AARoads Forum

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.233841,-75.239124,3a,75y,204.37h,84.12t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sh1bHH9n_vHDvDUp-rzIAWw!2e0

Here is one that I find interesting.  The US 202 shield here gets an upward and right arrow along with SECOND RIGHT to help ease confusion with the road that is immeadiately to the right.  However, the control cities for US 202 are not the same here with its directional arrows as they are to the right.  The cities of Doylestown and Norristown were both not made to help aid motorists in the same manner as the shield.  You would think that the person at PennDOT who thought of the SECOND RIGHT sign for US 202, would do the same for its control cities.

I thought about placing this in erroneous signs thread, but I do not think this counts as erroneous as much as inconsistent.  Plus I know that this is starting to become more common where the shields and the directional control have not so consistent arrows, but this one with the added on SECOND RIGHT for one and not the other is rather somewhat interesting to discuss.

Honestly, I believe that person who thought of the SECOND RIGHT sign was thinking of the use of it covered the entire installation of signs, that everything above the SECOND RIGHT sign was covered by it and that motorists would understand that the way to get to the listed control cities would be by turning on US-202 at the second right and not by turning onto what appears to be a very minor road (driveway into a parking lot, perhaps)?  At least that's the way I would take that sign installation if I were actually driving up to it in my car.

Arkansas frequently uses advance turn arrows on green guide signs.

Signs for I-276 (PA Turnpike) eastbound:

Most if not all of them originally listed New Jersey as a control destination.  However, due to the MUTCDFHWA prohibition of state names as destinations (I disagree 100% with MUTCDFHWA on this one), some newer PennDOT installments use either Philadelphia (http://goo.gl/maps/N92sR) (which is totally wrong IMHO) or NJ Tpk - New York (http://goo.gl/maps/vPPdV) (one could argue whether the latter is either the state or the city). 

Ironically, nearly every recent replacement BGS along the Turnpike/NE Extension mainline (PTC installations) still the old-school New Jersey listing, MUTCDFHWA prohibition be damned.

Quote from: From Photo from Flyer78

Should push come to shove regarding state name destination prohibitions; using Bensalem as an I-276 East destination through Willow Grove (Exit 343 - PA 611) would be a logical compromise.  Between the Bensalem (Exit 351 - US 1) interchange and the future I-95 interchange; either Bristol, TO NJ Tpk or even New York could be used as I-276 eastbound control destinations.

Quote from: PHLBOS on March 16, 2015, 12:32:42 PM
Most if not all of them originally listed New Jersey as a control destination.  However, due to the MUTCD prohibition of state names as destinations (I disagree 100% with MUTCD on this one), some newer PennDOT installments use either Philadelphia (http://goo.gl/maps/N92sR) (which is totally wrong IMHO) or NJ Tpk - New York (http://goo.gl/maps/vPPdV) (one could argue whether the latter is either the state or the city). 

While all references in the MUTCD refer to destinations or control cities, there doesn't appear to be a specific prohibition against using state names as the control. Even the street name/control city separation is a guidance (not a standard).

Quote from: roadfro on March 17, 2015, 02:24:13 AM

Quote from: PHLBOS on March 16, 2015, 12:32:42 PM
Most if not all of them originally listed New Jersey as a control destination.  However, due to the MUTCDFHWA prohibition of state names as destinations (I disagree 100% with MUTCDFHWA on this one), some newer PennDOT installments use either Philadelphia (http://goo.gl/maps/N92sR) (which is totally wrong IMHO) or NJ Tpk - New York (http://goo.gl/maps/vPPdV) (one could argue whether the latter is either the state or the city). 

While all references in the MUTCD refer to destinations or control cities, there doesn't appear to be a specific prohibition against using state names as the control. Even the street name/control city separation is a guidance (not a standard).

If it's not directly from MUTCD; then it might beIt's a directive from either FHWA or AASHTO.  All I know is that there has been a very noticable shift from listing state names as destinations in recent years.  Somebody out can feel free to confirm/clarify.  Clarified by Roadman in the reply below.  All references in previous post have been modified/corrected as required.

Eliminating state names in favor of cities when signs are updated, at least in Massachusetts, was based on a directive from the regional FHWA office in the early 1990s.  I would presume that the regional office got their direction from DC.

^ The FHWA office for Illinois must not care, especially since "Iowa" has started appearing as a control for I-88 on side roads.

Iowa has been a control point even way down in south Louisiana:   :sombrero:  :pan: https://www.google.com/maps/@30.250628,-92.998589,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5KfMqhMsPH3KRnmTfZyXaA!2e0 (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.250628,-92.998589,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5KfMqhMsPH3KRnmTfZyXaA!2e0)

But in this case, it's a town that is pronounced "I-way".

^ Or, as Yogi Bear would pronounce it,  "Eye-Oh-Way!"

Quote from: Revive 755 on March 17, 2015, 10:27:24 PM
^ The FHWA office for Illinois must not care, especially since "Iowa" has started appearing as a control for I-88 on side roads.

That's ISTHA.  IDOT District 1 also doesn't give a shit as evidenced by "Iowa", "Indiana", and "Wisconsin" showing up all over the place.  I'm surprised "Missouri" hasn't replaced "St Louis" yet.

Quote from: roadman on March 17, 2015, 09:50:16 AM
Eliminating state names in favor of cities when signs are updated, at least in Massachusetts, was based on a directive from the regional FHWA office in the early 1990s.  I would presume that the regional office got their direction from DC.

There's nothing wrong with state names for control cities though. It's a practice I would have rather seen continued rather than eliminating. The sign PHLBOS posted with New Jersey is a perfect example - how exactly are you going to put a control city on I-276 east when it doesn't even enter New Jersey and all the small towns it passes are probably too small to list? The closest is Trenton, which is incorrect. Of course, once I-95 is routed up there it will probably be replaced with New York City, and we'll get shunned like Maryland does with ignoring the three states before New York on their I-95 signs.

Quote from: Zeffy on March 18, 2015, 11:04:04 AMThere's nothing wrong with state names for control cities though. It's a practice I would have rather seen continued rather than eliminating. The sign PHLBOS posted with New Jersey is a perfect example - how exactly are you going to put a control city on I-276 east when it doesn't even enter New Jersey and all the small towns it passes are probably too small to list? The closest is Trenton, which is incorrect. Of course, once I-95 is routed up there it will probably be replaced with New York City, and we'll get shunned like Maryland does with ignoring the three states before New York on their I-95 signs.

Such was the reason why I mentioned using Bensalem from I-276 East signs from Valley Forge (Exit 326) through Willow Grove (Exit 343) and possibly Bristol or TO 95 NJ Tpk from Bensalem (Exit 351/US 1) to the new I-95 interchange as an option. 

Although using Trenton en lieu of Bensalem could work as well (Trenton on the Exit 351 BGS' (as a US 1 North destination off I-276)).

In some places, though, there is only one way to enter a state. With New Jersey, I would argue that from the I-95/I-295 split in Delaware, I-295 / Delaware Memorial Bridge is really the way to access New Jersey regardless of where in the state you're going. Similarly, from anywhere along and close to I-95 in New York state, the George Washington Bridge is the only option into NJ.

Quote from: bzakharin on March 19, 2015, 11:58:41 AM
In some places, though, there is only one way to enter a state. With New Jersey, I would argue that from the I-95/I-295 split in Delaware, I-295 / Delaware Memorial Bridge is really the way to access New Jersey regardless of where in the state you're going. Similarly, from anywhere along and close to I-95 in New York state, the George Washington Bridge is the only option into NJ.

I agree with you 100%.  Unfortunately, FHWA no longer sees eye-to-eye on this.

Quote from: PHLBOS on March 18, 2015, 06:03:31 PM

Quote from: Zeffy on March 18, 2015, 11:04:04 AMThere's nothing wrong with state names for control cities though. It's a practice I would have rather seen continued rather than eliminating. The sign PHLBOS posted with New Jersey is a perfect example - how exactly are you going to put a control city on I-276 east when it doesn't even enter New Jersey and all the small towns it passes are probably too small to list? The closest is Trenton, which is incorrect. Of course, once I-95 is routed up there it will probably be replaced with New York City, and we'll get shunned like Maryland does with ignoring the three states before New York on their I-95 signs.

Such was the reason why I mentioned using Bensalem from I-276 East signs from Valley Forge (Exit 326) through Willow Grove (Exit 343) and possibly Bristol or TO 95 NJ Tpk from Bensalem (Exit 351/US 1) to the new I-95 interchange as an option. 

Although using Trenton en lieu of Bensalem could work as well (Trenton on the Exit 351 BGS' (as a US 1 North destination off I-276)).

I'd say that from Valley Forge:  I-276 PENN TURNPIKE / Bensalem
From US 1: I-276 to NJTP / New York City

After the completion of I-95 interchange:
From Valley Forge:  I-276 PENN TURNPIKE / Bensalem
From US 1: I-276 to I-95 NJTP/New York City
From I-95 interchange: I-95 NORTH to NJTP/ New York City

Of course the northbound NJTP should have controls showing New York City continuously from at least this point northward. If they also wish to include Newark as well, that would be fine.

Quote from: Zeffy on March 18, 2015, 11:04:04 AM

Quote from: roadman on March 17, 2015, 09:50:16 AM
Eliminating state names in favor of cities when signs are updated, at least in Massachusetts, was based on a directive from the regional FHWA office in the early 1990s.  I would presume that the regional office got their direction from DC.

There's nothing wrong with state names for control cities though. It's a practice I would have rather seen continued rather than eliminating. The sign PHLBOS posted with New Jersey is a perfect example - how exactly are you going to put a control city on I-276 east when it doesn't even enter New Jersey and all the small towns it passes are probably too small to list? The closest is Trenton, which is incorrect. Of course, once I-95 is routed up there it will probably be replaced with New York City, and we'll get shunned like Maryland does with ignoring the three states before New York on their I-95 signs.

I wonder if this is why NYSDOT and the NYSTA are starting to use "New York City" instead of "New York", which irks me because technically there's no legal entity called "The City of New York City".

Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 23, 2015, 12:49:04 PM
I wonder if this is why NYSDOT and the NYSTA are starting to use "New York City" instead of "New York", which irks me because technically there's no legal entity called "The City of New York City".

It's the most commonly used name for the city, and serves as disambiguation.

There's no legal entity called "Washington, D.C.".

Quote from: NE2 on March 23, 2015, 07:09:37 PM
There's no legal entity called "Washington, D.C.".

The city of Washington in the District of Columbia?

The city of New York?

Quote from: The Nature Boy on March 23, 2015, 07:15:22 PM

Quote from: NE2 on March 23, 2015, 07:09:37 PM
There's no legal entity called "Washington, D.C.".

The city of Washington in the District of Columbia?

The city of Washington hasn't existed since 1871.

Quote from: PHLBOS on March 16, 2015, 12:32:42 PM
Signs for I-276 (PA Turnpike) eastbound:

Most if not all of them originally listed New Jersey as a control destination.  However, due to the MUTCDFHWA prohibition of state names as destinations (I disagree 100% with MUTCDFHWA on this one), some newer PennDOT installments use either Philadelphia (http://goo.gl/maps/N92sR) (which is totally wrong IMHO) or NJ Tpk - New York (http://goo.gl/maps/vPPdV) (one could argue whether the latter is either the state or the city). 

Ironically, nearly every recent replacement BGS along the Turnpike/NE Extension mainline (PTC installations) still the old-school New Jersey listing, MUTCDFHWA prohibition be damned.

Quote from: From Photo from Flyer78

Should push come to shove regarding state name destination prohibitions; using Bensalem as an I-276 East destination through Willow Grove (Exit 343 - PA 611) would be a logical compromise.  Between the Bensalem (Exit 351 - US 1) interchange and the future I-95 interchange; either Bristol, TO NJ Tpk or even New York could be used as I-276 eastbound control destinations.

Side note it's nice to see PTC properly using Clearview these days.

Quote from: corco on March 23, 2015, 08:49:31 PM

Quote from: The Nature Boy on March 23, 2015, 07:15:22 PM

Quote from: NE2 on March 23, 2015, 07:09:37 PM
There's no legal entity called "Washington, D.C.".

The city of Washington in the District of Columbia?

The city of Washington hasn't existed since 1871.

Interesting. I guess I never realized that "Washington" is not even legally apart of the city's name any more.

On State Route 22 approaching East Long Beach, is the speed limit 45 at this point (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.77439,-118.09865,3a,75y,265.96h,87.07t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s9zTe81_E5gzWBrMlxoCJtQ!2e0) or about to be 45?

Quote from: Occidental Tourist on March 24, 2015, 07:33:28 PM
On State Route 22 approaching East Long Beach, is the speed limit 45 at this point (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.77439,-118.09865,3a,75y,265.96h,87.07t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s9zTe81_E5gzWBrMlxoCJtQ!2e0) or about to be 45?

I'd say go with the more restrictive and interpret that the 45 speed starts at this point. Odd, I haven't seen too many "XX Zone Ahead" speed signs in California.


OT: Incredibly odd trajectories of the concrete pavement there, with asphalt in between. I'm guessing a realignment?

Quote from: roadfro on March 24, 2015, 09:23:46 PM

Quote from: Occidental Tourist on March 24, 2015, 07:33:28 PM
On State Route 22 approaching East Long Beach, is the speed limit 45 at this point (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.77439,-118.09865,3a,75y,265.96h,87.07t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s9zTe81_E5gzWBrMlxoCJtQ!2e0) or about to be 45?

I'd say go with the more restrictive and interpret that the 45 speed starts at this point. Odd, I haven't seen too many "XX Zone Ahead" speed signs in California.


OT: Incredibly odd trajectories of the concrete pavement there, with asphalt in between. I'm guessing a realignment?

It was once planned for CA22 to continue as a freeway to the west.

Quote from: roadfro on March 24, 2015, 09:23:46 PM

Quote from: Occidental Tourist on March 24, 2015, 07:33:28 PM
On State Route 22 approaching East Long Beach, is the speed limit 45 at this point (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.77439,-118.09865,3a,75y,265.96h,87.07t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s9zTe81_E5gzWBrMlxoCJtQ!2e0) or about to be 45?

I'd say go with the more restrictive and interpret that the 45 speed starts at this point. Odd, I haven't seen too many "XX Zone Ahead" speed signs in California.


OT: Incredibly odd trajectories of the concrete pavement there, with asphalt in between. I'm guessing a realignment?

The freeway was built over the top of a surface street.  To accommodate an interchange that was built, the alignment of the freeway was shifted south of the original street, but portions of the pavement from the original street still remain.

Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 23, 2015, 12:49:04 PM
I wonder if this is why NYSDOT and the NYSTA are starting to use "New York City" instead of "New York", which irks me because technically there's no legal entity called "The City of New York City".

It bothers me far more that there is in fact an entity officially named the "City of Salt Lake City."

Quote from: ekt8750 on March 24, 2015, 10:32:34 AMSide note it's nice to see PTC properly using Clearview these days.

Don't hold your breath with that one.  Unfortunately, a concurrent & adjacent PTC sign replacement project along I-276 goes overboard with multiple misapplications of the Clearview font as well as oversizing the destination text and possibly undersizing the BGS-mounted I-shields. 

To their credit & at least they use Series C numerals for all of their 3di shields instead of the asinine Series B or the CAD-elongated Series D.

On Parvin Mill Road in Parvin State Park (southern NJ), going South you see:
Speed Limit 40: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.529943,-75.111417,3a,75y,256.16h,66.16t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sIwTx3AbNxzo3YoTERiaaLw!2e0!5m1!1e1
Reduce Speed Ahead: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.517785,-75.123565,3a,75y,217.07h,67.76t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sxTeR1xGGB1uDZxHyOLFArg!2e0!5m1!1e1
Still 40: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.51601,-75.124514,3a,75y,205.56h,65.34t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sd0Z9b8iDqthWG6yjFG_FtA!2e0!5m1!1e1

But in the other direction, there is a Speed Limit 50 in the same place where the Second 40 is:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.515897,-75.124574,3a,75y,21.24h,76.49t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sVqqwnAGUTu0_Gtm7gAzD-w!2e0!5m1!1e1

So most likely that first 40 should be a 50. Unless you actually have different speed limits in different directions. If that's the case, the reduced speed sign actually refers to a 30 even further south (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.508103,-75.128542,3a,75y,174.08h,75.24t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sGIY255gbgN4tfCtR99RB8Q!2e0!5m1!1e1), but I don't recall ever seeing a reduce speed sign followed by the same speed limit, followed by a reduction later anywhere else.

Quote from: bzakharin on April 08, 2015, 06:21:56 PM
On Parvin Mill Road in Parvin State Park (southern NJ), going South you see:
Speed Limit 40: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.529943,-75.111417,3a,75y,256.16h,66.16t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sIwTx3AbNxzo3YoTERiaaLw!2e0!5m1!1e1
Reduce Speed Ahead: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.517785,-75.123565,3a,75y,217.07h,67.76t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sxTeR1xGGB1uDZxHyOLFArg!2e0!5m1!1e1
Still 40: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.51601,-75.124514,3a,75y,205.56h,65.34t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sd0Z9b8iDqthWG6yjFG_FtA!2e0!5m1!1e1

But in the other direction, there is a Speed Limit 50 in the same place where the Second 40 is:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.515897,-75.124574,3a,75y,21.24h,76.49t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sVqqwnAGUTu0_Gtm7gAzD-w!2e0!5m1!1e1

So most likely that first 40 should be a 50. Unless you actually have different speed limits in different directions

Especially on 2 lane roads, they're supposed to be the same.  I'm familiar with 2 other instances of this: 1 case the road is signed 40 when it should be 45.  But another case it's signed 40 when it should be 35!  In both cases, the incorrect limit has been posted for many years.   

In a 3rd case, I was familiar with another instance of a 35 mph signed with a 45 mph limit!  Using GSV's historical street view, here's the 45 mph posted back in 2009 (https://goo.gl/maps/D75xY), and with it's proper 35 mph limit sign in 2013 (https://goo.gl/maps/zczn2).

There is another one now that I think about it, also 50 vs 40. It's been there as long as I can remember:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.924802,-74.959959,3a,75y,222.61h,69.22t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5KjAV7eOkdKhOBq-0FDYsQ!2e0
and I assume it's supposed to be 40 seeing as it's a pretty populated area.

And I don't know if it counts as an inconsistency, but this sign on the same road https://www.google.com/maps/@39.921444,-74.963956,3a,75y,196.57h,78.39t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sDk3eZ_i6FvkVDPoxL0E_FQ!2e0!5s20130801T000000 (and the "Begin Burlington County 673" in the other direction) is only technically right. This is the county line and the road continues as Camden County 673.

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on April 08, 2015, 04:17:55 AM

Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 23, 2015, 12:49:04 PM
I wonder if this is why NYSDOT and the NYSTA are starting to use "New York City" instead of "New York", which irks me because technically there's no legal entity called "The City of New York City".

It bothers me far more that there is in fact an entity officially named the "City of Salt Lake City."

OT: I wonder if that's the first step of Utah attempting to transition away from usage of City as a suffix and into a more traditional "City of (blank)" format.  When I was up there a month ago, locals simply referred to it as Salt Lake. I have noticed, however, that most of the cities up there are billed as "(blank) City" in official correspondence.

Quote from: bzakharin on April 08, 2015, 08:02:53 PM
There is another one now that I think about it, also 50 vs 40. It's been there as long as I can remember:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.924802,-74.959959,3a,75y,222.61h,69.22t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5KjAV7eOkdKhOBq-0FDYsQ!2e0
and I assume it's supposed to be 40 seeing as it's a pretty populated area.

And I don't know if it counts as an inconsistency, but this sign on the same road https://www.google.com/maps/@39.921444,-74.963956,3a,75y,196.57h,78.39t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sDk3eZ_i6FvkVDPoxL0E_FQ!2e0!5s20130801T000000 (and the "Begin Burlington County 673" in the other direction) is only technically right. This is the county line and the road continues as Camden County 673.

600-series routes are not continuous across county lines, and in many cases either change numbers or are not a county route on the other side of the county line. this is an exception.

Springdale is definitely supposed to be 50, and that speed limit is consistent with other roads in the area. i always used to take Hainesport-Mt Laurel/Greentree to Sprindale/White Horse to get to the Echelon Mall area when I was younger (and when Echelon wasn't a joke).

Quote from: roadiejay on April 09, 2015, 07:30:02 AM

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on April 08, 2015, 04:17:55 AM

Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 23, 2015, 12:49:04 PM
I wonder if this is why NYSDOT and the NYSTA are starting to use "New York City" instead of "New York", which irks me because technically there's no legal entity called "The City of New York City".

It bothers me far more that there is in fact an entity officially named the "City of Salt Lake City."

OT: I wonder if that's the first step of Utah attempting to transition away from usage of City as a suffix and into a more traditional "City of (blank)" format.  When I was up there a month ago, locals simply referred to it as Salt Lake. I have noticed, however, that most of the cities up there are billed as "(blank) City" in official correspondence.

Most "City of X City" cities in New Jersey are known as "X City", while "City of X" are simply "X". The exceptions are Margate and Ventnor (both in Atlantic County) which are both "City of X City", but are just known as "X". There is also Borough of Surf City, which is known as Surf City.

Quote from: odditude on April 09, 2015, 09:37:36 AM

Quote from: bzakharin on April 08, 2015, 08:02:53 PM
There is another one now that I think about it, also 50 vs 40. It's been there as long as I can remember:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.924802,-74.959959,3a,75y,222.61h,69.22t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5KjAV7eOkdKhOBq-0FDYsQ!2e0
and I assume it's supposed to be 40 seeing as it's a pretty populated area.

And I don't know if it counts as an inconsistency, but this sign on the same road https://www.google.com/maps/@39.921444,-74.963956,3a,75y,196.57h,78.39t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sDk3eZ_i6FvkVDPoxL0E_FQ!2e0!5s20130801T000000 (and the "Begin Burlington County 673" in the other direction) is only technically right. This is the county line and the road continues as Camden County 673.

600-series routes are not continuous across county lines, and in many cases either change numbers or are not a county route on the other side of the county line. this is an exception.

Springdale is definitely supposed to be 50, and that speed limit is consistent with other roads in the area. i always used to take Hainesport-Mt Laurel/Greentree to Sprindale/White Horse to get to the Echelon Mall area when I was younger (and when Echelon wasn't a joke).

They don't *have* to be continuous, but this one is (Proof at the very next traffic light: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.90532,-74.966295,3a,37.5y,261.46h,83.3t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sNoAaYhYHU16d6KRe_WUe8A!2e0). Camden County isn't compelled to have its own "Begin 673" sign after the "End 673" sign from Burlington County. And this is the only County Route I know that doesn't change its number, but has End/Begin signs. Here is CR-616 at the same county line: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.931232,-74.980913,3a,75y,281.4h,84.6t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sC1cjKTN3Ts1qCe5NK1UNXQ!2e0!5s20130801T000000
No begin/end signs

Quote from: bzakharin on April 09, 2015, 09:40:57 AM

Quote from: roadiejay on April 09, 2015, 07:30:02 AM

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on April 08, 2015, 04:17:55 AM

Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 23, 2015, 12:49:04 PM
I wonder if this is why NYSDOT and the NYSTA are starting to use "New York City" instead of "New York", which irks me because technically there's no legal entity called "The City of New York City".

It bothers me far more that there is in fact an entity officially named the "City of Salt Lake City."

OT: I wonder if that's the first step of Utah attempting to transition away from usage of City as a suffix and into a more traditional "City of (blank)" format.  When I was up there a month ago, locals simply referred to it as Salt Lake. I have noticed, however, that most of the cities up there are billed as "(blank) City" in official correspondence.

Most "City of X City" cities in New Jersey are known as "X City", while "City of X" are simply "X". The exceptions are Margate and Ventnor (both in Atlantic County) which are both "City of X City", but are just known as "X". There is also Borough of Surf City, which is known as Surf City.

Same in Ohio. We have Grove City, officially City of Grove City, never just Grove, nor City of Grove. And we have Hilliard, officially City of Hilliard, which never has City on the end. Unless you're talking about Hilliard City Schools, which despite the name is not a function of the City of Hilliard.

---

Back on topic...

Years ago ODOT decided to change the westbound control city for I-70 west out of Columbus to Dayton, where it had previously been Indianapolis. There are still quite a few signs that were never amended, mostly on or approaching I-270, or on surface streets.

Quote from: bzakharin on April 09, 2015, 09:47:35 AM

Quote from: odditude on April 09, 2015, 09:37:36 AM

Quote from: bzakharin on April 08, 2015, 08:02:53 PM
There is another one now that I think about it, also 50 vs 40. It's been there as long as I can remember:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.924802,-74.959959,3a,75y,222.61h,69.22t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5KjAV7eOkdKhOBq-0FDYsQ!2e0
and I assume it's supposed to be 40 seeing as it's a pretty populated area.

And I don't know if it counts as an inconsistency, but this sign on the same road https://www.google.com/maps/@39.921444,-74.963956,3a,75y,196.57h,78.39t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sDk3eZ_i6FvkVDPoxL0E_FQ!2e0!5s20130801T000000 (and the "Begin Burlington County 673" in the other direction) is only technically right. This is the county line and the road continues as Camden County 673.

600-series routes are not continuous across county lines, and in many cases either change numbers or are not a county route on the other side of the county line. this is an exception.

Springdale is definitely supposed to be 50, and that speed limit is consistent with other roads in the area. i always used to take Hainesport-Mt Laurel/Greentree to Sprindale/White Horse to get to the Echelon Mall area when I was younger (and when Echelon wasn't a joke).

They don't *have* to be continuous, but this one is (Proof at the very next traffic light: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.90532,-74.966295,3a,37.5y,261.46h,83.3t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sNoAaYhYHU16d6KRe_WUe8A!2e0). Camden County isn't compelled to have its own "Begin 673" sign after the "End 673" sign from Burlington County. And this is the only County Route I know that doesn't change its number, but has End/Begin signs. Here is CR-616 at the same county line: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.931232,-74.980913,3a,75y,281.4h,84.6t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sC1cjKTN3Ts1qCe5NK1UNXQ!2e0!5s20130801T000000
No begin/end signs

...hence "this is an exception"

Problem with state names is they're so nonspecific. Imagine going through Indianapolis on WB I-70. "Illinois" would make sense for both NB I-65 and WB I-70. But they go to very different places.

No matter where in Florida you're headed, you want to take I-10 east from the end of I-65. Mississippi is sketchier, but if you've already gotten to the end of I-65, you're probably best off taking I-10 west.

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on April 08, 2015, 04:17:55 AM

Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 23, 2015, 12:49:04 PM
I wonder if this is why NYSDOT and the NYSTA are starting to use "New York City" instead of "New York", which irks me because technically there's no legal entity called "The City of New York City".

It bothers me far more that there is in fact an entity officially named the "City of Salt Lake City."

Michigan has the "Village of Mackinaw City" and the "City of the Village of Clarkston".

We have a Town of Colorado City in Arizona.

http://www.leagueaz.org/lgd/index.cfm?area=main&cid=15

We also have a "Town of Gilbert" with a population of 230,000. Arizona law allows for incorporation under either a town or city charter regardless of population.

Quote from: mhh on April 10, 2015, 10:24:29 PM

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on April 08, 2015, 04:17:55 AM

Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 23, 2015, 12:49:04 PM
I wonder if this is why NYSDOT and the NYSTA are starting to use "New York City" instead of "New York", which irks me because technically there's no legal entity called "The City of New York City".

It bothers me far more that there is in fact an entity officially named the "City of Salt Lake City."

Michigan has the "Village of Mackinaw City" and the "City of the Village of Clarkston".

Then there's the Village of Elk Grove Village in Illinois.  Yes, that's the full name.

Quote from: Scott5114 on April 10, 2015, 08:04:31 PM
Problem with state names is they're so nonspecific. Imagine going through Indianapolis on WB I-70. "Illinois" would make sense for both NB I-65 and WB I-70. But they go to very different places.

Depends on where you are.  Around Chicago, Wisconsin and Indiana make sense as going that way will get you to all Wisconsin points (I-90/94 west/I-294 north) or all Indiana points (I-90/94 east/I-294 south/I-80 east).  Iowa works well as well.  Using I-80 or I-88 west will get you to all Iowa points.

Quote from: Brandon on April 12, 2015, 05:39:55 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on April 10, 2015, 08:04:31 PM
Problem with state names is they're so nonspecific. Imagine going through Indianapolis on WB I-70. "Illinois" would make sense for both NB I-65 and WB I-70. But they go to very different places.

Depends on where you are.  Around Chicago, Wisconsin and Indiana make sense as going that way will get you to all Wisconsin points (I-90/94 west/I-294 north) or all Indiana points (I-90/94 east/I-294 south/I-80 east).  Iowa works well as well.  Using I-80 or I-88 west will get you to all Iowa points.

I could get snarky about Scott's comment and point out that I-65 doesn't go to Illinois. I agree with Brandon that the control cities of Wisconsin, Indiana, and Iowa make a lot of sense in Chicagoland, where they are used. From the first time I saw them, they were perfectly clear to me. Illinois wouldn't make sense in Indianapolis, but it's not used there.

Quote from: Brandon on April 12, 2015, 05:37:40 PM

Quote from: mhh on April 10, 2015, 10:24:29 PM

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on April 08, 2015, 04:17:55 AM

Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 23, 2015, 12:49:04 PM
I wonder if this is why NYSDOT and the NYSTA are starting to use "New York City" instead of "New York", which irks me because technically there's no legal entity called "The City of New York City".

It bothers me far more that there is in fact an entity officially named the "City of Salt Lake City."

Michigan has the "Village of Mackinaw City" and the "City of the Village of Clarkston".

Then there's the Village of Elk Grove Village in Illinois.  Yes, that's the full name.

In Indiana, we've got the Town of Parker City and the Town of Rome City.

Quote from: bzakharin on April 08, 2015, 06:21:56 PM
On Parvin Mill Road in Parvin State Park (southern NJ), going South you see:
Speed Limit 40: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.529943,-75.111417,3a,75y,256.16h,66.16t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sIwTx3AbNxzo3YoTERiaaLw!2e0!5m1!1e1
Reduce Speed Ahead: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.517785,-75.123565,3a,75y,217.07h,67.76t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sxTeR1xGGB1uDZxHyOLFArg!2e0!5m1!1e1
Still 40: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.51601,-75.124514,3a,75y,205.56h,65.34t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sd0Z9b8iDqthWG6yjFG_FtA!2e0!5m1!1e1

But in the other direction, there is a Speed Limit 50 in the same place where the Second 40 is:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.515897,-75.124574,3a,75y,21.24h,76.49t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sVqqwnAGUTu0_Gtm7gAzD-w!2e0!5m1!1e1

So most likely that first 40 should be a 50. Unless you actually have different speed limits in different directions. If that's the case, the reduced speed sign actually refers to a 30 even further south (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.508103,-75.128542,3a,75y,174.08h,75.24t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sGIY255gbgN4tfCtR99RB8Q!2e0!5m1!1e1), but I don't recall ever seeing a reduce speed sign followed by the same speed limit, followed by a reduction later anywhere else.

I just drove through there again yesterday and noticed that the "4" in that first "Speed Limit 40" was pasted on, so it may have been intentionally lowered from a 50 that was there before. That does not explain why the other direction is still 50 or why the "reduced speed ahead" sign is still there.

Quote from: Brandon on April 12, 2015, 05:39:55 PM

Quote from: Scott5114 on April 10, 2015, 08:04:31 PM
Problem with state names is they're so nonspecific. Imagine going through Indianapolis on WB I-70. "Illinois" would make sense for both NB I-65 and WB I-70. But they go to very different places.

Depends on where you are.  Around Chicago, Wisconsin and Indiana make sense as going that way will get you to all Wisconsin points (I-90/94 west/I-294 north) or all Indiana points (I-90/94 east/I-294 south/I-80 east).  Iowa works well as well.  Using I-80 or I-88 west will get you to all Iowa points.

I really think that LaDOTD should co-sign I-12 at its split from I-10 in Baton Rouge as "Mississippi" since if you are going to Mississippi, you will want to take I-12 and bypass New Orleans rather than stay on I-10.

Quote from: bzakharin on April 08, 2015, 08:02:53 PM
There is another one now that I think about it, also 50 vs 40. It's been there as long as I can remember:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.924802,-74.959959,3a,75y,222.61h,69.22t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5KjAV7eOkdKhOBq-0FDYsQ!2e0
and I assume it's supposed to be 40 seeing as it's a pretty populated area.

Not an inconsistency, but speaking of high speed limits in populated areas, check out Eagle Rd (ID-55) in Meridian, ID: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.634545,-116.35423,3a,75y,359.11h,88.53t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sZu7C0DpvHoiueT6MrD2M8g!2e0

55 speed limit, on a road that would probably be around 40 typically (traffic moves at 40-45 normally, except during rush hour where, good luck moving at all). Meridian has grown so fast, that a lot of this area was undeveloped not too long ago, but now it's suburbia and there's big box stores and shopping centers lining it from I-84 all the way to ID-44. I guess this is a case of the speed limit not keeping up with the development. As nice as it is to be able to go 55 in light traffic, I fully expect the limit to lower down to 45 or 40 sometime.

Even looking at the most recent street view (Oct 2011) at the intersection of Fairview and Eagle, it is completely unrecognizable to me. https://www.google.com/maps/@43.620015,-116.354418,3a,75y,10.75h,80.95t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sB2vRtX_2WjbeUWCROpuJLA!2e0 It's farm land, less than 4 years ago. There is a huge shopping center there on the east side of Eagle now, as you can see if you go into satellite view. (I don't remember if there's currently anything on the west side of the highway).

Also odd that if you continue on Eagle Rd. south of I-84 (where it's no longer a state highway), the road stays generally similar (though less congested), but the speed limit drops to 40 (well, there is a 50 zone between Fairview and I-84 but still): https://www.google.com/maps/@43.589658,-116.354557,3a,75y,180.59h,75.16t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1scvuHlsQkC6xa2ne7VRCejg!2e0

Would this one count?

OH 751 for County Rd 21/Stone Creek (1/2 mile) https://www.google.com/maps/@40.38524,-81.560633,3a,36.5y,42.64h,93.69t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s2ErAvilkSynTnguQyjbeMw!2e0

At the exit ramp, it becomes County Rd 53 (!)/Stone Creek
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.389804,-81.559194,3a,18.7y,34.58h,91.75t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sQ5LCWv_Fk8btkGMF08Rokw!2e0

Granted, both are correct - but more of them say County Rd 21 (old US 21 in this case) than do County Rd 53.

Quote from: doorknob60 on June 09, 2015, 02:17:30 PM

Quote from: bzakharin on April 08, 2015, 08:02:53 PM
There is another one now that I think about it, also 50 vs 40. It's been there as long as I can remember:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.924802,-74.959959,3a,75y,222.61h,69.22t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5KjAV7eOkdKhOBq-0FDYsQ!2e0
and I assume it's supposed to be 40 seeing as it's a pretty populated area.

Not an inconsistency, but speaking of high speed limits in populated areas, check out Eagle Rd (ID-55) in Meridian, ID: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.634545,-116.35423,3a,75y,359.11h,88.53t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sZu7C0DpvHoiueT6MrD2M8g!2e0

55 speed limit, on a road that would probably be around 40 typically (traffic moves at 40-45 normally, except during rush hour where, good luck moving at all). Meridian has grown so fast, that a lot of this area was undeveloped not too long ago, but now it's suburbia and there's big box stores and shopping centers lining it from I-84 all the way to ID-44. I guess this is a case of the speed limit not keeping up with the development. As nice as it is to be able to go 55 in light traffic, I fully expect the limit to lower down to 45 or 40 sometime.

Even looking at the most recent street view (Oct 2011) at the intersection of Fairview and Eagle, it is completely unrecognizable to me. https://www.google.com/maps/@43.620015,-116.354418,3a,75y,10.75h,80.95t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sB2vRtX_2WjbeUWCROpuJLA!2e0 It's farm land, less than 4 years ago. There is a huge shopping center there on the east side of Eagle now, as you can see if you go into satellite view. (I don't remember if there's currently anything on the west side of the highway).

Also odd that if you continue on Eagle Rd. south of I-84 (where it's no longer a state highway), the road stays generally similar (though less congested), but the speed limit drops to 40 (well, there is a 50 zone between Fairview and I-84 but still): https://www.google.com/maps/@43.589658,-116.354557,3a,75y,180.59h,75.16t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1scvuHlsQkC6xa2ne7VRCejg!2e0

44/State St also goes up to 55 just past Walmart, which is pretty deep into Boise/Garden City. When we moved there in the late 90s, that was all cow pasture, but now...yeah.

What I've noticed though is that nobody drives 55 on State St or on Eagle Rd, but given how proactive Idaho has been lately with lowering speed limits in rural areas (stupid 45 zones north of Smith's Ferry and north of New Meadows in the first canyon before Pinehurst) it's surprising that they're not doing the same in urban areas.

My sister lives right off Eagle Rd at an uncontrolled intersection north of Chinden, and making the left turn is terrifying. What I have heard is that they are going to be putting a median barrier in, eliminating the two way left turn lane, which would help to make the 55 MPH speed limit safer, and might be why the limit is still 55.

The new Idaho 16 extension between 44 and 20/26 is actually posted at 65, which really surprised me.

Quote from: corco on June 09, 2015, 07:44:32 PM

Quote from: doorknob60 on June 09, 2015, 02:17:30 PM

Quote from: bzakharin on April 08, 2015, 08:02:53 PM
There is another one now that I think about it, also 50 vs 40. It's been there as long as I can remember:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.924802,-74.959959,3a,75y,222.61h,69.22t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5KjAV7eOkdKhOBq-0FDYsQ!2e0
and I assume it's supposed to be 40 seeing as it's a pretty populated area.

Not an inconsistency, but speaking of high speed limits in populated areas, check out Eagle Rd (ID-55) in Meridian, ID: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.634545,-116.35423,3a,75y,359.11h,88.53t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sZu7C0DpvHoiueT6MrD2M8g!2e0

55 speed limit, on a road that would probably be around 40 typically (traffic moves at 40-45 normally, except during rush hour where, good luck moving at all). Meridian has grown so fast, that a lot of this area was undeveloped not too long ago, but now it's suburbia and there's big box stores and shopping centers lining it from I-84 all the way to ID-44. I guess this is a case of the speed limit not keeping up with the development. As nice as it is to be able to go 55 in light traffic, I fully expect the limit to lower down to 45 or 40 sometime.

Even looking at the most recent street view (Oct 2011) at the intersection of Fairview and Eagle, it is completely unrecognizable to me. https://www.google.com/maps/@43.620015,-116.354418,3a,75y,10.75h,80.95t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sB2vRtX_2WjbeUWCROpuJLA!2e0 It's farm land, less than 4 years ago. There is a huge shopping center there on the east side of Eagle now, as you can see if you go into satellite view. (I don't remember if there's currently anything on the west side of the highway).

Also odd that if you continue on Eagle Rd. south of I-84 (where it's no longer a state highway), the road stays generally similar (though less congested), but the speed limit drops to 40 (well, there is a 50 zone between Fairview and I-84 but still): https://www.google.com/maps/@43.589658,-116.354557,3a,75y,180.59h,75.16t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1scvuHlsQkC6xa2ne7VRCejg!2e0

44/State St also goes up to 55 just past Walmart, which is pretty deep into Boise/Garden City. When we moved there in the late 90s, that was all cow pasture, but now...yeah.

What I've noticed though is that nobody drives 55 on State St or on Eagle Rd, but given how proactive Idaho has been lately with lowering speed limits in rural areas (stupid 45 zones north of Smith's Ferry and north of New Meadows in the first canyon before Pinehurst) it's surprising that they're not doing the same in urban areas.

My sister lives right off Eagle Rd at an uncontrolled intersection north of Chinden, and making the left turn is terrifying. What I have heard is that they are going to be putting a median barrier in, eliminating the two way left turn lane, which would help to make the 55 MPH speed limit safer, and might be why the limit is still 55.

The new Idaho 16 extension between 44 and 20/26 is actually posted at 65, which really surprised me.

Yeah, both State St (ID-44) and Chinden (US-20/26) have higher than expected speed limits in sections, for the same reasons.

I partially like Oregon's policy on rural highways: 55 regardless of situation. Wide open road, or curvy mountain/coastal road, consistent posting. The reason I say partially, is because while it's nice that it doesn't randomly drop to 45 or have otherwise similar highways be different speed limits (which is common in WA and ID), the 55 maximum kills it in the straight sections. Do cops here enforce these rural speed limit drops (I've mostly only driven on I-84 and small parts of US-95, in terms of highways in Idaho)?

They recently (as in, a couple years ago) added median barriers on Eagle Rd. from Chinden to at least Ustick. Won't surprise me if they extend that all the way up to ID-44. I'd never want to turn left onto Eagle Rd without a signal. I don't even like using the U-Turn lanes they added if I can help it. Too much traffic.

Yeah, the final design is a full limited access freeway from ID-44 to I-84, so it makes sense they'd sign it with the default freeway limit of 65. This road (in combination with US-20/26 and Can-Ada Rd.) serves as a nice shortcut from Nampa into Eagle and NW Boise (especially with the construction mess going on with I-84 in Meridian).

Yes, rural Idaho cops are absolute dicks. My Dad has gotten 3 speeding tickets in the last two years on US-12 between Idaho 13 and the Montana line. That highway is posted at 50 for about 66 miles for no explicable reason, and he's always been ticketed for less than 60.

I never, ever go more than five over in rural Idaho (grew up in and family still resides in McCall) for that reason. I've lived/been engaged with that state since 1997 and just know way too many people that have been burned by overzealous police officers in Idaho to feel comfortable going more than five over.

Oregon...no. I agree on having reasonably consistent speeds and prohibiting what seem like arbitrary changes. Montana works with a blanket speed of 70 off-interstate, because that's actually a reasonable speed. Oregon encourages clumping, which is dangerous- to avoid getting a ticket in Oregon, you have to get yourself into a pack of other cars all going about 70 on roads that really should be posted at at least 65, particularly in the eastern part of the state.

Are you allowed to make a left turn from this left-turn lane in Bellingham WA?  https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7564631,-122.4650424,3a,75y,270.78h,86.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scdP_UNwghzxKeU9Uu9i8Bg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Quote from: Big John on September 18, 2015, 12:32:10 AM
Are you allowed to make a left turn from this left-turn lane in Bellingham WA?  https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7564631,-122.4650424,3a,75y,270.78h,86.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scdP_UNwghzxKeU9Uu9i8Bg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

I've posted a picture of that sign on another thread I think.  The answer is that you're not allowed to make a 90° left onto James Street (which is one-way the wrong way), but you are allowed to make a soft left onto State Street.

It really just needs a little "TO JAMES" plaque under the no left turn sign.

Quote from: Kacie Jane on September 18, 2015, 06:36:15 AM

Quote from: Big John on September 18, 2015, 12:32:10 AM
Are you allowed to make a left turn from this left-turn lane in Bellingham WA?  https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7564631,-122.4650424,3a,75y,270.78h,86.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scdP_UNwghzxKeU9Uu9i8Bg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

I've posted a picture of that sign on another thread I think.  The answer is that you're not allowed to make a 90° left onto James Street (which is one-way the wrong way), but you are allowed to make a soft left onto State Street.

It really just needs a little "TO JAMES" plaque under the no left turn sign.

Or really, eliminate that sign completely.  The sign on the traffic light pole shown on the link below, along with a One Way arrow, should suffice.  https://goo.gl/maps/QsW0L

Note: I was originally thinking of making this either a spearate thread or piggy-back it onto the I-95 MA signing thread; but thought it might be better suited here due to this thread subject.

For years the MA stretch of I-95 and US 1 in Peabody & Danvers (where both run nearly parallel & adjacent to each other between Exits 46 and 50) hasn't always been consitent with destination listings for ramp signage; particularly the southbound ramp signs (where duplicate destinations are used for separate southbound I-95 and US 1 ramps).

Here's how the various interchanges along I-95 and US 1 are presently signed:

Current entrance ramp signage I-95:
Exit 47A-B (MA 114)
Salisbury/Portsmouth, NH for northbound

TO 128 Waltham/Boston for southbound

No issues, can leave as is.  Option to change southbound legend to Boston/Providence, RI

Exit 48 (Centre St.)
Topsfield/Portsmouth, NH for northbound I-95 and US 1

Waltham/Boston for southbound I-95

No issues, can leave as is.  Option to change southbound legend to either Peabody*/Boston or Boston/Providence, RI.

*US 1 South destination signage would need to change to W. Peabody

Exit 49 (MA 62)
Topsfield/Portsmouth, NH for northbound I-95 and US 1

Peabody/Boston for southbound I-95

Change I-95 south signage to either just Boston, Waltham/Boston or Boston/Providence, RI.

Reason: US 1 South is signed for Peabody as well.

Current entrance ramp signage for US 1:
Lowell St.
TO 95 Danvers for northbound

Change to include Portsmouth, NH

Reason: no direct access to adjacent I-95 North

Lynnfield/Boston for southbound

Completely change to include TO 95 (south) and use Waltham instead of Lynnfield (or change to Boston/Providence, RI)

Reason: no direct access to nearby I-95 South

MA 114
Topsfield for northbound (one advance BGS includes Newburyport)

Peabody for southbound

Change Peabody to W. Peabody

Reason: 114 eastbound heads into Peabody.

Dayton/Centre Sts.
Topsfield/Portsmouth, NH for northbound US 1 and I-95

Boston for southbound US 1

Change Boston to either Peabody or W. Peabody

Reason: a direct ramp to I-95 southbound exists.

MA 62
Topsfield/Portsmouth, NH for northbound US 1 and I-95

Peabody for southbound US 1 (westbound signage)

Lynnfield/Boston for southbound US 1 (eastbound signage)

Change signage to read "1 SOUTH W. Peabody"

Reasons: I-95 South draws closer to Peabody's center 
________________________________________________
Somewhat Fictional Territory but here would is my proposal to rationalize the destination signing for I-95 and US 1.  The intent here is to sign I-95 in this vicinity with the more distant and/or prominent destinations (Boston/Waltham/Providence, RI/Salisbury/Portsmouth, NH) and US 1 in this area with the more local destinations (W. Peabody/Saugus/Danvers/Topsfield)

Option 1: start I-95 southbound Waltham/Boston destination combo at Exit 50 (such will continue until Exit 46) & change exit signage from Topsfield/Danvers to Danvers/Peabody.

MA 62 (northbound Exit 49)
Change I-95 southbound signage to either Waltham/Boston or Boston

Change US 1 southbound signage from eastbound MA 62 to Peabody.

Dayton/Centre Sts. (Exit 48)
Change US 1 southbound signage to Peabody.

MA 114 (northbound Exits 47A-B)
Change US 1 southbound signage to W. Peabody

Reason: 114 eastbound heads into Peabody

Lowell St. (off US 1)
Change northbound US 1 TO I-95 North signage to include Portsmouth, NH along w/Danvers

Change southbound US 1 signage to include TO I-95 South reference and use Waltham/Boston destination combination.

Option 2: start I-95 southbound Boston/Providence, RI destination combo at Exit 50 (such will continue until Exit 46) & change exit signage from Topsfield/Danvers to Danvers/Peabody. 

MA 62 (northbound Exit 49)
Change I-95 southbound signage to either Boston/Providence, RI or Boston

Change US 1 southbound signage from eastbound MA 62 to Peabody.

Dayton/Centre Sts. (Exit 48)
Change I-95 southbound signage to either Boston/Providence, RI or just Boston.

Change US 1 southbound signage to Peabody.

MA 114 (northbound Exits 47A-B)
Change I-95 southbound TO MA 128 signage to Boston/Providence, RI

Change US 1 southbound signage to W. Peabody

Reason: 114 eastbound heads into Peabody

Lowell St. (off US 1)
Change northbound US 1 TO I-95 North signage to include Portsmouth, NH along w/Danvers

Change southbound US 1 signage to include TO I-95 South reference and use Boston/Providence, RI destination combination.

Option 3: continue with signing Peabody/Boston combo for I-95 southbound until Exit 46 & change Exit 50 signage from Topsfield/Danvers to Danvers/W. Peabody. 

MA 62 (northbound Exit 49)
Change US 1 southbound signage to W. Peabody.

Dayton/Centre Sts. (Exit 48)
Change I-95 southbound signage to either Peabody/Boston or just Boston.

Change US 1 southbound signage to W. Peabody.

MA 114 (northbound Exits 47A-B)
Signage for I-95 southbound would change to either just Boston or Boston/Providence, RI combo.

Change US 1 southbound signage to W. Peabody

Reason: 114 eastbound heads into Peabody

US 1 South (Exit 46)
Exit signage could include Saugus along w/Boston.  Through I-95 South To MA 128 signage could list Peabody/Providence, RI combo.

MA 128 North (Exit 45)
Exit signage could include Peabody along with Gloucester.  Through I-95 South signage could list Waltham/Providence, RI combo.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Flushing,+Queens,+NY/@40.754107,-73.899727,3a,66.8y,102.39h,101.18t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sqU4nd1q8r0us8YVdtxnrzQ!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89c260054dc0633f:0xfaec24d1b474281e

The Westbound ramp to I-278 is signed with the boroughs of Brooklyn and Staten Island, while EB I-278 is signed with the Triborough Bridge.  Considering that NYC has finally stopped using the Verrazano Bridge for the WB control city on I-278 in favor of the boroughs it services, so should they have done it going the other way.

If you also look up on the bridge that carries I-278 over NY 25A, you will see Manhattan used along with the Triborough Bridge on the pull through sign up there. 

This is totally inconsistent not to mention violating the MUTCD rules.

The MA 62 WB paddle sign for US 1 SB (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.583678,-70.966621,3a,45.3y,342.5h,88.44t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1siitD-TRX9EE49rykSfhuZA!2e0) is one of my favorites anywhere.  Beside it being still a text sign, it's one of the few out there to call out "So. Lynnfield" versus just plain Lynnfield.  The WB BGSs read Peabody, but that one paddle sign has to be different.  Always loved it.

Quote from: PurdueBill on October 22, 2015, 09:52:46 PM
The MA 62 WB paddle sign for US 1 SB (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.583678,-70.966621,3a,45.3y,342.5h,88.44t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1siitD-TRX9EE49rykSfhuZA!2e0) is one of my favorites anywhere.  Beside it being still a text sign, it's one of the few out there to call out "So. Lynnfield" versus just plain Lynnfield.  The WB BGSs read Peabody, but that one paddle sign has to be different.  Always loved it.

How is it inconsistent?

The 62 WB signs for US 1 SB otherwise say Peabody (and the 95 SB sign ALSO says Peabody to boot)...I actually am fond of the paddle sign and its unusual reference to So. Lynnfield; it's a rare destination to be on a sign at all.

PHLBOS is correct that the big signs for US 1 SB from 62 WB ought to say W. Peabody if the ones for 95 SB say Peabody.  If I'm going to Peabody Square or Northshore Mall, I need to use 95 to 128.  If I'm going to West Peabody, I need to use US 1 to Lowell St/Pine St./Lake St. etc.  If W. Peabody isn't deemed appropriate by TPTB, then I could see Saugus or Lynnfield (maybe not So. Lynnfield).  They have Boston on the 95 sign to put traffic to Boston on 95 down to Exit 46 where it needs to get on US 1 anyway, so Boston (or Revere or something south of Saugus) wouldn't make sense for US 1.

The WB paddle sign having two different destinations than the BGS for the same exit is inconsistent but not the end of the world.  It could be argued that it even supplements the BGS with additional destinations that otherwise wouldn't fit.  It is a shame that the sign in question is gone, replaced with a non-text sign with Peabody and Boston.  So. Lynnfield was a fun destination with its abbreviation and all.  As I recall, the paddle sign in that street view was a successor to a much older one with the same text.

Quote from: PurdueBill on October 22, 2015, 09:52:46 PM
The MA 62 WB paddle sign for US 1 SB (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.583678,-70.966621,3a,45.3y,342.5h,88.44t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1siitD-TRX9EE49rykSfhuZA!2e0) is one of my favorites anywhere.  Beside it being still a text sign, it's one of the few out there to call out "So. Lynnfield" versus just plain Lynnfield.  The WB BGSs read Peabody, but that one paddle sign has to be different.  Always loved it.
...
So. Lynnfield was a fun destination with its abbreviation and all.  As I recall, the paddle sign in that street view was a successor to a much older one with the same text.

I remember the late 60s/early 70s era cut-corner version of that LGS quite well.  The SO. LYNNFIELD/BOSTON notation is obviously a carry-over (note the SO. abbreviation for SOUTH) from how the US 1 southbound ramps from MA 62 were originally signed (long before I-95 was built in this area).