Disclaimer, I've never been to northwest, north plains, north east, and have limited driving experience in the south and true Midwest.
For overall road design including some freeways and state highways I have to hands give it to Utah. Driving there was an absolutely joy.
As for freeways I'd say Texas and California. Though both have their fair share of shitty freeway designs, a lot of their newer stuff is awesome.
I-5 in Orange County is hands down one the coolest freeways I've ever been on. Same thing with 405 reconstruction in LA in Sepulveda pass. The 15 north of San Diego is pretty rad too.
As for Texas I love the design of Central Expressway(75) between LBJ and downtown. I love the LBJ reconstruction in north Dallas.
Couple other notable mentions North Dalla tollway(I've always loved that freeway) and 110 parkway in LA.
I also love the I-15 reconstruction in south Salt Lake City.
I've always considered Kansas to be the gold standard of freeway design and signage.
Is Kansas really that good? I have never driven on a Kansas road funny enough.
New York. Take your engineer from the Plains and show them the Major Deegan / I-95 interchange and they would think the impossible had been achieved.
I say from initial concept California probably was the best until the highways started to fall apart over the years in urbanized areas. I like the use of concrete which has for the most part held up very well. The older baked enamel signage generally is still present and still readable, despite looking hideous during the day from wear. The expressway designs in California still are by far the best in the country; some notable examples being US 101, CA 198, CA 152, CA 58, and many more. Even the two lane highway designs are very good and generally have a good variation from single lane road up to more modernized wide two-lanes with shoulders of a decent width. So rural two-lane state highway and expressway I'd say California is still up there, freeways....not so much.
Right now I think ADOT in Arizona is building some nice stuff freeway designs in the Phoenix area. The 101 project was completed in the last two decades and the 303 in addition to the 202 loops have been greatly expanded. The Phoenix freeways are super nice for the most part and well maintained and seem to handle the traffic well enough that it rarely doesn't cause traffic jams. There has been some nice expressway builds in the last decade like US 93 and AZ 260. Some two-lanes have received some nice touch-ups like AZ 89A where I'm fairly certain even slight banking was added. What Arizona gets knocked on is bad initial Interstate design (Vail to Benson and the Gila River Indian Community) and poorly maintained rural freeways.
If I was going to say something for numbering system design the win would go to Florida. The grid FDOT did in the 1945 renumbering makes sense when you realize what it; odd numbers climb westward, even numbers climb southward. Even the County Routes tend to retain the former state road numbers or are given a triple digit that complies in the grid. I like what Nevada did in their renumbering also by giving routes in a given area similar numbers and putting urban, primary, and secondary routes into separate number bands.
I'd have to say that the best overall design standards I've seen are here in NY. I've probably been to every state in Street View. In person, I've been to PA, MD, VA, MA, NJ, OH, MI (for about a mile then turned around), NC, SC, and GA.
NYSDOT state-maintained highways typically have full shoulders, wide lanes, and high-quality pavement. In PA and NC, I noticed that many state roads are narrow, and often have the white edge lines right on the edge of the asphalt. I think the aggregate in the asphalt is smaller in NY than in PA, so the road looks smoother.
NYSDOT and most local DOTs use thick lines on the pavement, which really stand out. I also like the older turn lane pavement markings. Before NY adopted the 2009 MUTCD, the word ONLY was right below the arrow like on the sign. I think the current wider spacing looks weird. This (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.9286937,-76.6069324,3a,89.7y,166.56h,63.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suUlG7WAw1nMtRNon4U2yww!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) Street View image shows the new spacing, and the ground out old paint closer to the turn arrows. Another (possibly Thruway-only) standard I liked was the use of a solid and dotted line to indicate a lane is merging or diverging (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0623057,-76.5596133,3a,75y,271.75h,71.74t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sfMz1qcovojlXONWZOWsiqw!2e0!5s20071001T000000!7i3328!8i1664).
As for road hardware, I think box-beam guardrail looks better than w-beam. Not all w-beam is bad, but there's some that looks cheap. I like the incremental panels and rounded corners used on freeway signs, and I like the bottom of exit tabs having no bottom border and square corners to line up with the sign below it (example (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0521709,-76.1256551,3a,33.2y,74.64h,100.37t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1skxdTkvy8RTTuPrbCsCwFOw!2e0)). Span wire traffic signal installs look nice compared to others I've seen around the country. There's usually a second wire (I assume for stability), and the signal heads have pipes of different lengths at the top so all the signal heads will be level, even with the sag of the wire. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.924955,-76.5941339,3a,30y,335.79h,95.51t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sQxp-PlWWZZP3V_TWUCaI5g!2e0) an extreme example from here in Auburn. Note how much longer the pipe is on the right side than in the middle. When I was visiting a friend who had just moved to Ohio last summer, I didn't like how sloppy the span wires looked. Here's (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5866436,-83.5604859,3a,66.8y,25.04h,91.97t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sd-BUENhNR7ojX2AMn6QpMw!2e0) one intersection we went through several times. Signs on NYSDOT-maintained highways use z-bars behind the sign to make it more stable. I think a sign with just a u-channel post looks sloppy and cheap. Also, NYSDOT doesn't use Clearview! Some Clearview signs slip through occasionally, but I'm guessing that's from the contractor doing the work.
British Columbia seems to check all of my boxes.
- Lots of impressive engineering projects lately (Hwy 1 upgrades all over the province, several new bridges, complete interchange overhauls, and so on)
- Excellent, and consistently good (and visible) pavement markings, and plenty of standards that dictate which types of markings should be used, and where (with high rates of compliance)
- Plenty of pro/per signals across the province, though more protected signals are popping up (booooo)
- Speed limits have been on the climb (highest limit in Canada is in BC -- 120 km/h)
- Road signage is all Clearview, and though its rollout was rocky, they've really been consistently good at churning out excellent, easy-to-read signage since then
- Several, very cool custom highway shields for particular routes (Crowsnest, Yellowhead, etc)
Quote from: Michael on January 14, 2017, 02:55:26 PM
I'd have to say that the best overall design standards I've seen are here in NY.
I generally think NY's roads are well-designed, but I don't like the blanket 55mph speed limit on non-Interstate routes. Some of the two-lane roads in the North Country are designed well enough that they should be able to be signed at 65 no problem.
Hell, US11 would probably be much less of a pain in the ass to drive on if the speed limit were a bit higher!
Also, some of the newer BGS installations are total garbage. There seems to be no standard for competent design anymore. The Thruway in particular is awful.
I love Maryland's the best because number one, I'm biased and number two, I love a lot of the newest ones, such as the I-95 Express Toll Lanes north of Baltimore and the accompanying ramps.
I like Oregon's state highway numbering scheme. Similar to US routes, numbers increase as you go westward and southward. So you can actually use the route numbers as a very rudimentary way of figuring out what part of the state you're in. I also like I-5 through the state, both in terms of aesthetics and roadway quality.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on January 14, 2017, 05:35:26 AMIs Kansas really that good? I have never driven on a Kansas road funny enough.
On untolled rural Interstates and on modernized two-lane roads--including Super Twos--yes, Kansas is really that good. Medians, where provided, are usually 60 ft or more, and curve design is more forgiving than virtually anywhere else.
In terms of signing, however, I would grant Minnesota an overall advantage, largely because MnDOT's general approach toward signing in urban areas reflects a more systematic application of human factors principles.
Quote from: Rothman on January 14, 2017, 09:04:33 AMNew York. Take your engineer from the Plains and show them the Major Deegan / I-95 interchange and they would think the impossible had been achieved.
I have driven through it and been impressed by it. However, it solves a problem--fitting an express highway through a densely developed neighborhood that pre-dates the motor car--that, by and large, does not exist in Kansas or indeed most of the states from the frontier tier westward, except Texas and the Pacific Coast states. Urban and rural design problems are really in different leagues.
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 14, 2017, 05:21:38 AM
I've always considered Kansas to be the gold standard of freeway design and signage.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corcohighways.org%2Fhighways%2Fks%2F70%2F185to99%2F4.jpg&hash=55e6d380fe35496a0e47322183b384615b2b1695)
Feel free to laugh at me, but I like New Jersey. This is largely because New Jersey has been willing to use grade-separated interchanges, fully free-flowing interchanges, and jughandle intersections in places where I feel most other states would use more-conventional interchanges/intersections with more signal phases. I know some people don't like New Jersey's signing techniques, and I admit the signage can be spotty at times, but I'd still say it's much better than in many other states (California, New Mexico, and Oklahoma come to mind). To me, New Jersey is just plain fun to drive in. One caveat to that, though: I've only driven through New Jersey in a car. I wonder how truck drivers feel about New Jersey--
I also like Texas for its freeway frontage road systems.
Based on my travels, I would have to say Texas has the best interchange and urban freeway designs. Jaw dropping stacks and tons and tons of lanes really does support the statement that "everything's bigger in Texas." Tennessee has exceptional overpass quality with the use of asphalt over the concrete base (which by itself has rough transitions from the pavement and the overpass). In terms of quality of widening jobs on rural interstates, Kentucky has to take the cake. Smooth and quiet asphalt, wide shoulders on both sides, full size Jersey barriers, great signage and Exit improvements.
Quote from: corco on January 15, 2017, 12:01:20 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 14, 2017, 05:21:38 AM
I've always considered Kansas to be the gold standard of freeway design and signage.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corcohighways.org%2Fhighways%2Fks%2F70%2F185to99%2F4.jpg&hash=55e6d380fe35496a0e47322183b384615b2b1695)
Every state will have its duds, and whenever KDOT fails, the result typically resembles that particular panel. The main problem that panel suffers from is the misinterpretation of the lowercase letter height requirement. If that were fixed, it would fully comply with the MUTCD. Which is more than we can say for the 'worst of' in most other states.
CA was the gold standard up until the '90's, when maintenance seemed to drop off at the same time that Caltrans elected to shed as much of their urban surface mileage as they could, leaving system gaps. Innovation in roadway design efforts appeared to all but vanish during that same era (likely due to revenue shortfalls). The fact that it takes all but a miracle to get a freeway project off the ground in CA these days has seemingly pushed road design to the back burner, so to speak; if you're not going to build or enhance roads on a regular basis, there's no impetus to introduce any improvements in facility design.
Having lived there for several years in the '90's, I would have ranked Oregon as more consistently superior to California overall (particularly in regards to pavement!) -- but when they fail, they fail spectacularly -- as with Portland-area freeway design and deployment (gotta love the Terwilliger curve, the Banfield section of I-84, and the lane-drops on I-5 north of the Fremont Bridge I-405 interchange), the I-84 ascent/descent of the Blue Mountains east of Pendleton with its overly sharp/low radius curvature, and the "hybrid" design of the US 97 Bend "bypass" (is it a freeway, is it an expressway, is it a boulevard, or just some half-assed attempt to satisfy everyone's political and social interests).
Actually, I'd currently place Washington (state, not DC!) above either of the other Pacific Coast states in regards to facility design as well as state highway maintenance. One of the more rational/logical state systems (WA 19 notwithstanding!) around, with ample signage for navigational aid. The visual aspect of their roads -- freeway or otherwise -- is also consistently above average.
In the Northeast, I agree with the above that NY seems to have the best state route design standards. I've spent equal time driving in PA and Western NY...and my biggest gripe about PA roads is that that isn't a clear design standard. There are several quadrant routes that have better standards than numbered routes...and though I don't think a well-designed quadrant route necessarily needs a number, I think some lower-designed numbered routes should be demoted to quadrant routes.
Another gripe about PA...I wish the quadrant routes had route signage. County-pentagons or maybe just a white rectangle...but if PennDOT press releases are going to refer to those (and therefore newspaper stories, GPS directions, and other publications), then they need to be signed so they can be read.
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 15, 2017, 04:45:26 AMEvery state will have its duds, and whenever KDOT fails, the result typically resembles that particular panel. The main problem that panel suffers from is the misinterpretation of the lowercase letter height requirement. If that were fixed, it would fully comply with the MUTCD. Which is more than we can say for the 'worst of' in most other states.
I think this sign is a knockdown replacement, since the exit direction sign in the other direction has no problems with it other than a badly faded K-99 shield. Knockdowns are actually one of KDOT's biggest weaknesses in signing--they also include route shields with Arial digits.
Quote from: sparker on January 15, 2017, 06:27:03 AM
CA was the gold standard up until the '90's, when maintenance seemed to drop off at the same time that Caltrans elected to shed as much of their urban surface mileage as they could, leaving system gaps. Innovation in roadway design efforts appeared to all but vanish during that same era (likely due to revenue shortfalls). The fact that it takes all but a miracle to get a freeway project off the ground in CA these days has seemingly pushed road design to the back burner, so to speak; if you're not going to build or enhance roads on a regular basis, there's no impetus to introduce any improvements in facility design.
Having lived there for several years in the '90's, I would have ranked Oregon as more consistently superior to California overall (particularly in regards to pavement!) -- but when they fail, they fail spectacularly -- as with Portland-area freeway design and deployment (gotta love the Terwilliger curve, the Banfield section of I-84, and the lane-drops on I-5 north of the Fremont Bridge I-405 interchange), the I-84 ascent/descent of the Blue Mountains east of Pendleton with its overly sharp/low radius curvature, and the "hybrid" design of the US 97 Bend "bypass" (is it a freeway, is it an expressway, is it a boulevard, or just some half-assed attempt to satisfy everyone's political and social interests).
Actually, I'd currently place Washington (state, not DC!) above either of the other Pacific Coast states in regards to facility design as well as state highway maintenance. One of the more rational/logical state systems (WA 19 notwithstanding!) around, with ample signage for navigational aid. The visual aspect of their roads -- freeway or otherwise -- is also consistently above average.
This post is totally on-point. It reminds me of my civil engineering studies. Caltrans used to be the gold standard for road construction back in the 60s and 70s--the California Bearing Ratio for soil strength comes to mind. More modern studies referenced in my civil engineering classes would reference WSDOT a lot (Washington State). Illinois used to be very important in the very early studies of Interstate construction, but certainly not anymore. Washington continues to impress me when it comes to Interstate construction and design. Smooth, sturdy roads, excellent allocations of space, consistent use of purple on signs for toll applications, and the most advanced HOV systems I've ever seen. Texas also has excellent roads, which is especially impressive just because of the sheer amount they have to maintain. Texas has clean, smooth roads and the most colossal flyover ramps I've ever seen. I'm biased against Texas, though, because I hate their constant insistence on putting frontage roads everywhere (makes exit ramp more expensive and more of a pain to navigate). In the Midwest, I'd have to go with Wisconsin. Certainly not Indiana, Iowa, or Illinois.
Quote from: sparker on January 15, 2017, 06:27:03 AM
Actually, I'd currently place Washington (state, not DC!) above either of the other Pacific Coast states in regards to facility design as well as state highway maintenance. One of the more rational/logical state systems (WA 19 notwithstanding!) around, with ample signage for navigational aid. The visual aspect of their roads -- freeway or otherwise -- is also consistently above average.
After viewing multiple state DOT websites, I can say that WSDOT's website is one of the best. Some of Washington's newer bridge designs are attractive. In terms of highway projects, the quality of work is generally good, but can vary. The viaduct replacement tunnel is Seattle so far has been an absolute nightmare. But other projects have been great. The SR20 widening project near Burlington turned out great. Likewise with the I-5 southbound Stilliguamish River bridge deck replacement.
As much as their pathological sign replacement annoys me, road signs in Washington State are in very good condition, and usually very useful and informative.
^^
I had no idea Washington was some sort of gold standard. I mean, I can tell just driving around the WSDOT doesn't fuck around (great signage -- though too many bubble shields --, always readable pavement markings, excellent transit and HOV accommodation, high capacity interchanges where it matters, wide use of active traffic management using VMSs and shoulder running, etc etc). I guess I'm just used to excellent highways, that I forgot that not everyone does it as well. :D
The one thing that WSDOT does that drives me fucking mad is this move towards only installing protected lefts when a new signal is installed. The only FYAs in the state have been installed through replacement projects (5-section to FYA for example) -- they are very cautious with replacing a protected left with a pro/per left (such an install is very rare, and I can't think of any off-hand). This is mostly the result of Washington's MUTCD, which heavily favors increasing control at intersections (going from pro/per to pro-only), rather than decreasing (going from pro-only to pro/per). Basically, once you've installed a protected left, it's very hard to get rid of it.
Quote from: epzik8 on January 14, 2017, 07:58:48 PM
...such as the I-95 Express Toll Lanes north of Baltimore and the accompanying ramps.
But there's only one interchange within those express toll lanes.
While the entire concept was a wonderful idea, the resulting project was a disaster. What should've been a 4 year project is now about 10 years old and still not entirely done yet, as they are still working at the 95/695 interchange. The 2nd phase, creating a toll/free 95 all the way to Bel Air never happened. Tolls have gone up extensively for everyone (although it did roll back a little for Maryland's EZ Pass holders). Maryland was left with a short, tolled highway that is rarely truly needed.
Yet, the rest of Maryland actually has decent roads. I've always been impressed with the wide shoulders of the local state roads, with accel/decal lanes at nearly every intersection. Signage is plentiful. Overall, Maryland does a great job.
Quote from: stridentweasel on January 15, 2017, 02:13:40 AM
One caveat to that, though: I've only driven through New Jersey in a car. I wonder how truck drivers feel about New Jersey--
They gotta pay a toll. 'Nough said! LOL
Because of the tight turns and numerous height restrictions once they're off the highways, I imagine it's a bit of a challenge for many of them. Even some US routes, such as US 130 in Brooklawn, has a 13' 0" restriction. The signed route for taller trucks utilizes township/boro roads amazingly.
I'll agree about NY. Even our modern two lane roads feel like interstates (geometry-wise). No idea why the speed limit is stuck at 55 (and 65 for freeways; I'd love to see 70/75), other than our NYC-dominated legislature. I like NY's signage standards too, though some modern stuff in certain areas don't look as good (*cough* Thruway, Region 7, Region 9 *cough*); I'm partial to the "classic" late 90s/early 00s from just before NY's adoption of the national MUTCD. The lane striping mentioned earlier wasn't just the Thruway; Region 1 did it too. And box beam IS wonderful; looks great, and you only need to replace the local segment when it gets hit, not a quarter mile down the road as well; the only thing box beam isn't good for is rustic rail (corten steel for everyone else), which rusts from the inside out.
Ontario also does a good job. Like NY, speed limits could be higher. I do wish they would post the exit tabs on every sign, though.
Quote from: jakeroot on January 15, 2017, 04:56:21 PM
The one thing that WSDOT does that drives me fucking mad is this move towards only installing protected lefts when a new signal is installed. The only FYAs in the state have been installed through replacement projects (5-section to FYA for example) -- they are very cautious with replacing a protected left with a pro/per left (such an install is very rare, and I can't think of any off-hand). This is mostly the result of Washington's MUTCD, which heavily favors increasing control at intersections (going from pro/per to pro-only), rather than decreasing (going from pro-only to pro/per). Basically, once you've installed a protected left, it's very hard to get rid of it.
I hate the excessive authoritarianism that causes a road agency to spam every intersection with protected-only left turns. I noticed this in California which drove me mad as well. West coast officials are confusing authoritarianism with progress in this instance--it's not progressive if it causes unnecessary delays.
Quote from: ukfan758 on January 15, 2017, 02:25:16 AM
In terms of quality of widening jobs on rural interstates, Kentucky has to take the cake. Smooth and quiet asphalt, wide shoulders on both sides, full size Jersey barriers, great signage and Exit improvements.
Agreed on this point. 75 is the one I'm on the most in KY and I really enjoy the 6 lane segments and look forward to them widening more of it . I also think KY does a great job with rural expressways.
I will agree that when they have the money that they need, WisDOT does an amazing job on their road projects. The recently rebuilt I-41 in the Green Bay, WI area is simply jaw-dropping!
Outside of Wisconsin, I've always been impressed with the work that MnDOT has been doing, mainly in the MStP metro area.
Mike
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 14, 2017, 10:25:20 AM
I say from initial concept California probably was the best until the highways started to fall apart over the years in urbanized areas. I like the use of concrete which has for the most part held up very well. The older baked enamel signage generally is still present and still readable, despite looking hideous during the day from wear. The expressway designs in California still are by far the best in the country; some notable examples being US 101, CA 198, CA 152, CA 58, and many more. Even the two lane highway designs are very good and generally have a good variation from single lane road up to more modernized wide two-lanes with shoulders of a decent width. So rural two-lane state highway and expressway I'd say California is still up there, freeways....not so much.
Right now I think ADOT in Arizona is building some nice stuff freeway designs in the Phoenix area. The 101 project was completed in the last two decades and the 303 in addition to the 202 loops have been greatly expanded. The Phoenix freeways are super nice for the most part and well maintained and seem to handle the traffic well enough that it rarely doesn't cause traffic jams. There has been some nice expressway builds in the last decade like US 93 and AZ 260. Some two-lanes have received some nice touch-ups like AZ 89A where I'm fairly certain even slight banking was added. What Arizona gets knocked on is bad initial Interstate design (Vail to Benson and the Gila River Indian Community) and poorly maintained rural freeways.
If I was going to say something for numbering system design the win would go to Florida. The grid FDOT did in the 1945 renumbering makes sense when you realize what it; odd numbers climb westward, even numbers climb southward. Even the County Routes tend to retain the former state road numbers or are given a triple digit that complies in the grid. I like what Nevada did in their renumbering also by giving routes in a given area similar numbers and putting urban, primary, and secondary routes into separate number bands.
I agree with this. California freeways and highways used to be cutting edge, and now they are falling apart with little investment in upgrades. Particularly with interchanges, there's a lot they could do to tweak capacity to help spread congestion out and other little fixes, and they've basically given up. And they seem so lax now in oversight of the details under the design-build model, that all kinds of issues seem to arise on recently-completed projects.
I also agree that ADOT builds some great highways in the west. Since the 80s, there's been a sea-change in how they approach freeway building, and most of the metro Phoenix projects have been very well executed. For all of the "Not another LA" rhetoric that began in the 90s, ADOT seems to have applied all the best aspects of the old Caltrans to their highway development projects.
This is a tough one, but I think I'll go with Texas.
Texas has an extensive network of paved farm-to-market roads that are as good as the primary network in some other states (KY, MO...). While the frontage road obsession takes some getting used to, the designs used in urban areas work quite well (I wish Kellogg frontage roads in Wichita functioned as well as Texas' frontage roads). A lot of the trunk highways are four lanes (JNW's po-boys notwithstanding), many others have passing lanes, and are generally a pleasure to drive. The I-35 project between Hillsboro and San Antonio has been taking forever, but the completed portions I've been on are fabulous.
Signage and especially pavement marking in Texas is top-notch, and to me the gold standard. There's very little bad I can say about Texas highways, but two things do come to mind. First is that I suspect some aging pavement conditions on non-Interstate trunk highways may become noticeable in a couple of years, and I wonder how actively the state re-paves them. Second, I've been on several highways on the southern part of the state with humps and dips, which becomes tedious with a heavy-laden vehicle. Highways that come to mind in this latter regard: US-385 south of Marathon, TX-255 (entire), TX-130 south of Austin (making 85 mph less enjoyable).
I think the way Texas does frontage roads is a pretty good concept, especially in execution. I've been to Texas briefly, and never really had an issue with them. I can also see it being a good way to sign both interstates and US routes.
Quote from: Quillz on January 19, 2017, 08:07:04 PM
I think the way Texas does frontage roads is a pretty good concept, especially in execution. I've been to Texas briefly, and never really had an issue with them. I can also see it being a good way to sign both interstates and US routes.
The thing that I love the most about how TxDOT does their freeway/tollway frontage roads is that they can be used to establish new corridors FIRST as super-wide median surface four lane roads, heading off any potential NIMBYs loooong before any of them have a chance to move into the areas, adding the freeways or tollways in the those spacious medians with little opposition later on when the need arises.
:nod:
Mike
Quote from: Occidental Tourist on January 19, 2017, 05:25:04 PM
I also agree that ADOT builds some great highways in the west. Since the 80s, there's been a sea-change in how they approach freeway building, and most of the metro Phoenix projects have been very well executed. For all of the "Not another LA" rhetoric that began in the 90s, ADOT seems to have applied all the best aspects of the old Caltrans to their highway development projects.
Agreed. If the state were to allow it I think some Phoenix area freeways could handle 70 mph speed limits due to their quality designs. Plus, we now have logo signs on our freeways (which many other Sun Belt states already did in their urban areas), which California still refuses to expand to urban areas.
Quote from: Quillz on January 19, 2017, 08:07:04 PM
I think the way Texas does frontage roads is a pretty good concept, especially in execution. I've been to Texas briefly, and never really had an issue with them.
Agreed. I especially like the special U turn lanes they have in some places to get from one frontage road to the other without having to make 2 left turns (not sure what these are officially called)
Quote from: Buck87 on January 24, 2017, 05:10:40 PM
Agreed. I especially like the special U turn lanes they have in some places to get from one frontage road to the other without having to make 2 left turns (not sure what these are officially called)
They are called "Texas U-Turn" or "Texas Turnaround" even out of state.
No love for Florida?
Wide lanes, generous runoff/breakdown lanes, smooth pavement, bright lane markings, wide rights-of-way, plenty of signage. Many urban/suburban state roads have dedicated bike lanes.
That's not to take away anything from Texas nor New York, but I think Florida deserves to be mentioned in the top 5.
Quote from: formulanone on January 24, 2017, 09:43:43 PM
No love for Florida?
Wide lanes, generous runoff/breakdown lanes, smooth pavement, bright lane markings, wide rights-of-way, plenty of signage. Many urban/suburban state roads have dedicated bike lanes.
That's not to take away anything from Texas nor New York, but I think Florida deserves to be mentioned in the top 5.
Fairly certain I plugged Florida earlier in the thread. There is some quality US Route expressway alignments like US 19, 192, and especially 27. I always liked the grid system they have going with all the routes.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 24, 2017, 10:16:24 PM
Quote from: formulanone on January 24, 2017, 09:43:43 PM
No love for Florida?
Wide lanes, generous runoff/breakdown lanes, smooth pavement, bright lane markings, wide rights-of-way, plenty of signage. Many urban/suburban state roads have dedicated bike lanes.
That's not to take away anything from Texas nor New York, but I think Florida deserves to be mentioned in the top 5.
Fairly certain I plugged Florida earlier in the thread. There is some quality US Route expressway alignments like US 19, 192, and especially 27. I always liked the grid system they have going with all the routes.
Ah, I see it now.
True...growing up around that grid system, I still tend to assume (wrongly) that just about every state has it.
Quote from: formulanone on January 24, 2017, 10:24:18 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 24, 2017, 10:16:24 PM
Quote from: formulanone on January 24, 2017, 09:43:43 PM
No love for Florida?
Wide lanes, generous runoff/breakdown lanes, smooth pavement, bright lane markings, wide rights-of-way, plenty of signage. Many urban/suburban state roads have dedicated bike lanes.
That's not to take away anything from Texas nor New York, but I think Florida deserves to be mentioned in the top 5.
Fairly certain I plugged Florida earlier in the thread. There is some quality US Route expressway alignments like US 19, 192, and especially 27. I always liked the grid system they have going with all the routes.
Ah, I see it now.
True...growing up around that grid system, I still tend to assume (wrongly) that just about every state has it.
Yeah really Nevada was the only one out here that kind of makes sense in similar fashion. I always liked US 27 especially, that was always such a nice quiet drive from Orlando down to Miami via Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades. I always found that ironic that I would be using US 27 so much considering I went to high school and lived on the route in Michigan of all places.
Florida always was pretty good with upkeep and over designing a lot of the lesser routes. FL 50 comes to mind as one of the roads I used to frequent that was basically almost an expressway for the entirety of the route that most people probably expect. I honestly miss being able to drive in the rain and not worry about the roadway being a hazard and having drivers around me accustomed to the conditions.
But then again....I would never trade some good ole mountain routes that I frequent regularly nowadays. :-D
California struck me as a freeway paradise in the mid Seventies when compared to Oregon. Seattle had the reversible flow middle lanes in downtown at that time, which sure seemed like a great idea at the time.
Since then I have lived in Louisiana and Utah. Utah was first half of the Nineties and Louisiana followed after that for a bit over two years. The Beehive State being the 7th most urbanized in the nation, saw I-15 being a wide freeway for a rather longish way. Unfortunately I have missed out on seeing the improvements built before the Winter Olympics. No doubt they may well have the best in the West.
Louisiana on the other hand was not particularly special in terms of any modern touches other than the massive very high freeway bridge (I-310?) that crosses the Mighty Mississippi by NOLA. To see so much causeway was amazing though. You don't need to drain the swamp if you can go right over it...LOL! As the I-49 South section fills in, no doubt more causeway will be added.
So I'll take Utah as my choice from what I have seen. That does mean I missed a lot sorry to say! Even if it needed work, I would love to drive the Pennsylvania Turnpike due to its historical nature. For a smaller state, Ohio packs in a lot of people. How well do they handle that kind of situation? I'm curious! Kentucky roadbuilding in the mountains would be very interesting to see. What is Chicago and their metro neighbors like Gary IN and Milwaukie WI like compared to SoCal for freeways and expressways?
Hawai'i is pretty special too!
Rick
How on Earth is Utah the 7th most urbanized state with all that empty space?
Oh wait, it is not about the state's overall urbanization, but the density of its urban areas. Whatever.
Quote from: Rothman on January 25, 2017, 02:09:06 PM
How on Earth is Utah the 7th most urbanized state with all that empty space?
Oh wait, it is not about the state's overall urbanization, but the density of its urban areas. Whatever.
Not much to do with empty space. It's just a measure of how much of the populace lives in an urban area. Utah ranks high in that regard.
Quote from: jakeroot on January 25, 2017, 02:12:48 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 25, 2017, 02:09:06 PM
How on Earth is Utah the 7th most urbanized state with all that empty space?
Oh wait, it is not about the state's overall urbanization, but the density of its urban areas. Whatever.
Not much to do with empty space. It's just a measure of how much of the populace lives in an urban area. Utah ranks high in that regard.
That empty space especially in the southern half of the state is some of the most uninhabited areas in the country. You could probably wander the San Rafael Swell or Maze in the Canyonlands and not see another person for weeks.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 25, 2017, 03:07:27 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 25, 2017, 02:12:48 PM
Quote from: Rothman on January 25, 2017, 02:09:06 PM
How on Earth is Utah the 7th most urbanized state with all that empty space?
Oh wait, it is not about the state's overall urbanization, but the density of its urban areas. Whatever.
Not much to do with empty space. It's just a measure of how much of the populace lives in an urban area. Utah ranks high in that regard.
That empty space especially in the southern half of the state is some of the most uninhabited areas in the country. You could probably wander the San Rafael Swell or Maze in the Canyonlands and not see another person for weeks.
Right. Although certainly how much of a state's population is urban is an interesting statistic, it'd also be interesting to see just the percentage of a state's area that is considered urban.
Quote from: kphoger on January 19, 2017, 06:12:39 PMTexas has an extensive network of paved farm-to-market roads that are as good as the primary network in some other states (KY, MO...). While the frontage road obsession takes some getting used to, the designs used in urban areas work quite well (I wish Kellogg frontage roads in Wichita functioned as well as Texas' frontage roads).
The more recently built freeways in Texas are attractive and operationally successful. In the era of primary Interstate construction, however, Texas did quite poorly, both on and off the Interstates. In the early 1960's they were notorious for penny-wise, pound-foolish moves like using little stubs of embankment to connect lengths on viaduct, using very low
k-values for vertical curves that go under overpasses so that a driver approaching the overpass has to deal with the optical illusion of running toward a raised concrete object at 60+ MPH, etc. The length of I-35 between Gainesville and the Red River bridge goes up hill and down dale (low curve
k-values, again) and has a sharp curve at the Red River itself. It is a textbook example of how not to design a rural Interstate.
Quote from: kphoger on January 19, 2017, 06:12:39 PMA lot of the trunk highways are four lanes (JNW's po-boys notwithstanding), many others have passing lanes, and are generally a pleasure to drive.
As it happens, TxDOT has two contracts under advertisement for Burnet County for the March 2017 letting, both of which will convert existing segments of poor-boy to Super Two with fresh chipseals (no repaving) for both. One covers US 183 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Burnet+County,+TX/@30.9688893,-98.0618599,3a,75y,308.22h,84.28t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1slSJ5oW-yk_aAhcBfEc_s1A!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DlSJ5oW-yk_aAhcBfEc_s1A%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D30.729002%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x865ae7ed519d70bb:0xb9ed3fdb7f4e699f!8m2!3d30.7270349!4d-98.2212979!6m1!1e1) near Lampasas while the other covers RM 1431 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Burnet+County,+TX/@30.5988385,-98.3307217,3a,75y,124.71h,85.44t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sdAhbqm1YFTTg1Hqos0m8TQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DdAhbqm1YFTTg1Hqos0m8TQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D29.869938%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x865ae7ed519d70bb:0xb9ed3fdb7f4e699f!8m2!3d30.7270349!4d-98.2212979!6m1!1e1) near Marble Falls. Both contracts will withdraw continuous passing opportunity for both directions, but create continuous full shoulders where none now exist.
Quote from: kphoger on January 19, 2017, 06:12:39 PMSignage and especially pavement marking in Texas is top-notch, and to me the gold standard. There's very little bad I can say about Texas highways, but two things do come to mind. First is that I suspect some aging pavement conditions on non-Interstate trunk highways may become noticeable in a couple of years, and I wonder how actively the state re-paves them.
"May become noticeable in a couple of years"? Right now they are already chipsealed to death. TxDOT doesn't allocate enough out of the large cities to maintain consistently good surface condition even on the important rural two-lanes.
Good surface condition is more than the mere absence of potholes. It is also consistent surface profile, without ruts, sags, depressions, or other slight differences in elevation that are enough to boggle a car's suspension and tire out the driver after several hundred miles. Preferably, it is also the absence of surface treatments like chipseals that somewhat extend pavement service life at a huge penalty in noise, vibration, and harshness.
When TxDOT actually goes in and reconstructs a rural two-lane from the subgrade up, as they did with US 281 through Hamilton County sometime in the last couple of years, the result is a wonder: smooth asphalt pavement, full shoulders, excellent reflectivity from fresh thermoplastic and pavement delineators, and superlative NVH characteristics. But this happens only once in a blue moon.
If we're talking vintage: hands down NY. Their Parkway are very aestheticlly pleasing and theyre a lot less mundane to drive on than your standard interstate.
If we're talking Interstate era onward: Virginia. I've always been drawn to how their congestion-based HOV lanes in the DC area operate. That and their pavement is always in good shape.
Quote from: J N Winkler on January 31, 2017, 12:19:46 AM
The length of I-35 between Gainesville and the Red River bridge goes up hill and down dale (low curve k-values, again) and has a sharp curve at the Red River itself. It is a textbook example of how not to design a rural Interstate.
The stretch of highway you mention is the only location where I actually wish Texas had
not raised the speed limit to 75 mph.
I have to agree with everyone who mentioned New York previously. Even since shortly after the US Highway system was developed, the state has been building alignments wide and with excellent geometry. Take US 20 west of Albany. Excluding a few places, it's generally very high quality and you could safely go 70+ even through the somewhat-rough terrain it traverses. Very little of that was improved after the 1930s. Many of the routes through the Adirondacks are wide and built to allow high speeds even crossing a mountain range. I expect state routes elsewhere to match in quality and I am always disappointed.
Know where the roads here generally suck? The Hudson Valley, and that's mostly because the network in many places predates the Revolution.
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on February 01, 2017, 10:38:51 PM
If we're talking vintage: hands down NY. Their Parkway are very aestheticlly pleasing and theyre a lot less mundane to drive on than your standard interstate.
If we're talking Interstate era onward: Virginia. I've always been drawn to how their congestion-based HOV lanes in the DC area operate. That and their pavement is always in good shape.
I like Virginia's expressways too but the pavement is pretty much hit or miss. I-85, I-264 and I-295 was notorious for potholes until recently.