Erroneous road signs

[Rothman]

Here's a classic.  Look at the sign on the right.  What's wrong with it?  https://goo.gl/maps/Xv5wTNg8ivT2

[Alex]

Found this last week on our way out from Omaha:



This should be a Nebraska 370 shield, not an Iowa one.
There is a companion circle N-85 shield in the northbound direction too.

[peterj920]

Blue banner for Wis 55

[peterj920]

North 43 should be Missouri, South should be Arkansas.

Shouldn't they both be Arkansas at this junction?

Yes, ODOT seem to have their own way of doing things

I can understand why the signs are posted the way that they are.  Heading north on OK 20, State Highway 43 heads into Missouri without any Arkansas destinations, which is most likely why the sign has a Missouri shield, despite straddling the Oklahoma/Arkansas border for about 5 miles.  Heading south into Oklahoma, State Highway 43 travels into Arkansas. 

[cl94]

Everyone's favorite New York example. Signed better than some touring routes, NY 990V is infamously posted. In fact, it is the legal and common name for the road that carries it. GSV coverage of the area is old and spotty at best, but I drove through earlier today and noticed that most of the reassurance shields had direction banners (East/West). Schoharie County posted a sign along CR 3 (what the highway is after state maintenance ends) facing the end of Greene CR 20 pointing to "NY 990V", "NY 30", and Conesville. This sign went up since GSV went through. Region 9 did do some good by eliminating most of the NY 962J signage, though.

[SD Mapman]

Everyone's favorite New York example. Signed better than some touring routes, NY 990V is infamously posted. In fact, it is the legal and common name for the road that carries it. GSV coverage of the area is old and spotty at best, but I drove through earlier today and noticed that most of the reassurance shields had direction banners (East/West). Schoharie County posted a sign along CR 3 (what the highway is after state maintenance ends) facing the end of Greene CR 20 pointing to "NY 990V", "NY 30", and Conesville. This sign went up since GSV went through. Region 9 did do some good by eliminating most of the NY 962J signage, though.

961F is still up too, looks like.

[Mergingtraffic]

On page 152 how about an erroneous RI-152 sign?  RI-152 doesn't even come down as far as where this exit is. I believe at one time it was supposed to.

[PHLBOS]

In its own, NY seems to have downgraded US 202 to NY 202 (but not US 6) in a couple places:

Here and here.

[Rothman]

In its own, NY seems to have downgraded US 202 to NY 202 (but not US 6) in a couple places:

Here and here.

At the recent conference that Vdeane and I attended, certain NYSDOT regional representatives (Region 8, I believe) stated that there was the perception -- albeit incorrect -- that there was a mandate to stop signing US routes in NY as US routes and to give them state shields. 

That was a little eye opening, since I always attributed it to sloppy specs or contractors (i.e., "The sign's got a number, what difference does the shape make?") rather than misunderstandings within NYSDOT.

[PHLBOS]

In its own, NY seems to have downgraded US 202 to NY 202 (but not US 6) in a couple places:

Here and here.

At the recent conference that Vdeane and I attended, certain NYSDOT regional representatives (Region 8, I believe) stated that there was the perception -- albeit incorrect -- that there was a mandate to stop signing US routes in NY as US routes and to give them state shields. 

That was a little eye opening, since I always attributed it to sloppy specs or contractors (i.e., "The sign's got a number, what difference does the shape make?") rather than misunderstandings within NYSDOT.

One problem (of many) with that notion vs. the above-examples is that NYSDOT doesn't seem to have any problems with posting US 6 shields.

[Rothman]

In its own, NY seems to have downgraded US 202 to NY 202 (but not US 6) in a couple places:

Here and here.

At the recent conference that Vdeane and I attended, certain NYSDOT regional representatives (Region 8, I believe) stated that there was the perception -- albeit incorrect -- that there was a mandate to stop signing US routes in NY as US routes and to give them state shields. 

That was a little eye opening, since I always attributed it to sloppy specs or contractors (i.e., "The sign's got a number, what difference does the shape make?") rather than misunderstandings within NYSDOT.

One problem (of many) with that notion vs. the above-examples is that NYSDOT Region 8 doesn't seem to have any problems with posting US 6 shields.

Probably depends upon the particular project manager as well.

[Mapmikey]

One problem (of many) with that notion vs. the above-examples is that NYSDOT doesn't seem to have any problems with posting US 6 shields.

There's always this from 2013:


Mike

[cl94]

Region 1 isn't much better. This one is in Saratoga, with the NY 9 shield right next to a US 9 shield.

[bzakharin]

In its own, NY seems to have downgraded US 202 to NY 202 (but not US 6) in a couple places:

Here and here.

At the recent conference that Vdeane and I attended, certain NYSDOT regional representatives (Region 8, I believe) stated that there was the perception -- albeit incorrect -- that there was a mandate to stop signing US routes in NY as US routes and to give them state shields. 

That was a little eye opening, since I always attributed it to sloppy specs or contractors (i.e., "The sign's got a number, what difference does the shape make?") rather than misunderstandings within NYSDOT.

Does the NYSDOT actually have the power to do something like that? Aren't there federal rules about how US and Interstate routes are supposed to be signed? Didn't Florida get into trouble by signing US routes with colored shields?

[kphoger]

If we removed all the "right number, wrong shield blank" posts from this thread, how short would it be?  These signs correctly convey the number of the highway they point to.  To me, they're more correct than incorrect.

[cl94]

If we removed all the "right number, wrong shield blank" posts from this thread, how short would it be?  These signs correctly convey the number of the highway they point to.  To me, they're more correct than incorrect.

Of course, in New York, numbers are not unique, so using the wrong shield blank could cause issues, especially with the number of suffixed routes.

[jbnv]

If we removed all the "right number, wrong shield blank" posts from this thread, how short would it be?  These signs correctly convey the number of the highway they point to.  To me, they're more correct than incorrect.

Good luck using that logic in Texas.

[machias]

In its own, NY seems to have downgraded US 202 to NY 202 (but not US 6) in a couple places:

Here and here.

At the recent conference that Vdeane and I attended, certain NYSDOT regional representatives (Region 8, I believe) stated that there was the perception -- albeit incorrect -- that there was a mandate to stop signing US routes in NY as US routes and to give them state shields. 

That was a little eye opening, since I always attributed it to sloppy specs or contractors (i.e., "The sign's got a number, what difference does the shape make?") rather than misunderstandings within NYSDOT.

I'm not surprised by that, as one of the state contractors apparently just assumed that anything designed in Series D was to be Clearview, that's how a lot of Clearview signs popped up on NYSDOT highways.

[steviep24]

"404 error" still exists. US 404 shield on NY 404.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.208586,-77.4609391,3a,15y,90.49h,87.54t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9bDp26y7ofVZcoI42H3-xA!2e0!5s20150801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

[bzakharin]

"404 error" still exists. US 404 shield on NY 404.

https://www.google.com/maps/@43.208586,-77.4609391,3a,15y,90.49h,87.54t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s9bDp26y7ofVZcoI42H3-xA!2e0!5s20150801T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

There is at least one in Delaware too:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6994938,-75.4012705,3a,15y,216.79h,85.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbLQyuyHuKWtsPcIhD-YAtQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1

[Eth]

If we removed all the "right number, wrong shield blank" posts from this thread, how short would it be?  These signs correctly convey the number of the highway they point to.  To me, they're more correct than incorrect.

After all, the number of the highway is all that matters. (NOTE: example given is not actually incorrect.)

[hbelkins]

At the recent conference that Vdeane and I attended, certain NYSDOT regional representatives (Region 8, I believe) stated that there was the perception -- albeit incorrect -- that there was a mandate to stop signing US routes in NY as US routes and to give them state shields. 

That was a little eye opening, since I always attributed it to sloppy specs or contractors (i.e., "The sign's got a number, what difference does the shape make?") rather than misunderstandings within NYSDOT.

How in the world would they come to that conclusion? Other than sheer stupidity?

[cl94]

At the recent conference that Vdeane and I attended, certain NYSDOT regional representatives (Region 8, I believe) stated that there was the perception -- albeit incorrect -- that there was a mandate to stop signing US routes in NY as US routes and to give them state shields. 

That was a little eye opening, since I always attributed it to sloppy specs or contractors (i.e., "The sign's got a number, what difference does the shape make?") rather than misunderstandings within NYSDOT.

How in the world would they come to that conclusion? Other than sheer stupidity?

With the crappy signage and marking jobs I've seen in R8, I can't say I'm surprised.

[Rothman]

At the recent conference that Vdeane and I attended, certain NYSDOT regional representatives (Region 8, I believe) stated that there was the perception -- albeit incorrect -- that there was a mandate to stop signing US routes in NY as US routes and to give them state shields. 

That was a little eye opening, since I always attributed it to sloppy specs or contractors (i.e., "The sign's got a number, what difference does the shape make?") rather than misunderstandings within NYSDOT.

How in the world would they come to that conclusion? Other than sheer stupidity?

At the conference, the presenter was just as confused as we all are when they brought up this idea in Q&A.  So, no one knows how they came up with the idea and they themselves just said that they heard that the order came down from management...which it didn't.

[1995hoo]

Stanley Roberts just tweeted this. It's near UCSF.