AARoads Forum

National Boards => General Highway Talk => Traffic Control => Topic started by: KCRoadFan on March 16, 2021, 07:29:04 PM

Title: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: KCRoadFan on March 16, 2021, 07:29:04 PM
San Antonio, TX. San Francisco, CA. Wichita, KS. Los Angeles, CA. Dallas, TX.

What do the aforementioned cities all have in common? Many, if not most, of the street signs don't display the suffix on them (at least, that's true of overhead signs at traffic lights). Also, in the first three cities listed, most of the "blade" signs at non-signalized intersections lack suffixes as well; this is especially true in San Antonio and San Francisco.

What other cities are like that? (I'm not talking about places such as Irvine, CA where many of the streets have no suffixes in their official names; these would be cities where the street names officially do contain suffixes, but the street signs exclude them.)
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: pianocello on March 16, 2021, 07:47:40 PM
New Orleans and Detroit come to mind, there aren't many suffixes at either signalized or non-signalized intersections.

Peoria, IL used to omit suffixes at their signalized intersections, but I don't know if they still do with some of their newer signs. The non-signalized intersections have them, IIRC.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: Max Rockatansky on March 16, 2021, 07:54:37 PM
Pretty much most of Fresno. 
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: KCRoadFan on March 16, 2021, 08:17:18 PM
Quote from: pianocello on March 16, 2021, 07:47:40 PM
New Orleans and Detroit come to mind, there aren't many suffixes at either signalized or non-signalized intersections.

Dang it - forgot about Detroit. I do remember that now, though, from when I visited back in 2006.

Now that I think of it, I remember that Cleveland does that a lot too. Looking around in Street View, I see that it's also the case in Toledo, and to a lesser extent in Erie, PA. Overall, it seems to be pretty common in the Rust Belt.

Back in my neck of the woods, St. Joseph, MO, also has a lot of street signs without suffixes.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: KCRoadFan on March 16, 2021, 08:24:35 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 16, 2021, 07:54:37 PM
Pretty much most of Fresno.

I don't know where you're coming from with this one - I looked around various sections of Fresno on Street View, and all the street signs I saw had suffixes.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: roadman65 on March 16, 2021, 09:29:21 PM
Wichita even signs I-135 without suffixes on exit guides.  Pawnee, Hydraulic, Kellogg, etc.  K-96 does as well.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50290352296_9b3730ccc2_k.jpg)
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: Max Rockatansky on March 16, 2021, 09:52:36 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 16, 2021, 08:24:35 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on March 16, 2021, 07:54:37 PM
Pretty much most of Fresno.

I don't know where you're coming from with this one - I looked around various sections of Fresno on Street View, and all the street signs I saw had suffixes.

Hence why I said most, I have things like this near me:

https://www.gribblenation.org/2018/03/nexus-of-universe-bulter-california.html?m=1

Pretty much anything that was a somewhat recent annexation by the City has the standard Fresno County street blade set up.  As an example; Butler Avenue does become a City Street and still has those County blades that lack suffixes. 
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: JoePCool14 on March 16, 2021, 10:40:28 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on March 16, 2021, 09:29:21 PM
Wichita even signs I-135 without suffixes on exit guides.  Pawnee, Hydraulic, Kellogg, etc.  K-96 does as well.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50290352296_9b3730ccc2_k.jpg)

For someone unfamiliar with the area, you might think that Kellogg was a control city rather than a street name.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: KCRoadFan on March 17, 2021, 12:29:35 AM
OK, I'm kicking myself for not having thought about this example until now. Here's one that's right in my own backyard. Throughout many of the Johnson County suburbs in the KC area (e.g. Overland Park, Lenexa, Shawnee, Leawood), the vast majority of street signs for small residential side streets do not include suffixes. (The signs for major through roads - such as, for example, Mission, Roe, Nall, Metcalf, Antioch, Switzer, Quivira, Pflumm, and Lackman - do have the suffixes.)
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: kphoger on March 17, 2021, 10:57:57 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 16, 2021, 10:40:28 PM
For someone unfamiliar with the area, you might think that Kellogg was a control city rather than a street name.

Or that Rock (https://goo.gl/maps/qa7bkJYFNoRiKeGLA) and Greenwich actually are nearby place names–or that Rock doesn't go to Rock, but Greenwich does go to Greenwich.  (Interestingly, guide signs for Greenwich actually put "Road" or "Rd" after it for some reason–even though that road actually goes to Greenwich, so nobody could be confused by its omission.)

Newer installations, however, include the generic where it was once left off:
old (https://goo.gl/maps/26ripDCeDvWjjAXW7)/new (https://goo.gl/maps/vFKbe21GvWJBzBjRA)
old (https://goo.gl/maps/ZbjZLmqKmPx92DLJ8)/new (https://goo.gl/maps/MYMNzLevVE5q7mWA7)
old (https://goo.gl/maps/4UW8QCpDDpjir9E87)/new (https://goo.gl/maps/giqQ4Qyi7KmHp2Sp9)
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: jp the roadgeek on March 17, 2021, 01:37:17 PM
Hamden, CT comes to mind.  I've seen a ton of street blades without suffixes as I drive along Whitney Ave (CT 10 for the northern portion)
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: kphoger on March 17, 2021, 01:54:12 PM
The town I grew up in.  It may have been fixed since then, though.  GSV imagery shows street blades with the generic along the state highways, anyway.  Didn't use to be like that.

Quote from: kphoger on November 27, 2018, 03:41:10 PM
Back when I lived in Atwood, computerized forms must have still been fairly new.  I remember conversations like this when ordering merchandise over the phone:

– What's your address?
– 806 S. First.
– Street?  Avenue? ...
– No, just 806 S. First.
– Right.  Is it First Street, or First Avenue, or what?
– No, it's just First.  Nothing after that.
– Well, it's a required field on the computer.  I have to put something.
– OK, then, put whatever you'd like.
– Should I put Street, or Avenue, or what?
– Put whatever you want.
– Which one is it?
– It's not.  It's just First.
– OK, I'll just put Street.
– Sounds good to me.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: SkyPesos on March 17, 2021, 02:04:23 PM
Imagine how much of a mess it would be if street signs in Queens lack suffixes
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: roadman65 on March 17, 2021, 02:09:59 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2021, 10:57:57 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 16, 2021, 10:40:28 PM
For someone unfamiliar with the area, you might think that Kellogg was a control city rather than a street name.

Also, Kellogg Avenue, is a freeway now.  Hardly any of it is arterial anymore, so it should have control cities instead. Kingman for Westbound US 54/400 and Augusta for Eastbound US 54/400.  It is the major E-W corridor and should be signed for long distance travelers.

Or that Rock (https://goo.gl/maps/qa7bkJYFNoRiKeGLA) and Greenwich actually are nearby place names–or that Rock doesn't go to Rock, but Greenwich does go to Greenwich.  (Interestingly, guide signs for Greenwich actually put "Road" or "Rd" after it for some reason–even though that road actually goes to Greenwich, so nobody could be confused by its omission.)

Newer installations, however, include the generic where it was once left off:
old (https://goo.gl/maps/26ripDCeDvWjjAXW7)/new (https://goo.gl/maps/vFKbe21GvWJBzBjRA)
old (https://goo.gl/maps/ZbjZLmqKmPx92DLJ8)/new (https://goo.gl/maps/MYMNzLevVE5q7mWA7)
old (https://goo.gl/maps/4UW8QCpDDpjir9E87)/new (https://goo.gl/maps/giqQ4Qyi7KmHp2Sp9)
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: 6a on March 18, 2021, 05:11:09 AM
In parts of Ohio, "roads"  don't have the rd. suffix on blades but other names do (lane, drive, etc.). It really depends on the county you're in.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210318/ff8be1eb2f99241f3647f1f25053776c.jpg)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210318/f3fdc914b74876c2c5ddfaa8e362059e.jpg)
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: Scott5114 on March 18, 2021, 07:31:42 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2021, 10:57:57 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 16, 2021, 10:40:28 PM
For someone unfamiliar with the area, you might think that Kellogg was a control city rather than a street name.

Or that Rock (https://goo.gl/maps/qa7bkJYFNoRiKeGLA) and Greenwich actually are nearby place names–or that Rock doesn't go to Rock, but Greenwich does go to Greenwich.  (Interestingly, guide signs for Greenwich actually put "Road" or "Rd" after it for some reason–even though that road actually goes to Greenwich, so nobody could be confused by its omission.)

I was browsing around Wichita on Google Maps looking around at the various ways these suffix-less streets are signed. Came across Topeka Street. Dropped the GSV pin on Kellogg right by the ramp, thinking "Man, there's no way signing this could be anything but confusing, unless they made an exception and put the suffix there."

The exit is signed "Central Business District" instead.

Well played, Wichita.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: kphoger on March 18, 2021, 08:22:06 PM
That exit is for four different cross streets, not just Topeka.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: TheStranger on March 18, 2021, 11:21:49 PM
IIRC Makati doesn't put up street suffixes for the most part in its central business district:

(https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/68860920_10107794726227983_6153082496004128768_o.jpg?_nc_cat=105&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=cdbe9c&_nc_ohc=undQb1r5e34AX9l5YhG&_nc_ht=scontent-sjc3-1.xx&oh=bcf315aeefe55bf690466dfa7b3dcc52&oe=607A9CA8)
(Note the "Thailand Street" former-street-name blade in this example)

And one example where one street uses the suffix and the other does not:
(https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/69315366_10107792797213743_6367488131003842560_o.jpg?_nc_cat=102&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=cdbe9c&_nc_ohc=rfpnpuF1SRsAX9y6NpO&_nc_ht=scontent-sjc3-1.xx&oh=99dd4a37e77ee10ed59bca9311777dc2&oe=607B213D)

Nearer to the Ayala Center mall complex (consisting of the Greenbelt and Glorietta shopping centers) the street names become common again:
(https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/70064040_10107819454806713_4569862631921287168_o.jpg?_nc_cat=101&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=cdbe9c&_nc_ohc=k_Vnt6FTs1gAX-hiZAS&_nc_ht=scontent-sjc3-1.xx&oh=6f5aa52306284d728c6e1df0bd838192&oe=607B03FF)

Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: jakeroot on March 19, 2021, 12:18:52 AM
Spokane, WA.

Practice is to use suffixes only overhead at traffic lights. Post-mounted street blades are generally suffix-less with some exceptions.

The old standard was suffix-less black-on-white (https://goo.gl/maps/itfya9D2dEkvSp6R7). Kind of looked like a mini San Francisco. Another example (https://goo.gl/maps/jpzmbYds7ZRVDqH97) of this, now gone. Very large block numbers on some.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: Ned Weasel on March 20, 2021, 12:48:22 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 18, 2021, 07:31:42 PM
I was browsing around Wichita on Google Maps looking around at the various ways these suffix-less streets are signed. Came across Topeka Street. Dropped the GSV pin on Kellogg right by the ramp, thinking "Man, there's no way signing this could be anything but confusing, unless they made an exception and put the suffix there."

The exit is signed "Central Business District" instead.

Well played, Wichita.

Meanwhile in Olathe, on a trip one might take from Chicago, Minneapolis, Des Moines, or Kansas City, to Santa Fe: https://goo.gl/maps/sTDQ5KXsX7SsgEFy6 .  It's also worth noting that US 56 in western Kansas is one of several possible routes to Santa Fe, but this is not where US 56 splits off of I-35.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: Scott5114 on March 20, 2021, 12:53:26 AM
Sure, but I think Johnson County is far enough away from Santa Fe NM that one would be more likely to interpret "Santa Fe" as a street name than they would "Topeka" in Wichita. (Topeka is at least in the same state, and someone might well think Topeka would be the next control city on the Kansas Turnpike rather than Kansas City.)

Quote from: kphoger on March 18, 2021, 08:22:06 PM
That exit is for four different cross streets, not just Topeka.

I still got a laugh out of it when I saw it. :spin:
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: hobsini2 on March 20, 2021, 06:12:24 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 17, 2021, 10:57:57 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 16, 2021, 10:40:28 PM
For someone unfamiliar with the area, you might think that Kellogg was a control city rather than a street name.

Or that Rock (https://goo.gl/maps/qa7bkJYFNoRiKeGLA) and Greenwich actually are nearby place names—or that Rock doesn't go to Rock, but Greenwich does go to Greenwich.  (Interestingly, guide signs for Greenwich actually put "Road" or "Rd" after it for some reason—even though that road actually goes to Greenwich, so nobody could be confused by its omission.)

Newer installations, however, include the generic where it was once left off:
old (https://goo.gl/maps/26ripDCeDvWjjAXW7)/new (https://goo.gl/maps/vFKbe21GvWJBzBjRA)
old (https://goo.gl/maps/ZbjZLmqKmPx92DLJ8)/new (https://goo.gl/maps/MYMNzLevVE5q7mWA7)
old (https://goo.gl/maps/4UW8QCpDDpjir9E87)/new (https://goo.gl/maps/giqQ4Qyi7KmHp2Sp9)
Broadway though is a pretty common name around the country where they don't use a suffix of avenue, street, etc because of "way" in the name.
Like Aurora...
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7707702,-88.3062997,3a,75y,63.55h,92.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sjxQ3554gDegMBaYZdx8RFQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Technically, it should say N Broadway Ave.

At least it is signed. further down Broadway, no street signs for nearly 3 years for Clark St and Washington St.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7538863,-88.3163875,18z?hl=en
Streetview, Washington St:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7533093,-88.3166303,3a,75y,184.11h,96.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMIx-MTcKUT9X7y1wUi4WvQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Clark St:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7542814,-88.3156975,3a,75y,193.9h,88.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svbrpU0vv3XMOwT10Te6mtQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
And this is off a STATE highway.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: ClassicHasClass on March 21, 2021, 12:19:57 PM
Irvine, CA has a lot of streets with no suffixes (suffixen?).
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: mrsman on March 21, 2021, 06:25:16 PM
Quote from: KCRoadFan on March 16, 2021, 07:29:04 PM
San Antonio, TX. San Francisco, CA. Wichita, KS. Los Angeles, CA. Dallas, TX.

What do the aforementioned cities all have in common? Many, if not most, of the street signs don't display the suffix on them (at least, that's true of overhead signs at traffic lights). Also, in the first three cities listed, most of the "blade" signs at non-signalized intersections lack suffixes as well; this is especially true in San Antonio and San Francisco.

What other cities are like that? (I'm not talking about places such as Irvine, CA where many of the streets have no suffixes in their official names; these would be cities where the street names officially do contain suffixes, but the street signs exclude them.)

L.A. is definitely a mixed bag here.

The street blades do have the suffix.  It is pretty universal across the city.  The "shotgun style" from the 1950's seems to use longer abbreviations like Ave and Blvd, whereas other newer blades seem to use the shorter Av and Bl.

The overhead signs on signals have a bit of an interesting history.  For the most part, you are correct that they do not include the suffix.  One exeption are the numbered streets which always (to my knowledge) had the suffixes. But many of those older* signs are getting replaced with signs that include the suffix.  Also, the font is being changed and the newer signs seem to employ Clearview.  And in many cases, the blue signs are being hung from the mast arm, whereas traditionally the signs were hung on the lightpole mast itself, above the right hand corner.

Let's get some examples:

Old style.  Bold font.  Placed on the mast, not the mast arm.  No suffix:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0621751,-118.3383869,3a,37.5y,349.61h,95.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6S4Nz-bFUIQsE4X25PYNhg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

At the very same intersection, we see a newer wider mast arm with a newer sign.  Clearview.  On the mast arm.  with a suffix.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0621159,-118.3385346,3a,75y,175.61h,87.02t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sg_FV7vNlbXJvamQ8UU9mvQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Here's a numbered street on the mast, bold font, old style but with a suffix:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0649767,-118.3384372,3a,75y,344.97h,98.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sh04PDSQ4kc63YTioEx9Fww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Here's an intersection in the SF Valley, three signs without suffix, but one with:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1940149,-118.3876392,3a,75y,283.78h,92.57t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1skOrX-LvQIUrsmzhtdJsG_A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Here's an example with the old "shotgun" street blades.  Notice BLVD and pan a little to the left to see AVE on the cross street.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1646401,-118.4181832,3a,37.5y,14.85h,88.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFObwu9FTMWuK3BMKoMlORQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

And on any street blade, of the many different types, that are newer than the shotgun it is reduced to only Bl or Av:

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1651013,-118.4208971,3a,75y,192.14h,79.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVeKw6G-Am5EHU8Puu8EpYg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192


Given the wide use of the suffix on the street blades, it has never bothered me that the overhead signs lacked it.  But nonetheless, I am glad to see that more of the signs are being replaced with suffixes, but I believe that the signs without suffixes are still more common citywide.

Here are two great articles on LA street blade styles from 10 years ago:

http://militantangeleno.blogspot.com/2011/03/signs-of-times.html

http://militantangeleno.blogspot.com/2011/03/more-street-signs-of-times.html



* One exception that I know about is at the corner of La Brea and Wilshire.  As a kid, this was the only intersection with La Brea Av and Wilshire Blvd.  No other intersection had the suffixes.  Eventually they changed the signs to conforl so just La Brea and Wilshire.  And now the suffixes are back.  I have no explanation for this.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: Scott5114 on March 21, 2021, 07:48:08 PM
The sign you note as being "Clearview" is not–it is vanilla Series D, as standardized in the 2004 SHS book. The other mixed-case FHWA Series signs in your links are an older version of the font that was drawn up before the lowercase characters for FHWA Series were standardized (which I refer to as the "chocolate FHWA Series").

Clearview can be positively identified if a lowercase L is present by a flat top and a serif "foot" extending to the right of the ascender, at the baseline.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: TEG24601 on March 22, 2021, 10:46:50 AM
Prior to 1992, my hometown's street signs were brown painted wood, with the street name added with what appeared to simple stickers, very easy to read.  All of them were just the name of the street, no suffix.  This lead to a lot of confusion, as street I grew up on was considered and Avenue by half the residents, and a Street by the other half.  To make matters worse, when they replaced them with much smaller blue signs, they added suffixes to the street names, and confusion was everywhere.  My street became a Street (although by now, everyone says Avenue), some became drives, we added a Road (which is not a common suffix in cities in our area), and one became a Loop.  There have been a few changes since then, but I'm convinced that there were no suffixes before the change, and someone just rolled dice to decide what suffix should go on the new metal blades.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: roadman65 on March 22, 2021, 11:13:04 AM
Osceola County, FL does it on many overhead signal signs at intersections. US 192 is Vine or Bronson on some assemblies at stop lights.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: SkyPesos on March 25, 2021, 09:06:26 PM
Just took a look at Cleveland on GSV for the Opportunity Corridor thread, seems like the Avenues, Roads, Drives, etc there lack suffixes, but the Streets have them.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: roadfro on March 28, 2021, 10:11:01 PM
The municipalities in the Las Vegas valley use suffixes on all standard street name signs. But for overhead street name signs at signalized intersections, many of the jurisdictions went through a phase where street suffixes were left off of these signs–this was part of the "all caps" period of street name signs.
North Las Vegas, which doesn't use back-lit street name signs, has largely stuck with the All-Caps era design, such as this example (https://goo.gl/maps/stXf9FfxJWqwQud99). Sometimes the suffix is included with all-caps same size as the street name (most consistently along Las Vegas Blvd, but also frequently on lesser-known streets)
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: ztonyg on April 06, 2021, 12:10:38 AM
Phoenix, AZ leaves off suffixes on traffic signals at major intersections.

The only exception is the N/S numbered streets as there is a 7th Ave and a 7th Street (1 mile apart) and Ave means west of Central and Street means east of Central.

Here is how Phoenix signs them:

https://goo.gl/maps/6hZzG7BNXRE6y9C4A

https://goo.gl/maps/8pUQD85VdYrHzFA97

https://goo.gl/maps/SngDd8i7aVGWRmKs8
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: US 89 on April 06, 2021, 01:26:21 AM
Salt Lake City leaves off street suffixes at the vast majority of its signalized intersections - here are a (https://goo.gl/maps/t6MyWVctF392WG9Q9) few (https://goo.gl/maps/Q35RRFNHsifstdGp9) examples (https://goo.gl/maps/Z3gzaei9T5YKrsv96).

This is not really all that well known for a number of reasons. Most obvious is that Salt Lake doesn't actually have very many suffixed streets with traffic lights, since the coordinate-named streets (stuff like "400 South") are officially unsuffixed. The other main reason is that UDOT - which leaves suffixes on in almost all cases - is generally in charge of signs at every signalized intersection that happens to be on a state highway. That means a lot of the major streets that actually do have names (such as State, Foothill, and Redwood) get suffixed UDOT-spec signs at their signals.

It should be noted, though, that even UDOT abandons this policy with the various Temple streets in downtown Salt Lake. All three do carry an official "St." suffix, but it is almost never signed, nor is it ever used in conversation.

Elsewhere in the Wasatch Front, suffixes are the norm but you might see a handful of signs without them. There are certain areas where this is more common (Murray and certain parts of east Layton come to mind), but interestingly this is often specific to the street itself. Winchester and Van Winkle are good examples of that pattern - they are signed without their "St" or "Expwy" suffixes in most cases, even on UDOT signs.
Title: Re: Cities where many of the street signs lack suffixes
Post by: index on April 06, 2021, 03:41:37 AM
Downtown Columbia, SC leaves off suffixes a lot on their overhead street blades at intersections.