What is everyone's thoughts on the new configuration coming from 10 East to 95 North or South? I have to go from 10 to 95 North to downtown for my work everyday. Both times I have used the new lanes, someone has almost killed me. I still see idiots coming from 17 trying to bulldoze their way over lanes to get to the 95 South lanes, but what they don't realize is they have their own 95 South exit if they keep going straight. There should be no reason why anyone coming from 17 needs to move over any lanes. Someone nearly wiped me out today as I was on the new flyover heading to 95 North and they darted over to the right trying to ge to 17's 95 South exit. Please tell me it will get better. Please tell em people will actually start reading sings and following the arrows. I drive white knuckled through this junction now.
I have a lot of people in my office use that interchange, and every last one of them yesterday was surprised at the lane re-alignment. As if there hasn't been construction there for the last x-number of years. It's a lack of common sense, a lack of paying attention, and a lack of caring, IMO.
Anyway, I sympathize with you on this. It's not hard to read signs and figure out what's going on if you're A) paying attention, B) give a damn, and C) have an ounce or three of common sense.
Unfortunately, my almost 10 years living here have reinforced the fact that indeed, no one knows how to drive in this town. :D
I have the same route as you, 17 to 10 to 95N and I absolutely love it. Unfortunately, with all of the traffic that is getting bottlenecked trying to go 95S, it's going to be a CF for a while. I sense that there will be FHP sitting in the merge lanes in the next few days to try and hinder some of the jack-offs that are cuttting across the merge lane because they don't want to wait in line.
Those poeple and the ones who are too busy doing everything else but drive are the reason that you're having to drive with white-knuckles. Once they start writing tickets, and everyone is 'aware' of the new traffic pattern, I think all will be well. I'm actually excited for once about the construction in this area, it appears, so far, that we might have decent flow - and other options for heading downtown and to riverside.
In the interchange area from left to right, seven lanes; Lanes 1 and 2 are I-95 South; Lanes 3,4,5 are I-95 North; Lane 6 is I-95 South (perferably for those coming off US-17, and Stockton St.) Lane 7 is Stockton exit. Bottom line is that the middle lanes (3,4,5) are I-95 North, and the side lanes minus Stockton's exit (1,2,6) are I-95 South That's how I break it down.
I drove the interchange Saturday. Coming EB from I-10 to NB I-95 very easy, if you just read a freaking sign. It amazes me how stupid people are. If you can't read a sign or follow road striping then maybe you shouldn't be driving!!!
It is easier to grasp while driving with cell phone off.....................
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on July 27, 2010, 09:27:08 AM
I have the same route as you, 17 to 10 to 95N and I absolutely love it. Unfortunately, with all of the traffic that is getting bottlenecked trying to go 95S, it's going to be a CF for a while. I sense that there will be FHP sitting in the merge lanes in the next few days to try and hinder some of the jack-offs that are cutting across the merge lane because they don't want to wait in line.
Me too in that route. Every day, up 17, 10, 95N, exit on Union. I think it's MUCH easier in the new format. I don't have to fight across 3 lanes anymore. And honestly, since there are ramps for NORTHBOUND traffic on both sides of the 10 now, there's no excuse to miss it.
FHP being present will only slow things down because folks will think there's a wreck or something. So they wouldn't pay attention to signage anyway.
The San Marco exit off 95 south has been pretty busy these past few days from people doing u-turns to get back onto 95 north.
Given how they've flipped the onramps to I-10 & I 95 N & S at two major junctions around town ( 95N/10W over the Fuller Warren and 295 & 95 at the southern end) I can understand how people would think the exits have been flipped around.
The mobile D.O.T sign on the Roosevelt expressway probably isn't enough warning for some people. I read about the changes for months in advance but it's such a routine driving that route it caught me off guard for a second. None of that justifies cutting someone off at the last minute though. It's just new, everyone will adapt.
I feel there is nothing wrong with the new interchange. It is tons better than what we had ten years ago. It will just take some getting used to. Alot of people in Jacksonville hate change, so we'll probably here complaints about it until everything completely finished and everyone has had time to adapt.
Quote from: David on July 27, 2010, 10:39:10 AM
The mobile D.O.T sign on the Roosevelt expressway probably isn't enough warning for some people.
How about the 15' x 40' sign over the interstate? ??? I guess I expect too much from other people on the way to work, I mean, paying attention and all. The e-mail will still be at the office when you get there. That funny text that you have to send could probably wait until you're walking from the parking lot. Make-up, really!
I'm ranting again, but I happen to fall in that small catagory of people who listen to music while driving. I don't drive too much over the speed limit. I move over for faster cars. I won't jap you while lanes merge, 1 for 1, if I push it too far, then I take the next exit and double-back. I don't like stress while I'm on the road.
I have to put what my hubby said this morning about it:QuoteThis makes us look like a bigger city now!
It makes merging from Roosevelt to 95-s a nightmare.
US 17 to 95S has its own lane that you never have to leave, supposedly. No need to cross 4 lanes.
Quote from: Doctor_K on July 27, 2010, 11:59:22 AM
US 17 to 95S has its own lane that you never have to leave, supposedly. No need to cross 4 lanes.
Yep, stay all the way right on 17. I don't think there is signage there now to convey that though, which is a problem. Once people figure out how it all works it will get better.
There are basically 95S exits on both sides of 10.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on July 27, 2010, 11:40:01 AM
How about the 15' x 40' sign over the interstate? ???
Who pays attention to the overhead signs when you've driven the same route for the billonth time!
People are creatues of habit, so driving in that area is going to be jacked up for a few weeks probably. Plus how often do you see two exits for the 95 south on opposite sides of the interstate?
No one should cut anyone off because of this but seeing your normal exit at first glance clear across the highway can cause a bit of a temporary freakout. But I just keep cruising and turn around. I'm not calling 1800 ax Gary.
Quote from: David on July 27, 2010, 12:40:24 PM
I'm not calling 1800 ax Gary.
Ya'll know who this is. This is Roz. :D
Used to make this drive (17-10-95S) everyday to school and have been following it. It seems to me that the new configuration is simply wonderful :)
7 lanes across! We are getting some wide highways, heh. I still think that 95 needs to be widened to at least 4 continuous lanes from Phillips to Southside as 3 lanes is not cutting it on a fairly busy section of highway through a major city.
Lastly, people in Jax are simply not used to wide highways and really large interchanges. Living in a bigger city like Atlanta or Houston for a while will make Jax driving seem like a breeze, but once the roadwork is complete, signs are up, and people are used to the new configuration, it will ultimately be one of the best interchanges anyone can ask for me thinks.
For years now people coming East on I-10 who work at BCBS or Fidelity, St. Joe, etc. have exited at Stockton, turned left on Gilmore, Ernest, Dellwood or Myra to College Street, under I-95 and right on Roselle to Riverside Ave to get to work.
HEY FOLKS! There is now an exit at Forrest Street that will take you right on to Riverside without cutting through our neighborhood. Much faster and smoother. Try it!
Same route coming to 5 Point from the west. Get off at Forrest, turn right on Park.
My first trek form I-10 heading to I-95 north I ended up inadvertently going over the Fuller Warren.
I knew about the change, but I didn't know they were going to close the other ramp. I don't think people are stupid necessarily, but creatures of habit. There were about fifty cars with me making the U-turn by Baptist to head back. I agree the signs are easy to read, and the interchange makes good sense.
I get on I-10 at the Stockton ramp and take I-95 S to the Southside. Ever since the new traffic pattern, it has been incredibly slow going across the Fuller Warren. Even at 7AM on Monday morning it was bad. I've just been taking College St. under the interstate, hopping over the Acosta and joining up with 95 from there lately. It might not save any time but it beats the stop-n-go traffic. Anyone else noticing the same thing? To me it doesn't look like something that's going to change, which sucks. There are just too many merges when both of the I-10 to I-95 sections merge and people getting on I-95 at the Park St. ramp. Damn transportation engineers...
When coming from the 17 expressway there's not much signage that indicates you need to stay right to get on 95 south.
I drove over it again tonight and paid extra close attention. You'll see one mobile d.o.t. sign "traffic pattern change ahead" and another one of the "pay attention to the sign" signs. Right after you come off Roosevelt expressway the first thing you see to your left is a massive 95 S sign.
You pass Stockton, then another large sign pointing to destinations downtown and THEN you finally see a small sign off to the right pointing towards 95 south. (the same one we've already been taking I thought)
So, how about more 95S signage for those on Roosevelt heading to the connector. Make one of those light-brights flash off some useful information.
Quote from: 9a is my backyard on July 27, 2010, 09:34:32 PM
I get on I-10 at the Stockton ramp and take I-95 S to the Southside. Ever since the new traffic pattern, it has been incredibly slow going across the Fuller Warren. Even at 7AM on Monday morning it was bad. I've just been taking College St. under the interstate, hopping over the Acosta and joining up with 95 from there lately. It might not save any time but it beats the stop-n-go traffic. Anyone else noticing the same thing? To me it doesn't look like something that's going to change, which sucks. There are just too many merges when both of the I-10 to I-95 sections merge and people getting on I-95 at the Park St. ramp. Damn transportation engineers...
Agree that this is a pain especially since the two right lanes disappear into the San Marco exit at the bottom of the bridge.
However, I don't think they could have done any better without taking out major hunks of the neighborhoods on both sides of the river. They had to work within the footprint that they had.
Quote from: David on July 27, 2010, 10:30:15 PM
When coming from the 17 expressway there's not much signage that indicates you need to stay right to get on 95 south.
I drove over it again tonight and paid extra close attention. You'll see one mobile d.o.t. sign "traffic pattern change ahead" and another one of the "pay attention to the sign" signs. Right after you come off of the 17 expressway the first thing you see to your left is a massive 95 SOUTH sign, about 6 lanes over to the left, with an oncoming barricade splitting 95 south and north.
You pass Stockton, then another large sign pointing to destinations downtown and THEN you finally see a small sign off to the right pointing towards 95 south. (the same one we've already been taking already I thought)
So, how about more 95 south signage for those on Roosevelt heading to the connector. Make one of those light-brights flash off some useful information.
Sometimes one wonders if FDOT engineers ever drive their own roads. Their standards for contractors closing lanes are also often woefully inadequate with short advance notice and lane mergers for the "actual" speeds involved.
I am sure if FDOT worked harder at better, more, and further advanced signage on our roads, even more accidents could be avoided and traffic would flow far better. I will say that road departments across the U.S. share this same affliction. Engineers seem so wrapped up in their projects that they forget that many of the users of their inventions don't get where they are "coming from" as quickly as they do. (It's the same flaw one sees in using lots of software written by entrenched programmers.)
stjr....while FDOT is far from perfect, suggesting they work harder at better, more, advanced signage is crazy....as it is, Department staff and consultants spend hundreds of hours working on signing and marking plans as well as Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) plans necessary during construction.
I would suggest that the majority of the fault here lies in an apathetic public that does not pay attention to the news (this was in the paper, on the radio, and on TV for several days before it happened)....and people that do everything else besides watching the road while driving.
Quote from: tufsu1 on July 28, 2010, 10:52:44 AM
stjr....while FDOT is far from perfect, suggesting they work harder at better, more, advanced signage is crazy....as it is, Department staff and consultants spend hundreds of hours working on signing and marking plans as well as Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) plans necessary during construction.
I would suggest that the majority of the fault here lies in an apathetic public that does not pay attention to the news (this was in the paper, on the radio, and on TV for several days before it happened)....and people that do everything else besides watching the road while driving.
Tufsu, from what I can tell, a significant portion of our population doesn't follow the news, at least regularly. I think MJ posters are far more informed and engaged than most of the general public. Maybe if FDOT posted traffic advisories on Facebook and Twitter, they would reach a lot more of that less informed public! ;D (Of course, I would miss those alerts being a non-social media user.)
As to the effort on signage, I am was intending to suggest they work "smarter", not "harder". Sorry for the confusion.
Three groups of professionals who are under-appreciated for the millions of lives they have saved (IMHO) are vaccine makers, plumbers and traffic engineers. Especially the guy who invented the little reflector "eyes" that lanes are marked with.
JTA wants advertising........who is going to read it? This is assuming people can read.....of course!
* can read
Quote from: stjr on July 28, 2010, 11:58:40 AM
Quote from: tufsu1 on July 28, 2010, 10:52:44 AM
stjr....while FDOT is far from perfect, suggesting they work harder at better, more, advanced signage is crazy....as it is, Department staff and consultants spend hundreds of hours working on signing and marking plans as well as Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) plans necessary during construction.
I would suggest that the majority of the fault here lies in an apathetic public that does not pay attention to the news (this was in the paper, on the radio, and on TV for several days before it happened)....and people that do everything else besides watching the road while driving.
Tufsu, from what I can tell, a significant portion of our population doesn't follow the news, at least regularly. I think MJ posters are far more informed and engaged than most of the general public. Maybe if FDOT posted traffic advisories on Facebook and Twitter, they would reach a lot more of that less informed public! ;D (Of course, I would miss those alerts being a non-social media user.)
As to the effort on signage, I am was intending to suggest they work "smarter", not "harder". Sorry for the confusion.
I don't blame folks for not watching like local news like we used to. Gone are the days of the crusading journalists who spoke truth to power. Instead, we have invisible focus groups that demand:
-Traffic and weather take up the first five minutes of the newscast
-Happy talk and fake banter eat up another five minutes
-World and national news stories soak up five minutes (What are you, CNN?)
-Sports and more fake banter use five more minutes
-Celebrity gossip, corporate PR b-rolls and useless 'news of the weird' waste the rest of the time.
And don't get me started on the error-ridden morning news on the local stations. I find myself watching 'Married, With Children' reruns while a read the newspaper and eat breakfast.
That said, commuters should know better. They could:
-Go online for the latest construction news (metrojacksonville.com)
-Take a practice commute on the weekend when there is less stress
-Leave for work a few minutes early to commute smoothly
-Repeat steps as necessary, finding new alternate routes if applicable...
Approaching the monster interchange from the Roosevelt Blvd. flyover, signs indicate a need to merge left to head south on I-95. The safer move is to take the unadveritized one-lane exit off to the right, which perhaps is tailored to cars approaching from Stockton Street.
I can't get too excited about the new interchange. In my opinion, this colossal interchange is more evidence that Jacksonville is 30 years behind the rest of the US in terms of urban planning. More thoughtful cities are hiding or eliminating their freeways, while Jacksonville continues to bloat them.
Quote from: johnny_simpatico on July 29, 2010, 10:36:56 AM
I can't get too excited about the new interchange. In my opinion, this colossal interchange is more evidence that Jacksonville is 30 years behind the rest of the US in terms of urban planning. More thoughtful cities are hiding or eliminating their freeways, while Jacksonville continues to bloat them.
I'm sorry, I guess I just don't understand. How anyone could hide or eliminate the intersection of two of this country's most important roads?
They aren't even at the final configuration yet, wait to judge it when it's all said and done. Then they are going to mess up 95SB with the overland bridge project. That 3rd SB lane can't come soon enough!
Quote from: David on July 27, 2010, 10:30:15 PM
When coming from the 17 expressway there's not much signage that indicates you need to stay right to get on 95 south.
I drove over it again tonight and paid extra close attention. You'll see one mobile d.o.t. sign "traffic pattern change ahead" and another one of the "pay attention to the sign" signs. Right after you come off Roosevelt expressway the first thing you see to your left is a massive 95 S sign.
You pass Stockton, then another large sign pointing to destinations downtown and THEN you finally see a small sign off to the right pointing towards 95 south. (the same one we've already been taking I thought)
So, how about more 95S signage for those on Roosevelt heading to the connector. Make one of those light-brights flash off some useful information.
I drive this way daily, read the news, studied the civil drawings and even noticed the 95S exit that looked like it would be a breeze to hit from 17 once the change took place. I thought I would be prepared, but as I 'followed the signs' a brief moment of panic set in when I saw the enormous sign pointing to the left for 95S an no mention of the one lane off to the right.
Additionally, I'm not a fan of how the right lane coming from 17 stops between the Stockton off and on ramps. This forces a merger just so you can get back over to take 95S. So much room and so many lanes, why kill one?
I can't get too excited about the new interchange. In my opinion, this colossal interchange is more evidence that Jacksonville is 30 years behind the rest of the US in terms of urban planning. More thoughtful cities are hiding or eliminating their freeways, while Jacksonville continues to bloat them.
[/quote]
God, I couldn't agree more. WIth 295 and 9A and 9B, they should have downsized 95 through the City. FDOT has devastated Brooklyn even more than it was already. Some of it was starting to come back before the plans to expand the highway. Additionally, it has increased greatly the noise in Riverside from the elevated lanes.
Quote from: johnny_simpatico on July 29, 2010, 10:36:56 AM
Approaching the monster interchange from the Roosevelt Blvd. flyover, signs indicate a need to merge left to head south on I-95. The safer move is to take the unadveritized one-lane exit off to the right, which perhaps is tailored to cars approaching from Stockton Street.
I can't get too excited about the new interchange. In my opinion, this colossal interchange is more evidence that Jacksonville is 30 years behind the rest of the US in terms of urban planning. More thoughtful cities are hiding or eliminating their freeways, while Jacksonville continues to bloat them.
This Merger is one of the strangest I have ever seen... Since its creation...the late 1950s or early 60s, I would love to know how many millions have been spent on it... Im sure when it is finally finished ... It will need to be added onto again... But when one looks at how much land area this merger takes up...it sure seems it could have been done another way... O well :)
I wonder just how much "Gate Concrete" supplied for the silly thing?
Quote from: CS Foltz on July 30, 2010, 08:35:46 PM
I wonder just how much "Gate Concrete" supplied for the silly thing?
whatever
Quote from: acme54321 on July 29, 2010, 10:43:00 AM
Quote from: johnny_simpatico on July 29, 2010, 10:36:56 AM
I can't get too excited about the new interchange. In my opinion, this colossal interchange is more evidence that Jacksonville is 30 years behind the rest of the US in terms of urban planning. More thoughtful cities are hiding or eliminating their freeways, while Jacksonville continues to bloat them.
I'm sorry, I guess I just don't understand. How anyone could hide or eliminate the intersection of two of this country's most important roads?
They aren't even at the final configuration yet, wait to judge it when it's all said and done. Then they are going to mess up 95SB with the overland bridge project. That 3rd SB lane can't come soon enough!
This one kind of gets me too. I'm not sure how the interchange could be hidden.
Quote from: tufsu1 on July 30, 2010, 08:42:08 PM
Quote from: CS Foltz on July 30, 2010, 08:35:46 PM
I wonder just how much "Gate Concrete" supplied for the silly thing?
whatever
"Whatever" nuts.
valid question.
"No matter how cynical you become, it's never enough to keep up."
Lily Tomlin
Big difference now from this:
(http://lh6.ggpht.com/_GhTb4kw3J1w/TH7jmb-6FVI/AAAAAAAAALY/pvjUGWp-sIQ/95_i10.jpg)
Anyone else besides me remember when this thing was brand new? As I recall the tiny 4 lane FREEway's with the hairpin loops and turns (see airport exit if you never experienced one) at this junction was mostly a landscaped show piece for the city. Grass, shrubs and lots of palms made it easy on the eyes, especially if the DRAW BRIDGE was up over the river and you got stuck waiting 20 minutes on the "super slab." My god what have they done!
OCKLAWAHA
David wrote
When coming from the 17 expressway there's not much signage that indicates you need to stay right to get on 95 south.
I drove over it again tonight and paid extra close attention. You'll see one mobile d.o.t. sign "traffic pattern change ahead" and another one of the "pay attention to the sign" signs. Right after you come off Roosevelt expressway the first thing you see to your left is a massive 95 S sign.
You pass Stockton, then another large sign pointing to destinations downtown and THEN you finally see a small sign off to the right pointing towards 95 south. (the same one we've already been taking I thought)
So, how about more 95S signage for those on Roosevelt heading to the connector. Make one of those light-brights flash off some useful information.
David, I could not agree with you more. I emailed the DOT and suggested that they do that exact thing-Have clear signage for drivers exiting from US 17 (Roosevelt Blvd.) that there is no need to cross over six lanes to go to 95 South.
I forgot to mention on the last post that the DOT didn't acknowledge my email. Anybody surprised?
Quote from: Dapperdan on July 27, 2010, 09:17:23 AM
What is everyone's thoughts on the new configuration coming from 10 East to 95 North or South? I have to go from 10 to 95 North to downtown for my work everyday. Both times I have used the new lanes, someone has almost killed me. I still see idiots coming from 17 trying to bulldoze their way over lanes to get to the 95 South lanes, but what they don't realize is they have their own 95 South exit if they keep going straight. There should be no reason why anyone coming from 17 needs to move over any lanes. Someone nearly wiped me out today as I was on the new flyover heading to 95 North and they darted over to the right trying to ge to 17's 95 South exit. Please tell me it will get better. Please tell em people will actually start reading sings and following the arrows. I drive white knuckled through this junction now.
Wins the award for the most retarded intersection ever built...
perhaps we should wait until construction is complete to judge it
I'm still impressed with whoever designed the work flow on this project. Keeping traffic moving while building the thing while keeping access for construction; opening one section, tearing up another all the while. One hell of a challenge to plan.
On the other hand, going straight toward the bridge to go North and turning left to go South is really, really counter intuitive. I can only imagine they were very constrained by the footprint and had no other choice. I think the planners don't like to design left exits.
Maybe TUFSU could give us some insight about the design.
Dog Walker...........I agree! It is one heck of a challange but like you I question left exits! Most everything is a right hand exit and for really good reasons!
Quote from: Dog Walker on September 05, 2010, 03:37:52 PM
I think the planners don't like to design left exits.
generally this is true...but sometimes they make sense
That may be true tufsu...........but I have to point out............reading signs to try and go the correct route may distract people from doing what they need to be doing............as in controling their vehicle! Most people can not drive very well anyway (operative word is "most") and then compound their frustration with an oddball exit and I think when the accident happens.......it will be a bad one!
Wait a minute, I don't have to go by 6 lanes to get to I-95 S anymore from Roosevelt? I didn't know that. Yes, I read the signs. As soon as I get off Roosevelt there's this big I-95S Sign all the way in the left! I was wondering why I always had to maneuver so dangerously to make an exit.
Anyone know why the Florida DOT Building is located like 4 feet away from this intersection?
Quote from: cityimrov on September 06, 2010, 05:48:35 PM
Anyone know why the Florida DOT Building is located like 4 feet away from this intersection?
the building was there prior...and they actually demolioshed some of it so the improvements could be built
Quote from: cityimrov on September 06, 2010, 05:48:35 PM
Wait a minute, I don't have to go by 6 lanes to get to I-95 S anymore from Roosevelt? I didn't know that. Yes, I read the signs. As soon as I get off Roosevelt there's this big I-95S Sign all the way in the left! I was wondering why I always had to maneuver so dangerously to make an exit.
this confusion can be solvbed with 1 fairly simple step....have a sign on Roosevelt telling folks heading to 95 South to stay in the right lane
So much for planning for contingencies............I guess the planners did not look for enough ahead or around! FDOT is about as competent as JTA!
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 06, 2010, 08:28:43 PM
Quote from: cityimrov on September 06, 2010, 05:48:35 PM
Wait a minute, I don't have to go by 6 lanes to get to I-95 S anymore from Roosevelt? I didn't know that. Yes, I read the signs. As soon as I get off Roosevelt there's this big I-95S Sign all the way in the left! I was wondering why I always had to maneuver so dangerously to make an exit.
this confusion can be solvbed with 1 fairly simple step....have a sign on Roosevelt telling folks heading to 95 South to stay in the right lane
From someone who commutes to work every day using this exit... its assinine the way the traffic is currently being routed. The one single lane towards the right linking 10 to 95 South is always BACKED the hell up in the morning(way more people get off Roosevelt and go 95 South than go 95 North)... and trying to cross over to get to the two left lanes feeding 95 South is dangerous when its not impossible.
I seriously hate the new routing.... 95 North was NEVER the bottleneck, its always has and still is the traffic feeding 95 South that creates the bottleneck. I hope this gets better when the flyover has been fully executed.
One positive note on the interchange is that traffic coming from the west now has another exit besides Stockton Street to get to Riverside Ave. The newly opened Forest St. exit has already taken some of the load off Stockton and our neighborhood streets.
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 06, 2010, 12:43:40 PM
Quote from: Dog Walker on September 05, 2010, 03:37:52 PM
I think the planners don't like to design left exits.
generally this is true...but sometimes they make sense
The parts I don't like about it are already completed. What idiot decided to have that tiny little exit for all of the I-10 to I-95 S traffic over on the right? That thing backs up horribly all the time, it is way too small and poorly designed. And by comparison, the I-95 North exit has like 4 lanes, but most of the traffic isn't going that way at peak traffic times, all the traffic is backed up for miles because everyone needs to use that tiny I-95 South exit.
And no joke, every time I'm going through there I'm almost killed by a bunch of people who are confused (with good reason) by the bizarre layout with all the exits to the left and unclear signage, and with our MFFY society today ("Me First and #$%! You") they all think it's perfectly acceptable to come to a complete stop in the middle of I-10, or just jack over and force you to slam on the brakes to avoid being sideswiped, instead of exiting and re-entering in the correct direction.
Honestly, and I mean this in all seriousness, the interchange that was there before actually worked much better. Usually highway projects are a groan when they're going on because they create congestion, but the result is worthwhile. In this case, they actually took something that was mediocre and made it terrible. I'd rather have mediocre back.
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on September 07, 2010, 08:34:04 AM
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 06, 2010, 12:43:40 PM
Quote from: Dog Walker on September 05, 2010, 03:37:52 PM
I think the planners don't like to design left exits.
generally this is true...but sometimes they make sense
The parts I don't like about it are already completed. What idiot decided to have that tiny little exit for all of the I-10 to I-95 S traffic over on the right? That thing backs up horribly all the time, it is way too small and poorly designed. And by comparison, the I-95 North exit has like 4 lanes, but most of the traffic isn't going that way at peak traffic times, all the traffic is backed up for miles because everyone needs to use that tiny I-95 South exit.
And no joke, every time I'm going through there I'm almost killed by a bunch of people who are confused (with good reason) by the bizarre layout with all the exits to the left and unclear signage, and with our MFFY society today ("Me First and #$%! You") they all think it's perfectly acceptable to come to a complete stop in the middle of I-10, or just jack over and force you to slam on the brakes to avoid being sideswiped, instead of exiting and re-entering in the correct direction.
Honestly, and I mean this in all seriousness, the interchange that was there before actually worked much better. Usually highway projects are a groan when they're going on because they create congestion, but the result is worthwhile. In this case, they actually took something that was mediocre and made it terrible. I'd rather have mediocre back.
Chris,
That one lane for I-95 South on the right is only supposed to be for people coming off 17. If you are comming from 10 West, you should be following the I-95 South signs to the left. I beleive there are two exit lanes there.
Quote from: Dapperdan on September 07, 2010, 09:30:57 AM
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on September 07, 2010, 08:34:04 AM
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 06, 2010, 12:43:40 PM
Quote from: Dog Walker on September 05, 2010, 03:37:52 PM
I think the planners don't like to design left exits.
generally this is true...but sometimes they make sense
The parts I don't like about it are already completed. What idiot decided to have that tiny little exit for all of the I-10 to I-95 S traffic over on the right? That thing backs up horribly all the time, it is way too small and poorly designed. And by comparison, the I-95 North exit has like 4 lanes, but most of the traffic isn't going that way at peak traffic times, all the traffic is backed up for miles because everyone needs to use that tiny I-95 South exit.
And no joke, every time I'm going through there I'm almost killed by a bunch of people who are confused (with good reason) by the bizarre layout with all the exits to the left and unclear signage, and with our MFFY society today ("Me First and #$%! You") they all think it's perfectly acceptable to come to a complete stop in the middle of I-10, or just jack over and force you to slam on the brakes to avoid being sideswiped, instead of exiting and re-entering in the correct direction.
Honestly, and I mean this in all seriousness, the interchange that was there before actually worked much better. Usually highway projects are a groan when they're going on because they create congestion, but the result is worthwhile. In this case, they actually took something that was mediocre and made it terrible. I'd rather have mediocre back.
Chris,
That one lane for I-95 South on the right is only supposed to be for people coming off 17. If you are comming from 10 West, you should be following the I-95 South signs to the left. I beleive there are two exit lanes there.
People are always confused and jacking over lanes trying to make that one. Also, the bigger one only has 2 lanes to handle the entire flow off of I-10, which is insufficient, they back up daily and the thing was just built. They replaced an exit with 2 lanes that were already insufficient with a more confusing and slower moving one that also has 2 lanes. If you were going to spend all that money, why not just make it 4 lanes or whatnot so the bottlenecks don't start up?
And this silly thing cost us what.........$100 Million Dollars!
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on September 07, 2010, 11:19:18 AM
People are always confused and jacking over lanes trying to make that one. Also, the bigger one only has 2 lanes to handle the entire flow off of I-10, which is insufficient, they back up daily and the thing was just built. They replaced an exit with 2 lanes that were already insufficient with a more confusing and slower moving one that also has 2 lanes. If you were going to spend all that money, why not just make it 4 lanes or whatnot so the bottlenecks don't start up?
One reason not to have 4 lanes coming from I-10 to I-95 south is that the Fuller Warren Bridge is only 4 lanes, and there are at least 2 lanes (or will be, I guess) continuing from I-95 on the north, plus the one that gets on at Park merges into all those lanes. Guess they could have widened the brand new bridge, but at what cost?
I've read as much of this as I can stand for one night...
Enter these project limits without exceeding speed limit or tailgating and one may notice that, upon completion, all eastbound drivers will soon have more and safer options.
Remain in lane 1 [a.k.a. fast lane/ inside lane / left lane] and you can totally bypass the new downtown West / Riverside/Brooklyn / Forest St interchange and Stockton St. altogether and shoot directly onto I95North without delay. Not all signage is mounted - not all is complete. Overhead will soon read 95North 95South (in that order from left to right).
Lane 2 provides an unfettered interstate rated path onto I95South. also bypassing "local traffic".
Lanes 3-7: local traffic. slow down a wee bit and turn up the volume on your Rush Limbaugh, Clark Howard, NPR, Rock105 what have you and shut the * up with all your griping. This new design creates 2 division points versus the previous outmoded Y design. Some are never pleased, however with added collective patience, the new Forest St interchange will do more to ease the confusion for non-locals when accessing this newly rebuilt section of [not really] "DT" while hopefully simultaneously centralizing the Prime Osborn Center/ revived Terminal.
Yes entering the zone from the 17spui/spur could be signed more completely, absolutely.
Immediately north of McDuff, a new succession of overheads could simply denote that Lane 2 is a merge lane which ends at Stockton St. and Lane 1 provides entrance to 95South and ends at Forest.
Much the same as the relocated overhead (further south, thus catching the motorists' attention sooner) warns of Roosevelt N Lane 3 ENDs at Edgewood Ave.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on September 07, 2010, 09:18:05 PM
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on September 07, 2010, 11:19:18 AM
People are always confused and jacking over lanes trying to make that one. Also, the bigger one only has 2 lanes to handle the entire flow off of I-10, which is insufficient, they back up daily and the thing was just built. They replaced an exit with 2 lanes that were already insufficient with a more confusing and slower moving one that also has 2 lanes. If you were going to spend all that money, why not just make it 4 lanes or whatnot so the bottlenecks don't start up?
One reason not to have 4 lanes coming from I-10 to I-95 south is that the Fuller Warren Bridge is only 4 lanes, and there are at least 2 lanes (or will be, I guess) continuing from I-95 on the north, plus the one that gets on at Park merges into all those lanes. Guess they could have widened the brand new bridge, but at what cost?
EXACTLY Charles...at least one person figured it out!
QuoteIf you were going to spend all that money, why not just make it 4 lanes or whatnot so the bottlenecks don't start up?
Put in four and it will still back up. Have you checked out the new lanes on I-95 between JTB and Bowden? Traffic still backs up during rush hour. The bottleneck on I-95 just shifted north to Bowden/University where the lanes cut down from four to three northbound. It will get worse as more development occurs on the Southside. You can't pave your way out of congestion so why bother? As a fiscal conservative, I would invest in a reliable mass transit alternative and let the bottlenecks happen.
Quote from: ricker on September 07, 2010, 09:32:42 PM
I've read as much of this as I can stand for one night...
Enter these project limits without exceeding speed limit or tailgating and one may notice that, upon completion, all eastbound drivers will soon have more and safer options.
Remain in lane 1 [a.k.a. fast lane/ inside lane / left lane] and you can totally bypass the new downtown West / Riverside/Brooklyn / Forest St interchange and Stockton St. altogether and shoot directly onto I95North without delay. Not all signage is mounted - not all is complete. Overhead will soon read 95North 95South (in that order from left to right).
Lane 2 provides an unfettered interstate rated path onto I95South. also bypassing "local traffic".
Lanes 3-7: local traffic. slow down a wee bit and turn up the volume on your Rush Limbaugh, Clark Howard, NPR, Rock105 what have you and shut the * up with all your griping. This new design creates 2 division points versus the previous outmoded Y design. Some are never pleased, however with added collective patience, the new Forest St interchange will do more to ease the confusion for non-locals when accessing this newly rebuilt section of [not really] "DT" while hopefully simultaneously centralizing the Prime Osborn Center/ revived Terminal.
Yes entering the zone from the 17spui/spur could be signed more completely, absolutely.
Immediately north of McDuff, a new succession of overheads could simply denote that Lane 2 is a merge lane which ends at Stockton St. and Lane 1 provides entrance to 95South and ends at Forest.
Much the same as the relocated overhead (further south, thus catching the motorists' attention sooner) warns of Roosevelt N Lane 3 ENDs at Edgewood Ave.
I'm not sure how regularly you drive the route we're talking about, but at the times I'm referring to there is no hope for ever even reaching the speed limit, let alone exceeding it. That's the whole point, traffic comes to a standstill twice a day. Regarding the exit and the number of lanes, the real problem was designing the bridge so it is also used as a jacked-up interchange. The 10/95 merge shouldn't have been made so that you immediately enter into a situation where you are forced to move at least 2-3 lanes to the left within the span of 800 feet to avoid being stuck exiting 95 at San Marco. That's the main problem.
They should have integrated at least a 2-lane flyover that attached to I-95 south before the bridge, and that would have been a relatively simple thing to accomplish. You really want to separate exiting and merging traffic from through traffic as much as possible, and instead the current design forces anybody exiting or merging onto the roadway on both sides to actually cross over several lanes through the middle of the flow of through traffic, and all 3 groups are generally moving at vastly different speeds. It's horribly flawed, and dangerous.
Also, I disagree with the cries of "you can't put in more lanes" as an improvement. The new fuller-warren bridge was a necessity, the old drawbridge was nonsensical on an interstate. But the rest of this interchange has actually made things far worse than they were before all the money was spent on the redesign. They made the curves sharper, and kept the same number of lanes the old roadways had. It's actually a step backwards. I think most people who live in the area and drive it regularly would rather have the old roadway back. The new one is frankly a disaster.
Also, you have to watch out for the "
Tufsu 'tude" that engineers and planners always crack out when something they designed is malfunctioning horribly. Whenever they discuss it, they never admit it's because it just plain didn't work, it's always blamed on all of the people who have to use it every day being too stupid and incompetent to realize how brilliant the design is. Except that's not how the world works. If it doesn't work then it doesn't work, and that's the end of the story.
The the problems aren't with the drivers, you can hardly blame people speeding when the whole problem is that instead of moving at the speed limit they're sitting on the interstate at a dead stop with the brakes on. That's the whole problem.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 07, 2010, 11:00:25 PM
QuoteIf you were going to spend all that money, why not just make it 4 lanes or whatnot so the bottlenecks don't start up?
Put in four and it will still back up. Have you checked out the new lanes on I-95 between JTB and Bowden? Traffic still backs up during rush hour. The bottleneck on I-95 just shifted north to Bowden/University where the lanes cut down from four to three northbound. It will get worse as more development occurs on the Southside. You can't pave your way out of congestion so why bother? As a fiscal conservative, I would invest in a reliable mass transit alternative and let the bottlenecks happen.
The I-95 backup that starts around bowden/university daily is a direct result of whatever idiot made the exit for JTB end in a timed stoplight rather than using a flyover or cloverleaf. As a stopgap measure they added an extra "waiting lane" for people in line to exit, and this made things a little better for the rest of the traffic flow over the past couple months since it's been open.
But this isn't some function of overcrowding or anything like you're making it sound, the I-95 south backups are simply a function of poor road design at 95/JTB, and they all flow upstream from that. In the northbound direction, the bottlenecks start at the beginning of the elevated roadway leading to the fuller warren bridge, which is also a function of poor design.
Everybody is forced to cross over multiple lanes to enter, exit, or just to stay on 95. And at the same time all this is going on, people are forced to cross over the flow of through traffic. There is no segregation of through traffic from traffic merging onto the roadway or exiting the roadway. Additionally, and the design of the new FW bridge is counter-intuitive leading to confusion, and they made a small flyover with sharp turns and too few lanes to handle all the 95/10 traffic, which is the initial cause of the area's backup, much like the southbound backups flow back to the JTB/95 problem.
If you fixed these congestion points, the 95/10 merge and the 95/JTB merge, the entirety of 95 between the airport and 295 would be relatively free-flowing, aside from accidents/blockages. They should have just bit the bullet and sped up the installation of a cloverleaf at JTB and installed the extra "waiting lane" at University instead of JTB. Once completed, southbound would flow smoothly at all times. The backups are caused by the right lane of I-95 S being at a dead stop for miles, which cuts capacity by 1/3'rd.
But FWIW, I think the future is definitely mass-transit. The oil situation and the environmental impacts of the number of cars we use on a daily basis will ultimately require that solution, unless we continue to ignore the problems. But there will come a time when they can no longer be ignored, and since it takes so long to get rail etc. off the ground, now's the time to start. So I'm in total agreement with you on that.
No attitude here Chris and I didn't design it....but all projevts have tradeoffs...be it financial, social. Or other.....in essence, we often can't build the ultimate or ideal project
It might just be me............but if we had a "Rail" option, then with sufficient use, traffic conditions could not help but improve..........less vehicles on roads! But JTA would not buy it.............bus is better than rail, right?
Bus is better than rail to those invested...Its interesting the trouble Jax is having since this new junction went up. Traffic & bottle necks is a good thing in my book. yep traffic is great for the economy.
Regardless of how you feel on the bus v rail issue, we should all be able to agree that buses can also take cars off the road....even at 50% capacity, they carry 25 people....whichlikely equates to about 20 cars
tufsu.......I agree but only if the bus's are used! I have never seen a bus loaded down at 50%......most I have seen is maybe 12 to 14! Just like the $kyway, was at City Hall last night for a zoning hearing and just happened to come out on the Park side in time to see it leaving the station............unless there were people laying on the floor............2 people on board! Mass Transit here......in town...........bites the big one!
Quote from: CS Foltz on September 09, 2010, 07:04:41 AM
tufsu.......I agree but only if the bus's are used! I have never seen a bus loaded down at 50%......most I have seen is maybe 12 to 14! Just like the $kyway, was at City Hall last night for a zoning hearing and just happened to come out on the Park side in time to see it leaving the station............unless there were people laying on the floor............2 people on board! Mass Transit here......in town...........bites the big one!
Just the other day, well around 2am, I was on JTB and only saw one other car. Those people who say JTB has congestion problems must be lying crooks who want to steal our money.
(note - that was sarcasm)
(hey, if stependare can quote himself, so can I ... :) )
Quote from: Charles Hunter on September 09, 2010, 07:08:59 AM
Just the other day, well around 2am, I was on JTB and only saw one other car. Those people who say JTB has congestion problems must be lying crooks who want to steal our money.
Well in more than one other city I have gotten stuck in bumper to bumper traffic for more than an hour on mutliple occasions in the early morning hours. We think Jax has congestion problems, and I have seen I-10 backed up in the morning, Blanding backed up continuously (OK that IS a congestion problem), 95S backed up to Baymeadows in the afternoon, and JTB backed up during a 30-45 minute period in morning and afternoon. So basically I have seen and driven Jax traffic (for 18 years). Having family in Chicago, Philly, and now living in Atlanta I have also seen REAL traffic and Jax doesn't have it. Chicago highways are about the same width as our highways and serve 9x as many people. Philly the same. Atlanta has 16+ lane highways and they still become parking lots serving 5x as many people. Every arterial road in Atlanta except for Peachtree (ironically) is like Blanding: continuously clogged. Rush hours aren't 30 minutes to maybe an hour, they are 2-3 hours, morning and afternoon. 2 a.m. does not equal empty highways and you still run the risk of getting stuck because the city doesn't "go to sleep" by 9 p.m. (like Jax does).
JTB serves a few hundred thousand family oriented people who have a 9-5 schedule. There are probably what ~120,000 people who work along JTB? JTB is also fairly wide right now for the population it serves. The only bottleneck happens around 9A and 95, but not all the lanes are clogged and not all day. Try a similar office/mall corridor in a larger city (like 285 between 20 and 85 on Atlanta's northside, which serves Vinings/Cumberland area employing ~250,000 and the Perimeter area employing ~250,000 and 4 major highways...20, 75, 400, 85) and you have 10-12 lanes at a standstill for a length of 10-20 miles in each direction for 3-5 hours a day on average with the other hours being 50-60 MPH congestion whereby you may be going the speed limit, but there is a car 15 ft. in front of you, 15 ft. behind you, and cars on either side of you.
Bottom line: people who gripe about Jax traffic being bad seem like they haven't experienced the 40 other metros with worse traffic no matter how large the highways and it reminds me of people who say we actually do have great parks in this city (?) like they haven't been to another city because if they have they would most likely have seen at least 1 or 2 parks there that put any of ours to shame.
Before we invest further on JTB, we need to pull our core in and look at transit alternatives. We have expanded our highways like crazy in the past decade without giving any legitimate thought to better public transportation (and BRT down Phillips does not count ;))
Well I'm not griping about traffic, I'm griping about bad road design that creates unnecessary congestion. I agree we don't have the traffic counts of any "real" MSA, that's mainly why I think it's so silly that we employ counterintuitive designs which lead to unnecessary congestion. With the smallish amount of traffic we actually have compared to our large amount of road infrastructure, the reality is our congestion points are a function of poor layout/design.
And I meant I-95. The issues are trickier on Blanding and Baymeadows, as there's not a whole lot of expansion room.
QuoteThe I-95 backup that starts around bowden/university daily is a direct result of whatever idiot made the exit for JTB end in a timed stoplight rather than using a flyover or cloverleaf. As a stopgap measure they added an extra "waiting lane" for people in line to exit, and this made things a little better for the rest of the traffic flow over the past couple months since it's been open.
The initial stoplight configuration was basically done to save money and the fact that the traffic wasn't as much of an issue there when it was constructed. Obviously, it has gotten progressively worse over the years due to the increased growth out towards the southside and the beaches. There is currently a PD&E being performed to fix the interchange of JTB and 95. However, the solution will cost, at a minimum 100MM.
Quote from: cline on September 09, 2010, 11:36:24 AM
The initial stoplight configuration was basically done to save money and the fact that the traffic wasn't as much of an issue there when it was constructed...... However, the solution will cost, at a minimum 100MM.
This, in a nutshell, is what is wrong with road building protocols. Why was JTB built to begin with? Because dramatic growth was expected in the area it was serving. So, why didn't they VISION/anticipate the future growth and plan for its later construction at the time rather than act surprised and spend $100 mm in the future for lack of planning? JTB and I-95 is a story repeated hundreds or thousands of times at interstate interchanges around the U.S. What happened there was totally predictable. And, these guys call themselves experts?
Quote from: stjr on September 09, 2010, 06:14:37 PM
Quote from: cline on September 09, 2010, 11:36:24 AM
The initial stoplight configuration was basically done to save money and the fact that the traffic wasn't as much of an issue there when it was constructed...... However, the solution will cost, at a minimum 100MM.
This, in a nutshell, is what is wrong with road building protocols. Why was JTB built to begin with? Because dramatic growth was expected in the area it was serving. So, why didn't they VISION/anticipate the future growth and plan for its later construction at the time rather than act surprised and spend $100 mm in the future for lack of planning? JTB and I-95 is a story repeated hundreds or thousands of times at interstate interchanges around the U.S. What happened there was totally predictable. And, these guys call themselves experts?
Well if the interchange was built initially to accommodate traffic 25-30 years into the future people would complain that we were overbuilding and spending unnecessary money to accommodate a demand that is decades away. For example, if public money was being spent to build the Nocatee Parkway and flyover (which is around 150MM), I am pretty sure there would be collective outrage on this board since that facility won't see its capacity fulfilled for many many years.
But really the point of this all is that no matter how much capacity we build, roadway facilities will eventually become congested. That's the fact. Even this ultimate design alternative for JTB/I-95/US1 interchange will become congested in a couple of decades. Bottom line, we can't build ourselves out of congestion. This is one of the reasons that mobility options (including the Skyway) are vital.
^Cline, that wasn't my point. I said where was the planning for "later construction"? That means, why didn't JTA/FDOT acquire the needed land for the interchange and land bank it when the land was worth little and available since the road wasn't yet built. Then, the ramps that were originally built should have been designed to be expanded in place, rather than being demolished and a new design created anew. Also, the traffic light design should never have been used, regardless of the traffic count. This is an interchange of two limited access highways (or should have been).
This city is clogged with interchanges designed this way and now impossible or financially out of reach for proper correction. Examples include Baymeadows, St. Augustine Road, SR 210, San Jose, Roosevelt, and Blanding. How many times do we need to repeat this process before we learn our lessons?
By the way, the stop light interchange design seems to be a local/Florida favorite. I don't see it much in other urban areas around the country. Maybe you would like to comment on that.
Quote from: stjr on September 09, 2010, 06:48:02 PM
^Cline, that wasn't my point. I said where was the planning for "later construction"? That means, why didn't JTA/FDOT acquire the needed land for the interchange and land bank it when the land was worth little and available since the road wasn't yet built. Then, the ramps that were originally built should have been designed to be expanded in place, rather than being demolished and a new design created anew. Also, the traffic light design should never have been used, regardless of the traffic count. This is an interchange of two limited access highways (or should have been).
This city is clogged with interchanges designed this way and now impossible or financially out of reach for proper correction. Examples include Baymeadows, St. Augustine Road, SR 210, San Jose, Roosevelt, and Blanding. How many times do we need to repeat this process before we learn our lessons?
By the way, the stop light interchange design seems to be a local/Florida favorite. I don't see it much in other urban areas around the country. Maybe you would like to comment on that.
So how much extra land should they have bought? Enough land to accommodate traffic demand in 1990, 2000, 2020, 2035, 2060 or beyond?
And stoplights at interchanges (specifically SPUIs) are used all over the country. Its not just a FL thing.
Quote from: cline on September 09, 2010, 06:55:05 PM
So how much extra land should they have bought? Enough land to accommodate traffic demand in 1990, 2000, 2020, 2035, 2060 or beyond?
Since there are clearly limits to the ultimate capacity/expansion of the roads servicing the interchange, they should buy enough land to match the impact on the interchange from that capacity being achieved. The old expression, "A chain is as strong as its weakest link" should apply here. What good is it to build out I-95 or JTB if the interchange connecting them can't service that traffic flow?
There is another alternative: Take the hundreds of millions needed for these, often stopgap, interchange improvements and build out commuter rail for the same or less. What do you think of placing a moratorium on interchange improvements like JTB and I-95 and putting the money toward mass transit?
Quote from: cline on September 09, 2010, 06:38:25 PM
Quote from: stjr on September 09, 2010, 06:14:37 PM
Quote from: cline on September 09, 2010, 11:36:24 AM
The initial stoplight configuration was basically done to save money and the fact that the traffic wasn't as much of an issue there when it was constructed...... However, the solution will cost, at a minimum 100MM.
This, in a nutshell, is what is wrong with road building protocols. Why was JTB built to begin with? Because dramatic growth was expected in the area it was serving. So, why didn't they VISION/anticipate the future growth and plan for its later construction at the time rather than act surprised and spend $100 mm in the future for lack of planning? JTB and I-95 is a story repeated hundreds or thousands of times at interstate interchanges around the U.S. What happened there was totally predictable. And, these guys call themselves experts?
Well if the interchange was built initially to accommodate traffic 25-30 years into the future people would complain that we were overbuilding and spending unnecessary money to accommodate a demand that is decades away. For example, if public money was being spent to build the Nocatee Parkway and flyover (which is around 150MM), I am pretty sure there would be collective outrage on this board since that facility won't see its capacity fulfilled for many many years.
But really the point of this all is that no matter how much capacity we build, roadway facilities will eventually become congested. That's the fact. Even this ultimate design alternative for JTB/I-95/US1 interchange will become congested in a couple of decades. Bottom line, we can't build ourselves out of congestion. This is one of the reasons that mobility options (including the Skyway) are vital.
You do have a point. There is a subset of people who complain about any government expenditure for anything. Spending an extra $30mm for future capacity, even when it is bound to save money in the long-run, would probably go over like a lead balloon.
Even though we all know it's idiotically shortsighted, expecting people to invest in something that won't bring benefits for 15 years is probably an unrealistic expectation, given the extremely polarized political climate of the past 10 years. This is the exact reason our state doesn't have reliable rail-based mass transit. It is frustrating.
Gentlemen..............I concur! Seems to be a case of damned if we do or don't do! There is no short term or inexpensive answer for either of those situations! So what do the heck we do.........personally, if I had a choice, hold on the concrete and start for rail! Hold on the bus's and start up some rail! Can you see the direction I would like to go.........but this is just my humble opinion! I love that JTA mantra "Bus just like rail but cheaper" yeah........right!
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on September 09, 2010, 08:36:46 PM
You do have a point. There is a subset of people who complain about any government expenditure for anything. Spending an extra $30mm for future capacity, even when it is bound to save money in the long-run, would probably go over like a lead balloon.
In the case of FDOT projects, I don't see this as obviously valid.
Seems when it is State money (really, ours the taxpayers), there is far less scrutiny by the local populace of the cost of each road project. FDOT is about to spend $170 million on the Overland Bridge project. Tens and hundreds of millions more for other area roads and interchanges. $48 million on a single ramp at 9A and I-95. When did anyone locally complain or even question these expenditures? My guess is, everyone figures its mostly someone else's money, i.e. they are taking it from taxpayers in other parts of the State or country (if Federal money is involved, which it usually is). It amounts to a dash for cash. (This is the same behavior that gave us the Skyway).
So, really, opposition from the public to spend a few more bucks to do these types of projects right is unlikely to materialize.
I suspect the better answer is that FDOT has a strong desire to extend the tentacles of its road network to the greatest extent today so it will have guaranteed "fix it" projects tomorrow. Job security. Cutting corners (literally ;)) is the way to accomplish this.
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on September 08, 2010, 11:06:22 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on September 07, 2010, 11:00:25 PM
QuoteIf you were going to spend all that money, why not just make it 4 lanes or whatnot so the bottlenecks don't start up?
Put in four and it will still back up. Have you checked out the new lanes on I-95 between JTB and Bowden? Traffic still backs up during rush hour. The bottleneck on I-95 just shifted north to Bowden/University where the lanes cut down from four to three northbound. It will get worse as more development occurs on the Southside. You can't pave your way out of congestion so why bother? As a fiscal conservative, I would invest in a reliable mass transit alternative and let the bottlenecks happen.
The I-95 backup that starts around bowden/university daily is a direct result of whatever idiot made the exit for JTB end in a timed stoplight rather than using a flyover or cloverleaf. As a stopgap measure they added an extra "waiting lane" for people in line to exit, and this made things a little better for the rest of the traffic flow over the past couple months since it's been open.
I was talking about the situation on the northbound lanes, during morning rush hour, that I drive through every weekday.
QuoteIf you fixed these congestion points, the 95/10 merge and the 95/JTB merge, the entirety of 95 between the airport and 295 would be relatively free-flowing, aside from accidents/blockages.
At what cost (financial, social, economic, etc.)? Unless a building mortuarium goes along with improvements, relief will only be short term but the damage to the adjacent environment and neighborhoods will be long term.
Construction of MLK & I-95 through Brentwood and New Springfield(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-1915-mlk-construction-moses-1962.jpg)
Under I-95: The once vibrant community of Sugar Hill(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/481258415_eLt2S-600x10000.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/481258411_yBHKS-600x10000.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/479043090_EXYfA-M.jpg)
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/479043390_qFPSu-M.jpg)
progress :)
the annoying part of the 10-95 exchange is that so much confusion is abetted by the incorrect signs.
I, like many of you, drive this expanse daily. more than once.
I am suprised to read that folks truly believe that the previous iteration of this junction was superior to what we will have at completion!
I cannot complain about the successful elimination of cross-weave maneuvers no longer required by motorists entering this zone.
If you cannot simply zoom out your focus and see that all is streamlined by designating I-10 Eastbound lanes 1 and 2 as thru lanes directly to !-95 north or south and all right-hand lanes are local exit/merge lanes.. . from McDuff to Adams DT_stay on a train and bypass town altogether kids.
I cannot agree that what we had before was better=safer.
sell me on that one!>?
Oh and entering 10 EAST from Stockton, seeking 95 North? no problem. Left side turn signals flashing, checking my mirrors, that lane ends at Forest, and move over one more, and that's it.
If that's too aggressive for you then you should mosey on around via Edison and Irene streets and enter 95N from Forest St. if merging freaks you out. But really, the old way was better!? c'mon joking right?
Quote from: ricker on September 11, 2010, 05:21:18 AM
I, like many of you, drive this expanse daily. more than once.
I am suprised to read that folks truly believe that the previous iteration of this junction was superior to what we will have at completion!
I cannot complain about the successful elimination of cross-weave maneuvers no longer required by motorists entering this zone.
If you cannot simply zoom out your focus and see that all is streamlined by designating I-10 Eastbound lanes 1 and 2 as thru lanes directly to !-95 north or south and all right-hand lanes are local exit/merge lanes.. . from McDuff to Adams DT_stay on a train and bypass town altogether kids.
I cannot agree that what we had before was better=safer.
sell me on that one!>?
Oh and entering 10 EAST from Stockton, seeking 95 North? no problem. Left side turn signals flashing, checking my mirrors, that lane ends at Forest, and move over one more, and that's it.
If that's too aggressive for you then you should mosey on around via Edison and Irene streets and enter 95N from Forest St. if merging freaks you out. But really, the old way was better!? c'mon joking right?
In my opinion, yeah. You have a valid point about everyone from Riverside who needed to enter at Stockton and then jack over 6 lanes to take 95 North, the new design certainly did clear that problem up somewhat since you only have to move one or two lanes now. But the rest of it, I mean, the proof's in the pudding. I drove through there yesterday at 3pm, coming from Springfield. It was not even rush hour yet, and 95 South was backed up well past the post office, probably almost to 8th street. 10 East was congested too.
Yes some little changes they made were improvements, but overall I have to say no, the traffic doesn't flow as well. Some of that undoubtedly has to do with the confusing/misleading/lack of signage, so I'm hoping it gets better as they finish installing the rest of the signs. And as far as safety goes, there probably has been an improvement in that, it's pretty hard to get hurt when you're only moving 10 miles an hour.
Quote from: stjr on September 09, 2010, 07:09:38 PM
Quote from: cline on September 09, 2010, 06:55:05 PM
So how much extra land should they have bought? Enough land to accommodate traffic demand in 1990, 2000, 2020, 2035, 2060 or beyond?
Since there are clearly limits to the ultimate capacity/expansion of the roads servicing the interchange, they should buy enough land to match the impact on the interchange from that capacity being achieved. The old expression, "A chain is as strong as its weakest link" should apply here. What good is it to build out I-95 or JTB if the interchange connecting them can't service that traffic flow?
There is another alternative: Take the hundreds of millions needed for these, often stopgap, interchange improvements and build out commuter rail for the same or less. What do you think of placing a moratorium on interchange improvements like JTB and I-95 and putting the money toward mass transit?
Hey STJR;
I think it has been mentioned in other parts of this site, but JTB was never envisioned as a major arterial between Southside and I-95. The original plan was to have the Hart Bridge Expressway come all the way down to a place near the JTB/Southside interchange.
When that plan was blocked, they routed JTB over the original Belfort Road ROW which used to curve west at St Lukes and intersect with Philips Highway. What you see today between I-95 and Philips is a remnant of that old Belfort Road alignment. That is why JTB takes that funny jog to the south west of Belfort.
Now to some people's credit, they did purchase a significant portion of land in and around Bonneval & Philips & I-95 to facilitate a future interchange. That is what they are planning to use in the current proposals.
With no more existing rail between the city core and the beach, (The FEC Mayport Line was torn out in 1936) only a totally new solution could be built as a transit option.
Spuwho, you bring up another failure of our road planners: Failure to have the bird-in-hand (i.e. an approved MASTER plan) before starting a project and then sticking to it. If the Hart connection you allude to was not nailed down, then why was JTB even started?
This is the same issue that plagues most of Jax transit, downtown, and other public projects: Failure to properly vision, design, and faithfully execute a comprehensive plan. How many projects here disappoint, fail, or don't function adequately because of this affliction? Lots.
Quote from STJR:
QuoteWhy was JTB built to begin with? Because dramatic growth was expected in the area it was serving.
Sorry you are wrong. JTB was built to CAUSE the growth; to open up the area for development. No growth was anticipated without the road. Think McCormick, Hodges, Davis, Peyton.
Quote from: Dog Walker on September 11, 2010, 01:25:56 PM
Quote from STJR:
QuoteWhy was JTB built to begin with? Because dramatic growth was expected in the area it was serving.
Sorry you are wrong. JTB was built to CAUSE the growth; to open up the area for development. No growth was anticipated without the road. Think McCormick, Hodges, Davis, Peyton.
Dog, I think we are trying to say the same thing. What I meant was that growth was expected upon the completion of the road. And, as EXPECTED, it succeeded in being the catalyst for same. Clearly, no road, no growth. The access it created stimulated the growth. And, no one, least of all, "transportation planning experts", should have been surprised.
When JTB was built, everyone called it "The Road to Nowhere." I'm sure the people who caused it to be built hoped that it would need to be expanded, but they had enough trouble getting it built in the first place and even had to build it as a toll road to justify it to the public.
"If you build it, they will come." Is far more true of roads than of baseball fields. We've been driving the roads around Orlando in the past few days and my nose has certainly been rubbed it that truth!
IIRC, the Skinners, Hodges, et al, donated the land for JTB, and reserved the right to have frequent access. Sometime later, JTA bought the limited access rights, to keep JTB from becoming Beach or Blanding Boulevard. This is part of the reason JTA paid for that new road just south of JTB (AC Skinner Parkway?), to make up for losing access to JTB.
Not that this has much to do with the topic "I10-95 Merger" ....
Quote from: Dog Walker on September 11, 2010, 01:51:49 PM
I'm sure the people who caused it to be built hoped that it would need to be expanded, but they had enough trouble getting it built in the first place and even had to build it as a toll road to justify it to the public.
Maybe opposition to the road was derived from the fact that almost all the land it crossed through was owned by three families: Skinner, Hodges, and Davis. This was a "special interest" road if there ever was one. But, the politicos were seduced by the donation of "free" land for the road. Of course, there were "terms and conditions" to go along with "free". Such as guaranteed interchanges to their properties built and paid for by we, the taxpayers. Needless to say, it made a lot of rich people richer. And, as evidenced by the estimated $114 million in present and future upgrades to the I-95/JTB interchange, following the six laning of much of JTB, we taxpayers will continue to pay for this for a very long time.
stjr..........the only thing that benifits anyone on AC Skinner Parkway is "DR Horten" and that about it...... some office complex's at the Belfort Road end, hotels and T Mobile Jacksonville Headquarters! DR Horten has two condo/apartment complex's down there, if I remember correctly!
Quote from: CS Foltz on September 11, 2010, 03:22:08 PM
stjr..........the only thing that benifits anyone on AC Skinner Parkway is "DR Horten" and that about it...... some office complex's at the Belfort Road end, hotels and T Mobile Jacksonville Headquarters! DR Horten has two condo/apartment complex's down there, if I remember correctly!
CS, me thinks you are referring to post by Charles. Point noted nonetheless. ;)
Ooops! Did not read far enough ahead! Thanks stjr.............credit where credit is due......Thanks Mr Charles!
Quote from: Dog Walker on September 11, 2010, 01:51:49 PM
When JTB was built, everyone called it "The Road to Nowhere." I'm sure the people who caused it to be built hoped that it would need to be expanded, but they had enough trouble getting it built in the first place and even had to build it as a toll road to justify it to the public.
"If you build it, they will come." Is far more true of roads than of baseball fields. We've been driving the roads around Orlando in the past few days and my nose has certainly been rubbed it that truth!
Talk about Urban Sprawl! ... I left Orlando in 2001 and except for work-related drives there, Never looked back. Before Disney, Im sure Orlando was a pretty sleepy area, and certainly it's outlying areas : Ocoee, Christmas, Winter Park, Casselberry, Longwood, etc were sleepy areas. Roads were built, and by God, they came.. like rats from a burning ship!
So CS...I assume that the folks who live in the DR Horton complexor work in the offices also benefit?
tufsu.......can't say for sure! I do know there appears to be quite a few retired types and some young professionals! Retired types probably go downtown for the exciting night life right? Plenty of trees left for DR Horton to cut down and name the streets after the cut trees! I do know there are alot of offices at the Belfort end, but have no idea as to what types of business's.............T Mobile Headquarters, a physicians bldg and then some financials and school. Got some typical strip mall stuff, a few foodie stores that open morning and lunch but no supper stuff! Then you have the Hotels past there..............several! Unless those who work there actually live in one of the DR Horton developments, I kinda doubt they all do! I know of no one who works at T Mobile, who lives in one of the two stick trash complexes...........at least as of one year ago. I knew most of them in the RF, Engineering and Design Departments and most of them lived in Clay County or out at the Beaches!
what do you mean you can't say for sure? You implied that Skinner Pkwy only benefits DR Horton...clearly it also benefits those who live there....without it, they couldn't access their houses!
Regarding 10/95_ what info is available on the dogpark?
will it connect the proposed artist walk from RAM to McCoy creek by way of school 4 and the abandoned 2 story brick structure across Forest St from new Animal Care and Control?
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 12, 2010, 11:23:36 PM
what do you mean you can't say for sure? You implied that Skinner Pkwy only benefits DR Horton...clearly it also benefits those who live there....without it, they couldn't access their houses!
tufsu...........you do realize that DR Horton did not build their complex's until AC Skinner was put in right? Belfort Rd was there long before AC Skinner along with most of the office bldg's all ready in place, the Hotels and the T Mobile Headquarter! That used to be a TV station by the way, AC Skinner stopped there, bridge was not there and road was not in place! When that was completed.............then DR Horton inserted their Apartments from hell........not before! I was refering to the people who live there, a mix of professionals and retired, but that did not go in until AC Skinner was completed, with our tax dollars by the way! DR Horton did not contribute and pay to have it done!
I am glad it was built as it helps me get between my office at Belfort and A.C. Skinner and S.S. Blvd without having to get caught up in the traffic at Belfort and JTB abd JTB and S.S. Blvd. There are several people at my office who live in those apartments that work in our office.
Quote from: CS Foltz on September 13, 2010, 07:19:03 AM
with our tax dollars by the way!
do the folks who live/work there pay taxes?
Of course they do...............at least I hope they do! Got nothing against AC Skinner or even the DR Horton projects! Those projects were not built until AC Skinner, the bridge that is, was completed then poof! Here comes DR with a megalopolis building project! They were not built until after the bridge was done so whose tax dollars were used? Theirs? Maybe, but concurrency sure has heck did not.............DR has a habit of talking big but putting the cost off on the public! I could use the old Bay Meadows Golf Course as an example! Both roads, Bay Meadows Circle East and West are "Private" not city nor county..........that means the area has to pay for road repairs and upgrades........not the city, county or state! That money comes out of my pocket, not your tax dollars like the Main Street upgrades did! There is a limit and when private enterprise takes advantage of private roads, without paying for the privilege, something is wrong here!
Construction concluding at intersection of interstates 10 and 95 in downtown Jacksonville
All lanes will be open by Friday night in the $152 million project.
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-09-13/story/construction-concluding-intersection-interstates-10-and-95
Let's hope the signs are ready too! LOL!
No matter what you think of the design, Archer-Western deserves major applause for bringing in this difficult, complicated project under time and under budget with minimal disruption to the surrounding neighborhoods and the traffic flow.
Be careful out there until you get used to the changes!
Glad to see this thing nearing the end. It should start to work more smoothly once the public adjusts to it.
Now we have the I95 overland bridge replacement to look forward too! :)
And the continued construction at I95 and JTB....
And the continued I10 widening...
Quote from: Dog Walker on September 14, 2010, 03:13:16 PM
Let's hope the signs are ready too! LOL!
No matter what you think of the design, Archer-Western deserves major applause for bringing in this difficult, complicated project under time and under budget with minimal disruption to the surrounding neighborhoods and the traffic flow.
Be careful out there until you get used to the changes!
Really, for all of the complaining (myself included) about the changes in traffic pattern, they truly did a great job with minimum disruption to traffic. Prior Proper Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance!
The Five P's Principal..............ya gotta love em!
In the earlier renderings and scaled models available for public viewing, there was a barrier to be constructed separating lanes 2 and 3 on Interstate-10 east, beginning before US-17 traffic joined the flow into Downtown, quite a length before the current (pointless) last-minute divider.
THIS would have eliminated the 6 lane side swiping which is still permitted.
As the project rests now, "cross weave" will unfortunately continue.
I saw a Neon from Roosevelt smash into a Camry in lane3 on 10E and spin into the east/west dividing wall sending the Camry into the wall over Rosselle St.
Smoking tires and scared faces.
2 days prior, a Mountaineer was rear-ended by an idiot looking right at me. I was 2 lanes to her right entering 10w from Irene (stockton).
SLOW DOWN to 45MPH and for everyone's sake, why tailgate if you're south of Adams St, East of McDuff, or northwest of the FullerWarren bridge, people!
Oh unless you like paying more for insurance, being without a car, or are just plain stupid.
Now , if PS #4 could be refurbed, the intersection would really be complete .
The signage is horrible. There is nothing indicating the left exit for 95N from 10E or the right exit for 95S from 17. So the whole weaving deal is even worse now. :-\
Agreed.
so succinctly stated.
Quote from: acme54321 on September 29, 2010, 08:36:09 PM
The signage is horrible. There is nothing indicating the left exit for 95N from 10E or the right exit for 95S from 17. So the whole weaving deal is even worse now. :-\
I too agree. I do like the interchange overall except for this great oversight
In the morning, unless you want to add about 10-12 minutes to your commute... you are essentially forced to cross over three lanes of traffic to get to the two far left lanes feeding I-10 East to I-95 South if you are merging into the highway from the Roosevelt on-ramp. If you stay in the single lane to the right(that serves THREE lanes of feeder traffic) I have timed over a two-week period a 10-12 minute difference in commute time when compared to making the wayward lane dance to the left.
BTW, leaving at 10 minutes to 8 today, I arrived to work off Gate Parkway at 8:48AM. That's a 58 minute commute, and I saw no evidence of an accident... just a bunch of Road Rangers trucks and two cement mixers blocking off lanes at the base of the Fuller Warren. I hope there wasn't an accident b/c that would suck if someone is hurt... but all I see is a monsterosity of a money pit built that made no difference whatsoever to traffic. I'm beginning to think I would literally pay MORE than I do in gas every month to ride commuter rail instead of going through all this GD traffic!!
I think there may be a need for signage on roosevelt expwy....other than that, the only reason the interchange seems odd is because folks are used to going to the left or right...think about it....ther are many roads that exit the opposite way that may seem intuitive without creating propblems.
give it some time and folks will get used to the new pattern....and then everything will work more smoothly.
Agreed, TU, but right now a lot of people are trying to crowd into the single, right-hand lane to get to I-95S and it is created horrendous backups.
A sign on the Roosevelt Ave approach indicating to stay right to go to I-95S might help a lot.
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 29, 2010, 11:05:00 PM
I think there may be a need for signage on roosevelt expwy....other than that, the only reason the interchange seems odd is because folks are used to going to the left or right...think about it....ther are many roads that exit the opposite way that may seem intuitive without creating propblems.
There is no sign indicating the left exit for through traffic from 10E to 95N. Next time you go through look at how many cars are using that ramp. Zero. I don't know if I have seen anyone go up it yet. The only signage for 95 north tells people to get into the center lanes where the DT exits are.
It seems odd to me that the two new ramps that are there to avoid all of the weaving are not even identified by signs on the appropriate roads ??? A center divider down the section where 17 comes in would help, so people cannot merge all the way accross and are forced to use the right side 95S exit and not weave over to the middle one.
Quote from: Dog Walker on September 30, 2010, 08:05:55 AM
Agreed, TU, but right now a lot of people are trying to crowd into the single, right-hand lane to get to I-95S and it is created horrendous backups.
A sign on the Roosevelt Ave approach indicating to stay right to go to I-95S might help a lot.
Congestion of that single lane is also not helped by people who go 30MPH around it >:(
Coming from I-95 northbound over the Fuller Warren, there is a lack of signage at the "Local Exits" ramp for downtown. The only sign is the exit number with no street names at the ramp. There was a temporary construction sign but it's now gone.
Also, out of three I-95 northbound exits for downtown, two remain accessible from the center "through" lanes. However, those "through" lane vehicles need to cross two or three lanes to exit downtown (Union and Kings Rd. exits) so I don't see where the weaving is eliminated in that case. This also makes the "local" ramp less than effective since only one of its three exits is exclusive to it. (And, that one exclusive "local" exit is for Monroe which appears will be going nowhere after its closed for the Courthouse.)
The taxpayer paid for all those high tech information signs........why aren't they being used? Additional signage should be installed for enought ahead to be of use.......just common sense!
95 North has ample capacity... its the merging of 95South from I-10 East that has, and continues to be the problem.
IMO, all this did was create a big thoroughfare to Forrest where not much traffic existed previously, nor exists now... and the congestion problems are still there.
Great way to spend hundreds of millions of dollars, wouldn't you say?
fieldafm, should folks like you going from Roosevelt to 95 south consider using the newly improved McDuff Av to get on 10 east to 95 south?
Quote from: urbanlibertarian on September 30, 2010, 01:23:23 PM
fieldafm, should folks like you going from Roosevelt to 95 south consider using the newly improved McDuff Av to get on 10 east to 95 south?
That's a REALLY good idea. I may try that on Tuesday(off Monday). I'll get back to you and let you know.
I tried snapping a picture of the difference today, but traffic flow was running fairly swiftly on the left hand lanes so it was better to pay attention to actually driving so as not to cause an accident than focus on some social experiment, lol.
Last night I drove up State to 95 S, and didn't know they were closing the 10 Westbound lanes.
All traffic was merged into the 95 Southbound side. An exit came up for Forest and I took it - I didn't want to do another late-night u-turn trip at San Marco like they did the last few weeks.
After I drive off I look up and notice a sign after my exit that was another ramp to 10 W. Had I known THAT, I wouldn't have bothered trying to get myself lost.
Does anyone else propose the idea for painting lane/exit markers on the roads?
RE: The Forest Street Exit
I think it was put in to serve the large number of people who work in the Riverside Ave. high rises. Blue Cross, Fidelity, Everbank Bldg., etc.
Before the construction of the new interchange and exit, anyone coming to work there from I-95 North took the Margaret Street exit to College or Post to get to Riverside Ave. Anyone coming from I-10 West had to get off at Stockton Street and work their way through the neighborhood to College or Margaret and Post Street.
The flow of people coming from Riverside, Murry Hill, Avondale, etc. to get to downtown and Riverside Ave businesses already crowded these corridors. The new Forest Street Exit is just two blocks from Riverside Ave and has three lanes directly there in the middle of the big building row.
Seems like smart planning to me and we are already seeing a reduction of traffic through the Post and Park Street intersection and through the neighborhood to College Street-Rosselle to Riverside.
I defended the interchange due to the route that I normally take - 17 to 95N, but today is a different story my friends.
Driving from 295 -10E - 95N - plenty of signage telling me that 95S is the 2 left lanes, 95N is the next 3 lanes. Once you get in view of the lane split - big sign reads (l to r) 95n - 95n - 95s - 95s- 95n - 95n - 95n - 95n - dt.
It might be part of the 'big plan', but if they just herded both left lanes (before you get to the 17 interchange) and made them stay there and not allow the merging 17 traffic to cross all the way over, a lot of the lane swapping and confusion would be eliminated.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on October 01, 2010, 02:09:21 PM
It might be part of the 'big plan', but if they just herded both left lanes (before you get to the 17 interchange) and made them stay there and not allow the merging 17 traffic to cross all the way over, a lot of the lane swapping and confusion would be eliminated.
AMEN BROTHER! Which according to the renderings of the project was supposed to be the plan to begin with. Wasn't there supposed to be a barrier separating incomming from US17 from the existing traffic on 10?
I thought I had read something along those lines. There also seemed to be a lot of road patching between cassat and mcduff, so maybe they are gearing up to start moving west with the project - it would kind of make sense that they don't jack the entire road up at once, since they have a lot of construction west of 295 also.
Maybe we're being too impatient and should let them actually finish (that makes me laugh a little - finish a road project) and then we can bitch about it. ;D
now DOW chemicals has identified a "shortage" in the necessary ingredient in road stripe paint.
NPR.
I find it funny that I pointed out these problems awhile back, saying the new interchange is asinine and dangerous. Everyone defended it. Now that people have had a chance to use it themselves, as I did, they see the same problems.
Anyway I hope they fix this design, it really is dangerous and a pain.
Quote from: urbanlibertarian on September 30, 2010, 01:23:23 PM
fieldafm, should folks like you going from Roosevelt to 95 south consider using the newly improved McDuff Av to get on 10 east to 95 south?
Forgive if noted earlier by others- Northbound Roosevelt to I-95 South-rather than attempting a heroic leap over to the northerly lanes just stay put on the southerly side and another Southbound lane appears.........
north miami, my suggestion was in re of the post below:
Quote from: fieldafm on September 29, 2010, 10:45:09 PM
In the morning, unless you want to add about 10-12 minutes to your commute... you are essentially forced to cross over three lanes of traffic to get to the two far left lanes feeding I-10 East to I-95 South if you are merging into the highway from the Roosevelt on-ramp. If you stay in the single lane to the right(that serves THREE lanes of feeder traffic) I have timed over a two-week period a 10-12 minute difference in commute time when compared to making the wayward lane dance to the left.
BTW, leaving at 10 minutes to 8 today, I arrived to work off Gate Parkway at 8:48AM. That's a 58 minute commute, and I saw no evidence of an accident... just a bunch of Road Rangers trucks and two cement mixers blocking off lanes at the base of the Fuller Warren. I hope there wasn't an accident b/c that would suck if someone is hurt... but all I see is a monsterosity of a money pit built that made no difference whatsoever to traffic. I'm beginning to think I would literally pay MORE than I do in gas every month to ride commuter rail instead of going through all this GD traffic!!
Quote from: fieldafm on October 01, 2010, 11:05:07 AM
Quote from: urbanlibertarian on September 30, 2010, 01:23:23 PM
fieldafm, should folks like you going from Roosevelt to 95 south consider using the newly improved McDuff Av to get on 10 east to 95 south?
That's a REALLY good idea. I may try that on Tuesday(off Monday). I'll get back to you and let you know.
I tried snapping a picture of the difference today, but traffic flow was running fairly swiftly on the left hand lanes so it was better to pay attention to actually driving so as not to cause an accident than focus on some social experiment, lol.
Ive been going into work earlier than normal this week, but have been using the McDuff onramp instead of the awful Roosevelt conundrum all week and its been a pretty big difference. We'll see if that continues when I stop going to work early.
Thank you for the suggestion!
I'm confused- Roosevelt turns into the McDuff on ramp. How else would you go?
^^
olives,
Are you suggesting local and nonlocal motorists should actively observe the overhead signs?
At one time in the recent past (as evidenced by google streetview/, may've since been updated?idk idc) ;
when traveling north on 17, over Edgewood, ahead the sign from L to R =
[I-10W Post St.], [I-10E 95].
Seems they SHOULD read:
Lane 1
[I-10West via McDuff, North Riverside] indicating that you can either make a left at what is NOW IslandBar, OR continue in your lane if that particualr left stacking/turn lane is too congested for your liking and simply make a left at the BP/Chevron which also McDuff.
NEXT, Lane 2 overhead:
[I-10 East, Stockton Street, Downtown, 95, Lane Ends 1mile. MERGE LEFT]
and Oh yeah. Also on 17n...
once north of the McDuff intersection, new overhead panel indicating 95 S bound traffic remain in LANE 1!
Lane 2 exits at Stockton.
Lane 1 ends at Forest St. merge left one lane to acces DT and 95N.
SIMPLE
^
olives, sorry I only now more fully understand the disconnect above.
I believe the earlier recommendation to fieldafm was to use McDuff Avenue to access I-10 East instead of the Roosevelt connector
Getting on I-10 East at a point west of- and therefore outside of the interchange- project limits so as to take advantage of the length of road ahead in eliminating the 3 lane change now necessary to avoid the single lane access to 95SOUTH between Stockton and Forest.
Single lane to 95 S still backs up herrondously and will continue to do so during overland bridge replacement through east SanMarco, Hendricks closure etc.
folks from northbound 17 prefer to dart over to Lanes 1 and 2 of 10E to cross the river rather than use the lane they're in. Adding 12 minutes to your commute time? maybe. sideswiping a bus/ considerably longer.
Evidence of the mad dart to the far left can now be seen via telling skid marks.........
I witnessed such a dash Sunday-like in a movie chase scene.
It will be interesting to monitor accident incidents.
More descriptive signage seems in order.
I have now been using McDuff to get on I-10 every morning and its quicker and safer than the mess at the Roosevelt on ramp.
On a bright note, I get on 10E to 95N from Roosevelt every morning and things are fine.
Sounds like the voices complaining about the "secret" exit from I-10 to I-95 South have been heard.
For the past two days there has been a crew putting up the foundation for a new, big traffic sign over the exit. The sign will probably go up next week after the concrete has hardened. Hope it doesn't cause confusion for people who are already in the correct lanes on the left.
Now that we're several months out, does this interchange seem to be a failure or a success? Or is it too soon to tell? I can't help to notice that there are still heavy backups early in the morning which originally were said to be because of drivers unfamiliar with the new traffic patterns. Now there should be no excuse though.
It looks like a lot of the backup in the right-most I-95 lane is partially caused by people moving right from the middle lanes, where they should go left instead.
The rapid merges after you get onto I-95 might also have something to do with it.
Well, if you are going 95 N from Stockton you've got to make at least 5 lane changes to continue on 95 N. I hate it. But then I believe they could have downsized 95 going through town because of 295, 9A & B.
Kay, Try getting on a couple of blocks away on the Forest St. entrance to go I-95 North. It's much easier and less tense making.
In my experience, the problem has been everyone crowding up on that "secret" right side exit... what I think would probably alleviate it is some signage further down I-10 telling people "Hey, stay in these damn lanes to go 95 south." Or maybe do something for the I-17 merger signage. (That Stockton exit always screws things up. People trying to cut traffic that's piling up for the 95 south exit. Trying to merge for 95 north. It's just a wreck on heavy traffic days.)