The BEST Transportation Agency in the U.S. (2021 Edition)

[sprjus4]

Funny how the "speed kills" crowd always talks about time savings (which, by the way, varies by how far you're going - over a long enough drive, it adds up), and never talk about how slower speed limits make it feel like you're crawling on the road, which is NOT a fun feeling.  Also funny how they use average speed rather than 85th percentile speed, which would likely tell a different story.  Of course average speed goes up - the people who drive the limit exactly or try to compromise between the limit and a more reasonable speed then increase their speed.  The fact that the average increase is less than the limit increase shows how the speeds of the fastest drivers (the problem ones) are unaffected by what's posted on the sign.

If I had my way, limits on freeways (across the board, except in areas that are significantly substandard or exit dense, or that are already posted at a reasonable limit) would be increased (to 65/70 in urban areas and 75/80 in rural ones) but be more strictly enforced.  No more "the limit is officially X but unofficially X+20".  That sits nicely with my rule-following sensibilities.  The American system of underposing limits but then having unposted "actual" speed limits that vary by jurisdiction does not sit well with me at all.

Agreed, and that fact about crawling does hold true too. I can't tell you the amount of times I'll be on an urban highway that's wide open, or a non-limited-access road that's artifically capped at 55 or 60 mph, and it just feels like a snail when you actually drive the limit. Drive 65-75 mph though... sure you're speeding, but it feels reasonable and you're actually getting the feeling of making forward progress. That's why if I travel here in Virginia for instance, I'm likely going 10-15 mph over in urban areas or underposted rural areas, not because I'm an excessive, reckless speeder, but simply because the reality of it is that's a reasonable speed. I go to Texas, on the other hand, and I have no problem staying within 5, maybe 10 mph depending on the flow, of a 75 mph 2 or 4 lane rural speed limit, or 65-70 mph urban speed limit - because it's posted to match the road conditions and reality.

My only true complaint with Texas limits is I wish more rural interstates would be posted at 80 mph besides simply I-10, a small part of I-20, and SH-130. But otherwise, 75 mph is still fairly reasonable, and it's certainly reasonable on non-limited-access divided highways and 2 lane roads.

Mix Utah's consistency to post 80 mph on all rural interstate mileage, with TxDOT's speed limits on non-limited-access routes, and it'd be the perfect combination.

[vdeane]

I'm generally the type to compromise between the limit and more reasonable speeds, to I tend to drive 5-7 over, though the plan would be to taper that down for higher limits (I've never encountered 75 or 80 zones, but I would likely aim for 77 or 78 in 75 and 80 in 80).  Many places feel more reasonable at that rather than the snail feel actually going the limit, though there are places where even those speeds feel really slow.

Whenever I drive the state car and actually follow the speed limit to the letter, the suburban 55 zones on the interstates are practically torture, and it's hard to actually keep my speed down (especially in the sedan; it's easier in the van, though the 55 zones still feel slow).

[kphoger]

Nothing is quite as bad as Oklahoma

I'm perplexed that someone so close to New Mexico would say such a thing.

[CoreySamson]

Guess I'll put UDOT in Tier 1...

Tier 1: Amazing
FDOT (Florida)
ADOT (Arizona)
UDOT (Utah)

Tier 2: Pretty Good
TxDOT (Texas)
TNDOT (Tennessee)
WisDOT (Wisconsin)
KDOT (Kansas)
INDOT (Indiana)
MoDOT (Missouri)
CDOT (Colorado)
NCDOT (North Carolina)
ODOT (Ohio)
IADOT (Iowa)
NEDOT (Nebraska)
DelDOT (Delaware)
WSDOT (Washington)
ITD (Idaho)
ISTHA (Illinois)

Tier 3: Okay
DOTD (Louisiana)
MDOT (Mississippi)
ODOT (Oregon)
MDOT (Michigan)
GDOT (Georgia)
VDOT (Virginia)
NYSDOT (New York)
MnDOT (Minnesota)
NJDOT (New Jersey)
MDOT (Maryland)
WVDOT (West Virginia)
KTC (Kentucky)

Tier 4: Mediocre
ARDOT (Arkansas)
PennDOT (Pennsylvania)
CalTrans (California)
SCDOT (South Carolina)

Tier 5: Bad
RIDOT (Rhode Island)
IDOT (Illinois)
WYDOT (Wyoming)

Tier 6: Garbage
ODOT (Oklahoma)
NMDOT (New Mexico)

Unsure (maybe people with more knowledge on these states can help out?)
NDOT (Nevada)
MDT (Montana)
NDDOT (North Dakota)
SDDOT (South Dakota)
ALDOT (Alabama)
VTrans (Vermont)
NHDOT (New Hampshire)
HDOT (Hawaii)
AKDOT (Alaska)
MaineDOT (Maine)
CTDOT (Connecticut)
MassDOT (Massachusetts)

Jayhawkco said Colorado should belong in Tier 3. Do you agree? And is TxDOT good enough to be Tier 1?

[JayhawkCO]

Nothing is quite as bad as Oklahoma

I'm perplexed that someone so close to New Mexico would say such a thing.

Road quality worse in New Mexico.  Sign quality worse in Oklahoma.

Chris

[kphoger]

Road quality worse in New Mexico.  Sign quality worse in Oklahoma.

I disagree about sign quality being better in New Mexico.  Interstate (BGS) signage, maybe.  But surface highway signage in New Mexico is really kind of awful:  missing shields for concurrencies, shield blank errors, hit-or-miss directional banners, refusal to admit the existence of some routes...

[JoePCool14]

Nothing is quite as bad as Oklahoma

I'm perplexed that someone so close to New Mexico would say such a thing.

Road quality worse in New Mexico.  Sign quality worse in Oklahoma.

Chris

Road quality is probably more important than signage quality, even as a roadgeek, it must be said. Therefore, NM could be the very bottom of the barrel.

[kphoger]

Really, New Mexico is barely any better than "Old" Mexico.

[Occidental Tourist]

New Mexico is horrible. US 285 should be sponsored by a tire manufacturer or a local alignment shop.

[US 89]

Unpopular opinion: Oklahoma signage is fine.

Sure, the signs they put out sometimes contain bizarre typographical errors you would never see anywhere else and aren't exactly aesthetically pleasing... but in my experience, for the most part, the information on them is accurate, and there are enough of them that it's not difficult to navigate. The same cannot be said of New Mexico.

[kphoger]

Yes.  In Oklahoma, I never wonder if I'm on the right road or where to turn.  Driving in New Mexico requires a bit of planning ahead, a bit of educated guessing, and a bit of hoping.

[vdeane]

Road quality worse in New Mexico.  Sign quality worse in Oklahoma.

I disagree about sign quality being better in New Mexico.  Interstate (BGS) signage, maybe.  But surface highway signage in New Mexico is really kind of awful:  missing shields for concurrencies, shield blank errors, hit-or-miss directional banners, refusal to admit the existence of some routes...

What is the refusal to admit the existence of some routes, and how is it different from how many places have unsigned designations?

[kphoger]

Road quality worse in New Mexico.  Sign quality worse in Oklahoma.

I disagree about sign quality being better in New Mexico.  Interstate (BGS) signage, maybe.  But surface highway signage in New Mexico is really kind of awful:  missing shields for concurrencies, shield blank errors, hit-or-miss directional banners, refusal to admit the existence of some routes...

What is the refusal to admit the existence of some routes, and how is it different from how many places have unsigned designations?

It's kind of like "missing shields for concurrencies", but seemingly more intentional–such as the below:

... along the US 56/64/412 concurrency ... I do not recall a single 64 marker on that stretch west of the Oklahoma line.

[Scott5114]

Road quality is probably more important than signage quality, even as a roadgeek, it must be said. Therefore, NM could be the very bottom of the barrel.

I mean, if there's a beautifully designed, constructed and maintained road that happens to run right between your origin and destination points, it still is completely useless if you can't find the damn thing.

ODOT signage is æsthetically garbage, violates norms of both graphic design and traffic control, and hurts your eyes to look at. But it's almost always there, and it's usually complete and mostly correct. ODOT signage sucks, but you can at least navigate with it. NMDOT sometimes can't even manage to clear that simple bar, to the point that it starts to negatively impact navigability. So there's a pretty good argument that NMDOT is worse than ODOT.

Someone here on the last thread even said they've been yelled at by an ISTHA employee, might have been Scott? I don't remember.

Yeah, that was me. It happened at the 2008 Chicago meet, so there were roadgeek witnesses. (I remember one of the locals apologizing on behalf of the State of Illinois. ) My crime? Taking a picture of a stop sign. NO PHOTOS ON THE TOLLWAY!

[Roadgeekteen]

Road quality is probably more important than signage quality, even as a roadgeek, it must be said. Therefore, NM could be the very bottom of the barrel.

I mean, if there's a beautifully designed, constructed and maintained road that happens to run right between your origin and destination points, it still is completely useless if you can't find the damn thing.

ODOT signage is æsthetically garbage, violates norms of both graphic design and traffic control, and hurts your eyes to look at. But it's almost always there, and it's usually complete and mostly correct. ODOT signage sucks, but you can at least navigate with it. NMDOT sometimes can't even manage to clear that simple bar, to the point that it starts to negatively impact navigability. So there's a pretty good argument that NMDOT is worse than ODOT.

Does signage quality matter as much anymore with GPS? It still matters of course, but how much?

[Scott5114]

Road quality is probably more important than signage quality, even as a roadgeek, it must be said. Therefore, NM could be the very bottom of the barrel.

I mean, if there's a beautifully designed, constructed and maintained road that happens to run right between your origin and destination points, it still is completely useless if you can't find the damn thing.

ODOT signage is æsthetically garbage, violates norms of both graphic design and traffic control, and hurts your eyes to look at. But it's almost always there, and it's usually complete and mostly correct. ODOT signage sucks, but you can at least navigate with it. NMDOT sometimes can't even manage to clear that simple bar, to the point that it starts to negatively impact navigability. So there's a pretty good argument that NMDOT is worse than ODOT.

Does signage quality matter as much anymore with GPS? It still matters of course, but how much?

Yes. How do you know where to turn to follow the GPS's directions if it's not labeled in some way? What if the GPS map is out of date or incomplete?

[TheStranger]

Road quality is probably more important than signage quality, even as a roadgeek, it must be said. Therefore, NM could be the very bottom of the barrel.

I mean, if there's a beautifully designed, constructed and maintained road that happens to run right between your origin and destination points, it still is completely useless if you can't find the damn thing.

ODOT signage is æsthetically garbage, violates norms of both graphic design and traffic control, and hurts your eyes to look at. But it's almost always there, and it's usually complete and mostly correct. ODOT signage sucks, but you can at least navigate with it. NMDOT sometimes can't even manage to clear that simple bar, to the point that it starts to negatively impact navigability. So there's a pretty good argument that NMDOT is worse than ODOT.

Does signage quality matter as much anymore with GPS? It still matters of course, but how much?

Yes. How do you know where to turn to follow the GPS's directions if it's not labeled in some way? What if the GPS map is out of date or incomplete?

That succinctly exemplifies why California's (not necessarily CalTrans mind you) "signage represents maintenance" stance annoys me to no end, especially when other states explicitly have come up with workarounds for that (i.e. Massachusetts).

An example of this that I've driven on several times now: the Rice Avenue/Route 1 thread on this forum has gone on for nearly a decade - with not a single Route 1 shield added to Rice in the meantime - which means 1 essentially disappears along US 101 in Ventura, then suddenly reappears on the PCH freeway south of Oxnard.  Sure, GPS can say "take the Rice Avenue exit" and then a few miles later, "continue on 1" near CSU Channel Islands, but that extra step/guesswork is not great when it should simply be "Continue on 1 from Ventura to Malibu" (or some variation of such) or "Take the Rice Avenue ramp to continue on 1 south."

[kphoger]

Does signage quality matter as much anymore with GPS? It still matters of course, but how much?

It matters very much to everyone not using GPS to get where they're going.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Road quality worse in New Mexico.  Sign quality worse in Oklahoma.

I disagree about sign quality being better in New Mexico.  Interstate (BGS) signage, maybe.  But surface highway signage in New Mexico is really kind of awful:  missing shields for concurrencies, shield blank errors, hit-or-miss directional banners, refusal to admit the existence of some routes...

What is the refusal to admit the existence of some routes, and how is it different from how many places have unsigned designations?

It's kind of like "missing shields for concurrencies", but seemingly more intentional–such as the below:

... along the US 56/64/412 concurrency ... I do not recall a single 64 marker on that stretch west of the Oklahoma line.

I've read that it is very intentional - NMDot considers lesser routes in a concurrency to not exist, and since US 64 in their determination is "lesser" than 56/412, they don't sign it.

[Scott5114]

Which is frankly sort of ridiculous–if anything sign 56/64. 412 is a three-digit route and therefore inherently more minor, and it doesn't even go anywhere in NM that 56 doesn't!

[JoePCool14]

Road quality is probably more important than signage quality, even as a roadgeek, it must be said. Therefore, NM could be the very bottom of the barrel.

I mean, if there's a beautifully designed, constructed and maintained road that happens to run right between your origin and destination points, it still is completely useless if you can't find the damn thing.

ODOT signage is æsthetically garbage, violates norms of both graphic design and traffic control, and hurts your eyes to look at. But it's almost always there, and it's usually complete and mostly correct. ODOT signage sucks, but you can at least navigate with it. NMDOT sometimes can't even manage to clear that simple bar, to the point that it starts to negatively impact navigability. So there's a pretty good argument that NMDOT is worse than ODOT.

Someone here on the last thread even said they've been yelled at by an ISTHA employee, might have been Scott? I don't remember.

Yeah, that was me. It happened at the 2008 Chicago meet, so there were roadgeek witnesses. (I remember one of the locals apologizing on behalf of the State of Illinois. ) My crime? Taking a picture of a stop sign. NO PHOTOS ON THE TOLLWAY!

Yes. I should've specified that sign aesthetics matter less than road quality and signage accuracy and placement. Therefore, NM is worst.

But still OkDOT doesn't get off the hook scot free.

Also, after my short stint in the Cincinnati area these past couple days, I definitely think Ohio DOT warrants its spot on our list. InDOT still irritates me however. Just drove up I-65, we stopped off for gas at an exit where no joke, every single BGS was missing for the exit. Only the services signs stood. There wasn't even a gore point sign. I think it was US-231?

[kphoger]

But still OkDOT doesn't get off the hook Scott5114 free.

FTFY

[webny99]

Someone here on the last thread even said they've been yelled at by an ISTHA employee, might have been Scott? I don't remember.

Yeah, that was me. It happened at the 2008 Chicago meet, so there were roadgeek witnesses. (I remember one of the locals apologizing on behalf of the State of Illinois. ) My crime? Taking a picture of a stop sign. NO PHOTOS ON THE TOLLWAY!

"No stop signs on the tollway!" would be the only appropriate response. 

[Scott5114]

But still OkDOT doesn't get off the hook Scott5114 free.

FTFY

You're damn right.

At one point I was maintaining a database of every ODOT sign error categorized by county and DOT division. US 71 was kind of helping me with it by informing me of everything he found near the AR border. I sort of let it go because it got to be too much to maintain...

[Scott5114]

Someone here on the last thread even said they've been yelled at by an ISTHA employee, might have been Scott? I don't remember.

Yeah, that was me. It happened at the 2008 Chicago meet, so there were roadgeek witnesses. (I remember one of the locals apologizing on behalf of the State of Illinois. ) My crime? Taking a picture of a stop sign. NO PHOTOS ON THE TOLLWAY!

"No stop signs on the tollway!" would be the only appropriate response. 

I still have the photo. I released it public domain, so post it wherever you want.