Service signs: Brand logos or no?

[blawp]

Split from the Road-Related Illustrations thread.

Here's some random logo signs I made.



^This one I saved as JPEG instead of PNG... So its fuzzy  

I didn't include "SpringHill Suites" because it would be before the intersection. So it wouldn't be necessary. Anything wrong? No exit number, as it's for a non-interstate highway. Opinions accepted!
BigMatt

Official highway signs shouldn't have advertisements. It should be generic. That's my only quibble.

[BigMattFromTexas]

Official highway signs shouldn't have advertisements. It should be generic. That's my only quibble.

Well they say that it helps keep the driver from looking all over for something. I think they can be convenient, especially with how hectic things can get along Texas freeways..
Especially in San Antonio..

BigMatt

[hobsini2]

Those type of signs that Matt created are tvery popular in the midwest. I know i have seen them in IL, IN, IA, MI, and WI. The restaurants are fine but i find the gas stations and the hotels more helpful finding them if you have a certain credit card for a particular brand or a rewards card for a hotel chain.

My only gripe Matt is I still think Whataburger is terrible food but that a whole different thing. Good job.

[kphoger]

I would be satisfied with leaving the logos off the mainline signs, and only putting them (and distance!) on the wayfinders along the exit ramp.  Seeing Food|Gas|Lodging would be good enough to signal me to exit there; if however, none of the restaurants are appealing to me, I haven't really lost much time by exiting and then getting back on right away.  However, if I had to drive 1.5 miles to find out I don't like any of the restaurants, find a place to turn around, and then drive 1.5 miles back again, then that's another story.

[Duke87]

Official highway signs shouldn't have advertisements. It should be generic. That's my only quibble.

I disagree. Having the brand specified is useful. I like knowing before I get off the highway that the lodging is a Best Western, not Madam Shelly's Motel No-tel. And I like being able to say "I feel like stopping at IHOP" and look specifically for one without getting off the highway.

[Stratuscaster]

I have no issue with it - especially if the businesses featured are paying for that exposure.

[blawp]

I've seen the logo signs even in urban areas on Texas highways and I find it tacky.

[PurdueBill]

The blue logo service signs aren't free advertising--they cost money to the businesses and raise (some) money for the state.  They are regulated by the MUTCD and state laws (for example, these are the regs in Ohio).

[blawp]

Still tacky. The signs should benefit the motorist and treat all roadside businesses equally, not the businesses that bid the highest.

[myosh_tino]

Still tacky. The signs should benefit the motorist and treat all roadside businesses equally, not the businesses that bid the highest.

Sorry blawp but I have to agree with Duke87 on this one and IMO, these signs *do* benefit the motorist.  I would like to know what types of businesses are located at the next exit so I can make a decision on whether to exit the freeway or not.  If I need gas and I see there's a Chevron station, I might pull off but if it's Billy Bob's Gas 'n Dash, I might not (of course if the next gas is too far then I have no choice but you get the point).  If I'm looking for a place to spend the night and there's a Comfort Inn, I'll probably exit but if it's the Bates Motel.... maybe not .

[blawp]

Ok but what if you exit and there's the advertised Chevron 1 mi to the left and a 76 (unadvertised) 1 mi to the right? It seems like the highway dept is endorsing Chevron, which shouldn't be their business.

[vdeane]

If you care enough, you're probably the 76, or a local who doesn't need the signs in the first place.

[blawp]

Logos on road signs are tacky, especially in urban areas. California only allows it in rural areas.

[agentsteel53]

Logos on road signs are tacky, especially in urban areas. California only allows it in rural areas.

that, combined with the fact that freeways were built early before the "service plaza" idea took hold, makes it damn near impossible to find gas near a freeway in urban parts of California.  you generally have to know what the major arterials are in a given city, and who from out of town knows that?

[formulanone]

Come on, you know you want to stop here:

[The Premier]

Actually, I don't.

[BigMattFromTexas]

You're just supposed to know where the gas stations or hotels are in a city I guess. I don't see how it's tacky, especially in Angelo, because the restaurants are all accessible by the exit before you can even see them..
BigMatt

[blawp]

Just have generic symbols for food/gas/diesel/lodging like California has. So tired of this corporatocracy...

[myosh_tino]

Just have generic symbols for food/gas/diesel/lodging like California has. So tired of this corporatocracy...

What are you talking about?  California's service signs are just like the ones posted by BigMatt (with the logos).  These are for the benefit of the motorists and I am glad they are posted on rural freeways.

[kphoger]

Just have generic symbols for food/gas/diesel/lodging like California has. So tired of this corporatocracy...

This I would tolerate, as long as any distance to said services over ½ mile is also stated on the mainline signs.  On the actual ramps themselves, I'd rather not lose the individual branding.  It might be worth it for me to drive 1½ miles to a Subway, but not to Aunt Sally's Café, which may or may not be open today.

[mightyace]

Well, I'd rather have these signs than billboards.

I agree with Jake in that those farther away from the exit should be marked.  It's frustrating when wanting to make a stop and discovering that Mapco is 7 miles from the exit!  And that's especially since they usually aren't marked well if they're away from the highway or have a convoluted route to get there.

My brother and I had a time finding a Publix advertised off of I-285 in Atlanta as it required three turns and on one of them, the sign was missing or we missed it.

[Scott5114]

Just have generic symbols for food/gas/diesel/lodging like California has. So tired of this corporatocracy...

This I would tolerate, as long as any distance to said services over ½ mile is also stated on the mainline signs.  On the actual ramps themselves, I'd rather not lose the individual branding.  It might be worth it for me to drive 1½ miles to a Subway, but not to Aunt Sally's Café, which may or may not be open today.

Funnily enough, the MUTCD requires that these signs require a notation for any business that may be closed when one might expect it to be open; this is why every Chick-Fil-A on one of these signs carries a "CLOSED SUNDAY" plaque.

Also, I am going to split this services sign discussion to a thread in the "Traffic Control" section.

[corco]

Those signs are awesome in unfamiliar areas- I can't even count the number of times I have used them. A lot of motorists would say the same thing, and that should tell you whether or not they are good- if people are using them, they're useful!

[kkt]

I actually like having the brands and logos posted.  It saves a lot of time when in unfamiliar areas.  I'd rather have the logos on a DOT sign than enormous billboards aimed at the highway traffic.

[SP Cook]

Of course the logos are helpful.  Now gasoline is pretty much gasoline, but as to food and motels, there is a huge difference.  Knowing what products are available is useful highway information.