I was originally going to ask which non-interstate corridor in each state is in the worst need of upgrades, but decided we didn't need to be that specific, since some states may have several and others none at all.
For this thread, I'm defining a corridor as any of the following:
(1) A single route number, in entirety or with endpoints
(2) "City X to City Y" using one or multiple routes
(3) "City X to Route Y" using one or multiple routes
2dis:
US 287 between DFW and Amarillo
Austin-Houston
US 29 in Virginia
3dis:
US 380 in northern DFW suburbs
Atlanta outer beltway, northern segment
Spurs to Tallahassee, Gainesville, North Port/Port Charlotte, Cape Coral
US 19 from St. Petersburg north to Crystal River in Florida. Some segments are now forced limited access but trying to commute on they highway is a total nightmare.
US 11 and Circle Dr from NY 481 to Chick-fil-A in Cicero, NY.
Low-hanging fruit: US 50/301 over a certain 4-mile-long twin-span bridge...
US 15 from the Point of Rocks Bridge to US 340 (aka the 2-lane segment) would be another good candidate.
Would also mention MD 32, but construction is now underway to extend the 4-lane segment to I-70!
For Ohio, not sure if there is one that's in "worst need" compared to some others mentioned in the thread. My main one would be US 36 between I-71 and US 23, but a new bypass to the east of downtown Delaware would be needed, and I think that's beyond the point of this thread. So then maybe US 23 at South Bloomfield and Circleville, though a South Bloomfield bypass is currently in planning.
US-23 between Flint and Toledo.
Quote from: jmacswimmer on May 14, 2021, 09:34:21 AM
US 15 from the Point of Rocks Bridge to US 340 (aka the 2-lane segment) would be another good candidate.
This is not a good use of resources unless Virginia has similar plans for U.S. 15 south of the Potomac River.
US 101 on the Oregon Coast has a need for plenty of upgrades all along its length.
Rick
Quote from: nexus73 on May 14, 2021, 10:33:04 AM
US 101 on the Oregon Coast has a need for plenty of upgrades all along its length.
Rick
Add OR 18 to that list. It is overly traveled for its size.
US 101 from Shelton to Sequim would also be a candidate, as the road is not built for the traffic that uses it.
US 2 from Snohomish to Leavenworth - needs a few extra passing lanes, and some curves buffed out.
Quote from: 1 on May 14, 2021, 08:04:39 AM
2dis:
Austin-Houston
Disagree. We take 71 frequently and while I'd love a freeway there (much like 290 out to I-10 on the west side) the existing road easy handles the traffic (probably due in part to having 2 expressways headed there)
There aren't a ton of candidates in Colorado off the top of my brain. It wouldn't hurt to upgrade CO83 between I-225 and the Springs to have an overflow route opposite I-25. Also it suffers less in the winter as compared to Momument Hill.
I also wouldn't hate it if US285 could somehow become completely limited access between I-25 and Sheridan.
Chris
OR-99W from Portland to McMinnville. While the Dundee bypass has helped a bit with bottlenecks, the road itself is still in pretty awful shape.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 14, 2021, 10:22:08 AM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on May 14, 2021, 09:34:21 AM
US 15 from the Point of Rocks Bridge to US 340 (aka the 2-lane segment) would be another good candidate.
This is not a good use of resources unless Virginia has similar plans for U.S. 15 south of the Potomac River.
I was just focusing on MD in that post, but agreed...widening US 15 only to the VA line would just create a new bottleneck (not unlike what currently happens northbound where the Leesburg Bypass narrows to 2 lanes...)
Regardless, I'm not sure whether VDOT or MDOT SHA have any actual plans for this corridor...I imagine the Point of Rocks Bridge would be a point of contention (not unlike the Legion Bridge downstream).
Quote from: jayhawkco on May 14, 2021, 10:53:03 AM
There aren't a ton of candidates in Colorado off the top of my brain. It wouldn't hurt to upgrade CO83 between I-225 and the Springs to have an overflow route opposite I-25. Also it suffers less in the winter as compared to Momument Hill.
I also wouldn't hate it if US285 could somehow become completely limited access between I-25 and Sheridan.
I for one would appreciate seeing US 85/Santa Fe Drive as a freeway between I-25 and 470, but like the east end of 285 that seems rather unlikely to ever happen.
Indiana: US 30 Warsaw to Columbia City
Quote from: 1 on May 14, 2021, 08:04:39 AM
US 287 between DFW and Amarillo
Austin-Houston
While ideally both of these corridors should be upgraded to interstate standards, I'd argue something like US-281 between San Antonio and Wichita Falls which is largely an undivided 2 lane road and then the occasional 4 lane portion, carrying large amounts of traffic including trucks with long, limited passing opportunities, is far more worthy to upgrade.
At least those corridors are 4 lane divided highway with largely town bypasses and a 75 mph uniform speed limit with limited to no interruptions (signals).
Here's another one I haven't seen mentioned - US-287 between I-45 and Fort Worth.
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 14, 2021, 09:51:13 AM
For Ohio, not sure if there is one that's in "worst need" compared to some others mentioned in the thread. My main one would be US 36 between I-71 and US 23, but a new bypass to the east of downtown Delaware would be needed, and I think that's beyond the point of this thread. So then maybe US 23 at South Bloomfield and Circleville, though a South Bloomfield bypass is currently in planning.
What about US 23 between I-270 and Delaware? Unless you were assuming I-71 > US 36 as the preferred route from Columbus.
Virginia... being more realistic as opposed to the fictional highways concept of upgrade the whole corridor to interstate standards (ideal, but never will happen)...
US-29 between I-66 and Gainesville; US-29 between Charlottesville and Ruckersville
US-58 between Suffolk Bypass and Franklin
US-17 between I-664 and I-64 (via James River Bridge); US-17 between Gloucester and Newport News (via Coleman Bridge)
VA-168 between the bottom end of the toll road and the North Carolina line.
VA-3 / US-17 west of I-95 until out of the Fredericksburg area
VA-234 and VA-286 between I-95 and I-66
Quote from: webny99 on May 14, 2021, 12:38:06 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 14, 2021, 09:51:13 AM
For Ohio, not sure if there is one that's in "worst need" compared to some others mentioned in the thread. My main one would be US 36 between I-71 and US 23, but a new bypass to the east of downtown Delaware would be needed, and I think that's beyond the point of this thread. So then maybe US 23 at South Bloomfield and Circleville, though a South Bloomfield bypass is currently in planning.
What about US 23 between I-270 and Delaware? Unless you were assuming I-71 > US 36 as the preferred route from Columbus.
Yes I'm assuming that I-71/US 36 is the preferred route. US 23 between I-270 and Delaware is so developed that carrying out any upgrade is near impossible at this point, so any upgrade on the Columbus-Toledo corridor now have to be between I-71 and US 23.
California's "Captain Obvious" corridors: CA 58 over the Tehachapis, CA 99 in Tulare County, and CA 152 in both the Los Banos and Gilroy areas. Also: finishing CA 14 north as a freeway to CA 58 (a couple of miles), and US 395 from I-15 to CA 58; that composite corridor serves as an effective L.A. commercial bypass that could stand relief of the suburban slog through west Victorville and Adelanto.
Up in OR, the OR 18 corridor from PDX metro out to the coast at Lincoln City has already been mentioned; I heartily concur there -- but I'd also suggest US 97 in it entirety -- add passing lanes for trucks, a few more divided expressway segments, and a number of other spot improvements such as finishing the RR grade separation at La Pine. A real freeway through Bend from the Sunriver area north to past Madras (i.e., the populated area along the corridor) would be nice -- but this is OR, so the prospects for such aren't great.
In NV, an expressway extension along US 395 south of Carson City through Gardnerville and Minden would likely be welcomed by the residents who have to deal with through commercial traffic on a facility that, while gradually improved over the last couple of decades, really needs to be bypassed for at least safety's sake.
And there's a couple of things in WA, particularly east of the Cascades, that could stand some attention: US 97 in the Yakima Valley would certainly benefit from a direct expressway connection through Toppenish to I-82, and US 2 from the Spokane area west to Wenatchee could use some expressway sections or at least a lot more passing lanes (I have friends in the Davenport area, and they dread having to use that facility).
Given time, I could probably come up with a lot more -- but these stand out in particular.
Quote from: cabiness42 on May 14, 2021, 11:55:42 AM
Indiana: US 30 Warsaw to Columbia City
Go Big or Go Home!
US 30: Mansfield, OH to New Lenox, IL
I think Illinois's would have to be US 20 between the Mississippi River and Rockford. Maybe.
CA-37 should be full freeway but it's not going to happen due to environmental concerns. Close the CA-84 gap by making Vasco Road signed as CA-84.Make CA-51 meet interstate standards.
In MN, it's US 12 from Orono to Litchfield. US 14 and MN 23 are both programmed to be dealt with, but 12 is likely going to stay how it is for decades to come.
Massachusetts huh... not sure, I'd have to guess MA 2 between Acton and Lexington, maybe the bridges to Cape Cod if they count.
NY is extremely lacking in rural four-lane non-freeways. Most states take them for granted, but they are glaringly absent here.
NY 14 between the Thruway and Watkins Glen comes to mind as a corridor that at least 40 other states would have widened or at least added passing lanes.
I think experience this week is showing that the US61/64/70/79 corridor between Memphis and West Memphis is in need of an upgrade. :)
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on May 14, 2021, 10:01:28 PM
I think experience this week is showing that the US61/64/70/79 corridor between Memphis and West Memphis is in need of an upgrade. :)
And that we need more bridges across the Mississippi.
Quote from: bing101 on May 14, 2021, 08:06:16 PM
CA-37 should be full freeway but it's not going to happen due to environmental concerns. Close the CA-84 gap by making Vasco Road signed as CA-84.Make CA-51 meet interstate standards.
Alameda County is reluctant to improve their section of Vasco, and D4 really doesn't want to multiplex CA 84 over I-580 from Isabel to Vasco Road (about 6 miles); there are long-range plans to cobble up a connector between the present Isabel/CA 84/I-580 interchange diagonally to just about where Vasco crosses the county line -- but no foreseeable funding for such -- and it would be strictly an Alameda County project (albeit with quite a bit of state funding aid as per usual practice these days). But getting Caltrans (via the State Transportation Commission) to approve the assumption of maintenance on a county facility in order to sign it as CA 84 just might be a bridge too far; the chances are that it'll remain with the two counties. Just a thought: it could conceivably be signed with a county pentagon as "J84" or the like (similar to the J59 effective extension of CA 59 north of Merced).
Quote from: sparker on May 15, 2021, 03:57:37 PM
Quote from: bing101 on May 14, 2021, 08:06:16 PM
CA-37 should be full freeway but it's not going to happen due to environmental concerns. Close the CA-84 gap by making Vasco Road signed as CA-84.Make CA-51 meet interstate standards.
Alameda County is reluctant to improve their section of Vasco, and D4 really doesn't want to multiplex CA 84 over I-580 from Isabel to Vasco Road (about 6 miles); there are long-range plans to cobble up a connector between the present Isabel/CA 84/I-580 interchange diagonally to just about where Vasco crosses the county line -- but no foreseeable funding for such -- and it would be strictly an Alameda County project (albeit with quite a bit of state funding aid as per usual practice these days). But getting Caltrans (via the State Transportation Commission) to approve the assumption of maintenance on a county facility in order to sign it as CA 84 just might be a bridge too far; the chances are that it'll remain with the two counties. Just a thought: it could conceivably be signed with a county pentagon as "J84" or the like (similar to the J59 effective extension of CA 59 north of Merced).
Some others that need help in the area:
- Byron Highway/J4
- Corral Hollow Pass Road
- Patterson Pass Road
in North Carolina:
US 52 between Mt Airy and Winston Salem. Narrow, bumpy and everyone drives too fast.
The 2-lane portion of US 17 between the Tar river and Neuse river. Its hard to believe any portion of US 17 is still 2 lanes.
US 158 between NC 168 Barco and Elizabeth City. Too much beach traffic to leave it as 2 lanes.
A previous answer would've been US 19/19E between the US 23 split in Mars Hill and NC 226 in Burnsville, but that has been upgraded recently
CA 99 from I-5 to US 50. It should be an interstate, but failing that it needs to be upgraded to interstate standard.
Quote from: fillup420 on May 15, 2021, 08:11:48 PM
US 52 between Mt Airy and Winston Salem. Narrow, bumpy and everyone drives too fast.
I'd mention the I-74 upgrade would do some work, but I'm honestly not sure on much that needs to be done. It's a full freeway with full size lane widths and a full paved outside shoulder.... 65 mph speed limit (ought to be 70 mph, but different story). Resurfacing maybe?
Quote
The 2-lane portion of US 17 between the Tar river and Neuse river. Its hard to believe any portion of US 17 is still 2 lanes.
I believe they're currently working from the bottom up. IMO, they should focus on the area between the end of 4 lanes south of Washington to Vanceboro, then the bypass connector to US-70.
Quote
US 158 between NC 168 Barco and Elizabeth City. Too much beach traffic to leave it as 2 lanes.
It's coming... well, starting in 2025.
https://www.ncdot.gov/news/public-meetings/Pages/R-2574-2018-06-05.aspx
To be honest, that project could be delayed 10 years, and not finished until 2038, and it'll still be done before the Mid-Currituck Bridge ever turns dirt.
I think that there is a strong case to widen CO-83 from Northgate to where it becomes a 6-lane road just east of castle rock. With the Powers extension not a pipe dream, more traffic might begin to use it as a bypass of the Palmer Divide. When I-25 is closed, 83 usually stays open (as it gets much less snow) causing the road to become a cluster. It doesn't need to be a freeway, just a divided 4 lane.
In Louisiana...
US 190 between Opelousas and Baton Rouge could use some upgrades. It's 4 lanes but the four laned section with homemade jersey barrier east of the Atchafalaya River is kind of awful. No way to have lanes for left turns. That's a very big corridor not just for trucks but anyone coming south on I-49 to cut the corner going to Baton Rouge and skip the I-10 swamp bridge east of Lafayette. It would be great to have bypasses around the towns, too, but Louisiana doesn't tend to do that like other states.
LA 28 east of Pineville or US 84 from Archie towards Mississippi. 28 would be a difficult upgrade.
LA 28 north or south bypass of Alexandria/Pineville. 28 through Pineville is very narrow and congested. This is also considered a possible future idea for I-14 (probably never going to happen) but a southern "loop" would be great to better connect all the southern legs of highways. For example, on the southwest side of town, anywhere around Woodworth, it's very zig-zaggy to get anywhere along Hwy 1 or to an area like Marksville. Also to get to Mississippi there's only one way which is LA 28 through town.
iPhone
Metro Detroit might need a Pontiac-to-Farmington highway, but there's no obvious place to put it and the 75/696 upgrades will help handle demand even if the route's circuitous. It would be nice to have a Van Dyke Freeway all the way to 696. The only road that REALLY needs an upgrade is M59 through Utica - always jammed, frequent wrecks, and neither 75/696/94 nor going WAY up to 69 is a fast alternative.
Those are all nice-to-haves. Michiganders mostly want better pavement rather than more.
What is needed is a good way NW-SE through Columbus. Both 23 and 315 clog up rapidly and really slow down a trip to the South. It's only 20 minutes slower to go all the way to Akron than to risk getting broadsided at every traffic light plunking through Delaware County. Any traffic anywhere in Columbus and you'll wish you'd decided to add a stop in Pittsburgh.
Quote from: chaparral on May 15, 2021, 09:55:46 PM
Metro Detroit might need a Pontiac-to-Farmington highway, but there's no obvious place to put it and the 75/696 upgrades will help handle demand even if the route's circuitous. It would be nice to have a Van Dyke Freeway all the way to 696. The only road that REALLY needs an upgrade is M59 through Utica - always jammed, frequent wrecks, and neither 75/696/94 nor going WAY up to 69 is a fast alternative.
I-275 was supposed to sort of be the Pontiac-Farmington link, except it got cancelled due to opposition. Would've helped the northern suburbs get to DTW airport too.
U.S. 81, U.S. 87, U.S. 82, U.S. 281, U.S. 287, U.S. 77, U.S. 177, U.S. 277, U.S. 377, U.S. 380, ... and many others ...
Some of these must be upgraded for connectivity purposes. But most of these are to provide badly needed upgrades for The Metroplex as well as alternate routes for Interstate 35 which itself needs expanded Interchanges and continuous Frontage Roads. However, add all the lanes and even Interchanges and even Bridges for The Frontage Roads it will still need to have other nearby Interstates to use. These U.S. Highways such as U.S. 281 and U.S. 377 have immense traffic them selves. Others such as U.S. 380 have many Construction Cranes building lots of Things nearby which is going to increase the amounts of traffic.
Dalton Highway
US 6 in Nevada
US 50 in Nevada
Quote from: bassoon1986 on May 15, 2021, 09:55:36 PM
US 190 between Opelousas and Baton Rouge could use some upgrades. It's 4 lanes but the four laned section with homemade jersey barrier east of the Atchafalaya River is kind of awful. No way to have lanes for left turns. That's a very big corridor not just for trucks but anyone coming south on I-49 to cut the corner going to Baton Rouge and skip the I-10 swamp bridge east of Lafayette. It would be great to have bypasses around the towns, too, but Louisiana doesn't tend to do that like other states.
It also effectively becomes I-10 whenever the bridge shuts down which happens frequently.
I'll add though that I'd rather see them spend money towards replacing the I-10 bridges completely with 6 lanes with full left and right shoulders, and finally increase the speed limit back up to 70 mph.
That might help in drawing traffic towards it, plus have extra room to not always shut down the bridge during a crash or even prevent many crashes that are caused by its narrow alignment.
Quote from: ilpt4u on May 14, 2021, 08:02:41 PM
I think Illinois's would have to be US 20 between the Mississippi River and Rockford. Maybe.
I could go for that, but IL 47 between I-55 and I-80 is up there, given how often there is construction making I-55 pretty much unusable between I-80 and IL 47.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on May 15, 2021, 03:59:45 PM
Quote from: sparker on May 15, 2021, 03:57:37 PM
Quote from: bing101 on May 14, 2021, 08:06:16 PM
CA-37 should be full freeway but it's not going to happen due to environmental concerns. Close the CA-84 gap by making Vasco Road signed as CA-84.Make CA-51 meet interstate standards.
Alameda County is reluctant to improve their section of Vasco, and D4 really doesn't want to multiplex CA 84 over I-580 from Isabel to Vasco Road (about 6 miles); there are long-range plans to cobble up a connector between the present Isabel/CA 84/I-580 interchange diagonally to just about where Vasco crosses the county line -- but no foreseeable funding for such -- and it would be strictly an Alameda County project (albeit with quite a bit of state funding aid as per usual practice these days). But getting Caltrans (via the State Transportation Commission) to approve the assumption of maintenance on a county facility in order to sign it as CA 84 just might be a bridge too far; the chances are that it'll remain with the two counties. Just a thought: it could conceivably be signed with a county pentagon as "J84" or the like (similar to the J59 effective extension of CA 59 north of Merced).
Some others that need help in the area:
- Byron Highway/J4
- Corral Hollow Pass Road
- Patterson Pass Road
Chances are that there won't be an actual upgrade to Byron Highway/J4; it's just too close to the UP Tracy-Benicia rail line; in the middle is also a grade crossing of said tracks on a S-curve. Although an actual alignment has yet to be adopted (after 62 years!), the parallel CA 239, which will likely depart Vasco Road just south of where CA 4 departs that corridor at Marsh Creek Road and skirt the foothills south to the I-205/580 junction, will probably be built first as a continuation of the CA 4 freeway alignment. Since there's quite a bit of housing development in the Mountain House area between Byron and Tracy, D4 (the corridor is within Contra Costa and Alameda counties) is likely waiting to see just where the developments are being planned in order to avoid any conflict.
Quote from: kkt on May 15, 2021, 08:20:28 PM
CA 99 from I-5 to US 50. It should be an interstate, but failing that it needs to be upgraded to interstate standard.
Caltrans is way ahead of you; the "master plan" for CA 99, which calls for a minimum of 6 lanes overall (8 near Bakersfield, Fresno, and Modesto-Stockton) has been in place since 2006. Improvements in the Madera area and the completion of the "missing link" freeway between Chowchilla and Merced were among the first batch of projects aimed toward fulfilling that goal; the stretch between CA 198 and Selma, including the Kings River bridge, has been under almost constant construction for over a decade now (it's arguably the highest AADT section aside from Modesto north). All improvements since the Turlock bypass of 1973 have been done to Interstate standards -- but there's still a lot of very old freeway, at least 55 years old and featuring poor lines of sight, underheight overcrossings, and gravel medians to deal with; most of that lies between Delano and CA 198. A lot of work has been done; but even though the last at-grade separation is gone, there remains a lot yet to do just to eliminate obsolescent segments; any notion of Interstate designation would necessarily follow that -- but that's not being prioritized right now.
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 15, 2021, 10:00:16 PM
Quote from: chaparral on May 15, 2021, 09:55:46 PM
Metro Detroit might need a Pontiac-to-Farmington highway, but there's no obvious place to put it and the 75/696 upgrades will help handle demand even if the route's circuitous. It would be nice to have a Van Dyke Freeway all the way to 696. The only road that REALLY needs an upgrade is M59 through Utica - always jammed, frequent wrecks, and neither 75/696/94 nor going WAY up to 69 is a fast alternative.
I-275 was supposed to sort of be the Pontiac-Farmington link, except it got cancelled due to opposition. Would've helped the northern suburbs get to DTW airport too.
I-275 would have still missed Pontiac but I don't see the need for a Pontiac-Farmington freeway though. Telegraph makes that connection and is a pretty free flowing highway. Development and lakes in the area stopped I-275 and development would stop this too.
It depends upgrade to what? Freeway?Expressway ? Or various 2 and 3 lane alternative?
Illinois really has no freeway upgrades planned so that would be fictional.
Expressways it's just parts of 67 and IL 127. Not a lot . Some suburban arterials.
On the other hand a bunch of shoulder paving was just added and it looks like a whole of of engineering onUS 20. Also 67 north of Monmouth is getting a full 2 lane with pace shoulder reconstruction including new alignment.
As to what should . They should look at all the old freeway corridors for this and passing lanes.
"Please help Powers Boulevard," he cried, dabbing his eyes with a handkerchief.
A freeway upgrade for Powers Blvd (aka Highway 21) in Colorado Springs was studied together north of Proby Pkwy (the COS airport access road), but the funding situation puts most of it solidly in the theoretical realm. As eastern developments make it continually more "central spine road" than "east side bypass," the pressure mounts. Something similar might be said for US 24, but it hasn't been swallowed up quite yet.
I agree with other posters' Colorado US 85 and CO 83 ideas. With US 85, I might extend my wish list range down to Castle Rock. While not necessarily a full freeway, the arterial/expressway style posted 55mph that comes with past/planned upgrades is awkward, where (congested times aside) you're the slow one if you're driving 70mph.
For Hwy 83, CDOT's gearing up for some further study (https://www.codot.gov/business/consultants/advertised-projects/2020/region-1-project-specific-sh-83-safety-and-operations-study-bayou-gulch-rd-to-el-paso-county-project-design-engineering-services). If their earlier safety eval is an indicator, they might be looking at a "Swedish 2+1 Road."
A couple others that have some studies behind them could be US 85 from the Denver metro to Greeley (2017 PEL (https://www.codot.gov/projects/archived-project-sites/us85pel)) and US 34 from I-25 to US 85 (2019 PEL (https://www.codot.gov/library/studies/us-34-planning-and-environmental-linkages-pel-study/assets/us34pel_document_final_jan2019_with_appa_fhwa_questionnaire_reduced.pdf)). I know US 85 is busy and full of trucks; I haven't been on US 34 there for many years, but I've heard bad things. Both PEL concepts are near-freeway for much of the corridors; neither make significant appearances on CDOT's 10-year plan.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 15, 2021, 10:05:40 PM
Quote from: bassoon1986 on May 15, 2021, 09:55:36 PM
US 190 between Opelousas and Baton Rouge could use some upgrades. It's 4 lanes but the four laned section with homemade jersey barrier east of the Atchafalaya River is kind of awful. No way to have lanes for left turns. That's a very big corridor not just for trucks but anyone coming south on I-49 to cut the corner going to Baton Rouge and skip the I-10 swamp bridge east of Lafayette. It would be great to have bypasses around the towns, too, but Louisiana doesn't tend to do that like other states.
It also effectively becomes I-10 whenever the bridge shuts down which happens frequently.
I'll add though that I'd rather see them spend money towards replacing the I-10 bridges completely with 6 lanes with full left and right shoulders, and finally increase the speed limit back up to 70 mph.
That might help in drawing traffic towards it, plus have extra room to not always shut down the bridge during a crash or even prevent many crashes that are caused by its narrow alignment.
Oh for sure. Louisiana's most needed upgrades are definitely on the interstates (I-49 in Shreveport and I-49 South, I-10 bridges in BR and LC and expanding I-12) but I was sticking to the non-interstates from the thread title.
iPhone
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on May 14, 2021, 08:09:46 AM
US 19 from St. Petersburg north to Crystal River in Florida. Some segments are now forced limited access but trying to commute on they highway is a total nightmare.
Wasn't that why the Veterans Pkwy was built (at least north of I-275)?
Quote from: jayhawkco on May 14, 2021, 10:53:03 AM
There aren't a ton of candidates in Colorado off the top of my brain. It wouldn't hurt to upgrade CO83 between I-225 and the Springs to have an overflow route opposite I-25. Also it suffers less in the winter as compared to Momument Hill.
I also wouldn't hate it if US285 could somehow become completely limited access between I-25 and Sheridan.
Chris
US 24 between Colorado Springs and Limon maybe to a 4 lane divided highway?
Quote from: chaparral on May 15, 2021, 09:55:46 PM
The only road that REALLY needs an upgrade is M59 through Utica - always jammed, frequent wrecks, and neither 75/696/94 nor going WAY up to 69 is a fast alternative.
Those are all nice-to-haves. Michiganders mostly want better pavement rather than more.
I could never understand why they dug that trench for the M-59 freeway and then ended it basically in the middle of town. They should have at least extended the freeway to M-53, if not all the way to I-94.
Quote from: sparker on May 14, 2021, 07:55:26 PM
California's "Captain Obvious" corridors: CA 58 over the Tehachapis, CA 99 in Tulare County, and CA 152 in both the Los Banos and Gilroy areas. Also: finishing CA 14 north as a freeway to CA 58 (a couple of miles), and US 395 from I-15 to CA 58; that composite corridor serves as an effective L.A. commercial bypass that could stand relief of the suburban slog through west Victorville and Adelanto.
Up in OR, the OR 18 corridor from PDX metro out to the coast at Lincoln City has already been mentioned; I heartily concur there -- but I'd also suggest US 97 in it entirety -- add passing lanes for trucks, a few more divided expressway segments, and a number of other spot improvements such as finishing the RR grade separation at La Pine. A real freeway through Bend from the Sunriver area north to past Madras (i.e., the populated area along the corridor) would be nice -- but this is OR, so the prospects for such aren't great.
In NV, an expressway extension along US 395 south of Carson City through Gardnerville and Minden would likely be welcomed by the residents who have to deal with through commercial traffic on a facility that, while gradually improved over the last couple of decades, really needs to be bypassed for at least safety's sake.
And there's a couple of things in WA, particularly east of the Cascades, that could stand some attention: US 97 in the Yakima Valley would certainly benefit from a direct expressway connection through Toppenish to I-82, and US 2 from the Spokane area west to Wenatchee could use some expressway sections or at least a lot more passing lanes (I have friends in the Davenport area, and they dread having to use that facility).
Given time, I could probably come up with a lot more -- but these stand out in particular.
I thought about CA 58 west of Bakersfield and then thought that CA 46 between CA 99 and I-5 would be a better route for making a 4 lane divided highway. Higher pop (Wasco and Paso Robles) served and straighter.
And while we are at it, can we finish a 4 lane divided highway with CA 14? There's about 15 miles left to do between Mojave and Inyokern. That would make US 395 and CA 14 a faster, more direct route between LA and Tahoe.
I'd say the entire Baltimore-Washington Parkway. A lot of GPS platforms advise drivers bound to the Northeast to use I-295 and the Balt - Wash Pkwy to rejoin I-95 north near College Park. It would make theoretical sense because that entire route (completely free-flowing limited access highway) would be more direct to reaching I-95 north than using I-95's Capital Beltway route. If they were to use it, though, they would be in for a nightmare of accidents, traffic jams, sharp curves, and bumps. I-95/I-495, though it has its own share of problems, would be much more effective in my opinion.
Quote from: OldDominion75 on May 16, 2021, 05:20:07 PM
I'd say the entire Baltimore-Washington Parkway. A lot of GPS platforms advise drivers bound to the Northeast to use I-295 and the Balt - Wash Pkwy to rejoin I-95 north near College Park. It would make theoretical sense because that entire route (completely free-flowing limited access highway) would be more direct to reaching I-95 north than using I-95's Capital Beltway route. If they were to use it, though, they would be in for a nightmare of accidents, traffic jams, sharp curves, and bumps. I-95/I-495, though it has its own share of problems, would be much more effective in my opinion.
Agreed, the Baltimore-Washington Parkway at least between I-495 and I-95 in Baltimore needs to have the remaining NPS portions taken over by the state, widened to an 8 lane freeway, and the speed limit increased to 65 mph.
Just my thoughts for Wisconsin:
1. Upgrade Wis 21 to 4 lane divided highway from I-90/94 in Tomah to Omro. 21 is already 4 lanes between Omro and Oshkosh. A bypass of Wautoma would be needed.
2. Upgrade US 12 to 4 lane divided highway between Cambridge and Whitewater. An east extension of the Ft Atkinson bypass would be nice.
3. Upgrade US 53 to a full freeway between Spooner and US 2.
4. Continue Upgrading Wis 29 to a full freeway between I-94 at Elk Mound and Green Bay.
5. Upgrade Wis 93, Wis 35 and US 53 to a 4 lane divided highway between Eau Claire and La Crosse. Doesn't have to be a freeway.
6. Upgrade US 18 to a 4 lane divided highway between Dodgeville and Prairie du Chien.
7. Upgrade Wis 11 and Wis 81 to a 4 lane divided highway between Dubuque and Beloit.
8. Upgrade Wis 11 and Wis 50 to a 4 lane divided highway between Janesville and Lake Geneva.
9. Upgrade Wis 36 to a 4 lane divided highway between Burlington and Lake Geneva.
10. Upgrade Wis 26 to a 4 lane divided highway between Wis 16 and Waupun.
11. Finish Upgrading US 151 to a full freeway between Columbus and Fond du Lac. Work this in conjunction with the Wis 23 upgrading to 4 lanes between Fond du Lac and Plymouth that is planned.
12. Upgrade US 61 to a 4 lane divided highway between La Crosse and Dickeyville.
Quote from: kkt on May 15, 2021, 08:20:28 PM
CA 99 from I-5 to US 50. It should be an interstate, but failing that it needs to be upgraded to interstate standard.
There was a rumor of CA-99 to be converted into I-7 or I-9 if approved but that may not likely happen for now
Quote from: hobsini2 on May 16, 2021, 05:11:10 PM
I thought about CA 58 west of Bakersfield and then thought that CA 46 between CA 99 and I-5 would be a better route for making a 4 lane divided highway. Higher pop (Wasco and Paso Robles) served and straighter.
And while we are at it, can we finish a 4 lane divided highway with CA 14? There's about 15 miles left to do between Mojave and Inyokern. That would make US 395 and CA 14 a faster, more direct route between LA and Tahoe.
46 is certainly a better route from I-5 to CA 101, but it would require a merge onto CA 99 and then some weaving traving with Bakersfield exit and entrance traffic and then exit again before too much longer. Better for I-40 to cross CA 99 instead of merging with it. Remember, lots of truck traffic on CA 99 and we're expecting at least some on the extension of I-40.
Quote from: sparker on May 16, 2021, 04:11:21 AM
Quote from: kkt on May 15, 2021, 08:20:28 PM
CA 99 from I-5 to US 50. It should be an interstate, but failing that it needs to be upgraded to interstate standard.
Caltrans is way ahead of you; the "master plan" for CA 99, which calls for a minimum of 6 lanes overall (8 near Bakersfield, Fresno, and Modesto-Stockton) has been in place since 2006. Improvements in the Madera area and the completion of the "missing link" freeway between Chowchilla and Merced were among the first batch of projects aimed toward fulfilling that goal; the stretch between CA 198 and Selma, including the Kings River bridge, has been under almost constant construction for over a decade now (it's arguably the highest AADT section aside from Modesto north). All improvements since the Turlock bypass of 1973 have been done to Interstate standards -- but there's still a lot of very old freeway, at least 55 years old and featuring poor lines of sight, underheight overcrossings, and gravel medians to deal with; most of that lies between Delano and CA 198. A lot of work has been done; but even though the last at-grade separation is gone, there remains a lot yet to do just to eliminate obsolescent segments; any notion of Interstate designation would necessarily follow that -- but that's not being prioritized right now.
Oh, I know, it's been on Caltrans list of things to do for ages, it's just that their progress has been glacial.
Quote from: bing101 on May 16, 2021, 05:43:16 PM
Quote from: kkt on May 15, 2021, 08:20:28 PM
CA 99 from I-5 to US 50. It should be an interstate, but failing that it needs to be upgraded to interstate standard.
There was a rumor of CA-99 to be converted into I-7 or I-9 if approved but that may not likely happen for now
It won't be far enough to even propose to the FHA and AASHTO for many more years.
Quote from: kkt on May 16, 2021, 05:46:25 PM
Quote from: hobsini2 on May 16, 2021, 05:11:10 PM
I thought about CA 58 west of Bakersfield and then thought that CA 46 between CA 99 and I-5 would be a better route for making a 4 lane divided highway. Higher pop (Wasco and Paso Robles) served and straighter.
And while we are at it, can we finish a 4 lane divided highway with CA 14? There's about 15 miles left to do between Mojave and Inyokern. That would make US 395 and CA 14 a faster, more direct route between LA and Tahoe.
46 is certainly a better route from I-5 to CA 101, but it would require a merge onto CA 99 and then some weaving traving with Bakersfield exit and entrance traffic and then exit again before too much longer. Better for I-40 to cross CA 99 instead of merging with it. Remember, lots of truck traffic on CA 99 and we're expecting at least some on the extension of I-40.
I-40 west of I-15 is merely a fictional concept.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 16, 2021, 05:24:18 PM
Quote from: OldDominion75 on May 16, 2021, 05:20:07 PM
I'd say the entire Baltimore-Washington Parkway. A lot of GPS platforms advise drivers bound to the Northeast to use I-295 and the Balt - Wash Pkwy to rejoin I-95 north near College Park. It would make theoretical sense because that entire route (completely free-flowing limited access highway) would be more direct to reaching I-95 north than using I-95's Capital Beltway route. If they were to use it, though, they would be in for a nightmare of accidents, traffic jams, sharp curves, and bumps. I-95/I-495, though it has its own share of problems, would be much more effective in my opinion.
Agreed, the Baltimore-Washington Parkway at least between I-495 and I-95 in Baltimore needs to have the remaining NPS portions taken over by the state, widened to an 8 lane freeway, and the speed limit increased to 65 mph.
As well as the interchanges with both I-695 and I-495 being re-vamped, replacing some (all?) of the tight loops ramps with flyovers. (To be fair, there's not a whole lot of real estate available at the Baltimore end)
I am not sure how much interest the NPS would have as far as transferring it to the state. I know NPS has little interest in upgrading capacity.
I don't necessarily think either needs to be a freeway, but as far as Utah goes I would appreciate seeing US 6 between Spanish Fork and Green River and US 191 between I-70 and Moab upgraded to four-lane divided. Both of those carry quite a bit of traffic - US 6 is full of trucks, and 191 has a good amount of national park/Moab tourist traffic plus some of those trucks. Those roads make up part of the fastest and most direct route from the Pacific Northwest to much of Texas.
Quote from: webny99 on May 14, 2021, 09:57:18 PM
NY is extremely lacking in rural four-lane non-freeways. Most states take them for granted, but they are glaringly absent here.
NY 14 between the Thruway and Watkins Glen comes to mind as a corridor that at least 40 other states would have widened or at least added passing lanes.
Continuing on with my theme of "routes
at least 40 other states would have widened":
-NY 14 between I-90 and Watkins Glen (as mentioned above)
-NY 104 between Williamson and Wolcott/NY 370
-NY 31 between Adams Basin and Brockport
-US 20A between East Aurora and NY 39
-US 20A between I-390 and Geneseo
-US 20/NY 5 between Canandaigua and Geneva
-US 20/NY 5 between NY 318 and Auburn
-NY 13 between Ithaca and Cortland
... and that just scratches the surface.
Quote from: US 89 on May 17, 2021, 12:24:35 AM
I don't necessarily think either needs to be a freeway, but as far as Utah goes I would appreciate seeing US 6 between Spanish Fork and Green River and US 191 between I-70 and Moab upgraded to four-lane divided. Both of those carry quite a bit of traffic - US 6 is full of trucks, and 191 has a good amount of national park/Moab tourist traffic plus some of those trucks. Those roads make up part of the fastest and most direct route from the Pacific Northwest to much of Texas.
Those are good ones, though after driving it over the weekend, I'm still surprised why UT-201 (or a combo of UT-201 and UT-202) isn't a full freeway out to I-80. At least from east of 202, 201 is divided, though you have only a handful of intersections that would need to be upgraded.
If 201 (or a the aforementioned 202/201 combo) is fully upgraded, you'd have a full freeway alternative to I-80 through much of the Salt Lake Valley.
^ I was thinking more about long-distance rural corridors when I made that post, but including urban highways I definitely agree with you regarding 201. Bangerter and the US 89 expressway in Davis County would also do well as full freeways, so it's a good thing UDOT is gradually making progress on those.
SR 36 between I-80 and Tooele would also be a good candidate, but in that case the Midvalley Highway should hopefully relieve some of the 36 traffic once it's done. Mountain View is probably fine as it is for now...although I can imagine traffic counts on the Salt Lake County part going way up once they make the connection to 201.
Quote from: hobsini2 on May 16, 2021, 05:03:01 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on May 14, 2021, 10:53:03 AM
There aren't a ton of candidates in Colorado off the top of my brain. It wouldn't hurt to upgrade CO83 between I-225 and the Springs to have an overflow route opposite I-25. Also it suffers less in the winter as compared to Momument Hill.
I also wouldn't hate it if US285 could somehow become completely limited access between I-25 and Sheridan.
Chris
US 24 between Colorado Springs and Limon maybe to a 4 lane divided highway?
Maybe if the Springs keeps growing, but as it sits, I've never seen too much congestion on that road. US85 between Denver and Greeley (mentioned upthread) is probably the only rural stretch that needs to be upgraded right now due to truck traffic.
Chris
One that never gets mentioned (because it's only needed a couple times a year), but I'd like to see in Michigan is US-12 between M-50 & US-127. Could we at least make it a 3 lane road, with the center lane used as a relief lane depending on traffic flow?
CA-60 from Moreno Valley to I-10. Granted it's in mountainous terrain, but it's also the only segment of the entire route that's not a freeway.
M-59 in Macomb County. The existing median is wide enough to fit a freeway through it!
US-31 through Grand Haven
Quote from: SeriesE on May 17, 2021, 08:19:59 PM
CA-60 from Moreno Valley to I-10. Granted it's in mountainous terrain, but it's also the only segment of the entire route that's not a freeway.
It's in the process of improvements -- primarily curvature reduction and improved lines of sight on the section through the Badlands -- but AFAIK the few grade crossings at the east end of the stretch (like Jackrabbit Trail) aren't being addressed by the current project. However, as the Beaumont/Banning area sees more and more "overflow" housing deployed in their area, pressure to bring CA 60 up to even higher standards (a full freeway, possibly with truck lanes up and down the hill) may increase. Only so many "band-aids" can be applied before more extensive surgery is appropriate!
Quote from: jayhawkco on May 17, 2021, 11:37:07 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on May 16, 2021, 05:03:01 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on May 14, 2021, 10:53:03 AM
There aren't a ton of candidates in Colorado off the top of my brain. It wouldn't hurt to upgrade CO83 between I-225 and the Springs to have an overflow route opposite I-25. Also it suffers less in the winter as compared to Momument Hill.
I also wouldn't hate it if US285 could somehow become completely limited access between I-25 and Sheridan.
Chris
US 24 between Colorado Springs and Limon maybe to a 4 lane divided highway?
Maybe if the Springs keeps growing, but as it sits, I've never seen too much congestion on that road. US85 between Denver and Greeley (mentioned upthread) is probably the only rural stretch that needs to be upgraded right now due to truck traffic.
Chris
I'd say US 24 could use upgrading to a 4-lane corridor due to safety concerns as there seem to be a lot of head-on collisions between the Springs and Limon.
Agreed about US 85 and US 285. If nothing else US285 from Sheridan to Santa Fe could use those traffic lights (and Sheridan city revenue light cameras) removed.
Another corridor that could use upgrading is US 285 between Aspen Park and Kenosha Pass. The two remaining traffic lights and single lane sections really back up on summer weekends for sure.
For Pennsylvania, I'd list a couple:
- PA 28 from Kittanning to PA 36/I-80 at Brookville, which is a 2-lane piecemealed corridor extension to a freeway from Pittsburgh
- US 322 from Clearfield to I-99 at Port Matilda, was supposed to be upgraded by funding got moved elsewhere
- US 322 east of State College, last piece in having a 4-lane route to Harrisburg
- US 30 from Chambersburg to York, slow going with lots of tourist traffic and towns along the way
- US 22 at Hollidaysburg, where a bypass would do wonders with this ARC corridor
- US 219 from Ebensburg to Northern Cambria, where an extension of the freeway or even a new 2-lane alignment would make US 219 much more useful as a through route by bypassing slow towns
Quote from: OldDominion75 on May 16, 2021, 05:20:07 PM
I'd say the entire Baltimore-Washington Parkway. A lot of GPS platforms advise drivers bound to the Northeast to use I-295 and the Balt - Wash Pkwy to rejoin I-95 north near College Park. It would make theoretical sense because that entire route (completely free-flowing limited access highway) would be more direct to reaching I-95 north than using I-95's Capital Beltway route. If they were to use it, though, they would be in for a nightmare of accidents, traffic jams, sharp curves, and bumps. I-95/I-495, though it has its own share of problems, would be much more effective in my opinion.
Does the National Park Service allow upgrades?
Quote from: texaskdog on May 14, 2021, 10:45:09 AM
Quote from: 1 on May 14, 2021, 08:04:39 AM
2dis:
Austin-Houston
Disagree. We take 71 frequently and while I'd love a freeway there (much like 290 out to I-10 on the west side) the existing road easy handles the traffic (probably due in part to having 2 expressways headed there)
I disagree with you. There needs to be 100% grade separation.