Why do states maintain this road but not that one?

[Mr. Matté]

If you compare a map of Pennsylvania roads maintained by PennDOT versus New Jersey roads maintained by NJDOT, Pennsylvania almost has infinitely more state-maintained roads. It seems like every minor arterial in PA has a four-digit SR number but in Jersey, only major city-connecting roads have the boring circle shield (save for those random 1/2 mile bridge and approach routes).

Why does it seem some states have every road maintained by the state while others barely have any? And what tends to determine what roads are maintained by a state versus local maintenance?

[NE2]

Politics.

I think the states that maintain all rural roads started doing so during the Great Depression.

[mcdonaat]

Politics.

I think the states that maintain all rural roads started doing so during the Great Depression.

Couldn't agree more. Louisiana has roads that are still gravel, some not connected to others, and a few roads that should be city maintained or parish, but are instead state owned.

[J N Winkler]

Politics.

I think the states that maintain all rural roads started doing so during the Great Depression.

Politics was undoubtedly a factor, but I don't think it was the only one--I remember reading that PennDOT's predecessor agency took over minor roads as secondary state highways after a study estimated that the overall cost would be smaller, due to efficiencies, economies of scale, etc.

Many, if not most, states that have only a signed primary state highway system still have a system of distributing a share of motoring tax revenues to local agencies for improving and maintaining roads which do not belong to the state highway system.  Many of these states also have unsigned secondary state highway systems which are given a type of preference in funding.  Kansas, for example, has an unsigned state secondary highway system which is subject to a 25,000-mile cap (as opposed to 10,000 miles for the state highway system).  In fact, I struggle to think of a single state that adopts a completely laissez-faire attitude toward roads that are not part of the state highway network.

[SP Cook]

Politics is the answer, but not in the negative sense.  Individual states do things differently, in this or 1000 other issues.  Governement closest the people deciding issues. 

Four states, including my own, have NO road system at all below the state level.  Other states have extensive county level highway departments.  Individual states making individual decisions.

[bulldog1979]

In Michigan, PA 51 of 1951 forms the modern basis for road funding and classification in the state. The State Trunkline Highway System received 39.1% of the Transportation Fund appropriations, the county road commissions receive another 39.1%, and 21.8% goes to cities and villages. (Townships haven't maintained roads since passage of the McNitt Act in the 1930s.) The county appropriation are also based on mileage of roads classified as primary, not local, county roads. In 1996, that appropriation to Marquette County was  $7,836/mile. (I'm sure it's different now, but that's a set of numbers I had handy.

Of course, roads are voluntarily transferred back and forth in terms of jurisdiction; MDOT has no ability to compel a city, village or county to relinquish or assume jurisdiction.

[Alps]

Given the overall condition of the secondary network, I prefer the NJ/NY system of a basic state maintained network and strong County governments maintaining arterials and collectors. I think the more localized you make the maintenance, the better a job that can be done. One man's opinion. (Not the New England approach where towns are stuck with everything that's not a state highway, because that can overload each municipality maintaining roads that are mostly intraregional/nonlocal traffic.)

[Alps]

In Michigan, PA 51 of 1951 forms the modern basis for road funding and classification in the state. The State Trunkline Highway System received 39.1% of the Transportation Fund appropriations, the county road commissions receive another 39.1%, and 28.1% goes to cities and villages.

No wonder they have problems. Keep spending 6.3% more than you have, you'll soon run into issues. (I think you meant 21.8% local)

[The High Plains Traveler]

I think the concept of states maintaining all roads within their boundaries is an east of the Appalachians concept. Otherwise, states have established highway systems that consisted of the main connecting routes and left the other roads to local governments. The timing of these systems being established is early 20th century; Minnesota created its trunk highway system in 1920, California's beginning around 1910, even New Mexico began to establish routes before its statehood in 1912. But, if you look at the route density, it is generally a relatively small percentage of overall road mileage in many states.

Overall, I think there is a devolution of state control. Colorado had a much larger state highway system until the early 1950s, when it reverted quite a bit of the system back to (mostly) county control. This is the reason for the many broken routes in Colorado.

[Brian556]

Quote from Steve;

I think the more localized you make the maintenance, the better a job that can be done. One man's opinion.

Well said, Steve. Case and point. TxDot used to maintain signals on state roads in my areas. Now the local cities maintain them. They even have an agreement with one of the cities to maintain signals outside of that city, which are located in smaller towns that don't have as signal dept. This is so much better because local crews have local knowlege of traffic patterns that TxDot employees based in Dallas don't, and can respond to problems much quicker.

Also, the cities around here asked and recieved to take over mowing on many state roads in their cities bacuase TxDot mows way too infrequently.

[SP Cook]

Quote from Steve;

I think the more localized you make the maintenance, the better a job that can be done. One man's opinion.

Well said, Steve. .

I agree.  In my state, the DOH, with jurisdiction over every road in the state, even most major city streets, is a huge orginization, and there is constant and unresolvable tension between those who would build and keep up the major thruways and important secondary roads, and those who want to maintain tiny, often one lane, routes of no importance to anyone other than the residents.  This gets expressed in a system where calling your state legislator is the best way to get your road maintained, and a constant robbing of Peter (main roads) to pay Paul (side roads), that leaves main routes in bad shape and leave a DOH that is over-politicized.

[hbelkins]

I agree.  In my state, the DOH, with jurisdiction over every road in the state, even most major city streets, is a huge orginization, and there is constant and unresolvable tension between those who would build and keep up the major thruways and important secondary roads, and those who want to maintain tiny, often one lane, routes of no importance to anyone other than the residents.  This gets expressed in a system where calling your state legislator is the best way to get your road maintained, and a constant robbing of Peter (main roads) to pay Paul (side roads), that leaves main routes in bad shape and leave a DOH that is over-politicized.

Obviously, Kentucky doesn't maintain every road in the state, but the DOT/DOH (in our case, KYTC) is definitely over-politicized. That's because of the way jobs are used as patronage despite laws supposedly prohibiting that. Our previous governor (a Republican) lost re-election primarily because he tried to end years of Democratic patronage and the Dems, in particular the attorney general with designs on the governorship himself, took offense to that. The current governor's administration has gone right back to doing things they way they were since the civil service laws were enacted in the early 1960s.  They've cloaked the patronage in a new way of doing things that is supposed to (in theory) prevent it, but it just masks it. It's still alive and well.

Equipment operator jobs don't pay particularly well, but there is plenty of opportunity for overtime in the winter and the benefits are decent, so these are sought-after jobs and there are only a handful available in each county. So they are prime political plums.

Same for social-service, family support and other jobs/offices/positions where there are only a limited number in each county. They don't have the OT potential that highway crew jobs have, but there is decent pay and benefits. Don't think patronage isn't alive and well in those agencies as well. It's no coincidence that in counties that are 50 to 75 percent Republican in registration, the state employee workforce is 75 percent Democrat.

As for calling the state legislators, it works here too, but mostly for rural state roads instead of local roads maintained by counties or cities. KYTC is executive branch and the legislators are (obviously) legislative branch, but all too often decisions are made in support of legislators' requests even when there is no sound engineering or other evidence (crash history, traffic count data, etc.) to support said decision. If a legislator's request gets turned down at the local (district level), even if there is solid evidence to support that decision, their next step is to write or call the transportation secretary.

[Mdcastle]

It's interesting looking at a 1920s Minnesota map with a 1940s and a 1950s. Except for the metro freeways all the roads that are still arguably of statewide importance were already included in 1920. Most of the 1933 and virtually all the  1949 expansions (which were decreed by the legislature against the will of the Highway Department) are questionable. Over the years Mn/DOT has been trying to reverse the 1949 expansion, abeit at a very slow rate. They've been trying to dump MN 232 for close to 20 years.

[cpzilliacus]

I think the concept of states maintaining all roads within their boundaries is an east of the Appalachians concept. Otherwise, states have established highway systems that consisted of the main connecting routes and left the other roads to local governments. The timing of these systems being established is early 20th century; Minnesota created its trunk highway system in 1920, California's beginning around 1910, even New Mexico began to establish routes before its statehood in 1912. But, if you look at the route density, it is generally a relatively small percentage of overall road mileage in many states.

Not in Maryland - the state (in the form of the State Highway Administration for "free" roads and the Maryland Transportation Authority for toll roads) maintains roads that are signposted with a route number, and sometimes maintains "dead end" roads that were left over when a highway was realigned (a lot of this was done in the 1950's through 1970's). 

But otherwise, secondary highway maintenance is left mostly to the counties, with some exceptions.  Municipalities usually maintain the roads within their corporate limits, though most numbered roads even in municipalities are state-maintained. 

The counties and the state will sometimes engineer a "swap," where some numbered roads are decommissioned to county roads, while others are "promoted" to state roads.

One exception to this is Baltimore City (an independent city, not part of any county, so effectively it is its own county).  The city maintains all roads within its corporate limits, except for those maintained by the Maryland Transportation Authority as part of the approach to the toll crossings of Baltimore Harbor (I-95, I-395, I-695 and I-895).  The city does maintain all of I-83 and all of Md. 295 within its boundaries.

Beyond the Baltimore City exception, the only other oddities are the federally-maintained parkways in the state (Baltimore-Washington Parkway, "secret" Md. 295), Suitland Parkway and the Clara Barton Parkway.

Overall, I think there is a devolution of state control. Colorado had a much larger state highway system until the early 1950s, when it reverted quite a bit of the system back to (mostly) county control. This is the reason for the many broken routes in Colorado.

In Maryland, condition of county roads can vary greatly from county to county.  I've driven on some that are in terrible condition, with bridges having posted weight limits as low as 10,000 pounds.  State roads, even those with low traffic volumes, are decently maintained statewide.

I should also add that in the suburban  counties, especially in subdivisions built since the early 1970's, there are many (short) roads that are privately maintained by a homeowners' association or condominium association.

[cpzilliacus]

Quote from Steve;

I think the more localized you make the maintenance, the better a job that can be done. One man's opinion.

Well said, Steve. .

I agree.  In my state, the DOH, with jurisdiction over every road in the state, even most major city streets, is a huge orginization, and there is constant and unresolvable tension between those who would build and keep up the major thruways and important secondary roads, and those who want to maintain tiny, often one lane, routes of no importance to anyone other than the residents.  This gets expressed in a system where calling your state legislator is the best way to get your road maintained, and a constant robbing of Peter (main roads) to pay Paul (side roads), that leaves main routes in bad shape and leave a DOH that is over-politicized.

I don't know your state well enough to make an informed comment about the above - but - I do know Virginia very well, which has a similar system.  The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) maintains very nearly every road (including public gravel roads), street, subdivision dead-end and everything else that is not privately-owned or within the corporate limits of a town (a municipality that's part of the surrounding county) or a city (cities in Virginia, no matter how small, are effectively their own counties, for they are never part of a county).

More than once, I have heard VDOT getting bashed for doing a lousy job (or not listening to complaints), invariably about roads on  the secondary system, usually by county elected officials (who have no authority at all over VDOT).  Perhaps this is by design, so that the agency is reasonably immune to some of the problems you describe above?

This statewide system of the Commonwealth maintaining effectively all roads was devised (at least in part) so that secondary roads would be kept to a similar standard, regardless of what county they are in.

In the towns and cities, VDOT only maintains roads that are Interstate or have a functional class of freeway. 

Only two Virginia counties maintain their own secondary streets and roads - Arlington County (across the Potomac River from D.C.) and Henrico County (just north of Richmond).  In those two counties, VDOT still maintains roads that have a posted route number.

As with Maryland, there are some federal parkways that are maintained by the National Park Service - the George Washington Memorial Parkway (and its short spur, the Spout Run Parkway); the Colonial Parkway between Jamestown and Yorktown; the Skyline Drive in Shenandoah National Park and the Blue Ridge Parkway.

And there's the oddity (for Virginia) of U.S. 13 crossing the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel (CBBT) and Va. 267 (Dulles Toll Road).  The CBBT is maintained by its own entity,  entirely separate from VDOT, and patrolled by its own CBBT District Police.

On Va. 267, east of the airport, the road is maintained by the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority (MWAA) and patrolled by MWAA Police.  West of the airport, Va. 267 is the privately-owned Dulles Greenway, maintained by its owners and patrolled (under contract) by the Virginia State Police. 

I suppose we can add the soon-to-open I-495 Express Lanes to the oddity list, since I understand that the owner of the concession (and not VDOT) will be responsible for maintaining those lanes.

[kphoger]

Here's an Illinois example I've wondered about:

The following paved, two-lane road is 69 miles long, yet it is not part of the state highway system.  Why has the IL-161 designation not been extended, or the road designated as an FAS route and given a 900-series number?

http://goo.gl/maps/Gow51

In contrast, the following paved, two-lane road is only 18 miles long, goes through no towns along the way, yet is an unsigned state highway (number 8799, to be precise).

http://goo.gl/maps/8DihF

Why the one and not the other?

[SP Cook]

I don't know your state well enough to make an informed comment about the above - but - I do know Virginia very well, which has a similar system. 

Virginia, North Carolina, and West Virginia are similar.  The difference is that in West Virginia there is not the exception for streets in a city.  City streets, if they carry a route number, are still maintained by the DOH.  In a small town, this generally means at least two streets are going to be maintained, as a town is generally the crossroads of two numbered roads.  And in many small towns, the entirity of the street system has been taken in as "County Routes" (County is a class of route, these routes are still maintained by the state), at the behest of some politician or another.  In bigger cities, most of the streets are going to carry US or state numbers and thus be maintained (including snow removal) by the state.  There are some, not small by WV standards, cities that don't even have a street department because the few streets in the town that are not state maintained can be repaired every now and then by contractors, without the need of full time employees.

I am told that North Carolina only has one actual county route, Mechlenburg County 4, located in Charlotte.

[dfilpus]

I am told that North Carolina only has one actual county route, Mechlenburg County 4, located in Charlotte.

Charlotte Route 4 is signed by the Charlotte Department of Transportation with a pentagon shield, but the roads that it travels along are all maintained by the state with their own four digit SR numbers. The county has nothing to do with the road.

[Brandon]

Here's an Illinois example I've wondered about:

The following paved, two-lane road is 69 miles long, yet it is not part of the state highway system.  Why has the IL-161 designation not been extended, or the road designated as an FAS route and given a 900-series number?

http://goo.gl/maps/Gow51

In contrast, the following paved, two-lane road is only 18 miles long, goes through no towns along the way, yet is an unsigned state highway (number 8799, to be precise).

http://goo.gl/maps/8DihF

Why the one and not the other?

Beats me.  I know that IDOT takes care of the oddball road here and there around here that is unmarked and unsigned.  A few are old alignments such as IL-129 (fmr US-66 1940-56) south of Braidwood.  IDOT still maintains the road even though the signs have been removed and the bridge over the tracks is gone.

[vdeane]

City streets, if they carry a route number, are still maintained by the DOH.

That's a good idea.  Cities and villages will often "forget" that one of their streets carries a route number, treat it as if it's just another random street and not an arterial/through route, and sparsely sign it if they sign it at all.  I've had to pull over, look at a map, and turn around in Plattsburg, NY for exactly that reason (not only is the signage sparse, it's wrong).

[cpzilliacus]

I don't know your state well enough to make an informed comment about the above - but - I do know Virginia very well, which has a similar system. 

Virginia, North Carolina, and West Virginia are similar.  The difference is that in West Virginia there is not the exception for streets in a city.  City streets, if they carry a route number, are still maintained by the DOH.

Similar in that case to Maryland, where the State Highway Administration maintains anything with a route number (that's not tolled), even within a municipality (except Baltimore City).   

In a small town, this generally means at least two streets are going to be maintained, as a town is generally the crossroads of two numbered roads.

Parsons, Thomas and Davis are examples that I am familiar with.  And Charles Town and Ranson, even though W.Va. 9 was long ago relocated onto a bypass and replaced (though the "downtown" areas) by W.Va. 115.

And in many small towns, the entirity of the street system has been taken in as "County Routes" (County is a class of route, these routes are still maintained by the state), at the behest of some politician or another. 

In Virginia every secondary system road, street or highway has a VDOT-assigned route number.  The "fractional" and "county" route numbering system in West Virginia seems to be less comprehensive than Virginia.

In most municipalities of Virginia, VDOT simply does not maintain anything in an incorporated area (there are apparently some exceptions for very small municipalities, in addition to Interstates and other freeway-class roads).  The secondary route numbers usually end at the town or city boundary, and even for primary system numbers (which continue into the city or town), the  road is maintained by the municipal government.  I have seen a few municipalities in Northern Virginia that continue a secondary route number inside their borders, but seems to not be standard Virginia practice.

In bigger cities, most of the streets are going to carry US or state numbers and thus be maintained (including snow removal) by the state.  There are some, not small by WV standards, cities that don't even have a street department because the few streets in the town that are not state maintained can be repaired every now and then by contractors, without the need of full time employees.

Outsourcing maintenance makes some sense.

I am told that North Carolina only has one actual county route, Mechlenburg County 4, located in Charlotte.

I've been in Charlotte, N.C., but have not noticed that route number (it would probably catch my attention if I did see it, since I have never seen a county route number shield in North Carolina).

[roadman65]

Is NC 80 part of North Carolina's state route system?  It is not connected to any other highway except the Blue Ridge Parkway and dead ends at Mt. Mitchell.  It is not even signed its entire way.  It looks like any other spur of the Blue Ridge Parkway and it seems odd that it has an NC number given to it.

[NE2]

Similar in that case to Maryland, where the State Highway Administration maintains anything with a route number (that's not tolled), even within a municipality (except Baltimore City).   

Isn't part of US 40 Scenic locally maintained?

In most municipalities of Virginia, VDOT simply does not maintain anything in an incorporated area (there are apparently some exceptions for very small municipalities, in addition to Interstates and other freeway-class roads).  The secondary route numbers usually end at the town or city boundary, and even for primary system numbers (which continue into the city or town), the  road is maintained by the municipal government.  I have seen a few municipalities in Northern Virginia that continue a secondary route number inside their borders, but seems to not be standard Virginia practice.

Only about 15% of the towns maintain their own streets: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_highways_in_Virginia#Towns
This can be laboriously checked using the traffic counts.

[Takumi]

Is NC 80 part of North Carolina's state route system?  It is not connected to any other highway except the Blue Ridge Parkway and dead ends at Mt. Mitchell.  It is not even signed its entire way.  It looks like any other spur of the Blue Ridge Parkway and it seems odd that it has an NC number given to it.

What? NC 80 connects to US 70 and NC 226A. http://www.vahighways.com/ncannex/route-log/nc080.html
You're thinking of NC 128. http://www.vahighways.com/ncannex/route-log/nc128.html

[roadman65]

Is NC 80 part of North Carolina's state route system?  It is not connected to any other highway except the Blue Ridge Parkway and dead ends at Mt. Mitchell.  It is not even signed its entire way.  It looks like any other spur of the Blue Ridge Parkway and it seems odd that it has an NC number given to it.

What? NC 80 connects to US 70 and NC 226A. http://www.vahighways.com/ncannex/route-log/nc080.html
You're thinking of NC 128. http://www.vahighways.com/ncannex/route-log/nc128.html

It was in 1991 I was there.  It was on a map I had then that I no longer have.  It might of been in error or I remember wrong.  Nonetheless, it is a state route designation that does not intersect with any other NC state maintained roads and it a spur of the BRP.