What is the highest quality road in the US?

[webny99]

This came up in another thread (my quote below) and I thought I would see what everyone's thoughts are on this. What do you think is the best/highest quality road in the US? We're not looking at scenic value here, purely the highest quality in terms of design characteristics and physical aspects of the roadway.

If it wasn't for all the truck traffic (and State Troopers...), I would have no problem whatsoever cruising at 100 mph in good weather [on the NYS Thruway between Buffalo and Utica]. Mostly straight, flat, excellent sightlines, wide median, average of more than 10 miles between exits. In short, it's one of the highest quality roads in the country

[SEWIGuy]

Probably one that opened up last week.

[paulthemapguy]

Probably one that opened up last week.

Right.

[JoePCool14]

The Northwest Tollway (I-90) out of Chicago is a very high-quality road that's only just a few years old. It's practically all concrete, with nice wide shoulders, decent signage, smart-road signs in the eastern segment, and plenty of lanes. In my opinion, it's the highest quality road in the Chicagoland area if not the entire state of Illinois.

[Max Rockatansky]

That depends on your definition of "quality."    I assume this referring to the maintenance level and design of a limited access road? 

[wanderer2575]

It's been some years since I drove it, but I-180 in Illinois was in excellent condition.

*ducks*

[JayhawkCO]

Not being sarcastic as the post above, but last time I drove I-19 in Arizona it was pretty pristine, granted that's been a while.

Chris

[webny99]

That depends on your definition of "quality."    I assume this referring to the maintenance level and design of a limited access road?

That is correct, in other words what road would be suitable for the highest speeds based on the design and other characteristics.

[Max Rockatansky]

That depends on your definition of "quality."    I assume this referring to the maintenance level and design of a limited access road?

That is correct, in other words what road would be suitable for the highest speeds based on the design and other characteristics.

I would probably offer I-80 in Nevada then.  Much of it is already is signed at 80 MPH but it could easily handle 100 MPH in favorable weather. 

[JayhawkCO]

That depends on your definition of "quality."    I assume this referring to the maintenance level and design of a limited access road?

That is correct, in other words what road would be suitable for the highest speeds based on the design and other characteristics.

Well, if that's the case, I might nominate I-80 through the Salt Flats.  (While I'm typing this, Max said something similar.)

Chris

[thspfc]

That depends on your definition of "quality."    I assume this referring to the maintenance level and design of a limited access road?

That is correct, in other words what road would be suitable for the highest speeds based on the design and other characteristics.

Well, if that's the case, I might nominate I-80 through the Salt Flats.  (While I'm typing this, Max said something similar.)

Chris

Based on that criteria, I-80 west of SLC is the only right answer.

I took "highest quality"  to mean in the best condition and being able to very efficiently move large amounts of traffic at once. Maybe US-75 between Dallas and McKinney?

[webny99]

I took "highest quality"  to mean in the best condition and being able to very efficiently move large amounts of traffic at once. Maybe US-75 between Dallas and McKinney?

That's part of it, but more lanes doesn't necessarily translate to a higher quality road - that has more to do with the design standards. US 75 northbound out of Dallas looks like a decent road, but it's not going to be in quite the same league as anything rural in terms of this exercise - exits are too frequent and traffic is presumably too heavy to sustain very high speeds without weaving.

[Scott5114]

I take issue with the example of quality given in the OP–exits every 10 miles makes a road lower quality in my book, because that means it's less likely I'll be able to actually use the road to get where I want to go. Good example is the H.E. Bailey Turnpike; there are so many missing exits at state highways and important county roads that for a good number of destinations you have to take a long, meandering out-of-the-way route due to lack of sensibly-placed interchanges. (God help you if you're trying to get to Pocasset, for instance.)

[tradephoric]

Ohio State Route 823 opened in 2018 and is a pretty smooth drive considering it cuts through the mountains. 

[StogieGuy7]

I'd have to agree with a previous poster that the portions of I-90 (Northwest Tollway) to the northwest of Chicago and/or I-94/294 (Tri-State Tollway) north of Lake-Cook Road would definitely qualify for this one. My vehicle is an FJ Cruiser, which is bulletproof but also an aerodynamic shoebox not built for speed. Yet I can easily cruise along at 85-90 mph (along with many other fellow travelers because this isn't uncommon here) and do so comfortably due to the smooth concrete, perfectly done leveling and banking of lanes, nice wide lanes and shoulders and a fairly straight design that has limited merging points.

Now, I'll admit that there are a lot of other contenders here: for one, I-94 from the IL border to MKE airport which is newly constructed, 8 lanes, and is very nice (but don't try going 90 b/c cheesehead cops are no fun).  That poster who mentioned I-80 west of SLC has a point, much of I-15 south of SLC is nice too when it's not under construction. I've driven several freeways in TX and FL that qualify too. And, California's I-805 (San Diego bypass) and I-280 (from Redwood City to San Jose) come to mind as being top tier too. 

[webny99]

I take issue with the example of quality given in the OP–exits every 10 miles makes a road lower quality in my book, because that means it's less likely I'll be able to actually use the road to get where I want to go. Good example is the H.E. Bailey Turnpike; there are so many missing exits at state highways and important county roads that for a good number of destinations you have to take a long, meandering out-of-the-way route due to lack of sensibly-placed interchanges. (God help you if you're trying to get to Pocasset, for instance.)

That doesn't have to do with the actual quality of the road itself, though. The reason I see fewer exits as better is because it means fewer merge/conflict points, less traffic because of the lack of access points, and an overall smoother flow, allowing for higher travel speeds. 

With that said, I do think the H.E. Bailey Turnpike is an interesting case study in the lack of exits. I can't help but wonder if the fact that it runs at an angle exacerbates the problem with accessing nearby destinations, as there aren't many parallel routes. Contrast that to the NYS Thruway, where US 20, NY 5, NY 31, and NY 33 all run parallel at various points, and I've never felt that it's particularly annoying or far-fetched to get to/from the Thruway. Sure, sometimes there is a different route to/from the Thruway depending on which direction you're heading, but that's to be expected on a toll road.

[Scott5114]

I take issue with the example of quality given in the OP–exits every 10 miles makes a road lower quality in my book, because that means it's less likely I'll be able to actually use the road to get where I want to go. Good example is the H.E. Bailey Turnpike; there are so many missing exits at state highways and important county roads that for a good number of destinations you have to take a long, meandering out-of-the-way route due to lack of sensibly-placed interchanges. (God help you if you're trying to get to Pocasset, for instance.)

That doesn't have to do with the actual quality of the road itself, though. The reason I see fewer exits as better is because it means fewer merge/conflict points, less traffic because of the lack of access points, and an overall smoother flow, allowing for higher travel speeds.

Sure, but an exit every mile or two is a reasonable number of conflict points. The first thing that pops into my head when I think "high-quality road" is I-35 between Emporia and Kansas City (at least before maintenance went to shit during the Brownback admin), and that has an exit at least once every 5 miles or so. In the interest of connectivity between systems, I feel like a freeway should at least have an exit to every state highway unless there's a good reason why not (e.g. it's close enough to another interchange–it's fine that the Turner Turnpike doesn't have an exit to OK-102 because it's right by the OK-66 exit).

With that said, I do think the H.E. Bailey Turnpike is an interesting case study in the lack of exits. I can't help but wonder if the fact that it runs at an angle exacerbates the problem with accessing nearby destinations, as there aren't many parallel routes.

I don't really think that's the problem; US-277 is a reasonable "parallel" route. The problem is things like a lack of an OK-76/OK-130 junction, which means to access OK-76 one either has to avoid the turnpike entirely and take either OK-37 through the Tri-City area or US-62/277 through Newcastle and Blanchard. The only all-turnpike route is to cross over OK-76, go 4½ miles further west to pick up OK-4, then take OK-4 back east for 4½ miles to arrive at its OK-76 interchange.

[hbelkins]

Ohio State Route 823 opened in 2018 and is a pretty smooth drive considering it cuts through the mountains.

And ODOT has already been milling rough spots in the pavement along that route.

[webny99]

In the interest of connectivity between systems, I feel like a freeway should at least have an exit to every state highway unless there's a good reason why not (e.g. it's close enough to another interchange–it's fine that the Turner Turnpike doesn't have an exit to OK-102 because it's right by the OK-66 exit).

I generally agree for non-toll roads, but it's OK to have more stringent standards for toll roads. Take for example the Thruway between either end of I-490. There's currently just one exit on that 28 mile stretch, at I-390. Meanwhile, there's seven state route crossings: NY 36, 386, 383, 15/253, 15A, 65, and 64 (not counting NY 19 or NY 96, which have access to the Thruway via I-490). Those state routes definitely do not all need exits. The whole point of toll roads like the Thruway is to separate the local traffic from the long-distance and truck traffic.  It would completely change the character of the Thruway for the worse to add that many exits, as it would become crowded with local and commuter traffic. You could argue for another exit at either NY 36 or NY 386 and maybe NY 64 or NY 65, but that's it. Anything more defeats the purpose.

The problem is things like a lack of an OK-76/OK-130 junction, which means to access OK-76 one either has to avoid the turnpike entirely and take either OK-37 through the Tri-City area or US-62/277 through Newcastle and Blanchard. The only all-turnpike route is to cross over OK-76, go 4½ miles further west to pick up OK-4, then take OK-4 back east for 4½ miles to arrive at its OK-76 interchange.

That doesn't strike me as particularly problematic, but I'm also not sure what the alternates are like. Does it really take a lot longer to just use OK 37 or US 62? Most toll roads probably have similar omissions, but that's by design, not necessarily a problem with the system, and certainly not something that would make me think less of the toll road.

[Techknow]

I-280 in California between I-380 and CA 85, basically through the peninsula. Yes, I'm well aware of it being dubbed "the most beautiful freeway in the world" and this portion is a signed scenic route, but really it's usually a smooth drive for me going through it even when there's traffic. I think one would have no problem driving it past 75 MPH (the fastest I driven on it) on I-280. Besides that it has three vista points but all are closed ATM (and a fourth one closed at 1996) and a rest area.

[Revive 755]

The Northwest Tollway (I-90) out of Chicago is a very high-quality road that's only just a few years old. It's practically all concrete, with nice wide shoulders, decent signage, smart-road signs in the eastern segment, and plenty of lanes. In my opinion, it's the highest quality road in the Chicagoland area if not the entire state of Illinois.

While the rebuilt I-90 is very good with lighting and the smart road signs, it still has some issues:

* The pavement does not seem to be holding up in many spots.  Unless the ISTHA is very aggressive with patching I-90 may need to be overlaid in a few years.

* The signing for eastbound near the Tri-State could be better, though some of it may be from the inadequacy of the MUTCD for handing option lanes where the through lane itself it dropped shortly after the first exit (One of the first signs for the interchange with the Tri-State should be clearer that the option lane is between NB and SB I-294.  The matter is not helped by the subsequent signs not showing the option lane.

* The rebuild didn't do enough for the cluster near the I-290/IL 53 interchange.  Westbound particularly has issues with merging traffic from I-290/IL 53 between Meacham Road and Roselle Road.  While some of this is beyond ISTHA's control, I think they could have gotten the merge for westbound a little better (maybe taken a lane beyond Roselle) and adding more space to stack vehicles outside of mainline for eastbound (maybe with two continous auxiliary lanes between Roselle and I-290/IL 53, and a third one near the exit).  Or better yet looked at removing or modifying the toll plaza on the EB I-90 to EB I-290 ramp.

* The acceleration lanes at the US 20/Hampshire interchange are way too short for the amount of truck traffic using that exit.  Eastbound is particularly bad with the upgrade at the merge location.

* Could have used a higher speed ramp for WB I-90 to SB I-39.



The Tri-State in Lake County has similar issues with the pavement not holding up.  The cloverleaf at IL 132 is also not one I would expect on a high quality road, lacking adequate acceleration/deceleration lanes for westbound and having a nasty tight radius near the end of the WB IL 132 to EB I-94 loop.

[Hobart]

The Northwest Tollway (I-90) out of Chicago is a very high-quality road that's only just a few years old. It's practically all concrete, with nice wide shoulders, decent signage, smart-road signs in the eastern segment, and plenty of lanes. In my opinion, it's the highest quality road in the Chicagoland area if not the entire state of Illinois.

As a south sider, I can certainly see the appeal behind I-90, but the entire road is quite soiled by the traffic machine cloverleaf at I-290. I remember driving through that a few months ago for work, it was 1 PM and it already felt like rush hour. For the cost of the land the cloverleaf is built on, IDOT got four lanes merging into each other at the toll barriers, frequent backups, and a textbook example of why cloverleaves are terrible 90% of the time.

This cloverleaf ruins the entire road. Sure, the actual surface of I-90 is nice, but leaving in this interchange was such a massive mistake that it easily takes I-90 down a few steps in quality.

If you're looking for the highest quality road in Chicagoland, I would honestly recommend I-355 south of I-55. It's not as high-tech as I-90, but it's paved almost as well and isn't clogged up by a cloverleaf.

[HighwayStar]

I take issue with the example of quality given in the OP–exits every 10 miles makes a road lower quality in my book, because that means it's less likely I'll be able to actually use the road to get where I want to go. Good example is the H.E. Bailey Turnpike; there are so many missing exits at state highways and important county roads that for a good number of destinations you have to take a long, meandering out-of-the-way route due to lack of sensibly-placed interchanges. (God help you if you're trying to get to Pocasset, for instance.)

This, and it is EXACTLY why toll roads, in any configuration, are always problematic.

My vote would go to something using the Texas U turn system, not sure which one.

[Scott5114]

I take issue with the example of quality given in the OP–exits every 10 miles makes a road lower quality in my book, because that means it's less likely I'll be able to actually use the road to get where I want to go. Good example is the H.E. Bailey Turnpike; there are so many missing exits at state highways and important county roads that for a good number of destinations you have to take a long, meandering out-of-the-way route due to lack of sensibly-placed interchanges. (God help you if you're trying to get to Pocasset, for instance.)

This, and it is EXACTLY why toll roads, in any configuration, are always problematic.

There's no reason at all the H.E. Bailey couldn't have more interchanges added once Oklahoma goes to all-electronic tolling. Other than the expense of building them, of course.

[HighwayStar]

I take issue with the example of quality given in the OP–exits every 10 miles makes a road lower quality in my book, because that means it's less likely I'll be able to actually use the road to get where I want to go. Good example is the H.E. Bailey Turnpike; there are so many missing exits at state highways and important county roads that for a good number of destinations you have to take a long, meandering out-of-the-way route due to lack of sensibly-placed interchanges. (God help you if you're trying to get to Pocasset, for instance.)

This, and it is EXACTLY why toll roads, in any configuration, are always problematic.

There's no reason at all the H.E. Bailey couldn't have more interchanges added once Oklahoma goes to all-electronic tolling. Other than the expense of building them, of course.

It could yes, but you still have to have the infrastructure to bill everyone going in and out of all of them, it is much simpler to just build freeways and fund them through broad taxes that fully capture their social value.