Which states get roasted the most?

Started by webny99, January 06, 2018, 03:13:26 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Jmiles32

#25
Quote from: Beltway on January 07, 2018, 11:44:45 PM
Quote from: Jmiles32 on January 07, 2018, 07:08:40 PM
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.
^Agreed. The timeframe I was referring to is from around 16 years ago(When VDOT sought and interstate designation for VA-895) to present day. While there are future I-73 and I-785 signs along their respected future corridors, I just don't think that outside of areas that might directly benefit from a new interstate such as Martinsville and Danville, real statewide support exists for designating and constructing these new interstates such as right now in NC. IMO VDOT not pursuing an interstate designation for VA-288, an important and useful connection between I-64 west and I-95 south of Richmond, is a great example of the current attitude the state has towards new interstates. 
Quote from: Beltway on January 07, 2018, 11:44:45 PM
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.
West Virginia and Maryland are both currently widening and planning to finish widening all of I-81 to six lanes throughout their state. Not saying VDOT needs to do exactly that due to having to deal with 325 miles of I-81, but significant improvements in the Roanoke, Harrisonburg, and Winchester areas definitely seem like a good place to start.
Aspiring Transportation Planner at Virginia Tech. Go Hokies!


Beltway

Quote from: Jmiles32 on January 08, 2018, 04:04:04 PM
Quote from: Beltway on January 07, 2018, 11:44:45 PM
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.
^Agreed. The timeframe I was referring to is from around 16 years ago(When VDOT sought and interstate designation for VA-895) to present day. While there are future I-73 and I-785 signs along their respected future corridors, I just don't think that outside of areas that might directly benefit from a new interstate such as Martinsville and Danville, real statewide support exists for designating and constructing these new interstates such as right now in NC. IMO VDOT not pursuing an interstate designation for VA-288, an important and useful connection between I-64 west and I-95 south of Richmond, is a great example of the current attitude the state has towards new interstates. 

I am still working with VDOT with my advocacy of Interstate designations for VA-288 and VA-895.  I will report when I hear a decision.  Nevertheless, they are currently operating as outer loop freeways.

A US-29 Interstate has been talked about in the past, but I seriously doubt that Albemarle County and one or two other counties in that area would ever allow it there.

Quote from: Jmiles32 on January 08, 2018, 04:04:04 PM
Quote from: Beltway on January 07, 2018, 11:44:45 PM
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.
West Virginia and Maryland are both currently widening and planning to finish widening all of I-81 to six lanes throughout their state. Not saying VDOT needs do exactly that due having to deal with 323 miles of I-81, but significant improvements in the Roanoke, Harrisonburg, and Winchester areas definitely seem like a good place to start.

20 miles is a lot less than 325 miles, indeed.  I would focus on the segment between Christiansburg and Troutville, widen to 4 lanes each way with interchange upgrades.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

Roadgeekteen

Oregon for speed limits, New York a close second.
God-emperor of Alanland, king of all the goats and goat-like creatures

Current Interstate map I am making:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&mid=1PEDVyNb1skhnkPkgXi8JMaaudM2zI-Y&ll=29.05778059819179%2C-82.48856825&z=5

Jmiles32

Quote from: Beltway on January 08, 2018, 09:08:04 PM
I am still working with VDOT with my advocacy of Interstate designations for VA-288 and VA-895.  I will report when I hear a decision.
^Look forward to hearing it.
Aspiring Transportation Planner at Virginia Tech. Go Hokies!

webny99

#29
Quote from: kphoger on January 08, 2018, 03:28:28 PM
Illinois deserves less.
New Mexico deserves more.

Are there even any members here from New Mexico?
Maybe that's why criticism is so sparse.

This has me thinking about how little I know about that state. It may be the only state where I've never even done GMSV (that will change soon) and I haven't seen too many sign pics around the forum, either.

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 08, 2018, 09:09:26 PM
Oregon for speed limits, New York a close second.

As far as NY, totally deserved. The thruway and I-81 are ridiculous. Most other aspects of NY (signage, routings, maintenance) there's not much to complain about. NY does get roasted for state politics (to the extent it's allowed here) which is, again, more than justified.




Pennsylvania, OTOH, has not been mentioned much in this thread, but I feel it deserves a fair bit of criticism. They have poor maintenance, narrow freeways, weird signage, and all the infamous problems like Breezewood, the I-95 gap, and I-99. And don't forget the 55 mph speed limit near Erie.

To their credit, they built a lot of their freeways earlier than other states, when there were fewer standards. They also have more rugged terrain to deal with, compared to most nearby states.

Overall rating: slightly under-roasted

RobbieL2415

Florida for having too many toll roads.

NY/NJ for having too many toll bridges.

RI for poor maintenance.

Personal opinion roast:
MD for requiring work zone speed limits to be followed EVEN WHEN THERE IS NO WORK ACTIVELY GOING ON.
VA for its fetish with 60mph speed limits
CT for poor milling and paving jobs and line painting.


oscar

Quote from: RobbieL2415 on January 08, 2018, 10:30:27 PM
VA for its fetish with 60mph speed limits

One nice thing about those limits was, at least when most freeway speed limits were standardized at 55mph and 65mph, odds were pretty good that 60mph limits were set by engineers for safety reasons, rather than by politicians.
my Hot Springs and Highways pages, with links to my roads sites:
http://www.alaskaroads.com/home.html

US 89

Quote from: Beltway on January 08, 2018, 09:08:04 PM
I am still working with VDOT with my advocacy of Interstate designations for VA-288 and VA-895.  I will report when I hear a decision.

What about I-366?  :pan:

LM117

Quote from: Beltway on January 08, 2018, 09:08:04 PM


I am still working with VDOT with my advocacy of Interstate designations for VA-288 and VA-895.  I will report when I hear a decision.  Nevertheless, they are currently operating as outer loop freeways.

A US-29 Interstate has been talked about in the past, but I seriously doubt that Albemarle County and one or two other counties in that area would ever allow it there.

VA-288 is practically screaming to become I-695.

As for US-29, the Piedmont Environmental Council will never allow an interstate to be built. Danville and Lynchburg were absolutely livid when Charlottesville & Albemarle County kept fighting against the proposed US-29 bypass of Charlottesville.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

LM117

#34
Quote from: Jmiles32 on January 08, 2018, 04:04:04 PMWhile there are future I-73 and I-785 signs along their respected future corridors, I just don't think that outside of areas that might directly benefit from a new interstate such as Martinsville and Danville, real statewide support exists for designating and constructing these new interstates such as right now in NC.

All VDOT has to do is modify some of the ramps on US-29 in Danville, as well as close the Elizabeth Street at-grade access and I-785 in VA will be complete. There are currently no plans to do so.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette

Beltway

Quote from: LM117 on January 09, 2018, 02:12:36 AM
All VDOT has to do is modify some of the ramps on US-29 in Danville, as well as close the Elizabeth Street at-grade access and I-785 in VA will be complete. There are currently no plans to do so.

Needs 10 foot wide paved right shoulders thruout, and 4 foot wide paved left shoulders thruout.

The Elizabeth Street access now is the first stage of an design that includes an overpassing roadway for Elizabeth Street and the completion of 4 ramps.

N.C. has about 20 miles of US-29 that is a nonlimited access highway and would need major construction if they want a freeway.  I don't think any detailed planning there yet.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

Beltway

#36
Quote from: LM117 on January 09, 2018, 01:54:35 AM
As for US-29, the Piedmont Environmental Council will never allow an interstate to be built. Danville and Lynchburg were absolutely livid when Charlottesville & Albemarle County kept fighting against the proposed US-29 bypass of Charlottesville.

The "Route 29 Solutions" projects being built in lieu of the bypass, are a very selfish scheme, much more intended to provide a good circulator system for locals, than to benefit thru traffic.  The total cost is about the same for each, about $200 million.  The recently completed Berkmar Drive Extension provides a nice north-south local collector just to the west of US-29, and the under construction Hillsdale Drive Extension will provide a nice north-south local collector just to the east of US-29.  The recently completed Rio Road interchange with US-29 provides a convenient Rio Road east-west connector between the two roads above, and overpass over US-29.

Funding for study and preliminary engineering for improvements to the intersection of Hydraulic Road and Route 29 is included in the Route 29 Solutions package.  At the request of the City of Charlottesville, VDOT agreed to include the extension of Hillsdale Drive south to Holiday Drive in the Hydraulic Road intersection study.  If that interchange is built, again it will be much more intended to a provide good circulator system for locals, than to benefit thru traffic.

There will still be at least 5 intersections on US-29 with multi-phase signals, on the section that would have been bypassed, that will only increase in congestion in the future.  While the "Route 29 Solutions" projects will provide some traffic relief to US-29, it will still be dysfunctional for long-distance and interregional traffic.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

dgolub

How about New Jersey?  Non-roadgeeks constantly get lost there.

TheArkansasRoadgeek

Quote from: US71 on January 07, 2018, 05:23:31 PM
Arkansas is bad about not posting concurrencies. They also repeat numbers.
I could also generalize the road network, but on CAP and other websites, they are gearing up for projects across the state! Now, the poor repair quality of some roads is a topic that is beyond a "dead horse" . If what they're predicting stays true, it'll be the year of change!


iPhone
Well, that's just like your opinion man...

Beltway

#39
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2018, 09:36:10 PM
Pennsylvania, OTOH, has not been mentioned much in this thread, but I feel it deserves a fair bit of criticism. They have poor maintenance, narrow freeways, weird signage, and all the infamous problems like Breezewood, the I-95 gap, and I-99. And don't forget the 55 mph speed limit near Erie.
To their credit, they built a lot of their freeways earlier than other states, when there were fewer standards. They also have more rugged terrain to deal with, compared to most nearby states.

Not really ... nearby states with higher mountains --

North Carolina   Mount Mitchell   6,684   Blue Ridge Mountains
Tennessee     Clingmans Dome   6,643   Blue Ridge Mountains
New Hampshire     Mount Washington   6,288   Northern U.S. Appalachians
Virginia   Mount Rogers   5,729   Blue Ridge Mountains
New York   Mount Marcy   5,344   Canadian Shield
Maine   Katahdin   5,268   Northern U.S. Appalachians
West Virginia   Spruce Knob   4,861   Appalachian Plateaus
Vermont   Mount Mansfield     4,393   Northern U.S. Appalachians
Kentucky   Black Mountain      4,139   Appalachian Plateaus
South Carolina   Sassafras Mountain   3,554   Blue Ridge Mountains
Massachusetts   Mount Greylock   3,487   Northern U.S. Appalachians
Maryland   Backbone Mountain   3,360   Appalachian Plateaus
Pennsylvania   Mount Davis   3,213   Appalachian Plateaus

Even New Jersey has some mountains, High Point    1,803   Appalachian Ridges
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

jeffandnicole

Quote from: Beltway on January 09, 2018, 08:54:11 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2018, 09:36:10 PM
Pennsylvania, OTOH, has not been mentioned much in this thread, but I feel it deserves a fair bit of criticism. They have poor maintenance, narrow freeways, weird signage, and all the infamous problems like Breezewood, the I-95 gap, and I-99. And don't forget the 55 mph speed limit near Erie.
To their credit, they built a lot of their freeways earlier than other states, when there were fewer standards. They also have more rugged terrain to deal with, compared to most nearby states.

Not really ... nearby states with higher mountains --

North Carolina   Mount Mitchell   6,684   Blue Ridge Mountains
Tennessee     Clingmans Dome   6,643   Blue Ridge Mountains
New Hampshire     Mount Washington   6,288   Northern U.S. Appalachians
Maine   Katahdin   5,268   Northern U.S. Appalachians
Virginia   Mount Rogers   5,729   Blue Ridge Mountains
New York   Mount Marcy   5,344   Canadian Shield
West Virginia   Spruce Knob   4,861   Appalachian Plateaus
Vermont   Mount Mansfield     4,393   Northern U.S. Appalachians
Kentucky   Black Mountain      4,139   Appalachian Plateaus
South Carolina   Sassafras Mountain   3,554   Blue Ridge Mountains
Massachusetts   Mount Greylock   3,487   Northern U.S. Appalachians
Maryland   Backbone Mountain   3,360   Appalachian Plateaus
Pennsylvania   Mount Davis   3,213   Appalachian Plateaus

Even New Jersey has some mountains, High Point    1,803   Appalachian Ridges

Pointing out tall mountain peaks has nothing to do with roads in other areas of the state.

The ruggedness has more to do with the width of the mountains and hills, and the roads necessary to pass thru them.  In PA, the mountain/hill terrain is deceiving, basically hitting every border state, so it's something often considered for every roadway. 

webny99

Quote from: Beltway on January 09, 2018, 08:54:11 AM
Quote from: webny99 on January 08, 2018, 09:36:10 PM
Pennsylvania, OTOH, has not been mentioned much in this thread, but I feel it deserves a fair bit of criticism. They have poor maintenance, narrow freeways, weird signage, and all the infamous problems like Breezewood, the I-95 gap, and I-99. And don't forget the 55 mph speed limit near Erie.
To their credit, they built a lot of their freeways earlier than other states, when there were fewer standards. They also have more rugged terrain to deal with, compared to most nearby states.

Not really ... nearby states with higher mountains --


New York's high point is hundreds of miles from PA. Also, rugged is not synonymous with having high peaks. Compared to the rest of the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic, Pennsylvania has more rugged terrain, and over a larger area of the state, too. Point stands.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 09, 2018, 09:01:17 AM
Pointing out tall mountain peaks has nothing to do with roads in other areas of the state.

The ruggedness has more to do with the width of the mountains and hills, and the roads necessary to pass thru them.  In PA, the mountain/hill terrain is deceiving, basically hitting every border state, so it's something often considered for every roadway. 

This  :clap:  :clap:

1995hoo

Quote from: RobbieL2415 on January 08, 2018, 10:30:27 PM
....
VA for its fetish with 60mph speed limits
....

That one kind of makes me scratch my head. I don't see what the big deal is. Most of those are statutory, although the way the statute is written lets VDOT set the speed limit no higher than 60 mph on many non-Interstate segments but allows them to set it lower. For quite some time after the NMSL appeal, Virginia stuck pretty closely to the old NMSL guidelines with a very few exceptions, the most notable being posting 65-mph limits on privately-built toll roads, such as the Dulles Greenway and Pocahontas Parkway, and on barrier-separated HOV lanes such as those on I-395. (I believe our forum member "Beltway" played a key role in getting the 65-mph limit posted on the Pocahontas Parkway.) As a general matter, Virginia has only grudgingly departed from the NMSL regime. As a general matter, the default speed limit in Virginia is 55 mph unless an exception allows for a higher or lower speed limit. The biggest exception is that in 2010 the statute was amended to allow for 70-mph limits on Interstates and Interstate look-alikes (though, again, it does not require 70-mph limits, even where traffic studies show 70 mph would be appropriate). Otherwise, most exceptions are codified by the General Assembly on a road-by-road basis. Here is what the statute says (Va. Code 46.2-870)–note the final sentence:

Quote§ 46.2-870. Maximum speed limits generally.
Except as otherwise provided in this article, the maximum speed limit shall be 55 miles per hour on interstate highways or other limited access highways with divided roadways, nonlimited access highways having four or more lanes, and all state primary highways.

The maximum speed limit on all other highways shall be 55 miles per hour if the vehicle is a passenger motor vehicle, bus, pickup or panel truck, or a motorcycle, but 45 miles per hour on such highways if the vehicle is a truck, tractor truck, or combination of vehicles designed to transport property, or is a motor vehicle being used to tow a vehicle designed for self-propulsion, or a house trailer.

Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this section, the maximum speed limit shall be 70 miles per hour where indicated by lawfully placed signs, erected subsequent to a traffic engineering study and analysis of available and appropriate accident and law-enforcement data, on: (i) interstate highways, (ii) multilane, divided, limited access highways, and (iii) high-occupancy vehicle lanes if such lanes are physically separated from regular travel lanes. The maximum speed limit shall be 60 miles per hour where indicated by lawfully placed signs, erected subsequent to a traffic engineering study and analysis of available and appropriate accident and law-enforcement data, on U.S. Route 23, U.S. Route 29, U.S. Route 58, U.S. Alternate Route 58, U.S. Route 360, U.S. Route 460, and on U.S. Route 17 between the Town of Port Royal and Saluda where they are nonlimited access, multilane, divided highways.

So, in other words, the 60-mph segments on Interstates are set that way entirely at VDOT's discretion because the statute allows up to 70-mph speed limits on Interstates. VDOT has said most of the 60-mph zones on Interstates (such as on I-66 from Manassas to Centreville or I-95 from the truck scales to just south of Occoquan) are intended to be "transitional" zones to "help drivers adjust" from rural speed limits to the urban 55-mph limit. I've always thought that sounds rather ludicrous.

Ultimately, what it boils down to is this: I'm not going to complain about the 60-mph speed limits because if it's posted at 60 mph, it means one of two things: Either (a) that's the highest speed limit allowed on that road by state law; or (b) they're allowed to post it at 65 or 70 but rejected those limits for whatever reason. Either way, in either of those circumstances I'd rather see a 60-mph sign than a 55-mph sign.

(BTW, an example of a road where the traffic studies showed a 70-mph limit would be appropriate but where one was not posted was the I-495 HO/T lanes, which are posted at 65. VDOT said when they first posted 65 that they never considered posting 70 there, although I can confirm from personal experience that if you set your cruise control at 70 mph there, most of the other traffic will be passing you and the cops are not likely to bother you for speeding. I passed two cops in there last week when I was doing 70 mph and neither seemed to care.)
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

jeffandnicole

Quote from: 1995hoo on January 09, 2018, 09:22:45 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on January 08, 2018, 10:30:27 PM
....
VA for its fetish with 60mph speed limits
....

That one kind of makes me scratch my head. I don't see what the big deal is. Most of those are statutory, although the way the statute is written lets VDOT set the speed limit no higher than 60 mph on many non-Interstate segments but allows them to set it lower. For quite some time after the NMSL appeal, Virginia stuck pretty closely to the old NMSL guidelines with a very few exceptions, the most notable being posting 65-mph limits on privately-built toll roads, such as the Dulles Greenway and Pocahontas Parkway, and on barrier-separated HOV lanes such as those on I-395. (I believe our forum member "Beltway" played a key role in getting the 65-mph limit posted on the Pocahontas Parkway.) As a general matter, Virginia has only grudgingly departed from the NMSL regime. As a general matter, the default speed limit in Virginia is 55 mph unless an exception allows for a higher or lower speed limit. The biggest exception is that in 2010 the statute was amended to allow for 70-mph limits on Interstates and Interstate look-alikes (though, again, it does not require 70-mph limits, even where traffic studies show 70 mph would be appropriate). Otherwise, most exceptions are codified by the General Assembly on a road-by-road basis. Here is what the statute says (Va. Code 46.2-870)—note the final sentence:

Quote§ 46.2-870. Maximum speed limits generally.
Except as otherwise provided in this article, the maximum speed limit shall be 55 miles per hour on interstate highways or other limited access highways with divided roadways, nonlimited access highways having four or more lanes, and all state primary highways.

The maximum speed limit on all other highways shall be 55 miles per hour if the vehicle is a passenger motor vehicle, bus, pickup or panel truck, or a motorcycle, but 45 miles per hour on such highways if the vehicle is a truck, tractor truck, or combination of vehicles designed to transport property, or is a motor vehicle being used to tow a vehicle designed for self-propulsion, or a house trailer.

Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this section, the maximum speed limit shall be 70 miles per hour where indicated by lawfully placed signs, erected subsequent to a traffic engineering study and analysis of available and appropriate accident and law-enforcement data, on: (i) interstate highways, (ii) multilane, divided, limited access highways, and (iii) high-occupancy vehicle lanes if such lanes are physically separated from regular travel lanes. The maximum speed limit shall be 60 miles per hour where indicated by lawfully placed signs, erected subsequent to a traffic engineering study and analysis of available and appropriate accident and law-enforcement data, on U.S. Route 23, U.S. Route 29, U.S. Route 58, U.S. Alternate Route 58, U.S. Route 360, U.S. Route 460, and on U.S. Route 17 between the Town of Port Royal and Saluda where they are nonlimited access, multilane, divided highways.

So, in other words, the 60-mph segments on Interstates are set that way entirely at VDOT's discretion because the statute allows up to 70-mph speed limits on Interstates. VDOT has said most of the 60-mph zones on Interstates (such as on I-66 from Manassas to Centreville or I-95 from the truck scales to just south of Occoquan) are intended to be "transitional" zones to "help drivers adjust" from rural speed limits to the urban 55-mph limit. I've always thought that sounds rather ludicrous.

Ultimately, what it boils down to is this: I'm not going to complain about the 60-mph speed limits because if it's posted at 60 mph, it means one of two things: Either (a) that's the highest speed limit allowed on that road by state law; or (b) they're allowed to post it at 65 or 70 but rejected those limits for whatever reason. Either way, in either of those circumstances I'd rather see a 60-mph sign than a 55-mph sign.

(BTW, an example of a road where the traffic studies showed a 70-mph limit would be appropriate but where one was not posted was the I-495 HO/T lanes, which are posted at 65. VDOT said when they first posted 65 that they never considered posting 70 there, although I can confirm from personal experience that if you set your cruise control at 70 mph there, most of the other traffic will be passing you and the cops are not likely to bother you for speeding. I passed two cops in there last week when I was doing 70 mph and neither seemed to care.)

If they ticketed for 5 over on a highway they'll be ticketing everyone as you said.  It's rare they'll bat an eye for 10 over. 

hotdogPi

States mentioned so far:

Arkansas
California
Connecticut
District of Columbia (Yes, I know it's not a state)
Georgia
Illinois
Maryland
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
(no mention of Texas with I-14 and I-69W/C/E?)
Virginia

Washington
Wisconsin

Quote from: webny99 on January 06, 2018, 03:13:26 PM
which states are critic-free?

Vermont is about as critic-free as you can get. The only complaint I've heard about them is that speed limits should be 70 or 75 instead of 65. Signage is good both aesthetically and for navigation, and their DOT is competent unlike some other states. And very little congestion, given that it's Vermont.
Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.

1995hoo

BTW, something I didn't think of when typing my prior post: I think one thing for which Virginia deserves to be mocked is the stupid law providing that anything over 80 mph is grounds for a reckless driving ticket (a misdemeanor, if you're convicted), even if the speed limit is 70 mph. There have been efforts to change this law as to 70-mph zones, but they stall in committee every year.
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

bzakharin

Maybe it's a regional thing, but I'm hearing "low slow Delaware" a lot. It's either all of Delaware or just the area south of I-95 (hence the low) depending on where you are. And the biggest complaint is left lane camping at slow speeds (hence the slow).

jeffandnicole

Quote from: bzakharin on January 09, 2018, 10:05:03 AM
Maybe it's a regional thing, but I'm hearing "low slow Delaware" a lot. It's either all of Delaware or just the area south of I-95 (hence the low) depending on where you are. And the biggest complaint is left lane camping at slow speeds (hence the slow).

Slower Delaware, rather than Lower Delaware.  Traditionally it was below the C&D canal, although with increased development it's really below Dover now.

I've always taken it to mean just the pace of life was slower down there.  There's quite a bit of bad driving in Delaware all throughout the state.

Beltway

Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 09, 2018, 09:01:17 AM
Pointing out tall mountain peaks has nothing to do with roads in other areas of the state.
The ruggedness has more to do with the width of the mountains and hills, and the roads necessary to pass thru them.  In PA, the mountain/hill terrain is deceiving, basically hitting every border state, so it's something often considered for every roadway. 

Tallest mountain is a good measure, as most states in that region have ones that are higher than PA, some states that are twice as high.

Plenty areas of PA are not "rugged".  SE PA is not, the I-79 route north of Cranberry is not.
http://www.roadstothefuture.com
http://www.capital-beltway.com

Baloney is a reserved word on the Internet
    (Robert Coté, 2002)

LM117

#49
Quote from: Beltway on January 09, 2018, 07:29:36 AM
Quote from: LM117 on January 09, 2018, 02:12:36 AM
All VDOT has to do is modify some of the ramps on US-29 in Danville, as well as close the Elizabeth Street at-grade access and I-785 in VA will be complete. There are currently no plans to do so.

Needs 10 foot wide paved right shoulders thruout, and 4 foot wide paved left shoulders thruout.

The Elizabeth Street access now is the first stage of an design that includes an overpassing roadway for Elizabeth Street and the completion of 4 ramps.

N.C. has about 20 miles of US-29 that is a nonlimited access highway and would need major construction if they want a freeway.  I don't think any detailed planning there yet.

The shoulders on US-29 between the US-29 Business split in Blairs and the NC state line already meets interstate standards. Once VDOT modifies some of the ramps at certain interchanges and deals with Elizabeth Street, I-785 shields can go up once NC finishes their part, whenever that may be.
“I don’t know whether to wind my ass or scratch my watch!” - Jim Cornette



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.