Road features you wish are used more in your state

[Max Rockatansky]

80-85 MPH speed limits on rural Interstates and more frequent 65 MPH two lanes (California).

[Great Lakes Roads]

Indiana:

More APL signs (the only usage that I know of is the I-65/74/465 exchanges south of Indianapolis)
Secondary control cities used between the major cities along the interstate (a practice in Illinois I'm personally fond of)
65 MPH speed limits along rural divided highways (and some two lane roads with passing lanes, similar to US 2 in Michigan)
Control cities on beltways
Conditional speed limits in work zones ("When Workers Present" )
ACTUAL "Keep Right Except to Pass" signage on every interstate/freeway (not just the Toll Road)
Rumble strips for roads with high speed limits approaching stop signs and traffic signals on a regular basis
More arrows painted on the road to warn drivers to get over when the lane ends
Acceleration lanes for traffic entering high speed roadways from at-grade intersections

Bolded segment edited in thanks to a response from 1. It conveys the message a lot better.

I'll add one more: 70 mph on four-lane roads with not a lot of driveways access or traffic lights

[SkyPesos]

Thought this have been a thread before, but nothing have come up in search results...

For Ohio:
- APL Signage. I'm really liking this partial APL style used in Michigan.
- FYA signals
- SPUI interchanges
- Dogbone interchanges
- DDI interchanges
- Side-mounted signals
- "Freeway Entrance" signs, accompanied with downward pointing arrows with route shields that the state already uses a bit.
- Enhanced mile markers on rural freeways and expressways
- Exit numbers on more non-interstate freeways and expressways

Some more:
- 75 mph on rural freeways. A lot of other countries post 120 km/h on freeways in similar terrain and environment as Ohio, so 75 mph would match that.
- 60 mph on some rural 2-lanes.
- "Next 3 exits"  sign in freeway medians, like what I see used in St Louis.

[sparker]

CA:  Green mileposts/paddles on at least Interstate facilities.  Would be nice on CA 99, CA 58, CA 60 and other routes that have substantial freeway mileage and/or serve as interregional connectors. 

[SkyPesos]

CA:  Green mileposts/paddles on at least Interstate facilities.  Would be nice on CA 99, CA 58, CA 60 and other routes that have substantial freeway mileage and/or serve as interregional connectors.

Are you referring to the stacked digits whole mile ones, or enhanced mile markers commonly subdivided at 0.5, 0.2 or 0.1 intervals?

[sparker]

CA:  Green mileposts/paddles on at least Interstate facilities.  Would be nice on CA 99, CA 58, CA 60 and other routes that have substantial freeway mileage and/or serve as interregional connectors.

Are you referring to the stacked digits whole mile ones, or enhanced mile markers commonly subdivided at 0.5, 0.2 or 0.1 intervals?

For the most part, stacked full-mile indicators would do, particularly in rural areas like I-5 in the Valley.  The enhanced mile markers (here locally applied to CA 17 in Santa Clara County) might supplement those in areas where there are problematic features (such as the steep gradients on CA 58 west of Tehachapi -- the ones that could use both a climbing lane EB and truck escape ramps WB) so as to enhance the ability of first responders to pinpoint an incident or stalled vehicle.  I could definitely see at least 0.2 mile indicators on I-80 from Colfax all the way over to Truckee! 

[kphoger]

Right turn arrows.

Man, I've been looking at a lot of Illinois GSV lately, and I sure do miss right turn arrows.

[NoGoodNamesAvailable]

I wish NY would adopt better/more creative signal placements like NJ. Also mast arms weren't common until recently, and they mostly look ugly. I prefer the smaller truss arms over the huge monotubes.

[hbelkins]

Kentucky:

END signs.
Higher speed limits.
2+1 corridors
Unique state highway route markers
State-named interstate route markers
Square markers for three- and four-digit routes

[ran4sh]

Georgia

Should use these features which are common in NC:

*Superstreet intersections for divided highways (This is something GA has started to do)
*Exit numbering for non-Interstate freeways uses the mileage from state border (Currently they are either non-numbered, sequential numbered, or numbered based on a GA SR mileage which resets at each county line)

Should also use these features:

*Proper warning for traffic lights on high-speed roads. GDOT used to do this, by having beacons mounted with a traffic signal warning sign that turn on when the light being approached is red or there may be congestion bc it just turned green, while turn off if the traffic is free-flowing on a green light. The current practice is simply for the beacon to flash at all times (requiring the driver to judge for themselves if the light is going to stay green or change to red).
*Mile markers on all state routes that count *state* mileage, and prioritize US routes (the current mile markers only count miles by county/they reset at county lines, and they prioritize the GA SR even if there is a US route).

[SeriesE]

California:
SPUI
Parclo B4
Exit numbers on all interchanges
Thermoplastic lines
Thermoplastic line based rumble strips across the lane
Yield signs instead of stop signs
Signed county roads

[kernals12]

Massachusetts:
Stack Interchanges
SPUIs
DDIs
Michigan Lefts

[1995hoo]

Virginia: More usage of 65 and 70 mph speed limits in urban areas. As far as rural speed limits, VDOT is quite good at posting state maximum permitted by law (70 mph) on all rural interstate highway segments. Urban areas... they tend to shy to 55 mph and maybe 60 mph more often than is reasonable despite nothing preventing them from going higher. Occasionally, you get a reasonably posted 65 mph urban speed limit (such as the recently increased from 60 mph I-64 segment in Newport News, I-95 immediately north of Richmond, etc.), but not often.

I'd like the General Assembly to amend the statute to give VDOT more discretion as to speed limits on non-Interstate-grade roads. Under the law as it's now written, the maximum allowable speed limit in Virginia on any road, or segment of road, with at-grade access is 55 mph unless the same statute contains a specific exception (all of which allow only for 60 mph). I'd like to see the statute allow, but not require, up to the statewide maximum (currently 70 mph) regardless of the type of road. In other words, let the traffic engineers handle it.



I'd like to see North Carolina post more signs that set off tolbs17.

[sprjus4]

I'd like the General Assembly to amend the statute to give VDOT more discretion as to speed limits on non-Interstate-grade roads. Under the law as it's now written, the maximum allowable speed limit in Virginia on any road, or segment of road, with at-grade access is 55 mph unless the same statute contains a specific exception (all of which allow only for 60 mph). I'd like to see the statute allow, but not require, up to the statewide maximum (currently 70 mph) regardless of the type of road. In other words, let the traffic engineers handle it.

I agree 100%. An outdated statute determining that 55 mph or 60 mph is the maximum safe speed on any roadway not built to limited access standards is purely artificial. The vast majority of divided highways in the state can easily handle at least 65 mph and even up to 70 mph on some of the more modern designed ones. Even a number of two lane roadways, depending on design, could be at least 60 or 65 mph.

The speed limits should be set by engineers, not a statue. I'd even argue let the interstate speeds exclusively bump to 75 mph with everything else 70 mph, but obviously neither of these will ever happen in the name of "safety" . It's ridiculous and any basic logic of reality conflicts it.

But it's important to note, all interstates in urban areas can legally be posted to 70 mph, but VDOT shy's away from this far too often, so it makes me question how willing they would be on the arterial system. A speed limit of 65 mph should at least be widespread on rural segments of four lane divided highway, in the sense 60 mph is used now.

Texas permits the speed limit of 75 mph to be posted anywhere, and engineers have no problem sharing that common rural interstate speed limit with thousands of miles of two lane roadway and four lane divided highway that can safely handle it. There's no discrimination. Only 80 mph and 85 mph are restricted to limited access roads and certain ones, but I'd consider those more "special exceptions" . That said, I believe Texas should expand the 80 mph limit to all rural interstate highways, and keep all other roads at 75 mph.

[citrus]

Lots of good California ones, but I'd add: allowing for signing state routes on roads that are not actually state-maintained. And I suppose the other way around too, not requiring state route signage on all state-maintained roads.

[SkyPesos]

CA:  Green mileposts/paddles on at least Interstate facilities.  Would be nice on CA 99, CA 58, CA 60 and other routes that have substantial freeway mileage and/or serve as interregional connectors.

Are you referring to the stacked digits whole mile ones, or enhanced mile markers commonly subdivided at 0.5, 0.2 or 0.1 intervals?

For the most part, stacked full-mile indicators would do, particularly in rural areas like I-5 in the Valley.  The enhanced mile markers (here locally applied to CA 17 in Santa Clara County) might supplement those in areas where there are problematic features (such as the steep gradients on CA 58 west of Tehachapi -- the ones that could use both a climbing lane EB and truck escape ramps WB) so as to enhance the ability of first responders to pinpoint an incident or stalled vehicle.  I could definitely see at least 0.2 mile indicators on I-80 from Colfax all the way over to Truckee!

Any photos/examples of those CA 17 enhanced MMs? I did a search on GSV, and didn't find any.

[kphoger]

CA:  Green mileposts/paddles on at least Interstate facilities.  Would be nice on CA 99, CA 58, CA 60 and other routes that have substantial freeway mileage and/or serve as interregional connectors.

Are you referring to the stacked digits whole mile ones, or enhanced mile markers commonly subdivided at 0.5, 0.2 or 0.1 intervals?

For the most part, stacked full-mile indicators would do, particularly in rural areas like I-5 in the Valley.  The enhanced mile markers (here locally applied to CA 17 in Santa Clara County) might supplement those in areas where there are problematic features (such as the steep gradients on CA 58 west of Tehachapi -- the ones that could use both a climbing lane EB and truck escape ramps WB) so as to enhance the ability of first responders to pinpoint an incident or stalled vehicle.  I could definitely see at least 0.2 mile indicators on I-80 from Colfax all the way over to Truckee!

Any photos/examples of those CA 17 enhanced MMs? I did a search on GSV, and didn't find any.

Here you go:

[kphoger]

The enhanced mile markers (here locally applied to CA 17 in Santa Clara County) might supplement those in areas where there are problematic features (such as the steep gradients on CA 58 west of Tehachapi -- the ones that could use both a climbing lane EB and truck escape ramps WB) so as to enhance the ability of first responders to pinpoint an incident or stalled vehicle.

Indeed.

For example:

SCH Number – 2020060038
Public Agency – California Department of Transportation, District 4 (DOT)
Document Title – Install Intermediate Enhanced Reference Location Signs
Posted – 6/3/2020

Caltrans plans to stencil intermediate enhanced reference location (IERL) markings and install IERL signs in the MazArthur Maze freeway interchange. The purpose is to reduce the time it takes for emergency first responders to arrive at accident locations in the MacArthur Maze by having special signs throughout the interchanges. The need is that victims and witnesses of roadway emergencies are often unable to correctly identify their exact location.

[JoePCool14]

Illinois:

* 4 and 5 level stack interchanges

* Continuous mile makers for the length of a route, though the current ones that reset at the county lines are better than nothing

* Interchange sequence/"Exit Menu" signs (example from Wisconsin

* Greater use of exit numbering on non-interstate freeways

* 75 mph rural speed limits on interstates

* 60 or 65 mph speed limits on rural two lane roads.  Particularly 65 since that was used prior to everything getting messed up in the 1970's, but 60 would be better than nothing.

* Overhead lane usage signs on arterials example from Wisconsin

* Yield controlled right turns

* Use of 'fixed' travel time signs (example from Indiana)

Some more to add for Illinois.

   
• IDOT: MUTCD-standard enhanced mile markers specifically on all urban/suburban Interstates and other routes like US-41 in Lake County
• IDOT, specifically District 1: More FYA signals
• IDOT, specifically District 1: Proper exit gore signage (seriously, they need to stop it with this cheap, ugly, poor-placed garbage)
• More medians to control left turns on major arterials
• More innovative interchange/intersection designs: more DDIs, roundabouts, SPUIs, Michigan lefts, etc., and while I'm at it, less cloverleafs
• IDOT and ISTHA: More complete access interchanges (thinking mostly of the Edens and the Tri-State)
• ISTHA: More interchanges in general (with cashless tolling becoming a thing, there are a couple roads I'd like to see ramps added in Lake County)
• Cook County: More usage of pentagon shields in the outskirts of the county

[TheStranger]

Lots of good California ones, but I'd add: allowing for signing state routes on roads that are not actually state-maintained. And I suppose the other way around too, not requiring state route signage on all state-maintained roads.

For the latter, isn't that already the case (and not in a good way?)

I know Route 18 was scantly signed ca. 2014 between Route 138 in Palmdale and US 395 - and that's a major regional connector!

Route 128 barely has signs between Winters and Monticello too (I've biked and driven this segment).

When I did my Old US 40 roadtrip a few days ago from SF to Sacramento, it was striking how Historic US 40 in Fairfield and Vacaville are legit better signed than the entirety of some state routes elsewhere in California!

[jdbx]

I'll add a few more for California, all of which pertain to freeways.  I feel like aside from the route signage continuity problems that others have noted, CalTrans does a pretty good job with most non-freeway routes:

• External exit tabs
• Continuous lighting on urban freeways
• Signing of which route is crossing over/under freeway (such as Arizona does https://goo.gl/maps/LUAtJfDE1fHctMbG8)

[sbeaver44]

Pennsylvania:

More Jersey style expressways instead of light after light
Mile markers on state highways and US Routes
Numbered exits on non-interstate freeways
Shoulders on two lane roads
Bring back rural waysides
Better pavement and design
Get rid of NO MERGE AREA design
Affordable Tolls (PTC, but PennDOT/Legislative fault)

PennDOT has done better recently, there's just so much catching up to do

SM-T290

[ztonyg]

Arizona:

• Enhanced Mile Markers
• 3dis
• Control Cities for Urban Freeways
• APL signage (there are only a very limited amount of APL signage)
• Travel Times for roads under construction (for some reason, Arizona eliminates travel times for roads under construction and then takes a long time to restore them after the construction is finished)
• Parclos

[kernals12]

Also, for Massachusetts, access management like they have in Virginia. It makes the roads safer and cuts down on the number of billboards, strip malls, and car dealerships that you're driving past.

[sbeaver44]

Also, for Massachusetts, access management like they have in Virginia. It makes the roads safer and cuts down on the number of billboards, strip malls, and car dealerships that you're driving past.

I'll second this for PA

See US 11/15 In Camp Hill and Hummels Wharf/Shamokin Dam, or any business highway near Philadelphia

SM-T290