High Shoulder????

[SSOWorld]

This might be considered "traffic control" by some, but I don't see it as such.

What is the definition of this????  IDOT (Illinois) has this on I-72 near the Missouri border and on I-155 (this is what I've seen so far).   Does any other state do this?


High Shoulder signs after Valley City Eagle Bridges by ssoworld, on Flickr

[kphoger]

It's a warning.  Hence the warning signs.

[roadfro]

Not a typical situation at all. I assume it means that the shoulders are significantly higher than the road (indicating the road was in a narrow cut situation or the shoulders were built up for some reason).

[Scott5114]

The shoulders don't look higher though. If it's referring to that rock cut, those rocks aren't the shoulder, they're in the clear zone.

[roadfro]

^ The shoulder doesn't necessarily mean just the paved shoulder...but yeah, I thought that the shoulders didn't look any different than normal (the condition could be out of view of the picture though).

[SSOWorld]

I noticed no difference any difference in the road's construction between the areas here and the rest of the roads.  I think that its... IDiOT being overly cautious.

[kphoger]

^ The shoulder doesn't necessarily mean just the paved shoulder

Yes it does.

    (625 ILCS 5/1-187.1) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 1-187.1)
    Sec. 1-187.1. Shoulder. That portion of the highway adjacent to the roadway for accommodating stopped vehicles or for emergency use.

[SSOWorld]

...

    (625 ILCS 5/1-187.1) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 1-187.1)
    Sec. 1-187.1. Shoulder. That portion of the highway adjacent to the roadway for accommodating stopped vehicles or for emergency use.

Where in that statement does "paved" show up?

[kphoger]

In the picture provided, the entire road from edge line to edge line is paved.  Therefore anything beyond the paved shoulder is not the 'shoulder' at all, per definition, because nothing beyond the pavement is intended for vehicular use.

[NE2]

Uh...

(625 ILCS 5/1-126) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 1-126)
    Sec. 1-126. Highway. The entire width between the boundary lines of every way publicly maintained when any part thereof is open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel or located on public school property.

(625 ILCS 5/1-179) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 1-179)
    Sec. 1-179. Roadway.
    That portion of a highway improved, designed or ordinarily used for vehicular travel, exclusive of the berm or shoulder. In the event a highway includes two or more separate roadways the term "roadway" as used herein shall refer to any such roadway separately but not to all such roadways collectively.

It helps to look up other definitions.

[Brian556]

Now, here's an actual high shoulder. It's on I-35E in Denton, TX. There is a mountable curb that would have to be driven over to access the shoulder. It's height has been diminished by multiple resurfacings. This section of I-35E was completed in 1959.

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=33.198243,-97.142733&spn=0.000018,0.012531&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=33.198091,-97.142518&panoid=H__Caza3HX6G3Yx68Mb7DA&cbp=12,120.69,,0,0

[J N Winkler]

In the picture provided, the entire road from edge line to edge line is paved.  Therefore anything beyond the paved shoulder is not the 'shoulder' at all, per definition, because nothing beyond the pavement is intended for vehicular use.

That is not necessarily true.  Shoulders do not have to have the same structural section throughout their entire width, nor do they have to be paved.  It is possible to have what is called a "stabilized vegetated" shoulder, which is a shoulder that has been seeded and looks like grass but is graded so that it does not have a crossfall greater than that of a typical paved shoulder (which is typically the same as the crossfall across the traveled way, or up to 4% in jurisdictions which permit greater crossfall on the shoulder than on the traveled way) and is also reinforced so it can take the weight of heavy vehicles.

In this particular case, however, I think the vegetated areas off to either side of the paved shoulder are not, in fact, part of the shoulder.

My problem with the "HIGH SHOULDER" signs shown in this picture is that it is not evident to the driver why this is a problem.  It may be that the length of road in cut has inadequate drainage (which is what Roadfro is hinting at by pointing out that the cliff is close to the edge of the paved shoulder, with a relatively flat vegetated slope between the two), but other possibilities include a slight level difference between the shoulder and the paved way, or features of shoulder geometry which promote ponding in the traveled way.  (One possible example of the latter is a break in superelevation between the traveled way and the shoulder, which creates a depression having its bottom at the shoulder stripe that can accumulate water in a sufficiently heavy rainstorm.)

All of these possible explanations, however, are symptomatic of faults in design or construction.  A well-designed and well-built high-speed facility should never ever have areas of ponding even in heavy rainstorms.  So the use of "HIGH SHOULDER" signing is not a cautious approach; in fact, it is the less conservative option compared to making the necessary revisions in drainage.

[kphoger]

Uh...

(625 ILCS 5/1-126) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 1-126)
    Sec. 1-126. Highway. The entire width between the boundary lines of every way publicly maintained when any part thereof is open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel or located on public school property.

(625 ILCS 5/1-179) (from Ch. 95 1/2, par. 1-179)
    Sec. 1-179. Roadway.
    That portion of a highway improved, designed or ordinarily used for vehicular travel, exclusive of the berm or shoulder. In the event a highway includes two or more separate roadways the term "roadway" as used herein shall refer to any such roadway separately but not to all such roadways collectively.

It helps to look up other definitions.

I'm quite familiar with those definitions.  I used to have them memorized, in fact, and even carried a copy in my wallet when I lived in Illinois, since hitchhiking was a primary mode of transportation for me then, and the law pertaining to hitchhiking contains the limiting phrase 'in a roadway'.  But I'm not sure why you mention those definitions, since (if I'm not mistaken) neither the word 'highway' nor the word 'roadway' had been used in this thread thus far.

That is not necessarily true.  Shoulders do not have to have the same structural section throughout their entire width, nor do they have to be paved.  It is possible to have what is called a "stabilized vegetated" shoulder, which is a shoulder that has been seeded and looks like grass but is graded so that it does not have a crossfall greater than that of a typical paved shoulder (which is typically the same as the crossfall across the traveled way, or up to 4% in jurisdictions which permit greater crossfall on the shoulder than on the traveled way) and is also reinforced so it can take the weight of heavy vehicles.

Thank you for clarifying that.  Knowing that now, I can think back and recall shoulders exactly like what you describe in the state of Illinois–though admittedly not very many.  At any rate, even if the land beyond the edge of the pavement in the picture is such a stabilized vegetated shoulder, it certainly doesn't look 'high'.

It may be that the length of road in cut has inadequate drainage

Interesting idea.  That definitely would be cause for a warning sign.  However, wouldn't it make a lot more sense to post a sign warning that includes the word 'flooding' or 'water'?

[NE2]

But I'm not sure why you mention those definitions, since (if I'm not mistaken) neither the word 'highway' nor the word 'roadway' had been used in this thread thus far.

Since they both appear in the definition of shoulder that you cited, I'm going to assume you're just extremely dense.

[roadfro]

But I'm not sure why you mention those definitions, since (if I'm not mistaken) neither the word 'highway' nor the word 'roadway' had been used in this thread thus far.

In replying to my comment, you inferred with the cited definition that "shoulder" only refers to a paved shoulder. That definition uses both terms 'highway' and 'roadway'--which is where the terms were introduced to the thread.

Analyzing the shoulder definition in the context of the definitions of "highway" and "roadway", an area adjacent to a roadway within the boundaries of a highway can constitute a legal unpaved shoulder. Thus, "shoulder" does not necessarily refer only to a paved shoulder.

[J N Winkler]

It may be that the length of road in cut has inadequate drainage

Interesting idea.  That definitely would be cause for a warning sign.  However, wouldn't it make a lot more sense to post a sign warning that includes the word 'flooding' or 'water'?

Such signs could indeed be used (various legends come to mind--"ROAD MAY FLOOD," "POSSIBLE WATER IN ROAD") and would also be applicable in what I think is the most likely scenario:  a flat spot in a curve transition or a grade break at the shoulder stripe due to improperly designed grading.  It could be agency policy, however, to use signs warning of flooding or water-on-the-road conditions only for roads in floodplain, this provision being justified on the basis that if drivers cannot see a flood gauge or an obvious reason why the road might flood, they are unlikely to take such signs seriously.

[Scott5114]

I'm going to assume you're just extremely dense.

Could we not be gratuitously rude? kphoger is conducting his discussion in a polite manner. That was uncalled for.

[agentsteel53]

high?  grass?  just wait for the 'CONTROLLED BURN - DO NOT INHALE' warning signs.

[kphoger]

But I'm not sure why you mention those definitions, since (if I'm not mistaken) neither the word 'highway' nor the word 'roadway' had been used in this thread thus far.

In replying to my comment, you inferred with the cited definition that "shoulder" only refers to a paved shoulder. That definition uses both terms 'highway' and 'roadway'--which is where the terms were introduced to the thread.

Analyzing the shoulder definition in the context of the definitions of "highway" and "roadway", an area adjacent to a roadway within the boundaries of a highway can constitute a legal unpaved shoulder. Thus, "shoulder" does not necessarily refer only to a paved shoulder.

Obviously there are unpaved shoulders.  But, as I said, that is not the case in the picture provided in the original picture:  It goes Roadway > Paved Shoulder > Not part of the road anymore

[roadfro]

Obviously there are unpaved shoulders.  But, as I said, that is not the case in the picture provided in the original picture:  It goes Roadway > Paved Shoulder > Not part of the road anymore

That "not part of the road anymore" can be part of the shoulder, by definition--there is nothing that indicates the unpaved area cannot be used to accommodate stopped vehicles or emergency purposes.


Looking at the picture closely (viewing a higher resolution on Flickr), it does appear that the unpaved area adjacent to the road might be a bit higher than the road surface. If that is the case, that could be the reason for the signs.

[Mr. Matté]

Here's the antonym of the "high shoulder" although at least GDOT makes it a little clearer (and repetitive in this case) what "low" means:
https://maps.google.com/?ll=32.039494,-81.207794&spn=0.00372,0.006968&t=m&z=18&layer=c&cbll=32.039583,-81.20785&panoid=CrzM6EtruOE6J5Ior26z1Q&cbp=12,357.37,,0,6.51

[Revive 755]

I recently drove I-155 northbound from I-55 and did not see any high shoulder signs, but there were a pair of warning signs that were covered not too far north of I-55.  Didn't look like there had been any work done recently though.