Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Indiana has basically the most consistently poor road maintenance, though Oklahoma is pretty close and Louisiana has spots which are downright preposterous.
I bet Michigan's poor roads beat out all 3 states.
Then how did the Interstates get approved funding in the 1950s?
Seems Eisenhower was seen as a Modern Republican of his time and a Moderate. He did not condemn the depression era jobs program for the most part and in 1956, this interstate highway system was a jobs stimulus program too that did stimulate the economy. We were not at war and it was our 'Happy Days era". Still it devastated our cities in neighborhoods being cut in half and some destroyed. It also increased white-flight from the cities to suburbs and our cities entered their greatest declines we still did not overcome. The 60s 70s had cities in great declines. So good and bad that changed the Nation.
I've been all over the country, the worst cities were.
NYC, LA and Boston. Boston pound for pound is the worst of the three worst. It's bad and the drivers are very aggressive. You better have your eyes open in any of these cities, but especially Boston. I saw a tour bus driver intentionally snip a car, for fighting for a space in the road. I kid you not. I was like wtf! Even in NY and LA, where you expect it to be bad, but in my opinion, Boston tops them all. LA's bad because it takes forever to get anywhere, NYC is just bad like Boston.
Honorable mention, D.C, especially if your driving on the beltway. Those the worst areas that I've driven in the US.
Last edited by supermanpansy; 05-06-2020 at 08:42 PM..
I've been all over the country, the worst cities were.
NYC, LA and Boston. Boston pound for pound is the worst of the three worst. It's bad and the drivers are very aggressive. You better have your eyes open in any of these cities, but especially Boston. I saw a tour bus driver intentionally snip a car, for fighting for a space in the road. I kid you not. I was like wtf! Even in NY and LA, where you expect it to be bad, but in my opinion, Boston tops them all. LA's bad because it takes forever to get anywhere, NYC is just bad like Boston.
Honorable mention, D.C, especially if your driving on the beltway. Those the worst areas that I've driven in the US.
Boston is just because the drivers are very aggressive and the roads are windy. But n reality, the quality of highways arent as bad as some other places. Once you know where youre going.. your fine
In exactly what ways does the Turnpike not meet Interstate standards? If you're talking about how narrow it supposedly is, does this four-lane segment west of Philadelphia not have a 4' inner shoulder and a 12' outer shoulder, exactly as the standards for four-lane Interstates specify?
By the way, that random point I selected is fortuitous, because you can see an overpass being reconstructed in the distance. I'll give you one guess what they're going to do to that segment of highway in the near future. Here's a hint, over near Harrisburg on a clearly poorly-maintained segment of the Turnpike.
Please do me a favor and find a segment of the Turnpike with inner shoulders that are less than 4' wide, not including the Northeast Extension, which was not even designated as an Interstate until the late 1990s, and, thus, was not as high of a priority for modernization as the mainline Turnpike, which was given Interstate designation in the late 1950s.
And if you think there's a short on- or off-ramp anywhere, then I encourage you to look for one anywhere on the entire system, even on the segment of the Northeast Extension with inner shoulders that haven't yet been widened.
Just so you know, Pennsylvania constructed about 500 miles of controlled-access highway before the advent of the Interstate Highway System, thus, there were no "Interstate standards" to design them to in the first place. They were intended as parkways, and because the vast majority of them were state routes, the vast majority of them were built entirely with state tax dollars. It's impossible to have foresight into standards that don't exist. This also explains why expanding many of the grandfathered segments involves massive property acquisitions.
Here's a stretch where it sure doesn't look like a 4 foot inner shoulder, though maybe it is. Note the substandard 13'1" clearance.
Uh-oh! 13'9" clearance on an interstate? Also, if you turn the picture around, you'll see that the inner shoulder isn't even 4 INCHES, much less 4 feet. And if you scoot ahead under the bridge, you'll see that there's very little deceleration lane before the exit ramp sharply curves. Better have good brakes and quick reflexes!
Admittedly, this too is on I-70. Maybe my beef is more with that highway than with with Turnpike.
Look, I get it. The Turnpike was designed before the interstates. So it's not going to necessarily match interstate standards. And I'll give Pennsylvania credit for rebuilding some segments that didn't meet the standards. Are you familiar with I-83 northbound, where it comes into PA 581, just south of Harrisburg? That used to be the most horribly designed interchange I had ever seen. But in checking out Google Maps, it looks like they're rebuilt it. So, kudos to them.
So, the conclusion I draw is that Pennsylvania's interstates are getting better. But that doesn't mean that they're quite "there" yet.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.