Which states get roasted the most?

[webny99]

Texas doesn't get much roasting, considering it is the second largest state in both area, and population, and we have a lot of users from there. Perhaps those who live there/visit frequently could comment more, but I personally, thought their DOT did an excellent job overall. I've only been once though.

[jakeroot]

Texas doesn't get much roasting, considering it is the second largest state in both area, and population, and we have a lot of users from there. Perhaps those who live there/visit frequently could comment more, but I personally, thought their DOT did an excellent job overall. I've only been once though.

My one problem with Texas, compared to other southern states, is how insanely fucking slow their residents drive. The speed limit would be 75, but you'd still have a bunch of cars camping out all over the road, all invariably doing something less than 75. You'd occasionally get moving, but it was never for long. On SH-130, where the limit is 85, I was going around 90 (very comfortable speed in our Ford Fusion) and we were flying past cars. No one was doing even 80. All of this was rather ironic considering how well known Texas is for setting high speed limits.

[US 89]

Texas doesn't get much roasting, considering it is the second largest state in both area, and population, and we have a lot of users from there. Perhaps those who live there/visit frequently could comment more, but I personally, thought their DOT did an excellent job overall. I've only been once though.

My one problem with Texas, compared to other southern states, is how insanely fucking slow their residents drive. The speed limit would be 75, but you'd still have a bunch of cars camping out all over the road, all invariably doing something less than 75. You'd occasionally get moving, but it was never for long. On SH-130, where the limit is 85, I was going around 90 (very comfortable speed in our Ford Fusion) and we were flying past cars. No one was doing even 80. All of this was rather ironic considering how well known Texas is for setting high speed limits.

Funny, I got a completely opposite idea the last time I was in Texas. My memory of Texas freeways is pickups driving 100 in the left lane, and then swerving across 5 lanes of traffic so they can make the next exit.

[jakeroot]

Texas doesn't get much roasting, considering it is the second largest state in both area, and population, and we have a lot of users from there. Perhaps those who live there/visit frequently could comment more, but I personally, thought their DOT did an excellent job overall. I've only been once though.

My one problem with Texas, compared to other southern states, is how insanely fucking slow their residents drive. The speed limit would be 75, but you'd still have a bunch of cars camping out all over the road, all invariably doing something less than 75. You'd occasionally get moving, but it was never for long. On SH-130, where the limit is 85, I was going around 90 (very comfortable speed in our Ford Fusion) and we were flying past cars. No one was doing even 80. All of this was rather ironic considering how well known Texas is for setting high speed limits.

Funny, I got a completely opposite idea the last time I was in Texas. My memory of Texas freeways is pickups driving 100 in the left lane, and then swerving across 5 lanes of traffic so they can make the next exit.

I've been hoping, basically since the day I left, that what I experienced was simply an anomaly. If any state actually has the infrastructure to support high speeds, it's Texas, so I was extremely annoyed to be the only one actually pushing it. I will eventually visit Texas again so I can board a cruise ship outside Houston. Here's hoping this future visit will change my perspective.

[hbelkins]

I've only been to Texas once. That journey consisted of an early-morning drive from Texarkana to the DFW area, and then back to Texarkana via Shreveport. What stood out to me was the overabundance of speed enforcement along I-30 westbound so early in the morning.

[formulanone]

Texas doesn't get much roasting, considering it is the second largest state in both area, and population, and we have a lot of users from there. Perhaps those who live there/visit frequently could comment more, but I personally, thought their DOT did an excellent job overall. I've only been once though.

My one problem with Texas, compared to other southern states, is how insanely fucking slow their residents drive. The speed limit would be 75, but you'd still have a bunch of cars camping out all over the road, all invariably doing something less than 75. You'd occasionally get moving, but it was never for long. On SH-130, where the limit is 85, I was going around 90 (very comfortable speed in our Ford Fusion) and we were flying past cars. No one was doing even 80. All of this was rather ironic considering how well known Texas is for setting high speed limits.

I've visited about 20 times, so all sorts of areas the state (except the panhandle).

Basically, I noticed drivers are reserved, if not speedy, on the highways, respectful on the two-lanes, but can be insanely fast on the frontage roads. The DFW metroplex seems to have more unruly/stupid parking lot drivers.

There's a few 75mph 2-lanes where even I didn't feel comfortable going 75 (due to high traffic), and some mid-day toll roads where the higher speed limits aren't always necessary...but it's nice when you need them.

Can't think of too many times I've been stuck behind a very slow vehicle on a Texas two-lane; it wasn't for long. They're pretty good about creating multiple passing lanes.

[SD Mapman]

Public Road Miles
140,753
About 100,000 miles of Kansas roads are non-paved.

*Immediatly starts to laugh*

That's a lot of non-paved roads, and I'm not sure if any other state has more.

Absolute distance wise, Kansas I think is the winner (maybe NE, MT, WY would contend?); percentage wise we in South Dakota have 75% unpaved roads (62055.718 mi out of 82556.802 mi) while the Kansas percentage is about 71%.
Data from: http://www.sddot.com/transportation/highways/planning/inventory/docs/CertifiedMileageBooklet.pdf

[Scott5114]

Texas doesn't get much roasting, considering it is the second largest state in both area, and population, and we have a lot of users from there. Perhaps those who live there/visit frequently could comment more, but I personally, thought their DOT did an excellent job overall. I've only been once though.

My one problem with Texas, compared to other southern states, is how insanely fucking slow their residents drive. The speed limit would be 75, but you'd still have a bunch of cars camping out all over the road, all invariably doing something less than 75. You'd occasionally get moving, but it was never for long. On SH-130, where the limit is 85, I was going around 90 (very comfortable speed in our Ford Fusion) and we were flying past cars. No one was doing even 80. All of this was rather ironic considering how well known Texas is for setting high speed limits.

Funny, I got a completely opposite idea the last time I was in Texas. My memory of Texas freeways is pickups driving 100 in the left lane, and then swerving across 5 lanes of traffic so they can make the next exit.

This is because all Texans drive at either 20 or 90, no exceptions. I am pretty sure I've never seen a car with Texas plates drive the speed limit.

The last rental car we had came with Texas plates, and I joked with my mom that meant we had no excuse not to make good time.

[kphoger]

Texas doesn't get much roasting, considering it is the second largest state in both area, and population, and we have a lot of users from there. Perhaps those who live there/visit frequently could comment more, but I personally, thought their DOT did an excellent job overall. I've only been once though.

My one problem with Texas, compared to other southern states, is how insanely fucking slow their residents drive. The speed limit would be 75, but you'd still have a bunch of cars camping out all over the road, all invariably doing something less than 75. You'd occasionally get moving, but it was never for long. On SH-130, where the limit is 85, I was going around 90 (very comfortable speed in our Ford Fusion) and we were flying past cars. No one was doing even 80. All of this was rather ironic considering how well known Texas is for setting high speed limits.

Funny, I got a completely opposite idea the last time I was in Texas. My memory of Texas freeways is pickups driving 100 in the left lane, and then swerving across 5 lanes of traffic so they can make the next exit.

This is because all Texans drive at either 20 or 90, no exceptions. I am pretty sure I've never seen a car with Texas plates drive the speed limit.

The last rental car we had came with Texas plates, and I joked with my mom that meant we had no excuse not to make good time.

That's just what I clicked on this thread to say.  It is simply un-Texan to drive at any speed between 50 and 80 mph.  Under 50 is fine, and over 80 is fine, but in between is just not cool.

[sparker]

California takes a beating on road maintenance and signage standards on Pacific Southwest.

And also for their relentless decommissioning of US highways.

New Mexico also gets a lot of flack for its signage (or lack thereof).

With the omnibus 1964 statewide renumbering effort, all the US decommissioning happened at once that year; signage of the routes not along Interstate corridors (US 6, Alternate US 40, US 299, US 399, most of US 466) was removed during that year.  The other decommissioned routes (US 40, US 60, US 66, US 70, US 80, US 91, US 99) saw signage removal over the following decade as Interstate mileage was constructed; the old routes served as "placeholders" until the system was functionally complete in the state.  US 99 was gone south of Sacramento by 1966, with the remainder, including the E/W split north of Sacramento, fully gone by the beginning of 1975.  The decommissionings were drastic, jarring, and abrupt -- but hardly relentless, seeing as how the change occurred all at once (although the signage removal process took a bit over 10 years!).  The only decommissioning of a US highway after that time was US 395, which like much of the previous decommissioning, happened because the 1968 Interstate addition legislation extended I-15 over much of its alignment.  It's not like the Division of Highways or successor Caltrans "had it in" for US highways in general-- they are simply operating on the principle of "death to multiplexes" whenever possible (their now-54-year-old "one road/one number" policy).

But they did operate under the assumption that US Routes were superfluous or at the same level as state highways after the advent of the Interstate era.  That seemed to be a fairly common theme nation wide, but it would seem that time has been kinder to keeping US Routes relevant than probably was originally envisions.  With that all said really the only US Routes that probably would have had realistic chance of staying in California would have been US 60, 99, and possibly 299 given it was close to 300 miles long.  Personally I'd much rather have a bunch of state highway numbers and US Route over the glut of worthless 3d Interstate designations California has it metro areas like the Bay or Los Angeles.

(forgive the delayed response to this, but I just got around to fully reading this thread)

As far as getting rid of US highways back in 1964, IMO they could have kept 299 despite its under-300-mile length; if NC can have 117 and 264, there's no reason to discriminate against us Westerners!  But given the eventual demise of US 99 itself, I might have renumbered 299 as something else; maybe one of the unused 2dus between 20 and 40.  Even though it is a major trucking corridor, 466 would likely have been a goner as well because of its long (and, for all intents and purposes, useless multiplex with US 91 and later US 93), as would 399 (which to me was always a dubious US route). 

I'm guessing the "worthless" 3di's referred to above would include 110, 710, and 880 -- not to mention 238; all were workable freeways prior to their Interstate designation.  The only reason they were designated in the first place was the availability of Interstate maintenance funds at the time they were commissioned; in that respect, "it's all about the Benjamins!"  Caltrans wanted to revamp the facilities, so they coordinated (some would say conspired) with some local congresspersons to secure the I-designations for just that purpose.  Pretty much all the other 3di's are legitimate bypasses or connectors built under the original chargeable plan (with the exception of I-215, which came into being as a replacement for the previous I-15E suffixed I-15 branch).     

[Max Rockatansky]

^^^^

299 might have made a decent US 38 given the length and the important connections it made to "interstate" highways across the tip of California.  CA 38 could have just been swapped around for something like 338 since that was a theme of the times with the 1964 renumbering.  I'd argue US 99 still had a solid purpose as well given that even as a loop of I-5 it would be well over 300 miles. 

I guess it just comes down to everything is more clear in retrospect.  At the time I'm sure everyone was excited to not only get Interstate corridors going, but the allure of federal funding assistance I'm was even a bigger factor.  Time has really shown that Interstate designations aren't the be all/end all of highway development, especially the pool of Federal Aid has largely dried up.  Some of the designations (which you cited the primary ones) tend to just come off as clutter in a modern sense. 

Its interesting to think that just a state over in Arizona the reverse is true.  All freeways outside of the primary Interstates are either State Routes like the X0X loops, a stand along state route like 143, or even US 60.  Some of the older plans including 3d Interstates but Arizona couldn't get a wiff of Federal Aid. I suspect that's the real reason there was never a 3d corridor in Arizona, why slap the designation on something that the state built alone?

[sparker]

^^^^

299 might have made a decent US 38 given the length and the important connections it made to "interstate" highways across the tip of California.  CA 38 could have just been swapped around for something like 338 since that was a theme of the times with the 1964 renumbering.  I'd argue US 99 still had a solid purpose as well given that even as a loop of I-5 it would be well over 300 miles. 

I guess it just comes down to everything is more clear in retrospect.  At the time I'm sure everyone was excited to not only get Interstate corridors going, but the allure of federal funding assistance I'm was even a bigger factor.  Time has really shown that Interstate designations aren't the be all/end all of highway development, especially the pool of Federal Aid has largely dried up.  Some of the designations (which you cited the primary ones) tend to just come off as clutter in a modern sense. 

Its interesting to think that just a state over in Arizona the reverse is true.  All freeways outside of the primary Interstates are either State Routes like the X0X loops, a stand along state route like 143, or even US 60.  Some of the older plans including 3d Interstates but Arizona couldn't get a wiff of Federal Aid. I suspect that's the real reason there was never a 3d corridor in Arizona, why slap the designation on something that the state built alone?

Part of the problem regarding AZ was that Phoenix was a burg somewhat under 100K population in the mid-50's when the Interstate system was being formulated; it's likely that it wasn't even considered significant enough at the time to warrant a bypass or inner-city loop, so 3di's weren't even in the works.  After the early 60's boom, fueled largely by a huge retiree influx (including several of my relatives!), there was sufficient regional population for additional Interstate routes -- and there were a few miles left in the "kitty" for a couple of short spurs (Phoenix's I-510 and Tucson's I-710); but I-510 ended up being subsumed by the rerouting of I-10 through the city center, and I-710 was cancelled due to Tucson NIMBY activity.  Funny thing -- the original 101/202/303 loops were to be numbered in the x10 and x17 ranges, but as state highways (possibly with the thought toward seeking Interstate status later on regardless of chargeability).  I have heard stories over the years about AZ-based anti-federal political activity being responsible for the concept of the Phoenix loop system as potential Interstates being jettisoned; but that never got beyond simple hearsay.  All I can say is the freeway network in Phoenix functions, for better or worse, just like any city with Interstate loops but with state numbering; it's a system that -- at least when compared to other metro regions' freeway systems -- isn't particularly broken and certainly isn't in any pressing need of red, white, and blue shields.  Among cities/metro areas of it's size, it is certainly an anomaly -- but it works!