AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: "Incorrect" Mile Markers  (Read 5615 times)

Bickendan

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2584
  • Last Login: October 25, 2020, 08:40:33 PM
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #25 on: May 11, 2017, 02:52:46 AM »

Oregon's highways...
Notable one: I-84.
Logged

US71

  • Road Scholar , Master of Snark
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10189
  • Mad man with a camera

  • Age: 60
  • Location: On the road again
  • Last Login: Today at 12:15:18 AM
    • The Road Less Taken
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #26 on: May 11, 2017, 08:32:10 AM »

There is supposedly an I-65 marker near Branson, MO
Logged
Don't make me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry.

Brandon

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10887
  • Mr. Accelerator is our friend; Mr. Brake is not.

  • Age: 43
  • Location: Joliet, IL
  • Last Login: October 26, 2020, 08:22:35 PM
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #27 on: May 11, 2017, 10:15:41 AM »

I-41 in Wisconsin they still reflect US 41. They are about 40 miles off. US 10 for whatever reason is also off by about 40 miles. I-39 is off but only by 4 miles no big deal there.

I-39 uses US-51's mileposting, even in the stretch that used to be Wis-78.
Logged
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

Illinois: America's own banana republic.

Brandon

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10887
  • Mr. Accelerator is our friend; Mr. Brake is not.

  • Age: 43
  • Location: Joliet, IL
  • Last Login: October 26, 2020, 08:22:35 PM
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #28 on: May 11, 2017, 10:16:35 AM »

The original section of I-69 in Indiana, intentionally shifted up a flat 200 miles instead of being shifted up by the proper mileage that the new sections (and routing along 465) will actually add.

I don't think InDOT knew how much they would add when they upped the original section by 200.
Logged
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

Illinois: America's own banana republic.

paulthemapguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5163
  • That's not how it works...

  • Age: 30
  • Location: Illinois
  • Last Login: Today at 12:27:04 AM
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #29 on: May 11, 2017, 12:05:53 PM »

The original section of I-69 in Indiana, intentionally shifted up a flat 200 miles instead of being shifted up by the proper mileage that the new sections (and routing along 465) will actually add.

I don't think InDOT knew how much they would add when they upped the original section by 200.

Do you think they'll change them again once the highway runs border-to-border (i.e. from KY to MI)?

There's a 419.99 in Colorado

I had the pleasure of driving past the 419.9 mile marker along US191 in northeast Arizona.  I did notice that they placed it just before the 420th mile (i.e. the space between 419 and 419.9 was indeed smaller than the interval between 419.9 and 421).  It wasn't incorrect, so I didn't initially say anything about it here.
Logged
Avatar is the last interesting highway I clinched.
My Shield Gallery https://flic.kr/s/aHsmhQf3nW
Source Photos https://flic.kr/s/aHskFU42pF
TM Clinches https://bit.ly/2UwRs4O

Killing people is bad. Make death happen less.

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14197
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: October 26, 2020, 08:24:35 PM
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #30 on: May 11, 2017, 01:24:52 PM »

There is supposedly an I-65 marker near Branson, MO

Any more info?  This is certainly something I'd notice, but I've hardly ever been south of 76 and have only been south of Hollister one time.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

ekt8750

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 506
  • Location: SE Pennsylvania
  • Last Login: June 03, 2020, 02:51:44 PM
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #31 on: May 11, 2017, 02:05:18 PM »

Pennsylvania...

I've mentioned this before, but the US 22/322 markers start at 200.0 going W from I-81.  They alternate displaying 22 and 322 with each marker...both routes are significantly more than 200 miles to their respective state lines and the concurrency is only 60 miles or so.  You can really see this when US 322 branches off I-83 towards Hershey where the mile markers start at 221, but that's only 7-8 miles away from the "mile 200"

Additionally, US 30 going east of York has mile markers beginning at 245 at the PA 24 exit.  I think these are correct, but in Chester County they begin at 269 with the Coatesville bypass.  Google Maps shows 43 miles on US 30 between these points, so I think Chester County's are wrong by about 20.

Nexus 6P

It really does't help that PA doesn't place true mileposts on signed routes that aren't on freeways.
Logged

PColumbus73

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 511
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Myrtle Beach, SC
  • Last Login: October 18, 2020, 12:40:02 PM
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #32 on: May 11, 2017, 02:51:19 PM »

SC 31 in Horry County, SC has backwards mile markers. Mile 0 is at the north end of the freeway.
Logged

Bickendan

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2584
  • Last Login: October 25, 2020, 08:40:33 PM
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #33 on: May 11, 2017, 02:57:07 PM »

SC 31 in Horry County, SC has backwards mile markers. Mile 0 is at the north end of the freeway.
Most Oregon north-south highways do this. Is SC 31 one of the lone instances of this in South Carolina?
Logged

PColumbus73

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 511
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Myrtle Beach, SC
  • Last Login: October 18, 2020, 12:40:02 PM
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #34 on: May 11, 2017, 03:25:05 PM »

SC 31 in Horry County, SC has backwards mile markers. Mile 0 is at the north end of the freeway.
Most Oregon north-south highways do this. Is SC 31 one of the lone instances of this in South Carolina?

I looked since you asked. SC 30 (signed as an east-west route), in Charleston County, has 'backwards' mile markers as well. BUT, SC 30 was intended to be part of I-526.

SC 22 has correct mile markers.

SC 31's mile markers might have been placed to avoid having to resign them when the highway was extended south, and since the north end is about 2-3 miles from the NC state line, I think it would make the most sense from a cost-saving standpoint.
Logged

Bickendan

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2584
  • Last Login: October 25, 2020, 08:40:33 PM
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #35 on: May 11, 2017, 04:39:57 PM »

That sounds like a good exception proving the rule scenario.
Logged

epzik8

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 992
  • Alive Since Ninety-Five

  • Age: 25
  • Location: Maryland, USA
  • Last Login: October 26, 2020, 06:43:26 AM
    • The Epzik8 Roadpage
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #36 on: May 11, 2017, 11:04:38 PM »

I-83 through Maryland is a couple miles off; this might be due to its cancellation through Little Italy-Fells Point in Baltimore, which would have taken it out to I-95.
Logged
From the land of red, white, yellow and black.

Washington Capitals, 2018 Stanley Cup CHAMPIONS!!!
____________________________

My clinched highways: http://tm.teresco.org/user/?u=epzik8
My clinched counties: http://mob-rule.com/user-gifs/epzik8.gif

dvferyance

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1308
  • Location: New Berlin WI
  • Last Login: October 16, 2020, 10:04:54 PM
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #37 on: May 12, 2017, 09:00:18 PM »

I-41 in Wisconsin they still reflect US 41. They are about 40 miles off. US 10 for whatever reason is also off by about 40 miles. I-39 is off but only by 4 miles no big deal there.

I-39 uses US-51's mileposting, even in the stretch that used to be Wis-78.
I know that but it isn't off by much so I am ok with it. I-41's on the other hand should be changed.
Logged

machias

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 753
  • Age: 52
  • Location: Chicago, IL
  • Last Login: October 26, 2020, 01:38:09 PM
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #38 on: May 13, 2017, 10:28:10 PM »

NY 5 Expressway in the Syracuse area starts with MP 0 at the intersection with NY 174. It should be MP 215.5.
Logged

Darkchylde

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 575
  • Posting from the ladies' room, probably

  • Location: Williamsport, PA
  • Last Login: September 03, 2020, 02:41:39 PM
    • Oh Noes!
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #39 on: May 15, 2017, 02:51:22 PM »

The original section of I-69 in Indiana, intentionally shifted up a flat 200 miles instead of being shifted up by the proper mileage that the new sections (and routing along 465) will actually add.

I don't think InDOT knew how much they would add when they upped the original section by 200.

Do you think they'll change them again once the highway runs border-to-border (i.e. from KY to MI)?
I don't think they will, though I'm no expert on INDOT practices. By doing that, though, it seems to signal that they're not going to change I-465's mileposts to reflect I-69's mileage. I-465's mileposting takes precedence right now over I-74's in that existing concurrency. The average motorist won't have any idea just how far it actually travels along 465 from the SW end to the NE end.

It's simply an easier shift for those advertising along the original route on billboards, or those giving directions. Most only have to add a 2 in front, those from Fort Wayne north only have to change a leading 1 to a 3.

PHLBOS

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7203
  • Age: 55
  • Location: Greater Philly, PA
  • Last Login: October 23, 2020, 01:12:16 PM
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #40 on: May 15, 2017, 04:31:01 PM »

One in southeastern PA:

PA 309's mile markers near Philly start at the beginning of the expressway portion (just south of the PA 152 interchange); roughly 2 miles north of its actual southern terminus w/PA 611 at the Philly line.

A couple in northeastern MA:

US 1 north of MA 60 still has occasional old mile markers erected that predate its 1989-90 rerouting onto I-93 from Boston south.
Old MM 48
More recent MM 53.8 just north of the old MM 48

MA 128 east of I-95 still has some mid-80s vintage, structure-mounted mile markers that reflect its pre-1988 intended south/western terminus at the US 1 interchange while the newer mainline mile markers reflect its official southern terminus at the I-95/93 interchange in Canton.
MM 3.71 at MA 114 overpass
MM 39.8 just east of the MA 114 overpass  (if 128 was fully truncated at I-95 in Peabody, this would be either MM 2.7 or 2.8)
Logged
GPS does NOT equal GOD

SectorZ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1393
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Tewksbury, MA
  • Last Login: October 26, 2020, 06:43:33 PM
Re: "Incorrect" Mile Markers
« Reply #41 on: May 15, 2017, 08:41:40 PM »

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4025435,-71.670155,3a,90y,249.36h,82.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9GQew45vZAVtNUF9bMy21Q!2e0!7i3328!8i1664

Old mile marker on MA 62 in Clinton MA. This one was accurate when 62 took this routing, but at some point was routed to a more southerly routing.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.