You've seen them - they're those double-sided signs in the medians of urban and suburban freeways, giving the distance to the next three (or sometimes four) exits to the nearest quarter of a mile. The MUTCD calls them "Interchange Sequence Signs."
Anyway, I have a question: what's the longest distance you've seen on one of these signs? Presumably, the most promising candidates would be in outer suburbia or exurbia - areas that are built-up enough (or becoming so) to warrant such signs being installed, but still sparse enough for the exits to be spaced relatively far apart.
The longest distance I've seen depicted on an Interchange Sequence Sign is 8 1/2 miles, on I-64/Highway 40 eastbound through rapidly growing St. Charles County, as you make your way towards St. Louis - more specifically, just east of the MO 364 interchange (GSV link: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7620465,-90.7658816,3a,15y,131.32h,95.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spY5sDMprCiuyLjAnPGqjKg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Has anyone elsewhere in the country seen any longer distances displayed on one of these signs? I'd be interested to know.
I-580 in south Reno (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.406723,-119.7539078,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6zbQYwWHJgIKVixgOeVl0Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). 1/4, 9 and 20. Mt. Rose Highway (1/4) and Old US 395 (9) are the next two exits, but there are two more exits in Washoe Valley before you get to Carson City. I think the Bellevue Road exit, the next exit after Old US 395, is approximately 13 miles from there.
Also, for a real oddball on I-580, try this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2063598,-119.7962288,3a,75y,270h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sG8FbYgMPdTkiA5XLPCADHQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). 26, 112 and 217. I know it's not exactly what you're looking for but it's double-sided, listing the Carson City exits in the southbound direction, and I've always thought that was a strange place for that particular sign.
I've found the best places to find stuff like this are at the fringes of urban areas. Largest one I recall seeing is the 14.25 on this sign in Santaquin, Utah on I-15:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/916/43307269081_9494bf3148_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/28YV5i8)
Interchange sequence signs aren't used in Illinois that way; however, ISTHA does post the signage for the next exit. Here's I-88 west at Rochelle (IL-251): https://goo.gl/maps/Hi2yhqS69Ywd5C796
Near the westbound "start" of I-70 near Baltimore:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48907512528_7c1e85f12c_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hvMMyC)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48907512858_934dc9502a_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2hvMMEj)
However, it doesn't meet the OP's criteria for "double-sided".
Quote from: US 89 on June 10, 2020, 01:13:10 AM
Largest one I recall seeing is the 14.25 on this sign in Santaquin, Utah on I-15:
[img snipped]
But in this case, doesn't Mona refer to the place, not the interchange?
Quote from: formulanone on June 10, 2020, 09:56:29 AM
Near the westbound "start" of I-70 near Baltimore:
[img snipped]
However, it doesn't meet the OP's criteria for "double-sided".
It's also just a standard mileage sign, not an interchange sequence sign.
Quote from: Brandon on June 10, 2020, 09:45:01 AM
Interchange sequence signs aren't used in Illinois that way; however, ISTHA does post the signage for the next exit. Here's I-88 west at Rochelle (IL-251): https://goo.gl/maps/Hi2yhqS69Ywd5C796
Thanks for posting that. I immediately thought of the sign but couldn't remember where it was.
Quote from: webny99 on June 10, 2020, 10:04:46 AM
Quote from: US 89 on June 10, 2020, 01:13:10 AM
Largest one I recall seeing is the 14.25 on this sign in Santaquin, Utah on I-15:
[img snipped]
But in this case, doesn't Mona refer to the place, not the interchange?
Maybe, maybe not. The exit at the interchange itself does indeed say "Mona" as the only legend. However, it also has a UT-54 shield, so that probably discounts it.
However, the challenge was for "interchange sequence signs", which
US 89's example certainly is. You could claim that "Mona" shouldn't be included on the interchange sequence sign, but it's an interchange sequence sign none the less.
Quote from: kphoger on June 10, 2020, 10:13:37 AM
However, the challenge was for "interchange sequence signs", which US 89's example certainly is. You could claim that "Mona" shouldn't be included on the interchange sequence sign, but it's an interchange sequence sign none the less.
It would be good to get clarification from the OP as to whether locales posted on interchange sequence signs can still be counted.
States vary tremendously in their application of interchange sequence signs. New York doesn't use them at all, for example. PennDOT does this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0613663,-80.0558346,3a,75y,223.42h,85.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7da_PbzWN_Y-TpkIM_Dtrg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1), but not consistently. Some states use a "hybrid" version that includes the control cities for the route in addition to upcoming exits. And some states use the classic double-sided version in the median; no control cities, just upcoming exits only, like the one posted in the OP.
(I would call the Utah example a variation of this last type, given that no exits are "skipped" by the sign: Mona is the next exit after Summit Ridge Pkwy, not a control city for I-15.)
Quote from: webny99 on June 10, 2020, 01:18:22 PM
New York doesn't use them at all, for example.
They exist:
http://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i81&state=NY&file=101_7243.JPG
http://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i81&state=NY&file=101_7246.JPG
http://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i88&state=NY&file=101_7295.JPG
http://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i81&state=NY&file=100_7528.JPG
https://goo.gl/maps/jDFhYEjLHqLbtoS36
Quote from: vdeane on June 10, 2020, 02:02:12 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 10, 2020, 01:18:22 PM
New York doesn't use them at all, for example.
They exist:
[links snipped]
You're right, I should have been more specific.
There are a few PA-style examples around, but they're used very sparingly, usually with shields instead of road names, not double-sided, not in the median, and usually for mid-sized towns/cities instead of larger urban areas.
I would say that's almost to the point of not being directly comparable to what the OP is looking for.
I thought I saw Erie on some Cleveland area center line signs.
Quote from: webny99 on June 10, 2020, 01:18:22 PM
It would be good to get clarification from the OP as to whether locales posted on interchange sequence signs can still be counted.
It's the Original Poster's first thread and just their second post on this forum; there's no need to make it super-specific.
Quote from: vdeane on June 10, 2020, 02:02:12 PMQuote from: webny99 on June 10, 2020, 01:18:22 PMNew York doesn't use them at all, for example.
They exist:
http://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i81&state=NY&file=101_7243.JPG
http://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i81&state=NY&file=101_7246.JPG
http://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i88&state=NY&file=101_7295.JPG
http://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i81&state=NY&file=100_7528.JPG
https://goo.gl/maps/jDFhYEjLHqLbtoS36
With the exception of the next-to-last example, all of those are community interchanges signs.
Quote from: webny99 on June 10, 2020, 01:18:22 PMPennDOT does this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0613663,-80.0558346,3a,75y,223.42h,85.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7da_PbzWN_Y-TpkIM_Dtrg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1), but not consistently.
Yup. That is a community interchanges sign.
PennDOT does use a few interchange sequence signs, but I'm noticing a definite preference for using ruled lines to separate exit listings, as in the next-to-last example Vdeane posted. One example in my pile of PennDOT sign design sheets goes like this: To [Pa. 60] South Crafton 1/2, [US 22] [US 30] West Weirton 1, Robinson Town Centre Boulevard 1 1/4. Another, without ruled lines, is as follows (I-70 in Westmoreland County): New Stanton 2, Pa Turnpike 2 1/4, US 119 3.
Quote from: webny99 on June 10, 2020, 01:18:22 PMSome states use a "hybrid" version that includes the control cities for the route in addition to upcoming exits. And some states use the classic double-sided version in the median; no control cities, just upcoming exits only, like the one posted in the OP.
(I would call the Utah example a variation of this last type, given that no exits are "skipped" by the sign: Mona is the next exit after Summit Ridge Pkwy, not a control city for I-15.)
Yup. The Utah example is a proper interchange sequence sign, but the fact Mona is actually the next exit in the sequence is the determining factor. Going by the picture alone, without researching the geography, it is easy to suspect that this is a hybridization of an interchange sequence sign and a post-interchange confirmatory sign. (Colorado DOT loves these hybrids.)
Quote from: J N Winkler on June 10, 2020, 03:07:35 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 10, 2020, 01:18:22 PMPennDOT does this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0613663,-80.0558346,3a,75y,223.42h,85.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7da_PbzWN_Y-TpkIM_Dtrg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1), but not consistently.
Yup. That is a community interchanges sign.
Thanks for the info! I was not aware there was a separate term for these. That certainly helps boil down and concisely express what I was trying to say in Reply #9.
Quote from: J N Winkler on June 10, 2020, 03:07:35 PM
Yup. The Utah example is a proper interchange sequence sign, but the fact Mona is actually the next exit in the sequence is the determining factor. Going by the picture alone, without researching the geography, it is easy to suspect that this is a hybridization of an interchange sequence sign and a post-interchange confirmatory sign. (Colorado DOT loves these hybrids.)
I had wondered if that was the case, after double-checking and noticing that there were no intermittent exits.
It seems that when the town/city listed is
not the actual control city for the route, it's likely to be true interchange sequence sign.
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 10, 2020, 02:33:32 PM
I thought I saw Erie on some Cleveland area center line signs.
Probably on I-90. I can picture them, but can't seem to find them on Street View.
Quote from: formulanone on June 10, 2020, 02:34:21 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 10, 2020, 01:18:22 PM
It would be good to get clarification from the OP as to whether locales posted on interchange sequence signs can still be counted.
It's the Original Poster's first thread and just their second post on this forum; there's no need to make it super-specific.
But what better way to introduce him/her to the forum than with a pedantic reply? :-D
There are several in Metro Detroit, but they aren't always in the median. Particularly if it's a depressed urban freeway like this example:
I-696 Scotia bridge (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4745838,-83.1731946,3a,75y,80.92h,88.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTUKMweWPWelVUJnmxTFsBQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en)
Other PennDOT examples:
Unruled:
Broad St 1/2, 8th Street 1, Ben Franklin Br 1 1/4 (temporary sign, I think)
Ridge Ave - Kelly Dr 1/2, I-76 1
Fox Street - Henry Ave 1 3/4, Ridge Ave - Kelly Drive 2 1/2, I-76 3
[I-279] South 1/4, 9TH St 1/2, N. Shore 3/4
McKnight Rd 1 3/4, [I-279] North 3, Perrysville Ave 3 1/4
[I-279] North 2 1/2, Perrysville Ave 2 3/4
[I-279] North 1 1/2, Perrysville Ave 1 3/4
[I-279] North 1/2, Perrysville Ave 3/4
Pa 56 East 1/2, Pa 756 1, Pa 56 West 2
New Cumberland 1/2, Camp Hill LEFT 1 1/4, Lemoyne 1 1/4
Hamilton Blvd 1/2, Cedar Crest Blvd 1 1/2, Lehigh Street 3 1/4
Cedar Crest Blvd 1/2, Lehigh Street 2 1/4, Summit Lawn 4
Ruled (horizontal line indicated by comma, line break within each destination group by slash):
PA 611 - Broad St 1/2, 8th Street 1, I-676 - US 30 East/Ben Franklin Br 1 1/4
Wissahickon Ave S 3/4, Wissahickon Ave N/Germantown Ave 1
Wissahickon Ave/Germantown Ave 1/4
Quote from: webny99 on June 10, 2020, 03:43:54 PM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on June 10, 2020, 02:33:32 PM
I thought I saw Erie on some Cleveland area center line signs.
Probably on I-90. I can picture them, but can't seem to find them on Street View.
I haven't been to Cleveland since at least 2008, so they could be gone now.
Quote from: kphoger on June 10, 2020, 10:13:37 AM
Quote from: Brandon on June 10, 2020, 09:45:01 AM
Interchange sequence signs aren't used in Illinois that way; however, ISTHA does post the signage for the next exit. Here's I-88 west at Rochelle (IL-251): https://goo.gl/maps/Hi2yhqS69Ywd5C796
Thanks for posting that. I immediately thought of the sign but couldn't remember where it was.
Quote from: webny99 on June 10, 2020, 10:04:46 AM
Quote from: US 89 on June 10, 2020, 01:13:10 AM
Largest one I recall seeing is the 14.25 on this sign in Santaquin, Utah on I-15:
[img snipped]
But in this case, doesn't Mona refer to the place, not the interchange?
Maybe, maybe not. The exit at the interchange itself does indeed say "Mona" as the only legend. However, it also has a UT-54 shield, so that probably discounts it.
However, the challenge was for "interchange sequence signs", which US 89's example certainly is. You could claim that "Mona" shouldn't be included on the interchange sequence sign, but it's an interchange sequence sign none the less.
Of course, KDOT practice would be to place a 54 shield there and not include the word Mona at all. This is a practice that works wonders for reducing message loading, but does require the driver to be familiar with which route numbers correspond to road names. If you're on I-635 looking for Kansas Avenue, you won't find it until a mile out from the interchange. It will have appeared earlier on the sequence signs, but is listed solely as K-32.
This is mitigated somewhat by the KDOT policy of disallowing routes to exist solely in incorporated areas, so you don't see random important corridors getting highway designations like you do in other states (Springfield, MO's Route 744, for example).
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 10, 2020, 06:45:26 PM
Quote from: kphoger on June 10, 2020, 10:13:37 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 10, 2020, 10:04:46 AM
Quote from: US 89 on June 10, 2020, 01:13:10 AM
Largest one I recall seeing is the 14.25 on this sign in Santaquin, Utah on I-15:
[img snipped]
But in this case, doesn't Mona refer to the place, not the interchange?
Maybe, maybe not. The exit at the interchange itself does indeed say "Mona" as the only legend. However, it also has a UT-54 shield, so that probably discounts it.
However, the challenge was for "interchange sequence signs", which US 89's example certainly is. You could claim that "Mona" shouldn't be included on the interchange sequence sign, but it's an interchange sequence sign none the less.
Of course, KDOT practice would be to place a 54 shield there and not include the word Mona at all. This is a practice that works wonders for reducing message loading, but does require the driver to be familiar with which route numbers correspond to road names. If you're on I-635 looking for Kansas Avenue, you won't find it until a mile out from the interchange. It will have appeared earlier on the sequence signs, but is listed solely as K-32.
In Utah, route numbers are generally only useful to the general public if they are a) interstates, b) inter-city connectors, or c) out in the middle of nowhere with no towns in sight. 54 is none of those. The vast majority of people who use SR 54 regularly will know it as “that road that goes from I-15 to Mona” (as opposed to a route like nearby SR 28, which will be known by its number). UDOT doesn’t use route numbers on sequence or mileage signs unless the route in question is identifiable by number alone. 54 is not.
As for the label on the sequence sign: I don’t see how Mona
doesn’t refer to the interchange. As far as I’m concerned, “Mona” is the best way to refer to exit 233, especially because there is only one Mona exit. SR 54 is unhelpful for the average motorist, so your other option is a street name - in this case “200 North”. Which is an even worse choice, given that nearly every city in Utah uses a grid system containing a street with that name.
I wish NY used text instead of shields on these type of signs. I would much rather see "Interstate 86 - XX miles" than an undersized, hard to read shield.
Quote from: US 89 on June 11, 2020, 01:40:03 AM
As for the label on the sequence sign: I don't see how Mona doesn't refer to the interchange. As far as I'm concerned, "Mona" is the best way to refer to exit 233, especially because there is only one Mona exit. SR 54 is unhelpful for the average motorist, so your other option is a street name - in this case "200 North" . Which is an even worse choice, given that nearly every city in Utah uses a grid system containing a street with that name.
Before I realized it was the next interchange in sequence, I wondered if it might be a control city, but I don't think there's any disagreement on this now. This just isn't a concept I'm used to, coming from the Northeast, where the use of route numbers is more mainstream and it's rare for towns/cities to be identified with a single exit in this manner (though it can happen, like Batavia on I-90, for example).
Quote from: webny99 on June 11, 2020, 07:59:51 AM
Quote from: US 89 on June 11, 2020, 01:40:03 AM
UDOT doesn't use route numbers on sequence or mileage signs unless the route in question is identifiable by number alone. 54 is not.
I wish NY had this policy. I would much rather see "Interstate 86 - XX miles" than an undersized, hard to read shield.
I think you may have misunderstood. "Interstate 86" and an undersized shield both use route numbers. I'll provide an example to clarify what I think
US 89 was saying:
The next exit is referred to only as "8000 South" on
this interchange sequence sign (https://goo.gl/maps/GNfiYPd4FYEKahbz8), even though UT-164 does appear on both the
advance (https://goo.gl/maps/LP2MxwLiRs7myDek6) and the
exit sign (https://goo.gl/maps/dc3jMHwb544JYGqN7). That's because UT-164 is not the only name for the road. On the other hand, US-6
does appear on the interchange sequence sign because that's the only name the road goes by at that location.
Quote from: kphoger on June 11, 2020, 10:43:59 AM
Quote from: webny99 on June 11, 2020, 07:59:51 AM
Quote from: US 89 on June 11, 2020, 01:40:03 AM
UDOT doesn't use route numbers on sequence or mileage signs unless the route in question is identifiable by number alone. 54 is not.
I wish NY had this policy. I would much rather see "Interstate 86 - XX miles" than an undersized, hard to read shield.
I think you may have misunderstood. "Interstate 86" and an undersized shield both use route numbers.
Yup. Sorry, my misunderstanding. Utah
does use text instead of route shields for this type of sign, but I got two lines of thought conflated. My comment still holds, but doesn't makes sense as a direct response to that quote. Fixed to remove quote.
In Kansas, KDOT uses shields for interchange sequence signs and text for route confirmatory signs. (I personally prefer shields for both, which is Arizona DOT's approach.)
I can readily understand Utah DOT giving preference to signing street names rather than route numbers (either shields or text) in urban areas. The underlying issue is map relatability: it makes more sense to sign the street name rather than the state route number if the relevant exit is a service interchange and drivers will be relying primarily on the street to navigate.
Notwithstanding what the MUTCD says, I've noticed some spread in shield sizes on interchange sequence signs. KDOT uses an uniform 24 in height and takes the shield into account in setting line height. As a result, interchange sequence signs that have shields on all three lines are typically much larger than signs that have just text on each line. Caltrans, on the other hand, requires just that the shield digits match the height of, and be vertically aligned with, any lowercase letters on the same line that do not have ascenders or descenders. This means the heights of interchange sequence signs are essentially fixed according to the number of lines of legend used, and also incentivizes the use of unnecessary words as alignment controls when said words would simply be left off in other states (e.g., "Jct" as part of phrase "Jct [SR 91]" when other states would just use "[SR 91]").
Quote from: kphoger on June 11, 2020, 10:43:59 AM
The next exit is referred to only as "8000 South" on this interchange sequence sign (https://goo.gl/maps/GNfiYPd4FYEKahbz8), even though UT-164 does appear on both the advance (https://goo.gl/maps/LP2MxwLiRs7myDek6) and the exit sign (https://goo.gl/maps/dc3jMHwb544JYGqN7). That's because UT-164 is not the only name for the road. On the other hand, US-6 does appear on the interchange sequence sign because that's the only name the road goes by at that location.
Yes. That and US 6 is a long-distance corridor with a recognizable route number - most people along the Wasatch Front are familiar with US 6 and have an idea of where that goes. If a numbered route with no name doesn't have a well-known number, that's when you'll start to see city names being used.
Quote from: webny99 on June 11, 2020, 11:08:51 AM
Yup. Sorry, my misunderstanding. Utah does use text instead of route shields for this type of sign, but I got two lines of thought conflated. My comment still holds, but doesn't makes sense as a direct response to that quote. Fixed to remove quote.
Utah has actually moved to shields for mileage and sequence signs in the past five years or so - here are a couple (https://goo.gl/maps/VyC4LLX562PTnUhK6) examples (https://goo.gl/maps/HZf26SSgn7DtzvADA). But just like the text versions that preceded them, they still aren't used if the route number is obscure or if there's a better known street name.
Quote from: US 89 on June 11, 2020, 01:30:27 PM
If a numbered route with no name doesn't have a well-known number, that's when you'll start to see city names being used.
Probably the size of the city (both population and land area) and its proximity to the interstate are also factors. It makes less sense to use the town/city name when there are multiple exits, creating ambiguity.
Quote from: US 89 on June 11, 2020, 01:30:27 PM
Utah has actually moved to shields for mileage and sequence signs in the past five years or so - here are a couple (https://goo.gl/maps/VyC4LLX562PTnUhK6) examples (https://goo.gl/maps/HZf26SSgn7DtzvADA). But just like the text versions that preceded them, they still aren't used if the route number is obscure or if there's a better known street name.
That's an unfortunate trend. I don't mind it so much with the direction, like your first example, but I have great disdain for the shield on a line by itself. Here's a New York example (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4876222,-77.5095129,3a,43.2y,195.2h,87.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLiS13VttKHwR8hDLV_q97Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) with an I-86 shield right in the middle of two lines of text. The words "Interstate 86" would create a much cleaner and smoother look IMO.
Quote from: webny99 on June 11, 2020, 03:57:14 PM
Quote from: US 89 on June 11, 2020, 01:30:27 PM
Utah has actually moved to shields for mileage and sequence signs in the past five years or so - here are a couple (https://goo.gl/maps/VyC4LLX562PTnUhK6) examples (https://goo.gl/maps/HZf26SSgn7DtzvADA). But just like the text versions that preceded them, they still aren't used if the route number is obscure or if there's a better known street name.
That's an unfortunate trend. I don't mind it so much with the direction, like your first example, but I have great disdain for the shield on a line by itself. Here's a New York example (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4876222,-77.5095129,3a,43.2y,195.2h,87.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLiS13VttKHwR8hDLV_q97Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) with an I-86 shield right in the middle of two lines of text. The words "Interstate 86" would create a much cleaner and smoother look IMO.
These are very frequently found across MA, with some including no destinations, just shields.
Quote from: webny99 on June 11, 2020, 03:57:14 PM
Quote from: US 89 on June 11, 2020, 01:30:27 PM
If a numbered route with no name doesn't have a well-known number, that's when you'll start to see city names being used.
Probably the size of the city (both population and land area) and its proximity to the interstate are also factors. It makes less sense to use the town/city name when there are multiple exits, creating ambiguity.
Quote from: US 89 on June 11, 2020, 01:30:27 PM
Utah has actually moved to shields for mileage and sequence signs in the past five years or so - here are a couple (https://goo.gl/maps/VyC4LLX562PTnUhK6) examples (https://goo.gl/maps/HZf26SSgn7DtzvADA). But just like the text versions that preceded them, they still aren't used if the route number is obscure or if there's a better known street name.
That's an unfortunate trend. I don't mind it so much with the direction, like your first example, but I have great disdain for the shield on a line by itself. Here's a New York example (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4876222,-77.5095129,3a,43.2y,195.2h,87.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLiS13VttKHwR8hDLV_q97Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) with an I-86 shield right in the middle of two lines of text. The words "Interstate 86" would create a much cleaner and smoother look IMO.
How about "Rte. I-86" (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.660141,-77.8096732,3a,19.9y,167.44h,84.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjtSihlJ2ViTaMIK2ifYdXw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)?
Quote from: vdeane on June 11, 2020, 09:13:49 PM
How about "Rte. I-86" (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.660141,-77.8096732,3a,19.9y,167.44h,84.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjtSihlJ2ViTaMIK2ifYdXw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)?
More like "Rte.
I-86"
Used to read "Rte. 17"
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 11, 2020, 09:20:20 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 11, 2020, 09:13:49 PM
How about "Rte. I-86" (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.660141,-77.8096732,3a,19.9y,167.44h,84.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjtSihlJ2ViTaMIK2ifYdXw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)?
More like "Rte. I-86"
Used to read "Rte. 17"
And now just I-86.
Quote from: vdeane on June 11, 2020, 09:28:04 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 11, 2020, 09:20:20 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 11, 2020, 09:13:49 PM
How about "Rte. I-86" (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.660141,-77.8096732,3a,19.9y,167.44h,84.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjtSihlJ2ViTaMIK2ifYdXw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)?
More like "Rte. I-86"
Used to read "Rte. 17"
And now just I-86.
Yikes, I think I remember that one, and there may have been more of those. Rte.
I-86 is terrible. I'd certainly rather a shield than
that.
In order of preference:
-Interstate 86
-I-86 (text)
-I-86 (shield)
-Rte.
I-86
All right everyone. This thread has gone WAY off topic.
Anyway, we're looking for long distances that appear on Interchange Sequence Signs. Here's another example from the St. Louis area (namely, on I-55 just south of Arnold), showing a distance of 7 1/4 miles: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.3929488,-90.3822973,3a,37.5y,182.21h,94.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sx5BO1mgthufCWs3qJQuvaA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Some words of clarification:
The signs don't necessarily *have* to be double-sided, nor do they have to be in the median (although most are). The only definite rule is that the sign has to show the distance to the *next three* (or four, or more) exits; thus, signs that combine the next couple exits with the distance to a control city (such as the one in Reno mentioning Carson City) don't qualify for the purposes of the OP. However, the other example mentioned (the Mona sign in Utah) is an eligible sign, because that one does, in fact, show the distances to the next three exits.
I'm just trying to get this thread back on track here. Thanks for understanding.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on June 12, 2020, 09:32:17 PM
All right everyone. This thread has gone WAY off topic.
...
I'm just trying to get this thread back on track here. Thanks for understanding.
Totally understood, and sorry for getting us off the rails.
It looks like you're new here, so I might just note that getting off-topic definitely happens here from time to time, and that's OK. Sometimes, tangents are what keep the discussion going. We've still had an interesting discussion, and appreciate the topic you started, even if there has been less direct examples and more other conversation than you might have envisioned.
These can't compete with some of the other examples, but here's 5-1/2 miles to N Washington St. (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9029318,-97.0933313,3a,18.4y,10.01h,85.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s11zwIy-zLo9FLzEYQC-mEw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) near Grand Forks, ND, and 3-1/2 miles to CR 20 (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.8776024,-96.8403928,3a,35.1y,14.11h,86.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDvk7LRxkRO4KLFFNm1JlfA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) near Fargo. North Dakota has an interesting practice of adding the exit numbers to the sign. This is helpful for conveying additional information, but appears a bit cluttered, and also seems redundant since the distances already tell you how far apart the exits are.
7 miles to Greenbrier Pkwy (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.8667565,-76.1952783,3a,44.9y,184.58h,87.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_px6Gm8EPqGT-rseLHPEGg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) on I-64 East in Norfolk, VA.
That sign has existed since around 1978 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xAxsgj84-Q) when the Greenbrier Pkwy interchange was constructed, with VA-44 posted next to I-264 which was removed in 1999 with the I-264 eastward extension.
I think there's a "CTH-N - 7 1/2 miles" in Madison, WI on the eastbound triplex between US 151 and the I-94 East/WIS 30 interchange.
I-376 west before the Penn Hills exit. Pittsburgh, 13 miles.
https://goo.gl/maps/3bMvFKWdo3PGZfAh7 (https://goo.gl/maps/3bMvFKWdo3PGZfAh7)
Quote from: tylert120 on June 13, 2020, 07:48:22 AM
I-376 west before the Penn Hills exit. Pittsburgh, 13 miles.
https://goo.gl/maps/3bMvFKWdo3PGZfAh7 (https://goo.gl/maps/3bMvFKWdo3PGZfAh7)
I would call that a hybrid between an interchange sequence sign and a regular post-interchange mileage sign.
Penn Hills and Churchville are the next two exits, but then there are other exits between those two and Pittsburgh. Also, Pittsburgh is served by multiple exits, not just one.
This won't win the thread, but I did think it was odd when I drove past earlier today. 7 1/2 to Spartanburg on I-85. https://goo.gl/maps/wiLRaxe4m3VX2M7f6
Quote from: webny99 on June 12, 2020, 10:33:06 PM
These can't compete with some of the other examples, but here's 5-1/2 miles to N Washington St. (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9029318,-97.0933313,3a,18.4y,10.01h,85.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s11zwIy-zLo9FLzEYQC-mEw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) near Grand Forks, ND, and 3-1/2 miles to CR 20 (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.8776024,-96.8403928,3a,35.1y,14.11h,86.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDvk7LRxkRO4KLFFNm1JlfA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) near Fargo. North Dakota has an interesting practice of adding the exit numbers to the sign. This is helpful for conveying additional information, but appears a bit cluttered, and also seems redundant since the distances already tell you how far apart the exits are.
I've seen this on some old overheads in Ohio as well.
Looks like the longest in the Richmond metro is 8 1/2. Actually the sign lists every exit on the VA 76 Powhite Pkwy Extension.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/JBZM9GC3cP2HeAhC6
Quote from: KCRoadFan on June 10, 2020, 12:55:32 AM
You've seen them - they're those double-sided signs in the medians of urban and suburban freeways, giving the distance to the next three (or sometimes four) exits to the nearest quarter of a mile. The MUTCD calls them "Interchange Sequence Signs."
Anyway, I have a question: what's the longest distance you've seen on one of these signs? Presumably, the most promising candidates would be in outer suburbia or exurbia - areas that are built-up enough (or becoming so) to warrant such signs being installed, but still sparse enough for the exits to be spaced relatively far apart.
The longest distance I've seen depicted on an Interchange Sequence Sign is 8 1/2 miles, on I-64/Highway 40 eastbound through rapidly growing St. Charles County, as you make your way towards St. Louis - more specifically, just east of the MO 364 interchange (GSV link: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7620465,-90.7658816,3a,15y,131.32h,95.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spY5sDMprCiuyLjAnPGqjKg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Has anyone elsewhere in the country seen any longer distances displayed on one of these signs? I'd be interested to know.
The Bay Area of California has at least two examples of 2-digits-and-a-fraction. US-101 NB shows Cochrane Rd and CASR-85. One of these is shown as 10
1/
2 and CASR-92 WB shows Foster City Blvd and US-101. One of these is shown as 11
1/
2. Outside the Bay Area, NB I-5 has Panoche Rd, Little Panoche Rd and an exit in between whose name escapes me at the moment. Two of these are double-digits, but no fraction.
This beats the one I posted previously, but is more typical of a sign that South Carolina would mount on the right side of the road (a typical distance sign)...17 miles to Spartanburg on I-85.
(https://i.imgur.com/NGyiqwZ.jpg)
^
Quote from: webny99 on June 13, 2020, 01:05:12 PM
I would call that a hybrid between an interchange sequence sign and a regular post-interchange mileage sign.
Penn Hills and Churchville are the next two exits, but then there are other exits between those two and Pittsburgh. Also, Pittsburgh is served by multiple exits, not just one.
Not necessarily an interchange sequence sign... there's multiple exits near Spartanburg.
^ Did you get your quotes mixed up? I think your reply is to the picture directly above it, not to the quote from me.
Quote from: webny99 on June 14, 2020, 01:53:38 PM
^ Did you get your quotes mixed up? I think your reply is to the picture directly above it, not to the quote from me.
I was using your quote to respond to his comment. My comments were adding onto that, not countering yours. Sorry about any confusion.
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 14, 2020, 02:15:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 14, 2020, 01:53:38 PM
^ Did you get your quotes mixed up? I think your reply is to the picture directly above it, not to the quote from me.
I was using your quote to respond to his comment. My comments were adding onto that, not countering yours. Sorry about any confusion.
Gotcha... all good. Missed your arrow at the top.
Before Polaris Pkwy was built, the northern most "interchange sequence sign" along I-71 NB (between Morse Rd & Oh 161) had 13 miles to US 36.
Quote from: KCRoadFan on June 10, 2020, 12:55:32 AM
You've seen them - they're those double-sided signs in the medians of urban and suburban freeways, giving the distance to the next three (or sometimes four) exits to the nearest quarter of a mile. The MUTCD calls them "Interchange Sequence Signs."
Anyway, I have a question: what's the longest distance you've seen on one of these signs? Presumably, the most promising candidates would be in outer suburbia or exurbia - areas that are built-up enough (or becoming so) to warrant such signs being installed, but still sparse enough for the exits to be spaced relatively far apart.
The longest distance I've seen depicted on an Interchange Sequence Sign is 8 1/2 miles, on I-64/Highway 40 eastbound through rapidly growing St. Charles County, as you make your way towards St. Louis - more specifically, just east of the MO 364 interchange (GSV link: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7620465,-90.7658816,3a,15y,131.32h,95.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spY5sDMprCiuyLjAnPGqjKg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
MoDOT never changed that sign to include the EB exit to Research Park Circle? (https://goo.gl/maps/ArL7LYXyiKbWkAmV8)
Quote from: Brandon on June 10, 2020, 09:45:01 AM
Interchange sequence signs aren't used in Illinois that way; however, ISTHA does post the signage for the next exit. Here's I-88 west at Rochelle (IL-251): https://goo.gl/maps/Hi2yhqS69Ywd5C796
I don't believe there are any butterfly-mounted interchange sequence signs in Illinois, but I-155 has a couple around Morton (https://goo.gl/maps/Ph7ZAKkCLUrYq7id7). There's also one on SB I-55/WB I-70 at IL 203 (https://goo.gl/maps/RhJAHXdHsckjdYAL7).
And a few on I-74 (https://goo.gl/maps/2i3gxEx9ssyPZkz19) in the Peoria area. (https://goo.gl/maps/dbudxybutnv7KWQc7)
Quote from: webny99 on June 14, 2020, 05:34:41 PM
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 14, 2020, 02:15:48 PM
Quote from: webny99 on June 14, 2020, 01:53:38 PM
^ Did you get your quotes mixed up? I think your reply is to the picture directly above it, not to the quote from me.
I was using your quote to respond to his comment. My comments were adding onto that, not countering yours. Sorry about any confusion.
Gotcha... all good. Missed your arrow at the top.
Upward pointing arrows don't even do any good anyway if the other user has most recent posts at the top rather than at the bottom. For example, here's how it looks on my screen.
↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
(https://i.imgur.com/zqj0xni.jpg)
10 miles to US-301 (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3128764,-81.8156877,3a,33.9y,262.35h,87.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sv4MWIewaotDoGEHWteRmkQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) outside of Jacksonville, FL on I-10 West.
14 miles to FL-21 (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.2920413,-81.8791938,3a,48.8y,186.27h,83.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZhcArf7vrebSpqNBAGJyuw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) outside of Jacksonville, FL on FL-23 South.
In Hagerstown MD: 10 3/4 miles to MD 68 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.6053822,-77.7379052,3a,44.9y,277.23h,95.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQzg7u3Xbb68bDxeuu-WAlg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1?hl=en) On I-70 West, and 13 miles to MD 17 (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.6057774,-77.7461096,3a,41.7y,102.26h,95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5jzXQephXnlCi7lZ50l_7A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1?hl=en) on I-70 East.
Quote from: sprjus4 on June 15, 2020, 01:47:02 PM
14 miles to FL-21 (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.2920413,-81.8791938,3a,48.8y,186.27h,83.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZhcArf7vrebSpqNBAGJyuw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) outside of Jacksonville, FL on FL-23 South.
I think that might be the longest yet for legitimate sequence sign contenders.
While doing a Google Search for something semi-related to this topic, I found a previous thread which, surprisingly enough, has not been linked to yet! So, here it is, just for interest's sake:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6416.0
Remembered one on the SB Tri-State in Chicagoland, with 7 miles for I-90 (https://goo.gl/maps/Q152ejQukDtEdPiVA).
Apologies for late replies. Just saw this thread.
Quote from: gonealookin on June 10, 2020, 01:11:51 AM
I-580 in south Reno (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.406723,-119.7539078,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6zbQYwWHJgIKVixgOeVl0Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). 1/4, 9 and 20. Mt. Rose Highway (1/4) and Old US 395 (9) are the next two exits, but there are two more exits in Washoe Valley before you get to Carson City. I think the Bellevue Road exit, the next exit after Old US 395, is approximately 13 miles from there.
Also, for a real oddball on I-580, try this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2063598,-119.7962288,3a,75y,270h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sG8FbYgMPdTkiA5XLPCADHQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192). 26, 112 and 217. I know it's not exactly what you're looking for but it's double-sided, listing the Carson City exits in the southbound direction, and I've always thought that was a strange place for that particular sign.
These were the first things that came to mind for me in the thread, even though they are somewhat outside the scope of the thread topic.
And I agree with you on the second sign...I've always thought both the placement and list of destinations on that sign was odd. They couldn't have listed some smaller local destination, like Washoe City or Jct SR 431 or Jct I-80 or Stead, to put Susanville on the last line? (I mean, who's really going to Alturas from Carson City?) An interchange sequence sign would have been better, with a post-interchange mileage sign listing the distance to Reno and Susanville after the Eastlake Blvd interchange.
Quote from: webny99 on June 12, 2020, 10:33:06 PM
These can't compete with some of the other examples, but here's 5-1/2 miles to N Washington St. (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9029318,-97.0933313,3a,18.4y,10.01h,85.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s11zwIy-zLo9FLzEYQC-mEw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) near Grand Forks, ND, and 3-1/2 miles to CR 20 (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.8776024,-96.8403928,3a,35.1y,14.11h,86.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDvk7LRxkRO4KLFFNm1JlfA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) near Fargo. North Dakota has an interesting practice of adding the exit numbers to the sign. This is helpful for conveying additional information, but appears a bit cluttered, and also seems redundant since the distances already tell you how far apart the exits are.
Having the interchange number to the left of the exit name is an option allowed in the MUTCD. I've not seen it implemented until seeing these examples. Not sure that I like it... Perhaps if the numbers were smaller (say, the size of a fraction number for comparable text height), or if there was some sort of separator between exit number and destination...?
While looking at 35E north of St. Paul on Street View, I came across this sign with a distance of 8 miles on it.
https://www.google.com/maps/@45.0499434,-93.0589046,3a,37.5y,7h,101.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQjKyi1S7Iy-MejvwAXI4Vg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Illinois/Chicago generally doesn't do the sequence exit signs. But they will, especially on the Tollways, put up the next 1 or 2 exits with the current exit like this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2335868,-88.8186047,3a,75y,75.49h,97.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spsDLGY1yO1M5aeR4TSmORQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
US 20 is 17 miles.
But, that was taken before the interchange with Route 23 opened in December. That would make Route 23 be 13 miles away instead.
Quote from: roadfro on July 04, 2020, 06:11:43 PM
Apologies for late replies. Just saw this thread.
Quote from: webny99 on June 12, 2020, 10:33:06 PM
These can't compete with some of the other examples, but here's 5-1/2 miles to N Washington St. (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9029318,-97.0933313,3a,18.4y,10.01h,85.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s11zwIy-zLo9FLzEYQC-mEw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) near Grand Forks, ND, and 3-1/2 miles to CR 20 (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.8776024,-96.8403928,3a,35.1y,14.11h,86.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDvk7LRxkRO4KLFFNm1JlfA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) near Fargo. North Dakota has an interesting practice of adding the exit numbers to the sign. This is helpful for conveying additional information, but appears a bit cluttered, and also seems redundant since the distances already tell you how far apart the exits are.
Having the interchange number to the left of the exit name is an option allowed in the MUTCD. I've not seen it implemented until seeing these examples. Not sure that I like it... Perhaps if the numbers were smaller (say, the size of a fraction number for comparable text height), or if there was some sort of separator between exit number and destination...?
I agree, they look awkward and kind of out-of-context. I think a heading above the column of exit numbers that said "EXIT" would make the meaning of the numbers much clearer.