North Carolina has one of the darkest highways in the nation. We should add lighting at every interchange so it won't be as scary to drive on. I've seen some people put their high-beams on. (Even on a 4-lane highway)
I think the forested section on US-264 (future I-587) wouldn't be a bad idea if there's no cars there, but I think the chances of lighting going at those interchanges are pretty slim atm.
Driving on the Neuse River bridge is a nightmare for me since it's so dark and there's no lighting whatsoever on that highway.
Ontario uses high-mast lighting on most lit sections of freeway and interchanges, barring ones that are near airports. I'm not sure why Ontario deems high-mast lighting is better than conventional lighting, but it seems to work.
(Curiously, I wonder why they decided to use 3-bulb lighting here on this section of Highway 400, which is 12 lanes wide in total... Seems like the number of bulbs is too little for the number of lanes.)
(https://i.imgur.com/YD0IiXo.png)
Where exactly is this section of US 264? Do you mean the hauntingly sparse segment between Engelhard and its eastern terminus with 64?
From my experiences of traveling through the South, freeways aren't typically lit until you go through the urban areas, and more often than not, you'll see those lights in the median, with some side-mounted units at the minor interchanges and high-mast lighting at the major ones.
In the Northeast and Midwest, the complete opposite is true, where you'll encounter lighting of some sort at almost every interchange (I cite the Tollways in IL, plus the IN Toll Road, OH/PA/NJ/MA Turnpikes, Garden State Parkway and NY State Thruway as some prime examples of such).
With high-mast lightning, I-270 between I-670 and OH 161 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0298889,-82.9034445,3a,19.2y,357.53h,91.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIGUsg8W8Hm9X8bz3PbmV5Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) uses them in the median as its main lightning type, along with some at the sides at the I-670, Morse and OH 161 interchanges. This is the only instance I can think of that does that. North of that section (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0937644,-82.9092113,3a,60.5y,308.25h,100.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjNK3-KHccYP2Lx7bV9ityA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), it switches to what I call the bell-shaped lighting poles (pretty common for freeway lighting in Ohio) in the median (lmk what the official name is, if there is one).
In Minnesota, just about every interchange is lit regardless of how busy it is or whether its in a rural or urban area. Historically, only rural interchanges that met a certain traffic volume threshold received lighting but MNDOT has substantially relaxed those standards over the past two decades or so and many interchanges that previously had no lighting now have lighting as they've been reconstructed. In urban areas, sometimes the lights are installed in the median, sometimes on the shoulders. MNDOT seems to do both pretty frequently depending on individual characteristics of the roadway. Urban areas (Minneapolis/Saint Paul, Duluth, Rochester, and Mankato) all have some sections of full freeway lighting. High mast lighting is pretty uncommon in Minnesota; it's for the most part reserved for major interchanges in rural areas or in urban areas away from homes. Most lighting (by MNDOT's estimates, about 95% of their lighting as of early 2020) is LED thanks to a mass conversion of the high-pressure sodium fixtures from 2015 to 2017.
Quote from: OldDominion75 on March 25, 2021, 08:37:37 PM
Where exactly is this section of US 264? Do you mean the hauntingly sparse segment between Engelhard and its eastern terminus with 64?
NC 11 interchange. and the I-95/I-795 junction. Not much traffic uses it so that could be the case, but really. Lighting on I-95 or I-795 and even US 301 in Wilson wouldn't bite to add.
My neighborhood got new LED street lights. They are for sure brighter. It helps with crime I'm sure!
Quote from: Henry on March 25, 2021, 08:40:21 PM
From my experiences of traveling through the South, freeways aren't typically lit until you go through the urban areas, and more often than not, you'll see those lights in the median, with some side-mounted units at the minor interchanges and high-mast lighting at the major ones.
In the Northeast and Midwest, the complete opposite is true, where you'll encounter lighting of some sort at almost every interchange (I cite the Tollways in IL, plus the IN Toll Road, OH/PA/NJ/MA Turnpikes, Garden State Parkway and NY State Thruway as some prime examples of such).
In Illinois, the Tollways set the standard if you want to have plentiful lighting. They also have largely converted to LED, minus just the Central section of I-294 that is being reconstructed (which will be once done). IDOT in the Chicago Region also has plentiful lighting in most places, with exception of a few oddities where one would think there'd be lighting but there isn't (US 12/IL 59 multiplex in Lake County at the interchanges is one that comes to mind). IDOT has been a lot less consistent about converting to LED, but it's slowly starting to occur. Other adjacent states aren't as consistent. Wisconsin, for instance, when traveling on I-94 West (really North) across the state line, you immediately notice a dropoff in lighting as soon as you cross! They may have some spot lighting at the top (or bottom) or ramps at interchanges. Missouri is another state that seems to have a similar aversion to lighting (and some of the ugliest light poles IMO), except unlike Wisconsin, they seem to put a single pole more at the merge of the ramps with maybe a pole at the top/bottom of the interchanges. IMO, both could take a lesson from the Illinois Tollway one state over.
Quote from: ChiMilNet on March 26, 2021, 06:31:58 PM
In Illinois, the Tollways set the standard if you want to have plentiful lighting. They also have largely converted to LED...
Honestly, I don't really like driving I-90 to Wisconsin, because it's just way too lit-up for a rural area. I prefer darkness after dark.
Quote from: kphoger on March 26, 2021, 08:09:45 PM
Quote from: ChiMilNet on March 26, 2021, 06:31:58 PM
In Illinois, the Tollways set the standard if you want to have plentiful lighting. They also have largely converted to LED...
Honestly, I don't really like driving I-90 to Wisconsin, because it's just way too lit-up for a rural area. I prefer darkness after dark.
So like our highways here in Greenville?
I've never driven that far east, so I don't know.
Quote from: kphoger on March 26, 2021, 08:26:14 PM
I've never driven that far east, so I don't know.
There's no lighting whatsoever. They are SUPER dark.
Sounds good to me, then.
Lighting in NY seems to be extremely minimal compared to other states
I drove through Belgium and every inch of motorway was lit, even in the middle of BFE (which is most of Belgium outside of Brussels).
Since I mentioned MN's take on freeway lighting yesterday, here are some of my lighting observations from other midwestern states in my travels:
North Dakota and South Dakota: Similar to MN in that interchanges that meet a certain traffic threshold are lit, but interchanges that serve very little traffic are dark (of which there are quite a few more of than MN). North Dakota makes fairly frequent use of high mast luminaires (especially in the Fargo area), while South Dakota prefers to stick more with at-grade lighting. Most lighting in both states is high-pressure sodium though there are some limited uses of LED luminaires in both states.
Wisconsin: Like was mentioned upthread, lighting is nonexistent on the mainline roadway except in urban areas but busier interchanges often have lighting at the ramp terminals. Interchanges with roundabout terminals often have enhanced lighting that extends a ways down the off-ramp to help guide drivers through the intersection. High mast lighting is rarely used. Nearly all WisDOT lighting is LED.
Iowa: Like WI, nearly all interchanges have lighting at the ramp terminals. Unlike WI, however, some busier rural interchanges (especially folded diamonds or interchanges with five ramps or more) have enhanced lighting on the ramps and mainline. Whether a rural interchange has lighting seems to vary more based upon when a section of highway was built than actual traffic or safety concerns, though. High mast lighting is used somewhat frequently at larger urban and suburban interchanges. Most non high mast freeway lighting is LED.
Illinois: Mentioned upthread; pretty much all interchanges are lit regardless of where in the state they are. High mast lighting is quite common. Most lighting is high-pressure sodium, though IDOT is beginning to convert fixtures to LED.
Indiana: Much like the Dakotas in that busier rural interchanges are lit and smaller rural interchanges are dark. It seems like Indiana has a higher traffic threshold to install lighting at rural interchanges, but the interchanges that do get lighting typically have the entirety of the interchange lit which is unlike what any of the other states mentioned above do. INDOT uses a mixture of high mast and at-grade lighting, sometimes at the same interchange. Most lighting is high-pressure sodium, but INDOT is beginning to convert fixtures to LED.
Michigan: Freeway lighting? What freeway lighting?!
Quote from: kphoger on March 26, 2021, 08:38:51 PM
Sounds good to me, then.
And I assume it's because of the low AADT.
Quote from: andrepoiy on March 25, 2021, 08:37:12 PM
Ontario uses high-mast lighting on most lit sections of freeway and interchanges, barring ones that are near airports. I'm not sure why Ontario deems high-mast lighting is better than conventional lighting, but it seems to work.
Because it illuminates the widest area for the best value. One HML unit can cover the same area as many standard luminaire poles, but with few pieces and no need for a bucket truck.
Quote from: andrepoiy on March 25, 2021, 08:37:12 PM
(Curiously, I wonder why they decided to use 3-bulb lighting here on this section of Highway 400, which is 12 lanes wide in total... Seems like the number of bulbs is too little for the number of lanes.)
That section is older, would do it that way nowadays (lessons learned).
West Virginia: mostly high-mast lighting, although there are some areas where there are low-mast lighting.
Quote from: OldDominion75 on March 25, 2021, 08:37:37 PM
Where exactly is this section of US 264? Do you mean the hauntingly sparse segment between Engelhard and its eastern terminus with 64?
IIRC, that's also the longest distance in North Carolina you can drive without gas being available. 38, 40ish miles I think? I also don't think there's any motorist services or gas in Stumpy Point.
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on March 27, 2021, 02:15:21 AM
West Virginia: mostly high-mast lighting, although there are some areas where there are low-mast lighting.
High mast lighting is relatively new in West Virginia. It's really only been in the last decade or so that it's been widely used, primarily at interchanges and newer rest areas. In the last 2-3 years, DOH has started to develop a preference for using high masts for continuous lighting including several miles of I-70 east of Wheeling that was previously unlit, and replacing existing "normal" lighting in the Charleston area.
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on March 26, 2021, 09:30:31 PM
Lighting in NY seems to be extremely minimal compared to other states
I don't know how this works in other states, but in New York it's the local municipality's responsibility for picking up the power bill on highway lighting.
There's lighting at every exit on the Spine of North Carolina (I-85/I-40 multiplex) between Greensboro and Hillsborough. Twenty years ago, this was mostly rural but now has the feel of a heavy industrial corridor, even somewhat here in Orange County.
Quote from: machias on March 28, 2021, 05:17:56 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on March 26, 2021, 09:30:31 PM
Lighting in NY seems to be extremely minimal compared to other states
I don't know how this works in other states, but in New York it's the local municipality's responsibility for picking up the power bill on highway lighting.
Let's address New York. As stated above, lighting along roadways aside from NYSTA or bridge authority property is paid for by the local municipality, and local municipalities do not want to pay for freeway lighting. Because of this, it tends to be limited to large cities. Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, and NYC have fully-lit freeway networks, few other places do.
It should also be noted that NY used to have far more lighting, particularly Upstate. If you look at photos of Albany from the 60s and early 70s, there is full lighting along every freeway. All freeway lighting in NYSDOT Region 1 was removed in the 1970s due to the energy crisis. I wouldn't be surprised if minimal lighting in other regions is for a similar reason.
Regions 4, 9, and 10 always had a decent amount of lighting around and Rochester has been the best-lit Upstate metro for quite some time.
High mast lighting is pretty rare in New York outside of toll plazas and tends to be limited to a handful of freeway-freeway interchanges. Region 4 (Rochester) is the only area that uses high mast lighting extensively, particularly along the Outer Loop and 490 east of town. Regions 3, 6, and 9 have it at a couple interchanges each.
Quote from: cl94 on March 28, 2021, 06:13:16 PM
Quote from: machias on March 28, 2021, 05:17:56 PM
Quote from: NoGoodNamesAvailable on March 26, 2021, 09:30:31 PM
Lighting in NY seems to be extremely minimal compared to other states
I don't know how this works in other states, but in New York it's the local municipality's responsibility for picking up the power bill on highway lighting.
Let's address New York. As stated above, lighting along roadways aside from NYSTA or bridge authority property is paid for by the local municipality, and local municipalities do not want to pay for freeway lighting. Because of this, it tends to be limited to large cities. Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, and NYC have fully-lit freeway networks, few other places do.
It should also be noted that NY used to have far more lighting, particularly Upstate. If you look at photos of Albany from the 60s and early 70s, there is full lighting along every freeway. All freeway lighting in NYSDOT Region 1 was removed in the 1970s due to the energy crisis. I wouldn't be surprised if minimal lighting in other regions is for a similar reason.
Regions 4, 9, and 10 always had a decent amount of lighting around and Rochester has been the best-lit Upstate metro for quite some time.
High mast lighting is pretty rare in New York outside of toll plazas and tends to be limited to a handful of freeway-freeway interchanges. Region 4 (Rochester) is the only area that uses high mast lighting extensively, particularly along the Outer Loop and 490 east of town. Regions 3, 6, and 9 have it at a couple interchanges each.
When the I-790/NY 5/8/12/49 junction was rebuilt in the late 1980s outside of Utica, high mast lighting was used at both that junction and the junction with Oriskany Blvd farther south. All of the high masts were removed about 8 years or so ago because of issues with the foundations, apparently they weren't poured correctly and were breaking. A few of the masts were replaced, but much of the lighting was simply removed.
Quote from: kphoger on March 26, 2021, 08:09:45 PM
I prefer darkness after dark.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 26, 2021, 08:16:23 PM
So like our highways here in Greenville?
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 26, 2021, 08:28:08 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 26, 2021, 08:26:14 PM
I've never driven that far east, so I don't know.
There's no lighting whatsoever. They are SUPER dark.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 27, 2021, 12:15:02 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 26, 2021, 08:38:51 PM
Sounds good to me, then.
And I assume it's because of the low AADT.
No, AADT has nothing to do with it. I just don't like super-lit roads.
Quote from: kphoger on March 30, 2021, 10:55:49 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 26, 2021, 08:09:45 PM
I prefer darkness after dark.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 26, 2021, 08:16:23 PM
So like our highways here in Greenville?
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 26, 2021, 08:28:08 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 26, 2021, 08:26:14 PM
I've never driven that far east, so I don't know.
There's no lighting whatsoever. They are SUPER dark.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 27, 2021, 12:15:02 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 26, 2021, 08:38:51 PM
Sounds good to me, then.
And I assume it's because of the low AADT.
No, AADT has nothing to do with it. I just don't like super-lit roads.
Why? Most people are against it
I see PennDOT replaced the I-99 mast pole lighting at Plank Road in Altoona per GSV. Now the usual poles at regular intervals.
This seems to be the norm in Central Florida especially SR 528 lighting.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 31, 2021, 11:47:36 AM
Why? Most people are against it
I dislike nighttime light pollution in general.
It seems to me that the tall mast lighting format was most popular between the late 1970s and the early 1990s. Today, installing such a setup would seem to be controversial due to NIMBY concerns regarding light pollution. And, with modern LEDs, you can install standard masts at standard intervals while using a lot less electricity than in the past.
Personally, I really like the new LED lighting. That said, I liked the old mercury lamps from the 60s and 70s and have always hated the pinkish fluorescents that started showing up around 1980 or so. They make everything look like crap. Even worse than San Diego's yellow bulbs. Can't wait to see every fixture with that pinkish bulb replaced with LEDs and I won't miss them one bit.
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 12:04:10 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 31, 2021, 11:47:36 AM
Why? Most people are against it
I dislike nighttime light pollution in general.
Understandable but they are fixing that with new cut-off fixtures.
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on March 31, 2021, 12:08:00 PM
It seems to me that the tall mast lighting format was most popular between the late 1970s and the early 1990s. Today, installing such a setup would seem to be controversial due to NIMBY concerns regarding light pollution. And, with modern LEDs, you can install standard masts at standard intervals while using a lot less electricity than in the past.
Personally, I really like the new LED lighting. That said, I liked the old mercury lamps from the 60s and 70s and have always hated the pinkish fluorescents that started showing up around 1980 or so. They make everything look like crap. Even worse than San Diego's yellow bulbs. Can't wait to see every fixture with that pinkish bulb replaced with LEDs and I won't miss them one bit.
That is why I hated as a kid to go Staten Island. They were the first place in the NYC metro to implement them, and to me they looked so dismal.
Now the new LED lights are bringing back the old feel.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 31, 2021, 12:13:40 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 12:04:10 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 31, 2021, 11:47:36 AM
Why? Most people are against it
I dislike nighttime light pollution in general.
Understandable but they are fixing that with new cut-off fixtures.
That only helps clear the sky above the fixtures. It doesn't help what I actually look at, which is the space below them.
I don't like the night to be lit up. I like darkness at night.
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 12:30:18 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 31, 2021, 12:13:40 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 12:04:10 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 31, 2021, 11:47:36 AM
Why? Most people are against it
I dislike nighttime light pollution in general.
Understandable but they are fixing that with new cut-off fixtures.
That only helps clear the sky above the fixtures. It doesn't help what I actually look at, which is the space below them.
I don't like the night to be lit up. I like darkness at night.
So you can see the Milky Way?
Quote from: roadman65 on March 31, 2021, 12:16:52 PM
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on March 31, 2021, 12:08:00 PM
It seems to me that the tall mast lighting format was most popular between the late 1970s and the early 1990s. Today, installing such a setup would seem to be controversial due to NIMBY concerns regarding light pollution. And, with modern LEDs, you can install standard masts at standard intervals while using a lot less electricity than in the past.
Personally, I really like the new LED lighting. That said, I liked the old mercury lamps from the 60s and 70s and have always hated the pinkish fluorescents that started showing up around 1980 or so. They make everything look like crap. Even worse than San Diego's yellow bulbs. Can't wait to see every fixture with that pinkish bulb replaced with LEDs and I won't miss them one bit.
That is why I hated as a kid to go Staten Island. They were the first place in the NYC metro to implement them, and to me they looked so dismal.
Now the new LED lights are bringing back the old feel.
Exactly my opinion. And, when they first went into use, in many cases they were first installed in high crime areas of cities (not that Staten Island is that) which gave an even creepier vibe to them. Then the epidemic of pink spread everywhere and here we are. Even the 2 streetlights in my semi-rural neighborhood are of this type. Bleech - I'd rather have darkness. The ones along the main roads, however, are the new LED and they look great.
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 31, 2021, 01:07:53 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 12:30:18 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 31, 2021, 12:13:40 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 31, 2021, 12:04:10 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 31, 2021, 11:47:36 AM
Why? Most people are against it
I dislike nighttime light pollution in general.
Understandable but they are fixing that with new cut-off fixtures.
That only helps clear the sky above the fixtures. It doesn't help what I actually look at, which is the space below them.
I don't like the night to be lit up. I like darkness at night.
So you can see the Milky Way?
Last I checked, the Milky Way is up in the sky, so it's irrelevant to what I said.
Quote from: roadman65 on March 31, 2021, 11:57:45 AM
I see PennDOT replaced the I-99 mast pole lighting at Plank Road in Altoona per GSV. Now the usual poles at regular intervals.
.
PennDOT has been taking down high-mast lighting in at least several places in SE PA (District 6-0).
I wonder why this (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.4259923,-77.9926931,3a,75y,141.08h,88.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1snKjukRPAYZM4B14BNlvZJQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DnKjukRPAYZM4B14BNlvZJQ%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D37.24152%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656) interchange has no lighting.
Quote from: StogieGuy7 on March 31, 2021, 12:08:00 PM
Even worse than San Diego's yellow bulbs.
Do you have GSVs of these yellow bulb installations? I remember them clearly from my trip to San Diego, but I can't find them when looking at daytime views. I remember them looking like fluorescent tubes wrapped in yellow, and I remember them in the zoo parking lot and from a neighborhood visible from I-5 south of town.
CT is pretty well lit. Here are the heavy hitters:
I-84: NY Border to Exit 8 (8 miles), Exit 10-11 (2 miles), Exit 17-30 (12 miles), Exit 33-65 (24 miles). About half of the 97 miles lit
I-91: I-95 to Exit 13 (11 miles), CT 9 to MA (31 miles). 42 of 58 miles lit
I-95: NY to Exit 55 (55 mi), Exit 68-70 (3 miles), Exit 74-81 (4 miles), Exit 82-90 (12 miles). 74 of 111 miles
I-291: Entire length
I-384: I-84 to just past CT 83 exit
I-395: Exits 13-14 (1 mi)
I-691/CT 66: I-84 to CT 10 and CT 71 to end
CT 2: I-84 to CT 94 and CT 32 concurrency through Norwich
CT 9: Area near I-95, Exits 10-18, north of Exit 21 (about 16-17 mi)
CT 8: I-95 to CT 15, Exit 13-17, Exit 24-35, Exit 43-44
CT 15: Very spotty. Only meat Sikorsky Bridge and the Hartford portion.
In these locations lighting is needed
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5715676,-86.6371006,925m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e1?authuser=0&entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.3567316,-86.8525497,1103m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e1?authuser=0&entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.324,-87.0473638,780m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e1?authuser=0&entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.2791636,-87.0946385,781m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e1?authuser=0&entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.7188637,-86.8297193,951m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e1?authuser=0&entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6109965,-85.7896312,925m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e1?authuser=0&entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6456429,-85.504258,231m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e1?authuser=0&entry=ttu
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.583936,-85.926073,519m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e1?authuser=0&entry=ttu
I like darkness at night. And too much lighting works against you at night, anyway. Between your dashboard, on-board entertainment, street lights, other headlights, too much brightness and it's glaring and hard to see.
I made a topic about Alaska's reflective poles. I really like those. In many stretches of highway, instead of lights, there are reflective poles that work like standard road signs. So they only light up when you get close to them. Combined with retroreflective lane markers, that's perfect. I find it easier to see the road with this scenario as opposed to lighting.
I'm thinking that the presence, or lack thereof, of freeway lighting in major metros (ie, Los Angeles, CA) has a LOT to do with the likelihood of the wiring for that lighting being stolen.
Mike
I always knew as a kid when I fell asleep in the car when we got to Milwaukee because that was the only place there was lighting on the highway. Not even Madison did that on 90/94.
Quote from: hobsini2 on August 13, 2023, 07:39:46 PM
I always knew as a kid when I fell asleep in the car when we got to Milwaukee because that was the only place there was lighting on the highway. Not even Madison did that on 90/94.
But they did on the Beltline.
Wisconsin used to be really stingy on freeway lighting, but have in the last 20 years have considerably increased lighting in high-traffic or more hazardous areas.
I've noticed that INDOT has started putting lighting on the interchange ramps... Right now, there are contracts to install lighting on the Kokomo section of US 31 as well as the rural sections of interstates outside of the major cities.
Ontario appears to now be more liberal in its application of freeway lighting, specifically in recently widened sections of freeways with rural surrounding land uses (but with AADTs that are more akin to urban freeways).
E.g: Highway 400 between King Road and Major Mackenzie Drive
(https://i.imgur.com/Oom79ck.png)
https://goo.gl/maps/1nZRduz5AWRrAxsR6