Signs with Logically Flawed Messages

[Road Hog]

The Van Alstyne exit on US 75 southbound continues this. There is a BGS that says "DFW Traffic Use Exit 38C" . A previous version of the sign said "DFW Traffic Do Not Exit."  Obviously this was intended to reduce confusion between SH 121 and FM 121, but to someone from Kansas this just reads like Van Alstyne doesn't want you city folk stopping in our burg and spending cash. TxDOT has made this a hash for nearly 2 decades going now.

[plain]

The Raceway gas station is the only one in the immediate vicinity of the VA 150/US 1 interchange. The other two are about a mile past that, and the restaurants are about a mile past those. 

Thanks for the info.  So, what is the approximate distance a driver on I-95 must travel between the signs and the services to access them, and how difficult would it be for them to return to I-95 to continue in the same direction?  Assuming there are no "freeway to freeway connection" restrictions in VA's sign policy, those should be the key factors in determining whether or not having signs on I-95 at this location is reasonable and appropriate.

Oooh ok. It's only a half mile between I-95 and US 1/301, as far as VA 150 go... then you can tack on the distances I mentioned earlier on top of that. It would be as difficult coming back as it was getting there (no change in this regard). I guess I was trying to say this situation is the only case where I've myself seen services signed on a freeway to another freeway. I'm just wondering how the services can be signed on I-95 but you need to use another freeway and one would need to get off that one to reach them. I really didn't know this was actually allowed for a certain distance in the MUTCD

[roadman]

The Raceway gas station is the only one in the immediate vicinity of the VA 150/US 1 interchange. The other two are about a mile past that, and the restaurants are about a mile past those. 

Thanks for the info.  So, what is the approximate distance a driver on I-95 must travel between the signs and the services to access them, and how difficult would it be for them to return to I-95 to continue in the same direction?  Assuming there are no "freeway to freeway connection" restrictions in VA's sign policy, those should be the key factors in determining whether or not having signs on I-95 at this location is reasonable and appropriate.

Oooh ok. It's only a half mile between I-95 and US 1/301, as far as VA 150 go... then you can tack on the distances I mentioned earlier on top of that. It would be as difficult coming back as it was getting there (no change in this regard). I guess I was trying to say this situation is the only case where I've myself seen services signed on a freeway to another freeway. I'm just wondering how the services can be signed on I-95 but you need to use another freeway and one would need to get off that one to reach them. I really didn't know this was actually allowed for a certain distance in the MUTCD

Thanks for the additional info.  Yes, the MUTCD only requires that eligible services be located so they provide for convenient re-entry back onto the original road (in this case, I-95), and does not specifically prohibit services signing for freeway to freeway connections.  As it is unusual that the convenient re-entry requirement can be met if one needs to travel from one freeway to another to access the services signed, many states (such as Massachusetts) specifically state in their sign policies that freeway to freeway connections to access services are not allowed.

Also remember that, per the MUTCD, the 3 mile distance from exit to services can be extended if there are no eligible services, or services wanting to have signs posted, within the 3 mile limit, unless a particular State has a more restrictive policy.  With some exceptions (usually Attractions), Massachusetts normally does not allow signs for services beyond the 3 mile limit.