AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Mountain West => Topic started by: sandiaman on April 18, 2009, 02:42:07 PM

Title: New Mexico
Post by: sandiaman on April 18, 2009, 02:42:07 PM
Has anyone  used  US 84/285  freeway north os Santa Fe to Pojuaque?  It is real pleasure to drive on,with Indian names on the overpasses,  ( each overpass has a  unique Tewa name on the overhead part of the overpass).  The  sound barrier walls have animal designs as well.  It goes past a huge new casino here called the Buffalo Thunder, which opened last summer.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Bickendan on August 08, 2009, 06:19:58 AM
I've been on it, but it was several years ago.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: J N Winkler on August 15, 2009, 05:51:47 AM
I have been on it multiple times and actually managed to obtain a partial set of construction plans for it.  The bridge designs are a particular treat.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Pink Jazz on December 21, 2018, 10:12:59 AM
NMDOT is increasing the speed limit on US 285 between Roswell and Vaughn to 75 mph:
https://www.rdrnews.com/2018/12/19/speed-limit-to-increase-to-75-mph-between-roswell-vaughn-in-january/

This is the second non-Interstate highway in New Mexico to have a 75 mph speed limit (the first being US 70 through White Sands).
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: The High Plains Traveler on December 29, 2018, 03:02:55 PM
Quote from: Pink Jazz on December 21, 2018, 10:12:59 AM
NMDOT is increasing the speed limit on US 285 between Roswell and Vaughn to 75 mph:
https://www.rdrnews.com/2018/12/19/speed-limit-to-increase-to-75-mph-between-roswell-vaughn-in-january/

This is the second non-Interstate highway in New Mexico to have a 75 mph speed limit (the first being US 70 through White Sands).
That is such a lonely highway. There is absolutely nothing in that stretch. It looks like someone tried once upon a time to operate a gas station along there, but it failed.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on December 29, 2018, 09:10:10 PM
    Part of Gary Johnson's four lane program.  Believe only reason US 285 was included in that, is due to the fact the route was designated as part of the WIPP waste route from Los Alamos to the WIPP facility near Carlsbad.   
    Like the rest of Johnson's program this particular route's rebuild fell short in several areas.   Medians too narrow, they certainly could have been opened up to the full 88 feet in desolate areas.  Shoulders often were "half" shoulders, only six feet wide or so.   Vertical and horizontal curves not always optimum.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: kinupanda on December 31, 2018, 11:44:30 AM
Drove the stretch northbound from the NM 599 Relief Route to NM 502 (I was cutting across to Los Alamos) in March. The artwork on the overpasses did catch my eye.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: CanesFan27 on July 07, 2019, 05:13:51 PM

In October 2007, I made my first visit to New Mexico.  My first full day there, I took a lengthy loop into Northern New Mexico and briefly into Colorado.  That one trip had me hooked! I hope you enjoy!

https://www.gribblenation.org/2019/07/looking-back-2010-new-mexico-visit.html
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on December 26, 2019, 01:57:14 PM
University Avenue / I-25 interchange (Exit 1) is slated to begin reconstruction January 2nd.   Two large traffic circles are included to connect the myriad ramps and frontage roads near the interchange and the state University.   Kind of bizarre, maybe it will work.   Last of the seven Interstate interchanges in the general area to undergo major rehabilitation and or reconstruction.  Most of these rehabs and replacements (since 2000) with the exception of Motel Blvd (i-10 Exit 139) have fallen well short of ideal.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: JKRhodes on January 10, 2020, 11:48:07 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on December 26, 2019, 01:57:14 PM
University Avenue / I-25 interchange (Exit 1) is slated to begin reconstruction January 2nd.   Two large traffic circles are included to connect the myriad ramps and frontage roads near the interchange and the state University.   Kind of bizarre, maybe it will work.   Last of the seven Interstate interchanges in the general area to undergo major rehabilitation and or reconstruction.  Most of these rehabs and replacements (since 2000) with the exception of Motel Blvd (i-10 Exit 139) have fallen well short of ideal.

I remember going to NMSU and routinely seeing traffic back up onto Southbound I-25 from the University exit; lots of accidents. They lengthened the deceleration lane as a stopgap measure, but it still gets bad when school is in session. I can imagine it's even worse today with more students commuting from Sonoma Ranch and other points north. The roundabouts and underpass will allow traffic coming off of I-25, as well as Triviz, more direct access to the Pan American Center. This should take a lot of pressure off of the intersection at Triviz and University, and in turn, reduce backups on Mainline I-25.

As for the intersections east of I-25, I'm not a big fan of having three intersections  (I-25 ramps, Don Roser, Telshor) in such close proximity, and this project won't do anything to address that. Then again I don't know if any improvements over there would be warranted at this time anyway.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on February 10, 2020, 12:10:21 AM
Quote from: JKRhodes on January 10, 2020, 11:48:07 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on December 26, 2019, 01:57:14 PM
University Avenue / I-25 interchange (Exit 1) is slated to begin reconstruction January 2nd.   Two large traffic circles are included to connect the myriad ramps and frontage roads near the interchange and the state University.   Kind of bizarre, maybe it will work.   Last of the seven Interstate interchanges in the general area to undergo major rehabilitation and or reconstruction.  Most of these rehabs and replacements (since 2000) with the exception of Motel Blvd (i-10 Exit 139) have fallen well short of ideal.

I remember going to NMSU and routinely seeing traffic back up onto Southbound I-25 from the University exit; lots of accidents. They lengthened the deceleration lane as a stopgap measure, but it still gets bad when school is in session. I can imagine it's even worse today with more students commuting from Sonoma Ranch and other points north. The roundabouts and underpass will allow traffic coming off of I-25, as well as Triviz, more direct access to the Pan American Center. This should take a lot of pressure off of the intersection at Triviz and University, and in turn, reduce backups on Mainline I-25.

As for the intersections east of I-25, I'm not a big fan of having three intersections  (I-25 ramps, Don Roser, Telshor) in such close proximity, and this project won't do anything to address that. Then again I don't know if any improvements over there would be warranted at this time anyway.

   The University Ave job (I-25 Exit 1) is actually a cheap redo.  It is only 33.4 million.  They are not touching most of the frontage roads - only a small piece of Triviz Ave is being altered, and there is no change to anything on the E side of the interchange.  Including the irksome University EB to 25 NB loop ramp, which was "restored" five or six years ago, after having been eliminated from it's original configuration as part of a "Quarter cloverleaf".   They spent 3.2 million to do that, and shifted the 25 NB mainlines six feet towards the median centerline as part of it.   
   Really doubt the new bridge has adequate width for eight lanes - two general purpose in each direction and two left hand turn lanes in each direction.  There should have been a symmetrical Diamond installed here - pulling the NB off and on ramps from 25 closer to the 25 mainlines.   That would have increased the distance between two of the University signals - Don Roser and the 25 ramps.  One way frontages would have prevented the current signal clustering.  And it is not clear if they are adding additional horizontal clearance for a six lane I-25, which thought? was supposed to happen between Exit 0 (I-10) and Exit 6 (US-70).  They are sticking message boards willy-nilly everywhere in the last few years, and several are just outside the R guardrail, on the four lane sections of 25.  Seems not thought out for any sort of widening, at all.  Cannot understand why these message boards cannot be centered on median centerline, with a center post, and boards facing in both directions?!?   
   Well at least it isn't becoming a DDI.  If the area had had true one way frontages established by 1980 - this area wouldn't have become the mess it is today.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: roadfro on February 10, 2020, 03:51:20 PM
^ At least as far as message boards in the median are concerned: sometimes it makes more sense to mount the DMS structure from a cantelivered structure on the outer shoulder. Especially since you need to run power and communications lines to it (which are usually more likely to be in the outside shoulder) as well as have a controller cabinet. Both the controller cabinet and the sign itself must be accessible for maintenance purposes, so it's usually better and safer on the outside shoulder where a DOT vehicle can park well outside of the traveled way. The only time I've seen NevadaDOT mount two DMSs in the median on one structure, it was an extremely wide non-landscaped median (about 40+ feet wide).
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Pink Jazz on March 04, 2020, 10:00:58 PM
Quote from: roadfro on February 10, 2020, 03:51:20 PM
^ At least as far as message boards in the median are concerned: sometimes it makes more sense to mount the DMS structure from a cantelivered structure on the outer shoulder. Especially since you need to run power and communications lines to it (which are usually more likely to be in the outside shoulder) as well as have a controller cabinet. Both the controller cabinet and the sign itself must be accessible for maintenance purposes, so it's usually better and safer on the outside shoulder where a DOT vehicle can park well outside of the traveled way. The only time I've seen NevadaDOT mount two DMSs in the median on one structure, it was an extremely wide non-landscaped median (about 40+ feet wide).


Speaking of DMS, NMDOT has bought exclusively from Adaptive Micro Systems since the early 2010s, making up the majority of the DMS in the state (previous installations were Skyline, and before that, ADDCO).  NMDOT since the early 2010s has chosen not to competively bid its contracts for DMS (unlike ADOT), since NMDOT prefers having commonality.  ADOT on the other hand prefers to go with the lowest cost (current vendor for ADOT is Daktronics).  I think because ADOT is a much larger agency than NMDOT, ADOT can better manage having multiple vendors and models of DMS.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: JKRhodes on April 28, 2020, 01:23:59 AM
Quote from: DJStephens on February 10, 2020, 12:10:21 AM
   Well at least it isn't becoming a DDI.  If the area had had true one way frontages established by 1980 - this area wouldn't have become the mess it is today.

You bring up an interesting point. So has the idea of a regional one-way frontage road system for I-25 been explored before? Aside from the area near the mall, it seems like it would be a pretty straightforward conversion and highly beneficial, especially for businesses near Spruce if they were to add on-ramps.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on May 03, 2020, 08:23:21 AM
Quote from: JKRhodes on April 28, 2020, 01:23:59 AM
Quote from: DJStephens on February 10, 2020, 12:10:21 AM
   Well at least it isn't becoming a DDI.  If the area had had true one way frontages established by 1980 - this area wouldn't have become the mess it is today.

You bring up an interesting point. So has the idea of a regional one-way frontage road system for I-25 been explored before? Aside from the area near the mall, it seems like it would be a pretty straightforward conversion and highly beneficial, especially for businesses near Spruce if they were to add on-ramps.

Was saying - there should have been one way frontages developed by 1980 - on both I-10 and 25 in the immediate municipal environs.   Just no foresight to have moved in that direction.   Only issue (then) is a small historic church (St James Presbyterian) that I-10 narrowly missed during its very late sixties construction.   So there would have been a gap in the EB frontage there.  Today, with development packing in at interchanges, on both 10 and 25, any true continuous frontages would be near impossible.   The early 10's "reconstruction" of the 10/25 interchange should have had conversion to one way frontages in it's immediate area.   Instead they must have got a waiver to cram in an additional projected diamond interchange just west of the 10/25 interchange - barely a half mile away.  Normal progression, as an area develops, and population and trips increase is to convert to one way frontage.  If one examines the current (newer) 10 E to 25 N ramp, the future traffic pattern is for (TO) EB 10 traffic to "enter" this ramp, and then "exit" it to reach 10 E.   Crazy, and one of the reasons why this state department is one of the worst in terms of design.   Has something like this been done anywhere else??
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: CanesFan27 on May 03, 2020, 09:45:39 AM
Feature I did on NM 14 - The Turquoise Trail.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2020/04/new-mexico-14-turquoise-trail.html
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Revive 755 on May 03, 2020, 12:58:31 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on May 03, 2020, 08:23:21 AM
Instead they must have got a waiver to cram in an additional projected diamond interchange just west of the 10/25 interchange - barely a half mile away.  Normal progression, as an area develops, and population and trips increase is to convert to one way frontage.  If one examines the current (newer) 10 E to 25 N ramp, the future traffic pattern is for (TO) EB 10 traffic to "enter" this ramp, and then "exit" it to reach 10 E.   Crazy, and one of the reasons why this state department is one of the worst in terms of design.   Has something like this been done anywhere else??

If there will be a Collector-Distributor roadway  for the new EB I-10 entrance and the ramp to NB I-25, yes.  If there will not be a C-D roadway, I still think there's an example somewhere in the Midwest, but I cannot place it at the moment.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: JKRhodes on May 06, 2020, 11:09:54 AM
Quote from: DJStephens on May 03, 2020, 08:23:21 AM
Instead they must have got a waiver to cram in an additional projected diamond interchange just west of the 10/25 interchange - barely a half mile away.  Normal progression, as an area develops, and population and trips increase is to convert to one way frontage.  If one examines the current (newer) 10 E to 25 N ramp, the future traffic pattern is for (TO) EB 10 traffic to "enter" this ramp, and then "exit" it to reach 10 E.   Crazy, and one of the reasons why this state department is one of the worst in terms of design.   Has something like this been done anywhere else??

It's common to have access to an adjacent street with C/D roadways, though I think it's frowned upon in heavily developed urban areas unless there's some braiding involved.

The closest example I can think of is Sunland Gin Road near the intersection of I-8 and I-10 in Arizona. Westbound freeway entrance has the option of slipping onto the Westbound I-8 ramp, or continuing onto I-10. Functionally it's very similar to what will exist in the future in Cruces, but laid out wider because there's more room.

I remember when they finished the reconstruction at I-10 and I-25, and figured that was the purpose of the unfinished the "on-ramp" to eastbound 10 coming off the flyover ramp.

What has me scratching my head is, where exactly is the new interchange going to be located?  Without seeing any plans, my best guess is that Arrowhead way will be elevated over Sam Steel Way and tied into I-10 at a tight diamond, which will require a substantial amount of bridge work to connect the ramps. Not to mention the demolition of half a neighborhood if Arrowhead is ever extended south of I-10.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on May 06, 2020, 10:03:15 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on May 03, 2020, 12:58:31 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on May 03, 2020, 08:23:21 AM
Instead they must have got a waiver to cram in an additional projected diamond interchange just west of the 10/25 interchange - barely a half mile away.  Normal progression, as an area develops, and population and trips increase is to convert to one way frontage.  If one examines the current (newer) 10 E to 25 N ramp, the future traffic pattern is for (TO) EB 10 traffic to "enter" this ramp, and then "exit" it to reach 10 E.   Crazy, and one of the reasons why this state department is one of the worst in terms of design.   Has something like this been done anywhere else??

If there will be a Collector-Distributor roadway  for the new EB I-10 entrance and the ramp to NB I-25, yes.  If there will not be a C-D roadway, I still think there's an example somewhere in the Midwest, but I cannot place it at the moment.

No, they are maintaining two way frontage on both sides in the area of this interchange (10/25).  If conversion to one way frontage was pursued - it would have simplified things quite a bit.  The 10 E to 25 N ramp was compressed to the SE, with inadequate deceleration/acceleration lanes. 
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Revive 755 on May 06, 2020, 10:27:36 PM
^ There's a bit of a difference between a C-D roadway and a frontage/outer road.
Example C-D roadway for SB I-55 between I-355 and the Joliet Road exit near Chicago, IL (the SB roadway with the overhead signs) (https://goo.gl/maps/M4GYxDowtK1EWnK79)
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: skluth on June 13, 2020, 05:00:49 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on May 06, 2020, 10:27:36 PM
^ There's a bit of a difference between a C-D roadway and a frontage/outer road.
Example C-D roadway for SB I-55 between I-355 and the Joliet Road exit near Chicago, IL (the SB roadway with the overhead signs) (https://goo.gl/maps/M4GYxDowtK1EWnK79)

This example of a C-D system on I-64 between Battlefield Blvd and Chesapeake Parkway (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.7784706,-76.2434792,2325m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en) is close to textbook. The ramps braid about halfway between the interchanges near the Spring Hill Suites.

Depending on the traffic volumes, just connecting the various ramps between interchanges with an extra lane can alleviate a lot of problems. I used to hate the cluster at the north end of Bloomington when going from I-55 to I-39 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.5369935,-89.0091347,2608m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en), but the redesign made this a breeze the last couple times I went through the area on my way home to Wisconsin.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on July 19, 2020, 12:33:37 PM
Quote from: JKRhodes on May 06, 2020, 11:09:54 AM
Quote from: DJStephens on May 03, 2020, 08:23:21 AM
Instead they must have got a waiver to cram in an additional projected diamond interchange just west of the 10/25 interchange - barely a half mile away.  Normal progression, as an area develops, and population and trips increase is to convert to one way frontage.  If one examines the current (newer) 10 E to 25 N ramp, the future traffic pattern is for (TO) EB 10 traffic to "enter" this ramp, and then "exit" it to reach 10 E.   Crazy, and one of the reasons why this state department is one of the worst in terms of design.   Has something like this been done anywhere else??

It's common to have access to an adjacent street with C/D roadways, though I think it's frowned upon in heavily developed urban areas unless there's some braiding involved.

The closest example I can think of is Sunland Gin Road near the intersection of I-8 and I-10 in Arizona. Westbound freeway entrance has the option of slipping onto the Westbound I-8 ramp, or continuing onto I-10. Functionally it's very similar to what will exist in the future in Cruces, but laid out wider because there's more room.

I remember when they finished the reconstruction at I-10 and I-25, and figured that was the purpose of the unfinished the "on-ramp" to eastbound 10 coming off the flyover ramp.

What has me scratching my head is, where exactly is the new interchange going to be located?  Without seeing any plans, my best guess is that Arrowhead way will be elevated over Sam Steel Way and tied into I-10 at a tight diamond, which will require a substantial amount of bridge work to connect the ramps. Not to mention the demolition of half a neighborhood if Arrowhead is ever extended south of I-10.

   Correct, the arrowhead road is supposed to be connected to 10 with a diamond interchange there.  Simply too close to the interchange with 25.  Would be interesting to learn about the "waiver" process to cram in such an interchange, so close to a preexisting interchange of two primary interstates.   The connection of two long distance interstates should have had precedent.  One way frontage in the area would have simplified matters a great deal.   Only a few additional underpasses would have been needed for the conversion.   
   No arrowhead would never be "extended" farther south.  It is simply a University internal collector road.   
   The crazy thing was, that space was left on the south side of 10, at cholla road and on the E side of 25, believe also cholla road, in the late sixties/early seventies for a future "proper" 10 E to 25 N flyover.  And they didn't use it.   Instead the present 10 E to 25 N flyover/exit was compressed to the SE.  To allow for this crazy arrowhead connection.  Nuts.   Design Regression at it's finest.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: JKRhodes on August 22, 2020, 12:10:56 AM
Quote

   Correct, the arrowhead road is supposed to be connected to 10 with a diamond interchange there.  Simply too close to the interchange with 25.  Would be interesting to learn about the "waiver" process to cram in such an interchange, so close to a preexisting interchange of two primary interstates.   The connection of two long distance interstates should have had precedent.  One way frontage in the area would have simplified matters a great deal.   Only a few additional underpasses would have been needed for the conversion.   
   No arrowhead would never be "extended" farther south.  It is simply a University internal collector road.   
   The crazy thing was, that space was left on the south side of 10, at cholla road and on the E side of 25, believe also cholla road, in the late sixties/early seventies for a future "proper" 10 E to 25 N flyover.  And they didn't use it.   Instead the present 10 E to 25 N flyover/exit was compressed to the SE.  To allow for this crazy arrowhead connection.  Nuts.   Design Regression at it's finest.

Could be the same yahoos that allowed a full diamond at Baseline Road and I-10 in Phoenix right next to the US 60. Exiting I-10 Westbound to US 60, you take a two lane exit. If you're not familiar with the area you assume both lanes go directly to US 60. But instead you get dumped onto a C/D road where you have about 12 seconds to merge all the way to the right before you get dumped right back onto I-10... If you miss this ramp, you have the option of jumping across three lanes to exit at Broadway and turn around, or slowly make your way to one of the other exits to go the other way on I-10.

At least in the Las Cruces example, as far as eastbound is concerned the lane continuity and forced merges won't be a big issue once it's built. If you exit I-10 East to go north on I-25, you're gonna get onto I-25 unless for some reason you decide to merge right and slip back onto I-10.

Westbound, that's another story. I wonder if they'll braid the Arrowhead exit or if they'll do something goofy to tie that one in.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: JKRhodes on August 22, 2020, 12:33:34 AM
Also, as a concept I like the idea of an Arrowhead exit serving NMSU and little else.

Phoenix has this beautiful grid network of heavy duty arterial streets. In the middle of it all you have the City of Tempe mucking up the works with all of their recent road diet/streetcar projects near ASU. As if the added college traffic didn't make the area enough of a headache for regional commuters.

Ditto for the City of Tucson; Broadway and Congress streets used to be capable of moving some cars through downtown. Now it's just a headache for anyone who needs to take that route to get to the freeway. They get to admire the city leaders' vision of a revitalized downtown while they sit in choked traffic.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on August 23, 2020, 10:05:57 AM
Quote from: JKRhodes on August 22, 2020, 12:33:34 AM
Also, as a concept I like the idea of an Arrowhead exit serving NMSU and little else.

Phoenix has this beautiful grid network of heavy duty arterial streets. In the middle of it all you have the City of Tempe mucking up the works with all of their recent road diet/streetcar projects near ASU. As if the added college traffic didn't make the area enough of a headache for regional commuters.

Ditto for the City of Tucson; Broadway and Congress streets used to be capable of moving some cars through downtown. Now it's just a headache for anyone who needs to take that route to get to the freeway. They get to admire the city leaders' vision of a revitalized downtown while they sit in choked traffic.

Switching to one way frontage (in the 10/25 interchange area) would have completely eliminated the idea for this regressive arrowhead interchange on 10.   
Yes am aware of the 10/US 60 connection in Phoenix.  Arizona generally has far better design standards than it's neighbor to the east, but yes it is a challenge to navigate that one in Phoenix.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: JKRhodes on August 25, 2020, 08:01:57 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on August 23, 2020, 10:05:57 AM
Quote from: JKRhodes on August 22, 2020, 12:33:34 AM
Also, as a concept I like the idea of an Arrowhead exit serving NMSU and little else.

Phoenix has this beautiful grid network of heavy duty arterial streets. In the middle of it all you have the City of Tempe mucking up the works with all of their recent road diet/streetcar projects near ASU. As if the added college traffic didn't make the area enough of a headache for regional commuters.

Ditto for the City of Tucson; Broadway and Congress streets used to be capable of moving some cars through downtown. Now it's just a headache for anyone who needs to take that route to get to the freeway. They get to admire the city leaders' vision of a revitalized downtown while they sit in choked traffic.

Switching to one way frontage (in the 10/25 interchange area) would have completely eliminated the idea for this regressive arrowhead interchange on 10.   
Yes am aware of the 10/US 60 connection in Phoenix.  Arizona generally has far better design standards than it's neighbor to the east, but yes it is a challenge to navigate that one in Phoenix.

I often wonder what the rationale was for the major streets in Las Cruces and how they were laid out... Old wagon trails, maybe?
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on August 28, 2020, 08:03:29 PM
the story goes that when the original las Cruces town site was laid out (1849) following the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, was that rawhide rope was used by the surveyors.  It rained, and the rawhide stretched, giving the "crooked" streets of the original town site still visible today.   The neighboring town of Mesilla remained in Mexico until 1854, when it, and a strip on the southern ends of both New Mexico and Arizona was purchased for the future southern transcontinental railroad.  Best known as the Gadsden Purchase.   Just about all of today's I-10 in AZ and NM follows that railroad, and is contained in the strip.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: JKRhodes on September 21, 2020, 05:56:07 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on August 28, 2020, 08:03:29 PM
the story goes that when the original las Cruces town site was laid out (1849) following the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, was that rawhide rope was used by the surveyors.  It rained, and the rawhide stretched, giving the "crooked" streets of the original town site still visible today.   The neighboring town of Mesilla remained in Mexico until 1854, when it, and a strip on the southern ends of both New Mexico and Arizona was purchased for the future southern transcontinental railroad.  Best known as the Gadsden Purchase.   Just about all of today's I-10 in AZ and NM follows that railroad, and is contained in the strip.


Funny, the legend I always heard, regarding the northwesterly jog and the reason the USA didn't get Puerto Penasco in the Gadsden purchase, is because the surveyors were low on supplies and in a hurry to get to Yuma. I did some more research and found the real story; that Mexico didn't want to lose overland access to the Baja peninsula (which I don't think the USA had any interest in acquiring.) So letting Mexico keep that narrow strip of land was a fair compromise.

In any event, dropping in from the west at night on I-10, the views of Las Cruces are absolutely beautiful in my opinion. It's one of the few cities I've driven into on a major interstate highway where I can see 90% of the city lights from the freeway.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: machias on February 11, 2021, 01:02:16 AM
I'm curious about freeway signing practices in New Mexico. I've been driving I-10, I-25, and I-40 this week, and the guide sign designs seem a little disorganized. Lettering is a little all over the place, exit tabs have differing spacing, etc. At first I thought it varied by district, but I don't think that's the case. Does NMDOT provide specific plans for signs or is it left up to contractors?  I'm not overly familiar with NMDOT.

I will say that I preferred driving US 70 from Clovis to Roswell (to work my way down to I-10) versus I-25 from Hatch to Albuquerque (to get back up to I-40 to head east). The pavement on the interstates can be quite rough at times, especially the last western stretch along I-10.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Pink Jazz on February 11, 2021, 11:27:03 AM
Quote from: machias on February 11, 2021, 01:02:16 AM
I'm curious about freeway signing practices in New Mexico. I've been driving I-10, I-25, and I-40 this week, and the guide sign designs seem a little disorganized. Lettering is a little all over the place, exit tabs have differing spacing, etc. At first I thought it varied by district, but I don't think that's the case. Does NMDOT provide specific plans for signs or is it left up to contractors?  I'm not overly familiar with NMDOT.

I will say that I preferred driving US 70 from Clovis to Roswell (to work my way down to I-10) versus I-25 from Hatch to Albuquerque (to get back up to I-40 to head east). The pavement on the interstates can be quite rough at times, especially the last western stretch along I-10.


New Mexico tends to show a lot of inconsistency.  District 5 (Santa Fe) even experimented with Clearview for a while.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: ethanhopkin14 on February 17, 2021, 02:29:02 PM
We know New Mexico tends to ignore long distance concurrencies on interstates.  I find it interesting when I find references to the concurrencies (https://goo.gl/maps/Bsita89Sw4Veq1JL9) on the intersecting highways. 
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: aboges26 on February 26, 2021, 02:13:27 PM
Quote from: Pink Jazz on February 11, 2021, 11:27:03 AM
Quote from: machias on February 11, 2021, 01:02:16 AM
I'm curious about freeway signing practices in New Mexico. I've been driving I-10, I-25, and I-40 this week, and the guide sign designs seem a little disorganized. Lettering is a little all over the place, exit tabs have differing spacing, etc. At first I thought it varied by district, but I don't think that's the case. Does NMDOT provide specific plans for signs or is it left up to contractors?  I'm not overly familiar with NMDOT.

I will say that I preferred driving US 70 from Clovis to Roswell (to work my way down to I-10) versus I-25 from Hatch to Albuquerque (to get back up to I-40 to head east). The pavement on the interstates can be quite rough at times, especially the last western stretch along I-10.


New Mexico tends to show a lot of inconsistency.  District 5 (Santa Fe) even experimented with Clearview for a while.

Also due to changing styles over time and signs not getting changed out for newer ones.  In my district they will get a project to redo signs on a discrete stretch of highway and they will leave some signs while changing the others.  Inconsistency is rampant while if you ask them why they do something they either pass the buck to someone else, say they will get to it (and never do), or say "well that is the design standard in the book or plans" even if it obviously does not work for a specific setup to due geometry, sight distances, or other factors.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on March 01, 2021, 10:10:28 AM
Quote from: aboges26 on February 26, 2021, 02:13:27 PM
Quote from: Pink Jazz on February 11, 2021, 11:27:03 AM
Quote from: machias on February 11, 2021, 01:02:16 AM
I'm curious about freeway signing practices in New Mexico. I've been driving I-10, I-25, and I-40 this week, and the guide sign designs seem a little disorganized. Lettering is a little all over the place, exit tabs have differing spacing, etc. At first I thought it varied by district, but I don't think that's the case. Does NMDOT provide specific plans for signs or is it left up to contractors?  I'm not overly familiar with NMDOT.

I will say that I preferred driving US 70 from Clovis to Roswell (to work my way down to I-10) versus I-25 from Hatch to Albuquerque (to get back up to I-40 to head east). The pavement on the interstates can be quite rough at times, especially the last western stretch along I-10.

And that's because New Mexico typically only does sign replacements when a given stretch of roadway undergoes complete reconstruction. There are some signs along I-40 that date back to the highway's original construction with button copy and faded green background. The wide variety of sign formats also depicts how New Mexico's sign designs have evolved over the past several decades. But when New Mexico changes its sign format standards, NMDOT doesn't go out and update the signage; rather they let the old signage stand until that section of roadway is reconstructed, at which point they would typically replace the signage to reflect current design and formatting standards.  Fortunately, like most other states New Mexico's BGS signage uses extruded aluminum, although NMDOT got cheap with signage when they reconstructed the Big-I in Albuquerque about 20 years ago and resorted to sheet aluminum for the BGSs there. Those signs have since been replaced with new signage made from extruded aluminum.


New Mexico tends to show a lot of inconsistency.  District 5 (Santa Fe) even experimented with Clearview for a while.

Also due to changing styles over time and signs not getting changed out for newer ones.  In my district they will get a project to redo signs on a discrete stretch of highway and they will leave some signs while changing the others.  Inconsistency is rampant while if you ask them why they do something they either pass the buck to someone else, say they will get to it (and never do), or say "well that is the design standard in the book or plans" even if it obviously does not work for a specific setup to due geometry, sight distances, or other factors.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on April 11, 2021, 02:28:36 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 17, 2021, 02:29:02 PM
We know New Mexico tends to ignore long distance concurrencies on interstates.  I find it interesting when I find references to the concurrencies (https://goo.gl/maps/Bsita89Sw4Veq1JL9) on the intersecting highways.

  Yes that is correct.  For example, there is no US - 70 markers on I-10 between the W side of las Cruces (Exit 135) and Lordsburg (Exit 26).  Don't see why it is so hard to include them, along the 10 corridor for consistency and continuity. 
   Am also of the opinion that US - 85 should be restored in the state, following much of it's original roadbed, where it still exists, and I-25 where it was supplanted.   For the nostalgia and tourist standpoint, if nothing else.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: US 89 on April 11, 2021, 02:41:24 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on April 11, 2021, 02:28:36 PM
Am also of the opinion that US - 85 should be restored in the state, following much of it's original roadbed, where it still exists, and I-25 where it was supplanted.   For the nostalgia and tourist standpoint, if nothing else.

One problem with that: as far as I know, NM is not a state where numbered highways can be routed on locally-maintained streets. Although independent portions of old 85 are still state roads in many areas (NM 1, 314, and 313 come to mind), there are also several places where the old road is now under local jurisdiction... including through the Albuquerque metro. Unless you wanted to put a restored US route along NM 45... which sort of ruins the historic aspect a bit as that's well away from downtown.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on May 22, 2021, 08:44:27 PM
Quote from: US 89 on April 11, 2021, 02:41:24 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on April 11, 2021, 02:28:36 PM
Am also of the opinion that US - 85 should be restored in the state, following much of it's original roadbed, where it still exists, and I-25 where it was supplanted.   For the nostalgia and tourist standpoint, if nothing else.

One problem with that: as far as I know, NM is not a state where numbered highways can be routed on locally-maintained streets. Although independent portions of old 85 are still state roads in many areas (NM 1, 314, and 313 come to mind), there are also several places where the old road is now under local jurisdiction... including through the Albuquerque metro. Unless you wanted to put a restored US route along NM 45... which sort of ruins the historic aspect a bit as that's well away from downtown.

It would make sense for New Mexico to re-sign US-85 through the state, either along I-10 and I-25, or over its original alignment where possible. The AASHTO never deleted US-85 through New Mexico, so it technically still exists through the state using I-10 and I-25. Making the case to sign US-85 through New Mexico:  there is still a signed stretch of US-85 from the Mexican Border in El Paso, Texas to the TX/NM line. If nothing else, sign US-85 through New Mexico to maintain continuity with the signed sections in Texas and Colorado.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: triplemultiplex on June 09, 2021, 10:49:52 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 22, 2021, 08:44:27 PM
It would make sense for New Mexico to re-sign US-85 through the state, either along I-10 and I-25, or over its original alignment where possible. The AASHTO never deleted US-85 through New Mexico, so it technically still exists through the state using I-10 and I-25. Making the case to sign US-85 through New Mexico:  there is still a signed stretch of US-85 from the Mexican Border in El Paso, Texas to the TX/NM line. If nothing else, sign US-85 through New Mexico to maintain continuity with the signed sections in Texas and Colorado.

I have the opposite opinion.  It makes more sense to eliminate as much of US 85 as feasible.  It's a pointless redundancy now.  New southern terminus in Castle Rock, CO.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: ethanhopkin14 on June 10, 2021, 11:51:57 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on June 09, 2021, 10:49:52 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 22, 2021, 08:44:27 PM
It would make sense for New Mexico to re-sign US-85 through the state, either along I-10 and I-25, or over its original alignment where possible. The AASHTO never deleted US-85 through New Mexico, so it technically still exists through the state using I-10 and I-25. Making the case to sign US-85 through New Mexico:  there is still a signed stretch of US-85 from the Mexican Border in El Paso, Texas to the TX/NM line. If nothing else, sign US-85 through New Mexico to maintain continuity with the signed sections in Texas and Colorado.

I have the opposite opinion.  It makes more sense to eliminate as much of US 85 as feasible.  It's a pointless redundancy now.  New southern terminus in Castle Rock, CO.

Agreed.  Then, in El Paso, Pisano Dr. would become BL-10. 
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 15, 2021, 12:44:10 PM
I was looking at a report of major freight bottlenecks and their rankings. New Mexico was in the lowest tier but still had more bottlenecks than Oklahoma which surprised me. I can't recall ever getting caught in any real traffic congestion there and I pass through ABQ multiple times a month.

https://www.ccjdigital.com/economic-trends/freight-demand/article/15065715/traffic-delays-freight-movement-more-than-600-million-hours
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on June 17, 2021, 08:05:24 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 15, 2021, 12:44:10 PM
I was looking at a report of major freight bottlenecks and their rankings. New Mexico was in the lowest tier but still had more bottlenecks than Oklahoma which surprised me. I can't recall ever getting caught in any real traffic congestion there and I pass through ABQ multiple times a month.

https://www.ccjdigital.com/economic-trends/freight-demand/article/15065715/traffic-delays-freight-movement-more-than-600-million-hours

The lack of planning for an Albuquerque circumferential meant that everything long distance has to pass straight through Albu.   The original "big I" (mid sixties) had good geometrics, and a large footprint, but featured left exits and entrances, likely to save on costs.  The rebuild, twenty years ago, moved everything to the right side.   They did cheap out, again, by not making every flyover two lanes, only a few of them were.   25, through the core of the interchange, also should have had eight lanes, not six.   
Of all the quadrants of a hypothetical Albu. Beltway, the NW quadrant would likely make the most sense, and have the most use.   40 E to 25 N, and 25 S to 40 W.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: aboges26 on June 17, 2021, 11:54:45 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 15, 2021, 12:44:10 PM
I was looking at a report of major freight bottlenecks and their rankings. New Mexico was in the lowest tier but still had more bottlenecks than Oklahoma which surprised me. I can't recall ever getting caught in any real traffic congestion there and I pass through ABQ multiple times a month.

https://www.ccjdigital.com/economic-trends/freight-demand/article/15065715/traffic-delays-freight-movement-more-than-600-million-hours

You are sure lucky, every time I go to or through ABQ I end up in traffic.  Maybe things have changed since COVID, as I have not been back since the start of it when everyone was panic buying and we were just trying to do a normal Costco run.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Plutonic Panda on June 18, 2021, 12:10:46 AM
Quote from: aboges26 on June 17, 2021, 11:54:45 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 15, 2021, 12:44:10 PM
I was looking at a report of major freight bottlenecks and their rankings. New Mexico was in the lowest tier but still had more bottlenecks than Oklahoma which surprised me. I can't recall ever getting caught in any real traffic congestion there and I pass through ABQ multiple times a month.

https://www.ccjdigital.com/economic-trends/freight-demand/article/15065715/traffic-delays-freight-movement-more-than-600-million-hours

You are sure lucky, every time I go to or through ABQ I end up in traffic.  Maybe things have changed since COVID, as I have not been back since the start of it when everyone was panic buying and we were just trying to do a normal Costco run.
Well, granted, most of my travels are through I-40 and that's it. Sometimes I'll go to old town.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on June 18, 2021, 07:34:30 AM
Quote from: aboges26 on June 17, 2021, 11:54:45 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 15, 2021, 12:44:10 PM
I was looking at a report of major freight bottlenecks and their rankings. New Mexico was in the lowest tier but still had more bottlenecks than Oklahoma which surprised me. I can't recall ever getting caught in any real traffic congestion there and I pass through ABQ multiple times a month.

https://www.ccjdigital.com/economic-trends/freight-demand/article/15065715/traffic-delays-freight-movement-more-than-600-million-hours

You are sure lucky, every time I go to or through ABQ I end up in traffic.  Maybe things have changed since COVID, as I have not been back since the start of it when everyone was panic buying and we were just trying to do a normal Costco run.

While 40 was completed through ABQ in 1969, "reconstruction" started in the mid eighties.  Interchange and bridge replacements across the interstate, pavement replacements and overlays,
etc.  There was almost constant work, on 40, for at least twenty years running, somewhere, in Bernalillo county.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Kniwt on June 18, 2021, 03:12:10 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on June 18, 2021, 07:34:30 AM
While 40 was completed through ABQ in 1969, "reconstruction" started in the mid eighties.  Interchange and bridge replacements across the interstate, pavement replacements and overlays,
etc.  There was almost constant work, on 40, for at least twenty years running, somewhere, in Bernalillo county.   

This reminded me that I have this pic from a 1971 "mini" RMcN, and approximately the same location now. Looks like the cloverleaf was partially removed at some point, and the eastbound offramp to San Mateo Blvd. is a little bit back from this view.

(https://i.imgur.com/0CbAYQv.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/cU5segv.png)

Edit: Indeed, Historic Aerials confirms that the cloverleaf was taken out between 2005 and 2009:

(https://i.imgur.com/aLR9ckN.png)
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: aboges26 on June 19, 2021, 03:22:07 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 18, 2021, 12:10:46 AM
Quote from: aboges26 on June 17, 2021, 11:54:45 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 15, 2021, 12:44:10 PM
I was looking at a report of major freight bottlenecks and their rankings. New Mexico was in the lowest tier but still had more bottlenecks than Oklahoma which surprised me. I can't recall ever getting caught in any real traffic congestion there and I pass through ABQ multiple times a month.

https://www.ccjdigital.com/economic-trends/freight-demand/article/15065715/traffic-delays-freight-movement-more-than-600-million-hours

You are sure lucky, every time I go to or through ABQ I end up in traffic.  Maybe things have changed since COVID, as I have not been back since the start of it when everyone was panic buying and we were just trying to do a normal Costco run.
Well, granted, most of my travels are through I-40 and that's it. Sometimes I'll go to old town.

In my travels I-40 seems to have less stop-and-go traffic but will get thick traffic, whereas I always seem to have a bad time on I-25 between I-40 and Paseo del Norte, and on Paseo del Norte from I-25 to Coors.  If I have the time I always take Tramway when going from US 550 to I-40 east and vice versa. Tramway from I-25 to at least Paseo del Norte should be turned into a freeway ASAP and it appears from there to I-40 piecemeal work to improve the rest to a Texas-style freeway or resemble Bangerter Hwy in Salt Lake City would be possible.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on June 22, 2021, 07:36:00 AM
Quote from: aboges26 on June 19, 2021, 03:22:07 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 18, 2021, 12:10:46 AM
Quote from: aboges26 on June 17, 2021, 11:54:45 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 15, 2021, 12:44:10 PM
I was looking at a report of major freight bottlenecks and their rankings. New Mexico was in the lowest tier but still had more bottlenecks than Oklahoma which surprised me. I can't recall ever getting caught in any real traffic congestion there and I pass through ABQ multiple times a month.

https://www.ccjdigital.com/economic-trends/freight-demand/article/15065715/traffic-delays-freight-movement-more-than-600-million-hours

You are sure lucky, every time I go to or through ABQ I end up in traffic.  Maybe things have changed since COVID, as I have not been back since the start of it when everyone was panic buying and we were just trying to do a normal Costco run.
Well, granted, most of my travels are through I-40 and that's it. Sometimes I'll go to old town.

In my travels I-40 seems to have less stop-and-go traffic but will get thick traffic, whereas I always seem to have a bad time on I-25 between I-40 and Paseo del Norte, and on Paseo del Norte from I-25 to Coors.  If I have the time I always take Tramway when going from US 550 to I-40 east and vice versa. Tramway from I-25 to at least Paseo del Norte should be turned into a freeway ASAP and it appears from there to I-40 piecemeal work to improve the rest to a Texas-style freeway or resemble Bangerter Hwy in Salt Lake City would be possible.

The interchanges/intersections of 25/PDN, Tramway/PDN, and Tramway/40 were all allowed to become almost completely packed in/surrounded by development, preventing any decent improvements to a full limited access directional interchanges.   While working up there - 20-25 years ago - remember the cheap waferboard condos going up, surrounding the Tramway/40 interchange, and thinking - where is the planning?  There is virtually none, today.   The state is near the bottom - in terms of design standards, planning, transparency and decision making in terms of public works.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: triplemultiplex on June 22, 2021, 02:40:12 PM
I always appreciated the drive times on the VMS for I-40 in ABQ.  It tells you how many minutes to Coors; which to me, seems like a way of telling evening commuters how long before they get home and can pop open a beer.

"I'm only 8 minutes from my first Coors!"
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: aboges26 on June 23, 2021, 11:26:23 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on June 22, 2021, 07:36:00 AM
Quote from: aboges26 on June 19, 2021, 03:22:07 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 18, 2021, 12:10:46 AM
Quote from: aboges26 on June 17, 2021, 11:54:45 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 15, 2021, 12:44:10 PM
I was looking at a report of major freight bottlenecks and their rankings. New Mexico was in the lowest tier but still had more bottlenecks than Oklahoma which surprised me. I can't recall ever getting caught in any real traffic congestion there and I pass through ABQ multiple times a month.

https://www.ccjdigital.com/economic-trends/freight-demand/article/15065715/traffic-delays-freight-movement-more-than-600-million-hours

You are sure lucky, every time I go to or through ABQ I end up in traffic.  Maybe things have changed since COVID, as I have not been back since the start of it when everyone was panic buying and we were just trying to do a normal Costco run.
Well, granted, most of my travels are through I-40 and that's it. Sometimes I'll go to old town.

In my travels I-40 seems to have less stop-and-go traffic but will get thick traffic, whereas I always seem to have a bad time on I-25 between I-40 and Paseo del Norte, and on Paseo del Norte from I-25 to Coors.  If I have the time I always take Tramway when going from US 550 to I-40 east and vice versa. Tramway from I-25 to at least Paseo del Norte should be turned into a freeway ASAP and it appears from there to I-40 piecemeal work to improve the rest to a Texas-style freeway or resemble Bangerter Hwy in Salt Lake City would be possible.

The interchanges/intersections of 25/PDN, Tramway/PDN, and Tramway/40 were all allowed to become almost completely packed in/surrounded by development, preventing any decent improvements to a full limited access directional interchanges.   While working up there - 20-25 years ago - remember the cheap waferboard condos going up, surrounding the Tramway/40 interchange, and thinking - where is the planning?  There is virtually none, today.   The state is near the bottom - in terms of design standards, planning, transparency and decision making in terms of public works.

All true, but NMDOT is so "by the book" that when the AADT meets their arbitrary number (which is so far past bearable for users) they will bat no eye at buying and clearing the property for something that will barely fix the situation (thinking 1 lane fly-overs that will clog and create back-ups for miles).
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on June 27, 2021, 11:27:17 AM
Guessing you are referring the the 25 N to PDN "ramp".  Yes it is documented that the state department owned property in the 25/PDN interchange area, sold it, and then bought it back, at higher cost to construct the "ramp".  It features substandard design, no shoulder, and dumps traffic into the L lane of PDN westbound.   There should have been foresight, with acquisition and clearance of that entire interchange area, as far back as the late seventies, for a full symmetrical stack. 
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: JKRhodes on July 05, 2021, 10:26:53 PM
I'm trying to understand the rationale behind this "hybrid SPUI" at PDN and 2nd Street. There certainly doesn't seem to be any savings in ROW vs a standard SPUI. If anything it appears to take up more:

https://goo.gl/maps/NAQ6UUpRP5dErPkX7
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Plutonic Panda on July 05, 2021, 10:52:16 PM
And it has left exits yuck
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: JKRhodes on July 05, 2021, 11:12:13 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 05, 2021, 10:52:16 PM
And it has left exits yuck
My main gripe. Upon further study it seems  they may have designed it that way in order to buy a few extra car lengths of queue space for SB 2nd street approaching El Pueblo. Still, very odd. Based on each iteration of street view it doesn't look heavily traveled enough to routinely back up into the SPUI, and there are pylons to eliminate weaving. So a standard SPUI would have probably served its purpose just fine.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on July 05, 2021, 11:41:38 PM
Quote from: JKRhodes on July 05, 2021, 11:12:13 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 05, 2021, 10:52:16 PM
And it has left exits yuck
My main gripe. Upon further study it seems  they may have designed it that way in order to buy a few extra car lengths of queue space for SB 2nd street approaching El Pueblo. Still, very odd. Based on each iteration of street view it doesn't look heavily traveled enough to routinely back up into the SPUI, and there are pylons to eliminate weaving. So a standard SPUI would have probably served its purpose just fine.

Using historicaerials.com to view the PDN/2nd Street interchange, it was previously an at-grade intersection that was converted to the current interchange some time between 1991 and 1996. My theory into why they built it the way they did is they had to keep the existing intersection open and unobstructed while construction of the interchange proceeded. You'll notice that the EB and WB left-hand offramps both intersect 2nd Street at the same point where the previous at-grade intersection used to lie. From that, it looks like they built the overpasses outside of the existing intersection to keep the intersection and its approaches unimpeded during construction. When the overpasses were completed, it would be relatively easy to shift PDN traffic onto the new overpasses, and then convert the old PDN roadway to the offramps you see today. 

It's not necessarily how I would have built the interchange, but I can see the logic in the design...it was all about maintaining traffic flow through the intersection while the interchange was being built. 
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: triplemultiplex on July 07, 2021, 12:29:03 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on July 05, 2021, 11:41:38 PM
Using historicaerials.com to view the PDN/2nd Street interchange, it was previously an at-grade intersection that was converted to the current interchange some time between 1991 and 1996. My theory into why they built it the way they did is they had to keep the existing intersection open and unobstructed while construction of the interchange proceeded. You'll notice that the EB and WB left-hand offramps both intersect 2nd Street at the same point where the previous at-grade intersection used to lie. From that, it looks like they built the overpasses outside of the existing intersection to keep the intersection and its approaches unimpeded during construction. When the overpasses were completed, it would be relatively easy to shift PDN traffic onto the new overpasses, and then convert the old PDN roadway to the offramps you see today.

This has always been my assumption as well.  It was the result of someone's poor planning in terms of construction staging.
Everyone knows that to build a single point interchange under traffic, you rough in the ramps first, shift the traffic over to the ramps, and then build your bridges in the 'median'.  Once the bridges are done, traffic is shifted there, then you clean up the ramps and voila: completed SPUI.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: thenetwork on July 26, 2021, 06:24:54 PM
A Shocker crossing into the state On US-550 today ...

After nearly 2 years, they FINALLY got around  Is to putting a "Welcome to New Mexico" sign at the border.

THIS,...coming a few weeks after a.FULL resurfacing of US-550 between Aztec and Bloomfield.

Still nothing on US‐491 South yet...
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on August 12, 2021, 08:11:43 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on July 05, 2021, 11:41:38 PM
Quote from: JKRhodes on July 05, 2021, 11:12:13 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 05, 2021, 10:52:16 PM
And it has left exits yuck
My main gripe. Upon further study it seems  they may have designed it that way in order to buy a few extra car lengths of queue space for SB 2nd street approaching El Pueblo. Still, very odd. Based on each iteration of street view it doesn't look heavily traveled enough to routinely back up into the SPUI, and there are pylons to eliminate weaving. So a standard SPUI would have probably served its purpose just fine.

Using historicaerials.com to view the PDN/2nd Street interchange, it was previously an at-grade intersection that was converted to the current interchange some time between 1991 and 1996. My theory into why they built it the way they did is they had to keep the existing intersection open and unobstructed while construction of the interchange proceeded. You'll notice that the EB and WB left-hand offramps both intersect 2nd Street at the same point where the previous at-grade intersection used to lie. From that, it looks like they built the overpasses outside of the existing intersection to keep the intersection and its approaches unimpeded during construction. When the overpasses were completed, it would be relatively easy to shift PDN traffic onto the new overpasses, and then convert the old PDN roadway to the offramps you see today. 

It's not necessarily how I would have built the interchange, but I can see the logic in the design...it was all about maintaining traffic flow through the intersection while the interchange was being built.

Was under the impression it dated from late eighties.   Just illustrates the non-standard, design-regressive, weird stuff that has been allowed to have been built in this state.   If mid nineties, could  very well have been an excretion from Pete Rahn's school of thought.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on November 19, 2021, 09:12:38 AM
NMDOT's new website just went live. The URL is https://www.dot.nm.gov/
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: CanesFan27 on January 08, 2022, 05:09:24 PM
Not all roadtrips are long drives - New Mexico Highway 28 is a great example.  History, scenery, and a lot of pecans.  Come along for the ride.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2022/01/new-mexico-route-28.html
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: oscar on January 08, 2022, 09:43:47 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on November 19, 2021, 09:12:38 AM
NMDOT's new website just went live. The URL is https://www.dot.nm.gov/

NMDOT still hasn't updated at least its main posted route log since 2010. I just use NMDOT's online Roadway Functional Class map (https://nmdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=f2fc877d107b4e338deb789f70a8779e) to get the latest, though the "latest" may be a few years old.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: jtespi on September 17, 2022, 03:30:12 AM
Hello everyone, I'm quoting from another thread below regarding the old NMDOT plans to widen roads 10 years ago. It appears like US-54 won't ever be made a divided highway between Tularosa and Vaughn.

New Google Street (https://goo.gl/maps/ikincWChS4yViAUN6) View (https://goo.gl/maps/7pFzpc7Tyj29iQBW8) imagery (https://goo.gl/maps/fsRw8YkxmF5Sp51n8) was captured in the past few months and shows the current state of US-54. The state has "upgraded" (reconstructed) all but an 11-mile segment from mile posts 152 (https://goo.gl/maps/3DaPPeY93BVtcL5k7) to 163 (https://goo.gl/maps/jwJLykVEzmhqa6Re8) of US-54 between Tularosa and Vaughn with wider lanes and hard shoulders. The speed limit was also raised in most of these resconstructed sections to 65 MPH - although it is still a 2-lane road with a few passing lane segments. Previously, in early 2021, ABQtraveler (in the outer quote) noted there was a 17-mile segment that still needed to be reconstructed. That has shrunk by 5 miles to 11 miles remaining of 2-lane road with no hard shoulders.

I think it's pretty sad the state is reconstructing the roadway adjacent to the old alignment then they rip out the old roadway bed instead of repaving it to make a divided highway.

Quote from: abqtraveler on January 25, 2021, 04:09:06 PM
Quote from: Chris on January 25, 2021, 01:14:39 PM
Since the GRIP was mentioned, I attempted to research it and found this map (December 2003):

(https://i.imgur.com/GjVSQAO.jpg)

Looking at the blue expansion corridors, it appears that the I-25 six laning to Santa Fe and US 54 four laning from Alamogordo to Santa Rosa were not completed, but the others have become four lane highways.

GRIP means Governor Richardson's Investment Partnership. I've seen that abbreviation being used for 'Governor's Road Improvement Program' in other states, but in New Mexico the governor wanted to put his name in it.

https://nmceh.org/pages/reports/The_Governor's_Invest_New_Mexico.pdf
...
Also you notice the blue line for US-54 between Alamogordo and Vaughn. The original plan was to expand this segment of US-54 from 2 to 4 lanes as it handles a lot of truck traffic running between the ports of entry in El Paso and I-40 in Santa Rosa. What has been done so far was building a new roadway for US-54, and removing the old roadway without expanding to to 4 lanes. There is still about 17 miles of old US-54 roadway between Ancho and Corona that has yet to be reconstructed.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on September 17, 2022, 10:29:37 PM
Was on this stretch of US-54 over Labor Day weekend.  Duran south to Tularosa. The sub-standard section remaining is between Corona and Carrizozo.   Closer to Corona. Am of belief that the two lane upgrades are adequate, as sight lines are being somewhat improved.    Given the traffic counts, the improved sight lines give greater safety when passing.  A semi-trailer has greater sight ahead, due to their raised seat positions.   A "cheapie" four lane, which is what they probably were planning on, at one point, would not be better imho, than an improved two lane, with some passing three lane sections.  By "cheapie" four lane, meant a "flush median" or a "poor boy".   There have now been three "cheapie" flush median jobs done statewide.  US 550/NM 44, with it's horrific safety record, US 70/380 Hondo Valley, and US 82 E of Artesia.  All are less than optimum, some (US 550/NM 44) are significantly worse.  But yes, a divided four lane, with a minimum sixty foot median, would be the best long term outcome, for US 54.  Personally don't believe it will ever happen.     
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on September 21, 2022, 10:54:48 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on September 17, 2022, 10:29:37 PM
Was on this stretch of US-54 over Labor Day weekend.  Duran south to Tularosa. The sub-standard section remaining is between Corona and Carrizozo.   Closer to Corona. Am of belief that the two lane upgrades are adequate, as sight lines are being somewhat improved.    Given the traffic counts, the improved sight lines give greater safety when passing.  A semi-trailer has greater sight ahead, due to their raised seat positions.   A "cheapie" four lane, which is what they probably were planning on, at one point, would not be better imho, than an improved two lane, with some passing three lane sections.  By "cheapie" four lane, meant a "flush median" or a "poor boy".   There have now been three "cheapie" flush median jobs done statewide.  US 550/NM 44, with it's horrific safety record, US 70/380 Hondo Valley, and US 82 E of Artesia.  All are less than optimum, some (US 550/NM 44) are significantly worse.  But yes, a divided four lane, with a minimum sixty foot median, would be the best long term outcome, for US 54.  Personally don't believe it will ever happen.     
Unfortunately all of what you described are byproducts of New Mexico doing things on the cheap, like they know how to. The stretch of 54 between Carrizozo and Tularosa was reconstructed in the 2011-2013 timeframe. Within 5 years the subgrade had settled and the pavement had completely failed in some areas, and NMDOT had to go back and completely redo parts of that stretch.

Further north on 54, I think there is about 10 or so miles of the old pavement remaining that needs to be reconstructed. That includes a stretch that goes through a fairly steep canyon between MPs 152 and 156. Not sure if they've done so already, but NMDOT plans to let two construction contracts at some point to reconstruct that last remaining stretch between MPs 152 and 163.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on September 22, 2022, 07:47:40 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on September 21, 2022, 10:54:48 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on September 17, 2022, 10:29:37 PM
Was on this stretch of US-54 over Labor Day weekend.  Duran south to Tularosa. The sub-standard section remaining is between Corona and Carrizozo.   Closer to Corona. Am of belief that the two lane upgrades are adequate, as sight lines are being somewhat improved.    Given the traffic counts, the improved sight lines give greater safety when passing.  A semi-trailer has greater sight ahead, due to their raised seat positions.   A "cheapie" four lane, which is what they probably were planning on, at one point, would not be better imho, than an improved two lane, with some passing three lane sections.  By "cheapie" four lane, meant a "flush median" or a "poor boy".   There have now been three "cheapie" flush median jobs done statewide.  US 550/NM 44, with it's horrific safety record, US 70/380 Hondo Valley, and US 82 E of Artesia.  All are less than optimum, some (US 550/NM 44) are significantly worse.  But yes, a divided four lane, with a minimum sixty foot median, would be the best long term outcome, for US 54.  Personally don't believe it will ever happen.     
Unfortunately all of what you described are byproducts of New Mexico doing things on the cheap, like they know how to. The stretch of 54 between Carrizozo and Tularosa was reconstructed in the 2011-2013 timeframe. Within 5 years the subgrade had settled and the pavement had completely failed in some areas, and NMDOT had to go back and completely redo parts of that stretch.

Further north on 54, I think there is about 10 or so miles of the old pavement remaining that needs to be reconstructed. That includes a stretch that goes through a fairly steep canyon between MPs 152 and 156. Not sure if they've done so already, but NMDOT plans to let two construction contracts at some point to reconstruct that last remaining stretch between MPs 152 and 163.

Yep the section N of Tularosa has a lot of "crazed" cracking, where "ruts" are starting to develop from the weight of the trucking.   Am not sure why they couldn't achieve decent compaction of the subgrade, the state technicians have good / new Seamans densiometers, as well as a few Troxlers.   In fact pretty much everything they have, equipment wise is near new.   
Compare that to many small private labs, which are still using 35-40-45 year old Troxlers that are pieced together.    Have no idea how many proctors they pulled when doing the soil analysis for that stretch.   There are areas of extreme "expansive" soils, with clays and caliche present.  If you travel the horrible Alamogordo "bypass" or "relief route" as Johnson and Rahn called them, there is a pocket of extremely heaved material, even the guardrails along the roadway are heaved into an undulating pattern.   The state people have been out there in that last week, putting a "new mexico patch" over the underlying asphalt in the heaved area.   
But no, the section S of Corona still has to be rebuilt.  Have to hope they incorporate a full climbing lane for NB trucking in that incline, as well as improving sight lines, with better horizontal and vertical curvature.    And full shoulders as well.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: thenetwork on September 22, 2022, 01:59:18 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on September 21, 2022, 10:54:48 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on September 17, 2022, 10:29:37 PM
Was on this stretch of US-54 over Labor Day weekend.  Duran south to Tularosa. The sub-standard section remaining is between Corona and Carrizozo.   Closer to Corona. Am of belief that the two lane upgrades are adequate, as sight lines are being somewhat improved.    Given the traffic counts, the improved sight lines give greater safety when passing.  A semi-trailer has greater sight ahead, due to their raised seat positions.   A "cheapie" four lane, which is what they probably were planning on, at one point, would not be better imho, than an improved two lane, with some passing three lane sections.  By "cheapie" four lane, meant a "flush median" or a "poor boy".   There have now been three "cheapie" flush median jobs done statewide.  US 550/NM 44, with it's horrific safety record, US 70/380 Hondo Valley, and US 82 E of Artesia.  All are less than optimum, some (US 550/NM 44) are significantly worse.  But yes, a divided four lane, with a minimum sixty foot median, would be the best long term outcome, for US 54.  Personally don't believe it will ever happen.     
Unfortunately all of what you described are byproducts of New Mexico doing things on the cheap, like they know how to.

It's sad when NMDOT will spend the extra money on a rebuilding project for "decorative" center medians/bridges/etc and over-the-top redundant signage, but won't put money and/or labor aside to perform scheduled maintenance (weed spraying, sweeping, crack sealing, litter control,...) to keep their "investments" looking presentable and lasting for more than just 3-5 years.  I guess they really want to show locals and out-of-towners just how "poor" their state is.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on September 23, 2022, 02:51:22 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on September 22, 2022, 01:59:18 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on September 21, 2022, 10:54:48 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on September 17, 2022, 10:29:37 PM
Was on this stretch of US-54 over Labor Day weekend.  Duran south to Tularosa. The sub-standard section remaining is between Corona and Carrizozo.   Closer to Corona. Am of belief that the two lane upgrades are adequate, as sight lines are being somewhat improved.    Given the traffic counts, the improved sight lines give greater safety when passing.  A semi-trailer has greater sight ahead, due to their raised seat positions.   A "cheapie" four lane, which is what they probably were planning on, at one point, would not be better imho, than an improved two lane, with some passing three lane sections.  By "cheapie" four lane, meant a "flush median" or a "poor boy".   There have now been three "cheapie" flush median jobs done statewide.  US 550/NM 44, with it's horrific safety record, US 70/380 Hondo Valley, and US 82 E of Artesia.  All are less than optimum, some (US 550/NM 44) are significantly worse.  But yes, a divided four lane, with a minimum sixty foot median, would be the best long term outcome, for US 54.  Personally don't believe it will ever happen.     
Unfortunately all of what you described are byproducts of New Mexico doing things on the cheap, like they know how to.

It's sad when NMDOT will spend the extra money on a rebuilding project for "decorative" center medians/bridges/etc and over-the-top redundant signage, but won't put money and/or labor aside to perform scheduled maintenance (weed spraying, sweeping, crack sealing, litter control,...) to keep their "investments" looking presentable and lasting for more than just 3-5 years.  I guess they really want to show locals and out-of-towners just how "poor" their state is.
Even funnier...if you've driven on any of New Mexico's interstates and as you approach a town, you'll see a blue sign highlighting the traveler amenities in that town. What I find laughable...and it speaks to what a bass ackwards place New Mexico is...those blue signs highlight the town has "X MODERN STATIONS," like somehow New Mexico is some third world country that lacks "modern" gas stations with 21st century technology. Here's an example of one of those blue signs on I-40 EB, approaching Moriarty, NM.

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0231622,-106.0933251,3a,75y,129.08h,83.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPnA4612sYQmN68gbPsxJAQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: thenetwork on September 23, 2022, 08:30:26 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on September 23, 2022, 02:51:22 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on September 22, 2022, 01:59:18 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on September 21, 2022, 10:54:48 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on September 17, 2022, 10:29:37 PM
Was on this stretch of US-54 over Labor Day weekend.  Duran south to Tularosa. The sub-standard section remaining is between Corona and Carrizozo.   Closer to Corona. Am of belief that the two lane upgrades are adequate, as sight lines are being somewhat improved.    Given the traffic counts, the improved sight lines give greater safety when passing.  A semi-trailer has greater sight ahead, due to their raised seat positions.   A "cheapie" four lane, which is what they probably were planning on, at one point, would not be better imho, than an improved two lane, with some passing three lane sections.  By "cheapie" four lane, meant a "flush median" or a "poor boy".   There have now been three "cheapie" flush median jobs done statewide.  US 550/NM 44, with it's horrific safety record, US 70/380 Hondo Valley, and US 82 E of Artesia.  All are less than optimum, some (US 550/NM 44) are significantly worse.  But yes, a divided four lane, with a minimum sixty foot median, would be the best long term outcome, for US 54.  Personally don't believe it will ever happen.     
Unfortunately all of what you described are byproducts of New Mexico doing things on the cheap, like they know how to.

It's sad when NMDOT will spend the extra money on a rebuilding project for "decorative" center medians/bridges/etc and over-the-top redundant signage, but won't put money and/or labor aside to perform scheduled maintenance (weed spraying, sweeping, crack sealing, litter control,...) to keep their "investments" looking presentable and lasting for more than just 3-5 years.  I guess they really want to show locals and out-of-towners just how "poor" their state is.
Even funnier...if you've driven on any of New Mexico's interstates and as you approach a town, you'll see a blue sign highlighting the traveler amenities in that town. What I find laughable...and it speaks to what a bass ackwards place New Mexico is...those blue signs highlight the town has "X MODERN STATIONS," like somehow New Mexico is some third world country that lacks "modern" gas stations with 21st century technology. Here's an example of one of those blue signs on I-40 EB, approaching Moriarty, NM.

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.0231622,-106.0933251,3a,75y,129.08h,83.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPnA4612sYQmN68gbPsxJAQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192


"X Modern stations"....the rest of the stations in town have pit-toilets out back.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on September 25, 2022, 11:18:57 AM
There used to be one, approaching las Cruces from the N, on SB I-25.  Believe it was finally removed, as the number of restaurants was constantly changing, as it is the type of business most likely to fail.
They do have the "blue" background signage, with the icons for prominent fuel stations and restaurants at each exit, though.  Not perfect but better than nothing.   And at least it's not Clearview.  That alone, the relative lack of Clearview, does bring the state up a few notches, from the absolute bottom.       
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: kphoger on September 26, 2022, 09:40:40 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on September 23, 2022, 08:30:26 PM
"X Modern stations"....the rest of the stations in town have pit-toilets out back.

I've used a gas station bathroom like that before.  The gas station itself was closed at the time, and the bathroom was basically an outhouse on the side of the building.  The water didn't even work.

Loma Alta, Texas (https://goo.gl/maps/LUWTM1VqkD6Sy1Lg6)
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: triplemultiplex on September 26, 2022, 03:41:44 PM
I seem to recall a blue logo sign in NM that had Taco Bell listed under "Gas".
:-D
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Plutonic Panda on December 14, 2022, 11:55:57 AM
New Mexico DOT is asking for almost 900 million in additional funding. Hopefully they get it and fund much needed projects.

https://www.krqe.com/news/new-mexico/department-of-transportation-asks-for-additional-889-million-on-budget/
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on December 14, 2022, 03:47:57 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 14, 2022, 11:55:57 AM
New Mexico DOT is asking for almost 900 million in additional funding. Hopefully they get it and fund much needed projects.

https://www.krqe.com/news/new-mexico/department-of-transportation-asks-for-additional-889-million-on-budget/
Two projects at the top of my list that should be prioritized: the I-25/Montgomery interchange reconstruction, and straightening out the dreaded S-curve on I-25 through downtown Albuquerque.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on December 18, 2022, 11:24:49 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 14, 2022, 03:47:57 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 14, 2022, 11:55:57 AM
New Mexico DOT is asking for almost 900 million in additional funding. Hopefully they get it and fund much needed projects.

https://www.krqe.com/news/new-mexico/department-of-transportation-asks-for-additional-889-million-on-budget/
Two projects at the top of my list that should be prioritized: the I-25/Montgomery interchange reconstruction, and straightening out the dreaded S-curve on I-25 through downtown Albuquerque.

Has anything started in SE NM, in the oil fields?  They did have some terrible "improvements" slated for US -285 SE of Carlsbad.  A THREE LANE poor boy.  Simply awful.  That stretch, all the way S to Pecos, should be Expressway grade, divided four lane.  Access maintained, for oil field interests and ranchers, but some full interchanges at certain intersections.  Crap.   Yes am aware Texas did a poor boy three lane, south of the NM state line, that is equally bad.  Clearview also, served on top.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on December 21, 2022, 04:49:07 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on December 18, 2022, 11:24:49 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 14, 2022, 03:47:57 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 14, 2022, 11:55:57 AM
New Mexico DOT is asking for almost 900 million in additional funding. Hopefully they get it and fund much needed projects.

https://www.krqe.com/news/new-mexico/department-of-transportation-asks-for-additional-889-million-on-budget/
Two projects at the top of my list that should be prioritized: the I-25/Montgomery interchange reconstruction, and straightening out the dreaded S-curve on I-25 through downtown Albuquerque.

Has anything started in SE NM, in the oil fields?  They did have some terrible "improvements" slated for US -285 SE of Carlsbad.  A THREE LANE poor boy.  Simply awful.  That stretch, all the way S to Pecos, should be Expressway grade, divided four lane.  Access maintained, for oil field interests and ranchers, but some full interchanges at certain intersections.  Crap.   Yes am aware Texas did a poor boy three lane, south of the NM state line, that is equally bad.  Clearview also, served on top.
They've been working in phases on Highway 285 from Artesia to the TX state line, with the ultimate goal of 285 being 4 lanes along that entire stretch. From what I've seen thus far, they are "pulling a US-550" with 2 lanes in each direction, separated by a 3-foot rumble strip centerline rather than a physical median divider.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: triplemultiplex on December 22, 2022, 10:23:28 AM
No one cheaps out on a four-lane expansion like New Mexico!
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on December 22, 2022, 10:47:27 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 14, 2022, 03:47:57 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 14, 2022, 11:55:57 AM
New Mexico DOT is asking for almost 900 million in additional funding. Hopefully they get it and fund much needed projects.

https://www.krqe.com/news/new-mexico/department-of-transportation-asks-for-additional-889-million-on-budget/
Two projects at the top of my list that should be prioritized: the I-25/Montgomery interchange reconstruction, and straightening out the dreaded S-curve on I-25 through downtown Albuquerque.

Is that APS warehouse building still in the SE quadrant of that "S" curve?  The one they put that "mural" on?  Cannot for the life of me understand why it is so hard to comprehend that that facility has to be moved.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on December 23, 2022, 09:30:57 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on December 22, 2022, 10:47:27 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 14, 2022, 03:47:57 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 14, 2022, 11:55:57 AM
New Mexico DOT is asking for almost 900 million in additional funding. Hopefully they get it and fund much needed projects.

https://www.krqe.com/news/new-mexico/department-of-transportation-asks-for-additional-889-million-on-budget/
Two projects at the top of my list that should be prioritized: the I-25/Montgomery interchange reconstruction, and straightening out the dreaded S-curve on I-25 through downtown Albuquerque.

Is that APS warehouse building still in the SE quadrant of that "S" curve?  The one they put that "mural" on?  Cannot for the life of me understand why it is so hard to comprehend that that facility has to be moved.
It's still there, and most (if not all) of the land to the east of I-25 between the APS Warehouse and Gibson is owned by UNM. There's also the South Diversion Channel that runs adjacent and to the east of the freeway through that area. Finally, at the I-25/Gibson interchange, there are two cemeteries that butt up against the ramps in the northeast and southwest quadrants, that would make expansion of that interchange very difficult.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on February 09, 2023, 10:42:53 PM
Believe those are indigent or what used to be known a "pauper" cemeteries.  There is precedent for exhumation and relocation.   Both could be combined into a single location E of the roadway.   Obviously respect for the dead, has be considered here, in any relocation.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: jtespi on April 27, 2023, 02:46:06 AM
Quote from: DJStephens on September 17, 2022, 10:29:37 PM
There have now been three "cheapie" flush median jobs done statewide.  US 550/NM 44, with it's horrific safety record, US 70/380 Hondo Valley, and US 82 E of Artesia.  All are less than optimum, some (US 550/NM 44) are significantly worse.  But yes, a divided four lane, with a minimum sixty foot median, would be the best long term outcome, for US 54.  Personally don't believe it will ever happen.     

I was driving US-550 between San Ysidro and Bernalillo on Easter weekend and man that stretch of roadway is scary. You are only 1.5 meters (5 feet) from a head-on collision with just two sets of rumble strips and double yellow lines "protecting" you. It feels almost as dangerous as passing on a two-lane road to be in the left (inner) lane with traffic whizzing by at ~75 MPH.

They need to install a concrete barrier along most of that stretch, especially in areas where there's no need to maintain access to intersecting roads. Unfortunately, I don't think the state will do anything to put a barrier unless/until there's a major (fatal) crash along that stretch of highway.

Also, this intersection with NW Loop Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/HS9Howf1oDNkUX7T7) in the north part of Rio Rancho is very scary, especially at night or during times of high traffic volume. There's a major accident waiting to happen since left turns from NW Loop to NB 550 are allowed and the speed limit is still 70 MPH at that part (at least for SB 550).

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 17, 2021, 02:29:02 PM
We know New Mexico tends to ignore long distance concurrencies on interstates.  I find it interesting when I find references to the concurrencies (https://goo.gl/maps/Bsita89Sw4Veq1JL9) on the intersecting highways.
What's even more bizarre about that signage at that interchange is that it only mentions US-70 west NOT I-10 west. Even Google Maps is confused (https://goo.gl/maps/4Va52wiP5NRPr5Dt8) and labels I-10 as "US-70" in the Street View name. But near that previous Street View location (https://goo.gl/maps/4bnCfebR24vfDh5C6), you can see they replaced the earlier (https://goo.gl/maps/trJryd95VyePeACSA) US-70 shield (that was mistakenly on a 3-digit sized US-highway shield) to a green sign with only the US-70 shield, completely omitting I-10.

Quote from: oscar on January 08, 2022, 09:43:47 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on November 19, 2021, 09:12:38 AM
NMDOT's new website just went live. The URL is https://www.dot.nm.gov/

NMDOT still hasn't updated at least its main posted route log since 2010. I just use NMDOT's online Roadway Functional Class map (https://nmdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=f2fc877d107b4e338deb789f70a8779e) to get the latest, though the "latest" may be a few years old.
You should see the trouble I'm having trying to get Google Maps to get rid of the NM-342 designation along Lohman and Amador Avenues in Las Cruces. I sent them links (https://www.dot.nm.gov/planning-research-multimodal-and-safety/planning-division/data-management-bureau/roadway-inventory-program/) to the state's latest route log PDF document (https://api.realfile.rtsclients.com/PublicFiles/f260a66b364d453e91ff9b3fedd494dc/3f745f06-9146-4e1d-892f-3272df795f8b/NM%20Routes) and Google still refuses to remove the 342 designation. That road hasn't been designated or signed as NM-342 in Las Cruces in over 20 years and yet Google still thinks NM-342 exists. It's absolutely maddening that the old Google Map Maker program no longer exists, because I'd probably have more luck trying to correct it when GMM existed.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on April 30, 2023, 11:48:28 AM
Quote from: jtespi on April 27, 2023, 02:46:06 AM
I was driving US-550 between San Ysidro and Bernalillo on Easter weekend and man that stretch of roadway is scary. You are only 1.5 meters (5 feet) from a head-on collision with just two sets of rumble strips and double yellow lines "protecting" you. It feels almost as dangerous as passing on a two-lane road to be in the left (inner) lane with traffic whizzing by at ~75 MPH.They need to install a concrete barrier along most of that stretch, especially in areas where there's no need to maintain access to intersecting roads. Unfortunately, I don't think the state will do anything to put a barrier unless/until there's a major (fatal) crash along that stretch of highway.
Also, this intersection with NW Loop Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/HS9Howf1oDNkUX7T7) in the north part of Rio Rancho is very scary, especially at night or during times of high traffic volume. There's a major accident waiting to happen since left turns from NW Loop to NB 550 are allowed and the speed limit is still 70 MPH at that part (at least for SB 550).
That NM - 44 / US - 550 adbomination was the single worst project of the gary johnson administration, and there were a lot of public works eggs laid during that governor's tenure.   Design - it's at the bottom of the barrel here, and seemingly new ways to go even lower are found.
As for fatalities, suspect there has been at least two dozen, on that stretch of road in twenty years, possibly more.  Nearly all could have been prevented, had there been proper design applied - mainly a depressed grassed median of at least 60 feet, full shoulders, and 85 MPH design speed, with appropriate horizontal and vertical curvature corrections.     
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on July 12, 2023, 09:28:41 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on April 30, 2023, 11:48:28 AM
Quote from: jtespi on April 27, 2023, 02:46:06 AM
I was driving US-550 between San Ysidro and Bernalillo on Easter weekend and man that stretch of roadway is scary. You are only 1.5 meters (5 feet) from a head-on collision with just two sets of rumble strips and double yellow lines "protecting" you. It feels almost as dangerous as passing on a two-lane road to be in the left (inner) lane with traffic whizzing by at ~75 MPH.They need to install a concrete barrier along most of that stretch, especially in areas where there's no need to maintain access to intersecting roads. Unfortunately, I don't think the state will do anything to put a barrier unless/until there's a major (fatal) crash along that stretch of highway.
Also, this intersection with NW Loop Rd (https://goo.gl/maps/HS9Howf1oDNkUX7T7) in the north part of Rio Rancho is very scary, especially at night or during times of high traffic volume. There's a major accident waiting to happen since left turns from NW Loop to NB 550 are allowed and the speed limit is still 70 MPH at that part (at least for SB 550).
That NM - 44 / US - 550 adbomination was the single worst project of the gary johnson administration, and there were a lot of public works eggs laid during that governor's tenure.   Design - it's at the bottom of the barrel here, and seemingly new ways to go even lower are found.
As for fatalities, suspect there has been at least two dozen, on that stretch of road in twenty years, possibly more.  Nearly all could have been prevented, had there been proper design applied - mainly a depressed grassed median of at least 60 feet, full shoulders, and 85 MPH design speed, with appropriate horizontal and vertical curvature corrections.   
I suspect they widened NM-44/US-550 the way they did for two reasons: 1) to get it done as cheaply as possible, and 2) to appease the Native Americans whose reservations 550 goes through by keeping the widening within the existing right-of-way. If you look at 550 in its current state, there is very little room within the existing ROW for further widening in most places, although in some places the ROW might be wide enough to add a real median between the opposing lanes. It's also important to remember that the ROW just doesn't account for the roadway itself, but also includes the required clear zones and accommodates proper grading between the roadway and surrounding environment for the drainage of stormwater from the roadway.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: LilianaUwU on July 12, 2023, 09:54:48 PM
I'm gonna say it: if nothing else, a Jersey barrier in the median is desperately needed on that stretch of highway.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on July 12, 2023, 10:56:47 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 12, 2023, 09:54:48 PM
I'm gonna say it: if nothing else, a Jersey barrier in the median is desperately needed on that stretch of highway.
They've long talked about installing some kind of physical divider along 550 between Bernalillo and Bloomington, either a concrete Jersey barrier or cable barriers. No solution has gained traction, since New Mexico is just about flat broke. We barely get enough money to preserve our existing highways, let alone make simple improvements like cable barriers down the middle of 550.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: JKRhodes on July 12, 2023, 11:10:47 PM
Noticed 404/Ohara in the anthony gap is being 4 laned, mostly with a narrow median and a concrete center divider. Also looks like there are some occasional provisions for future at grade intersections.

Feels like it's gearing up for more suburban development; curious if there's any reworking planned for the intersections at 213 and a more direct connection to Lisa Road. Anyone have further 411 on the plans?
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on July 13, 2023, 07:48:21 AM
A couple weeks ago I drove from Albuquerque to Alamogordo. Good news is they're now working on reconstructing the final 11-mile stretch of US-54 between Carrizozo and Corona (MP 152 to MP 163). That, when finished, will complete the reconstruction of US-54 between Tularosa and Vaughn that began around 2010. I think they saved this stretch for last because about a 2-3 mile segment between MP 154 and MP 157 goes through a rather steep canyon. There will likely be a significant amount of blasting required to reconstruct the stretch through the canyon to the modern roadway profile seen elsewhere between Tularosa and Vaughn.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: brad2971 on July 13, 2023, 07:50:00 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on July 12, 2023, 10:56:47 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 12, 2023, 09:54:48 PM
I'm gonna say it: if nothing else, a Jersey barrier in the median is desperately needed on that stretch of highway.
They've long talked about installing some kind of physical divider along 550 between Bernalillo and Bloomington, either a concrete Jersey barrier or cable barriers. No solution has gained traction, since New Mexico is just about flat broke. We barely get enough money to preserve our existing highways, let alone make simple improvements like cable barriers down the middle of 550.

I'm sorry, but NM is nowhere close to being broke. NM produces 1.8 million barrels of oil per day, with all the associated tax revenue that comes with that. If NM can afford to do this: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/new-mexico/articles/2023-04-14/new-mexico-taxpayers-getting-rebates-due-to-budget-surplus#:~:text=April%2014%2C%202023%2C%20at%205%3A56%20p.m.&text=SANTA%20FE%2C%20N.M.%20(AP),Michelle%20Lujan%20Grisham%20announced%20Friday

It can easily afford safety solutions on US 550, whether they be Jersey barriers or triple-cable barrier.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on July 13, 2023, 11:11:38 AM
Quote from: brad2971 on July 13, 2023, 07:50:00 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on July 12, 2023, 10:56:47 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 12, 2023, 09:54:48 PM
I'm gonna say it: if nothing else, a Jersey barrier in the median is desperately needed on that stretch of highway.
They've long talked about installing some kind of physical divider along 550 between Bernalillo and Bloomington, either a concrete Jersey barrier or cable barriers. No solution has gained traction, since New Mexico is just about flat broke. We barely get enough money to preserve our existing highways, let alone make simple improvements like cable barriers down the middle of 550.

I'm sorry, but NM is nowhere close to being broke. NM produces 1.8 million barrels of oil per day, with all the associated tax revenue that comes with that. If NM can afford to do this: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/new-mexico/articles/2023-04-14/new-mexico-taxpayers-getting-rebates-due-to-budget-surplus#:~:text=April%2014%2C%202023%2C%20at%205%3A56%20p.m.&text=SANTA%20FE%2C%20N.M.%20(AP),Michelle%20Lujan%20Grisham%20announced%20Friday

It can easily afford safety solutions on US 550, whether they be Jersey barriers or triple-cable barrier.
Yes, but in the context of highway funding, NM is broke. The NM government's priority for spending is on handouts...always has been. Moreover, the political will does not exist to raise revenue to invest in our roads. New Mexico's motor fuel tax sits at 19 cents, among the lowest in the nation. It hasn't been raised since 1993. Attempts to raise the fuel tax over the past decade at both the state and local level have been squashed. Tolls are a non-starter. New Mexico is a pay-as-you-go state for highway financing, meaning the state doesn't borrow money to pay for road projects, although local governments may take out bonds (upon approval by the voters) to expedite the financing of road projects.

But you're right in the sense that New Mexico has the money, but it's more of a matter of priorities for the Legislature and the Governor. This last legislative session, NMDOT requested a $1 billion increase in funding for road projects this fiscal year, and lawmakers laughed at them. Again, out here, politicians heavily rely on handouts to buy votes come election time.

The other thing that concerns me is that throughout this year's legislative session is how lawmakers and talking heads were crowing about how New Mexico was flush with cash, with a budget surplus of over $1 billion. What they're not telling us is how much of that "surplus" is from one-time infusions of cash from federal spending (i.e., COVID bailouts, IIJA, etc.) and how much of that is from perpetual revenue streams. So while it all sounds good right now, I'm not convinced the state's financial health in future fiscal years will remain this way, especially when the money from the COVID bailouts and IIJA run out.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: brad2971 on July 13, 2023, 05:47:07 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on July 13, 2023, 11:11:38 AM
Quote from: brad2971 on July 13, 2023, 07:50:00 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on July 12, 2023, 10:56:47 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 12, 2023, 09:54:48 PM
I'm gonna say it: if nothing else, a Jersey barrier in the median is desperately needed on that stretch of highway.
They've long talked about installing some kind of physical divider along 550 between Bernalillo and Bloomington, either a concrete Jersey barrier or cable barriers. No solution has gained traction, since New Mexico is just about flat broke. We barely get enough money to preserve our existing highways, let alone make simple improvements like cable barriers down the middle of 550.

I'm sorry, but NM is nowhere close to being broke. NM produces 1.8 million barrels of oil per day, with all the associated tax revenue that comes with that. If NM can afford to do this: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/new-mexico/articles/2023-04-14/new-mexico-taxpayers-getting-rebates-due-to-budget-surplus#:~:text=April%2014%2C%202023%2C%20at%205%3A56%20p.m.&text=SANTA%20FE%2C%20N.M.%20(AP),Michelle%20Lujan%20Grisham%20announced%20Friday

It can easily afford safety solutions on US 550, whether they be Jersey barriers or triple-cable barrier.
Yes, but in the context of highway funding, NM is broke. The NM government's priority for spending is on handouts...always has been. Moreover, the political will does not exist to raise revenue to invest in our roads. New Mexico's motor fuel tax sits at 19 cents, among the lowest in the nation. It hasn't been raised since 1993. Attempts to raise the fuel tax over the past decade at both the state and local level have been squashed. Tolls are a non-starter. New Mexico is a pay-as-you-go state for highway financing, meaning the state doesn't borrow money to pay for road projects, although local governments may take out bonds (upon approval by the voters) to expedite the financing of road projects.

But you're right in the sense that New Mexico has the money, but it's more of a matter of priorities for the Legislature and the Governor. This last legislative session, NMDOT requested a $1 billion increase in funding for road projects this fiscal year, and lawmakers laughed at them. Again, out here, politicians heavily rely on handouts to buy votes come election time.

The other thing that concerns me is that throughout this year's legislative session is how lawmakers and talking heads were crowing about how New Mexico was flush with cash, with a budget surplus of over $1 billion. What they're not telling us is how much of that "surplus" is from one-time infusions of cash from federal spending (i.e., COVID bailouts, IIJA, etc.) and how much of that is from perpetual revenue streams. So while it all sounds good right now, I'm not convinced the state's financial health in future fiscal years will remain this way, especially when the money from the COVID bailouts and IIJA run out.

Not to get too political about this, but I'm willing to venture a guess that a future governing party in New Mexico that is aligned with the people/industry producing 1.8 million barrels of oil per day would have little to no trouble passing funding to make the likes of four-lane US 550 safer. The behavior that you've described shows a certain amount of tone-deafness to NM's current economic situation, especially in the Permian Basin part of the state. That tone-deafness is not long for this world.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on July 19, 2023, 12:20:23 AM
     The problem is, the average working class person in this state does not vote.  The west coast transplants and those with far-left "pie in the sky" viewpoints are the ones that do.   That is why the last R congressional representative, Herrell, who was the superior candidate, was defeated by single issue voters.
     Have seen the las Cruces area pretty much "flip" over to a complete "progressive" city council.  Terrible.  Crime is on the upswing, police have their hands tied, a lot of roaming vagrants, there is a complete lack of planning, large new subdivsions are rubber stamped, with no traffic projections.   There are now crazy "initiatives" such as traffic "calming" and "road diets".  Diets where a five lane cross section is needed, and necessary, the room meaning ROW is often there.  Skewing and shifting.  Regressive design on all fronts.   Extreme over-densification of land use in many areas leading to congestion and blight.  And in a state, that relies heavily on public sector employment, the trough is bigger than ever.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Rothman on July 19, 2023, 07:08:16 AM


Quote from: DJStephens on July 19, 2023, 12:20:23 AM
     The problem is, the average working class person in this state does not vote.  The west coast transplants and those with far-left "pie in the sky" viewpoints are the ones that do.   That is why the last R congressional representative, Herrell, who was the superior candidate, was defeated by single issue voters.
     Have seen the las Cruces area pretty much "flip" over to a complete "progressive" city council.  Terrible.  Crime is on the upswing, police have their hands tied, a lot of roaming vagrants, there is a complete lack of planning, large new subdivsions are rubber stamped, with no traffic projections.   There are now crazy "initiatives" such as traffic "calming" and "road diets".  Diets where a five lane cross section is needed, and necessary, the room meaning ROW is often there.  Skewing and shifting.  Regressive design on all fronts.   Extreme over-densification of land use in many areas leading to congestion and blight.  And in a state, that relies heavily on public sector employment, the trough is bigger than ever.

A stupefying political rant.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: ethanhopkin14 on July 19, 2023, 10:14:45 AM
Quote from: DJStephens on July 19, 2023, 12:20:23 AM
     The problem is, the average working class person in this state does not vote.  The west coast transplants and those with far-left "pie in the sky" viewpoints are the ones that do.   That is why the last R congressional representative, Herrell, who was the superior candidate, was defeated by single issue voters.
     Have seen the las Cruces area pretty much "flip" over to a complete "progressive" city council.  Terrible.  Crime is on the upswing, police have their hands tied, a lot of roaming vagrants, there is a complete lack of planning, large new subdivsions are rubber stamped, with no traffic projections.   There are now crazy "initiatives" such as traffic "calming" and "road diets".  Diets where a five lane cross section is needed, and necessary, the room meaning ROW is often there.  Skewing and shifting.  Regressive design on all fronts.   Extreme over-densification of land use in many areas leading to congestion and blight.  And in a state, that relies heavily on public sector employment, the trough is bigger than ever.

I have always wondered this about New Mexico.  Driving across the state, many residents love to show their political affiliations in the line of flags and placards.  Reading all of the political viewpoints, you would swear you were driving through one of the reddest states, but they vote primarily the other way. 
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: JKRhodes on July 19, 2023, 10:24:06 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 19, 2023, 10:14:45 AM
Quote from: DJStephens on July 19, 2023, 12:20:23 AM
     The problem is, the average working class person in this state does not vote.  The west coast transplants and those with far-left "pie in the sky" viewpoints are the ones that do.   That is why the last R congressional representative, Herrell, who was the superior candidate, was defeated by single issue voters.
     Have seen the las Cruces area pretty much "flip" over to a complete "progressive" city council.  Terrible.  Crime is on the upswing, police have their hands tied, a lot of roaming vagrants, there is a complete lack of planning, large new subdivsions are rubber stamped, with no traffic projections.   There are now crazy "initiatives" such as traffic "calming" and "road diets".  Diets where a five lane cross section is needed, and necessary, the room meaning ROW is often there.  Skewing and shifting.  Regressive design on all fronts.   Extreme over-densification of land use in many areas leading to congestion and blight.  And in a state, that relies heavily on public sector employment, the trough is bigger than ever.

I have always wondered this about New Mexico.  Driving across the state, many residents love to show their political affiliations in the line of flags and placards.  Reading all of the political viewpoints, you would swear you were driving through one of the reddest states, but they vote primarily the other way.

I work with a handful of folks from rural, southern, NM. Talking to them get reference to, and a sense of disdain for, "the north" pulling strings of the state. Santa Fe to some degree, yes, but also seems large voting base in Albuquerque has large scale poverty / social issues, and gets bought off with democratic handouts.

Las Cruces, a liberal college town by some accounts, had an amazing turnout at George Strait/Martina McBride Pan America Center concert 10 years ago when I went.

Agreed. Poll data really doesn't line up with what I see when I visit, which I'll admit also involves staying out of Albuquerque at all costs.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Alex on July 19, 2023, 10:28:06 AM
Quote from: DJStephens on July 19, 2023, 12:20:23 AM
there is a complete lack of planning, large new subdivisions are rubber stamped, with no traffic projections.

IMO this is a nationwide problem, and one that is shared equally among both political parties.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 19, 2023, 10:50:27 AM
We have plenty of bone-headed examples of "urban planning" here in deep-red Oklahoma. Real estate developers are only concerned about pushing through their latest deals ASAP. It doesn't matter if those deals conflict with any long term street/highway plans that might be on the books. They'll plop their development right in the way of it. Hell, it doesn't even matter if there is adequate water supply or utilities for the new development. That's where their connections to local city councils, county commissioners and state reps come into play. Dip into the trough and let the taxpayers fund the extension of infrastructure to the new douchebag-priced subdivision. Meanwhile streets and highways get neglected. The highways that everyone uses is socialism-funded -so that's bad and we can't do it. Yet the same people keep bitching about the toll gates on the turnpikes and how they need to be removed.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on July 19, 2023, 02:51:15 PM
Quote from: Alex on July 19, 2023, 10:28:06 AM
Quote from: DJStephens on July 19, 2023, 12:20:23 AM
there is a complete lack of planning, large new subdivisions are rubber stamped, with no traffic projections.

IMO this is a nationwide problem, and one that is shared equally among both political parties.
That is true. Politicians seem to never hesitate to approve a new development or subdivision or master-planned community because of the "promise" of new tax revenue. In reality, a lot of these politicians are getting their palms greased by the developers, and so the rubber stamp comes out.

Point in fact, the Santolina development alongside I-40 west of Albuquerque was rammed through the Bernalillo County Commission. Santolina is a master-planned community that, when fully built out, would be 22 square miles and have over 30,000 homes that could house up to 90,000 people. Prior to county commission approval, the Santolina development proposal required approval from Albuquerque Public Schools and the Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Utility Authority (ABCWUA). The main backer of the Santolina development is the mega-bank Barclays.

The scarcity of water has always been a concern in New Mexico, to the point where the threat of rationing water is always present. That did not stop ABCWUA from approving the water management plan that was pencil-whipped by the developers' consultants. No new highways or improvements to existing highways are proposed as part of the Santolina development, as NMDOT stated the proposed development would not only have "no significant impact" to traffic on I-40, but somehow "reduce traffic" on I-40 through Albuquerque. How do you "reduce traffic" when adding another 90,000 residents to your metro area with no highway improvements?  Progressive thinking defies logic.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on July 19, 2023, 07:17:35 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 19, 2023, 10:50:27 AM
We have plenty of bone-headed examples of "urban planning" here in deep-red Oklahoma. Real estate developers are only concerned about pushing through their latest deals ASAP. It doesn't matter if those deals conflict with any long term street/highway plans that might be on the books. They'll plop their development right in the way of it. Hell, it doesn't even matter if there is adequate water supply or utilities for the new development. That's where their connections to local city councils, county commissioners and state reps come into play. Dip into the trough and let the taxpayers fund the extension of infrastructure to the new douchebag-priced subdivision. Meanwhile streets and highways get neglected. The highways that everyone uses is socialism-funded -so that's bad and we can't do it. Yet the same people keep bitching about the toll gates on the turnpikes and how they need to be removed.
I'd pay double the current state tax (currently 17 cents/gal up to 35 cents/gal) here, if there was a "house cleaning" at the department HQ on Cerrillos Road in Santa Fe.   To play "catch up" and build the surface infrastructure this state didn't build, and still needs.   Design standards restoration would be at the top of the list.   As well as ripping out, and "re-doing" a lot of Gary Johnson stuff, as well, which was almost universally terrible.   Johnson, as some may know, was a "darling" of the Libertarian crowd.  So yes, both parties have been bad for better surface infrastructure in this state.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on July 19, 2023, 09:32:48 PM
So, break...break...
I frequently visit the site historicaerials.com, which has aerial photos and topographical maps of places around the country, going back into the early part of the last century.  I was recently looking at aerial photos and old topo maps for Albuquerque and noticed something interesting.  On the 1960 topo map there existed a route co-designated "TR-66" using the US route shield (not sure if TR stood for Truck Route or Temporary Route) and NM-297. TR-US-66/NM-297 appears to have began at the intersection of Menaul Boulevard and Second Street (then Alt US-85, current NM-47). The TR-US-66/NM-297 designation followed Menaul Boulevard east to Wyoming Boulevard. The TR-US-66 designation split off Menaul at Victor Circle, which merges into Wyoming Boulevard. TR-US-66 then followed Wyoming Boulevard south to Central Avenue (former US-66), where it ended.

The NM-297 designation continued on Menaul past Wyoming to Snowheights Circle. It then followed Snowheights, to Eubank Boulevard, and then followed Eubank south to Central Avenue, where it also ended.

As previously mentioned, the TR-US-66/NM-297 designation appeared on the 1960 topo map, but it was gone in the 1969 topo map (the next available in the historicaerials.com database for that area).

Anyone road history buffs have any knowledge of what happened there?
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 20, 2023, 02:08:48 PM
Quote from: abqtravelerPoliticians seem to never hesitate to approve a new development or subdivision or master-planned community because of the "promise" of new tax revenue. In reality, a lot of these politicians are getting their palms greased by the developers, and so the rubber stamp comes out.

Unfortunately a lot of these guys doing the rubber stamping may be in their graves 20 or so years from now when the demographics model to support those kinds of housing developments totally falls apart. No policy makers will be held accountable. There is going to be a shit load of old Americans wanting to sell these big-ass homes and not have any buyers for them.

Japan has been dealing with shrinking population and a serious demographic imbalance of too many older people and not enough young, working age people. One thing that has been happening lately is municipal and prefecture governments are demolishing properties of elderly people who've died. Their heirs often won't claim the homes. They may not be able to afford the renovations needed to make the properties sell-able. They may not be able to afford the property taxes (including back taxes that may be owed). And there isn't enough potential buyers in the market. Abandoned properties out in rural areas are especially prone to get bulldozed. Working age (often single) adults are opting for city life.

The US could be in a similar situation 20 years from now. Here in Lawton we have new subdivisions going up on the far East and West sides of the area. These are big homes with big utility bills and maintenance costs. It's going to be funny when these home buyers want to "down-size" in the future and sell their properties. A single child-less adult is not going to have much use for a big-ass house well outside of town. I can imagine a lot of these currently-nice housing subdivisions becoming ghost towns in the future.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: triplemultiplex on July 20, 2023, 05:03:24 PM
I'm tempted to make a snarky "modest proposal" type statement about culling the boomers as they age out of usefulness.
Be a lot cheaper than trying to care for all these old people. 
I say it in jest, but I wouldn't put it past a place like China to actually pull that move as their own demographic time bomb starts going off.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: The Ghostbuster on July 20, 2023, 05:10:18 PM
Don't insult boomers! My mother is a boomer.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 20, 2023, 07:36:45 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplexI say it in jest, but I wouldn't put it past a place like China to actually pull that move as their own demographic time bomb starts going off.

With China being an authoritarian police state (and considering the rash things their government has done in the past) there's no telling what their government could do in response to their generational demographics crisis. So far their actions to end the one child only policy has made no difference. Marriage and birth rate levels are still falling. At some point the Chinese government is going to get desperate, if they're not already. A Logan's Run plot scenario is probably unlikely as long as China wants to be an exporter of manufactured goods and raw materials. Whether they like or it or not they'll probably be forced to import a lot of foreign labor or outsource a lot of their production to other countries.

Birth rates in Japan aren't improving. South Korea has the world's lowest total fertility rate, an average of .085 children per female. A country needs a TFR of 2.2 to reach the replacement rate level.

I worry about the demographic trend line in the US. It will affect our tax base and adversely affect funding things like highway construction and maintenance. Of course if our population is aging and eventually shrinking there won't be a need for as many highways.

Here in Oklahoma the rural parts of the state have quite a few highways and bridges as well as seemingly countless number of section line roads. Nearly all the rural areas in Oklahoma are bleeding away population. The state already has serious highway funding struggles. As those rural areas continue to shrink it's going to get harder to justify spending money on roads and bridges in those areas.

Some parts of New Mexico are adding population. But there are other areas which seem like they're in decline, such as the Southeast part of the state.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: thenetwork on July 20, 2023, 08:25:41 PM
Even the state's resurfacing projects are hit and miss this year:

There is a several mile stretch of US-550 north of Aztec that is getting resurfaced. -- with big Gov Grisham signs promoting several million in this "community investment" for the last 2 months.  A little over 1 month into the actual construction, only the NB lanes are done, but as of Monday, the lanes have let to be striped and traffic has not yet shifted over...

Meanwhile, on US-64 between Kirkland and Shiprock, a similar-length stretch for a similar type of simple resurfacing --  No big project signage touting community investment  and no two-way traffic shifts onto one side.   This project was completely done in under 2 weeks with little fanfare.

BTW, the US-64 stretch was in much worse shape than the US-550 segment. 

Go Figure!
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on July 21, 2023, 08:51:23 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 20, 2023, 05:03:24 PM
I'm tempted to make a snarky "modest proposal" type statement about culling the boomers as they age out of usefulness.
Be a lot cheaper than trying to care for all these old people. 
I say it in jest, but I wouldn't put it past a place like China to actually pull that move as their own demographic time bomb starts going off.
Supposedly in the Soviet Union, particularly during the rule of Stalin, people who were too old or too sick to work or contribute to society were "euthanized." Obviously, and thankfully, we're nowhere near that level of barbarism here.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Rothman on July 21, 2023, 09:09:20 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on July 21, 2023, 08:51:23 AM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on July 20, 2023, 05:03:24 PM
I'm tempted to make a snarky "modest proposal" type statement about culling the boomers as they age out of usefulness.
Be a lot cheaper than trying to care for all these old people. 
I say it in jest, but I wouldn't put it past a place like China to actually pull that move as their own demographic time bomb starts going off.
Supposedly in the Soviet Union, particularly during the rule of Stalin, people who were too old or too sick to work or contribute to society were "euthanized." Obviously, and thankfully, we're nowhere near that level of barbarism here.
Give it a week or two.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Bobby5280 on July 21, 2023, 08:35:37 PM
Provided the US doesn't turn into an authoritarian dictatorship we'll probably be doing more to copy Japan's style: an elderly person with no living relatives dies in his apartment. No one knows about it. After a few months or even more than a year someone finally visits the apartment to check on the person when his bank account finally runs dry from automatic bill payments. They discover skeletal remains inside.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on July 26, 2023, 01:05:54 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 20, 2023, 07:36:45 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplexI worry about the demographic trend line in the US. It will affect our tax base and adversely affect funding things like highway construction and maintenance. Of course if our population is aging and eventually shrinking there won't be a need for as many highways.
Here in Oklahoma the rural parts of the state have quite a few highways and bridges as well as seemingly countless number of section line roads. Nearly all the rural areas in Oklahoma are bleeding away population. The state already has serious highway funding struggles. As those rural areas continue to shrink it's going to get harder to justify spending money on roads and bridges in those areas.   Some parts of New Mexico are adding population. But there are other areas which seem like they're in decline, such as the Southeast part of the state.
Population in the SE counties is more "cyclical" depending on the fortunes of the oil patch. Chaves, Lea, and Eddy counties.  There is upscale housing construction occurring, on the fringes of both Carlsbad and Hobbs.   For those fortunate individuals that have found somewhat stable employment there.    For most, it's "hit or miss" or leave when you are laid off.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: JKRhodes on July 26, 2023, 08:43:39 PM
Drove to El Paso several weeks ago and noticed the pavement on Eastbound I-10 between Lordsburg and Deming was quite rough, warped, almost to the point of being hazardous.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: ethanhopkin14 on July 27, 2023, 10:36:18 AM
Quote from: JKRhodes on July 26, 2023, 08:43:39 PM
Drove to El Paso several weeks ago and noticed the pavement on Eastbound I-10 between Lordsburg and Deming was quite rough, warped, almost to the point of being hazardous.

Strange.  We limped the RV back home from Los Angeles after blowing out the shocks.  The pavement all the way across Arizona was so bad I had to slow down before any rough pavement I saw, and even then it was so rough I was convinced we would end up in the ditch.  The drive across New Mexico was smooth and pleasant.  I even made the comment to my wife that I was shocked that the road in New Mexico would be better than the road in California and Arizona.  This was all heading eastbound as well. 
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on July 28, 2023, 10:39:03 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 27, 2023, 10:36:18 AM
Quote from: JKRhodes on July 26, 2023, 08:43:39 PM
Drove to El Paso several weeks ago and noticed the pavement on Eastbound I-10 between Lordsburg and Deming was quite rough, warped, almost to the point of being hazardous.

Strange.  We limped the RV back home from Los Angeles after blowing out the shocks.  The pavement all the way across Arizona was so bad I had to slow down before any rough pavement I saw, and even then it was so rough I was convinced we would end up in the ditch.  The drive across New Mexico was smooth and pleasant.  I even made the comment to my wife that I was shocked that the road in New Mexico would be better than the road in California and Arizona.  This was all heading eastbound as well.
Strange.  Was under belief that "Mountain States" recently completed a "mill and fill" from MP 55 (Quincy) to roughly MP 42 heading WB.  Maybe? they didn't do the EB side, although that would be hard to believe.   They did do a cheap Patch job on the Exit 49 interchange.  That bridge was a strange structure, and they did the absolutely cheapest job in "fixing" it.  The corridor, from MP 55 to the E side of Lordsburg (MP 26) should have been completely rebuilt, with a wider median, new interchanges, and a frontage added, along the S side of the ROW, for local ranch access.   Of course, the cheap way out was chosen.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: JKRhodes on July 28, 2023, 11:42:22 AM
Quote from: DJStephens on July 28, 2023, 10:39:03 AM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 27, 2023, 10:36:18 AM
Quote from: JKRhodes on July 26, 2023, 08:43:39 PM
Drove to El Paso several weeks ago and noticed the pavement on Eastbound I-10 between Lordsburg and Deming was quite rough, warped, almost to the point of being hazardous.

Strange.  We limped the RV back home from Los Angeles after blowing out the shocks.  The pavement all the way across Arizona was so bad I had to slow down before any rough pavement I saw, and even then it was so rough I was convinced we would end up in the ditch.  The drive across New Mexico was smooth and pleasant.  I even made the comment to my wife that I was shocked that the road in New Mexico would be better than the road in California and Arizona.  This was all heading eastbound as well.
Strange.  Was under belief that "Mountain States" recently completed a "mill and fill" from MP 55 (Quincy) to roughly MP 42 heading WB.  Maybe? they didn't do the EB side, although that would be hard to believe.   They did do a cheap Patch job on the Exit 49 interchange.  That bridge was a strange structure, and they did the absolutely cheapest job in "fixing" it.  The corridor, from MP 55 to the E side of Lordsburg (MP 26) should have been completely rebuilt, with a wider median, new interchanges, and a frontage added, along the S side of the ROW, for local ranch access.   Of course, the cheap way out was chosen.

If memory serves it was eastbound #2 lane somewhere around Quincy signage and beginning of safety corridor. Pavement looked freshly laid but surface had settled and warped some.

Westbound was smooth.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 08, 2023, 01:50:34 PM
Last week I went thru the NE corner of New Mexico while driving from Oklahoma to Colorado. There was quite a bit of road construction along the entire road trip. Downtown Amarillo was a mess (I took Loop 335 around for the return trip). I-25 going South out of Colorado Springs is really bad. It's "cattle chute" city with all traffic diverted over to one side while they completely re-build the Northbound lanes. NE NM is arguably an even worse mess.

NM DOT has a couple of re-surfacing projects going on with US-64/87 between Clayton and Raton. Basically it looks like all they're doing is just putting down another layer of asphalt on top of compromised roadway. I was having to dodge around big pot holes in the Des Moines area. Portions of this 4-lane divided highway in a lot of other places are in bad shape. The only spots that are any good at all are the concrete-based segments near Mount Dora.

And just what the hell are they trying to do on I-25 going up Raton Pass? All traffic has been shifted to the Northbound lanes. I could spot some work going on with a couple of bridges, but it doesn't look like they're doing anything to improve the rest of the highway while those lanes are shut down. It seems like a whole lot of disruption for what looks like a patch job.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on August 15, 2023, 10:42:35 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 08, 2023, 01:50:34 PM
Last week I went thru the NE corner of New Mexico while driving from Oklahoma to Colorado. There was quite a bit of road construction along the entire road trip. Downtown Amarillo was a mess (I took Loop 335 around for the return trip). I-25 going South out of Colorado Springs is really bad. It's "cattle chute" city with all traffic diverted over to one side while they completely re-build the Northbound lanes. NE NM is arguably an even worse mess.

NM DOT has a couple of re-surfacing projects going on with US-64/87 between Clayton and Raton. Basically it looks like all they're doing is just putting down another layer of asphalt on top of compromised roadway. I was having to dodge around big pot holes in the Des Moines area. Portions of this 4-lane divided highway in a lot of other places are in bad shape. The only spots that are any good at all are the concrete-based segments near Mount Dora.

And just what the hell are they trying to do on I-25 going up Raton Pass? All traffic has been shifted to the Northbound lanes. I could spot some work going on with a couple of bridges, but it doesn't look like they're doing anything to improve the rest of the highway while those lanes are shut down. It seems like a whole lot of disruption for what looks like a patch job.

NMDOT has been doing construction over Raton Pass since at least 2016. They started by reconstructing the interchange and weigh station at the top of the pass at the state line, and they've been working south toward the town of Raton. It's been stretched out over this many years because all of the work is being done under multiple contracts in phases.  The goatrope that I-25 between Raton and Raton pass has turned into reminds me of the mess US-550 through Bernalillo was when NMDOT decided it would be a wise idea to reconstruct that road in multiple phases that spanned more than a decade.  How history repeats itself.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on August 19, 2023, 11:27:17 AM
was at Raton Pass last summer.   One of the two carriageways leading up to the pass on the NM side was heavily potholed.  There is severe winter weather in that pass area.  Ironically, the highway geometry was better on the NM side, of the pass, than the CO side.  The CO side, heading downhill to the north, was narrow, with a center barrier wall and tight interchanges.
And certain "powers that be" want to make this a dedicated PTP corridor for heavy freight?  What are they smoking?  Do they understand the terrain and the weather?   The conditions and obsolescence that exist?   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 19, 2023, 09:27:16 PM
The steep grades and occasionally terrible weather make Raton Pass a bad enough choice for routing the Ports to Plains corridor into Colorado. Then there is the matter of traffic capacity thru the Pass. It's not like they can simply add more lanes. That location could turn into a bottleneck.

An improved US-287 corridor from Texas into SE Colorado would provide redundancy to I-25. If Raton Pass was socked in with snow it's possible US-287 would still be open. If US-287 was at least four lane divided going over the caprock it's possible more trucks would shift to using that route rather than I-25.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: splashflash on August 19, 2023, 11:04:50 PM
One hopes that the congressional numbering legislation spurs Colorado to be more proactive about their leg of US 287.  Some people from SE Colorado are concerned.


A story from a town near US 287.
https://theprowersjournal.com/2023/05/council-receives-update-on-ports-to-plains-corridor-alliance/

Haggard warned that Colorado is lagging behind other southern states such as Texas or New Mexico in designating its portion of the Corridor as a 'future interstate' in order to qualify for future funding for their own road improvements.

"We need to alert all of our state representatives to the need to begin to act and let them know that Texas and New Mexico are taking a lead."   She said a highway spur that runs between Dalhart, Texas and Raton, New Mexico already connects to northbound I-25 thru Colorado to Wyoming.  That spur has the potential to reroute commercial and tourist traffic away from Highway 287, potentially reducing development that would help improve the overall economic climate in southeastern Colorado.

Haggard pointed out several truck stop companies are already eyeing possible land purchases around Raton, based on the potential growth from increased trucker traffic.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 20, 2023, 12:00:30 PM
People in SE Colorado might be screwed.

The biggest problem for them is all focus in the state seems to be on the Front Range cities (and maybe some of the tourism spots in the mountains). The Eastern part of the state seems to be less of a priority.

For a long time Colorado's government has had a very stubbborn culture of foot-dragging in place concerning highway improvement. The policy appears to be "do the bare minimum it takes to barely get by."

We see this "policy" in end results like the re-build of I-25 between Colorado Springs and Castle Rock where one mere toll lane in each direction was added. Woo hoo! US-24 going East of Colorado Springs has seen many serious and even fatal collisions due to it being a dinky 2-lane road with poorly designed intersections. CDOT 4-laned US-24 to just short of Falcon (which is blowing up in population). The only thing they've done in the years since is make a couple intersections, such as the one with Elbert Road, a little more visible with some street lights and a turn lane. US-24 should be four lane divided past Peyton and Calhan, if not 4-lane divided all the way to Limon and I-70.

Oklahoma has more highways, section line roads, etc than Colorado yet ODOT has managed to build a lot more 4-lane divided highways through rural collision-prone areas. CDOT seems to be accepting of grisly collisions as just a fact of life.

New Mexico did at least manage to 4-lane US-64/87 from Texline to Raton. They just did a crappy job with the project. At least motorists easily can pass slow-rolling RVs now though. Still, without some serious federal prodding (and funding) it's very unlikely the NM state government would take any initiative at all to improve US-64/87 to Interstate quality on its own.

We could see an absurd situation where an oddly signed "I-27N" gets built to Stratford, TX and goes no farther North. That's currently the point where the current US-287 4-lane configuration ends.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: kwellada on August 24, 2023, 04:33:34 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 08, 2023, 01:50:34 PM
And just what the hell are they trying to do on I-25 going up Raton Pass? All traffic has been shifted to the Northbound lanes. I could spot some work going on with a couple of bridges, but it doesn't look like they're doing anything to improve the rest of the highway while those lanes are shut down. It seems like a whole lot of disruption for what looks like a patch job.

I'm potentially going to be taking Raton Pass over Labor Day as part of a leisurely road trip. Was traffic backed up or miserable on your trip, or manageable? I have the option of doing a little backtracking after visiting the Capulin Volcano Natl. Monument to take two lane highways into Colorado if Raton Pass is a pain right now.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Bobby5280 on August 24, 2023, 09:46:06 PM
The traffic flow was alright. It wasn't bumper to bumper or anything like that. But I didn't drive through there on a holiday weekend; traffic could be a good bit heavier Labor Day weekend. I imagine the time of day going over the pass would matter too.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Sykotyk on September 19, 2023, 07:19:20 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on August 19, 2023, 11:27:17 AM
was at Raton Pass last summer.   One of the two carriageways leading up to the pass on the NM side was heavily potholed.  There is severe winter weather in that pass area.  Ironically, the highway geometry was better on the NM side, of the pass, than the CO side.  The CO side, heading downhill to the north, was narrow, with a center barrier wall and tight interchanges.
And certain "powers that be" want to make this a dedicated PTP corridor for heavy freight?  What are they smoking?  Do they understand the terrain and the weather?   The conditions and obsolescence that exist?

This was the part that always bugged me.

From Wichita Falls to Denver, Colorado, the suggested route is US287 to Amarillo, to Raton Pass via FM1061 and US385 to US87 and I-25 north along the front range through Pueblo, Colorado Springs, and into Denver from the south.

It's 653 total miles, and includes several passes or steep hills (Raton Pass, as well as between CS and Denver near I believe Castle Rock?).

If you take US287 to Amarillo, follow the TX-LP335, back to US287 and follow that through Boise City, Oklahoma and the towns of Colorado such as Springfield, Lamar, Eads, Kit Carson, Hugo, etc... it's only 645 miles. And not one mountain pass. Sure, I-70 has a slight hill somewhere east of Bennett.

But here's the stoppages on the US287 route from I-40 and north:

Getting off I-40, and getting off Lp-335 are both signaled. The entire town of Dumas. The 4-way stop at Stratford. Lights going through Lamar. That's it. Eads and Kit Carson both drive straight through. Springfield doesn't have a light as far as I can remember. I thought at US160 there may have been a stop sign, but google maps doesn't show one.

Now here's the kicker. NM charges a Weight Distance Permit for large trucks, per mile. Why would any truck traverse New Mexico, and one major mountain pass, and all that traffic through the front range cities. To drive 8 miles further. Just because more of it is freeway? US287 even one lane for long stretches is far more open. And not putting money into making that stretch safer, the way Oklahoma did with Boise City is just poor planning.

Eads, Kit Carson, and Springfield need bypasses of at least 2 or 4 lane. No interchanges needed. Lamar needs a freeway bypass around the west side of town probably to tie straight into the US50/US287 interchange. Dumas, in Texas, desperately needs a bypass along with something for Cactus. If traffic dictates and Oklahoma improves the road, revisiting the intersection in Stratford could be done as well. But for now, US54/US287 is a major junction now that probably would need a C shaped bypass to allow both through routes a direct shot around town.

Keeping the two-lane for long stretches of open Colorado landscape isn't a huge issue. Four-laning as expressways would be great. But, not necessary. Fixing the towns first would go a long way to making things safer.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Bobby5280 on September 19, 2023, 11:11:00 PM
Quote from: SkyotykFrom Wichita Falls to Denver, Colorado, the suggested route is US287 to Amarillo, to Raton Pass via FM1061 and US385 to US87 and I-25 north along the front range through Pueblo, Colorado Springs, and into Denver from the south.

I don't think the short cut using FM-1061 from the NW corner of Amarillo to US-385 in Tascosa is worth all that much versus taking US-287 up to Dumas and US-87 across to Hartley. FM-1061 is a narrow 2-lane road with no shoulders. It goes over some irregular terrain. A fair amount of semi trucks use it. Those conditions scare me a bit.

And then there's the matter of Dumas having the last cheap gasoline. I usually top off my tank there before driving the rest of the way to Colorado Springs. Farther Northwest it usually gets quite a bit more pricey. Sometimes Dalhart's fuel prices might be okay. Of course I might start altering plans a bit once the Amarillo location of Buc-ee's opens sometime in 2024.

Quote from: SkyotykIf you take US287 to Amarillo, follow the TX-LP335, back to US287 and follow that through Boise City, Oklahoma and the towns of Colorado such as Springfield, Lamar, Eads, Kit Carson, Hugo, etc... it's only 645 miles. And not one mountain pass. Sure, I-70 has a slight hill somewhere east of Bennett.

My route from Lawton to Colorado Springs is shorter going by way of Raton Pass. I don't like taking US-287 North of Dumas thru Boise City into SE Colorado. The route can stink really bad due to all the feed lots and meat processing facilities North of Dumas. I really don't like that 2-lane road going across the OK/CO border. It's dangerous. Great for head-on collision with a semi.

I don't like driving on 2-lane roads for long distances. During the day it can be easy to get stuck behind a slow poke, especially if the terrain is uneven, blocking visibility of on-coming traffic. We all know the various night time hazards.

If the Ports to Plains Corridor is going to be built into Colorado it ought to be built right. And that means a minimum of a 4-lane divided highway with at-grade intersections. Preferably it would be Interstate quality. If they build Super-2 bypasses around towns they ought to be built in a manner where they can be upgraded to full Interstate quality in phases. Enough ROW has to be bought and reserved up front.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: kphoger on September 20, 2023, 09:54:29 AM
Quote from: Sykotyk on September 19, 2023, 07:19:20 PM
Springfield doesn't have a light as far as I can remember. I thought at US160 there may have been a stop sign, but google maps doesn't show one.

Yeah, that surprised me too.  I expected it to be a four-way stop, but nope.

Quote from: Sykotyk on September 19, 2023, 07:19:20 PM
Why would any truck traverse New Mexico, and one major mountain pass, and all that traffic through the front range cities. To drive 8 miles further. Just because more of it is freeway?

Yes, because more of it is freeway.

Quote from: Sykotyk on September 19, 2023, 07:19:20 PM
US287 even one lane for long stretches is far more open.

A local might know that, but not a dispatcher in another state telling the driver which route to take.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: CtrlAltDel on November 02, 2023, 02:03:54 PM
Does anyone, just offhand, know why there is a big overhead sign on I-40 west welcoming drivers to New Mexico, but no other similar signs at any of the other places an Interstate enters the state? Was it perhaps a local effort or something like that?
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: oscar on November 02, 2023, 02:32:35 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on November 02, 2023, 02:03:54 PM
Does anyone, just offhand, know why there is a big overhead sign on I-40 west welcoming drivers to New Mexico, but no other similar signs at any of the other places an Interstate enters the state?

There's an identical sign over I-10, just north of the Texas state line.

I haven't lately been at the three other Interstate crossings into New Mexico (I-10 and I-40 from Arizona, I-25 from Colorado).
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 03, 2023, 05:25:21 PM
I wonder if they'll build similar overhead "welcome" and "you're now leaving" signs on I-25 at Raton Pass. The last time I drove through Raton Pass (in August) they didn't have any welcome to New Mexico signs. The one that was there was installed on a bridge over I-25 that was demolished and replaced.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on November 05, 2023, 11:05:14 AM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on November 02, 2023, 02:03:54 PM
Does anyone, just offhand, know why there is a big overhead sign on I-40 west welcoming drivers to New Mexico, but no other similar signs at any of the other places an Interstate enters the state? Was it perhaps a local effort or something like that?
Yes there is one on I-10 westbound (actually due N at that point) in Anthony.   Not really sure why these structures were even warranted at all, as a simple two post sign off the R shoulder would have sufficed.  The "leaving new mexico" gantry with the stone base, just off the R shoulder heading southbound just before Exit O is even worse.  It sits where a half mile (2500 feet) deceleration lane should have been constructed for trucking that seeks to exit should be.  Instead, there is an abrupt veer off to the right.  Insane this was not corrected, meaning a decel lane not built at that point.     
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: CtrlAltDel on November 05, 2023, 02:05:53 PM
Quote from: oscar on November 02, 2023, 02:32:35 PM
There's an identical sign over I-10, just north of the Texas state line.

Quote from: DJStephens on November 05, 2023, 11:05:14 AM
Yes there is one on I-10 westbound (actually due N at that point) in Anthony.

Ah, I missed that one, since there's a "regular" sign right at the border. Thanks.


Quote from: DJStephens on November 05, 2023, 11:05:14 AM
Not really sure why these structures were even warranted at all

I would imagine that no one has ever claimed that these signs were warranted. But why are there so few of them? Is it just where the traffic entering the state is highest? Or perhaps just tourism traffic?
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 05, 2023, 05:11:49 PM
I rather like the overhead structure. It's unique and to me signifies when you've truly entered the west. I could OKC is the crossroads where a western landscape(minus the mountains of course) starts to begin with the grasslands slowly turning into desert the further west you go but whenever I see that New Mexico sign I get excited. Then right to the southwest you can see the huge plateau(the name eludes me).
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: kphoger on November 06, 2023, 11:30:25 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on November 05, 2023, 05:11:49 PM
I rather like the overhead structure. It's unique and to me signifies when you've truly entered the west.

They're so common in Mexico, that I've never considered their being uncommon here in the US.

Entering:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/3pPKseXipzRCyU72A — "Welcome to Coahuila"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/eBe5VsPh9a1XJndX7 — "Welcome / San Luis Potosí / Fascinating for its nature"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/SNcLYn1RuJvwYX1N7 — "Welcome to Zacatecas"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/QxwoAyG3Ud8NZSyy8 — "Welcome to Tabasco / Happy stay"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/o6qgLEQH3zQShXuh7 — "Welcome to Colima / State government of Colima"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/5vV36JixE59iQaBy9 — "Welcome to the state of Oaxaca"

Leaving:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/S3HCvBNkDLu1M2LF8 — "Querétaro wishes you a happy trip"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/jQLNyCEoHJBGbTXJ7 — "Happy trip / End Nayarit"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/yKfsUwierQT8xzQeA — "Happy trip / Baja California Sur"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Ls9S4G4qPjBBQxecA — "Good trip / Come back soon" (Quintana Roo)
https://maps.app.goo.gl/uciW9cydLUsyS1L8A — "The state of Colima appreciates your visit"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Jwq6TNWYSZ9TcNVY7 — "San Luis Potosí / It has what you like / We want you here"
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Bobby5280 on November 06, 2023, 12:24:21 PM
Those overhead sign structures in Mexico look cheap and utilitarian. The roads look pretty bad too. The overhead Welcome signs on the NM/TX border at I-40 and I-10 are far more decorative and expensive looking.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 06, 2023, 09:03:37 PM
Quote from: kphoger on November 06, 2023, 11:30:25 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on November 05, 2023, 05:11:49 PM
I rather like the overhead structure. It's unique and to me signifies when you've truly entered the west.

They're so common in Mexico, that I've never considered their being uncommon here in the US.

Entering:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/3pPKseXipzRCyU72A — "Welcome to Coahuila"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/eBe5VsPh9a1XJndX7 — "Welcome / San Luis Potosí / Fascinating for its nature"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/SNcLYn1RuJvwYX1N7 — "Welcome to Zacatecas"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/QxwoAyG3Ud8NZSyy8 — "Welcome to Tabasco / Happy stay"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/o6qgLEQH3zQShXuh7 — "Welcome to Colima / State government of Colima"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/5vV36JixE59iQaBy9 — "Welcome to the state of Oaxaca"

Leaving:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/S3HCvBNkDLu1M2LF8 — "Querétaro wishes you a happy trip"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/jQLNyCEoHJBGbTXJ7 — "Happy trip / End Nayarit"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/yKfsUwierQT8xzQeA — "Happy trip / Baja California Sur"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Ls9S4G4qPjBBQxecA — "Good trip / Come back soon" (Quintana Roo)
https://maps.app.goo.gl/uciW9cydLUsyS1L8A — "The state of Colima appreciates your visit"
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Jwq6TNWYSZ9TcNVY7 — "San Luis Potosí / It has what you like / We want you here"
I don't know New Mexico that well apart from interstates. I've been on every interstate in NW with the exception of of I-25 between ABQ and Santa Fe(I still haven't been there) but those are some ugly looking signs. I still love the I-40 sign.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on November 06, 2023, 09:24:29 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on November 05, 2023, 05:11:49 PM
I rather like the overhead structure. It's unique and to me signifies when you've truly entered the west. I could OKC is the crossroads where a western landscape(minus the mountains of course) starts to begin with the grasslands slowly turning into desert the further west you go but whenever I see that New Mexico sign I get excited. Then right to the southwest you can see the huge plateau(the name eludes me).
That's the Caprock Escarpment. It defines the northern edge of the Llano Estacado that makes up the landscape most of the Texas Panhandle and eastern New Mexico.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 07, 2023, 03:21:40 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on November 06, 2023, 09:24:29 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on November 05, 2023, 05:11:49 PM
I rather like the overhead structure. It's unique and to me signifies when you've truly entered the west. I could OKC is the crossroads where a western landscape(minus the mountains of course) starts to begin with the grasslands slowly turning into desert the further west you go but whenever I see that New Mexico sign I get excited. Then right to the southwest you can see the huge plateau(the name eludes me).
That's the Caprock Escarpment. It defines the northern edge of the Llano Estacado that makes up the landscape most of the Texas Panhandle and eastern New Mexico.
Thank you for the that. There's a rest area when it's open I go in and walk around for about 20 minutes and always read the stuff they have and observe the paintings. I stand and look towards the southwest and feel a wave a bliss.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 14, 2023, 07:22:27 PM
I was surprised to read this. There are discussions about widening I-40 to six lanes each way from ABQ to the AS state line. I personally haven't seen the need for that entire stretch to be six lanes but I wouldn't complain if it were either but at 4.8 billion dollars(if built today) I'd think there are better uses of that money around the state currently.

I-40 from ABQ to Laguna definitely needs a six lane treatment. Some of the western four lane segments just need to be reconstructed(preferably with concrete).

NMDOT recommends spotty six lane widenings where needed and reconstruction otherwise. Amazingly I am here to say I agree with NMDOT. That said some legislators think otherwise.

https://www.krqe.com/news/albuquerque-metro/new-study-of-i-40-between-arizona-and-albuquerque-details-major-issues/
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: JREwing78 on November 14, 2023, 10:29:55 PM
I'm moderately impressed at the 20,000 vpd (vehicles per day) at the Arizona state line, rising to about 30,000 vpd near Laguna, and about 34,000 on the western ABQ outskirts. I-40 apparently is a fairly heavily trafficked route. East of the Mississippi, however, that kind of traffic barely gets on anyone's radar. Michigan has 4 lane freeways running AADTs of 60,000 and 70,000 vpd, for example, with 10,000-15,000 of those commercial trucks.

If I was charged with New Mexico's transportation budget, I would certainly reserve ROW for 6-laning when they need to rebuild (and 8-laning closer to ABQ). If they haven't added a third lane on uphill grades, certainly that's in order. Yes, resolve the ramp length and curve deficiencies as the road is rebuilt. But those traffic levels don't scream a need for 6 lanes.

Some of those folks need a ride down I-94 in southern Michigan to re-calibrate their notion of what heavy traffic looks like.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on November 14, 2023, 10:33:02 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on November 14, 2023, 07:22:27 PM

I-40 from ABQ to Laguna definitely needs a six lane treatment. Some of the western four lane segments just need to be reconstructed(preferably with concrete).

If they decide to pave any stretch of I-40 with concrete, they need to use low-alkali cement, as the failure of the current roadway that was originally paved with concrete and overlaid with asphalt, was largely due to alkali-silica reaction (ASR) that shortened the life of the concrete to less than 20 years in some places.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: US 89 on November 14, 2023, 11:18:38 PM
I would like to see a lot of road projects in New Mexico get funded before a six-lane of I-40 from Arizona to Albuquerque. Plenty of rural corridors could do with an upgrade from 2 to 4 lanes - in particular, US 84 and 60 from Santa Rosa to the Texas line immediately comes to mind, as does US 285 from Clines Corners to near Santa Fe.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: Plutonic Panda on November 14, 2023, 11:39:25 PM
Quote from: US 89 on November 14, 2023, 11:18:38 PM
I would like to see a lot of road projects in New Mexico get funded before a six-lane of I-40 from Arizona to Albuquerque. Plenty of rural corridors could do with an upgrade from 2 to 4 lanes - in particular, US 84 and 60 from Santa Rosa to the Texas line immediately comes to mind, as does US 285 from Clines Corners to near Santa Fe.
I can't believe they'd prioritize this over widening I-40 to six lanes from ABQ to Moriarty. I drive I-40 from LA to OKC multiple times a year and while there are some stretches that need it six laned this is one that needs it the most. ABQ to Laguna makes sense as well.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: DJStephens on November 15, 2023, 12:25:11 PM
Quote from: US 89 on November 14, 2023, 11:18:38 PM
I would like to see a lot of road projects in New Mexico get funded before a six-lane of I-40 from Arizona to Albuquerque. Plenty of rural corridors could do with an upgrade from 2 to 4 lanes - in particular, US 84 and 60 from Santa Rosa to the Texas line immediately comes to mind, as does US 285 from Clines Corners to near Santa Fe.
Am of belief a complete six laning of 40 W of Albuquerque environs is simply not necessary.  Some climbing lanes in places - sure.  Just make sure they are built to the Outside and no lane shifting is done.  A tall order here.   
    US - 285 between I-25 and 40 should have been four laned decades ago.  Believe plans were on the books.  As a rural expressway, with access maintained, 60 to 88 foot grassed median.   Suspect NIMBYists (W coast imports) already living in area deep sixed those plans.   
    Frankly don't support any additional four lane jobs, until standards are restored.   A major focus of the Gary Johnson administration was to perform cheap four lane "jobbies" statewide.  Most were of low standards and could have been much better.  Most featured either flush or minimal median separation of opposing lanes of traffic.  Blame Johnson, Pete Rahn, and "practical design" for that.  Scores have died in cross over wrecks that were frankly avoidable if proper design had been employed.  Yes speed, alcohol, and inattention were major factors.  But absolutely no margin of error exists with a flush median.   No more flush medians.    View the most recent one, "NM 404" for the most recent example.   There are center barrier walls in places, mountable curbing in others, but the fact is that the end result will be, and is a poor product.   
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: thenetwork on November 16, 2023, 09:33:42 PM
At least for what I see in Northwest NM, they will spend boku time and money to rebuild and/or widen roads, but never do preventative maintenance on them to keep them in good shape for more than a decade.

About a 5 mile stretch of US-550 north of Azrec has been under construction for nearly 6 months.  They did add some curbing, but overall it has taken them forever to mill and resurface this stretch with little to no other improvements (sign/light/culvertt replacements).

Meanwhile I have seen 10-15 mile stretches of roadway in Colorado and Utah get practically the same improvements in under 2 months this summer.  And slightly shorter stretches of roadway in NM with a quick milling and resurfacing in less than 2 weeks!

They should spend that "widening" money on preservation and upkeep of the roads they already have -- and keep construction activity ACTIVE where you see people working in zones more days than not.
Title: Re: New Mexico
Post by: abqtraveler on November 17, 2023, 12:23:24 AM
Quote from: thenetwork on November 16, 2023, 09:33:42 PM
At least for what I see in Northwest NM, they will spend boku time and money to rebuild and/or widen roads, but never do preventative maintenance on them to keep them in good shape for more than a decade.

About a 5 mile stretch of US-550 north of Azrec has been under construction for nearly 6 months.  They did add some curbing, but overall it has taken them forever to mill and resurface this stretch with little to no other improvements (sign/light/culvertt replacements).

Meanwhile I have seen 10-15 mile stretches of roadway in Colorado and Utah get practically the same improvements in under 2 months this summer.  And slightly shorter stretches of roadway in NM with a quick milling and resurfacing in less than 2 weeks!

They should spend that "widening" money on preservation and upkeep of the roads they already have -- and keep construction activity ACTIVE where you see people working in zones more days than not.
While preventative maintenance is important to extend the amount of time between major overhauls of highways and bridges, NMDOT has been notorious in recent years of doing a half-assed job on both.

For starters, there's the reconstruction of US-54 between Carrizozo and Tularosa that took place from 2010 to 2013. In addition to not using that opportunity to widen 54 to 4 lanes, the pavement lasted less than 10 years before it completely failed and had to be reconstructed again.

Here in Albuquerque, they are reconstructing the intersection of Wyoming Blvd and Menaul Blvd. Currently the intersection itself is paved with concrete, but driving through there yesterday, they are paving the reconstructed lanes with asphalt.  So I expect they'll be back out here within 5 to 10 years ripping up the intersection yet again and laying down new pavement because the asphalt will be completely rutted and potholed by then. What really irks me though is they're taking out Victor Circle, which used to offer motorists a "free right" from eastbound Menaul to southbound Wyoming. After the project is finished, traffic will no longer be able to bypass the light to go from eastbound Menaul to southbound Wyoming.

Just more examples of doing things that make no sense.