User-friendly Mississippi traffic count maps

[lamsalfl]

http://www.gomdot.com/Divisions/IntermodalPlanning/Resources/Maps/TrafficVolumeMaps.aspx

Just looking at the existing 6-lane part of I-10, the traffic counts on the 4-lane segments warrant upgrading, since they are at or near the levels of the 6-lane segments.  Noted that US 49 south of I-10 is well into the 40k's.  The proposed I-310 would really clean that area up.

[Chris]

Those are good maps, as opposed to those horrible maps they have at ILDOT of INDOT. For me, states who sort their traffic counts per county are the worst. I think I have like 50 PDFs of Florida traffic counts (all their counties).

[froggie]

A bit of an improvement over their previous PDF traffic count maps, I'll agree.

That said, I'd suggest taking the Gulf Coast counties counts with a grain of salt.  Given the vast upheaval of traffic flow that Katrina induced, I'd only trust counts that were taken in 2007 or 2008.  Several of the locations along I-10 haven't had counts taken since 2004...what you're seeing there is estimates since then.  But MDOT's estimating formulas didn't take Katrina into account.

Regarding Chris's comment, for me, sorting traffic volumes by county isn't the issue.  It's those who sort them by town/township and don't include maps (Maine in particular) that are.

[3467]

IL DOT does have a downloadable pdf beside the horrible interactive one

Does anyone know a link to all the states? It would benice to have a national one of the Interstates and NHS

Thanks

[Alps]

See the new topic in General Highway Talk.

[Chris]

Mississippi's busiest freeway is I-55 in Jackson at 148,000 AADT.

It always surprises me how low the rural traffic volumes are, even in Mississippi, if you get outside Jackson, traffic volumes drop immediately to the 30,000's, and below the 20,000's once you're like 20 miles outside the city. This is fairly consistent throughout the United States, except for some more urban corridors, but 20,000 for a rural volume is something you find in many states. Only the Rocky Mountain states have lower rural volumes, especially further north.

I-10 around Gulfport-Biloxi get's about 60,000 AADT, not very high, but I guess I-10 doesn't have much of a commuter function because it bypasses the area.

[mightyace]

It always surprises me how low the rural traffic volumes are, even in Mississippi, if you get outside Jackson, traffic volumes drop immediately to the 30,000's, and below the 20,000's once you're like 20 miles outside the city. This is fairly consistent throughout the United States, except for some more urban corridors, but 20,000 for a rural volume is something you find in many states. Only the Rocky Mountain states have lower rural volumes, especially further north.

That's one reason why things like high-speed rail has been a pipe-dream in this country and even as it may be coming to fruition it is in regional corridors where the traffic is there.

[3467]

You will notice itis even lower if you take the big trucks off
In Illinois US 34 has a car volume similar to I-80.
Yes Rail does well regionally like the Midwest Higher speed plan that maximizes existing routes.
Also I think it shows how few new Interstate type roads we need
We need mostly 4 lane expressways and shared 4s in the rural areas

[berberry]

We need mostly 4 lane expressways and shared 4s in the rural areas

I'm not sure what a "shared 4" is (new here), but I think I agree with your point.  I like Mississippi's idea of four-laning US routes where they do not parallel interstates, and I think that would have been a better basis for the stimulus package Congress passed last year (which should have been ALL infrastructure imo, since that's the sort of spending that pays the taxpayers back most handsomely).  Build freeway bypasses around the larger towns and cities, like MS did with, for instance, US 45 around Meridian and Tupelo, and I think you can attract a lot of car traffic to those upgraded-but-ordinary roads and off the major interstates. 

I live in Vicksburg.  If I want to drive to Memphis, I have US-61 as a good alternative to I-55.  Even with the remaining 60 or so miles of two-lane highway between the Yazoo River and Leland, it's a faster route, owing mainly to the fact that there are few large trucks using it.

[froggie]

"Shared 4" is MoDOT's term for what is in reality a 3-lane road where the center lane alternates as a passing lane for either direction.

That stretch of 61 is also pretty open and empty...easier to pass slower traffic in such cases.

[mightyace]

^^^

Though it's a little more than just a three lane highway with alternating passing sections.

According to the website (http://www.modot.org/Shared4-Lane/Shared4Lane.htm), there is a four foot median between directions of oncoming traffic with rumble strips on the edges of the median.  Though, the median appears, otherwise, to be flat.

[berberry]

"Shared 4" is MoDOT's term for what is in reality a 3-lane road where the center lane alternates as a passing lane for either direction.

I see a road like that rarely, and I don't think Mississippi has any - at least nothing of any significant length.  I remember a number of such roads in England and Scotland, though, when I visited there a few years ago.  I'm kinda glad we don't have a lot of them here.

[mightyace]

I'm kinda glad we don't have a lot of them here.

As was discussed in another thread, there were and still are a few of these (without the "median") in some parts of the country like Pennsylvania and Maryland.