AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Stack interchange design chronology/history  (Read 14065 times)

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3334
  • Last Login: Today at 04:51:28 AM
Stack interchange design chronology/history
« on: September 18, 2010, 05:47:37 AM »


An outgrowth of a discussion in the Pacific Southwest forum about the unusually laid-out I-10/I-110 interchange in Los Angeles - http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3434.0 - JN Winkler and I ended up looking into why the stack interchange design seemed so uncommon from the time the first one opened in 1953, the Four-Level at today's I-110 and US 101 in downtown LA...to the 1960s, when they started to become considered the most ideal design for freeway-to-freeway junctions nationwide.

Now, the Four-Level lacks some of the modern trappings of stacks - long ramps with gradual rises to bigger and bigger elevations (and thus high design speed), HOV-lane dedicated ramps, etc. - but at the outset solved one major problem that the cloverleaf interchanges of past years had: weaving from ramp to ramp.  So when/where was the second ever stack interchange built, and when did the stack design go beyond simply weave-elimination to speed and capacity increases as we see it today?  IIRC, Ohio was the other early adopter of this design.

For that matter, before the four-level stack became the standard freeway-to-freeway interchange design, were there any other non-cloverleaf standards used at multiple different interchanges?

Below is a basic chronology of California stacks (both full and partial), to give an idea of when the design improvements came about in my home state:

US 101/I-110, The Four-Level (designed ca. 1949, finished 1953)
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=34.06265,-118.249283&spn=0.008746,0.013797&z=16

Route 163/I-5 (1962-1963, when US 395 was on the Cabrillo Freeway) (partial stack, southeast quadrant missing due to proximity of Park Boulevard)
http://bit.ly/9TU4y4

I-10/I-405 (1965)
http://bit.ly/ctIgl4

Route 60/I-710 (1967)
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=34.034862,-118.168666&spn=0.008749,0.013797&z=16

I-980/Route 24/I-580 (1970)
http://bit.ly/aUSSFz

Route 57/I-10/Route 71, Kellogg Interchange (1972) (stack plus extra spoke for Route 71)
http://bit.ly/ds6edS

I-210/Route 134/I-710 stub (ramps do not perfectly align on the same level) (1974)
http://bit.ly/aUGtHH

I-805/Route 94 (partial stack, northwest quadrant missing due to Route 15) (1974)
http://bit.ly/99D1oS

I-8/I-805 (1972-1974)
http://bit.ly/c2mlv2

Route 118/I-5 (partial stack, missing northwest quadrant due to I-405) (1976)
http://bit.ly/9Xp99I

I-10/I-15 (1975-1978)
http://bit.ly/a8oZPT

Route 2/Route 134 (one cloverleaf) (started 1971, completed 1978)
http://bit.ly/9f1pNL

I-680/I-280/US 101 (one cloverleaf) (started 1974, completed 1982)
http://bit.ly/94hWl3

Route 60/I-15 (one cloverleaf) (started 1979, completed 1987)
http://bit.ly/dDmDlk

Route 87/I-280 (ramps do not perfectly align on the same level) (work began in 1971, completed in 1988)
http://bit.ly/9OGisM

Route 91/I-15 (one cloverleaf) (1989)
http://bit.ly/co4wqj

I-105/I-110 (one cloverleaf) (1985-1993)
http://bit.ly/cATkfD

I-105/I-405 (1989-1993)
http://bit.ly/cBKhgu

I-105/I-710 (1990-1993)
http://bit.ly/bRIL93

I-8/Route 125 (one cloverleaf) (1989-1992)
http://bit.ly/agvwqG
Logged
Chris Sampang

Alps

  • Everybody Obeys the Octagon
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11916
  • Views expressed are my own, not my employer's.

  • Age: 35
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: October 19, 2018, 10:31:25 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #1 on: September 18, 2010, 11:29:50 PM »

NJ has a lot of designs that just sort of splay all over the place.  The distinguishing characteristic is that they tried to avoid going to a third level whenever possible.  Looking at I-287 Exit 10 (CR 527), I-95 Exit 1 (NJ 29), I-80 Exit 53 (NJ 23/US 46), and many others, you have some very intricate designs that came out of that philosophy.  The only Northeastern city that was big on the stacks is Albany.  Baltimore used the reverse-roadways strategy twice at I-95/695, though one of them is now becoming a stack.

Brandon

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9736
  • Mr. Accelerator is our friend; Mr. Brake is not.

  • Age: 41
  • Location: Joliet, IL
  • Last Login: October 19, 2018, 05:43:50 PM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #2 on: September 20, 2010, 10:23:15 AM »

The four level stack never seemed to catch on in Illinois.  IDOT, ISTHA, and Cook County built a number of three level stacks, but never a four level stack.  A partial listing:
I-80 and Center Street, Exit 131 (one of a very few serving a local street)
I-80, I-94, I-294, and IL-394
I-55 and I-90/94
I-55 and I-355
I-294 and I-88
I-294 and I-90
I-55/70 and I-255 (only downstate one I know of)

Other three level derivations at the end of an expreesway or tollway include:
I-94 and I-57
I-80 and I-355
I-290 and I-355
I-55 and Lake Shore Drive
I-39 and I-90 (current interchange - the former was a trumpet)
I-55 and I-155

I-74 and I-474 as well and I-39 and US-20 seem to be an odd semi-directional with a loop.  Then there's I-57 and I-80 which resembles nothing else in the state.

Otherwise, the cloverleaf is IDOT's preferred choice between freeways.  ISTHA goes for more elaborate and imaginative designs (see I-88 and I-355).
Logged
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

Illinois: America's own banana republic.

Screw the KSA; Stand with Canada.

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3334
  • Last Login: Today at 04:51:28 AM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #3 on: September 20, 2010, 11:58:25 AM »

The four level stack never seemed to catch on in Illinois.  IDOT, ISTHA, and Cook County built a number of three level stacks, but never a four level stack.  A partial listing:

I-80, I-94, I-294, and IL-394

This actually looks like a modified partial stack with one cloverleaf for 394 north to 294 north/80 west - but four levels!  (The ramps carrying 94 from the Bishop Ford Freeway to I-80 east are elongated, thus making the interchange appearance much less obviously stack-like.)




I-55/70 and I-255 (only downstate one I know of)

This probably would fit nicely in the "cloverstack" department with two cloverleaves, and two flyovers.
Logged
Chris Sampang

Brandon

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 9736
  • Mr. Accelerator is our friend; Mr. Brake is not.

  • Age: 41
  • Location: Joliet, IL
  • Last Login: October 19, 2018, 05:43:50 PM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #4 on: September 20, 2010, 03:12:11 PM »

The four level stack never seemed to catch on in Illinois.  IDOT, ISTHA, and Cook County built a number of three level stacks, but never a four level stack.  A partial listing:

I-80, I-94, I-294, and IL-394

This actually looks like a modified partial stack with one cloverleaf for 394 north to 294 north/80 west - but four levels!  (The ramps carrying 94 from the Bishop Ford Freeway to I-80 east are elongated, thus making the interchange appearance much less obviously stack-like.)

It's not exactly four levels.  The I-94 eastbound ramp never enters the main part of the interchange that IL-394 and I-80/294 enter.  It skirts the northeast quadrant of the interchange with separate bridges over IL-394 and then I-80/294 with an at-grade section between.  I'd never classify it as a classic four level stack.
Logged
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

Illinois: America's own banana republic.

Screw the KSA; Stand with Canada.

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3334
  • Last Login: Today at 04:51:28 AM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #5 on: September 20, 2010, 03:24:21 PM »

The four level stack never seemed to catch on in Illinois.  IDOT, ISTHA, and Cook County built a number of three level stacks, but never a four level stack.  A partial listing:

I-80, I-94, I-294, and IL-394

This actually looks like a modified partial stack with one cloverleaf for 394 north to 294 north/80 west - but four levels!  (The ramps carrying 94 from the Bishop Ford Freeway to I-80 east are elongated, thus making the interchange appearance much less obviously stack-like.)

It's not exactly four levels.  The I-94 eastbound ramp never enters the main part of the interchange that IL-394 and I-80/294 enter.  It skirts the northeast quadrant of the interchange with separate bridges over IL-394 and then I-80/294 with an at-grade section between.  I'd never classify it as a classic four level stack.

It seems more like it's a stack-inspired design, but not quite one.  The four levels I'm thinking of:

80 (and 294, 94)
394/94 (and cloverleaf to 80 WB)
EB 94 ramp from Bishop Ford to 80
ramps from 294 SB/80 EB to 94 WB and from 80/94 WB to 394 SB
Logged
Chris Sampang

haljackey

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 303
  • Location: London, Ontario, Canada
  • Last Login: October 14, 2018, 09:58:46 AM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #6 on: September 22, 2010, 11:49:44 AM »

Some stacks in Canada:

The only "true" 4-level stack in Canada. The two highest flyovers are actually sunken here to give the interchange a lower profile, it's short height making it less of a NIMBY.


Here's a clover-stack design. These ones are more popular in Canada.
Logged

Stephane Dumas

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1714
  • Last Login: October 19, 2018, 10:15:19 PM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #7 on: September 22, 2010, 07:26:03 PM »

Texas goes a bit further, some of them are 5-levels when we include the service roads like the High-Five in Dallas http://mapper.acme.com/?ll=32.924167,-96.763611&z=15&t=M&marker0=32.924167,-96.763611,High Five Interchange or the ones located along Beltway 8 in Houston.
Logged

haljackey

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 303
  • Location: London, Ontario, Canada
  • Last Login: October 14, 2018, 09:58:46 AM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #8 on: September 23, 2010, 12:43:45 AM »

Texas goes a bit further, some of them are 5-levels when we include the service roads like the High-Five in Dallas http://mapper.acme.com/?ll=32.924167,-96.763611&z=15&t=M&marker0=32.924167,-96.763611,High Five Interchange or the ones located along Beltway 8 in Houston.

Yeah nearly all major interchanges are 3 levels in Canada. I think the 4th level contributes to high cost and NIMBYism as people can see the junction from a distance.

Texas has gone nuts with their five level stacks. Thing is it's just a 4 level stack with frontage roads included. I am not a fan of frontage roads. If they weren't there you wouldn't need to build a 5th level, which would really aid the extreme design and construction costs.
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3334
  • Last Login: Today at 04:51:28 AM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #9 on: September 23, 2010, 01:01:26 AM »


Texas has gone nuts with their five level stacks. Thing is it's just a 4 level stack with frontage roads included. I am not a fan of frontage roads. If they weren't there you wouldn't need to build a 5th level, which would really aid the extreme design and construction costs.

Considering that Texas freeway philosophy has almost always included the frontages, and that real estate is a lot cheaper there than in other places (and probably aided by developers contributing land to freeway projects - as was the case with US 59 in Houston)...I'm not surprised that the scale of stack interchanges there is much larger than it is elsewhere.

This does beg the question: are there any small-sized stacks in the vein of the original Four-Level, that are not necessarily high-speed interchanges but do remove weaving?  I think the 60/710 interchange about 12-13 years later seems to have added more right of way for faster ramps, and the examples from Ohio that JN Winkler has mentioned also appear to have less-sharp turns than the original in downtown Los Angeles.
Logged
Chris Sampang

Bickendan

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2341
  • Last Login: Today at 04:33:37 AM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #10 on: September 23, 2010, 03:15:21 AM »

The I-5/405/US30 interchange in Portland was supposed to be a full-stack, but when the Freeway Revolts killed the Mt. Hood Freeway, they also killed the Rose City Freeway, which would have been what the Kerby Ave ramps are now and the I-5 to Kerby ramps all got axed.

That said, I'm not sure if it can be considered a 4-level stack, as I-5 has directional ramps to Greeley Ave in the interchange footprint, and I-5 passes over a couple city streets (Mississippi Ave being most prominent) within the interchange footprint.

To further examine it, I-405 is a double-deck bridge at the location, with the US 30 ramps directly over each other, with US 30 west ABOVE the bridge, and US 30 east BELOW the bridge. This interchange, even WITHOUT the missing ramps, may be a true 6-level stack...

I took a look at it... It's a 7-level! And would have been 8, possibly 9 if fully built!!!
http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&ll=45.543915,-122.675754&spn=0.004644,0.009989&t=k&z=17&msid=100045224592058361583.000490e7b0fef84924512
Logged

jjakucyk

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 207
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Cincinnati
  • Last Login: October 19, 2018, 02:31:39 PM
    • Cincinnati Traction History
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #11 on: September 23, 2010, 12:02:12 PM »

This does beg the question: are there any small-sized stacks in the vein of the original Four-Level, that are not necessarily high-speed interchanges but do remove weaving?

The I-75/US-35 stack in Dayton, Ohio (mentioned in the other thread) is a pretty tight interchange.  The ramps are signed for 40 mph.  http://maps.google.com/maps?t=h&gl=us&om=0&ie=UTF8&ll=39.747578,-84.205399&spn=0.006047,0.009763&z=17
Logged

andytom

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 160
  • Age: 57
  • Location: Beaverton, OR
  • Last Login: March 22, 2013, 08:23:41 PM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #12 on: September 23, 2010, 01:52:07 PM »

The I-5/405/US30 interchange in Portland was supposed to be a full-stack, but when the Freeway Revolts killed the Mt. Hood Freeway, they also killed the Rose City Freeway, which would have been what the Kerby Ave ramps are now and the I-5 to Kerby ramps all got axed.

That said, I'm not sure if it can be considered a 4-level stack, as I-5 has directional ramps to Greeley Ave in the interchange footprint, and I-5 passes over a couple city streets (Mississippi Ave being most prominent) within the interchange footprint.

To further examine it, I-405 is a double-deck bridge at the location, with the US 30 ramps directly over each other, with US 30 west ABOVE the bridge, and US 30 east BELOW the bridge. This interchange, even WITHOUT the missing ramps, may be a true 6-level stack...

I count only 5 levels.  Level 1 is the Greeley Ave and US-30 EB ramps.  Level 2 is I-5.  Level 3 is the bottom deck of the bridge.  Level 4 is the top deck.  Level 5 is the US-30 WB flyover.  I don't count the surface streets as a level because the topography and height of the bridge require that the entire interchange be elevated regardless of what is underneath.

--Andy
Logged

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 37
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #13 on: September 23, 2010, 02:02:03 PM »

are the surface streets directly accessible from the interchange?  if so, that would make sense as a sixth level.  If not, then no.
Logged
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3334
  • Last Login: Today at 04:51:28 AM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #14 on: September 23, 2010, 02:29:13 PM »

are the surface streets directly accessible from the interchange?  if so, that would make sense as a sixth level.  If not, then no.

That actually would make me ask...is the Four-Level actually a five-level interchange when there have always been ramps to Flower Street and to Grand Avenue as part of the complex?
Logged
Chris Sampang

andytom

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 160
  • Age: 57
  • Location: Beaverton, OR
  • Last Login: March 22, 2013, 08:23:41 PM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #15 on: September 23, 2010, 10:22:46 PM »

are the surface streets directly accessible from the interchange?  if so, that would make sense as a sixth level.  If not, then no.

Yes, but only through ramps that are already accounted for on Level 1 (to/from Greeley Ave), and Levels 3 and 4 (to/from Kirby Ave, the East/West straight throughs).  Greeley Ave essentially starts on those ramps (doesn't traverse the interchange) and Kirby Ave is well outside the confines of the interchange.  In both cases, the surface streets can be considered to be on the same level as the ramps themselves.  None of the streets that cross underneath the interchange are directly connected into the interchange without connecting to another street or making a U-Turn.

--Andy
« Last Edit: September 23, 2010, 10:24:41 PM by andytom »
Logged

TheStranger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3334
  • Last Login: Today at 04:51:28 AM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #16 on: September 30, 2010, 07:50:17 PM »

I was just Googling a few minutes ago to see if there was a comprehensive list of stack interchanges (both full and 3/4ths) out there and there isn't, so...I wonder how many are out there both in North America, and worldwide.

California has 11 true stacks and 9 three-quarters stacks, in addition to being the home of the very first one.  I-280 has the closest proximity between two stack interchanges (the 101 and 87 junctions in San Jose); I-10 has the most full stacks for any one numbered route with three (at 405, 57/71, and 15), while I-105 has the highest percentage of 3/4-or-full stack interchanges per capita (3 of the 4 freeway-to-freeway junctions are stacks).

Logged
Chris Sampang

jdb1234

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 535
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Birmingham, AL
  • Last Login: October 19, 2018, 03:48:36 AM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #17 on: September 30, 2010, 09:03:46 PM »

Alabama only has two four-level stacks:

I-459 @ I-65
I-459 @ I-20

Both were built in the late '70s/early '80s
Logged

Anthony_JK

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1260
  • Age: 54
  • Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
  • Last Login: October 19, 2018, 09:00:31 PM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #18 on: September 30, 2010, 09:15:22 PM »

IIRC, Louisiana has only three what you would call true stack  4-way interchanges:

1) I-49 @ LA 3132 (Inner Loop/Terry Bradshaw Passway) in Shreveport
2) I-110 @ Airline Highway (US 61/190) in Baton Rouge
3) I-310 @ Airline Highway (US 61) just west of Kenner

There are also these 3-way directional interchanges:

I-10/I-110 and I-10/I-12 "Splits" in Baton Rouge
I-10/I-310 west of Kenner
I-10/I-210 (both ends) in Lake Charles
I-20/I-220 east end near Bossier City

The I-49/I-20 interchange in Shreveport is more of a partial directional because the north side transitions to a one-way couplet (Pete Haris Drive/Allen Ave.) that serves downtown Shreveport. If the I-49 Inner City Connector is ever built, though, that interchange will undoubtledly be converted to a full stack.

Also, if I-49 South is ever built through Lafayette, the ultimate plan is to convert the existing full cloverleaf interchange between I-10 and I-49/US 167 to a fully directional stack...though from the plans I've seen, it won't be a true Maltese Cross stack but something more like the Texas stacks (but only 4 levels and w/o frontage roads).  Also, fully directional 3-way interchanges would be built for connections to I-310 and the Westbank Expressway....if they ever get to upgrading US 90 to I-49 in the next millenium.  :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:


Anthony
Logged

WNYroadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 369
  • Age: 28
  • Last Login: October 19, 2018, 12:27:29 AM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #19 on: October 01, 2010, 12:49:08 AM »

Logged

UptownRoadGeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 551
  • Location: 2957′53″N 904′14″W
  • Last Login: September 29, 2018, 01:38:04 PM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #20 on: October 02, 2010, 01:08:15 AM »

There are also these 3-way directional interchanges:

I-10/I-110 and I-10/I-12 "Splits" in Baton Rouge
I-10/I-310 west of Kenner
I-10/I-210 (both ends) in Lake Charles
I-20/I-220 east end near Bossier City

Don't forget I-10/I-510 and I-10/US 90Z
Logged

national highway 1

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1670
  • From Down Under

  • Age: 21
  • Location: Carlingford, NSW, Australia
  • Last Login: October 19, 2018, 07:53:38 PM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #21 on: October 02, 2010, 07:30:20 PM »

Don't forget I-10/I-510 and I-10/US 90Z
What's US 90Z?
Logged
"Set up road signs; put up guideposts. Take note of the highway, the road that you take." Jeremiah 31:21

UptownRoadGeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 551
  • Location: 2957′53″N 904′14″W
  • Last Login: September 29, 2018, 01:38:04 PM
Logged

Revive 755

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Last Login: October 17, 2018, 10:16:41 PM
Re: Stack interchange design chronology/history
« Reply #23 on: October 04, 2010, 11:07:47 PM »

I-55/70 and I-255 (only downstate one I know of)

Maybe I use a different standard, but I-55/70 at I-255 is more of a sprawling two level design:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=38.673633,-90.029354&spn=0.012732,0.041199&t=k&z=16

If IDOT had wanted to, they could have gone for a mutant stack had the IL 3 and Tudor ramps been put in closer proximity than they were in the PSB complex:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=38.6163,-90.16825&spn=0.006371,0.020599&t=k&z=17
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.