Regional Boards > Northeast

New Jersey Turnpike

<< < (844/850) > >>

cpzilliacus:

--- Quote from: SignBridge on October 23, 2021, 09:15:34 PM ---MUTCD Sec. 2E.10 reads in part: No more than two destination names or street names should be displayed on any Advance Guide Sign or Exit Direction sign. When two or three signs are placed on the same supports, destinations or names should be limited to one per sign or to total of three in the display.

That recommendation (not a standard) has existed through many generations of the Manual and is one I generally agree with. And as we've all noted it is followed in varying degrees. But it must also be a difficult task for the engineers involved to make the best decisions in this regard and not all of us will agree with all such decisions. 

--- End quote ---

I have seen many panels with three (especially common in Virginia) and even four lines which seem to work well for me.

roadman65:

--- Quote from: SignBridge on October 23, 2021, 09:15:34 PM ---MUTCD Sec. 2E.10 reads in part: No more than two destination names or street names should be displayed on any Advance Guide Sign or Exit Direction sign. When two or three signs are placed on the same supports, destinations or names should be limited to one per sign or to total of three in the display.

That recommendation (not a standard) has existed through many generations of the Manual and is one I generally agree with. And as we've all noted it is followed in varying degrees. But it must also be a difficult task for the engineers involved to make the best decisions in this regard and not all of us will agree with all such decisions. 

--- End quote ---


Airports are the worst violators with ten airlines on one panel.  Airlines are like cities and the same as driving directions.  If they can do it, why not public freeways.

SignBridge:
The guidelines in the MUTCD section that I cited above are designed for easiest readability at interstate highway speed which was probably presumed to be around 65mph. The idea being to not overload the driver's ability to read at that speed. My guess is that the issue is less critical on airport approach roads with somewhat lower speeds. Though I agree that ten names on a sign would be hard to read.

jeffandnicole:

--- Quote from: roadman65 on October 27, 2021, 09:51:59 PM ---
--- Quote from: SignBridge on October 23, 2021, 09:15:34 PM ---MUTCD Sec. 2E.10 reads in part: No more than two destination names or street names should be displayed on any Advance Guide Sign or Exit Direction sign. When two or three signs are placed on the same supports, destinations or names should be limited to one per sign or to total of three in the display.

That recommendation (not a standard) has existed through many generations of the Manual and is one I generally agree with. And as we've all noted it is followed in varying degrees. But it must also be a difficult task for the engineers involved to make the best decisions in this regard and not all of us will agree with all such decisions. 

--- End quote ---


Airports are the worst violators with ten airlines on one panel.  Airlines are like cities and the same as driving directions.  If they can do it, why not public freeways.

--- End quote ---

Just because they are doing it, doesn't mean they're doing it well.

ran4sh:
I think with airlines it is not usually a problem because people expect there to be an airline list at some point, and if it's alphabetical then it's easy for a lot of drivers to pick out if their airline is there or not.

As for what I-95's control city should be for the northbound entrance from westbound I-78 - I wouldn't use NYC at all because that traffic is either coming from NYC or coming from a point where, if they wanted to go to NYC, they should have entered I-78 east instead of west. Thus, it would be appropriate to use the next control city for I-95, which is New Haven.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version