Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Driscoll Bridge also carries two separate routes (GSP and 9), so halve it. But yes, the GSP is wider than average for the area, perhaps the widest along with parts of the Turnpike north of Baltimore.
The Driscoll Bridge also carries two separate routes (GSP and 9), so halve it. But yes, the GSP is wider than average for the area, perhaps the widest along with parts of the Turnpike north of Baltimore.
You could take out Hwy9 and it'll still be pretty damn wide lol
Garden State Parkway is actually my favorite freeway to drive on, we drove it from Newark Liberty airport to Cape May-Wildwoods area.
I know I've driven through Springfield on 95. I don't think I've crossed the Driscoll Bridge though, but I've used the NJ Turnpike that had multiple lanes, but was split. The longest stretches of 95 with more than 4 lanes can be found in Miami / Fort Lauderdale. I'll find some pics when I get home.
I-635 in Dallas know as Lyndon B. Johnson freeway is going to be expanded to a 20 lane freeway expected to be completed in 2015.
I think its only 16 now but the WAY they are doing it is fantastic! The only think I can say is that they didn't implement a rail line with it at the same time, (but they don't have the cash for that right now) http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMc-ZPWo2nQ
I think Dallas has found a pretty good middle ground lately between a mix of freeways, tollways and rail/public transit. Because I love highways (fast/fun to drive) and public transit (I laugh at people who would willingly DRIVE into downtown Dallas). Even the tollways are fun, (faster/less likely to run into traffic jams) and I can't wait for the variable tollways which for the auto perspective is what Dallas was looking for. All that being said, WIDE flat freeways act as a barrier to pedestrians. So making them compact in a way similar to Central Expressway with a rail line nearby (Like the Red or Green Line) would be excellent for development.
I think when you start getting freeways that are more than 4 lanes in each direction (assuming its a compact design it can have 2-3 frontage lane roads in each direction) it starts to act as a major barrier. Urban freeways just need to be more compact and excluding freeway interchanges and airport freeways, shouldn't exceed 4 main lanes per direction.
Last edited by Gamarabi; 03-15-2012 at 11:42 PM..
Reason: Added last paragraph
You can't leave out San Diego... within the last 5 years they have completed 2 major freeway interchanges, where the 5 meets the 805, there are now 24 lanes across and where the 15 meets the 163 there are now 24 lanes across
You can't leave out San Diego... within the last 5 years they have completed 2 major freeway interchanges, where the 5 meets the 805, there are now 24 lanes across and where the 15 meets the 163 there are now 24 lanes across
Does anybody else think that adding freeway lanes is getting out of control? Last year when I was in LA, I was driving on one freeway (101 I think) too many lanes wide to even count. Heavy fast moving traffic in all lanes, and in one of the middle lanes, some guys in an old beater car broken down, looking scared as hell. If you break down in the middle of that, where are you supposed to go?
I think we should have regulations that on all freeways, there be one breakdown lane for every two lanes of traffic. That would limit freeways to four lanes each direction with breakdown lanes on the right and left sides. Any additional lanes should be separate express lanes in their own section, also limited to four lanes each direction with breakdown lanes on the right and left sides. That would be a maximum of 16 lanes with eight breakdown lanes. Anything beyond that should be public transit, bus lanes or rail. No exceptions.
Sorry but if you have that much traffic moving in one place, you have to start thinking about public transit.
I think when you start getting freeways that are more than 4 lanes in each direction (assuming its a compact design it can have 2-3 frontage lane roads in each direction) it starts to act as a major barrier. Urban freeways just need to be more compact and excluding freeway interchanges and airport freeways, shouldn't exceed 4 main lanes per direction.
I don't think it should exceed three in each direction. The less lanes available, the more important lane control is. When you have 8 to 20 travel lanes the slower traffic keep right rule does not work at all and people are just going to use any lane they choose to travel in. That being said, you're going to get drivers who will sit in the left lane and cause other drivers to swing around them impacting drivers on the other lanes. The more lanes, the less efficient the traffic flow is.
The only exception is if the lanes are separated in Local-Express format such as I-270 in Maryland or the trucks/buses and cars along the New Jersey Turnpike but they should be no more than three travel lanes with a shoulder lane.
Does anybody else think that adding freeway lanes is getting out of control? Last year when I was in LA, I was driving on one freeway (101 I think) too many lanes wide to even count. Heavy fast moving traffic in all lanes, and in one of the middle lanes, some guys in an old beater car broken down, looking scared as hell. If you break down in the middle of that, where are you supposed to go?
I think we should have regulations that on all freeways, there be one breakdown lane for every two lanes of traffic. That would limit freeways to four lanes each direction with breakdown lanes on the right and left sides. Any additional lanes should be separate express lanes in their own section, also limited to four lanes each direction with breakdown lanes on the right and left sides. That would be a maximum of 16 lanes with eight breakdown lanes. Anything beyond that should be public transit, bus lanes or rail. No exceptions.
Sorry but if you have that much traffic moving in one place, you have to start thinking about public transit.
You can build more freeways and widen the ones you've already got. Until cities really invest and build out their transit systems, traffic will continue to be a problem.
No more than 3 travel lanes? Ha. The Capital Beltway has 5 in spots, and it's still a parking lot every day. Same with I-95 in South Florida. If you've got extra-large amounts of traffic, you need extra-large roadways. Transit just isn't going to cut it; while South Florida has little transit, D.C. has an extensive system already.
No more than 3 travel lanes? Ha. The Capital Beltway has 5 in spots, and it's still a parking lot every day. Same with I-95 in South Florida. If you've got extra-large amounts of traffic, you need extra-large roadways. Transit just isn't going to cut it; while South Florida has little transit, D.C. has an extensive system already.
DC's transit is mainly for radial trips (maybe going to Arlington/Alexandria/a few MD inner suburbs, but primarily for downtown) but not really for orbital trips. Perhaps MD's purple line could alleviate some beltway congestion but only for those whose beginning and end are along the line.
Also, the answer to the OP is Toronto. Specifically the 401, with at one point 18 lanes total. Holds the record for most traffic in one freeway for North America (world?)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Largest Freeways
