Freeway exit number tabs - when did they become common in your state?

[KCRoadFan]

As for those exit number tabs that we take for granted on interstate highways, along with many other freeways, today, here's a question I have: for those who have lived long enough to remember, when did they first become commonplace on the freeways of your state? I asked because on one of the "roadgeek"  websites I've looked at, I saw several pictures of exit signs along I-70 in Missouri from the 70's and 80's, none of which had exit numbers. By contrast, I've also seen pictures of signs in Pennsylvania and Ohio, from about the same era, that did have exit tabs. Anyway, whatever you come across, I'm interested to see it posted!

[Techknow]

For California they aren't common at all, but three of them did pop up in San Francisco recently. Some of us that frequent the Pacific Southwest sub-forum have posted about it: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29046.msg2746237#msg2746237

If we count internal exit tabs in California, then they really only became common around 2002 when the Cal-NExUS program started.

[amroad17]

In Virginia, where I lived from 1972-94, the only exit tabs in the 1970's were on I-81, on the Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike, on the Washington Beltway, and on I-64 in Hampton and Newport News [numbered 4-10 from Mallory St (268) to Jefferson Ave (255)].  All sequential.  It was around 1981 that VDOT began installing sequential exit tabs along the Interstates in the Commonwealth (except for I-295 which showed mile-based exit numbers).  It was around 1990-91 that the sequential exit numbers were changed to mile-based exit numbers (save for the x64's and I-581).

Also, in the 1970's while taking an annual spring trip to Florida using the completed portions of I-95 from Kenly, NC to Daytona Beach (starting in 1975), I noticed NC had mile-based numbers, SC did not receive tabs until 1976 (mile-based) and GA received theirs in 1976 or 1977 (sequential).  Florida, IIRC received theirs between 1978-80 (sequential), save for the Sunshine State Pkwy, err Florida's Turnpike with their hybrid numbering scheme.

In my birth state (NY), I am not really sure when exit tabs were added to the regular Interstates (Thruway already had exit tabs).  I do recall seeing them in 1972 on I-81 on our move from the Syracuse area to Hampton Roads, however, Machias has shown a photo of the Bear Street interchange sign in Syracuse from 1976 that does not have an exit tab.  I thought that NY had started using all-text on their BGS's starting in 1971 or 1972 and the photo that I have seen shows an outlined NY 298 shield on it which makes me think that the photo was taken in the late 1960's.

[plain]

In Virginia, where I lived from 1972-94, the only exit tabs in the 1970's were on I-81, on the Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike, on the Washington Beltway, and on I-64 in Hampton and Newport News [numbered 4-10 from Mallory St (268) to Jefferson Ave (255)].  All sequential.  It was around 1981 that VDOT began installing sequential exit tabs along the Interstates in the Commonwealth (except for I-295 which showed mile-based exit numbers).

I-295 actually didn't have exit numbers at all (VDOT installed the tabs from the get go but left them blank) until it was fully completed in 1992. But yeah it was milage based when they did sign them.

The Richmond-Petersburg Tpk indeed always had exit numbers, but they didn't start appearing on separate tabs until the 1970's.

[Scott5114]

So far as I can tell from historic photos, they were already common in Oklahoma by the 1970s.

[Max Rockatansky]

Just recently in California, even though the really aren't even yet all that common.

[Henry]

For as long as I've been alive, I've always seen exit numbers on Chicago's expressways. At first they were of the usual type, but then in the 1980s IL began to integrate them into the top of the exit signs (GA and WA later picked up on this practice as well).

For an example of the early signing procedures, this is the Kennedy Expressway from the late 70s with an exit tab on top of the BGS:

[ran4sh]

Exit numbers have been used in Georgia for a long time. Georgia added them at a time when sequential numbers were the more common system, and the sequential system was used for a long time (they were changed to mile-based in 2000).

Exit number *tabs*, however, only became common in the early 2010s. At some point in the late 00s Georgia changed its signage standards to more closely match the MUTCD examples. Older Georgia signage (which is still common in a lot of the state) has the exit number on a full-width section of the top of the sign (as well as Series C text, and the text "Exit X miles" instead of the standard "X miles" when the exit tab has the word "exit").

Numbering of exits on non-Interstates is also more recent, although the dates that each of those routes received exit numbers is different for each route. SR 400 used to be the only non-Interstate with exit numbers, but now they are posted for a few other freeways such as US 78 (SR 410), US 80 near Columbus, SR 10 Loop, etc.

[J N Winkler]

In my work with old signing plans, I've observed a number of permutations on exit numbering, including variations in tab design.  It would actually be quite an undertaking to catalogue how things have changed over the years in the 50 states.

A few examples:

*  In the early 1970's, several states dual-posted sequential and mileage-based exit numbers.  For a time, FHWA encouraged this system.  Colorado's version used center-mounted tabs stacked on top of each other, with "EXIT" and the sequential number on one and "MILE" and the mileage on the other.  CDOT eventually dropped this system in favor of posting only the sequential numbers, and then changed to mileage-based.  (As late as 2002, older button-copy signs in Colorado still had exit tabs with unfaded sheeting where copy for the old sequential numbers had been removed.)

*  Many states did not post exit numbers for Interstate-to-Interstate interchanges.  In Pennsylvania, for example, signing for them had center-mounted tabs with "JUNCTION" instead of "EXIT" and a number.  Tabs (with or without a number) also had no bottom border.  (The term exit crown for an exit tab is an agency heirloom--ConnDOT, for example, still uses it, even though center-mounted tabs are now deprecated.)

*  In the early 1970's, a few states started numbering their exits with mileage-based numbers right out of the gate, but used two-line tabs ("EXIT" at top and number below) mounted on the left side of the sign, even for right exits.  Arizona did this, as did Kansas with its free Interstates.  By the late 1970's, these states were using tabs in the familiar one-line format, typically either center- or right-mounted.

*  Exit tabs on non-Interstates have been mandated since 2009 (though not all states are in compliance and FHWA isn't enforcing this requirement), and were encouraged before then.  Iowa DOT started using them (mileage-based, of course) in the late 1990's/early 2000's by retrofitting existing signs, resulting in dozens of advance guide signs with "EXIT" both in the tab and on the main sign panel.  (The MUTCD has long required that an advance guide sign use the word "Exit" at least once, but the tab counts toward this, which is the reason distance expressions typically omit the word "EXIT" when the sign has a tab.)  In MTR's mid-noughties heyday, there was also excitement about exit numbers in the 500's on US route freeways in North Carolina.

[amroad17]

^ I did see one occurrence of MILE/EXIT tab in Virginia.  When the Willoughby Spit section of I-64 opened from the HRBT to the 4th View interchange, the signage for 4th View (US 60 East) had a one line exit tab with MILE 273 EXIT 71 on it.  This was the only one I saw in Virginia.  When VDOT installed Exit tabs in the Hampton Roads area, they posted them using sequential numbers, not switching to mile-based until 1990-91.

I also saw this on I-295 around Providence in the early 2000's.

[roadman65]

The Garden State Parkway had a square number in the top center with no EXIT on them.  They were standard except for the three NJDOT sections that had standard exit tabs.

The NJ Turnpike just started using them as numbers were within the sign body ( and still are south of East Brunswick) and the free interstates started them when NJ started to assign exit numbers from about 1975 to 1993.   I-287 was last because of the never built I-95 to use the Edison portion of the freeway so south of Basking Ridge was number less except for US 202 & 206 and two exits in Franklin and one in Piscataway.

[DrSmith]

In Pennsylvania, I remember most of I-95 in Philly didn't really have any exit numbers posted into the 90s. Most were older signs without shields even, instead using text for route numbers. Even with the conversion to mile-based exits, I don't think that stretch saw numbers for a while.

[connroadgeek]

Why does California not have them? How do people refer to the exits if there are no numbers?

[J N Winkler]

Why does California not have them? How do people refer to the exits if there are no numbers?

Short version of the story:

*  California does have them now, since Calnexus was introduced in 2002.  It does not have true mileposts, however.

*  People described exits by cross street and lived with the ambiguity in cases where a street or streets of the same name interchanged multiple times with freeways in a single metro area.

*  Caltrans carried out a pilot study into posting exit tabs in downtown Los Angeles in the early 1970's.  The final report recommended rolling them out statewide, but this proposal was rejected, probably on grounds of cost.  Caltrans did maintain sign specs for exit tabs for the more than 30 years they were not being actively posted.

[ethanhopkin14]

Short version of the story:

*  California does have them now, since Calnexus was introduced in 2002.  It does not have true mileposts, however.

They really need to have true mileposts.

*  People described exits by cross street and lived with the ambiguity in cases where a street or streets of the same name interchanged multiple times with freeways in a single metro area.

This has never been an issue growing up in Texas.  We too lived with the ambiguity.  People rarely, if not never, refer to the exit number on an interstate.  I think that has a lot to do with A) there are so many exists in Texas and B) there are so many freeways in Texas without exit numbers, people get used to saying "take the XXX Road exit".  I know we are talking Texas v California, but I think there is a parallel there.  I also know in New England, exit numbers are a huge deal, mainly because a given state will not have many exits.  People will say, "I live at exit XX".

*  Caltrans carried out a pilot study into posting exit tabs in downtown Los Angeles in the early 1970's.  The final report recommended rolling them out statewide, but this proposal was rejected, probably on grounds of cost.  Caltrans did maintain sign specs for exit tabs for the more than 30 years they were not being actively posted.

I remember seeing those exit tabs on SR-110 back in 2001.  They were pre Calnexus so that wasn't the reason they were there.  It took me years to finally get to the bottom of why there were rando exit numbers in a state that famously (and deliberately) had none. 

[OracleUsr]

NC had them in the 70's.   I remember seeing them on the stretch of I-40 that opened up in 1977.  Before that I don't remember but I would guess 70's was when they popped up.

[roadman65]

NC didn't have it on I-95 in Robeson County cause the US 301 exit in St. Paul's use TO NC 79 Parkton Northbound and St. Paul's Southbound.  No exit numbers were used and certainly no US 301 shields or text even.

[roadfro]

Short version of the story:

*  California does have them now, since Calnexus was introduced in 2002.  It does not have true mileposts, however.

They really need to have true mileposts.

I agree it would be nice, but is there really a true need for actual mileposts?

Nevada is a bit similar, using a similar county-based mileposting system identical to California's postmile system for all highways, except Nevada differs in that actual MUTCD mileposts are used on interstate highways in addition to the county miles (although these haven't always been well maintained). We seem to make do. In the last several years, NDOT has made an effort to make milepost panels more visible and readable so they are more useful to the public.

California has gone so long without traditional mileposts that they may not see a tangible benefit over the expense.

*  People described exits by cross street and lived with the ambiguity in cases where a street or streets of the same name interchanged multiple times with freeways in a single metro area.

This has never been an issue growing up in Texas.  We too lived with the ambiguity.  People rarely, if not never, refer to the exit number on an interstate.  I think that has a lot to do with A) there are so many exists in Texas and B) there are so many freeways in Texas without exit numbers, people get used to saying "take the XXX Road exit".  I know we are talking Texas v California, but I think there is a parallel there.  I also know in New England, exit numbers are a huge deal, mainly because a given state will not have many exits.  People will say, "I live at exit XX".

The lack of exit numbers caused me and my friends a bit of hassle during a trip in California while I was in college. This was after CalNExUS had started, but still early on in the program when implementation was still somewhat piecemeal. We were headed from Reno toward San Jose on southbound I-680, looking for a Mission Blvd exit. Unbeknownst to us, there are two Mission Blvd exits along I-680 about four miles apart–we exited the first (now exit 16), but we were actually needing to exit the second (now exit 12). We lost about 15 minutes trying to figure out where we went wrong. It also didn't help that at the time, the second exit was just signed as "Mission Blvd" instead of the "CA 262 to I-880 / Mission Blvd" currently used, and our directions did not mention 262 (I'm not sure if 262 was signed at the time).

[ethanhopkin14]

Short version of the story:

*  California does have them now, since Calnexus was introduced in 2002.  It does not have true mileposts, however.

They really need to have true mileposts.

I agree it would be nice, but is there really a true need for actual mileposts?

Nevada is a bit similar, using a similar county-based mileposting system identical to California's postmile system for all highways, except Nevada differs in that actual MUTCD mileposts are used on interstate highways in addition to the county miles (although these haven't always been well maintained). We seem to make do. In the last several years, NDOT has made an effort to make milepost panels more visible and readable so they are more useful to the public.

California has gone so long without traditional mileposts that they may not see a tangible benefit over the expense.

They might not see an advantage, but being from a state that doesn't use the post mile blades, they might as well be written in Chinese and in invisible ink.  If I ever broke down on I-10 and needed to call in my location I would say "I am somewhere on I-10 in the dessert that's between Blythe and Indio."

[J N Winkler]

Short version of the story:

*  California does have them now, since Calnexus was introduced in 2002.  It does not have true mileposts, however.

They really need to have true mileposts.

I agree it would be nice, but is there really a true need for actual mileposts?

Nevada is a bit similar, using a similar county-based mileposting system identical to California's postmile system for all highways, except Nevada differs in that actual MUTCD mileposts are used on interstate highways in addition to the county miles (although these haven't always been well maintained). We seem to make do. In the last several years, NDOT has made an effort to make milepost panels more visible and readable so they are more useful to the public.

California has gone so long without traditional mileposts that they may not see a tangible benefit over the expense.

I agree with Ethanhopkin14--California needs to roll out true mileposts.  And I do agree with you that they absolutely don't see the need.  This was also true of exit numbering itself; it took FHWA pressure and internal lobbying from engineers trained out of state to get Calnexus back in 2002.

In 2003 or thereabouts, I visited the Caltrans library and looked at their signing and signals file, which had an excerpt from an in-house newsletter telling the story of an engineer in District 2 (inland far northern California) who had gotten his BSCE in Colorado, made exit numbering his Toastmasters topic of choice when he went to work for Caltrans, and--after several years speaking on the virtues of exit tabs--got to make his pitch in 2002 to Jeff Morales, then Caltrans director and himself a former Illinois DOT secretary.

Today, in Calnexus' 20th anniversary year, it is striking how few complaints you hear about exit numbering in discussion spaces (such as California-specific areas of Web forums or Facebook groups with a focus on California roads) that have a geographic focus on the state.  This is not true for whole-face retroreflectorization for all guide signs, which had been rolled out several years earlier; there are still complaints about glare and comments about how "the old signs" were so much better.

Exit numbering in California continues to evolve upward, as Caltrans moves toward externally mounted 30" tabs and federal-standard gore signs while slowly phasing out the one-sign-in-each-direction policy (under which an exit number was considered to be signed even if it appeared just once on a gore sign, advance guide sign, or exit direction sign) as signs are replaced.

Nevada and its postmiles also form an exception to the rule that actually strengthens the argument for mileposts in California.  Nevada DOT now has an enhanced version of the postmile with the shield, a refinement that has yet to be introduced in the neighboring state to the west.  Mileposts were originally required only on Interstates, and for the past several decades at least, Nevada has had a much smaller percentage of non-Interstate mileage within its freeway network than California.  In terms of the map relatability benefits of milepointing, this actually puts Nevada slightly ahead of 100% MUTCD-compliant states that don't use milemarkers (or equivalents) on non-freeways (Missouri is one example), and quite far ahead of California, where even the Interstates don't have milemarkers that line up with the mileage-based exit numbers.

As for Caltrans' pre-existing provision for mileposts, I have personally never laid eyes on a sign spec for one, though Joe Rouse (Caltrans engineer who handles traffic matters and occasionally posts on here) has mentioned finding an obsoleted spec.

[ran4sh]

That must be part of why Caltrans exit numbering in district 2 seems to be done much better than the other districts. In particular, on a recent trip there I appreciated that the exit gore signage had FHWA standard signs, something that other large states like Florida doesn't even do right (Florida tends to squeeze a 3-digit exit number into a space meant for 2 digits).

[US 89]

Depends on what you mean by "tab".

If you're just looking for exit numbers themselves, based on old photos, they were introduced in stages across Utah starting apparently in the mid-1970s. Different freeways got them at different times. Sometimes these were separate tabs mounted above the sign, but usually they were part of the sign itself separated by a horizontal bar. Basically all of the separate tab ones were gone by the 1990s. This (ca.2001) is what the last iteration of the in-sign exit numbers looked like.

Exit tabs like these were reintroduced around 2005. The tabs have since been updated and squared off a bit - this is the current design.

[jakeroot]

Today, in Calnexus' 20th anniversary year, it is striking how few complaints you hear about exit numbering in discussion spaces (such as California-specific areas of Web forums or Facebook groups with a focus on California roads) that have a geographic focus on the state.  This is not true for whole-face retroreflectorization for all guide signs, which had been rolled out several years earlier; there are still complaints about glare and comments about how "the old signs" were so much better.

I think many California roadgeeks are of the opinion that things were "better the way they were" ... in other words, no exit numbers and older, non reflective signage. Even if, objectively, the driving public is better off with both.

That said, the other explanation, at least for exit numbers, is just that they're largely ignored. I'd imagine a good chunk of those roadgeeks, much like the general public, doesn't really use exit numbers on a regular basis. The addition of exit numbers to signs has made them fairly cramped, as rolled out by Caltrans, but the messaging itself isn't really given much thought.

California may well be a lot like us here in Washington, where exit numbers are not used in any capacity. Only interstates have them (except I-705), and even then they are ignored. Literally everyone uses road names.

[ethanhopkin14]

Today, in Calnexus' 20th anniversary year, it is striking how few complaints you hear about exit numbering in discussion spaces (such as California-specific areas of Web forums or Facebook groups with a focus on California roads) that have a geographic focus on the state.  This is not true for whole-face retroreflectorization for all guide signs, which had been rolled out several years earlier; there are still complaints about glare and comments about how "the old signs" were so much better.

I think many California roadgeeks are of the opinion that things were "better the way they were" ... in other words, no exit numbers and older, non reflective signage. Even if, objectively, the driving public is better off with both.

That said, the other explanation, at least for exit numbers, is just that they're largely ignored. I'd imagine a good chunk of those roadgeeks, much like the general public, doesn't really use exit numbers on a regular basis. The addition of exit numbers to signs has made them fairly cramped, as rolled out by Caltrans, but the messaging itself isn't really given much thought.

California may well be a lot like us here in Washington, where exit numbers are not used in any capacity. Only interstates have them (except I-705), and even then they are ignored. Literally everyone uses road names.

I will say in Texas they are not used, but me personally, I use them to gauge where I am in a trip.  I do remember (roughly) how many miles most interstates stay in the states I am driving in, or if I am driving to say, Los Angeles, I know I-10 terminates 22ish miles west of downtown, so when I am in the dessert and see exit 192 for SR 177, I know I am about 170 miles from Los Angeles and I know that's more that 2 hours (baring severe traffic) left of driving within an instant.  I do this with most states.  I may have missed the last mile marker (or last ten mile markers) but the big exit sign tells me approximately where I am on the road, the state and my trip. 

[CtrlAltDel]

California may well be a lot like us here in Washington, where exit numbers are not used in any capacity. Only interstates have them (except I-705), and even then they are ignored. Literally everyone uses road names.

I think this is true most of the time for locals, except in places like New Jersey. With out-of-towners, I'd wager the situation is different.