Road projects that didn't meet your expectations

[twinsfan87]

A couple from the North Metro

To access the new segment of MN-610 from SB CSAH 81, you need to go through the stoplight at Elm Creek Blvd. The whole point of having the freeway is so that you can avoid all the stoplights on 81.

Further along 81, at the Triangle reconstruction there is no direct connection from SB 81 to SB 169. You need to make a signal-controlled left turn on 85th. Given that one of the goals of the project was to facilitate these SB-SB and NB-NB movements without affecting EW traffic on 85th, this is disappointing.

I think that they are expecting a lot of the SB CSAH 81-to-SB US 169 traffic to use MN 610 now, but I agree with you that they could've done something different to accommodate those major movements. The SB 169-to-SB CSAH 81 ramp is really nice though!

I also really wish that when Mn/DOT reconstructed MN 100 they would have built a 6-lane freeway from CSAH 81 to I-694 instead of the 4-lane freeway. The 4-lane section definitely backs up a lot more than the 6-lane portions in the morning/evening! So frustrating!

[on_wisconsin]

The WIS 26 -Ft. Atkinson bypass, the connection with USH 12 is just a simple diamond, not remotely what will be needed once the connection with the Whitewater bypass is built. 

[Scott5114]

Grand Avenue Great Streets project, St. Louis MO
* Another traffic screwing, lane reduction project that has attempted to make St. Louis as pleasant to drive as Chicago.

Were your expectations different? If you want a pleasant drive, stay out of the city.

Oklahoma City is usually quite pleasant to drive in. Just because it is a city, it does not follow that it must necessarily be difficult to drive in.

[vtk]

Roberts Rd in western Franklin County, OH, has a couple of projects gone awry.  First, a bit of backstory.  Roberts Rd is a relatively direct route from the Lake Darby community to the south end of Hilliard, where it meets I-270.  The road has historically been underappreciated by the county Engineer's Office.  It remained a gravel road into the 70s, later than many other county roads nearby.  Roberts Rd is and always has been stop-controlled at every north-south crossroad (where signals weren't installed yet).  To continue on Roberts Rd requires jogging left at Walker Rd and, until recently, Alton & Darby Creek Rd.  The intersection with Amiity Rd used to have a high accident rate, due to the odd angle and many dump trucks on Amity Rd that don't have to stop.

The first messed up project (within my personal memory) was to improve safety at Amity Rd.  It was obvious to most of us that simply making it a 4-way stop would be sufficient. FCEO decided to fix the angle instead, by realigning Roberts Rd with a bit of an S-curve.  Amity Rd traffic still doesn't have to stop, though the dump trucks are gone.  The problem now is the shoulders drain poorly, and some people fail to negotiate the new curve. I once had an episode involving black ice, in which I barely managed to stay on the road, rolling through the stop in the endeavour.

More recently, they removed the jog at Alton & Darby Creek Rd. Hilliard annexed the northern of the two intersections in 2008, along with a whole lot of farmland that was to be developed.  Then the housing market crashed, so most of that development hasn't happened.  But the plans included a relocated Roberts Rd, which got built this summer.  There are a few things wrong with what they actually built, though.  First of all, the speed limit on the new Roberts Rd (and a portion of it that was rebuilt in place) is 35 MPH, compared to 50 MPH to the east and 55 MPH to the west.  Though FCEO was the lead agency on this project, it smacks of Hilliard design interference.  Secondly, the new roadway simply ends at a T with the old alignment, so through traffic on Roberts Rd still has to make a turn.  It's yield-controlled, so through traffic doesn't have to stop in either direction, but one of these days a student on the way to Bradley High School is going to run through the yield and smash into a westbound car coming off Old Roberts Rd...  Older versions of Hilliard's master plan indicated a larger Roberts Rd relocation project, with a new-alignment roadway connecting Roberts Rd west of Walker Rd directly to Roberts Rd east of Alton & Darby Creek Rd.  Theoretically what was built this summer could be part of that larger plan, but I don't think that's very likely.  [View this realignment on OpenStreetMap]



Perhaps more relevant to non-locals is a recent project on I-270 on the south side of Columbus.  The bridges over the Scioto River have for decades been two lanes each way, which I always thought was really dumb considering I-270 has 2+2=2 merge conditions coming out of its interchanges with both I-71 and US 23 heading for the bridges.  I heard last year that ODOT was going to widen the Scioto River bridges to accommodate 4 lanes each way plus full breakdown lanes on both sides, though only 3 lanes would be used in the immediate future.  The project apparently finished a couple of weeks ago.  Sure enough, the Scioto River bridges were widened enough to accommodate 4 lanes each way plus breakdown lanes on either side.  And that's all – no widening of anything else.  I-270 itself is still only two lanes each way between I-71 and US 23, and the smaller bridges off either end of the main Scioto River bridges are still just wide enough for two lanes and a breakdown lane.  There's no sign of any more work happening in this construction season.  Maybe next year?  Anyway, I feel like illustrating this...

First-built configuration:


How I think it should be improved:


How I thought they were going to fix it this year:


What they actually did this year:

[Revive 755]

Grand Avenue Great Streets project, St. Louis MO
* Another traffic screwing, lane reduction project that has attempted to make St. Louis as pleasant to drive as Chicago.

Were your expectations different? If you want a pleasant drive, stay out of the city.

I at least expect to be able to make a right turn onto the street easily in the off peak hours; the reduced lane design has queuing that can make such turns problematic.

And there are streets in St. Louis that were more pleasant (but may have since been subject to similar traffic screwing projects) but are not suburban in nature, with examples such as Jefferson Avenue, Forest Park Avenue, and Hampton Avenue

[mgk920]

The WIS 26 -Ft. Atkinson bypass, the connection with USH 12 is just a simple diamond, not remotely what will be needed once the connection with the Whitewater bypass is built. 

My crystal ball still shows that a high-powered trumpet interchange, favoring a US 12 through movement to a new-ROW freeway running northwestward from there, by that WI 26 curve SW of that interchange will ultimately be needed once US 12 'grows up'.  At least major upgrades on those lines are in the current 'awaiting funding' hopper at the south end of Fort Atkinson for when the US 12 east bypass is built to Whitewater.

My big disappointments in Wisconsin?

-The WI 11 Janesville bypass (an at-grade 90 degree intersection turn at its west end?)
-The US 12 non-freeway connection between I-90/94 and the new US 12 freeway to the south at Lake Delton (Wisconsin Dells)
-The I-39/90/94 split near Portage ('Cascade Interchange').  There is no safe and legal way for non-motorized traffic to easily cross I-90/94 there and it includes several nasty 'left entrance/exit' situations on its I-39 leg.

Mike

[apete2]

In Rochester, Jefferson Rd (NY252) widening. 3 mainline lanes each direction from I390 until almost the Marketplace mall. For some reason they ended the project just before the 5 lane intersection with Hylan Dr and NY15, so lanes go from 4 -> 2 and then back to 5 in less than 1/2 mile. They could have at least extended the third lane to feed the double left for Hylan Dr, since the mall and Wegmans plaza are major traffic generators.

http://maps.google.com/?ll=43.08681,-77.626884&spn=0.003816,0.009645&hnear=Rochester,+Monroe,+New+York&t=h&z=17&vpsrc=6

Also the NY15A rebuild near Monroe Community College. Aux lanes were added between 390 and Crittenden to bring to 8 total, but still only 4 mainline lanes near MCC, where turning traffic backs up. Really could have used 6 lanes.

http://maps.google.com/?ll=43.105871,-77.613655&spn=0.003815,0.009645&hnear=Rochester,+Monroe,+New+York&t=h&z=17&vpsrc=6

[D-Dey65]

I just thought of another one last night. Florida DOT recently had a reconstruction project on I-75 between Exit 274(I-275) and 279(Florida SR 54). This was supposed to include the widening of I-75 north of Florida SR 56, and a northbound collector-distributor road to prevent weaving between I-275 and SR 56. Besides the fact that it should've also included a southbound C-D road, the exit number for SR 56 was kept as Exit I-275 at all three points, when it should've been been Exit 274 northbound on I-75 and Exit 60 in I-275. But the worst thing about it is, they never widened I-75 between SR's 56 and 54.

[triplemultiplex]

The EB US 10/45 split in by Winchester, WI.
US 45 exits off of US 10 as a single lane that immediately goes to two lanes.  I would like to have seen a couple hundred meters of axillary lane before the split so the right lane EB becomes either/or, thus making that exit nicer.

The ~2000 rebuild of the Northwest Interchange (US 41/45 & WI 145) in Milwaukee and the loss of the 3rd SB lane on 41/45.  Might have been reasonable if WI 145 actually went somewhere instead of being the dead end spur it is.

[wytout]

I can honestly say that any projects that have recently taken place in CT have met or exceeded my expectations.  Reason being:  My expectations of highway planning are so low in this state that doing nothing at all would likely meet my expectations.

[mgk920]

The EB US 10/45 split in by Winchester, WI.
US 45 exits off of US 10 as a single lane that immediately goes to two lanes.  I would like to have seen a couple hundred meters of axillary lane before the split so the right lane EB becomes either/or, thus making that exit nicer.

I have always thought that diverge to be a bit odd.  I am also somewhat disappointed in what I consider to be poor engineering geometrics on the NB US 45 flyover in that one.

I call that the 'Winchester' interchange.

The ~2000 rebuild of the Northwest Interchange (US 41/45 & WI 145) in Milwaukee and the loss of the 3rd SB lane on 41/45.  Might have been reasonable if WI 145 actually went somewhere instead of being the dead end spur it is.

That's called the 'Granville' interchange (that section of Milwaukee was all Granville Township before it was annexed into the city in 1956).

Mike

[roadman65]

I-4 to John Young Parkway flyover could have been done differently.  Now you have weaving to get into the SB Lanes of JYP off the flyover merge with SB JYP having to weave as well to get into the turn lanes for LB McCleod.  Only from I-4 WB to LB McCleod the project works, that is why it was done in the first place.  Most WB I-4 motorists exiting at John Young Parkway head for WB LB McCleod, so FDOT made that flyover like they did there.  SB John Young from the ramp is supposed to get into the left lane with NB John Young Traffic, and then turn right at the signal, but most cars and trucks are not doing that.  Hence the weave!  I think it might of been better to build a flyover directly onto LB McCleod where I-4 and McCleod run parallel and use LB McCleod as the connector to JYP.  Then the LB McCleod bound traffic would be where they need to be and better traffic control at the John Young Parkway and LB McCleod Intersection.

I-4 to FL 408 was done poorly, as back ups still occur from EB I-4 to FL 408 (most of the problem through here).  Only from FL 408 to EB I-4 was only done and even though that was needed, the former was more needed. 

[D-Dey65]

I just thought of another one; The new US 19-98 bridge over the Cross Florida Barge Canal in Red Level, Florida. The newer bridges are lower, and I'm not complaining about that. My problem is frontage roads on both sides of the canal don't loop underneath the bridge, and don't have connecting exit and entrance ramps, like for example the Robert Moses Causeway Drawbridge on Captree Island.

[DeaconG]

I-4 to John Young Parkway flyover could have been done differently.  Now you have weaving to get into the SB Lanes of JYP off the flyover merge with SB JYP having to weave as well to get into the turn lanes for LB McCleod.  Only from I-4 WB to LB McCleod the project works, that is why it was done in the first place.  Most WB I-4 motorists exiting at John Young Parkway head for WB LB McCleod, so FDOT made that flyover like they did there.  SB John Young from the ramp is supposed to get into the left lane with NB John Young Traffic, and then turn right at the signal, but most cars and trucks are not doing that.  Hence the weave!  I think it might of been better to build a flyover directly onto LB McCleod where I-4 and McCleod run parallel and use LB McCleod as the connector to JYP.  Then the LB McCleod bound traffic would be where they need to be and better traffic control at the John Young Parkway and LB McCleod Intersection.

I-4 to FL 408 was done poorly, as back ups still occur from EB I-4 to FL 408 (most of the problem through here).  Only from FL 408 to EB I-4 was only done and even though that was needed, the former was more needed. 

The I-4/FL 408 interchange isn't done yet.  There are plans in place to complete the interchange to eliminate the trumpet but that requires money they currently don't have and aren't expected to have before 2013. (And yes, it does suck-they need to lose that trumpet badly).

Here's what they have planned, per the Central Florida Roads website:

http://www.cflroads.com/Project/Details/30/242484_4_I_4_from_West_of_Orange_Blossom_Trail_to_Ivanhoe_Boulevard

You may want to click on the SR408 PDF to see the build out of what was known a couple of years ago as the Ultimate I-4/SR 408 Interchange:

http://www.cflroads.com/Asset/File/50/SR408.pdf

[SteveG1988]

On CR 537 they replaced the bridge over crosswicks creek with a brand new all concrete span, instead of one with wood piers...problem is when they were done with it they never properly repaved the approaches to the span, leaving it a rather wobbly texture.

They temporarialy moved the traffic over to a bailey bridge off the center line.

It is not easily visible on google street view, but the pavement going upto the short bridge is fairly wobbly feeling.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=new+egypt+nj&ll=40.085271,-74.538551&spn=0.002216,0.003449&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&hnear=New+Egypt,+Ocean,+New+Jersey&gl=us&t=h&z=18&vpsrc=6&layer=c&cbll=40.085317,-74.538437&panoid=2Dylqemzs09-cBKc7xmEoA&cbp=12,238.59,,0,17.64

[Lyle]

U.S. 1 in Florida between Homestead and Key Largo. Definitely should have been two lanes in each direction all the way.

[ShawnP]

KC Icon--250 million dollars and still a high speed left hand exit at the Paseo. Had their once in a lifetime chance and cheaped it. People would have understood a extra 10 million or so to eliminate that traffic hazard.

3 Trails Crossing--Not as bad as the KC Icon but still left a left hand exit at 71 North. MODOT your'e supposed to get rid of these flaws instead of rebuilding them.

[Mdcastle]

U.S. 1 in Florida between Homestead and Key Largo. Definitely should have been two lanes in each direction all the way.

This was one of my least favorite roads I've been on. (I was on it on a Thursday night). I kept thinking "when are they going to upgrade this to 4 lanes?".It reminded me of London Road in Duluth, another two lane stretch of road connecting two four lane stretches heading to a resort area, and with traffic on your tail that wants to speed. I took Card Sound Road on the way back.

Mn/DOT seems to waffle between doing things right (the Wakota Bridge) and doing things half baked (the MN 13 interchange in Savage) based on politics and funding.

[Coelacanth]

doing things right (the Wakota Bridge)

These are two phrases I'm not accustomed to seeing in the same sentence.

[triplemultiplex]

doing things right (the Wakota Bridge)

These are two phrases I'm not accustomed to seeing in the same sentence.

Well it was the contractor that messed up on that one, not MNDOT.

[ftballfan]

doing things right (the Wakota Bridge)

These are two phrases I'm not accustomed to seeing in the same sentence.

Well it was the contractor that messed up on that one, not MNDOT.

It widened I-494 from four lanes all the way to 10.

[Mdcastle]

^^^ Yes, I was referring to the project conceptionally, not the implementation. All the drama and miscues are in the past and now we have a 10 lane bridge as well as an obvious gap in the freeway system filled in. Although the boneheaded concept everyone likes to jump on, putting traffic signals on US 169 in Bloomington, wasn't Mn/DOTs doing.

Probably the worst current projects conceptionally are being done with suboptimal designs due to budgets rather than waiting until the money is available, I-694/US 10/MN 51 and the already mentioned MN 13 "half an interchange".