AARoads Forum

Seven years ago, I started a thread called "The BEST Transportation Agency in the U.S." (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=12426) here on the forum to determine which DOT was actually the best.

Since it's been so long since the original thread, I thought it was a good time to bring up the topic again to see if people's opinions had changed based on new places they'd been to, new DOT policies that have changed since, and also to hear what newcomers to the forum have to say.

One thing I feel like might still hold true today:

Quote from: JoePCool14 on May 18, 2014, 12:21:08 PM
All I know is that IDiOT is out.  :pan:

So I ask you all: What is the BEST transportation agency in the U.S. in 2021?

Latest generally-agreed upon rankings. (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29130.msg2626525#msg2626525)

Wow, if your profile age is correct, I respect you for being here seven years ago.

ODOT (Ohio) wins for several aspects, including their signage and the 6-laning of many of their rural interstates.

However, I prefer NYSDOT's use of incremental sign panels (which have rounded corners) instead of the extruded ones (which have square corners). Unfortunately for NYSDOT, though, states that still use sequential exit numbers automatically rank below all the states that use mileage-based.

Any DOT that continues to use Clearview is right out, in my book.

Quote from: webny99 on April 26, 2021, 10:42:23 AM
Wow, if your profile age is correct, I respect you for being here seven years ago.

Just don't look at my early posts. :colorful: Most of them are a mess.

Quote from: I-35 on April 26, 2021, 10:46:20 AM
Any DOT that continues to use Clearview is right out, in my book.

I used to think that too, but there is more to DOTs than just Clearview usage. Also, many roadgeeks these days are more neutral on Clearview.

INDOT has gotten a lot better since the gas tax has passed. They have a lot more money to do badly needed work. There are tons of preventative maintenance projects now and road quality is much better now.

Pixel 5

NCDOT if you like interstates.

Quote from: I-35 on April 26, 2021, 10:46:20 AM
Any DOT that continues to use Clearview is right out, in my book.

I'm not going that quick in eliminating all Clearview states. I think Michigan's signage is good despite using Clearview.

My feelings on this haven't changed.

Quote from: Scott5114 on May 18, 2014, 05:53:43 PM
As before when this has been discussed, I vote for KDOT:

• Clear, consistent signage
• No Clearview
• Well-maintained road surfaces (KDOT is not afraid to tear a road down to the dirt and rebuild it if necessary)
• Excellent attention to detail in road geometry (curves are banked just right)
• Does a good job attending to transportation needs in Northeast Kansas (I have heard that their work in Sedgwick County leaves something to be desired, so that is a mark against them)
• Excellent state map
• Well-organized route system
• Frequent decommissionings to avoid spending money on roads that don't need to be state-maintained (freeing it up for improvements on other routes)

Driving in Kansas is always a pleasure, to an extent that I have seen unmatched by any other state so far (although WisDOT and TDOT come close in my limited experience with them).

Caltrans sucks their signage is trash. I don't care if it has button copy signs, they're outdated, impossible to read and need replacing. they need mile markers on their highways, they barely sign turns on their routes either.

I'm not going to name a best yet, but another one I'll eliminate from even the top 10: PennDOT.

Quote from: silverback1065 on April 26, 2021, 11:54:37 AM

INDOT has gotten a lot better since the gas tax has passed. They have a lot more money to do badly needed work. There are tons of preventative maintenance projects now and road quality is much better now.

Pixel 5

I'll second that. I noticed a change in road quality on various segments of I-74 between Indy and Cincy that I was asking myself when driving on it about a month ago "Am I really in Indiana?". Also little road work too on I-74, unlike Illinois's rural interstates, where any day you pick, there's a super 2 section of I-70 in IL because of construction. What would be nice to see next in Indiana is a complete 6 lane of I-65 between Indy and Chicago. Would make my travels to Chicago even better, combined with the I-74 improvements.

Even though it improved a lot, not sure if I would name it the best DOT still.

Quote from: SkyPesos on April 26, 2021, 09:11:07 PM
I'm not going to name a best yet, but another one I'll eliminate from even the top 10: PennDOT.

Quote from: silverback1065 on April 26, 2021, 11:54:37 AM

INDOT has gotten a lot better since the gas tax has passed. They have a lot more money to do badly needed work. There are tons of preventative maintenance projects now and road quality is much better now.

Pixel 5

I'll second that. I noticed a change in road quality on various segments of I-74 between Indy and Cincy that I was asking myself when driving on it about a month ago "Am I really in Indiana?". Also little road work too on I-74, unlike Illinois's rural interstates, where any day you pick, there's a super 2 section of I-70 in IL because of construction. What would be nice to see next in Indiana is a complete 6 lane of I-65 between Indy and Chicago. Would make my travels to Chicago even better, combined with the I-74 improvements.

Even though it improved a lot, not sure if I would name it the best DOT still.

I wouldn't say they're the best. Just much improved.

Pixel 5

From the professional end, I like how well put together FDOT's CAD standards and programs are. Their design standards are also pretty easy to find online, for the most part.

I like MDOT (Maryland) for the following reasons:

• They have Clearview signage scattered throughout the state.
• They know how to pave and widen highways and what circumstances to do so under.
• They have signs posting designated routes and distances to points of interest throughout the state, complete with Maryland flags.
• They let every county choose their own street blade styles.
• They post signs approaching intersections indicating cities in each direction (left, right and straight).
• SHA and MTA just have it together, although the same can't be said for the Baltimore City DOT.

Quote from: SkyPesos on April 26, 2021, 12:21:27 PM

Quote from: I-35 on April 26, 2021, 10:46:20 AM
Any DOT that continues to use Clearview is right out, in my book.

I'm not going that quick in eliminating all Clearview states. I think Michigan's signage is good despite using Clearview.

Michigan's signage is good because of Clearview.

Quote from: epzik8 on April 26, 2021, 10:35:25 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on April 26, 2021, 12:21:27 PM

Quote from: I-35 on April 26, 2021, 10:46:20 AM
Any DOT that continues to use Clearview is right out, in my book.

I'm not going that quick in eliminating all Clearview states. I think Michigan's signage is good despite using Clearview.

Michigan's signage is good because of Clearview.

Nope. It's good in spite of it. Across Lake Michigan, WisDOT also puts out quality on their signs without a hint of Clearview.

Quote from: silverback1065 on April 26, 2021, 09:27:00 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on April 26, 2021, 09:11:07 PM
I'm not going to name a best yet, but another one I'll eliminate from even the top 10: PennDOT.

Quote from: silverback1065 on April 26, 2021, 11:54:37 AM

INDOT has gotten a lot better since the gas tax has passed. They have a lot more money to do badly needed work. There are tons of preventative maintenance projects now and road quality is much better now.

Pixel 5

I'll second that. I noticed a change in road quality on various segments of I-74 between Indy and Cincy that I was asking myself when driving on it about a month ago "Am I really in Indiana?". Also little road work too on I-74, unlike Illinois's rural interstates, where any day you pick, there's a super 2 section of I-70 in IL because of construction. What would be nice to see next in Indiana is a complete 6 lane of I-65 between Indy and Chicago. Would make my travels to Chicago even better, combined with the I-74 improvements.

Even though it improved a lot, not sure if I would name it the best DOT still.

I wouldn't say they're the best. Just much improved.

Pixel 5

Now if INDOT continues to get better...

VDOT has gotten a lot better in the past seven years. They still use that stupid SMART SCALE system to prioritize projects, but their customer service and citizen outreach is excellent. They do a great job of responding to reports made on My VDOT (sometimes even on the same day depending on what the issue is).

Also, the VDOT Northern Virginia District's PIO is probably the best PIO in the whole damn country.

https://twitter.com/VaDOTNOVA/status/1386629936656654336

Quote from: silverback1065 on April 26, 2021, 09:04:18 PM
Caltrans sucks their signage is trash. I don't care if it has button copy signs, they're outdated, impossible to read and need replacing. they need mile markers on their highways, they barely sign turns on their routes either.

So are you saying it's a multi-way tie for first place, between every other agency?

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:56:21 AM
NCDOT if you like interstates.

if you like small sections of pointless interstates that don't go anywhere  :spin:

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:56:21 AM
NCDOT if you like interstates.

@FritzOwl

OwlDOT ?

Quote from: Scott5114 on April 26, 2021, 07:30:19 PM
My feelings on this haven't changed.

Quote from: Scott5114 on May 18, 2014, 05:53:43 PM
As before when this has been discussed, I vote for KDOT:

• Clear, consistent signage
• No Clearview
• Well-maintained road surfaces (KDOT is not afraid to tear a road down to the dirt and rebuild it if necessary)
• Excellent attention to detail in road geometry (curves are banked just right)
• Does a good job attending to transportation needs in Northeast Kansas (I have heard that their work in Sedgwick County leaves something to be desired, so that is a mark against them)
• Excellent state map
• Well-organized route system
• Frequent decommissionings to avoid spending money on roads that don't need to be state-maintained (freeing it up for improvements on other routes)

Driving in Kansas is always a pleasure, to an extent that I have seen unmatched by any other state so far (although WisDOT and TDOT come close in my limited experience with them).

It seems like Ontario checks a lot of those boxes.

However, some things that aren't that great:
- I'd just say that Ontario signage is usually okay, but some of them are a bit strange or inconsistent. There is Clearview on a few signs, but no new signs have Clearview anymore.
- I'd also say that Ontario's decommissioning of routes in 1997 had made the system less useful due to random/large gaps in routes, random stubs routes (e.g. Highway 20), and the system doesn't actually go anywhere in population centres. (for example, there are no non-freeway Ontario highways within Toronto since they were all decommissioned).

Quote from: andrepoiy on April 28, 2021, 12:28:23 PM
It seems like Ontario checks a lot of those boxes.

However, some things that aren't that great:
- I'd just say that Ontario signage is usually okay, but some of them are a bit strange or inconsistent. There is Clearview on a few signs, but no new signs have Clearview anymore.
- I'd also say that Ontario's decommissioning of routes in 1997 had made the system less useful due to random/large gaps in routes, random stubs routes (e.g. Highway 20), and the system doesn't actually go anywhere in population centres. (for example, there are no non-freeway Ontario highways within Toronto since they were all decommissioned).

Ontario doesn't seem to care about system connectivity in general.  A lot of the roads (especially 400-series highways) that go to the border stop short of it, on the reasoning that MTO doesn't maintain it/"it's not a freeway because of customs/toll plazas/etc." (I know ON 402, ON 405, and the QEW have this issue, and that ON 401 will once the Gordie Howe Bridge is completed; I think ON 3 does as well).  There's also the whole issue with ON 407 ending at ON 35/115, with a RIRO section of that before the ON 115 freeway to Peterborough.  Ontario is great at getting individual road sections up to high standards, but when it comes to making the road system useful as a system, they don't care.  At all.

Quote from: vdeane on April 28, 2021, 12:52:24 PM

Quote from: andrepoiy on April 28, 2021, 12:28:23 PM
- I'd also say that Ontario's decommissioning of routes in 1997 had made the system less useful due to random/large gaps in routes, random stubs routes (e.g. Highway 20), and the system doesn't actually go anywhere in population centres. ...

Ontario doesn't seem to care about system connectivity in general.  ...

That's a really interesting point. I would also suggest the Red Hill Valley Pkwy not getting a 400-number and the QEW narrowing from eight lanes down to six at the Parkway's eastern terminus as evidence of this.

Quote from: vdeane on April 28, 2021, 12:52:24 PM
A lot of the roads (especially 400-series highways) that go to the border stop short of it, on the reasoning that MTO doesn't maintain it/"it's not a freeway because of customs/toll plazas/etc." (I know ON 402, ON 405, and the QEW have this issue ...

As for ON 405, Google says it goes right to the border. Is that incorrect?

Quote from: epzik8 on April 26, 2021, 10:35:25 PM
I like MDOT (Maryland) for the following reasons:

On the other hand, FHWA often sends someone around with a camera and takes pictures of MD signage to put above the words "NOT ACCEPTABLE" in MUTCD compliance documents, like the infamous Clearview circular (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/clearviewdesignfaqs/index.htm). They appear to have no idea how to make panels the proper size for the legend they contain, since they either have margins so small the text almost runs into the edge lines or gaping gulfs of space around blocks of legend, and sometimes both on the same sign.

Also the fact that they have enough sharply-angled exit ramps that they have a standard-ish method of signing those (with a right arrow) is a little concerning.

Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on April 27, 2021, 09:01:36 AM
Also, the VDOT Northern Virginia District's PIO is probably the best PIO in the whole damn country.

H.B. Elkins has entered the chat

Quote from: webny99 on April 28, 2021, 06:51:13 PM
As for ON 405, Google says it goes right to the border. Is that incorrect?

According to the MTO's traffic data, ON 405 ends approximately at the toll barrier for the bridge, right about where the ramps for the interchange with Niagara Parkway used to be.

Quote from: webny99 on April 28, 2021, 06:51:13 PM

Quote from: vdeane on April 28, 2021, 12:52:24 PM

Quote from: andrepoiy on April 28, 2021, 12:28:23 PM
- I'd also say that Ontario's decommissioning of routes in 1997 had made the system less useful due to random/large gaps in routes, random stubs routes (e.g. Highway 20), and the system doesn't actually go anywhere in population centres. ...

Ontario doesn't seem to care about system connectivity in general.  ...

That's a really interesting point. I would also suggest the Red Hill Valley Pkwy not getting a 400-number and the QEW narrowing from eight lanes down to six at the Parkway's eastern terminus as evidence of this.

Quote from: vdeane on April 28, 2021, 12:52:24 PM
A lot of the roads (especially 400-series highways) that go to the border stop short of it, on the reasoning that MTO doesn't maintain it/"it's not a freeway because of customs/toll plazas/etc." (I know ON 402, ON 405, and the QEW have this issue ...

As for ON 405, Google says it goes right to the border. Is that incorrect?

The reason why the Red Hill Valley Parkway, along with other municipal expressways such as Don Valley Parkway, Gardiner Expy, Allen Road, Lincoln Alexander Parkway, and E.C. Row Expressway do not get a 400-number is that they are not owned nor maintained by the province.

The privately-owned section of the 407 is also technically not part of the provincial system, as it doesn't have that crown shield. It's just that the freeway's name happens to be 407 Express Toll Route.

Google Maps is incorrect in a lot of places in Ontario, as it often shows decommissioned Ontario highways; For example, Highway 9 on Google Maps shows the section from Orangeville to Harriston as Hwy 9, even though it was decommissioned back in 1998 and is now a county route.

Another funny thing is that ON511 (the government website to see road conditions/traffic/construction) doesn't include reports on any Connecting Link section of provincial roads either. It makes the already-discontinuous system look even more discontinuous. (A Connecting Link is a municipal or county maintained road that is signed as an Ontario route and gets subsidized from the provincial government). Check it out: https://511on.ca/

Quote from: silverback1065 on April 26, 2021, 11:54:37 AM
INDOT has gotten a lot better since the gas tax has passed. They have a lot more money to do badly needed work. There are tons of preventative maintenance projects now and road quality is much better now.

INDOT may have improved the quality of their roads, but there's still a lot to dislike:

* The decommissioning of through town routes and the resulting gaps.

* New construction/reconstructions resulting in significant downgrades at major junctions - the latest would be the proposed Veterans Parkway interchange with the new I-69 Ohio River Bridge around Evansville.  The previous example would be the downgrades to the I-465/Sam Jones interchange - should have been a direct ramp for SB to EB rather than the triple left.

* Plenty of work zones with speed limit reductions that appear unwarranted.

Quote from: fillup420 on April 28, 2021, 11:48:46 AM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:56:21 AM
NCDOT if you like interstates.

if you like small sections of pointless interstates that don't go anywhere  :spin:

Besides I-87, which will be extended, where else are you talking about?

Quote from: sprjus4 on April 28, 2021, 10:57:03 PM

Quote from: fillup420 on April 28, 2021, 11:48:46 AM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:56:21 AM
NCDOT if you like interstates.

if you like small sections of pointless interstates that don't go anywhere  :spin:

Besides I-87, which will be extended, where else are you talking about?

I-74?

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 28, 2021, 10:58:01 PM

Quote from: sprjus4 on April 28, 2021, 10:57:03 PM

Quote from: fillup420 on April 28, 2021, 11:48:46 AM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:56:21 AM
NCDOT if you like interstates.

if you like small sections of pointless interstates that don't go anywhere  :spin:

Besides I-87, which will be extended, where else are you talking about?

I-74?

While the routing of I-74 can be disputed, it is at least signed or will be with the completion of various under construction or planned projects, between I-77 and somewhere outside of Wilmington.

I applaud NCDOT for at least pushing forth with highway projects instead of remaining dormant as many states do. The latest interstate additions in the past decade may seem over the top, but they do have merit and connectivity purposes. More than most states can say.

Quote from: sprjus4 on April 28, 2021, 11:00:44 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 28, 2021, 10:58:01 PM

Quote from: sprjus4 on April 28, 2021, 10:57:03 PM

Quote from: fillup420 on April 28, 2021, 11:48:46 AM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:56:21 AM
NCDOT if you like interstates.

if you like small sections of pointless interstates that don't go anywhere  :spin:

Besides I-87, which will be extended, where else are you talking about?

I-74?

While the routing of I-74 can be disputed, it is at least signed or will be with the completion of various under construction or planned projects, between I-77 and somewhere outside of Wilmington.

I applaud NCDOT for at least pushing forth with highway projects instead of remaining dormant as many states do. The latest interstate additions in the past decade may seem over the top, but they do have merit and connectivity purposes. More than most states can say.

I thought that I-74 was supposed to go to Myrtle Beach?

Quote from: Revive 755 on April 28, 2021, 10:55:34 PM
The previous example would be the downgrades to the I-465/Sam Jones interchange - should have been a direct ramp for SB to EB rather than the triple left.

Is the downgrade of 465 and San Jones because of the IND airport terminal relocation? I checked Historic Aerials for the previous configuration, and it was a cloverstack with the SB-EB direction served by a flyover, and it was reconfigured just a couple of years after the terminal got relocated. If that's the case, I get the reason for the downgrade, as the airport traffic isn't there anymore.

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 28, 2021, 11:04:13 PM

Quote from: sprjus4 on April 28, 2021, 11:00:44 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 28, 2021, 10:58:01 PM

Quote from: sprjus4 on April 28, 2021, 10:57:03 PM

Quote from: fillup420 on April 28, 2021, 11:48:46 AM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:56:21 AM
NCDOT if you like interstates.

if you like small sections of pointless interstates that don't go anywhere  :spin:

Besides I-87, which will be extended, where else are you talking about?

I-74?

While the routing of I-74 can be disputed, it is at least signed or will be with the completion of various under construction or planned projects, between I-77 and somewhere outside of Wilmington.

I applaud NCDOT for at least pushing forth with highway projects instead of remaining dormant as many states do. The latest interstate additions in the past decade may seem over the top, but they do have merit and connectivity purposes. More than most states can say.

I thought that I-74 was supposed to go to Myrtle Beach?

It's never gonna happen. Wilmington is ultimately where any connection is going to end up.

Quote from: sprjus4 on April 28, 2021, 11:24:15 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 28, 2021, 11:04:13 PM

Quote from: sprjus4 on April 28, 2021, 11:00:44 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 28, 2021, 10:58:01 PM

Quote from: sprjus4 on April 28, 2021, 10:57:03 PM

Quote from: fillup420 on April 28, 2021, 11:48:46 AM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:56:21 AM
NCDOT if you like interstates.

if you like small sections of pointless interstates that don't go anywhere  :spin:

Besides I-87, which will be extended, where else are you talking about?

I-74?

While the routing of I-74 can be disputed, it is at least signed or will be with the completion of various under construction or planned projects, between I-77 and somewhere outside of Wilmington.

I applaud NCDOT for at least pushing forth with highway projects instead of remaining dormant as many states do. The latest interstate additions in the past decade may seem over the top, but they do have merit and connectivity purposes. More than most states can say.

I thought that I-74 was supposed to go to Myrtle Beach?

It's never gonna happen. Wilmington is ultimately where any connection is going to end up.

If SC really want an interstate to Myrtle Beach, kind of wondering, why specifically I-73/I-74? An I-20 eastern extension is shorter than anything that involves those two routes.

I gotta get a nod for Wisconsin when it comes to their interchange choices more recently.

Freeway-to-freeway interchanges are (mostly) stacks, roundabout interchanges are on the rage, and they are starting to use Diverging Diamond Interchanges on some of their busier interchanges! They have also raised the speed limit to 70 mph to match their neighbors as they were the last to do so. WisDOT has a "either go big or go home attitude" when it comes to their road design!

WisDOT has also widened a lot of roads in the past 10 years to catch up with the growth of the state as well as the traffic from Chicagoland. Widening projects include:

• I-39/90 between Beloit and Madison
• I-94 North-South Freeway between IL State Line to Milwaukee
• WI-441 in Appleton
• I-41 Expansion in Green Bay and Fond du Lac/Oshkosh
• Soon-to-get underway: I-43  between Milwaukee and Grafton

Quote from: SkyPesos on April 28, 2021, 11:30:24 PM
If SC really want an interstate to Myrtle Beach, kind of wondering, why specifically I-73/I-74? An I-20 eastern extension is shorter than anything that involves those two routes.

Construction of an I-20 extension would likely be longer than I-73, if it's a direct shot.

But realistically, if you extend I-20, you can't go through Florence obviously in a straight line - you're likely going to head up I-95 North for some distance. You could split off around SC-327 and follow it back to US-76, but then you're now having to build a new interstate through the Great Pee Dee River and associated wetlands - environmental issues are already an obstacle to getting the present routing built - no way another wetland crossing would fly. So, you could then extend this theoretical I-20 extension further north along I-95 across its crossing of the Great Pee Dee River, then follow the SC-38 corridor to US-501 - and at that point that's the proposed routing for I-73.

So either way, you end up with the same routing. It's merely a matter of what number it will be called. And considering a much future Phase 2 would extend I-73 from I-95 to North Carolina to tie into their portion, along a totally different route, it's now unrelated to I-20 entirely.

Quote from: Scott5114 on April 28, 2021, 08:15:59 PM

Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on April 27, 2021, 09:01:36 AM
Also, the VDOT Northern Virginia District's PIO is probably the best PIO in the whole damn country.

H.B. Elkins has entered the chat

Oops, sorry, H.B.

VDOT just because it is Virginia. They have some cool interchanges too.

Quote from: sprjus4 on April 28, 2021, 11:00:44 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 28, 2021, 10:58:01 PM

Quote from: sprjus4 on April 28, 2021, 10:57:03 PM

Quote from: fillup420 on April 28, 2021, 11:48:46 AM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:56:21 AM
NCDOT if you like interstates.

if you like small sections of pointless interstates that don't go anywhere  :spin:

Besides I-87, which will be extended, where else are you talking about?

I-74?

While the routing of I-74 can be disputed, it is at least signed or will be with the completion of various under construction or planned projects, between I-77 and somewhere outside of Wilmington.

I applaud NCDOT for at least pushing forth with highway projects instead of remaining dormant as many states do. The latest interstate additions in the past decade may seem over the top, but they do have merit and connectivity purposes. More than most states can say.

I wouldn't count the planned projects.  At one time, NY 17 was planned to be upgraded to a full freeway around Hale Eddy back in 2017.  Obviously that didn't happen.  As it is now, I-74 is signed on a bunch of short sections and the concurrency with I-73.  I-87 is only about ten miles long.  I-26 exists in two sections.  It's a mess, and with how many designations NC is working on, probably will be for quite some time to come; even when I-74 is done, it will be other routes.

for worst i will put penndot here. so many terrible substandard interstates!

Quote from: silverback1065 on April 29, 2021, 04:48:39 PM
for worst i will put penndot here. so many terrible substandard interstates!

penndot is horrible they work on us-30 for like hundreds of time in a month but then there are hundreds of potholes everywhere

Quote from: silverback1065 on April 29, 2021, 04:48:39 PM
for worst i will put penndot here. so many terrible substandard interstates!

Breezewood alone disbars PennDOT from winning. Not that that's their only issue.

I've got mostly positive, but nevertheless mixed opinions about TXDOT.

Pros:
- Projects actually get started and completed
- Freeway design is looking up
- Signage, though Clearview, is usually amazing
- Roads are usually very well surfaced and free of potholes
- Uses high-efficiency junctions well

Cons:
- Quality of new construction is concerning
- The Houston district is a hotbed of mediocre signage and quality
- Signs seem to be damaged easily in heavy winds
- Not very much attention given to pedestrians

Probably somewhere around 5th-10th place in the overall scheme of things.

Let's get back on topic.

I haven't heard much on this forum regarding ALDOT, SCDOT, or NDDOT. How do we feel on those?

Really.  If this can't get back on topic, I actually think it might be time for moderator intervention.

Quote from: vdeane on April 29, 2021, 12:44:59 PM
As it is now, I-74 is signed on a bunch of short sections and the concurrency with I-73.

Once the construction of the Winston-Salem Beltway and the Rockingham Bypass (both currently under construction) are complete by 2024, I-74 will exist in 3 segments. One 17 mile segment between the Virginia state line following I-77 and US-52, a second 122 mile segment between Winston-Salem and Rockingham, and a third 18 mile segment near I-95.

US-74 is actively getting upgraded extending east from I-95 with the construction of numerous interchanges over the last decade, with more planned, and an eventual upgrade to the Rockingham-Laurinburg segment planned in the next decade. US-52 north of Winston-Salem is already built to freeway standards - various smaller upgrades are needed to meet full interstate standards. Once those projects are complete, I-74 will be continuously signed throughout the state.

They've made significant progress so far in the past 2 decades with more planned.

Quote from: vdeane on April 29, 2021, 12:44:59 PM
I-26 exists in two sections.

Technically, yes, though it's functionally one interstate with a small segment that needs shoulder widening, plus a major upcoming, and fully funded project to overhaul the Asheville I-240 North interchange.

Quote from: CoreySamson on April 29, 2021, 05:12:42 PM
Let's get back on topic.

I haven't heard much on this forum regarding ALDOT, SCDOT, or NDDOT. How do we feel on those?

SCDOT = no money = joke

Quote from: CoreySamson on April 29, 2021, 05:12:42 PM
Let's get back on topic.

I haven't heard much on this forum regarding ALDOT, SCDOT, or NDDOT. How do we feel on those?

SCDOT seems alright from my experiences visiting the state. Their signs are a-ok, despite using Clearview. Road surfaces seemed okay from what I remember. In terms of the nitty-gritty though, I'm not sure.

North Dakota... now that's a state we don't hear too much about around here.

Quote from: sprjus4 on April 29, 2021, 05:18:40 PM

Quote from: CoreySamson on April 29, 2021, 05:12:42 PM
Let's get back on topic.

I haven't heard much on this forum regarding ALDOT, SCDOT, or NDDOT. How do we feel on those?

SCDOT = no money = joke

Agreed, I recall I-95 (in addition to being just 4 lanes everywhere outside Florence) being rather bumpy throughout the state.  If they could at least prioritize 6-laning from GA to I-26 (or even just to exit 33)...

Quote from: kphoger on April 29, 2021, 05:14:46 PM
Really.  If this can't get back on topic, I actually think it might be time for moderator intervention.

Agreed...all this [redacted western PA city] & [redacted state across the Potomac from MD] spam is just asinine.

Little Delaware gets overlooked quite a lot, and some of their signage is just a disaster, but overall they do a pretty good job.  They have done a lot of road widening over the past 20 years; more so than many other states in the area.   They probably could've done a better job with 95 between MD and 295 in hindsight, either with an Express/Local Division or Car/Truck Division, to help with traffic that can bottleneck at many points along the "Delaware Turnpike" portion of the highway. But overall, compared to many other states in the greater Northeast region, they're pretty good at what they do in a very built-up area.

Posts not germane to the subject of transportation agencies have been removed.

Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 29, 2021, 05:43:36 PM
Little Delaware gets overlooked quite a lot, and some of their signage is just a disaster, but overall they do a pretty good job.  They have done a lot of road widening over the past 20 years; more so than many other states in the area.   They probably could've done a better job with 95 between MD and 295 in hindsight, either with an Express/Local Division or Car/Truck Division, to help with traffic that can bottleneck at many points along the "Delaware Turnpike" portion of the highway. But overall, compared to many other states in the greater Northeast region, they're pretty good at what they do in a very built-up area.

This could be wrong, but my thought is that simply giving a 3rd lane to the 295 ramp (either by adding yet another lane to 95 approaching the split, or taking one away from 95/495 at the split) would uncork a lot of the northbound issues in that area.  Southbound would be harder since ending a lane is more complicated operations-wise than opening one - not sure the best way to handle that since a hypothetical 3rd lane for the southbound 295 merge would just have to end fairly quickly anyway.

But agreed on DelDOT, they get a lot of mileage out of their tolls on I-95 & DE 1! (My understanding is that a lot of the DE 1 improvements south of Dover are being funded by DE 1 toll revenue.)

Quote from: SkyPesos on April 28, 2021, 11:09:14 PM

Quote from: Revive 755 on April 28, 2021, 10:55:34 PM
The previous example would be the downgrades to the I-465/Sam Jones interchange - should have been a direct ramp for SB to EB rather than the triple left.

Is the downgrade of 465 and San Jones because of the IND airport terminal relocation? I checked Historic Aerials for the previous configuration, and it was a cloverstack with the SB-EB direction served by a flyover, and it was reconfigured just a couple of years after the terminal got relocated. If that's the case, I get the reason for the downgrade, as the airport traffic isn't there anymore.

No, a lot of the SB to EB traffic are downtown commuters using Sam Jones as a shortcut to reach 70 East to get downtown. It was pretty independent of IND traffic. I too am not a fan of the current triple left...and its a very tight triple left.

With that said, I think INDOT has improved.

• Better cleanup work (litter control, highway sweeping, etc)
• I-69 Extension
• Plans in place to fix the 2 largest traffic issues in Indy
• Have repaved or repaired almost every mile of interstate in the Indy metro over the past 2 years (no joke)

List most states, there are some places where they seem to just do a patch over and over again instead of a full repair (like 74 in Shelby Co.). Also they sometimes put up incorrect signs and don't fix them.

NYCDOT has its issues (especially with how they maintain expressways) but I think they have some of the best maintenance and design for local streets. Their parking signs are much more legible and consistent than the standard MUTCD signs, and they are usually good with signal configurations (creative use of LPIs and FYA, not afraid of permissive left turns, and the signals are pretimed instead of actuated which is almost always the right choice in an urban environment).

Also, you can complain about the speed cameras and red light cameras, but I have seen first hand that they really do cut down on reckless driving. The program is not too unreasonable, you have to be going over 36 to get caught by the speed cameras and NYC times its yellow intervals correctly. Look at neighboring cities without such a program like Newark and JC in NJ and people drive much more recklessly and run red lights with impunity. So I think it's a good system.

Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on April 29, 2021, 09:04:27 PM
NYCDOT has its issues (especially with how they maintain expressways) but I think they have some of the best maintenance and design for local streets. Their parking signs are much more legible and consistent than the standard MUTCD signs, and they are usually good with signal configurations (creative use of LPIs and FYA, not afraid of permissive left turns, and the signals are pretimed instead of actuated which is almost always the right choice in an urban environment).

Also, you can complain about the speed cameras and red light cameras, but I have seen first hand that they really do cut down on reckless driving. The program is not too unreasonable, you have to be going over 36 to get caught by the speed cameras and NYC times its yellow intervals correctly. Look at neighboring cities without such a program like Newark and JC in NJ and people drive much more recklessly and run red lights with impunity. So I think it's a good system.

Ha!  NYCDOT's letting record during COVID has been miserable and causing the State to do accounting gymnastics to deal with their lack of getting projects out on the street.

Even outside of COVID, NYCDOT is notorious for demanding a larger share of federal dollars and being unable to spend them due to the byzantine processes they have to follow to get projects done.

So...nah.

Quote from: jmacswimmer on April 29, 2021, 05:22:18 PM
Agreed, I recall I-95 (in addition to being just 4 lanes everywhere outside Florence) being rather bumpy throughout the state.  If they could at least prioritize 6-laning from GA to I-26 (or even just to exit 33)...

There were definitely some bad, bumpy, unimproved segments on my most recent trip through the state. Not impressed in that regard, in addition to the fact it's all 4 lanes, especially south of I-26.

Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on April 29, 2021, 12:19:17 AM
I gotta get a nod for Wisconsin when it comes to their interchange choices more recently.

Freeway-to-freeway interchanges are (mostly) stacks, roundabout interchanges are on the rage, and they are starting to use Diverging Diamond Interchanges on some of their busier interchanges! They have also raised the speed limit to 70 mph to match their neighbors as they were the last to do so. WisDOT has a "either go big or go home attitude" when it comes to their road design![/quote]

Wisconsin went a little overboard with the roundabout though - I would like to know how trucks can get gaps to get through some of the ones along I-41.

If Wisconsin keeps at some of the improvements they have done, I could go for them as the best, but there are two other things Wisconsin does I take issue with:

* Excessive use for stop-controlled right turns at signalized intersections (example near Racine) (https://goo.gl/maps/NtDz4NB8LRnob7au5).  Either use yield signs on most of them (as a lot of other states would) or signalize the right turns like Illinois.

* Lack of reflective pavement markers - much easier to figure out where the lanes are in Illinois in a nighttime rain storm compared to Wisconsin.

---

Doesn't seem to much in the way of comments on how well the various states do on snow removal - curious how the Dakotas would compare to Michigan or Maine.

Quote from: Rothman on April 29, 2021, 09:26:21 PM
NYCDOT is notorious for demanding a larger share of federal dollars and being unable to spend them due to the byzantine processes they have to follow to get projects done.

Isn't that true of every agency in NYC, not just transportation?  That's my impression as an outsider.

Quote from: kphoger on April 30, 2021, 10:02:56 AM

Quote from: Rothman on April 29, 2021, 09:26:21 PM
NYCDOT is notorious for demanding a larger share of federal dollars and being unable to spend them due to the byzantine processes they have to follow to get projects done.

Isn't that true of every agency in NYC, not just transportation?  That's my impression as an outsider.

It sounds true for the MTA in NYC too. Not sure about the third NYC transportation agency (Port Authority)

i would put Indianapolis DPW on the list of worst. they're perpetually cash strapped and road quality is embarrassing.

Quote from: Scott5114 on May 18, 2014, 05:53:43 PM
As before when this has been discussed, I vote for KDOT:

I know you live in a state that makes KDOT look flawless, but as long as I'm here, you can always count on me to pick apart your idealization of KDOT.

Quote

• Clear, consistent signage

There has never been clear messaging to warn of the lane drop on the southbound 69 at 135th Street, and I personally don't feel "RIGHT LANE ONLY" does the job, when they could at least use a bit of extra sheet metal and go with MODOT's "RIGHT LANE EXIT ONLY" panels.  I'm guessing this signage will never live up to MUTCD standards until The Widening happens.

Also, I'm definitely not a fun of the "blink and you'll miss it" way of signing US 50, an important National highway and a well used freeway in Missouri, at one of its most important turning points: https://goo.gl/maps/AiXq4G3xV8Eog2XcA , https://goo.gl/maps/qc39YVjGYEeSRupt8 .  In fact, this is very inconsistent with the way US 24 and 40 are signed at one of their major turning points: https://goo.gl/maps/Lh5tiiBQZJFfVEYJ6 , https://goo.gl/maps/Wz9oFxG1eNwa28rX7 .

Quote

• Well-maintained road surfaces (KDOT is not afraid to tear a road down to the dirt and rebuild it if necessary)

No argument.  They certainly do a good job in this department, and one could argue, this is the most important thing.

Quote

• Excellent attention to detail in road geometry (curves are banked just right)

Actually, I'll agree again for the most part and even argue that they do a better job than the KTA, especially with the example of this theoretically 75-MPH curve https://goo.gl/maps/jeg1XXUdNYYLdW9V8 , which always feels awkward every time I drive it.  However, this theoretically 65-MPH KDOT curve: https://goo.gl/maps/m4ebo5BNpFQr3ZFP6 , also feels awkward.

Quote

• Well-organized route system

Really?  Why is the eastern leg of K-96 not an X35 when it could, and arguably should, be?  Why is K-10 not an X-70 when it functions as one?  No, I know the historical reasons; this was a mostly rhetorical question.  I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're only talking about the State Route system and not the US Highways, but that leads me into....

...the problem with US Highways in Kansas.  They're an absolute mess, especially in Northeast Kansas.  US 40 through Lawrence, US 69 through Merriam, OP, and KCK, and US 169 in Johnson and Wyandotte Counties are the biggest offenders.  We both know those routings are so messy and nonsensical because of KDOT's attempt at minimizing state highway mileage and its policy of not having state routes exist entirely within contiguous city limits, which would allow the northern end of Metcalf Avenue to be K-635 instead of a nonsensical leg of US 69.  And these messy routings leave the signage being haphazard at best.  Good luck following US 169 from Missouri all the way through Kansas (spoiler alert: its signage disappears just south of KCK).

Quote

• Frequent decommissionings to avoid spending money on roads that don't need to be state-maintained (freeing it up for improvements on other routes)

This is just as much a problem as it is a benefit.  Or maybe it's more that the decommissionings of minor routes are okay (although I'm not sure how I feel about K-12 and K-150 in Johnson County, especially considering a state DOT might have done a better job at maintaining traffic flow rather than the cities sticking four-phase signals all over them).  But the re-routings of US Highways to reduce state highway mileage makes things a mess as described above.

Quote

• No Clearview

https://youtu.be/JMvJg8PhRg0

But anyway, if there's one opinion we can all agree on, it's that, no matter who is the BEST, ALANDOT is definitely the GOAT.

Quote from: stridentweasel on April 30, 2021, 11:37:58 AM
Really?  Why is the eastern leg of K-96 not an X35 when it could, and arguably should, be?  ...  No, I know the historical reasons; this was a mostly rhetorical question.

The eastern leg of K-96 still very much functions as part of the Hutchinson—Parsons route.  As it is, a person driving that stretch merely takes K-96 to US-400.  With your renumbering, that person would have to take K-96, then transition to K-x35 to US-400.

Nobody is using the eastern leg of K-96 as a loop/bypass route of either I-35 or I-135:

I-35 to I-35 = alternate route uses I-135 and K-254
SB I-135 to WB US-54 or SB I-35 = alternate route uses existing I-235
SB I-135 to NB I-35 = alternate route would have been K-196 or K-254 further back

Really, it adds a number to the mix for little benefit.

Quote from: SkyPesos on April 30, 2021, 10:08:05 AM
It sounds true for the MTA in NYC too. Not sure about the third NYC transportation agency (Port Authority)

The Port Authority is self-sufficient and doesn't generally receive grants or tax dollars intended for government agencies (outside some rare exceptions where they asked for federal assistance like after 9/11 or during COVID). They make more than enough money from outrageously expensive tolls, rent revenue at the WTC and airports, and airport fees.

Here's an (incomplete) tier list based on my personal experience and what I've heard, tell me what you think:

Tier 1: Amazing
FDOT (Florida)
WSDOT (Washington)
ADOT (Arizona)

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

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

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

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

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

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

EDIT: Took some more feedback, 6/6/21

Quote from: CoreySamson on May 27, 2021, 07:51:01 PM
Here's an (incomplete) tier list based on my personal experience and what I've heard, tell me what you think:

Tier 1: Amazing
ODOT (Ohio)
FDOT (Florida)
WSDOT (Washington)
ADOT (Arizona)

Tier 2: Pretty Good
TxDOT (Texas)
TNDOT (Tennessee)
WisDOT (Wisconsin)
KDOT (Kansas)
INDOT (Indiana)
MoDOT (Missouri)
UDOT (Utah)
CDOT (Colorado)

Tier 3: Okay
DOTD (Louisiana)
MDOT (Mississippi)
ODOT (Oregon)
MDOT (Michigan)
GDOT (Georgia)
VDOT (Virginia)
NYSDOT (New York)

Tier 4: Mediocre
ARDOT (Arkansas)
PennDOT (Pennsylvania)
CalTrans (California)
SCDOT (South Carolina)
IDOT (Illinois)
MDOT (Maryland)

Tier 5: Bad
ODOT (Oklahoma)
NMDOT (New Mexico)
RIDOT (Rhode Island)

Unsure (maybe people with more knowledge on these states can help out?)
ITD (Idaho)
NDOT (Nevada)
WYDOT (Wyoming)
MDT (Montana)
NDDOT (North Dakota)
SDDOT (South Dakota)
NEDOT (Nebraska)
IADOT (Iowa)
MnDOT (Minnesota)
KTC (Kentucky)
ALDOT (Alabama)
WVDOT (West Virginia)
DelDOT (Delaware)
NJDOT (New Jersey)
VTrans (Vermont)
NHDOT (New Hampshire)
HDOT (Hawaii)
AKDOT (Alaska)
MaineDOT (Maine)
CTDOT (Connecticut)
MassDOT (Massachusetts)

I'd put North Carolina with either Tier 1 or Tier 2. Certainly better than Virginia, for instance, and somewhat comparable to Florida.

Quote from: CoreySamson on May 27, 2021, 07:51:01 PM
Here's an (incomplete) tier list based on my personal experience and what I've heard, tell me what you think:

Tier 1: Amazing
ODOT (Ohio)
FDOT (Florida)
WSDOT (Washington)
ADOT (Arizona)

Tier 2: Pretty Good
TxDOT (Texas)
TNDOT (Tennessee)
WisDOT (Wisconsin)
KDOT (Kansas)
INDOT (Indiana)
MoDOT (Missouri)
UDOT (Utah)
CDOT (Colorado)
NCDOT (North Carolina)

Tier 3: Okay
DOTD (Louisiana)
MDOT (Mississippi)
ODOT (Oregon)
MDOT (Michigan)
GDOT (Georgia)
VDOT (Virginia)
NYSDOT (New York)

Tier 4: Mediocre
ARDOT (Arkansas)
PennDOT (Pennsylvania)
CalTrans (California)
SCDOT (South Carolina)
IDOT (Illinois)
MDOT (Maryland)

Tier 5: Bad
ODOT (Oklahoma)
NMDOT (New Mexico)
RIDOT (Rhode Island)

Unsure (maybe people with more knowledge on these states can help out?)
ITD (Idaho)
NDOT (Nevada)
WYDOT (Wyoming)
MDT (Montana)
NDDOT (North Dakota)
SDDOT (South Dakota)
NEDOT (Nebraska)
IADOT (Iowa)
MnDOT (Minnesota)
KTC (Kentucky)
ALDOT (Alabama)
WVDOT (West Virginia)
DelDOT (Delaware)
NJDOT (New Jersey)
VTrans (Vermont)
NHDOT (New Hampshire)
HDOT (Hawaii)
AKDOT (Alaska)
MaineDOT (Maine)
CTDOT (Connecticut)
MassDOT (Massachusetts)

EDIT: Forgot NCDOT

I would put Iowa and Nebraska in 2 and Minnesota in 3. I would drop Illinois down to 5.

Having driven in Illinois, Oklahoma, and New Mexico, if you drop Illinois to 5, you'd have to create a Tier 6 for OK and NM. If IDOT's crimes are like embezzling and tax fraud, Oklahoma and New Mexico's are like snorting a line of coke and driving down the sidewalk in a crowded pedestrian area while shooting unlicensed firearms out the windows.

IDOT is much closer in quality to Caltrans and ArDOT than it is ODOT and NMDOT.

If you have Ohio as tier 1, so does at least half of the tier 2 states. I find Ohio roads to be good, but not really best of the best.

Chiming in about CalTrans in response to some of what had been posted earlier:

There are certainly some flaws that can easily be acknowledged...

- the 120 inch height limit does create cramped signage (something that is being addressed in the past year with increased sign heights) and seems to be more of an aesthetic preference than a practical

- very few roads are built out here in recent years, but that is in some ways due to a political climate entirely out of the agency's control.

- the haphazardness of route segmentation/truncation and signage may also be to an extent out of the agency's control (due to legislative involvement in route numbering).

- some districts are just better able to get things accomplished than others, accounting for vast differences in sign quality and style (i.e. Santa Clara County and southern San Mateo County starting to adopt wider gore point exit number signs compared to San Francisco).

- a few of the older interchanges are hard to upgrade due to right-of-way issues (older tight cloverleafs along the San Bernardino Freeway, or the 101/880 bottleneck in San Jose)

Things that they can control and improve:

- maintenance of existing roads (280 being ultra-bumpy past the Alemany Maze)
- having highway lighting that is actually on (280 south of 380 can be extremely dark at night due to the lights being kept off; noticed similar things around 101 north of the airport as well)
- making sure the numbered routes that do exist ARE signed properly.  Getting those 262 shields on in the last month is a nice start but plenty of other roads that could use trailblazers.

Things they have done well:

- the Route 99 upgrades in the last 20 years to make it a seamless freeway corridor from Wheeler Ridge to almost the Sacramento/Sutter County line. hopefully eventually all the way to Yuba City entirely.

- widening projects in Orange County

- pushing through with some key expressway upgrades (Route 132 along the old I-5W corridor in Modesto, Route 58 near Kramer Junction, Route 12 between Route 29 and I-80)

Quote from: TheStranger on May 28, 2021, 03:47:21 AM
- having highway lighting that is actually on (280 south of 380 can be extremely dark at night due to the lights being kept off; noticed similar things around 101 north of the airport as well)

Do you know if this is actually an intentional choice by Caltrans? Here in Oklahoma, we have a lot of dark freeways, but it's not ODOT's doing–thieves have stolen the wiring out of the lights to sell as scrap copper!

Quote from: CoreySamson on May 27, 2021, 07:51:01 PM
Here's an (incomplete) tier list based on my personal experience and what I've heard, tell me what you think:

I'd put NJDOT in Tier 2, and bump PennDOT up to Tier 3.  PennDOT is so much better than its old reputation.  And NJDOT is pretty amazing except for a few blemishes here and there.

Quote from: Scott5114 on May 28, 2021, 05:53:30 AM

Quote from: TheStranger on May 28, 2021, 03:47:21 AM
- having highway lighting that is actually on (280 south of 380 can be extremely dark at night due to the lights being kept off; noticed similar things around 101 north of the airport as well)

Do you know if this is actually an intentional choice by Caltrans? Here in Oklahoma, we have a lot of dark freeways, but it's not ODOT's doing–thieves have stolen the wiring out of the lights to sell as scrap copper!

I originally thought it was because of the following two factors:

- power savings/less electricity use
- wanting to avoid light pollution

Having said that, I haven't seen much documentation on this, only that there are a lot of sections of Bay Area freeway that remain dark at night.  IIRC the Nimitz Freeway/880 is lit in some portions but in others has the streetlamps left dark.

This may be a district-specific thing and not statewide, i.e. this example story of the opposite problem (lights on during the day) -
https://www.pe.com/2018/06/03/driver-wonders-why-new-60-freeway-median-lights-are-on-during-the-day/

What is amusing is in following the construction progress and completion of the Metro Manila Skyway, Philippine engineers not only made sure to have full streetlamp lighting for most of the newly built Stage 3 (in particular from Manila to Caloocan), they also came up with a new style of expressway lighting using LED tape on the top edge of the concrete barriers!  So weird to see the Philippines be more imaginative with road lighting than Northern California at this present time.

WSDOT as a Tier 1?
Uh, I'd need some very good justification for such a high appraisal for a DOT that allowed this to be installed:
https://goo.gl/maps/BBbx7TT4iaMY4xMD9

I was going to make a joke about ODOT being a top-notch agency, but signage wise (not counting the lack of trailblazer or reassurance shields on many of the post-2002 Routes), ODOT's signs look better than WSDOT's.

Now, as for maintencance, construction, sure, credit where it's due. It feels like WSDOT moves forward faster and better than ODOT does with new facilities as well as maintaining them (though local politics on my side of the Columbia doesn't help...).

I'd do NJDOT as Tier 3. Some things they do, they do well. Some things they don't do well, they make sure they f it up as best they can.

DelDOT: 20 years ago, I'd put them in as Tier 1. But some slippage may push them down to Tier 2.

Maryland: Overall, Tier 2. Their handling of EZ Pass, especially full time ETC: Tier 5

Can we please create another tier between 4 and 5? IDOT may not be OkDOT, but to put it on the same level as SCDOT or even PennDOT just feels insulting to those two states.

Also, we're all pretty familiar with why Oklahoma and New Mexico are so bad, but why is Rhode Island so bad?

Quote from: JoePCool14 on May 29, 2021, 08:33:22 PM
Can we please create another tier between 4 and 5? IDOT may not be OkDOT, but to put it on the same level as SCDOT or even PennDOT just feels insulting to those two states.

Also, we're all pretty familiar with why Oklahoma and New Mexico are so bad, but why is Rhode Island so bad?

I have no idea why New Mexico seems to be universally considered to be bad by people with experience in that state, but I'm quite familiar with the (https://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=ri12&state=RI&file=102_0039.JPG) issues (https://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=ri37&state=RI&file=101_9877.JPG) people (https://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i95&state=RI&file=101_9624.JPG) have (https://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=ri103&state=RI&file=101_9891.JPG) with Rhode Island (not to mention the whole RI 238/RI 138A designation confusion/inconsistency).

Signage isn't the only thing that matters. You also have signal timing and phasing, avoiding confusion, avoiding crashes, avoiding congestion due to poor design, not having unnecessary complex intersections (but using them when necessary), reasonable speed limits, ability to respond to requests, making documents public, etc.

Quote from: vdeane on May 29, 2021, 09:44:04 PM

Quote from: JoePCool14 on May 29, 2021, 08:33:22 PM
Can we please create another tier between 4 and 5? IDOT may not be OkDOT, but to put it on the same level as SCDOT or even PennDOT just feels insulting to those two states.

Also, we're all pretty familiar with why Oklahoma and New Mexico are so bad, but why is Rhode Island so bad?

I have no idea why New Mexico seems to be universally considered to be bad by people with experience in that state

Band-aid fixes to problem corridors like US 550, abysmal signage of US routes, a bizarre state highway system...

Quote from: 1 on May 29, 2021, 09:51:17 PM
not having unnecessary complex intersections (but using them when necessary),

NJ gets last place in that category for me.

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 29, 2021, 10:36:56 PM

Quote from: vdeane on May 29, 2021, 09:44:04 PM
I have no idea why New Mexico seems to be universally considered to be bad by people with experience in that state

Band-aid fixes to problem corridors like US 550, abysmal signage of US routes, a bizarre state highway system...

"Abysmal signage" not limited to US routes, to the point where route signage in NM can be a joke.

Quote from: CoreySamson on May 27, 2021, 07:51:01 PM
Here's an (incomplete) tier list based on my personal experience and what I've heard, tell me what you think:

Tier 1: Amazing
FDOT (Florida)
WSDOT (Washington)
ADOT (Arizona)

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

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

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

Tier 5: Bad
ODOT (Oklahoma)
NMDOT (New Mexico)
RIDOT (Rhode Island)

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

EDIT: Took some more feedback, 5/28/21

Personally I would list West Virginia in Tier 3. Pavement quality isn't always the greatest, but at least they are actively trying to improve I-64 and I-81. The KYTC should be at least Tier 3...having been there recently, there were quite a few unfilled potholes on I-75 between Cincinnati and Lexington. Props to them though for widening I-65 and I-75 as much as they have.

As for the already-ranked...I'm not quite sure Ohio should be in Tier 2. I-71 and I-270 were pretty rough when I drove through a couple weeks ago. Now obviously that's just a small portion of their overall system but it sure left an impression. As for PennDOT...there's much work to be done, of course, but with a little more refinement and more funding, they could see a move up to Tier 3.

Quote from: oscar on May 29, 2021, 10:44:52 PM

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 29, 2021, 10:36:56 PM

Quote from: vdeane on May 29, 2021, 09:44:04 PM
I have no idea why New Mexico seems to be universally considered to be bad by people with experience in that state

Band-aid fixes to problem corridors like US 550, abysmal signage of US routes, a bizarre state highway system...

"Abysmal signage" not limited to US routes, to the point where route signage in NM can be a joke.

During my one visit to NM in person, I encountered a highway junction in the middle of nowhere that was signposted entirely without arrows. The motorist was just supposed to intuit which route was which based on the placement of the shields within the assembly.

I also encountered this questionable sign placement. Which of these messages is really more important?
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e9/New_Mexico_SR_456_adjust.jpg/800px-New_Mexico_SR_456_adjust.jpg)

Quote from: Crown Victoria on May 29, 2021, 11:03:22 PM
As for the already-ranked...I'm not quite sure Ohio should be in Tier 2. I-71 and I-270 were pretty rough when I drove through a couple weeks ago. Now obviously that's just a small portion of their overall system but it sure left an impression.

Ohio was ranked tier 1 (and at the top of t1 too) initially, I asked to drop it down to t2 earlier in the thread. I think it's fine in t2 considering its issues. Indiana and Michigan (both also in t2) are a bit worse for pavement quality, though Indiana is improving. Not sure about Michigan as I haven't been there since 2018.

Quote from: SkyPesos on May 29, 2021, 11:15:02 PM

Quote from: Crown Victoria on May 29, 2021, 11:03:22 PM
As for the already-ranked...I'm not quite sure Ohio should be in Tier 2. I-71 and I-270 were pretty rough when I drove through a couple weeks ago. Now obviously that's just a small portion of their overall system but it sure left an impression.

Ohio was ranked tier 1 (and at the top of t1 too) initially, I asked to drop it down to t2 earlier in the thread. I think it's fine in t2 considering its issues. Indiana and Michigan (both also in t2) are a bit worse for pavement quality, though Indiana is improving. Not sure about Michigan as I haven't been there since 2018.

Well moving Ohio from Tier 1 was probably a good move. I'm sure there's other parts of their system that are in better shape than I-71 between Cincinnati and Columbus.

I realize that this thread is mostly about state DOTs, but if we were to include other authorities, then I would place the PTC at least in Tier 3. Considering their financial difficulties (which are mostly imposed on them by law), the PTC does a decent job with maintenance, and is actively working to reconstruct and widen the entire mainline and NE Extension as their resources allow. They are also well regarded when it comes to winter weather.

Quote from: Crown Victoria on May 30, 2021, 11:03:21 AM

Quote from: SkyPesos on May 29, 2021, 11:15:02 PM

Quote from: Crown Victoria on May 29, 2021, 11:03:22 PM
As for the already-ranked...I'm not quite sure Ohio should be in Tier 2. I-71 and I-270 were pretty rough when I drove through a couple weeks ago. Now obviously that's just a small portion of their overall system but it sure left an impression.

Ohio was ranked tier 1 (and at the top of t1 too) initially, I asked to drop it down to t2 earlier in the thread. I think it's fine in t2 considering its issues. Indiana and Michigan (both also in t2) are a bit worse for pavement quality, though Indiana is improving. Not sure about Michigan as I haven't been there since 2018.

Well moving Ohio from Tier 1 was probably a good move. I'm sure there's other parts of their system that are in better shape than I-71 between Cincinnati and Columbus.

I realize that this thread is mostly about state DOTs, but if we were to include other authorities, then I would place the PTC at least in Tier 3. Considering their financial difficulties (which are mostly imposed on them by law), the PTC does a decent job with maintenance, and is actively working to reconstruct and widen the entire mainline and NE Extension as their resources allow. They are also well regarded when it comes to winter weather.

They also have all the Breezewoods because they weren't willing to use their own money to build junctions with interstates, as the other toll agencies were.  It also took then decades to build two ramps to complete I-95, most of that before Act 44.  And one could question whether they really should be doing reconstruction/widening projects, given their financial situation.  In NY, we have a preservation first policy for a reason.  If the PTC had one too, perhaps tolls wouldn't be as sky high as they are.

PTC is the worst simply because they couldn't complete I-95 until 2018.

Quote from: vdeane on May 30, 2021, 12:21:48 PM

Quote from: Crown Victoria on May 30, 2021, 11:03:21 AM

Quote from: SkyPesos on May 29, 2021, 11:15:02 PM

Quote from: Crown Victoria on May 29, 2021, 11:03:22 PM
As for the already-ranked...I'm not quite sure Ohio should be in Tier 2. I-71 and I-270 were pretty rough when I drove through a couple weeks ago. Now obviously that's just a small portion of their overall system but it sure left an impression.

Ohio was ranked tier 1 (and at the top of t1 too) initially, I asked to drop it down to t2 earlier in the thread. I think it's fine in t2 considering its issues. Indiana and Michigan (both also in t2) are a bit worse for pavement quality, though Indiana is improving. Not sure about Michigan as I haven't been there since 2018.

Well moving Ohio from Tier 1 was probably a good move. I'm sure there's other parts of their system that are in better shape than I-71 between Cincinnati and Columbus.

I realize that this thread is mostly about state DOTs, but if we were to include other authorities, then I would place the PTC at least in Tier 3. Considering their financial difficulties (which are mostly imposed on them by law), the PTC does a decent job with maintenance, and is actively working to reconstruct and widen the entire mainline and NE Extension as their resources allow. They are also well regarded when it comes to winter weather.

They also have all the Breezewoods because they weren't willing to use their own money to build junctions with interstates, as the other toll agencies were.  It also took then decades to build two ramps to complete I-95, most of that before Act 44.  And one could question whether they really should be doing reconstruction/widening projects, given their financial situation.  In NY, we have a preservation first policy for a reason.  If the PTC had one too, perhaps tolls wouldn't be as sky high as they are.

All of which I took into consideration, whether stated or not. Given their situation, I feel the PTC is doing a decent job. Sure, they're not perfect, and yes, those tolls are high and going higher. But overall, the quality of PTC roadways is good and getting better. Would it be nice to have direct freeway-to-freeway interchanges? Of course! And it would be nice too if the I-95 interchange was fully complete. But the unreconstructed parts of the mainline are 65-80 years old, and much of the widening is sorely needed closer to the major metro areas. So that brings us to the situation we have now, where the PTC has to invest in the system despite a precarious financial position.

Quote from: Scott5114 on May 29, 2021, 11:09:38 PM

Quote from: oscar on May 29, 2021, 10:44:52 PM

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 29, 2021, 10:36:56 PM

Quote from: vdeane on May 29, 2021, 09:44:04 PM
I have no idea why New Mexico seems to be universally considered to be bad by people with experience in that state

Band-aid fixes to problem corridors like US 550, abysmal signage of US routes, a bizarre state highway system...

"Abysmal signage" not limited to US routes, to the point where route signage in NM can be a joke.

During my one visit to NM in person, I encountered a highway junction in the middle of nowhere that was signposted entirely without arrows. The motorist was just supposed to intuit which route was which based on the placement of the shields within the assembly.

I also encountered this questionable sign placement. Which of these messages is really more important?

NM signage problems are worse than poor sign placement or even omission. Sometimes there are signs posted that are just flat out wrong. Other times there are signs that are... interesting, to say the least. For example, this delightfully nonstandard way to sign the US 62/180/285 overlap in Carlsbad (https://goo.gl/maps/o8aQnBMjbBthsxEs5).

But NMDOT's issues go well beyond just signs. Aside from making improvements as cheaply as they possibly can (see the previously mentioned US 550), their pavement is often in terrible shape. US 491 heading south from Shiprock to Gallup was one of the bumpiest long-distance highways I've ever been on.

Quote from: US 89 on May 30, 2021, 04:10:09 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on May 29, 2021, 11:09:38 PM

Quote from: oscar on May 29, 2021, 10:44:52 PM

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on May 29, 2021, 10:36:56 PM

Quote from: vdeane on May 29, 2021, 09:44:04 PM
I have no idea why New Mexico seems to be universally considered to be bad by people with experience in that state

Band-aid fixes to problem corridors like US 550, abysmal signage of US routes, a bizarre state highway system...

"Abysmal signage" not limited to US routes, to the point where route signage in NM can be a joke.

During my one visit to NM in person, I encountered a highway junction in the middle of nowhere that was signposted entirely without arrows. The motorist was just supposed to intuit which route was which based on the placement of the shields within the assembly.

I also encountered this questionable sign placement. Which of these messages is really more important?

NM signage problems are worse than poor sign placement or even omission. Sometimes there are signs posted that are just flat out wrong. Other times there are signs that are... interesting, to say the least. For example, this delightfully nonstandard way to sign the US 62/180/285 overlap in Carlsbad (https://goo.gl/maps/o8aQnBMjbBthsxEs5).

Their signing of the US 56/412 overlap is also pretty weird:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/1437/4721756286_2e874d8018_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/8cfeD9)DSCF2117 (https://flic.kr/p/8cfeD9) by ooss (https://www.flickr.com/photos/usends/), on Flickr

(https://live.staticflickr.com/5622/20747662115_89682949ea_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/xBpc7k)DSCN5944 (https://flic.kr/p/xBpc7k) by ooss (https://www.flickr.com/photos/usends/), on Flickr

(https://www.usends.com/uploads/7/5/0/3/75032313/end056-412w-last-2021-min_orig.jpg)
(Photos by Dale Sanderson)

I'll call that US 14/103 instead if that's how they'll write it out. Pretty much the same number.

Oh, and if that arrow on the Springer sign felt just a tad off to you, you're not wrong. Here's a closeup of it, rotated. Somehow they managed to get the angles on the left and right sides of the arrowhead different.
(https://i.imgur.com/AIuaYuW.png)

Quote from: Scott5114 on May 30, 2021, 11:45:09 PM
(https://www.usends.com/uploads/7/5/0/3/75032313/end056-412w-last-2021-min_orig.jpg)
(Photos by Dale Sanderson)

This is good compared to some of what NM puts out. I saw several of those along the US 56/64/412 concurrency, mixed at random with solo US 56 shields. I do not recall a single 64 marker on that stretch west of the Oklahoma line.

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 30, 2021, 12:38:28 PM
PTC is the worst simply because they couldn't complete I-95 until 2018.

Except that it was New Jersey's fault that PTC needed to construct an interchange for completion of I-95.

Quote from: ran4sh on May 31, 2021, 01:22:37 AM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 30, 2021, 12:38:28 PM
PTC is the worst simply because they couldn't complete I-95 until 2018.

I-295 to I-195 was signed as "TO I-95" in the northbound direction for a long time before the new interchange and re-routing (thanks to NJDOT).  But, IIRC, there never was any signage in the southbound direction on the Turnpike telling anyone to take Exit 7A for I-95 to Philly (thanks to the NJTA).

Quote
Except that it was New Jersey's fault that PTC needed to construct an interchange for completion of I-95.

So, building Fritz Owl-style freeways would suddenly bump a DOT up one or more tiers?  If that's the case, then why is A(Z)DOT in Tier 1 when Tucson exists?

What exactly is FritzOwl-ish about Tucson?

Quote from: sprjus4 on May 31, 2021, 08:55:47 AM
What exactly is FritzOwl-ish about Tucson?

Tucson is the exact opposite of FritzOwl. He's saying that Arizona is Tier 1 despite being the AntiFritzOwl.

Quote from: 1 on May 31, 2021, 08:56:51 AM

Quote from: sprjus4 on May 31, 2021, 08:55:47 AM
What exactly is FritzOwl-ish about Tucson?

Tucson is the exact opposite of FritzOwl. He's saying that Arizona is Tier 1 despite being the AntiFritzOwl.

Then look at Phoenix. It's the opposite of Tucson.

Quote from: ran4sh on May 31, 2021, 01:22:37 AM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 30, 2021, 12:38:28 PM
PTC is the worst simply because they couldn't complete I-95 until 2018.

Except that it was New Jersey's fault that PTC needed to construct an interchange for completion of I-95.

It's also the PTC's fault an interchange wasn't built there from the get-go.  Most states would have at least built a double-trumpet there when I-95 went through, and when NJ cancelled the Somerset Freeway, it would have been simply rerouted - perhaps with planned upgrades, but at least the designation switch could have happened immediately.  This ties into the whole Breezewood problem the PTC has, with very few true freeway/freeway interchanges with interstates.  Most toll agencies built trumpet/double trumpet interchanges to the interstates with their own toll money (or accepted federal money with a promise to remove the tolls when the bonds were paid off, a requirement Congress later repealed due to lobbying from those states).  Not the PTC, though.  And even when the switch happened, why did it take so long to build the interchange?  Act 44 wouldn't come into existence for another 2-3 decades after that point.  Act 44 and their current financial situation cannot be blamed for their interchange problems, at I-95 or anywhere else.

Quote from: Bickendan on May 28, 2021, 11:36:39 PM
WSDOT as a Tier 1?
Uh, I'd need some very good justification for such a high appraisal for a DOT that allowed this to be installed:
https://goo.gl/maps/BBbx7TT4iaMY4xMD9

I was going to make a joke about ODOT being a top-notch agency, but signage wise (not counting the lack of trailblazer or reassurance shields on many of the post-2002 Routes), ODOT's signs look better than WSDOT's.

Now, as for maintencance, construction, sure, credit where it's due. It feels like WSDOT moves forward faster and better than ODOT does with new facilities as well as maintaining them (though local politics on my side of the Columbia doesn't help...).

WSDOT's SW Division runs different to the rest of the state, from the looks of their signage oddities.

Overall, I'd put WSDOT in the B tier at best due to their chronic mishandling of urban state routes (often overriding local wishes to not have a deathtrap in the middle of cities).

Guess we need to lower our standards for tier 1 then. At this rate, we'll find enough flaws of each DOT that none of them will be tier 1.

Oklahoma is Tier -1.

Quote from: SkyPesos on May 30, 2021, 11:46:57 PM
I'll call that US 14/103 instead if that's how they'll write it out. Pretty much the same number.

Personally I prefer US 0.136.

On that same idea, US 1-9 in NJ should really be US -8.

Quote from: ran4sh on May 31, 2021, 01:22:37 AM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 30, 2021, 12:38:28 PM
PTC is the worst simply because they couldn't complete I-95 until 2018.

I-295 to I-195 was signed as "TO I-95" in the northbound direction for a long time before the new interchange and re-routing (thanks to NJDOT).  But, IIRC, there never was any signage in the southbound direction on the Turnpike telling anyone to take Exit 7A for I-95 to Philly (thanks to the NJTA).

Not necessarily a bad thing. Taking 7A to 295 North to 95 South wasn't a sensible route to Philly.

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 30, 2021, 12:38:28 PM
Except that it was New Jersey's fault that PTC needed to construct an interchange for completion of I-95.

The PTC often can't connect itself with other interstates in its own state. The PTC/95 missing interchange wasn't a unique situation to them. Let's be thankful it was done right, compared to some of the original designs they considered, many of which were 1 lane ramps into a traditional Interchange toll plaza.

Having driven in all 50 states, my top 3 are: Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan (in that order).  My bottom 3 are: Hawaii, Oklahoma, New Mexico.

Quote from: Bruce on May 31, 2021, 06:23:40 PM

Quote from: Bickendan on May 28, 2021, 11:36:39 PM
WSDOT as a Tier 1?
Uh, I'd need some very good justification for such a high appraisal for a DOT that allowed this to be installed:
https://goo.gl/maps/BBbx7TT4iaMY4xMD9

I was going to make a joke about ODOT being a top-notch agency, but signage wise (not counting the lack of trailblazer or reassurance shields on many of the post-2002 Routes), ODOT's signs look better than WSDOT's.

Now, as for maintencance, construction, sure, credit where it's due. It feels like WSDOT moves forward faster and better than ODOT does with new facilities as well as maintaining them (though local politics on my side of the Columbia doesn't help...).

WSDOT's SW Division runs different to the rest of the state, from the looks of their signage oddities.

Overall, I'd put WSDOT in the B tier at best due to their chronic mishandling of urban state routes (often overriding local wishes to not have a deathtrap in the middle of cities).

That's fair, although I'm not a fan of the general WSDOT internal exit tab. I much prefer ODOT's centered external, or even CalTran's style for internal (yeah, I realize that's not a popular take lol).

Sticking with my original assessment:

Quote from: on_wisconsin on May 19, 2014, 01:15:16 PM
ISTHA.

Although, I would throw VDOT's NoVA district near the top as well.

Living in Arizona I'd say that the state is mostly Tier 1.

However, there are a number of signage goofs around the state such as:

https://goo.gl/maps/GsEDuLbqQW3v4ohbA

or

https://goo.gl/maps/vVzPsdSeVa2se2LcA

or a whole stretch of signs that look like:

https://goo.gl/maps/2FnkwxiE5FLiX9sz8

Plus the rubberized asphalt overlay on a lot of Phoenix area roads is in pretty horrible shape at this point with lots of patching, worn pavement, and potholes.

ADOT in general puts out a decent quality highway but it's not perfect. In my mind Northern Virginia (VDOT) is as close to perfection as I've ever seen.

Quote from: ztonyg on June 02, 2021, 05:29:21 PM
Living in Arizona I'd say that the state is mostly Tier 1.

However, there are a number of signage goofs around the state such as:

https://goo.gl/maps/GsEDuLbqQW3v4ohbA

or

https://goo.gl/maps/vVzPsdSeVa2se2LcA

or a whole stretch of signs that look like:

https://goo.gl/maps/2FnkwxiE5FLiX9sz8

Plus the rubberized asphalt overlay on a lot of Phoenix area roads is in pretty horrible shape at this point with lots of patching, worn pavement, and potholes.

ADOT in general puts out a decent quality highway but it's not perfect. In my mind Northern Virginia (VDOT) is as close to perfection as I've ever seen.

I like how you said that ADOT is Tier 1 but then proceeded to say mostly negative things about them.  :clap:

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 02, 2021, 07:38:14 PM

Quote from: ztonyg on June 02, 2021, 05:29:21 PM
Living in Arizona I'd say that the state is mostly Tier 1.

However, there are a number of signage goofs around the state such as:

https://goo.gl/maps/GsEDuLbqQW3v4ohbA

or

https://goo.gl/maps/vVzPsdSeVa2se2LcA

or a whole stretch of signs that look like:

https://goo.gl/maps/2FnkwxiE5FLiX9sz8

Plus the rubberized asphalt overlay on a lot of Phoenix area roads is in pretty horrible shape at this point with lots of patching, worn pavement, and potholes.

ADOT in general puts out a decent quality highway but it's not perfect. In my mind Northern Virginia (VDOT) is as close to perfection as I've ever seen.

I like how you said that ADOT is Tier 1 but then proceeded to say mostly negative things about them.  :clap:

I meant to say that I'm not sure that ADOT is Tier 1.

A lot of that status is based upon the freeway system built in the Phoenix area post 1985.

I-17 from it's start at the I-10 split until at least Loop 101 is on my top 10 list for ugliest freeways in any urban area. Especially the portion south of I-10 (that really should simply be US 60 and not I-17 but I'll save that rant for some other time).

https://goo.gl/maps/6LBrKu4Kx9aDj4Gy5'

AZ 51 south of Glendale Ave is a "fun" drive (granted it wasn't originally designed and built by ADOT) but still the ups, downs, and curves are not Interstate standard and are quite an adventure for the traffic it carries. Unlike I-17 though AZ 51 is actually a quite beautiful urban freeway and the part north of Glendale Ave. (designed and built by ADOT) is one of my favorite urban freeways anywhere in both design and aesthetics.

Quote from: CoreySamson on May 27, 2021, 07:51:01 PM

Tier 1: Amazing
FDOT (Florida)
WSDOT (Washington)
ADOT (Arizona)

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

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

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

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

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

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

This is where we stand right now. Please note that each tier's states are not ordered by how good they are within that tier, only by how good they are compared to other tiers. As for the answer to the OP, I'm thinking FDOT is the best at this moment. Seems like they are able to finish needed projects, fix problem areas, and do it all while making the roads look nice. The only bad thing I have to say about them is their exit gore signs look really ugly.

Someone said earlier in the thread that Hawaii was bottom 3. Anybody else agree? I don't think I've heard much else negative about HDOT, so I'm reserving judgement until I get more answers.

FDOT as #1? As recently as 2015 there was an advance guide sign on I-75 (approaching I-10) that had an exit arrow, despite the exit being 2 miles from that point.

Quote from: ran4sh on June 07, 2021, 01:10:50 AM
FDOT as #1? As recently as 2015 there was an advance guide sign on I-75 (approaching I-10) that had an exit arrow, despite the exit being 2 miles from that point.

So you're disqualifying FDOT from first place because of... one sign error?

If that's the case, then could you list a DOT that is better worthy for 1st that has not ever made a mistake?

Quote from: sprjus4 on June 07, 2021, 01:20:29 AM

Quote from: ran4sh on June 07, 2021, 01:10:50 AM
FDOT as #1? As recently as 2015 there was an advance guide sign on I-75 (approaching I-10) that had an exit arrow, despite the exit being 2 miles from that point.

So you're disqualifying FDOT from first place because of... one sign error?

If that's the case, then could you list a DOT that is better worthy for 1st that has not ever made a mistake?

Yeah, what would everyone else's pick for 1st be?

I'd say somewhere between FDOT, NCDOT, and TxDOT – from my experience.

Cannot speak for ADOT or WsDOT.

Having driven most of the Western US in my life and having driven through most of the Southwest the past couple of weeks, I continue to be impressed with how well the roads are engineered and maintained in Utah, particularly in comparison to the surrounding states.  Is there a reason UDOT is not considered a top tier agency?  I haven't driven in the Wasatch Front for many years now, so I don't know if freeway and population expansion there has allowed it to match the rest of the state in terms of road and sign quality, though.

In terms of road quality UDOT is top tier - even in the rapidly growing Wasatch Front, where several highways have been newly built or upgraded recently - but there are just a few other things that would keep it from that overall level in my view. One is the poor handling of route concurrencies, which has been getting better in recent years but still is not great (see I-70 in eastern Utah and I-80/US 189). Another is the existence of seemingly endless varieties of beehive state route shield, most of which don't actually look that good. And their traffic signal placement in general is not great compared to many other neighboring states.

That said, they're a great agency that does a fine job.

For Washington, didn't they refuse to implement any 75 zones after state law allowed them to do so?  That would drop them a tier in my book.  I also prefer regular exit tabs to their full width ones, but that's more minor and arguably a personal preference.

So I guess we can agree that Washington is clear Tier 2. This is starting to turn into my pet project, sort of like how Rothman provides the scoreboard for the lowest-traveled route number thread.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Any arguments for any of the Tier 2 states to be in Tier 1 instead? And are there any Tier 1s out of the states without a ranking at the moment?

VTrans > NHDOT > MassDOT, but MassDOT is definitely not in tier 5 or 6. Given the top-heavy list, I would probably put them as 1, 2, and 3; a more even list would put MassDOT in 4.

I think NY should be in Tier 2.

Really the only major thing preventing it from being Tier 1 is the sequential exit numbers, and a few smaller things like route shields often lacking direction banners, and the use of route shields instead of LGS's at freeway entrances (although that's more personal preference than an actual problem).

There's also the low freeway speed limits, but I'm not sure how much that factors in, if at all.

Another one that hasn't really been mentioned is ISTHA, which has been steadily improving over the years. Lots of roads being completely rebuilt, ending its use of Clearview, experimenting with things like smart roads that IDOT simply will not do. They're either Tier 2 or 3 in my book.

I know some people feel very differently on them though. Someone here on the last thread even said they've been yelled at by an ISTHA employee, might have been Scott? I don't remember.

I'll nominate WYDOT to be Tier 5.  Nothing is quite as bad as Oklahoma, but with Wyoming's ridiculously low taxes, the roads are in pretty rough shape.  Lots of signage "curiosities", including not updating signs for moved routes for multiple years.  I'll also just add that a lot of their state routes don't serving anything useful other than oil fields, and the oil companies themselves could be in charge of those roads.

ITD I think is in Tier 2.  The roads have all been in pretty good shape every time I've driven through there (I've been on 30ish% of the roads there) and signage has been solid as well.

I'd also raise UDOT to Tier 1.  Given climactic challenges, it has the best roads in the region.

I also think you can drop CDOT down to Tier 3.  Not enough action on improving the highways, only adding toll lanes.  From driving in western Colorado this weekend, a lot of signing that leaves me wanting.

Chris

Quote from: vdeane on June 07, 2021, 12:44:33 PM
For Washington, didn't they refuse to implement any 75 zones after state law allowed them to do so?  That would drop them a tier in my book.  I also prefer regular exit tabs to their full width ones, but that's more minor and arguably a personal preference.

Here's the study: https://wsdot.wa.gov/planning/Studies/i90speedlimit/default.htm

A five-minute time savings makes no difference at all, so keeping the limit at 70 is reasonable. And given how awful the drivers in WA are when it comes to long-distance travel (refusing to keep right, truckers ready to blindly change lanes, not slowing for curves and hills), we shouldn't encourage them to go any faster.

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

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

Quote from: Bruce on June 07, 2021, 08:09:19 PM

Quote from: vdeane on June 07, 2021, 12:44:33 PM
For Washington, didn't they refuse to implement any 75 zones after state law allowed them to do so?  That would drop them a tier in my book.  I also prefer regular exit tabs to their full width ones, but that's more minor and arguably a personal preference.

Here's the study: https://wsdot.wa.gov/planning/Studies/i90speedlimit/default.htm

A five-minute time savings makes no difference at all, so keeping the limit at 70 is reasonable. And given how awful the drivers in WA are when it comes to long-distance travel (refusing to keep right, truckers ready to blindly change lanes, not slowing for curves and hills), we shouldn't encourage them to go any faster.

Speed limits should be set at the 85th percentile. It would've been reasonable to increase the limit to 75 mph, but they didn't. Plain and simple. The safety argument has been debunked 1000 times over, it never holds true in reality. People are going to drive 75-80 mph in a 70 mph zone, they'll continue to drive those speeds in a 75 mph zone. Increasing the speed limit isn't going to change existing behaviors by any large margin, except bring the law closer to reality, which is what WsDOT refused to do in this instance, if anything making it less safe by keeping that gap between those traveling the higher speeds and those obeying the speed limit.

Quote from: vdeane on June 07, 2021, 09:46:19 PM
Funny how the "speed kills" crowd always talks about time savings (which, by the way, varies by how far you're going - over a long enough drive, it adds up), and never talk about how slower speed limits make it feel like you're crawling on the road, which is NOT a fun feeling.  Also funny how they use average speed rather than 85th percentile speed, which would likely tell a different story.  Of course average speed goes up - the people who drive the limit exactly or try to compromise between the limit and a more reasonable speed then increase their speed.  The fact that the average increase is less than the limit increase shows how the speeds of the fastest drivers (the problem ones) are unaffected by what's posted on the sign.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Quote from: jayhawkco on June 07, 2021, 04:07:29 PM
Nothing is quite as bad as Oklahoma

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Quote from: kphoger on June 08, 2021, 03:48:39 PM

Quote from: jayhawkco on June 07, 2021, 04:07:29 PM
Nothing is quite as bad as Oklahoma

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

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

Chris

Quote from: jayhawkco on June 08, 2021, 04:05:37 PM
Road quality worse in New Mexico.  Sign quality worse in Oklahoma.

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

Quote from: jayhawkco on June 08, 2021, 04:05:37 PM

Quote from: kphoger on June 08, 2021, 03:48:39 PM

Quote from: jayhawkco on June 07, 2021, 04:07:29 PM
Nothing is quite as bad as Oklahoma

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

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

Chris

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

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

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

Unpopular opinion: Oklahoma signage is fine.

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

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

Quote from: kphoger on June 08, 2021, 04:50:02 PM

Quote from: jayhawkco on June 08, 2021, 04:05:37 PM
Road quality worse in New Mexico.  Sign quality worse in Oklahoma.

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

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

Quote from: vdeane on June 09, 2021, 12:52:44 PM

Quote from: kphoger on June 08, 2021, 04:50:02 PM

Quote from: jayhawkco on June 08, 2021, 04:05:37 PM
Road quality worse in New Mexico.  Sign quality worse in Oklahoma.

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

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

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

Quote from: US 89 on May 31, 2021, 12:24:24 AM
... along the US 56/64/412 concurrency ... I do not recall a single 64 marker on that stretch west of the Oklahoma line.

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 08, 2021, 06:14:30 PM
Road quality is probably more important than signage quality, even as a roadgeek, it must be said. Therefore, NM could be the very bottom of the barrel.

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

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

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 07, 2021, 03:45:37 PM
Someone here on the last thread even said they've been yelled at by an ISTHA employee, might have been Scott? I don't remember.

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

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 09, 2021, 01:20:07 PM

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 08, 2021, 06:14:30 PM
Road quality is probably more important than signage quality, even as a roadgeek, it must be said. Therefore, NM could be the very bottom of the barrel.

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

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

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

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 09, 2021, 01:23:25 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 09, 2021, 01:20:07 PM

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 08, 2021, 06:14:30 PM
Road quality is probably more important than signage quality, even as a roadgeek, it must be said. Therefore, NM could be the very bottom of the barrel.

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

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

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

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

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 09, 2021, 01:24:53 PM

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 09, 2021, 01:23:25 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 09, 2021, 01:20:07 PM

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 08, 2021, 06:14:30 PM
Road quality is probably more important than signage quality, even as a roadgeek, it must be said. Therefore, NM could be the very bottom of the barrel.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 09, 2021, 01:23:25 PM
Does signage quality matter as much anymore with GPS? It still matters of course, but how much?

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

Quote from: kphoger on June 09, 2021, 01:08:21 PM

Quote from: vdeane on June 09, 2021, 12:52:44 PM

Quote from: kphoger on June 08, 2021, 04:50:02 PM

Quote from: jayhawkco on June 08, 2021, 04:05:37 PM
Road quality worse in New Mexico.  Sign quality worse in Oklahoma.

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

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

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

Quote from: US 89 on May 31, 2021, 12:24:24 AM
... along the US 56/64/412 concurrency ... I do not recall a single 64 marker on that stretch west of the Oklahoma line.

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

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

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 09, 2021, 01:20:07 PM

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 08, 2021, 06:14:30 PM
Road quality is probably more important than signage quality, even as a roadgeek, it must be said. Therefore, NM could be the very bottom of the barrel.

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

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

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 07, 2021, 03:45:37 PM
Someone here on the last thread even said they've been yelled at by an ISTHA employee, might have been Scott? I don't remember.

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

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

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

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

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 09, 2021, 04:15:03 PM
But still OkDOT doesn't get off the hook Scott5114 free.

FTFY

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 09, 2021, 01:20:07 PM

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 07, 2021, 03:45:37 PM
Someone here on the last thread even said they've been yelled at by an ISTHA employee, might have been Scott? I don't remember.

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

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

Quote from: kphoger on June 09, 2021, 04:18:16 PM

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 09, 2021, 04:15:03 PM
But still OkDOT doesn't get off the hook Scott5114 free.

FTFY

You're damn right. :bigass:

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

Quote from: webny99 on June 09, 2021, 04:22:18 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 09, 2021, 01:20:07 PM

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 07, 2021, 03:45:37 PM
Someone here on the last thread even said they've been yelled at by an ISTHA employee, might have been Scott? I don't remember.

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

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

I still have the photo. I released it public domain, so post it wherever you want.
(https://i.imgur.com/lpSJ0sl.jpg)

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 09, 2021, 01:23:25 PM
Does signage quality matter as much anymore with GPS? It still matters of course, but how much?

They are called reassurance shields for a reason. Google Maps can be off when it comes to giving proper directions.

Where does DDOT (District of Columbia) go on this?

I'd put them in Tier 5 given how hard it is to follow numbered routes through the city (and some of the signage is old enough it has state-name US shields, which is cool for roadgeeks but kind of goes to show you how much they neglect the signage). I only went there for a few days in 2007, though, so it may have improved since then.

Quote from: MillTheRoadgeek on June 11, 2021, 01:18:59 PM
Where does DDOT (District of Columbia) go on this?

Absolutely awful, borderline Tier 6 for me. They've never heard of FHWA standard fonts, which to me is just such a fail all on its own. Literally everything is Arial. And sometimes, stretched and compressed Arial.

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 12, 2021, 06:22:17 PM

Quote from: MillTheRoadgeek on June 11, 2021, 01:18:59 PM
Where does DDOT (District of Columbia) go on this?

Absolutely awful, borderline Tier 6 for me. They've never heard of FHWA standard fonts, which to me is just such a fail all on its own. Literally everything is Arial. And sometimes, stretched and compressed Arial.

Helvetica, actually. Although it looks like some newer signage uses FHWA fonts.

Which tier would AlanDOT fall under? A new tier 7?

Quote from: SkyPesos on June 12, 2021, 08:15:20 PM
Which tier would AlanDOT fall under? A new tier 7?

While also being tier 1, but not.

Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on April 29, 2021, 09:04:27 PM
NYCDOT has its issues (especially with how they maintain expressways) but I think they have some of the best maintenance and design for local streets. Their parking signs are much more legible and consistent than the standard MUTCD signs, and they are usually good with signal configurations (creative use of LPIs and FYA, not afraid of permissive left turns, and the signals are pretimed instead of actuated which is almost always the right choice in an urban environment).

Also, you can complain about the speed cameras and red light cameras, but I have seen first hand that they really do cut down on reckless driving. The program is not too unreasonable, you have to be going over 36 to get caught by the speed cameras and NYC times its yellow intervals correctly. Look at neighboring cities without such a program like Newark and JC in NJ and people drive much more recklessly and run red lights with impunity. So I think it's a good system.

The difference between NYSDOT and NYCDOT is amazing. I wrote a physical letter to NYSDOT LI about an inaccurate sign, they replied and fixed it within a week. I made a similar report to NYCDOT about an inaccurate sign and it took them like 8 months to close the request and idk if they actually did it. Same for FOIL requests, NYSDOT gets it to me in a week, NYCDOT took about 8 months and sent the wrong doc.

With the expressways, NYCDOT caps all NYC freeways at 50 mph for some reason, meaning the Clearview and West Shore Expressways are 50 mph speed traps with higher design speeds, and the city refuses to acknowledge that they are the operator of these corridors. I sent NYSDOT's letter saying the speed limits were under the city's control, to NYCDOT, and kept being told it's the state's problem. That individual is now the SI borough commissioner...

Their signals are awful. The yellows are about 2-2.5 seconds (it's frustrating seeing NYC drivers slam on their brakes when they're driving on LI or upstate and the light turns yellow). They rejected my proposal to allow right-on-red at an intersection with no cross traffic, with no explanation. Any signals that control interchanges with surface streets are timed awfully and will back up the highway's mainline. The yield signs at the ends of long entrance long ramps. They replace damaged NYSDOT exit signs with these monstrosities: https://goo.gl/maps/i6aZu5a4hWYjxbEr6

/rant

Quote from: crispy93 on June 14, 2021, 11:59:56 AM
With the expressways, NYCDOT caps all NYC freeways at 50 mph for some reason, meaning the Clearview and West Shore Expressways are 50 mph speed traps with higher design speeds, and the city refuses to acknowledge that they are the operator of these corridors. I sent NYSDOT's letter saying the speed limits were under the city's control, to NYCDOT, and kept being told it's the state's problem. That individual is now the SI borough commissioner...

Isn't it NYSDOT, though, that refuses to increase the LIE (I-495) from 55 mph to 65 mph? Or the SH-27 Sunrise Hwy? Both are limited access facilities that are easily designed for 70 mph or greater, particularly the further east you go.

Quote from: crispy93 on June 14, 2021, 11:59:56 AM

Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on April 29, 2021, 09:04:27 PM
NYCDOT has its issues (especially with how they maintain expressways) but I think they have some of the best maintenance and design for local streets. Their parking signs are much more legible and consistent than the standard MUTCD signs, and they are usually good with signal configurations (creative use of LPIs and FYA, not afraid of permissive left turns, and the signals are pretimed instead of actuated which is almost always the right choice in an urban environment).

Also, you can complain about the speed cameras and red light cameras, but I have seen first hand that they really do cut down on reckless driving. The program is not too unreasonable, you have to be going over 36 to get caught by the speed cameras and NYC times its yellow intervals correctly. Look at neighboring cities without such a program like Newark and JC in NJ and people drive much more recklessly and run red lights with impunity. So I think it's a good system.

The difference between NYSDOT and NYCDOT is amazing. I wrote a physical letter to NYSDOT LI about an inaccurate sign, they replied and fixed it within a week. I made a similar report to NYCDOT about an inaccurate sign and it took them like 8 months to close the request and idk if they actually did it. Same for FOIL requests, NYSDOT gets it to me in a week, NYCDOT took about 8 months and sent the wrong doc.

With the expressways, NYCDOT caps all NYC freeways at 50 mph for some reason, meaning the Clearview and West Shore Expressways are 50 mph speed traps with higher design speeds, and the city refuses to acknowledge that they are the operator of these corridors. I sent NYSDOT's letter saying the speed limits were under the city's control, to NYCDOT, and kept being told it's the state's problem. That individual is now the SI borough commissioner...

Their signals are awful. The yellows are about 2-2.5 seconds (it's frustrating seeing NYC drivers slam on their brakes when they're driving on LI or upstate and the light turns yellow). They rejected my proposal to allow right-on-red at an intersection with no cross traffic, with no explanation. Any signals that control interchanges with surface streets are timed awfully and will back up the highway's mainline. The yield signs at the ends of long entrance long ramps. They replace damaged NYSDOT exit signs with these monstrosities: https://goo.gl/maps/i6aZu5a4hWYjxbEr6

/rant

Are you sure it's NYCDOT capping the freeways at 50?  I was under the impression that there's an actual law setting 50 as the maximum allowed speed to be posted in NYC.

Quote from: vdeane on June 14, 2021, 01:40:17 PM

Quote from: crispy93 on June 14, 2021, 11:59:56 AM

Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on April 29, 2021, 09:04:27 PM
NYCDOT has its issues (especially with how they maintain expressways) but I think they have some of the best maintenance and design for local streets. Their parking signs are much more legible and consistent than the standard MUTCD signs, and they are usually good with signal configurations (creative use of LPIs and FYA, not afraid of permissive left turns, and the signals are pretimed instead of actuated which is almost always the right choice in an urban environment).

Also, you can complain about the speed cameras and red light cameras, but I have seen first hand that they really do cut down on reckless driving. The program is not too unreasonable, you have to be going over 36 to get caught by the speed cameras and NYC times its yellow intervals correctly. Look at neighboring cities without such a program like Newark and JC in NJ and people drive much more recklessly and run red lights with impunity. So I think it's a good system.

The difference between NYSDOT and NYCDOT is amazing. I wrote a physical letter to NYSDOT LI about an inaccurate sign, they replied and fixed it within a week. I made a similar report to NYCDOT about an inaccurate sign and it took them like 8 months to close the request and idk if they actually did it. Same for FOIL requests, NYSDOT gets it to me in a week, NYCDOT took about 8 months and sent the wrong doc.

With the expressways, NYCDOT caps all NYC freeways at 50 mph for some reason, meaning the Clearview and West Shore Expressways are 50 mph speed traps with higher design speeds, and the city refuses to acknowledge that they are the operator of these corridors. I sent NYSDOT's letter saying the speed limits were under the city's control, to NYCDOT, and kept being told it's the state's problem. That individual is now the SI borough commissioner...

Their signals are awful. The yellows are about 2-2.5 seconds (it's frustrating seeing NYC drivers slam on their brakes when they're driving on LI or upstate and the light turns yellow). They rejected my proposal to allow right-on-red at an intersection with no cross traffic, with no explanation. Any signals that control interchanges with surface streets are timed awfully and will back up the highway's mainline. The yield signs at the ends of long entrance long ramps. They replace damaged NYSDOT exit signs with these monstrosities: https://goo.gl/maps/i6aZu5a4hWYjxbEr6

/rant

Are you sure it's NYCDOT capping the freeways at 50?  I was under the impression that there's an actual law setting 50 as the maximum allowed speed to be posted in NYC.

NYSDOT said as much. I also searched the V&TL and there's nothing capping speed limits in NYC. I also had a state assemblyman call NYSDOT R11 and were were told the same thing, speed limits are the city's problem.

I was thinking more along the lines of a city ordinance.  The 50 mph limit originated in the 1970s oil crisis; IIRC, the whole state actually dropped to 50 for a time, but outside of NYC raised to 55 when the NMSL became law.  NYC, of course, remains unchanged to this day.

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

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

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

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

Tier 5: Bad
RIDOT (Rhode Island)
IDOT (Illinois)
WYDOT (Wyoming)
DDOT (District Of Columbia)
NYCDOT (New York City)

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

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

Updated. Where does ALDOT place on this? I hear a lot from their neighboring states' DOTs, but not theirs.

You're not missing out on much with ALDOT, unless safety standards from the 1960s are exactly what you've been missing. Pavement quality is mediocre at times; it usually goes bad in 5-6 years. State-supported signage isn't bad, generally pretty consistent and well-placed. New DOT website (seems a little easier to navigate). They're pretty concise and specific-enough in some plans (though I don't delve into those often), but behind the times on many innovations. And you could still get paper maps through early-2020, though I haven't looked for 2021 editions.

Considering their budget, low-average to the brink of mediocre would suffice. I would be hard-pressed to put them in the same category as Maryland and New York, honestly. But I think PennDOT isn't that bad, considering their fairly massive inventory.

The below is a pretty bold statement regarding HDOT, yet no details were given.

Anyone?  What's your impression of HDOT?

Quote from: machias on May 31, 2021, 11:25:06 PM
Having driven in all 50 states, my top 3 are: Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan (in that order).  My bottom 3 are: Hawaii, Oklahoma, New Mexico.

Quote from: formulanone on June 15, 2021, 05:54:44 PM
And you could still get paper maps through early-2020, though I haven't looked for 2021 editions.

F.Y.I. Many states still offer official printed maps at rest stops and to order online.

Quote from: kphoger on June 15, 2021, 08:16:16 PM
The below is a pretty bold statement regarding HDOT, yet no details were given.

Anyone?  What's your impression of HDOT?

Quote from: machias on May 31, 2021, 11:25:06 PM
Having driven in all 50 states, my top 3 are: Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan (in that order).  My bottom 3 are: Hawaii, Oklahoma, New Mexico.

I don't disagree too strongly with his ranking of Hawaii's DOT. It has the disadvantage of getting starved for funds, by a public pretty indifferent to transportation improvements. Hawaii's economy also got double-whammied by major recessions in both the U.S. and Japan. So I'm tempted to cut it some slack due to "degree of difficulty". (While it never snows on the state highways, volcano goddess Madame Pele likes to screw around with the ones on the Big Island.)

State route numbering and signage is pretty good from the mainland perspective (county route signage varies from terrific on Kauai to virtually non-existent on Oahu), too bad locals don't give a crap about route numbers. Alaska has a similar issue, plus its hunters like to use rural route markers for target practice. That means its route markers are few and far between, and placed strategically at junctions where they are most needed and the added traffic discourages vandalism.

I'm not sure Oklahoma ranks below South Carolina.

I don't feel like reading back through 200 posts, but why is Texas in Tier 2? They're building all kinds of massive stacks and new freeways, the things that people here care about the most.

Quote from: formulanone on June 15, 2021, 05:54:44 PM
You're not missing out on much with ALDOT, unless safety standards from the 1960s are exactly what you've been missing. Pavement quality is mediocre at times; it usually goes bad in 5-6 years. State-supported signage isn't bad, generally pretty consistent and well-placed. New DOT website (seems a little easier to navigate). They're pretty concise and specific-enough in some plans (though I don't delve into those often), but behind the times on many innovations. And you could still get paper maps through early-2020, though I haven't looked for 2021 editions.

See, I would have easily put ALDOT in the higher half. In my experience, signage is always there and always readable, and pavement quality is pretty good even off interstates. Maybe I’m just comparing it too much to nearby states like TN/GA/SC, all of which I feel like have worse pavement and signage.

Kind of wondering, how would a tier list based solely on signage in a state turn out? Like Michigan is tier 3 on the overall tier list above, as their pavement quality is driving it down, though I think their signage is pretty good, maybe even borderline amazing, as long as you have no issues with clearview.

Ohio's would be at amazing, especially considering that control cities and/or a BGS are signed for most onramps, but signage like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1331865,-82.9715144,3a,19.4y,26.47h,100.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMTL_DSoMD6vG7KK92uIAwA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) is enough to move it down a tier for me.

Quote from: SkyPesos on June 16, 2021, 09:44:31 AM
Kind of wondering, how would a tier list based solely on signage in a state turn out? Like Michigan is tier 3 on the overall tier list above, as their pavement quality is driving it down, though I think their signage is pretty good, maybe even borderline amazing, as long as you have no issues with clearview.

Ohio's would be at amazing, especially considering that control cities and/or a BGS are signed for most onramps, but signage like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.1331865,-82.9715144,3a,19.4y,26.47h,100.82t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMTL_DSoMD6vG7KK92uIAwA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) is enough to move it down a tier for me.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=22284.0

As much as I love VTrans, one thing I don't love about them is the whole milepoint exit number thing, basically allowing them to retain sequential for at least the next 10 years (we'll see if they actually change properly then).  Meanwhile, NHDOT would have done a proper conversion by now, were it not for their governor.  On the other hand, one could argue that milepoint exit numbers with a theoretical conversion in 2030 is still more hope for a switch than we have from NH.

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 16, 2021, 01:45:39 AM
I don't feel like reading back through 200 posts, but why is Texas in Tier 2? They're building all kinds of massive stacks and new freeways, the things that people here care about the most.

Outside of the big city, you can find all sorts of squirrelly Texas setups, like interchanges between non-freeways plopped in random small towns, for apparently no reason, that require U turns to make some of the movements. The frontage road system is interesting and occasionally useful but can lead to some awkward setups and development patterns. Signage is internally consistent but often takes massive liberties with the MUTCD (continued use of Clearview after authorization revoked/expired, "Obey warning signs, state law"). Wacky control city choices (Waco and Denton in DFW? Really?). The somewhat confusing abundance of secondary highway types. Plain square highway marker, which is also used for LOOP and SPUR routes. Horizontal signal heads. Lots of use of chipseal on surface roads...

Driving in Texas is generally an acceptable experience, but they do things differently enough down there that there's bound to be one thing about it that they do worse than your home state. And there's just something I can't put my finger on about driving in Texas that is just exhausting. I am always relieved to see the Oklahoma welcome sign when returning from Texas in a way that I'm not when I'm returning from Kansas or Missouri.

One major bonus that boosts Texas in my books is the reasonable speed limits. It's a minor detail but makes a major difference driving in rural areas. The sheer ability to legally drive up to 75 mph on a two lane road, whereas in some states that's 20 mph over and considered "reckless driving" . Even for divided highways in a lot of instances, particularly compared to a state like I'm in. They give us 60 mph in some areas though  :sleep:

Additionally, the same principle could apply to urban freeways, where everything isn't simply capped at 55 mph or maybe 60 mph despite being able to safely handle much faster.

Quote from: CoreySamson on April 29, 2021, 05:02:25 PM
I've got mostly positive, but nevertheless mixed opinions about TXDOT.

Pros:
- Projects actually get started and completed
- Freeway design is looking up
- Signage, though Clearview, is usually amazing
- Roads are usually very well surfaced and free of potholes
- Uses high-efficiency junctions well

Cons:
- Quality of new construction is concerning
- The Houston district is a hotbed of mediocre signage and quality
- Signs seem to be damaged easily in heavy winds
- Not very much attention given to pedestrians

Probably somewhere around 5th-10th place in the overall scheme of things.

Here was my earlier assessment of TxDOT right before the Angelo drama went down. I think there's enough cons here to weigh against the pros (stacks, good speed limits, etc.), which is why they are in Tier 2 in my book.

MN probably belongs in the OK, but here's the rundown:

Good
-Signage
-Lighting
-Urban freeway networks
-Investment in repairing rough pavement
-Decreasing prevalence of 55 MPH zones across the state

Bad
-Lack of control cities in areas and often poor choices for the ones that are used
-Cloverleaves
-Ghosted/aggressively decommissioned US routes

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 16, 2021, 01:46:55 PM
Horizontal signal heads.

Why should this count against Texas? I happen to like the look of horizontal signal heads quite a bit. TX is far from the only state with them, too - they make up 99.5% of traffic lights in NM and are quite common in other states such as NE, WI, FL...

^ Agreed, I don't mind them as much either. Sure, it's different and not the norm, but it's not terrible. I'll also add while I dislike Clearview font generally and prefer the standard FHWA design, I don't mind it as much in Texas given their signage is almost universally consistent. It just has almost a sense of uniqueness in a way for Texas.

I don't get what makes horizontal signals worse. Lots of other countries I've been to (Japan, Taiwan, some cities in China, Singapore) uses horizontal signals, and I'm indifferent about it.

Horizontal signals look decent when it's just one per gantry, like how Wisconsin used to do them. Texas traffic lights generally look sloppy and inconsistent, even ones on mast arms compared to span wires.

Quote from: US 89 on June 17, 2021, 02:42:35 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 16, 2021, 01:46:55 PM
Horizontal signal heads.

Why should this count against Texas? I happen to like the look of horizontal signal heads quite a bit. TX is far from the only state with them, too - they make up 99.5% of traffic lights in NM and are quite common in other states such as NE, WI, FL...

I mentioned Clearview and the plain square route marker too, both of which a lot of people like. It's just one of those you-like-it-or-you-don't things. Coming from a majority-vertical state, horizontal signals feel bad and wrong to me, and I'm always relieved to leave one of those regions and return to normalcy.

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 17, 2021, 01:15:25 PM
I mentioned Clearview and the plain square route marker too, both of which a lot of people like. It's just one of those you-like-it-or-you-don't things. Coming from a majority-vertical state, horizontal signals feel bad and wrong to me, and I'm always relieved to leave one of those regions and return to normalcy.

Coming from a majority-vertical state, I find horizontal signals to feel like a breath of fresh air.

Coming from a state that doesn't use Clearview in its DOT (and only occasionally uses it in its Turnpike Authority), I find seeing Clearview to feel like a breath of fresh air.

Honestly, anything that makes me feel like I'm away from home has always been a plus to me.  Anything that reminds me of my home area feels daunting and burdensome.

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 17, 2021, 01:15:25 PM

Quote from: US 89 on June 17, 2021, 02:42:35 AM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 16, 2021, 01:46:55 PM
Horizontal signal heads.

Why should this count against Texas? I happen to like the look of horizontal signal heads quite a bit. TX is far from the only state with them, too - they make up 99.5% of traffic lights in NM and are quite common in other states such as NE, WI, FL...

I mentioned Clearview and the plain square route marker too, both of which a lot of people like. It's just one of those you-like-it-or-you-don't things. Coming from a majority-vertical state, horizontal signals feel bad and wrong to me, and I'm always relieved to leave one of those regions and return to normalcy.

Of course, spend enough time in Lawton or downtown OKC and your outlook just might change...

I've mentioned my distaste for the Project 360 horizontal signals in downtown OKC, which I consider to be a bad idea because the rest of the city uses vertical, even near overpasses, as do most of the suburbs (Mustang is the sole horizontal light jurisdiction, and their conversion was recent). A driver crossing a jurisdictional boundary, especially a state line, might well be expecting a change in the way traffic control devices are installed, but a driver moving from one district to another in the same city probably won't be. I also take issue with the way that the Project 360 signals were designed–the horizontal mounting was decided on by a streetscape designer, not anyone from the city traffic department.

As for Lawton–well, no offense to Bobby5280, but I'd rather not spend enough time in Lawton to become used to it. :-D

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 19, 2021, 01:26:08 PM
I've mentioned my distaste for the Project 360 horizontal signals in downtown OKC, which I consider to be a bad idea because the rest of the city uses vertical, even near overpasses, as do most of the suburbs (Mustang is the sole horizontal light jurisdiction, and their conversion was recent). A driver crossing a jurisdictional boundary, especially a state line, might well be expecting a change in the way traffic control devices are installed, but a driver moving from one district to another in the same city probably won't be. I also take issue with the way that the Project 360 signals were designed—the horizontal mounting was decided on by a streetscape designer, not anyone from the city traffic department.

As for Lawton—well, no offense to Bobby5280, but I'd rather not spend enough time in Lawton to become used to it. :-D

Do you have a picture or a link to a picture of any other those Project 360 lights? The way you're describing them reminds me of those weird shiny, oval lights in Houston which I think look terrible.

Kind of curious, how would horizontal traffic signals be angled on a mast arm, for like left turns on a SPUI offramp? Would it be dangled a bit below the mast arm?

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 19, 2021, 07:24:54 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 19, 2021, 01:26:08 PM
I've mentioned my distaste for the Project 360 horizontal signals in downtown OKC, which I consider to be a bad idea because the rest of the city uses vertical, even near overpasses, as do most of the suburbs (Mustang is the sole horizontal light jurisdiction, and their conversion was recent). A driver crossing a jurisdictional boundary, especially a state line, might well be expecting a change in the way traffic control devices are installed, but a driver moving from one district to another in the same city probably won't be. I also take issue with the way that the Project 360 signals were designed–the horizontal mounting was decided on by a streetscape designer, not anyone from the city traffic department.

As for Lawton–well, no offense to Bobby5280, but I'd rather not spend enough time in Lawton to become used to it. :-D

Do you have a picture or a link to a picture of any other those Project 360 lights? The way you're describing them reminds me of those weird shiny, oval lights in Houston which I think look terrible.

But of course (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4688193,-97.5164536,3a,29.1y,115.48h,94.98t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ss7bfAdMtDqe5XrteFFI7Ww!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Ds7bfAdMtDqe5XrteFFI7Ww%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D33.001743%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192). They look better than the Houston ones, but these usually come with a nice side of 3/4-errored negative-contrast Clearview for good measure, so it's kind of a wash.

It is described in the design document as a "contemporary | minimalist | elegant | stainless steel | rectangular pole" (punctuation as in original).

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 19, 2021, 07:50:06 PM

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 19, 2021, 07:24:54 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 19, 2021, 01:26:08 PM
I've mentioned my distaste for the Project 360 horizontal signals in downtown OKC, which I consider to be a bad idea because the rest of the city uses vertical, even near overpasses, as do most of the suburbs (Mustang is the sole horizontal light jurisdiction, and their conversion was recent). A driver crossing a jurisdictional boundary, especially a state line, might well be expecting a change in the way traffic control devices are installed, but a driver moving from one district to another in the same city probably won't be. I also take issue with the way that the Project 360 signals were designed–the horizontal mounting was decided on by a streetscape designer, not anyone from the city traffic department.

As for Lawton–well, no offense to Bobby5280, but I'd rather not spend enough time in Lawton to become used to it. :-D

Do you have a picture or a link to a picture of any other those Project 360 lights? The way you're describing them reminds me of those weird shiny, oval lights in Houston which I think look terrible.

But of course (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4688193,-97.5164536,3a,29.1y,115.48h,94.98t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1ss7bfAdMtDqe5XrteFFI7Ww!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Ds7bfAdMtDqe5XrteFFI7Ww%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D33.001743%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192). They look better than the Houston ones, but these usually come with a nice side of 3/4-errored negative-contrast Clearview for good measure, so it's kind of a wash.

It is described in the design document as a "contemporary | minimalist | elegant | stainless steel | rectangular pole" (punctuation as in original).

Thanks. Those are definitely better than the Houston ones, but still think they look bad overall. And yeah, the street name signs look awful. But they fit well in Oklahoma.  :spin:

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 19, 2021, 07:50:06 PM
It is described in the design document as a "contemporary | minimalist | elegant | stainless steel | rectangular pole" (punctuation as in original).

Since vertical bar means "or" (at least in several programming languages, regular expressions, and Google Search), their statement will be true even if it's only one of the five.

Quote from: 1 on June 19, 2021, 08:31:47 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 19, 2021, 07:50:06 PM
It is described in the design document as a "contemporary | minimalist | elegant | stainless steel | rectangular pole" (punctuation as in original).

Since vertical bar means "or" (at least in several programming languages, regular expressions, and Google Search), their statement will be true even if it's only one of the five.

It certainly is stainless steel, so I guess that makes the statement evaluate true.

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 19, 2021, 01:26:08 PM
I've mentioned my distaste for the Project 360 horizontal signals in downtown OKC, which I consider to be a bad idea because the rest of the city uses vertical, even near overpasses, as do most of the suburbs (Mustang is the sole horizontal light jurisdiction, and their conversion was recent). A driver crossing a jurisdictional boundary, especially a state line, might well be expecting a change in the way traffic control devices are installed, but a driver moving from one district to another in the same city probably won't be.

So they might be surprised by the alignment of the stoplights.  Big whoop.

Quote from: kphoger on July 08, 2021, 04:49:23 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 19, 2021, 01:26:08 PM
I've mentioned my distaste for the Project 360 horizontal signals in downtown OKC, which I consider to be a bad idea because the rest of the city uses vertical, even near overpasses, as do most of the suburbs (Mustang is the sole horizontal light jurisdiction, and their conversion was recent). A driver crossing a jurisdictional boundary, especially a state line, might well be expecting a change in the way traffic control devices are installed, but a driver moving from one district to another in the same city probably won't be.

So they might be surprised by the alignment of the stoplights.  Big whoop.

It is quite a large whoop if you are colorblind–the whoop may be an ambulance siren.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 08, 2021, 11:15:54 PM

Quote from: kphoger on July 08, 2021, 04:49:23 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 19, 2021, 01:26:08 PM
I've mentioned my distaste for the Project 360 horizontal signals in downtown OKC, which I consider to be a bad idea because the rest of the city uses vertical, even near overpasses, as do most of the suburbs (Mustang is the sole horizontal light jurisdiction, and their conversion was recent). A driver crossing a jurisdictional boundary, especially a state line, might well be expecting a change in the way traffic control devices are installed, but a driver moving from one district to another in the same city probably won't be.

So they might be surprised by the alignment of the stoplights.  Big whoop.

It is quite a large whoop if you are colorblind–the whoop may be an ambulance siren.

Pfft.  The vast majority of colorblind people can tell the difference between red and green lights on a traffic signal, no matter the alignment.  Some states even test you for colorblindness as a license requirement nowadays.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 08, 2021, 11:15:54 PM

Quote from: kphoger on July 08, 2021, 04:49:23 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 19, 2021, 01:26:08 PM
I've mentioned my distaste for the Project 360 horizontal signals in downtown OKC, which I consider to be a bad idea because the rest of the city uses vertical, even near overpasses, as do most of the suburbs (Mustang is the sole horizontal light jurisdiction, and their conversion was recent). A driver crossing a jurisdictional boundary, especially a state line, might well be expecting a change in the way traffic control devices are installed, but a driver moving from one district to another in the same city probably won't be.

So they might be surprised by the alignment of the stoplights.  Big whoop.

It is quite a large whoop if you are colorblind–the whoop may be an ambulance siren.

I'm still convinced the main group of people concerned about colorblind issues are those that aren't colorblind. As if you're trying to find any excuse for something you don't like.

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 16, 2021, 02:27:36 PM
MN probably belongs in the OK, but here's the rundown:

I was surprised to see Minnesota rank as low as it did.
Signage seems better than any surrounding state (perhaps roughly equivalent to WI). No Clearview at all, and signs seems to be replaced earlier than in, say, IA/NE which keep far more signs of questionable quality (faded/hard to read/peeling/damaged/very old) - MNDot signage is clean and consistent from area to area and time to time, keeping a consistent look regarding fonts/size/design/etc (e.g. no old all-caps distance signs as seen in Nebraska, which there may be followed by a newer mixed case sign, and so on, all mixed up - MN's are consistent). It's rarer and more difficult to see an old/damaged/hard to read sign than in most other states I've driven in, certainly rarer than in IA/NE/IL, etc, as are sign goofs/mixups - far more common in most other places I've driven, thanks to that consistency.

Span wire traffic lights are virtually nonexistent, FYA are becoming very common, roundabouts are implemented pretty well, and MN has touches such as the signs on traffic light arms denoting the routes, plenty of bypass lanes for slow left turn situations (all signed, as are right/left turn lanes) and consistent Interstate distance signs with three towns (next exit, next mid-sized town, typically, control city/destination), true mile markers on every numbered highway (unlike WI or MO), plenty of speed limit/route reassurance signage, and city limit signs giving population for all incorporated towns (not seen in more states, surprisingly to me). Ditto for the No Passing Zone pennant that I didn't realize wasn't more common elsewhere (used without fail in MN, and in a large size to boot).

Many intersections on state and US highways are lit. Pavement quality, anecdotally, strikes me as better than most other midwest states, easily - lots of smooth concrete and newly resurfaced roads - this has really gotten better in recent years, and most of the roads I drive are in good to excellent shape (barring a soon-to-be-replaced stretch of US 14, the only one that's not "good"). A good chunk of two-lanes are posted at a more-reasonable 60mph, something not seen in neighbors WI/IA, and centerline and edge rumble strips are very common.

Control cities outside of MSP are okay (Albert Lea makes sense as it's an important junction, even if Moorhead should probably be changed to Fargo). Lack of control cities in MSP isn't ideal, but many places choose very poor control cities within urban areas so this is challenging to some extent. I'm not a fan of the ghosting of US highways, though.

As far as other states I've spent a lot of time driving in, Missouri's ranking seems good (pretty darn good signage, particularly considering the size of their system, and generally good pavement - I'd say it's one of the better states for sure). Iowa's signage is a bit haphazard for such a high ranking, and it (and Nebraska) have some truly dreadful pavement. There's a lot of faded signs and plenty of mixed Clearview/Highway Gothic signs in Iowa due to patching, plus plenty of bad greenout jobs. Nebraska signage, when new and of freeway grade, is excellent, but non-Interstate routes are full of rough signage (such as a LGS on US 75 "greened out" with what looks to be green duct tape, that sort of thing), or all of the battered signs on I-129. I do like the diagrammatic junction signs, though. Wisconsin and South Dakota are generally good in the signage department, though WI has some rough pavement and could stand to raise two-lane speed limits. Kansas is good, but a long drive on its two lanes (US 75, US 59, and others) left me less than impressed in terms of signage and pavement quality, considering its sterling reputation.

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 08, 2021, 11:15:54 PM

Quote from: kphoger on July 08, 2021, 04:49:23 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 19, 2021, 01:26:08 PM
I've mentioned my distaste for the Project 360 horizontal signals in downtown OKC, which I consider to be a bad idea because the rest of the city uses vertical, even near overpasses, as do most of the suburbs (Mustang is the sole horizontal light jurisdiction, and their conversion was recent). A driver crossing a jurisdictional boundary, especially a state line, might well be expecting a change in the way traffic control devices are installed, but a driver moving from one district to another in the same city probably won't be.

So they might be surprised by the alignment of the stoplights.  Big whoop.

It is quite a large whoop if you are colorblind–the whoop may be an ambulance siren.

Still no different than the change happening at a city limit or state border.

Besides which, horizontal signals also have specific locations in the signal head for precisely that reason, and I have to imagine affected red/green colorblind drivers pay attention to that kind of thing.

Quote from: Rothman on July 08, 2021, 11:23:57 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 08, 2021, 11:15:54 PM

Quote from: kphoger on July 08, 2021, 04:49:23 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 19, 2021, 01:26:08 PM
I've mentioned my distaste for the Project 360 horizontal signals in downtown OKC, which I consider to be a bad idea because the rest of the city uses vertical, even near overpasses, as do most of the suburbs (Mustang is the sole horizontal light jurisdiction, and their conversion was recent). A driver crossing a jurisdictional boundary, especially a state line, might well be expecting a change in the way traffic control devices are installed, but a driver moving from one district to another in the same city probably won't be.

So they might be surprised by the alignment of the stoplights.  Big whoop.

It is quite a large whoop if you are colorblind–the whoop may be an ambulance siren.

Pfft.  The vast majority of colorblind people can tell the difference between red and green lights on a traffic signal, no matter the alignment.  Some states even test you for colorblindness as a license requirement nowadays.

I'm curious how colorblind drivers deal with this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0467005,-76.1852526,3a,75y,235.68h,88.5t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1swvpNSMCQMi6v_VPac9uKDA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DwvpNSMCQMi6v_VPac9uKDA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D62.53826%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192).

With horizontal traffic lights, kind of curious, do drivers generally know that the order of the light is reversed in left side driving countries, like in Japan and Singapore, the green light is on the left and red on the right? If not, this may be an issue for colorblind drivers.

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 09, 2021, 01:13:26 PM
With horizontal traffic lights, kind of curious, do drivers generally know that the order of the light is reversed in left side driving countries, like in Japan and Singapore, the green light is on the left and red on the right? If not, this may be an issue for colorblind drivers.

If I were red/green colorblind enough to not tell stoplights apart, and I were planning to drive in a RHD country, then you can bet your sweet bippy I'd be looking into that kind of thing ahead of time.

But also, wouldn't they figure it out after, say, their first one or two intersections?

Quote from: vdeane on July 09, 2021, 12:50:11 PM

Quote from: Rothman on July 08, 2021, 11:23:57 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on July 08, 2021, 11:15:54 PM

Quote from: kphoger on July 08, 2021, 04:49:23 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 19, 2021, 01:26:08 PM
I've mentioned my distaste for the Project 360 horizontal signals in downtown OKC, which I consider to be a bad idea because the rest of the city uses vertical, even near overpasses, as do most of the suburbs (Mustang is the sole horizontal light jurisdiction, and their conversion was recent). A driver crossing a jurisdictional boundary, especially a state line, might well be expecting a change in the way traffic control devices are installed, but a driver moving from one district to another in the same city probably won't be.

So they might be surprised by the alignment of the stoplights.  Big whoop.

It is quite a large whoop if you are colorblind–the whoop may be an ambulance siren.

Pfft.  The vast majority of colorblind people can tell the difference between red and green lights on a traffic signal, no matter the alignment.  Some states even test you for colorblindness as a license requirement nowadays.

I'm curious how colorblind drivers deal with this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0467005,-76.1852526,3a,75y,235.68h,88.5t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1swvpNSMCQMi6v_VPac9uKDA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DwvpNSMCQMi6v_VPac9uKDA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D62.53826%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192).

I am colorblind and I have no issue with it.

I am more afraid of drivers that think top means stop and bottom means go rather than red and green on that one.

Quote from: kphoger on July 09, 2021, 01:39:45 PM

Quote from: SkyPesos on July 09, 2021, 01:13:26 PM
With horizontal traffic lights, kind of curious, do drivers generally know that the order of the light is reversed in left side driving countries, like in Japan and Singapore, the green light is on the left and red on the right? If not, this may be an issue for colorblind drivers.

If I were red/green colorblind enough to not tell stoplights apart, and I were planning to drive in a RHD country, then you can bet your sweet bippy I'd be looking into that kind of thing ahead of time.

But also, wouldn't they figure it out after, say, their first one or two intersections?

^This.

I'm with whoever said the non-colorblind have no clue about the colorblind.  The misperceptions -- and sometimes bad policies as a result -- abound.

Quote from: tman on July 09, 2021, 12:11:03 AM
Lack of control cities in MSP isn't ideal, but many places choose very poor control cities within urban areas so this is challenging to some extent.

One question I suppose is what's worth signing at some of the urban interchanges. The two core cities are both generally signed very well at interchanges where roads lead to those, but the makeup of the freeway system generally means you need to transfer freeways at least once to get to any given suburban point. For example, the major traffic shift point of MN 62/100 in Edina. To get to Eden Prairie, you'll have to take 62 to 212. Minnetonka, 62 to 494 to 7. To get to Bloomington, you'll probably have to get on 494 from 100 in order to get where you want to go in Bloomington, but you're in Bloomington as it is so it's pointless to put it on the signs at 494/100. As for cities on those routes, are Richfield, St. Louis Park, Golden Valley, Robbinsdale worth putting on signs? I don't really thunk so.

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 12, 2021, 07:46:58 PM

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 12, 2021, 06:22:17 PM

Quote from: MillTheRoadgeek on June 11, 2021, 01:18:59 PM
Where does DDOT (District of Columbia) go on this?

Absolutely awful, borderline Tier 6 for me. They've never heard of FHWA standard fonts, which to me is just such a fail all on its own. Literally everything is Arial. And sometimes, stretched and compressed Arial.

Helvetica, actually. Although it looks like some newer signage uses FHWA fonts.

I have seen some mediocre signs, especially their rather strange Highway Gothic compositions. I do quite wonder as to why it doesn't slot in here. Perhaps any other U.S. territories as well, or is that getting specific to county/city levels?

Quote from: MillTheRoadgeek on July 09, 2021, 09:15:37 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 12, 2021, 07:46:58 PM

Quote from: JoePCool14 on June 12, 2021, 06:22:17 PM

Quote from: MillTheRoadgeek on June 11, 2021, 01:18:59 PM
Where does DDOT (District of Columbia) go on this?

Absolutely awful, borderline Tier 6 for me. They've never heard of FHWA standard fonts, which to me is just such a fail all on its own. Literally everything is Arial. And sometimes, stretched and compressed Arial.

Helvetica, actually. Although it looks like some newer signage uses FHWA fonts.

I have seen some mediocre signs, especially their rather strange Highway Gothic compositions. I do quite wonder as to why it doesn't slot in here. Perhaps any other U.S. territories as well, or is that getting specific to county/city levels?

You can address major city/county DOTs if you want. Stuff like Chicago DOT that's well known enough.

For the record, where does CDOT belong? Definitely not on top but they're not the worst...

Quote from: JoePCool14 on July 10, 2021, 03:45:02 PM
For the record, where does CDOT belong? Definitely not on top but they're not the worst...

Good: pavement quality

Bad: machete treatment of US routes, poorly signed speed limit reductions

Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on July 10, 2021, 04:04:26 PM

Quote from: JoePCool14 on July 10, 2021, 03:45:02 PM
For the record, where does CDOT belong? Definitely not on top but they're not the worst...

Good: pavement quality

Bad: machete treatment of US routes, poorly signed speed limit reductions

Another bad is that they consider 5-light towers acceptable for protected only lefts. See Michigan Avenue for examples.