By this I mean roads like US 15 in PA, or NY 5 in Buffalo. I don't know what else to call them; maybe non-Interstate grade expressways, with minimal at grade intersections.
California is the king of the expressway configuration. US 101 is probably the prime example in that it doesn't have a traffic light between San Francisco and Los Angeles but for the most part is an expressway. Some other notable examples would be segments of CA 58, CA 198, CA 152, US 395, CA 65, CA 46, CA 60, CA 78, and CA 86 which come to mind off the top of my head. Oddly California even has a weird definition of what an "expressway" might be which in some cases can mean two lanes segments provided they have enough access control.
Florida is another state big on expressway alignments like US 19, US 27, and almost all of FL 50 just name a few. Michigan has some notable expressways like US 127 north of Lansing and even Arizona is starting to get some large ones with the likes of AZ 85, 260, 87 or even US 60.
The upper Midwest is rife with these: IA 27/Avenue of the Saints, extended S as MO 27/US 61. US 20 E-W across the state, the IA 163 corridor, and even US 61 from Davenport to Dubuque. Wisconsin's got almost too many to count: US 151, US 10, WI 29, parts of WI 26, etc., etc. Even Minnesota, reluctant as it is to deploy any continuous freeways (Interstates notwithstanding) outside Twin Cities metro, is gradually (and glacially!) improving the MN 60/US 169 corridor through Mankato to expressway standards (IA's done their corresponding part with US 75 and IA 60 NE of Sioux City). The idiom seen in this region (rural expressway with some freeway segments around towns & cities) appears to have served it well (although more than one of us has projected potential Interstate corridors over some or all of these facilities).
Agreed the Midwest probably wins. Also thinking of North Dakota with US 2 across the entire state and US 83 between Minot and Bismarck. These roads are even signed 70 mph in many places.
South Dakota has it with the Heartland Expressway/SD 79 and also parts of US 85.
Nexus 6P
New Jersey has a batch of them, for example NJ 3, NJ 4, NJ 24, NJ 42, and NJ 440. It's also the state from which we get the term "Jersey freeway" for a reason.
Louisiana isn't a contender in this contest. It's pretty much all or nothing when it comes to freeways. There are only a few highways that I wouldn't even call freeways or expressways, they just happen to have an exit or two on them:
US 71/US 165 in Alexandria
US 61/US 190 in Baton Rouge
US 165 in Monroe
iPhone
Quote from: dgolubNew Jersey has a batch of them, for example NJ 3, NJ 4, NJ 24, NJ 42, and NJ 440. It's also the state from which we get the term "Jersey freeway" for a reason.
Given the OP's definition (minimum of at-grade intersections), I would not put New Jersey's highways (with their preponderance of driveways and RIRO's) in the same category. The specific examples you cited are also all full freeway segments, while the OP is looking for routes that are not quite full freeway but are still limited-access.
Mississippi could be considered a contender in this. Since 1987, they've been upgrading their core rural routes to a rural arterial standard. Existing driveways and intersections are typically kept, though new alignment segments are built as limited-access. This would include most of Mississippi's US routes (excluding US 278 and those parallel to Interstates), MS 25, and MS 67.
Sparker's right in that the Midwest is rife with them, the Upper Midwest in particular (Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and the Dakotas). Though both Ohio and West Virginia also have a fair number of them as well.
CA-71 Chino hills freeway has an at grade intersection at one point.
CA-47 Terminal Island Freeway has an at grade sections and its a limited access road.
Travis Air Base Parkway in Fairfield, CA is a city owned expressway.
It's set up as the Santa Clara Expressway system its county managed highways.
Richmond Parkway and Vasco road could meet the definition that the OP is saying.
Quote from: froggie on May 07, 2017, 11:07:54 AM
Though both Ohio and West Virginia also have a fair number of them as well.
Was going to mention West Virginia but saw you did.
Most of the ADHS corridors in the Mountaineer State are what transportation engineers and planners would call expressways (never mind WVDOT/DOH's annoying habit of installing signs which imply that the corridors are freeways, which most are not).
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 07, 2017, 01:25:32 PM
Quote from: froggie on May 07, 2017, 11:07:54 AM
Though both Ohio and West Virginia also have a fair number of them as well.
Was going to mention West Virginia but saw you did.
Most of the ADHS corridors in the Mountaineer State are what transportation engineers and planners would call expressways (never mind WVDOT/DOH's annoying habit of installing signs which imply that the corridors are freeways, which most are not).
More recently-built roads (US 48, US 35) have considerably fewer at-grades than some of the older corridors (US 119, US 19 between Beckley and Fayetteville, US 50). Of course US 48 was built over a new-terrain route, while the others were built pretty much adjacent to the routes they replaced or other parallel routes.
Quote from: hbelkins on May 07, 2017, 03:00:59 PM
More recently-built roads (US 48, US 35) have considerably fewer at-grades than some of the older corridors (US 119, US 19 between Beckley and Fayetteville, US 50). Of course US 48 was built over a new-terrain route, while the others were built pretty much adjacent to the routes they replaced or other parallel routes.
Correct. And even on the "old" part of western Corridor H (between I-79 and WV-92 just west of Elkins), it is
very obvious that more intersections at-grade were allowed as compared to eastern Corridor H (Wardensville to Davis).
Others have told me that western Corridor H is now signed as U.S. 48 (last time I was on it in February, there were no signs up).
Quote from: cpzilliacus on May 07, 2017, 01:25:32 PM
.....never mind WVDOT/DOH's annoying habit of installing signs which imply that the corridors are freeways, which most are not.
Caltrans, as well as its predecessor Division of Highways agency, also had a habit of posting signs declaring a facility to be a "freeway". These signs were generally posted along chain-link fences or other delineations of highway easement and were usually black and about 2' x 3', invariably mounted perpendicular to the roadway. These were found along expressway (both 2 & 4 lane, divided and undivided). The practice seems not to have been continued, although some of this signage persists. Other posters who have gotten out a bit more in the state (Max, Coatimundi, Quillz, etc.) might be able to cast some more recent light as to where these signs remain posted.