What roads can you all think of that are those "crap, I got caught behind a semi, now I'm stuck for a long while" roads?
I'll give an example. Driving recently from my house in Bend, OR to see some friends in Portland, I went over the Cascades Mountains via US 20 to OR 22, to I-5 (wanted to hike around Detroit Lake en route). I got caught behind a semi soon after 22 split off of 20, and didn't have any passing opportunity until Detroit. Actually, driving the road after stopping, there didn't appear to be any passing lanes until pretty far west of the Detroit Lake area.
This is probably most prevalent in the mountains. What roads can you think of that need more (or better/longer) passing lanes?
I remember US-6 across Pennsylvania being a terrible slog.
why aren't all those trucks taking 80?
I assume you don't intend to confine this to two-lane roads where you pass over the center line and that's OK to include multiple-lane roads on which passing is difficult due to the volume of traffic or other issues.
The following two readily come to mind:
I-81, at least the portion from Scranton on down to the northern end of the I-77 concurrency. (I haven't been on the other segments often enough to comment on those; if I take I-81 south, I normally turn south on I-77 towards Charlotte.) The volume of truck traffic, coupled with there generally being only two lanes on each side, makes it extremely hard to pass. There have been some improvements down beyond Roanoke with the addition of some climbing lanes for slow vehicles, but those are limited improvements. The road really needs a third lane.
I-95 through much of North and South Carolina, except around Florence and Fayetteville, would be another. To me the volume of truck traffic doesn't feel as heavy as it does on I-81 (whether it is or not is a separate question), but the road is still generally two lanes per side and it's hard to pass due to left-lane hogs. I think the substandard sections around Lumberton make it feel worse than it really is.
Oh, just the majority of US 206. Once you're stuck behind a truck, unless you get to the rare parts where it opens to 3 or 4 lanes both ways, you're pretty much SOL.
Can I just say I wish all roads are 2 lanes or greater each way? :-)
Parts of Route 2 in Massachusetts, especially the Mohawk Trail section west of Greenfield, can be really bad to drive if you wind up stuck behind a slow moving semi.
Quote from: roadman on August 14, 2014, 12:50:36 PM
Parts of Route 2 in Massachusetts, especially the Mohawk Trail section west of Greenfield, can be really bad to drive if you wind up stuck behind a slow moving semi.
I was on 2 in Charlemont recently, running late for a wedding, when a tractor pulling one of those big overloaded wagons of hay pulled out right in front of me in one of those no-passing areas and craaaawwwled along for a few miles. A true test of my serenity and patience.
This was followed by me following Google's route and not my instincts and getting stuck waiting for a very slow 100+ car train to pass.
(We made the wedding with about five minutes to spare.)
Quote from: Pete from Boston on August 14, 2014, 01:00:56 PM
I was on 2 in Charlemont recently, running late for a wedding, when a tractor pulling one of those big overloaded wagons of hay pulled out right in front of me in one of those no-passing areas and craaaawwwled along for a few miles. A true test of my serenity and patience.
This was followed by me following Google's route and not my instincts and getting stuck waiting for a very slow 100+ car train to pass.
(We made the wedding with about five minutes to spare.)
Glad you got to the church on time. A couple of years back, I was returning from a section of the Albany area I'd never traveled to before. Looking for the best route back to I-90, I plugged in my GPS (which I had with me to find my way to a couple of destinations that were only accessible from the local roads north of Albany) and hit the 'home' button. Unfortunately, when the "do you want to use toll roads" dialogue box came up, I hit the 'NO" button (which is placed where the average person would expect the "YES" button to be). The result was a much longer ride than I'd expected, as the GPS directed me through the southwest quadrant of Albany and onto NY 2, which became MA 2.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on August 14, 2014, 11:53:16 AM
This is probably most prevalent in the mountains. What roads can you think of that need more (or better/longer) passing lanes?
A few that come to mind in Louisiana:
- LA 1 between Alexandria and US 190, excepting Marksville-Mansura (especially from New Roads south along False River)
- LA 42 in Ascension Parish (this road is slated to be widened soon)
- LA 25 between Covington and Folsom
- LA 70 between Sorrento and the Sunshine Bridge (this section needs to be 4 lanes)
- LA 30 (Nicholson Drive) between the LSU campus and St. Gabriel
Unfortunately, Louisiana does not really do passing lanes. When I first encountered them in other states I was impressed, then as always wondered why DOTD had not thought to implement them.
They are definitely necessary in Texas with its 75 MPH two lane roads. A slow semi would ruin the fun without them.
There are a lot of them out in the populous state of New York:
I-87 south of Saratoga
I-90 between Hamburg and Herkimer
I-95 (all of it)
I-190 north of downtown Buffalo
I-278
I-287 (Cross Westchester)
I-290 (all)
I-490
I-495 (west of William Floyd Parkway)
I-678
I-787
US 4 north of Fort Ann
US 9 in Albany and Saratoga Counties south of NY 146, along with Warren County south of NY 9N
US 11 north of I-781
US 20 (everything between Albany and Silver Creek that isn't 4+ lanes)
US 219 (at least 4 on all of it, 6+ north of US 20A)
NY 5 east of Buffalo
NY 7 in/west of Schenectady
NY 24 (both halves)
NY 27, especially the limited-access section
NY 28
NY 149 west of Fort Ann
NY 78 between West Seneca and NY 93
NY 63 between I-390 and US 20
NY 33 (most of it)
US 2, between Snohomish and Leavenworth.
If we're allowed to include freeways, let me cast as many votes as possible for the four-lane sections of I-5 in California, primarily through the Central Valley. As long as the state persists with this infuriating 55 m.p.h. truck speed limit, we'll also have perpetual log jams where trucks in the right lane are going 55, and the left lane is governed by one old lady glacially passing the truck at 56.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 14, 2014, 12:03:44 PM
I remember US-6...why aren't all those trucks taking 80?
Considering that time and diesel are both costly, I can't imagine that many truckers are using US 6 as an alternative to I-80. There's more economic activity along the US 6 corridor than you might think–Zippo in Bradford, Channellock in Meadville–and many more unglamorous factories of companies you've never heard of.
Pick any road in the UP. You either get stuck behind a log truck or an RV.
Given that passing lanes refers to relatively short (1/2 to 2 mile typically) sections of additional lane that are primarily intended to break up queues of traffic on 2-lane roads, it's not something that's really applicable to freeways except for short truck climbing lanes.
Quote from: froggie on August 15, 2014, 06:49:31 AM
Given that passing lanes refers to relatively short (1/2 to 2 mile typically) sections of additional lane that are primarily intended to break up queues of traffic on 2-lane roads, it's not something that's really applicable to freeways except for short truck climbing lanes.
If you read the first post in this thread, his actual query is a little more detailed than the subject line (which of necessity is short and may not always reflect the actual scope of the topic). As you very well know, it's quite easy to get stuck behind a tractor-trailer (or a group thereof) on many "freeways."
Edited to add: Some of said roads could certainly benefit from targeted lanes in the manner of those "passing lanes" on two-lane roads in cases where money or space reasons make widening the whole road impractical. Think about how many people view the "climbing lane" areas as places to try to floor it to get ahead of a clump of traffic. An occasional short stretch of third lane on a two-lane carriageway might help accomplish the same thing.
One two-lane road that came to mind as needing passing lanes as I typed that edit is VA-20 between its northern terminus at Wilderness and the town of Orange. It has plenty of passing zones, but there's enough traffic that it's hard to pass. (In fairness, most of my trips on that road are to or from UVA football games, which might well contribute to the traffic compared to other days–but I've usually found it hard to pass on there even on non-football days.)
QuoteIf you read the first post in this thread, his actual query is a little more detailed than the subject line (which of necessity is short and may not always reflect the actual scope of the topic). As you very well know, it's quite easy to get stuck behind a tractor-trailer (or a group thereof) on many "freeways."
I did read his post. The example he cited suggested that he was referring to passing lanes on non-freeways.
Quote from: froggie on August 15, 2014, 11:15:40 AM
QuoteIf you read the first post in this thread, his actual query is a little more detailed than the subject line (which of necessity is short and may not always reflect the actual scope of the topic). As you very well know, it's quite easy to get stuck behind a tractor-trailer (or a group thereof) on many "freeways."
I did read his post. The example he cited suggested that he was referring to passing lanes on non-freeways.
You're certainly entitled to your interpretation, but the rest of us are also entitled to interpret it in the manner we think appropriate. The first sentence of the original post says this, which I think makes it legitimate to include freeways on which this sort of thing routinely happens, regardless of the example given in the subsequent paragraph:
Quote
What roads can you all think of that are those "crap, I got caught behind a semi, now I'm stuck for a long while" roads?
I was once traveling US 211 and encountered a slow poke in front of me where it narrows down to three overall lanes crossing both mountain ranges near Luray, VA. It has a truck climb lane gong up hill making it maintain two lanes and of course dropping to one single lane down hill on all hills for obvious reasons. However, I ran into something I thought I would never run into and that is someone going way under the posted 55 mph limit going down hill. That is right, down hill where you need to use your lower gears or brake just to prevent you from exceeding 55 mph.
This guy was mostly paranoid of driving mountain winding roads and was too scared to ride at 55 even though its a chore to slow down as gravity really takes over here, and could not get around him until losing him on I-81. It was the hill leading westward into New Market where the road then ends at US 11 to turn left to form a concurrency through the city.
I am sure he is not the only one to ever accomplish this, so I would say that VDOT needs to four lane US 211 over the hills of the Blue Ridge Mountain region for this. Trying to break for slow pokes on a steep down grade is dangerous and I remember having to ride my brake pedal most of the way so I would not be in his back seat. Even in second gear it did not help.
To what extent does US-211 crossing through a national park impact the ability to widen the road? It passes through Shenandoah National Park in that area.
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 15, 2014, 11:40:58 AM
To what extent does US-211 crossing through a national park impact the ability to widen the road? It passes through Shenandoah National Park in that area.
I never said the process would be easy. Anyway is the mountain between Luray and New Market in the National Park? I know that is part of George Washington Forest, but I think its outside the jurisdiction of the NP area.
Quote from: roadman65 on August 15, 2014, 11:43:33 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 15, 2014, 11:40:58 AM
To what extent does US-211 crossing through a national park impact the ability to widen the road? It passes through Shenandoah National Park in that area.
I never said the process would be easy. Anyway is the mountain between Luray and New Market in the National Park? I know that is part of George Washington Forest, but I think its outside the jurisdiction of the NP area.
Yeah, I didn't mean to suggest you thought it'd be easy; I just thought the issue bore mention because of your comment about VDOT widening the road. I didn't know whether you knew the road passes through federal lands. I'm not sure whether the western segment you mention is part of Shenandoah National Park, though it certainly crosses through a federally-protected area.
QuoteYou're certainly entitled to your interpretation, but the rest of us are also entitled to interpret it in the manner we think appropriate. The first sentence of the original post says this, which I think makes it legitimate to include freeways on which this sort of thing routinely happens, regardless of the example given in the subsequent paragraph:
I was also applying the engineering definition in my interpretation. By their vary nature, except for the rare Super-2, freeways always have a "passing lane". Whether you can pass quickly in it or not due to traffic is certainly another matter...though IMO people make I-81 and I-95 out to be a lot worse than they really are.
QuoteHowever, I ran into something I thought I would never run into and that is someone going way under the posted 55 mph limit going down hill. That is right, down hill where you need to use your lower gears or brake just to prevent you from exceeding 55 mph.
IIRC, only the Massanutten Mtn crossing (between Luray and New Market) is 55 MPH. Thornton Gap is 45 on the west side and 35 on the east side. And I can believe the latter...some of those curves and reverse curves on the east side of Thorton Gap can barely be done at 30 in a car, let alone a semi. Doesn't surprise me that a truck would be going slow down that grade.
Would the moderators please amend the terms of service to clarify we must all use words in their engineering sense? I was unaware that was required. :thumbdown:
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 14, 2014, 12:08:08 PM
I-81, at least the portion from Scranton on down to the northern end of the I-77 concurrency. (I haven't been on the other segments often enough to comment on those; if I take I-81 south, I normally turn south on I-77 towards Charlotte.) The volume of truck traffic, coupled with there generally being only two lanes on each side, makes it extremely hard to pass. There have been some improvements down beyond Roanoke with the addition of some climbing lanes for slow vehicles, but those are limited improvements. The road really needs a third lane.
There was talk by VDOT to make a separate roadway for trucks like the NJ Parkway. I don't know what happened to that proposal
Quote from: Arkansastravelguy on August 15, 2014, 10:06:11 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 14, 2014, 12:08:08 PM
I-81, at least the portion from Scranton on down to the northern end of the I-77 concurrency. (I haven't been on the other segments often enough to comment on those; if I take I-81 south, I normally turn south on I-77 towards Charlotte.) The volume of truck traffic, coupled with there generally being only two lanes on each side, makes it extremely hard to pass. There have been some improvements down beyond Roanoke with the addition of some climbing lanes for slow vehicles, but those are limited improvements. The road really needs a third lane.
There was talk by VDOT to make a separate roadway for trucks like the Garden State Parkway. I don't know what happened to that proposal
FTFY. On a side note, I remember hearing about that too. I'm pretty sure it died due to a lack of funds. Just like what happened to the proposal to do the same to I-70 in Missouri. It's also worth noting that due to the terrain, it would be difficult to build new carriageways for I-81 through Virginia, even if money wasn't an object.
Colorado:
Freeways: I-70 east of Vail
Non-Freeways: US-6 east of Loveland Pass & US-550 south of Ouray.
Quote from: signalman on August 16, 2014, 04:48:17 AM
Quote from: Arkansastravelguy on August 15, 2014, 10:06:11 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on August 14, 2014, 12:08:08 PM
I-81, at least the portion from Scranton on down to the northern end of the I-77 concurrency. (I haven't been on the other segments often enough to comment on those; if I take I-81 south, I normally turn south on I-77 towards Charlotte.) The volume of truck traffic, coupled with there generally being only two lanes on each side, makes it extremely hard to pass. There have been some improvements down beyond Roanoke with the addition of some climbing lanes for slow vehicles, but those are limited improvements. The road really needs a third lane.
There was talk by VDOT to make a separate roadway for trucks like the Garden State Parkway. I don't know what happened to that proposal
FTFY. On a side note, I remember hearing about that too. I'm pretty sure it died due to a lack of funds. Just like what happened to the proposal to do the same to I-70 in Missouri. It's also worth noting that due to the terrain, it would be difficult to build new carriageways for I-81 through Virginia, even if money wasn't an object.
Your are correct, and another sticking point was that the private companies bidding to build the project wanted noncompete clauses that could conceivably be construed as prohibiting Virginia from improving routes like US-29 and even parts of I-95. That was a non-starter for the Commonwealth.
As I recall, there was also argument as to whether the tolls would apply only to trucks or to all traffic. Many of the I-81 locals were opposed to the latter.
I remember when the parallel roadway or separate trucks-only lanes for I-81 was first brought up. There are a lot of exits on I-81 that are used by locals only. It seems to me like I-81 in Virginia has a higher density of rural exits than just about any interstate I can think of. At the time, I thought the trucks-only portion should just have exits only at major intersecting routes. I even went so far as to compile a list, but I have no idea what I may have done with such a list.
I have traveled Interstate 81 many times and six lanes from Harrisburg, PA to Interstate 77 in Virginia would be welcomed. The cost of widening this huge expanse of interstate would be well into the billions of dollars.
If separate toll lanes were ever considered, many sections of US 11 would have to be moved. There are some tight spaces in places south of Ironto, VA where the heart of the Blue Ridge Mountains are an integral part of the landscape. Some three-lane sections do exist in southern VA, but not enough. In addition, there is a very hilly section of Interstate 81 north of the Interstate 77 interchange southbound to Charlotte, NC. The median is grass, very narrow and on an incline with no steel barrier between the two carriageways. I believe the Elvis Church is nearby. :wave:
Quote from: froggie on August 16, 2014, 12:18:49 PM
As I recall, there was also argument as to whether the tolls would apply only to trucks or to all traffic. Many of the I-81 locals were opposed to the latter.
I think you're right. I think there were two proposals, one from Star Solutions and I don't remember who submitted the other. At least one of the two would have tolled only the trucks. I seem to recall one of them would have put the truck carriageways on the inside, too (reverse of the New Jersey Turnpike's normal layout). Seeing hbelkins's comment above makes me wonder whether that proposal might have given the truck lanes fewer exits or utilized occasional slip ramps (similar to I-270 in Maryland, but less frequent). I just don't remember seeing the details on that part of the proposal.
I-270 is odd in that the "local" lanes are really just glorified c/d lanes.
Quote from: vdeane on August 16, 2014, 06:15:28 PM
I-270 is odd in that the "local" lanes are really just glorified c/d lanes.
If you're talking about Columbus, that is true. In one case, the C/D lanes skip an exit that is accessible only with the mainline/"express" lanes. I watched them rebuild Exit 30 (SR 161) and figured they'd add access between Exit 32 and SR 161. Was I wrong. At least they get slow merging traffic out of the way.
Quote from: cl94 on August 16, 2014, 06:44:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 16, 2014, 06:15:28 PM
I-270 is odd in that the "local" lanes are really just glorified c/d lanes.
If you're talking about Columbus, that is true. In one case, the C/D lanes skip an exit that is accessible only with the mainline/"express" lanes. I watched them rebuild Exit 30 (SR 161) and figured they'd add access between Exit 32 and SR 161. Was I wrong. At least they get slow merging traffic out of the way.
Maryland.
Quote from: GaryV on August 15, 2014, 05:55:10 AM
Pick any road in the UP. You either get stuck behind a log truck or an RV.
20 years ago, you could argue more passing lanes were needed in the UP. Now, it's a harder case to make.
MDOT has been very aggressive about building passing lanes in the UP on the busier highways, such as US-41 between Houghton and Marquette, M-28 between Marquette and Seney, and US-2 between St. Ignace and Gladstone. About every 10-12 miles, you get a 2-mile stretch to pass slower traffic. If there's significant grades, you also generally get an adequate passing lane.
WisDOT, on the other hand, is very stingy with them. In general, when WisDOT does provide them, they tend to be so short as to almost be worthless. That's when they offer them at all. US-14 between Oregon and Darien, for example, is fairly heavily trafficked (5,000 vpd - 10,000 vpd) and features none. Neither does US-12 east of Madison. The one on Hwy 26 north of Rosendale is almost worthless since it's so short. US-141 features exactly ONE set north of where the 4-lane peters out in Pound.
In WisDOT's defense, it tends to turn the highways that need passing lanes into 4-lane highways. There are exceptions - see the aforementioned stretches of US-12 and US-14. But at least WisDOT don't pull BS like MDOT's design of US-127 south of Jackson, MI.
US-127 south of Jackson should've been converted to 4-lane expressway 60 years ago when they built the current 2-lane section. The ROW exists for it, even if it's inadequate for Interstate-compatible freeway. Instead of that, MDOT has Band-Aided US-127 with passing lanes interspersed with 2-lane stretches with a center turning lane. Oh, and it carries 15,000 vpd, except during Michigan International Speedway race days, when it carries far more traffic.
MDOT has other examples of cheaping out with passing lanes instead of 4-laning:
- M-72 between Traverse City & Grayling
- US-31 north of Ludington
- US-23 north of Standish (though that could also be partially blamed on environmentalists).
- M-115 between Clare and Cadillac
- US-223
Roads or Highways in California
CA 62 Climbing from Coachella Valley to Morongo Valley, that's a dangerous grade, and it is 2 lanes eachway but it would be safer to have a truck lane climbing that pass.
Also CA 247 between Yucca Valley and Lucerne Valley, it's 2 lane but could use some passing Lanes. Traffic is moderate on it, enough to do something.
Freeways, I'd say add a lane to Eastbound I-10 between Yucaipa and Beaumont.
OR-126 between the US-20 split and around Vida. There are no good passing opportunities in here, similar to OR-22, and there's enough traffic that it can be a problem.
US-97 between Redmond and Madras should be 4 lanes the whole way. It's currently 2 lanes with 2 or 3 sections of passing lanes.
US-101 in Oregon. Probably all of it. But my recent pain was between Florence and Newport. We made a round trip to Newport once, and then headed up from Florence to Waldport the next day to take OR-34. Each and every time, we consistently got stuck behind cars that refused to go above 45 MPH, even on the straight sections. The speed limit is of course 55, and should be about 60 here. It was painful, and there are no places to pass.
All of I-65 and I-70 in Indiana that isn't already 6+ lanes.
AZ64 from Williams to the Grand Canyon terribly needs to be 4 laned. It is currently only two lanes with NB/SB each only have two passing lanes for the entire 65 mile stretch, one between Williams and Valle, and one between Valle and the Canyon. Its a stupidly heavily trafficked road, with loads of motor homes and international drivers. There are numerous fatal head on collisions from tourists (usually internationals) pushing it and passing in No Passing zones on blind hills. All of the locals know how dangerous it is, yet ADOT lets it fall on deaf ears because I guess there aren't "enough" fatalities, despite dozens of close calls each day.
I-95 in Jasper County, SC. It gets congested after US 17 merges into the freeway as it now has two corridors together the remainder of the route into Florida.
I-10 east of Houston all the way into Louisiana. Plus in LA from the Texas border to Lake Charles area.
I-30 from Texarkana to Dallas needs to be six lanes.
IMAO, I think passing lanes are band aids rather than a solution. If you build just a small area for passing you might as well do a whole segment unless it is a truck climb lane which is due to short distance truck slowdowns.
These are all good ideas, though I was thinking of getting more a list of roads that once you're stuck behind slow moving traffic, you're stuck for a long while, single file.
At least with 4 lane or more roads, you DO have the option to pass, provided you don't have a slow poke in the left lane.
I've noticed it's mostly mountain roads that have sparse passing lanes. Get behind a semi, or a truck hauling a camper, and you're going slow for a long time. :-)
Quote from: OCGuy81 on August 21, 2014, 11:05:41 AM
These are all good ideas, though I was thinking of getting more a list of roads that once you're stuck behind slow moving traffic, you're stuck for a long while, single file.
At least with 4 lane or more roads, you DO have the option to pass, provided you don't have a slow poke in the left lane.
I've noticed it's mostly mountain roads that have sparse passing lanes. Get behind a semi, or a truck hauling a camper, and you're going slow for a long time. :-)
Well, even though I-65 is 4 lanes, I have been stuck going below the speed limit in the left lane for as much as 15 miles at a time before.
Quote from: OCGuy81 on August 21, 2014, 11:05:41 AM
I've noticed it's mostly mountain roads that have sparse passing lanes. Get behind a semi, or a truck hauling a camper, and you're going slow for a long time. :-)
...or a big ass RV driven by a retired couple that don't mind if it takes 8 hours to go 50 miles -- they have all the time in the world. The rest of us, however....
Quote from: thenetwork on August 16, 2014, 10:18:53 AM
Colorado:
Freeways: I-70 east of Vail
Non-Freeways: US-6 east of Loveland Pass & US-550 south of Ouray.
U.S. 550 south of Ouray is kind of geologically limited as to locations for passing lanes. Having one side of the road drop off into an abyss, with no guard rail, kind of limits my inclination to pass.
U.S. 24 between Falcon (east of Colorado Springs) and Limon needs a few more passing opportunities.
Quote...or a big ass RV driven by a retired couple that don't mind if it takes 8 hours to go 50 miles -- they have all the time in the world. The rest of us, however....
Couldn't agree more, and it's those types that really inspired me to post this topic! :-/
Quote from: JREwing78 on August 17, 2014, 03:56:18 PM
Quote from: GaryV on August 15, 2014, 05:55:10 AM
Pick any road in the UP. You either get stuck behind a log truck or an RV.
20 years ago, you could argue more passing lanes were needed in the UP. Now, it's a harder case to make.
MDOT has been very aggressive about building passing lanes in the UP on the busier highways, such as US-41 between Houghton and Marquette, M-28 between Marquette and Seney, and US-2 between St. Ignace and Gladstone. About every 10-12 miles, you get a 2-mile stretch to pass slower traffic. If there's significant grades, you also generally get an adequate passing lane.
I will admit that US-2 has gotten better, at least the eastern half. But most times in the summer, US-2 is busy enough that it would warrant 4 lanes all the way from Escanaba to St Ignace. M-28 could use a few more.
But you get west of US-41 or certainly US-141, and they are still a lot more needed.
Eastbound I-10 up the long grade from Indio could surely use a truck lane, or at least make it a "no passing" zone for trucks and have strict CHP enforcement.
In response to another thread, the entire Staten Island Expressway. Thing is at capacity and one idiot slowing down at the hill will create nasty traffic.
Quote from: Urban Prairie Schooner on August 14, 2014, 07:33:37 PM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on August 14, 2014, 11:53:16 AM
This is probably most prevalent in the mountains. What roads can you think of that need more (or better/longer) passing lanes?
A few that come to mind in Louisiana:
- LA 1 between Alexandria and US 190, excepting Marksville-Mansura (especially from New Roads south along False River)
- LA 42 in Ascension Parish (this road is slated to be widened soon)
- LA 25 between Covington and Folsom
- LA 70 between Sorrento and the Sunshine Bridge (this section needs to be 4 lanes)
- LA 30 (Nicholson Drive) between the LSU campus and St. Gabriel
Unfortunately, Louisiana does not really do passing lanes. When I first encountered them in other states I was impressed, then as always wondered why DOTD had not thought to implement them.
They are definitely necessary in Texas with its 75 MPH two lane roads. A slow semi would ruin the fun without them.
And in Texas, most 2-lane state highways have paved shoulders, so adding a passing lane is just a matter of restriping. Don't know why we don't see it more often. It's a cheap solution.
To use Agentsteel's idea... Make I-95 a 800 lane highway from Richmond to Boston
iPhone