Driving around in Quebec a few years ago I noticed green markers every 1 km, each giving the distance. (I remember them well, as my 1988 car died at km 26 on autoroute 15 between Brossard and St-Bernard-de-Lacolle, at the US border. We were on our way home, we thought. Not.) There could be small, intermediate markers though in other places.
Carleton -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ziser, Jesse Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2008 01:12 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:40402] Re: Exit numbering by distance. Why every 100 m? That's an order of magnitude more frequent than the current markers. I expect that increasing the number of markers by a factor of 20 would have a huge cost for a country the size of the US. Why can't they just be every kilometer? Or even every 2 km? --- Mike Millet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I suspected that would be the case. I still like the idea of having > signposts every 100m and then just having an exit every 1600m rather than > every mile. > > That way you still have a logical progression of signage. > > Mike > > On Feb 9, 2008 9:43 PM, Phil Chernack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I believe only three states still use sequential numbering for exits. > > States like Florida, Georga, Verigina and Pennsylvania switched to > > distance-based exit numbers in the past 5 or so years. I brought this very > > issue up a while ago in this list as one of the things that needs to be > > considered when switching to metric. The bigger problem is that exits are > > somewhat like area codes in the sense that many businesses use the exit > > number in their marketing. Just as when an area code changes, businesses > > need to make changes to their marketing materials as well. My guess is that > > if the switch is made to metric for highways, exit numbers will be the last > > thing to change and that change may take upwards of 20 years or so. The > > only way I would see it happening sooner without state highway departments > > screaming bloody murder is if money is provided by the FHWA to do so. I > > would also think that after a switch on speed limits and odometers, people > > will eventually want exits to be metric-based. > > > > BTW, the MUTCD specifies that exits may be based on either distance or > > sequential. It is recommened to use distance based on either km or miles. > > > > Phil > > > > On Feb 9, 2008 11:12 PM, Mike Millet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I'm doing a short paper for history class on the effects of the > > > Interstate Highway System on the United States. One thing I noticed when > > > researching was that many states now number exits by the mile. My question > > > is, when the inevitable metric switch happens, will they renumber the > > > exits? I know a lot of nations that have been metric for a while have > > > distance markers every 100m and exits every 1km if possible. > > > > > > Renumbering the exits seems like quite an extensive task. It makes me > > > wonder if the US should just signpost every 100m and then replace the sign > > > saying "exit 310 next 1 mile" with one saying "exit next 1.6km or 1600m" > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > -- > > > "The boy is dangerous, they all sense it why can't you?" > > > > > > (\__/) > > > (='.'=)This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your > > > (")_(")signature to help him gain world domination. > > > > > > > > > -- > "The boy is dangerous, they all sense it why can't you?" > > (\__/) > (='.'=)This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your > (")_(")signature to help him gain world domination. > ____________________________________________________________________________ ________ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
