I just returned from a weekend in LA, and driving through the Gaviota Tunnel above Santa Barbara on 101, it occurred to me that all of the multi-lane tunnels I've encountered in my adopted home state freely allow lane changes within the tunnel.
Contrast that with my native state, and absolutely every tunnel I can think of–all of the Turnpike tunnels, Squirrel Hill, Fort Pitt–expressly prohibit changing lanes in the tunnel and usually emphasize the restriction with a double white line separating the lanes. (I don't consider the cut-and-fill type of cap on I-95 in Philadelphia to be true tunnel.)
So what would be the rationale for prohibiting lane changes? As I compare tunnels in the two states, PA tunnels are typically longer, but if anything, that would strike me as a reason to allow lane changes, not prohibit them. Is this just another manifestation of PennDOTs more nanny-like tendencies (like posting low speed limits, no passing zones for seemingly no reason, etc.)?
Around the region, MD's tunnels forbid lane changes, but DC's I-395 tunnel allows them. I recall that the Holland and Lincoln tunnels forbid, but the Ted Williams allows. Elsewhere, CO allows (in my experience) but NV forbids. I don't really see a pattern here...
Road capacity drops when people change lanes (so I hear).
Maybe engineers want to get the most capacity out of these two lane tunnels as they can. There's really no benefit to changing lanes... you take up two lanes of space when passing, and when you do change lanes, your lane will probably slow back down again making one want to change lanes AGAIN... when one should've just stayed in the same lane the whole time and notice it taking the same amount of time regardless.
Changing lanes can also be hazardous. Cars can get hit and that's a huge problem. Versus if all the cars are made to be in the same lane, the drivers only need to slow down for the drivers in front of them.
I've always assumed it's to eliminate one possible cause of accidents (people who change lanes without looking, especially when you have other people who do not turn on their headlights in the tunnel). Of course, sometimes it doesn't matter. We had to change lanes in Pennsylvania's Allegheny Mountain tunnel when our lane was blocked by someone changing a flat tire. Of all the awful places to have that happen to you!
The major tunnels in Tidewater Virginia (Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel and Monitor-Merrimac Bridge-Tunnel) also prohibit lane changes in the tunnels, if memory serves (I seldom visit that area). The Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel's tubes are single-lane in each direction and of course passing isn't allowed in that circumstance. Does anyone know of any situation where a tunnel has one lane each way but DOES allow passing over the center line?
Quote from: briantroutman on August 26, 2013, 04:03:31 AMI don't consider the cut-and-fill type of cap on I-95 in Philadelphia to be true tunnel.
It isn't. There also isn't any lane-changing prohibitions on it.
Quote from: briantroutman on August 26, 2013, 04:03:31 AMI recall that the Holland and Lincoln tunnels forbid, but the Ted Williams allows.
Incorrect, the Ted Williams Tunnel indeed prohibits lane changing; however, the other Big Dig tunnels (the O'Neill & Liberty Tunnels) do not. The reasoning for such is due to (and one can probably apply such principle elsewhere) is that the tunnels that prohibit lane changing are also
tunnels that have no paved shoulders.
It's also worth noting that the majority of tunnels that cross under a body of water have no shoulders (& hence prohibit lane changes) due to construction costs; a wider tunnel w/shoulders would be more costly to build.
QuoteThe major tunnels in Tidewater Virginia (Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel and Monitor-Merrimac Bridge-Tunnel) also prohibit lane changes in the tunnels, if memory serves (I seldom visit that area).
As does the Downtown Tunnel and (upon widening) the Midtown Tunnel.
Of NJ's two tunnels (cut and cover tunnels), the Trenton Tunnel permits passing - also has full right shoulder and 3' left shoulder. The speed limit is 45 mph - which is actually higher than the 40 mph limit north of the tunnel. The AC Expressway connector tunnel does not permit passing. No shoulders (except at the curved ends, for sight distance reasons). 35 mph limit, which I believe is the limit for the entire connector roadway.
The George Wallace Tunnel on I-10 in Mobile, AL does allow passing by way of lane changes!
Quote from: froggie on August 26, 2013, 08:56:55 AM
QuoteThe major tunnels in Tidewater Virginia (Hampton Roads Bridge-Tunnel and Monitor-Merrimac Bridge-Tunnel) also prohibit lane changes in the tunnels, if memory serves (I seldom visit that area).
As does the Downtown Tunnel and (upon widening) the Midtown Tunnel.
Thanks. I couldn't remember. Last time I went through the Downtown Tunnel was sometime in the spring of 1998 driving up from Durham for a job interview. I remember the very intimidating interview (something like nine federal judges and magistrate judges all interviewing me at once) better than I remember the drive.
The two tunnels on I-77 between Bluefield and Wytheville prohibit lane changes. So does the Cumberland Gap Tunnel on US 25E.
Invariably I make the wrong call on what lane to be in, and always end up in the lane that's moving the slowest.
Quote from: hbelkins on August 26, 2013, 11:32:26 AM
The two tunnels on I-77 between Bluefield and Wytheville prohibit lane changes. So does the Cumberland Gap Tunnel on US 25E.
Invariably I make the wrong call on what lane to be in, and always end up in the lane that's moving the slowest.
That's when you should pass the slower vehicle! Oh, don't tell me a stripe of paint prohibits someone from doing that.
Funny our reactions to various laws:
Driving 10 mph over the limit? Doesn't phase most of us.
Changing lanes in a tunnel with a solid line down the middle? Who would ever dare do such a thing? (Besides me, that is)
I got pulled over a few years back by an undercover state trooper for changing lanes in the HRBT. Someone in front of me slammed on their brakes, as many people tend to do entering those tunnels, and rather than slam on mine, I cut over into the empty other lane. This was on the descent into the tunnel, before the tunnel proper.
While I didn't get a ticket, the prohibition is most certainly legal. While the line is only a single solid white line, there are black-on-white "STAY IN LANE" signs, and the VMS's approaching the tunnel by default read "DO NOT CHANGE LANES IN TUNNEL"
What really interests me is that on The Pennsylvania Turnpike, not only is lane changing forbidden, but all trucks must use the right lane. If you get stuck behind a truck in the Kitatinny and Blue Mountain Combo you have to wait a while as both tunnels are almost two miles in length together to get out from behind the slowpoke!
However, its the why that gets me, as on three lane roadways its obvious why many states (NJ, NY, CT always had this) are now banning trucks from left lanes on three or more lane highways because the slow acceleration of the larger vehicles would block all lanes from a smooth cruise. Having one lane truck free at least opens somewhat of a door to pass through. In the tunnel, however, you have two lanes that are totally equal so it does not matter from one to the other. If you encounter a slow moving truck, you cannot access the truck free lane as you can on outside tunnel roads that allow general passing.
Quote from: PHLBOS on August 26, 2013, 08:53:21 AM
Quote from: briantroutman on August 26, 2013, 04:03:31 AMI recall that the Holland and Lincoln tunnels forbid, but the Ted Williams allows.
Incorrect, the Ted Williams Tunnel indeed prohibits lane changing; however, the other Big Dig tunnels (the O'Neill & Liberty Tunnels) do not. The reasoning for such is due to (and one can probably apply such principle elsewhere) is that the tunnels that prohibit lane changing are also tunnels that have no paved shoulders.
It appears that parts of the Ted Williams do (http://bit.ly/12EDXBa), and others don't.
I'd accept that the no passing restriction was strictly because of lacking shoulders and the increased peril of an accident in such close corridors, but most of the California tunnels that permit lane changes also have no shoulder. And all of those dangers would also apply to narrow bridges–I'm thinking of the old PA Turnpike bridges over the Susquehanna and Lehigh Rivers–and those both allowed lane changes.
While I'll agree that changing lanes willy-nilly would increase the risk of a collision unnecessarily, I've seen numerous occasions where the "STAY IN LANE" business leads to a more dangerous situation. Especially in PA, where many tunnels are on long grades. Since you have to pick a lane 500 ft before even entering the tunnel, people end up moving over to the left lane for fear that a truck might be in the right lane. So then you have grandma in the left lane going 52 needlessly and people on the right whizzing by at 75. And if you're trying to "do the right thing", you dutifully creep along behind grandma at a safe distance. But if you're not so obedient, you might tailgate grandma, you might try to unsafely pass on the right, cut between vehicles... Yes, all of this could still happen if lane changes were permitted, but I think a lot of potential conflict is created when there's an incompatibility between some people obeying the law and others disregarding it because they think it's unjustified.
Also, accidents are more likely to happen in tunnels where lane changing occurs, thus the prohibitions on the signs and in the solid lines all the way through.
Quote from: briantroutman on August 26, 2013, 02:10:52 PMIt appears that parts of the Ted Williams do (http://bit.ly/12EDXBa), and others don't.
That section you posted is approaching a ramp merge and is three lanes wide for a short period. Beyond that point, the two remaining tunnels lanes are indeed separated by twin, solid white lines.
http://goo.gl/maps/bMEQe (http://goo.gl/maps/bMEQe)
Another tunnel observation, it would appear that the
STAY IN LANE rule seems to only apply towards
2-lane tunnels with no shoulders. The eastbound Storrow Drive tunnel in Boston is 3-lanes wide w/no shoulders but allows lane-changing & passing.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 26, 2013, 12:15:13 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on August 26, 2013, 11:32:26 AM
The two tunnels on I-77 between Bluefield and Wytheville prohibit lane changes. So does the Cumberland Gap Tunnel on US 25E.
Invariably I make the wrong call on what lane to be in, and always end up in the lane that's moving the slowest.
That's when you should pass the slower vehicle! Oh, don't tell me a stripe of paint prohibits someone from doing that.
Funny our reactions to various laws:
Driving 10 mph over the limit? Doesn't phase most of us.
Changing lanes in a tunnel with a solid line down the middle? Who would ever dare do such a thing? (Besides me, that is)
Lots of tunnels have video monitoring systems. It would be easy to spot a vehicle making a lane change and then tell a nearby cop to go write a ticket.
The I-895 Baltimore tunnel has "STAY IN LANE" signed as black tiles in a sea of white tiles on the walls of the tunnel.
I wonder to what extent part of it might have to do with visibility issues due to the fact that many (certainly not all, but many) tunnels either slope or curve (or both). The tunnels in Baltimore would be fine examples of that; the Harbor Tunnel feels like it has a considerably steeper slope, while the Fort McHenry Tunnel has a long curve. In either case, might part of the thinking be that it's undesirable to have someone changing lanes to accelerate past a slowpoke when he might not be able to see stopped traffic up ahead due to the ceiling blocking out the view "up the hill" (for lack of a better way to phrase it)?
The Garden State Parkway in Irvington, NJ has a tunnel underneath a parking lot that is very dark causing a limited sight distance while getting adjusted to the dark. Yet lane changing is allowed. It might have to do with the fact that it is not considered a tunnel but an elongated overpass as its constructed more like one with normal bridge piers and no tile walls as traditional tunnels, but the nonetheless it gets dark due to your pupils adjusting, hence the extra lighting in many other tunnels at the portals.
Quote from: hbelkins on August 26, 2013, 03:22:34 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 26, 2013, 12:15:13 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on August 26, 2013, 11:32:26 AM
The two tunnels on I-77 between Bluefield and Wytheville prohibit lane changes. So does the Cumberland Gap Tunnel on US 25E.
Invariably I make the wrong call on what lane to be in, and always end up in the lane that's moving the slowest.
That's when you should pass the slower vehicle! Oh, don't tell me a stripe of paint prohibits someone from doing that.
Funny our reactions to various laws:
Driving 10 mph over the limit? Doesn't phase most of us.
Changing lanes in a tunnel with a solid line down the middle? Who would ever dare do such a thing? (Besides me, that is)
Lots of tunnels have video monitoring systems. It would be easy to spot a vehicle making a lane change and then tell a nearby cop to go write a ticket.
The I-895 Baltimore tunnel has "STAY IN LANE" signed as black tiles in a sea of white tiles on the walls of the tunnel.
Not really. Now you get into the 'who saw what' issue. Cop didn't see it. I guess they could pull the video if it's recorded...but video in itself may not be a permitted use by the prosecution for a ticket. The person viewing the video may be the one going to court to testify if the defendent (the vehicle driver) took it to court. But...did the video show the driver who was driving?
Video can be used for going thru red lights and for speeding, in specific situations. Using video to capture someone passing illegally isn't permitted.
As you see, most likely someone won't be pulled over due to the video system.
I don't necessarily know if your statements are accurate in all states. As a general matter, any time you start saying something "isn't permitted" you run into the potential problem of the law differing from place to place. As a general matter, you're correct that the use of the video, or the use of a communication from a video operator to a cop, is problematic because it's hearsay. Hearsay is defined, for evidentiary purposes, as an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. In this case, that means the cop who issued the ticket says that he knows you changed lanes illegally because the video operator told him so. He doesn't know it himself.
But the hearsay rule contains a ton of exceptions and several of those might apply to this sort of thing, especially if the prosecution sought to introduce the videotape itself. The exceptions vary from state to state, of course, but as a general matter there are a number of them that would likely be relevant.
That's all assuming a judge or hearing officer would even listen to the objection. Judges in courts not of record (which in many states includes traffic courts) often can't be bothered with the rules of evidence because they know there's no transcript and the whole matter would be reviewed de novo on appeal; they also know that only a very small fraction of drivers will bother with the time and expense of an appeal. (I remember being in a general district court in Alabama when a colleague raised a hearsay objection and the judge said–I kid you not–"Ahhh, shit, we just let that stuff in in the district court. It's easier for everybody that way.")
A potential bigger issue would be, as you correctly note, whether the video showed who was driving. However, it may not be terribly difficult to get around that problem if the entire tunnel is subject to video surveillance. It wouldn't be hard to establish that the car never stopped moving to allow for a driver change. I suppose you could argue that people changed seats while the vehicle was moving (more plausible in the case of bigger vehicles like RVs or trucks, obviously), but it's unclear whether that argument would pass what we often call "the laugh test" if you tried to argue it as to a regular car.
I-90 in Seattle/Mercer Island and Boston allows you to change lanes. I-5 express lanes do as well.
I believe the US-26 Vista Ridge tunnel allows lane-changes outbound, but no lane changes inbound (since there's a split right after the tunnel and guide signs allocate traffic well before the tunnel).
On the freeway, rear-ending and lane-changing are viable causes for accidents. Accidents in tunnels are more dangerous, especially involving hazardous cargo (which most tunnels ban anyways).
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 26, 2013, 12:15:13 PM
Driving 10 mph over the limit? Doesn't phase most of us.
Changing lanes in a tunnel with a solid line down the middle? Who would ever dare do such a thing? (Besides me, that is)
I've seen it done occasionally... not very common though in my experience (and I have more experience in these tunnels than I could ever have wanted).
The only time I've ever changed lanes was to get out of the way of an ambulance.
I'm curious as to how enforcement would be prioritized over other traffic violations (speeding, etc...). I doubt they'd use cameras (at least here in Pittsburgh).
Quote from: briantroutman on August 26, 2013, 04:03:31 AM
Around the region, MD's tunnels forbid lane changes, but DC's I-395 tunnel allows them. I recall that the Holland and Lincoln tunnels forbid, but the Ted Williams allows. Elsewhere, CO allows (in my experience) but NV forbids. I don't really see a pattern here...
The (short) cut-and-cover Winters Run Tunnel on Md. 200 (ICC) allows passing. Probably because it has shoulders.
Lane-changing in the tunnels along I-70 in Colorado is OK.
Quote from: Mr_Northside on August 26, 2013, 06:23:41 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 26, 2013, 12:15:13 PM
Driving 10 mph over the limit? Doesn't phase most of us.
Changing lanes in a tunnel with a solid line down the middle? Who would ever dare do such a thing? (Besides me, that is)
I've seen it done occasionally... not very common though in my experience (and I have more experience in these tunnels than I could ever have wanted).
The only time I've ever changed lanes was to get out of the way of an ambulance.
I'm curious as to how enforcement would be prioritized over other traffic violations (speeding, etc...). I doubt they'd use cameras (at least here in Pittsburgh).
The Port Authority does have tunnel cameras. That said, I've changed lanes on rare occasions (if one lane is stopped and the other is free-flowing - presumably an accident or breakdown ahead), and I've taken flash photos without incident. The cameras are not used for enforcement - at least, by and large - they are used to detect traffic incidents or rogue pedestrians.
Changing lanes is apparently allowed on the I-49 tunnel in northern Arkansas as there are no signs prohibiting them and the centerline is a white dotted line.
Quote from: KEK Inc. on August 26, 2013, 05:56:28 PM
I-90 in Seattle/Mercer Island and Boston allows you to change lanes.
To clarify for I-90 in Boston: The Pru(dential) and Liberty Tunnels both have shoulders and allow the changing of lanes; but the
main core of the 2-lane/no shoulder Ted Williams Tunnel (beneath Boston Harbor) does not.
Quote from: PHLBOS on August 27, 2013, 08:26:43 AM
Quote from: KEK Inc. on August 26, 2013, 05:56:28 PM
I-90 in Seattle/Mercer Island and Boston allows you to change lanes.
To clarify for I-90 in Boston: The Pru(dential) and Liberty Tunnels both have shoulders and allow the changing of lanes; but the main core of the 2-lane/no shoulder Ted Williams Tunnel (beneath Boston Harbor) does not.
The Prudential tunnel does not have shoulders, and is marked with solid lines.
And by Liberty Tunnel, what on earth are you referring to?
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 27, 2013, 09:03:34 AMThe Prudential tunnel does not have shoulders, and is marked with solid lines.
My bad on the shoulders reference to the Pru Tunnel. IIRC, the 3-lanes in that tunnel weren't always marked with a solid line and I don't recall seeing any
STAY IN LANE signs even with the single sold white lines.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 27, 2013, 09:03:34 AM
And by Liberty Tunnel, what on earth are you referring to?
The short I-90/Big Dig tunnel that links the Pike to the Ted Williams Tunnel. This was also the tunnel that had the imfamous ceiling tile collapse that killed a female passenger in a passing car several years ago.
This tunnel was originally named the O'Neill Tunnel by then-Governor Romney (the I-93 tunnels originally had the Liberty name) but the Democratic legislators switched the names either at the end of Romney's term or shortly after he left office. They wanted the longer distance (I-93) tunnel to be named after the late, former-Speaker of the House that pushed for funding of the Big Dig project during the 80s.
Quote from: PHLBOS on August 27, 2013, 09:59:29 AM
This tunnel was originally named the O'Neill Tunnel by then-Governor Romney (the I-93 tunnels originally had the Liberty name) but the Democratic legislators switched the names either at the end of Romney's term or shortly after he left office. They wanted the longer distance (I-93) tunnel to be named after the late, former-Speaker of the House that pushed for funding of the Big Dig project during the 80s.
remember, kids, your tax dollars pay for this revolving door of idiocy.
can't we just name it after some universally beloved* non-partisan Boston figure? there's plenty of them. Paul Revere, Sam Adams, etc etc...
* or, dead for long enough that nobody remembers that they were a sheep-fucker.
I'm sure most Americans that recognize Sam Adams will wonder why they named a tunnel after someone who brewed beer. :-D
Is there a standardised way of signing stay in lane rules? I've been looking through my photos and I found this one with NO LANE CHANGING. I've seen STAY IN LANE and DO NOT PASS all the time but this is one is unusual to me.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.speedcam.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk%2Flanechanging.jpg&hash=1be5e74a1ffeb68f2d590d7826f4cc8164dc922a)
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 27, 2013, 12:58:55 PMremember, kids, your tax dollars pay for this revolving door of idiocy.
IMHO, the MA voters that keep re-electing these legislators (some have probably been there since the last Dukakis Administration or close to it) that make these decisions are the bigger idiots. Yes, I said it.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 27, 2013, 12:58:55 PM
can't we just name it after some universally beloved non-partisan Boston figure? there's plenty of them. Paul Revere, Sam Adams, etc etc...
Gov. Weld indeed did that when he named the 3rd Harbor Tunnel after the former Boston Red Sox player Ted Williams... who was still alive at the time.
They could've used another sports figure name for the remaining Big Dig tunnel(s) like Celtics player Bob Cousy, Bruins player Bobby Orr, or another Red Sox player Carl Yastrzemski (aka '
Yaz'). Naming it after former Patriots QB Steve Grogan might be pushing it a tad.
However, Bay State Dems are collectively one of the most partisan bunch of politicians out there. Although Gov. Romney threw them a bone by naming the short I-90 tunnel as the O'Neill Tunnel and naming the I-93 tunnel as the Liberty Tunnel; they wanted the main tunnel (the I-93 ones) named after their champion.
Some voters wanted the tunnels named the Taxpayer's Tunnel.
BTW, Paul Revere has a whole town adjacent to Boston named after him.
Quote from: Truvelo on August 27, 2013, 03:39:22 PM
Is there a standardised way of signing stay in lane rules? I've been looking through my photos and I found this one with NO LANE CHANGING. I've seen STAY IN LANE and DO NOT PASS all the time but this is one is unusual to me.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.speedcam.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk%2Flanechanging.jpg&hash=1be5e74a1ffeb68f2d590d7826f4cc8164dc922a)
STAY IN LANE and DO NOT PASS are both standardized messages. DO NOT PASS is really intended for the two-way application, though not specifically limited to such. I prefer STAY IN LANE - what if you want to change lanes without passing anyone? DO NOT PASS makes no sense, to me, on a one-directional multi-lane road, and I frequently ignore those signs (for example, 2 miles in advance of a construction zone with a lane closure, slow truck on the right, I'm passing. If you want me to stay behind the truck, merge the lane there, instead of 2 miles later).
Quote from: Truvelo on August 27, 2013, 03:39:22 PM
Is there a standardised way of signing stay in lane rules? I've been looking through my photos and I found this one with NO LANE CHANGING. I've seen STAY IN LANE and DO NOT PASS all the time but this is one is unusual to me.
Obviously, they don't care if you stay in your lane or not, as long as you don't change lanes. :spin:
The West Rock tunnel on CT 15 and the cut and cover I-84 tunnel in downtown Hartford both prohibit lane changes (the latter especially because of merges to/from the I-91 interchange), while the short cut and cover CT 72 tunnel in downtown New Britain allows for them.
Just wondering...how many tunnels feature passing zones...and interchanges? The Trenton Tunnel permits passing, and also on the north end of the tunnel has a SB Exit/NB Entrance. It's only a few hundred feet into the tunnel where the gore point is located, but the ramps are treated just like one would find on any regular highway.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2013, 08:29:48 AM
Just wondering...how many tunnels feature passing zones...and interchanges?
Two of the fore-mentioned Boston Big Dig tunnels O'Neill Tunnel (I-90) and the Liberty Tunnel (I-93) feature both passing zones and interchanges. The Mass Pike Pru Tunnel has a partial interchange in it (Exit 22).
The eastern end of the Ted Williams Tunnel features an interchange w/Logan Airport (Exit 26) with passing lanes in that
immediate vicinity only.
One Boston tunnel that was part of the Central Artery North Area (CANA) Project, a pre-cursor to the Big Dig, but not yet mentioned in this thread is the short US 1 tunnel (named City Square Tunnel) in Charlestown/City Square. It features an interchange (for Charlestown/City Square) at the tunnel's ends. The southbound tunnel allows passing throughout but the northbound tunnel only allows passing mid-way through (where the entrance ramp from City Square above merges on the left side and northward).
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2013, 08:29:48 AM
Just wondering...how many tunnels feature passing zones...and interchanges? The Trenton Tunnel permits passing, and also on the north end of the tunnel has a SB Exit/NB Entrance. It's only a few hundred feet into the tunnel where the gore point is located, but the ramps are treated just like one would find on any regular highway.
Not sure this counts (since most of the ramp is outside the tunnel), but the I-10 tunnel in Phoenix has the entrance/exit lanes for 7th ave & st partially in the tunnel. It's also another tunnel which allows passing. It also has really cool (IMO) lighted signs for the exits on either side of the tunnel and for a lane ending.
While I'm sure there's probably a number of examples where this is wrong, can we assume that generally speaking, modern cut/cover tunnels (most likely carrying high-grade freeways/Interstates) are more likely to allow passing, whereas either older, substandard cut/cover or even newer drilled/tube (water/mountain) tunnels are less likely to allow passing? It just seems like cut/cover tunnels are more likely to be wide enough to allow for shoulders (which I'd imagine makes it "safe enough" for passing).
Quote from: jeffandnicole on August 28, 2013, 08:29:48 AM
Just wondering...how many tunnels feature passing zones...and interchanges? The Trenton Tunnel permits passing, and also on the north end of the tunnel has a SB Exit/NB Entrance. It's only a few hundred feet into the tunnel where the gore point is located, but the ramps are treated just like one would find on any regular highway.
The I-395 tunnel in DC (locally often called the Third Street Tunnel, also sometimes called the Center Leg Freeway) has four lanes per side and permits passing, and it also has a northbound exit and southbound entrance. The northbound exit is further interesting because after splitting off into a separate passageway, the exit ramp itself then splits.
Street View of the main exit point here: http://goo.gl/maps/Di8hc (the cars ahead of and behind the Google car with no lights on are not an unusual sight in that tunnel)
Street View of that ramp split is here: http://goo.gl/maps/MpwWl
I always thought it was because, when there is a lot of traffic, it can back things up. It is also often narrower than a normal road. That can also be tied with maintaining your speed through a tunnel...
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on August 27, 2013, 10:46:44 PM
The West Rock tunnel on CT 15 and the cut and cover I-84 tunnel in downtown Hartford both prohibit lane changes (the latter especially because of merges to/from the I-91 interchange), while the short cut and cover CT 72 tunnel in downtown New Britain allows for them.
Prohibit is a double white. Discourage is a single white. Both of your cases are single whites.