News report about new New York welcome signs

[Jim]

Apparently some of the new signs posted entering New York with tourism information are potentially non-compliant with federal regulations.  The only place I've heard of it is on this local news report from WRGB in Albany.

http://www.cbs6albany.com/news/features/paid/stories/you-paid-highway-signs-106.shtml

[Edited to correct call letters of the station for the news story.]

[roadman]

From Section 2A.06 of the 2009 MUTCD:

Standard:
14 Except as provided in Paragraph 16 and except for the Carpool Information (D12-2) sign
(see Section 2I.11), Internet addresses and e-mail addresses, including domain names and uniform resource
locators (URL), shall not be displayed on any sign, supplemental plaque, sign panel (including logo sign
panels on Specific Service signs), or changeable message sign.
Guidance:
15 Unless otherwise provided in this Manual for a specific sign, and except as provided in Paragraph 16,
telephone numbers of more than four characters should not be displayed on any sign, supplemental plaque, sign
panel (including logo sign panels on specific service signs), or changeable message sign.
Option:
16 Internet addresses, e-mail addresses, or telephone numbers with more than four characters may be displayed
on signs, supplemental plaques, sign panels, and changeable message signs that are intended for viewing only
by pedestrians, bicyclists, occupants of parked vehicles, or drivers of vehicles on low-speed roadways where
engineering judgment indicates that an area is available for drivers to stop out of the traffic flow to read the
message.

Doesn't seem like there's much gray area in that one.  Although I have seen cases where FHWA regional offices have allowed the posting of project-specific Internet addresses on temporary freeway signing for construction projects.  So NY State may have an argument for not putting blueout over the Internet addresses on these signs.

PS - The "I love NY" "landscaping" in the medians is probably the silliest and most wasteful thing I've seen come along in quite some time.

[KEVIN_224]

The above link is for WRGB-TV (CBS) channel 6 of Schenectady. WTEN-TV is ABC channel 10 of Albany. With that said...

Don't the Pennsylvania welcome signs have web addresses on them, too?

[Alps]

The above link is for WRGB-TV (CBS) channel 6 of Schenectady. WTEN-TV is ABC channel 10 of Albany. With that said...

Don't the Pennsylvania welcome signs have web addresses on them, too?

The P-A license plates have web addresses on them. Nothing is sacred.

[Pete from Boston]

The above link is for WRGB-TV (CBS) channel 6 of Schenectady. WTEN-TV is ABC channel 10 of Albany. With that said...

Don't the Pennsylvania welcome signs have web addresses on them, too?

The P-A license plates have web addresses on them. Nothing is sacred.

Still?  That was one of those late-90s knee-jerk let's-internet-everything moves that I was sure would have gone away.

[Gnutella]

I think the New York welcome signs should read, "WELCOME TO NEW YORK, BITCHES!"

[dgolub]

The above link is for WRGB-TV (CBS) channel 6 of Schenectady. WTEN-TV is ABC channel 10 of Albany. With that said...

Don't the Pennsylvania welcome signs have web addresses on them, too?

The P-A license plates have web addresses on them. Nothing is sacred.

Still?  That was one of those late-90s knee-jerk let's-internet-everything moves that I was sure would have gone away.

Yes, still.  It's kind of messed up.  I think I've seen it from a couple of other states as well.

[Pete from Boston]

The above link is for WRGB-TV (CBS) channel 6 of Schenectady. WTEN-TV is ABC channel 10 of Albany. With that said...

Don't the Pennsylvania welcome signs have web addresses on them, too?

The P-A license plates have web addresses on them. Nothing is sacred.

Still?  That was one of those late-90s knee-jerk let's-internet-everything moves that I was sure would have gone away.

Yes, still.  It's kind of messed up.  I think I've seen it from a couple of other states as well.

Reminding people of a website makes sense if your entire business is a website.  For everything else the address is "google.com."

[hbelkins]

It's a plot. If New York switches to mileage-based exit numbers, they'll let the website deal slide. 

[Jim]

From Section 2A.06 of the 2009 MUTCD:

Standard:
14 Except as provided in Paragraph 16 and except for the Carpool Information (D12-2) sign
(see Section 2I.11), Internet addresses and e-mail addresses, including domain names and uniform resource
locators (URL), shall not be displayed on any sign, supplemental plaque, sign panel (including logo sign
panels on Specific Service signs), or changeable message sign.

I have definitely seen URLs other than carpool info sites on changeable message signs not only in New York, but in many other places as well.  Some that come to mind are the URLs for various state "511" web sites and the URL for the Massachusetts RMV.

PS - The "I love NY" "landscaping" in the medians is probably the silliest and most wasteful thing I've seen come along in quite some time.

From the same state that can't afford to keep all of the rest areas open on non-Thruway interstates...

[PHLBOS]

Still?  That was one of those late-90s knee-jerk let's-internet-everything moves that I was sure would have gone away.

Yes, still.  It's kind of messed up.  I think I've seen it from a couple of other states as well.

IIRC, PA was one of if not the first state to start doing such circa 2000.  The web address listing did change a few years later.

First design w/web address:

Second & current design w/new web address:

[dgolub]

Still?  That was one of those late-90s knee-jerk let's-internet-everything moves that I was sure would have gone away.

Yes, still.  It's kind of messed up.  I think I've seen it from a couple of other states as well.

IIRC, PA was one of if not the first state to start doing such circa 2000.  The web address listing did change a few years later.

First design w/web address:

Second & current design w/new web address:

Just remember, you have a constitutional right to cover it up.

[Alps]

From Section 2A.06 of the 2009 MUTCD:

Standard:
14 Except as provided in Paragraph 16 and except for the Carpool Information (D12-2) sign
(see Section 2I.11), Internet addresses and e-mail addresses, including domain names and uniform resource
locators (URL), shall not be displayed on any sign, supplemental plaque, sign panel (including logo sign
panels on Specific Service signs), or changeable message sign.

I have definitely seen URLs other than carpool info sites on changeable message signs not only in New York, but in many other places as well.  Some that come to mind are the URLs for various state "511" web sites and the URL for the Massachusetts RMV.

I heard that, unofficially, the FHWA is getting more lenient on the use of URLs, especially now with all of the handy link shorteners going around. The rules are roughly like this: top-level address only (nothing beyond .foo), omit http://, preferable to omit www. if possible. There's probably a maximum length thrown in.

[Pete from Boston]

Having just seen these signs on 84 WB, all I can say is, holy distraction!  Four consecutive closely-spaced signs of a LOT of non-critical text, along with a big silly logo that faces... no one at all that doesn't turn their head away from forward.  It's impossible to read all that stuff at 70mph and actually watch the road.  Why do DOTs allow this when distracted driving raises such an outcry?

[roadman65]

The above link is for WRGB-TV (CBS) channel 6 of Schenectady. WTEN-TV is ABC channel 10 of Albany. With that said...

Don't the Pennsylvania welcome signs have web addresses on them, too?

The P-A license plates have web addresses on them. Nothing is sacred.

Florida too uses its state's official web address on its normal license plate.   I say normal, because our state has so many specialty plates that you can purchase for extra yearly registration fees such as FSU, University of Florida, etc. which do not have the myflorida.com on it.

[roadman]

Having just seen these signs on 84 WB, all I can say is, holy distraction!  Four consecutive closely-spaced signs of a LOT of non-critical text, along with a big silly logo that faces... no one at all that doesn't turn their head away from forward.  It's impossible to read all that stuff at 70mph and actually watch the road.  Why do DOTs allow this when distracted driving raises such an outcry?

Because state tourism agencies carry far more weight with the local politicians than DOT signing and safety engineers do.  In the early 2000s, MassHighway was forced to go through a similar exercise when the Legislature gave the Massachusetts Office of Travel and Tourism (MOTT) a bunch of money for promotion of local tourist oriented businesses.  MOTT, not wanting to get into the highway sign business,  then turned around and gave the money to MassHighway with the request to issue contracts for the installation of Attractions LOGO signs at a large number of Interstate and freeway interchanges.  The sign installations were controversial at first because, although the attractions and businesses included on the signs were selected by the regional tourism councils, said councils made those decisions without consulting local businesses first.  As a result, in some areas, popular and well-known tourist businesses were not placed on the signs in favor of more obscure ones.

Most MOTT-inspired Attractions signs use text logos, and all the signs are completely full.  As Pete from Boston stated - Holy Distraction Batman!

[Pete from Boston]

Having just seen these signs on 84 WB, all I can say is, holy distraction!  Four consecutive closely-spaced signs of a LOT of non-critical text, along with a big silly logo that faces... no one at all that doesn't turn their head away from forward.  It's impossible to read all that stuff at 70mph and actually watch the road.  Why do DOTs allow this when distracted driving raises such an outcry?

Because state tourism agencies carry far more weight with the local politicians than DOT signing and safety engineers do.  In the early 2000s, MassHighway was forced to go through a similar exercise when the Legislature gave the Massachusetts Office of Travel and Tourism (MOTT) a bunch of money for promotion of local tourist oriented businesses.  MOTT, not wanting to get into the highway sign business,  then turned around and gave the money to MassHighway with the request to issue contracts for the installation of Attractions LOGO signs at a large number of Interstate and freeway interchanges.  The sign installations were controversial at first because, although the attractions and businesses included on the signs were selected by the regional tourism councils, said councils made those decisions without consulting local businesses first.  As a result, in some areas, popular and well-known tourist businesses were not placed on the signs in favor of more obscure ones.

Most MOTT-inspired Attractions signs use text logos, and all the signs are completely full.  As Pete from Boston stated - Holy Distraction Batman!

The Cambridge, Mass., police have recently had a "be aware of who else is using the road" safety VMS in Porter Square.  It uses a four-phase message that takes about twenty seconds of driver attention to cycle through (only actually possible to read for folks who get stuck at the light).

Sometimes the irony is so thick it is hard to know where to start explaining why it's wrong.

[MikeCL]

I think these signs are a huge waste... going from CT into NY on 95-S I can see how much extra tourism you will get because of a sign you are going to pass and forget in like the next 5 min.

[MikeCL]

Having just seen these signs on 84 WB, all I can say is, holy distraction!  Four consecutive closely-spaced signs of a LOT of non-critical text, along with a big silly logo that faces... no one at all that doesn't turn their head away from forward.  It's impossible to read all that stuff at 70mph and actually watch the road.  Why do DOTs allow this when distracted driving raises such an outcry?

Reminds me of this Hazmat sign in the Bronx white text on red background.. I pass it all the time but no way in the world can anyone read that sign doing 70

[roadman65]

Apparently some of the new signs posted entering New York with tourism information are potentially non-compliant with federal regulations.  The only place I've heard of it is on this local news report from WRGB in Albany.

http://www.cbs6albany.com/news/features/paid/stories/you-paid-highway-signs-106.shtml

[Edited to correct call letters of the station for the news story.]

I appreciate you giving credit to the source of info here, but since you posted the link the station now has updated their news and the story you want us to see is not there.