AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: New Mexico  (Read 15195 times)

sandiaman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 157
  • Last Login: July 03, 2015, 02:55:54 PM
New Mexico
« on: April 18, 2009, 02:42:07 PM »

Has anyone  used  US 84/285  freeway north os Santa Fe to Pojuaque?  It is real pleasure to drive on,with Indian names on the overpasses,  ( each overpass has a  unique Tewa name on the overhead part of the overpass).  The  sound barrier walls have animal designs as well.  It goes past a huge new casino here called the Buffalo Thunder, which opened last summer.
Logged

Bickendan

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2789
  • Last Login: Today at 04:43:36 AM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #1 on: August 08, 2009, 06:19:58 AM »

I've been on it, but it was several years ago.
Logged

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7195
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: October 23, 2021, 11:09:21 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #2 on: August 15, 2009, 05:51:47 AM »

I have been on it multiple times and actually managed to obtain a partial set of construction plans for it.  The bridge designs are a particular treat.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

Pink Jazz

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1607
  • Real Men Wear Pink

  • Age: 33
  • Location: Queen Creek, AZ
  • Last Login: October 23, 2021, 09:08:55 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #3 on: December 21, 2018, 10:12:59 AM »

NMDOT is increasing the speed limit on US 285 between Roswell and Vaughn to 75 mph:
https://www.rdrnews.com/2018/12/19/speed-limit-to-increase-to-75-mph-between-roswell-vaughn-in-january/

This is the second non-Interstate highway in New Mexico to have a 75 mph speed limit (the first being US 70 through White Sands).
Logged

The High Plains Traveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1135
  • Age: Just an old prairie dog

  • Location: Pueblo West CO
  • Last Login: September 09, 2021, 10:51:35 PM
    • Unofficial Minnesota and New Mexico Highway Pages
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #4 on: December 29, 2018, 03:02:55 PM »

NMDOT is increasing the speed limit on US 285 between Roswell and Vaughn to 75 mph:
https://www.rdrnews.com/2018/12/19/speed-limit-to-increase-to-75-mph-between-roswell-vaughn-in-january/

This is the second non-Interstate highway in New Mexico to have a 75 mph speed limit (the first being US 70 through White Sands).
That is such a lonely highway. There is absolutely nothing in that stretch. It looks like someone tried once upon a time to operate a gas station along there, but it failed.
Logged
"Tongue-tied and twisted; just an earth-bound misfit, I."

DJStephens

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 827
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Las Cruces NM 88012
  • Last Login: October 23, 2021, 01:25:46 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #5 on: December 29, 2018, 09:10:10 PM »

    Part of Gary Johnson's four lane program.  Believe only reason US 285 was included in that, is due to the fact the route was designated as part of the WIPP waste route from Los Alamos to the WIPP facility near Carlsbad.   
    Like the rest of Johnson's program this particular route's rebuild fell short in several areas.   Medians too narrow, they certainly could have been opened up to the full 88 feet in desolate areas.  Shoulders often were "half" shoulders, only six feet wide or so.   Vertical and horizontal curves not always optimum.   
Logged

kinupanda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 73
  • Age: 39
  • Location: San Antonio, TX
  • Last Login: September 25, 2021, 10:35:23 PM
    • kinupanda.com
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #6 on: December 31, 2018, 11:44:30 AM »

Drove the stretch northbound from the NM 599 Relief Route to NM 502 (I was cutting across to Los Alamos) in March. The artwork on the overpasses did catch my eye.
Logged

CanesFan27

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1284
  • Last Login: October 12, 2021, 11:10:08 AM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #7 on: July 07, 2019, 05:13:51 PM »


In October 2007, I made my first visit to New Mexico.  My first full day there, I took a lengthy loop into Northern New Mexico and briefly into Colorado.  That one trip had me hooked! I hope you enjoy!

https://www.gribblenation.org/2019/07/looking-back-2010-new-mexico-visit.html
Logged

DJStephens

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 827
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Las Cruces NM 88012
  • Last Login: October 23, 2021, 01:25:46 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #8 on: December 26, 2019, 01:57:14 PM »

University Avenue / I-25 interchange (Exit 1) is slated to begin reconstruction January 2nd.   Two large traffic circles are included to connect the myriad ramps and frontage roads near the interchange and the state University.   Kind of bizarre, maybe it will work.   Last of the seven Interstate interchanges in the general area to undergo major rehabilitation and or reconstruction.  Most of these rehabs and replacements (since 2000) with the exception of Motel Blvd (i-10 Exit 139) have fallen well short of ideal.   
Logged

JKRhodes

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 280
  • Ditat Deus

  • Age: 38
  • Location: Safford, Arizona
  • Last Login: July 16, 2021, 12:49:11 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #9 on: January 10, 2020, 11:48:07 PM »

University Avenue / I-25 interchange (Exit 1) is slated to begin reconstruction January 2nd.   Two large traffic circles are included to connect the myriad ramps and frontage roads near the interchange and the state University.   Kind of bizarre, maybe it will work.   Last of the seven Interstate interchanges in the general area to undergo major rehabilitation and or reconstruction.  Most of these rehabs and replacements (since 2000) with the exception of Motel Blvd (i-10 Exit 139) have fallen well short of ideal.

I remember going to NMSU and routinely seeing traffic back up onto Southbound I-25 from the University exit; lots of accidents. They lengthened the deceleration lane as a stopgap measure, but it still gets bad when school is in session. I can imagine it's even worse today with more students commuting from Sonoma Ranch and other points north. The roundabouts and underpass will allow traffic coming off of I-25, as well as Triviz, more direct access to the Pan American Center. This should take a lot of pressure off of the intersection at Triviz and University, and in turn, reduce backups on Mainline I-25.

As for the intersections east of I-25, I'm not a big fan of having three intersections  (I-25 ramps, Don Roser, Telshor) in such close proximity, and this project won't do anything to address that. Then again I don't know if any improvements over there would be warranted at this time anyway.
Logged

DJStephens

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 827
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Las Cruces NM 88012
  • Last Login: October 23, 2021, 01:25:46 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #10 on: February 10, 2020, 12:10:21 AM »

University Avenue / I-25 interchange (Exit 1) is slated to begin reconstruction January 2nd.   Two large traffic circles are included to connect the myriad ramps and frontage roads near the interchange and the state University.   Kind of bizarre, maybe it will work.   Last of the seven Interstate interchanges in the general area to undergo major rehabilitation and or reconstruction.  Most of these rehabs and replacements (since 2000) with the exception of Motel Blvd (i-10 Exit 139) have fallen well short of ideal.

I remember going to NMSU and routinely seeing traffic back up onto Southbound I-25 from the University exit; lots of accidents. They lengthened the deceleration lane as a stopgap measure, but it still gets bad when school is in session. I can imagine it's even worse today with more students commuting from Sonoma Ranch and other points north. The roundabouts and underpass will allow traffic coming off of I-25, as well as Triviz, more direct access to the Pan American Center. This should take a lot of pressure off of the intersection at Triviz and University, and in turn, reduce backups on Mainline I-25.

As for the intersections east of I-25, I'm not a big fan of having three intersections  (I-25 ramps, Don Roser, Telshor) in such close proximity, and this project won't do anything to address that. Then again I don't know if any improvements over there would be warranted at this time anyway.

   The University Ave job (I-25 Exit 1) is actually a cheap redo.  It is only 33.4 million.  They are not touching most of the frontage roads - only a small piece of Triviz Ave is being altered, and there is no change to anything on the E side of the interchange.  Including the irksome University EB to 25 NB loop ramp, which was "restored" five or six years ago, after having been eliminated from it's original configuration as part of a "Quarter cloverleaf".   They spent 3.2 million to do that, and shifted the 25 NB mainlines six feet towards the median centerline as part of it.   
   Really doubt the new bridge has adequate width for eight lanes - two general purpose in each direction and two left hand turn lanes in each direction.  There should have been a symmetrical Diamond installed here - pulling the NB off and on ramps from 25 closer to the 25 mainlines.   That would have increased the distance between two of the University signals - Don Roser and the 25 ramps.  One way frontages would have prevented the current signal clustering.  And it is not clear if they are adding additional horizontal clearance for a six lane I-25, which thought? was supposed to happen between Exit 0 (I-10) and Exit 6 (US-70).  They are sticking message boards willy-nilly everywhere in the last few years, and several are just outside the R guardrail, on the four lane sections of 25.  Seems not thought out for any sort of widening, at all.  Cannot understand why these message boards cannot be centered on median centerline, with a center post, and boards facing in both directions?!?   
   Well at least it isn't becoming a DDI.  If the area had had true one way frontages established by 1980 - this area wouldn't have become the mess it is today.   
« Last Edit: February 10, 2020, 12:26:14 AM by DJStephens »
Logged

roadfro

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4342
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Reno, NV
  • Last Login: October 23, 2021, 01:52:57 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #11 on: February 10, 2020, 03:51:20 PM »

^ At least as far as message boards in the median are concerned: sometimes it makes more sense to mount the DMS structure from a cantelivered structure on the outer shoulder. Especially since you need to run power and communications lines to it (which are usually more likely to be in the outside shoulder) as well as have a controller cabinet. Both the controller cabinet and the sign itself must be accessible for maintenance purposes, so it's usually better and safer on the outside shoulder where a DOT vehicle can park well outside of the traveled way. The only time I've seen NevadaDOT mount two DMSs in the median on one structure, it was an extremely wide non-landscaped median (about 40+ feet wide).
Logged
Roadfro - AARoads Pacific Southwest moderator since 2010, Nevada roadgeek since 1983.

Pink Jazz

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1607
  • Real Men Wear Pink

  • Age: 33
  • Location: Queen Creek, AZ
  • Last Login: October 23, 2021, 09:08:55 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #12 on: March 04, 2020, 10:00:58 PM »

^ At least as far as message boards in the median are concerned: sometimes it makes more sense to mount the DMS structure from a cantelivered structure on the outer shoulder. Especially since you need to run power and communications lines to it (which are usually more likely to be in the outside shoulder) as well as have a controller cabinet. Both the controller cabinet and the sign itself must be accessible for maintenance purposes, so it's usually better and safer on the outside shoulder where a DOT vehicle can park well outside of the traveled way. The only time I've seen NevadaDOT mount two DMSs in the median on one structure, it was an extremely wide non-landscaped median (about 40+ feet wide).


Speaking of DMS, NMDOT has bought exclusively from Adaptive Micro Systems since the early 2010s, making up the majority of the DMS in the state (previous installations were Skyline, and before that, ADDCO).  NMDOT since the early 2010s has chosen not to competively bid its contracts for DMS (unlike ADOT), since NMDOT prefers having commonality.  ADOT on the other hand prefers to go with the lowest cost (current vendor for ADOT is Daktronics).  I think because ADOT is a much larger agency than NMDOT, ADOT can better manage having multiple vendors and models of DMS.
Logged

JKRhodes

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 280
  • Ditat Deus

  • Age: 38
  • Location: Safford, Arizona
  • Last Login: July 16, 2021, 12:49:11 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #13 on: April 28, 2020, 01:23:59 AM »


   Well at least it isn't becoming a DDI.  If the area had had true one way frontages established by 1980 - this area wouldn't have become the mess it is today.

You bring up an interesting point. So has the idea of a regional one-way frontage road system for I-25 been explored before? Aside from the area near the mall, it seems like it would be a pretty straightforward conversion and highly beneficial, especially for businesses near Spruce if they were to add on-ramps.
« Last Edit: April 28, 2020, 01:27:48 AM by JKRhodes »
Logged

DJStephens

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 827
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Las Cruces NM 88012
  • Last Login: October 23, 2021, 01:25:46 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #14 on: May 03, 2020, 08:23:21 AM »


   Well at least it isn't becoming a DDI.  If the area had had true one way frontages established by 1980 - this area wouldn't have become the mess it is today.

You bring up an interesting point. So has the idea of a regional one-way frontage road system for I-25 been explored before? Aside from the area near the mall, it seems like it would be a pretty straightforward conversion and highly beneficial, especially for businesses near Spruce if they were to add on-ramps.

Was saying - there should have been one way frontages developed by 1980 - on both I-10 and 25 in the immediate municipal environs.   Just no foresight to have moved in that direction.   Only issue (then) is a small historic church (St James Presbyterian) that I-10 narrowly missed during its very late sixties construction.   So there would have been a gap in the EB frontage there.  Today, with development packing in at interchanges, on both 10 and 25, any true continuous frontages would be near impossible.   The early 10's "reconstruction" of the 10/25 interchange should have had conversion to one way frontages in it's immediate area.   Instead they must have got a waiver to cram in an additional projected diamond interchange just west of the 10/25 interchange - barely a half mile away.  Normal progression, as an area develops, and population and trips increase is to convert to one way frontage.  If one examines the current (newer) 10 E to 25 N ramp, the future traffic pattern is for (TO) EB 10 traffic to "enter" this ramp, and then "exit" it to reach 10 E.   Crazy, and one of the reasons why this state department is one of the worst in terms of design.   Has something like this been done anywhere else??
« Last Edit: May 03, 2020, 08:32:42 AM by DJStephens »
Logged

CanesFan27

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1284
  • Last Login: October 12, 2021, 11:10:08 AM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #15 on: May 03, 2020, 09:45:39 AM »

Logged

Revive 755

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4420
  • Last Login: October 23, 2021, 11:19:04 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #16 on: May 03, 2020, 12:58:31 PM »

Instead they must have got a waiver to cram in an additional projected diamond interchange just west of the 10/25 interchange - barely a half mile away.  Normal progression, as an area develops, and population and trips increase is to convert to one way frontage.  If one examines the current (newer) 10 E to 25 N ramp, the future traffic pattern is for (TO) EB 10 traffic to "enter" this ramp, and then "exit" it to reach 10 E.   Crazy, and one of the reasons why this state department is one of the worst in terms of design.   Has something like this been done anywhere else??

If there will be a Collector-Distributor roadway  for the new EB I-10 entrance and the ramp to NB I-25, yes.  If there will not be a C-D roadway, I still think there's an example somewhere in the Midwest, but I cannot place it at the moment.
Logged

JKRhodes

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 280
  • Ditat Deus

  • Age: 38
  • Location: Safford, Arizona
  • Last Login: July 16, 2021, 12:49:11 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #17 on: May 06, 2020, 11:09:54 AM »

Instead they must have got a waiver to cram in an additional projected diamond interchange just west of the 10/25 interchange - barely a half mile away.  Normal progression, as an area develops, and population and trips increase is to convert to one way frontage.  If one examines the current (newer) 10 E to 25 N ramp, the future traffic pattern is for (TO) EB 10 traffic to "enter" this ramp, and then "exit" it to reach 10 E.   Crazy, and one of the reasons why this state department is one of the worst in terms of design.   Has something like this been done anywhere else??

It's common to have access to an adjacent street with C/D roadways, though I think it's frowned upon in heavily developed urban areas unless there's some braiding involved.

The closest example I can think of is Sunland Gin Road near the intersection of I-8 and I-10 in Arizona. Westbound freeway entrance has the option of slipping onto the Westbound I-8 ramp, or continuing onto I-10. Functionally it's very similar to what will exist in the future in Cruces, but laid out wider because there's more room.

I remember when they finished the reconstruction at I-10 and I-25, and figured that was the purpose of the unfinished the "on-ramp" to eastbound 10 coming off the flyover ramp.

What has me scratching my head is, where exactly is the new interchange going to be located?  Without seeing any plans, my best guess is that Arrowhead way will be elevated over Sam Steel Way and tied into I-10 at a tight diamond, which will require a substantial amount of bridge work to connect the ramps. Not to mention the demolition of half a neighborhood if Arrowhead is ever extended south of I-10.
Logged

DJStephens

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 827
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Las Cruces NM 88012
  • Last Login: October 23, 2021, 01:25:46 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #18 on: May 06, 2020, 10:03:15 PM »

Instead they must have got a waiver to cram in an additional projected diamond interchange just west of the 10/25 interchange - barely a half mile away.  Normal progression, as an area develops, and population and trips increase is to convert to one way frontage.  If one examines the current (newer) 10 E to 25 N ramp, the future traffic pattern is for (TO) EB 10 traffic to "enter" this ramp, and then "exit" it to reach 10 E.   Crazy, and one of the reasons why this state department is one of the worst in terms of design.   Has something like this been done anywhere else??

If there will be a Collector-Distributor roadway  for the new EB I-10 entrance and the ramp to NB I-25, yes.  If there will not be a C-D roadway, I still think there's an example somewhere in the Midwest, but I cannot place it at the moment.

No, they are maintaining two way frontage on both sides in the area of this interchange (10/25).  If conversion to one way frontage was pursued - it would have simplified things quite a bit.  The 10 E to 25 N ramp was compressed to the SE, with inadequate deceleration/acceleration lanes. 
Logged

Revive 755

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4420
  • Last Login: October 23, 2021, 11:19:04 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #19 on: May 06, 2020, 10:27:36 PM »

Logged

skluth

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1454
  • Age: 65
  • Location: Palm Springs, CA
  • Last Login: October 23, 2021, 10:09:09 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #20 on: June 13, 2020, 05:00:49 PM »

^ There's a bit of a difference between a C-D roadway and a frontage/outer road.
Example C-D roadway for SB I-55 between I-355 and the Joliet Road exit near Chicago, IL (the SB roadway with the overhead signs)

This example of a C-D system on I-64 between Battlefield Blvd and Chesapeake Parkway is close to textbook. The ramps braid about halfway between the interchanges near the Spring Hill Suites.

Depending on the traffic volumes, just connecting the various ramps between interchanges with an extra lane can alleviate a lot of problems. I used to hate the cluster at the north end of Bloomington when going from I-55 to I-39, but the redesign made this a breeze the last couple times I went through the area on my way home to Wisconsin.
Logged

DJStephens

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 827
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Las Cruces NM 88012
  • Last Login: October 23, 2021, 01:25:46 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #21 on: July 19, 2020, 12:33:37 PM »

Instead they must have got a waiver to cram in an additional projected diamond interchange just west of the 10/25 interchange - barely a half mile away.  Normal progression, as an area develops, and population and trips increase is to convert to one way frontage.  If one examines the current (newer) 10 E to 25 N ramp, the future traffic pattern is for (TO) EB 10 traffic to "enter" this ramp, and then "exit" it to reach 10 E.   Crazy, and one of the reasons why this state department is one of the worst in terms of design.   Has something like this been done anywhere else??

It's common to have access to an adjacent street with C/D roadways, though I think it's frowned upon in heavily developed urban areas unless there's some braiding involved.

The closest example I can think of is Sunland Gin Road near the intersection of I-8 and I-10 in Arizona. Westbound freeway entrance has the option of slipping onto the Westbound I-8 ramp, or continuing onto I-10. Functionally it's very similar to what will exist in the future in Cruces, but laid out wider because there's more room.

I remember when they finished the reconstruction at I-10 and I-25, and figured that was the purpose of the unfinished the "on-ramp" to eastbound 10 coming off the flyover ramp.

What has me scratching my head is, where exactly is the new interchange going to be located?  Without seeing any plans, my best guess is that Arrowhead way will be elevated over Sam Steel Way and tied into I-10 at a tight diamond, which will require a substantial amount of bridge work to connect the ramps. Not to mention the demolition of half a neighborhood if Arrowhead is ever extended south of I-10.

   Correct, the arrowhead road is supposed to be connected to 10 with a diamond interchange there.  Simply too close to the interchange with 25.  Would be interesting to learn about the "waiver" process to cram in such an interchange, so close to a preexisting interchange of two primary interstates.   The connection of two long distance interstates should have had precedent.  One way frontage in the area would have simplified matters a great deal.   Only a few additional underpasses would have been needed for the conversion.   
   No arrowhead would never be "extended" farther south.  It is simply a University internal collector road.   
   The crazy thing was, that space was left on the south side of 10, at cholla road and on the E side of 25, believe also cholla road, in the late sixties/early seventies for a future "proper" 10 E to 25 N flyover.  And they didn't use it.   Instead the present 10 E to 25 N flyover/exit was compressed to the SE.  To allow for this crazy arrowhead connection.  Nuts.   Design Regression at it's finest.   
« Last Edit: July 26, 2020, 09:28:53 AM by DJStephens »
Logged

JKRhodes

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 280
  • Ditat Deus

  • Age: 38
  • Location: Safford, Arizona
  • Last Login: July 16, 2021, 12:49:11 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #22 on: August 22, 2020, 12:10:56 AM »

Quote

   Correct, the arrowhead road is supposed to be connected to 10 with a diamond interchange there.  Simply too close to the interchange with 25.  Would be interesting to learn about the "waiver" process to cram in such an interchange, so close to a preexisting interchange of two primary interstates.   The connection of two long distance interstates should have had precedent.  One way frontage in the area would have simplified matters a great deal.   Only a few additional underpasses would have been needed for the conversion.   
   No arrowhead would never be "extended" farther south.  It is simply a University internal collector road.   
   The crazy thing was, that space was left on the south side of 10, at cholla road and on the E side of 25, believe also cholla road, in the late sixties/early seventies for a future "proper" 10 E to 25 N flyover.  And they didn't use it.   Instead the present 10 E to 25 N flyover/exit was compressed to the SE.  To allow for this crazy arrowhead connection.  Nuts.   Design Regression at it's finest.

Could be the same yahoos that allowed a full diamond at Baseline Road and I-10 in Phoenix right next to the US 60. Exiting I-10 Westbound to US 60, you take a two lane exit. If you're not familiar with the area you assume both lanes go directly to US 60. But instead you get dumped onto a C/D road where you have about 12 seconds to merge all the way to the right before you get dumped right back onto I-10... If you miss this ramp, you have the option of jumping across three lanes to exit at Broadway and turn around, or slowly make your way to one of the other exits to go the other way on I-10.

At least in the Las Cruces example, as far as eastbound is concerned the lane continuity and forced merges won't be a big issue once it's built. If you exit I-10 East to go north on I-25, you're gonna get onto I-25 unless for some reason you decide to merge right and slip back onto I-10.

Westbound, that's another story. I wonder if they'll braid the Arrowhead exit or if they'll do something goofy to tie that one in.
Logged

JKRhodes

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 280
  • Ditat Deus

  • Age: 38
  • Location: Safford, Arizona
  • Last Login: July 16, 2021, 12:49:11 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #23 on: August 22, 2020, 12:33:34 AM »

Also, as a concept I like the idea of an Arrowhead exit serving NMSU and little else.

Phoenix has this beautiful grid network of heavy duty arterial streets. In the middle of it all you have the City of Tempe mucking up the works with all of their recent road diet/streetcar projects near ASU. As if the added college traffic didn't make the area enough of a headache for regional commuters.

Ditto for the City of Tucson; Broadway and Congress streets used to be capable of moving some cars through downtown. Now it's just a headache for anyone who needs to take that route to get to the freeway. They get to admire the city leaders' vision of a revitalized downtown while they sit in choked traffic.
Logged

DJStephens

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 827
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Las Cruces NM 88012
  • Last Login: October 23, 2021, 01:25:46 PM
Re: New Mexico
« Reply #24 on: August 23, 2020, 10:05:57 AM »

Also, as a concept I like the idea of an Arrowhead exit serving NMSU and little else.

Phoenix has this beautiful grid network of heavy duty arterial streets. In the middle of it all you have the City of Tempe mucking up the works with all of their recent road diet/streetcar projects near ASU. As if the added college traffic didn't make the area enough of a headache for regional commuters.

Ditto for the City of Tucson; Broadway and Congress streets used to be capable of moving some cars through downtown. Now it's just a headache for anyone who needs to take that route to get to the freeway. They get to admire the city leaders' vision of a revitalized downtown while they sit in choked traffic.

Switching to one way frontage (in the 10/25 interchange area) would have completely eliminated the idea for this regressive arrowhead interchange on 10.   
Yes am aware of the 10/US 60 connection in Phoenix.  Arizona generally has far better design standards than it's neighbor to the east, but yes it is a challenge to navigate that one in Phoenix.   
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.