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.
Location: northern Vermont - previously NM, WA, & MA
10,749 posts, read 23,813,296 times
Reputation: 14660
Advertisements
Houston is carving out its 3rd beltway loop around the city (Texas State Highway 99 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). But it seems more of an anomaly as it has the land, resources, private enterprise, and proper political backing to do such an undertaking.
Atlanta can't manage to do a second beltway, or even a partial one in the congested northern burbs, where I'd say it would be most beneficial as a bypass route. Though these new freeways tend to spawn more new suburban sprawl, simply creating new congestion.
Seattle could really benefit from a new eastern arc freeway bypassing the I-5 & 405 congestion. It would be a difficult undertaking with the mountainous topography, environmental impact, and NIMBY opposition.
Are there any metros besides Houston that are building new beltways, spurs, or bypass routes or is transportation planning going a different direction? Are we in a lull between freeway building and new forms of transportation corridors? Many metro areas are boxed in with development with no more room for new freeways. What direction are American cities heading with road building and other new or upgraded forms of transportation corridors in the 2020's?
Last edited by Champ le monstre du lac; 02-16-2015 at 01:52 PM..
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
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
How exactly do you "carve up" a city with something that goes around it?
By the way, I wholeheartedly agree that there should be more investment in public transit, but letting highway infrastructure rot is not the way to do it. And while I understand that the United States let its rail infrastructure rot for several decades, I also understand that two wrongs don't make a right. We deserve both modern public transit and modern highways. The "invest in every mode of transportation except highways" contingency is just as clueless as the "invest in highways only" contingency.
Birmingham, AL is (kind of, sort of, maybe) in the process of completing it's FIRST loop. Lots of controversy, because detractors have a strong point that traffic levels don't really support building it, and that it's really just a boondoggle for developers. The north side folks have felt left out for 30+ years as the south side boomed and grew around the southern part of the loop (459). They want theirs, too.
Location: The Greatest city on Earth: City of Atlanta Proper
8,485 posts, read 14,994,819 times
Reputation: 7333
I can't speak for other cities, but in Atlanta (contrary to popular belief) there is no political will to build new highways of any sort. A little known fact is that in Atlanta the highways were only partially built. There were mass revolts by neighborhood groups in Atlanta proper when the second phase of highway construction in the 1970s due to the negative effect the original highway had on the city. They were successful in getting the projects killed and since then there has only been one new high built in the metro (lots of widening though) and that was only because it included a MARTA rail line in the middle of it.
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.
Both Charlotte and Raleigh continue to build their loops that have been under construction for decades.
Charlotte's I-485 is almost complete with 59 miles of its planned 67 miles. For Charlotte, it's the first real loop around the greater city, save for the urban loop around its very core.
Raleigh's 540 Outer Loop is part I-540 and part toll road: NC540 and has 42 of its planned 68 mile route completed. It is often referred to as the Outer Loop to distinguish itself from Raleigh's Beltline which is part I-40 and part I-440 and jointly runs ~24 miles around the older part of the city and establishes the common local nomenclature: Inside the Beltline or ITB. A new Interstate spur is being established as US-64 running east out of Raleigh is re-designated as I-495 between I-440 and I-95.
Houston is carving out its 3rd beltway loop around the city (Texas State Highway 99 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia). But it seems more of an anomaly as it has the land, resources, private enterprise, and proper political backing to do such an undertaking.
Atlanta can't manage to do a second beltway, or even a partial one in the congested northern burbs, where I'd say it would be most beneficial as a bypass route. Though these new freeways tend to spawn more new suburban sprawl, simply creating new congestion.
Seattle could really benefit from a new eastern arc freeway bypassing the I-5 & 405 congestion. It would be a difficult undertaking with the mountainous topography, environmental impact, and NIMBY opposition.
Are there any metros besides Houston that are building new beltways, spurs, or bypass routes or is transportation planning going a different direction? Are we in a lull between freeway building and new forms of transportation corridors? Many metro areas are boxed in with development with no more room for new freeways. What direction are American cities heading with road building and other new or upgraded forms of transportation corridors in the 2020's?
One thing though, the freeway expansion isn't really a new project for Houston; its been envisioned for decades.
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.
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.
