News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Weirdest Quirks of Your State DOT?

Started by i-215, January 17, 2019, 10:22:27 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

PHLBOS

Quote from: Ian on January 31, 2019, 07:15:50 PM
  • The strict use of inline-5 "tower signals" in lieu of the traditional doghouse within many Midwest states (Illinois and Iowa, to name a few).
I believe that in-line tower signals long predates the doghouse-style signals.

Growing up in eastern MA during the 70s; inline-4 tower signals were quite common.  In-line 5s were rare but did exist even back then.  The first in-line 5 signalhead I saw was along MA 114 in Peabody circa 1973 at this intersection.  From 1973 to about the late 90s/early 2000s, these in-line 5 signalheads featured R-Y-G-GSA-GRA and faced MA 114 eastbound traffic on Andover St.

Two green-phases existed for eastbound Andover St.:

1.  The first allowed only straight (onto Central St.) plus right-turn (onto Endicott St.) movements - the in-lines would show GSA-GRA.  Left-turn movement (onto Pulaski St./through 114 eastbound) would not be allowed to proceed - a separate R-Y-GLA would be lit red.
2.  The second phase allowed all movement s from eastbound Andover St. and the in-lines would only show the green ball and the left signal would light GLA.

In subsequent years (mid 1980s); the left-most in-line was modified to replace the GRA lens with a GLA lens.  As a result, the first phase would only show a GSA for that one signalhead and the second phase would show both the GSA & GLA... the other in-line signalhead would still show GSA & GRA.  This modification meant that the centrally-located green ball on those in-line 5s would never light up again.

When these signals were replaced with the current ones that did away with the in-line 5s; the two phases for eastbound Andover St. were reversed (first-phase, all eastbound traffic gets the green/second phase, left turns to Pulaski St. are prohibited via a separate signalhead displaying a RLA).
GPS does NOT equal GOD


thenetwork

Quote from: US 89 on January 31, 2019, 07:58:38 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 31, 2019, 04:44:19 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on January 31, 2019, 03:07:03 PM
COLORADO:

US routes which 'split' from Interstate routes, but there is no physical connection.

Where?

US 85 south of Colorado Springs, here: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7763576,-104.7839736,17z

Apparently the US 85 roadway north of that bridge was returned to the city, but it's still state-maintained to the southeast. US 85 was not rerouted in the process, so the officially designated 85 alignment jumps right from that bridge down to I-25.

That's the first one to cross my mind.

Another one is in Glenwood Springs, CO.  https://goo.gl/maps/rvij2VBod4v

US-6 follows the frontage road -- which is a dead end street that does not allow access back to I-70 where US-6 "theoretically" shares the freeway with the former until it leaves and parallels again at exit 109.

Ian

#177
Quote from: DaBigE on January 31, 2019, 11:43:20 PM
I think that's the first time I've heard of a doghouse-style referred to as traditional. Granted, I've been surrounded by the inline-5 for the vast majority of my life, so my view has been a little skewed. Which came first, the doghouse or the inline-5? I always thought the doghouse came second, as an evolution of the inline-5 -- as a way to conserve vertical space.

Quote from: PHLBOS on February 01, 2019, 10:46:34 AM
I believe that in-line tower signals long predates the doghouse-style signals.

I suppose I used the term "traditional" a bit loosely. The point I was trying to make was that while most of the country moved to doghouses, some states in the Midwest continued their strict use of tower signals.

Some states use both. California, for example, likes to mix it up by using doghouses on overhead PPLT's with towers on the sides.

The topic of PPLT signals brought this question to my mind. Are there any other states (or towns/counties) besides Rhode Island and New Jersey that still use bi-modal green/yellow arrows in lieu of doghouses/towers for PPLT and right turn signals? I've seen those arrows used for 3-section FYA heads, but haven't seen too many states that still consistently install them on newer PPLT's.
UMaine graduate, former PennDOT employee, new SoCal resident.
Youtube l Flickr

silverback1065

Quote from: MNHighwayMan on February 01, 2019, 10:18:19 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 01, 2019, 08:33:55 AM
The fact that button copy signs are still out there at all (I know they're great, but not on a modern road, they belong in a museum) remove ALL of them!

Finally, someone else who agrees! :nod:

you should see those things at night, they're black and barely can be seen. screw that! I don't know how caltrans is allowed to get away with such shitty signage on their interstates. 

jakeroot

Quote from: Ian on February 01, 2019, 11:47:55 AM
The topic of PPLT signals brought this question to my mind. Are there any other states (or towns/counties) besides Rhode Island and New Jersey that still use bi-modal green/yellow arrows in lieu of doghouses/towers for PPLT and right turn signals? I've seen those arrows used for 3-section FYA heads, but haven't seen too many states that still consistently install them on newer PPLT's.

Definitely the most common right-turn filter signals in Western Washington. I can think of many new ones. Some places like Federal Way will use doghouses overhead and 5-section towers on the pole (like CA), but they are relatively unusual in using non-bi-modal signals.

Up until about 2014 or so, bi-modal left turn signals were definitely the most common left turn signal installed in Western Washington (apart from a couple cities and Pierce County in general). But the FYA is now the norm (increasingly popular for right turn signals now, too).

US 89

Quote from: thenetwork on February 01, 2019, 11:30:52 AM
Quote from: US 89 on January 31, 2019, 07:58:38 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 31, 2019, 04:44:19 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on January 31, 2019, 03:07:03 PM
COLORADO:

US routes which 'split' from Interstate routes, but there is no physical connection.

Where?

US 85 south of Colorado Springs, here: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7763576,-104.7839736,17z

Apparently the US 85 roadway north of that bridge was returned to the city, but it's still state-maintained to the southeast. US 85 was not rerouted in the process, so the officially designated 85 alignment jumps right from that bridge down to I-25.

That's the first one to cross my mind.

Another one is in Glenwood Springs, CO.  https://goo.gl/maps/rvij2VBod4v

US-6 follows the frontage road -- which is a dead end street that does not allow access back to I-70 where US-6 "theoretically" shares the freeway with the former until it leaves and parallels again at exit 109.

How about US 6 in Mack? That's where they have that END US 6 sign, and as far as I can tell, there isn't a single US 6 sign on the road connecting to I-70 exit 11. I don't think it's state maintained either. https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2222338,-108.8635537,16z

There's also the issue of US 50 in that area, too. Signage in Grand Junction is pretty clear that US 50 should continue west on the old road into Fruita, but I'm not seeing much if any signage on that. Google thinks 50 leaves the old road for I-70 at the SH-139 junction, but a quick GSV shows there isn't a single US 50 shield posted there.

This is worse than I thought.  :crazy:

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: silverback1065 on February 01, 2019, 12:11:10 PM
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on February 01, 2019, 10:18:19 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 01, 2019, 08:33:55 AM
The fact that button copy signs are still out there at all (I know they're great, but not on a modern road, they belong in a museum) remove ALL of them!

Finally, someone else who agrees! :nod:

you should see those things at night, they're black and barely can be seen. screw that! I don't know how caltrans is allowed to get away with such shitty signage on their interstates.

Most of that is probably attributable to wear and tear on the older Signs.  There is still some newer button-copy/reflective paint BGSs in District 6 that were installed no less than two decades ago that look pretty good/reflect well.  The reflective paint shields still reflect up to 4-5 decades after installation in extreme circumstances.  Regarding the California MUTCD I tend to prefer it over the Federal MUTCD just simply because it's slightly different.  I know that's not a big thing for traffic control fans but I tend to find 100% uniform signage to be boring to look at. 

MNHighwayMan

#182
Quote from: Ian on February 01, 2019, 11:47:55 AM
The topic of PPLT signals brought this question to my mind. Are there any other states (or towns/counties) besides Rhode Island and New Jersey that still use bi-modal green/yellow arrows in lieu of doghouses/towers for PPLT and right turn signals? I've seen those arrows used for 3-section FYA heads, but haven't seen too many states that still consistently install them on newer PPLT's.

Des Moines has a bunch of four section PPLT towers with bi-modal arrows, but they are all older installs. I have no idea on exactly how old they are, and they're mixed in with a bunch of both five-section towers and doghouses–a real menagerie of signal equipment setups around here!

All recent (last few years) new signal installations use FYAs.

kphoger

Quote from: thenetwork on January 31, 2019, 03:07:03 PM
US routes which 'split' from Interstate routes, but there is no physical connection.

I had no idea these situations existed before this thread.

Quote from: US 89 on January 31, 2019, 07:58:38 PM
US 85 south of Colorado Springs, here: https://www.google.com/maps/@38.7763576,-104.7839736,17z

Apparently the US 85 roadway north of that bridge was returned to the city, but it's still state-maintained to the southeast. US 85 was not rerouted in the process, so the officially designated 85 alignment jumps right from that bridge down to I-25.

Physical connection provided by Academy Blvd.  But I get what you're saying.

Quote from: The High Plains Traveler on February 01, 2019, 12:09:13 AM
Also, U.S. 24 between Limon and the Kansas border. U.S. 24 is supposedly routed along I-70 east of Limon, but then appears on the I-70 north frontage road west of Seibert, starting at a county road with no interchange. It follows the old pre-interstate route to Burlington, and then angles northeast. However, at the east city limits, it ends. The road from there to the Kansas border is a state frontage road but not part of U.S. 24, and where it enters Kansas it is a county road until it reaches the Kanorado city limits, where it becomes a Kansas state highway that connects to I-70.

Wow, US-24 through eastern Colorado is freaking insane!

Quote from: thenetwork on February 01, 2019, 11:30:52 AM
Another one is in Glenwood Springs, CO.  https://goo.gl/maps/rvij2VBod4v

US-6 follows the frontage road -- which is a dead end street that does not allow access back to I-70 where US-6 "theoretically" shares the freeway with the former until it leaves and parallels again at exit 109.

Physical connection provided by Exit #114.  But, again, I get what you're saying.

Quote from: US 89 on February 01, 2019, 12:58:47 PM
How about US 6 in Mack? That's where they have that END US 6 sign, and as far as I can tell, there isn't a single US 6 sign on the road connecting to I-70 exit 11. I don't think it's state maintained either. https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2222338,-108.8635537,16z

There's also the issue of US 50 in that area, too. Signage in Grand Junction is pretty clear that US 50 should continue west on the old road into Fruita, but I'm not seeing much if any signage on that. Google thinks 50 leaves the old road for I-70 at the SH-139 junction, but a quick GSV shows there isn't a single US 50 shield posted there.

This is worse than I thought.  :crazy:

According to MESalek, US-6 silently follows I-70 to Mack;  whether the connection between Exit #11 and signed US-6 is included in that description isn't entirely clear.

I'm not certain US-50 even legislatively exists west of Grand Junction BL-70.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

Roadwarriors79

Quote from: ctkatz on January 31, 2019, 05:19:57 AM
Quote from: SD Mapman on January 27, 2019, 08:59:29 PM
In South Dakota, if route doesn't hit the WY (for an even-numbered route) or ND (for an odd-numbered route) state lines, the mileage to those lines is added to the mileposts.

This is how you can have a 64-mile long highway have a 300 milepost: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.7022672,-98.0180608,3a,15y,285.74h,86.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJGApUKISBjWf5MX_ViP8sQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (from the west end of SD 38 in Mitchell)

as I understand it, arizona does (or at least did) the same thing. that's partially why I 17 has high exit numbers and milage even though it's relatively short. I 17 took over mileage of a replaced state highway in north central (?) arizona that did not start at a western or southern border.

Yes, Arizona and the way it mileposts some highways. In a lot of cases, they are inherited from an older numbered highway. I-17 inherited the mileposts from AZ 69, as an example.

bugo

Quote from: cabiness42 on January 19, 2019, 11:52:59 AM
Indiana:

Separate state highways with the same number.  Some original due to the grid system and others due to the transfer of state highways in urban areas to cities (another quirk).
Arkansas is infamous for this.

bugo



Quote from: wanderer2575 on January 20, 2019, 10:15:52 AM
I've noted before that in Michigan, one doesn't pay tolls at the Mackinac Bridge and Canadian border crossing facilities, one pays fares.


Oklahoma uses "fares" on its turnpike system.

ipeters61

Quote from: bugo on February 21, 2019, 03:57:58 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on January 19, 2019, 11:52:59 AM
Indiana:

Separate state highways with the same number.  Some original due to the grid system and others due to the transfer of state highways in urban areas to cities (another quirk).
Arkansas is infamous for this.
Pennsylvania has a few interstates that also have state routes.  Off the top of my head I can think of 283 (PA-283 and I-283 intersect each other) and 380 (opposite sides of the state).

Delaware has DE-9 in Kent and New Castle Counties and US-9 in Sussex County (distinct routes).  We also have DE-202 in Wilmington in addition to US-202 (though all points of US-202 south of DE-202 are multiplexes to its end).
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed on my posts on the AARoads Forum are my own and do not represent official positions of my employer.
Instagram | Clinched Map

J N Winkler

I have never understood why Michigan DOT uses the term fare for signing on toll facilities when the actual enabling legislation (at least for the Mackinac Bridge) uses the word toll.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

plain

Quote from: Ian on February 01, 2019, 11:47:55 AM
The topic of PPLT signals brought this question to my mind. Are there any other states (or towns/counties) besides Rhode Island and New Jersey that still use bi-modal green/yellow arrows in lieu of doghouses/towers for PPLT and right turn signals? I've seen those arrows used for 3-section FYA heads, but haven't seen too many states that still consistently install them on newer PPLT's.

I'm late with this response but the city of Charlottesville, VA still uses 4-section signals with bi-modal yellow/green arrows extensively. Matter of fact, I don't recall seeing an FYA or even a doghouse inside that city.
Newark born, Richmond bred

Scott5114

Quote from: bugo on February 21, 2019, 04:01:37 AM
Oklahoma uses "fares" on its turnpike system.

They may in their literature, but to my knowledge, "toll" is always used on signs.

uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

Brandon

Quote from: J N Winkler on February 21, 2019, 11:27:16 AM
I have never understood why Michigan DOT uses the term fare for signing on toll facilities when the actual enabling legislation (at least for the Mackinac Bridge) uses the word toll.

It probably dates from when these bridges were ferries.
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg

jakeroot

Quote from: Brandon on February 22, 2019, 07:17:31 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on February 21, 2019, 11:27:16 AM
I have never understood why Michigan DOT uses the term fare for signing on toll facilities when the actual enabling legislation (at least for the Mackinac Bridge) uses the word toll.

It probably dates from when these bridges were ferries.

But what makes Michigan unique in this respect? Certainly there are countless bridges across the US that use the term "toll" despite having replaced ferries.

J N Winkler

My theory, which was my original reason for looking up the Mackinac Bridge enabling legislation, is that Michigan had some law or constitutional provision that forbade toll facilities and that designating estuarial crossings as fare-payable infrastructure was the accepted workaround, similar to Oregon using just "Speed" on what are functionally speed limit signs.  But if the actual legislation itself uses the word toll, then I don't think that theory is tenable.  Michigan has also gone through (if memory serves) four constitutions, the most recent being adopted in 1961, well after the Mackinac Bridge opened.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

DandyDan

One thing I noticed here in Iowa, or at least Mason City, is that if there is a stop sign at a divided highway, the one way sign atop the stop sign will be as big as, if not bigger than, the stop sign itself.
MORE FUN THAN HUMANLY THOUGHT POSSIBLE

rarnold

Iowa
-"Speed Zone Ahead" signs instead of "Reduce(d) Speed Ahead"
-On new 3-digit state and US highways, shields are using Series B numbers
-Though disappearing, the small county line signs placed above route shields
-gravel shoulders, even on freeways like Avenue of the Saints and US 20 (tractors allowed on most of these expressways)
-unique junction plates that are the width of the shield
-rumble strips at stop signs (not unique to Iowa, but they used to be at all stop signs)
-Interchange numbers on small plates below shield at Interstate interchanges
-Buckle Up for Life! signs

silverback1065

why does oregon not use SPEED LIMIT signs, but instead just uses SPEED signs ?

Bickendan


kphoger

Quote from: silverback1065 on February 25, 2019, 06:05:25 PM
why does oregon not use SPEED LIMIT signs, but instead just uses SPEED signs ?

Every time I try to understand the difference between SPEED and SPEED LIMIT, my brain starts to hurt too much.  Hopefully someone else can shed some light.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

jakeroot

Someone should vet me, but I think I got it...

Has to do with the way Oregon's speed law is/was written. Oregon uses a "Basic Rule" for speed limits. Basically, Oregon has no statutory speed limit, with the only limit being "reasonable and prudent" plus several other factors (but none being a fixed limit, hence why there was no "LIMIT" wording). You could conceivably exceed the posted "limits", but exceeding the posted speed was prima-facie evidence for a speeding ticket, so it wasn't like Montana.

But things have changed...

As of 2003, it is illegal (according to ORS 811.111) to exceed 65 on interstates (or whatever else is posted), or 55 on other roads that aren't otherwise posted (plus a few other situations). I think this new law is why "LIMIT" is showing up on more signs.



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.