Roadgeek Hot Takes

[PColumbus73]

I like tolls

Tolls are fine. I don't like bill-by-mail/bill-by-plate.

[PColumbus73]

- Not everything needs to be an Interstate, some proposed Interstates might be better left as existing state and US routes, 'bringing jobs to (insert place here)' isn't enough to justify an Interstate (ahem... North Carolina)

Same here. It has become a pet peeve of mine when some state proposes an interstate number that's just an overlay of an existing, and perfectly serviceable us highway/state route

Reminds me of the I-685 and 777 proposals in NC. I-685 is possibly less egregious between Greensboro and I-95, but US 421 is adequate as-is. East of I-95, they propose it paralleling I-40 within 10-20 miles to Wilmington?

777 is just a big fat pork project. All the substantial movements are already handled by I-40 and 74.

[TheStranger]

For all the talk on this forum about whether California's internal exit number tabs are legible or not...I think the bigger thing here is getting people to actually use the exit numbers in regular conversation.  Pre-2001 I get the sense most folks here were used to just saying they were going to (exit name) and I don't think that has completely changed a quarter-century later.

[ElishaGOtis]

I like tolls

Tolls are fine. I don't like bill-by-mail/bill-by-plate.

I like AET and toll by plate   

[Max Rockatansky]

For all the talk on this forum about whether California's internal exit number tabs are legible or not...I think the bigger thing here is getting people to actually use the exit numbers in regular conversation.  Pre-2001 I get the sense most folks here were used to just saying they were going to (exit name) and I don't think that has completely changed a quarter-century later.

Off forum I once considered banning external tab complaints in groups I managed.  Of all the things to talk about that are road related in California that is among the more plebeian. 

[Molandfreak]

There is nothing at all "confusing" about concurrencies. If two roads have a clearly defined purpose and both of those routes/purposes happen to share the same pavement for a stretch, nobody is losing their minds over two shields on the same assembly.

[1995hoo]

There is nothing at all "confusing" about concurrencies. If two roads have a clearly defined purpose and both of those routes/purposes happen to share the same pavement for a stretch, nobody is losing their minds over two shields on the same assembly.

Your comment prompts me to think of something. I was reading something about British history that referred to certain monarchs with two ordinal references to reflect the differing number of monarchs with certain names in England and Scotland. For example, King James I (the first of that name in England) was referred to as "James VI and I" because he was also the sixth of that name in Scotland. In a similar vein, when the late Queen took the throne, some Scots brought a lawsuit saying she couldn't be Queen Elizabeth II because there had never been a Queen Elizabeth I in Scotland (they lost both because they didn't have standing and because numbering is part of the royal prerogative).

So anyway, it gave me the somewhat amusing mental image of a concurrency that uses both sets of exit numbers. For example, the exit nearest to where I live is signed Exit 173 using I-95's exit numbers. The road signs also have I-495 shields. So in this scenario, the exit would be signed "Exit 173 and 60." (The potential advantage is that it would be less confusing to someone coming down I-495 because right now Exit 57 is followed three miles later by Exit 173. The potential disadvantages seem to outweigh that, though.)

[Scott5114]

Projects such as the I-40 relocation in OKC, the I-44 rebuild in Tulsa, and the US 69/75 upgrades in Durant show that Oklahoma can build quality roads without needing tolls

Oklahoma can build quality roads without needing tolls, but it needs a decade and change to do so because of the state's slow-drip pay-as-you-go funding mechanisms.

[Scott5114]

Here's my Clearview hot take—I think the agencies still using it are doing so not because they think it's actually better, but because they want to signal that FHWA can't tell them what to do.

It's either that or they're corrupt.

Clearview is fine.  It's just as good as the regular typeface, even if it requires larger sign panels to achieve the same legibility.

Larger sign panels = more expensive signs. That's not "just as good", especially if you're a government agency with only so much money you're allowed to spend.

[vdeane]

There is nothing at all "confusing" about concurrencies. If two roads have a clearly defined purpose and both of those routes/purposes happen to share the same pavement for a stretch, nobody is losing their minds over two shields on the same assembly.

They make sense in moderation, but there are some states that have them all over the place to connect otherwise unrelated corridors and reduce the number of numbers they use (such as Maine).  And then there are the ones that overlay separate state route numbers onto US routes and/or interstates.  Sometimes they're hidden, sometimes they're not (such a Georgia).

[Big John]

There is nothing at all "confusing" about concurrencies. If two roads have a clearly defined purpose and both of those routes/purposes happen to share the same pavement for a stretch, nobody is losing their minds over two shields on the same assembly.

They make sense in moderation, but there are some states that have them all over the place to connect otherwise unrelated corridors and reduce the number of numbers they use (such as Maine).  And then there are the ones that overlay separate state route numbers onto US routes and/or interstates.  Sometimes they're hidden, sometimes they're not (such a Georgia).

Like this?: https://maps.app.goo.gl/rW25ST81rR9ChYBa9

[pderocco]

For all the talk on this forum about whether California's internal exit number tabs are legible or not...I think the bigger thing here is getting people to actually use the exit numbers in regular conversation.  Pre-2001 I get the sense most folks here were used to just saying they were going to (exit name) and I don't think that has completely changed a quarter-century later.

I pretty much never refer to interchanges by their exit numbers. The only thing I use exit numbers for is computing the distance between two interchanges on a long trip, which is why I dislike sequential numbering.

[1995hoo]

I pretty much never refer to interchanges by their exit numbers. The only thing I use exit numbers for is computing the distance between two interchanges on a long trip, which is why I dislike sequential numbering.

I use the exit number when I give directions, but I also try to mention what the sign says because it gives an extra point of reference.

I'm also used to having to explain the exit number for our neighborhood because, as noted in my other comment further up the thread, depending on which way you're coming from the exit before ours is Exit 57 and then ours is Exit 173 but is only three miles east of Exit 57. Confused the heck out of my brother-in-law when he visited and his wife failed to tell him my explanation prior to his encountering it because when she said "Exit 173" he thought they were about to have another two hours to go.

[SEWIGuy]

I-99 is fine

[Max Rockatansky]

I-99 is fine

As is I-238.

[LilianaUwU]

The unusual aspects of I-99 and I-238 are fun, actually.

[TheCatalyst31]

Some things I agree with the New Urbanists on that aren't necessarily popular here:
-America, and its major cities in particular, spends too much of its transportation funding on roads as opposed to public transit
-Building one more lane usually won't fix traffic, even if there are places where it makes sense
-NYC's congestion pricing system is good

[SEWIGuy]

The unusual aspects of I-99 and I-238 are fun, actually.

Exactly!

[LilianaUwU]

Another thing: I-99 and I-238 are the Fire Emblem: Three Houses of the roadgeek community. No matter how much time passes, there will always be discourse about I-99 and I-238.

[xonhulu]

I-99 is fine

As is I-238.

Change I-99 into I-79.5 to fit the grid, and turn I-238 into I-1580 since it's a spur off I-580. See if that makes everyone happier.

The unusual aspects of I-99 and I-238 are fun, actually.

Yup.

[74/171FAN]

I think I-238 should be I-1080.  If we can fit I-H201, why not I-1080?

[PColumbus73]

I-99 is fine

As is I-238.

As is Breezewood

[Bruce]

Road histories often focus too much on minute details and don't zoom out to provide context, especially when researching the history of mid-century freeways that displaced lower-class neighborhoods of color.

[SEWIGuy]

I think I-238 should be I-1080.  If we can fit I-H201, why not I-1080?

Because I-238 works just as well.

[Big John]

I-30 and I-45 are too short to be considered major interstate highways.