View Single Post
  #51  
Old Posted Apr 1, 2023, 10:39 AM
ns_kid's Avatar
ns_kid ns_kid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozabald View Post
Agreed that NS should move exit numbers to distance-based rather than sequential. However, NS is not alone with sequential exit numbering. The New York Thruway uses sequential exit numbering; as does the New Jersey Turnpike. Believe Vermont and New Hampshire also use sequential numbering statewide.
Actually, Nova Scotia is getting close to alone. My understanding is there are now just two provinces (NS and NL) using sequential highway exit numbers. (PEI and the territories don't have numbered exits.) I believe Saskatchewan was the last to make the change, in 2018, although I'm not sure if older highway signage has all been converted yet.

In the US, the Federal Highway Administration decreed in 2009 that federally-funded highway exits should have mileage-based numbers, but there's no deadline for conversions. Only three states and the District of Columbia still have sequential numbers exclusively. Another six, including New York, have a mixture.

This has long been a pet peeve of mine. I know Nova Scotians are supposed to hate change but, for pete's sake, why we continue to build new highways and new highway interchanges and slap As and Bs and Es and Ws on them and think that's not confusing is beyond me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Empire View Post
The best example of the poor exit numbering strategy is "EXIT 0" from Bi Hi to Joseph Howe.
I've thought an "exit zero" was a bit bizarre as well. But the American highway code does specify that an exit at the beginning of a highway should be designated "0".

Last edited by ns_kid; Apr 1, 2023 at 10:52 AM.
Reply With Quote