Newest System Interchange in Each State

[MNHighwayMan]

Wow I didn't expect to surprise my roadgeeks with a term I've taken for granted since I was basically a kid.

I'm more of an old roadmap guy than n expert roadgeek, Were there an exam requirement to post here, I'd probably score a 64.

You're not alone. This thread is the first I'd heard of a "system interchange."

[hotdogPi]

Wow I didn't expect to surprise my roadgeeks with a term I've taken for granted since I was basically a kid.

I'm more of an old roadmap guy than n expert roadgeek, Were there an exam requirement to post here, I'd probably score a 64.

You're not alone. This thread is the first I'd heard of a "system interchange."

Same here.

[Beltway]

Wow I didn't expect to surprise my roadgeeks with a term I've taken for granted since I was basically a kid.

I'm more of an old roadmap guy than n expert roadgeek, Were there an exam requirement to post here, I'd probably score a 64.

You're not alone. This thread is the first I'd heard of a "system interchange."

Same here.

Same here.  And worked for a state DOT for 43 years.

[froggie]

^ Seems that VDOT and PennDOT didn't bother with the term.  But I know from personal experience that MnDOT and AASHTO (in the Green Book) do.

(EDIT):  I've found some VDOT project study references that use the system/service interchange terminology, so maybe it was just Scott's unit that didn't use the terms.

[Beltway]

^ Seems that VDOT and PennDOT didn't bother with the term.  But I know from personal experience that MnDOT and AASHTO (in the Green Book) do.

What makes you think that the highway material that I have been reading online for the last 20 years is restricted to two states; it has been from most states as well and FHWA and other publications.  An internet search reveals relatively few cites as defined here.  Like I said before, it is a poorly designed term that is too general-sounding to be meaningful to most readers.

[froggie]

^ You referenced your state DOT work and I recall those being the two states you worked for.  No need to get all defensive.

[abefroman329]

If freeway-to-freeway interchanges are what we're looking for, I'm pretty sure Georgia's newest one would be the south end of GA 400 at I-85, which looks like it opened in either 1994 or 1995.

The ramps carrying traffic from I-85 south to GA-400 north, and from GA-400 south to I-85 north, are only about a decade old.

I'm pretty sure the interchange at GA-316 and the Athens Bypass is newer than 1994 or 1995.

[Beltway]

^ You referenced your state DOT work and I recall those being the two states you worked for.  No need to get all defensive.

You started posting on misc.transport.road in 1998, IIRC, and have regularly posted on various roads/highways forums since then, as I have.  I don't recall the term "system interchange" ever being mentioned before this thread, as far as what is commonly referred to as a freeway-to-freeway interchange.  Do you?

Granted there are so many threads on AAROADS forum that I only read a small portion of them, mainly in the areas of this part of the country.

[hotdogPi]

^ You referenced your state DOT work and I recall those being the two states you worked for.  No need to get all defensive.

You started posting on misc.transport.road in 1998, IIRC, and have regularly posted on various roads/highways forums since then, as I have.  I don't recall the term "system interchange" ever being mentioned before this thread, as far as what is commonly referred to as a freeway-to-freeway interchange.  Do you?

Granted there are so many threads on AAROADS forum that I only read a small portion of them, mainly in the areas of this part of the country.

Googling site:aaroads.com/forum "system interchange" (which works better than the built-in forum search) gives 112 results. For comparison, this is thread #24025.

[Eth]

If freeway-to-freeway interchanges are what we're looking for, I'm pretty sure Georgia's newest one would be the south end of GA 400 at I-85, which looks like it opened in either 1994 or 1995.

The ramps carrying traffic from I-85 south to GA-400 north, and from GA-400 south to I-85 north, are only about a decade old.

Those particular ramps opened around 2014, but they were additions to the existing interchange.

I'm pretty sure the interchange at GA-316 and the Athens Bypass is newer than 1994 or 1995.

Not a free-flowing interchange, nor is that part of 316 a freeway.

[J N Winkler]

Googling site:aaroads.com/forum "system interchange" (which works better than the built-in forum search) gives 112 results. For comparison, this is thread #24025.

Forum search works well enough for identifying instances of {"system interchange"} if one goes to "Home" and runs the search from there.  I get four pages of results with up to 30 results per page going back to the establishment of this forum in 2009.  I think a post I wrote on 2009-06-15 may be the oldest occurrence on this forum, but I am far from the only one to have used it.  Roadfro (NV), Deathtopumpkins (VA), and Mgk920 (WI) have all used it in conversations in which I had no involvement.

It does not surprise me that the term system interchange comes very naturally to Wisconsin-based users such as Mgk920 and Triplemultiplex.  WisDOT has spent years and billions on updating old and marginally competent freeway-to-freeway interchanges that were originally built to directional designs.  With the substantial completion of the Zoo Interchange expansion in Milwaukee, Wisconsin is also the newest US state with at least one Maltese cross stack.  Googling {site:wisconsindot.gov "system interchange"} returns 66 hits, the top of which is a link to FDM 11-30, the section of WisDOT's facilities design manual that deals with interchanges.

[froggie]

^ Regarding Wisconsin and system interchanges, a quick search of MTR finds a number of references to such from both MGK and Craig Holl.  Even before I did that search, I recalled MGK using the term on MTR on several occasions.  There was also an MTR thread from 2002 from a "Mr Sparkle" about Interstate-to-Interstate interchanges that were not full system interchanges, though I must've missed that thread at the time because I was on deployment.

[hotdogPi]

Googling site:aaroads.com/forum "system interchange" (which works better than the built-in forum search) gives 112 results. For comparison, this is thread #24025.

Forum search works well enough for identifying instances of {"system interchange"} if one goes to "Home" and runs the search from there.  I get four pages of results with up to 30 results per page going back to the establishment of this forum in 2009.  I think a post I wrote on 2009-06-15 may be the oldest occurrence on this forum, but I am far from the only one to have used it.  Roadfro (NV), Deathtopumpkins (VA), and Mgk920 (WI) have all used it in conversations in which I had no involvement.

For some reason, forum search always tells me there's only a single page unless the number of results is just the slightest bit above 30. It's been that way for me since I came here.

[webny99]

I can't say I'd ever heard "system interchange", but it wasn't beyond my comprehension to figure out what it meant. In fact, it sounds like a term I might actually use and get funny looks from the general population (sort of like "freeway"!  ). I am just realizing as I type this post that I tend to use "network" instead of "system". The two are basically synonymous as far as I am concerned.

Systems are intriguing to me, and while all of the roads in a given place could be considered a system, the systems I find most intriguing are freeway systems - excluding all surface streets, anything with traffic signals, at-grade intersections, and so on. Relatedly, one freeway system I detest (and there are not many) is that of Lexington, KY. It is not visually appealing, but more importantly, it is very disjointed and incoherent, requiring surface streets to transition between freeways, and a partial beltway that must be frustrating to drive. Perhaps what is most irksome is that you cannot use those freeways to get between one part of the metro area and another. Sure, they exist, but they don't function as a complete system to provide the fastest travel times between one area and another, and don't provide that much value to the average commuter. I've had similar thoughts about some Canadian cities, including Vancouver and Winnipeg.

[vdeane]

Systems are intriguing to me, and while all of the roads in a given place could be considered a system, the systems I find most intriguing are freeway systems - excluding all surface streets, anything with traffic signals, at-grade intersections, and so on. Relatedly, one freeway system I detest (and there are not many) is that of Lexington, KY. It is not visually appealing, but more importantly, it is very disjointed and incoherent, requiring surface streets to transition between freeways, and a partial beltway that must be frustrating to drive. Perhaps what is most irksome is that you cannot use those freeways to get between one part of the metro area and another. Sure, they exist, but they don't function as a complete system to provide the fastest travel times between one area and another, and don't provide that much value to the average commuter. I've had similar thoughts about some Canadian cities, including Vancouver and Winnipeg.

Same.  I'm even the type likely to evaluate an apartment based on how useful the local freeway system would be for various trips (for example, trips to the east wouldn't use Rochester's freeway system at all if taken from an eastern exurb (NY 250/NY 104 being faster) or southern Henrietta (Thruway is closer), and even larger swaths of Buffalo and Syracuse have similar issues).

I don't understand what's going on with Vancouver.  They basically have two freeway systems connected only by the SFPR, an at-grade expressway.  This does seem to happen more often in Canada, probably because of an overall lower population density combined with less of a tendency towards suburban sprawl.  Another one that annoys me is Ottawa/Gatineau.

[kphoger]

For the record...  I've never worked for a DOT or any other technical profession like that, yet I knew instantly what a "system interchange" was.  Not really sure where I picked it up, but it was already a part of my lexicon.  It may or may not have been from this forum.

[Beltway]

^ Regarding Wisconsin and system interchanges, a quick search of MTR finds a number of references to such from both MGK and Craig Holl.  Even before I did that search, I recalled MGK using the term on MTR on several occasions.  There was also an MTR thread from 2002 from a "Mr Sparkle" about Interstate-to-Interstate interchanges that were not full system interchanges, though I must've missed that thread at the time because I was on deployment.

I suppose I could have acted "super smart" and not indicate that I had not heard the term before...    ... but part of the issue is that I initially thought "what system is referred to"?  The whole highway system?  One of the recognized sub-systems that are called "systems" by the DOTs?  As in Interstate system, primary system, secondary system and urban system.  Interchanges are not necessarily on a freeway, most are but quite a few aren't.

[US 89]

I was aware of the phrase "system interchange" before I knew this forum existed. I know Utah (UDOT) has used the term in various brochures, handouts, etc. In addition, I don't think anyone has mentioned the Wikipedia page...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interchange_(road)#System_interchange

[Mr_Northside]

I like C.P. Zilliacus' idea (aired occasionally on the road-related Facebook groups) of applying federal coercion by cancelling the tax-exempt status of PTC bonds if a plan to remedy Breezewood is not developed and pursued.

I also kind of wonder what would happen if, instead of that "stick", the feds used a "carrot" and said that USDOT would pay 100% of it.  The 2 ramps would get built, and neither PennDOT nor the PTC would have to alter their long term/short term budget one cent.

I'm curious as to whether any local interests could still manage to derail such a tempting "carrot".  Obviously, if they have cause due to the planning, they (local interests) could sue to try and stop it, but I have a feeling that the PTC & PennDOT probably wouldn't give in so easily and lose some free ramps.


Not that I'm trying to derail this thread into yet another Breezewood thread either.........

[Beltway]

I like C.P. Zilliacus' idea (aired occasionally on the road-related Facebook groups) of applying federal coercion by cancelling the tax-exempt status of PTC bonds if a plan to remedy Breezewood is not developed and pursued.

I also kind of wonder what would happen if, instead of that "stick", the feds used a "carrot" and said that USDOT would pay 100% of it.  The 2 ramps would get built, and neither PennDOT nor the PTC would have to alter their long term/short term budget one cent.
I'm curious as to whether any local interests could still manage to derail such a tempting "carrot".  Obviously, if they have cause due to the planning, they (local interests) could sue to try and stop it, but I have a feeling that the PTC & PennDOT probably wouldn't give in so easily and lose some free ramps.

Not sure how tempting that alone would be... how about a twofer to really be tempting?

Offer both Breezewood and Carlisle (I-81) turnpike direct interchanges, 100% federally funded and beyond their regular FHWA funding.

[Tom958]

If freeway-to-freeway interchanges are what we're looking for, I'm pretty sure Georgia's newest one would be the south end of GA 400 at I-85, which looks like it opened in either 1994 or 1995.

The last stretch of 400, including that interchange, opened in 1993. I suppose that's the newest, unless...

...one includes Sugarloaf Parkway at GA 316, c. 2012. 316 is actually an at-grade expressway here with no driveway access and roughly a mile from the interchange to an intersection in each direction. However, the interchange is a free-flowing trumpet that's designed to remain free-flowing as 316 is converted to a freeway in the coming decades and Sugarloaf is extended as a freeway to the north.

And, I'm in the "Doesn't everyone here know what system and service interchanges are?" camp.

[webny99]

I'm even the type likely to evaluate an apartment based on how useful the local freeway system would be for various trips (for example, trips to the east wouldn't use Rochester's freeway system at all if taken from an eastern exurb (NY 250/NY 104 being faster) or southern Henrietta (Thruway is closer), and even larger swaths of Buffalo and Syracuse have similar issues).

Yeah, Rochester's eastern (and especially southeastern) suburbs are frustrating. NY 31 and NY 250 are among the most chronically congested/slow moving routes outside the outer loop. I don't envy anyone living or otherwise commuting to/from the Fairport area, as there is just no fast way to get anywhere. Turning NY 441 into a full freeway to Walworth is one of my pipe dreams, as is a Victor to Webster freeway, possibly as a realigned NY 250.

I don't understand what's going on with Vancouver.  They basically have two freeway systems connected only by the SFPR, an at-grade expressway.  This does seem to happen more often in Canada, probably because of an overall lower population density combined with less of a tendency towards suburban sprawl.

I've been to the Vancouver area twice, and found the lack of freeways to be less of an issue getting to/from/between the suburbs, and more of an issue with the urban core itself, which is entirely devoid of freeways. They desperately need the equivalent of a 3di connecting downtown to the TransCanada Highway. It takes forever just to get from downtown to the freeway, and there is no alternative to passing through some pretty gritty areas.

Winnipeg, on the other hand, has no freeway network at all, aside from some upgraded segments of their perimeter highway. Basically every through road has become a six+ lane congested mess, like NY 104 in Greece and NY 78 near Buffalo.

Another one that annoys me is Ottawa/Gatineau.

I resent that the two networks are completely separate and you must pass directly through the city center to get from one to the other. Taken on it's own, though, Ottawa's network seems to be simple and workable enough. ON 416 and ON 417 are actually some of Ontario's better freeways (IMO) and at least the latter gets close enough to downtown that it's useful to commuters.

[vdeane]

Yeah, Rochester's eastern (and especially southeastern) suburbs are frustrating. NY 31 and NY 250 are among the most chronically congested/slow moving routes outside the outer loop. I don't envy anyone living or otherwise commuting to/from the Fairport area, as there is just no fast way to get anywhere. Turning NY 441 into a full freeway to Walworth is one of my pipe dreams, as is a Victor to Webster freeway, possibly as a realigned NY 250.

Looks like the originally proposed Pittsford-Webster Expressway.
http://nysroads.com/planned.php

I resent that the two networks are completely separate and you must pass directly through the city center to get from one to the other. Taken on it's own, though, Ottawa's network seems to be simple and workable enough. ON 416 and ON 417 are actually some of Ontario's better freeways (IMO) and at least the latter gets close enough to downtown that it's useful to commuters.

It certainly looks like each province ignored the existence of the other when building their networks.  I'd love to see something connecting A-5 and ON 417 as well as an extension of A-50 to the west along QC 148.

[webny99]

one of my pipe dreams, a Victor to Webster freeway, possibly as a realigned NY 250.

Looks like the originally proposed Pittsford-Webster Expressway.
http://nysroads.com/planned.php

Yeah, I've actually considered tying a fictional Webster-Victor freeway into I-490 just north of Eastview Mall, i.e. the southern half would head due south instead of southwest. Even without a freeway, an extension of NY 250 to I-490 would be very handy.

Interesting that NY-286 was recommended to be a freeway corridor, while NY 441 is the busier (and more congested) of the two, carrying a lot more long distance traffic. NY 286 has its share of congestion as well, but only on the two lane segment, whereas NY-441 through Penfield is bad even with four lanes.

It certainly looks like each province ignored the existence of the other when building their networks.

Not too surprising, given the way Quebec seems to ignore the rest of Canada and do their own thing as much as possible! 

[vdeane]

one of my pipe dreams, a Victor to Webster freeway, possibly as a realigned NY 250.

Looks like the originally proposed Pittsford-Webster Expressway.
http://nysroads.com/planned.php

Yeah, I've actually considered tying a fictional Webster-Victor freeway into I-490 just north of Eastview Mall, i.e. the southern half would head due south instead of southwest. Even without a freeway, an extension of NY 250 to I-490 would be very handy.

Interesting that NY-286 was recommended to be a freeway corridor, while NY 441 is the busier (and more congested) of the two, carrying a lot more long distance traffic. NY 286 has its share of congestion as well, but only on the two lane segment, whereas NY-441 through Penfield is bad even with four lanes.

Given that NY 286 has the western end shown as "complete", I'm not convinced that the proposed network was entirely freeway.  Looks like it curved southwest to tie into the Pittsford Bypass.  I do also find it interesting that NY 441 doesn't appear at all on there.

It certainly looks like each province ignored the existence of the other when building their networks.

Not too surprising, given the way Quebec seems to ignore the rest of Canada and do their own thing as much as possible! 

And yet they're the one that built an autoroute to the border.