News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

I-25 Albuquerque Rebuild

Started by abqtraveler, August 11, 2021, 08:43:53 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

abqtraveler

The reconstruction and widening of I-25 through Albuquerque has been in the works for many years. Over the past decade, several projects have been completed, including:

I-25/Paseo Del Norte interchange reconstruction
Added travel lane between Jefferson Blvd and Alameda Blvd
Reconstruction of the I-25/Rio Bravo interchange
Added travel lane between Sunport Blvd and NM-47 near the Isleta Pueblo

Next up:  Reconstructing and widening I-25 between Comanche Rd. and Montgomery Blvd. This project is estimated at $100 million, with construction projected to start in 2023.

And NMDOT is currently planning to reconstruct I-25 in the vicinity of Gibson Blvd starting in 2027 (hopefully they'll eliminate the dreaded S-curve between Central Ave and Avenida Cesar Chavez at that time).

https://www.abqjournal.com/2418501/100m-i25-project-aims-to-ease-bottlenecks-ex-interchanges-with-both-montgomery-and-comanche-targeted.html
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201


DJStephens

The S curve S of the Lead/Coal couplet should have been addressed - at the same time as the Big I reconstruction of '00-'02.  At least 15 million was wasted - to elevate 25 over Lomas Blvd, on a replacement bridge, to connect to the ancient late fifties elevated section over Central Ave.   This is whats known as a "throwaway improvement".  The entire 25 mainline - needs to be depressed, widened, and decked over in the Central / Lead / Coal environs.   The property E of the mainline - in the S curve vicinity, believe is owned by APS and needs to be relocated.   There does appear to be room, in fact, to have a eight to ten lane depressed facility, with parallel one way frontages on each side, at grade, in this Lomas / Central / Lead / Coal environ.   

abqtraveler

Quote from: DJStephens on September 26, 2021, 12:23:48 PM
The S curve S of the Lead/Coal couplet should have been addressed - at the same time as the Big I reconstruction of '00-'02.  At least 15 million was wasted - to elevate 25 over Lomas Blvd, on a replacement bridge, to connect to the ancient late fifties elevated section over Central Ave.   This is whats known as a "throwaway improvement".  The entire 25 mainline - needs to be depressed, widened, and decked over in the Central / Lead / Coal environs.   The property E of the mainline - in the S curve vicinity, believe is owned by APS and needs to be relocated.   There does appear to be room, in fact, to have a eight to ten lane depressed facility, with parallel one way frontages on each side, at grade, in this Lomas / Central / Lead / Coal environ.

And from what I'm seeing, it looks like NMDOT is going to take a very piecemeal approach to dealing with the S-curve. The first project will permanently close the NB offramp to MLK Boulevard and extend the lane from the Lead/Coal onramp to the Lomas exit. Next will be the reconstruction of the I-25/Gibson interchange. I don't know how they're planning to functionally improve the Gibson interchange given there are two cemeteries on opposite sides that butt up right against the ramps. One of the concepts I saw had braided ramps between Sunport Blvd and Lead/Coal that includes the interchanges with Gibson and Cesar Chavez.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

rarnold

Quote from: DJStephens on September 26, 2021, 12:23:48 PM
The S curve S of the Lead/Coal couplet should have been addressed - at the same time as the Big I reconstruction of '00-'02.  At least 15 million was wasted - to elevate 25 over Lomas Blvd, on a replacement bridge, to connect to the ancient late fifties elevated section over Central Ave.   This is whats known as a "throwaway improvement".  The entire 25 mainline - needs to be depressed, widened, and decked over in the Central / Lead / Coal environs.   The property E of the mainline - in the S curve vicinity, believe is owned by APS and needs to be relocated.   There does appear to be room, in fact, to have a eight to ten lane depressed facility, with parallel one way frontages on each side, at grade, in this Lomas / Central / Lead / Coal environ.   

Another problem with not having a viable bypass route to divert traffic to during a project.

DJStephens

The only parallel street in the vicinity is Broadway, to the west.   Frankly would get APS out of there, build "temporary" frontages, and then start the utility relocations, then start the trench.   

abqtraveler

Quote from: rarnold on October 20, 2021, 10:53:39 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on September 26, 2021, 12:23:48 PM
The S curve S of the Lead/Coal couplet should have been addressed - at the same time as the Big I reconstruction of '00-'02.  At least 15 million was wasted - to elevate 25 over Lomas Blvd, on a replacement bridge, to connect to the ancient late fifties elevated section over Central Ave.   This is whats known as a "throwaway improvement".  The entire 25 mainline - needs to be depressed, widened, and decked over in the Central / Lead / Coal environs.   The property E of the mainline - in the S curve vicinity, believe is owned by APS and needs to be relocated.   There does appear to be room, in fact, to have a eight to ten lane depressed facility, with parallel one way frontages on each side, at grade, in this Lomas / Central / Lead / Coal environ.   

Another problem with not having a viable bypass route to divert traffic to during a project.
They should build a westside bypass of I-25 that runs along the West Mesa from Bernalillo or Algodones in the north to Isleta in the south. In fact, there were proposals back in the late '60s to construct a beltway around ABQ. Portions of Tramway, Paseo Del Norte and Paseo Del Volcan were built as elements of that beltway concept. The idea at the time was the beltway would have been built out in stages as money became available.

While recent development in the Albuquerque foothills has effectively killed any chance of Tramway being upgraded to a full freeway, the Paseo Del Volcan portion is still on the table. Maybe within my lifetime I'll see such a westside bypass be fully built out.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

DJStephens

#6
Suspect Coors Blvd was once viewed as the W section of that long dead beltway idea.  The original I-40 / Coors interchange (1961) had some elements that hinted at limited access extensions both N and S along Coors, that of course never happened.   It's replacement (2003) struggled to fit into an area that had literally become overwhelmed by growth. 
Hypothetical N-S west side freeways then moved W.  Unser Blvd, and then Paseo de Volcan.   
Too much tribalism, and fiefdoms for something like a beltway to ever happen.   If by some miracle, it could happen, would run it from just W of the S I-25 Rio Grande Bridge, curving in an arc to meet I-40 at the hypothetical full stack at I-40.   Then following Paseo del Volcan alignment to the NNE, finally reaching I-25 again in Bernalillo.   Interstate 425.    Was in the Albuquerque area last month (Aug 22).  The Bernalillo area along US 550 / NM 44 was packed in by growth and traffic lights.  Remember the late nineties, when it was still "semi-rural".  Absolutely no sense of foresight or planning.   

abqtraveler

Quote from: DJStephens on November 01, 2021, 08:06:45 AM
Suspect Coors Blvd was once viewed as the W section of that long dead beltway idea.  The original I-40 / Coors interchange (1961) had some elements that hinted at limited access extensions both N and S along Coors, that of course never happened.   It's replacement (2003) struggled to fit into an area that had literally become overwhelmed by growth.   
Too much tribalism, and fiefdoms for something like a beltway to ever happen.   If by some miracle, it could happen, would run it from just W of the S I-25 Rio Grande Bridge, curving in an arc to meet I-40 at the hypothetical full stack at I-40.   Then following Paseo del Volcan alignment to the NNE, finally reaching I-25 again in Bernalillo.   Interstate 425.   
That's exactly what I would envision, and the state already owns the ROW from I-40 to US-550 for the proposed Northwest Loop (aka Paseo Del Volcan). The trouble will be in securing the ROW south of I-40 and north of US-550, as any freeway would cut through Native American land and land that's part of the old Spanish land grants.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

aboges26

Quote from: abqtraveler on November 01, 2021, 03:39:03 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on November 01, 2021, 08:06:45 AM
Suspect Coors Blvd was once viewed as the W section of that long dead beltway idea.  The original I-40 / Coors interchange (1961) had some elements that hinted at limited access extensions both N and S along Coors, that of course never happened.   It's replacement (2003) struggled to fit into an area that had literally become overwhelmed by growth.   
Too much tribalism, and fiefdoms for something like a beltway to ever happen.   If by some miracle, it could happen, would run it from just W of the S I-25 Rio Grande Bridge, curving in an arc to meet I-40 at the hypothetical full stack at I-40.   Then following Paseo del Volcan alignment to the NNE, finally reaching I-25 again in Bernalillo.   Interstate 425.   
That's exactly what I would envision, and the state already owns the ROW from I-40 to US-550 for the proposed Northwest Loop (aka Paseo Del Volcan). The trouble will be in securing the ROW south of I-40 and north of US-550, as any freeway would cut through Native American land and land that's part of the old Spanish land grants.

The Northwest Loop and Paseo del Volcan are two completely different roads / proposed roads.  Both exist as stubs off of US 550 but the Northwest Loop is planned to parallel Paseo del Volcan to the west of the West Mesa and will have an interchange with I-40 just to the east of exit 140 / the Rio Puerco bridge.

DJStephens

#9
Quote from: aboges26 on November 11, 2021, 03:30:29 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on November 01, 2021, 03:39:03 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on November 01, 2021, 08:06:45 AM
Suspect Coors Blvd was once viewed as the W section of that long dead beltway idea.  The original I-40 / Coors interchange (1961) had some elements that hinted at limited access extensions both N and S along Coors, that of course never happened.   It's replacement (2003) struggled to fit into an area that had literally become overwhelmed by growth.   
Too much tribalism, and fiefdoms for something like a beltway to ever happen.   If by some miracle, it could happen, would run it from just W of the S I-25 Rio Grande Bridge, curving in an arc to meet I-40 at the hypothetical full stack at I-40.   Then following Paseo del Volcan alignment to the NNE, finally reaching I-25 again in Bernalillo.   Interstate 425.   
That's exactly what I would envision, and the state already owns the ROW from I-40 to US-550 for the proposed Northwest Loop (aka Paseo Del Volcan). The trouble will be in securing the ROW south of I-40 and north of US-550, as any freeway would cut through Native American land and land that's part of the old Spanish land grants.

The Northwest Loop and Paseo del Volcan are two completely different roads / proposed roads.  Both exist as stubs off of US 550 but the Northwest Loop is planned to parallel Paseo del Volcan to the west of the West Mesa and will have an interchange with I-40 just to the east of exit 140 / the Rio Puerco bridge.
Unser Blvd is yet another "quasi" expressway that could have been more.  So neither NW Loop or Paseo del Volcan are envisioned to have a true limited access build out?   Stub outs, sounds like a future at grade intersection, that will be smothered by growth.  Not surprising.  Probably impossible, with today's mentalities, but would construct a Freeway segment directly atop US 550 / NM 44 to properly connect to I-25.  Six lanes, MSE walls, elevated, with parallel frontages.  Have not been up there in years, know that there was some type of scoping, at one point, to re-construct the US 550 / NM 44 interchange with I-25.  It likely was scaled back or was back-burnered.   Again, not surprising.   

triplemultiplex

They threw up a fairly good SPUI at I-25 and US 550 in the mid teens.  Probably stuck with that for a while now.
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

aboges26

Quote from: DJStephens on November 12, 2021, 08:41:44 PM
Quote from: aboges26 on November 11, 2021, 03:30:29 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on November 01, 2021, 03:39:03 PM
Quote from: DJStephens on November 01, 2021, 08:06:45 AM
Suspect Coors Blvd was once viewed as the W section of that long dead beltway idea.  The original I-40 / Coors interchange (1961) had some elements that hinted at limited access extensions both N and S along Coors, that of course never happened.   It's replacement (2003) struggled to fit into an area that had literally become overwhelmed by growth.   
Too much tribalism, and fiefdoms for something like a beltway to ever happen.   If by some miracle, it could happen, would run it from just W of the S I-25 Rio Grande Bridge, curving in an arc to meet I-40 at the hypothetical full stack at I-40.   Then following Paseo del Volcan alignment to the NNE, finally reaching I-25 again in Bernalillo.   Interstate 425.   
That's exactly what I would envision, and the state already owns the ROW from I-40 to US-550 for the proposed Northwest Loop (aka Paseo Del Volcan). The trouble will be in securing the ROW south of I-40 and north of US-550, as any freeway would cut through Native American land and land that's part of the old Spanish land grants.

The Northwest Loop and Paseo del Volcan are two completely different roads / proposed roads.  Both exist as stubs off of US 550 but the Northwest Loop is planned to parallel Paseo del Volcan to the west of the West Mesa and will have an interchange with I-40 just to the east of exit 140 / the Rio Puerco bridge.
Unser Blvd is yet another "quasi" expressway that could have been more.  So neither NW Loop or Paseo del Volcan are envisioned to have a true limited access build out?   Stub outs, sounds like a future at grade intersection, that will be smothered by growth.  Not surprising.  Probably impossible, with today's mentalities, but would construct a Freeway segment directly atop US 550 / NM 44 to properly connect to I-25.  Six lanes, MSE walls, elevated, with parallel frontages.  Have not been up there in years, know that there was some type of scoping, at one point, to re-construct the US 550 / NM 44 interchange with I-25.  It likely was scaled back or was back-burnered.   Again, not surprising.

Surprisingly no, the ROW is preserved for both Paseo del Norte and the Northwest Loop for an ultimate freeway build out.  The parcel maps I saw have ROW preserved for a full stack at I-40 for the NW Loop.  The NW Loop ROW largely got donated / set aside by developers and is a long way off from construction, but I do know utilities are or will soon be utilizing a portion of the corridor near I-40.

Unser I believe also has enough ROW to eventually get comfortably upgraded to freeway in its northern end and in the I-40 area it seems squeezing it in Texas-style may have been the plan at one point.  NMDOT has a book and they sure stick to it, they seem to like making 6 lane at-grades with a modicum of access control instead of going to a 4 lane freeway for the sake of safety and pollution reduction on high traffic corridors.

US 550 in Bernalillo really grinds my gears, this reconstruction is (maybe "was" now) taking forever just to keep the traffic lights.  Texas could have built the entire thing as a freeway in a year.  Not sure if there was any scaled back plans or if that is the ultimate plan for the next rebuild in 10 years, or if that would be reserved for after increasing to 8 lanes.

aboges26

Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 12, 2021, 10:28:41 PM
They threw up a fairly good SPUI at I-25 and US 550 in the mid teens.  Probably stuck with that for a while now.

SPUIs tend to get turned into DDIs, so its probable that will be the next configuration in 10 years.  Depends on how many Californians end up moving in and staying.

US 89

Quote from: aboges26 on November 30, 2021, 11:17:22 PM
Quote from: triplemultiplex on November 12, 2021, 10:28:41 PM
They threw up a fairly good SPUI at I-25 and US 550 in the mid teens.  Probably stuck with that for a while now.

SPUIs tend to get turned into DDIs, so its probable that will be the next configuration in 10 years.  Depends on how many Californians end up moving in and staying.

As much as I wish 550 were a freeway through Bernalillo, the 550/25 interchange seems as good a place as ever to build a DDI. Functionally it's a very similar interchange to I-15/US 91 in Brigham City UT, where there is a new-ish DDI that works great in my experience.

Plutonic Panda

Quote from: aboges26 on November 30, 2021, 11:16:08 PM
US 550 in Bernalillo really grinds my gears, this reconstruction is (maybe "was" now) taking forever just to keep the traffic lights.  Texas could have built the entire thing as a freeway in a year.  Not sure if there was any scaled back plans or if that is the ultimate plan for the next rebuild in 10 years, or if that would be reserved for after increasing to 8 lanes.
Don't even get me started on that bullshit. I always get routed behind the casino. It should be a full freeway with direct connect ramps to I-25.

Speaking of needed improvements in ABQ area I-40 needs to be at least six lanes to Edgewood and I'd argue Moriarty.

DJStephens

#15
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 02, 2021, 12:54:34 PM
Quote from: aboges26 on November 30, 2021, 11:16:08 PM
US 550 in Bernalillo really grinds my gears, this reconstruction is (maybe "was" now) taking forever just to keep the traffic lights.  Texas could have built the entire thing as a freeway in a year.  Not sure if there was any scaled back plans or if that is the ultimate plan for the next rebuild in 10 years, or if that would be reserved for after increasing to 8 lanes.
Don't even get me started on that bullshit. I always get routed behind the casino. It should be a full freeway with direct connect ramps to I-25.

Speaking of needed improvements in ABQ area I-40 needs to be at least six lanes to Edgewood and I'd argue Moriarty.
There is a six lane cross-section E of Albu all the way to NM - 14.   An additional EB climbing lane further east would be useful.  To the crest of Sedillo Hill.  Am not sure if an additional WB lane is warranted from Moriarty to NM - 14.  The Edgewood early 00's interchange "redo" is horrible and needs to be ripped out and redone properly.   Doing it on the Cheap.  Absolute Crap.   

abqtraveler

Quote from: DJStephens on December 02, 2021, 10:49:34 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 02, 2021, 12:54:34 PM
Quote from: aboges26 on November 30, 2021, 11:16:08 PM
US 550 in Bernalillo really grinds my gears, this reconstruction is (maybe "was" now) taking forever just to keep the traffic lights.  Texas could have built the entire thing as a freeway in a year.  Not sure if there was any scaled back plans or if that is the ultimate plan for the next rebuild in 10 years, or if that would be reserved for after increasing to 8 lanes.
Don't even get me started on that bullshit. I always get routed behind the casino. It should be a full freeway with direct connect ramps to I-25.

Speaking of needed improvements in ABQ area I-40 needs to be at least six lanes to Edgewood and I'd argue Moriarty.
There is a six lane cross-section E of Albu all the way to NM - 14.   An additional EB climbing lane further east would be useful.  To the crest of Sedillo Hill.  Am not sure if an additional WB lane is warranted from Moriarty to NM - 14.  The Edgewood early 00's interchange "redo" is horrible and needs to be ripped out and redone properly.   Doing it on the Cheap.  Absolute Crap.   
There was a study that NMDOT did a few years ago where they were considering adding one or two interchanges between Sedillo Hill and Edgewood. At the very least they were looking at adding a diamond interchange at NM-217/Mountain Valley Road, and perhaps a second interchange a couple of miles to the east of there. NMDOT used to have a link to the study on its old website, but it's not on the newly revamped website.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

aboges26

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 02, 2021, 12:54:34 PM
Quote from: aboges26 on November 30, 2021, 11:16:08 PM
US 550 in Bernalillo really grinds my gears, this reconstruction is (maybe "was" now) taking forever just to keep the traffic lights.  Texas could have built the entire thing as a freeway in a year.  Not sure if there was any scaled back plans or if that is the ultimate plan for the next rebuild in 10 years, or if that would be reserved for after increasing to 8 lanes.
Don't even get me started on that bullshit. I always get routed behind the casino. It should be a full freeway with direct connect ramps to I-25.

Speaking of needed improvements in ABQ area I-40 needs to be at least six lanes to Edgewood and I'd argue Moriarty.

With the amount of truck traffic on I-40, it is arguably necessary to six lane I-40 across NM for the sake of safety.  Not sure how many lives need to be lost for this to be realized by NMDOT, but then again US 550 is notorious for its DUI and distracted driving accidents resulting in deaths of whole families and there is not even a squeak regarding safety improvements.

triplemultiplex

Quote from: aboges26 on December 17, 2021, 12:30:16 AM
With the amount of truck traffic on I-40, it is arguably necessary to six lane I-40 across NM for the sake of safety. 

That seems like massive overkill.  40 gets pretty desolate the closer one gets to the state lines.
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

Plutonic Panda

Quote from: triplemultiplex on December 22, 2021, 10:40:24 AM
Quote from: aboges26 on December 17, 2021, 12:30:16 AM
With the amount of truck traffic on I-40, it is arguably necessary to six lane I-40 across NM for the sake of safety. 

That seems like massive overkill.  40 gets pretty desolate the closer one gets to the state lines.
I mean I certainly wouldn't be complaining if we added a third lane each way on all of our interstates but yeah there's probably better uses of that money. I-40 does need more six laning though in NM particularly around Albuquerque.

DJStephens

#20
   Outside of the Albuquerque SMSA, a few climbing lanes in a few places on I - 40 would be enough.   One outside the current EB lanes to the top of Sedillo Hill would be first on the list.   
   Another place a climbing lane would be useful is on I-10 WB climbing out of the Rio Grande Valley W of las Cruces.   The one that exists there now, starts half way up the hill and ends abruptly before an antiquated interchange with US - 70.   An antiquated interchange, that will be eventually rebuilt in a regressive fashion.   
   Seems their too busy spreading fairy dust, or painting rainbows to fix issues like this.   

abqtraveler

Quote from: DJStephens on December 22, 2021, 09:22:22 PM
   Outside of the Albuquerque SMSA, a few climbing lanes in a few places on I - 40 would be enough.   One outside the current EB lanes to the top of Sedillo Hill would be first on the list.   
   Another place a climbing lane would be useful is on I-10 WB climbing out of the Rio Grande Valley W of las Cruces.   The one that exists there now, starts half way up the hill and ends abruptly before an antiquated interchange with US - 70.   An antiquated interchange, that will be eventually rebuilt in a regressive fashion.   
   Seems their too busy spreading fairy dust, or painting rainbows to fix issues like this.
There's a lot of things that NMDOT could do to improve its highways, from a safety perspective. For a state that ranks near the top for fatal highway crashes (per capita), it blows my mind that NMDOT can't even pursue simple, low-cost solutions such as cable barriers along its freeways and 4-lane highways to reduce the number of fatal head-on collisions.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

jtespi

Bumping this thread because I found the NMDOT's project website where one of the projects listed is "I-25 Improved | Comanche to Montgomery".

The project is about to be advertised to bidders later this year with final design and construction starting next year (2023).

Looking at the project plans, I wish it had gone 1 mile further north to the Jefferson Street exit. There is a lot of traffic during rush hours with many people turning onto Pan American NB/SB. The Jefferson Street overpass bridge is narrow and only allows 2 through lanes and 1 left turn lane in each direction.
Thankfully, the project adds Texas-style turnarounds to both Comanche and Montgomery. This is something that should have been added to all interchanges along I-25 & Pan American. Jefferson really needs a turnaround.

Also listed on the project website is "I-25 and Gibson Boulevard Interchange Reconstruction" which is in the study and design phase with the description "Reconstruct I-25 and Gibson Blvd interchange with bridge replacement and auxiliary lanes." There is no dedicated website for that planned project.

Does anyone know the current construction progress of the Sunport Blvd. extension? The traffic signals at the I-25 and Sunport interchange have been in all-way flash mode for over a year. A BernCo public works webpage says the project started last September and will conclude in 18 months (Spring 2023).

jtespi

Quote from: abqtraveler on October 20, 2021, 10:00:11 AM
And from what I'm seeing, it looks like NMDOT is going to take a very piecemeal approach to dealing with the S-curve. The first project will permanently close the NB offramp to MLK Boulevard and extend the lane from the Lead/Coal onramp to the Lomas exit.

It looks like your prediction came true. KRQE News just reported today that the MLK offramp from NB I-25 will be closed by early August. The auxiliary (exit only) lane to the Lomas exit will then be extended south to just north of the Lead Ave overpass (the NB bridge doesn't support more than 3 lanes).

Papa Emeritus

Quote from: aboges26 on December 17, 2021, 12:30:16 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 02, 2021, 12:54:34 PM
Quote from: aboges26 on November 30, 2021, 11:16:08 PM
US 550 in Bernalillo really grinds my gears, this reconstruction is (maybe "was" now) taking forever just to keep the traffic lights.  Texas could have built the entire thing as a freeway in a year.  Not sure if there was any scaled back plans or if that is the ultimate plan for the next rebuild in 10 years, or if that would be reserved for after increasing to 8 lanes.
Don't even get me started on that bullshit. I always get routed behind the casino. It should be a full freeway with direct connect ramps to I-25.

Speaking of needed improvements in ABQ area I-40 needs to be at least six lanes to Edgewood and I'd argue Moriarty.

With the amount of truck traffic on I-40, it is arguably necessary to six lane I-40 across NM for the sake of safety.  Not sure how many lives need to be lost for this to be realized by NMDOT, but then again US 550 is notorious for its DUI and distracted driving accidents resulting in deaths of whole families and there is not even a squeak regarding safety improvements.

I agree about the need to 6 lane 40 across the state.

I took 40 from Grants to ABQ Airport on a Sunday afternoon, and it was one of the scariest drives of my life, because of the combination of aggressive car drivers and very heavy truck traffic.

At the very least, they need to 3 lane the portions of 40 that go up hills, so there's an easier way to pass slower trucks.

I also feel 75 MPH is too high of a speed limit, because of the up and down terrain.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.