Freeway Regulations that should be adopted by the FHWA

[vdeane]

Like this interchange in Lexington KY with New Circle Road (KY 4) and Versailles Road (US 60). https://maps.app.goo.gl/Wh9HBeUhPywHBUCo8  See how you have to make a dangerous left on a busy road to get to the on ramp? 

How is that dangerous?  Just find a gap in traffic and turn.  I thought you were talking about something like this!

[Henry]

Maybe ban full-width gantries for use with single signs (like the ones GDOT uses), unless they're APLs or VMSs; diagrammaticals were retired in 2023, but they remain the only other acceptable use for this application.

[Revive 755]

Like this interchange in Lexington KY with New Circle Road (KY 4) and Versailles Road (US 60). https://maps.app.goo.gl/Wh9HBeUhPywHBUCo8  See how you have to make a dangerous left on a busy road to get to the on ramp?

How is that dangerous?  Just find a gap in traffic and turn.  I thought you were talking about something like this!

Neither of those look that bad.  Perhaps try NB I-57 to WB US 30 in the southern Chicago suburbs.  Or the nearby one from WB US 30 into a shopping center (assuming IDOT has not switched it to protected-only.

[Georgia Guardrail]

Like this interchange in Lexington KY with New Circle Road (KY 4) and Versailles Road (US 60). https://maps.app.goo.gl/Wh9HBeUhPywHBUCo8  See how you have to make a dangerous left on a busy road to get to the on ramp?

How is that dangerous?  Just find a gap in traffic and turn.  I thought you were talking about something like this!

Neither of those look that bad.  Perhaps try NB I-57 to WB US 30 in the southern Chicago suburbs.  Or the nearby one from WB US 30 into a shopping center (assuming IDOT has not switched it to protected-only.

Yeah that would be a much better example of what I meant.

[cockroachking]

Like this interchange in Lexington KY with New Circle Road (KY 4) and Versailles Road (US 60). https://maps.app.goo.gl/Wh9HBeUhPywHBUCo8  See how you have to make a dangerous left on a busy road to get to the on ramp?

How is that dangerous?  Just find a gap in traffic and turn.  I thought you were talking about something like this!

Neither of those look that bad.  Perhaps try NB I-57 to WB US 30 in the southern Chicago suburbs.  Or the nearby one from WB US 30 into a shopping center (assuming IDOT has not switched it to protected-only.

The first link looks like a nightmare. The second link looks like nothing unusual. I'd be extremely annoyed if I was a local and that second one got converted to protected only.

[Scott5114]

My local instance of this is I-11 EB to Decatur Blvd., which has the insanity of having a stop-controlled on-ramp to a ten lane street. At least there's a median so nobody can turn left there. And there's a No U Turn sign so people won't dive across all five lanes to hang a left—oh, what am I saying, this is Vegas, it's not like anyone is going to actually look at the sign.

[kphoger]

My local instance of this is I-11 EB to Decatur Blvd., which has the insanity of having a stop-controlled on-ramp to a ten lane street. At least there's a median so nobody can turn left there. And there's a No U Turn sign so people won't dive across all five lanes to hang a left—oh, what am I saying, this is Vegas, it's not like anyone is going to actually look at the sign.

With no left or through movement, I don't see why a stoplight should be necessary.

[wanderer2575]

Maybe ban full-width gantries for use with single signs (like the ones GDOT uses), unless they're APLs or VMSs; diagrammaticals were retired in 2023, but they remain the only other acceptable use for this application.

Other than being a waste of money (which regulations generally do not address), what's the problem?

I can sort of maybe see the justification for a single-sign gantry when it's placed at an entrance ramp and the desire is that the sign be seen from the thru lanes, such as here.  (This one really should be an exit-only sign over the ramp lane, but that's another issue.)

[Rothman]

Maybe ban full-width gantries for use with single signs (like the ones GDOT uses), unless they're APLs or VMSs; diagrammaticals were retired in 2023, but they remain the only other acceptable use for this application.

Other than being a waste of money (which regulations generally do not address), what's the problem?

I can sort of maybe see the justification for a single-sign gantry when it's placed at an entrance ramp and the desire is that the sign be seen from the thru lanes, such as here.  (This one really should be an exit-only sign over the ramp lane, but that's another issue.)

Engineers are getting more wary of certain cantilevered overhead sign structures.  Wonder if we'll see more full width ones rather than fewer...

[1995hoo]

....

4.) Signals required when left turns cross >2 lanes of traffic

....

That seems irrelevant on a "freeway," which should not have traffic lights nor at-grade left turns at all.

This is for interchange ramps that connect a freeway and access road.  If the access road has 2 lanes in both directions, there should be a signalized intersection and not just a stop sign for left turns to get on or off the ramp.

I don't favor any blanket rule of this sort because such a rule would not take into account relative traffic volumes on the ramps and the other road. This left turn onto a on-ramp near Charlottesville works perfectly well with just a Yield sign, for example, due to low traffic volume going in this particular direction, whereas if you pivot the camera around the other way and go to the other side of the interchange, you'll see there is a light serving the far higher traffic volumes heading from southbound Route 29 to eastbound I-64.

[kphoger]

Really, when it comes to this, I don't see how an intersection at a freeway interchange is all that different from an intersection elsewhere.

If this intersection or this one should have to be stoplight-controlled based on lane count, then why shouldn't this one too?

[hbelkins]

Like this interchange in Lexington KY with New Circle Road (KY 4) and Versailles Road (US 60). https://maps.app.goo.gl/Wh9HBeUhPywHBUCo8  See how you have to make a dangerous left on a busy road to get to the on ramp?

How is that dangerous?  Just find a gap in traffic and turn.  I thought you were talking about something like this!

Depending on the time of day, making that left turn can be a real adventure. You'd almost be better off getting on KY 4 northbound and going to the next exit and turning around.

[RobbieL2415]

It should be mandatory for three or more signalized intersections with one half mile of each other to be on a coordinated traffic management system.

[NE2]

It should be mandatory for three or more signalized intersections with one half mile of each other to be on a coordinated traffic management system.

Ah yes, the freeway regulations. The freeway regulations about traffic lights on the regulated freeway.

[kphoger]

It should be mandatory for three or more signalized intersections with one half mile of each other to be on a coordinated traffic management system.

Ah yes, the freeway regulations. The freeway regulations about traffic lights on the regulated freeway.

You obviously haven't seen any freeways with >2 stoplights within a half-mile of each other.[/sarc]

In all seriousness, this is actually a problem at freeway interchanges where both ramps are signalized but there's a nearby but unsynchronized stoplight just a block or two away.

[1995hoo]

It should be mandatory for three or more signalized intersections with one half mile of each other to be on a coordinated traffic management system.

Ah yes, the freeway regulations. The freeway regulations about traffic lights on the regulated freeway.

You obviously haven't seen any freeways with >2 stoplights within a half-mile of each other.[/sarc]

....

Would three traffic lights within 0.9 of a mile qualify?

(Of course, none of us would consider that road a "freeway" except insofar as the road's formal name includes that word, sort of like the infamous Rockaway Freeway in Queens. But West Virginia's DOT regards it as a "freeway" and that's why I cited it.)

[kphoger]

* I-180 (Cheyenne) has entered the chat.

[Revive 755]

Neither of those look that bad.  Perhaps try NB I-57 to WB US 30 in the southern Chicago suburbs.  Or the nearby one from WB US 30 into a shopping center (assuming IDOT has not switched it to protected-only.

The first link looks like a nightmare. The second link looks like nothing unusual. I'd be extremely annoyed if I was a local and that second one got converted to protected only.

At least for Illinois and Missouri, three opposing through lanes is when those state DOT's start considering protected-only as the default (Missouri seems a lot stricter on it).  The US 30 intersection has the left turn opposed by four through lanes and has a negative offset.