Roadgeek Hot Takes

[CoreySamson]

Thought we would have had this thread by now, but nothing turned up on the Google search method that kphoger swears by.

Anyways, what are some of your roadgeek hot takes? I'm not necessarily looking for opinions regarding popular fictional highway extensions/ideas (I-45 to Oklahoma, etc.), but instead more stuff that's a bit more niche/controversial.


Here are some of my biggest takes:

- O(k)DOT is a much better DOT than many give it credit for. It's not perfect (definitely still bottom-half of all the states), but I don't think it deserves all the hate that it gets. 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. Speaking of tolls, if ODOT was run the same way as OTA is run I think it would be in the top 10 DOTs.

- I-69W in Texas should be completely ditched and replaced with an I-6 running from Laredo to Corpus Christi.

- I don't necessarily think that Memphis needs another Mississippi River bridge. Replacements of the existing bridges, sure, but it is extremely difficult to find a place where another bridge could feasibly work.

- Speaking of Mississippi River bridges, the John James Audubon bridge was colossal waste of money.

- Houston should build another freeway loop around the Grand Parkway.

[Henry]

Chicago wasted a golden opportunity by not building I-494. That would've been very helpful to traffic bypassing downtown to the west.

The WA 167 direct connection to I-5 is long overdue; it should've been built years ago.

As I-710 will not get built in Pasadena, the stub end should be converted into a surface boulevard.

[Max Rockatansky]

The hobby in general has way too much of an emphasis on numbered highways. 

[formulanone]

It's 2025; if you're still using puke emojis to describe Clearview, maybe growing up is something you've given up.

[LilianaUwU]

It's 2025; if you're still using puke emojis to describe Clearview, maybe growing up is something you've given up.

Coldest take of all time. Clearview isn't that bad. Then again, I come from a province where the conversion was one-to-one.

[kphoger]

nothing turned up on the Google search method that kphoger swears by.

Google search = unpopular opinions site:www.aaroads.com

↓ 6th search result ↓

Thread = Unpopular Anything Road-Related Opinions

[I-35]

It's 2025; if you're still using puke emojis to describe Clearview, maybe growing up is something you've given up.

Clearview sucks, no emojis needed.  The research data that brought it about was flawed and appears to have been a make work program for a specific typeface designer.

[kphoger]

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

[vdeane]

It's 2025; if you're still using puke emojis to describe Clearview, maybe growing up is something you've given up.

Coldest take of all time. Clearview isn't that bad. Then again, I come from a province where the conversion was one-to-one.

Québec has one of the better Clearview implementations (it helps that they avoid using it for exit numbers and route shields), but I still prefer the older signs over it.

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

Honestly, the larger size is one of the things I don't like about it.  Then again, you're probably used to Mexico's (IMO very ugly) signs.

[1995hoo]

Clearview is ugly but is easier to read from a distance (something I notice more every year as I continue to age). Therefore, Clearview serves a useful purpose.

In my view, perhaps the most useful sign assembly for comparing the two is on southbound I-95 between Lorton and Woodbridge, Virginia, because both signs are for the same road and the same city. To be fair, the Gothic sign on the right is older and would not be formatted the same way today, but to me the main aspect for comparison purposes is the word "Woodbridge." I find it far easier to read from a distance in Clearview on the sign over the express lanes.

[PColumbus73]

- Double-reds should be more common for protected left turns (see South Carolina, Georgia, Virginia)

- Incomplete interchanges are fine

- 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)

[jeffandnicole]

It's 2025; if you're still using puke emojis to describe Clearview, maybe growing up is something you've given up.

Clearview sucks, no emojis needed.  The research data that brought it about was flawed and appears to have been a make work program for a specific typeface designer.

My hot take on this:  You may be surprised to learn that there's a LOT of companies, individuals, or other entities that are sole sources for products used by the government.  You (or we) are fortunate that this is simply an optional font, not a mandatory font.  The average motorist doesn't notice any huge differences.  We have several threads of stuff much worse than Clearview.

[vdeane]

Clearview is ugly but is easier to read from a distance (something I notice more every year as I continue to age). Therefore, Clearview serves a useful purpose.

In my view, perhaps the most useful sign assembly for comparing the two is on southbound I-95 between Lorton and Woodbridge, Virginia, because both signs are for the same road and the same city. To be fair, the Gothic sign on the right is older and would not be formatted the same way today, but to me the main aspect for comparison purposes is the word "Woodbridge." I find it far easier to read from a distance in Clearview on the sign over the express lanes.

*takes a look at the next sign down*

If this is representative of modern installs, VDOT may be the new gold standard for decent Clearview.

[jeffandnicole]

- 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)

Shouting this out to everyone in the back who cries that I-76 should continue to Atlantic City.  And broadcasting it via bullhorn for those that claim it'll increase development and jobs along the Expressway in what's actually a federally protected national reserve where development is unwanted.

[PColumbus73]

Also: Roads can have a speed limit lower than 65 MPH.

[kphoger]

Then again, you're probably used to Mexico's (IMO very ugly) signs.

I have to drive through a whole lot of Texas before I get to Mexico.  And Texas has been doing an awesome job with Clearview for a long time now.

[wanderer2575]

Clearview is ugly but is easier to read from a distance (something I notice more every year as I continue to age). Therefore, Clearview serves a useful purpose.

In my view, perhaps the most useful sign assembly for comparing the two is on southbound I-95 between Lorton and Woodbridge, Virginia, because both signs are for the same road and the same city. To be fair, the Gothic sign on the right is older and would not be formatted the same way today, but to me the main aspect for comparison purposes is the word "Woodbridge." I find it far easier to read from a distance in Clearview on the sign over the express lanes.

I don't think the font is what makes the left sign easier to read.  It's that the font size is a little larger and there's more contrast between the text color and background color.

I don't hate Clearview.  I just don't buy the notion that, all else being equal, it's an easier read than Gothic.  And I don't like that Michigan spent zillions replacing freeway signs regardless of whether needed, just to get the font out there, while it largely ignores surface road BGSs that truly are in need of replacement.

[JayhawkCO]

- 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)

I used to agree, but I kind of think otherwise now. I think "interstate" should be pretty synonymous with limited-access highway. US routes could be divided highways. State highways being undivided. This is kind of how Puerto Rico does their roads. The same route number might change signage depending in its "quality" where highway 1 could have primary, urban primary, secondary, and tertiary segments of the same highway.

[1995hoo]

Clearview is ugly but is easier to read from a distance (something I notice more every year as I continue to age). Therefore, Clearview serves a useful purpose.

In my view, perhaps the most useful sign assembly for comparing the two is on southbound I-95 between Lorton and Woodbridge, Virginia, because both signs are for the same road and the same city. To be fair, the Gothic sign on the right is older and would not be formatted the same way today, but to me the main aspect for comparison purposes is the word "Woodbridge." I find it far easier to read from a distance in Clearview on the sign over the express lanes.

I don't think the font is what makes the left sign easier to read.  It's that the font size is a little larger and there's more contrast between the text color and background color.

....

Fair enough. I drive past that sign often enough to have a firm opinion that I find the typeface easier to read. Northern Virginia is a bit of a mish-mash of Clearview and Gothic signs because there are some newer Gothic signs posted after VDOT had switched to Clearview; that situation resulted from construction contracts that went out during the period when the FHWA revoked authorization for Clearview. So I drive past signs in both typefaces on a regular basis and I am firm in my opinion that my eyes find Clearview easier to read at a distance. Up close it's not as big a deal, of course.

[RobbieL2415]

ConnDOT is the absolute cheapest when it comes to signs.

[vdeane]

- 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)

Shouting this out to everyone in the back who cries that I-76 should continue to Atlantic City.  And broadcasting it via bullhorn for those that claim it'll increase development and jobs along the Expressway in what's actually a federally protected national reserve where development is unwanted.

I think that's mostly roadgeeks being frustrated with one freeway having several numbers and trying to find a non-roadgeek reason to justify it.

[LilianaUwU]

I think that's mostly roadgeeks being frustrated with one freeway having several numbers and trying to find a non-roadgeek reason to justify it.

Make it NJ 42 all the way from I-71 in Ohio to Baltic Avenue.

[SeriesE]

I've never cared for beltways. One is kind of fine, but less so when there are more than one ring. I think they should built as grids so the road network can be more logically expanded.

[SeriesE]

- 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

[ElishaGOtis]

I like tolls