http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/politics/blogs/vote-up/2016/11/02/ny-highway-signs-illegal/93173466/
Well, since this is now a separate thread... Cuomo reached a goal with his signs - upstate tourism attracts some attention - from general public and feds. Maybe not the type attention he wants, though...
No idea how NY thinks any part of that meets MUTCD standards. If it was all in FHWA Series fonts except for the logo blocks, they might have a better time arguing that.
Glad to know the federal government has solved all other problems, freeing it up to police highway signs.
Quote from: jbnv on November 04, 2016, 08:06:22 AM
Glad to know the federal government has solved all other problems, freeing it up to police highway signs.
With motorists more distracted than ever on the highways (and distracted driving accidents up in the polls), I'm happy to know that the government is doing something useful like trying to keep unnecessary distractions off the roadways. Are these tourism signs the biggest priority in the country? Hardly. But any effort to maintain standards and accepted practices on our transportation network, thereby increasing citizen safety, is appreciated by many.
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 04, 2016, 08:23:42 AM
With motorists more distracted than ever on the highways (and distracted driving accidents up in the polls), I'm happy to know that the government is doing something useful like trying to keep unnecessary distractions off the roadways.
Your state can do that themselves. And if they are choosing not to, that's on them.
Quote from: jbnv on November 04, 2016, 09:54:19 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 04, 2016, 08:23:42 AM
With motorists more distracted than ever on the highways (and distracted driving accidents up in the polls), I'm happy to know that the government is doing something useful like trying to keep unnecessary distractions off the roadways.
Your state can do that themselves. And if they are choosing not to, that's on them.
Problem is - and I am sorry for getting political - this is governor's pet program, and his approach to laws is that he wants something, and law says "no" - f#ck that law.
Given that governor Cuomo II is a boy from a good family, his farther also was a governor, his ex-wife is JFK niece - he can often get away with his approaches.
And on one hand, he's rumored to have presidential ambitions - but on the other hand his right hand men is indicted by feds on corruption charges, and governor is very upset that he didn't know how his campaign contributions were solicited..
So this story is much more involved than simple noncompliance sign story.
Quote from: kalvado on November 04, 2016, 10:15:34 AM
Quote from: jbnv on November 04, 2016, 09:54:19 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 04, 2016, 08:23:42 AM
With motorists more distracted than ever on the highways (and distracted driving accidents up in the polls), I'm happy to know that the government is doing something useful like trying to keep unnecessary distractions off the roadways.
Your state can do that themselves. And if they are choosing not to, that's on them.
Problem is - and I am sorry for getting political - this is governor's pet program, and his approach to laws is that he wants something, and law says "no" - f#ck that law.
Given that governor Cuomo II is a boy from a good family, his farther also was a governor, his ex-wife is JFK niece - he can often get away with his approaches.
And on one hand, he's rumored to have presidential ambitions - but on the other hand his right hand men is indicted by feds on corruption charges, and governor is very upset that he didn't know how his campaign contributions were solicited..
So this story is much more involved than simple noncompliance sign story.
Especially when the goal of the program (increase tourism dollars) can just as easily be achieved, and at the same or less cost, by installing compliant signs instead of this "Burma Shave" style c^&p NYS has put up.
Quote from: roadman on November 04, 2016, 10:55:51 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 04, 2016, 10:15:34 AM
Quote from: jbnv on November 04, 2016, 09:54:19 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 04, 2016, 08:23:42 AM
With motorists more distracted than ever on the highways (and distracted driving accidents up in the polls), I'm happy to know that the government is doing something useful like trying to keep unnecessary distractions off the roadways.
Your state can do that themselves. And if they are choosing not to, that's on them.
Problem is - and I am sorry for getting political - this is governor's pet program, and his approach to laws is that he wants something, and law says "no" - f#ck that law.
Given that governor Cuomo II is a boy from a good family, his farther also was a governor, his ex-wife is JFK niece - he can often get away with his approaches.
And on one hand, he's rumored to have presidential ambitions - but on the other hand his right hand men is indicted by feds on corruption charges, and governor is very upset that he didn't know how his campaign contributions were solicited..
So this story is much more involved than simple noncompliance sign story.
Especially when the goal of the program (increase tourism dollars) can just as easily be achieved, and at the same or less cost, by installing compliant signs.
Honestly speaking, I doubt signs would actually do much in terms of tourism. Rest areas with some information would do much more, from my perspective. And there is no limitations on posting web addresses in rest areas, as far as I can tell..
Quote from: jbnv on November 04, 2016, 09:54:19 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 04, 2016, 08:23:42 AM
With motorists more distracted than ever on the highways (and distracted driving accidents up in the polls), I'm happy to know that the government is doing something useful like trying to keep unnecessary distractions off the roadways.
Your state can do that themselves. And if they are choosing not to, that's on them.
But when the signs are installed on a federally funded highway and the state is not doing its job adhering to federal standards for that highway then it should be up to the federal government to make sure that they funds they are providing for the highway are used on a highway that meets federal standards.
Maybe the U.S. government should get out of the highway business altogether and leave it up to the states?
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 04, 2016, 12:46:56 PM
Quote from: jbnv on November 04, 2016, 09:54:19 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 04, 2016, 08:23:42 AM
With motorists more distracted than ever on the highways (and distracted driving accidents up in the polls), I'm happy to know that the government is doing something useful like trying to keep unnecessary distractions off the roadways.
Your state can do that themselves. And if they are choosing not to, that's on them.
But when the signs are installed on a federally funded highway and the state is not doing its job adhering to federal standards for that highway then it should be up to the federal government to make sure that they funds they are providing for the highway are used on a highway that meets federal standards.
Maybe the U.S. government should get out of the highway business altogether and leave it up to the states?
Maybe the US Government should get out of everything and leave the states to do everything themselves. Instead of one nation, we'll be 50 nations.
But, of course, the second there's a national disaster, who will the state go running to for additional funding?
Quote from: kalvado on November 03, 2016, 01:44:15 PM
Well, since this is now a separate thread...
Didn't realize that it had been mentioned elsewhere. I saw it on Facebook.
Quote from: hbelkins on November 04, 2016, 02:04:08 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 03, 2016, 01:44:15 PM
Well, since this is now a separate thread...
Didn't realize that it had been mentioned elsewhere. I saw it on Facebook.
No need to feel guilty.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1487.2500 - and look up replies from
empirestate and
dgolub
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 04, 2016, 12:51:34 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 04, 2016, 12:46:56 PM
Quote from: jbnv on November 04, 2016, 09:54:19 AM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 04, 2016, 08:23:42 AM
With motorists more distracted than ever on the highways (and distracted driving accidents up in the polls), I'm happy to know that the government is doing something useful like trying to keep unnecessary distractions off the roadways.
Your state can do that themselves. And if they are choosing not to, that's on them.
But when the signs are installed on a federally funded highway and the state is not doing its job adhering to federal standards for that highway then it should be up to the federal government to make sure that they funds they are providing for the highway are used on a highway that meets federal standards.
Maybe the U.S. government should get out of the highway business altogether and leave it up to the states?
Maybe the US Government should get out of everything and leave the states to do everything themselves. Instead of one nation, we'll be 50 nations.
But, of course, the second there's a national disaster, who will the state go running to for additional funding?
There are things the federal (not national) government should do, and things they shouldn't do. Start with "We the People..." and continue through to "No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened." Then get back to us on whether the federal government really should be in the business of dictating this kind of signage.
Quote from: Brandon on November 04, 2016, 02:21:28 PM
There are things the federal (not national) government should do, and things they shouldn't do. Start with "We the People..." and continue through to "No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened." Then get back to us on whether the federal government really should be in the business of dictating this kind of signage.
Relax control - and the next thing you'll find is that one state is posting speed limits in km/h and the other - in meters/s, and feet per minute are used in next county, and only cops know where and what is enforceable. Speed limit signs will obscured by ads anyway...
There is a reason and benefit - (and cost and disadvantage) - in establishing and enforcing uniform standards. And once you let things slip too far, it is too late.
I agree that legislating how corners are rounded on exit tabs is a bit too much - but these tourism ads really go in the wrong direction.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 04, 2016, 12:51:34 PM
Maybe the US Government should get out of everything and leave the states to do everything themselves. Instead of one nation, we'll be 50 nations.
The Constitution assigns specific powers and responsibilities (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_the_United_States_Congress) to the government. The Tenth Amendment gives all other legislative powers to the states.
The Constitution gives Congress the authority "to establish post roads." I don't know whether any authority has recognized this right as a right to establish a national highway system, but let's assume that it does. Even then, it doesn't mandate a national highway system.
The Constitution also gives Congress the power to establish weights and measures. I doubt that the Founding Fathers envisioned this power to prohibit states from posting self-promotional signs on national highways.
I don't believe that there is any further justification for the Federal Government providing funding for highways. We built a national highway system, and it is good, but the states can maintain it. Let them figure out how to pay for them.
Quote from: jbnv on November 04, 2016, 03:20:49 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 04, 2016, 12:51:34 PM
Maybe the US Government should get out of everything and leave the states to do everything themselves. Instead of one nation, we'll be 50 nations.
The Constitution assigns specific powers and responsibilities (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_the_United_States_Congress) to the government. The Tenth Amendment gives all other legislative powers to the states.
The Constitution gives Congress the authority "to establish post roads." I don't know whether any authority has recognized this right as a right to establish a national highway system, but let's assume that it does. Even then, it doesn't mandate a national highway system.
The Constitution also gives Congress the power to establish weights and measures. I doubt that the Founding Fathers envisioned this power to prohibit states from posting self-promotional signs on national highways.
I don't believe that there is any further justification for the Federal Government providing funding for highways. We built a national highway system, and it is good, but the states can maintain it. Let them figure out how to pay for them.
What's ironic is that based on your location, Louisiana, your state receives the 5th most help from the feds for Transportation Funding. (http://taxfoundation.org/blog/how-your-state-s-road-spending-funded). Your state only provided 27.5% of its own money for transportation projects.
States like Louisiana depend on the feds. Consider yourself fortunate.
Quote from: jbnv on November 04, 2016, 03:20:49 PM
I doubt that the Founding Fathers envisioned this power to prohibit states from posting self-promotional signs on national highways.
Did you ever drive Thruway where it goes through reservation? Did you enjoy all those ads along the road?
Give it a try - and you may realize there is a reason ads are restricted along highways.
As for powers.. States
voluntarily adopted federal highway standard. Their good will could be assisted with some minor pressure applied via funding distribution, but yet - states saw some value in adopting single standard. If they want to depart from that standard - they have that powers. Same as feds have right to withhold funds..
Quote from: kalvado on November 04, 2016, 03:46:43 PM
Quote from: jbnv on November 04, 2016, 03:20:49 PM
I doubt that the Founding Fathers envisioned this power to prohibit states from posting self-promotional signs on national highways.
Did you ever drive Thruway where it goes through reservation? Did you enjoy all those ads along the road?
Give it a try - and you may realize there is a reason ads are restricted along highways.
As for powers.. States voluntarily adopted federal highway standard. Their good will could be assisted with some minor pressure applied via funding distribution, but yet - states saw some value in adopting single standard. If they want to depart from that standard - they have that powers. Same as feds have right to withhold funds..
The NYS Thruway was one of the first highways to ban billboards within a certain distance of the ROW. The Thruway authority proactively removed billboards in the early days. For a highway agency that holds on to its legacy roots, installing the CuomoSigns had to be a painful exercise. I know that many within the NYSTA think they're ridiculous and should not be allowed but King Andy gets his way on pet projects.
As long as the NYS Thruway (or any other applicable roadway in NYS) carries Interstate designations, I don't mind the FHWA doing what they need to do to maintain standards as they benefit safer roads for the motorist.
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 04, 2016, 05:07:25 PM
Quote from: kalvado on November 04, 2016, 03:46:43 PM
Quote from: jbnv on November 04, 2016, 03:20:49 PM
I doubt that the Founding Fathers envisioned this power to prohibit states from posting self-promotional signs on national highways.
Did you ever drive Thruway where it goes through reservation? Did you enjoy all those ads along the road?
Give it a try - and you may realize there is a reason ads are restricted along highways.
As for powers.. States voluntarily adopted federal highway standard. Their good will could be assisted with some minor pressure applied via funding distribution, but yet - states saw some value in adopting single standard. If they want to depart from that standard - they have that powers. Same as feds have right to withhold funds..
The NYS Thruway was one of the first highways to ban billboards within a certain distance of the ROW. The Thruway authority proactively removed billboards in the early days. For a highway agency that holds on to its legacy roots, installing the CuomoSigns had to be a painful exercise. I know that many within the NYSTA think they're ridiculous and should not be allowed but King Andy gets his way on pet projects.
As long as the NYS Thruway (or any other applicable roadway in NYS) carries Interstate designations, I don't mind the FHWA doing what they need to do to maintain standards as they benefit safer roads for the motorist.
Sometimes there is only that much Thruway can do:
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Buffalo,+NY/@42.5792087,-79.0707195,3a,66.8y,266.4h,73.79t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s_zTuTjkXc4noQL9iCBG7Jg!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89d3126152dfe5a1:0x982304a5181f8171!5m1!1e1
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 04, 2016, 03:38:21 PM
What's ironic is that based on your location, Louisiana, your state receives the 5th most help from the feds for Transportation Funding. (http://taxfoundation.org/blog/how-your-state-s-road-spending-funded). Your state only provided 27.5% of its own money for transportation projects.
States like Louisiana depend on the feds. Consider yourself fortunate.
Of course, because all of that money we're getting is getting I-49 done, and fixing the I-10 cluster in Baton Rouge, and building I-69 up north... oh wait, only one of these is actually happening, and rather slowly at that. (But at least we're replacing perfectly-good Clearview signs with FHWA equivalents.)
Like I said, let the states figure out how to pay for it. Here's a novel idea: how about tolls? Like we probably should have done in the first place? I know that's a dirty word for some people, but it's the most fair, most effective way of paying for roads through the people that actually use them.
Quote from: jbnv on November 04, 2016, 03:20:49 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 04, 2016, 12:51:34 PM
Maybe the US Government should get out of everything and leave the states to do everything themselves. Instead of one nation, we'll be 50 nations.
The Constitution assigns specific powers and responsibilities (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Powers_of_the_United_States_Congress) to the government. The Tenth Amendment gives all other legislative powers to the states.
The Constitution gives Congress the authority "to establish post roads." I don't know whether any authority has recognized this right as a right to establish a national highway system, but let's assume that it does. Even then, it doesn't mandate a national highway system.
The Constitution also gives Congress the power to establish weights and measures. I doubt that the Founding Fathers envisioned this power to prohibit states from posting self-promotional signs on national highways.
I don't believe that there is any further justification for the Federal Government providing funding for highways. We built a national highway system, and it is good, but the states can maintain it. Let them figure out how to pay for them.
Don't forget the Elastic Clause (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessary_and_Proper_Clause), which one could argue pretty much allows them to regulate highway signs. Besides, I'm pretty sure the Founding Fathers didn't even consider an Air Force when they were creating the constitution, but look at what we have now...
I'm fearing a lock in the near future for this thread.
The CuomoSigns were the subject of the "Off the Northway" column by Stephen Williams in today's Schenectady Daily Gazette.
http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2016/nov/05/i-love-ny-signs/ (http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2016/nov/05/i-love-ny-signs/)
I'm not sure if this link will let someone without a subscription in, though.
Quote from: Jim on November 05, 2016, 10:55:48 PM
The CuomoSigns were the subject of the "Off the Northway" column by Stephen Williams in today's Schenectady Daily Gazette.
http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2016/nov/05/i-love-ny-signs/ (http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2016/nov/05/i-love-ny-signs/)
I'm not sure if this link will let someone without a subscription in, though.
I could only read the first few sentences before the rest of it was blocked.
Quote from: 74/171FAN on November 06, 2016, 07:06:23 AM
Quote from: Jim on November 05, 2016, 10:55:48 PM
The CuomoSigns were the subject of the "Off the Northway" column by Stephen Williams in today's Schenectady Daily Gazette.
http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2016/nov/05/i-love-ny-signs/ (http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2016/nov/05/i-love-ny-signs/)
I'm not sure if this link will let someone without a subscription in, though.
I could only read the first few sentences before the rest of it was blocked.
Try this link (http://www.dailygazette.com/news/2016/nov/05/i-love-ny-signs/?print)
I live right on the border of NYS and I see these signs all the time and some of the large signs are too much to take in at highway speeds.
*fidgets*
*whistles softly*
Yeah, I'll keep quiet on this one.