Birmingham Northern Beltline (I-422, I-959)

[Charles2]

Another question is whether this bypass is too far out to reduce congestion on existing routes.

Not a chance.  There are no logical connections on the route as it stands now.

[Tourian]

Building the route closer to the city would put it through people's homes. That wouldn't serve a purpose as a bypass. I do not see how anyone can look at that map and conclude that it has "no logical connections." There's critical thought and than there's just straight up bull headed contrarianism.

I bet the people sitting on 20/59 or even 459 this morning and yesterday wish we had that road.

[froggie]

The only way such a road would fully serve it's purputed purpose as a "bypass" is if no development happens along it.  Odds of that happening?  I'd say zilch.

[Charles2]

The only way such a road would fully serve it's purputed purpose as a "bypass" is if no development happens along it.  Odds of that happening?  I'd say zilch.

I'd put it at slim and none, and Slim just left the building. 

[ARMOURERERIC]

Are they anywhere near putting another portion under contract?

[codyg1985]

The only way such a road would fully serve it's purputed purpose as a "bypass" is if no development happens along it.  Odds of that happening?  I'd say zilch.

I'd put it at slim and none, and Slim just left the building. 

I will say that it would be more difficult to develop a lot of the land around the Beltline due to it being rugged. Still, it could happen around the spokes, especially around the northeast quadrant of the route where development is happening more.

[Tourian]

Putting that sort of condition on such a road is specious and inane statement. This is the modern age of the automobile and this is not a rural route. There will be development.

[froggie]

Putting that sort of condition on such a road is specious and inane statement. This is the modern age of the automobile and this is not a rural route. There will be development.

Then claiming that the road will serve as a bypass is just as "specious and inane" of a statement.  Let's cut to the chase:  this road isn't about being a bypass.  This road is all about development.

[silverback1065]

Putting that sort of condition on such a road is specious and inane statement. This is the modern age of the automobile and this is not a rural route. There will be development.

Then claiming that the road will serve as a bypass is just as "specious and inane" of a statement.  Let's cut to the chase:  this road isn't about being a bypass.  This road is all about development.

isn't that what every road is touted as, from a politicians perspective? 

[froggie]

Not always.  Often the politicians cite them as being to reduce traffic.  But unless you limit access or limit growth along the new road, you're really not reducing traffic.

[freebrickproductions]

The only way such a road would fully serve it's purputed purpose as a "bypass" is if no development happens along it.  Odds of that happening?  I'd say zilch.

I'd put it at slim and none, and Slim just left the building. 

AL 275 around Talladega, AL comes close as there's barely been any development along that bypass, but then again, that's probably because Talladega has been shrinking for the past several years.

[Tourian]

Putting that sort of condition on such a road is specious and inane statement. This is the modern age of the automobile and this is not a rural route. There will be development.

What is to keep someone from using it as a bypass or as a detour?

Nothing. Two wrecks last week shut down 459 and 20/59 for hours each. People could have used the NB to get around. There is nothing specious about that. Just reality. But again, if you don't live here and have no skin in the game I guess its just something too tough to conceptualize.

[froggie]

But again, if you don't live here and have no skin in the game I guess its just something too tough to conceptualize

Only if your state chooses to build it with their own money.  But since they went as far as to get it designated as an Appalachian corridor payable 100% with Federal funding, every gas-buyer in the country has "skin in the game".

And just because I don't live down there now doesn't mean I'm not familiar with the area.

[Tourian]

The benefits of a full circle bypass shouldn't have to be explained, or justified or debated. It should be automatically understood. Federal funding also means out of towners get to use it. It isn't just for Alabamians. That is what the Federal Interstate system is all about.

[froggie]

The "benefits" of a full circle bypass are also often overtouted.  And in this case, would be obscenely expensive compared to the "benefits" provided.

[Rothman]

Federal funding also means out of towners get to use it. It isn't just for Alabamians.

Huh?  So...if a road is only state funded, out-of-staters can't use it?  

[Anthony_JK]

The benefits of a full circle bypass shouldn't have to be explained, or justified or debated. It should be automatically understood. Federal funding also means out of towners get to use it. It isn't just for Alabamians. That is what the Federal Interstate system is all about.

Actually, it does...especially if other people are footing the bill for it, and it diverts precious funds from what are considered more important needs.

And, last time I checked, they weren't punishing out-of-state drivers for using state-funded roads; nor were they refunding their gas tax money.

[Tourian]

Federal funding also means out of towners get to use it. It isn't just for Alabamians.

Huh?  So...if a road is only state funded, out-of-staters can't use it?  

No the inverse of a statement isnt always true. You are just twisting my words. Go back and read who I was replying to and why and not take my reply out of context.

[Tourian]

The benefits of a full circle bypass shouldn't have to be explained, or justified or debated. It should be automatically understood. Federal funding also means out of towners get to use it. It isn't just for Alabamians. That is what the Federal Interstate system is all about.

Actually, it does...especially if other people are footing the bill for it, and it diverts precious funds from what are considered more important needs.

And, last time I checked, they weren't punishing out-of-state drivers for using state-funded roads; nor were they refunding their gas tax money.

Apparently Congress disagrees with you. As for the rest of your post. See the above.

[Rothman]

Federal funding also means out of towners get to use it. It isn't just for Alabamians.

Huh?  So...if a road is only state funded, out-of-staters can't use it?  

No the inverse of a statement isnt always true. You are just twisting my words. Go back and read who I was replying to and why and not take my reply out of context.

Okay...

The benefits of a full circle bypass shouldn't have to be explained, or justified or debated. It should be automatically understood. Federal funding also means out of towners get to use it. It isn't just for Alabamians. That is what the Federal Interstate system is all about.

Yeah, read through it again and it still doesn't make sense to me.  People just care about roads taking them to where they need to go.  They don't care about the funding behind them, especially when you consider how much of FHWA's federal funding is used off the interstate system (I wouldn't be surprised if, here in NY, anyway, more federal funds are used off the interstate than on per FFY).

[Anthony_JK]

The benefits of a full circle bypass shouldn't have to be explained, or justified or debated. It should be automatically understood. Federal funding also means out of towners get to use it. It isn't just for Alabamians. That is what the Federal Interstate system is all about.

Actually, it does...especially if other people are footing the bill for it, and it diverts precious funds from what are considered more important needs.

And, last time I checked, they weren't punishing out-of-state drivers for using state-funded roads; nor were they refunding their gas tax money.

Apparently Congress disagrees with you. As for the rest of your post. See the above.

*citation needed*

Also, the Feds do fund other non-Interstate highways through the NHS.

That fact no more justifies the Birmingham Northern Beltline than it does the Baton Rouge Loop. But, whatever...you just be you.

[Rothman]

The benefits of a full circle bypass shouldn't have to be explained, or justified or debated. It should be automatically understood. Federal funding also means out of towners get to use it. It isn't just for Alabamians. That is what the Federal Interstate system is all about.

Actually, it does...especially if other people are footing the bill for it, and it diverts precious funds from what are considered more important needs.

And, last time I checked, they weren't punishing out-of-state drivers for using state-funded roads; nor were they refunding their gas tax money.

Apparently Congress disagrees with you. As for the rest of your post. See the above.

*citation needed*

Also, the Feds do fund other non-Interstate highways through the NHS.

...and off the NHS.  The number of federal-aid eligible roads out there is quite considerable.  A lot of Surface Transportation Program funding goes to non-NHS roads.

[seicer]

Such as ADHS routes, like Corridor V. The benefits of a full circle bypass should be explained, as the benefits are not all guaranteed or granted. Is one needed of Birmingham at such an extreme cost? It's still up for debate. What about Charleston, W.Va. where it's still debated every decade or so? Can Paducah, Ky. have a full circle bypass, too?

[tidecat]

Nashville needs a full circle more so than Birmingham.  Although of all the cities on I-65, the only one that actually has a bypass that connects to 65 on both ends is Indianapolis, although Louisville will join them in about 8-10 months.

The only benefit of Corridor X-1 in its current configuration is that it will be a shortcut for traffic making the I-65 South to I-20/59 Southwest connection (i.e., from Nashville to New Orleans).  The eastern side isn't useful for Atlanta to Huntsville traffic as there are dramatically shorter non-interstate routes to connect to I-75 in Georgia.  If one was headed from Atlanta to Cullman the eastern leg might work, but I-20, US 27, and US 278 may still be shorter.

[codyg1985]

If the Birmingham loop was a circle and not a deformed football that is pointed up the Appalachian mountains, then it would be more useful.