Small mile marker signs

[CapeCodder]

I've noticed that in some states mile markers are hilariously tiny. NJ and VA (I-95 specifically for both) have really small ones. Does this violate MUTCD?

[hotdogPi]

Are these markers meant for the general public, or are they like these?



(this road also has regular-sized mile markers every 0.2; the tiny diamonds are sporadic but can have odd numbers)

[CapeCodder]

Are these markers meant for the general public, or are they like these?



(this road also has regular-sized mile markers every 0.2; the tiny diamonds are sporadic but can have odd numbers)

General Public. They're posted every mile.

[kphoger]

I've noticed that in some states mile markers are hilariously tiny. NJ and VA (I-95 specifically for both) have really small ones. Does this violate MUTCD?

As I'm reading MUTCD §2H.05 (Reference Location Signs (D10-1 through D10-3) and Intermediate Reference Location Signs (D10-1a through D10-3a)), I believe the standard only applies to "expressway facilities that are located on a route where there is reference location sign continuity" and freeways.  Therefore, I suppose, mile markers that differ from the standard don't violate the MUTCD if they're on regular single-carriageway routes.

But, tying this in with another discussion on the forum about California's and Nevada's post miles system, I think this might mean the markers on CA-99 do violate the MUTCD.  And, for that matter, so do the ones on US-75 north of Dallas.

Someone more familiar with the ins and outs of the MUTCD than I am might need to weigh in on this.

[Rothman]

See also the Thruway's tenth-mile markers...

[jeffandnicole]

I've noticed that in some states mile markers are hilariously tiny. NJ and VA (I-95 specifically for both) have really small ones. Does this violate MUTCD?

You're talking about the basic ones that were prevalent before the enhanced style came along? They were the MUTCD standard.

[CapeCodder]

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4865016,-74.39786,3a,15y,67.27h,85.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJHZTcjjWmy3KEEXD6-C_fw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

These are the type of markers in question. Seems like it's a proto-enhanced mm blade

[DJ Particle]

Are these markers meant for the general public, or are they like these?



(this road also has regular-sized mile markers every 0.2; the tiny diamonds are sporadic but can have odd numbers)

That one's in Massachusetts.  They were posted every 1/10th mile.  At some point in the mid-1980s, they experimented with "lollipop-stick" style markers, but reverted to the diamonds in their final posting in the mid-1990s.  They have since joined the national standard.

[formulanone]

I've noticed that in some states mile markers are hilariously tiny. NJ and VA (I-95 specifically for both) have really small ones. Does this violate MUTCD?

I'm not an expert on various editions of the MUTCD, but from seeing so much variety out in the field, I'm guessing there was no national standard whatsoever until the "enhanced mile markers" came about.

[jeffandnicole]

Here was the 2003 MUTCD guidance: https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2003r1r2/part2/part2d2.htm#figure2D13

And the 2000 guidance:  https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/millennium/06.14.01/2endi.pdf (Scroll to page 2E-13)

Hard to tell the actual sizes of the numbers on the NJ Turnpike signage, but they were probably fine at the time of installation.  In most states, you often only find MM every mile, so using them every 1/10th of a mile is relatively unheard of for an entire route, especially outside a heavily travelled area.

[ctkatz]

I am told caltrans does in fact mile mark their roads, but I'll be damned if I could see them the two times I drove out there the vast majority of the time. bad enough that they reset all of their mileage at the county lines.

[Road Hog]

Texas posts them on reassurance signs but you have to look to find them. Plus they use an arcane zero point that has been often discussed on this board.