U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [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 02-18-2015, 09:28 PM
 
Location: M I N N E S O T A
14,800 posts, read 17,705,729 times
Reputation: 9029

Advertisements

Sort of recently built beltways....

355 outside of Chicago
840 way outside of Nashville goes almost halfway around Nashville
269/385 outside of Memphis... still under construction.
65/5 South and East of Des Moines.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-18-2015, 09:32 PM
 
Location: M I N N E S O T A
14,800 posts, read 17,705,729 times
Reputation: 9029
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
In areas with little population growth, there's not much need for new beltways.
True but I wonder what the deal is with Albuquerque
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2015, 10:51 AM
 
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
9,422 posts, read 18,316,727 times
Reputation: 11902
Quote:
Originally Posted by iNviNciBL3 View Post
True but I wonder what the deal is with Albuquerque
Any recent growth or projected future growth would be on the West Side and Rio Rancho. There has been talk of a 1/4 arc freeway to connect I-25 north of Bernalillo and I-40 west of Albuquerque. Some small stubs and 1st phase sections have been built in Rio Rancho near US 550 (Paseo del Volcan). Compared with most metros in the Western US, growth around here is not very robust. West Side freeway connections are a long way from completion and still in the talking and proposals stages.

Lawmakers push ABQ-Rio Rancho highway plans forward | KRQE News 13

There has also been some discussion of a southern arc as a bypass relief for I-40 since its such a busy cross country shipping route for trucks. Kirtland AFB and all the land around it owned by the Feds seems to hinder that route. It seems a logical route as ABQ could use a bypass but I don't see it happening. Even if neither proposal got built I think ABQ will be fine with just the two interstates and the existing Paseo del Norte freeway (NM 423) connection to the West Side.

Last edited by Desert_SW_77; 02-19-2015 at 11:35 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2015, 02:15 PM
 
Location: Denver, Colorado U.S.A.
14,174 posts, read 23,274,499 times
Reputation: 10428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kar54 View Post
In Colorado Springs, the west side is pinned in by the mountains, the Air Force Academy northwest and Ft Carson southwest. Therefore the city grew primarily north and east. Years ago, Nevada Avenue, the first major multilane street east of the downtown core was called the "I-25 Bypass". Academy Blvd, a few miles east of Nevada was considered for reconstruction as a beltway in the 1960's. Never happened. Then Powers Blvd a few miles further east was going to be developed as a beltway (some areas even have overpasses with ramps designed to accommodate) in the late 1990's. Never happened. That leaves another road, a few miles further east, Marksheffel. That will never happen either. It's come down to funding. Neither the city or state can afford it and the feds are never going to chip in. I think this city will be one of the largest in the country without a major "freeway system". There's one freeway, I-25, running north/south for a metro area of almost 700,000. I think in our case, beltways and spurs will indeed be a thing of the past. Too late.
And it's rather a PITA to get around the Springs due to the lack of freeways. An eastern loop (or half loop) would have really helped.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2015, 02:22 PM
 
Location: Denver, Colorado U.S.A.
14,174 posts, read 23,274,499 times
Reputation: 10428
Denver's 470 loop is somewhat of a failure IMO. I occasionally use the eastern section of the 470 when traffic up the 25 and 225 is solid jammed, but it costs something like $6.50 one way No wonder there's never any heavy traffic on it. The northern side of the loop is the same way... high tolls and little traffic. The southwestern section is not tolled, but it's only 2 lanes in each direction, so jammed up all the time. And then there's a little section in the NW of the metro area that was never completed - due to NIMBYs, from what I've heard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2015, 06:21 AM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC
1,658 posts, read 1,860,106 times
Reputation: 1478
Quote:
Originally Posted by TyBrGr View Post
roads are not something the US needs more of. Cities should invest in public transit, but of course republicans don't do that because they benefit more from suburban sprawl. DC is a perfect model. They fought off carving the city up with beltways & built a subway system instead, which has made the city & its suburbans very urban. DC still has a lot of sprawl, but it would be much much worse if metro was never built
I'd argue to the contrary with how DC's freeways were constructed. By blocking freeways from being built through the city, all car traffic was forced to crowd onto what is the current beltway. Just looking at the map you can see why it's a disaster. 95 and 66 were blocked from intersecting inside the beltway. DC is a massive metro with no east-west nor north-south freeway going through it. Only the beltway. So it will be forever and frustrating and congested mess.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2015, 09:11 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,983 posts, read 41,929,314 times
Reputation: 14804
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeusAV View Post
I'd argue to the contrary with how DC's freeways were constructed. By blocking freeways from being built through the city, all car traffic was forced to crowd onto what is the current beltway. Just looking at the map you can see why it's a disaster. 95 and 66 were blocked from intersecting inside the beltway. DC is a massive metro with no east-west nor north-south freeway going through it. Only the beltway. So it will be forever and frustrating and congested mess.
But it makes more sense to through traffic around rather through a congested center city. Maybe the beltway just needs more lanes. I-695 almost goes through the city, it's mainly north-south that's blocked.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2015, 10:17 AM
 
2,289 posts, read 1,294,216 times
Reputation: 1520
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kar54 View Post
It's come down to funding. Neither the city or state can afford it and the feds are never going to chip in.
I understand that the Great Depression was a period of doldrums. For example, little new housing was built then. (Yes, I'm aware that there some prestige projects, as I call them).

This so called Great Recession is quite different from the prosperous 1950s, when the interstate highway system took off.

Last edited by Tim Randal Walker; 02-20-2015 at 10:43 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2015, 06:18 PM
 
12,289 posts, read 15,184,803 times
Reputation: 8100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tim Randal Walker View Post
I understand that the Great Depression was a period of doldrums. For example, little new housing was built then. (Yes, I'm aware that there some prestige projects, as I call them).

This so called Great Recession is quite different from the prosperous 1950s, when the interstate highway system took off.
There was an attempt to stimulate the economy a few years back with public works. After unemployment eased, there was little interest in such projects. However, the need for infrastructure investment remains.

Many highways and transit lines were inadequate to begin with, and now age is taking its toll.

Last edited by pvande55; 02-20-2015 at 06:20 PM.. Reason: Add reasoning
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2015, 07:06 PM
 
2,941 posts, read 3,856,857 times
Reputation: 1439
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
But it makes more sense to through traffic around rather through a congested center city. Maybe the beltway just needs more lanes. I-695 almost goes through the city, it's mainly north-south that's blocked.
Not really some traffic is going to said center but using the beltway and other traffic is not. The smart move is to have both so that traffic can sort itself.
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:

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 > General Forums > Urban Planning
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 · Bug Bounty

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