AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Author Topic: Why doesn't New Mexico assign exit numbers to unnumbered interchanges?  (Read 11229 times)

MattHanson939

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 109
  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: June 30, 2023, 12:34:57 AM

In the past, interchanges on non-interstate highways in New Mexico didn't have exit numbers at all; and this was the case up until the early 2000s.  It all changed when US 84/285 was upgraded from a divided highway to a freeway in 2002-05.  It was the first non-interstate highway in the state to use exit numbers.  And most new interchanges that were built after that project wrapped up followed suit, with the exception of NM 423 (Paseo del Norte) between Coors Blvd. and I-25 within Albuquerque (the intersection with Jefferson Street was upgraded to an interchange but no exit number assigned).  Two new interchanges were built on NM 599 in recent years, and they were numbered.  And the same happened on US 84/285 north of Pojoaque when an at-grade intersection was upgraded to an interchange as part of the stretch between Pojoaque and Española being upgraded to an expressway.

However, interchanges on US 84/285 and NM 599 that were built during the late 1990s / early 2000s still don't have exit numbers.  The US 84-285/NM 599 interchange is only numbered going southbound.  And in Pojoaque, the interchange with NM 502 still isn't numbered.  So this brings me to my question. 

Why doesn't New Mexico assign exit numbers to interchanges on its non-interstate highways that currently don't have exit numbers?  They ought to do so whenever signs at these interchanges get replaced.  Having seen old photos of I-25 and I-40 in Albuquerque dating back to the 60's and 70's, they initially didn't have exit numbers; but then in the '80s, they started having exit numbers as old signs were getting replaced.  The Big-I still didn't have exit numbers until the interchange was rebuilt in 2000-02.
 

Another highway that ought to use exit numbers is the freeway section of US 70 in Las Cruces.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2023, 09:20:48 PM by andy3175 »
Logged

wanderer2575

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2231
  • Location: Farmington Hills, MI
  • Last Login: Today at 05:21:56 PM

Are milemarkers posted?  I would think that with no milemarkers, there won't be mile-based exit numbers.
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 28733
  • My 2 Achilles' heels: sarcasm & snark

  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: February 23, 2024, 03:34:36 PM

Another highway that ought to use exit numbers is the freeway section of US 70 in Las Cruces.

Are milemarkers posted?

Yes.  https://goo.gl/maps/hCJSTEapWRSzN5377
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. Dick
If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

DJStephens

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1117
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Las Cruces NM 88012
  • Last Login: February 23, 2024, 11:06:23 AM

    The las Cruces "expressway" segment of US 70 is of a mish-mash of varying quality and standards.  Hatched in the mid nineties, and built in the '99 to '04 timeframe, as part of Gary Johnson's and Pete Rahn's "do it on the cheap" mindset, the project removed several at grade intersections that had been the scene of grisly T bones since the sixties.   
    Frankly, looking back, would have spent a bit more, and applied Interstate design standards to the the stretch.  Full Shoulders, No Shifting at Overpasses, and coherent deceleration and acceleration lanes at Exits.   Some locations have adequate decel / accel lanes, others do not.  An Auxiliary lane exists in one stretch, but not in another where there should be one.   Initial Re construction did not provide for crossover incident protection, aside from "field fence".  Subsesquent mods provided a double?!? cable barrier, that is fragile, and highly suseptible to damage.  Why on earth didn't they just put in Double Faced CBR?!?   Monotube gantries are placed "willy nilly" often way to close to the main lanes or too near a decel lane that is too short.  More recently "Sylvia" message boards were erected, again, too close to the main lanes or too close to an decel / exit ramp that is too short.  For heavens sake, place it far enough away to provide a ten foot shoulder! 
      It did not also take into account the very real probability of the area becoming a retirement "mecca" as recent development has borne out.   No one saw this coming?  Up to 5000 homes, are slated or are already extant in the N Sonoma Ranch Blvd area, N of the expressway.   Each home, will have up to three personal vehicles and they will travel out of the area for shopping, work, or sightseeing.  Most are new west coast transplants.   Nightmarish traffic jams await, in the near future, in what was once a "sleepy" little town.  A once little town, that now has grown to 125,000 residents, if everyone is counted, which they are not.   Absolutely no foresight or planning exists here.  Seems par for the course, for the entire state, and W Texas as well.     
« Last Edit: March 20, 2023, 02:54:56 PM by DJStephens »
Logged

JoePCool14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3140
  • Age: 23
  • Location: Illinois / Wisconsin
  • Last Login: February 18, 2024, 06:56:10 PM
    • My TravelMapping stats

Does NMDOT have a Contact Us page? You could always try and submit a comment to see if they have an official position on it.
Logged

:) Needs more... :sombrero: Not quite... :bigass: Perfect.
JDOT: We make the world a better place to drive.
Travel Mapping | 55+ Clinches | 225+ Traveled | 7000+ Miles Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4882
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: Today at 04:16:16 PM

I prefer exits to have numbers (preferably mileage-based). I know some states number their freeway/expressway/tollway exits more extensively than others do. Outside of New Mexico's Interstates, about the only roadways that could be given exit numbers are the US 70 freeway east of Las Cruces, and the NM 423 Paseo Del Norte Blvd. NE. Let me know if I missed any others.
Logged

MattHanson939

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 109
  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: June 30, 2023, 12:34:57 AM

I prefer exits to have numbers (preferably mileage-based). I know some states number their freeway/expressway/tollway exits more extensively than others do. Outside of New Mexico's Interstates, about the only roadways that could be given exit numbers are the US 70 freeway east of Las Cruces, and the NM 423 Paseo Del Norte Blvd. NE. Let me know if I missed any others.

As I mentioned before, a couple interchanges on the US 84/285 freeway-expressway north of Santa Fe that were built in the late '90s and early 2000s could be given exit numbers.  In particular, the interchange with NM 502 in Pojoaque ought to be numbered.  The interchange with NM 599 just north of Santa Fe is given an exit number but only going southbound.  The exit number should also be present going northbound.  On NM 599, the interchanges with Camino La Tierra/Calle Nopal and Ridgetop Road should also be numbered to retain consistency with newer interchanges built during the 2010s, which do have exit numbers.

New Mexico doesn't do sequential-based exit numbers on any of its highways at all.  They're always mileage-based.
Logged

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1226
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: February 23, 2024, 05:39:07 PM

I prefer exits to have numbers (preferably mileage-based). I know some states number their freeway/expressway/tollway exits more extensively than others do. Outside of New Mexico's Interstates, about the only roadways that could be given exit numbers are the US 70 freeway east of Las Cruces, and the NM 423 Paseo Del Norte Blvd. NE. Let me know if I missed any others.

As I mentioned before, a couple interchanges on the US 84/285 freeway-expressway north of Santa Fe that were built in the late '90s and early 2000s could be given exit numbers.  In particular, the interchange with NM 502 in Pojoaque ought to be numbered.  The interchange with NM 599 just north of Santa Fe is given an exit number but only going southbound.  The exit number should also be present going northbound.  On NM 599, the interchanges with Camino La Tierra/Calle Nopal and Ridgetop Road should also be numbered to retain consistency with newer interchanges built during the 2010s, which do have exit numbers.

New Mexico doesn't do sequential-based exit numbers on any of its highways at all.  They're always mileage-based.
I don't think New Mexico ever had sequential numbers. I think they went with mileage-based numbers from the beginning.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

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

jtespi

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 58
  • Age: 25
  • Location: Las Cruces, NM
  • Last Login: August 21, 2023, 06:06:09 PM

    The las Cruces "expressway" segment of US 70 is of a mish-mash of varying quality and standards.  Hatched in the mid nineties, and built in the '99 to '04 timeframe, as part of Gary Johnson's and Pete Rahn's "do it on the cheap" mindset, the project removed several at grade intersections that had been the scene of grisly T bones since the sixties.   
    Frankly, looking back, would have spent a bit more, and applied Interstate design standards to the the stretch.  Full Shoulders, No Shifting at Overpasses, and coherent deceleration and acceleration lanes at Exits.   Some locations have adequate decel / accel lanes, others do not.  An Auxiliary lane exists in one stretch, but not in another where there should be one.   Initial Re construction did not provide for crossover incident protection, aside from "field fence".  Subsesquent mods provided a double?!? cable barrier, that is fragile, and highly suseptible to damage.  Why on earth didn't they just put in Double Faced CBR?!?   Monotube gantries are placed "willy nilly" often way to close to the main lanes or too near a decel lane that is too short.  More recently "Sylvia" message boards were erected, again, too close to the main lanes or too close to an decel / exit ramp that is too short.  For heavens sake, place it far enough away to provide a ten foot shoulder! 
      It did not also take into account the very real probability of the area becoming a retirement "mecca" as recent development has borne out.   No one saw this coming?  Up to 5000 homes, are slated or are already extant in the N Sonoma Ranch Blvd area, N of the expressway.   Each home, will have up to three personal vehicles and they will travel out of the area for shopping, work, or sightseeing.  Most are new west coast transplants.   Nightmarish traffic jams await, in the near future, in what was once a "sleepy" little town.  A once little town, that now has grown to 125,000 residents, if everyone is counted, which they are not.   Absolutely no foresight or planning exists here.  Seems par for the course, for the entire state, and W Texas as well.   

Amazingly, the US-70 mainlines still have their original pavement between Rinconada and Nasa Rd. They just crack sealed it about 8 years ago and it is very bumpy now. Since they've started to repave portions of the frontage road at intersections, I really hope they'll fully repave the US-70 mainlines. After 20+ years of service, the asphalt just needs to be replaced.
I hope they use high quality asphalt like they used in the 2009 repave of I-25 in Las Cruces. That lasted good for 10 years. The recently repaved (around 2020-2021) section of US-70 through WSMR is already starting to become rough in sections.

You can already see backups happening at rush hour at the Sonoma Ranch exit going eastbound. Exiting traffic wanting to turn left (north on Sonoma Ranch) is getting to the point where it backs up to the US-70 EB mainlines. That's where they should have built an exit-only lane in both directions between Rinconada and Sonoma Ranch. There's only 500 m (1640 ft) of separation between the two entrance and exit ramps.

I don't see them ever numbering the exits on US-70 in Las Cruces. Partly because most residents just refer to the exits by their names (i.e. the Sonoma Ranch exit or the Nasa Road exit) and because the exit numbers would be similar to those along I-10 in Las Cruces. The US-70 mile markers start at 151 at the I-25 interchange and go to 161 by Nasa Rd. I-10's exit numbers are 135 to 144 in Las Cruces. Although I think the first reason is more valid, since people know the US-70 exits by the street's name.

Thankfully, the NMDOT is planning on eventually making I-25 six lanes north of Lohman. There's regular daily backups on I-25 northbound approaching the US-70 interchange and extending ~2.3 km (1.4 mi) south to the Spruce Ave bridge. They have a project website and the project is officially known as the I-25 Safety and Capacity Study (Control Number LC00380).
Logged

DJStephens

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1117
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Las Cruces NM 88012
  • Last Login: February 23, 2024, 11:06:23 AM

Amazingly, the US-70 mainlines still have their original pavement between Rinconada and Nasa Rd. They just crack sealed it about 8 years ago and it is very bumpy now. Since they've started to repave portions of the frontage road at intersections, I really hope they'll fully repave the US-70 mainlines. After 20+ years of service, the asphalt just needs to be replaced.
I hope they use high quality asphalt like they used in the 2009 repave of I-25 in Las Cruces. That lasted good for 10 years. The recently repaved (around 2020-2021) section of US-70 through WSMR is already starting to become rough in sections.
You can already see backups happening at rush hour at the Sonoma Ranch exit going eastbound. Exiting traffic wanting to turn left (north on Sonoma Ranch) is getting to the point where it backs up to the US-70 EB mainlines. That's where they should have built an exit-only lane in both directions between Rinconada and Sonoma Ranch. There's only 500 m (1640 ft) of separation between the two entrance and exit ramps.

I don't see them ever numbering the exits on US-70 in Las Cruces. Partly because most residents just refer to the exits by their names (i.e. the Sonoma Ranch exit or the Nasa Road exit) and because the exit numbers would be similar to those along I-10 in Las Cruces. The US-70 mile markers start at 151 at the I-25 interchange and go to 161 by Nasa Rd. I-10's exit numbers are 135 to 144 in Las Cruces. Although I think the first reason is more valid, since people know the US-70 exits by the street's name.

Thankfully, the NMDOT is planning on eventually making I-25 six lanes north of Lohman. There's regular daily backups on I-25 northbound approaching the US-70 interchange and extending ~2.3 km (1.4 mi) south to the Spruce Ave bridge. They have a project website and the project is officially known as the I-25 Safety and Capacity Study (Control Number LC00380).
There is an "auxiliary" lane for 70 EB between Rinconada and Sonoma Ranch.  There isn't one EB, where there should be one.   That is where the monotube Sonoma Ranch Exit gantry, and the more recent "Sylvia" message board are placed erroneously.  The amount of traffic, that will seek to travel up and down this stretch of Sonoma Ranch, it's beyond possible belief.  Don't believe that there was any sort of foresight for this.
As for I-25 widening, noticed that yet another "Sylvia' message board was installed, with concrete base, just outside the R guardrail on 25 south of Exit 6.  Isn't that going to need to be ripped out, and moved, when the widening happens?!?   There's another one, also just outside the R guardrail, S of University.   Why can't these devices be installed, on the Median Centerline??   The entire 25 corridor, from the 10 interchange, to just N of Exit 6, is a prime example of mistakes and "piecemealing".  The ROW corridor is wide enough, that when reconstruction started ( N Main in '99) some sort of long term vision with six lanes, a 60 foot median, and interchange bridges with far greater horizontal clearances could have been envisioned.   
Logged

JKRhodes

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 396
  • Ditat Deus

  • Age: 40
  • Location: Safford, Arizona
  • Last Login: February 04, 2024, 02:45:12 PM

Amazingly, the US-70 mainlines still have their original pavement between Rinconada and Nasa Rd. They just crack sealed it about 8 years ago and it is very bumpy now. Since they've started to repave portions of the frontage road at intersections, I really hope they'll fully repave the US-70 mainlines. After 20+ years of service, the asphalt just needs to be replaced.
I hope they use high quality asphalt like they used in the 2009 repave of I-25 in Las Cruces. That lasted good for 10 years. The recently repaved (around 2020-2021) section of US-70 through WSMR is already starting to become rough in sections.
You can already see backups happening at rush hour at the Sonoma Ranch exit going eastbound. Exiting traffic wanting to turn left (north on Sonoma Ranch) is getting to the point where it backs up to the US-70 EB mainlines. That's where they should have built an exit-only lane in both directions between Rinconada and Sonoma Ranch. There's only 500 m (1640 ft) of separation between the two entrance and exit ramps.

I don't see them ever numbering the exits on US-70 in Las Cruces. Partly because most residents just refer to the exits by their names (i.e. the Sonoma Ranch exit or the Nasa Road exit) and because the exit numbers would be similar to those along I-10 in Las Cruces. The US-70 mile markers start at 151 at the I-25 interchange and go to 161 by Nasa Rd. I-10's exit numbers are 135 to 144 in Las Cruces. Although I think the first reason is more valid, since people know the US-70 exits by the street's name.

Thankfully, the NMDOT is planning on eventually making I-25 six lanes north of Lohman. There's regular daily backups on I-25 northbound approaching the US-70 interchange and extending ~2.3 km (1.4 mi) south to the Spruce Ave bridge. They have a project website and the project is officially known as the I-25 Safety and Capacity Study (Control Number LC00380).
There is an "auxiliary" lane for 70 EB between Rinconada and Sonoma Ranch.  There isn't one EB, where there should be one.   That is where the monotube Sonoma Ranch Exit gantry, and the more recent "Sylvia" message board are placed erroneously.  The amount of traffic, that will seek to travel up and down this stretch of Sonoma Ranch, it's beyond possible belief.  Don't believe that there was any sort of foresight for this.
As for I-25 widening, noticed that yet another "Sylvia' message board was installed, with concrete base, just outside the R guardrail on 25 south of Exit 6.  Isn't that going to need to be ripped out, and moved, when the widening happens?!?   There's another one, also just outside the R guardrail, S of University.   Why can't these devices be installed, on the Median Centerline??   The entire 25 corridor, from the 10 interchange, to just N of Exit 6, is a prime example of mistakes and "piecemealing".  The ROW corridor is wide enough, that when reconstruction started ( N Main in '99) some sort of long term vision with six lanes, a 60 foot median, and interchange bridges with far greater horizontal clearances could have been envisioned.

I’m of the opinion they should have constructed ramps at Sonoma Ranch, Rinconada and Mesa Grande in X, rather than diamond, configuration. Seeing as how they already borrowed the Texas u-turn idea.  Seems it would alleviate the mainline backups at Sonoma Ranch and eased access to Jornada, many of whose residents were initially quite upset about changes in access to their neighborhood when the design was initially rolled out.
Logged

DJStephens

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1117
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Las Cruces NM 88012
  • Last Login: February 23, 2024, 11:06:23 AM

Okay, you are referring to "Braided Ramps" then?  The design of what is there now, is inconsistent.  Some ramps have "decel" or "accel" length to them, others do not.  As mentioned before, there is an Auxiliary lane between Sonoma and Rinconada WB, but not EB.  Why?  Gantry and Message Board structures were placed too close to the R edge of pavement, and too close to the abrupt EB exit ramp for Sonoma Ranch.  There is and will be an incredible amount of traffic seeking to utilize the Sonoma Ranch interchange.  A double L hand turn, for EB traffic exiting for Sonoma Ranch NB will be needed in the near future.  There are PE's stamping these decisions.  What are they smoking?  There are, by the way, a lot of Dispensaries here now.   
« Last Edit: June 04, 2023, 11:12:09 AM by DJStephens »
Logged

JKRhodes

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 396
  • Ditat Deus

  • Age: 40
  • Location: Safford, Arizona
  • Last Login: February 04, 2024, 02:45:12 PM

Okay, you are referring to "Braided Ramps" then?  The design of what is there now, is inconsistent.  Some ramps have "decel" or "accel" length to them, others do not.  As mentioned before, there is an Auxiliary lane between Sonoma and Rinconada WB, but not EB.  Why?  Gantry and Message Board structures were placed too close to the R edge of pavement, and too close to the abrupt EB exit ramp for Sonoma Ranch.  There is and will be an incredible amount of traffic seeking to utilize the Sonoma Ranch interchange.  A double L hand turn, for EB traffic exiting for Sonoma Ranch NB will be needed in the near future.  There are PE's stamping these decisions.  What are they smoking?  There are, by the way, a lot of Dispensaries here now.

Sometimes it’s called a reverse diamond. Exiting traffic slips from the mainline to the feeder road where the previous street’s on ramp would normally be. Entering traffic from the previous street slips from feeder to mainline where the next off ramp would normally go. They share the feeder and access to adjacent parcels/side streets in the mean space.

Though, with the queues you’re describing, a braided ramp solution is probably the better option.  Or a more robust arterial network that can tie into adjacent under utilized exits. Both sound like painful fixes given the amount of stuff that’s already been built.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2023, 11:44:14 AM by JKRhodes »
Logged

jtespi

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 58
  • Age: 25
  • Location: Las Cruces, NM
  • Last Login: August 21, 2023, 06:06:09 PM

Okay, you are referring to "Braided Ramps" then?  The design of what is there now, is inconsistent.  Some ramps have "decel" or "accel" length to them, others do not.  As mentioned before, there is an Auxiliary lane between Sonoma and Rinconada WB, but not EB.  Why?  Gantry and Message Board structures were placed too close to the R edge of pavement, and too close to the abrupt EB exit ramp for Sonoma Ranch.  There is and will be an incredible amount of traffic seeking to utilize the Sonoma Ranch interchange.  A double L hand turn, for EB traffic exiting for Sonoma Ranch NB will be needed in the near future.  There are PE's stamping these decisions.  What are they smoking?  There are, by the way, a lot of Dispensaries here now.

Sometimes it’s called a reverse diamond. Exiting traffic slips from the mainline to the feeder road where the previous street’s on ramp would normally be. Entering traffic from the previous street slips from feeder to mainline where the next off ramp would normally go. They share the feeder and access to adjacent parcels/side streets in the mean space.

Though, with the queues you’re describing, a braided ramp solution is probably the better option.  Or a more robust arterial network that can tie into adjacent under utilized exits. Both sound like painful fixes given the amount of stuff that’s already been built.

The reverse diamond or X configuration might actually work except that the Rinconada eastbound entrance ramp is the first one since I-25. There's new Street View imagery from last month showing the current state of things. The frontage road and mainlines could be expanded to the south between Rinconada and Sonoma Ranch with the relocation/reconfiguration of the large power transmission lines. There currently isn't any development (i.e. driveways) between the Rinconada EB entrance ramp and the Sonoma Ranch EB exit ramp.

But yes, you can see how backed up it gets. The Street View car rolled through at the exact perfect time to document this.

It is especially egregious that they installed this 120 m (390 ft) long divider that prevents anyone from using the turnaround to access the Starbucks, Carl's Jr, or Denny's parking lot. This will put a lot more pressure on the already overloaded EB to NB left turn at Sonoma Ranch.
Logged

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1226
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: February 23, 2024, 05:39:07 PM

Okay, you are referring to "Braided Ramps" then?  The design of what is there now, is inconsistent.  Some ramps have "decel" or "accel" length to them, others do not.  As mentioned before, there is an Auxiliary lane between Sonoma and Rinconada WB, but not EB.  Why?  Gantry and Message Board structures were placed too close to the R edge of pavement, and too close to the abrupt EB exit ramp for Sonoma Ranch.  There is and will be an incredible amount of traffic seeking to utilize the Sonoma Ranch interchange.  A double L hand turn, for EB traffic exiting for Sonoma Ranch NB will be needed in the near future.  There are PE's stamping these decisions.  What are they smoking?  There are, by the way, a lot of Dispensaries here now.

Sometimes it’s called a reverse diamond. Exiting traffic slips from the mainline to the feeder road where the previous street’s on ramp would normally be. Entering traffic from the previous street slips from feeder to mainline where the next off ramp would normally go. They share the feeder and access to adjacent parcels/side streets in the mean space.

Though, with the queues you’re describing, a braided ramp solution is probably the better option.  Or a more robust arterial network that can tie into adjacent under utilized exits. Both sound like painful fixes given the amount of stuff that’s already been built.

The reverse diamond or X configuration might actually work except that the Rinconada eastbound entrance ramp is the first one since I-25. There's new Street View imagery from last month showing the current state of things. The frontage road and mainlines could be expanded to the south between Rinconada and Sonoma Ranch with the relocation/reconfiguration of the large power transmission lines. There currently isn't any development (i.e. driveways) between the Rinconada EB entrance ramp and the Sonoma Ranch EB exit ramp.

But yes, you can see how backed up it gets. The Street View car rolled through at the exact perfect time to document this.

It is especially egregious that they installed this 120 m (390 ft) long divider that prevents anyone from using the turnaround to access the Starbucks, Carl's Jr, or Denny's parking lot. This will put a lot more pressure on the already overloaded EB to NB left turn at Sonoma Ranch.
I suspect they installed that divider to eliminate weaving in that area, particularly if that location has had a lot of crashes caused by folks suddenly going from the far left lane to make the right turn into the Starbucks/Carl's Jr/Denny's lot.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

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

jtespi

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 58
  • Age: 25
  • Location: Las Cruces, NM
  • Last Login: August 21, 2023, 06:06:09 PM

I suspect they installed that divider to eliminate weaving in that area, particularly if that location has had a lot of crashes caused by folks suddenly going from the far left lane to make the right turn into the Starbucks/Carl's Jr/Denny's lot.
That's probably why they did that, but honestly it is overkill. The entrance to Starbucks, Carl's Jr. and Denny's is 100 m (330 ft) from the turnaround. I never noticed any crashes from such maneuvers and it wasn't difficult to wait for a gap in traffic at the end of the turnaround.

This divider only puts more pressure on the traffic signals at Sonoma Ranch and Bataan Memorial E & W, which are already overloaded during afternoon rush hour.
Logged

JKRhodes

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 396
  • Ditat Deus

  • Age: 40
  • Location: Safford, Arizona
  • Last Login: February 04, 2024, 02:45:12 PM

Thorpe, aside from the weird cluster of intersections near the freeway, seems like it's just begging to be extended east and tied into Peachtree hills Road. Has this been studied or considered? Could take some pressure off of US 70 if Sonoma Ranch had a more direct route to I-25
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4207
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 01:38:39 PM

I can't help but wonder if the people who designed Las Cruces' US-70 expressway going East of I-25 were using highways in Mexico as their design inspiration. Six lanes of US-70 plus the frontage roads (Bataan Memorial E & W) spans only 200' of ROW. It's less than that in some places. It does expand out to about 250' wide at intersections such as Del Ray Blvd. Overall it's a very skinny design with very short, inadequate slip ramps. The expressway has a third world look and feel to it. It wouldn't be so bad if the shoulders had been made with adequate widths and the ramp geometry designed better.

I can't think of many other freeways crammed in as tight as this. The first couple miles of I-88 in Binghamton come to mind.

With Las Cruces growing the way that it is NM DOT really needs to do some significant upgrades to that stretch of US-70. Otherwise they're going to see more and more serious accidents happening. They don't necessarily need to expand the ROW out to 350'+ widths like some freeway/frontage road combos in Texas. But the ROW needs to be closer to 300' than 200' (or less). Exit numbers along that road would be nice too, but that's the least of that highway's problems.
Logged

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1226
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: February 23, 2024, 05:39:07 PM

I can't help but wonder if the people who designed Las Cruces' US-70 expressway going East of I-25 were using highways in Mexico as their design inspiration. Six lanes of US-70 plus the frontage roads (Bataan Memorial E & W) spans only 200' of ROW. It's less than that in some places. It does expand out to about 250' wide at intersections such as Del Ray Blvd. Overall it's a very skinny design with very short, inadequate slip ramps. The expressway has a third world look and feel to it. It wouldn't be so bad if the shoulders had been made with adequate widths and the ramp geometry designed better.

I can't think of many other freeways crammed in as tight as this. The first couple miles of I-88 in Binghamton come to mind.

With Las Cruces growing the way that it is NM DOT really needs to do some significant upgrades to that stretch of US-70. Otherwise they're going to see more and more serious accidents happening. They don't necessarily need to expand the ROW out to 350'+ widths like some freeway/frontage road combos in Texas. But the ROW needs to be closer to 300' than 200' (or less). Exit numbers along that road would be nice too, but that's the least of that highway's problems.
To that point, I would think that NMDOT should look at 4-laning NM-26 between Deming and Hatch, which is often used as a shortcut from I-25 to I-10 heading west toward Arizona.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

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

DJStephens

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1117
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Las Cruces NM 88012
  • Last Login: February 23, 2024, 11:06:23 AM

I can't help but wonder if the people who designed Las Cruces' US-70 expressway going East of I-25 were using highways in Mexico as their design inspiration. Six lanes of US-70 plus the frontage roads (Bataan Memorial E & W) spans only 200' of ROW. It's less than that in some places. It does expand out to about 250' wide at intersections such as Del Ray Blvd. Overall it's a very skinny design with very short, inadequate slip ramps. The expressway has a third world look and feel to it. It wouldn't be so bad if the shoulders had been made with adequate widths and the ramp geometry designed better.

I can't think of many other freeways crammed in as tight as this. The first couple miles of I-88 in Binghamton come to mind.

With Las Cruces growing the way that it is NM DOT really needs to do some significant upgrades to that stretch of US-70. Otherwise they're going to see more and more serious accidents happening. They don't necessarily need to expand the ROW out to 350'+ widths like some freeway/frontage road combos in Texas. But the ROW needs to be closer to 300' than 200' (or less). Exit numbers along that road would be nice too, but that's the least of that highway's problems.
    Look up "Pete Rahn" and "practical design".  Buzzword for doing it on the Cheap.   The design, for the most part, is terrible.   They trucked down fill, from the base of the Organ mountains, for new overpasses, instead of trenching and depressing the main lines in the Roadrunner Pkwy and Rinconada exit areas.   So the main lines were left "humped up" instead of being constructed with a far less incline heading E from the I-25 interchange.  There should have been a 2-3% main line grade, instead of 6-7%.   The main lines were also "shifted" on the new overpasses, at just about all of the interchanges, instead of remaining on the original alignment.  Shifting and Skewing, it is way too common here, and looks like crap.   
    Did write several letters to certain "engineers" and politicans at that time, ('98-'99) suggesting better, long term design, but for the most part was ignored.   Fast forward 22-24 years, and they are building houses like crazy along Sonoma Ranch N.   Although the pace has slowed, there are still numerous "west coasters" that want to re-locate and or retire here.   These new residents are going to seek to drive, and the current surface infrastructure, which is constrained, and "road dieted" will be overwhelmed.   No one could see it coming?!?
Logged

DJStephens

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1117
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Las Cruces NM 88012
  • Last Login: February 23, 2024, 11:06:23 AM

Thorpe, aside from the weird cluster of intersections near the freeway, seems like it's just begging to be extended east and tied into Peachtree hills Road. Has this been studied or considered? Could take some pressure off of US 70 if Sonoma Ranch had a more direct route to I-25
Frankly, that type of thinking doesn't exist here.  There will be delay, fence sitting, obfuscation, and malfeasence, while the problem of congestion continues to grow.   If you look at Engler Rd, you might start to understand the mindset.   Several disconnected sections, of varying design standards.   No movement to connect, despite a "half baked" I-25 overpass, with weird geometrics and no exit ramps.   Meanwhile tax revenue from wealthy west coast transplants pours into city coffers.   
« Last Edit: July 26, 2023, 12:57:33 PM by DJStephens »
Logged

JKRhodes

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 396
  • Ditat Deus

  • Age: 40
  • Location: Safford, Arizona
  • Last Login: February 04, 2024, 02:45:12 PM

Thorpe, aside from the weird cluster of intersections near the freeway, seems like it's just begging to be extended east and tied into Peachtree hills Road. Has this been studied or considered? Could take some pressure off of US 70 if Sonoma Ranch had a more direct route to I-25
Frankly, that type of thinking doesn't exist here.  There will be delay, fence sitting, and malfeasence, while the problem of congestion continues to grow.   If you look at Engler Rd, you might start to understand the mindset.   Several disconnected sections, of varying design standards.   No movement to connect, despite a "half baked" I-25 overpass, with weird geometrics and no exit ramps.   Meanwhile tax revenue from wealthy west coast transplants pours into city coffers.

Ah! When I lived there in 2005 and explored some, I never understood the random  “boulevard to nowhere”  in the middle of Sonoma ranch that had me scratching my head. But it makes more sense now

That’s crazy! In Arizona where we have section line roads, I’ve seen plenty of two lane farm roads widened adjacent to new suburban neighborhoods as part of the developer’s “impact offset”  or whatever it’s called but never a disconnected section quite like this. That’s wild.
Logged

jtespi

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 58
  • Age: 25
  • Location: Las Cruces, NM
  • Last Login: August 21, 2023, 06:06:09 PM

I can't help but wonder if the people who designed Las Cruces' US-70 expressway going East of I-25 were using highways in Mexico as their design inspiration. Six lanes of US-70 plus the frontage roads (Bataan Memorial E & W) spans only 200' of ROW. It's less than that in some places. It does expand out to about 250' wide at intersections such as Del Ray Blvd. Overall it's a very skinny design with very short, inadequate slip ramps. The expressway has a third world look and feel to it. It wouldn't be so bad if the shoulders had been made with adequate widths and the ramp geometry designed better.

I can't think of many other freeways crammed in as tight as this. The first couple miles of I-88 in Binghamton come to mind.

With Las Cruces growing the way that it is NM DOT really needs to do some significant upgrades to that stretch of US-70. Otherwise they're going to see more and more serious accidents happening. They don't necessarily need to expand the ROW out to 350'+ widths like some freeway/frontage road combos in Texas. But the ROW needs to be closer to 300' than 200' (or less). Exit numbers along that road would be nice too, but that's the least of that highway's problems.

If they put a solid concrete barrier in the median and also between the mainlines and the frontage roads, they would be able to squeeze 6 lanes of freeway and 4 lanes of frontage roads in largely the same right-of-way.

The median currently wastes 6 meters (20 feet) and the buffer between the frontage road and the mainlines wastes 5 meters (16 feet) x 2. That's 16 meters (50 ft) of free space that can potentially be used. The existing lanes are 3.5 m (11.5 ft), so you can use up 7 m (23 ft) to build two more lanes and then have 9 m (27 ft) left over for concrete barriers and wider shoulders.
Logged

DJStephens

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1117
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Las Cruces NM 88012
  • Last Login: February 23, 2024, 11:06:23 AM

I can't help but wonder if the people who designed Las Cruces' US-70 expressway going East of I-25 were using highways in Mexico as their design inspiration. Six lanes of US-70 plus the frontage roads (Bataan Memorial E & W) spans only 200' of ROW. It's less than that in some places. It does expand out to about 250' wide at intersections such as Del Ray Blvd. Overall it's a very skinny design with very short, inadequate slip ramps. The expressway has a third world look and feel to it. It wouldn't be so bad if the shoulders had been made with adequate widths and the ramp geometry designed better.

I can't think of many other freeways crammed in as tight as this. The first couple miles of I-88 in Binghamton come to mind.

With Las Cruces growing the way that it is NM DOT really needs to do some significant upgrades to that stretch of US-70. Otherwise they're going to see more and more serious accidents happening. They don't necessarily need to expand the ROW out to 350'+ widths like some freeway/frontage road combos in Texas. But the ROW needs to be closer to 300' than 200' (or less). Exit numbers along that road would be nice too, but that's the least of that highway's problems.

    If they put a solid concrete barrier in the median and also between the mainlines and the frontage roads, they would be able to squeeze 6 lanes of freeway and 4 lanes of frontage roads in largely the same right-of-way.
    The median currently wastes 6 meters (20 feet) and the buffer between the frontage road and the mainlines wastes 5 meters (16 feet) x 2. That's 16 meters (50 ft) of free space that can potentially be used. The existing lanes are 3.5 m (11.5 ft), so you can use up 7 m (23 ft) to build two more lanes and then have 9 m (27 ft) left over for concrete barriers and wider shoulders.
"They" did add a center concrete double faced barrier (CBR) wall three years ago.  From the eastern edge of the Exit 6 interchange extending up the hill to the Rinconada overpass.   Before, there was just "mountable" median.  They also added double cable barrier all the way to the eastern end of the section (Baylor Canyon/NASA Road) interchange at that same time.   Where only field fence existed before.   The cross section immediately E of Exit 6 has six lanes on the main lines.  There needs to be a Full Left shoulder there.  Eliminating it would feed into this culture and mindset of regressive design which is all too omnipresent here.   
« Last Edit: July 26, 2023, 05:49:56 PM by DJStephens »
Logged

jtespi

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 58
  • Age: 25
  • Location: Las Cruces, NM
  • Last Login: August 21, 2023, 06:06:09 PM
Re: US-70 in Las Cruces
« Reply #24 on: July 30, 2023, 06:30:29 AM »

"They" did add a center concrete double faced barrier (CBR) wall three years ago.  From the eastern edge of the Exit 6 interchange extending up the hill to the Rinconada overpass.   Before, there was just "mountable" median.  They also added double cable barrier all the way to the eastern end of the section (Baylor Canyon/NASA Road) interchange at that same time.   Where only field fence existed before.   The cross section immediately E of Exit 6 has six lanes on the main lines.  There needs to be a Full Left shoulder there.  Eliminating it would feed into this culture and mindset of regressive design which is all too omnipresent here.

I know; that upgrade from Del Rey to Rinconada was done around 2016. I was saying that they could make the rest of US-70 six lanes total using the same approach without having to move the frontage roads. Of course, they'd just have to add a center span to all of the bridges since they were built as two separate structures with a gap in the median. There's enough room in the center median of US-70 and the buffer between the mainlines and the frontage road to add two more lanes - as long as a concrete barrier is used in 3 places: between the mainlines, and between each frontage road.
Logged

 


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