AARoads Forum

National Boards => General Highway Talk => Traffic Control => Topic started by: roadman65 on January 23, 2015, 12:29:49 PM

Title: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: roadman65 on January 23, 2015, 12:29:49 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Woodbridge+Township,+NJ/@40.54005,-74.297462,3a,37.5y,140.74h,82.66t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sRPLssxwC1cyRP2A8U9MQxw!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89c3b5b758c6349b:0x938c0e659e3a78da
This one here(located below the green sign on the brown face) lets motorists entering the NJ Turnpike from Exit 11 to use Exit 4 for the State Aquarium, however it does not say whether to go North or South on the Turnpike.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: roadman on January 23, 2015, 01:22:24 PM
Why are they even posting for the State Aquarium at Exit 11 in the first place?  That to me is the real issue here - overuse and indiscriminate use of unnecessary signing.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: NE2 on January 23, 2015, 01:27:14 PM
Did the NJ Turnpike originally use signs that said EXITS 1-10 and EXITS 12-18 instead of just south and north?
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 23, 2015, 01:28:41 PM
When the Camden Aquarium first opened I believe the state funded it or operated it, so signs went up all over the state for it. 

As for the GSV, pan to the left, and all the signs say is 'North' & 'South'.  If your destination was Exit 2 or Exit 12, you still wouldn't have any idea where to go.

Quote from: NE2 on January 23, 2015, 01:27:14 PM
Did the NJ Turnpike originally use signs that said EXITS 1-10 and EXITS 12-18 instead of just south and north?

I don't recall seeing them.  The PA Turnpike had them though.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: Pink Jazz on January 23, 2015, 03:20:19 PM
I would think a separate ATTRACTION logo sign with the aquarium's logo would be better than a brown sign from such a distance.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: roadman65 on January 23, 2015, 03:46:27 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 23, 2015, 01:22:24 PM
Why are they even posting for the State Aquarium at Exit 11 in the first place?  That to me is the real issue here - overuse and indiscriminate use of unnecessary signing.
I believe there are signs on the NB GSP at I-195 in Wall Township also mentioning the attraction as well.  There it is even more broader as it did say "At Camden" in a separate sign beneath the main sign.  No mention  at all to use I-195 West to the SB NJT or even SB I-295 which is even more direct to Camden from I-195 than the turnpike is.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: SidS1045 on January 23, 2015, 04:23:31 PM
The most annoying sign ever:  THRUWAY.

OK if you're a local and know where you're going.  Otherwise...
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: 1995hoo on January 23, 2015, 04:55:30 PM
I remember when I growing up there were pull-through signs on northbound I-81 that used a control point of simply "Canada." I remember thinking even as a kid that they were utterly vague and unspecific because Canada's a big place. I suppose there's nowhere of note in reasonable proximity on the other side of the border there, though.

I don't know whether those signs are still there because the only time I've been on that segment in the past 20 years was a southbound trip coming home from Mont-Tremblant and Ottawa.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: roadman65 on January 23, 2015, 04:57:53 PM
When I was there back in 12, some of the ramp signs in the Watertown area still had Canada as control point for I-81 N Bound.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: 1995hoo on January 23, 2015, 04:58:54 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 23, 2015, 04:57:53 PM
When I was there back in 12, some of the ramp signs in the Watertown area still had Canada as control point for I-81 N Bound.

I thought about clicking through Street View but quickly decided it'd take forever and isn't worth the trouble. I assume vdeane probably knows whether they're still there.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: Pete from Boston on January 23, 2015, 05:20:29 PM
"Canada" was still around in Watertown, N.Y., last time I was there.  It pops up a lot in northern Vermont. 

I felt this dumbed-down vagueness reflected poorly on our awareness beyond our borders until the last time I was heading for I-89 from Montréal and ended up on A-15 instead of A-10 because the latter is signed "U.S.A."
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: NE2 on January 23, 2015, 05:29:26 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fma%2Fi-90%2Farrow.jpg&hash=b96807976a85f5276efdcce4b5a140f8b38f17cc)
from http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/ma/i-90/

Thread over.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: roadman on January 23, 2015, 05:59:30 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 23, 2015, 05:29:26 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fma%2Fi-90%2Farrow.jpg&hash=b96807976a85f5276efdcce4b5a140f8b38f17cc)
from http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/ma/i-90/

Thread over.
+ 1 million for that post.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: roadman65 on January 23, 2015, 06:10:34 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 23, 2015, 05:59:30 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 23, 2015, 05:29:26 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fma%2Fi-90%2Farrow.jpg&hash=b96807976a85f5276efdcce4b5a140f8b38f17cc)
from http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/ma/i-90/

Thread over.
+ 1 million for that post.
Obviously you cannot get more broader than that.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: Zeffy on January 23, 2015, 06:14:17 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 23, 2015, 05:29:26 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fma%2Fi-90%2Farrow.jpg&hash=b96807976a85f5276efdcce4b5a140f8b38f17cc)
from http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/ma/i-90/

Thread over.

I'm inclined to think that nothing is topping this. No way.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: 1995hoo on January 23, 2015, 06:40:05 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 23, 2015, 05:29:26 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fma%2Fi-90%2Farrow.jpg&hash=b96807976a85f5276efdcce4b5a140f8b38f17cc)
from http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/ma/i-90/

Thread over.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Outstanding find. Thanks for the Friday afternoon laugh.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: vdeane on January 23, 2015, 11:06:40 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 23, 2015, 04:58:54 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 23, 2015, 04:57:53 PM
When I was there back in 12, some of the ramp signs in the Watertown area still had Canada as control point for I-81 N Bound.

I thought about clicking through Street View but quickly decided it'd take forever and isn't worth the trouble. I assume vdeane probably knows whether they're still there.
Still around when I went through there and I'm not aware of any sign rehabs, but I don't have the chance to get up to Region 7 nearly as often since I graduated.  There's not much in the way of street view past NY 12; just some of the old bad imagery southbound, but the youtube user roadwaywizwny has real time videos of I-81.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: kendancy66 on January 23, 2015, 11:25:07 PM
I noticed that in word points the button copy O looks like most of the buttons are missing and the letter is about too fall off. Is there some reason that particular letter has that problem. Of all the button copy sings with that kind of defect it seems like O is the letter with that problem
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: machias on January 23, 2015, 11:40:50 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on January 23, 2015, 04:23:31 PM
The most annoying sign ever:  THRUWAY.

OK if you're a local and know where you're going.  Otherwise...

About 10 years ago NYSDOT Region 3 and I had a long discussion about signs that just said "Thruway" for the interchanges in the Syracuse area. The logic was that the Thruway was the destination and the motorist would see additional destinations once they were through the toll booth. I countered that people would not be happy if every interchange was just signed with the route number and about a year later new signs appeared with the control destinations of Albany and Buffalo.

Originally I-81 signed the interchange as (90) (Thruway shield) "Thruway". When the interchange was rebuilt around 1983 or so, they went with (90) Thruway. They'll eventually have all signs in the area showing "Albany - Buffalo".

It doesn't bother me as much when you're entering the Thruway from a two-lane road, but for interstate to interstate connections there definitely should be control destinations.

I'm eager to see what Region 2 does when they replace the button copy "To 90" signs (with nothing else on them) from 1989.

As far as "Canada", I think that's too broad as well, but I don't know what you'd put on the signs along I-81... Kingston? Ottawa? I-81 basically takes you the Canadian border and then you have to figure out where you want to go from there.  I think Canada does the job.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: Pete from Boston on January 24, 2015, 09:07:51 AM
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7424/9045044346_64fcf612ed_z.jpg)
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: TEG24601 on January 24, 2015, 10:35:15 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 23, 2015, 12:29:49 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Woodbridge+Township,+NJ/@40.54005,-74.297462,3a,37.5y,140.74h,82.66t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sRPLssxwC1cyRP2A8U9MQxw!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89c3b5b758c6349b:0x938c0e659e3a78da (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Woodbridge+Township,+NJ/@40.54005,-74.297462,3a,37.5y,140.74h,82.66t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sRPLssxwC1cyRP2A8U9MQxw!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89c3b5b758c6349b:0x938c0e659e3a78da)
This one here(located below the green sign on the brown face) lets motorists entering the NJ Turnpike from Exit 11 to use Exit 4 for the State Aquarium, however it does not say whether to go North or South on the Turnpike.


Since the sign is on the right, I would assume that you need to go North (as that is the right hand exit/through lanes).  If you needed to go South, that sign should be on the Left. - And now that I have checked the map, it tells me that whomever erected that sign is an idiot.  If they aren't going to add anymore information is should be on the Left, since you need to go South to reach exit 4, or it should actually be a reassurance sign on the Southbound ramp.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: Zeffy on January 24, 2015, 10:44:13 AM
Quote from: TEG24601 on January 24, 2015, 10:35:15 AM
Since the sign is on the right, I would assume that you need to go North (as that is the right hand exit/through lanes).  If you needed to go South, that sign should be on the Left. - And now that I have checked the map, it tells me that whomever erected that sign is an idiot.  If they aren't going to add anymore information is should be on the Left, since you need to go South to reach exit 4, or it should actually be a reassurance sign on the Southbound ramp.

The only reasoning I could have is that the Turnpike Authority assumed people would know to go south since Camden (where the Aquarium is located) is located south of Woodbridge (where this gantry is). But still, not everyone is a local.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: txstateends on January 24, 2015, 01:01:18 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on January 24, 2015, 09:07:51 AM
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7424/9045044346_64fcf612ed_z.jpg)

I guess they'll never have the chance to be more specific since all the stores are gone now.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: txstateends on January 24, 2015, 01:15:28 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on January 23, 2015, 11:40:50 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on January 23, 2015, 04:23:31 PM
The most annoying sign ever:  THRUWAY.

OK if you're a local and know where you're going.  Otherwise...

About 10 years ago NYSDOT Region 3 and I had a long discussion about signs that just said "Thruway" for the interchanges in the Syracuse area. The logic was that the Thruway was the destination and the motorist would see additional destinations once they were through the toll booth. I countered that people would not be happy if every interchange was just signed with the route number and about a year later new signs appeared with the control destinations of Albany and Buffalo.

Originally I-81 signed the interchange as (90) (Thruway shield) "Thruway". When the interchange was rebuilt around 1983 or so, they went with (90) Thruway. They'll eventually have all signs in the area showing "Albany - Buffalo".

This reminds me of how approaches used to be signed for the DFW Turnpike and the Dallas N. Tollway.  On signs SB on I-35E and on signs leading west out of downtown Dallas, they would sign the DFW Turnpike as simply "Turnpike"--no specifics, no shield.  I guess they thought that there was only one Turnpike in the area, why be more specific?  Same with the Dallas N. Tollway; the NB exit to it from I-35E as well exits each way to it from I-635, all had "Tollway" (nothing more, except for arrows and directions) on the BGSes.  To my knowledge, the approaches to the DFW Turnpike never were more specific than "Turnpike", but fortunately, all the BGSes referencing the Dallas N. Tollway now say it in full.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: Pete from Boston on January 24, 2015, 02:32:54 PM

Quote from: txstateends on January 24, 2015, 01:01:18 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on January 24, 2015, 09:07:51 AM
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7424/9045044346_64fcf612ed_z.jpg)

I guess they'll never have the chance to be more specific since all the stores are gone now.

Admittedly, I stole this joke from Eugene Mirman, who suggested that being more specific might have been a good idea in retrospect. 
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: roadman65 on January 24, 2015, 04:17:31 PM
Quote from: TEG24601 on January 24, 2015, 10:35:15 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 23, 2015, 12:29:49 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Woodbridge+Township,+NJ/@40.54005,-74.297462,3a,37.5y,140.74h,82.66t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sRPLssxwC1cyRP2A8U9MQxw!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89c3b5b758c6349b:0x938c0e659e3a78da (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Woodbridge+Township,+NJ/@40.54005,-74.297462,3a,37.5y,140.74h,82.66t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sRPLssxwC1cyRP2A8U9MQxw!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89c3b5b758c6349b:0x938c0e659e3a78da)
This one here(located below the green sign on the brown face) lets motorists entering the NJ Turnpike from Exit 11 to use Exit 4 for the State Aquarium, however it does not say whether to go North or South on the Turnpike.


Since the sign is on the right, I would assume that you need to go North (as that is the right hand exit/through lanes).  If you needed to go South, that sign should be on the Left. - And now that I have checked the map, it tells me that whomever erected that sign is an idiot.  If they aren't going to add anymore information is should be on the Left, since you need to go South to reach exit 4, or it should actually be a reassurance sign on the Southbound ramp.
The problem with engineers in New Jersey is that they think everyone is local and knows where the relationships are between the exits.

Then you have the toll roads being destinations themselves.  Like it was mentioned about the NYS Thruway in Syracuse on I-81 using that logic before Buffalo and Albany were both introduced to the last sign upgrade.  If it were not for the MUTCD the "Parkway" would still have no control cities other than
"Shore Points" and "Cape May Ferry" at the big 129 split and of course from the ACE in Egg Harbor Township, as those signs are erected by the South Jersey Transportation Authority and not the NJTA or the now defunct NJHA.

Just as bridges and tunnels are considered valid destinations, so are the toll roads in the North-East as even Pennsylvania for decades used the PA Turnpike as a control point from connecting freeways besides NY, NJ, MA, and wherever.

As far as the person erecting that sign being an idiot, you are right.  It must be the same person who signed Winfield Park for SB Exit 136 who forgot to install a follow up sign later on as it requires a u turn through the Concord Street jughandle on CR 615 due to a left turn prohibition at the end of the ramp.  Also it could be the same idiot who signed NJ 82 West at Exit 139B without follow up signs on Chestnut St/ Stuyvesant Ave especially being direct lefts are prohibited onto NJ 82 from Stuyvesant Avenue in Downtown Union.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 24, 2015, 06:54:35 PM
There's a "Historic Site" Big Brown Sign somewhere along I-95, with the exit number, I believe in the Carolinas.  No, it doesn't specific the historic site.  It just says "Historic Site".
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: SignGeek101 on January 24, 2015, 08:01:18 PM
Any control city that says "Canada" or, on this side of the border: U.S.A.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: jbnv on January 24, 2015, 08:34:18 PM
"BEACH" (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.848577,-94.368536,3a,75y,210.34h,88.2t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sTURwa8l70Lkct4u4_ds-Jw!2e0?hl=en) (small blue sign at the bottom of the BGS)

"Casino Area" (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.196973,-93.241212,3a,37.5y,281.25h,84.64t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1ssRgNkl7wD4IuDVn_l5RlyQ!2e0?hl=en)
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: roadman65 on January 24, 2015, 08:56:42 PM
I used to hate (and I still do) when NYCDOT (and the NYSTA) use "New Jersey" as a control city when we do actually have cities, towns, townships, boroughs, and even villages with names that can be used.

I used to feel that other states have something against New Jersey that none of our cities made it onto highway guides on major freeways and some small signs, and especially on the PANYNJ crossings.

Now I am sort of relieved that the NYCDOT placed Newark or Trenton now on I-95 guide signs and pull through signs in NYC.  Also to the fact that Perth Amboy is (or was as NYCDOT did recently remove Jersey City from the I-278 guides at NY 440 NB) used on NY 440 SB near the Outerbridge Crossing.

Also to the fact that NJDOT does indeed use "Pennsylvania" on I-78 at Phillipsburg instead of "Easton" as PA, also, is one to use New Jersey on guide signs instead of places in it in many places.  What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

However, the NYSTA still uses "New Jersey" at Exits 13, 14A, and 15 for the PIP, GSP, and I-287 instead of the GWB for the PIP, Newark for the GSP, and of course Morristown for I-287 as that is what is used once inside New Jersey.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: Zeffy on January 24, 2015, 10:50:08 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 24, 2015, 08:56:42 PM
I used to feel that other states have something against New Jersey that none of our cities made it onto highway guides on major freeways and some small signs, and especially on the PANYNJ crossings.

Every state hates us.

Fuck them. There's something special about living in Jersey, and given the choice I wouldn't have it any other way.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: Pete from Boston on January 24, 2015, 11:09:33 PM

Quote from: Zeffy on January 24, 2015, 10:50:08 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 24, 2015, 08:56:42 PM
I used to feel that other states have something against New Jersey that none of our cities made it onto highway guides on major freeways and some small signs, and especially on the PANYNJ crossings.

Every state hates us.

That isn't true.  Some people in New Jersey have the idea that it's the most hated place in the universe, but after a lot of years away it just does not seem to be the case.  Far more people hate New York, California, Texas... hell, New Jersey has been a consistently marketable cultural commodity for years now.  They can't get enough damn movies and TV shows made featuring it to satisfy the demand.

There's a lot to say about New Jersey in some other thread, but for now let it suffice to say there is not this massive swell of hatred for the place out there.  That's inferiority complex bullshit that comes from New Jerseyans first and foremost.

–Jerseyman in exile
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: Takumi on January 24, 2015, 11:17:28 PM
Would a blank BGS be considered too broad? I have a photo of one somewhere...
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: Alex4897 on January 25, 2015, 10:06:16 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on January 24, 2015, 10:50:08 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 24, 2015, 08:56:42 PM
I used to feel that other states have something against New Jersey that none of our cities made it onto highway guides on major freeways and some small signs, and especially on the PANYNJ crossings.

Every state hates us.

Fuck them. There's something special about living in Jersey, and given the choice I wouldn't have it any other way.

At least you get mentioned, Delaware gets the shaft more often than not.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: xcellntbuy on January 25, 2015, 01:53:52 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 23, 2015, 05:29:26 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fma%2Fi-90%2Farrow.jpg&hash=b96807976a85f5276efdcce4b5a140f8b38f17cc)
from http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/ma/i-90/

Thread over.
I remember those signs from long, long ago.  It may have been most appropriate from West Stockbridge, MA at the still partial interchange with MA 41.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: jwolfer on January 25, 2015, 03:31:08 PM
Quote from: Alex4897 on January 25, 2015, 10:06:16 AM
Quote from: Zeffy on January 24, 2015, 10:50:08 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 24, 2015, 08:56:42 PM
I used to feel that other states have something against New Jersey that none of our cities made it onto highway guides on major freeways and some small signs, and especially on the PANYNJ crossings.

Every state hates us.

Fuck them. There's something special about living in Jersey, and given the choice I wouldn't have it any other way.

At least you get mentioned, Delaware gets the shaft more often than not.
Delaware is that even a state?
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: jwolfer on January 25, 2015, 03:42:35 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on January 24, 2015, 11:09:33 PM

Quote from: Zeffy on January 24, 2015, 10:50:08 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 24, 2015, 08:56:42 PM
I used to feel that other states have something against New Jersey that none of our cities made it onto highway guides on major freeways and some small signs, and especially on the PANYNJ crossings.

Every state hates us.

That isn't true.  Some people in New Jersey have the idea that it's the most hated place in the universe, but after a lot of years away it just does not seem to be the case.  Far more people hate New York, California, Texas... hell, New Jersey has been a consistently marketable cultural commodity for years now.  They can't get enough damn movies and TV shows made featuring it to satisfy the demand.

There's a lot to say about New Jersey in some other thread, but for now let it suffice to say there is not this massive swell of hatred for the place out there.  That's inferiority complex bullshit that comes from New Jerseyans first and foremost.

–Jerseyman in exile
New Jersey is so fractured in municipal governments. Everywhere is its own city/township/borough. Cities that would have annexed adjacent areas in other states saw those adjacent areas become their own government. Most of New Jersey is suburbs of New York or Philadelphia and lives in the shadow of those cities. Newark and Camden in another location without NYC/Philadelphia nearby would be the centers of a major metro area.

No city is really large enough to be a control city. Cross country traffic on i80 or the NJTP is not going to Paterson or Newark. Atlantic City is the closest to being a control city for out of state. Its far enough away from Philadelphia or NYC to not be engulfed in suburbs.

And this us from a native of New Jersey. I was born and raised in Point Pleasant.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: NE2 on January 25, 2015, 03:55:03 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on January 25, 2015, 03:42:35 PM
New Jersey is so fractured in municipal governments. Everywhere is its own city/township/borough. Cities that would have annexed adjacent areas in other states saw those adjacent areas become their own government.
What other states? Kentucky? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jefferson_County_KY_places.svg) Each of those little colored areas is its own city.
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: jwolfer on January 25, 2015, 04:03:56 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 25, 2015, 03:55:03 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on January 25, 2015, 03:42:35 PM
New Jersey is so fractured in municipal governments. Everywhere is its own city/township/borough. Cities that would have annexed adjacent areas in other states saw those adjacent areas become their own government.
What other states? Kentucky? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jefferson_County_KY_places.svg) Each of those little colored areas is its own city.
Most of the south and west. But really its more of a factor of proximity to large cities. New jersey is very much about home rule. People get upset if you say "you live in Pt Pleasant.. No I live in Pt Pleasant Beach!" Its the sane all over.. Some has to do with 600+ school districts and 500+ municipalities
Title: Re: Signs that are too broad and could be more specific
Post by: TEG24601 on January 25, 2015, 04:48:19 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on January 24, 2015, 08:01:18 PM
Any control city that says "Canada" or, on this side of the border: U.S.A.


Which makes me glad WSDOT did something right, and has all the control cities North of Seattle set as "Vancouver, B.C.".


On this same vein, how about those signs that just say "City Center" or "Downtown", with no city stated.  The exit for I-475 off of I-75 near Flint for years just said "DOWNTOWN".


I would also like to include those signs than mention a street name or a highway number with no city attached.  Often you don't know what city you are in when driving, especially when the cities are jammed up against each other.  There are also several that bother me because they give you the name of the street/road that crosses a freeway, but doesn't mention that the road changes names 1000 yards to the west, 128th St. SW in Everett is a good example, it becomes Airport Road, and turns northward about 1000 yards west of I-5, and Airport Road is a major access road to Boeing's Paine Field from the South, but no mention.