What state has the most efficient highway and road network

[Buffaboy]

I'm wondering what state connects each municipality the best at appropriate speeds without congestion.

[SteveG1988]

North dakota.

[Ned Weasel]

There are so many ways to define the relevant concepts that you could end up with 50 different answers.

[kkt]

Alaska

[froggie]

There are so many ways to define the relevant concepts that you could end up with 50 different answers.

This.

[Tarkus]

There are so many ways to define the relevant concepts that you could end up with 50 different answers.

This.

And not a single one of them would be Oregon.

[jakeroot]

I move to rename the thread "What city has..." Current question is far too vague to debate with civility.

Though, right off the bat, I've always been impressed by Texas. Though, I didn't enjoy the traffic last I was there (mainly Houston).

[jeffandnicole]

I'm wondering what state connects each municipality the best at appropriate speeds without congestion.

Being that states such as New Jersey are 100% incorporated, almost every town has multiple access points to the town next to it!  Only downside would be potential congestion.

Now, I know what you're really asking - in states where there's lots of open space between towns, which one is the best.   Tough one, because if the space is open and unincorporated, chances are the speeds will be high with very little traffic.  The congestion point would be where the road has entered the town and encounters a traffic light or travel lane reduction.

[TXtoNJ]

I move to rename the thread "What city has..." Current question is far too vague to debate with civility.

Though, right off the bat, I've always been impressed by Texas. Though, I didn't enjoy the traffic last I was there (mainly Houston).

A lack of an all-freeway connection between Houston and Austin pretty much disqualifies Texas, though.

Colorado's connections between major population centers are impressive, but much of that is because of favorable geography. The impact of I-70 west can't be overstated.

[peterj920]

Wisconsin's freeway/expressway network connects to every city over 15,000.  The expressways are built with bypasses around communities without any stops. 

[jakeroot]

I move to rename the thread "What city has..." Current question is far too vague to debate with civility.

Though, right off the bat, I've always been impressed by Texas. Though, I didn't enjoy the traffic last I was there (mainly Houston).

A lack of an all-freeway connection between Houston and Austin pretty much disqualifies Texas, though.

Can't you take the 10, to the 130, to the 45, to the 35? Sure, lots of turns, but it's all freeway (unless you're being pedantic and refuse to count the 130 as a freeway -- though, as far as I'm concerned, its 85 mph limit makes it the best freeway in the country).

Though, credit where credits due: the lack of a direct, single-route connection does knock it down a few points.   

[cl94]

There are so many ways to define the relevant concepts that you could end up with 50 different answers.

This.

Ja. This is like starting a discussion about politics. There is no right answer and the discussion will go nowhere. Do you mean density, travel speed, congestion, ... ? So many metrics that could be used and many of said metrics, if used together, cancel each other out.

[TXtoNJ]

I move to rename the thread "What city has..." Current question is far too vague to debate with civility.

Though, right off the bat, I've always been impressed by Texas. Though, I didn't enjoy the traffic last I was there (mainly Houston).

A lack of an all-freeway connection between Houston and Austin pretty much disqualifies Texas, though.

Can't you take the 10, to the 130, to the 45, to the 35? Sure, lots of turns, but it's all freeway (unless you're being pedantic and refuse to count the 130 as a freeway -- though, as far as I'm concerned, its 85 mph limit makes it the best freeway in the country).

Though, credit where credits due: the lack of a direct, single-route connection does knock it down a few points.   

Even before 130, you could take 10 to 35, or 45 to 20 to 35E to 35, but both of those routes take you just a bit out of the way. So does 130, about an hour or so.

[Buffaboy]

There are so many ways to define the relevant concepts that you could end up with 50 different answers.

This.

Ja. This is like starting a discussion about politics. There is no right answer and the discussion will go nowhere. Do you mean density, travel speed, congestion, ... ? So many metrics that could be used and many of said metrics, if used together, cancel each other out.

Well I didn't try to make it intentionally unclear, but I think I'm coming from a density perspective. The Wisconsin example seems to fit what I had in mind.

As you said, congestion with density doesn't necessarily make a state's highway system the best, just look at New Jersey.

[mariethefoxy]

when it moves, Massachusett's system works well, average speeds are pretty quick on 84, 90 and 495 (the interstate highways in MA i have the most experience with) when it doesnt move, its vehicular hell comparable to the Cross Bronx traffic.

[Rothman]

when it moves, Massachusett's system works well, average speeds are pretty quick on 84, 90 and 495 (the interstate highways in MA i have the most experience with) when it doesnt move, its vehicular hell comparable to the Cross Bronx traffic.

That was an impressive 180.   

[Thunderbyrd316]

And not a single one of them would be Oregon.
[/quote]

   Got that right!

[CapeCodder]

when it moves, Massachusett's system works well, average speeds are pretty quick on 84, 90 and 495 (the interstate highways in MA i have the most experience with) when it doesnt move, its vehicular hell comparable to the Cross Bronx traffic.

Agreed. Cross Bronx traffic is the worst. I saw it first hand while on the Greyhound from Boston to St. Louis. Absolutely standstill. Nobody moved.

[jakeroot]

If not Texas, perhaps Florida? Lots of tolls, sure, but they provide for a steady flow of income into the state's transportation coffers, and as a result, the roads are in great shape. Every time I turn around, it seems like they're building a new road, refurbishing another one, etc. Bridges are in good shape too, and I can't think of any missing connections between Florida's major cities (only awkward movement seems to be between I-95 and I-4, Jacksonville/Orlando, but even that's being awfully persnickety).

[Kacie Jane]

(only awkward movement seems to be between I-95 and I-4, Jacksonville/Orlando, but even that's being awfully persnickety).

Jacksonville/Orlando is being extremely persnickety.  I think you meant Tampa, and even then, Florida is so narrow and the angles are so shallow, you're barely going out of your way to head slightly southeast to Daytona before you cross back west.  The biggest problem there though is how crowded (and slightly old/substandard) I-4 gets through downtown Orlando.

[SD Mapman]

If you're looking at no congestion, South Dakota, North Dakota, or Wyoming would work really well. There is no congestion here!

To take it a step further, SD and ND do a really good job of connecting the 10,000+ population centers with four-lane expressways/Interstates, if that floats your boat.

[jakeroot]

(only awkward movement seems to be between I-95 and I-4, Jacksonville/Orlando, but even that's being awfully persnickety).

Jacksonville/Orlando is being extremely persnickety.  I think you meant Tampa, and even then, Florida is so narrow and the angles are so shallow, you're barely going out of your way to head slightly southeast to Daytona before you cross back west.  The biggest problem there though is how crowded (and slightly old/substandard) I-4 gets through downtown Orlando.

Yes, I suppose that is what I meant (though Tampa, by way of Orlando). Freeways within downtown cores seem to be the worst of Florida's roads, though I'll take I-4 through downtown Orlando any day over I-5 through Seattle.

[mariethefoxy]

when it moves, Massachusett's system works well, average speeds are pretty quick on 84, 90 and 495 (the interstate highways in MA i have the most experience with) when it doesnt move, its vehicular hell comparable to the Cross Bronx traffic.

That was an impressive 180.   

am I right? it can be a quick drive or a frustrating hell ride depending on the traffic.

[jwolfer]

(only awkward movement seems to be between I-95 and I-4, Jacksonville/Orlando, but even that's being awfully persnickety).

Jacksonville/Orlando is being extremely persnickety.  I think you meant Tampa, and even then, Florida is so narrow and the angles are so shallow, you're barely going out of your way to head slightly southeast to Daytona before you cross back west.  The biggest problem there though is how crowded (and slightly old/substandard) I-4 gets through downtown Orlando.

Jacksonville to Tampa via Orlando is a pain in the ass.. Most people use i10/us 301 to i75. US 301 is all divided highways most of it 65mph but there are the infamous speed traps of Lawtey and Waldo. Waldo PD has been disbanded yay!

Full freeway Starke bypass is in the works. I could see 301 being full freeway someday. A better connection to i75 is needed, right now its via SR 326 north of Ocala.

Even with issues and more miles, using 301 or just going to i75 is quicker/easier than going thru Orlando

[Revive 755]

Wisconsin's freeway/expressway network connects to every city over 15,000.  The expressways are built with bypasses around communities without any stops.

Wisconsin might be the closest to perfect, but still has a few flaws:

* No good east-west access from Kenosha or Racine over to I-39.  WI 50 is sprouting stoplights and needed a bypass around Paddock Lake.

* The US 12 corridor between the Illinois border and Madison

* The need for a farther out bypass of Milwaukee for those from Chicagoland who want to access the 41 corridor.