I-195 (NJ) replacement of reassurance shields w/ mile marker/reassurance signs?

[SectorZ]

Pennsylvania has been doing something similar to this. Shields only on whole number mileposts and the first milepost at the start of a freeway. I agree that there's no need to have a shield every 1/10 of a mile.

Actually, there is.  Those mileposts are to help in the case of a breakdown, accident, etc.  Most people aren't familiar with exactly where they are.  If they need help, they can say "I see a mile post that says East Route 76, 347.4", or they can say "I think I passed Harrisburg, but I don't know where I am".

I respectfully disagree with your implication that every enhanced reference marker needs to be identical in design.  Even if people aren't familiar as to their exact location on a roadway at any given time, one would hope they would remember the route they are traveling on without the need for "in your face" reminders every 1/10th of a mile.  And, providing route and direction information only at the even milepoints should be a sufficent reminder to those who are still "what route am I on" challenged.

As I noted in a previous post, FHWA alllowed Massachusetts to install their intermediate markers with just the milepoint information.  To my knowledge, this hasn't created any issues for either drivers reporting incidents or for emergency crews responding to such incidents.

You will be surprised.  Ask our friend who works on the NJTA how many people say they are on the New Jersey Parkway, or the Garden State Turnpike, or on the New York Parkway. 

Remember, there's over 200 million drivers.  Many of them took a single test to become licensed drivers for life.  They only had to score an 80% or better on their test.  Doesn't matter if they got "T/F: The threshold of impairment is .15" wrong in 1947, or if they missed "What do you do when you encounter a red, 8 sided sign with the word STOP".  As long as they can answer 80% of the questions correctly, then take a driving test where the most important thing is to not hit a tree at 25 mph, then they are allowed to drive anywhere and everywhere, forever.

Some of them are visiting from other countries.  They barely understand English.  They know that they want to go from point A to point B.  They have to remember to stay on the correct side of the road, and look for signs with their destination on it.  If the sign says "New York City", and they want to go to New York City, they take that route.  They have no clue what route they are on.

And no matter how familiar they are with a route, if they are in an accident and disoriented, they may have forgotten exactly where they are. 

Talk to any first responder. I'm sure they can tell you numerous stories where they are searching for someone that gave incomplete information. 

You are thinking like a roadgeek.  Think like an average person who drives the roads.  There's a reason why those enhanced mile markers are preferred.

From what I have read, the idea of having the route shield on them was to assist people either in accidents who may be so flustered or injured that they lost the ability to know where they are at that time. And remember, you may know what road you are on, but if you wipe out and are incapacitated somewhere, you've got to hope the person calling EMS knows it, too.

I wish Massachusetts had 80% as a threshold to pass for a learner's permit, it's 70% (out of 20), and once you get number 14 correct the test shuts off so you can't get more than 14 of the 20 right.

[NJRoadfan]

You will be surprised.  Ask our friend who works on the NJTA how many people say they are on the New Jersey Parkway, or the Garden State Turnpike, or on the New York Parkway. 

......or that they are are mile marker Z 1000.

[roadman]

All excellent points jeffandnicole - thanks.

[ixnay]

Pennsylvania has been doing something similar to this. Shields only on whole number mileposts and the first milepost at the start of a freeway. I agree that there's no need to have a shield every 1/10 of a mile.

Maryland (MdTA) is doing this - but only on the toll-maintained system.

On the SHA ("free") network, you are fortunate to get a mile marker every mile.

On MD's Eastern Shore alone, I've seen mileposts on U.S. 50, U.S. 301, U.S. 13, U.S. 113, and MD 90.

As for multiplexing, 50 gets priority where it shares pavement with 301, but look at these from the Salisbury bypass...

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.393991,-75.564013,3a,21.4y,139.22h,87.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s51GyyNMMzlM3vF4k68ZHcQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

and a few yards further ahead...

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.392719,-75.557544,3a,79.8y,130h,80.44t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5c-IzE0JFFh9I0qDRCxq_g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

ixnay

[Alps]

You will be surprised.  Ask our friend who works on the NJTA how many people say they are on the New Jersey Parkway, or the Garden State Turnpike, or on the New York Parkway. 

......or that they are are mile marker Z 1000.

Or they are blindly following their GPS and so they don't have a clue what the last route they turned onto was.

[bzakharin]

There currently tends to be a variation of sorts.  I've seen some enhanced mile markers with a blue background (as opposed to the more standard green), others that just list the first letter of the direction cardinal (vs. spelling it out) and I-shields that neutered the INTERSTATE listing in them.

I've seen a few (very few) larger blue signs on 295 at seemingly random places including on on- and off-ramps. Those say something like "Interstate 295 North Exit X" or something like that. The ones on the mainline have the mile number. Don't remember if the off-ramp ones do too. I wonder why they are there and how it was decided which areas get them.

[jeffandnicole]

There currently tends to be a variation of sorts.  I've seen some enhanced mile markers with a blue background (as opposed to the more standard green), others that just list the first letter of the direction cardinal (vs. spelling it out) and I-shields that neutered the INTERSTATE listing in them.

I've seen a few (very few) larger blue signs on 295 at seemingly random places including on on- and off-ramps. Those say something like "Interstate 295 North Exit X" or something like that. The ones on the mainline have the mile number. Don't remember if the off-ramp ones do too. I wonder why they are there and how it was decided which areas get them.

On I-295 near NJ 73, and around that interchange, it appears NJDOT must've done some testing of various milepost options, including color, size, location, etc.  That's where you see most of the unusual mileposts. 

[roadman65]

Since jeffandnicole brought up ignorance of driving by non road geeks, that is why in DC they need to go back to shielding the three US routes properly as well as some cities that maintain their streets need to also follow suit.  As many non road geeks will see that road on a map.  Remember you have some people who refuse to go forward and still read maps.  Plus in DC's example you have many motorists who are tourists who need to find these routes to get out of town.  So yes trailblazing, as in adding them to the said milemarkers on interstates needs to be addressed in urban cities who are careless now.  I am not suggesting DC use mile markers on non freeways but keep up with the shields and trailblazers frequently.  Even in NJ where NJDOT gave the three counties in northern NJ control over US 202, needs to a better job than they are as signs are still scarce to non and in some areas using the old two digit US route shields that lost their capability to reflect back in the Carter years, leaving you clueless at night.  Morris County, although has did a somewhat better job than in the past, but some areas in Passaic and Bergen still need work.

Bottom line non road geeks do not think like us and need the extra signing.  Jeff made that point clear and after hearing it and the supporting comments following it I now realize how we as society changed in many ways.

[hbelkins]

These things aren't to replace reassurance markers, but to aid in emergency response, as countless others have pointed out.

One route in a multiplex rules the day in terms of reference locations.  See the MUTCD 2H.05 D10-09.

And the freeway higher up in the hierarchy takes precedence (eg Interstate over US Route over State Route).

Interesting that the OP chose a photo from Missouri, as the Show Me State has been removing Interstate reassurance markers from routes where other route classifications run concurrently with Interstates. In the example shown, the I-35 sign has been removed in favor of a MO 110 (CKC) marker. It's also happened southwest of St. Louis, where US 50 is signed on I-44, but I-44 itself isn't.

[bzakharin]

These things aren't to replace reassurance markers, but to aid in emergency response, as countless others have pointed out.

One route in a multiplex rules the day in terms of reference locations.  See the MUTCD 2H.05 D10-09.

And the freeway higher up in the hierarchy takes precedence (eg Interstate over US Route over State Route).

Interesting that the OP chose a photo from Missouri, as the Show Me State has been removing Interstate reassurance markers from routes where other route classifications run concurrently with Interstates. In the example shown, the I-35 sign has been removed in favor of a MO 110 (CKC) marker. It's also happened southwest of St. Louis, where US 50 is signed on I-44, but I-44 itself isn't.

And with toll authorities all bets are off. I-476 has continuous mile markers from the Blue Route to the Northeast extension, whereas the NJ Turnpike does its own thing with both I-95 and I-78.

[Roadrunner75]

I just noticed these too for the first time driving on 195 a few days ago.  Seemed like overkill to me, but I can understand the points above.

[DrSmith]

So a different take on this.... If the reason is everyone has cell phones, can we triangulate the location rather than installation of tons of more signs along the highway?

[odditude]

So a different take on this.... If the reason is everyone has cell phones, can we triangulate the location rather than installation of tons of more signs along the highway?

that might work for 911, but isn't going to help somebody who's calling Joe's Towing.

[jeffandnicole]

So a different take on this.... If the reason is everyone has cell phones, can we triangulate the location rather than installation of tons of more signs along the highway?

It's not really installing tons more signs - milemarkers have been in use for a long time.  It's just the info contained on them that's different.

And I don't think 911 operators want to be in the business of trying to figure out everyone's location all the time, which isn't an exact science.  They take your call and move on to the next call. 

[cpzilliacus]

So a different take on this.... If the reason is everyone has cell phones, can we triangulate the location rather than installation of tons of more signs along the highway?

911 centers (and some others) can determine where you are from the latitude and longitude of your phone if it has GPS capability.

[cpzilliacus]

So a different take on this.... If the reason is everyone has cell phones, can we triangulate the location rather than installation of tons of more signs along the highway?

It's not really installing tons more signs - milemarkers have been in use for a long time.  It's just the info contained on them that's different.

And I don't think 911 operators want to be in the business of trying to figure out everyone's location all the time, which isn't an exact science.  They take your call and move on to the next call.

I really like having milepost signs every 1/10th of a mile, as the New Jersey Turnpike Authority, the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, the MdTA and some state DOTs (such as Virginia) do on freeway-class roads. 

Makes identification of problems (not just freeway emergencies) faster and easier for all involved.

[ekt8750]

So a different take on this.... If the reason is everyone has cell phones, can we triangulate the location rather than installation of tons of more signs along the highway?

It's not really installing tons more signs - milemarkers have been in use for a long time.  It's just the info contained on them that's different.

And I don't think 911 operators want to be in the business of trying to figure out everyone's location all the time, which isn't an exact science.  They take your call and move on to the next call.

I really like having milepost signs every 1/10th of a mile, as the New Jersey Turnpike Authority, the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, the MdTA and some state DOTs (such as Virginia) do on freeway-class roads. 

Makes identification of problems (not just freeway emergencies) faster and easier for all involved.

I don't think anyone's arguing that. The debate here is whether there's a need for the highway shield on each post vs one on every whole mile.

[jeffandnicole]

So a different take on this.... If the reason is everyone has cell phones, can we triangulate the location rather than installation of tons of more signs along the highway?

It's not really installing tons more signs - milemarkers have been in use for a long time.  It's just the info contained on them that's different.

And I don't think 911 operators want to be in the business of trying to figure out everyone's location all the time, which isn't an exact science.  They take your call and move on to the next call.

I really like having milepost signs every 1/10th of a mile, as the New Jersey Turnpike Authority, the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, the MdTA and some state DOTs (such as Virginia) do on freeway-class roads. 

Makes identification of problems (not just freeway emergencies) faster and easier for all involved.

I don't think anyone's arguing that. The debate here is whether there's a need for the highway shield on each post vs one on every whole mile.

Personally, yes.  If there's an issue at MM 23.4, you want the person calling for help to be able to inform the 911 operator where the issue is. 

I know the argument is "Well, shouldn't the driver know what route their on"? Yes. But that doesn't always happen.  Or, the driver is injured, and it's up to a passenger who was sleeping or reading for the past hour to be able to report the location. 

[ekt8750]

So a different take on this.... If the reason is everyone has cell phones, can we triangulate the location rather than installation of tons of more signs along the highway?

It's not really installing tons more signs - milemarkers have been in use for a long time.  It's just the info contained on them that's different.

And I don't think 911 operators want to be in the business of trying to figure out everyone's location all the time, which isn't an exact science.  They take your call and move on to the next call.

I really like having milepost signs every 1/10th of a mile, as the New Jersey Turnpike Authority, the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, the MdTA and some state DOTs (such as Virginia) do on freeway-class roads. 

Makes identification of problems (not just freeway emergencies) faster and easier for all involved.

I don't think anyone's arguing that. The debate here is whether there's a need for the highway shield on each post vs one on every whole mile.

Personally, yes.  If there's an issue at MM 23.4, you want the person calling for help to be able to inform the 911 operator where the issue is. 

I know the argument is "Well, shouldn't the driver know what route their on"? Yes. But that doesn't always happen.  Or, the driver is injured, and it's up to a passenger who was sleeping or reading for the past hour to be able to report the location.

I can see both sides of the argument and believe more information is better than less but the graphich designer in me believes there is something to be about sign clutter to point where said sign loses its effectiveness and of you're going by MUTCD standards, putting a shield and the cardinal direction on a 1/10 marker could get pretty crowded.

[jeffandnicole]

I had read that when NJ went widespread with these enhanced reference mm's, they would do them every 2/10th of a mile, with signs on both front and back.  At least it does take away a little sign clutter that way, and they should still be within eyesight of someone.  Of course, when they get knocked down, there's now no sign for 4/10th of a mile, or about 2,000 feet, which makes them a little more hard to view if you happen to be in the middle of them.

They recently posted new ones on 295 in the 295/76/42 construction zone area, although they were every 1/10th of a mile, probably to assist with breakdowns and incidents in the construction zone.

[lordsutch]

911 centers (and some others) can determine where you are from the latitude and longitude of your phone if it has GPS capability.

True, but it's not required to be particularly accurate (and getting an accurate lock will take a minute or so if the GPS isn't active, particularly in rural areas where WiFi geolocation is impossible and the nearest cell tower can be miles away).

Even if it someone involved in an incident is the caller, as pointed out above, people who have just suffered head trauma (which includes getting whacked in the face by a deploying airbag) may not actually remember where they are. And even small kids can read a sign and tell an operator what numbers are on it if they're in a car and the adult(s) have been incapacitated.

Besides which, the person calling may not actually be where the incident is anymore. By the time a passing motorist has dialed 911 and gotten through to an operator, they could be a mile away or more from an incident.

If the feds get their way and require all cars to have something like OnStar installed (and subscription-free for emergency usage), at least some of the need will go away - presumably the car will be able to keep a GPS lock at almost all times since the power requirements compared to everything else in the car would be minimal - but not all of it, particularly in the passing motorist scenario or when emergency responders need to give accurate locations to each other over a radio or text link.

[vdeane]

While tenth mile markers have been in use in SOME places prior to the enhanced mile markers, the new markers are so huge that Fucillo could do advertising for them.  That makes them more expensive and IMO less attractive.  At least the standard mile markers look good, and many jurisdictions (like the Thruway) used tenth mile markers that were even smaller than that.  Most tenth mile markers in NY were the side of our reference markers (Region 1 being the exception... which is probably one reason why R1 has been so fast to adopt the standard mile markers).

[amroad17]

The only state that is doing any "replacements" is Missouri (Why?  I do not know.  It is rather idiotic.).  In the photo, the sign behind the enhanced I-35 marker is a Missouri 110 reassurance sign, without the I-35 sign that should be above it.

The area I am from, Cincinnati, uses these enhanced milemarkers every tenth of a mile.  In Lexington, KY, along I-75, the enhanced markers are every two tenths of a mile--a decision I like.  You really do not need to see these every tenth of a mile.

[bzakharin]

I just noticed that the Atlantic City Expressway Westbound has the shield and direction on every mile marker (even 1/10th ones). However, the markers are of the same size as normal mile markers, which is why I only noticed this now. If you don't know the shield, it's impossible to make out "Atlantic City Expressway" from a moving vehicle. Not sure if you're stopped. Eastbound mile markers curiously have this only every full mile, and not on the 1/10ths.

[ekt8750]

That has to be new cause last time I was on the ACE (Memorial Day weekend) I didn't see them at all.