Road features you wish are used more in your state

[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.

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

See MA 9.

[tolbs17]

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.

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.

I know in North Carolina, they did plan to raise the speed limit on freeways to 75 mph but that plan is dead it seems like. Unless they are trying to wait for the western states to raise it first... Many freeways can easily handle it (except for busy highways like I-485 and I-540) But elsewhere, I can definitely see it happening.

https://myfox8.com/news/nc-senate-approves-75-mph-speed-limit/

[dgolub]

New York:
* Speed limits over 55 MPH
* Grade-separated interchanges on surface roads
* Business and alternate routes
* Signed county route numbers in the counties that don't have them

[US 89]

Utah:

Four laned rural corridors where traffic warrants it (cough US 6)
Speed limits higher than 65 on non-Interstates
More full system interchanges, not the half-assed things that get built (looking at you, Bangerter at 15 and 201)
Signed county routes in the vast majority of counties which lack them
Far post mounted traffic signals
Horizontal traffic signals
Rumble strips when roads approach stop signs
Control cities on beltways

[NWI_Irish96]

SPUIs

I would say this too. There are a lot of places in Indiana that could benefit from them.

[fillup420]

NC implement of 65 mph speed limits on 4-lane divided highways.

Has North Carolina used 65 mph speed limits on non-limited-access highways in the past? I'm not sure. But I do agree it would be nice to see more widespread.

Don't think so.

I'll add for Virginia: if we're making full on changes: 75 mph speed limits on rural limited access highways, 65 mph on non-limited-access highways.

Would be great for North Carolina too. People speed like crazy

I have only seen a few instances of 60 posted on 4 lane divided routes. Its usually kept to 55. There are also more than a few 2 lane state/US highways that could easily handle 65+. US 64 between western Statesville and Taylorsville could have a 70 limit no problem; its a 2 lane road built to freeway standards. I definitely don't find myself cruising at 90 on that stretch

[sprjus4]

^ Agreed. And further east, there's a larger number of 60 mph divided routes, though a lot of 55 mph where it could still easily be much higher.

[hobsini2]

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)

definitely the "Fixed" travel time signs. Not on message boards. Especially in metro areas.
Also, the sequence of exits sign as well.

Good calls.

[webny99]

Ramp meters are an interesting one. Not used much in NY, but not sure I want them either.

Also for NY...

-Better mile markers on state routes
-County and town line signs on the Thruway
-Town line signs on all interstates
-2 mile advance signs for rural exits (this is becoming more common in I-81 and needs to become NYSTA standard)

[hobsini2]

Other than Wisconsin, what other states use a sign like this? While this sign is in Illinois, this is a sometimes used WisDOT practice with a city with multiple exits.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4697664,-88.9949755,3a,29.8y,25.42h,90.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbfkqg0w0jtLJqVTMWA7WSQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Personally, I prefer this practice instead of this sign just saying "Beloit Next 3 Exits".

[SkyPesos]

Other than Wisconsin, what other states use a sign like this? While this sign is in Illinois, this is a sometimes used WisDOT practice with a city with multiple exits.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4697664,-88.9949755,3a,29.8y,25.42h,90.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbfkqg0w0jtLJqVTMWA7WSQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Personally, I prefer this practice instead of this sign just saying "Beloit Next 3 Exits".

I know there's some in Missouri. I-70 WB have a sign for "St Charles Exits"  with the next 3 exits (229, 228 and 227) listed just east of the eastern Missouri River crossing.

EDIT: Seems like it's gone after the Convention Center exit opened, but this is what it used to look like: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7609209,-90.4728443,3a,22.8y,272.51h,99.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0BcUrAsxf83A7x5xqwTYWQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[Scott5114]

Other than Wisconsin, what other states use a sign like this? While this sign is in Illinois, this is a sometimes used WisDOT practice with a city with multiple exits.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4697664,-88.9949755,3a,29.8y,25.42h,90.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbfkqg0w0jtLJqVTMWA7WSQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Personally, I prefer this practice instead of this sign just saying "Beloit Next 3 Exits".

It's in the MUTCD, so theoretically any state could use it. Oklahoma has used it to sign exits that serve OU facilities.

It's not terrible, but I prefer the Kansas method of doing the "City, Next 3 exits" and then supplementing that with next-three-exit menu signs in the median.

[vdeane]

Ramp meters are an interesting one. Not used much in NY, but not sure I want them either.

They're not used much upstate, but the area around NYC has a few.  They're on I-495, the Northern State Parkway, I-87/I-287, and I-287 (to clarify, they're on both the Cross-Westchester and the Thruway mainline where the overlap is); possibly elsewhere too.

[ran4sh]

In all states I wish superstreets and Michigan Lefts were used more, in conjunction with traffic signal progression. Superstreets are ideal because they separate the road into different signals for each direction, which means each direction's traffic signals can be timed like a one-way street instead of having to try to fit a two-way progression where it may not work.

In Georgia I wish the state would properly sign the entrances to freeways per the MUTCD. For example, there is guidance for overhead signage if a multi-lane road approaches freeway on-ramps, but Georgia often uses ground-mounted signs only (which, on a multi-lane road, a vehicle in the right lane may block the view from vehicles using the left lane).

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Other than Wisconsin, what other states use a sign like this? While this sign is in Illinois, this is a sometimes used WisDOT practice with a city with multiple exits.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4697664,-88.9949755,3a,29.8y,25.42h,90.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbfkqg0w0jtLJqVTMWA7WSQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Minnesota has a few sets of these. St. Cloud, Owatonna, Albert Lea if I recall correctly. Smaller cities with multiple exits generally just get the "(city) NEXT _ EXITS" sign.

[DandyDan]

Other than Wisconsin, what other states use a sign like this? While this sign is in Illinois, this is a sometimes used WisDOT practice with a city with multiple exits.
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4697664,-88.9949755,3a,29.8y,25.42h,90.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbfkqg0w0jtLJqVTMWA7WSQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

Minnesota has a few sets of these. St. Cloud, Owatonna, Albert Lea if I recall correctly. Smaller cities with multiple exits generally just get the "(city) NEXT _ EXITS" sign.

IIRC, Mankato and North Mankato each get one of those on US 169. Fairmont and Worthington also get one on I-90. OTOH, it would be tough to make one for Austin, which has 8 exits.

As for Iowa, two rather obvious things to do would be to pave the shoulders of freeways and expressways and have right turn lanes at intersections where right turns are frequent.

[jbnv]

Louisiana:
* Signage that doesn't trigger OCD.
* Using display boards to display travel times instead of witticisms.
* FREEWAY ENTRANCE signs.
* Texas-style frontage roads in urban areas.
* Business interstates instead of legacy US routes.
* Ability to use TxTag on the Causeway and other few tolls roads that we have.
* Pavement that lasts.

[tolbs17]

Louisiana:
* FREEWAY ENTRANCE signs.
* Business interstates instead of legacy US routes.

Is there any specific reason why these 2 are really needed? We seem to do fine without FREEWAY ENTRANCE signs as well as business interstates. We are getting rid of them cause they cause confusion to drivers.

[vdeane]

We are getting rid of them cause they cause confusion to drivers.

Meanwhile in NY we're in the process of adding one...

[paulthemapguy]

Runaway truck ramps.  Illinois isn't flat, after all. 

[webny99]

We are getting rid of them cause they cause confusion to drivers.

Meanwhile in NY we're in the process of adding one...

Yes, I've noticed that. FREEWAY ENTRANCE signs have been appearing everywhere, seemingly out of nowhere.

[tolbs17]

We are getting rid of them cause they cause confusion to drivers.

Meanwhile in NY we're in the process of adding one...

Yes, I've noticed that. FREEWAY ENTRANCE signs have been appearing everywhere, seemingly out of nowhere.

I'm more into freeway ends compared to entrance signs.

[SkyPesos]

We are getting rid of them cause they cause confusion to drivers.

Meanwhile in NY we're in the process of adding one...

Yes, I've noticed that. FREEWAY ENTRANCE signs have been appearing everywhere, seemingly out of nowhere.

I'm more into freeway ends compared to entrance signs.

So a sign like this (replacing the Chinese highway marker with a Interstate/US/state one of course)?

[jbnv]

Louisiana:
* Business interstates instead of legacy US routes.

Is there any specific reason why these 2 are really needed? We seem to do fine without FREEWAY ENTRANCE signs as well as business interstates. We are getting rid of them cause they cause confusion to drivers.

Which part does "We are getting rid of them cause they cause confusion to drivers" apply to?

Specifically re business interstates: All of Louisiana's 2DIs run parallel to an older US highway. In some cases, only a few miles separates the interstate and the old highway. I don't see any need to keep some of those highways signed as US highways since they aren't the primary highways any more. 

Specifically:

* US 51 in LaPlace:  The southernmost few miles of this highway connect the southern terminus at US 61 to I-55. Then US 51 is multiplexed onto I-55 for ~25 miles before splitting and going into Hammond. The *only* reason US 51 still exists south of Hammond is for those last few miles in LaPlace. That's pretty much what a business interstate is for in the first place.

* Other examples of legacy US routes effectively replaced by interstates (within Louisiana): US 11; US 190 east of Baton Rouge; US 90 from Lake Charles to Lafayette; US 90 through New Orleans; US 51 from Hammond to Amite. Most or all of these already serve as alternate routes for their respective interstates, so why not put up a green shield to indicate that?

P.S.: Louisiana has several cases of legacy US business routes that serve little if any purpose a short distance from the parent highway. Some examples: 51 in Hammond; 90 in Lake Charles; 90 in Lafayette; 90 in metro New Orleans (with the Westbank Expressway signed as the business route!?!); 190 in Slidell; 165 in Monroe. Now obviously these could and probably should be deleted without converting them to business interstates. The point of including them here is that if you want to talk about confusion, then I see more of that in these legacy routes than in Business Interstate labels.

[SkyPesos]

90 in metro New Orleans (with the Westbank Expressway signed as the business route!?!);

I was confused about that the first time looking at it. Primary route on an arterial and a freeway as a business route? That is pretty much the complete opposite of what a Business route is supposed to be. Either change the banner to "Bypass", or switch the 90 and 90 Business designations.