I was wondering what the largest road sign that anyone has seen?
The I-95 shields on the New England Thruway tollgate?
Mike
Here are some of the larger ones I've seen in my travels...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5299%2F5539785439_db58eb936b_z.jpg&hash=863687ae6c6c086bf18078ac027ed437a3a1a5cf)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5059%2F5540363792_524fdee440_z.jpg&hash=f7fc3681ebcaee9b4641b33950c94ab89e0d4a14)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5107%2F5650097977_c721b10de0_z.jpg&hash=036370556173dcb8494e879aad909dd2cccc9fd1)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5156%2F5915631717_bd11755410_z.jpg&hash=cb467525d70855d07f676b7279685affe569d556)
NB I-65 near I-80/94; U.S. 6.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.billburmaster.com%2Frmsandw%2Findiana%2Fimages%2Fn65at8094_0709d.jpg&hash=a4b0273175ec48926321e4de9504273e256a39de)
Quote from: rmsandw on March 20, 2012, 10:24:19 PM
NB I-65 near I-80/94; U.S. 6.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.billburmaster.com%2Frmsandw%2Findiana%2Fimages%2Fn65at8094_0709d.jpg&hash=a4b0273175ec48926321e4de9504273e256a39de)
Yikes--couldn't they have put the 80/94/6 shields under one direction, since they are all the same? Especially on the right-hand sign, to trade a little width to decrease the height? The right-hand one is one of the tallest signs for its width around!
As far as the Mass. signs, the most overdone huge diagrammatic has to be on I-91 approaching MA 2 EB, with 2-mile and 1-mile enormous diagrammatics for a simple one-lane right-hand exit with no option lanes, exit-only lanes, or anything else unusual. Not sure why they went so wild. See http://homepage.mac.com/kefkafloyd/valleyroads/91.html most of the way down for pics.
Quote from: eagle14410 on March 20, 2012, 09:46:39 PM
I was wondering what the largest road sign that anyone has seen?
Why does it matter whether one of us has seen it?
I suppose it doesnt......show me whatever you can find! LOL
Quote from: NE2 on March 20, 2012, 11:23:54 PM
Quote from: eagle14410 on March 20, 2012, 09:46:39 PM
I was wondering what the largest road sign that anyone has seen?
Why does it matter whether one of us has seen it?
I hear that they grow highway signs in Central Florida as big as the state of Delaware.
Quote from: Hot Rod Hootenanny on March 21, 2012, 12:15:30 AM
I hear that they grow highway signs in Central Florida as big as the state of Delaware.
The state of Delaware had the biggest one posted at one point...
(https://www.aaroads.com/delaware/vidcaps/de-001_007_sb_exit_164a_03.jpg)
Quote from: NE2 on March 20, 2012, 11:23:54 PM
Quote from: eagle14410 on March 20, 2012, 09:46:39 PM
I was wondering what the largest road sign that anyone has seen?
Why does it matter whether one of us has seen it?
if a road sign is put up, and no one sees it, does it still have to be obeyed?
I don't think they were actually the "biggest" signs I've ever seen, but the ones that came to my mind when I saw this thread were the absurd series of pull-through signs Delaware had on I-95 just south of the I-95/I-295 merge. (I have not been that way in a couple of years and so I don't know if they might have changed any of these as part of the widening project.) I say "absurd" primarily because they had a string of three or four of these all in extremely close proximity, and they come to mind as "big" signs because the portion of the sign with the words is so tiny. I think they seemed a lot bigger than they really were just because of the large amount of green space. Compare to the old sign that used to appear at the I-95/I-895 split northeast of Baltimore (second photo below), which was on the whole probably a "bigger" sign but which I always thought didn't seem as large because of the white dividing lines separating it into "panels."
Pictures from AARoads.com:
(https://www.aaroads.com/delaware/delaware050/i-095_sb_exit_004b_03.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/mid-atlantic/maryland095/i-095_sb_exit_061_11.jpg)
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 21, 2012, 11:33:55 AM
I don't think they were actually the "biggest" signs I've ever seen, but the ones that came to my mind when I saw this thread were the absurd series of pull-through signs Delaware had on I-95 just south of the I-95/I-295 merge. (I have not been that way in a couple of years and so I don't know if they might have changed any of these as part of the widening project.) I say "absurd" primarily because they had a string of three or four of these all in extremely close proximity, and they come to mind as "big" signs because the portion of the sign with the words is so tiny. I think they seemed a lot bigger than they really were just because of the large amount of green space. Compare to the old sign that used to appear at the I-95/I-895 split northeast of Baltimore (second photo below), which was on the whole probably a "bigger" sign but which I always thought didn't seem as large because of the white dividing lines separating it into "panels."
Those always struck me as overkill, and the number of them, repeated every 1,000 feet or something, ridiculous. When I last drove through (July 2010), the two (https://www.aaroads.com/delaware/delaware050/i-095_sb_exit_005a_02.jpg) 80s-based (https://www.aaroads.com/delaware/delaware050/i-095_sb_exit_004b_01.jpg) signs were still in place at DE-141. The third was replaced in the 90s (https://www.aaroads.com/delaware/delaware050/i-095_sb_exit_004b_02.jpg), with those Clearviewized by 2010. New sign bridges were added over the ten-lane portion, which eliminated the next two (https://www.aaroads.com/delaware/delaware050/i-095_sb_exit_004b_03.jpg) sets (https://www.aaroads.com/delaware/delaware050/i-095_sb_exit_004b_04.jpg). But when you thought the era of those godzilla signs was over, a new one was added ahead of Exit 4A!
(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/northeast/i-095_sb_exit_004_10.jpg) (//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/northeast/i-095_sb_exit_004_10.jpg)
Yeah, it was the number of signs more than the size of them that struck me as being silly. They could have had one of those signs at or near the spot where the left lane ended. Even then I think it was unnecessary. The yellow signs in the two images you linked always struck me as stupid because they're not terribly helpful to the average driver–I mean, 2100 feet? Really? Who the heck can visualize 2100 feet?
I don't mind Clearview, but the new pull-through sign in the picture you posted just doesn't look right to me. The exit sign looks OK despite the oddly-sized exit tab, but something doesn't look right about the pull-through sign and I'm not sure what it is. I think it may have to do with the leading and the larger space between "Baltimore" and the arrows. The sides maybe look a little squeezed too, but that seems to be more common these days (maybe DOTs want to use smaller signs to save money on sheet metal?). As I look at the image multiple times I'm guessing that the reason I dislike it is probably that its dimensions, especially the vertical dimension, look funny next to the other sign.
I stopped going that way several years ago in favor of the I-78 route to New York, so I hadn't seen the new signs. I suppose if I make a daytrip to Philadelphia to see the Springsteen exhibit I'll go that way, though, unless I take Amtrak.
Buffalo, NY:
(http://://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=embed&hl=en&geocode=&q=hamburg+ny&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=41.224889,107.138672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hamburg,+Erie,+New+York&ll=42.715893,-78.829477&spn=0.000416,0.000817&t=k&z=14&layer=c&cbll=42.856459,-78.791597&panoid=svcpuja_KYVOp1pqAruTbA&cbp=12,337.12,,0,0&output=svembed"></iframe><br%20/><small><a%20href="http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=embed&hl=en&geocode=&q=hamburg+ny&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=41.224889,107.138672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hamburg,+Erie,+New+York&ll=42.715893,-78.829477&spn=0.000416,0.000817&t=k&z=14&layer=c&cbll=42.856459,-78.791597&panoid=svcpuja_KYVOp1pqAruTbA&cbp=12,337.12,,0,0"%20style="color:#0000FF;text-align:left">View%20Larger%20Map</a></small>)
Quote from: thenetwork on March 21, 2012, 03:42:39 PM
Buffalo, NY:
(http://://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=embed&hl=en&geocode=&q=hamburg+ny&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=41.224889,107.138672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hamburg,+Erie,+New+York&ll=42.715893,-78.829477&spn=0.000416,0.000817&t=k&z=14&layer=c&cbll=42.856459,-78.791597&panoid=svcpuja_KYVOp1pqAruTbA&cbp=12,337.12,,0,0&output=svembed"></iframe><br%20/><small><a%20href="http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=embed&hl=en&geocode=&q=hamburg+ny&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=41.224889,107.138672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hamburg,+Erie,+New+York&ll=42.715893,-78.829477&spn=0.000416,0.000817&t=k&z=14&layer=c&cbll=42.856459,-78.791597&panoid=svcpuja_KYVOp1pqAruTbA&cbp=12,337.12,,0,0"%20style="color:#0000FF;text-align:left">View%20Larger%20Map</a></small>)
Image is not displaying. I see there is a massive string of characters within the "IMG" tags, but I don't know where to begin trying to edit it!
Along I-76 west in Upper Merion Twp., PA at the recently-opened EXIT 329 (King of Prussia - Norristown). The main sign board & lettering (in Clearview) seem abnormally huge; especially since this exit is for a regular street (the ramp terminates at the Gulph Road-Henderson Road intersection).
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 20, 2012, 11:05:56 PM
As far as the Mass. signs, the most overdone huge diagrammatic has to be on I-91 approaching MA 2 EB, with 2-mile and 1-mile enormous diagrammatics for a simple one-lane right-hand exit with no option lanes, exit-only lanes, or anything else unusual. Not sure why they went so wild. See http://homepage.mac.com/kefkafloyd/valleyroads/91.html most of the way down for pics.
That location is in Greenfield MA, and is where the I-91 north and MA 2 east overlap splits. Although the exit to MA 2 east is a "standard" right hand ramp and is fairly simple from a geometric standpoint, the split sees a lot of unfamiliar drivers - especially during the fall foliage season.
As I understand it, about the same time the signs on this section of I-91 were last replaced (in the mid-1990s), the Exit 27 'split' in Greenfield was identified by the locals as having a safety problem due to last minute lane changes. This would explain MassHighway's rationale for going with diagrammatic signs for this location at that time.
Given the changes in the 2009 MUTCD regarding diagrammatic signs, it will be interesting to see if MassDOT goes back to a 'conventional' sign treatment for this exit when the I-91 signs are next updated, or if they will try to convince FHWA to allow them to replace the existing diagrammatics at this location 'in-kind'.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 21, 2012, 02:18:40 PM
I don't mind Clearview, but the new pull-through sign in the picture you posted just doesn't look right to me. (snip) something doesn't look right about the pull-through sign and I'm not sure what it is. I think it may have to do with the leading and the larger space between "Baltimore" and the arrows. The sides maybe look a little squeezed too, but that seems to be more common these days (maybe DOTs want to use smaller signs to save money on sheet metal?).
Looks to me like you nailed the issue with this panel. The space between the legends is correct, but the space between the route shield and the legend is too large, the space between the legend and the arrows is too large, and the top and bottom margins are too small. In signing parlance, a panel designed like this one is said to have an 'unbalanced' legend.
Regarding the side margins, the MUTCD standards state that margins should be at least equal to the height of the adjacent letters (i.e. 16 inch left and right margins for a 16/12 legend). However, over time, many state DOTs have discovered that reducing the margin to 75% of the letter height (12 inch for a 16/12 inch legend) results in a reduced panel width (usually a 1 to 1 1/2 foot difference, depending upon the spelling of the legend) without unacceptably compromising legibility. Several states also have reduced their inter-letter spacing on guide sign legends to 85% to 90% of the FHWA recommended standard as well, again to reduce panel width.
In this case, however, it appears that Delaware went a little too far in economizing on panel size. Visually, the narrower Clearview font (as opposed to Highway Gothic) only excerbates the "something's not quite right to my eye" apparance of the sign you noted as well.
A couple of candidates for the largest sign that I saw Tuesday in North Carolina:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7060%2F7001715095_4a09a65cb4_b.jpg&hash=5a39d98acadaaa07a5f91672cc50d245df638236)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm7.staticflickr.com%2F6113%2F6855600724_5f94321e3f_b.jpg&hash=7ed33e858c669f1a4b850be4cb8528d6d01eb7f0)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7129%2F7001716961_60af6fc59d_b.jpg&hash=97d9c7b8b0d828bc5f76635d5cce49d66f59dad3)
Damn, from my days in the Triangle in the mid-1990s I recognize the last of those as I-40. I was there when the first segment of I-540 opened to traffic (the portion from I-40 to US-70; it didn't get much use except by those of us who wanted to see how fast our cars could go). Back then the sign was a tiny little thing that had nothing but the exit tab and the "NORTH I-540" legend. I don't think it even said "TO US-70" back when it first opened. Quite the change!
The "NORTH" at the bottom of that sign is a bit odd. I know North Carolina likes to put "DOWNTOWN" in all caps when a route takes you to a downtown area, e.g., "Roxboro St DOWNTOWN" at the Roxboro Street exit on I-85. Is the "NORTH" on this sign being used in a similar sense to indicate that I-540 is the best route to Raleigh's northern suburbs off Falls of Neuse Road and areas like that, or do you think it's intended in a manner similar to Jersey's "Shore Points" signs?
If you're talking surface-mounted route markers, Massachusetts has some of the biggest I've ever seen. I've seen some I-495 and Mass 128 signs that look like they are 6 feet wide.
For ground-mounted signs.... Here's one at the Colombia (NL) border crossing, right where the access road hits highway 2. I don't know what used to be depicted on the sign, but now it's just a huge expanse of green.
http://g.co/maps/5t9q2 (http://g.co/maps/5t9q2)
Quote from: rmsandw on March 20, 2012, 10:24:19 PM
NB I-65 near I-80/94; U.S. 6.
And here I thought this (http://www.flickr.com/photos/iccdude/5916879689/in/set-72157625788248838) sign was pretty tall!
This one isn't very large per se, but it isn't everyday you come across a ground mounted diagrammatic sign...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm7.staticflickr.com%2F6131%2F5919618319_ddfc4a8cdb_z.jpg&hash=e10c7d07dbed51ce3b5503dfb683d7dacf65ac57)
Quote from: Alex on March 21, 2012, 02:01:08 PM
(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/northeast/i-095_sb_exit_004_10.jpg)
I almost wish there were some unambiguous way to put "Newark" and "Baltimore" on the same line to make for a smaller sign panel.
My first thought was "Newark | Baltimore", but that could potentially be misread as indicating to keep left for Newark and keep right for Baltimore.
Quote from: okroads on March 22, 2012, 07:05:59 AM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7129%2F7001716961_60af6fc59d_b.jpg&hash=97d9c7b8b0d828bc5f76635d5cce49d66f59dad3)
I find the juxtaposition of the huge exit 283 sign with the rather small exit 282 sign amusing.
Quote from: Central Avenue on March 22, 2012, 05:16:12 PM
I find the juxtaposition of the huge exit 283 sign with the rather small exit 282 sign amusing.
Same.
As for my entry, I'll go with this monster from I-395 in Arlington:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsphotos.xx.fbcdn.net%2Fhphotos-snc6%2F228629_2097183310417_1270395589_2602592_1142186_n.jpg&hash=566e2b046f8943f5b31e546cab79466446f6d87d)
Quote from: hbelkins on March 22, 2012, 02:30:06 PM
If you're talking surface-mounted route markers, Massachusetts has some of the biggest I've ever seen. I've seen some I-495 and Mass 128 signs that look like they are 6 feet wide.
I've even seen some of those large trailblazer signs on local roads.
In Marblehead, MA (my hometown); large trailblazer signs for MA 114 (Lafayette Street) were erected near the Maple Street intersection when a new traffic signal for said-intersection was erected several years ago. Serious overkill IMHO.
Quote from: PennDOTFan on March 22, 2012, 04:05:11 PM
This one isn't very large per se, but it isn't everyday you come across a ground mounted diagrammatic sign...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm7.staticflickr.com%2F6131%2F5919618319_ddfc4a8cdb_z.jpg&hash=e10c7d07dbed51ce3b5503dfb683d7dacf65ac57)
In Canton, MA; prior to the current signage erected at the I-95/93 interchange; the MassDPW did have a couple of small ground-mounted diagrammatic signs mounted along I-95 North to supplement the 1977-era exit signs. These were erected AFTER to the main exit signs were put up: one around 1979, the other in 1982-83. No control destinations were listed, just the
NORTH 95 &
NORTH 93 listings.
There's a ground-mounted diagrammatic for I-79 and I-68. I'm too lazy to look for one of my pictures to link to. :-D
This one is on I-690 in Syracuse, NY just before its interchange with I-81:
(https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_york600/i-690_wb_exit_013_01.jpg)
Credit: AARoadsQuote from: 1995hoo on March 21, 2012, 04:54:11 PM
Quote from: thenetwork on March 21, 2012, 03:42:39 PM
Buffalo, NY:
(http://://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=embed&hl=en&geocode=&q=hamburg+ny&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=41.224889,107.138672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hamburg,+Erie,+New+York&ll=42.715893,-78.829477&spn=0.000416,0.000817&t=k&z=14&layer=c&cbll=42.856459,-78.791597&panoid=svcpuja_KYVOp1pqAruTbA&cbp=12,337.12,,0,0&output=svembed"></iframe><br%20/><small><a%20href="http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=embed&hl=en&geocode=&q=hamburg+ny&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=41.224889,107.138672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hamburg,+Erie,+New+York&ll=42.715893,-78.829477&spn=0.000416,0.000817&t=k&z=14&layer=c&cbll=42.856459,-78.791597&panoid=svcpuja_KYVOp1pqAruTbA&cbp=12,337.12,,0,0"%20style="color:#0000FF;text-align:left">View%20Larger%20Map</a></small>)
Image is not displaying. I see there is a massive string of characters within the "IMG" tags, but I don't know where to begin trying to edit it!
Fixed it (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=embed&hl=en&geocode=&q=hamburg+ny&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=41.224889,107.138672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hamburg,+Erie,+New+York&ll=42.715893,-78.829477&spn=0.000416,0.000817&t=k&z=14&layer=c&cbll=42.856459,-78.791597&panoid=svcpuja_KYVOp1pqAruTbA&cbp=12,337.12,,0,0). It looks like thenetwork tried to use the embed code and missed a colon, which messed it up by making it use html encoding for special characters.
Quote from: hbelkins on March 22, 2012, 08:55:53 PM
There's a ground-mounted diagrammatic for I-79 and I-68. I'm too lazy to look for one of my pictures to link to. :-D
There's one on I-77 northbound ahead of the merge with I-64 as well:
(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/mid-atlantic/i-077_nb_exit_040_01.jpg) (//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/mid-atlantic/i-077_nb_exit_040_01.jpg)
Quote from: Central Avenue on March 22, 2012, 05:16:12 PM
I almost wish there were some unambiguous way to put "Newark" and "Baltimore" on the same line to make for a smaller sign panel.
My first thought was "Newark | Baltimore", but that could potentially be misread as indicating to keep left for Newark and keep right for Baltimore.
British practice seems to be to use a comma: "Newark, Baltimore". I imagine that's the best that you could do.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fnj%2Fgsp%2Fn127_1.jpg&hash=9783bd366dc6e9f107c6b01e05bb8c53fabeef25)
Quote from: Central Avenue on March 22, 2012, 05:16:12 PM
Quote from: Alex on March 21, 2012, 02:01:08 PM
(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/northeast/i-095_sb_exit_004_10.jpg)
My first thought was "Newark | Baltimore", but that could potentially be misread as indicating to keep left for Newark and keep right for Baltimore.
[/quote]
"Newark - Baltimore" on a single line might work. Might require a slightly wider panel, but the greater width would be more than offset by the reduced panel height.
Quote from: roadman on March 23, 2012, 09:31:14 AM
"Newark - Baltimore" on a single line might work. Might require a slightly wider panel, but the greater width would be more than offset by the reduced panel height.
DC has a sign sort of in that vein on the inbound 14th Street Bridge. "Capitol Hill" appears on the first line and then "Nationals Park [dot] Verizon Center" on the second line. By "[dot]" I mean it looks as though they literally used a small dot, similar to the alternate sign for multiplication shown here · , but I suppose it could be a small hyphen instead because they ALSO used a different typeface to cram in the text. Google Street View image here. This assembly is all-around ugly in my opinion. (http://g.co/maps/rnw8m)
I think if a DOT were to put two cities on the same line, a better way to separate them would be with a full-sized em dash (the "long dash" that in typography is normally set against the surrounding words with either no space or else a "small space"–it looks like the one I just used in this sentence after "small space"). I recognize that wouldn't have fit on the DC sign, though they could have used a bigger sign too.
Quote from: roadman on March 23, 2012, 09:31:14 AM
"Newark - Baltimore" on a single line might work. Might require a slightly wider panel, but the greater width would be more than offset by the reduced panel height.
Simply eliminating Newark is all that is needed.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 23, 2012, 11:28:19 AM
they ALSO used a different typeface to cram in the text. Google Street View image here. This assembly is all-around ugly in my opinion. (http://g.co/maps/rnw8m)
The smaller lettering (looks like 13.3/10) on the retrofitted legend is a classic example of trying to accommodate legend changes within existing panel dimensions - presumably so the existing structure can be retained. However, if they had abbrievated "Verizon Ctr.", they probably could have gotten away with a series Em font.
And what's the deal with not trimming off the tops of the sign hangers? Detracts from the sign appearance almost as much as the goofy font does.
Quote from: roadman on March 23, 2012, 12:22:45 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 23, 2012, 11:28:19 AM
they ALSO used a different typeface to cram in the text. Google Street View image here. This assembly is all-around ugly in my opinion. (http://g.co/maps/rnw8m)
The smaller lettering (looks like 13.3/10) on the retrofitted legend is a classic example of trying to accommodate legend changes within existing panel dimensions - presumably so the existing structure can be retained. However, if they had abbrievated "Verizon Ctr.", they probably could have gotten away with a series Em font.
And what's the deal with not trimming off the tops of the sign hangers? Detracts from the sign appearance almost as much as the goofy font does.
I don't think sticking to the same sign size was the issue there. That sign assembly has gone through several versions over the years, and adding destinations to the sign is only a very recent innovation for DC. That sign went up sometime during the Fenty Administration (2007 to 2011), which of course is rather obvious if you know Nationals Park opened in March 2008! When I was growing up, I recall the sign for I-395 had a shield with two or three big arrows pointing diagonally down and to the right (the arrows were kind of similar to the late lamented old sign assembly on the southbound New Jersey Turnpike at Exit 6). I don't recall what the US-1 (14th Street) sign said. Then sometime in the 1990s they changed to a diagrammatic sign–see below for a June 2005 image of that sign from AARoads.com (the Verizon Center used to be called the MCI Center). BTW, the signs on the HOV bridge have always been different and there used to be a sign there that listed 12th Street as the "control city"!
(https://www.aaroads.com/mid-atlantic/district_of_columbia/i-395_nb_exit_001a_04.jpg)
Incidentally, the sign shown above mentions the 12th Street exit. Part of DC's sign-replacement project involved replacing the signs for that exit and in doing so they eliminated all the signs that notified you that the right lane is exit-only at that exit. A lot of local drivers are just jackasses who would use the exit-only lane to try to get around everyone else anyway, but because DC is the nation's capital we get an awful lot of tourists who get caught unaware there (and the fact that there are two exit lanes, one of them optional, makes the omission of the exit-only warning a real hazard).
Ultimately, from my point of view as someone who's lived in this area since 1974 what it amounts to is that DC had the noble intent of FINALLY improving their road signs but did their usual half-assed job of it where they improved a couple of things but in the process screwed up others.
I suppose this is turning into a threadjack.....
Edited to add:
BTW, the untrimmed sign hangers are seemingly a DC tradition too. This sign assembly was located above southbound I-395 in DC for many years and was only recently replaced (the bubble shield, however, was a more recent addition to a much older sign). Again from AARoads.com:
(https://www.aaroads.com/mid-atlantic/district_of_columbia/i-395_sb_exit_001a_03.jpg)
Quote from: Central Avenue on March 22, 2012, 05:16:12 PM
Quote from: Alex on March 21, 2012, 02:01:08 PM
(//www.aaroads.com/forum_images/northeast/i-095_sb_exit_004_10.jpg)
I almost wish there were some unambiguous way to put "Newark" and "Baltimore" on the same line to make for a smaller sign panel.
My first thought was "Newark | Baltimore", but that could potentially be misread as indicating to keep left for Newark and keep right for Baltimore.
Quote from: roadman on March 23, 2012, 09:31:14 AM
"Newark - Baltimore" on a single line might work. Might require a slightly wider panel, but the greater width would be more than offset by the reduced panel height.
Instead of messing around with hyphens or "pipes" (it's the only word I can think of to describe the "|" character... thanks UNIX), why not do something California's been doing for quite some time. In the case of the I-95 pull through, why not put the control cities next to the route shield with the cardinal direction above the shield. Kind of like this...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.markyville.com%2Faaroads%2F4-160_future.png&hash=a7a07e4566bb4093c9708c55482cf1c051add00b)
Is the complaint with the Newark/Baltimore sign actually the height, or is it more the empty space on either side?
Because if we're complaining solely about the height, there's no need to combine the lines of text (or delete one). The other sign on that gantry has three lines of text, yet is slightly shorter (not counting the exit tab). There appears to be extra vertical space between the text and the shield/arrows, not to mention larger text and shield, on the pull-through.
If the complaint is more about the empty space, then that's something you'd have to combine the lines of text to solve. But that's a problem that I think is common to all pull-throughs, save for California-style ones as myosh_tino mentioned.
Quote from: Kacie Jane on March 23, 2012, 03:46:45 PM
....
If the complaint is more about the empty space, then that's something you'd have to combine the lines of text to solve. But that's a problem that I think is common to all pull-throughs, save for California-style ones as myosh_tino mentioned.
The other alternative would be to follow the example of the unique (in my observation, anyway) sign on I-87 north of Albany. I can't imagine this would ever become common, though. I've always kind of liked this sign.
(https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_york087/i-087_anw_nb_exit_007_01.jpg)
The original objection to the Delaware pull-through signs that Alex and I were getting at was that if you look at the old sign (see my first post that started this discussion), you have to realize that sign was one of about four or five such signs all in rapid succession with no exits in the area. That string of signs was located just to the south of where I-295 merges into I-95 south of Wilmington, Delaware. Because of the merge there were five lanes across that narrowed down to four about half a mile later. Instead of just putting up a "Lane Ends 1/2 Mile" sign and then another "Lane Ends/Merge Right" sign, the Delaware DOT felt the need to post a series of these enormous pull-through signs with the arrows. Notice how Alex called the series of signs "overkill" and "ridiculous." The road was widened in recent years, which in theory would have eliminated the need for those signs because you no longer have that lane drop. Alex points out that they took down several of them but then put up this new one further down the road.
My objection to the new sign in Delaware, aside from thinking it's probably unnecessary, is that it's ugly. I don't mind Clearview at all and I think a lot of the new Clearview signs on the Beltway here in Virginia look pretty sharp and are well-done. But I think the Delaware pull-through sign Alex posted is ugly. As I said before, I can't quite put my finger on WHY I think it's ugly.
On US 192 in Kissimmee, FL there is a large sign on the EB side that is the one mile guide sign for the Disney World exit (World Drive) that is super huge.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 23, 2012, 04:13:12 PM
The other alternative would be to follow the example of the unique (in my observation, anyway) sign on I-87 north of Albany. I can't imagine this would ever become common, though. I've always kind of liked this sign.
(https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_york087/i-087_anw_nb_exit_007_01.jpg)
I believe these style signs are just a New York thing. I haven't seen them anywhere else. Other than this one, there's one on I-787 southbound at the circle stack interchange, one on I-87/NY Thruway northbound just past the Tappan Zee Bridge, and there might be a couple others.
Quote from: Snappyjack on March 23, 2012, 04:40:04 PM
I believe these style signs are just a New York thing. I haven't seen them anywhere else. Other than this one, there's one on I-787 southbound at the circle stack interchange, one on I-87/NY Thruway northbound just past the Tappan Zee Bridge, and there might be a couple others.
Ah, thanks for that. I haven't been on I-787 since August 1984 on the way home from Quebec City and the Saguenay River area and I guess I just didn't notice the one near the Tappan Zee Bridge the last time I went that way. I remember wondering if the one in the picture I posted was done that way due to high winds or the like, but I quickly dismissed that idea because of the standard-shaped sign located next to it.
Actually, your first assumption was correct. That is indeed why those signs are the way they are. Apparently that design reduces wind drag on the panels. However, I believe it was just an experiment on NYSDOT's part because I have never seen another one put up since these were.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 23, 2012, 11:28:19 AM
Quote from: roadman on March 23, 2012, 09:31:14 AM
"Newark - Baltimore" on a single line might work. Might require a slightly wider panel, but the greater width would be more than offset by the reduced panel height.
DC has a sign sort of in that vein on the inbound 14th Street Bridge. "Capitol Hill" appears on the first line and then "Nationals Park [dot] Verizon Center" on the second line. By "[dot]" I mean it looks as though they literally used a small dot, similar to the alternate sign for multiplication shown here · , but I suppose it could be a small hyphen instead because they ALSO used a different typeface to cram in the text. Google Street View image here. This assembly is all-around ugly in my opinion. (http://g.co/maps/rnw8m)
Hoo, at that same location, the sign used to read "I-395 North - Baltimore - New York."
IMO, the ugly sign is an improvement.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 23, 2012, 05:31:15 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 23, 2012, 11:28:19 AM
Quote from: roadman on March 23, 2012, 09:31:14 AM
"Newark - Baltimore" on a single line might work. Might require a slightly wider panel, but the greater width would be more than offset by the reduced panel height.
DC has a sign sort of in that vein on the inbound 14th Street Bridge. "Capitol Hill" appears on the first line and then "Nationals Park [dot] Verizon Center" on the second line. By "[dot]" I mean it looks as though they literally used a small dot, similar to the alternate sign for multiplication shown here · , but I suppose it could be a small hyphen instead because they ALSO used a different typeface to cram in the text. Google Street View image here. This assembly is all-around ugly in my opinion. (http://g.co/maps/rnw8m)
Hoo, at that same location, the sign used to read "I-395 North - Baltimore - New York."
IMO, the ugly sign is an improvement.
I was pretty sure I remembered the Baltimore/New York sign being the old diagrammatic sign for the 12th Street exit. You're right, it made no sense; I'm sure it was descended from the days when that was I-95. BTW, there is still a sign with an I-95 shield if you know where to look (it's not on the highway).
I do have to admit I've used that road so many times (including commuting that way for nine years when I worked downtown) that I often don't notice the signs unless I'm specifically thinking about such things or a new sign is posted.
Quote from: Snappyjack on March 23, 2012, 04:40:04 PMI believe these style signs are just a New York thing. I haven't seen them anywhere else. Other than this one, there's one on I-787 southbound at the circle stack interchange, one on I-87/NY Thruway northbound just past the Tappan Zee Bridge, and there might be a couple others.
In Massachusetts, there's a pull-through sign along I-95 South at Exit 46 (US 1 South) in Peabody that has the same layout. It was erected during the mid-90s.
Quote from: Kacie Jane on March 23, 2012, 03:46:45 PM
Is the complaint with the Newark/Baltimore sign actually the height, or is it more the empty space on either side?
Because if we're complaining solely about the height, there's no need to combine the lines of text (or delete one). The other sign on that gantry has three lines of text, yet is slightly shorter (not counting the exit tab). There appears to be extra vertical space between the text and the shield/arrows, not to mention larger text and shield, on the pull-through.
If the complaint is more about the empty space, then that's something you'd have to combine the lines of text to solve. But that's a problem that I think is common to all pull-throughs, save for California-style ones as myosh_tino mentioned.
Funny, in the sign I was picturing in my head I had already eliminated the excess vertical space, so I hadn't even considered that.
That said, wouldn't doing both (removing the excess vertical space
and combining the two lines of text) make for an even smaller panel than either alone?
Quote from: myosh_tino on March 23, 2012, 01:46:12 PMInstead of messing around with hyphens or "pipes" (it's the only word I can think of to describe the "|" character... thanks UNIX), why not do something California's been doing for quite some time. In the case of the I-95 pull through, why not put the control cities next to the route shield with the cardinal direction above the shield. Kind of like this...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.markyville.com%2Faaroads%2F4-160_future.png&hash=a7a07e4566bb4093c9708c55482cf1c051add00b)
Ah. I do like that. It seems it would work well for a lot of pull-through signs, honestly.
This one is not tall but it is wide...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.billburmaster.com%2Frmsandw%2Fillinois%2Fimages%2Fsb294atw80c.jpg&hash=324dc1de04493b144d8223bd535d88f2eba637ca)
SB I-294 at I-80...spans over 4 lanes and shoulders.
Similar sign on I-88 - spans 4 lanes. (And the text sizing seems to be off, but I digress).
http://g.co/maps/fgd6s
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 23, 2012, 06:05:51 PM
Quote from: Snappyjack on March 23, 2012, 04:40:04 PMI believe these style signs are just a New York thing. I haven't seen them anywhere else. Other than this one, there's one on I-787 southbound at the circle stack interchange, one on I-87/NY Thruway northbound just past the Tappan Zee Bridge, and there might be a couple others.
In Massachusetts, there's a pull-through sign along I-95 South at Exit 46 (US 1 South) in Peabody that has the same layout. It was erected during the mid-90s.
https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/massachusetts050/i-095_sb_exit_046_04.jpg
I think the signs have since been replaced but retained the same layout though, as I don't remember the US 1 shield having a Jersey-style black background. I'll be taking that exit in about 20 minutes though, so I'll check on it.
I know that the signs BEYOND that exit have since been replaced but I believe that sign along with the others north of it have not been or not yet replaced when I was up there last December. I will be up there again in a couple weeks for Easter. I might have a chance to look and see if there have been any updates.
Note: that US 1 sign with the Jersey-style shield is actually OLDER than that pull-through sign. It dates back to 1987 when the last piece of I-95 in Massachusetts was finally built and fully-opened in 1988.
The original pull-through sign at that interchange was a more standard rectangular sign that simply read, "95 SOUTH - Waltham".
Checked this morning, and yup, neither sign has been replaced.
This is in my opinion, the largest sign that I've seen in California. This is located at the east CA-46/CA-41 intersection in San Luis Obispo County.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7271%2F6866907508_8cfc53b9a8_c.jpg&hash=fad95f05d5afc2e1311a795d3e7417730dcd2be6)