News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Erroneous road signs

Started by FLRoads, January 20, 2009, 04:01:44 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

kphoger

Quote from: jakeroot on December 18, 2018, 04:48:42 PM
Kind of makes me wonder why more states don't have rules where everything is automatically a state route, even if it says "US" or "INTERSTATE".

For example, that US-79 example in TN would be WA-79 in WA, even if the shields all say "US". Everything is basically a hidden state route (I-5 is WA-5, US-2 is WA-2, etc). So, in a sense, there is no way to mix up "SR" and "US" or "I", since legally, "SR" is always correct at the most basic level.

That would prevent the state from duplicating numbers across different highway classifications.  I really don't think Cicero Avenue in Chicago should be renumbered just because of the existence of US-50 more than 150 miles south of Kankakee.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.


jakeroot

Quote from: kphoger on December 19, 2018, 02:59:50 PM
That would prevent the state from duplicating numbers across different highway classifications. I really don't think Cicero Avenue in Chicago should be renumbered just because of the existence of US-50 more than 150 miles south of Kankakee

I don't see why this is ever desirable, even if duplicate route numbers are miles apart.

Why does Cicero Ave have to have a "route 50" designation?

The way the UK does it, I can sort of understand. It's one route, with one number. It can either be (for example) "A3", "M3", or "A3(M)", depending on the road, but it's still a single line on a map. That's not the case in some US states, where there could be three of the same route numbers, without any connection between them. Needlessly confusing when there's literally thousands of options for numbers...you just have to avoid the one's designated for interstates and US routes.

Is there really a chance for confusion? Maybe, maybe not. Depends on how close the routes are to each other. I seem to recall some pretty bad examples in LA and NC. Regardless, it's best to just not allow it. Don't let people confuse "route X" for "US X" or "I-X". Just make everything "route X" with a fancy shield if need-be.

kphoger

Quote from: jakeroot on December 19, 2018, 03:18:59 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 19, 2018, 02:59:50 PM
That would prevent the state from duplicating numbers across different highway classifications. I really don't think Cicero Avenue in Chicago should be renumbered just because of the existence of US-50 more than 150 miles south of Kankakee

I don't see why this is ever desirable, even if duplicate route numbers are miles apart.

Why does Cicero Ave have to have a "route 50" designation?

I don't see why it's undesirable.

One reason it might be desirable is to use as many lower numbers as possible, as those are arguably easier for people to read and remember.  No sense in using larger numbers when there are smaller numbers going unused.

Take, for example, MO-49.  No chance in hell it could ever be mistaken for I-49, yet you'd have the state write legislation to change the route number, the highway department put up new signage, residents and businesses change their address, etc, etc...  All for what gain?
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

apeman33

#4403
Posted either sometime this morning or very early afternoon, the perhaps first-ever documentation of a white sunflower shield.

kphoger

Quote from: apeman33 on December 19, 2018, 04:29:15 PM
Posted either sometime this morning or very early afternoon, the perhaps first-ever documentation of a white sunflower shield.


This should probably have been posted in the "Signs with Design Errors" thread, but...

Do you know if any of the other approaches have similar white sunflowers?  I'll be passing through that junction in a few days.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

US 89

Quote from: kphoger on December 19, 2018, 02:59:50 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 18, 2018, 04:48:42 PM
Kind of makes me wonder why more states don't have rules where everything is automatically a state route, even if it says "US" or "INTERSTATE".

For example, that US-79 example in TN would be WA-79 in WA, even if the shields all say "US". Everything is basically a hidden state route (I-5 is WA-5, US-2 is WA-2, etc). So, in a sense, there is no way to mix up "SR" and "US" or "I", since legally, "SR" is always correct at the most basic level.

That would prevent the state from duplicating numbers across different highway classifications.  I really don't think Cicero Avenue in Chicago should be renumbered just because of the existence of US-50 more than 150 miles south of Kankakee.

When Utah changed to its modern system in 1977, it renumbered SR-50 to SR-26 simply due to the existence of US-50 200 miles to the south. Of course, it should be noted that there were several examples from that renumbering that were far more confusing: SR-15 actually intersected I-15, as did I-84 and SR-84 (which actually was largely a parallel route to I-15/84).

As it is today, I see no problem with Utah's system. Under the old system, you could have one US highway falling under multiple legislative designations (as an example, the independent portions of US-89 were officially a combination of SR-259, 11, 258, 118, 24, 28, 32, 8, 271, 169, 49, 50, 84, 13, and 16 before 1977). And to make it more complicated, lots of those routes had independent portions signed as such that weren't part of a legislative designation.

Instead of a situation like the one above, every independent segment of US-89 is now simply designated SR-89. Keeps things much simpler.

jakeroot

#4406
Quote from: kphoger on December 19, 2018, 04:27:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 19, 2018, 03:18:59 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 19, 2018, 02:59:50 PM
That would prevent the state from duplicating numbers across different highway classifications. I really don't think Cicero Avenue in Chicago should be renumbered just because of the existence of US-50 more than 150 miles south of Kankakee

I don't see why this is ever desirable, even if duplicate route numbers are miles apart.

Why does Cicero Ave have to have a "route 50" designation?

I don't see why it's undesirable.

One reason it might be desirable is to use as many lower numbers as possible, as those are arguably easier for people to read and remember.  No sense in using larger numbers when there are smaller numbers going unused.

Take, for example, MO-49.  No chance in hell it could ever be mistaken for I-49, yet you'd have the state write legislation to change the route number, the highway department put up new signage, residents and businesses change their address, etc, etc...  All for what gain?

(had to give this a bit of thought, because you make good points)

If a state currently does not use a system like Utah or Washington, where all routes are legislatively state routes, I can see why conversion to this style might not be worth the change. When CA and WA adopted this numbering style in 1964 (OR chose not to), the state highway networks were still expanding (making it the best time for a numbering change). It made sense at the time to reduce the chance of confusion for drivers, especially if the state's grid aligned too closely with the national grid, and to simplify route numbering for legislative purposes (to avoid having to use hidden or duplicate routes, a la FL or AL, to keep track of routes for maintenance, etc).

Using WA as an example, if I understand WA route numbering correctly, "SR 5" (if it weren't assigned to I-5) would have been very close to I-5, perhaps even overlapping it, due to how our grid aligns with the Interstate grid. Back in 1967, when US-12 was expanded into WA, it aligned almost exactly with existing SR-12, which (I believe) was then renumbered to SR-14, or SR-14 was expanded to cover former sections of SR-12...not sure which.

From a purely colloquial point of view, states like WA, CA, and UT get to say "route X" without having to specify further. Here in WA, using the term "US" is rather unusual; we tend to prefer "Highway" (so, "Highway 2" or "Highway 12"). The nice thing is, we're not even wrong saying that, since US-2 and US-12 are legally state highways with fancy shields. Does this make a huge difference long term? Perhaps. I guess, in the eyes of 60s/70s lawmakers, the change to the "federal route as state route" style of numbering seemed to make more sense in almost everyone's point of view.

EDIT: forgot to mention. Here in Seattle, we have our "500 series" freeways. It's possible this numbering style was chosen so that "5xx" usually meant freeway or very important Seattle-area route, because our numbering style does sometimes eliminate the ability to use lower numbers. That said, not that many interstates or US routes exist in WA to begin with, so there's probably more to it than that. But that's an option for this style of numbering, to improve route number recognition when lower numbers are taken.

apeman33

Quote from: kphoger on December 19, 2018, 04:42:34 PM
Quote from: apeman33 on December 19, 2018, 04:29:15 PM
Posted either sometime this morning or very early afternoon, the perhaps first-ever documentation of a white sunflower shield.


This should probably have been posted in the "Signs with Design Errors" thread, but...

Do you know if any of the other approaches have similar white sunflowers?  I'll be passing through that junction in a few days.

I looked around. Just this one at the time. They appeared to still be in the process of installing signs, so there might be a possibility that they could have put up at least one other.

cjk374

Quote from: apeman33 on December 19, 2018, 04:29:15 PM
Posted either sometime this morning or very early afternoon, the perhaps first-ever documentation of a white sunflower shield.


This is hopefully not the beginning of KS shields losing their unique quality that makes it a KS shield....similar to LA losing the green from its state shields.
Runnin' roads and polishin' rails.

hbelkins

Quote from: kphoger on December 19, 2018, 04:27:11 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 19, 2018, 03:18:59 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 19, 2018, 02:59:50 PM
That would prevent the state from duplicating numbers across different highway classifications. I really don't think Cicero Avenue in Chicago should be renumbered just because of the existence of US-50 more than 150 miles south of Kankakee

I don't see why this is ever desirable, even if duplicate route numbers are miles apart.

Why does Cicero Ave have to have a "route 50" designation?

I don't see why it's undesirable.

One reason it might be desirable is to use as many lower numbers as possible, as those are arguably easier for people to read and remember.  No sense in using larger numbers when there are smaller numbers going unused.

Take, for example, MO-49.  No chance in hell it could ever be mistaken for I-49, yet you'd have the state write legislation to change the route number, the highway department put up new signage, residents and businesses change their address, etc, etc...  All for what gain?

I don't know if Kentucky has given any thought to changing the number of KY 69 because of the presence of I-69 in the state now. If so, it could be done here administratively, as route numbers are not written into statute.


Government would be tolerable if not for politicians and bureaucrats.

kphoger

Quote from: cjk374 on December 20, 2018, 06:50:34 AM
This is hopefully not the beginning of KS shields losing their unique quality that makes it a KS shield....similar to LA losing the green from its state shields.

Road construction signage variances should never be taken as indicative of actual future changes.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. DickIf you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

Mccojm

Found this error on wb ny-25a just east on ny-110 in Huntington.




iPhone
My expressed thoughts do not reflect those of NYSDOT, other associated agencies or firms.  Do not take anything I say as official unless it is released by said agencies.

NYSDOT R10 Long Island construction Group since 2013.

Scott5114

Quote from: kphoger on December 20, 2018, 12:26:52 PM
Quote from: cjk374 on December 20, 2018, 06:50:34 AM
This is hopefully not the beginning of KS shields losing their unique quality that makes it a KS shield....similar to LA losing the green from its state shields.

Road construction signage variances should never be taken as indicative of actual future changes.

It wouldn't make sense for Kansas to change to white. At least, not for the reasons Louisiana did.

Green Louisiana shields were made by printing with green ink on white sheeting. This green ink was more expensive, and tended to fade faster than black ink does. Thus, LaDOTD decided it was more economical to go to black and white.

K-shields are printed with black ink on yellow sheeting. They already have to have yellow sheeting around for warning signs, so it's not any more expensive than it would be to print on white, and they use the same black ink they use for warnings, US route shields, regulatory signs, etc. So the only reason Kansas would abandon the yellow sunflower is if they just thought it looked better. And that would be silly, because if a flower is white, it's not a sunflower.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

formulanone

Quote from: Mccojm on December 20, 2018, 02:46:15 PM
Found this error on wb ny-25a just east on ny-110 in Huntington.



On loan from West Virginia?

Brandon

Quote from: jakeroot on December 19, 2018, 03:18:59 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 19, 2018, 02:59:50 PM
That would prevent the state from duplicating numbers across different highway classifications. I really don't think Cicero Avenue in Chicago should be renumbered just because of the existence of US-50 more than 150 miles south of Kankakee

I don't see why this is ever desirable, even if duplicate route numbers are miles apart.

Why does Cicero Ave have to have a "route 50" designation?

Because it was designated as State Bond Issue (SBI) Route 50 prior to the US highway system being designated in Illinois.  It's also an entirely different route (as Illinois 50) than US-50 downstate.  No one would ever confuse the two.

Here's a closer example, M-96 and I-96 in Michigan.  Again, even though these are much closer together than the Illinois example (IL-50 and US-50), no one ever gets them confused as one is "M-96" and the other is "I-96" or "96".
"If you think this has a happy ending, you haven't been paying attention." - Ramsay Bolton

"Symbolic of his struggle against reality." - Reg

jakeroot

#4415
Quote from: Brandon on December 20, 2018, 05:12:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on December 19, 2018, 03:18:59 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 19, 2018, 02:59:50 PM
That would prevent the state from duplicating numbers across different highway classifications. I really don't think Cicero Avenue in Chicago should be renumbered just because of the existence of US-50 more than 150 miles south of Kankakee

I don't see why this is ever desirable, even if duplicate route numbers are miles apart.

Why does Cicero Ave have to have a "route 50" designation?

Because it was designated as State Bond Issue (SBI) Route 50 prior to the US highway system being designated in Illinois.  It's also an entirely different route (as Illinois 50) than US-50 downstate.  No one would ever confuse the two.

Here's a closer example, M-96 and I-96 in Michigan.  Again, even though these are much closer together than the Illinois example (IL-50 and US-50), no one ever gets them confused as one is "M-96" and the other is "I-96" or "96".

Read my post above, Brandon. And don't give people too much credit. I was just talking to somebody the other day who was confused by the existence of signals on the corners of intersections. People are really fucking stupid. WA (and other states) were in a position in the 1960s to overhaul their route number systems to eliminate even the slightest chance of confusion, but as states slow down highway construction, I see no reason to change things these days.

SectorZ

Quote from: formulanone on December 20, 2018, 05:00:43 PM
Quote from: Mccojm on December 20, 2018, 02:46:15 PM
Found this error on wb ny-25a just east on ny-110 in Huntington.



On loan from West Virginia?

Or pointing to Connecticut 110 across the sound.

ThatTenneseeRoadgeek


cjk374

Quote from: Scott5114 on December 20, 2018, 03:23:27 PM
Quote from: kphoger on December 20, 2018, 12:26:52 PM
Quote from: cjk374 on December 20, 2018, 06:50:34 AM
This is hopefully not the beginning of KS shields losing their unique quality that makes it a KS shield....similar to LA losing the green from its state shields.

Road construction signage variances should never be taken as indicative of actual future changes.

It wouldn't make sense for Kansas to change to white. At least, not for the reasons Louisiana did.

Green Louisiana shields were made by printing with green ink on white sheeting. This green ink was more expensive, and tended to fade faster than black ink does. Thus, LaDOTD decided it was more economical to go to black and white.

K-shields are printed with black ink on yellow sheeting. They already have to have yellow sheeting around for warning signs, so it's not any more expensive than it would be to print on white, and they use the same black ink they use for warnings, US route shields, regulatory signs, etc. So the only reason Kansas would abandon the yellow sunflower is if they just thought it looked better. And that would be silly, because if a flower is white, it's not a sunflower.

I have never seen a green Louisiana shield fade. Do you have pics of any?
Runnin' roads and polishin' rails.

Mr. Matté

This stop ahead sign along CR 534 in BurlCo, NJ states the stop sign is 857 feet. Not only is the distance an oddball amount, it's incorrect. The centerline distance to the stop bar is about 764 feet while the actual 857-foot measurement puts it past the intersection to the stop bar on the opposite side of the intersection.

roadman65

This assembly in Crestline, KS https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/47472796512/ has it showing both N Bound US 69 and E Bound US 160 going left and straight.  In reality both implied directions are straight and to the left is SB US 69 and WB US 160.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

1995hoo

"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

formulanone


1995hoo

Quote from: formulanone on May 07, 2019, 05:23:32 AM
Is Mt. Nuie in Hawaii?

Could be, but that particular reference is in Phoenix.
"You know, you never have a guaranteed spot until you have a spot guaranteed."
—Olaf Kolzig, as quoted in the Washington Times on March 28, 2003,
commenting on the Capitals clinching a playoff spot.

"That sounded stupid, didn't it?"
—Kolzig, to the same reporter a few seconds later.

WNYroadgeek

I think you've got the wrong 390 there, fellas: https://goo.gl/maps/QCrWRUSgbhsB61Mp6



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.