When I used to live in Ohio, I never realized how common Interchange Sequence signs were in urban areas of large cities. Over the years, a few freeway stretches started to use them (I-71 in North Columbus and the Innerbelt in Cleveland), but not to the extent as in other large cities, like Detroit, Denver, LA, and St. Louis.
What other state DOTs or Larger cities shun the use of Interchange Sequence signs (which usually list the next 3 exits on the freeway) in larger, urban areas? Which ones use it very sparingly, like in Ohio?
MA does not use them in the immediate Boston area but has done such for other cities and towns.
Quote from: PHLBOS on July 30, 2015, 04:27:06 PM
MA does not use them in the immediate Boston area but has done such for other cities and towns.
In places where MA has used interchange sequence signing (sucha sI-290 through Worcester), placement has been spotty at best and generally not consistent with MUTCD requirements or guidance. As such, most of the existing signs will be pulled out and not replaced during the next round of sign update projects.
Quote from: roadman on July 30, 2015, 04:31:25 PMIn places where MA has used interchange sequence signing (such as I-290 through Worcester), placement has been spotty at best and generally not consistent with MUTCD requirements or guidance. As such, most of the existing signs will be pulled out and not replaced during the next round of sign update projects.
Example of a fairly recent installation/replacement (copied from the MA I-95 Signing Work thread):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-b-E9SghJ9Pc%2FUy9FNH7tf1I%2FAAAAAAAABV0%2Fn2nPlLHWeno%2Fs1600%2Fi95signs321k.jpg&hash=35061fcf986490ddfef2226e40b47d7198e34947)
New Orleans does not. But that could have changed since I've been last.
Chicago doesn't use them at all. In fact, I don't know anywhere in Illinois that does.
FL 528 uses them for Orlando as the exits are not sequential.
Westbound:
FL 417
FL 436
McCoy Road
Eastbound:
FL 436
FL 417
The reason why EB does not have three is because the first exit for Orange Avenue is on FDOT Turnpike Enterprise maintained roadway, and those signs are former OOCEA now CFX property. To me they need to include I-4 going WB as its signed for Orlando anyway. Though long and out of the way, but still one of Orlando's exits.
Quote from: bassoon1986 on July 30, 2015, 08:14:19 PM
New Orleans does not. But that could have changed since I've been last.
They're nowhere in the entire N.O. metro area, except for the Westbank Expressway. Far as I'm aware, the only metro in Louisiana that uses them with any frequency at all is Shreveport.
Quote from: Darkchylde on July 30, 2015, 09:15:56 PM
Quote from: bassoon1986 on July 30, 2015, 08:14:19 PM
New Orleans does not. But that could have changed since I've been last.
They're nowhere in the entire N.O. metro area, except for the Westbank Expressway. Far as I'm aware, the only metro in Louisiana that uses them with any frequency at all is Shreveport.
Houma and Morgan City only use the Next X Exit signs, but you are right they generally do not use them and I have not seen them when I was there a few years ago.
Quote from: PHLBOS on July 30, 2015, 04:46:32 PM
Quote from: roadman on July 30, 2015, 04:31:25 PMIn places where MA has used interchange sequence signing (such as I-290 through Worcester), placement has been spotty at best and generally not consistent with MUTCD requirements or guidance. As such, most of the existing signs will be pulled out and not replaced during the next round of sign update projects.
Example of a fairly recent installation/replacement (copied from the MA I-95 Signing Work thread):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-b-E9SghJ9Pc%2FUy9FNH7tf1I%2FAAAAAAAABV0%2Fn2nPlLHWeno%2Fs1600%2Fi95signs321k.jpg&hash=35061fcf986490ddfef2226e40b47d7198e34947)
That is actually a Community Interchanges Identification Sign, not an Interchange Sequence Sign.
Quote from: tribar on July 30, 2015, 08:30:38 PM
Chicago doesn't use them at all. In fact, I don't know anywhere in Illinois that does.
There's some around Peoria and a few scattered ones downstate. That said, IDOT District 1 completely shuns the things. Now, ISTHA has a different solution to it. Instead of having sequence signage, they tend to post the BGSs of the next two exits, even if those exits are miles away.
InDOT does use them extensively in NW Indiana (even including Illinois exits on the last few in the state).
Unless I'm forgetting a couple downstate, New York doesn't use them. Exits in urban areas are often so close that they would create unnecessary sign clutter. There are a few variations of a community interchanges sign, but that's the extent.
Ohio uses them quite extensively in Columbus, can't remember if they're used elsewhere.
Newark, NJ used to use them, but since the late 90's the city has been split into its sections: Ironbound, Downtown-Arts, University Heights, and Newark Airport (especially on I-78). It used to be "Newark" meant the Downtown areas when signing, but since many non road geeks were being confused about cities still being signed within their boundaries the road agencies nationwide seemed to have no choice but to split areas of larger cities.
BTW, NYC is so big that is why no exit sequence or exit lists could be made. I did once see "Hunts Point Market" on I-278 years ago denoting the Next 2 Exits back in the 70's, but I think that it may be long gone now.
Quote from: cl94 on July 31, 2015, 05:55:13 PM
Exits in urban areas are often so close that they would create unnecessary sign clutter.
Wait–isn't this precisely the reason
for using urban interchange sequence signs? My understanding is that they basically replace the standalone "2
MILES" and "1
MILE" signs that would otherwise overlap and clutter the motorist's view, leaving only the "
1/
2 MILE" and gore signs.
What Brian said. This is the kind of sign we're (supposed to be) talking about. (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.788456,-122.516723,3a,37.5y,122.49h,92.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5kC0al2BqNh_sCJweKID1w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1) Signs that list every exit in a city are kinda similar, but a different animal. Signs that just say "NEXT 4 EXITS" are a different thing entirely.
Quote from: roadman65 on July 31, 2015, 06:24:50 PM
BTW, NYC is so big that is why no exit sequence or exit lists could be made. I did once see "Hunts Point Market" on I-278 years ago denoting the Next 2 Exits back in the 70's, but I think that it may be long gone now.
NYC's size has nothing to do with it. There's nothing stopping them from posting a sign that lists the next three exits, and then another sign three exits later listing the
next three, and then another sign... That's essentially what they do in Seattle, which has (very quick, guaranteed not 100% accurate count) 22 exits on I-5 in city limits. And throughout major cities in California. Dunno if you noticed, but Los Angeles is also frickin huge.
(Though they aren't used consistently in Seattle, and I couldn't find the one I was think of in Northgate on Street View. So you got the Bellingham example instead, where they only list two exits for some reason instead of three.)
Quote from: briantroutman on July 31, 2015, 06:39:19 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 31, 2015, 05:55:13 PM
Exits in urban areas are often so close that they would create unnecessary sign clutter.
Wait–isn't this precisely the reason for using urban interchange sequence signs? My understanding is that they basically replace the standalone "2 MILES" and "1 MILE" signs that would otherwise overlap and clutter the motorist's view, leaving only the "1/2 MILE" and gore signs.
You're lucky to get more than 1 advance in New York City. Stuff is just too close.
Quote from: cl94 on July 31, 2015, 05:55:13 PM
Unless I'm forgetting a couple downstate, New York doesn't use them. Exits in urban areas are often so close that they would create unnecessary sign clutter. There are a few variations of a community interchanges sign, but that's the extent.
Ohio uses them quite extensively in Columbus, can't remember if they're used elsewhere.
I-81 has them each direction approaching Watertown. Those are the only ones I can think of off the top of my head.
I forgot about Watertown. I have that featured on my flickr pages. The reasoning for that one is rather than sign NY 3, NY 12F, and NY 12 for Watertown, the local street names are used instead.
PennDOT does that approaching cities with multiple exits. The exit for NY 3 is signed: NY 3- Arsenal St.- Sacketts Harbor. The "Arsenal St." replaces "Watertown" as its co signed with "Sacketts Harbor" which is NY 3's other control city. The other two exits have their other direction control city with the proper Watertown Street names as well.
Quote from: cl94 on July 31, 2015, 08:15:30 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on July 31, 2015, 06:39:19 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 31, 2015, 05:55:13 PM
Exits in urban areas are often so close that they would create unnecessary sign clutter.
Wait–isn't this precisely the reason for using urban interchange sequence signs? My understanding is that they basically replace the standalone "2 MILES" and "1 MILE" signs that would otherwise overlap and clutter the motorist's view, leaving only the "1/2 MILE" and gore signs.
You're lucky to get more than 1 advance in New York City. Stuff is just too close.
Which is why you put advance warning for multiple exits on a single sign.
I don't recall seeing them last time I was in Louisville or around Lexington, KY.
There is an old button copy interchange sequence sign in New London on I-95 south which lists the exits with shopping malls.
Quote from: Kacie Jane on July 31, 2015, 09:35:14 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 31, 2015, 08:15:30 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on July 31, 2015, 06:39:19 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 31, 2015, 05:55:13 PM
Exits in urban areas are often so close that they would create unnecessary sign clutter.
Wait–isn't this precisely the reason for using urban interchange sequence signs? My understanding is that they basically replace the standalone "2 MILES" and "1 MILE" signs that would otherwise overlap and clutter the motorist's view, leaving only the "1/2 MILE" and gore signs.
You're lucky to get more than 1 advance in New York City. Stuff is just too close.
Which is why you put advance warning for multiple exits on a single sign.
In NY we don't use as many advance signs as other states do. If there's a 1 mile sign, there's no* half mile sign, and 2 mile + signs are rarely used. Urban areas get the same number of advance signs as everywhere else.
*I-88 exit 6 has both 1 mile and 1/2 mile for reasons I can't fathom.
Quote from: vdeane on August 01, 2015, 08:15:31 PM
Quote from: Kacie Jane on July 31, 2015, 09:35:14 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 31, 2015, 08:15:30 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on July 31, 2015, 06:39:19 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 31, 2015, 05:55:13 PM
Exits in urban areas are often so close that they would create unnecessary sign clutter.
Wait–isn't this precisely the reason for using urban interchange sequence signs? My understanding is that they basically replace the standalone "2 MILES" and "1 MILE" signs that would otherwise overlap and clutter the motorist's view, leaving only the "1/2 MILE" and gore signs.
You're lucky to get more than 1 advance in New York City. Stuff is just too close.
Which is why you put advance warning for multiple exits on a single sign.
In NY we don't use as many advance signs as other states do. If there's a 1 mile sign, there's no* half mile sign, and 2 mile + signs are rarely used. Urban areas get the same number of advance signs as everywhere else.
*I-88 exit 6 has both 1 mile and 1/2 mile for reasons I can't fathom.
Yes. Urban areas get one advance in almost every case and it can be as little as 1/4 mile. Multiple advances in New York are used only in the event of a lane drop or multilane exit. I can only think of a handful of signs for a distance greater than 1 mile and they are often near toll booths (such as this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.951686,-78.741636,3a,51.1y,122.84h,84.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNo52FjSnakUlVPKP1h5MaA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and another one (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.800583,-78.815148,3a,75y,55.63h,79.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbZLEr23jdJhksvZpF29j1w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)) or Thruway Exit 24 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.727291,-73.891533,3a,48.6y,142.25h,89.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXA1FMvWpt6dUCRlfDrETVQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), which is a special case for obvious reasons.
I only remember 2 in Connecticut:
* I-84 eastbound, for the 3 exits in the "canyon" in Hartford, 3/10, 4/10, and 5/10 of a mile (probably gone now)
* CT 2 eastbound, East Hartford; a sequence sign for "Jct Rte 3", "Jct Rte 17", and "Jct Rte 94". Intervening exit (Griswold St.) omitted. I think this is also gone.
Thanks for the insights. I always thought there were more cities and states that used them a lot. I guess when I was younger, those kid of signs really stuck out and I thought they were more prevalent.
In TN I've only seen them used in Memphis along the 6-lane portion on TN 385 near Germantown. Nowhere else. They are desperately needed throughout the state.
Never seen them anywhere in KY, but WV seems to use them in Huntington, Charleston, and Beckley.
In NC I've seen them in Charlotte mostly, but I think I've seen one or two in Winston-Salem as well.
In SC they're fairly common in Columbia, Charleston, and Greenville, and maybe along SC 31 in the Myrtle Beach area. They also have advanced signage for a town's exits for Newberry and Manning, though the signs for each exit still mention the town.
They're used kind of spottily around Atlanta, mostly on and inside 285. Actually, I shouldn't say that: I find them so irritating that I tend to ignore them. This photo that afone took shows why:
1. Georgia includes a pointless NEXT THREE EXITS plaque at the top of the sign. Dude, we already know that.
2. As shown here, the closest destination is already referenced twice in this one photo on the standard signage, and the standard signage is already awfully wordy for reasons beyond GDOT's control. OT, but IMO sequential signage should cover the next three (or two) exits that aren't already appearing on the standard signage.
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7343/16414397292_1ffa3a9b5f_b.jpg)
Quote from: Tom958 on August 02, 2015, 06:34:49 AM
IMO sequential signage should cover the next three (or two) exits that aren't already appearing on the standard signage.
That would be fine with me as well, as long as GDOT stopped using the "NEXT 3 EXITS" wording, because as-is, GDOT would be required to display Peachtree Rd on the sequence signage since it is one of the next three exits.
Quote from: Kacie Jane on July 31, 2015, 09:35:14 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 31, 2015, 08:15:30 PM
You're lucky to get more than 1 advance in New York City. Stuff is just too close.
Which is why you put advance warning for multiple exits on a single sign.
With regards to New York City specifically, the reason we don't have such signs is because they weren't in general use back when all of our highways were built, and there is a striking lack of initiative amongst NYSDOT R11 and NYCDOT to really rethink how they sign things. New signs very often simply carbon copy the ones they replace, or change some text but don't really rethink the overall design, preserving such historical oddities as center tabbing, putting a route shield and highway name on the same sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.786683,-73.793825,3a,27.9y,74.45h,95.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFM3iAmdHL8KA7zhUtiweRQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), using single arrows to point to ramps which are multiple lanes (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.683436,-73.726586,3a,75y,18.62h,76.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPld2d4cgwGOC_Vop8WRPWA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), and the use of "RIGHT LANE" as advance text for exits instead of a distance or arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.827874,-73.836663,3a,46.3y,343.87h,87.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSTM51u6QDVz5qi72VeD7qw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). And yes, that is a left-aligned tab for a right-hand exit. :-|
It also doesn't help that the culture in New York City is simultaneously quite parochial and quite exceptionalist. There is a strong mindset of "if it wasn't invented here, it must be inferior". Exit list signage is a good idea, but it was someone else's idea so we're not eager to use it.
At the same time, though, this attitude produces some unique local flavor to the roads, which I appreciate simply for its stand in defiance of the genericization of America.
IMHO, I think I-4 should use them like Caltrans does after every interchange to denote the next 3 interchanges instead of using more panels. Even the Garden State Parkway with its latest sign change in Middlesex County is using way too many panels to alert motorists of NJ 27, Wood Ave. S, and US 1 where a sequential sequence sign would be simpler and safer as motorists have to worry about other things while driving.
Quote from: Duke87 on August 02, 2015, 02:53:04 PM
Quote from: Kacie Jane on July 31, 2015, 09:35:14 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 31, 2015, 08:15:30 PM
You're lucky to get more than 1 advance in New York City. Stuff is just too close.
Which is why you put advance warning for multiple exits on a single sign.
With regards to New York City specifically, the reason we don't have such signs is because they weren't in general use back when all of our highways were built, and there is a striking lack of initiative amongst NYSDOT R11 and NYCDOT to really rethink how they sign things. New signs very often simply carbon copy the ones they replace, or change some text but don't really rethink the overall design, preserving such historical oddities as center tabbing, putting a route shield and highway name on the same sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.786683,-73.793825,3a,27.9y,74.45h,95.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFM3iAmdHL8KA7zhUtiweRQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), using single arrows to point to ramps which are multiple lanes (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.683436,-73.726586,3a,75y,18.62h,76.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPld2d4cgwGOC_Vop8WRPWA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), and the use of "RIGHT LANE" as advance text for exits instead of a distance or arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.827874,-73.836663,3a,46.3y,343.87h,87.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSTM51u6QDVz5qi72VeD7qw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). And yes, that is a left-aligned tab for a right-hand exit. :-|
It also doesn't help that the culture in New York City is simultaneously quite parochial and quite exceptionalist. There is a strong mindset of "if it wasn't invented here, it must be inferior". Exit list signage is a good idea, but it was someone else's idea so we're not eager to use it.
At the same time, though, this attitude produces some unique local flavor to the roads, which I appreciate simply for its stand in defiance of the genericization of America.
Valid points mostly. My point isn't that NYC (or S) DOT should be shamed or flogged for not using Interchange Sequence Signage. Just that New York being too big or the exits too close, as was said on the first page, isn't valid logic. Those aren't reasons these signs
can't be used there, and in fact may be good reasons why they
should be.
Quote from: Kacie Jane on August 02, 2015, 05:06:51 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on August 02, 2015, 02:53:04 PM
Quote from: Kacie Jane on July 31, 2015, 09:35:14 PM
Quote from: cl94 on July 31, 2015, 08:15:30 PM
You're lucky to get more than 1 advance in New York City. Stuff is just too close.
Which is why you put advance warning for multiple exits on a single sign.
With regards to New York City specifically, the reason we don't have such signs is because they weren't in general use back when all of our highways were built, and there is a striking lack of initiative amongst NYSDOT R11 and NYCDOT to really rethink how they sign things. New signs very often simply carbon copy the ones they replace, or change some text but don't really rethink the overall design, preserving such historical oddities as center tabbing, putting a route shield and highway name on the same sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.786683,-73.793825,3a,27.9y,74.45h,95.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFM3iAmdHL8KA7zhUtiweRQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), using single arrows to point to ramps which are multiple lanes (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.683436,-73.726586,3a,75y,18.62h,76.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPld2d4cgwGOC_Vop8WRPWA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), and the use of "RIGHT LANE" as advance text for exits instead of a distance or arrow (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.827874,-73.836663,3a,46.3y,343.87h,87.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSTM51u6QDVz5qi72VeD7qw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). And yes, that is a left-aligned tab for a right-hand exit. :-|
It also doesn't help that the culture in New York City is simultaneously quite parochial and quite exceptionalist. There is a strong mindset of "if it wasn't invented here, it must be inferior". Exit list signage is a good idea, but it was someone else's idea so we're not eager to use it.
At the same time, though, this attitude produces some unique local flavor to the roads, which I appreciate simply for its stand in defiance of the genericization of America.
Valid points mostly. My point isn't that NYC (or S) DOT should be shamed or flogged for not using Interchange Sequence Signage. Just that New York being too big or the exits too close, as was said on the first page, isn't valid logic. Those aren't reasons these signs can't be used there, and in fact may be good reasons why they should be.
We're also talking money that New York doesn't have. Adding interchange sequence signage to what already exists would nearly double the amount of signage. Transportation funding is being slashed and there's barely enough funding to maintain what highway infrastructure exists or what must be replaced immediately. Under the streets, the MTA isn't even getting enough state funding to keep the subway and commuter rail systems running. It's getting pretty bad out here.
Oklahoma is very spotty at using them. They have installed some in Norman with the recent construction on I-35, but elsewhere in the metro, they are occasionally posted at best.
Quote from: Brandon on July 31, 2015, 03:49:16 PM
Quote from: tribar on July 30, 2015, 08:30:38 PM
Chicago doesn't use them at all. In fact, I don't know anywhere in Illinois that does.
There's some around Peoria and a few scattered ones downstate. That said, IDOT District 1 completely shuns the things. Now, ISTHA has a different solution to it. Instead of having sequence signage, they tend to post the BGSs of the next two exits, even if those exits are miles away.
InDOT does use them extensively in NW Indiana (even including Illinois exits on the last few in the state).
District 1 Does follow - somewhat - the pattern that ISHTA uses on Chicago's expressways. I say "somewhat" because it depends on the density of interchanges and the presence of a freeway-to-freeway interchange which would take up all the room on the sign gantries - an example is on the Kennedy between Ohio Street and the (don't call me Jane Byrne) Circle. the signage shows the next two exits, but is interrupted at times by the signing of the upcoming Circle connections. That's their alternative to these sequencing signs - it's effective, but not ideal in the least. CDOT doesn't even bother on the LSD and Skyway.
WisDOT uses some form of them in several places. Madison (Interstates and the Beltline) hast them used extensively as does the greater Milwaukee area (southern Washington and Ozaukee Counties, Milwaukee County and eastern Waukesha County). I-94 in Racine and Kenosha counties also uses them - rural or urban. The signs also include Russell Road and the US-41 split in Illinois, but not south of WIS 165 so the first ISTHA interchange is not listed.
Other areas having the same scheme as Madison and Milwaukee are: WIS 29 and US-51 in Wausau metro area, US-53 in Eau Claire/Chippewa falls, I-94 through Hudson, and the urban freeways of Green Bay, Appleton, Oshkosh and Fond du Lac. Most of these were installed after rebuilds of the freeway(s) in recent years.
Most other cities are fitted with a "[City name here] next # [Exits|Interchanges]" or list of exits (up to 3) - prominent ones are Stevens Point (doesn't include Plover), Portage, La Crosse, Chippewa Falls (WIS-29 only - see above for US-53), Eau Claire (I-94 only - see above for US-53), Sheboygan and Manitowoc.
When I was driving in Metro Detroit for the first time, or even my first time in SoCal, f I had a ways to go, I'd be traveling in one of the leftmost lanes.
When my exit first appeared on the third (bottom) row of upcoming exits on the sequential sign, I would move one lane to the right. When it was the 2nd listed exit on the sign, I would move one lane to the right again. When it was the next exit (usually would then be the top exit on the ISS) I would now be in the rightmost lane to prepare to exit.
That is how I perceive the use of those signs and how I treated them. Like previous posters have said, in cities where exits often sneak up on an unsuspecting driver who is not in position to exit, you have someone in a far left lane slowing down traffic for all so they can get all the way over to the exit lane in time. If the ISS was used more often in urban areas, or areas where exits are closely spaced, there is a greater chance these drivers will start moving over earlier with plenty of time as not to impede the traffic flow as much as they (hopefully) will have better notice their exit is coming up.
I know that Albuquerque uses them on I-25 from Tramway (NM 556) to the Airport (Support Boulevard).