What are some locations where an acceleration lane ends, and is followed almost immediately by a deceleration lane for the next exit?
I-90 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1447434,-79.912159,3a,75y,224.73h,85.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFeotpS_4aV8ZJdFwruuFfw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), Harborcreek, PA
ON 401 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1325053,-80.6858419,313m/data=!3m1!1e3), Woodstock, ON
What is your preference in these cases: separate acceleration and deceleration lanes (creating high density in the right lane of the freeway), or an auxiliary lane (creating a weave)? In these two extreme examples above, I'd prefer an auxiliary lane, but anything that would require 1/4 mile new pavement or more, I'd say leave it as-is, as weaves are sub-optimal.
On the other extreme, here's an auxiliary lane (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2249385,-77.6745584,3a,75y,187.91h,79.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spmTbf2Tnpq4dFaFjmZpOrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) on NY 390 in Greece, NY, which is almost 1 1/2 miles in length. Ordinarily I'd say it's too long, but it's actually needed to handle the volumes. In this case, I'd say the rightmost through lane on NY 390 should extend through the NY 104 interchange instead of exiting, thereby making this lane a through traffic lane which becomes an exit only lane further upstream.
Quote from: webny99 on May 10, 2018, 01:32:55 PM
What are some locations where an acceleration lane ends, and is followed almost immediately by a deceleration lane for the next exit?
I-90 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1447434,-79.912159,3a,75y,224.73h,85.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFeotpS_4aV8ZJdFwruuFfw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), Harborcreek, PA
ON 401 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1325053,-80.6858419,313m/data=!3m1!1e3), Woodstock, ON
What is your preference in these cases: separate acceleration and deceleration lanes (creating high density in the right lane of the freeway), or an auxiliary lane (creating a weave)? In these two extreme examples above, I'd prefer an auxiliary lane, but anything that would require 1/4 mile new pavement or more, I'd say leave it as-is, as weaves are sub-optimal.
On the other extreme, here's an auxiliary lane (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2249385,-77.6745584,3a,75y,187.91h,79.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spmTbf2Tnpq4dFaFjmZpOrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) on NY 390 in Greece, NY, which is almost 1 1/2 miles in length. Ordinarily I'd say it's too long, but it's actually needed to handle the volumes. In this case, I'd say the rightmost through lane on NY 390 should extend through the NY 104 interchange instead of exiting, thereby making this lane a through traffic lane which becomes an exit only lane further upstream.
I-95/MA 128 N/B in Lexington and Burlington, between the junctions of 4/225 and US 3 has this condition, and in fact was just re-striped to be so. There is over a mile between exits, but only a breakdown lane for less than 1000 feet.
Between IL-53 and I-355 on I-55 in Illinois. This is a cluster almost all the time due to the distance between the two interchanges and the short ramps for IL-53.
I've long wanted to see one on I-90 (each direction) between exits 36 (I-81) and 37 (Electronics Parkway).
Utah has done a good job with adding auxiliary lanes when freeways are reconstructed, but there are several freeways I feel could really use them.
I-80 between exit 118 (Redwood Rd) and 120 (I-15).
I-15 through St. George
All of I-215 north of I-80 (they're doing some major reconstruction on it now, which might include addition of auxiliary lanes)
All of I-15 between exit 328 (200 North Kaysville) and 338 (5600 South Roy), which should be widened anyway
US-89 northbound between exit 404 (SR-193) and 405 (South Weber Dr)
SR-201 between exit 11 (5600 West) and 13 (Bangerter Highway)
I-15 south between exit 316 (500 South) and 315 (2600 South) in Bountiful
Quote from: vdeane on May 10, 2018, 02:17:55 PM
I've long wanted to see one on I-90 (each direction) between exits 36 (I-81) and 37 (Electronics Parkway).
Of course. Don't know how I forgot about that one. Though considering it's the thruway, it might be a long shot to expect it to materialize.
Quote from: webny99 on May 10, 2018, 01:32:55 PM
What are some locations where an acceleration lane ends, and is followed almost immediately by a deceleration lane for the next exit?
I-90 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1447434,-79.912159,3a,75y,224.73h,85.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFeotpS_4aV8ZJdFwruuFfw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), Harborcreek, PA
ON 401 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1325053,-80.6858419,313m/data=!3m1!1e3), Woodstock, ON
While the EB example on the 401 looks alright, it's roughly 400m or a quarter mile apart from the last continuity line of the acceleration lane to the first continuity line of the deceleration line. I do admit, I'm surprised they never simply made that an auxiliary lane.
It should be noted that the widening of the 401 in that stretch was rather recent, happened around 2011. Prior to that, there was a lane drop EB after the 403, and the lane didn't pick up again until just before the Cedar Creek Road exit (268), and prior to 2003, the lane didn't start back up until after Homer Watson Blvd in Kitchener.
US-23 on the east side of Ann Arbor (roughly US-12 to M-14)
US-23 between Lee Rd and I-96 in Brighton
NY-33 between Suffolk St and Eggert Rd
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Kensington+Expy,+Buffalo,+NY+14215/@42.9332105,-78.8044162,3a,49.9y,296.41h,89.62t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s7d0_pvp7m7SUvErg8k2qyw!2e0!4m6!1m3!3m2!1s0x89d372cb5b3cf49f:0x696f6a7c7c3c42c7!2sSuffolk+St,+Buffalo,+NY+14215!3m1!1s0x89d30d329fd762c3:0x204c9374df221386
TN-385 between Ridgeway Rd and Kirby Pkwy, and between Kirby Pkwy and Riverdale Rd. Also there is already one eastbound between I-240 and Ridgeway but an additional westbound lane is badly needed due to the daily morning backups that occur.
I-84(E) between exits 62 and 63. Because mall traffic.
An extended exit lane is needed on the southbound Garden State Parkway approaching Exit 135 (Clark). It backs up every afternoon onto the right travel lane for over an half mile.
Outer Loop of the Capital Beltway between VA-7 and I-66:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9003021,-77.2161382,2369m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en&authuser=0
Traffic always backs up here during the afternoon rush hour and there is an existing auxiliary lane between the same exits on the Inner Loop. Seems like a simple fix and yet it hasn't really been discussed much.
Another one is Northbound I-95 between PW Pkwy and VA-123:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6670133,-77.2661078,2525m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en&authuser=0
Heavy traffic combined with hardly any time to merge has resulted in frequent backups here.
CT20 westbound, between CT75 and Hamilton Road South.
Tri-State Tollway can use some
What about assigning maximum and minimum lengths for auxiliary lanes?
Some closely spaced exits, like NY 342 and I-781 on I-81 in Watertown, and NY 250 and Phillips Rd on 104 in Webster, would be substandard without auxiliary lanes. But at what threshold do you think they're actually needed?
On NJ 42 Northbound, the lane entering from NJ 55 travels over a mile before exiting to I-295. There's even an exit (and entrance) with its own (short) exit lane branching off of this extra lane. Needless to say weaving is rampant here, especially for those using said exit. That said, ending the lane in between would hardly be a good solution considering the volume on that stretch of NJ 42. I guess the best thing to do here would be to extend NJ 55 parallel to NJ 42 all the way to I-295, and have separate exits off of 55 for 42 and Creek Road.
Quote from: webny99 on May 14, 2018, 09:09:38 PM
What about assigning maximum and minimum lengths for auxiliary lanes?
Some closely spaced exits, like NY 342 and I-781 on I-81 in Watertown, and NY 250 and Phillips Rd on 104 in Webster, would be substandard without auxiliary lanes. But at what threshold do you think they're actually needed?
I-781/NY 342 seems to be particularly close even with the auxiliary lane, at least SB.
Maybe northbound VA 288 near the US 360 interchange (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.4210626,-77.6287012,1484m/data=!3m1!1e3) to help mitigate the crazy movements that happen as a result of the C/D lane merging into the mainline right before the onramp from EB US 360 does?
Quote from: bzakharin on May 15, 2018, 12:58:31 PM
On NJ 42 Northbound, the lane entering from NJ 55 travels over a mile before exiting to I-295. There's even an exit (and entrance) with its own (short) exit lane branching off of this extra lane. Needless to say weaving is rampant here, especially for those using said exit. That said, ending the lane in between would hardly be a good solution considering the volume on that stretch of NJ 42. I guess the best thing to do here would be to extend NJ 55 parallel to NJ 42 all the way to I-295, and have separate exits off of 55 for 42 and Creek Road.
Just wait until the ramp from 42 North to 295 South is finally built. 55 North will finally have 2 lanes merging into Rt. 42, but the furthest right lane will quickly take off again for 295 South. The current exit for Creek Rd moves closer to Rt. 55. And the current lane from 55 to 42 will become an option lane for 295 North or 42 North/76 West.
Quote from: Brandon on May 10, 2018, 02:04:22 PM
Between IL-53 and I-355 on I-55 in Illinois. This is a cluster almost all the time due to the distance between the two interchanges and the short ramps for IL-53.
1. I was going to say this exact thing
2. I knew Brandon was gonna beat me to the punch haha
Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 15, 2018, 02:24:19 PM
Quote from: bzakharin on May 15, 2018, 12:58:31 PM
On NJ 42 Northbound, the lane entering from NJ 55 travels over a mile before exiting to I-295. There's even an exit (and entrance) with its own (short) exit lane branching off of this extra lane. Needless to say weaving is rampant here, especially for those using said exit. That said, ending the lane in between would hardly be a good solution considering the volume on that stretch of NJ 42. I guess the best thing to do here would be to extend NJ 55 parallel to NJ 42 all the way to I-295, and have separate exits off of 55 for 42 and Creek Road.
Just wait until the ramp from 42 North to 295 South is finally built. 55 North will finally have 2 lanes merging into Rt. 42, but the furthest right lane will quickly take off again for 295 South. The current exit for Creek Rd moves closer to Rt. 55. And the current lane from 55 to 42 will become an option lane for 295 North or 42 North/76 West.
So it'll make it worse for anyone not heading from 42 to 76 or 55 to 295? And even for those who are, they'll have to deal with merging traffic in both directions? I fail to see how this is better than when 42/295 used to merge and then split, which was one of the reasons for the current project in the first place.
Oregon:
I-5:
Rose Quarter area (at a minimum, perferably widen to 4 lanes each way)
From 217 to 205 each way (mp 292-288)
SB only: Wilsonville road (mp 283) to OR 551 (mp 282)
Roseburg area
I-84:
The Dalles would be nice, but not needed
I-205 to 181st avenue WB direction only. (mp 9-13)
I-205:
Powell blvd to I-84 (planned)
OR 213 to Sunrise/Milwakee Expressway (mp 10-13)
Milwakee Expressway to Sunnyside road (mp 13-14)
Last 2 are only after Sunrise expressway gets finished.
OR 217:
OR 8 to Scholls Ferry (SB planned) (mp 2-4)
OR 99W to Scholls Ferry (planned) (mp 4-6)
Then again, I'm optimistic.
I-40 eastbound (probably westbound too as I saw it back up during evening rush last week) between Appling Road and Germantown Parkway in Memphis.
Raleigh's Beltline I-440 was widened in the early nineties from 4 lanes to 6 continuous with auxiliary lanes between exits that look like a 4th lane.
Many drivers, perhaps elderly, default to the right lane so this confuses them, and many others have complained about the right lane that (starts and stops) over and over.
I'm not a huge fan, but if you want decent queue lengths and exits are close together I guess there's no other option other than 2 lane-exits which might require the new Euro arrow signs at the fork. I don't know.
North Carolina has done a great job with those new lane split signs.
I've never seen how California is doing them.
Georgia's are just fair and they all have vertical open gap that looks like they're spliting into 2 pieces.
Ontario really loves two-lane exits (with the rightmost thru lane as an option lane). I hadn't thought of the potential this has for queue reduction, but that's an excellent point.
MD 32 westbound is missing an auxiliary lane between the on-ramp from Dorsey Run Road to the C-D lane for the US 1 interchange. MD 32 eastbound does have an auxiliary lane between these two interchanges.
CT tends to have too many where it creates more traffic slow downs. They are too short to really be useful but during rush hour people use them as passing lanes and then merge back in and slows down traffic. I-84 in western CT has this a lot.
Other times CT will end the "slow vehicle lane" half way up the hill. typical.
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on July 09, 2018, 02:40:19 PM
CT tends to have too many where it creates more traffic slow downs. They are too short to really be useful but during rush hour people use them as passing lanes and then merge back in and slows down traffic. I-84 in western CT has this a lot.
Other times CT will end the "slow vehicle lane" half way up the hill. typical.
I use the longer climbing lanes to pass slow traffic. Passing on the right with three or more lanes is legal here.
In Illinois:
* I-290 between Woodfield Road and the I-90 ramps.
* I-290 EB between the EB St. Charles Road entrance and the ramp to SB I-294 (can't remember if one is being put here as part of the Tri-State rebuild)
* Several spots on I-55 east of I-294
Quote from: Revive 755 on July 11, 2018, 09:47:16 PM
In Illinois:
* I-290 between Woodfield Road and the I-90 ramps.
* I-290 EB between the EB St. Charles Road entrance and the ramp to SB I-294 (can't remember if one is being put here as part of the Tri-State rebuild)
* Several spots on I-55 east of I-294
I think I saw St. Charles Road area may be part of plan. Need to find that doc.
I-290 / I-90 needs alot more.
More
I-94
past deerfield rd to half-day rd
milwaukee to grand
I-90
sayre to nagle
foster to bryn mawr
IL-53
euclid thru rand
I-355
lake to army trail road
army trail road to roosevelt
I-190
mannheim road to I-294
Bump, but I think auxiliary lanes are needed here:
US-264 at Bell Rd (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/35.6149658,-77.6652915/35.6163673,-77.6732507/@35.6146976,-77.6704741,16z/data=!4m2!4m1!3e0)
I-40 at Conover (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7190749,-81.2203854,16z) - Long merge lane but I do think an auxiliary lane is needed due to the fact my friends were actually driving in the merge lane that was ending! Example (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7176831,-81.2198961,3a,65y,69.8h,80.49t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1syO1sCfU3_2nxnyXiSdcA0g!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DyO1sCfU3_2nxnyXiSdcA0g%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D90.82943%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)
Lexington Ky
Winchester Rd interchange and the I-64 split on I-75
SM-G950U
They added them in most of the needed places during my decades in St Louis. However, these places still could use aux lanes
I-55 between Gasconade and President/Potomac (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.5844561,-90.2189979,1544m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en)
NB I-55 between Union Road and Bayless (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.544155,-90.296689,1137m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en)
NB I-55 from the cloverleaf ramp at IL 157 to the top of the bluff (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6868189,-89.9979394,2770m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en)
I-55 between US 40 and IL 162 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7250078,-89.9150576,2180m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en)
I-70 between West Florissant and North Broadway (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.684772,-90.2229337,691m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en)
WB I-44 between Grand and Jefferson (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6150022,-90.2295272,945m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en)
I-44 between Southwest and Hampton (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6165643,-90.29401,1087m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en)
For Cincinnati:
- I-75 between OH 562 and OH 126. I was on OH 562 getting onto I-75 NB a week ago, and the exit ramp backed on on 562 all the way to the OH 4 exit, because of the short merge area on I-75. Also the Towne St ramp removal on NB I-75 would help too.
- I-71 between US 22/3 and Pfeiffer. Especially the SB direction between 126 and 22, where mall traffic back up on the freeway. An auxiliary lane already exists for SB 71 between Pfeiffer and 126, but would be nice to extend that to the US 22 exit, as previously mentioned, and add them to the NB lanes.
Found this while browsing GSV, this would be a great candidate for auxiliary lanes, considering US 60 east of Phoenix have so many tightly spaced exit ramps like this:
(https://i.imgur.com/G2dZcQq.png)
I-69 between Exits 316 and 317 in Indiana. Allen County has rapidly sprawled on the north side and the southwest side. Union chapel Road (Exit 317) is the last exit north in Allen County before the Dekalb County line (Mile 322) and the next exit is at Co Rd 11A (Exit 326). The stretch between 316 and 317 is where the 3rd lane each way ends, so traffic on I-69 is less spread. Add in everyone entering from Union Chapel with little merge room and you have congestion.
Here are some for Wisconsin Us 53 from Us 12 to River Prairie Drive and from River Prairie Drive to Wi 312 and one on Wi 29 from county highway X in Lake Wissota to Wi 29 BUS / 178
Georgia 10 Loop from exit 6 to exit 15. Which is about half of the length of that route, but it has 2/3 of the exits. Along that stretch there is about 1 exit for each mile, but only 2 auxiliary lanes currently exist (along the Outer loop from exit 11 to exit 12, and along the Inner loop from exit 11 to exit 10C).
On US 53 in Eau Claire, one will be needed between WI 312 (North Crossing) and River Prairie Dr and another one between River Prairie Dr and US 12 (Clairemont Ave)
Quote from: vdeane on May 10, 2018, 02:17:55 PM
I've long wanted to see one on I-90 (each direction) between exits 36 (I-81) and 37 (Electronics Parkway).
Yeah, came back here to second that and also note that I-87 could use auxiliary lanes between NY 144 and the Berkshire Connector.
I'd really like to see the entire segment from I-787 south to the Berkshire Connector widened to six lanes... hopefully the construction just south of I-787 is a step in the right direction, at least for a slight extension of the six lanes if not a longer widening project.
Definitely US-23 between I-94 & US-12 in Washtenaw County, Michigan.
Quote from: I-55 on August 04, 2021, 12:04:54 AM
I-69 between Exits 316 and 317 in Indiana. Allen County has rapidly sprawled on the north side and the southwest side. Union chapel Road (Exit 317) is the last exit north in Allen County before the Dekalb County line (Mile 322) and the next exit is at Co Rd 11A (Exit 326). The stretch between 316 and 317 is where the 3rd lane each way ends, so traffic on I-69 is less spread. Add in everyone entering from Union Chapel with little merge room and you have congestion.
If INDOT is smart, they will also add in an aux lane on NB I-69 between Coldwater Rd and I-469 solely because of the traffic jam that occurs during the day. Maybe when they modify the 469/69 interchange in a couple years it'll get rectified.
This is one that is almost indefensible since it was just completed a little over a year ago. I-49 between the Wedington Dr. exit (current exit 64, until they renumber the exits to account for mileage down to Louisiana like the soon to be or already open newer sections of I-49) and Porter Rd./Mt. Comfort Rd (Exit 65). Those exits are already less than 3/4 mile apart from each other to begin with, so that leaves less than half a mile of enforced merging, so anyone who is travelling through is pretty much forced into the center or left lane to keep from hitting brakes heavily (or stopping altogether as off-ramp traffic backs up onto the shoulder) during peak times. They had the right-of-way already when they did the 6/8 lane expansion in Fayetteville, but couldn't be bothered to pave another 1/2 mile in each direction to keep the on-ramp as an off-ramp. At 4:30PM onward, southbound I-49 traffic backs up onto the shoulder awfully close to the end of the on-ramp from Porter Rd. anyway, and it's hard to get over enough to stop on the shoulder with such a short one lane off-ramp onto Wedington Dr.
I-49 Exit 64 southbound (https://goo.gl/maps/76KZC4xrxpheLMWL6)
I-49 Exit 65 northbound (https://goo.gl/maps/LhDebJAMBmnH8mQk9)
MN 62 between France Ave and Xerxes Ave.
Desperately needed here. I might have to request or find plans to add an exit lane here (and widen the exit ramp to two lanes) as well as reconfiguring the nearby NC-97 interchange.
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.8332744,-78.3103441,370m/data=!3m1!1e3
In this plan, I-540 will get auxiliary lanes at every single interchange. I believe it's from US-70 to Capital Blvd (US-1). Ramp meters are a part of that plan too.
https://ncdot.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?layers=8623ff32a0a249c79a106dfb12dc83b2
In the Buffalo area, I-290 has some egregious ones.
The most notable is between Exit 4 (I-990) and Exit 5 (NY 263) (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9907963,-78.7955922,865m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu). Heading east, the two lanes entering from I-990 collapse into the mainline in the span of about 800 feet, squeezing all traffic into the three thru lanes to pass under Maple Ave, only for a decel lane for NY 263 to open up almost immediately. And westbound, the two lane exit to I-990 is wasted by the bottleneck. It's even more egregious when compared to heading the other direction from I-990, which has a full 10-lanes between there and US 62. This setup should be mirrored heading towards NY 263.
I-290 WB also has a short 600-foot span between Exit 5 (NY 263) and Exit 6 (NY 240/324) with no auxiliary lane, though EB does have an auxiliary lane in this instance.
And then there's the eastern terminus of I-290, where new auxiliary lanes on I-90 have helped somewhat (especially on I-90 EB), but I-290 EB still backs up due to the auxiliary lane formed on I-90 exiting to NY 33 WB. A 500 ft extension to join the lane that opens up for NY 33 EB (shown here (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9353622,-78.7667565,258m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu)) would do wonders, and it's baffling why this was not done with the recent project. This would make a full 8-lanes in both directions between I-290 and the south side of the NY 33 interchange.