Rural Freeways That Need Six Lanes

[froggie]

^ Except for Detroit (where I'd argue the congestion isn't in the city proper but in the suburbs), those aren't exactly large metropolitan areas.

[Rothman]

Well, the thread is about rural freeways and we were responding to a particular comment.

[jakeroot]

The one thing that I have noticed is that the more lanes built just attracts more traffic.  I have witnessed this in Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee.  So why bother in the first place.

The cars aren't being added; while traffic increases on that route, it decreases on other routes.

Vehicle registrations have gone up by 72 million since 1990. Where are those cars going? You could easily say the owners use transit, or bike, or whatever. But we don't really build the infrastructure for those things, so most of those cars are probably being driven at least once a week.

[hotdogPi]

The one thing that I have noticed is that the more lanes built just attracts more traffic.  I have witnessed this in Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee.  So why bother in the first place.

The cars aren't being added; while traffic increases on that route, it decreases on other routes.

Vehicle registrations have gone up by 72 million since 1990. Where are those cars going?

It goes up over time due to population growth, but building a new road doesn't have much effect on the total number of cars compared to doing nothing.

A few people will be driving when they wouldn't have driven otherwise, but there are also people who are now taking a shorter route because the new road exists.

[jakeroot]

The one thing that I have noticed is that the more lanes built just attracts more traffic.  I have witnessed this in Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee.  So why bother in the first place.

The cars aren't being added; while traffic increases on that route, it decreases on other routes.

Vehicle registrations have gone up by 72 million since 1990. Where are those cars going?

It goes up over time due to population growth, but building a new road doesn't have much effect on the total number of cars compared to doing nothing.

A few people will be driving when they wouldn't have driven otherwise, but there are also people who are now taking a shorter route because the new road exists.

Sure. But that's why congestion has increased so much over the last 30+ years. Our roads are handling more cars than they were intended to. To alleviate the issue, we widen our roads. But in doing so, we increase the theoretical capacity of those roads. This improves the average LOS conditions in the mean time, but also makes the routes more attractive for people who live in the area that either don't, or will soon be, driving. Never mind new homeowners.

[webny99]

I would say most of I-81, especially from the southern terminus to I-78 in PA, and then I-78 to Syracuse being a longer term vision.

[Skye]

Adding to my previous post, I-95 in South Carolina.

[Flint1979]

Try Duluth, MN, Binghamton, NY and I'd even argue Detroit, MI.  Despite the highways, congestion has not filled capacity.

The blanket idea that more lanes just fill up automatically with congestion just because they're there is unfounded in reality.

That's because Detroit's freeway system was built for a city much bigger than Detroit even at it's peak population of 1,849,568 in 1950. Detroit lacks a good mass transit system so depending on your car is how you get around.

[RoadMaster09]

For the Deep South in AL and MS, some of my thoughts:

Mississippi

I-10: Warrants 6 lanes across the state (it's not a very long stretch). Quite urbanized too between New Orleans and Mobile/Pensacola.

I-20 and 20/59: May be warranted in the longer term from Vicksburg to the Jackson metro. Apart from in Meridian, traffic isn't very high from Jackson to Tuscaloosa.

I-22: 4 lanes is definitely sufficient.

I-55: Not much in the way of upgrades needed. May warrant 6 lanes south to Senatobia in the longer term. Traffic drops quite fast once outside the Jackson metro.

I-59: 4 lanes is probably sufficient. The only fairly busy sections are near Hattiesburg but a US 49 freeway is definitely of higher priority.

Alabama

I-10: Warrants at least 6 lanes across the state, if it isn't already (it's mostly urban anyway).

I-20 and 20/59: From Tuscaloosa eastward, the sections that are not 6 lanes ideally should be. AADT is near or over 40,000 through most of the state.

I-22: 4 lanes is definitely sufficient.

I-59: I'd say it should be 6 lanes about as far as Argo. Traffic does drop into St. Clair County, and is quite low beyond Gadsden.

I-65: From the Tennessee line to near the Lowndes-Montgomery county line definitely calls for 6 lanes on any sections that are not such (especially between Birmingham and Montgomery where AADT is up close to 50,000). In southern Alabama, the AADT in the 20,000 to 25,000 range doesn't really call for it until Mobile County.

[froggie]

I-10: Warrants 6 lanes across the state (it's not a very long stretch). Quite urbanized too between New Orleans and Mobile/Pensacola.

6 lanes would be a "nice to have" on I-10, but it isn't an outright necessity.  Traffic moves fairly well in part because it is INLAND from most of the coastal urbanization.  MDOT has also 6-laned it from the Long Beach exit (Exit 28) to MS 609 and is in the process of extending that to MS 57.  That covers the bulk of the busier traffic area.  I could eventually see an extension of that to Diamondhead (Exit 16) but it's not outright needed beyond Bay St Louis.  Widening across the Pascagoula River would also be very difficult due to the wetlands and the length of the bridge.  At 4 miles, it's almost as long as the Twin Spans over Lake Pontchartrain (which required emergency Katrina-related funding in order to replace and widen).

Having been stationed in that area twice, I would also say that 10 is most definitely not urbanized between Slidell and the Canal Rd exit (Exit 31) in Gulfport, especially where it crosses the Stennis Space Center buffer zone.  There's also an expanse east of Ocean Springs that is not urbanized due to the Pascagoula River basin and an adjacent wildlife refuge area.

[DJStephens]

I would say most of I-81, especially from the southern terminus to I-78 in PA, and then I-78 to Syracuse being a longer term vision.

Believe you are referring to I-81 North.  Is there really much through truck and other traffic north of Binghamton??  Would suspect it falls off quite a bit, and may have been a part, a very small part, of the decision to scrap 81's route through Syracuse itself.  That and of course the state is stretched very thin and costs there are very high. 

[froggie]

^ Not enough to warrant 6 lanes...not even by his own criteria (first post of the thread).

[thspfc]

^ Not enough to warrant 6 lanes...not even by his own criteria (first post of the thread).

Can you quote people when responding to them? Especially earlier on this page, when your reply ended up on a different page than the post you were responding to. 

[webny99]

^ Not enough to warrant 6 lanes...not even by his own criteria (first post of the thread).

Not now, which is why I mentioned it as something long-term, not an immediate need.

[hobsini2]

Wisconsin:
I-39/90: (Under const currently) IL State Line to US 12/18 Madison
I-39: I-90/94/Wis 78 Portage to US 51 Portage
I-39: Wis 54 Plover to US 10 West Exit 165 (Stevens Point)
I-39/US 51: Business US 51 Rothschild to Hwy WW Brokaw (Wausau)
I-90/94: Wis 78 Portage to I-90/94 Split Tomah.
I-90: MM State Line to Wis 16 La Crosse (not sure if this is 6 lanes already)
I-94: Wis 25 Menomonie to US 53 Eau Claire
I-94: I-39/90/Wis 30 Madison to Hwy N Cottage Grove
I-94: Wis 67 Oconomowoc to Wis 16 Waukesha
I-41: US 151 Fond du Lac to Wis 26 Oshkosh (Wis 26 to US 45 is 6 lanes around Oshkosh)
I-41: US 45 Oshkosh to Wis 114 Neenah (Wis 114 to I-43 Green Bay I believe is now 6 lanes)
I-43: Wis 83 Mukwonago to I-41/894 Greenfield
I-43: Wis 100 Fox Point to Wis 57 North Port Washington
I-43: Hwy V Exit 120 to Wis 42 Sheboygan
I-43: Silver Creek Rd to Rockwood Rd (Manitowoc)
I-43: US 141 Exit 178 Bellevue to I-41 Green Bay (I think parts of this are 6 lanes)
US 53: I-94 Eau Claire to Hwy S Chippewa Falls
US 2/53: US 2 East Amnicon Falls to 53rd Ave E Superior (US 2 & 53 in Superior is a city street (2nd St) that should be 6 lanes as well through town to Belknap St.)
US 61/151: IA State Line to US 61 North Dickeyville
Wis 29: Business Wis 29/90th St Exit 72 to Hwy X Exit 80 (Chippewa Falls)
Wis 29: 72nd Ave Wausau to I-39/US 51 North JCT Wausau
Wis 29: I-39/US 51 South JCT to Hwy J Weston (Wausau)
Wis 29: Hillcrest Rd Howard to I-41 Green Bay
Wis 172: I-41 Ashwaubenon to I-43 Bellevue (Green Bay)

[Big John]

Wisconsin:

I-41: US 45 Oshkosh to Wis 114 Neenah (Wis 114 to I-43 Green Bay I believe is now 6 lanes)

I-41 from US45 to WI 114 is already 6 lanes.  I-41 from WI 15 Appleton to Scheuring Rd (CTH F) De Pere is 4 lanes but needs 6 lanes.

[Scott5114]

The one thing that I have noticed is that the more lanes built just attracts more traffic.  I have witnessed this in Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee.  So why bother in the first place.

The one thing that I have noticed is that no matter where you drive, you just end up dying at some point anyway. I have witnessed this in Oklahoma, Kansas, and Missouri. So why bother in the first place.

[hobsini2]

Wisconsin:

I-41: US 45 Oshkosh to Wis 114 Neenah (Wis 114 to I-43 Green Bay I believe is now 6 lanes)

I-41 from US45 to WI 114 is already 6 lanes.  I-41 from WI 15 Appleton to Scheuring Rd (CTH F) De Pere is 4 lanes but needs 6 lanes.

Been too long since I was last north of Oshkosh.

[Beltway]

The one thing that I have noticed is that the more lanes built just attracts more traffic.  I have witnessed this in Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee.  So why bother in the first place.

The one thing that I have noticed is that no matter where you drive, you just end up dying at some point anyway. I have witnessed this in Oklahoma, Kansas, and Missouri. So why bother in the first place.

Yeah, some people would say, "Why not just pull the noose and get it over with."

[Max Rockatansky]

I-215 in California comes to mind mostly because the rural parts are largely being absorbed as suburban outgrowth.  I was really surprised I-215 south of Cajon Pass was still only four lanes when I drove it yesterday. 

[thspfc]

Wisconsin:
I-39/90: (Under const currently) IL State Line to US 12/18 Madison
This has been needed for a long time, thank god it's finally happening.
I-39: I-90/94/Wis 78 Portage to US 51 Portage
Why do this section but not anything north of it? I-39 between Cascade Interchange and Plover does not need 6 lanes, and won't for a long time.
I-39: Wis 54 Plover to US 10 West Exit 165 (Stevens Point)
Not immediately, but probably in 5-10 years.
I-39/US 51: Business US 51 Rothschild to Hwy WW Brokaw (Wausau)
The WI-29 concurrency is already 6 lanes, and the last section before WW has climbing lanes for trucks. The whole thing does need 6 lanes though.
I-90/94: Wis 78 Portage to I-90/94 Split Tomah.
Yes.
I-90: MM State Line to Wis 16 La Crosse (not sure if this is 6 lanes already)
The last time I was in La Crosse was 6 or 7 years ago, so I'm not sure.
I-94: Wis 25 Menomonie to US 53 Eau Claire
Not so much as between Portage and Tomah, but still needs 6 lanes.
I-94: I-39/90/Wis 30 Madison to Hwy N Cottage Grove
Already 6 lanes.
I-94: Wis 67 Oconomowoc to Wis 16 Waukesha
Agreed.
US 61/151: IA State Line to US 61 North Dickeyville
Maybe a third lane NB for slow trucks, but it doesn't need 6 full lanes.
Wis 172: I-41 Ashwaubenon to I-43 Bellevue (Green Bay)
Already 6.

[Big John]

Wisconsin:
[
Wis 172: I-41 Ashwaubenon to I-43 Bellevue (Green Bay)
Already 6.

Partially so.  The part from Webster to I-43 is 4 lanes.

[sprjus4]

The one thing that I have noticed is that the more lanes built just attracts more traffic.  I have witnessed this in Florida, Georgia, and Tennessee.  So why bother in the first place.

I suppose we should just downsize all freeways in the country, urban or rural to 4-lanes. Tell me how it works it for you then 

It may seem like a 6-lane freeway is overcrowded, make it 4-lanes, and you get nowhere.

Your comment is moot. Aren't you the anti-new-freeways person anyway?

[Scott5114]

Your comment is moot. Aren't you the anti-new-freeways person anyway?

He's the anti-everything person. He blanches if you suggest any government agency does anything that costs more than $8.

[webny99]

Top 5 for Upstate NY, in this order:

*I-490 between exits 25 and 27
*I-190 between I-290 and Niagara Falls
*I-90/Thruway between Exit 50/Williamsville and Exit 47/LeRoy
*I-90/Thruway between Exit 44/Farmington and Exit 42/Geneva
*I-87 between Harriman and Albany

On that last one, I can't comment on which specific segments need widening the worst, however, I would assume Exit 21A/Berkshire Connector to Exit 23/I-787 is the top priority. The I-787 to I-90 segment is super nice now that it's been widened - one of the only stretches in Upstate NY that compares to legitimate large scale widenings that have been done in other states.