I have been in 41 states, and this is what I've seen.
I nominate my current home of Oregon as the state with the worst signing.
1) Multiplexes are very poorly signed.
2) Very little use of reassurance shields, especially on state highways.
3) "TO" isn't used when giving directions to a highway. For example, I-405 in Portland doesn't say "TO" US 26, it merely says 405/26, even though it doesn't actually meet with US 26 until after its junction with I-5. (US 26's routing through Portland is confusing to begin with)
4) Approaching a state highway from an arterial street seldom uses a JCT sign. For example, and street approaching Scholls Ferry Rd (OR 210) isn't signed with a "JCT 210" sign.
As for the best state,I say Wisconsin. Maybe it's bias since I grew up there but...
1) Multiplexes are signed incredibly well. A prime example is I-94/US41 between the IL state line and Milwaukee. The multiplex is signed on the mainlanes, frontage road signs, junction signs, and BGS displays.
2) They sign their TRIplex of 39/90/94 very well.
3) Certain counties sign mileposts every tenth of a mile.
4) JCT signs are always well displayed.
Thoughts? Your opinions?
I agree with you on Oregon being awful awful awful. Doesn't US-26 join I-405 from exit 2A to I-5 though?
Oregon reassurance shields show up in really random places. They'll pop up on bridge posts not anywhere near another road, but then you'll get to a major arterial and there won't be any signage.
I'm partial to Idaho's signage. It's very consistent and concurrencies are well signed. The only gripe you could possibly have about it is that Big Green Signs rarely list US routes running concurrent with the Interstates, but the US Routes are well signed on reassurance shields.
From what I have seen in Nebraska I have been very impressed there too. The junction signage is particularly cool.
Georgia has poor signage in places, such as when lanes end. Sometimes, lanes just end without any warning. That's just maddening.
Be well,
Bryant
From what I've seen on pictures, California seems to have very OLD signage. Not necessarily the worst though.
WA has good signage...we try to update our signs as soon as possible. So far, no flaws except the US 99 sign in Seattle...which we purposley set there.
When Washington signs things totally up to their standards they are awesome, but there's too many holes in signage where they break from that. Signage is quite poor along Seattle-area arterials and concurrencies aren't very well signed either.
WSDOT is considering making some new state route signs soon...replace the green ones and with that they will make those Seattle area signs better.
The green signs themselves aren't the problem; it's the lack of signage in places where signs need to be. Following the path of State Route 900 through Renton, for example, is incredibly difficult. What I've seen in previous WSDOT sign replacement is that they don't add new signs, just put new ones up where the old ones are.
California does have very old signage, but it will soon have the newest signage in the nation thanks to the CAL NEXUS program.
In NY region 2's signage is pretty bad. They use "TO" on nearly every guide panel and box all the street names, making it impossible to read them.
California definitely has the best...
I'd say Virginia is one of the worst.
My big pet peeve, besides the fact that Louisiana does a poor job of marking many of its routes (especially minor SRs), is that there is no distinction in signage between "primary" and "secondary" state highways. And yes, some Louisiana state highways are distinctly primary and others are distinctly secondary, though to be certain they aren't defined exactly that way in a legal sense anymore.
If you believed the signage, all state highways in La. are "primary." Big mistake. No way that, for example, LA 971 is of the same level of importance as, say, LA 67 or LA 10.
The new monochrome SR signage is ironic to me, because in the past I considered that perhaps a B&W state highway shield would be useful for signing the minor state routes, reserving the old green and white shields for primary routes only, thereby creating a needed distinction in signage.
Of course, my optimal solution would be to remove the vast majority of the minor routes from the state highway system altogether. But regrettably as I have come to learn over time, the mechanics of transportation politics in Louisiana are such that such a course of action would be complicated and essentially untenable. That's what happens when local "good old boy" types with their perpetual subsidy mentalities run the show, as they so often do here...
Arkansas gets a nod for worst because of having a policy of not signing overlapped routes. Instead the routes appear to be segmented.
I thought that Arkansas just had the worst quality of highways.
Arkansas is terrible, but the same also applies to Utah and their refusal to sign concurrencies (*cough*US 189) . It's not nearly as broken up as Arkansas, though
The routes in Arkansas don't just appear to be segmented; they are segmented. Attempting to follow Arkansas 162 for example (There are better examples, my knowledge of the Arkansas highway system isn't that great and their state map sucks and I don't feel like looking more carefully), yields an incredibly strange concurrency
Utah does this too to a lesser extent.
Quote from: corco on February 01, 2009, 02:44:13 AM
From what I have seen in Nebraska I have been very impressed there too. The junction signage is particularly cool.
I had a nice long reply with many examples from streetview, but a computer just decided to eat it. But anyway, I would not say that Nebraska's signage is the best because:
1) Subpar signage of Interstate/US route multiplexes (NB US 77 approaching its multiplex with I-80:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.810529,-96.753373&spn=0,359.956055&z=15&layer=c&cbll=40.810429,-96.753326&panoid=uRR8AtQb-j76lQLq8sUJXQ&cbp=12,323.8830815678229,,0,-13.290129118996695 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.810529,-96.753373&spn=0,359.956055&z=15&layer=c&cbll=40.810429,-96.753326&panoid=uRR8AtQb-j76lQLq8sUJXQ&cbp=12,323.8830815678229,,0,-13.290129118996695)
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.81329,-96.754789&spn=0,359.956055&z=15&layer=c&cbll=40.813198,-96.754752&panoid=xrMWFom8STJkhxoHee813Q&cbp=12,346.76955623068187,,0,10.400794308570907 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.81329,-96.754789&spn=0,359.956055&z=15&layer=c&cbll=40.813198,-96.754752&panoid=xrMWFom8STJkhxoHee813Q&cbp=12,346.76955623068187,,0,10.400794308570907)http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.814134,-96.75509&spn=0,359.956055&z=15&layer=c&cbll=40.813977,-96.755026&panoid=zJcVY1jltx2vv70Oz20-vg&cbp=12,340.7745167839722,,0,-12.212073779895393 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.814134,-96.75509&spn=0,359.956055&z=15&layer=c&cbll=40.813977,-96.755026&panoid=zJcVY1jltx2vv70Oz20-vg&cbp=12,340.7745167839722,,0,-12.212073779895393)
2) Not always signing the link routes right
(example from US 77: http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.741144,-96.717281&spn=0,359.824219&z=13&layer=c&cbll=40.741266,-96.71721&panoid=ooYEny6h5vdT3zXS1QZ29g&cbp=12,2.5222385935916805,,0,-43.27584396560947 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.741144,-96.717281&spn=0,359.824219&z=13&layer=c&cbll=40.741266,-96.71721&panoid=ooYEny6h5vdT3zXS1QZ29g&cbp=12,2.5222385935916805,,0,-43.27584396560947); there should at least be a "TO" banner on that sign, beside mention of L55X). There are a few other examples along US 30 where it parallels I-80.
3) Poor "TO NE 2" signage on US 77 south of the SPUI with NE 2 (instead of a direct route via the next intersection, they go down to L55W, then back north up L55W to NE 2)
4) Lack of use of control cities on I-680 and I-480
6) Poor distance signage on I-80. May be personal opinion, but I prefer Illinois way (next exit/next medium sized city, most likely with another interstate/control city). Cheyenne ought to appear sooner than on a sign with Denver somewhere after Gothenburg.
7) Lousy mileposts on I-80 west of Lincoln (they can do better than four small green squares with numbers bolted to a post)
That said, I like the junction signage, the occasional use of left/right turn lane signs, and the use of shields for routes on distance signs.
I haven't been in enough states recently to say which is the best for signage. However, I can say some of the states that I don't think are the best: Illinois (poor signage of Interstate/US/State Route multiplexes, see I-55/I-70/US 40 or I-255/US 50 or I-255/US 50/IL 3 where IL 3 is missing from some assemblies); Indiana (the multiplexed routes disappearing along I-465), Missouri (distance signage like Nebraska, disappearing routes around downtown Kansas City), Iowa (need better control city use or signs for St. Paul and Des Moines on the Avenue of the Saints and the Burlington Des Moines corridors respectively), or Pennsylvania (end speed limit xx, yet not marking what it changes to, Baltimore should pop up on distance signs for I-70 after Washington, PA).
Very interesting- I haven't spent much time recently in eastern Nebraska- mainly on 20/26/I-80/I-76/N-92 in Western Nebraska where it has appeared to be of high quality. I do agree on the mileposts being bad however. Wyoming uses those wood post things on secondary roads but full MUTCD mile markers on the mainline which is better.
Now that you mention it though I have noticed some instances where the link is signed as the main route, especially with US-30 on the mainline but also with US-26 and N-92 at L-79E in Melbeta:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Fne%2F92%2F26tol79e%2F3.JPG&hash=37056d9b282a428a3877abccb8ce50b422788400)
Language -DTP
MN has a nack for not signing US routes paralleled with Interstates.
US 12 is only mentioned at the start of I-94 at the WI border and in Minneapolis (at I-394 where it turns on to the west) and at I-494.
The same goes for US 52 - You don't know it's there ever once you get onto I-94. - even into North Dakota :crazy:
On the other hand - In Wisconsin - If it weren't for I-39 taking out part of WIS-78 - It would have been co-signed with at least one US or Interstate route throughout its length, in both WI and IL.
Is I-39's "solo stretch" near Portgage still signed as I-39 TO 51? Poor 39 can't get no respect....no respect at all, I tell ya!
Quote from: DrZoidberg on February 02, 2009, 12:00:42 PM
Is I-39's "solo stretch" near Portgage still signed as I-39 TO 51? Poor 39 can't get no respect....no respect at all, I tell ya!
Only the first reassurance set after the interchange. The ones after the next two exits after that are actual solo I-39 shields - one of the five has black background might I add.
This was after the road was rebuilt. The signs had TO-51 signs all the way north to 51 and TO-78 signs going south prior to that. (That was about a year after the I-39 signs went up.)
Quote from: Bryant5493 on February 01, 2009, 08:40:21 AM
Georgia has poor signage in places, such as when lanes end. Sometimes, lanes just end without any warning. That's just maddening.
Be well,
Bryant
Georgia is home to the absolute most hideous signing error in my experience. I was going down a road in Atlanta at night that dead-ends .... silently, with no warning, with a *black tarp* over a pile of cinder blocks.
I was doing 35 (speed limit was marked as 35 or 40) and I basically had to slam the brakes at the last second.
Another signing question.
Since I-10 has been revamped on the west side of Houston, is the US 90 concurrency signed with it at all? I always thought it was funny how US 90 vanished near Katy, and then didn't appear again until the east side of Houston.
Tennessee does a poor job of signing its arterial highways.
I bet anyone to try and follow the US routes through Nashville without a road atlas or a GPS. Especially with US31E and US31W north of town versus US 31 and US 31A south of town.
US 70 and US 70S leave the city both east and west but I'm only sure that US 70 goes through downtown!
There is also US 431, US 41, and US 41A.
All of these road go through downtown but the reassurance and directional signs are inadequate or just plain missing.
And out in the country, there is no consistency to sign usage and inadequate signing of through routes.
Makes me wanna :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
Memphis is also pretty bad... does anyone know where US-78 ends, for example? It just kinda ... stops existing.
This may help with agentsteel's US 78 question. Great site, I might add.
http://www.geocities.com/usend7079/End078/end078.htm (http://www.geocities.com/usend7079/End078/end078.htm)
I would have to say California has the best. Although CA's signage is the oldest (just pick any random piece of freeway signage in LA County or on I-15/I-215 at the base of the Cajon Pass), it is still remarkably effective. I have never gotten lost once in California. There might be some bias in that, figuring I'm a native Californian. Exits are signed accordingly; thru routes as well. 'Tis all I have to say about that.
Kansas is almost certainly the best in my book. Clear, consistent signage... all concurrencies are marked (even when I-35 runs concurrent with three US routes they're all signed). The signs are very reflective and the state highway shield is unique and easy to spot.
New Mexico has to be among the worst. Only done a little driving through NM, where I encountered a state highway intersection which contained absolutely no arrows. Just two shields and a fork in the road. I had to guess that since the highway I wanted had its shield posted on the right that the right fork was correct. Thankfully I was right, or who knows where I would have ended up. I've looked through some NM pictures and it looks the whole state is similarly bad.
The District of Columbia is pretty bad, too. There's this unsigned interstate that branches off I-395 that you have to take to get to DC 295 from I-395. Well, as if having a road with no real easy name isn't difficult enough, I was trying to find DC 295...there it is on one gantry, but by the next, the exit is renamed to "Pennsylvania Avenue". Couldn't determine if that was where I wanted to go or not, so I passed it up–and ended up getting dumped onto a surface street in Anacostia. Finally just ended up giving up finding DC 295 and going back to the Capital Beltway and going around that way instead.
South Carolina had some pretty bad signage in the areas that I was. Oh and the Charlotte area of NC was just unbelieveable.
Oregon's marking of highways, particularly downtown Portland, is pretty bad. It's partially messed up a little because they've actually moved the routing on US-26 . . . it used to be routed down Market and Clay down to Naito, then down Naito to the Ross Island ramps. Now, it's very briefly multiplexed with I-405, then up 5th/6th into the "Willy Wonka Zone", as I call it, where it curves around and does some really weird stuff--none of which is well-marked--before getting onto the Ross Island.
OR-10, OR-43 and OR-99W get lost in the Willy Wonka Zone as well, and the signage tends to contradict where they actually begin and end. They really ought to just get a big bulldozer and level some of those office buildings in the way. The Willy Wonka Zone is one of the worst designed setups out there.
Plus there's all the post-2002 routes that aren't signed yet, or are badly signed.
I'm actually a huge fan of our variant Speed Limit signs without the word "Limit", though, even if the FHWA doesn't like them.
QuoteOregon's marking of highways, particularly downtown Portland, is pretty bad. It's partially messed up a little because they've actually moved the routing on US-26 . . . it used to be routed down Market and Clay down to Naito, then down Naito to the Ross Island ramps. Now, it's very briefly multiplexed with I-405, then up 5th/6th into the "Willy Wonka Zone", as I call it, where it curves around and does some really weird stuff--none of which is well-marked--before getting onto the Ross Island.
OR-10, OR-43 and OR-99W get lost in the Willy Wonka Zone as well, and the signage tends to contradict where they actually begin and end. They really ought to just get a big bulldozer and level some of those office buildings in the way. The Willy Wonka Zone is one of the worst designed setups out there.
Plus there's all the post-2002 routes that aren't signed yet, or are badly signed.
I'm actually a huge fan of our variant Speed Limit signs without the word "Limit", though, even if the FHWA doesn't like them.
- Downtown Portland, at least when I last drove through it, still has Clay signed as West 26, not so sure if Market is signed as East 26. You are correct that 26 does multiplex with I-405 for about 1/2 mile, and it is signed, but once you exit 405, good luck!
- Another interesting note on OR-10 and the Ross Island Bridge, is that 10 is signed on the western end of the bridge, even though it doesn't actually start until it splits from Barbur a few miles south.
- There is at least one OR-99W shield along Barbur Blvd. I hit it a few times a week if I go up Corbett to Barbur (I work on John's Landing and sometimes use this as an alternative to I-5)
- OR 43 is signed as Macadam "loops" around to I-5 south, but it simply disappears. Now that I think about it, does Oregon use "END" shields at all on their highways? I've never seen one.
Oregon just isn't bad about route signing, they're also bad about updating them. Drive along 217 and see for yourself. There's a few really old school 217 signs.
Alabama does a somewhat good job signing its roads, but a lot of the signs are very, very old and fading badly. My state with the best signs would be missouri. whenever i travel there i like the evry .2 mile milemarker and all the signs are very new and routes are signed well.
I read something on MTR a while back that CA doesn't multiplex highways at all. If that's the case, does that give I-10 a small "gap" near downtown LA where it technically multiplexes with I-5? I haven't driven that stretch of I-10....going east, are you directed onto 5 to continue on along I-10?
Quote from: DrZoidberg on February 04, 2009, 07:50:53 PM
I read something on MTR a while back that CA doesn't multiplex highways at all. If that's the case, does that give I-10 a small "gap" near downtown LA where it technically multiplexes with I-5? I haven't driven that stretch of I-10....going east, are you directed onto 5 to continue on along I-10?
California just does not have that many overlaps. However U.S. 95 and Interstate 40 (http://www.westcoastroads.com/california/images025/i-040_wb_exit_133_06.jpg) is signed. The overlap between Interstate 5 and 10 is so short that once they merge, the sign bridges already tout the split.
See the bottom of http://www.westcoastroads.com/california/i-005nf_ca.html (http://www.westcoastroads.com/california/i-005nf_ca.html) and http://www.westcoastroads.com/california/i-005sq_ca.html (http://www.westcoastroads.com/california/i-005sq_ca.html)
Thank you, aaroads, for clarifying that.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on February 02, 2009, 02:45:01 PM
Georgia is home to the absolute most hideous signing error in my experience. I was going down a road in Atlanta at night that dead-ends .... silently, with no warning, with a *black tarp* over a pile of cinder blocks.
I was doing 35 (speed limit was marked as 35 or 40) and I basically had to slam the brakes at the last second.
Yeah, good you didn't hit that.
I know one time, I was merging onto I-75 northbound from Akers Mill Road (or Cumberland Boulevard, can't remeber which one connects with I-75), and I was cruising along. I thought the entrance ramp to I-75 northbound turned into an exit-only lane, but no -- it ended abrutly. Good thing no one was already on the freeway mainline.
Be well,
Bryant
Another signing question that jumped into my head was the use of Freeway Entrance signs. Is CA the only state to do this?
Washington uses Freeway Entrance signs fairly religiously, and I've seen a couple in Idaho, but none in Wyoming
Quote from: DrZoidberg on February 05, 2009, 07:16:08 PM
Another signing question that jumped into my head was the use of Freeway Entrance signs. Is CA the only state to do this?
Nevada uses them see example (https://www.aaroads.com/west/nevada999/carp_elgin_rd_nb_at_i-015_sb_02), and a few pop up in Utah minus the reassurance shield. I wish they used them everywhere. :camo:
Quote from: DrZoidberg on February 04, 2009, 12:39:55 PM
Oregon just isn't bad about route signing, they're also bad about updating them. Drive along 217 and see for yourself. There's a few really old school 217 signs.
Yes, there's that one really old OR-217 shield on the northern Hall Blvd overpass (near Washington Square). That's the only old school shield I remember of the top of my head at the moment, though I kind of vaguely remember there being one near 99W as well. I'd imagine it probably dates to when the actual freeway was just opened in the 1970s.
OR-99W was really only signed on the "Pacific Highway" section in Tigard before, so it's interesting to hear there's shields on Barbur now. Some of the ODOT maps I've seen show it going down Barbur and splitting off at the Naito Parkway interchange, then going over the Steel Bridge and getting lost, though I believe historically it was routed down Interstate Avenue and joined up with 99E again somewhere near Marine Drive.
I've always considered OR-43 to end there at SW Kelly Avenue--which, supposedly, is US 26 WB, but it's the Willa Wonka Zone, so who knows.
I also wish they'd sign First Avenue/Glencoe Road between OR-8 in Hillsboro and US-26 in North Plains as part of OR-219, too. It's a major road, and it'd only be logical to have that highway designation continue up to a US highway, even if it is county-maintained--which has a precedent anyways with all of OR-210 and parts of OR-8 and 10.
I think this may be material for another topic in the West Coast Roads area. :biggrin:
-Alex (Tarkus)
I always though Maryland has great signage, Texas was surprisingly weak.
Florida is pretty good when it comes to its signage but it is not perfect. The state does have a knack for this:
(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/us-090_and_us-231_001)
Eastbound US 90 and Southbound US 331 multiplex just west of DeFuniak Springs
(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/southeast/us-090_and_us-231_002_jct)
US 331 having a junction with itself one mile later...
This is a common occurrence in Florida in regards to multiplexed routes, especially the US highways. The only thing I can think of as to why FDOT does this is to alert motorists who enter the highway after the multiplex begins...otherwise it doesn't really make any sense.
Quote from: aaroads on February 05, 2009, 11:07:59 AM
Quote from: DrZoidberg on February 04, 2009, 07:50:53 PM
I read something on MTR a while back that CA doesn't multiplex highways at all. If that's the case, does that give I-10 a small "gap" near downtown LA where it technically multiplexes with I-5? I haven't driven that stretch of I-10....going east, are you directed onto 5 to continue on along I-10?
California just does not have that many overlaps. However U.S. 95 and Interstate 40 (http://www.westcoastroads.com/california/images025/i-040_wb_exit_133_06.jpg) is signed. The overlap between Interstate 5 and 10 is so short that once they merge, the sign bridges already tout the split.
See the bottom of http://www.westcoastroads.com/california/i-005nf_ca.html (http://www.westcoastroads.com/california/i-005nf_ca.html) and http://www.westcoastroads.com/california/i-005sq_ca.html (http://www.westcoastroads.com/california/i-005sq_ca.html)
I've driven that. First time, it startled me because I thought I had gotten off I-10 by mistake as there was no reassurance sign as you bank to the right after the underpass. It isn't until a quartermile when you're merged with I-5 that there's a sign indicating that I-10 exits to the right. Considering it's the junction of the 101, it's easy to assume you took the wrong road.
Sykotyk
QuoteOR-99W was really only signed on the "Pacific Highway" section in Tigard before, so it's interesting to hear there's shields on Barbur now.
I've only seen two along Barbur. One is seen when driving up Corbett prior to turning onto Barbur. The shield simply reads "99W <-->" The other one was seen near the Fred Meyer at Terwilliger. Pulling out onto Barbur, signs direct traffic to northbound I-5 and 99W. I'll try and snap a picture next time I'm over that way.
A minor correction to my rant on NDOR's poor signage of the US 77/I-80 multiplex: there is a sign on NB US 77 instructing US 77 traffic to follow I-80 EB:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.80603,-96.750412&spn=0,359.978027&z=16&layer=c&cbll=40.805804,-96.750257&panoid=gVjyskXxlDW4W1yM2O-a7A&cbp=12,14.547315505654353,,0,2.3705967338992666 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=40.80603,-96.750412&spn=0,359.978027&z=16&layer=c&cbll=40.805804,-96.750257&panoid=gVjyskXxlDW4W1yM2O-a7A&cbp=12,14.547315505654353,,0,2.3705967338992666)
That said, I have a few new complaints:
1) Signage in the work zone on I-80 around Lincoln is subpar. First, they need to list more than the exit number on some of the temporary signs. Shouldn't be too hard to add a shield for US 77 and I-180. Then there are spots where the construction is pretty much finished for now, like on EB I-80 at the US 6/Waverly Exit, yet there is no signage marking the exit for US 6.
2) The eastern US 77/NE 92 intersection is poorly marked, and this is extremely apparent after dark. If not better signage, it needs more reflectors or better lighting. It also probably should have an advisory speed for the SB-WB ramp.
3) Poor business route signage. Since the business routes are not state maintained, this varies from city to city, but Fremont is definitely not good at signing business routes.
4) Signage on EB I-80 approaching the I-480 interchange neglects to provide details for those wanting to use SB US 75:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=41.222859,-95.981841&spn=0,359.956055&z=15&layer=c&cbll=41.222818,-95.981965&panoid=cVY2hbpjyiFToINJR4fapQ&cbp=12,69.0850188772257,,0,-22.240617836803594 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie=UTF8&ll=41.222859,-95.981841&spn=0,359.956055&z=15&layer=c&cbll=41.222818,-95.981965&panoid=cVY2hbpjyiFToINJR4fapQ&cbp=12,69.0850188772257,,0,-22.240617836803594)
I wish California would put up the direction of the route(s) on some of its BGS. I don't like seeing an interstate or state highway with out any indication if the route is going north, south, east, or west.
Worst signage in Lincoln was going from I-80 to NE-2 to cut down to Kansas City.
I wonder if/when they'll ever build a southern bypass around Lincoln for those going I-80 to NE-2?
Sykotyk
On M-10, there are two different control cities. At I-75 and at I-94, the control city is Southfield. But just a few miles north at M-8, it suddenly becomes Lansing! WTF? :ded:
Another strike for Oregon DOT. OR 217, a major artery on Portland's west side....not a single reassurance marker heading north for the entire length. Also, OR 210, Scholls Ferry Rd, not a single reassurance marker. The only way you know it's 210 is the sign guiding you off of 217.
"OR-99W was really only signed on the "Pacific Highway" section in Tigard before, so it's interesting to hear there's shields on Barbur now.[/quote]
I've only seen two along Barbur. One is seen when driving up Corbett prior to turning onto Barbur. The shield simply reads "99W <-->" The other one was seen near the Fred Meyer at Terwilliger. Pulling out onto Barbur, signs direct traffic to northbound I-5 and 99W. I'll try and snap a picture next time I'm over that way. "
There are also overhead signs on Naito north of the split with Barbur. Two on southbound near the US 26 exit which mark the route as OR 10/99W and one on northbound which identifies it as US 26/OR 99W, which is right after a reassurance assembly indicating it's US 26/OR 10.
There used to be reassurance markers on southbound Barbur south of Corbett, but they've been gone awhile. I do have a picture of them if I can retrieve it from the hard drive of my old PC.
In general, I agree that Oregon's signing is generally poor.
Quote from: DrZoidberg on February 08, 2009, 10:14:20 PM
Another strike for Oregon DOT. OR 217, a major artery on Portland's west side....not a single reassurance marker heading north for the entire length. Also, OR 210, Scholls Ferry Rd, not a single reassurance marker. The only way you know it's 210 is the sign guiding you off of 217.
That might also be partly because OR-210 is maintained by Washington County in its entirety, not ODOT. If you look at much of the speed signs, you'll notice that they're almost all in Washington County fonts as opposed to ODOT fonts. (The silly things I pay attention to. :spin:)
I believe it was transferred sometime in the late 1980s/early 1990s when Scholls Ferry was widened between Nimbus and Murray. Pretty much shields on OR-210, OR-10 and OR-8 were installed before Washington County took control of them.
-Alex (Tarkus)
Good information, Alex. Are you a Portlander? I'm a Lake Osweogan myself.
The signage for US 50 and Route 99 in Sacramento tends to border on the bizarre (and this includes one segment that BOTH highways share!).
US 50 eastbound is always signed, from the I-80 junction and through town (and this entire section from West Sacramento onwards is always called US 50 in traffic reports, including the triple concurrency on the WX segment from I-5 to Route 99). Westbound?
At exit 7, it is signed as "TO I-80 West San Francisco."
At Exit 6A, it suddenly becomes "TO I-80/I-5 CA-99 - San Francisco" - technically correct as you will be on Route 99 once the ramps from the Oak Park interchange merge in, but at that moment the route is only US 50 and not Business 80 or Route 99.
At I-5 and on the Pioneer Bridge, it's signed as "Business 80 - San Francisco." Those are the last sign gantries pointing out which route it is, until the terminus at I-80.
(And in that entire segment, the freeway onramps in both directions are ALWAYS signed only for Business 80! There are some signs pointing out the mutiple designations on nearby surface streets, but never the Freeway Entrance ones.)
From both Route 99 and I-5, US 50 East is only signed and not US 50 West, thus creating the illusion that US 50's western terminus is at either of those interchanges, which is absolutely not the case (as both the exit numbers and legislative definition attest to).
Now about to make a seperate Route 99 post because THAT one is even more complicated and confusing. :crazy: :pan:
Route 99 in Sacramento. Where do I begin!? :poke:
Northbound
At exit 297, a small sign notes "TO I-5/CA 99 USE I-80 WEST" which is inaccurate as I-80 hasn't used the Capital City Freeway route in 27 years. :p (There is a non-reflective I-80 overhead sign in the vicinity of US 50 Exit 7, and three newer red-and-blue I-80 signs along the business route's exits.)
Right after that is a "TO I-80 WEST/I-5/CA 99 San Francisco" sign gantry - repeated about a quarter mile ahead - that doesn't make a through route clear. (99 will end up using that ramp to take the westbound WX segment of the Capital City Freeway through midtown/downtown; implied in the following descriptions is the aforementioned fact that US 50 is never signed westbound through here at any point.)
Between the two gantries is one pull-through which notes, "TO CA 99 Yuba City/I-5 Redding USE San Francisco Exit"
At the gore point, the signage now identifies that ramp as simply "TO I-80 West - San Francisco" along with the companion branch of "US 50 East - South Lake Tahoe." Yet when the exit splits into the 99 northbound ramp and the ramp to 50 east, suddenly 99 reappears as the through route, "TO I-80/I-5 CA-99 San Francisco/Redding."
At I-5, 99 northbound (which will take the ramp from 50 west to 5 north) is only identified as "TO 99."
Along I-5, northbound 99 only is given a trailblazer once or twice (I think around the Richards Boulevard exit), though at many of the signs in the downtown area, as well as at Richards Boulevard and on Garden Highway in south Natomas, the concurrency is completely acknowledged. I-80 eastbound and westbound in Natomas also identifies both 5 and 99 in signs for the 80/5 junction.
In North Natomas, 99 isn't acknowledged much on the concurrency up to the north 99/5 split (though oddly, at 99's exit with Elkhorn Boulevard, the long-defunct concurrency with Route 70 IS mentioned; two or so downtown Sacramento gantries, near the Amtrak station and on Capitol Mall, mention 70/99 as well, even though 70 stopped reaching downtown ca. 1970.)
Southbound
Along Route 99 in north Natomas (past the Elkhorn exit), the concurrency is completely acknowledged, including one trailblazer for both 5 and 99 as you merge onto I-5 south. Then none of the gantries mention 99's presence on the mainline towards US 50.
Another southbound trailblazer pops up on the bridge crossing the American River (after the Garden Highway exit). After Richards Boulevard, the upcoming exit for the WX Freeway is properly identified with all three routes - US 50/Business 80/CA 99. At the Q Street exit, all three routes continue to correctly be noted, this time as "US 50/Business 80/CA 99 South - Fresno-San Francisco."
Where the 99/5 split occurs, the signage once also was as correct as the Q Street overheads, though this recently was changed (if I am not mistaken) to US 50/Business 80/To 99. When the 50 west (Business 80 west) ramp heads off, the split is signed as...
"US 50 EAST/TO 99 Fresno" and "TO I-80 San Francisco" (note no mention of Business 80).
After that, 99 next reappears on the advance signage for the direct ramp to the South Sacramento Freeway.
Oh, and did I mention that there are NO trailblazers of any sort along US 50 (and Route 99) between West Sacramento and the Oak Park interchange? :rolleyes:
Quote from: DrZoidberg on February 10, 2009, 11:22:02 PM
Are you a Portlander? I'm a Lake Osweogan myself.
Yes, born and raised in Washington County. I'm in Eugene most of the year for my education, though, right now.
-Alex (Tarkus)
QuoteYes, born and raised in Washington County. I'm in Eugene most of the year for my education, though, right now.
A Duck, I assume?? That's okay, I guess.....married to an OSU alum. :-P But I have nothing against the Ducks. My alma mater is a badger (UW Madison)