Shocker! Calififornia Has The Worst Freeways!!!

[Marilyn. 340]

Californians idle in the nation's worst traffic jams on interstates surrounding major metropolitan areas but they are far from alone -- 52 percent of these urban stretches of highways are congested, according to a new study released on Thursday.

Drivers in four lucky states enjoyed zero congestion: Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming.

But one Midwestern state, Minnesota, and two East Coast states nearly matched California's sorry showing.

Some 83.33 percent of California's urban interstates are overcrowded, followed by Minnesota at 77.78 percent and New Jersey at 73.35 percent, according to the 16th annual survey by The Reason Foundation, a Los Angeles-based nonpartisan group.

Manhattan popularized the term "gridlock" but traffic jams on New York's urban interstates were only mediocre, ranking 37th at 53.39 percent, according to the libertarian-idea promoting group that compared volume-to-capacity ratios.

Drivers in some states whose booming economies are magnets for new residents spent much more time car-sitting without moving than New Yorkers. Florida ranked 40th at 59.44 percent. And Texas, whose $50 billion road privatization dwarfs all of its peers, was 41st at 59.67 percent, the study said.

And for the eighth year in a row, New Jersey had the nation's worst overall road system, according to the group.

"Gridlock isn't going away," said David Hartgen, the lead author and a professor at the University of North Carolina.

To reverse this trend, the 50 states -- which spent almost $99 billion on roads in 2005 -- must prioritize their dollars on traffic-busting projects, added the Charlotte-based expert.

That might be a bit of a challenge for New Jersey, whose Democratic Gov. John Corzine might partly privatize its toll roads. New Jersey's administrative costs were the nation's highest at $68,352 per state-controlled mile, the study said.

Massachusetts was 49th at $60,807; next was California, whose overhead ate up $50,614. New York ranked 43rd -- but its $18,687 tab was less than one-third of neighboring New Jersey.

Florida ranked 42nd at $16,109; Texas was much leaner, spending just $3,147 which put it in 9th place.

North Dakota had the least expensive bureaucrats, spending only $1,786, followed closely by Arkansas, which ranked second at $1,805, and Missouri which was third at $1,989.

New Jersey's total road budget -- $2.36 million per state-controlled mile -- was also more than double that of the next biggest spender, which was Massachusetts at $893,236.

Florida was 48th at $570,191, just above New York, which ranked 47th with a budget of $552,807.

California was 43rd in total spending at $336,954. Texas spent just less than third of that, ranking 26th at $106,221.

South Carolina spent the least -- $31,262. West Virginia was second at $41,839; next came North Carolina at $44,654.

Though states got 13 percent more federal transportation aid in 2005 than in 2004, they may have focused on potholes.

"They put the money right to work on the road surface," Hartgen said by telephone, noting the "pavement condition" of urban and rural roads improved. But fatalities rose a bit and little headway was made in speeding urban interstate trips.

"They put a lot more money into the system but haven't really turned the corner on congestion," Hartgen said.

Though often driver-maddening, traffic jams can actually cut deaths by slowing speeds. "Most of the states with very low accident rates also have very high congestion," said Hartgen.

Massachusetts did best on the death scale, with only 0.797 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles. Connecticut came second at 0.865, followed by Vermont at 0.946.

New Jersey was 5th with 1.013, followed by New York at 1.039. California took 19th place with 1.315 fatalities.

Montana was the deadliest, with 2.256 fatalities. South Dakota was 49th at 2.215; South Carolina was 48th at 2.211.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070628/us_nm/...states_roads_dc

that is interesting Montana is one of the states with 0 congestion but it has the most vehicle fatalities and California is only 19th and it has the worst traffic congestion

ok, I butchered the spelling of California

[sereia 0]

i hate driving hereeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!! i miss (mostly) stress free ny subways!

[no name 1]

that is interesting Montana is one of the states with 0 congestion but it has the most vehicle fatalities and California is only 19th and it has the worst traffic congestion

Because Montana has no speed limit on many roads.

[Alex+R 0]

I felt like the traffic in California was really not that bad, despite all the stories I'd heard. But now I see that apparently Minnesota matches California in crappy traffic, so I guess that explains my perspective... I had no idea we were so bad, although I do know that I wouldn't want to be on a highway at any time between, say, 6 a.m. and 9 p.m.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

Next headline: Pope is discovered to be Catholic. Bear chits in woods

last weekend we drove to Palm Springs and it took us an hour to go 20 miles - and this was staying off the 10 and leaving at 3pm.

[Dan J 277]

that is interesting Montana is one of the states with 0 congestion but it has the most vehicle fatalities and California is only 19th and it has the worst traffic congestion

Because Montana has no speed limit on many roads.

Or very many people for that matter.

Yes Minneapolis can get bad, there are projects underway to widen some of the major freeways. I don't have to commute to work, so I don't really care as much.

[Alex+R 0]

that is interesting Montana is one of the states with 0 congestion but it has the most vehicle fatalities and California is only 19th and it has the worst traffic congestion

Because Montana has no speed limit on many roads.

Or very many people for that matter.

Yes Minneapolis can get bad, there are projects underway to widen some of the major freeways. I don't have to commute to work, so I don't really care as much.

The problem, IMO, is that instead of increasing public transportation, they just keep building more roads. They build new highways, and then more people move to those areas because hey, now there's more highway there, and then the congestion continues. If they spent more money expanding the lightrail, we'd have a nice system going.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

Californians idle in the nation's worst traffic jams on interstates surrounding major metropolitan areas but they are far from alone -- 52 percent of these urban stretches of highways are congested, according to a new study released on Thursday.

Drivers in four lucky states enjoyed zero congestion: Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming.

But one Midwestern state, Minnesota, and two East Coast states nearly matched California's sorry showing.

Some 83.33 percent of California's urban interstates are overcrowded, followed by Minnesota at 77.78 percent and New Jersey at 73.35 percent, according to the 16th annual survey by The Reason Foundation, a Los Angeles-based nonpartisan group.

Manhattan popularized the term "gridlock" but traffic jams on New York's urban interstates were only mediocre, ranking 37th at 53.39 percent, according to the libertarian-idea promoting group that compared volume-to-capacity ratios.

Drivers in some states whose booming economies are magnets for new residents spent much more time car-sitting without moving than New Yorkers. Florida ranked 40th at 59.44 percent. And Texas, whose $50 billion road privatization dwarfs all of its peers, was 41st at 59.67 percent, the study said.

And for the eighth year in a row, New Jersey had the nation's worst overall road system, according to the group.

"Gridlock isn't going away," said David Hartgen, the lead author and a professor at the University of North Carolina.

To reverse this trend, the 50 states -- which spent almost $99 billion on roads in 2005 -- must prioritize their dollars on traffic-busting projects, added the Charlotte-based expert.

That might be a bit of a challenge for New Jersey, whose Democratic Gov. John Corzine might partly privatize its toll roads. New Jersey's administrative costs were the nation's highest at $68,352 per state-controlled mile, the study said.

Massachusetts was 49th at $60,807; next was California, whose overhead ate up $50,614. New York ranked 43rd -- but its $18,687 tab was less than one-third of neighboring New Jersey.

Florida ranked 42nd at $16,109; Texas was much leaner, spending just $3,147 which put it in 9th place.

North Dakota had the least expensive bureaucrats, spending only $1,786, followed closely by Arkansas, which ranked second at $1,805, and Missouri which was third at $1,989.

New Jersey's total road budget -- $2.36 million per state-controlled mile -- was also more than double that of the next biggest spender, which was Massachusetts at $893,236.

Florida was 48th at $570,191, just above New York, which ranked 47th with a budget of $552,807.

California was 43rd in total spending at $336,954. Texas spent just less than third of that, ranking 26th at $106,221.

South Carolina spent the least -- $31,262. West Virginia was second at $41,839; next came North Carolina at $44,654.

Though states got 13 percent more federal transportation aid in 2005 than in 2004, they may have focused on potholes.

"They put the money right to work on the road surface," Hartgen said by telephone, noting the "pavement condition" of urban and rural roads improved. But fatalities rose a bit and little headway was made in speeding urban interstate trips.

"They put a lot more money into the system but haven't really turned the corner on congestion," Hartgen said.

Though often driver-maddening, traffic jams can actually cut deaths by slowing speeds. "Most of the states with very low accident rates also have very high congestion," said Hartgen.

Massachusetts did best on the death scale, with only 0.797 fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles. Connecticut came second at 0.865, followed by Vermont at 0.946.

New Jersey was 5th with 1.013, followed by New York at 1.039. California took 19th place with 1.315 fatalities.

Montana was the deadliest, with 2.256 fatalities. South Dakota was 49th at 2.215; South Carolina was 48th at 2.211.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070628/us_nm/...states_roads_dc

that is interesting Montana is one of the states with 0 congestion but it has the most vehicle fatalities and California is only 19th and it has the worst traffic congestion

ok, I butchered the spelling of California

Not really.

The 0 congestion is due to low population as a whole in MT--on interstates, you literally have "miles-and-miles of nothing", and also total vehicle population.

But max permitted speed is higher @ 75 mph (originally, MT wanted no limit, but DOT said "no maintenance of interstates and US highways then").

I've driven through MT, and it is hard to see a cop (and quite easy to drive a lot more than 75 on the interstate). Even when a driver is stopped, the cop takes the fine there-and-then closing the matter.

One fatality in that bonks up fatality rates.

Edited June 29, 2007 by CherryXS

[one...two...tree 2,762]

last weekend we drove to Palm Springs and it took us an hour to go 20 miles - and this was staying off the 10 and leaving at 3pm.

That is one of the worst stretches of road. I try to drive in the middle of the night when taking the 10 to go to Phx and back.

The other clusterf##k is the 101 to 405 interchange... it's insane.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

I once made the mistake of taking the 10 all the way to Vegas - it took us 4 hours to get to Barstow!

Although not nearly as bad as taking the Tejon pass when there was a forest fire nearby - I actually saw men getting out of their cars, going to take a piss at the side of the road and coming back having not made any progress.

Edited June 29, 2007 by robinklake

[no name 1]

last weekend we drove to Palm Springs and it took us an hour to go 20 miles - and this was staying off the 10 and leaving at 3pm.

That is one of the worst stretches of road. I try to drive in the middle of the night when taking the 10 to go to Phx and back.

The other clusterf##k is the 101 to 405 interchange... it's insane.

I like to say the ENTIRE 405 sucks. Even on Sundays.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

I almost always take Sepulveda if I am going over the hill - I scoot past the suckers on the 405 almost every time.

[Saddle Bronc 124]

IMO, the entire state of CA is insane--so no surprise about its roads.

Of course, MD and VA aren't much better, and a chopfrack VA legislator has decided to increase his company's revenue with a $3550 "driver responsibility tax".

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/18/1818.asp

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

California is great - that's why we tolerate the crappy roads

[no name 1]

California is great - that's why we tolerate the crappy roads

IS IT?