Which states get roasted the most?

[webny99]

These are the states I feel get the most road-related criticism (on this forum, anyways):
1] Pennsylvania
2] North Carolina
3] Illinois

Are we justified in criticizing these states? What other states get a bad rap, or which states are critic-free?

[hotdogPi]

OκlahO_Ma.

[Max Rockatansky]

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

[Thing 342]

These are the states I feel get the most road-related criticism (on this forum, anyways):
1] Pennsylvania
2] North Carolina
3] Illinois

Are we justified in criticizing these states? What other states get a bad rap, or which states are critic-free?

NC gets flak for overzealously pursuing dubious Interstate designations, but otherwise their roads are some of the best in the southeast. They're generally well-maintained and have excellent signage standards.

South Carolina, on the other hand...

[SSOWorld]

Wisconsin has enough flak for it's redundancy

[US 89]

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).

[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).

[jakeroot]

In my area, Oregon gets roasted quite a bit for under-posting their freeway network's speed limits, especially in rural areas. Though they did raise the limit to 70 in some places in 2016, at least making them equal with Washington. Now, the CA-OR-WA stretch collectively receives shit from other western states for not raising the limit past 70. Washington is the first of the three to at least consider doing so, by legally allowing 75, but it's only at WSDOT's discretion, and they've been unenthusiastic about it.

[jeffandnicole]

Once you remove I-95's gap, and things like their lacking of interstate numbers on roads that would be interstates in nearly every other state (ie: I-76 to NJ 42 to ACX), NJ gets roasted a lot less on here than it does elsewhere publicly.

[Hurricane Rex]

In my area, Oregon gets roasted quite a bit for under-posting their freeway network's speed limits, especially in rural areas. Though they did raise the limit to 70 in some places in 2016, at least making them equal with Washington. Now, the CA-OR-WA stretch collectively receives shit from other western states for not raising the limit past 70. Washington is the first of the three to at least consider doing so, by legally allowing 75, but it's only at WSDOT's discretion, and they've been unenthusiastic about it.

Oregon more than Washington. I'm considering proposing to my local representative a bill that would raise speed limits in Oregon. It will be on Fictiional highways as my 500th post. I84 between mp 130-208 or 130-217 is raised to 75T70 while the rest of Oregon is raised to 70T65. He seems open about if the data is there (which it is) and ODOT refuses (which they likely will).

Also, Oregon is roasted for our traffic problems and transit system.

[LM117]

North Carolina. It's not even close. Every time another state either gets another interstate or proposes one, NC gets dragged into the conversation. I couldn't keep a straight face when I saw this thread :

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=20638.0

As much as people like to shit on NC for their interstates, most of them are logical additions. I-74 and I-87 are really the only questionable interstates. Their other future interstate designations make sense. Contrary to popular belief, not every freeway is planned to become an interstate.

[Eth]

Most of the roasting directed at Georgia these days is about our implementation of APL signage (which, to be fair, is usually crap). Either that or our insistence on fully signing the US/state route concurrencies that Alabama, Florida, and Tennessee keep hidden. Otherwise, we're mostly ignored like the rest of the South.

[US71]

Arkansas is bad about not posting concurrencies. They also repeat numbers.

[jakeroot]

In my area, Oregon gets roasted quite a bit for under-posting their freeway network's speed limits, especially in rural areas. Though they did raise the limit to 70 in some places in 2016, at least making them equal with Washington. Now, the CA-OR-WA stretch collectively receives shit from other western states for not raising the limit past 70. Washington is the first of the three to at least consider doing so, by legally allowing 75, but it's only at WSDOT's discretion, and they've been unenthusiastic about it.

Oregon more than Washington. I'm considering proposing to my local representative a bill that would raise speed limits in Oregon. It will be on Fictional highways as my 500th post. I84 between mp 130-208 or 130-217 is raised to 75T70 while the rest of Oregon is raised to 70T65. He seems open about if the data is there (which it is) and ODOT refuses (which they likely will).

I would wait until there's at least five years of crash data before proposing another increase. If the number of crashes decreased following the increase along I-84, you'd have a case.

[Hurricane Rex]

In my area, Oregon gets roasted quite a bit for under-posting their freeway network's speed limits, especially in rural areas. Though they did raise the limit to 70 in some places in 2016, at least making them equal with Washington. Now, the CA-OR-WA stretch collectively receives shit from other western states for not raising the limit past 70. Washington is the first of the three to at least consider doing so, by legally allowing 75, but it's only at WSDOT's discretion, and they've been unenthusiastic about it.

Oregon more than Washington. I'm considering proposing to my local representative a bill that would raise speed limits in Oregon. It will be on Fictional highways as my 500th post. I84 between mp 130-208 or 130-217 is raised to 75T70 while the rest of Oregon is raised to 70T65. He seems open about if the data is there (which it is) and ODOT refuses (which they likely will).

I would wait until there's at least five years of crash data before proposing another increase. If the number of crashes decreased following the increase along I-84, you'd have a case.

When I started to look into this 2 years ago, I had a goal of the 2019 session. I've changed the plan so many times now as I've driven on more roads in Oregon. My current goal is the 2021 session which is 5 years after the last increase went into effect. Except in Roseburg, the I-5/I-84 data can already support 70T65. Does anyone know where I could find the crash data?

[Jmiles32]

Although North Carolina IMO takes the crown for it's obsession with new(and sometimes unessessary) interstates, I think it's pretty funny that one of Virginia's main criticisms is the exact opposite: not giving a damn about new interstates while also in some cases, neglecting current ones(I-81).

[Beltway]

Although North Carolina IMO takes the crown for it's obsession with new(and sometimes unessessary) interstates, I think it's pretty funny that one of Virginia's main criticisms is the exact opposite: not giving a damn about new interstates while also in some cases, neglecting current ones(I-81).

The only new Interstate route that would really make sense is I-73, if only it didn't cost $4 billion ...

Virginia was proactive in getting key Interstate additions in the 1960s and 1970s -- the I-295 southern extension, I-195, I-664, I-264 expansion of Downtown Tunnel and Berkley Bridge, I-264 Beach Expwy.  The original I-295 at outer beltway distance itself was proactive thinking and something that naysayers could have argued against.

Finding a way to build I-66 inside the Beltway deserves a lot of credit as the U.S. Secretary of Transportation had ruled against it.

Major freeways while not Interstate routes have been key additions -- VA-288, VA-895, VA-150, VA-76, VA-195, VA-168,  VA-267. 

I-81 is well maintained, it does definitely need widening but then so does the whole route between Knoxville and at least to Harrisburg.  VDOT had a toll-assisted plan for widening the entire 325 miles but too many local officials and motorist/trucking groups were in opposition.

[paulthemapguy]

Arkansas is bad about not posting concurrencies. They also repeat numbers.

Arkansas and Indiana both piss me right off because of this.

NC needs to stop making dumb interstates.  PA needs to fix Breezewood and maintain their turnpike.  IL needs to acquire a state government.  OK needs to just stop being goofy lol.

Interesting that there aren't any western states on our lists.

[oscar]

Arkansas is bad about not posting concurrencies. They also repeat numbers.

[snip]

Interesting that there aren't any western states on our lists.

You can say the same bad things, and more, about California. Just fewer of us out there to gripe.

[index]

Not a state, but to my knowledge, DC (DDOT) is pretty bad. They're garbage at signing any kind of route (especially US), their roads are, in a lot of areas, rather bad shape, and when they do sign routes, the signage is usually poor. I've seen them get criticized on this forum for these issues multiple times.

[Max Rockatansky]

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.

[inkyatari]

I'd say Illinois gets it worst, deservedly so, due to the awful financial position of the state.

[paulthemapguy]

Oh yeah!  I totally forgot New Mexico, with its terrible signage and inexplicable assignment of state route numbers.

[Takumi]

Virginia gets a lot of crap for its speeding laws, but it really isn't as bad as people say. We don't live in constant fear of being pulled.

[kphoger]

Illinois deserves less.
New Mexico deserves more.