This interchange was just rebuilt. Corinth Pkwy used to go over I-35E, but that has been reversed. It is well done, with all left turns being double. I was shocked to find the US 77 signs. There are none anywhere else on the I-35Express project, so obviously a different set of engineers designed this interchange, and put the US 77 signs in the plans, and the contractor just went with it.
Also, the Denton/Dallas signage is not needed here, since Corinth Pkwy is not a state highway.
Also, to me it was wasteful for them to make the temporary signs when they could have gone ahead and installed the permanent signs here, saving a lot of money.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F1.15.2016%2520Corinth%2520Pkwy-I-35E%2520005_zpsm2tln5l6.jpg&hash=a5e307988b0d5f549787db1ce91ac56caaebba49) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/1.15.2016%20Corinth%20Pkwy-I-35E%20005_zpsm2tln5l6.jpg.html)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F1.15.2016%2520Corinth%2520Pkwy-I-35E%2520004_zpslyxmukrb.jpg&hash=c5c3de392a704f927f796b1b0deb6e2452359b6a) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/1.15.2016%20Corinth%20Pkwy-I-35E%20004_zpslyxmukrb.jpg.html)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F1.15.2016%2520Corinth%2520Pkwy-I-35E%2520003_zpsh3ntf6tj.jpg&hash=2c3b263925624f71491426b14316fb3bd512a349) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/1.15.2016%20Corinth%20Pkwy-I-35E%20003_zpsh3ntf6tj.jpg.html)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F1.15.2016%2520Corinth%2520Pkwy-I-35E%2520001_zpsktwj6y1y.jpg&hash=c5a14ffe3205526ae23666d9255c47a191c757ee) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/1.15.2016%20Corinth%20Pkwy-I-35E%20001_zpsktwj6y1y.jpg.html)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F1.15.2016%2520Corinth%2520Pkwy-I-35E%2520007_zpsx1j85yx2.jpg&hash=406dddacc49383ec9a2f6189676216e8fbf02148) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/1.15.2016%20Corinth%20Pkwy-I-35E%20007_zpsx1j85yx2.jpg.html)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F1.15.2016%2520Corinth%2520Pkwy-I-35E%2520011_zpshcghcjfq.jpg&hash=bd88b07738845976714cc69609f1d1b99f6eaf5d) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/1.15.2016%20Corinth%20Pkwy-I-35E%20011_zpshcghcjfq.jpg.html)
Was this just a fluke, or is this a trend to come? In any event, I say it's about time Texas acknowledged the Interstate 35E is also part of US 77.
"NBFR"? Sign contractor's from Houston, apparently.
This is just a fluke.
The temporary signs have been replaced with permanent ones that have US 77 shields and state-name interstate shields. It is beautiful! It was raining so I couldn't get a pic. I will get one next sunny day.
Quote from: TXtoNJ on January 16, 2016, 01:21:12 AM
"NBFR"? Sign contractor's from Houston, apparently.
Looks painfully bizarre to me. I'm more used to something like this: "I-35E Service Drive".
To me, "I-35E" would be best. Of course it's a frontage road, that does not need to be said.
Why is the Dallas/Denton sign unnecessary? Every interstate interchange I have seen...state maintained road or not...has always included control point signs.
Yeah. Unbelievable. Definitely shopped.
ha ha NE2...this is the real deal
Quote from: Brian556 on November 08, 2016, 02:21:54 PM
ha ha NE2...this is the real deal
Then why can't you believe it?
Alright, I'm an idiot. What's the big deal? Does US 77 not exist in Texas? Does I-35E not overlap with US-77?
Also, I don't see the issue with the Denton/Dallas signs. They're guide signs, and are a helpful on all roads, state highway or otherwise.
Dallas County doesn't post US 67 or US 77 on their interstate overlays so this would be a change in that.
US 77 is supposed to be hidden on I-35E. Green guide signs are not supposed to be posted where a city street intersects a highway
Quote from: Mapmikey on November 08, 2016, 08:52:06 PM
Dallas County doesn't post US 67 or US 77 on their interstate overlays so this would be a change in that.
Still don't see what the big deal is, or why this would be "unbelievable".
Quote from: Brian556 on November 09, 2016, 12:38:47 AM
Green guide signs are not supposed to be posted where a city street intersects a highway
....why?
Quote from NE2:
Quote
Then why can't you believe it?
Because it was not expected, and is not supposed to be done
Quote from Jakeroot:
Quote....why?
TxDOT signing policy
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F11.10.2016%2520011_zpse3ppzmkx.jpg&hash=0d65fbf2ea59a5aec9499fc56b419358651bfc38) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/11.10.2016%20011_zpse3ppzmkx.jpg.html)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F11.10.2016%2520009_zpsd9sve0dj.jpg&hash=6cab7570e67271e49480c25d43f567f55847cfec) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/11.10.2016%20009_zpsd9sve0dj.jpg.html)
Quote from: Brian556 on November 09, 2016, 01:13:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 09, 2016, 01:21:43 AM
Quote from: Brian556 on November 09, 2016, 12:38:47 AM
Green guide signs are not supposed to be posted where a city street intersects a highway
....why?
TxDOT signing policy
That's fine. But earlier, you stated:
Quote from: Brian556 on January 15, 2016, 05:34:27 PM
the Denton/Dallas signage is not needed here, since Corinth Pkwy is not a state highway.
What you mean to say is, "not required". Guide signs are always helpful, regardless if they're required or not.
Sorry to nitpick, but from the perspective of someone not from the area, to say that a guide sign is not needed because of the designation (or lack thereof), is quite strange, if not, hard to comprehend.
Quote from: Brian556 on November 09, 2016, 01:13:29 PM
Quote from NE2:
Quote
Then why can't you believe it?
Because it was not expected, and is not supposed to be done
You were there and took photos. Do you not believe your own eyes?
Where is 35-C?
The way that they have the signal heads horizontally aligned despite the fact that the arm is at an upward angle is kind of weird.
It's good to see the state-name Interstate shields again. I have missed them for too many years.
Quote from Scott 5114:
QuoteThe way that they have the signal heads horizontally aligned despite the fact that the arm is at an upward angle is kind of weird.
That's nothing..
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F10.31.13%2520006_zpsjw1ymnvg.jpg&hash=f1417c202f0f1754fad02e3eac5da3d5beb72572) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/10.31.13%20006_zpsjw1ymnvg.jpg.html)
That's actually an example of what I would expect to see. Each signal head from right to left is slightly higher to follow the upward angle of the arm. In the I-35 junction example, the arm has an upward angle, but each signal head is mounted further and further beneath the arm to cause all of the signal heads to form a horizontal line.
It makes sense from a design point of view, but it is so seldom done it looks bizarre in practice.
Aside from the strange looking design, those temporary I-35E & US-77 signs were gigantic.
So far, all the permanent new-install shields on poles along the parts of the Dallas-Denton I-35E redo project are being put up with US 77 shields included. This is in Carrollton and Farmers Branch, that I've seen--I haven't gotten any close-up looks farther north. The installs are both along main lanes as well as those on service roads (cross streets and ramps).
I don't know if the contractor is doing this as a big sign goof, or if someone out there has a secret campaign to bring US 77 back to equal signage prominence with I-35E. I've *never* understood the lack of shields (mainly in overlap-concurrency examples) on some stretches of road. If a route (like US 77 in this case) is part of a highway, sign it as such. Don't be lazy or inconsistent about it. The only reason for shields not appearing on a highway should be that it's decommissioned and no longer along that highway (US 66 is an obvious, prime example). US 67 disappears at the Hunt County line and suddenly reappears in southern Dallas--dumb. US 77 appears and disappears between the OK border and Waco--dumb. US 287 is not well-represented along I-45 between Ennis and Corsicana. I don't get it. One part of a DOT's/agency's focus should be making things *clear* to drivers, no matter what part of the process. We have enough confused, distracted people on the road as it is. Leaving off what route is part of a highway helps no one. If a route is generally seen as duplicative (or unnecessary), decommission it. If it is not, sign it. DOTs/agencies need to wake up and realize this.
Quote from: txstateends on September 04, 2017, 02:23:16 PM
So far, all the permanent new-install shields on poles along the parts of the Dallas-Denton I-35E redo project are being put up with US 77 shields included. This is in Carrollton and Farmers Branch, that I've seen--I haven't gotten any close-up looks farther north. The installs are both along main lanes as well as those on service roads (cross streets and ramps).
I don't know if the contractor is doing this as a big sign goof, or if someone out there has a secret campaign to bring US 77 back to equal signage prominence with I-35E. I've *never* understood the lack of shields (mainly in overlap-concurrency examples) on some stretches of road. If a route (like US 77 in this case) is part of a highway, sign it as such. Don't be lazy or inconsistent about it. The only reason for shields not appearing on a highway should be that it's decommissioned and no longer along that highway (US 66 is an obvious, prime example). US 67 disappears at the Hunt County line and suddenly reappears in southern Dallas--dumb. US 77 appears and disappears between the OK border and Waco--dumb. US 287 is not well-represented along I-45 between Ennis and Corsicana. I don't get it. One part of a DOT's/agency's focus should be making things *clear* to drivers, no matter what part of the process. We have enough confused, distracted people on the road as it is. Leaving off what route is part of a highway helps no one. If a route is generally seen as duplicative (or unnecessary), decommission it. If it is not, sign it. DOTs/agencies need to wake up and realize this.
The new route marker assemblies on FM 407/ Lake Park Rd omit US 77, while all other new ones have it.
I was ok with it not being signed. I felt it was easy enough for drivers to understand, especially considering that drivers are not likely to enter I-35 from US 77 and then exit when it exits in order to stay on it. US 77 has no real relevance in Texas north of Waco. In Oklahoma, its relevance is relatively minor.
And, yes, it does look like TxDOT is trying to unhide US 77. Another member posted a pic of a I-35/US 77 assembly in the Waco area a while back.
As far as the I-45/US 287 multiplex goes, there is no sign telling NB traffic on US 287 to turn right on I-45. There is also no multiplex reassurance north or that intersection. Farther up, there are several multiplex reassurance assemblies. Another big issue in Corsicana is that BUSINESS US 287 does not have any BUSINESS plaques. It is still signed as regular 287. Also, the city of Corsicana has a lot of "Highway 75" street signs on the I-45 Business Loop, despite US 75 having been decommissioned in 1987. Some of them are new. The Corsicana area is a disaster signage-wise. (These observations are from 2012)
Shorter multiplexes with interstates, in my opinion, however, should always be signed.
All non-interstate multiplexes should be fully signed