Rural Freeways That Need Six Lanes

[Plutonic Panda]

Blurring the rural/urban bit a bit, couple California nominations:
CA 1 from Santa Cruz to Watsonville (CA 17 to CA 152), to say nothing of the Watsonville to Castroville's 2 lane segment...

I'll one up you and say there's a segment in Santa Cruz that could use the 8 lane treatment. There are so many segments on CA-1 that even need to just be widened to 4 lanes.

[nexus73]

I-5 from OR 62 to US 199

If we replaced the original I-5 viaduct in Medford, then we can 6-lane all the way south until the land flattens out.  Obviously the Rogue Valley needs 6 lanes but as we head south and have a ton of truck traffic, they need the extra lane for climbing up and dropping down so the other 2 lanes of passenger vehicle traffic can proceed at a decent speed.

Oh heck, just 6-lane minimum all of I-5 and call it a day!  There is so much traffic on it.

Rick

[JoePCool14]

Observation that I'm not sure has been pointed out yet. Just about all the freeways that have been nominated for widening are I-x5 routes.

[SkyPesos]

Observation that I'm not sure has been pointed out yet. Just about all the freeways that have been nominated for widening are I-x5 routes.

Not a surprise to me, a lot of my initial thoughts for interstates that need to be 6 laned are x5 routes.
I-65: Remaining 4 lane section north of Nashville to KY border, also Indianapolis-Chicago.
I-75: Remaining 4 lane section in Ohio
I-85: Remaining 4 lane sections between Atlanta and Charlotte
I-95: Too many examples to list here

[Flint1979]

Observation that I'm not sure has been pointed out yet. Just about all the freeways that have been nominated for widening are I-x5 routes.

Not a surprise to me, a lot of my initial thoughts for interstates that need to be 6 laned are x5 routes.
I-65: Remaining 4 lane section north of Nashville to KY border, also Indianapolis-Chicago.
I-75: Remaining 4 lane section in Ohio
I-85: Remaining 4 lane sections between Atlanta and Charlotte
I-95: Too many examples to list here

I hate and I mean HATE that four lane stretch of I-75 in Ohio. From Findlay to Troy it's 80 miles of headache.

[sprjus4]

I-95: Too many examples to list here

That gap between the Georgia/South Carolina state line and VA I-295 definitely stands out as one.

[webny99]

Observation that I'm not sure has been pointed out yet. Just about all the freeways that have been nominated for widening are I-x5 routes.

A lot of the ongoing discussion has been about I-x5 routes, because there are some egregious ones. But there were plenty of I-x0's (and routes that end in neither 0 or 5, such as parts of I-87) mentioned earlier in the thread.

[Plutonic Panda]

There are many spots on I-40, I-70, and I-10 that need to be six lanes.

[Avalanchez71]

Observation that I'm not sure has been pointed out yet. Just about all the freeways that have been nominated for widening are I-x5 routes.

Not a surprise to me, a lot of my initial thoughts for interstates that need to be 6 laned are x5 routes.
I-65: Remaining 4 lane section north of Nashville to KY border, also Indianapolis-Chicago.  Waste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.
I-75: Remaining 4 lane section in Ohio
I-85: Remaining 4 lane sections between Atlanta and Charlotte  Wish list but not needed.
I-95: Too many examples to list hereWaste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.

[Flint1979]

I-70 between I-75 and the Indiana/Ohio state line. It's six lanes for awhile then goes down to four and when it goes down to four the truck traffic uses the left lane constantly and no one can pass it's totally ridiculous and stressful to drive under those conditions.

[SkyPesos]

Observation that I'm not sure has been pointed out yet. Just about all the freeways that have been nominated for widening are I-x5 routes.

Not a surprise to me, a lot of my initial thoughts for interstates that need to be 6 laned are x5 routes.
I-65: Remaining 4 lane section north of Nashville to KY border, also Indianapolis-Chicago.  Waste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.
I-75: Remaining 4 lane section in Ohio
I-85: Remaining 4 lane sections between Atlanta and Charlotte  Wish list but not needed.
I-95: Too many examples to list hereWaste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.

You forgot to cross out I-75 and label it with waste of money 

Also aren't the Interstate Highways built for tons of non-locals/truckers to use it as well, besides the local taxpayers? Maybe this is why Wyoming wanted to toll I-80...

[jmacswimmer]

Observation that I'm not sure has been pointed out yet. Just about all the freeways that have been nominated for widening are I-x5 routes.

Not a surprise to me, a lot of my initial thoughts for interstates that need to be 6 laned are x5 routes.
I-65: Remaining 4 lane section north of Nashville to KY border, also Indianapolis-Chicago.  Waste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.
I-75: Remaining 4 lane section in Ohio
I-85: Remaining 4 lane sections between Atlanta and Charlotte  Wish list but not needed.
I-95: Too many examples to list hereWaste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.

You forgot to cross out I-75 and label it with waste of money 

Also aren't the Interstate Highways built for tons of non-locals/truckers to use it as well, besides the local taxpayers? Maybe this is why Wyoming wanted to toll I-80...

...and why NC wanted to toll I-95, and VA wanted to toll I-81...
FWIW, any non-locals/truckers who fuel up at gas stations/truck stops (and thus pay gas tax) along those routes are technically taxpayers, aren't they?

[froggie]

Since virtually every Interstate highway project involves Federal money, every person who buys gas in the U.S. is contributing.  "Local taxpayers" contribute, at most, 10% of these projects (state/local match to the 90% Federal match).

[Flint1979]

Observation that I'm not sure has been pointed out yet. Just about all the freeways that have been nominated for widening are I-x5 routes.

Not a surprise to me, a lot of my initial thoughts for interstates that need to be 6 laned are x5 routes.
I-65: Remaining 4 lane section north of Nashville to KY border, also Indianapolis-Chicago.  Waste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.
I-75: Remaining 4 lane section in Ohio
I-85: Remaining 4 lane sections between Atlanta and Charlotte  Wish list but not needed.
I-95: Too many examples to list hereWaste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.

You forgot to cross out I-75 and label it with waste of money 

Also aren't the Interstate Highways built for tons of non-locals/truckers to use it as well, besides the local taxpayers? Maybe this is why Wyoming wanted to toll I-80...

Truckers are what clog everything up. I was on I-70 yesterday between Richmond and I-75 and it was a clusterfuck of trucks for 30 miles just miles of trucks using both lanes. It was a blessing when I got closer to I-75 and got that third lane. Then I-75 itself was a clusterfuck going through Dayton as usual.

[SEWIGuy]

Observation that I'm not sure has been pointed out yet. Just about all the freeways that have been nominated for widening are I-x5 routes.

Not a surprise to me, a lot of my initial thoughts for interstates that need to be 6 laned are x5 routes.
I-65: Remaining 4 lane section north of Nashville to KY border, also Indianapolis-Chicago.  Waste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.
I-75: Remaining 4 lane section in Ohio
I-85: Remaining 4 lane sections between Atlanta and Charlotte  Wish list but not needed.
I-95: Too many examples to list hereWaste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.

Aren't those travelling out of town "taxpayers?" 

[Avalanchez71]

Observation that I'm not sure has been pointed out yet. Just about all the freeways that have been nominated for widening are I-x5 routes.

Not a surprise to me, a lot of my initial thoughts for interstates that need to be 6 laned are x5 routes.
I-65: Remaining 4 lane section north of Nashville to KY border, also Indianapolis-Chicago.  Waste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.
I-75: Remaining 4 lane section in Ohio
I-85: Remaining 4 lane sections between Atlanta and Charlotte  Wish list but not needed.
I-95: Too many examples to list hereWaste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.

Aren't those travelling out of town "taxpayers?"

Yes they are as well as the through trucks.  However, the locals who have the right of way taken from them are going to disagree with the need of I-65 widened. 

[SEWIGuy]

Observation that I'm not sure has been pointed out yet. Just about all the freeways that have been nominated for widening are I-x5 routes.

Not a surprise to me, a lot of my initial thoughts for interstates that need to be 6 laned are x5 routes.
I-65: Remaining 4 lane section north of Nashville to KY border, also Indianapolis-Chicago.  Waste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.
I-75: Remaining 4 lane section in Ohio
I-85: Remaining 4 lane sections between Atlanta and Charlotte  Wish list but not needed.
I-95: Too many examples to list hereWaste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.

Aren't those travelling out of town "taxpayers?"

Yes they are as well as the through trucks.  However, the locals who have the right of way taken from them are going to disagree with the need of I-65 widened. 

Yeah but that has always been the case.  The people who had their farmland "taken from them" when the first round of interstates were built didn't benefit from them as much as "those travelling out of town."  That's the balancing act that we have had to manage for years.

I have been pro expanding current corridors versus building new ones for a long time.  I-65 is a great example.  The stretch between Indianapolis and Chicago would benefit greatly from an expansion to six lanes.  IMO the benefit of those travelling the system exceeds the loss of those whose land is purchased.

[sprjus4]

Observation that I'm not sure has been pointed out yet. Just about all the freeways that have been nominated for widening are I-x5 routes.

Not a surprise to me, a lot of my initial thoughts for interstates that need to be 6 laned are x5 routes.
I-65: Remaining 4 lane section north of Nashville to KY border, also Indianapolis-Chicago.  Waste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.
I-75: Remaining 4 lane section in Ohio
I-85: Remaining 4 lane sections between Atlanta and Charlotte  Wish list but not needed.
I-95: Too many examples to list hereWaste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.

Aren't those travelling out of town "taxpayers?"

Yes they are as well as the through trucks.  However, the locals who have the right of way taken from them are going to disagree with the need of I-65 widened.

I feel like one of the reasons you heavily oppose I-65 being widened is because you would somehow be impacted... hate to break it to you, but all those highways you crossed out do need to be widened, and given you crossed out I-95, it makes me wonder how much you've actually driven that road, particularly during peak times. It's a nightmare with bumper to bumper traffic and stop-and-go conditions. But I suppose that's adequate for you. My most recent trip was free-flowing 75+ mph in Georgia with 6 lanes, then down to 35-60 mph (never really got faster, despite the 70 mph limit) throughout South Carolina's 4 lanes virtually through the entire state, plus having to exit a couple times and avoid some continuous red areas. "Waste of money"  "Not needed"  

At this point, you're merely trolling, deeming any new expansion project a "waste"  despite the fact I guarantee 90% of them you've never even driven or have driven once, and have virtually no recurring experience with them enough to soundly say it's not needed.

And for the record, the vast majority of interstate widenings occur in the median, within existing right of way.

[Flint1979]

I-70 between Richmond, Indiana and Dayton, Ohio was a slugfest on Monday afternoon. After I crossed into Ohio it was 30 miles of truck after truck after truck taking up both lanes, slowing traffic down to the high 50's/low 60's mph. I would say this stretch calls for more than four lanes which is what it is and it's probably a daily thing through there considering it is I-70 one of the crossroads of America.

I-75 between Troy and Findlay, Ohio without looking has probably been mentioned maybe by me I just don't remember lol. But same thing just less traffic. It'd be nice if they cut down on the 80 miles of four lanes through there and start widening it.

I don't think any part of I-75 between Bay City, MI and Miami should be under six lanes. In fact it should be six lanes up to the US-23 split in Standish. That is a logical point to cut it back down to four lanes because a lot of traffic stays on US-23 heading toward Lake Huron. The stretch between the US-23 split in Flint and the south end of I-475 should be 6-8 lanes as well.

[SkyPesos]

I don't think any part of I-75 between Bay City, MI and Miami should be under six lanes. In fact it should be six lanes up to the US-23 split in Standish. That is a logical point to cut it back down to four lanes because a lot of traffic stays on US-23 heading toward Lake Huron. The stretch between the US-23 split in Flint and the south end of I-475 should be 6-8 lanes as well.

I'll exclude I-75 in Macon from the 6 laning, as I-475 is the bypass and is 6 laned already.

[skluth]

It may have been mentioned earlier. But yesterday I drove I-5 past Camp Pendleton which is already eight lanes wide. It was the middle of the day and packed. It could probably use another lane, even if it was an HOV lane. Trucks using all but the far left lane didn't help matters either.

[Plutonic Panda]

It may have been mentioned earlier. But yesterday I drove I-5 past Camp Pendleton which is already eight lanes wide. It was the middle of the day and packed. It could probably use another lane, even if it was an HOV lane. Trucks using all but the far left lane didn't help matters either.

Lol that road could use 2 or even 3 more lanes each way. Ideally it'd be widened with one additional GP lane plus two tolled lanes each way.

[Avalanchez71]

Observation that I'm not sure has been pointed out yet. Just about all the freeways that have been nominated for widening are I-x5 routes.

Not a surprise to me, a lot of my initial thoughts for interstates that need to be 6 laned are x5 routes.
I-65: Remaining 4 lane section north of Nashville to KY border, also Indianapolis-Chicago.  Waste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.
I-75: Remaining 4 lane section in Ohio
I-85: Remaining 4 lane sections between Atlanta and Charlotte  Wish list but not needed.
I-95: Too many examples to list hereWaste of money as it would not be serving the needs of the taxpayers but those travelling out of town.

Aren't those travelling out of town "taxpayers?"

Yes they are as well as the through trucks.  However, the locals who have the right of way taken from them are going to disagree with the need of I-65 widened.

I feel like one of the reasons you heavily oppose I-65 being widened is because you would somehow be impacted… hate to break it to you, but all those highways you crossed out do need to be widened, and given you crossed out I-95, it makes me wonder how much you’ve actually driven that road, particularly during peak times. It’s a nightmare with bumper to bumper traffic and stop-and-go conditions. But I suppose that’s adequate for you. My most recent trip was free-flowing 75+ mph in Georgia with 6 lanes, then down to 35-60 mph (never really got faster, despite the 70 mph limit) throughout South Carolina’s 4 lanes virtually through the entire state, plus having to exit a couple times and avoid some continuous red areas. “Waste of money” “Not needed” 

At this point, you’re merely trolling, deeming any new expansion project a “waste” despite the fact I guarantee 90% of them you’ve never even driven or have driven once, and have virtually no recurring experience with them enough to soundly say it’s not needed.

And for the record, the vast majority of interstate widenings occur in the median, within existing right of way.

I was just through the I-95 corridor area back in April.  I will be back later next month.  US 301 was a nice option as well.

I-65 winding and expansion would affect me.

[Occidental Tourist]

It may have been mentioned earlier. But yesterday I drove I-5 past Camp Pendleton which is already eight lanes wide. It was the middle of the day and packed. It could probably use another lane, even if it was an HOV lane. Trucks using all but the far left lane didn't help matters either.

Way more common in California now.  It drives me nuts.

[sprjus4]

I was just through the I-95 corridor area back in April.  I will be back later next month.  US 301 was a nice option as well.

Which section? I'm specifically referring to the 4 lane segments south of VA I-295.

And for the record, suggesting a 2 lane or 4 lane arterial highway littered with signals, passing though small towns, etc. is a viable alternative and reason not to widen an interstate highway is a poor one and simply doesn't meet reality.

I-65 winding and expansion would affect me.

So, asides from your personal impacts, what are your reasons for opposing the project? You cannot seriously argue that I-65 is adequate, particularly during peak times and with heavy truck volumes. Also, the fact Kentucky has expanded there segment to 6 lanes. Plus I-65 south of I-840 needs to be expanded to 8 lanes. You, yourself, have said it's an issue yet claimed it does not need to be widened - I suppose you take traffic congestion and bumper to bumper for miles as "acceptable"  or suggest using a 2 lane arterial highway as a reason to not widen it.