Carranza Road
- Thread starter Joe1999
- Start date
You know, I don't mind them paving that road. It's really rough on cars, which I think the bulk of traffic on that road is. Obviously I wouldn't want them paving it past the bridge. But it seems silly to have Carranza Rd. half-paved, and Friendship-Speedwell road be "used to be paved."
I believe they were just cutting the small pine trees back so cars don't get pinstriped. They did the same thing from Friendship to Hawkins Bridge a year or so ago.
Of course if they would cut the grass / weeds once a year, they wouldn't have to make such a mess.
Roy
Of course if they would cut the grass / weeds once a year, they wouldn't have to make such a mess.
Roy
I have a huge issue with State dollars being allocated/spent on repairing any of these less traveled roads. Take that money and finish up the major highways/freeways and local town road, but don't spend it so some yahoo can tear it up over and over.
You won't say that after the roads in the Pines become impassable. It is true that yahoos do some tearing up but just general use does it's share as well.
Steve
Impassable may be one thing, but widening it so someone doesn't get a scratch? Come on now. I don't want my dollars going to that. Earlier in the year when Hampton Road basically washed away and fell through in an area was one thing. That was a safety issue, but again, wasting money on widening or smoothing the road is not what I want to see.
I'm with you. also, why do we want to promote more traffic in the woods anyway? the condition of some of the roads helps to keep some areas remote. pave carranza and it will see alot more traffic. I feel that the less asphalt in the woods the better.
It's a dual-edged sword, isn't it? One of the reasons why we have so much access to the pines is that so many of these roads (trails?) are still actually township, county, or state roads. That means they have to maintain them to some minimum standard for unimproved ways, and it also means that no matter how much of the land on either side is private, state forest, wildlife management, etc., we still get to drive in there. There are plenty of times that I see piles of trash and wish it were less accessible, but it really is a unique situation. Up here in the northern part of the state we have some large state forests that are nearly inaccessible to vehicle traffic. Not that I mind walking, but I can explore a lot more when an area is accessible to my truck.
As a dirt road, it's awful. It's really washboarded, it's wide, and there isn't too much interesting to see past the monument. Why wouldn't you want it paved? It's not like they'd pave to Hawkins Bridge or something.
I am totally against paving that road. Less accessible is better. I don't mind them fixing the bad potholes and grading it every few years as they've done in the past. Don't see any reason why they can't just continue with business as usual.
