Why no 4 or 5 level stack interchanges in the Northeast?

[longhorn]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cufE4dw5d0Q

In Texas 4 or 5 level stacks are as common as trees, yet for example in DC, or NYC I noticed this piece of civic engineering does not exist in the northeast, why?

[cl94]

Albany would beg to differ. We have 2. CT has one plus the Waterbury interchange that is 4 levels, Queens has 1. The reason is that the expressway system generally predates the use of stacks and it is quite costly to modify a cloverleaf into one.

[jeffandnicole]

Yeah, can't say there's none, but there's very few.  Often times it just comes down to preferred methods of designing interchanges between highways.

When the 295/76/42 interchange is completed, it'll nearly be 4 levels but not in the conventional way.  The lowest level is actually a tunnel from 295 South to 42 South, and not directly under the other 3 levels.  And the 3rd level is simply a cross-street (Browning Road) that cuts thru the interchange without any connection to it.  The 2nd level is 76/42 and the 4th level is 295, although they would appear as the 1st and 3rd levels due to the tunnel.

[froggie]

Topography issues, older and more-established development, and less open space play factors as well.

[cl94]

Terrain was probably a large reason why the two Albany stacks exist. In the 90/787 interchange, the third level is I-90, which crosses the Hudson on a high-level bridge immediately to the east of the interchange that has to have ship clearance, while I-90 Exit 6 has I-90 on the bottom in a ravine/large road cut, while US 9 is on the top level, even with ground level on both sides of the bridge. In those situations, stacks were probably much cheaper than cloverleafs. Even with I-90 being so high up at 787, the hill immediately to the west is brutal.

[abqtraveler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cufE4dw5d0Q

In Texas 4 or 5 level stacks are as common as trees, yet for example in DC, or NYC I noticed this piece of civic engineering does not exist in the northeast, why?

In the Northeast, there are too many NIMBYs with deep enough pockets to hold up the construction of huge freeway interchanges (and freeways in general) in court.  The only interchanges that come close to a Texas-style stack interchange I know of in Connecticut is the I-84/Route 9 interchange in Farmington and the Route 8/Route 15 interchange in Trumbull.  The I-84/Route 9 interchange is only half-used and the Connecticut DOT has recently started talking about removing the unused portions of the interchange since nothing will ever be built to the north of I-84.  The Route 8/Route 15 interchange only half-built (missing Rt 8 S -> Rt 15 N and Rt 8 N -> Rt 15 S movements).  Then you have the two Mixmaster interchanges, I-84 and Route 8 in Waterbury and I-91, I-95 and Route 34 in New Haven, but these aren't true stack interchanges.

[ATLRedSoxFan]

New England just has an on-going love affair with clover-leafs, especially Massachusetts. Actually, topagraphy, land availability, funding and NIMBY's are a part of the equation too. Both I-93/95 interchanges in Canton and Woburn come to mind where it would be useful, but it will be YEARS before any of those become a reality. And one can only imagine the nightmares, once either of those projects commence. Last I've heard, they're on the books, but it will be quite sometime.

[hotdogPi]

Both I-93/95 interchanges in Canton and Waltham

I-93 in Waltham?

[PHLBOS]

Both I-93/95 interchanges in Canton and Waltham

I-93 in Waltham?

I believe he meant to say Woburn.

[ATLRedSoxFan]

I did mean Woburn. 

[The Ghostbuster]

Where would you build the multi-level stack interchanges, longhorn?

[jakeroot]

...topography, land availability, funding and NIMBY's are a part of the equation too.

In the Northeast, there are too many NIMBYs with deep enough pockets to hold up the construction of huge freeway interchanges (and freeways in general) in court.

How much say do NIMBY's really have? I have a really hard time believing that locals have any say in the design of an interchange. Their input is accepted, of course, but I would guess that it's largely ignored.

[jeffandnicole]

...topography, land availability, funding and NIMBY's are a part of the equation too.

In the Northeast, there are too many NIMBYs with deep enough pockets to hold up the construction of huge freeway interchanges (and freeways in general) in court.

How much say do NIMBY's really have? I have a really hard time believing that locals have any say in the design of an interchange. Their input is accepted, of course, but I would guess that it's largely ignored.

Yeah.  Because I-95 wasn't built thru NJ because NJDOT deemed it a waste of time and money. 

Depends on the state.  In NJ, it is absolutely valuable.  NJDOT will not do a project if it doesn't have the support of the towns in which are impacted. 

In all honesty, all you have to do is read the threads found throughout the Northeast forum, and you'll encounter a nearly endless stream of highways that were never built, or scaled down, at least in part due to NIMBYism.

[jakeroot]

...topography, land availability, funding and NIMBY's are a part of the equation too.

In the Northeast, there are too many NIMBYs with deep enough pockets to hold up the construction of huge freeway interchanges (and freeways in general) in court.

How much say do NIMBY's really have? I have a really hard time believing that locals have any say in the design of an interchange. Their input is accepted, of course, but I would guess that it's largely ignored.

Yeah.  Because I-95 wasn't built thru NJ because NJDOT deemed it a waste of time and money. 

Depends on the state.  In NJ, it is absolutely valuable.  NJDOT will not do a project if it doesn't have the support of the towns in which are impacted. 

In all honesty, all you have to do is read the threads found throughout the Northeast forum, and you'll encounter a nearly endless stream of highways that were never built, or scaled down, at least in part due to NIMBYism.

I didn't say anything about the highways themselves. I'm speaking purely about interchanges...you know, the topic of this thread?

I will ask again: How much say do NIMBY's really have...in the design of an interchange? My immediate guess is little to none. Projects which acquire more ROW generally have higher amounts of public input, because more land is taken, and it affects more people. But new interchanges seldom take any additional land (and if they do, it's to increase the size of a loop, or build C/D lanes), so the only people who it stands to affect are those who can see the junction from their back porch.

[jeffandnicole]

In all honesty, all you have to do is read the threads found throughout the Northeast forum, and you'll encounter a nearly endless stream of interchanges that were never built, or scaled down, at least in part due to NIMBYism.

[cl94]

They have a shocking amount of input. The NIMBYs went crazy when NYSDOT thought about rebuilding a couple interchanges in Buffalo, they went crazy over the exits on the Northway that have been rebuilt (or are currently in the plans). One of the reasons I-87 Exit 6 is a SPUI instead of something better for NY 7 through traffic is NIMBYism. NYSDOT and NYSTA wanted to build a couple diamond interchanges on the Thruway east of Buffalo as part of the now-cancelled plan to move the toll booths (all stopped by NIMBYs). There's even NIMBYism for stuff that remains within the confines of the current interchange. NIMBYism is quite rampant in these parts.

Here's a very short list of the New York interchanges I know of that were not built/toned down due to NIMBYism (and these don't include cancelled freeways):

-I-87 (Northway) Exit 3 (the more-recent plan that added an interchange and moved Exit 4 north)
-I-87 (Northway) Exit 6 (some of the original plans were grander)
-I-90 exit(s) between Exits 48A and 49
-I-290 Exit 3 (plans to do major modifications were abandoned)

There are probably a bunch more in this state and tons more throughout the northeast.

[Duke87]

Another potential factor: the relative prevalence of ticketed toll roads in the northeast. Whenever two freeways cross and one of them is a ticketed toll road, the interchange between them is probably going to be a double trumpet or something similar because of the necessity of forcing all traffic changing roads at the interchange to pass through a single toll plaza.


But yes, it is definitely true that we tend to be less grandiose with our freeway construction up in this part of the country. So you can end up with interchanges like this one or this one which are stack-esque but lower capacity, not as tall, not as high speed, and not as safe given the left exits and entrances.

You also get interchanges like this one which are even more stack-esque but incomplete. In this particular case, of the three missing movements, two of them would be redundant because they can be made using route 25 shortly to the west, but the lack of a direct ramp from route 8 south to route 15 north (east on the compass here) is because of NIMBY opposition to this interchange having a fourth level. People complained it would be too big and not fit in with the character of the Merritt Parkway. So the state removed that ramp from the plans to make the interchange smaller.

[cl94]

You also have things like the Albany Circle Stack out here that, while performing the same function as a stack (and with similar advisory speeds to the local stacks), but fit better in a cramped urban environment. Interchanges like the Bruckner are 4 levels, but they definitely aren't stacks. Key reason is that the infrastructure tends to be older and had to snake through dense environments.

The toll road thing is major: of the locations where two expressways cross in the northeast, several of the most major examples involve toll roads (I-87/I-90, I-87/I-84, I-81/I-90, I-90/I-91/US 5, I-90/I-95, I-95/I-78, etc.). In fact, I can only think of 8 locations in the northeast where 2 2DIs cross without a concurrency that don't involve a toll booth. 3 of those are in PA and 3 are in very dense urban environments.

[NJRoadfan]

NJDOT's engineers seemed to have an evasion to building stacks even in areas they would fit. For some reason they seemed very concerned about minimizing the amount of bridges used in an interchange, or even anything that might be 3 levels. So ones gets complex messes like I-78/I-287.

[Alps]

Two more points I didn't see in the thread.
1) Right of way. Stacks take up more right of way if designed to modern standards. The ones here in Texas are enormous, and were built well before development filled in around them. The Northeast was already developed, so interchanges had to take up the least room possible. Politics often played a role in where ramps could and could not go.
2) Ice. Bridges freeze before roadway surfaces. We know the sign. Well, tall ramp bridges freeze first, and that's just not a problem in the South like it is in the North.

[jeffandnicole]

Even Delaware, where DelDOT can seemingly do anything it pleases, keeps its interchanges to a minimum height.  2 of the biggest interchanges in the state: 95/295/495 and 95/1 are both 2 levels.  I'm sure if I thought long and hard about it I'll find one that's 3 levels, but nothing off the top of my head.

In PA, the 95/Betsy Ross Bridge interchange approaches 4 levels, but I don't know if it ever gets there.  The 95/PA Turnpike Interchange is going to be 2 levels at most whenever that project is completed (maybe it's 3...I'm not glancing at the plans right now). 

Some of the 295/76/42 designs included a stack of 295 North over 295 South over Browning Rd over 76/42, but community opposition was against that design...even taking into account fewer homes/businesses would need to be taken.

The 295/42 missing move ramps have been delayed over 10 years now because of a single developer.  Not too much NIMBYism, but it shows how much NJDOT values community and municipal input.  In the end, the developer isn't going to get what he wanted, but it still delayed the project a minimum of 11 years now.

When NJDOT wanted to remove the Marlton Circle (NJ Routes 70/73), there was a lot of opposition to an interchange there, including within the state and municipality.  Eventually, everyone decided that was going to be the best option.  Well, everyone except for a small group of 100 or so people, that insisted on an intersection using advanced technology (which was simply loop detectors in the road...technology that's been around for decades).  NJDOT and the town gave them a LOT of time to discuss their plans, although it was very apparent they weren't going to work.

[Mergingtraffic]

I believe the US-7/CT-15 interchange would have been stack-ish but NIMBYs complained and the CT DOT even catered to them by trying to rush in a cloverleaf...a NEW cloverleaf.  I was at the public meeting.  Thank god, another set of NIMBYs said the cloverleaf would've taken more space than a stack-ish interchange.  Now the proposal is going to be flyunder ramps rather than flyover ramps.  We shall see.

NIMBYs have ton of say around here.  It's all about being politically correct no matter how crazy it sounds.  Bikes and Peds have priority around here. Again, b/c of the PC movement. Most drivers want roads but never speak up b/c are busy with everyday life.  But the NIMBYs are the ones that go to the meetings and such.

CT seems to have been engineered by one dude back in the 50s and 60s.  It's all trumpets or cloverleafs or left exits that drop a lane in between the left exit and left entrance.  It's that way all over the state.

Although, there's a new stack on the books.  The I-84/CT-8 mixmaster plans to be rebuilt as a stack.  Again, we shall see.
The stacks that were built, aren't fully used.  I-84/CT-9 in Farmington.

[jakeroot]

Without responding to everyone, I do see all of your points. Several of them just don't seem to apply to where I'm from (keep reading for an explanation), hence my original curiosity and confusion.

There is a new freeway here in the Seattle area that will begin construction in a few years. One of the interchanges will be with I-5 just east of Tacoma. I've gone to a couple open houses, and barring the occasional question regarding ROW acquisition, there wasn't really a lot opposition to the highway; in fact, nearly all neighboring councils are for it: http://goo.gl/GppWFN.

Here's a picture of one of the new interchanges. I'm guessing something like this wouldn't be received very warmly back east?



I understand historic reasons for freeway revolts. Highways were often plowed through city centers, displacing thousands. I'm not for that. I am for rebuilding junctions to meet higher demand, and new highways, where needed, that don't conflict too much with what already exists. This new freeway will displace dozens of households, but the benefits far outweigh the the drawbacks, even when considering the displaced households: several of the homes are in areas that aren't exceptionally desirable, and it gives many of the homeowners a chance to "get out" and start new.

Anyways, my point is that, even here in the Cascadia "bioregion", new highways are still perfectly acceptable. Four or five level junctions, where needed, presumably in the middle of nowhere, just don't strike me as propositions that would be received so negatively.

[Duke87]

I'm guessing something like this wouldn't be received very warmly back east?

Holy moly no it would not. I see at least a dozen houses being demolished to make way for this. That alone would make this an unfeasible proposal in the northeast. It would have to be redesigned to preserve as many existing structures as possible if it were to be built at all.

And yes, you'd get every other typical argument pulled out against it as well. "Why are we spending so much money to build something so huge, it's wasteful". "Why are we building more infrastructure for cars, oh my god global warming". "This is going to destroy our community and wreck everyone's property values". "It's going to be noisy and I don't like the noise". "My little Timmy has asthma and if there's a highway near us it will get worse". "What about the endangered racoon ticks that live around there". Etc, etc, etc.

And the fact of the matter is that most northeastern states would not have the budgetary fortitude to be able to afford building something like this these days anyway.


That said, it is specifically the northeast. The southeast (traditionally known as simply "the south") is much more welcoming of new freeway construction than the northeast is.

[kurumi]

NIMBYs do have an impact on not only interchange location but design. The original CA 85/17 interchange would have had higher, indirect ramps and fewer loops. But Los Gatos, California is not a place you can just Robert Moses your way through. It's a wealthy area.

MergingTraffic is correct: the circa-2005 7/15 interchange design was sort of a half-stack incorporating the existing half-cloverleaf. But the original 1970s design was a full stack -- one of only 2 that I know of statewide.

I-91 at CT 9 would have been a natural place for a stack, but maybe the layout of the land precluded that.