has-no-plans-to-complete-Hwy-465-564627821.html/) to complete it.
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 02, 2020, 08:00:55 PM
Missouri:
Bypassing some medium-sized towns (Macon, Owensville, Jackson, Kennett)
I'm a little shocked Hannibal isn't on that list, or are we still hopeful that MoDOT pulls that one off for the AotS?
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 02, 2020, 08:24:18 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 02, 2020, 08:00:55 PM
Missouri:
Bypassing some medium-sized towns (Macon, Owensville, Jackson, Kennett)
I'm a little shocked Hannibal isn't on that list, or are we still hopeful that MoDOT pulls that one off for the AotS?
That of course too. My mind was on 36/72 instead of AotS for some reason.
Quote from: ibthebigd on October 02, 2020, 07:41:16 PM
Extend I-865 to I-74
It'd be more likely an I-x74 along IN-32 but still won't happen.
MA: Upgrading the cloverleaf interchanges between interstates in the greater Boston area.
The new road diet on SR 37 in Lakeland, Flotilla.
Quote from: ibthebigd on October 02, 2020, 07:41:16 PM
Indiana
4 Lane IN 1 from I-70 to Connersville
Extend I-865 to I-74
SM-G950U
What problems would these roads solve? Are there so many people going from the NW side of Indy to I-74 that 86th St/IN 267 doesn't suffice? Is there so much traffic on IN 1 that 4-laning is jutified?
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 02, 2020, 08:00:55 PM
Missouri:
Completing the MO-21 freeway south of Hillsboro
Expanding Highway 40 to 4 lanes each direction through Richmond Heights
Eliminating left exits at the 170/70 interchange (the geometry is super wonky)
Where would the new MO 21 freeway go? It bypasses Desoto and Hillsboro. The terrain gets sharper south of there.
I don't think they could expand it to a full eight lanes.
I agree with this one. The first exit from 170 to 70 WB puts you in the left lane. The second one puts you far right for the airport. There should just be one.
Quote from: CapeCodder on October 03, 2020, 11:21:50 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on October 02, 2020, 08:00:55 PM
Missouri:
Completing the MO-21 freeway south of Hillsboro
Expanding Highway 40 to 4 lanes each direction through Richmond Heights
Eliminating left exits at the 170/70 interchange (the geometry is super wonky)
Where would the new MO 21 freeway go? It bypasses Desoto and Hillsboro. The terrain gets sharper south of there.
IIRC it was supposed to stay west of but relatively close to existing MO 21, curving east to terminate at existing MO 21 south of Rte H.
Quote from: ibthebigd on October 02, 2020, 07:41:16 PM
Indiana
4 Lane IN 1 from I-70 to Connersville
Extend I-865 to I-74
SM-G950U
I don't see the need for expanding IN-1 to four lanes. The traffic volumes around the I-70 exit are under 10,000 VPD and it gets lower as you head toward Connersville.
As far as I-865 goes, how are you going to extend it any further west? There is development just west of where I-865 dumps into I-65. All this would have to be demolished for any extending of I-865
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9313753,-86.3481654,3a,75y,172.5h,92.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZW0c-AkwzCtjk4zQTmKAcw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
there's no need to extend 865, no one uses 74 west of indy anyway, it's one of the least traveled interstates in the state.
Quote from: ibthebigd on October 02, 2020, 07:41:16 PM
Kentucky
4 lane US 25 between Georgetown Ky and Lexington
Not needed. I-75 carries the through traffic.
Quote4 Lane US 27 between Lancaster and Somerset
Not needed. A few passing lanes are all that's needed.
QuoteExtend Cumberland Parkway to I-75
Not needed. Although the parkway will be extended to the KY 80/KY 461 intersection, the existing KY 80 carries traffic just fine.
QuoteEastbound exit to I-64 from the Mountain Parkway
Not really needed, but there is a plan under development to make that interchange fully directional.
Quote4 Lane US 62 from Georgetown to Mount Sterling
You mean US 460, but this isn't really needed. Through traffic is going to use I-75 and I-74.
What Kentucky really needs is to extend the BG Parkway to I-64.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 03, 2020, 05:39:41 PM
What Kentucky really needs is to extend the BG Parkway to I-64.
A good one for the Never Likely Fix thread. Too many fancy horse farms surrounding Keeneland. I don't know if Kentucky was paying attention, but West Virginia section of fancy horse farms all sold off for development within 10 years of completing I-64 through Teays Valley (and the local show horse park shut down a few years later). I doubt that anything will disrupt Keeneland, but race horses and show horse get awfully skittish around road noise. But the current traffic certainly warrants extending the Blue Grass to I-64 (or to New Circle Road, with a freeway connection on the northeast side of Lexington).
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 02, 2020, 12:56:12 PM
Cline Ave Bridge in East Chicago.
I thought that was in progress, unless INDOT diverted the $$ destined for it to other projects
The one I don't ever see ever getting fixed in my area of Iowa is making the I-35/US 18 interchange south of Clear Lake into a full cloverleaf. They would have to build a new expressway to Garner, but I doubt that really needs to happen.
Quote from: M3100 on October 02, 2020, 06:45:47 PM
Quote from: DTComposer on October 02, 2020, 05:41:55 PM
Bay Area:
- Freeway connection between I-880 and I-680 in Fremont or Milpitas
I take it you mean a fully grade-separated route. I've used the Mission Blvd. extension (California SR 262?) and that works, to a point, but it is not a true freeway.
Yes. Originally CA-237 was going to be routed more to the northeast from Alviso, crossing I-880 (nee CA-17) and joining I-680 near Scott Creek Road. This would have obviated the need for Mission Blvd/CA-262 to be part of the state highway system.
Even so, CA-262 was built as freeway as far as Warm Springs Blvd. (and remains as such), I'm assuming because it pre-dates the idea of having two freeways coming from San Jose to Fremont (i.e. I-680), and thus was going to be the connector between the Nimitz Freeway and CA-21 towards Pleasanton.
Even as late as the early 1980s the right-of-way was clear for a full freeway upgrade (the developments on the south side of Mission and Warm Springs were originally built with no access from Mission, and the north side of the intersection was undeveloped). It would have been less than 3,000 feet of construction, but by 1987 it was hemmed in by development.
CA-237 has even more development, and you can tell by the way the CA-237/I-880 interchange was rebuilt that there is no intention of continuing CA-237 as a freeway to the east.
Quote from: silverback1065 on October 03, 2020, 03:30:46 PM
there's no need to extend 865, no one uses 74 west of indy anyway, it's one of the least traveled interstates in the state.
the amount of truck traffic on IN 32 between I-74 and I-65 seems to indicate the need for a better connection to I-74.
I would use I-74 west of Indy more than I-65 if the US 41/IN 63 corridor was of better quality.
Surprised Breezewood has not been mentioned yet.
Quote from: silverback1065 on October 03, 2020, 03:30:46 PM
there's no need to extend 865, no one uses 74 west of indy anyway, it's one of the least traveled interstates in the state.
Trucks like it - part of the Long Distance Chicago Bypass - either to/from I-80 at the Quad cities or to I-39 and up north to 90/94 in Wisconsin at Bloomington/Normal
I've used IN 32 between 74 and 65. Trucks use that route plenty, as well
Looking at the Satellite on Google Maps, New Construction subdivision looks to be being built west of the 65/865 interchange. 865 could Zag, but if INDOT is ever going to think about doing it, they need to protect a corridor, and soon
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 03, 2020, 10:20:48 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on October 03, 2020, 03:30:46 PM
there's no need to extend 865, no one uses 74 west of indy anyway, it's one of the least traveled interstates in the state.
Trucks like it - part of the Long Distance Chicago Bypass - either to/from I-80 at the Quad cities or to I-39 and up north to 90/94 in Wisconsin at Bloomington/Normal
I've used IN 32 between 74 and 65. Trucks use that route plenty, as well
Looking at the Satellite on Google Maps, New Construction subdivision looks to be being built west of the 65/865 interchange. 865 could Zag, but if INDOT is ever going to think about doing it, they need to protect a corridor, and soon
I noticed the last few times I drove around Bloomington that most of the I-74 traffic at the I-55/I-74 split south of town was truck traffic. I figured it was truckers bypassing Chicago and shunpiking the toll roads. I imagine most of it was heading for I-70.
Looking at the map, the best option might be four-laning IN 32 between I-74 and I-65, preferably on a new limited access alignment.
Twin Cities metro:
-widening MN 62 between 100 and Cedar
-widening US 169 between 13 and 610
-fixing the 394/Shelard Parkway/55 mess on 169
-flyover ramp upgrades at several cloverleaves
-Lyndale Avenue from 94 to Lake Street
Quote from: skluth on October 03, 2020, 11:28:28 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on October 03, 2020, 10:20:48 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on October 03, 2020, 03:30:46 PM
there's no need to extend 865, no one uses 74 west of indy anyway, it's one of the least traveled interstates in the state.
Trucks like it - part of the Long Distance Chicago Bypass - either to/from I-80 at the Quad cities or to I-39 and up north to 90/94 in Wisconsin at Bloomington/Normal
I've used IN 32 between 74 and 65. Trucks use that route plenty, as well
Looking at the Satellite on Google Maps, New Construction subdivision looks to be being built west of the 65/865 interchange. 865 could Zag, but if INDOT is ever going to think about doing it, they need to protect a corridor, and soon
I noticed the last few times I drove around Bloomington that most of the I-74 traffic at the I-55/I-74 split south of town was truck traffic. I figured it was truckers bypassing Chicago and shunpiking the toll roads. I imagine most of it was heading for I-70.
Looking at the map, the best option might be four-laning IN 32 between I-74 and I-65, preferably on a new limited access alignment.
I did that route about a month ago. I'm not a truck driver or anything just a road tripper. I came from Walcott, Iowa to Saginaw, Michigan via I-74 and I-474 around Peoria since the Illinois River bridge on I-74 is under construction. Went to Montezuma, Indiana simply to collect Parke County. Main reason was because I wanted to do a massive bypass of Chicago, secondary reason is it put me on the right route to collect some counties in Illinois and Indiana. When I was in Bloomington, Illinois I just kept following I-74 east.
Regarding IN-32, that might be a better plan to connect I-74 to I-65 but if someone from NW Indy was heading for I-74 westbound I think sliding down the west side of I-465 to I-74 is doable enough. IN-32 could be upgraded to four lanes between Lebanon and Crawfordsville that would be better than extending I-865 further west which can't be done since there is development right on the other side of the western end of I-865.
In Pennsylvania:
-Schuylkill Expressway. There are plans to widen the shoulders for use as travel lanes during peak traffic, but a proper reconstruction and widening will most likely never happen, at least anytime soon.
-Interstate 476/Blue Route widening between MacDade Blvd. and PA 3. It took decades to get the road built due to local opposition, and as a compromise was only built to 4 lanes. It clearly needs more, but...
-Numerous junctions between the PA Turnpike and other freeways/Interstates, including with I-376 near Homewood, PA 28, US 219, I-99, I-81 at Carlisle, US 222, and I-80...
Quote from: Revive 755 on October 03, 2020, 10:04:26 PM
Surprised Breezewood has not been mentioned yet.
-Breezewood.
Edit: I did not include the NE Extension/I-78 junction above as I feel the current setup adequately handles traffic to/from I-78 via the US 22 and PA 309 freeways. Also the Turnpike/I-95/I-295 interchange is planned for completion, albeit not in the near future. Lastly, the Scranton Beltway project would improve connections between the NE Extension and I-81, whenever it gets built.
Quote from: Flint1979 on October 04, 2020, 07:51:36 AM
...extending I-865 further west which can't be done since there is development right on the other side of the western end of I-865.
It could be done yet, but it would involve 865 running parallel along 65 for a bit to the northwest, and then turning west - along the lines of 88/355, 290/294, 76/295, 85/285, 35W/94, etc
Especially with the Amazon DC, that area is going to continue to grow, so if even on INDOT's RADAR, a corridor protection kinda needs to move quick
Quote from: Flint1979 on October 03, 2020, 03:10:10 PM
As far as I-865 goes, how are you going to extend it any further west? There is development just west of where I-865 dumps into I-65. All this would have to be demolished for any extending of I-865
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9313753,-86.3481654,3a,75y,172.5h,92.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZW0c-AkwzCtjk4zQTmKAcw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
After all these years, someone finally built on that land... I suppose it was inevitable.
I could see some sort of westbound connection a bit north of the current 865/65 junction, perhaps along/near the current Whitestown Pkwy corridor, ala the 285/85 southside split in Atlanta, though it would be pricy to construct.
As for "need," a lot would depend on bypassing Chicago. The Illiana is still dead in the water, last I heard, so an easy connection to 74 would give westbound traffic easy access to a continued northwestward route that doesn't get closer to Chicago itself, and a natural bypass/access potentially to 39 to get around Chicagoland, as well as potential access to the CKC corridor.
(Yeah, I know, it's pie-in-the-sky stuff, don't judge me)
There's a few problems in the Palm Springs/Coachella Valley (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8221312,-116.390305,10.74z?hl=en) that Caltrans or local governments will never fix.
- Indian Canyon Road from Sunrise and I-10 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8821288,-116.5252812,13.74z?hl=en) is regularly closed by sand during a lot of high wind events and any time it rains. This is the main road for emergency traffic from I-10 and points north to Desert Regional Hospital, the only hospital in Palm Springs. (Eisenhower, the largest local hospital, is several miles away on the Rancho Mirage/ Palm Desert border.) Gene Autry Trail between I-10 and PS also closes during and after some of these events, but it's not as severe. One needs to be a low bridge above the flood plain.
- An alternate road to I-10 between Banning and the CA 111 exit. (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9217663,-116.7698199,12.99z?hl=en) There are some side roads between the two exits, but no connections on the very edge of either side of that gap. I-10 backs up for miles here whenever there's an accident or even heavy traffic from events like Coachella and Stagecoach. There is no good way to bypass it.
- Widening I-10 east of Indio to the Arizona state line to six lanes so there is always a truck-free lane. There are a lot of accidents on this stretch, especially at night. Six lanes might actually happen one day, but I don't see it in my lifetime.
- Converting all the stop lights on CA 86 to interchanges. It would be impossible to remove all the sideroads, but most aren't that busy. The lights at Avenue 50, Avenue 52, and 66th Avenue (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.625437,-116.1281785,12.25z?hl=en) are especially dangerous. Preferably this would be part of a non-stop CA 86/78/111 south to I-8, but that's no longer local for me.
- Do something about the stoplights between I-10 and the CA 62 climb up to Morongo Valley and Joshua Tree (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9611351,-116.5770118,12.5z?hl=en). It's not bad on the way up, but a pain in the ass when you've been braking all the way down that long downhill. Personally, I'd build a full interchange at Pierson Blvd and a half interchange for Indian Canyon. A Two Bunch Palms Trail extension west with a full interchange would be better than one at Pierson, but I'm already way too ambitious here.
Chicagoland
With 60% Certainty
* A relief/alternative route for I-80/I-94
* Freeway upgrades for more of IL 394
With 75% Certainty
* The mess at the north end of IL 53 - Lake Cook needs to be at least six-laned between IL 53 and US 12, and the Lake Cook intersection with US 12 needs a triple left for EB US 12 to EB Lake Cook or a higher type alternative design.
* US 12 through Lake County
* US 12 through Richmond
* Adding the missing movements at the I-94/IL 120 interchange
* Extending IL 390 west and/or upgrading US 20 to the Elgin Bypass - I think the most that will happen is IL 390 will make it to County Farm Road and a new interchange will eventually get added on US 20 at Shales Parkway.
With 99.99% Certainty
* The missing movements at the Kennedy/Edens Junction
* Off peak congestion on I-290 between US 12/20/45/Mannheim Road and IL 43/Harlem Avenue
* The IL 83/IL 64 intersection (ideally should be an interchange)
* Upgrading Palatine Road to a full freeway between IL 53 and I-294 (unless somehow it becomes the next big project for ISTHA after 2025)
* Completing the interchanges on the Edens with Willow Road
* Making both ends of the Edens Spur full access (so NB I-294 to NB US 41 becomes possible)
I am sure there are plenty more others can add.
This lane merging here (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.142717,-77.5504355,3a,75y,230.78h,86.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2uu8LYkDJBBOp2uQ1kziSw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) should absolutely become a through lane rather than inexplicably ending and cramming three lanes of traffic into two. Volumes (and morning congestion, at least pre-COVID) warrant it, and it would be inexpensive to fix (only $1M by the DOT's own estimate) but it probably isn't going to happen.
Quote from: webny99 on October 04, 2020, 03:15:04 PM
This lane merging here (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.142717,-77.5504355,3a,75y,230.78h,86.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2uu8LYkDJBBOp2uQ1kziSw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) should absolutely become a through lane rather than inexplicably ending and cramming three lanes of traffic into two. Volumes (and morning congestion, at least pre-COVID) warrant it, and it would be inexpensive to fix (only $1M by the DOT's own estimate) but it probably isn't going to happen.
Depending on how much traffic is coming down off I-490, the lane drop might be necessary. If the onramp dumps directly into a third lane, heavy onramp traffic will cause congestion on the mainline and bring the onramp to a standstill. I know it doesn't seem fair to folks driving on the "mainline", but traffic patterns sometimes don't follow the route numbers.
Michigan:
* Six-laning US-23 between I-75 in Flint and I-94 in Ann Arbor
* Six-laning all of I-94 between I-196 in Benton Harbor and US-23.
Quote from: Dirt Roads on October 04, 2020, 03:34:35 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 04, 2020, 03:15:04 PM
This lane merging here (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.142717,-77.5504355,3a,75y,230.78h,86.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2uu8LYkDJBBOp2uQ1kziSw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) should absolutely become a through lane rather than inexplicably ending and cramming three lanes of traffic into two. Volumes (and morning congestion, at least pre-COVID) warrant it, and it would be inexpensive to fix (only $1M by the DOT's own estimate) but it probably isn't going to happen.
Depending on how much traffic is coming down off I-490, the lane drop might be necessary. If the onramp dumps directly into a third lane, heavy onramp traffic will cause congestion on the mainline and bring the onramp to a standstill. I know it doesn't seem fair to folks driving on the "mainline", but traffic patterns sometimes don't follow the route numbers.
That merge he's talking about is from another onramp. Here's the view from further back (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1433711,-77.5471168,3a,17.2y,257.23h,89.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5Z0LJ0pOj2iFNrDIep3DPw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1).
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on October 04, 2020, 12:50:09 AM
Twin Cities metro:
-widening MN 62 between 100 and Cedar
-widening US 169 between 13 and 610
-fixing the 394/Shelard Parkway/55 mess on 169
-flyover ramp upgrades at several cloverleaves
-Lyndale Avenue from 94 to Lake Street
May I also add:
- upgrade MN-252 into a freeway
- upgrade the rest of MN-36 into a freeway (and renumber it and WI-64 to I-135 to Somerset, WI)
- reroute US-169 along current MN-610, I-94, and MN-101.
Quote from: ftballfan on October 03, 2020, 08:20:07 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on October 02, 2020, 12:56:12 PM
Cline Ave Bridge in East Chicago.
I thought that was in progress, unless INDOT diverted the $$ destined for it to other projects
It wasn't an INDOT project. A private company decided to build it, but hit some kind of snag and the project is now idle.
two things, in my area.
the intersection of us-287 bypass, and north overland trail. i've mentioned it before. terrible intersection of a county road and a super-2.
the intersection of vine and lemay in fort collins. 2 2-lane streets with no left turn lanes or anything, with railroad tracks that tie things up for hours at times, plus its in a neighborhood with no room for expansion. city says they have a fix for it, but i'm not holding my breath.
Quote from: Finrod on October 02, 2020, 12:47:52 PM
Completing the interchange between I-75 and I-575 in Cobb. Currently there are no ramps from I-575 South to I-75 North or I-75 South to I-575 North, and putting them in would require some major rock blasting.
How much of a problem is that, really? Particularly for the 575-to-75 movement, surely going 3/4 mile on Chastain would still probably be quicker than the 5-mile freeway journey would be even with a free-flowing ramp.
Quote from: DJ Particle on October 05, 2020, 01:27:44 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on October 04, 2020, 12:50:09 AM
Twin Cities metro:
-widening MN 62 between 100 and Cedar
-widening US 169 between 13 and 610
-fixing the 394/Shelard Parkway/55 mess on 16
-flyover ramp upgrades at several cloverleaves <in priority order 135W/494, I35W/694, I94/494/694, I494/TH100>
-Lyndale Avenue from 94 to Lake Street
May I also add:
- upgrade MN-252 into a freeway
- upgrade the rest of MN-36 into a freeway (and renumber it and WI-64 to I-135 to Somerset, WI)
- reroute US-169 along current MN-610, I-94, and MN-101. <Don't see this as necessary. Current 169 would still be a TH through Champlin anyway.>
The main thing missing from both these lists is the connection from I394EB to I94EB.
Also the connection from SB TH169 to WB TH212 is a deathtrap.
Quote from: silverback1065 on October 02, 2020, 12:30:02 PM
What are some major or at least significant road issues in your state or city that they will likely never fix? Either because they have explicitly said they never will or funding, etc. One example near me is the intersection of College Av. and Kessler Blvd. E Dr. in Indianapolis. This intersection is notoriously terrible during rush hour, in particular for Kessler traffic. the simple fix is to simply widen Kessler. This intersection has been studied and gets a LOS of F. Recently the Red Line BRT Line was added on College, possibly making it worse (not sure on this, the route is too new to tell). Anyway, the city has no plans on fixing this mess, what are some examples near you all?
How many times have you talked with them pointing the problems and suggesting solutions in several price ranges?
Sometimes that's all it takes to get action.
Quote from: DJ Particle on October 05, 2020, 01:27:44 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on October 04, 2020, 12:50:09 AM
Twin Cities metro:
-widening MN 62 between 100 and Cedar
-widening US 169 between 13 and 610
-fixing the 394/Shelard Parkway/55 mess on 169
-flyover ramp upgrades at several cloverleaves
-Lyndale Avenue from 94 to Lake Street
May I also add:
- upgrade MN-252 into a freeway
- upgrade the rest of MN-36 into a freeway
The plan of converting MN 252 to a freeway has been accelerating in the last couple years, and Oak Park Heights has changed positions on a MN 36 freeway. So I think those things are decidedly less impossible now.
Then a continuation of SR 453 to Leesburg as US 441 between Mount Dora and Leesburg is so congested due to sprawl along the corridor. I know its in the master plan, but I doubt it will ever materialize in my lifetime just as I-69 completed from Mexico to Canada or I-74's two segments between Mt. Airy, NC and Cincinnati, OH.
Quote from: vdeane on October 04, 2020, 08:29:47 PM
Quote from: Dirt Roads on October 04, 2020, 03:34:35 PM
Quote from: webny99 on October 04, 2020, 03:15:04 PM
This lane merging here (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.142717,-77.5504355,3a,75y,230.78h,86.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2uu8LYkDJBBOp2uQ1kziSw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) should absolutely become a through lane rather than inexplicably ending and cramming three lanes of traffic into two. Volumes (and morning congestion, at least pre-COVID) warrant it, and it would be inexpensive to fix (only $1M by the DOT's own estimate) but it probably isn't going to happen.
Depending on how much traffic is coming down off I-490, the lane drop might be necessary. If the onramp dumps directly into a third lane, heavy onramp traffic will cause congestion on the mainline and bring the onramp to a standstill. I know it doesn't seem fair to folks driving on the "mainline", but traffic patterns sometimes don't follow the route numbers.
That merge he's talking about is from another onramp. Here's the view from further back (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1433711,-77.5471168,3a,17.2y,257.23h,89.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5Z0LJ0pOj2iFNrDIep3DPw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1).
Yes, correct. Thanks for pointing out the congestion further back - I missed that myself, but that's just what a typical morning rush used to look like!
We have been discussing the "Loop Road", the re-routing of US 50 behind the casinos at South Lake Tahoe/Stateline, forever. Discussion thread here. (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=9728.0)
The political angst about that is ongoing. It's certainly a point of discussion in the South Lake Tahoe City Council races this November (I'm not a part of that as I live in Nevada). It looks to me like it's going to be a subject of argument, with no actual shovels in the ground, for the rest of my lifetime. Nevada isn't the problem there, the arguing is all within California.
1. CA 17 Los Gatos-Scotts Valley. A long tunnel notwithstanding, there's no politically/environmentally consensual solution to that problem. So it'll be one band-aid after another (provided the whole damn range doesn't burn up in the next decade!) with little in the way of incident reduction or traffic relief to show for it.
2. US 101 Salinas-Gilroy. Might get upgraded as far south as San Juan Bautista/CA 156 north junction, especially if some activity toward a CA 152 and/or CA 25 set of upgrades actually materializes. Past that, another D4/D5 joint "band-aid" would likely be administered. Those two districts seem to cringe at deploying anything that could be seen as capacity increases by automotive transportation critics, so actually bringing US 101 up to full and continuous freeway standards down to Salinas is at best a long shot.
3. Connecting I-880 and I-680 at or near CA 262. Talked about, dismissed, revived, planned, forgotten -- all of the above have applied since plans for 237 across Milpitas were scrapped. We'll just have to see if the cut/cover plan currently being fomented actually materializes in my lifetime.
Quote from: Eth on October 05, 2020, 10:16:53 AM
Quote from: Finrod on October 02, 2020, 12:47:52 PM
Completing the interchange between I-75 and I-575 in Cobb. Currently there are no ramps from I-575 South to I-75 North or I-75 South to I-575 North, and putting them in would require some major rock blasting.
How much of a problem is that, really? Particularly for the 575-to-75 movement, surely going 3/4 mile on Chastain would still probably be quicker than the 5-mile freeway journey would be even with a free-flowing ramp.
I wouldn't think it would be a big deal, but I've read how it's still a long-term goal for the GDOT. I get the impression that Chastain was expanded to what it is now largely because of those missing ramps. Certainly no sane person nowadays tries to use Barrett Parkway to connect between 75 and 575.
i've mentioned this intersection before... its been reconfigured a few times, and people keep dying here. bridge it over, put in a light.. something... small county road intersecting with 65mph (i think its a 'super-2') us-287 near fort collins. turning highway north, its either a left right into the passing lane, or a right into the slow lane usually occupied by trucks.
turning highway south, its either a left into the single lane, or a right into a very short merge lane.
https://goo.gl/maps/AuHUazRjufAQeaUV6 (https://goo.gl/maps/AuHUazRjufAQeaUV6)
North Avenue in Atlanta, parts of which have been or still are various numbered routes, is sixty feet wide and was striped for six lanes from I-75-85 to Boulevard- - except for the block between Peachtree and Juniper Streets, which is ten feet narrower. As this Streetview (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7713087,-84.3829098,3a,16.2y,272.8h,91.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sxKA0mIRCAUdP6hm61PsV2A!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DxKA0mIRCAUdP6hm61PsV2A%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D348.64728%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) shows, the reduction in width and lane count is entirely on the north side, requiring through drivers to shift left from the correct through lanes and enticing unattentive drivers into heading straight from the left turn lane, cutting off or hitting cars that are proceeding correctly.
For most of my life, an eighteen-or-so story fifties-vintage building on that block (why was it allowed to be built there in the first place?) prevented the addition of another lane. Then, a few years ago, that building was torn down and replaced by a five or six story building... and the street still remains as it was. :banghead:
In fairness, the stretch of North Avenue east of here has finally been striped down to two lanes in each direction instead of three, and a two-way left turn is provided so drivers must opt into the left turn lane at Juniper rather than it being a surprise change to a through lane. but still. :pan:
The most obvious example that comes to mind for Austin is the gap in Barton Skyway where its namesake bridge was never built. The environmental NIMBYs would not take it well and the well-off (and only getting richer) neighborhood on the east side won't want the traffic.
Only second because it feels like there's some chance it might happen some day is completing the SH 45 loop. It might even help one of my personal complaints about the Austin road network, which is the lack of crossings of Lake Austin.
In the Wichita area, the Kellogg freeway (US 54-400) is projected to end in the east at a traffic signal at 143rd Street East (Springdale Road, just one mile west of the Butler County line). The next two and a half miles east are built up and, in Butler County, are part of the tony suburb of Andover. I remember seeing a document issued years ago by either Wichita city government or the MPO that disavowed any intent to extend the freeway further east. Now that is apparently under consideration, but I expect land acquisition to be a significant and possibly insurmountable obstacle.
In order for Kellogg to be fully upgraded to freeway between deep rural areas west of Kingman in the west and just west of Leon in the east, the following upgrades to full freeway would need to happen:
* Construction of the Kingman bypass (part of the current 10-year transportation plan)
* Construction of a Goddard bypass (tentatively planned as part of the Northwest Wichita Bypass)
* Completion of the freeway (partial frontage roads already built) between Goddard and 111th Street West in Wichita
* Construction of a freeway (currently unplanned, but IMO most plausible as a very expensive "throughpass") through eastern Sedgwick County and Andover to connect to the four-lane divided segment east of Andover
* Upgrade of the Andover-Augusta section to full freeway (would likely require construction of frontage roads for at least part of the length)
* A freeway bypass of Augusta (also built on top of the current US 54 routing)
Quote from: J N Winkler on October 17, 2020, 01:11:17 PM
* Construction of a Goddard bypass (tentatively planned as part of the Northwest Wichita Bypass)
Why would Goddard need to be bypassed? The current alignment of US 54 already looks wide enough to be upgraded to a freeway. The only issues I see are a few houses that would need to have their driveways relocated, and a gas station that would need to have one of its three access points closed.
"Suicide Alley", Cape Cod.
Despite the changes in 1989 (the year the lollipop sticks went up) and 1992 (slight widening to allow for a larger median), head-on accidents are still far too common there.
Will likely never be fixed because: proximity to delicate reservoirs/aquifers (especially near Exit 85), NIMBYism.
Quote from: stridentweasel on October 17, 2020, 09:24:35 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on October 17, 2020, 01:11:17 PM
* Construction of a Goddard bypass (tentatively planned as part of the Northwest Wichita Bypass)
Why would Goddard need to be bypassed? The current alignment of US 54 already looks wide enough to be upgraded to a freeway. The only issues I see are a few houses that would need to have their driveways relocated, and a gas station that would need to have one of its three access points closed.
A "throughpass" more or less on the existing alignment may be what is eventually constructed, but the prevailing concept for the Northwest Wichita Bypass has been for it to tie in to a northern bypass of Goddard, which (as of the early 2000's) had a gravity sewer system that tends to disfavor housing subdivisions north of US 54. Given that there are now houses near Tanganyika Wildlife Park, I'm not sure that is still true.
Quote from: ibthebigd on October 02, 2020, 07:41:16 PM
Indiana
4 Lane IN 1 from I-70 to Connersville
So I drove this section of IN 1 for the first time a couple weeks ago. It was not during rush hour (if that even exists in this area of the state) but there was nowhere near the traffic to justify 4 lanes.
The Kansas Expressway extension south of Republic Road in the south side of Springfield, MO
i-72 will never be finished in missouri.
For Sacramento
The completion of CA-244 would never be finished due to the area not being all built up for the completion of the Beltline freeway.
Widening of Yolo Causeway I-80
Make CA-99 north of Natomas meet interstate standards for the rumored I-9 and make CA-51 meet interstate standards.
Austin's never getting a high-capacity arterial in the central section.
A north-side freeway bypass of the Madison area, to compliment the existing Beltline Highway along the south and west sides of the city. There was a study about being a roadway called the North Mendota Parkway, but it likely will never be built.
Another for Indiana: I-67 (regardless of whether or not you perceive it as a problem is it 95% likely this designation will NOT be happening)
Quote from: M3100 on October 02, 2020, 06:45:47 PM
Quote from: DTComposer on October 02, 2020, 05:41:55 PM
Bay Area:
These are "problems" (depending on your perspective) that I do not see being resolved at least in the next 40 years, if ever:
- Freeway connection between I-880 and I-680 in Fremont or Milpitas
I take it you mean a fully grade-separated route. I've used the Mission Blvd. extension (California SR 262?) and that works, to a point, but it is not a true freeway.
I invite you to take a look at this recent thread in the Pacific Southwest board: Route 262 freeway upgrade proposal in Fremont (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=27911.msg2544783)
Quote from: I-55 on October 02, 2020, 03:51:14 PM
Mississippi:
That stupid 4 way stop on US-82 in Mathiston. (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5404351,-89.1240358,3a,75y,258.46h,88.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOdzn3Z-q42fTPv3_cs9H6Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
I know I'm a month late with this response but what the fuck were they thinking with this??? Might as well make it a regular full blown traffic signal.
WI-26 in Rosendale. WISDOT hates anyone who uses WI-26 as a shortcut between I-41 and US-151, so they got rid of the signage for Oshkosh (on US-151 at the WI-26 exit) and Madison (on I-41 at the WI-26 exit). This to me is a clear statement that WISDOT is not at all interested in a Rosendale bypass, and would rather have thru traffic go through Fond du Lac.
A US-29 bypass of northern Charlottesville.
i'll add i-69 in mississippi to this list.
Ohio:
- A bypass of Delaware to connect US-23 to I-71, with a freeway-to-freeway connection.
- 6-laning I-70 east of Columbus to Zanesville, and/or partly smoothening out those 3 hills mentioned recently in another thread
Pennsylvania:
- Adding a third bore, or even widening the existing bores, of the Squirrel Hill Tunnel on Parkway East (I-376). A bypass was planned with the PATP Southern Beltway project, but that was axed.
Maryland:
- Eliminating the remaining traffic signals on US-29 north of New Hampshire Ave.
- Upgrading MD-3 to freeway, or at least replacing the major intersections with interchanges. Same with the stretch of US-301 south of there, through Bowie, that 3 sort of "turns into".
101 from Cahuenga Pass to downtown. That road needs to be double or triple stacked. I've been caught in bumper to bumper traffic at 11PM on a SUNDAY. No wrecks, no construction, just complete lack of capacity and horrible design. Same goes for the 110 through downtown LA.
I'm also wondering if I-5 from 134 through the East LA interchange widened. Unlikely but seems somewhat probable given California's initiative to improve I-5 through SoCal.
I also wonder if TxDOT will ever widen the Central Expressway again.
Quote from: sparker on October 08, 2020, 12:57:19 AM
2. US 101 Salinas-Gilroy. Might get upgraded as far south as San Juan Bautista/CA 156 north junction, especially if some activity toward a CA 152 and/or CA 25 set of upgrades actually materializes. Past that, another D4/D5 joint "band-aid" would likely be administered. Those two districts seem to cringe at deploying anything that could be seen as capacity increases by automotive transportation critics, so actually bringing US 101 up to full and continuous freeway standards down to Salinas is at best a long shot.
It's crazy to think that the Prunedale bypass was still an active proposal at the time the AARoads forums started, and now has essentially been permanently shelved in favor of the spot upgrades to 101/156 through there (which don't really address the road geometry or capacity but at least provided much more in the way of grade separation than in the past).
I saw you and DTComposer mention 262 in the thread, I wonder how far the current proposals for that route will go - especially when a few miles from there is the canceled north-south 238 freeway segment!
---
Now thinking out loud about things that will never get built or fixed here that haven't yet been mentioned:
- it's still a pipe dream for Dianne Feinstein but overall the Southern Crossing has been discussed in some form since the early 1940s without being built, even though the Bay Bridge has been asked to carry more of the SF/Peninsula-East Bay commute load that it ever was intended to in all that time. One could argue that the switch to five-lanes-per-deck in the 1960s was a band-aid.
- the aforementioned north-south 238, which would have turned the north-south 680-Mission Boulevard-Macarthur Freeway corridor from SJ-Oakland into a viable alternate to 880, in much the same way that 280 and 101 parallel each other between SF and SJ.
- much of the proposed Sacramento suburban freeway network of the 1970s, canceled originally due to that vote by local officials ca. 1975. Easy to see where projects like 244 (allowing US 50 traffic going west to SF to bypass downtown Sacramento) and 143 (allowing cars getting to 80 east from 99 north to entirely skip midtown Sacramento) had their logical aims, and the unbuilt Citrus Heights-Rancho Cordova portion of 65 would have served Sunrise Mall, which currently is nowhere near any of the existing limited access routes.
Of the road projects that were active then, only some semblance of the 148 corridor (Capital Southeast Connector), and some talk about improving Business 80 in North Sacramento/Arcade (essentially similar to the 1970s attempts to upgrade then-I-80 to modern interstate standards) seem to be realistically possible now.
- 380 west of 280. While I fully get not crossing the San Andreas Fault, not going all the way to the originally proposed Pacifica terminus...I still think having it go a tiny bit further west to Skyline Boulevard/Route 35 would be more than enough to be useful.
- Not sure the Route 4 freeway gap between Brentwood and Stockton is ever meant to be connected.
- Route 92 was originally proposed to continue east of downtown Hayward to I-580, allowing east-west traffic to bypass I-238 and the short segment of 880 between 238 and 92 that gets congested at rush hour. Definitely not happening now.
---
In Metro Manila, it almost seems like the exact opposite has happened: if San Miguel Corporation or MPTC think a route will happen, it seems like for the most part it will. The one project that does appear to be on the back burner though (despite it reappearing in one article a couple of weeks ago) is completing the C-3 corridor between San Juan and Buendia Avenue in Makati, if only because the right of way might be blocked by the upcoming Pasig River Expressway. (A past proposal to create a C-3 connector, the Metro Manila Skybridge, seems to have been supplanted by the eventually built Skyway Stage 3 between those two cities)
On the other hand, while it seemed for so long EDSA would be relegated to its current awkward setup as a not-quite-limited-access boulevard, San Miguel has expressed long-term interest in building a viaduct along the avenue's right of way. Whether it will be needed quite as much once other projects have been completed (i.e. C-6/Southeast Metro Manila Expressway) remains to be seen.
Another one they is actively being studied by OCTA is SR 55 through Costa Mesa. One of the concepts is a trenched freeway which I pray to god they build but I wonder if they will ever do a single thing that corridor. It sucks and should be a freeway all the way to PCH. While they're at it they need to convert PCH to a freeway LOL. Now I'm in fantasy land but boy would that be nice.
I also wonder if OCTA will ever go through with the Irvine-Corona Tunnel.
I guess we can throw 241 extension to the 5 as slim possibility likely not ever to happen now.
Cincinnati: brent spence bridge
there's more, but that's the first thing I can think of off my head
Quote from: sparker on October 08, 2020, 12:57:19 AM
1. CA 17 Los Gatos-Scotts Valley. A long tunnel notwithstanding, there's no politically/environmentally consensual solution to that problem. So it'll be one band-aid after another (provided the whole damn range doesn't burn up in the next decade!) with little in the way of incident reduction or traffic relief to show for it.
There is this from Caltrans:
https://sccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/final_hwy17_amp.pdf (https://sccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/final_hwy17_amp.pdf)
If this was implemented on the Santa Cruz County side, and (I think) the following was done on the Santa Clara County side (all ranging on the unlikely side):
-Reduction of curve radius north of CA-35 interchange
-Improvements to Redwood Estates interchange
-Bridge over Moody Gulch
-Conversion of Idylwild Drive intersection to interchange
-Increased shoulder widths in Los Gatos Creek Canyon
This would significantly increase safety along the route. It wouldn't increase capacity, though; nor would I want it, current traffic levels notwithstanding.
Quote from: TheStranger on December 18, 2020, 10:56:14 AM
be useful.
- Not sure the Route 4 freeway gap between Brentwood and Stockton is ever meant to be connected.
- Route 92 was originally proposed to continue east of downtown Hayward to I-580, allowing east-west traffic to bypass I-238 and the short segment of 880 between 238 and 92 that gets congested at rush hour. Definitely not happening now.
The likelihood of CA 4 ever being upgraded to a freeway between Brentwood/Discovery Bay and Stockton is slim and none (and slim's left the building!). It would not only be an environmental disaster, but the overall cost of constructing a series of berms and bridges across the heart of the Delta would be prohibitive. If the freeway is to be extended in
any direction, it'll likely be on the longstanding CA 239 corridor, which would take it generally SSE to the I-580/205 interchange near Altamont. That would tie together much of the housing development spread out along the east side of the Diablos and the range to the south. Also a possibility, but more remote, considering Alameda County's reticence to expand road capacity, would be a CA 84 freeway upgrade of Vasco Road, departing from that existing facility near the Alameda/Contra Costa county line and heading toward the eastern terminus of CA 84 at the I-580 Isabel interchange between Pleasanton and Livermore.
As far as CA 92 is concerned, most of it between I-880 and the former 92/185/238 intersection in downtown Hayward has been relinquished; this was in concert with the opening of the direct ramps from EB 92 to NB I-880, one of the principal purposes of which was to divert traffic that would end up on EB I-580 away from the local surface streets and onto NB I-880 and EB I-238. The notion of a direct 92 freeway connection to both 238 and 580 essentially died when the previously adopted CA 238 freeway alignment south to Fremont was deleted due to litigation in the '70's.
Austin, TX -
The William Cannon Dr. exit on Loop 1 NB is an exit only, for no reason. The right lane continues past the exit as if it wasn't exit-only. (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.2163636,-97.842276,3a,75y,76.12h,76.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4cCa4MA9n3SVPx9ZDEYYqg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&authuser=0) There's congestion here nearly every morning as traffic merges left. It could be fixed with a bucket of grey paint, but it's been this way since 2016. I have no clue why it was changed.
On the other side of Loop 1, the left shoulder is wide enough to fit another lane. In fact, it does fit another lane further north. That lane ends immediately after a major highway junction. This one's been like that since at least 2007 when street view first came through.
South Bay Ln. ends just short of Loop 1. (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.1819343,-97.8860048,1003a,35y,17.81h/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en&authuser=0) It's not a vital connection, but the intersection with Loop 1 was built over twenty years ago, and has spent that entire time as a useless, disconnected turnaround.
Barton Skyway doesn't connect across the Barton Creek Greenbelt (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.2565909,-97.7867135,1204a,35y,70.88h/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en&authuser=0) - this is understandable, as the greenbelt is environmentally sensitive and the neighborhood groups are powerful in the area. But the connection would be a vital link if it were ever built.
Northland Dr. changes its name to Allandale Rd. and Koenig Ln. without changing alignment, while also carrying RM 2222 and parts of TX 69 and US 290, and being a frontage road for 290. It's a mess and they should have given it a continuous name decades ago, but it's too late now.