City names written in the road for guidance

[jakeroot]

Not sure how common this is outside of the UK.

Leading up to a roundabout in Gig Harbor, WA, the pavement markings for each lane say exactly which lanes goes to which destination (City *Center, Tac(oma), Brem(erton)):

[NoGoodNamesAvailable]

Not sure how common this is outside of the UK.

Leading up to a roundabout in Gig Harbor, WA, the pavement markings for each lane say exactly which lanes goes to which destination (City *Center, Tac(oma), Brem(erton)):

It bothers me that they wrote CITY CENTRE in the backwards/European style but BREM ONLY in the typical North American style.

With how "centre" is spelled you'd think the designer copied british plans for intersection markings wholesale. With how famously bad civil engineers are at spelling, it wouldn't surprise me if they had no idea it was nonstandard. I have noticed the "centre" spelling starting to creep into AmE though, enough to make Webster turn in his grave.

[jakeroot]

It bothers me that they wrote CITY CENTRE in the backwards/European style but BREM ONLY in the typical North American style.

With how "centre" is spelled you'd think the designer copied british plans for intersection markings wholesale. Although the "centre" spelling has been creeping into AmE lately, enough to make Webster turn in his grave.

I noticed that as well. I prefer the "backwards" style myself when the text is close together. I think the "right only" message above "BREM" was put in place after the fact, which is why it's backwards compared to the "CITY CENTRE" message.

My first thread on this website was actually on then spelling of that message. Turns out, the engineer that was responsible for the roundabout markings was English, so he decided that the message was to be written in BrE. His heritage may very well have been why city names were used for the destinations (very UK-thing to do), and why it was written top-to-bottom.

[jamess]

"only Brem" makes as much, if not more sense than "Brem Only"

[nexus73]

Having seen several route number designators placed on freeway pavement during a trip to Memphis TN and back to Oregon in 2017, I found looking at them awkward as I prefer to keep my eyes focused further down the freeway.  Overhead BGS's work much better for driving safely IMO.

Rick

[jakeroot]

Actually I said that pavement markings are awkward.  Anything that forces me to look down instead of out when driving is a hazard IMO.

The markings in my example are there to help you choose a lane at an intersection (in addition to the sign just out of view).

The idea with pavement markings is not for you to look "down" on them. They're meant to be viewed from a distance, so that you can act upon them when you arrive at them. In this case, two lanes splitting to three, with proper lane choice being extremely important as lane changes are not permitted within the roundabout. Note that looking at the above image from a distance (example below), they're as much in your "outward" vision as the roundabout itself...

[nexus73]

Actually I said that pavement markings are awkward.  Anything that forces me to look down instead of out when driving is a hazard IMO.

The markings in my example are there to help you choose a lane at an intersection (in addition to the sign just out of view).

The idea with pavement markings is not for you to look "down" on them. They're meant to be viewed from a distance, so that you can act upon them when you arrive at them. In this case, two lanes splitting to three, with proper lane choice being extremely important as lane changes are not permitted within the roundabout. Note that looking at the above image from a distance (example below), they're as much in your "outward" vision as the roundabout itself...

Well, all I can say is your eyes work different than mine.  Printing anything on pavement for me means not seeing it until I am close to that printing.  A BGS lets me see my lane assignment from a much farther distance assuming the sign is properly placed and marked.  YMMV.

Rick

[billpa]

I think they're a great idea and I would like to see more of it in North America.

I don't get the argument that a driver would be forced to look at the ground. 
First of all, the idea is to combine words on the pavement with signs on the side of or above the road- not replace the signs.
Secondly, a lot of states don't use 'Big' green signs at intersections, they use little ones that are not always easy to read when you're also trying to work out which lane you need to be in.
Also, the idea that you can't look down because it's somehow dangerous (I 'guess' that's the argument) seems a bit silly since we're always looking at the road to see stripes and lines.

[nexus73]

I think they're a great idea and I would like to see more of it in North America.

I don't get the argument that a driver would be forced to look at the ground. 
First of all, the idea is to combine words on the pavement with signs on the side of or above the road- not replace the signs.
Secondly, a lot of states don't use 'Big' green signs at intersections, they use little ones that are not always easy to read when you're also trying to work out which lane you need to be in.
Also, the idea that you can't look down because it's somehow dangerous (I 'guess' that's the argument) seems a bit silly since we're always looking at the road to see stripes and lines.

If you want to see something on the ground you need to look at the ground.  If I was your driver ed teacher, you would learn how to look at the world past your windshield in a much different way than you do.  The most visual information one can gather is what is in the distance.  That is where you are driving to after all!  Short of something coming from the side, what you saw out there will in very short order be right in front of you.  If there were no obstacles, hazards, changes in the road and such, you are fine.  Just do not take your eyes off the prize because more road is being fed to you with each passing moment!

Rick

[jakeroot]

Just do not take your eyes off the prize because more road is being fed to you with each passing moment!

That's only half the job. You're not accounting for changes in the road between your car and "the prize".

You should always focus your eyes well ahead of your car (that's driver's ed 101 -- I hope you don't think you're the only one doing it), but you have to continually acknowledge what's directly in front of you to account for changes between when you looked at point A, and when you arrived at point A. If you only look out, you're going to miss all sorts of things that might not have been visible from a distance: potholes, children or people running out, small animals, cars darting out, and so on. Never mind that you have to continually watch your mirrors too.

Even when you (Rick) are driving, you're acknowledging the pavement markings by staying within your lane, choosing the correct lane at an intersection, and so on. So I assume you don't have a problem with pavement markings in general? Just the smaller extra details?

I do find it strange that you so strongly prefer signs, since those often require you to look away from the road. Just look at my above image. The advanced roundabout sign requires you to look towards the shoulder. At least the city names are written directly in front of you. Plus, we're approaching a roundabout in the image above. You can't look way out when approaching these, as they require up-to-the-second care and attention to ensure proper yielding, lane choice, etc.

[nexus73]

Just do not take your eyes off the prize because more road is being fed to you with each passing moment!

That's only half the job. You're not accounting for changes in the road between your car and "the prize".

You should always focus your eyes well ahead of your car (that's driver's ed 101 -- I hope you don't think you're the only one doing it), but you have to continually acknowledge what's directly in front of you to account for changes between when you looked at point A, and when you arrived at point A. If you only look out, you're going to miss all sorts of things that might not have been visible from a distance: potholes, children or people running out, small animals, cars darting out, and so on. Never mind that you have to continually watch your mirrors too.

Even when you (Rick) are driving, you're acknowledging the pavement markings by staying within your lane, choosing the correct lane at an intersection, and so on. So I assume you don't have a problem with pavement markings in general? Just the smaller extra details?

I do find it strange that you so strongly prefer signs, since those often require you to look away from the road. Just look at my above image. The advanced roundabout sign requires you to look towards the shoulder. At least the city names are written directly in front of you. Plus, we're approaching a roundabout in the image above. You can't look way out when approaching these, as they require up-to-the-second care and attention to ensure proper yielding, lane choice, etc.

Anything that can come from the side is obviously very important.  Some things are easily seen in the distance and can be accommodated.  Those are the easy ones.  Over here the danger comes from what literally leaps out of nowhere.  We have a four letter word for those: DEER.  Drive in Oregon and you will see plenty of Deer Crossing signs but do the deer read the signs?  Of course not...LOL!

Slow Children is another sign that shows up sometimes.  Oh if only those children were slow!  They can leap like a deer right into the path of a vehicle.  Hazards like this on a highway are rare.  City streets is where one encounters them most of the time.  Geez, can you imagine the world if children really were told to go play in the middle of the freeway and did so?  Horrific hilarity would ensue!

How to perceive pavement markings: These are continuous for the most part.  On occasion some road work or bigtime fading wipes out the lane markings but it is very easy to "connect the dots" when driving on the highway during the day so one does maintain proper lane position.  At night is when conditions changing is much more dangerous.  What were bright glowing dots and well-lit lines suddenly becoming a visual black hole, especially where curves are, can leave one in the lurch.  If you know your road well, that helps so long as additional hazards are not present.  Drive on a road one does not know well and now it is random rollin' time.  Yikes!

You must look at signs much differently than I do.  You do not have as fast a thought process as I do for processing visual information apparently.  I know how to view a visually complex environment and react with instinct, which I do quite well.  Maybe someone needs to teach you how to grasp the view.  Maybe it is beyond the capacity of your brain to do so. With perception and processing of what is seen being so different from person to person, then adding in how you are describing how you are seeing what you see, you might wish to be extra cautious and slow going in your driving.  Heck, even when one is an expert driver, those are still good words of advice to heed.  Do not exceed one's ability to handle the situation. 

Some of us have driven various vehicles commercially.  Some of us have driven various vehicles recreationally.  Some of us just "daily drive".  Some of us have very good brain wiring. Some of us have exceptional eyesight.  Some of us are distracted.  Some of us are tired.  Some of us have visual impairments to deal with and from various sources.  There is a complex mix of factors that go into the operation of vehicles.  That is just for one person.

Now let's put 200 million of us on da' road and see what happens!

Rick

[kphoger]

I've seen this in Mexico.

[djsekani]

Weird conversation. What is a driver supposed to be watching if they're not watching the road?

[Revive 755]

I thought I saw this done on an interstate somewhere in the Midwest, but I cannot find it on Google.

[jakeroot]

I thought I saw this done on an interstate somewhere in the Midwest, but I cannot find it on Google.

It seems to be less common than I thought it may have been.

[mrsman]

I thought I saw this done on an interstate somewhere in the Midwest, but I cannot find it on Google.

It seems to be less common than I thought it may have been.

Street names and highway numbers are far more common then destination cities on pavement, at least in the US.

[jakeroot]

I thought I saw this done on an interstate somewhere in the Midwest, but I cannot find it on Google.

It seems to be less common than I thought it may have been.

Street names and highway numbers are far more common then destination cities on pavement, at least in the US.

For sure. But I thought that there might be a few examples of non-numbered side roads using destination text instead of street numbers or something, especially at complex roundabouts or something similar (like my example).

[kphoger]

I've seen this in Mexico.

Well, I suppose I should actually link to some I've seen, huh?

'MONTERREY', kind of faded on the most recent GSV, in Saltillo.

'MONCLOVA' on the Monterrey—Saltillo toll road.

[jakeroot]

I've seen this in Mexico.

Well, I suppose I should actually link to some I've seen, huh?

I trusted you!

Cool examples, though, especially that Monterrey one. Only seen that double/triple-wide message for "SCHOOL" messages myself.

[formulanone]

Found an example of this last month when leaving Austin-Bergstrom International Airport:

[jakeroot]

Found an example of this last month when leaving Austin-Bergstrom International Airport:

Sweet! Nice find! I suppose airports probably would be a popular place to install such guidance markings, given how confusing some of them can be. Especially helpful for foreign visitors too, as they may need a while before they become accustomed to our route guidance customs (we can at least give them a helping hand getting out of the rental car lot).

[ilpt4u]

US 51 South, approaching the Cairo, IL Ohio and Mississippi River Bridges and US 60/62, paints the Left turn lane as "KY ONLY *left arrow*"  and the Straight ahead lane as "MO ONLY *straight arrow*"

https://goo.gl/maps/ZUcpdUMaqDHgZ46X6

Not city names - just state Postal abbreviations

[jakeroot]

US 51 South, approaching the Cairo, IL Ohio and Mississippi River Bridges and US 60/62, paints the Left turn lane as "KY ONLY *left arrow*"  and the Straight ahead lane as "MO ONLY *straight arrow*"

https://goo.gl/maps/ZUcpdUMaqDHgZ46X6

Not city names - just state Postal abbreviations

Good enough to count!

[Scott5114]

Sweet! Nice find! I suppose airports probably would be a popular place to install such guidance markings, given how confusing some of them can be.

Most airports seem to only be confusing because for whatever reason they refuse to use standard MUTCD signage and marking solutions and try to half-assedly reinvent the wheel, leading to ambiguity.

[jakeroot]

Few airports use much of any standard that resemble MUTCD guidelines; all sorts of fonts, logos, colors, borders, shapes, and arrows are possible...

One of the best airports for signage, in my opinion, has to be SeaTac airport near Seattle (KSEA). The signage is entirely in Clearview, even the negative contrast text (and is pretty much the only place in WA where you can find Clearview), but the sign layouts and colors are all MUTCD-compliant. Including things like yellow "only" tabs and MUTCD-spec 45/30-degree arrows.