Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MattHanson939]

In the past, interchanges on non-interstate highways in New Mexico didn't have exit numbers at all; and this was the case up until the early 2000s.  It all changed when US 84/285 was upgraded from a divided highway to a freeway in 2002-05.  It was the first non-interstate highway in the state to use exit numbers.  And most new interchanges that were built after that project wrapped up followed suit, with the exception of NM 423 (Paseo del Norte) between Coors Blvd. and I-25 within Albuquerque (the intersection with Jefferson Street was upgraded to an interchange but no exit number assigned).  Two new interchanges were built on NM 599 in recent years, and they were numbered.  And the same happened on US 84/285 north of Pojoaque when an at-grade intersection was upgraded to an interchange as part of the stretch between Pojoaque and Española being upgraded to an expressway.

However, interchanges on US 84/285 and NM 599 that were built during the late 1990s / early 2000s still don't have exit numbers.  The US 84-285/NM 599 interchange is only numbered going southbound.  And in Pojoaque, the interchange with NM 502 still isn't numbered.  So this brings me to my question. 

Why doesn't New Mexico assign exit numbers to interchanges on its non-interstate highways that currently don't have exit numbers?  They ought to do so whenever signs at these interchanges get replaced.  Having seen old photos of I-25 and I-40 in Albuquerque dating back to the 60's and 70's, they initially didn't have exit numbers; but then in the '80s, they started having exit numbers as old signs were getting replaced.  The Big-I still didn't have exit numbers until the interchange was rebuilt in 2000-02.
 

Another highway that ought to use exit numbers is the freeway section of US 70 in Las Cruces.

[wanderer2575]

Are milemarkers posted?  I would think that with no milemarkers, there won't be mile-based exit numbers.

[kphoger]

Another highway that ought to use exit numbers is the freeway section of US 70 in Las Cruces.

Are milemarkers posted?

Yes.  https://goo.gl/maps/hCJSTEapWRSzN5377

[DJStephens]

    The las Cruces "expressway" segment of US 70 is of a mish-mash of varying quality and standards.  Hatched in the mid nineties, and built in the '99 to '04 timeframe, as part of Gary Johnson's and Pete Rahn's "do it on the cheap" mindset, the project removed several at grade intersections that had been the scene of grisly T bones since the sixties.   
    Frankly, looking back, would have spent a bit more, and applied Interstate design standards to the the stretch.  Full Shoulders, No Shifting at Overpasses, and coherent deceleration and acceleration lanes at Exits.   Some locations have adequate decel / accel lanes, others do not.  An Auxiliary lane exists in one stretch, but not in another where there should be one.   Initial Re construction did not provide for crossover incident protection, aside from "field fence".  Subsesquent mods provided a double?!? cable barrier, that is fragile, and highly suseptible to damage.  Why on earth didn't they just put in Double Faced CBR?!?   Monotube gantries are placed "willy nilly" often way to close to the main lanes or too near a decel lane that is too short.  More recently "Sylvia" message boards were erected, again, too close to the main lanes or too close to an decel / exit ramp that is too short.  For heavens sake, place it far enough away to provide a ten foot shoulder! 
      It did not also take into account the very real probability of the area becoming a retirement "mecca" as recent development has borne out.   No one saw this coming?  Up to 5000 homes, are slated or are already extant in the N Sonoma Ranch Blvd area, N of the expressway.   Each home, will have up to three personal vehicles and they will travel out of the area for shopping, work, or sightseeing.  Most are new west coast transplants.   Nightmarish traffic jams await, in the near future, in what was once a "sleepy" little town.  A once little town, that now has grown to 125,000 residents, if everyone is counted, which they are not.   Absolutely no foresight or planning exists here.  Seems par for the course, for the entire state, and W Texas as well.     

[JoePCool14]

Does NMDOT have a Contact Us page? You could always try and submit a comment to see if they have an official position on it.

[The Ghostbuster]

I prefer exits to have numbers (preferably mileage-based). I know some states number their freeway/expressway/tollway exits more extensively than others do. Outside of New Mexico's Interstates, about the only roadways that could be given exit numbers are the US 70 freeway east of Las Cruces, and the NM 423 Paseo Del Norte Blvd. NE. Let me know if I missed any others.

[MattHanson939]

I prefer exits to have numbers (preferably mileage-based). I know some states number their freeway/expressway/tollway exits more extensively than others do. Outside of New Mexico's Interstates, about the only roadways that could be given exit numbers are the US 70 freeway east of Las Cruces, and the NM 423 Paseo Del Norte Blvd. NE. Let me know if I missed any others.

As I mentioned before, a couple interchanges on the US 84/285 freeway-expressway north of Santa Fe that were built in the late '90s and early 2000s could be given exit numbers.  In particular, the interchange with NM 502 in Pojoaque ought to be numbered.  The interchange with NM 599 just north of Santa Fe is given an exit number but only going southbound.  The exit number should also be present going northbound.  On NM 599, the interchanges with Camino La Tierra/Calle Nopal and Ridgetop Road should also be numbered to retain consistency with newer interchanges built during the 2010s, which do have exit numbers.

New Mexico doesn't do sequential-based exit numbers on any of its highways at all.  They're always mileage-based.

[abqtraveler]

I prefer exits to have numbers (preferably mileage-based). I know some states number their freeway/expressway/tollway exits more extensively than others do. Outside of New Mexico's Interstates, about the only roadways that could be given exit numbers are the US 70 freeway east of Las Cruces, and the NM 423 Paseo Del Norte Blvd. NE. Let me know if I missed any others.

As I mentioned before, a couple interchanges on the US 84/285 freeway-expressway north of Santa Fe that were built in the late '90s and early 2000s could be given exit numbers.  In particular, the interchange with NM 502 in Pojoaque ought to be numbered.  The interchange with NM 599 just north of Santa Fe is given an exit number but only going southbound.  The exit number should also be present going northbound.  On NM 599, the interchanges with Camino La Tierra/Calle Nopal and Ridgetop Road should also be numbered to retain consistency with newer interchanges built during the 2010s, which do have exit numbers.

New Mexico doesn't do sequential-based exit numbers on any of its highways at all.  They're always mileage-based.

I don't think New Mexico ever had sequential numbers. I think they went with mileage-based numbers from the beginning.

[jtespi]

    The las Cruces "expressway" segment of US 70 is of a mish-mash of varying quality and standards.  Hatched in the mid nineties, and built in the '99 to '04 timeframe, as part of Gary Johnson's and Pete Rahn's "do it on the cheap" mindset, the project removed several at grade intersections that had been the scene of grisly T bones since the sixties.   
    Frankly, looking back, would have spent a bit more, and applied Interstate design standards to the the stretch.  Full Shoulders, No Shifting at Overpasses, and coherent deceleration and acceleration lanes at Exits.   Some locations have adequate decel / accel lanes, others do not.  An Auxiliary lane exists in one stretch, but not in another where there should be one.   Initial Re construction did not provide for crossover incident protection, aside from "field fence".  Subsesquent mods provided a double?!? cable barrier, that is fragile, and highly suseptible to damage.  Why on earth didn't they just put in Double Faced CBR?!?   Monotube gantries are placed "willy nilly" often way to close to the main lanes or too near a decel lane that is too short.  More recently "Sylvia" message boards were erected, again, too close to the main lanes or too close to an decel / exit ramp that is too short.  For heavens sake, place it far enough away to provide a ten foot shoulder! 
      It did not also take into account the very real probability of the area becoming a retirement "mecca" as recent development has borne out.   No one saw this coming?  Up to 5000 homes, are slated or are already extant in the N Sonoma Ranch Blvd area, N of the expressway.   Each home, will have up to three personal vehicles and they will travel out of the area for shopping, work, or sightseeing.  Most are new west coast transplants.   Nightmarish traffic jams await, in the near future, in what was once a "sleepy" little town.  A once little town, that now has grown to 125,000 residents, if everyone is counted, which they are not.   Absolutely no foresight or planning exists here.  Seems par for the course, for the entire state, and W Texas as well.   

Amazingly, the US-70 mainlines still have their original pavement between Rinconada and Nasa Rd. They just crack sealed it about 8 years ago and it is very bumpy now. Since they've started to repave portions of the frontage road at intersections, I really hope they'll fully repave the US-70 mainlines. After 20+ years of service, the asphalt just needs to be replaced.
I hope they use high quality asphalt like they used in the 2009 repave of I-25 in Las Cruces. That lasted good for 10 years. The recently repaved (around 2020-2021) section of US-70 through WSMR is already starting to become rough in sections.

You can already see backups happening at rush hour at the Sonoma Ranch exit going eastbound. Exiting traffic wanting to turn left (north on Sonoma Ranch) is getting to the point where it backs up to the US-70 EB mainlines. That's where they should have built an exit-only lane in both directions between Rinconada and Sonoma Ranch. There's only 500 m (1640 ft) of separation between the two entrance and exit ramps.

I don't see them ever numbering the exits on US-70 in Las Cruces. Partly because most residents just refer to the exits by their names (i.e. the Sonoma Ranch exit or the Nasa Road exit) and because the exit numbers would be similar to those along I-10 in Las Cruces. The US-70 mile markers start at 151 at the I-25 interchange and go to 161 by Nasa Rd. I-10's exit numbers are 135 to 144 in Las Cruces. Although I think the first reason is more valid, since people know the US-70 exits by the street's name.

Thankfully, the NMDOT is planning on eventually making I-25 six lanes north of Lohman. There's regular daily backups on I-25 northbound approaching the US-70 interchange and extending ~2.3 km (1.4 mi) south to the Spruce Ave bridge. They have a project website and the project is officially known as the I-25 Safety and Capacity Study (Control Number LC00380).

[DJStephens]

Amazingly, the US-70 mainlines still have their original pavement between Rinconada and Nasa Rd. They just crack sealed it about 8 years ago and it is very bumpy now. Since they've started to repave portions of the frontage road at intersections, I really hope they'll fully repave the US-70 mainlines. After 20+ years of service, the asphalt just needs to be replaced.
I hope they use high quality asphalt like they used in the 2009 repave of I-25 in Las Cruces. That lasted good for 10 years. The recently repaved (around 2020-2021) section of US-70 through WSMR is already starting to become rough in sections.
You can already see backups happening at rush hour at the Sonoma Ranch exit going eastbound. Exiting traffic wanting to turn left (north on Sonoma Ranch) is getting to the point where it backs up to the US-70 EB mainlines. That's where they should have built an exit-only lane in both directions between Rinconada and Sonoma Ranch. There's only 500 m (1640 ft) of separation between the two entrance and exit ramps.

I don't see them ever numbering the exits on US-70 in Las Cruces. Partly because most residents just refer to the exits by their names (i.e. the Sonoma Ranch exit or the Nasa Road exit) and because the exit numbers would be similar to those along I-10 in Las Cruces. The US-70 mile markers start at 151 at the I-25 interchange and go to 161 by Nasa Rd. I-10's exit numbers are 135 to 144 in Las Cruces. Although I think the first reason is more valid, since people know the US-70 exits by the street's name.

Thankfully, the NMDOT is planning on eventually making I-25 six lanes north of Lohman. There's regular daily backups on I-25 northbound approaching the US-70 interchange and extending ~2.3 km (1.4 mi) south to the Spruce Ave bridge. They have a project website and the project is officially known as the I-25 Safety and Capacity Study (Control Number LC00380).

There is an "auxiliary" lane for 70 EB between Rinconada and Sonoma Ranch.  There isn't one EB, where there should be one.   That is where the monotube Sonoma Ranch Exit gantry, and the more recent "Sylvia" message board are placed erroneously.  The amount of traffic, that will seek to travel up and down this stretch of Sonoma Ranch, it's beyond possible belief.  Don't believe that there was any sort of foresight for this.
As for I-25 widening, noticed that yet another "Sylvia' message board was installed, with concrete base, just outside the R guardrail on 25 south of Exit 6.  Isn't that going to need to be ripped out, and moved, when the widening happens?!?   There's another one, also just outside the R guardrail, S of University.   Why can't these devices be installed, on the Median Centerline??   The entire 25 corridor, from the 10 interchange, to just N of Exit 6, is a prime example of mistakes and "piecemealing".  The ROW corridor is wide enough, that when reconstruction started ( N Main in '99) some sort of long term vision with six lanes, a 60 foot median, and interchange bridges with far greater horizontal clearances could have been envisioned.   

[JKRhodes]

Amazingly, the US-70 mainlines still have their original pavement between Rinconada and Nasa Rd. They just crack sealed it about 8 years ago and it is very bumpy now. Since they've started to repave portions of the frontage road at intersections, I really hope they'll fully repave the US-70 mainlines. After 20+ years of service, the asphalt just needs to be replaced.
I hope they use high quality asphalt like they used in the 2009 repave of I-25 in Las Cruces. That lasted good for 10 years. The recently repaved (around 2020-2021) section of US-70 through WSMR is already starting to become rough in sections.
You can already see backups happening at rush hour at the Sonoma Ranch exit going eastbound. Exiting traffic wanting to turn left (north on Sonoma Ranch) is getting to the point where it backs up to the US-70 EB mainlines. That's where they should have built an exit-only lane in both directions between Rinconada and Sonoma Ranch. There's only 500 m (1640 ft) of separation between the two entrance and exit ramps.

I don't see them ever numbering the exits on US-70 in Las Cruces. Partly because most residents just refer to the exits by their names (i.e. the Sonoma Ranch exit or the Nasa Road exit) and because the exit numbers would be similar to those along I-10 in Las Cruces. The US-70 mile markers start at 151 at the I-25 interchange and go to 161 by Nasa Rd. I-10's exit numbers are 135 to 144 in Las Cruces. Although I think the first reason is more valid, since people know the US-70 exits by the street's name.

Thankfully, the NMDOT is planning on eventually making I-25 six lanes north of Lohman. There's regular daily backups on I-25 northbound approaching the US-70 interchange and extending ~2.3 km (1.4 mi) south to the Spruce Ave bridge. They have a project website and the project is officially known as the I-25 Safety and Capacity Study (Control Number LC00380).

There is an "auxiliary" lane for 70 EB between Rinconada and Sonoma Ranch.  There isn't one EB, where there should be one.   That is where the monotube Sonoma Ranch Exit gantry, and the more recent "Sylvia" message board are placed erroneously.  The amount of traffic, that will seek to travel up and down this stretch of Sonoma Ranch, it's beyond possible belief.  Don't believe that there was any sort of foresight for this.
As for I-25 widening, noticed that yet another "Sylvia' message board was installed, with concrete base, just outside the R guardrail on 25 south of Exit 6.  Isn't that going to need to be ripped out, and moved, when the widening happens?!?   There's another one, also just outside the R guardrail, S of University.   Why can't these devices be installed, on the Median Centerline??   The entire 25 corridor, from the 10 interchange, to just N of Exit 6, is a prime example of mistakes and "piecemealing".  The ROW corridor is wide enough, that when reconstruction started ( N Main in '99) some sort of long term vision with six lanes, a 60 foot median, and interchange bridges with far greater horizontal clearances could have been envisioned.

I’m of the opinion they should have constructed ramps at Sonoma Ranch, Rinconada and Mesa Grande in X, rather than diamond, configuration. Seeing as how they already borrowed the Texas u-turn idea.  Seems it would alleviate the mainline backups at Sonoma Ranch and eased access to Jornada, many of whose residents were initially quite upset about changes in access to their neighborhood when the design was initially rolled out.

[DJStephens]

Okay, you are referring to "Braided Ramps" then?  The design of what is there now, is inconsistent.  Some ramps have "decel" or "accel" length to them, others do not.  As mentioned before, there is an Auxiliary lane between Sonoma and Rinconada WB, but not EB.  Why?  Gantry and Message Board structures were placed too close to the R edge of pavement, and too close to the abrupt EB exit ramp for Sonoma Ranch.  There is and will be an incredible amount of traffic seeking to utilize the Sonoma Ranch interchange.  A double L hand turn, for EB traffic exiting for Sonoma Ranch NB will be needed in the near future.  There are PE's stamping these decisions.  What are they smoking?  There are, by the way, a lot of Dispensaries here now.   

[JKRhodes]

Okay, you are referring to "Braided Ramps" then?  The design of what is there now, is inconsistent.  Some ramps have "decel" or "accel" length to them, others do not.  As mentioned before, there is an Auxiliary lane between Sonoma and Rinconada WB, but not EB.  Why?  Gantry and Message Board structures were placed too close to the R edge of pavement, and too close to the abrupt EB exit ramp for Sonoma Ranch.  There is and will be an incredible amount of traffic seeking to utilize the Sonoma Ranch interchange.  A double L hand turn, for EB traffic exiting for Sonoma Ranch NB will be needed in the near future.  There are PE's stamping these decisions.  What are they smoking?  There are, by the way, a lot of Dispensaries here now.

Sometimes it’s called a reverse diamond. Exiting traffic slips from the mainline to the feeder road where the previous street’s on ramp would normally be. Entering traffic from the previous street slips from feeder to mainline where the next off ramp would normally go. They share the feeder and access to adjacent parcels/side streets in the mean space.

Though, with the queues you’re describing, a braided ramp solution is probably the better option.  Or a more robust arterial network that can tie into adjacent under utilized exits. Both sound like painful fixes given the amount of stuff that’s already been built.

[jtespi]

Okay, you are referring to "Braided Ramps" then?  The design of what is there now, is inconsistent.  Some ramps have "decel" or "accel" length to them, others do not.  As mentioned before, there is an Auxiliary lane between Sonoma and Rinconada WB, but not EB.  Why?  Gantry and Message Board structures were placed too close to the R edge of pavement, and too close to the abrupt EB exit ramp for Sonoma Ranch.  There is and will be an incredible amount of traffic seeking to utilize the Sonoma Ranch interchange.  A double L hand turn, for EB traffic exiting for Sonoma Ranch NB will be needed in the near future.  There are PE's stamping these decisions.  What are they smoking?  There are, by the way, a lot of Dispensaries here now.

Sometimes it’s called a reverse diamond. Exiting traffic slips from the mainline to the feeder road where the previous street’s on ramp would normally be. Entering traffic from the previous street slips from feeder to mainline where the next off ramp would normally go. They share the feeder and access to adjacent parcels/side streets in the mean space.

Though, with the queues you’re describing, a braided ramp solution is probably the better option.  Or a more robust arterial network that can tie into adjacent under utilized exits. Both sound like painful fixes given the amount of stuff that’s already been built.

The reverse diamond or X configuration might actually work except that the Rinconada eastbound entrance ramp is the first one since I-25. There's new Street View imagery from last month showing the current state of things. The frontage road and mainlines could be expanded to the south between Rinconada and Sonoma Ranch with the relocation/reconfiguration of the large power transmission lines. There currently isn't any development (i.e. driveways) between the Rinconada EB entrance ramp and the Sonoma Ranch EB exit ramp.

But yes, you can see how backed up it gets. The Street View car rolled through at the exact perfect time to document this.

It is especially egregious that they installed this 120 m (390 ft) long divider that prevents anyone from using the turnaround to access the Starbucks, Carl's Jr, or Denny's parking lot. This will put a lot more pressure on the already overloaded EB to NB left turn at Sonoma Ranch.