This is only a preliminary indication, and I have found no newspaper articles or TV news clips dealing with it, but I have seen it in too many construction plans sets already for it to be a fluke: North Dakota is changing its state route marker design. The Indian chief bust with feather headdress and "N D" in upper corners is giving way to a state-outline design, with the number in the state silhouette and "NORTH DAKOTA" above (Series B). So far the new design is available only as an insertable sheet in various construction plans sets--it has not yet been added to NDDOT's manuals and publications page (https://www.dot.nd.gov/manuals/manuals-publications.htm), which still has links to the old design.
So far I have seen the new shield only as an independent-mount (two-digit) square. I don't know if a separate three-digit independent-mount version or guide sign designs have been developed yet.
Is it going to be green?
'cause that would make everyone think that the two Dakotas are actually one state.
Also, I think this was floated about before as a redesign (although I have no idea if it ever got anywhere)
http://www.us-highways.com/newnd.htm (http://www.us-highways.com/newnd.htm)
As a South Dakotan, this feels like they're ripping us off (if it is in fact true). Maybe the idea was "Hey, let's make our route shield like SD's and then people might come here by mistake!" (because there really isn't much of a reason to vacation in ND...)
Quote from: SD Mapman on November 17, 2015, 01:19:57 PMIs it going to be green? 'cause that would make everyone think that the two Dakotas are actually one state.
Not in the independent-mount design I have seen--it is only two colors: state outline and words "NORTH DAKOTA" are white against nonreflective black. I don't know how they plan to do the independent-mount design, but if they follow the standard advice and eliminate the black background and put the white elements directly against the green sign background, then the result will look a bit like the South Dakota guide-sign marker except for "NORTH DAKOTA" floating above.
Quote from: SD Mapman on November 17, 2015, 01:19:57 PMAlso, I think this was floated about before as a redesign (although I have no idea if it ever got anywhere)
http://www.us-highways.com/newnd.htm (http://www.us-highways.com/newnd.htm)
It actually does look a little like R.V. Droz' suggested redesign, except there is no green.
Quote from: SD Mapman on November 17, 2015, 01:19:57 PMAs a South Dakotan, this feels like they're ripping us off (if it is in fact true). Maybe the idea was "Hey, let's make our route shield like SD's and then people might come here by mistake!" (because there really isn't much of a reason to vacation in ND...)
I'm hoping someone has on-the-ground verification.
I kind of liked the Indian headdress design and wouldn't have expected concerns about cultural appropriation to receive much play in North Dakota.
Quote
I'm hoping someone has on-the-ground verification.
Do you know where to look? Preferably west of US 83.
This seems logical, though, given the recent abandonment of the Fighting Sioux mascot at UND, and given that this would certainly rile up the very vocal minority opposed to that action, it makes sense not to publicize it too much.
Quote from: J N Winkler on November 17, 2015, 01:53:29 PM
Quote from: SD Mapman on November 17, 2015, 01:19:57 PMIs it going to be green? 'cause that would make everyone think that the two Dakotas are actually one state.
Not in the independent-mount design I have seen--it is only two colors: state outline and words "NORTH DAKOTA" are white against nonreflective black. I don't know how they plan to do the independent-mount design, but if they follow the standard advice and eliminate the black background and put the white elements directly against the green sign background, then the result will look a bit like the South Dakota guide-sign marker except for "NORTH DAKOTA" floating above.
Quote from: SD Mapman on November 17, 2015, 01:19:57 PMAlso, I think this was floated about before as a redesign (although I have no idea if it ever got anywhere)
http://www.us-highways.com/newnd.htm (http://www.us-highways.com/newnd.htm)
It actually does look a little like R.V. Droz' suggested redesign, except there is no green.
Quote from: SD Mapman on November 17, 2015, 01:19:57 PMAs a South Dakotan, this feels like they're ripping us off (if it is in fact true). Maybe the idea was "Hey, let's make our route shield like SD's and then people might come here by mistake!" (because there really isn't much of a reason to vacation in ND...)
I'm hoping someone has on-the-ground verification.
I kind of liked the Indian headdress design and wouldn't have expected concerns about cultural appropriation to receive much play in North Dakota.
Do you have a link to those construction specs you mentioned?
Does this leave Washington alone in the "busts as markers" design category?
Quote from: corco on November 17, 2015, 02:26:46 PMQuoteI'm hoping someone has on-the-ground verification.
Do you know where to look? Preferably west of US 83.
Some of the recent contracts have involved ND 23, whose western end is at Watford City (US 85 corridor, well west of US 83), and detour plans--not just plans for permanent signing--call for use of the new marker. However, I can't promise that construction has started. ND 23 is what I was seeing yesterday; my script works by pulling in contracts as they are first advertised (it doesn't wait until after the letting date, unlike some of the other scripts I run), so if you allow one month for the advertising period to run out, another month for contract award, and two months for issuance of Notice to Proceed, it could be March 2016 before signs start cropping up.
I'll have a look and see what else I find. I actually first became aware of this development about a month ago, but said nothing because I couldn't be sure then that it wasn't a fluke.
Quote from: corco on November 17, 2015, 02:26:46 PMThis seems logical, though, given the recent abandonment of the Fighting Sioux mascot at UND, and given that this would certainly rile up the very vocal minority opposed to that action, it makes sense not to publicize it too much.
I see that reasoning, but the strategy of presenting that minority with a
fait accompli is not without risk.
Quote from: SD Mapman on November 17, 2015, 03:50:17 PMDo you have a link to those construction specs you mentioned?
NDDOT has construction plans online (http://www.dot.nd.gov/dotnet/eplans/default.aspx) and the new route marker design is included as a sheet in the contracts that actually call for use of a state route marker. Here is an example (Job 8 in the letting of December 16, 2015, page 93 in the PDF):
http://www.dot.nd.gov/business/bidopenings/20151216-0930%5CJob%2008%5CSOIB-SOI-4-023(019)087%20Final%20Plans%202of4.pdf
Interesting. I was in Williston a couple weeks ago, which has a bunch of new signs for ND 1804 that popped up when US 85 was rerouted around Williston earlier this year, but those are Indian Head shields.
I'll probably be in or close enough to Watford to detour over there in the next few months, so I'll keep my eyes open.
I looked some more and my first discovery of the new route marker seems to have been last October 20, in a ND 200 (part of MSR 200) contract in the western part of the state. It also turns out there is a three-digit independent-mount version after all.
Screenshot:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sabre-roads.org.uk%2Fwiki%2Fimages%2F8%2F8f%2FNew-nd-route-markers.jpg&hash=0387a9d1fb8b5abba8ecaf4ad708a74959b36f1d)
How far west? I was on parts of ND 200 in July and didn't see them.
The contract includes county line signs for Dunn and McKenzie Counties which I presume are to be erected at the ND 200 crossing--so, pretty far west. But this was an October advertisement, so they might not even have decided to change the marker in July.
Oh, gotcha. I was thinking October 2014.
Quote from: J N Winkler on November 17, 2015, 05:41:53 PM
I looked some more and my first discovery of the new route marker seems to have been last October 20, in a ND 200 (part of MSR 200) contract in the western part of the state. It also turns out there is a three-digit independent-mount version after all.
Screenshot:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sabre-roads.org.uk%2Fwiki%2Fimages%2F8%2F8f%2FNew-nd-route-markers.jpg&hash=0387a9d1fb8b5abba8ecaf4ad708a74959b36f1d)
I note that the wide version of the state outline is not a simple geometric stretch; the left and right edges are only scaled about an extra 10% horizontally, with the top and bottom edges extended to make up most of the additional overall width. Also, the smallest wide shield is 24" by 18", which is a 4:3 ratio, slightly wider than the 5:4 used by the larger sizes and most other 3-digit route marker designs.
So ND has finally jumped on the "state outline on highway markers" bandwagon? Interesting!
However, I like that the signs will remain black and white to distinguish themselves from their green cousins in SD.
Quote from: J N Winkler on November 17, 2015, 05:41:53 PM
I looked some more and my first discovery of the new route marker seems to have been last October 20, in a ND 200 (part of MSR 200) contract in the western part of the state. It also turns out there is a three-digit independent-mount version after all.
Screenshot:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sabre-roads.org.uk%2Fwiki%2Fimages%2F8%2F8f%2FNew-nd-route-markers.jpg&hash=0387a9d1fb8b5abba8ecaf4ad708a74959b36f1d)
Is the PDF this is from still online? I'll give the Wikipedia shields department a heads-up so we can get some SVGs made.
Nice catch, by the way. If it wasn't for you sitting there reading all the sign plans, we'd have had no idea.
I'm a little disappointed because I like the existing ND design aesthetically, but it makes sense why it is being retired, and it always was kind of awkward in 3-digit applications.
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 18, 2015, 06:30:46 PM
it always was kind of awkward in 3-digit applications.
Exactly why I have been proposing a replacement for the George Washington bust here in Washington State. After two digits, the letters start getting cramped. I do wonder if readability suffers as a result, but I don't have the money or time to perform any meaningful tests.
Here's a comparison between ND and WA. At least North Dakota had a 3-digit width:
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/61/WA-281.svg/600px-WA-281.svg.png) (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b0/North_Dakota_281.svg/600px-North_Dakota_281.svg.png)
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 18, 2015, 06:30:46 PMIs the PDF this is from still online? I'll give the Wikipedia shields department a heads-up so we can get some SVGs made.
It is page 75 in this PDF file (part of Job 31 in the letting of November 13, 2015):
http://www.dot.nd.gov/business/bidopenings/20151113-0930/Job%2031/SOIB-5-200(024)075%20Final%20Plans%203of7%20ED.pdf
This file may not always remain online at that URL, but NDDOT archives letting plans online, so one way or another it should remain available indefinitely.
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 18, 2015, 06:30:46 PMNice catch, by the way. If it wasn't for you sitting there reading all the sign plans, we'd have had no idea.
I am happy to be of help. I don't know, though, if they plan to follow your own state's example and swap out the existing markers within a relatively short period of time. At this point I have seen the new marker only in contract plans for jobs in the western part of the state. I haven't actually travelled to North Dakota in fifteen years (last visit was in 2000 to see Theodore Roosevelt National Park).
I'll keep an eye out for the guide-sign markers.
Quote from: Henry on November 18, 2015, 11:57:53 AM
So ND has finally jumped on the "state outline on highway markers" bandwagon? Interesting!
However, I like that the signs will remain black and white to distinguish themselves from their green cousins in SD.
SD might be moving to black and white, too. I saw black-and-white shields at the SD 324 exit in 2014, but that could have just been stupid East River contractor error.
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 18, 2015, 06:30:46 PM
I'm a little disappointed because I like the existing ND design aesthetically, but it makes sense why it is being retired, and it always was kind of awkward in 3-digit applications.
It was really awkward for 4 digits.
Quote from: SD Mapman on November 19, 2015, 06:38:06 PM
Quote from: Henry on November 18, 2015, 11:57:53 AM
So ND has finally jumped on the "state outline on highway markers" bandwagon? Interesting!
However, I like that the signs will remain black and white to distinguish themselves from their green cousins in SD.
SD might be moving to black and white, too. I saw black-and-white shields at the SD 324 exit in 2014, but that could have just been stupid East River contractor error.
If that is true, wouldn't it be confusing to the average driver? ND and SD look almost the same, so it would be better off keeping the green and white signs up so that the differences will be more obvious.
Well the ND shield says "NORTH DAKOTA" on it, so that should be a pretty good giveaway if people are confused about which Dakota they are in.
Perhaps more importantly, I don't know that a single out-of-region tourist (roadgeeks excluded) has ever driven from one Dakota directly to the other on anything but US-85 or I-29, so honestly I'm not sure that there's that much room for confusion. The Dakota borderlands are pretty sparsely populated and travelled to - the "average driver" wouldn't likely ever even be in a position to be confused by it.
Quote from: corco on November 21, 2015, 02:36:18 PMWell the ND shield says "NORTH DAKOTA" on it, so that should be a pretty good giveaway if people are confused about which Dakota they are in.
Another giveaway is that the SD shield has curved north and south borders while the new ND shield does not (I suspect the distinction is between Robinson and Mercator projections).
--fixed quote
Quote from: jakeroot on November 17, 2015, 04:05:41 PM
Does this leave Washington alone in the "busts as markers" design category?
New Hampshire still has the "Old Man in the Mountain" shields, which I suppose is a bust. And since the Old Man is no more, there's a "slight" chance they could change it, though the memory will likely keep it alive.
Quote from: J N Winkler on November 21, 2015, 03:08:04 PM
Quote from: corco on November 21, 2015, 02:36:18 PMWell the ND shield says "NORTH DAKOTA" on it, so that should be a pretty good giveaway if people are confused about which Dakota they are in.
Another giveaway is that the SD shield has curved north and south borders while the new ND shield does not (I suspect the distinction is between Robinson and Mercator projections).
--fixed quote
Some SD shields are made lazily and have straight borders. Again, contractor errors.
It seems to me that the new shields will look essentially identical on guide signs. The "green" SD shields are really just green borders, so the fact that the border is green does nothing to differentiate the shield on a guide sign, and I can't imagine that the "North Dakota" text will make it onto a guide sign either. Looks too much like a banner in that circumstance.
Quote from: vdeane on November 22, 2015, 02:35:25 PMIt seems to me that the new shields will look essentially identical on guide signs. The "green" SD shields are really just green borders, so the fact that the border is green does nothing to differentiate the shield on a guide sign, and I can't imagine that the "North Dakota" text will make it onto a guide sign either. Looks too much like a banner in that circumstance.
We will just have to see how things develop. My suspicion is that if NDDOT decides to eliminate "NORTH DAKOTA" for the guide-sign marker, as is a reasonable choice for keeping digit height above a minimum value that allows easy reading, they will have to follow SDDOT's example and use a three-digit-width shield for both two- and three-digit routes since neither state outline is really recognizable when it is manipulated to fill a square box completely.
Per Corco's observations, I would expect recognition to be a problem only in situations involving borderlands travel near the I-29 corridor (the only freeway that crosses the border between the two states) where the driver is able to move between a SD freeway sign with the SD guide-sign shield and a ND freeway sign with the ND guide-sign shield without being aware of crossing a state line or being exposed to the independent-mount shields in both states, which are readily differentiable from each other.
Such a thing can happen (I made a silent crossing of the Kansas/Nebraska state line on a county road when visiting the Arikaree Breaks several weeks ago, and confirmed I was in Nebraska largely on the basis of cues like bolded digits and white outlines on route markers once I hit US 34), but working out an itinerary whereby it is possible is not a trivial task.
In any case, it strikes me as similar to how every New England state (except Vermont and New Hampshire) use the exact same square (save for Rhode Island including "RI" at the top). Of course, it wouldn't be this way if ND and SD weren't in the heart of rectangle state territory.
Even if there were same numbers in neighboring states with designs similar to each other, people don't follow "Idaho Highway 24" or "Washington State Route 512", they follow "Highway 24" or "512 Freeway". The state they are in really doesn't have any bearing on their route selection, it's just the number.
Quote from: J N Winkler on November 22, 2015, 02:52:53 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 22, 2015, 02:35:25 PMIt seems to me that the new shields will look essentially identical on guide signs. The "green" SD shields are really just green borders, so the fact that the border is green does nothing to differentiate the shield on a guide sign, and I can't imagine that the "North Dakota" text will make it onto a guide sign either. Looks too much like a banner in that circumstance.
We will just have to see how things develop. My suspicion is that if NDDOT decides to eliminate "NORTH DAKOTA" for the guide-sign marker, as is a reasonable choice for keeping digit height above a minimum value that allows easy reading, they will have to follow SDDOT's example and use a three-digit-width shield for both two- and three-digit routes since neither state outline is really recognizable when it is manipulated to fill a square box completely.
Per Corco's observations, I would expect recognition to be a problem only in situations involving borderlands travel near the I-29 corridor (the only freeway that crosses the border between the two states) where the driver is able to move between a SD freeway sign with the SD guide-sign shield and a ND freeway sign with the ND guide-sign shield without being aware of crossing a state line or being exposed to the independent-mount shields in both states, which are readily differentiable from each other.
Such a thing can happen (I made a silent crossing of the Kansas/Nebraska state line on a county road when visiting the Arikaree Breaks several weeks ago, and confirmed I was in Nebraska largely on the basis of cues like bolded digits and white outlines on route markers once I hit US 34), but working out an itinerary whereby it is possible is not a trivial task.
That's also where one of the two number-continuity routes is, so that makes sense (127). (but the other one is 1804 so...)
Also, SD is fanatical about even numbers being east-west and odd numbers being north-south, ND uses Clearview, and the way the signs are set up is slightly different between states (I don't know what it is, but something just feels off). (Yes, I'm contradicting myself here, just go with it.)
Circle shields are very commonplace too. Hell, even two adjacent states (NJ and DE) use them!
Quote from: vdeane on November 22, 2015, 03:04:58 PM
(save for Rhode Island including "RI" at the top)
IN and IL put their names on top of the rectangle too! Only difference is, they actually spell them out. SC used to share its design with RI until it recently converted to new blue-and-white with the state outline on top.
Quote from: vdeane on November 22, 2015, 02:35:25 PM
It seems to me that the new shields will look essentially identical on guide signs. The "green" SD shields are really just green borders, so the fact that the border is green does nothing to differentiate the shield on a guide sign, and I can't imagine that the "North Dakota" text will make it onto a guide sign either. Looks too much like a banner in that circumstance.
Quote from: vdeane on November 22, 2015, 03:04:58 PM
In any case, it strikes me as similar to how every New England state (except Vermont and New Hampshire) use the exact same square (save for Rhode Island including "RI" at the top). Of course, it wouldn't be this way if ND and SD weren't in the heart of rectangle state territory.
True, but no one else uses state shapes.
Quote from: J N Winkler on November 18, 2015, 10:31:52 PM
It is page 75 in this PDF file (part of Job 31 in the letting of November 13, 2015):
http://www.dot.nd.gov/business/bidopenings/20151113-0930/Job%2031/SOIB-5-200(024)075%20Final%20Plans%203of7%20ED.pdf (http://www.dot.nd.gov/business/bidopenings/20151113-0930/Job%2031/SOIB-5-200(024)075%20Final%20Plans%203of7%20ED.pdf)
Did anyone else notice that they have the "A" and "B" (X/Y) dimensions reversed on the 3-digit sign diagram?
I did not notice the reversal of dimension labelling. However, after pulling up the sheet again and looking at it, I see that the 18" height has a single-asterisk footnote call and the footnote reads: "Sign not for indecent use (only for use within a guide sign)."
Malapropism aside, this implies that the guide-sign version is the same as the independent-mount version, which means black on green (major rule of tincture violation: ugh).
Quote from: J N Winkler on December 01, 2015, 01:13:44 PM
I did not notice the reversal of dimension labelling. However, after pulling up the sheet again and looking at it, I see that the 18" height has a single-asterisk footnote call and the footnote reads: "Sign not for indecent use (only for use within a guide sign)."
Malapropism aside, this implies that the guide-sign version is the same as the independent-mount version, which means black on green (major rule of tincture violation: ugh).
Guess we'll have to wait and see when they go up in the field.
Quote from: vdeane on November 22, 2015, 03:04:58 PM
In any case, it strikes me as similar to how every New England state (except Vermont and New Hampshire) use the exact same square (save for Rhode Island including "RI" at the top). Of course, it wouldn't be this way if ND and SD weren't in the heart of rectangle state territory.
Hey now. CT uses a thicker black border than ME/MA! :colorful:
Quote from: SD Mapman on November 23, 2015, 02:30:30 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 22, 2015, 02:35:25 PM
It seems to me that the new shields will look essentially identical on guide signs. The "green" SD shields are really just green borders, so the fact that the border is green does nothing to differentiate the shield on a guide sign, and I can't imagine that the "North Dakota" text will make it onto a guide sign either. Looks too much like a banner in that circumstance.
Quote from: vdeane on November 22, 2015, 03:04:58 PM
In any case, it strikes me as similar to how every New England state (except Vermont and New Hampshire) use the exact same square (save for Rhode Island including "RI" at the top). Of course, it wouldn't be this way if ND and SD weren't in the heart of rectangle state territory.
True, but no one else uses state shapes.
Ahem...
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cc/Louisiana_new_state_highway_shield_1064_east_Natalbany.JPG/220px-Louisiana_new_state_highway_shield_1064_east_Natalbany.JPG)
ID, AL...
"No one else uses state shapes" has to be read in the context of the earlier statement that ND and SD are "in the heart of rectangle state territory."
It appears route markers aren't the only things North Dakota is about to change:
http://www.aashtojournal.org/Pages/12232015ndakota.aspx
Quote from: froggie on December 24, 2015, 09:49:56 AM
It appears route markers aren't the only things North Dakota is about to change:
http://www.aashtojournal.org/Pages/12232015ndakota.aspx
Those look a little too crowded for my taste, but as I live south of the border it's not my problem.
NDDOT project SNH-2-013(054)262 (Job 3 in the just-advertised letting for February 5, 2016) appears to be the first to call for the new route markers in the eastern half of the state, near Kulm. The route marker sheet includes a drawing for four-digit routes, for which Series B digits are used. Oddly enough, the final sign layout sheet marks two Indian head shields (for ND 13 and ND 56) as "Existing to remain."
(Kulm is the German exonym for a Polish town, Chelmno, which was in Prussia 1772-1920 and became the site of an extermination camp during World War II.)
Quote from: froggie on December 24, 2015, 09:49:56 AM
It appears route markers aren't the only things North Dakota is about to change:
http://www.aashtojournal.org/Pages/12232015ndakota.aspx
Not bad. A hell of a lot better than the state route marker redesign.
The re-design makes me sad. I've always thought that North Dakota's state routes had the most attractive signs.
I always like it when states mix it up with their state highway symbols. There are too many states using circles, squares, squares with the state name, and state shapes. Any distinctive name or color scheme is nice. Like the yellow sunflowers of Kansas, or the Colorado state flag, or the busts of George in Washington. So the conversion of ND's signs to a hum-drum state shape would be a step down in originality. Though I also hope that they don't use SD's green background so they remain distinct. (something more colorful than black-and-white might be pretty cool though? like blue?)
Regardless of what color the background is, they'll still look the same on guide signs, unless North Dakota decides to pull a NJ.
So has anybody seen one of these used in the field yet? Any photos they'd like to share?
Quote from: paulthemapguy on February 21, 2016, 11:02:48 AM
So has anybody seen one of these used in the field yet? Any photos they'd like to share?
To do that, someone would have to go to North Dakota... and I can't think of anyone who would want to do that when they could go to South Dakota :bigass:.
More evidence that this is the new way of doing things (probably overkill, but what the heck).
http://www.dot.nd.gov/business/bidopenings/20160318-0930/Job%2010/SS-1-806(050)031_Final%20Plans_ED.pdf (http://www.dot.nd.gov/business/bidopenings/20160318-0930/Job%2010/SS-1-806(050)031_Final%20Plans_ED.pdf)
http://www.dot.nd.gov/business/bidopenings/20160318-0930/Job%2010/SS-1-024(021)008_Final%20Plans_ED.pdf (http://www.dot.nd.gov/business/bidopenings/20160318-0930/Job%2010/SS-1-024(021)008_Final%20Plans_ED.pdf)
While they are not correct specs (unlike the diagram earlier), they are very similar to SD's "stylized" route markers in South Dakota plans.
Probably the first guide-sign use of the new shield is in a regionwide sign retroreflectivity upgrade contract, also in the March 18, 2016 letting. Sign panel detail sheets are in these two files:
http://www.dot.nd.gov/business/bidopenings/20160318-0930%5CJob%2048%5CSHE-9-999(346)%20Final%20Plans%202of3%20ED.pdf
http://www.dot.nd.gov/business/bidopenings/20160318-0930%5CJob%2048%5CSHE-9-999(346)%20Final%20Plans%203of3%20ED.pdf
There are a total of 262 pattern-accurate sign panel detail sheets.
As an aside, it is not too often that I find not one, but two, really large pure signing contracts when I do the weekly run of my downloader controller script on Monday night. The other was for permanent signing of a new motorway segment of Danish Route 15, a northern bypass of Silkeborg (grading and some paving now visible in Google Maps satellite view) that closes a gap between two other motorway lengths of Route 15. The contract includes not just fixed permanent signs for the new motorway, but also patches and overlays regionwide, since the Danish highway authorities are also updating the control city network to exploit the coming availability of a continuous motorway from Herning to Aarhus. There were a total of 259 sign panel detail sheets, 77 for "Tavler" (signs on Route 15 itself) and 182 for "Følgevejvisning" (regionwide sign modifications).
Doesn't North Dakota know that shield backgrounds aren't to be used on guide signs? Yuk. Looks like we have a new New Jersey on our hands.
So what was the issue with the native american head design? Didnt they use a similar design for decades?
The speculation is cultural appropriation, but I am not aware NDDOT has released anything public to confirm.
Quote from: mariethefoxy on February 25, 2016, 03:43:48 AM
So what was the issue with the native american head design? Didnt they use a similar design for decades?
Yes, and it's actually a Sioux headdress.
Quote from: Brandon on February 25, 2016, 12:30:13 PM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on February 25, 2016, 03:43:48 AM
So what was the issue with the native american head design? Didnt they use a similar design for decades?
Yes, and it's actually a Sioux headdress.
Actually, it's the profile of Marcellus Red Tomahawk, the guy who killed Sitting Bull (and they use his profile for other things as well): http://bismarcktribune.com/news/columnists/curt-eriksmoen/the-man-behind-the-highway-patrol-logo/article_d77f6384-c106-11de-b9d6-001cc4c03286.html (http://bismarcktribune.com/news/columnists/curt-eriksmoen/the-man-behind-the-highway-patrol-logo/article_d77f6384-c106-11de-b9d6-001cc4c03286.html)
Quote from: vdeane on February 24, 2016, 07:27:04 PM
Doesn't North Dakota know that shield backgrounds aren't to be used on guide signs? Yuk. Looks like we have a new New Jersey on our hands.
It might be a "Distinguish from SD" thing, as SD doesn't use shield backgrounds.
Yay, 700th Post!
Quote from: SD Mapman on February 25, 2016, 01:10:56 PM
Quote from: Brandon on February 25, 2016, 12:30:13 PM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on February 25, 2016, 03:43:48 AM
So what was the issue with the native american head design? Didnt they use a similar design for decades?
Yes, and it's actually a Sioux headdress.
Actually, it's the profile of Marcellus Red Tomahawk, the guy who killed Sitting Bull (and they use his profile for other things as well): http://bismarcktribune.com/news/columnists/curt-eriksmoen/the-man-behind-the-highway-patrol-logo/article_d77f6384-c106-11de-b9d6-001cc4c03286.html (http://bismarcktribune.com/news/columnists/curt-eriksmoen/the-man-behind-the-highway-patrol-logo/article_d77f6384-c106-11de-b9d6-001cc4c03286.html)
Then removing him from the state route markers and replacing those with a generic state-shape shield is a grave mistake, IMHO.
Quote from: mariethefoxy on February 25, 2016, 03:43:48 AM
So what was the issue with the native american head design? Didnt they use a similar design for decades?
Maybe they just wanted a rebrand. But it's likely not a coincidence it came about around the same time as the end of the bitter years-long battle over U of ND's nickname and mascot.
Quote from: Brandon on February 26, 2016, 01:21:17 PM
Quote from: SD Mapman on February 25, 2016, 01:10:56 PM
Actually, it's the profile of Marcellus Red Tomahawk, the guy who killed Sitting Bull (and they use his profile for other things as well): http://bismarcktribune.com/news/columnists/curt-eriksmoen/the-man-behind-the-highway-patrol-logo/article_d77f6384-c106-11de-b9d6-001cc4c03286.html (http://bismarcktribune.com/news/columnists/curt-eriksmoen/the-man-behind-the-highway-patrol-logo/article_d77f6384-c106-11de-b9d6-001cc4c03286.html)
Then removing him from the state route markers and replacing those with a generic state-shape shield is a grave mistake, IMHO.
If he belongs to the Lakota, maybe communicating with the actual Lakota is the most responsible thing to do. If the Lakota have expressed concerns that it's insensitive, maybe it's time to change it. But maybe they would like the recognition as being such important part of the state that they were put on the road markers! It could go either way, but the only way to know their stance is to talk to them directly!
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 03, 2016, 04:32:30 AM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on February 25, 2016, 03:43:48 AM
So what was the issue with the native american head design? Didnt they use a similar design for decades?
Maybe they just wanted a rebrand. But it's likely not a coincidence it came about around the same time as the end of the bitter years-long battle over U of ND's nickname and mascot.
I think it's more of a preventative measure, to try to avoid any controversy whatsoever. This would keep in line with the fact that it was never officially announced (to try to avoid riling up the people opposed to change).
I came across this in my travels today. This is at I-29 & ND 11, just east of the interchange looking west. The overpass over I-29 is closed, so a detour onto I-29 is posted.
I've never posted a photo here before, so hopefully I did it correctly.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FZXyWD4a.jpg%3F1&hash=a5cbc2d2c923e4a3036170595062c7ba85173b36)
Quote from: M86 on April 24, 2016, 02:12:19 AM
I came across this in my travels today. This is at I-29 & ND 11, just east of the interchange looking west. The overpass over I-29 is closed, so a detour onto I-29 is posted.
I've never posted a photo here before, so hopefully I did it correctly.
~snipped~
Yes, it worked. Did you happen to notice any non-detour signs in the area?
Quote from: froggie on December 24, 2015, 09:49:56 AM
It appears route markers aren't the only things North Dakota is about to change:
http://www.aashtojournal.org/Pages/12232015ndakota.aspx
What is this? The linked page isn't loading today.
Quote from: SD Mapman on April 24, 2016, 10:20:26 AM
Yes, it worked. Did you happen to notice any non-detour signs in the area?
Nope, all the signs I saw were associated with the detour. There was this, some on the ramps, and some on I-29 at the next exit to the north for the detour. I'll keep my eye out though, I venture up to ND quite a bit.
It looks like more are starting to pop up. These were in the town of Forman:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FSgObi1i.jpg&hash=36ca5024b0ae8d26c520de7f1e3b3871aa373b24)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FWqrCgyS.jpg&hash=db056f34851a5a0c73f4581028ef3b464669e29a)
(Sorry about the blurriness in that one)
I also saw some for ND 1804 north of Bismarck but didn't get a photo.
Quote from: M86 on June 15, 2016, 01:48:05 PM
It looks like more are starting to pop up. These were in the town of Forman:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FSgObi1i.jpg&hash=36ca5024b0ae8d26c520de7f1e3b3871aa373b24)
Compared to South Dakota:
(https://c5.staticflickr.com/9/8152/7433441644_6a4e226d88.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/cjSkdY)
I think its interesting they decided to cram the state name in there.
Quote from: rte66man on June 20, 2016, 08:53:02 PM
I think its interesting they decided to cram the state name in there.
They had the space for it, considering that ND is wider than it is tall. They could have done the same for SD, because the state's overall proportions are similar. Instead, they stretched the state's shape vertically so it could cover more of the square sign panel. Which is the better choice? I'm not sure. But ND's shape is a bit less distinctive so I think that adding the state name was a useful thing to do.
Quote from: rte66man on June 20, 2016, 08:53:02 PM
Compared to South Dakota:
(https://c5.staticflickr.com/9/8152/7433441644_6a4e226d88.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/cjSkdY)
I think its interesting they decided to cram the state name in there.
Good grief, SDDOT needs a sign engineer... or an engineer that knows signs and fonts. There needs to be some consistency!
The old ND route sign had N and D in the corners, with the headdress. And now, they're mimicking Minnesota's route marker.
Quote from: M86 on July 02, 2016, 04:48:08 AM
The old ND route sign had N and D in the corners, with the headdress. And now, they're mimicking Minnesota's route marker.
That's 'cause ND is the failed hybrid of SD and MN. :sombrero:
Quote from: M86 on July 02, 2016, 04:48:08 AM
Good grief, SDDOT needs a sign engineer... or an engineer that knows signs and fonts. There needs to be some consistency!
My guess is the sign on the left was part of a different project.
Back to the subject at hand, I took a trip through Western ND recently and did not notice any new signs (and I looked too). Just guessing, but were those two photos on the eastern side of the state?
I personally think the old shields looked a lot better. The old ones had character, the new ones look more generic.
Quote from: SD Mapman on July 06, 2016, 10:35:23 PM
Back to the subject at hand, I took a trip through Western ND recently and did not notice any new signs (and I looked too). Just guessing, but were those two photos on the eastern side of the state?
Maybe they plan on only replacing older worn-out signs; that would certainly make more sense economically then replacing perfectly good signs.
He meant nobody uses a North Dakota state shape but North Dakota...
I've got no problem with them looking nearly identical on guide signs anyway. So what if they do? If you have trouble navigating because you thought you were in a different state, then you shouldn't be on the highway.
Quote from: kphoger on July 21, 2016, 12:13:10 PMI've got no problem with them looking nearly identical on guide signs anyway. So what if they do? If you have trouble navigating because you thought you were in a different state, then you shouldn't be on the highway.
Even at a distance, I think they are sufficiently easy to distinguish since only SD has that rather conspicuous "tail" on the southeast corner. SD also has just the one width for guide signs.
My biggest objection to the ND design is the use of the independent-mount shield as the guide-sign shield. This puts black directly on top of green, which is a rule-of-tincture violation. I would adapt the design concept for guide signs by having "NORTH DAKOTA" in white floating above the state shape, whose width would vary with digit count (Texas/Louisiana/old Caltrans style) to allow the use of Series D at a consistent height and normal intercharacter spacing regardless of number of digits in the route number.
An alternate and simpler solution that avoids a rule-of-tincture violation is simply to invert the colors of the independent-mount shield. This is very similar to what Idaho does with guide-sign state route shields, except that the state shape appears in outline rather than solid black, presumably to avoid a black blob that would obscure the digits at a distance.
We finally had some official stories about why the change is being made.
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2016/08/10/north-dakota-faced-complaints-over-sioux-image-signs
Basically, a former North Dakota resident who is not Native American threatened to sue the state.
Red Tomahawk descendants are upset about the change, and are quoted in the story complaining about "Indian wannabes" causing problems.
Quote from: WestDakota on August 13, 2016, 01:04:54 AM
We finally had some official stories about why the change is being made.
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2016/08/10/north-dakota-faced-complaints-over-sioux-image-signs
Basically, a former North Dakota resident who is not Native American threatened to sue the state.
Red Tomahawk descendants are upset about the change, and are quoted in the story complaining about "Indian wannabes" causing problems.
Basically a white twit is pissy because they use the image of a person who was Amerindian? I'm getting just a bit sick of this whitewashing of our history, removing tribal images and names because some white asshole finds them offensive.
Quote from: WestDakota on August 13, 2016, 01:04:54 AM
We finally had some official stories about why the change is being made.
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2016/08/10/north-dakota-faced-complaints-over-sioux-image-signs
Basically, a former North Dakota resident who is not Native American threatened to sue the state.
Red Tomahawk descendants are upset about the change, and are quoted in the story complaining about "Indian wannabes" causing problems.
Aaaand I thought as much.
Quote from: Brandon on August 13, 2016, 09:04:15 AM
Quote from: WestDakota on August 13, 2016, 01:04:54 AM
We finally had some official stories about why the change is being made.
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2016/08/10/north-dakota-faced-complaints-over-sioux-image-signs
Basically, a former North Dakota resident who is not Native American threatened to sue the state.
Red Tomahawk descendants are upset about the change, and are quoted in the story complaining about "Indian wannabes" causing problems.
Basically a white twit is pissy because they use the image of a person who was Amerindian? I'm getting just a bit sick of this whitewashing of our history, removing tribal images and names because some white asshole finds them offensive.
White people on both the political left and the right need to stop trying to speak for people and groups they know nothing about.
This is how I explained it to my friend:
North Dakota's state highway markers have featured the cut out of a Native Sioux Chief for the last century, as shown in the picture.
White people complained about it saying it's a misappropriation of Native culture. They threaten the state with legal action, so the state decides to change their state highway marker to a boring cutout shape of North Dakota.
Now the Native American chiefs at the Sioux reservation are seeing the changed signs, and they're actually disappointed about it! Now it's clear. The people who complained about the signs were white SJW-types trying to speak for minorities they had no business speaking for.
I posted this quote too from the article, which I love:
QuoteAccording to one chief's perception, the Native American symbology on the original signs cited a partnership between cultures. To quote, "'The reason why Red Tomahawk is on those signs was to honor that tribal relationship,' Standing Rock Sioux Chairman Dave Archambault II said. 'All of the sudden, they want to take that honoring away. We're not happy.'
Spotted at least a half dozen signs/shields with the new design last weekend. Ones in Dickinson were just installed in June.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on August 14, 2016, 03:51:32 PM
White people on both the political left and the right need to stop trying to speak for people and groups they know nothing about.
This is how I explained it to my friend:
North Dakota's state highway markers have featured the cut out of a Native Sioux Chief for the last century, as shown in the picture.
White people complained about it saying it's a misappropriation of Native culture. They threaten the state with legal action, so the state decides to change their state highway marker to a boring cutout shape of North Dakota.
Now the Native American chiefs at the Sioux reservation are seeing the changed signs, and they're actually disappointed about it! Now it's clear. The people who complained about the signs were white SJW-types trying to speak for minorities they had no business speaking for.
I posted this quote too from the article, which I love:
Nailed it. I grew up near the ND border in South Dakota, and recently moved back to the same area. As a kid, I was always fascinated by the ND State Highway shields/markers... It was so different than SD's. And now, when I heard about ND changing their signs, I just assumed the reason was outcry was from Native Americans. Sigh, how wrong and stupid I was to think that.
Quote from: M86 on August 22, 2016, 02:48:26 AM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on August 14, 2016, 03:51:32 PM
White people on both the political left and the right need to stop trying to speak for people and groups they know nothing about.
This is how I explained it to my friend:
North Dakota's state highway markers have featured the cut out of a Native Sioux Chief for the last century, as shown in the picture.
White people complained about it saying it's a misappropriation of Native culture. They threaten the state with legal action, so the state decides to change their state highway marker to a boring cutout shape of North Dakota.
Now the Native American chiefs at the Sioux reservation are seeing the changed signs, and they're actually disappointed about it! Now it's clear. The people who complained about the signs were white SJW-types trying to speak for minorities they had no business speaking for.
I posted this quote too from the article, which I love:
Nailed it. I grew up near the ND border in South Dakota, and recently moved back to the same area. As a kid, I was always fascinated by the ND State Highway shields/markers... It was so different than SD's. And now, when I heard about ND changing their signs, I just assumed the reason was outcry was from Native Americans. Sigh, how wrong and stupid I was to think that.
The thing that got me was how quietly it was done. There weren't really any news articles on it until after the fact.
Maybe that guy was worried Red Tomahawk's descendants would hunt him down.
Quote from: SD Mapman on August 22, 2016, 10:33:13 AM
The thing that got me was how quietly it was done. There weren't really any news articles on it until after the fact.
Maybe that guy was worried Red Tomahawk's descendants would hunt him down.
corco, can you close/lock this thread?