AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Northwest => Topic started by: xonhulu on February 28, 2010, 01:21:36 AM

Title: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: xonhulu on February 28, 2010, 01:21:36 AM
Good news: a bunch of reassurance markers have been posted along the recently (2002) designated OR 103.  The bad news?  See below:
(http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/th_OR103SignGoof8.jpg) (http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/th_OR103SignGoof5.jpg) (http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/th_OR103SignGoof3.jpg) (http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/th_OR103SignGoof1.jpg) (http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/th_OR103SignGoof2.jpg) (http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/th_OR103SignGoof4.jpg)

Apparently, the shield goof condition is contagious, because at 103's north end if you turn west on OR 202 you'll see this:

(http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/th_OR202SignGoof7.jpg) (http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/th_OR202SignGoof6.jpg) (http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/th_OR202SignGoof3.jpg) (http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/th_OR202SignGoof2.jpg) (http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/th_OR202SignGoof9.jpg) (http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/th_OR202SignGoof1.jpg) (http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/th_OR202SignGoof8.jpg)

My favorite, though, is this one on a 2-digit shield:

(http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/OR202SignGoof4.jpg?t=1267897180)

Somebody is seriously confused here, it seems...
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: agentsteel53 on February 28, 2010, 01:25:00 AM
hm, here I had wondered if good old US-3 would ever spawn a branch route.  :-D

202, seen that before but I do like the narrow Oregon style with Series B numbers.  Haven't seen a 202 like that since New Jersey.
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: Alps on February 28, 2010, 02:10:44 AM
The narrow 202 actually looks more NH style.  The ones in NJ are all old and done by the county with a variant font - narrower numerals.  See www.alpsroads.net/roads/nh/us_202/e.jpg and www.alpsroads.net/roads/nj/us_202/sinter.jpg
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: agentsteel53 on February 28, 2010, 02:18:25 AM
oh that is not a "variant font", that is standard federal spec Series A on the second one - just like intended up to 1970 or so.  Those signs are older than the one or two I saw in NJ with the Series B font.  And yes, NH is similar too - I saw a couple of 9/202 pairs, which I believe you documented, with the Series B font on the 202 and the white background on the state route 9 shields.  

the 202s are much older than the 9s. I am still unsure when NH switched from the "boring square" to the white-background Old Man; I have seen white background Old Man as old as 1977 and as new as 1984, and who knows when they switched to the black-background Old Man.  I just know in 1986 when I was a kid, I remember just white-background Old Man shields... neither the white squares nor the black-background Old Man style.

the 202/9 pairs have white-background 202s that were repainted, to have the black background, likely in 1981 when their corresponding Old Man 9 shields were installed.  The white-background US shields I think date to the 1950s; at least, I know that the 1961 MUTCD demanded black-background US shields, in contrast to the white-background of the 1948 MUTCD.
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: andytom on February 28, 2010, 03:05:51 AM
Recent sign contract gone horribly wrong?  The 202's were OR sheilds 2.5 yrs ago (the last time I drove the Hood-To-Coast route which follow all but 10 miles of OR-202).
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: xonhulu on February 28, 2010, 11:04:24 AM
Recent sign contract gone horribly wrong?  The 202's were OR sheilds 2.5 yrs ago (the last time I drove the Hood-To-Coast route which follow all but 10 miles of OR-202).

I'd guess it's very recent.  I'm pretty sure I was on OR 103 last fall and the shields weren't there.  The US 202's were only on westbound 202.  They added a lot of these assemblies; I don't remember it being signed so frequently before, and it isn't signed that generously on eastbound 202 even now.

Here's another recent error involving OR 202.  This time, it's the right shield.  However, we're not on 202 here: this is actually OR 47 just past the Apiary Road junction, and 202 doesn't begin until Mist which is still 7 miles ahead, as the sign says.

(http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/OR47-202NatalSignGoof.jpg?t=1267507096)
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: andytom on February 28, 2010, 03:06:10 PM
This one could be hwy vs. route confusion.  The Nehalem Hwy (hwy 102) follows OR-47 through Vernonia to Mist, then OR-202 to Astoria.  Road contracts and plans, in OR, are always done based on hwy numbers, not route numbers so the contractor may have just thought it was all the same route number.

--Andy
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: xonhulu on February 28, 2010, 03:37:04 PM
This one could be hwy vs. route confusion.  The Nehalem Hwy (hwy 102) follows OR-47 through Vernonia to Mist, then OR-202 to Astoria.  Road contracts and plans, in OR, are always done based on hwy numbers, not route numbers so the contractor may have just thought it was all the same route number.

That's logical.  This isn't a very common error.  I've been trying to think if I've ever seen an incorrect route number posted in Oregon, and except for a couple of cases where 99 and 99E/W were mixed up, I couldn't think of any.

The US/state shield confusion is much more widespread in Oregon, and I guess more understandable.  Oregon invites the route/highway confusions with their dual system.  While on that trip yesterday, I saw several maps where US 101 BUS was labeled as "OR 105," using its highway number instead.  Not that that wouldn't be a good idea, as that mostly rural route is hardly a "business" route.
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: xonhulu on March 01, 2010, 02:05:54 AM
I've been trying to think if I've ever seen an incorrect route number posted in Oregon, and except for a couple of cases where 99 and 99E/W were mixed up, I couldn't think of any.

I did think of one other example: when OR 282 was initially signed in Odell, one assembly referred to it as OR 281 -- nearby, but not the same route.  The error lasted about a year, but was eventually fixed.  The two errors involving 99 instead of 99E near Jefferson, and 99W instead of 99 in Roseburg, are still unfixed, AFAIK.
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: Bickendan on March 01, 2010, 04:25:08 AM
99 on 99E near Jefferson? On I-5? I haven't noticed that one.
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: luokou on March 01, 2010, 05:33:11 AM
I do enjoy seeing the new route numbers being signed (even if it's a US shield goof)! Though, I do find it particularly annoying when a US route is signed with a state shield. If a contractor were to fix the sign errors posted above, I'd love to acquire one of those goofs :]
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: Tarkus on March 01, 2010, 05:46:20 PM
There's also a couple bogus OR-99W shields in Eugene along OR-99.  They're on the Hilyard Street Extension that was built as a new alignment for OR-99 Northbound in 2008.

It seems there's been a lot of error shields as of late, between those and the US Route goofs.  They don't seem to have screwed up the recently-signed OR-569 or OR-528 in the Eugene-Springfield area, though.

-Alex (Tarkus)
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: agentsteel53 on March 01, 2010, 06:04:20 PM
there is a green sign with a US-99W shield on it at US-20 in Corvallis.  I have heard that this green sign is actually correct (or was, anyway, at the time of its installation), and dates back to the late 1960s.  It is not button copy, but apparently Oregon went to retroreflective sheeting for their eye-level (as opposed to overhead pass-through) green signs early on.

I've also seen US-27, US-58, and US-82 shields - as well as US-140 (never quite got that designation despite being a multi-state route that historically started at US-40) and US-126 (the US route was decommissioned years before this sign was put up on state route 126)

that said, despite the prevalence of old-style Oregon/US and state route eagle cutouts, and Oregon's predilection for screwing this up... I have never seen an old style cutout with an state/US mixup error on it. 

(also, have never seen an Oregon US 28 shield - anyone got a photo of one?  I have a photo of a white guide sign with "TO ROUTE 28" spelled out, but alas no shield)
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: xonhulu on March 01, 2010, 10:04:59 PM
99 on 99E near Jefferson? On I-5? I haven't noticed that one.

It's not on the freeway itself.  You have to take the South Jefferson exit.  It's at the bottom of the ramps to/from NB I-5.
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: xonhulu on March 01, 2010, 10:31:35 PM
I've also seen US-27, US-58, and US-82 shields - as well as US-140 (never quite got that designation despite being a multi-state route that historically started at US-40) and US-126 (the US route was decommissioned years before this sign was put up on state route 126)

I've seen those, as well as US 22, US 39, US 47, US 86, a few US 99's, US 103, US 201, US 202, US 205, US 216, US 224, US 240 and US 245.  And I'm probably leaving some out.  Not exactly a rare phenomenon!

Quote
that said, despite the prevalence of old-style Oregon/US and state route eagle cutouts, and Oregon's predilection for screwing this up... I have never seen an old style cutout with an state/US mixup error on it.
 

You mean contractors and transportation workers used to be more conscientious and paid attention to details??  

Quote
(also, have never seen an Oregon US 28 shield - anyone got a photo of one?  I have a photo of a white guide sign with "TO ROUTE 28" spelled out, but alas no shield)

Unfortunately, I've never seen one either.  Wouldn't mind seeing one if anyone can find a picture.
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: agentsteel53 on March 01, 2010, 10:32:49 PM
I'd love to see US 39, 47, and 86, since those were never part of the US system!  Also 205, 216, 245.
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: Scott5114 on March 01, 2010, 11:15:17 PM
Haven't both 39 and 47 turned up in Montana?
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: agentsteel53 on March 01, 2010, 11:17:51 PM
yes they have. 

(http://www.aaroads.com/shields/img/MT/MT19740391i1.jpg)

(http://www.aaroads.com/shields/img/MT/MT19800471i1.jpg)

the funny thing about the 47: in 2005 when I was there (Hardin, MT) they had the older-spec 47 shield up, similar to the 39 with the classic shape and the Series C font.  Then sometime between 2005 and 2007 they replaced the signs ... with another set of error US shields, except with the modern shape and Series D font.  Oops!
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: florida on March 02, 2010, 06:31:46 PM
hm, here I had wondered if good old US-3 would ever spawn a branch route.  :-D


They had to give US 101 a friend ;-)
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: xonhulu on March 02, 2010, 08:35:58 PM
I'd love to see US 39, 47, and 86, since those were never part of the US system!  Also 205, 216, 245.

Here are some of your requests:

(http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/OR39Merrillsigngoof1.jpg?t=1267578766)

(http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/OR205Narrowssigngoof1.jpg?t=1267578802)

(http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/OR216GrassValley1.jpg?t=1267580016)

Unfortunately, I never took a picture of the US 47 goof; it was temporary signage during a construction project, also where the US 240 was posted.
And the US 86 and US 245 pictures were on the hard drive of my PC when it crashed -- no backup and the signs have since been replaced.
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: rawmustard on March 02, 2010, 09:08:18 PM
And the US 86 and US 245 pictures were on the hard drive of my PC when it crashed -- no backup and the signs have since been replaced.

My dad and I still wished we had cameras the day we spotted a US 86 goof in Three Rivers.
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: agentsteel53 on March 02, 2010, 09:24:50 PM

My dad and I still wished we had cameras the day we spotted a US 86 goof in Three Rivers.

there is a US-86 in El Centro, CA.  That's about the only US-86 out there!

(http://www.aaroads.com/shields/img/CA/CA19800861i1.jpg)

classic 1961-spec shield shape, even!
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: xonhulu on March 03, 2010, 12:42:00 AM
There's also a couple bogus OR-99W shields in Eugene along OR-99.  They're on the Hilyard Street Extension that was built as a new alignment for OR-99 Northbound in 2008.

Interestingly, this part of 99 actually was 99W for a brief period in the 1960's while the I-5 freeway was being built.
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: xonhulu on March 03, 2010, 11:14:45 PM
have never seen an Oregon US 28 shield - anyone got a photo of one?  I have a photo of a white guide sign with "TO ROUTE 28" spelled out, but alas no shield

You'd see one in the photo I discovered at the link below if it were clearer...

http://www.historicphotoarchive.com/caps4/00313.html
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: agentsteel53 on March 03, 2010, 11:45:31 PM

http://www.historicphotoarchive.com/caps4/00313.html

I'm this close to coughing up the money for a print.  5x7 should show it clearly enough, I'd imagine.
Title: Re: New U.S. Highways? No, ODOT sign goofs.
Post by: agentsteel53 on March 04, 2010, 12:08:35 AM
very nice!  never seen an Oregon with the thick border like that 126.