Erroneous road signs

[twinsfan87]

^^ I noticed that last time I was in Milwaukee too. I get what WisDOT's trying to say, but it's not really correct.

[Ian]

It always annoyed me that New Jersey keeps the black background behind the route shields on their BGS.

It used to bug me, but now I've gotten used to it. It'd be a little strange if NJDOT just stopped doing it.

[adt1982]

It always annoyed me that New Jersey keeps the black background behind the route shields on their BGS.

It used to bug me, but now I've gotten used to it. It'd be a little strange if NJDOT just stopped doing it.

INDOT does it too.

[elsmere241]

It always annoyed me that New Jersey keeps the black background behind the route shields on their BGS.

It used to bug me, but now I've gotten used to it. It'd be a little strange if NJDOT just stopped doing it.

What seems strange to me is the white backgrounds behind the county route shields, in contrast.

[hbelkins]

It always annoyed me that New Jersey keeps the black background behind the route shields on their BGS.

I, on the other hand, like the practice.

[PurdueBill]

It always annoyed me that New Jersey keeps the black background behind the route shields on their BGS.

I, on the other hand, like the practice.

It does quite literally address the idea that shields on BGS should appear as they do independently mounted.  Wasn't that in play when California made their standalone shields green?

[PHLBOS]

I'm just glad someone else remembers that sign!  (And as you probably recall, it had a counterpart facing EB traffic which was identical except for the arrow direction.)

I miss that old sign and hate the new one to this day for replacing it, especially with the errors.

Then you probably remember the similar-vintage (early 70s) US 1 South Exit signs off MA 114.  Those signs had a similar arrangement:
1st line SOUTH
2nd line 1 (offset to the left*)
3rd line Boston
45 degree right arrow underneath.

*Blank space was reserved for I-95 shields had the original I-95 alignment been built south of MA 128. 
The current Exit 46 off I-95 northbound entry/southbound exit movements were originally supposed to be the opposite; northbound exit off I-95 (for US 1 North & Lowell Street)/southbound entrance (for traffic coming from MA 114).  The current ramp configuration (circa 1987-1988) is a modified version of what was originally intended to be a temporary condition/arrangement (that opened in 1974-1975) until the completion of I-95 to at least 128.

[PurdueBill]

I'm just glad someone else remembers that sign!  (And as you probably recall, it had a counterpart facing EB traffic which was identical except for the arrow direction.)

I miss that old sign and hate the new one to this day for replacing it, especially with the errors.

Then you probably remember the similar-vintage (early 70s) US 1 South Exit signs off MA 114.  Those signs had a similar arrangement:
1st line SOUTH
2nd line 1 (offset to the left*)
3rd line Boston
45 degree right arrow underneath.

*Blank space was reserved for I-95 shields had the original I-95 alignment been built south of MA 128. 
The current Exit 46 off I-95 northbound entry/southbound exit movements were originally supposed to be the opposite; northbound exit off I-95 (for US 1 North & Lowell Street)/southbound entrance (for traffic coming from MA 114).  The current ramp configuration (circa 1987-1988) is a modified version of what was originally intended to be a temporary condition/arrangement (that opened in 1974-1975) until the completion of I-95 to at least 128.

Yep, I do remember those and miss them too.  The replacements don't have nearly the character of the originals.  I recall on US 1 NB, near what was then Thompson's garden center but a little closer to 114, just past where Costco is today, a pair of signs for 114 on the same posts, one for 114 EB and one for 114 WB, with smallish rectangular 114 shields with outlines, unlike many old Mass signs that had rectangular borderless shields (even for 2-digit routes).  They actually replaced those once with carbon-copy signs with similar shields before the current generation signs appeared, but the carbon copies didn't last all that long.

The opposite movements at Exit 46 are visible in the Historic Aerials view from 1978, albeit already not in use anymore.  (Linking to that is not perfect; one bump of zoom out will give a better view.)

[PHLBOS]

The opposite movements at Exit 46 are visible in the Historic Aerials view from 1978, albeit already not in use anymore.  (Linking to that is not perfect; one bump of zoom out will give a better view.)

Nice find.  I do remember seeing that small US 1 North overpass and wondered back then what it was for; I found out several years later.

I recall on US 1 NB, near what was then Thompson's garden center but a little closer to 114, just past where Costco is today, a pair of signs for 114 on the same posts, one for 114 EB and one for 114 WB, with smallish rectangular 114 shields with outlines, unlike many old Mass signs that had rectangular borderless shields (even for 2-digit routes).

Those 114 BGS signs that you speak of also originally had the erroneous NORTH-SOUTH cardinals rather than the WEST-EAST ones.  I commented on this on either another thread or further back on this one.  These signs were all erected in 1971, at least a decade after 114 switched from a N-S to W-E.  The corrections on the original BGS signs were made sometime in 1974.

All the original 70s-eras BGS signs at US 1/Lowell St., US 1/I-95/MA 114, and most of the US 1/I-95/Centre/Dayton St. had outlines for both the US 1 & MA 114 shields.  Even the original structure-mounted BGS for MA 62 along I-95 North (at the Centre Street overpass) featured an outline for the MA 62 shield.  Those must've all been installed in the same contract.  The signs further north (closer to MA 62 and the I-95/US 1 (Exit 50) interchange) featured no outlines for the US & MA shields.

IIRC, most of the shields were replaced on the original signs during the early-to-mid 80s due to dirt and the shields becoming harder to read at night as they aged.

[vdeane]

No pictures, but I found a couple of major errors yesterday:
-In Plattsburg at the eastern end of NY 3, not only do they mistake US 9 for NY 9, they also sign it wrong.  As signed, straight is for NY 9 north, and right is for NY 9 south.  In reality, left is for US 9 north, and straight is for US 9 south.  They also neglect to mention NY 22.
-In Burlington on US 7/US 2 south/east, signage at a turn actually directs traffic to US 7 Alternate.  A portion of city streets is also signed as US 2 as a result.
-NY 22 is not signed north of US 11
-NY 374 is barely signed north of US 11; just the assembly saying that it heads to the border exists.  The reference markers also start at US 11.

[Alps]

-NY 22 is not signed north of US 11
-NY 374 is barely signed north of US 11; just the assembly saying that it heads to the border exists.  The reference markers also start at US 11.

Jury's out on NY 22 as to whether it was actually truncated or not, because all the signs seem to have been consciously removed at some point, but the legal definition remains to the border. So now you raise the question as to whether the same has happened to NY 374, and if so, what "the same" is...

[cu2010]

-NY 374 is barely signed north of US 11; just the assembly saying that it heads to the border exists.  The reference markers also start at US 11.

NY374 north of US11 is maintained by Franklin County, not NYSDOT, hence the lack of reference markers.  Likewise, NY22 north of Mooers is maintained by Clinton County.  As Steve said, in both cases, the legal definition remains, even if signs don't.

[vdeane]

Indeed, though it's odd that they start at 1000 when posted at US 11.  Then again, this is the first time I've actually payed attention to the reference markers on a road where the DOT didn't maintain the starting point.  Maybe they normally they start at the first portion the DOT maintains.

[Alps]

-NY 374 is barely signed north of US 11; just the assembly saying that it heads to the border exists.  The reference markers also start at US 11.

NY374 north of US11 is maintained by Franklin County, not NYSDOT, hence the lack of reference markers.  Likewise, NY22 north of Mooers is maintained by Clinton County.  As Steve said, in both cases, the legal definition remains, even if signs don't.

Was that always the case? I know Doug and others have said that NY 22 was well signed to the border in the past, never asked about 374.

[WNYroadgeek]

NY 219 should be US 219: http://g.co/maps/8tw7c

Granted, that street view image is from 5 years ago, so it possible that the error has since been corrected.

[CL]

...a '61 spec shield, which Utah stopped using sometime in the mid-90s or so.

You sure? I'm pretty sure Utah stopped using '61-spec shields around the time that the '70-specs came out.



I think that's a '70-spec US-91 shield, taken probably in 1970 (construction through this stretch finished in 1971).

[agentsteel53]

...a '61 spec shield, which Utah stopped using sometime in the mid-90s or so.

You sure? I'm pretty sure Utah stopped using '61-spec shields around the time that the '70-specs came out.



I think that's a '70-spec US-91 shield, taken probably in 1970 (construction through this stretch finished in 1971).

that is technically a 1957-spec California shield, except not a cutout with "US" on it.

I think that is more a one-off than anything else.

but yes, they probably were using 1970 spec here and there, but their formal MUTCD specifications called for '61 for many more years.  there are a lot of '61 spec shields with good-condition white Scotchlite that I believe they are 80s-90s.

[FLRoads]

This scene would not be erroneous other than the fact that this should be a U.S. 271 trailblazer, not U.S. 270! This was taken just west of the Arkansas state line southwest of Fort Smith near the entrance ramp to U.S. 271 north.

[vtk]

Sorry, no photo, but...

On I-71 SB approaching I-670, there was an exit sequence sign listing the distances to 5th Ave, I-670, and Cleveland Ave. Due to the Columbus Crossroads project currently underway, the Cleveland Ave exit has closed permanently. The sign was duly patched with a bright orange CLOSED panel.

That sign was mounted on the 11th Ave bridge. Since the Cleveland Ave exit closed, that bridge has been dismantled and is being rebuilt now. The exit sequence sign came down with the old bridge. Its replacement, a shiny new Clearview sign, is mounted on a new cantilever structure.

The shiny new sign includes the Cleveland Ave exit, which is closed and will never reopen.  There isn't even a CLOSED panel.

[Central Avenue]

A bit blurry, but for what it's worth:



Somehow the inclusion of Cleveland Avenue completely escaped me when I took the picture.

EDIT: Turns out I also have a shot of the old one:

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

The fools should have left the Leonard Ave/Jack Gibbs Blvd/Cleveland Ave off ramp from I-71 SB open till they completed the access road/ramp to the eastside (Spring, Long, Broad, Bryden, Main)

[CentralCAroadgeek]

On that brown sign on the right, why is the exit tab not aligned properly?

[national highway 1]

Why did they change the exit number from 109C to 108B?

[Central Avenue]

Why did they change the exit number from 109C to 108B?

Exit 109C is closed, so they're directing Convention Center and Nationwide Arena traffic to 108B instead.

[vtk]

On that brown sign on the right, why is the exit tab not aligned properly?

Very good question. I can't come up with details that make sense, but I think that sign may have a long history of modifications.

The fools should have left the Leonard Ave/Jack Gibbs Blvd/Cleveland Ave off ramp from I-71 SB open till they completed the access road/ramp to the eastside (Spring, Long, Broad, Bryden, Main)

I don't think that would have been possible. BTW, that CD road you refer to will be / is called Lester Dr.

More detailed discussion of this belongs in the Columbus Crossroads thread, I think.