U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-06-2015, 02:28 PM
 
Location: ATL -> HOU -> DAL
4,365 posts, read 3,521,550 times
Reputation: 3475

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gulch View Post
C-D lanes as far north as the Spalding Drive bridge and a rebuilding of the Abernathy Road interchange.

Project Layout Map (PI 721850-)
Great. That will help a ton in the mornings NB.
Of course, by the time this even starts I probably won't need it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-06-2015, 03:03 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
6,547 posts, read 7,627,702 times
Reputation: 4361
Quote:
Originally Posted by cqholt View Post
Good, that interchange could use a DDI.
I really like the DDI's. They are clever.

I wish the state would build all new overpasses with a DDI, even if they were smaller with fewer lanes. I've noticed that are sticking with traditional overpasses at new sites.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2015, 04:01 PM
 
Location: Kirkwood
23,211 posts, read 17,414,202 times
Reputation: 5365
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwkimbro View Post
I really like the DDI's. They are clever.

I wish the state would build all new overpasses with a DDI, even if they were smaller with fewer lanes. I've noticed that are sticking with traditional overpasses at new sites.
Cheaper
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-06-2015, 06:38 PM
 
1,944 posts, read 2,217,970 times
Reputation: 1446
Lol, there will be waaay more vehicles than those renderings show
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2015, 10:44 AM
 
22 posts, read 18,031 times
Reputation: 16
can we just have a new i-385..and keep a i-485 in mind ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2015, 11:03 AM
 
5,102 posts, read 5,959,443 times
Reputation: 3116
Quote:
can we just have a new i-385..and keep a i-485 in mind ?
Odd number 3 digit interstates are designated for spurs or other non beltway roads.

There already is a 485.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2015, 11:42 AM
 
Location: Georgia
1,462 posts, read 1,419,788 times
Reputation: 1092
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeP View Post
Odd number 3 digit interstates are designated for spurs or other non beltway roads.

There already is a 485.
Not in Georgia. We could have a 485 if we wanted to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2015, 11:43 AM
 
Location: North Atlanta
5,396 posts, read 3,795,633 times
Reputation: 2952
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeP View Post
Odd number 3 digit interstates are designated for spurs or other non beltway roads.

There already is a 485.
You could have a I-485 in Georgia (the other I-485 is in another state), though if GDOT were to resurrect the old 1960s plans for it, the Eastside neighborhoods would be...less than thrilled.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2015, 02:51 PM
bu2
 
9,874 posts, read 6,356,626 times
Reputation: 4117
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwkimbro View Post
I really like the DDI's. They are clever.

I wish the state would build all new overpasses with a DDI, even if they were smaller with fewer lanes. I've noticed that are sticking with traditional overpasses at new sites.
I'm not sold. Its fairly confusing. The proof, of course, is what it does to speeding people through. They are designed for intersections with very heavy left turn traffic. If you don't have a lot of left turns its ridiculous to make everyone cross twice. They don't work in all situations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-08-2015, 03:29 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
6,547 posts, read 7,627,702 times
Reputation: 4361
Quote:
Originally Posted by bu2 View Post
I'm not sold. Its fairly confusing. The proof, of course, is what it does to speeding people through. They are designed for intersections with very heavy left turn traffic. If you don't have a lot of left turns its ridiculous to make everyone cross twice. They don't work in all situations.
agree and disagree. They state GDOT does look at how many people turn and they have these standards in place.

The thing is just about every freeway crossing with an interchange has this or the likely growth potential.

I'm not worried about them being confusing. The public has adjusted to them fairly well. The more common they are, the more in the public will know of them.

The real reason I'm sold is simply they increase efficiency and capacity with limited cost. It is using the light-timings more efficiently a majority of the time. There are few interchanges that don't benefit from having a two-cycle light sequence where cars can turn at the same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top