Print

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

[MattHanson939]

There are some highways within New Mexico that have low speed limits when motorists can easily go faster on them safely.  Some of these highways used to have higher limits in the past.

• NM 502 between the NM 30 interchange and Pojoaque Valley High School had a 65 mph limit until 2007 when it was lowered to 55 mph shortly after being designated as a safety corridor.  I think it should be raised back to 65 or at least be raised to 60.

• Similarly, NM 30 used to have a 60 mph (except at the Santa Clara Canyon Road junction where it briefly dropped to 45 mph before resuming the 60 mph limit), then dropped to 50 mph on the outskirts Española.  And if I recall correctly, it dropped to 40 mph just before its northern terminus at US 84/285.  Now, it's 55 mph from NM 502 to Santa Clara Canyon Road, drops to 45 mph from there until the outskirts of Española where it's 40 mph until the route's north end.

• NM 599 is 55 mph between Airport Road and US 84/285, and motorists usually drive 60-65 mph on that stretch.  Especially since one of the at-grade intersections was upgraded to an interchange about 10 years ago, I think it should be either 60 or 65 mph; but I would have 55 mph advisory speeds at sharp turns and existing intersections.  And if almost the entire route is upgraded to freeway standards, then definitely raise the speed limit to 65 mph from the I-25 frontage road to US 84/285.

• US 84/285 from Pojoaque to La Puebla Road used to have a 60 mph limit but then it was lowered to 55 mph.  And even more strange, NMDOT kept the 55 mph limit on that stretch even after it was upgraded to an expressway.  It boggles my mind why they would do that.  The stretch between Santa Fe and Pojoaque was 60 mph most of the way when it was a regular divided highway, and it was raised to 65 mph after being upgraded to a freeway in 2005.

• NM 136 used to be 55 mph from the Santa Teresa international crossing to the Texas state line, where it became TX 178 and the speed limit went up to 60 mph upon crossing into Texas.  But recently, they raised the speed limit to 60 mph on the New Mexico side.

[Bobby5280]

US 64/87 thru Northeast NM used to be 55mph or less along much of the way when it was a 2 lane highway. Man I hated it. On road trips from Oklahoma to Colorado I'd usually try to hit it late at night when traffic was minimal. During the day there would always be some RV or other slow-poke motorist creating a long "train" of vehicles behind it (cue Gandalf: "you shall not pass!").

Even if I ended up behind just one slow-poke vehicle it was really difficult to pass out there. The terrain is wide open, hardly any trees at all, just mostly scrub grass and small bushes. You could see distant mountains. But you couldn't see much of the road ahead because of all the subtle ebbs and rolls. It would be easy to get stuck. Then another vehicle gets stuck behind you. And another, and another, etc.

NM DOT did a pretty crappy job with the 4-laning of US 64/87. But at least it was finally 4 lanes and divided. The speed limit was upped to 65mph or 70mph along much of the way. It was at least possible to get around the slow pokes during daylight hours.

[MattHanson939]

US 64/87 thru Northeast NM used to be 55mph or less along much of the way when it was a 2 lane highway. Man I hated it. On road trips from Oklahoma to Colorado I'd usually try to hit it late at night when traffic was minimal. During the day there would always be some RV or other slow-poke motorist creating a long "train" of vehicles behind it (cue Gandalf: "you shall not pass!").

Even if I ended up behind just one slow-poke vehicle it was really difficult to pass out there. The terrain is wide open, hardly any trees at all, just mostly scrub grass and small bushes. You could see distant mountains. But you couldn't see much of the road ahead because of all the subtle ebbs and rolls. It would be easy to get stuck. Then another vehicle gets stuck behind you. And another, and another, etc.

NM DOT did a pretty crappy job with the 4-laning of US 64/87. But at least it was finally 4 lanes and divided. The speed limit was upped to 65mph or 70mph along much of the way. It was at least possible to get around the slow pokes during daylight hours.

If I recall correctly, the speed limit is 70 on 64/87 east of Raton.  And as a matter of fact, I believe it's going to be upgraded to Interstate standards in the coming years.

[Bobby5280]

Even though US-64/87 thru NE NM is part of the Ports to Plains Corridor I have not seen any substantial proposals to upgrade the highway to Interstate standards.

In order for that portion of US-64/87 to reach current Interstate quality standards a bunch of it would have to be re-built. There is one short segment near Sierra Grande that has a concrete super-slab road bed. The rest of it is somewhat unstable asphalt.

Not many limited access exits would have to be built between Raton and Texline. On the other hand there are quite a few rural roads connecting directly at-grade to the US-64/87 main lanes. Those at-grade connections would need to be separated at least by new frontage road segments.

As it stands, TX DOT doesn't appear to be in any hurry to upgrade US-287 North of Amarillo to Interstate standards. The Loop 335 project in Amarillo will open the door for Northerly upgrades. I think TX DOT will be concentrating more on projects South of Lubbock.

One thing that could give US-64/87 hope on being upgraded to Interstate standards: Colorado. CDOT hasn't done squat to upgrade any of the existing US-287 route in Eastern CO to even ordinary 4-lane highway status. Colorado has multiple 2-lane highways that need to be 4-lane divided just for safety sake (like US-24 between Colorado Springs and Limon). I think the state's lawmakers believe everyone just needs to pedal around on bicycles. With that road block in place, I can imagine a scenario where a possible North extension of I-27 ends up going to Raton. But then I remember New Mexico isn't much different from Colorado in terms of political ideology yet NM has less population and money.

[MattHanson939]

There's a stretch of I-10 near Las Cruces where the speed limit is capped at 65 mph but ought to be raised to 75 mph because there aren't closely spaced interchanges.  And that is between exits 132 (airport) and 139 (Motel Blvd).  The 65 mph limit is only reasonable from Motel Blvd. to the junction with I-25.  Other than that, it doesn't make sense because I-25 near Albuquerque is 75 mph between Broadway and Rio Bravo, then drops to 65 as you approach the city limits, briefly drops to 55 mph from Gibson Blvd. to Central Ave. goes back to 65 mph as you approach the Big-I and remains at 65 mph until after Tramway Blvd. where the 75 mph limit resumes.  In fact, the speed limit remains at 75 mph at Santa Fe.

[abqtraveler]

Last time I drove US-54 between Carrizozo and Corona, most of the road was posted at 65 MPH, save for about 17 miles between MP 146 and 163, that hasn't yet been reconstructed and was still posted at 55 MPH.  Strangely, there was a very short section (less than a quarter mile in length), about 15 miles north of Carrizozo where the speed limit dropped very abruptly from 65 MPH to 45 MPH, then back up to 65 MPH. There's nothing there, so I don't see the reasoning behind dropping the speed limit on such a short stretch out in the middle of nowhere, aside from creating an arbitrary speed trap.

[MattHanson939]

Even though US-64/87 thru NE NM is part of the Ports to Plains Corridor I have not seen any substantial proposals to upgrade the highway to Interstate standards.

In order for that portion of US-64/87 to reach current Interstate quality standards a bunch of it would have to be re-built. There is one short segment near Sierra Grande that has a concrete super-slab road bed. The rest of it is somewhat unstable asphalt.

Not many limited access exits would have to be built between Raton and Texline. On the other hand there are quite a few rural roads connecting directly at-grade to the US-64/87 main lanes. Those at-grade connections would need to be separated at least by new frontage road segments.

As it stands, TX DOT doesn't appear to be in any hurry to upgrade US-287 North of Amarillo to Interstate standards. The Loop 335 project in Amarillo will open the door for Northerly upgrades. I think TX DOT will be concentrating more on projects South of Lubbock.

One thing that could give US-64/87 hope on being upgraded to Interstate standards: Colorado. CDOT hasn't done squat to upgrade any of the existing US-287 route in Eastern CO to even ordinary 4-lane highway status. Colorado has multiple 2-lane highways that need to be 4-lane divided just for safety sake (like US-24 between Colorado Springs and Limon). I think the state's lawmakers believe everyone just needs to pedal around on bicycles. With that road block in place, I can imagine a scenario where a possible North extension of I-27 ends up going to Raton. But then I remember New Mexico isn't much different from Colorado in terms of political ideology yet NM has less population and money.

Last year a bill was signed into law allowing I-27 to be extended northward to Raton and southward towards Laredo.  But then there are some complications in some areas.  For instance in downtown Amarillo, shortly after I-27 ends at I-40, US 287 downgrades from a freeway and splits into four separate one-way surface streets; and then goes back to freeway standards as you head north from Amarillo.  I'm not sure what solution there would be if you want to continue the freeway north of I-40 through downtown Amarillo.  Some possibilities come to mind, including:

- Build an elevated viaduct.
- Have the freeway run underneath downtown Amarillo.
- Or here is perhaps the best solution at Amarillo.  Leave the four one-way surface streets as they are through downtown.  However, upgrade the west part of Loop 335 to interstate standards and re-designate that as I-27.  And re-designate the current alignment of I-27 towards I-40 as an auxiliary interstate (I-140, I-127) just until the freeway splits into four surface streets.

[Bobby5280]

If I-27 is ever actually extended North of Amarillo I see no chance for it cutting North thru downtown. I-27 will be re-directed onto the Western half of Loop-335. The entire loop is slowly being upgraded to Interstate standards in a series of project phases. That includes at least one five level directional stack interchange with I-40 on the West side of town. I don't know what they have in mind for the East side crossing (probably a volleyball interchange if I had to guess).

In previous discussions on pushing I-27 thru downtown Amarillo, Wichita Falls and the I-44 viaduct there over Broad and Holliday streets was mentioned as an example. But that example in Wichita Falls is less than a mile long. The downtown Amarillo gap between I-27 and the Dumas Freeway is 2 miles long, and it runs through far more complicated (and more valuable) territory. A fair amount of revitalization work has taken place in Amarillo's downtown district. I'm sure a lot of residents there would be raising all hell if someone proposed building a couple elevated freeway viaducts through the middle of it. Tunneling underneath downtown could cost literally billions of dollars, which doesn't seem appropriate for a city of 200,000 people. Re-routing I-27 via the loop is the lesser of all evils.

As for a law allowing I-27 to be extended to Raton, I guess all we can do is wait and see what happens (with a lot of stress being put on that "wait" part). The Ports to Plains Corridor has two legs going North out of Amarillo. One goes to Raton. The other goes up into Colorado.

Some people in Dumas have been pushing for years to get a US-287 relief route bypass built around the West side of town. Their main streets have been getting beat to shit by all the heavy truck traffic going thru town. A $38 Million rehab project on existing US-287 in Dumas is underway now. A new bypass route could help I-27 efforts to some extent, but it could do more for pushing I-27 toward Stratford, Boise City and SE Colorado rather than Raton. If Texas is going to have to do more of the heavy lifting on I-27 efforts than the feds TX DOT will prioritize building more of I-27 in-state. It's the same situation as I-69 in East Texas. They'll probably build all of I-369 up to Texarkana before they complete I-69 to the Louisiana border.

I think New Mexico's state government will have to get far more seriously involved if they have any desire to see I-27 go to Raton. TX DOT won't extend I-27 to Texline otherwise.

[DJStephens]

If I recall correctly, the speed limit is 70 on 64/87 east of Raton.  And as a matter of fact, I believe it's going to be upgraded to Interstate standards in the coming years.

That's a Pipe Dream.  Will never happen in this state.  Besides there are more important items that could and should be addressed first.  Not saying that they will.  But they have more importance. 
1. Partial Albuquerque Beltway
2. Appropriate depression and decking over of I-25 south of the "big I". 
3. Statewide reconstruction and improvement of Existing highways, with some spot widenings, climbing lanes, and interchange additions/improvements. 

[DJStephens]

There's a stretch of I-10 near Las Cruces where the speed limit is capped at 65 mph but ought to be raised to 75 mph because there aren't closely spaced interchanges.  And that is between exits 132 (airport) and 139 (Motel Blvd).

The reason it is posted at 65 MPH is due to the fact that the highway (I-10) lies inside a penisula jutting out from the W edge of the city limits (near Motel Blvd), along I-10, and up the hill to the Industrial Park.  The Industrial park is part of the City.   The I-10 corridor, up the hill to Crawford Blvd (Exit 132) is inside the City limits.   What needs to be done, however, is to extend the current Piss Poor climbing lane for I-10 WB, in both directions.  From before the bottom of the climb, to just west of Crawford Blvd.  Completely to the outside, preserving the good 88 foot median for most of the stretch.   Am of the suspiscion that the W Picacho exit (135) is to be reconstructed, in a regressive fashion, in the near future, and this need for a climbing lane WB will be completely ignored.   

[Bobby5280]

I'm starting to think New Mexico is the "Mississippi of the West." That's not a compliment. It's in the context of Mississippi being the poorest state in the country. Despite its natural resources (such as oil) and its scenic attractions New Mexico appears to strive at being an arm-pit of the country -in large part due to policy choices.

Just in case anyone takes offense to my comments about the state: I was born in New Mexico and have relatives there. I wish New Mexico was a lot better. There is a great deal of potential that is just getting wasted.

I don't understand why a metro as big as Albuquerque has such a dopey highway network. The situation there seems considerably worse than the one up the road in Colorado Springs. And that's still fairly bad. A long time ago Phoenix and Austin were in similar situations, but those cities finally gave up and started building additional super highways.

Surface arterial streets can move large volumes of traffic only so well. Anti-freeway idiots in Colorado Springs are begrudgingly having to convert intersections along Powers Blvd into grade-separated freeway exits one at a time. Originally there was a plan to build Powers as a freeway from the outset. But that plan got nixed. Now here we are 20+ years later. They're having to piece-meal in new freeway exits along Powers at a far higher cost.

Outside of Albuquerque the rest of New Mexico's highways do need a lot of basic improvement. The priority seems to be doing things on the cheap, just "good enough" to get by. That's what I see on my somewhat frequent drives of US-64/87 between Texline and Raton.

[US 89]

Outside of Albuquerque the rest of New Mexico's highways do need a lot of basic improvement. The priority seems to be doing things on the cheap, just "good enough" to get by. That's what I see on my somewhat frequent drives of US-64/87 between Texline and Raton.

Absolutely. Ever driven US 550? Cheapest four lane I've ever seen that didn't make much of a dent in the crash/fatality rates.

Surface arterial streets can move large volumes of traffic only so well. Anti-freeway idiots in Colorado Springs are begrudgingly having to convert intersections along Powers Blvd into grade-separated freeway exits one at a time. Originally there was a plan to build Powers as a freeway from the outset. But that plan got nixed. Now here we are 20+ years later. They're having to piece-meal in new freeway exits along Powers at a far higher cost.

A city of Albuquerque's size should probably have more freeways, but I've never really had much issue getting around ABQ. Yeah, there's a limit to how well surface arterials can move traffic, but Albuquerque's surface road network is a lot better than Colorado Springs's, especially in the northeast part of the city. It's like Tucson. They opted to go the route of really good surface arterials instead of freeways, and they aren't really that much worse off for it.

The problem with Albuquerque is roads like Coors or Tramway, which are intended to be freeway-type roads but there is essentially no way at all to upgrade them. Coors has that overpowered interchange at 40, but then right next to that on both sides is a metric shitload of driveways and traffic lights with no room to widen or expand anything. Tramway at least has the right-of-way for an expansion, but it would likely require removing the bike trail and you bet your ass the rich NIMBYs up there will never allow such a thing to occur. US 550 also could use some interchanges in Bernalillo but that seems even less likely.

[DJStephens]

I'm starting to think New Mexico is the "Mississippi of the West." That's not a compliment. It's in the context of Mississippi being the poorest state in the country. Despite its natural resources (such as oil) and its scenic attractions New Mexico appears to strive at being an arm-pit of the country -in large part due to policy choices.
Outside of Albuquerque the rest of New Mexico's highways do need a lot of basic improvement. The priority seems to be doing things on the cheap, just "good enough" to get by. That's what I see on my somewhat frequent drives of US-64/87 between Texline and Raton.

    Mississippi and New Mexico "trade places" in a lot of socio-economic indicators.  However, would say New Mexico is "richer" now, due to the significant numbers of west coast transplants that have moved here.  So the socio economic picture is that of a Dumb Bell - a lot of poor, and a fair amount of Rich.  And the transplants have brought their politics.   Meaning the west coast "feel good" progressive type of politics, i.e.  fairy dust, rainbows, and unicorns.  And they vote in far greater numbers than members of other constituences or groups. Meaning as a percentage of their total group size.  They continually push for, and get such niche projects as the Central Avenue disaster, or that pet train, which simply will never give much in the way of return.  Squandering scarce dollars on projects that simply benefit too few.   
     Mississippi has done a much better job at basic improvements - double barreling US highways and extending four lane arterials to rural areas, because they have not compromised standards, i.e. no PETE RAHN, they didn't have Tony Anaya, either.   Are they perfect, no, they don't have the tax base, not even the tax base New Mexico has. 

[kkt]

New Mexico is certainly one of the poorer states.  Wikipedia's list of states by per person income

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_income

shows N.M. at 45th, above Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, West Virginia, and Mississippi.
I suspect that position in the list makes it look better than it is for lots of the people there - a millionaire's hangout like Santa Fe raises the average a lot but doesn't do much for the people living everywhere else.

[abqtraveler]

New Mexico is certainly one of the poorer states.  Wikipedia's list of states by per person income

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_income

shows N.M. at 45th, above Alabama, Louisiana, Arkansas, West Virginia, and Mississippi.
I suspect that position in the list makes it look better than it is for lots of the people there - a millionaire's hangout like Santa Fe raises the average a lot but doesn't do much for the people living everywhere else.

That's the truth of it. There's a huge wealth gap between rich and poor in New Mexico, with a relatively small middle/working class. For way too long, the political establishment has believed the only way to "grow the state's economy" is to expand the size of government, while keeping in place a tax and regulatory scheme that showcases the state government's long-running hostility toward private sector investment and growth.

[MattHanson939]

The reason it is posted at 65 MPH is due to the fact that the highway (I-10) lies inside a penisula jutting out from the W edge of the city limits (near Motel Blvd), along I-10, and up the hill to the Industrial Park.  The Industrial park is part of the City.   The I-10 corridor, up the hill to Crawford Blvd (Exit 132) is inside the City limits.

It is technically inside city limits, but here's the thing.  There's plenty of distance between Crawford Blvd. and Picacho Ave. (3 miles) as well as between Picacho Ave. and Motel Blvd (4 miles).  And there isn't as much traffic on that stretch as there is after the junction with I-25 when you're headed towards El Paso.  So I don't see any reason why there can't be a 75 mph speed limit and then drop it to 65 mph at Motel Blvd. when interchanges get more closely spaced.  Plus, I-25 between Broadway Blvd. (exit 215) and Rio Bravo Blvd. (exit 220) in Albuquerque is also technically within city limits, yet the speed limit stays at 75 mph until Rio Bravo where it drops to 65 mph.  And Albuquerque is significantly bigger than Las Cruces.

[MattHanson939]

Ever driven US 550? Cheapest four lane I've ever seen that didn't make much of a dent in the crash/fatality rates.

NMDOT could've done better with widening US 550 (formerly NM 44).  The least they could've done was make the median a little wider to install a jersey barrier like they did with two stretches of US 84/285 north of Santa Fe.  If not, they could've built another roadway next to the existing two-lane road but 30 feet apart from each other and repainted the old road.

[abqtraveler]

Ever driven US 550? Cheapest four lane I've ever seen that didn't make much of a dent in the crash/fatality rates.

NMDOT could've done better with widening US 550 (formerly NM 44).  The least they could've done was make the median a little wider to install a jersey barrier like they did with two stretches of US 84/285 north of Santa Fe.  If not, they could've built another roadway next to the existing two-lane road but 30 feet apart from each other and repainted the old road.

I think a big reason why NMDOT widened US-550 in the way that they did is due to the fact that 550 goes through a lot of Native American reservations along its route, and they wanted to keep the highway expansion within the existing right-of-way to avoid a protracted fight with the various tribes through which 550 passes. There are some places along 550 where the ROW is wide enough to accommodate separated carriageways, but there are also areas---mainly through the reservations--where the current roadway cross-section barely fits within the existing ROW.

[US 89]

Ever driven US 550? Cheapest four lane I've ever seen that didn't make much of a dent in the crash/fatality rates.

NMDOT could've done better with widening US 550 (formerly NM 44).  The least they could've done was make the median a little wider to install a jersey barrier like they did with two stretches of US 84/285 north of Santa Fe.  If not, they could've built another roadway next to the existing two-lane road but 30 feet apart from each other and repainted the old road.

I think a big reason why NMDOT widened US-550 in the way that they did is due to the fact that 550 goes through a lot of Native American reservations along its route, and they wanted to keep the highway expansion within the existing right-of-way to avoid a protracted fight with the various tribes through which 550 passes. There are some places along 550 where the ROW is wide enough to accommodate separated carriageways, but there are also areas---mainly through the reservations--where the current roadway cross-section barely fits within the existing ROW.

That's a good point, but it didn't seem to be an issue for US 491, which spends a lot of mileage in the Navajo reservation and various parcels of Navajo "off-reservation trust land" and yet has two carriageways all the way from Shiprock to Gallup.

[MattHanson939]

I think a big reason why NMDOT widened US-550 in the way that they did is due to the fact that 550 goes through a lot of Native American reservations along its route, and they wanted to keep the highway expansion within the existing right-of-way to avoid a protracted fight with the various tribes through which 550 passes. There are some places along 550 where the ROW is wide enough to accommodate separated carriageways, but there are also areas---mainly through the reservations--where the current roadway cross-section barely fits within the existing ROW.

In the areas where 550 goes through the reservations, they could've made the median a bit wider and installed a concrete jersey barrier, while going with separated carriageways in other areas.  Had they widened 550 that way instead, there would've been far fewer crashes.

[abqtraveler]

I think a big reason why NMDOT widened US-550 in the way that they did is due to the fact that 550 goes through a lot of Native American reservations along its route, and they wanted to keep the highway expansion within the existing right-of-way to avoid a protracted fight with the various tribes through which 550 passes. There are some places along 550 where the ROW is wide enough to accommodate separated carriageways, but there are also areas---mainly through the reservations--where the current roadway cross-section barely fits within the existing ROW.

In the areas where 550 goes through the reservations, they could've made the median a bit wider and installed a concrete jersey barrier, while going with separated carriageways in other areas.  Had they widened 550 that way instead, there would've been far fewer crashes.

That I don't disagree with. But it's typical of New Mexico to do things on the cheap.

Point in fact, they've spent the last 15 years reconstructing US-54 between Vaughn and Tularosa. NMDOT had the golden opportunity to 4-lane 54, yet they chose not to do so. Moreover, they did such a half-ass job that within 5 years, the pavement on the section between Carrizozo and Three Rivers had completely failed and they were out there repaving that section yet again.

[DJStephens]

I think a big reason why NMDOT widened US-550 in the way that they did is due to the fact that 550 goes through a lot of Native American reservations along its route, and they wanted to keep the highway expansion within the existing right-of-way to avoid a protracted fight with the various tribes through which 550 passes. There are some places along 550 where the ROW is wide enough to accommodate separated carriageways, but there are also areas---mainly through the reservations--where the current roadway cross-section barely fits within the existing ROW.

In the areas where 550 goes through the reservations, they could've made the median a bit wider and installed a concrete jersey barrier, while going with separated carriageways in other areas.  Had they widened 550 that way instead, there would've been far fewer crashes.

That I don't disagree with. But it's typical of New Mexico to do things on the cheap.

Point in fact, they've spent the last 15 years reconstructing US-54 between Vaughn and Tularosa. NMDOT had the golden opportunity to 4-lane 54, yet they chose not to do so. Moreover, they did such a half-ass job that within 5 years, the pavement on the section between Carrizozo and Three Rivers had completely failed and they were out there repaving that section yet again.

   Good design should have trumped any "concerns" over passing through, and with the reservations.  Besides, an improved road, with widened ROW would have benefitted tribal concerns as well.  Believe this realization is finally coming to roost in the Gila Reservation members SE of Phoenix.   Gary Johnson, and his henchman Pete Rahn, were terrible mistakes for the state.   Personally would have paid a state tax of 35 cents a gallon, double the current 17 cents per gallon, if southeastern standards and mentalities were to take root.   
    As to US 54, one cannot four lane every highway in the state.  Especially with "acceptable" standards - i.e. 60 foot minimum median, some bypasses, a few interchanges, full shoulders and proper horizontal and vertical curvature. An improved two lane, with occasional passing lanes is what has been pursued.   Most four lane conversions in the state have been frankly awful, with little to no median seperation, partial shoulders, lack of interchanges where needed, crummy low buck bypasses ("relief routes"), poor and shoddy construction, and general short cuts.
   With 54, N of Tularosa, it appears in most places, an entirely new roadbed has been constructed, alongside the old fifties non shoulder narrow footprint.   Just too much shifting and skewing in places, without good transitions.   And there should have been a Truck bypass of Carrizozo to it's west.  As for the failures, it likely has to do with the alluvial soils, with not enough proctors pulled to properly prepare the differing subgrades with adequate compaction and watering during construction and soil placement.   

[abqtraveler]

I think a big reason why NMDOT widened US-550 in the way that they did is due to the fact that 550 goes through a lot of Native American reservations along its route, and they wanted to keep the highway expansion within the existing right-of-way to avoid a protracted fight with the various tribes through which 550 passes. There are some places along 550 where the ROW is wide enough to accommodate separated carriageways, but there are also areas---mainly through the reservations--where the current roadway cross-section barely fits within the existing ROW.

In the areas where 550 goes through the reservations, they could've made the median a bit wider and installed a concrete jersey barrier, while going with separated carriageways in other areas.  Had they widened 550 that way instead, there would've been far fewer crashes.

That I don't disagree with. But it's typical of New Mexico to do things on the cheap.

Point in fact, they've spent the last 15 years reconstructing US-54 between Vaughn and Tularosa. NMDOT had the golden opportunity to 4-lane 54, yet they chose not to do so. Moreover, they did such a half-ass job that within 5 years, the pavement on the section between Carrizozo and Three Rivers had completely failed and they were out there repaving that section yet again.

Good design should have trumped any "concerns" over passing through, and with the reservations.  Besides, an improved road would benefit tribal concerns as well.  Believe this realization is finally coming to roost in the Gila Reservation members SE of Phoenix.   Gary Johnson, and his henchman Pete Rahn, were terrible mistakes for the state.   Personally would have paid a state tax, double the current 17 cents per gallon, if southeastern standards and mentalities were to take root.   
As to US 54, one cannot four lane every highway in the state.  Especially with "acceptable" standards - i.e. 60 minimum median, full shoulders and proper horizontal and vertical curvature. An improved two lane, with occainsional passing lanes is what has been pursured.   Appears in most places, an entirely new roadbed has been constructed, alongside the old fifties non shoulder narrow footprint.   Just too much shifting and skewing in places, without good transitions.   As for the failures, it likely has to do with the alluvial soils, with not enough proctors pulled to properly prepare the differing subgrades with adequate compaction and watering during construction and placement.   

I agree that not all roads need to be 4-laned, but with all the truck traffic that uses US-54 as a shortcut between I-40 and El Paso (and perhaps I-10 West at Las Cruces via US-70 between Alamogordo and Cruces), that would more than justify widening US-54 to 4 lanes between I-40 and Tularosa. I can't tell you how many times I've been stuck on 54 behind a convoy of semis and unable to pass due to the amount of oncoming traffic.

[DJStephens]

There are passing lane sections on 54 N of Tularosa.  Am of belief they are roughly every five miles.  Not sure how many are in the section between Corona and Vaughn.   Do know there are not any in the "unimproved" narrow section S of Corona.   

[abqtraveler]

There are passing lane sections on 54 N of Tularosa.  Am of belief they are roughly every five miles.  Not sure how many are in the section between Corona and Vaughn.   Do know there are not any in the "unimproved" narrow section S of Corona.   

There are a couple of passing lane sections about 10 and 15 miles north of Carrizozo, respectively. They just finished rebuilding the section between MP 146 and MP 153, which leaves about 10 or so miles of the original road remaining to be rebuilt. Most of that stretch winds its way through a narrow canyon and has a significant change in elevation. Save the best for last, I suppose.