Road width

[Buffaboy]

Why does it seem like a lot of roads down south are very narrow, lack shoulders and are hillier than those in northern states? As an example look at this road

https://www.google.com/maps/place/1738-1998+E+John+St,+Matthews,+NC+28105/@35.0954183,-80.703388,3a,54.5y,330.14h,70.92t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1swXcldzUJqHxOdWeVqzu-cg!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x8854243ddda1d27b:0xda9fcb4b23150fe

Then look at this:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/505-569+Harris+Hill+Rd,+Lancaster,+NY+14086/@42.9416512,-78.677162,3a,49.9y,314.11h,67.56t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1smrHESK4ArvJv2k0eNalfsw!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89d3756a8f3d46e9:0xeed070d2386cb966

[freebrickproductions]

Lack of funding, mainly. It's why many roads down here, especially older ones and county roads, are very narrow.

[SectorZ]

I find even US routes, major state routes, and busy roads in cities/large towns in the south tend to be ridiculously narrow compared to where I am in New England.

[Max Rockatansky]

Hell, we still have single lane state highways in California.  Generally non-expressway level state highways have narrow shoulders or the soft dirt variety.

[Rothman]

I am not so certain this is true, given back roads I have been on in NY, PA, KY, GA, NC...heck, even MA.  Narrow roads without shoulders are everywhere.

[froggie]

Numerous different reasons, ranging from changing standards (for example...at the time the Interstates came about, standard lane width was about 10ft, it's now 12ft) to different topography (and Buffaboy, you're implying that you DON'T have narrow hilly roads in New York...a very dangerous assumption) to different priorities (preservation vs. expansion, with the latter primarily Interstate/freeway) to different funding needs/desires. 

As Rothman indicated, and despite SectorZ's observations, this is not region-specific.  Just as there are plenty of wide roads in the South, there are plenty of narrow roads in New England and New York.

[SectorZ]

Numerous different reasons, ranging from changing standards (for example...at the time the Interstates came about, standard lane width was about 10ft, it's now 12ft) to different topography (and Buffaboy, you're implying that you DON'T have narrow hilly roads in New York...a very dangerous assumption) to different priorities (preservation vs. expansion, with the latter primarily Interstate/freeway) to different funding needs/desires. 

As Rothman indicated, and despite SectorZ's observations, this is not region-specific.  Just as there are plenty of wide roads in the South, there are plenty of narrow roads in New England and New York.

I think the observation to be made is how unnecessary the narrowness is. I'll cite US 460 in southeast VA as an example. There is no shoulder at all for dozens of miles along it, yet plenty of room for even a moderate one that would be safe for cycling or walking. That type of lengthy malfunction doesn't exist in New England. Most high speed roads up here tend to have fairly large shoulders, to the point of them being safe as outright breakdown lanes. Most roads that are narrow in New England are narrow because of their surroundings. In the south, it seems more unnecessary to be so narrow.

[J N Winkler]

Numerous different reasons, ranging from changing standards (for example...at the time the Interstates came about, standard lane width was about 10ft, it's now 12ft) to different topography (and Buffaboy, you're implying that you DON'T have narrow hilly roads in New York...a very dangerous assumption) to different priorities (preservation vs. expansion, with the latter primarily Interstate/freeway) to different funding needs/desires.

I would say that by the mid-1930's, the choice was between 11 ft and 12 ft as the standard unit lane width for high-type roads.  The primary state highway I am aware of that was built most recently with 10 ft unit lane width is SH 10 in the late 1940's between La Junta and Walsenburg in Colorado.  There was an enormous amount of change between 1920 and 1935 not just in standards for unit lane width but also right-of-way width, ditch cross-section, etc.  Thereafter the scope of change has been much smaller and has generally covered features outside the traveled way:  e.g., in the 1980's Kansas was still building high-type two-lane roads with shoulders that were part paved, part gravel, but by about 1995 this had been abandoned in favor of pavement across the entire cross-section.

There is some evidence that roads with 11 ft unit lane widths have slightly better safety records than roads with 12 ft unit lane widths.  The optimum, from the point of view of safety, is considered to lie between 11 ft and 12 ft but closer to 11 ft.  There are examples of roads built fairly recently to an 11 ft unit lane width, e.g. the mid-1980's US 54 freeway over West Street in Wichita (the rest of the freeway has 12 ft unit lane width).

Unit lane width of 10 ft or below imposes a significant capacity penalty.  I think it was the very first edition of the Highway Capacity Manual, in 1950, that noted the capacity of a 10 ft lane was 70% that of a 12 ft lane.  9 ft or less results in meeting traffic overrunning the shoulder and did not survive the Model T era as a design standard.

[J N Winkler]

I think the observation to be made is how unnecessary the narrowness is. I'll cite US 460 in southeast VA as an example. There is no shoulder at all for dozens of miles along it, yet plenty of room for even a moderate one that would be safe for cycling or walking.

US 460 is a weird example.  It is a four-lane undivided rural arterial essentially all the way from Richmond to Suffolk, but on very narrow right-of-way.  The country is mostly flat and the issue with adding shoulders is likely the need to acquire additional right-of-way to accommodate drainage facilities.

Looking more broadly in Virginia and elsewhere, I think it is a question (as Froggie points out) of how highly modern roadside development is prioritized.  For example, US 501 between Lynchburg and Roxboro is two-lane in both Virginia and North Carolina, but in Virginia the road has no shoulders while in North Carolina it has a stabilized vegetated shoulder.