Perfect signage one direction and crappy the other

[roadman65]

Living in NJ I have noticed how construction contractors have erected freeway signs as part of a construction project on one side of an intersection but on the other Little Green Signs.  US 22 at US 202 & 206 in Somerville in 1988 was one instance when the interchange got an overhaul when the Bridgewater Commons opened.

US 22 got freeway style overheads, but US 202 & 206 got ground mount LGSes as part of the same project. Of course 5 years later NJDOT had to spend money added on to the Somerville Circle reconfiguration project to get matching signs.

Now I see in Eatontown, NJ after the second reconfigured NJ 35 and 36 intersection they gave Route 35 freeway overheads, but Route 36 got crappy small signs plus missing guides on Rte. 36 west for NJ 35 southbound to boot.

https://goo.gl/maps/vVbRhfcUcC1puQLE6

https://goo.gl/maps/LmYuncakDTCviWXG8

I have seen that done in Florida too where a construction project includes overhead signs on one road, but substandard ground mounts on the other. SR 50 at SR 436 comes to mind as SR 50 gets great large signs for SR 436, but SR 436 has no large signs and instead small shields. All part of the SPUI project years ago to upgrade that particular intersection.

What do contractors do that?

[Scott5114]

It's not perfect signage because it's Oklahoma, but on I-35 at SH-51 in Payne County, going northbound you have reasonably correct signage and southbound there's a panel that includes a CT 51 shield.

[andrepoiy]

Highway 401 ramps to Highway 400 in Toronto:

Eastbound, there's perfect signage according to OTM standards. First, APL sign, then a pull-through sign. Very good.



However, westbound, they skip the APL sign, and instead post two pull-through signs.