Signs using "must exit" instead of "exit only"

[1995hoo]

I thought of this topic because three times in the past month, I've passed signs that use the words "MUST EXIT" in some formulation. I remember when I was growing up it seemed like Delaware preferred those words–I remember on I-295 at the US-13 interchange there were a number of signs saying either "THIS LANE MUST EXIT" (with a downward-pointing arrow) or simply "MUST EXIT." Those signs have all long since been replaced and the new signs use the now-customary "EXIT ONLY."

But last Friday I was on a southbound Acela approaching Philadelphia's 30th Street Station and I saw the following sign out the window (I didn't have my phone out and so wasn't fast enough to get a picture):
https://goo.gl/maps/RnVXSLczDYPpUEge8

Also, twice in the past month I've passed a sign on the I-495 Inner Loop in Virginia, a fairly new vertical BGS on the right side of the road as you pass through the Route 7 interchange in Tysons Corner. The sign is an advance BGS for the left-side Dulles exit and, like the sign in Philadelphia, it says "LEFT LANE MUST EXIT" (though it has the words stacked–"left lane" on one line and "must exit" on a second line underneath). I don't have any pictures because both times in the past month I was driving, traffic was reasonably heavy, and by the time I remembered the sign was there it was too late to get a picture. It's not on Google yet–their images are from October 2022 and the sign is more recent because it was posted due to construction causing changes in the lane configuration. That particular sign is interesting because the overhead signs further down the road use "EXIT ONLY."

I'm curious whether anyone has any idea how common the use of "MUST EXIT" is elsewhere. I always kind of liked that wording because I've always felt it's unambiguous. I've seen a few articles over the years in which writers have wrongly said "EXIT ONLY" means you can exit there but you can't re-enter the highway. If those people think that, surely there are others who think that as well. It's obviously an unreasonable interpretation (the interchange nearest to my house proves it), but it's still out there. "This Lane Must Exit" leaves no room for doubt what it means.



BTW, those of you who are interested in trains might take note that you can see two new Acela trainsets (not yet in passenger service) in the background of that Google Street View image if you zoom in under the BGS.

[formulanone]

I found an example west of Miami, on Killian Parkway (SR 990):



Alberta seems to have a few; this one is just outside the Edmonton Airport...



...and here's one in Calgary, also on AB 2:



"EXIT ONLY" seems to be more common in Alberta, however.

[1995hoo]

A Google search for <Delaware "Must Exit" sign> turned up, among others, this one that must be relatively new in view of the Clearview. The same Google search turned up Delaware's MUTCD and it calls for "Exit Only," but I guess some newer signs adhere to their older protocol.

[LilianaUwU]

#redirect [[Delaware]]

[1995hoo]

#redirect [[Delaware]]

Except in the original post I noted seeing such this month in Pennsylvania and Virginia.

[Amaury]

Not an exit, so not sure if this counts, but: https://goo.gl/maps/4nmsYqvYfhJXcKjs7

[Big John]

^^MUTCD R3-7.  Standard sign found all over the USA.

[J N Winkler]

I'm curious whether anyone has any idea how common the use of "MUST EXIT" is elsewhere. I always kind of liked that wording because I've always felt it's unambiguous. I've seen a few articles over the years in which writers have wrongly said "EXIT ONLY" means you can exit there but you can't re-enter the highway. If those people think that, surely there are others who think that as well. It's obviously an unreasonable interpretation (the interchange nearest to my house proves it), but it's still out there. "This Lane Must Exit" leaves no room for doubt what it means.

If memory serves, the rationale for standardizing on "Exit Only" rather than "Must Exit" back in the mid-1970's was to avoid the prescriptive overtones of the latter.  Many agencies also originally rendered these and other lane-drop-related legends in black against white (regulatory colors), but black on yellow was ultimately chosen so that drivers would not interpret "Exit Only" as an instruction to exit when they preferred to execute a safe transition to a through lane.  This issue assumes particular salience in states that penalize drivers for changing out of trap lanes, as I understand Virginia does.

I've spoken to people without experience driving in the US who have interpreted "Exit Only" as indicating re-entry is not possible at the same interchange.  However, I haven't heard that this misunderstanding doesn't go away after a few instances of observing lane-drop signing in context.  It goes the other way too:  an American friend with no overseas travel experience pointed to the British "Escape lane" sign (used for runaway truck ramps) in Know your traffic signs and asked if that was like "Exit Only" here.

[jeffandnicole]

I'm curious whether anyone has any idea how common the use of "MUST EXIT" is elsewhere. I always kind of liked that wording because I've always felt it's unambiguous. I've seen a few articles over the years in which writers have wrongly said "EXIT ONLY" means you can exit there but you can't re-enter the highway. If those people think that, surely there are others who think that as well. It's obviously an unreasonable interpretation (the interchange nearest to my house proves it), but it's still out there. "This Lane Must Exit" leaves no room for doubt what it means.

If memory serves, the rationale for standardizing on "Exit Only" rather than "Must Exit" back in the mid-1970's was to avoid the prescriptive overtones of the latter.  Many agencies also originally rendered these and other lane-drop-related legends in black against white (regulatory colors), but black on yellow was ultimately chosen so that drivers would not interpret "Exit Only" as an instruction to exit when they preferred to execute a safe transition to a through lane.  This issue assumes particular salience in states that penalize drivers for changing out of trap lanes, as I understand Virginia does.

I've spoken to people without experience driving in the US who have interpreted "Exit Only" as indicating re-entry is not possible at the same interchange.  However, I haven't heard that this misunderstanding doesn't go away after a few instances of observing lane-drop signing in context.  It goes the other way too:  an American friend with no overseas travel experience pointed to the British "Escape lane" sign (used for runaway truck ramps) in Know your traffic signs and asked if that was like "Exit Only" here.

Of all the US signage, I think this is one of the most confusing phrases of language used.  "Exit Only" conveys that there's an exit, but no entrance.  To most of us, we get it what it really means.  But to most of America, especially those that don't often drive on highways or see it for the first time, the term is confusing.

There is other signage that people may not like, but people understand why the message is that's being conveyed, even to most people seeing it for the first time.  The 'Exit Only' message though never received that same knowledge.  I preferred 'Must Exit' myself.  Other messages may be better, but take up more space when limited space is available. 

[Mapmikey]

Of all the US signage, I think this is one of the most confusing phrases of language used.  "Exit Only" conveys that there's an exit, but no entrance.  To most of us, we get it what it really means.  But to most of America, especially those that don't often drive on highways or see it for the first time, the term is confusing.

There is a way to convey when that actually is the situation:  https://goo.gl/maps/HCnPEpfeJ99ACc1E7

There is GMSV of the "left lane must exit" on I-495, which is an excellent way to convey the idea that not everybody must exit here.  I imagine in the 70s the exit only phrasing might have come about because there were still plenty of freeways/interstates with temporary endings that were heavily posted with must exit signage.

[1995hoo]

^^^^

Thanks, although that's not the sign I was thinking of (I had not noticed that one when I was driving through there). The one I was referring to is further south in between the general-purpose lanes and the exit roadway for Route 7. It doesn't show up on Street View yet.

[jp the roadgeek]

Another sign here that was replaced with a white LEFT LANE MUST EXIT sign with the CT 9 sign replacement/exit renumbering project (not in GSV yet)

[roadman65]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/52880763799/in/photostream/
This one uses neither. Just long upward liane control arrows for I-95 South.

[jakeroot]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/52880763799/in/photostream/
This one uses neither. Just long upward liane control arrows for I-95 South.

I personally prefer this treatment, though I would like to see hook arrows for the right turn.

The only issue I have with this design, though: if there are no shared lanes, why are the signs shared? These could have easily been two separate signs. This goes for all APLs that don't have any option lanes (even if they aren't supposed to be used without option lanes).

[jakeroot]

If memory serves, the rationale for standardizing on "Exit Only" rather than "Must Exit" back in the mid-1970's was to avoid the prescriptive overtones of the latter.  Many agencies also originally rendered these and other lane-drop-related legends in black against white (regulatory colors), but black on yellow was ultimately chosen so that drivers would not interpret "Exit Only" as an instruction to exit when they preferred to execute a safe transition to a through lane.  This issue assumes particular salience in states that penalize drivers for changing out of trap lanes, as I understand Virginia does.

This is the best explanation I've yet to hear as to why black-on-yellow is used over black-on-white. I've always interpreted "Exit Only" as regulatory, as you have to do what the sign says if you stay in that lane. But if the idea with yellow was nothing more than to not scare drivers into thinking they had to exit (as black-on-white "Must Exit" signs may do), that makes a lot more sense.

Still, it goes against everything I learned as a driver, which is that signs warning of an upcoming turn should be black-on-white. "Exit Only" signs are exceptions because they don't tell you to do anything, sure. But apparently that was by design. But then, why are more signs not designed in this way, such as the R3-5 sign? Regulatory signs don't technically requires drivers to do that "thing" until that "thing" occurs. Eg, "right lane must turn right" applies when you reach the right turn, not when you see the sign.

Has there been any consideration of using "Must Exit" in black-on-white at the actual split, but "Exit Only" (in black-on-yellow) on signage preceding the split? Warnings at the gore point make no sense to me; you have to exit at that point.

[US 89]

Of all the US signage, I think this is one of the most confusing phrases of language used.  "Exit Only" conveys that there's an exit, but no entrance.  To most of us, we get it what it really means.  But to most of America, especially those that don't often drive on highways or see it for the first time, the term is confusing.

There is a way to convey when that actually is the situation:  https://goo.gl/maps/HCnPEpfeJ99ACc1E7

There is GMSV of the "left lane must exit" on I-495, which is an excellent way to convey the idea that not everybody must exit here.  I imagine in the 70s the exit only phrasing might have come about because there were still plenty of freeways/interstates with temporary endings that were heavily posted with must exit signage.

But that's not anywhere close to standardized. Florida puts something to the effect of "no re-entry"  on a white sign by the exit. And this is how Georgia does it: https://goo.gl/maps/iv9ozf22sX2mRfET7

[ran4sh]

Of all the US signage, I think this is one of the most confusing phrases of language used.  "Exit Only" conveys that there's an exit, but no entrance.  To most of us, we get it what it really means.  But to most of America, especially those that don't often drive on highways or see it for the first time, the term is confusing.

There is a way to convey when that actually is the situation:  https://goo.gl/maps/HCnPEpfeJ99ACc1E7

Which there is no standard for in the MUTCD, so different states do different things. Some states don't even bother indicating the absence of a re-entry ramp. (It's also sometimes implied by the absence of blue service signs, since those are only supposed to be posted if access to return to the highway is available)

[ran4sh]

Of all the US signage, I think this is one of the most confusing phrases of language used.  "Exit Only" conveys that there's an exit, but no entrance.  To most of us, we get it what it really means.  But to most of America, especially those that don't often drive on highways or see it for the first time, the term is confusing.

There is a way to convey when that actually is the situation:  https://goo.gl/maps/HCnPEpfeJ99ACc1E7

There is GMSV of the "left lane must exit" on I-495, which is an excellent way to convey the idea that not everybody must exit here.  I imagine in the 70s the exit only phrasing might have come about because there were still plenty of freeways/interstates with temporary endings that were heavily posted with must exit signage.

But that's not anywhere close to standardized. Florida puts something to the effect of "no re-entry"  on a white sign by the exit. And this is how Georgia does it: https://goo.gl/maps/iv9ozf22sX2mRfET7

And, in Georgia, that's *if* the sign indicates it at all. The I-285 partial interchanges with Glenridge EB and Peachtree-Dunwoody WB have never had that indication, and the 10 Loop partial interchange with Oconee Connector had its "no return access" legend removed from the sign, for example.

[jeffandnicole]

Of all the US signage, I think this is one of the most confusing phrases of language used.  "Exit Only" conveys that there's an exit, but no entrance.  To most of us, we get it what it really means.  But to most of America, especially those that don't often drive on highways or see it for the first time, the term is confusing.

There is a way to convey when that actually is the situation:  https://goo.gl/maps/HCnPEpfeJ99ACc1E7

There is GMSV of the "left lane must exit" on I-495, which is an excellent way to convey the idea that not everybody must exit here.  I imagine in the 70s the exit only phrasing might have come about because there were still plenty of freeways/interstates with temporary endings that were heavily posted with must exit signage.

But that's not anywhere close to standardized. Florida puts something to the effect of "no re-entry"  on a white sign by the exit. And this is how Georgia does it: https://goo.gl/maps/iv9ozf22sX2mRfET7

And, in Georgia, that's *if* the sign indicates it at all. The I-285 partial interchanges with Glenridge EB and Peachtree-Dunwoody WB have never had that indication, and the 10 Loop partial interchange with Oconee Connector had its "no return access" legend removed from the sign, for example.

Delaware goes fancy with "No Return to Northbound "95 shield" at Harvey Rd: https://goo.gl/maps/8oSsaeiPZGTfPGfk6

[1995hoo]

Of all the US signage, I think this is one of the most confusing phrases of language used.  "Exit Only" conveys that there's an exit, but no entrance.  To most of us, we get it what it really means.  But to most of America, especially those that don't often drive on highways or see it for the first time, the term is confusing.

There is a way to convey when that actually is the situation:  https://goo.gl/maps/HCnPEpfeJ99ACc1E7

There is GMSV of the "left lane must exit" on I-495, which is an excellent way to convey the idea that not everybody must exit here.  I imagine in the 70s the exit only phrasing might have come about because there were still plenty of freeways/interstates with temporary endings that were heavily posted with must exit signage.

But that's not anywhere close to standardized. Florida puts something to the effect of "no re-entry"  on a white sign by the exit. And this is how Georgia does it: https://goo.gl/maps/iv9ozf22sX2mRfET7

And, in Georgia, that's *if* the sign indicates it at all. The I-285 partial interchanges with Glenridge EB and Peachtree-Dunwoody WB have never had that indication, and the 10 Loop partial interchange with Oconee Connector had its "no return access" legend removed from the sign, for example.

Delaware goes fancy with "No Return to Northbound "95 shield" at Harvey Rd: https://goo.gl/maps/8oSsaeiPZGTfPGfk6

I've seen something similar to that somewhere else along I-95 in another state, but I'm blanking on where it was.

[roadfro]

If memory serves, the rationale for standardizing on "Exit Only" rather than "Must Exit" back in the mid-1970's was to avoid the prescriptive overtones of the latter.  Many agencies also originally rendered these and other lane-drop-related legends in black against white (regulatory colors), but black on yellow was ultimately chosen so that drivers would not interpret "Exit Only" as an instruction to exit when they preferred to execute a safe transition to a through lane.  This issue assumes particular salience in states that penalize drivers for changing out of trap lanes, as I understand Virginia does.

This is the best explanation I've yet to hear as to why black-on-yellow is used over black-on-white. I've always interpreted "Exit Only" as regulatory, as you have to do what the sign says if you stay in that lane. But if the idea with yellow was nothing more than to not scare drivers into thinking they had to exit (as black-on-white "Must Exit" signs may do), that makes a lot more sense.

Still, it goes against everything I learned as a driver, which is that signs warning of an upcoming turn should be black-on-white. "Exit Only" signs are exceptions because they don't tell you to do anything, sure. But apparently that was by design. But then, why are more signs not designed in this way, such as the R3-5 sign? Regulatory signs don't technically requires drivers to do that "thing" until that "thing" occurs. Eg, "right lane must turn right" applies when you reach the right turn, not when you see the sign.

Has there been any consideration of using "Must Exit" in black-on-white at the actual split, but "Exit Only" (in black-on-yellow) on signage preceding the split? Warnings at the gore point make no sense to me; you have to exit at that point.

I think the 2009 MUTCD adopted the R3-33 "Right Lane Must Exit" regulatory sign for optional use at exit only lanes to help address this situation.

This sign I believe was adopted into the MUTCD via a state sign synthesis study, as Nevada DOT had been using a regulatory sign with same wording but slightly different layout for years at exit only lanes. NDOT commonly installs this sign on freeways at exit only lane drops (typically about halfway between the advance and exit direction overhead signs).

[CtrlAltDel]

I think the 2009 MUTCD adopted the R3-33 "Right Lane Must Exit" regulatory sign for optional use at exit only lanes to help address this situation.

This sign I believe was adopted into the MUTCD via a state sign synthesis study, as Nevada DOT had been using a regulatory sign with same wording but slightly different layout for years at exit only lanes. NDOT commonly installs this sign on freeways at exit only lane drops (typically about halfway between the advance and exit direction overhead signs).

Is that what this is?:

[ran4sh]

No, the R3-8 depicted there is the exact same sign that would also be used on non-freeways. R3-33 is a text sign "right lane must exit"

[Rothman]

I think the 2009 MUTCD adopted the R3-33 "Right Lane Must Exit" regulatory sign for optional use at exit only lanes to help address this situation.

This sign I believe was adopted into the MUTCD via a state sign synthesis study, as Nevada DOT had been using a regulatory sign with same wording but slightly different layout for years at exit only lanes. NDOT commonly installs this sign on freeways at exit only lane drops (typically about halfway between the advance and exit direction overhead signs).

Is that what this is?:

I hate it when option lanes are marked as exit only.

[ran4sh]

They aren't... but let's go ahead and restart that debate.