Lake Pontchartrain Causeway Signage

[rlb2024]

I don't know what's up with the Lake Pontchartrain Causeway, but all of the signs are being replaced -- and it ain't pretty.  The font size on all of the existing signs has gotten smaller -- with no change in the size of the signs -- and they are putting ENORMOUS mile marker signs every 1/10 mile.  These are the signs that are being installed on Interstate highways every mile, with the direction, highway number, and mile marker.  Every mile or half-mile is OK, and for fog reasons if smaller signs are needed every 1/10 mile that's understandable.  But 4-foot-tall signs every 528 feet?  Really?  All you see are signs everywhere . . .

[rlb2024]

This article from the New Orleans Times-Picayune shows the mile marker signs . . .

http://www.nola.com/traffic/index.ssf/2014/08/causeway_mile-marker_signs_an.html

[mcdonaat]

Why??? Why not the smaller signs, but make them more reflective? I don't understand why we have giant signs along the Causeway, other than a need to spend money.

[froggie]

My guess is that the Causeway Commission wants to make it easier for drivers to pinpoint where they are in the event of an incident or crash.

[codyg1985]

I like the shields. This is also pretty consistent with what LaDOTD does along long causeway bridges, anyway, but I think those mile markers are every 2/10 of a mile instead of 1/10 of a mile.

[rlb2024]

I like the shields. This is also pretty consistent with what LaDOTD does along long causeway bridges, anyway, but I think those mile markers are every 2/10 of a mile instead of 1/10 of a mile.

Most of the ones on the long bridges, though, aren't that tall -- they just say "mile 132.4" or something like that.  They don't show the direction or the highway logo.

Also, they replaced all of the other signs on the bridge -- and the font size is much smaller.  Some you can barely read until you're right up on them.  Lettering is much smaller than on the every-528-feet mileage signs.

[bugo]

They might be coming down: http://www.nola.com/traffic/index.ssf/2014/08/roundly-criticized_causeway_si.html#incart_related_stories

[cjk374]

The Ouachita River bridge in Monroe has really small 1/10th milemarkers that are retroflective.  They could've used those on the causeway and they would have accomplished the same goal.

[brownpelican]

I saw them as I traveled the bridge Monday. I didn't have any problems reading them.

[Scott5114]

Missouri uses these exact markers at a 2/10 mile interval. Maybe the Causeway should just take down the odd-numbered ones?

The people complaining about it need to find something better to do, though.

[codyg1985]

Missouri uses these exact markers at a 2/10 mile interval. Maybe the Causeway should just take down the odd-numbered ones?

The people complaining about it need to find something better to do, though.

That would make the most sense to me, too. I think the odd ones were also put in place due to the possibility of fog.

Even on the I-10 twin spans, I think the mile markers are spaced every 2/10th of a mile.

[jdb1234]

Personally, they don't look a whole lot different than what I have seen in Georgia:

[codyg1985]

^ That style is very common. I think has been adopted in the latest MUTCD. I want to say that the NJ Turnpike or the Garden State Parkway also has them in areas where signage has been updated.

[rlb2024]

I have seen the new-style signs in many places and really like them, but not at 1/10 mile intervals.  Especially on a road with no shoulder on either side -- along other highways they are on the other side of the shoulder, so they are far enough away that they're not right on top of you.  And especially when some of them are mounted less than 2 feet in front of other signs and obscure large portions of those other signs (distance to next crossover, etc.).

Many other highways in Louisiana (I-10 Atchafalaya bridge and through Metairie, as well as the I-49 elevated portion through Alexandria and in fog-prone area adjacent to the Red River, for just a few examples) are indeed marked every 2/10 mile, but with smaller signs at the fractional-mile locations.

As someone who has commuted across the Causeway for over 20 years -- many times before sunrise -- those big reflective signs every 528 feet are just obnoxious.  I understand the fog issues, but when the fog gets bad (10 to 15 times each winter at the most) the bridge police either convoy traffic across at reduced speeds (and will know immediately where any problems occur) or close off one lane and reduce the speed limit to 35 MPH while constantly patrolling using the closed-off lane.

For those who believe that we need to find something better to do than complain about this, when we see excessive taxpayer money being spent on unnecessary items (over $100K of federal grant money for the signs, plus another $15K of toll revenue for the 480 required sign posts), I believe it is our obligation to question how wisely our money is being spent by public officials.  And the Causeway Commission apparently got the message, as installation of the remaining signs is now on hold while the entire project is being reviewed.

[vdeane]

And now they're spending more money on a review of whether or not to use the already spent money.

[Pete from Boston]

And potentially what, a redesigned marker to be installed at further expense?

These are standard markers here, albeit at 1/5-mile intervals.  I guess in areas of extreme fog they need to be closer.  Would it be preferable to have motorists walking in fog to find their location?

[vdeane]

I prefer the small version MUTCD markers (a la what Vermont uses) for tenth mile markers (actually, I prefer NYSDOT Region 1's green and white ones, but I'm pretty sure that those aren't an option here (they appear to be being phased out anyways)).

[rlb2024]

The project will continue as designed:

http://www.nola.com/traffic/index.ssf/2014/09/causeway_mile-market_project_t.html#incart_m-rpt-2

Oh well . . .

[cjk374]

I wonder if any butter fingers have dropped signs or post materials in the water yet?