What to do when up to 6 shields are required for a single route/exit? Go Up! These are definitely unique-looking and accurately describe where you're headed: The large but loosely defined northern half of Raleigh. "North" in this case isn't referring to direction but rather a destination.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2F540_zps71c7af15.png&hash=d88b0ee4580c063866aac09c39e38991022d0ef7)
what shield is greened out/removed under the "TO" at upper right?
the NORTH as a general direction reflects practice in England, Chile, etc... have only very rarely seen it in the US. I'm not sure I would recognize it as such, instead thinking it would lead me to the northern parts of Raleigh, not "things generally to the north, like Richmond or Boston".
Quote from: architect77 on October 12, 2012, 08:48:27 PM
What to do when up to 6 shields are required for a single route/exit? Go Up! These are definitely unique-looking and accurately describe where you're headed: The large but loosely defined northern half of Raleigh. "North" in this case isn't referring to direction but rather a destination.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2F540_zps71c7af15.png&hash=d88b0ee4580c063866aac09c39e38991022d0ef7)
If this is the location in NC I'm thinking of (for some reason I can't see the photo), for one thing, you don't need separate cardinal directions and "TO" legends above each shield. Common direction routes need only one cardinal direction centered above their respective shields. You then place all "TO" routes on one line, with a single "TO" to the left of the shields, beneath the primary routes. You then place "Raleigh" beneath the whole mess, and your "action" legend (1/2 MILE) beneath that.
Makes the signs much easier to read (and understand) at 65 MPH, and reduces your overall panel size by about 35 to 40 percent - which also requires less complicated structures as well.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 12, 2012, 08:50:51 PM
what shield is greened out/removed under the "TO" at upper right?
That blank space is meant to be for TOLL NC 540. The shield looks exactly like the white diamond 540 shield next to the I-540 shield. It's actually all part of the same road - but due to a combination of explosive population growth, bureaucratic bungling, and mayors eager to shove the new road through to eventually expand their tax base - part of NC 540 is tolled and part of it is not. (None of the Interstate portion is tolled). The idea is to warn drivers that they while they won't pay a toll by taking this particular ramp, they will start to pay tolls later on down the route.
Four shields, one sign on the Kingery Expressway:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi837.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fzz298%2Fmidamcrossrds%2F100_2253.jpg&hash=a2937e2dab4114d896a6c466e5b30f74b6e15fb1)
RE: I-540/NC-540. If it's the same road, using the I-540 shields should be fine. All it needs is a "TOLL" banner.
Quote from: Brandon on October 13, 2012, 12:14:52 AM
RE: I-540/NC-540. If it's the same road, using the I-540 shields should be fine. All it needs is a "TOLL" banner.
I agree. However, it was decided here that the rest of 540 had to be built as a toll road NOW, as opposed to waiting for tax revenue to come in over 30 years to build it as a free route. Now I don't remember exactly why, but for some reason the fact that the new part is tolled and the old part isn't means the new part cannot carry Interstate shields at least until the toll bonds are paid off. That's why the loop is part I-540, part FREE NC 540, and part TOLL NC 540.
Quote from: broadhurst04 on October 14, 2012, 07:06:37 PM
Quote from: Brandon on October 13, 2012, 12:14:52 AM
RE: I-540/NC-540. If it's the same road, using the I-540 shields should be fine. All it needs is a "TOLL" banner.
I agree. However, it was decided here that the rest of 540 had to be built as a toll road NOW, as opposed to waiting for tax revenue to come in over 30 years to build it as a free route. Now I don't remember exactly why, but for some reason the fact that the new part is tolled and the old part isn't means the new part cannot carry Interstate shields at least until the toll bonds are paid off. That's why the loop is part I-540, part FREE NC 540, and part TOLL NC 540.
Bunk. A toll road can carry an interstate shield from the start. I-355 here (built 1989, extended 2007) did have an interstate shield from the start, and was planned to carry an interstate shield even though it was also planned as a tollway and has never used tax dollars. There is no reason North Carolina cannot call it all I-540 from the start.
Six shields on one sign in East St. Louis:
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=east+st.+louis,+il&hl=en&ll=38.632302,-90.150923&spn=0.007115,0.016512&sll=42.032432,-88.091192&sspn=0.215482,0.528374&hnear=East+St+Louis,+St+Clair,+Illinois&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=38.632475,-90.15056&panoid=1DoylcMvKDQZXUfQY24VoQ&cbp=12,240.34,,0,-5.32 (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=east+st.+louis,+il&hl=en&ll=38.632302,-90.150923&spn=0.007115,0.016512&sll=42.032432,-88.091192&sspn=0.215482,0.528374&hnear=East+St+Louis,+St+Clair,+Illinois&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=38.632475,-90.15056&panoid=1DoylcMvKDQZXUfQY24VoQ&cbp=12,240.34,,0,-5.32)
The other direction has one sign with four:
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=east+st.+louis,+il&hl=en&ll=38.631782,-90.151223&spn=0.007116,0.016512&sll=42.032432,-88.091192&sspn=0.215482,0.528374&hnear=East+St+Louis,+St+Clair,+Illinois&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=38.631833,-90.151103&panoid=pQ7TDaGm7i7x-MAmtNg5Lw&cbp=12,65,,0,-1.11 (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=east+st.+louis,+il&hl=en&ll=38.631782,-90.151223&spn=0.007116,0.016512&sll=42.032432,-88.091192&sspn=0.215482,0.528374&hnear=East+St+Louis,+St+Clair,+Illinois&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=38.631833,-90.151103&panoid=pQ7TDaGm7i7x-MAmtNg5Lw&cbp=12,65,,0,-1.11)
If Caltrans were to ever sign all of the hidden routes within Sacramento on the Capitol City Freeway/Business 80, the exit sign on northbound CA-99 approaching this freeway might look something like this...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.markyville.com%2Faaroads%2F2many_shields.png&hash=67316ae55e052428fd8490a3a28eb4f5fb883d2d)
The east-west portion of the Capitol City Freeway is currently signed as US 50 and BL-80 but it also carries CA-16, CA-99 and I-305. To make the above sign even more absurd, I added "TO I-5" to add a 6th shield on that sign. The north-south portion of the Capitol City Freeway is only signed as BL-80 but it also carries hidden CA-51. That makes 10 shields total for all signs on that truss. :-o
Quote from: broadhurst04 on October 14, 2012, 07:06:37 PM
I agree. However, it was decided here that the rest of 540 had to be built as a toll road NOW, as opposed to waiting for tax revenue to come in over 30 years to build it as a free route. Now I don't remember exactly why, but for some reason the fact that the new part is tolled and the old part isn't means the new part cannot carry Interstate shields at least until the toll bonds are paid off. That's why the loop is part I-540, part FREE NC 540, and part TOLL NC 540.
generally speaking, I'd want a single route number, but in the case of a half-free half-toll road with the same number, a shield shape change does serve as a useful mnemonic.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 12, 2012, 08:50:51 PM
what shield is greened out/removed under the "TO" at upper right?
the NORTH as a general direction reflects practice in England, Chile, etc... have only very rarely seen it in the US. I'm not sure I would recognize it as such, instead thinking it would lead me to the northern parts of Raleigh, not "things generally to the north, like Richmond or Boston".
Based on other signage in North Carolina (and based on where I-540 goes), I believe they're using it in the sense you mean, not as in "The North" like the way in the UK they'd say "The Midlands" or the like. One of North Carolina's standard practices is to put "DOWNTOWN" in all caps under the city name when the road to which the sign refers is a direct route to downtown, although sometimes they omit the city name in favor of the road name (for example, when I lived in Durham one of the signs said "Roxboro St/DOWNTOWN"). The use of "NORTH" on the sign shown in the original post is extremely similar and would lead me to interpret it in the same manner–i.e., in this case, Northern Raleigh.
That's how I'd read it if I were driving in that area, anyway. (When I lived there, I-540 was a short route that ran from I-40 to US-70 and so didn't get much use. When I commuted to North Raleigh in the summer of 1996 I took the Durham Freeway to I-40 to Wade Avenue to the Beltline to Wake Forest Road. I-540 would have simplified it substantially.)
Here's an example (from AARoads) of the "DOWNTOWN" signage from the Beltline around Raleigh. The empty space used to be a US-64 shield. It's now US-64 business but I guess they hadn't fixed it when the picture was taken.
(https://www.aaroads.com/southeast/north_carolina440/i-440_eb_exit_013a_03.jpg)
Here's one from the Greensboro area that shows both the "DOWNTOWN" practice and five shields on a single overhead (so it fits with the original subject of this thread). I still think of this area as I-85, not Green I-85, because that's how it was during my years in North Carolina.
(https://www.aaroads.com/southeast/north_carolina040/i-040_eb_exit_220_01.jpg)
Just throwing these out there for the "4 route shields on 1 sign" category...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8424%2F7866911994_b5fc49dbd4_z.jpg&hash=7ab314efe42608caff3a4e68d691657a353be62e)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7267%2F7868929880_20ff121b23_z.jpg&hash=5a5335c175079159241aedab77e799222d5ded4e)
The thing that popped up in my head when I saw the thread is... I-95/US1/US9/US46 SB entering New Jersey. The mainline itself is a shield salad, add the rest and it's just crazy.
Bowers Hill, VA. Note that VA 191 is not on the mainline at the exit; it's the first intersection past it from 13B.
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-TADPnRopSLc/UARFX77QtuI/AAAAAAAADFU/lYkQDCIXVOA/s816/DSC01325.JPG)
(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-HkQrDYt5FU8/UARFYFqUw-I/AAAAAAAADGA/R7tpA3HBckY/s816/DSC01326.JPG)
On this one, 191 even gets mentioned before US 58 and 460.
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-yo1hcRxkIQI/UARFYJoazGI/AAAAAAAADFc/EexIlYhX7Pg/s816/DSC01327.JPG)
Here's an elegant one from Wyoming
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Fwy%2F25%2F96to25douglas%2F4.jpg&hash=f8eb6fb6e2c17207ea18e3c1997742a0fa3c8a76)
Quote from: Brandon on October 14, 2012, 09:18:43 PM
Bunk. A toll road can carry an interstate shield from the start. I-355 here (built 1989, extended 2007) did have an interstate shield from the start, and was planned to carry an interstate shield even though it was also planned as a tollway and has never used tax dollars. There is no reason North Carolina cannot call it all I-540 from the start.
You're right - there's no reason it can't all carry an Interstate designation. It's just that the Turnpike Authority decided not to pursue an Interstate designation for the parts of the loop they were planning to toll. I think they actually thought we would think of it as two highways operating independently of each other if the toll portion was an NC route and the free portion was an Interstate. Never mind that it all looks like one loop road on a map and drives like it's all one loop road.
Except that part of NC 540 is free. So it's signed NC 540 to TOLL NC 540. Can't find a photo of this, but here's the opposite for NC 147 (from http://www.flickr.com/photos/adamontheroad/6489694435/):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7026%2F6489694435_807d7becce_z.jpg&hash=1265d747ed598cdf4c36bd345ddf1c9845359013)
Some I can think off of the top of my head:
(east-bound approaching the Marquette Interchange)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FAS0Od.jpg&hash=d401e8203bc0318c4845f3c4c8d895a9ce129378)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FkSckA.jpg&hash=89270bf16fae2b541383783c9f238e31cb0fc390)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FKPGMk.jpg&hash=852488178942a4693b1df312475baab11dfa4026)
At the Airport Circle in Camden/Pennsauken, NJ.
http://goo.gl/maps/VocsK
Even better...it's on a modified circle with overpasses, so the amount of time one has to view the sign is extremely limited!
Here's a fiver just north of the Raritan...
http://goo.gl/maps/DgvqP
Quote from: hubcity on October 16, 2012, 03:14:06 PM
Here's a fiver just north of the Raritan...
http://goo.gl/maps/DgvqP
I've never liked the way that the Garden State Parkway's shield is depicted as a route number here and elsewhere (but I have an admitted strong preference for route numbers).
About the only place you'll find four shields on a BGS in Kansas.... Wyandotte County.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.route56.com%2Fgallery%2Fzp-core%2Fi.php%3Fa%3D2009%2Fmar09%2F031009%26amp%3Bi%3D36391.jpg%26amp%3Bs%3D700&hash=13fb8eb9033cc8e585779136ece9a05467e06011)
Quote from: route56 on October 17, 2012, 08:15:34 AM
About the only place you'll find four shields on a BGS in Kansas.... Wyandotte County.
[img
Indeed. Here in Wichita, there is a section of I-135 that also carries US-81, K-15, and K-96. However, you won't find all those shields on an overhead. Even where overheads exist, the secondary routes are still pole-mounted.
Example on WB K-254 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.764748,-97.315763&spn=0.003508,0.003449&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=37.764877,-97.316527&panoid=aEn3RiFul6JBdyQ8MfzWyw&cbp=12,233.49,,1,0.08)
Example on SB I-135 / US-81 / K-15 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.764095,-97.323477&spn=0.003532,0.003449&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=37.763991,-97.323481&panoid=EqtPG3KetGEKlaqNVPhvFA&cbp=12,195.23,,1,-3.92)
Example on NB I-235 / EB K-96 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.758879,-97.325343&spn=0.003533,0.003449&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=37.758878,-97.325447&panoid=WypRLy84lG7bjB1jMiAFMA&cbp=12,84.79,,1,-1.68)
Example on NB I-135 / US-81 / K-15 / WB K-96 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.760905,-97.320495&spn=0.003533,0.003449&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=37.760905,-97.320495&panoid=K8G9OKl118L12WRroDZ9Gw&cbp=12,348.22,,1,-3.29)
Example on WB K-96 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.743639,-97.313853&spn=0.003533,0.003449&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=37.743637,-97.313605&panoid=BHEC71LStYesC46OSG885w&cbp=12,265.97,,1,1.54)
A bit of sine salad at the transition from 29th St North to Hydraulic (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.737628,-97.319636&spn=0.003534,0.003449&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=37.737618,-97.319776&panoid=f_XkUXN5GtMLX2LZ3Xb4Ng&cbp=12,78.96,,1,1.33)
Advance signage on S. Hydraulic (approaching 29th St North) (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.739388,-97.318075&spn=0.003534,0.003449&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=37.73948,-97.318004&panoid=APluY4NJk_gTPnGR0TU46w&cbp=12,241.27,,1,-0.77); but Signage at the ramp itself (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.738035,-97.319185&spn=0.003534,0.003449&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=37.7381,-97.319089&panoid=v8M22QiELD_aZ4IpzLiTVg&cbp=12,242.57,,1,6.44)
Newon prefers to simply pretend certain routes don't exist at certain points.
At 1st Street (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=38.042447,-97.322844&spn=0.002488,0.003449&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=38.042339,-97.322774&panoid=82vj8dspn_JOxz7mbpDRHQ&cbp=12,77.53,,0,-1.96) and Broadway (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=38.049955,-97.322832&spn=0.002488,0.003449&t=m&z=18&layer=c&cbll=38.049955,-97.322832&panoid=QsOw2VM_4-ZI58hwxcFjjg&cbp=12,106.56,,0,-8.54), it's a Wichita-style setup: only I-135 on the green sign, everything on the pole-mounts.
On EB US-50 / SB K-15 (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=38.026296,-97.334664&spn=0.002489,0.003449&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=38.026296,-97.334664&panoid=60C6sXojwenjGT5PWPHnGQ&cbp=12,97.87,,0,-15.68), K-15 ignores itself and US-81 is absent altogether.
Farther north, the practice persists.
Here's an example on EB K-4 / Bus US-81 outside of Lindsborg (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=38.62128,-97.622259&spn=0.004937,0.006899&t=k&z=17&layer=c&cbll=38.621359,-97.622194&panoid=HDQ7KIG1H7dNM9uOobBr3Q&cbp=12,55.57,,1,-1.54).
Here's another on WB K-4 at Assaria (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=38.681674,-97.6208&spn=0.009866,0.013797&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=38.681677,-97.620281&panoid=Rsc1uBzoNcbYHlf_EJGhsw&cbp=12,275.95,,1,-2.45).
Quote from: Dr Frankenstein on October 15, 2012, 09:59:53 PM
The thing that popped up in my head when I saw the thread is... I-95/US1/US9/US46 SB entering New Jersey. The mainline itself is a shield salad, add the rest and it's just crazy.
I think it's better now, but some of the old salad signs were downright confusing around there in years past, not to mention with bizarre shapes.
http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/nj/i-95/6s.html http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/nj/i-95/6n.html From Alps' site
Quote from: kphoger on October 17, 2012, 10:08:44 AM
A bit of sine salad at the transition from 29th St North to Hydraulic (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.737628,-97.319636&spn=0.003534,0.003449&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=37.737618,-97.319776&panoid=f_XkUXN5GtMLX2LZ3Xb4Ng&cbp=12,78.96,,1,1.33)
That one is made harder to understand by a left arrow on the right side of the assembly. That would be a no-no, right? It seems that the left-turn routes should logically be shown to the left of the through routes.
I don't think much of the pole-mounted signs in general. Too many places to look.
I like the practice done in some places in Johnson County–interstates only on the overheads, and directions for the associated US routes down on the legs of the gantry. What most people are looking for gets the most prominent location without a bunch of clutter, but if you're one of the rare souls actually interested in what US 50 or US 56 is doing, you still get that information.
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 17, 2012, 06:43:51 PM
I like the practice done in some places in Johnson County–interstates only on the overheads, and directions for the associated US routes down on the legs of the gantry. What most people are looking for gets the most prominent location without a bunch of clutter, but if you're one of the rare souls actually interested in what US 50 or US 56 is doing, you still get that information.
that sounds related to this 1950s CA practice: freeway names on the guide signs, route shields on the gantry leg.
(//www.aaroads.com/shields/img/CA/CA19550662i1.jpg)
however, I do not know why 66 warranted its own shield on the black sign.
(//www.aaroads.com/shields/img/CA/CA19580101i1.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images100/us-101_sb_exit_001e_02a.jpg)
Obviously the wind is about to send that gantry crashing to the ground any minute now.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on October 17, 2012, 06:52:46 PM
(//www.aaroads.com/shields/img/CA/CA19550662i1.jpg)
however, I do not know why 66 warranted its own shield on the black sign.
I'm guessing that, perhaps, the "66 Pasadena" is an early sort of black-out/green-out since it doesn't align with the upper word "Freeway" on the right. I'll bet it said "Arroyo Seco" before that, and that wasn't the original routing of 66.
It was 66 when the Four-Level opened. Perhaps there were problems with people following 66 keeping to the right and then cutting left when they realized they needed to take the left fork.
Quote from: NE2 on October 19, 2012, 01:01:03 AM
It was 66 when the Four-Level opened. Perhaps there were problems with people following 66 keeping to the right and then cutting left when they realized they needed to take the left fork.
that's a good possibility.
as for the blackout: I think the sign said "Pasadena Freeway" originally, with no shield. the word Pasadena has a Series EM capital letter, while the other capitals on that sign are Series D. I'd have to look up when the changeover was made, but I recall 1956 or so. that also coincides with when shields were first used on green signs. so that patch might date to ~1956, bolstering the idea that it was a retrofit of a ~1952 guide sign.
(the question is: what sign existed before the Santa Ana Freeway through sign? that also has Series EM capitals, implying that it is a 1956 or later sign.)
Quote from: theline on October 17, 2012, 04:55:54 PM
Quote from: kphoger on October 17, 2012, 10:08:44 AM
A bit of sine salad at the transition from 29th St North to Hydraulic (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.737628,-97.319636&spn=0.003534,0.003449&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=37.737618,-97.319776&panoid=f_XkUXN5GtMLX2LZ3Xb4Ng&cbp=12,78.96,,1,1.33)
That one is made harder to understand by a left arrow on the right side of the assembly. That would be a no-no, right? It seems that the left-turn routes should logically be shown to the left of the through routes.
I don't think much of the pole-mounted signs in general. Too many places to look.
While this particular assembly was only tangentally related to the OP, I figured I'd mention this, just to keep the AREs satisfied:
I verified yesterday that what exists in the field is the correct layout–left-turn routes on the left, through routes on the right. It's hard to believe that I shouldn't have noticed that error before, since it's not all that uncommon of a path for me to take. The GMSV is from July 2011, and shows black-on-white arrows; I seem to recall seeing white-on-blue arrows yesterday which looked shiny, but I'll have to check again next time I'm through there.
Quote from: kphoger on October 20, 2012, 09:57:13 AM
A bit of sine salad at the transition from 29th St North to Hydraulic (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.737628,-97.319636&spn=0.003534,0.003449&t=k&z=18&layer=c&cbll=37.737618,-97.319776&panoid=f_XkUXN5GtMLX2LZ3Xb4Ng&cbp=12,78.96,,1,1.33)
Verified, and mystery solved. The arrows (at least) were replaced in November, and the assembly was presumably switched to the correct configuration at that time.
Photos taken about 30 minutes ago:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi410%2Fkphoger%2Fassembly.png&hash=5d1ccc600c51b307b8b947aae766c63e3f5a62df)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi410%2Fkphoger%2Fdatetag.jpg&hash=34f9c6644861a1d37cb66279d105dbf66bb281de)
[end boring tangent subthread]
Did Kansas get a new sticker for the back of their signs? Is this the end of "ERECTION DATE:" ?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimageshack.us%2Fa%2Fimg837%2F2633%2F268q.jpg&hash=eaa67b671107adaaf9c5edd2085ede5cc3d1f8ac) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/837/268q.jpg/)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.staticflickr.com%2F3205%2F3145793724_2e35f464ec_b.jpg&hash=4406bae8e5e14949383c8fc6e0a489291725281e) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antlers2/3145793724/)
U.S. 12/18 at I 39/90 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/antlers2/3145793724/) by Steve Schar (http://www.flickr.com/people/antlers2/), on Flickr
Just remembered this example!
Another example, this time on I-95 northbound approaching the I-395 interchange (exits 182A-B) in Bangor, ME. This one's even complete with atrocious shields!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8470%2F8136591461_4c640f76aa_z.jpg&hash=820e77d7aa0cb378dc5411d165117173f5b50a62)
Another example which I passed yesterday, this one on I-96 east approaching the "Mixing Bowl" interchange in metro Detroit.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7263%2F8151985274_35c6a45596.jpg&hash=eae7335e24d1d131990875ccc495e32f21e71395) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/michsignalboy/8151985274/)
I-96 EB approaching I-275/I-696/M-5 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/michsignalboy/8151985274/) by MichSignalBoy (http://www.flickr.com/people/michsignalboy/), on Flickr
^^ North 5 and East 5? :spin:
Yes.
Quote from: Big John on November 04, 2012, 11:20:50 AM
^^ North 5 and East 5? :spin:
It happens... (http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2683/5860694397_9f0c2c8be4_b.jpg)
I was trying to think of examples in Mass of signs with 4 shields and the only one I could think of offhand was an historic example that I only wish I'd taken a picture of back then. Southbound on I-95 approaching exit 50 back in the late 80s when the road was closed south of there due to construction of the tie-in to 128 (with the prior and current I-95 SB to US 1 SB ramp carrying NB 1 to 95 traffic, thus nowhere for SB traffic to go other than exit 48, Centre St., which certainly couldn't handle that), the existing sign for exit 50 had a 95 shield tacked on, resulting in 4 shields. The extremely tacky, somewhat-inaccurate cartoon below shows the idea...the I-95 shield was tacked on to the right of the US 1 shield as I recall, and at the time the exit for US 1 was posted as TO 62 and 114. Today it is only posted as TO 62 despite there still not being direct access to 114 southbound. I can't remember if the exits had gotten their exit numbers and tabs yet then or not....I think so but the panels originally had no tabs and the word EXIT was down with the distance. The subsequent replacement eliminated the redundant EXIT wording.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww2.uakron.edu%2Fgenchem%2Fexit50.png&hash=6532bd87a5e7760171b4c78105e52a922d0a45ca)
Like I said, it's a crummy cartoon, but I do recall the 95 being fudged in to the right of US 1, and the sign being relatively tall vertically and starting with 3 shields and then going to 4 during the detour. I also seem to recall the 114 being a square shield, as was done sometimes in Mass, like 110 and 113 on 93 signage from a previous era.
Quote from: PennDOTFan on November 04, 2012, 01:09:04 PM
Quote from: Big John on November 04, 2012, 11:20:50 AM
^^ North 5 and East 5? :spin:
It happens... (http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2683/5860694397_9f0c2c8be4_b.jpg)
Beltways are indeed common examples of changing cardinal directions and it's not uncommon to see something like that picture at the inflection point. Non-circular roads like M-5 that change in direction are a little more rare and the signage with non-matching directions is a little more attention-getting.
On the four-shields topic, I thought of another in New England:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fnh%2Fi-93%2Fn20.jpg&hash=9b5371b71a02f820f131f9530b55a1e1dc86bf46)
From Steve's NH I-93 page (http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/nh/i-93/).
Quote from: PennDOTFan on November 03, 2012, 09:17:58 PM
Another example, this time on I-95 northbound approaching the I-395 interchange (exits 182A-B) in Bangor, ME. This one's even complete with atrocious shields!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8470%2F8136591461_4c640f76aa_z.jpg&hash=820e77d7aa0cb378dc5411d165117173f5b50a62)
Ah, the Maine Route 15 interchange ... for which there's no room on the sign
This one looks pretty nice in Little Rock, AR
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2F0%2F06%2FI30EasternTerminus.jpg&hash=5fbc704ba012143f33cbb7be972667a80b28c819)
(Not my image, from Wikipedia)
Quote from: PurdueBill on November 04, 2012, 01:13:23 PM
I was trying to think of examples in Mass of signs with 4 shields and the only one I could think of offhand was an historic example that I only wish I'd taken a picture of back then. Southbound on I-95 approaching exit 50 back in the late 80s when the road was closed south of there due to construction of the tie-in to 128 (with the prior and current I-95 SB to US 1 SB ramp carrying NB 1 to 95 traffic, thus nowhere for SB traffic to go other than exit 48, Centre St., which certainly couldn't handle that), the existing sign for exit 50 had a 95 shield tacked on, resulting in 4 shields. The extremely tacky, somewhat-inaccurate cartoon below shows the idea...the I-95 shield was tacked on to the right of the US 1 shield as I recall, and at the time the exit for US 1 was posted as TO 62 and 114. Today it is only posted as TO 62 despite there still not being direct access to 114 southbound. I can't remember if the exits had gotten their exit numbers and tabs yet then or not....I think so but the panels originally had no tabs and the word EXIT was down with the distance. The subsequent replacement eliminated the redundant EXIT wording.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww2.uakron.edu%2Fgenchem%2Fexit50.png&hash=6532bd87a5e7760171b4c78105e52a922d0a45ca)
Like I said, it's a crummy cartoon, but I do recall the 95 being fudged in to the right of US 1, and the sign being relatively tall vertically and starting with 3 shields and then going to 4 during the detour. I also seem to recall the 114 being a square shield, as was done sometimes in Mass, like 110 and 113 on 93 signage from a previous era.
The BGS that you speak & illustrated of was originally erected in the mid-1970s when the I-95 extension between Topsfield & Peabody (Exit 46) was fully completed. IIRC, the Exit 50 tab (center-mounted) was added either during the 80s southbound detour or just after (when I-95 between Exits 46 & 45 (MA 128)) opened.
BTW, it's worth noting that the control destinations for the original BGS' from I-95 South were
Middleton & Danvers (MA 62 control destinations) not
Danvers &
Topsfield (which are what's listed on the current BGS'). The original MA 62 & MA 114 shields did
not sport outlines as well. The US 1 shield would later (mid-80s) be replaced with one that featured a white square background.
Additionally, the I-95 shield that was temporarily thrown on that BGS had the numerals in an (ugly IMHO) experimental font that the DPW & even RIDOT featured on many of their 80s-vintage Interstate shields.
The original pull-thorugh BGS for I-95 South (covered during that detour) listed
Lynn along w/
Boston as a control destination despite the fact that it was fabricated
years after it was long-since known that I-95
proper wasn't going to continue south of MA 128 into Lynn.
Another example that might not exist now (not 100% sure) is the approach BGS' for Exit 60 along I-295
Southbound; I-195, I-95, NJ 29, NJ 129 and/or NJTP shields were all crammed onto the same BGS'.
Quote from: architect77 on October 12, 2012, 08:48:27 PM
What to do when up to 6 shields are required for a single route/exit? Go Up! These are definitely unique-looking and accurately describe where you're headed: The large but loosely defined northern half of Raleigh. "North" in this case isn't referring to direction but rather a destination.
Here's a panel that is almost exactly a year old (since it was uncovered). North bound I-95 in Prince George's County, Maryland between Md. 212 (Powder Mill Road) and Md. 200 (ICC). Most of the signage on Md. 200 only mentions I-270, not I-370, so this one is a little unique in that way.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2Fcpz%2Fdsc01250.jpg&hash=541fbee10a59d7e91426254c22849093ca369938)
I think they should have just decommissioned I-370 and replaced it all with 200, including the little piece of non-freeway beyond 270. Or maybe make the whole thing either I-370, or just turn 200 into MD 370 to avoid possible confusion.
Quote from: Roadsguy on November 05, 2012, 03:12:28 PM
I think they should have just decommissioned I-370 and replaced it all with 200, including the little piece of non-freeway beyond 270. Or maybe make the whole thing either I-370, or just turn 200 into MD 370 to avoid possible confusion.
One of the loudest (and most-obnoxious, a self-admitted member of Earth First!) opponents of the Md. 200 project for many years had a Web site on which he insisted that Maryland was going to number the InterCounty Connector as I-370.
Archive.org has a link to that site (it is now defunct) here (http://web.archive.org/web/20000815090957/http://www.igc.org/icc370/) from 2000, which was not long after then-Maryland Gov. Parris Glendening (D) announced that he was cancelling the project.
I think there are institutional issues regarding a possible decommissioning of I-370, even though Md. 200 actually pre-dates I-370 (Md. 200 was in state documents many years before I-370). For one thing, I-370 was built using Interstate dollars, which may complicate matters as far as changing it to Md. 200. Very nearly all of Md. 200 was built to Maryland Interstate standards, the one exception being the eastern end (now under construction), which will be an at-grade signalized intersection at U.S. 1 (Baltimore Avenue), not exactly Interstate-standard. I believe an at-grade intersection was selected because just beyond U.S. 1 is the CSX Capital Subdivision (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_Subdivision) railroad line (2 tracks), so building a trumpet-type interchange there would have been complex and expensive.
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 05, 2012, 09:45:18 AM
Quote from: PurdueBill on November 04, 2012, 01:13:23 PM
I was trying to think of examples in Mass of signs with 4 shields and the only one I could think of offhand was an historic example that I only wish I'd taken a picture of back then. Southbound on I-95 approaching exit 50 back in the late 80s when the road was closed south of there due to construction of the tie-in to 128 (with the prior and current I-95 SB to US 1 SB ramp carrying NB 1 to 95 traffic, thus nowhere for SB traffic to go other than exit 48, Centre St., which certainly couldn't handle that), the existing sign for exit 50 had a 95 shield tacked on, resulting in 4 shields. The extremely tacky, somewhat-inaccurate cartoon below shows the idea...the I-95 shield was tacked on to the right of the US 1 shield as I recall, and at the time the exit for US 1 was posted as TO 62 and 114. Today it is only posted as TO 62 despite there still not being direct access to 114 southbound. I can't remember if the exits had gotten their exit numbers and tabs yet then or not....I think so but the panels originally had no tabs and the word EXIT was down with the distance. The subsequent replacement eliminated the redundant EXIT wording.
Like I said, it's a crummy cartoon, but I do recall the 95 being fudged in to the right of US 1, and the sign being relatively tall vertically and starting with 3 shields and then going to 4 during the detour. I also seem to recall the 114 being a square shield, as was done sometimes in Mass, like 110 and 113 on 93 signage from a previous era.
The BGS that you speak & illustrated of was originally erected in the mid-1970s when the I-95 extension between Topsfield & Peabody (Exit 46) was fully completed. IIRC, the Exit 50 tab (center-mounted) was added either during the 80s southbound detour or just after (when I-95 between Exits 46 & 45 (MA 128)) opened.
BTW, it's worth noting that the control destinations for the original BGS' from I-95 South were Middleton & Danvers (MA 62 control destinations) not Danvers & Topsfield (which are what's listed on the current BGS'). The original MA 62 & MA 114 shields did not sport outlines as well. The US 1 shield would later (mid-80s) be replaced with one that featured a white square background.
Additionally, the I-95 shield that was temporarily thrown on that BGS had the numerals in an (ugly IMHO) experimental font that the DPW & even RIDOT featured on many of their 80s-vintage Interstate shields.
The original pull-thorugh BGS for I-95 South (covered during that detour) listed Lynn along w/Boston as a control destination despite the fact that it was fabricated years after it was long-since known that I-95 proper wasn't going to continue south of MA 128 into Lynn.
Another example that might not exist now (not 100% sure) is the approach BGS' for Exit 60 along I-295 Southbound; I-195, I-95, NJ 29, NJ 129 and/or NJTP shields were all crammed onto the same BGS'.
I knew you would remember a little better than I....I wish I'd taken pics of the old signs. I knew the old state outlines didn't have borders but didn't manage to bother with the detail for the sketch. I remember Lynn being on there which was a telltale of the original plans.
The sketch was admittedly crummy but the best I could whip up fast so as not to have to try to verbally describe the old sign. I still remember the narrowing of 4 lanes to 2 starting a couple miles back from there, the construction projects and detours, RIDOT-style 95 shields aplenty around the project area, especially in Peabody....since I lived only a short distance from there at the time. I think the non-cutout "RIDOT" shields had the same type of digits as you mention showing up on the overhead.
I would love for some sign to show ALL the routes on board with 465 at the point it carries the most routes. (Yes, I know that it is possible that technically the routes in question cease to exist during their overlap, but it would be awesome for the purposes of a sign with 8 shields.)
Florida's Turnpike; I can only suppose they might have put "Beeline/Beachline Expressway" in that gap:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.formulanone.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F02%2FOBT528bgsAbove-Turnpike.jpg&hash=b4c1506c7600ecc6b3aed59965bba19f1198ee2a)
Leaving Memphis, on I-55 north:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.formulanone.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F11%2FI55n%2BUS61-64-70-79bgsMemphis.jpg&hash=5a6c0d50eae65562d3b795ad3267651b4c9d807e)
Outside of Greensboro, NC:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.formulanone.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F06%2FInt73s-ThreeBGSTenShields.jpg&hash=55a9bf3e67298a15aaa53f27930e3ada977dde47)
Other end of Md. 200, on I-270:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2Fcpz%2FDistrict-4-20121128-00040.jpg&hash=d84c0fb2218734ed7782a31b5d96eab911a3cd8a)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2Fcpz%2FDistrict-4-20121128-00042.jpg&hash=815e779c88faf45d5c293a75c12585fb173e3e6e)
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 10, 2012, 02:09:03 AM
Other end of Md. 200, on I-270:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2Fcpz%2FDistrict-4-20121128-00040.jpg&hash=d84c0fb2218734ed7782a31b5d96eab911a3cd8a)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2Fcpz%2FDistrict-4-20121128-00042.jpg&hash=815e779c88faf45d5c293a75c12585fb173e3e6e)
I thought the ampersand (&) was banned? I'm surprised to see it on a new clearview sign.
Quote from: Scott5114 on October 20, 2012, 04:51:54 PMDid Kansas get a new sticker for the back of their signs? Is this the end of "ERECTION DATE:" ?
Don't think so--that sticker means the sign was installed by KDOT maintenance forces. I think "ERECTION DATE" is still around for contractor-installed signs.
Quote from: DaBigE on December 10, 2012, 09:31:05 AM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 10, 2012, 02:09:03 AM
Other end of Md. 200, on I-270:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2Fcpz%2FDistrict-4-20121128-00040.jpg&hash=d84c0fb2218734ed7782a31b5d96eab911a3cd8a)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.toward.com%2Fcpz%2FDistrict-4-20121128-00042.jpg&hash=815e779c88faf45d5c293a75c12585fb173e3e6e)
I thought the ampersand (&) was banned? I'm surprised to see it on a new clearview sign.
Truth be told, the exit tab and
TO Clearview cardinal are actually unauthorized uses of Clearview (from a design standpoint) to begin with so it's essentially a wash IMHO. Clearview's not supposed to be used in an all-CAPs application.
QuoteI-230 and I-330
My guess would be 230 is reserved for the Texarkana loop (which now won't be I-230, but nobody knew I-49/I-69 were coming at the time.
I-330...maybe held for a potential freeway spur to Hot Springs?
MUTCD says "Word messages should not contain periods, apostrophes, question marks, ampersands, or other punctuation or characters that are not letters, numerals, or hyphens unless necessary to avoid confusion" so apparently ampersands are not verboten but are discouraged when possibly confusing. The application in the exit tab isn't the end of the world but probably they could have gotten away with "9B-10". Maryland ampersands always used to appear in the main text of the sign anyway!
I've seen a button copy ampersand on old signage on OH I-280 SB a few miles from the south end; it was on a mileage sign for "I-80 & 90" but that is now replaced with a new sign with shields for both interstates and the turnpike.
Natick, MA:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8070%2F8245401673_39ab598ae4_z.jpg&hash=e89bf58810aae84fbfafd06f84cb4f9c50c6bfcb)
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 10, 2012, 02:30:23 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on December 10, 2012, 09:31:05 AM
I thought the ampersand (&) was banned? I'm surprised to see it on a new clearview sign.
Truth be told, the exit tab and TO Clearview cardinal are actually unauthorized uses of Clearview (from a design standpoint) to begin with so it's essentially a wash IMHO. Clearview's not supposed to be used in an all-CAPs application.
I noticed that too, but I didn't want to drag things too far away from the main topic of this thread, especially when it's been beaten to death elsewhere on these forums. This was just the first time I've ever seen an ampersand (post-2009 MUTCD update)
in Clearview.
Madison Beltline at Verona Rd- Midvale Blvd
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.staticflickr.com%2F3082%2F3192706623_c332af1089_z.jpg&hash=db019c598ec63560ca3f51760abff78813fa648b)
Four U.S. Highways by Steve Schar on Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/antlers2/3192706623/in/set-72157611752253779
Park St at Madison Beltline
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8181%2F8040216287_f259c85f11_z.jpg&hash=8c684becf8853480f0559ab41f4cbcfd22a01281)
Southbound US 151 by iowahighways on Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/iowahighways/8040216287/
Quote from: PurdueBill on December 10, 2012, 04:37:55 PM
MUTCD says "Word messages should not contain periods, apostrophes, question marks, ampersands, or other punctuation or characters that are not letters, numerals, or hyphens unless necessary to avoid confusion" so apparently ampersands are not verboten but are discouraged when possibly confusing. The application in the exit tab isn't the end of the world but probably they could have gotten away with "9B-10". Maryland ampersands always used to appear in the main text of the sign anyway!
I've seen a button copy ampersand on old signage on OH I-280 SB a few miles from the south end; it was on a mileage sign for "I-80 & 90" but that is now replaced with a new sign with shields for both interstates and the turnpike.
I know of at least one button copy ampersand surviving in the Columbus area: "EXITS 30 & 33" for the combined OH-161 and Easton Way sign on I-270 NB. (https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-WLV6-7KMP0Q/UGhF-ftwk-I/AAAAAAAAB7M/BMaksQ0wXl0/s0/DSCN4099.JPG) I'm guessing they wanted to avoid "EXITS 30-33" because it could be misinterpreted as including exit 32 (Morse Road), which it does not.
Quote from: Central Avenue on December 18, 2012, 09:50:25 AM
I know of at least one button copy ampersand surviving in the Columbus area: "EXITS 30 & 33" for the combined OH-161 and Easton Way sign on I-270 NB. (https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-WLV6-7KMP0Q/UGhF-ftwk-I/AAAAAAAAB7M/BMaksQ0wXl0/s0/DSCN4099.JPG) I'm guessing they wanted to avoid "EXITS 30-33" because it could be misinterpreted as including exit 32 (Morse Road), which it does not.
I'm glad they did that, because if I were there, I totally would interpret a "30-33" as including 32.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Fort+Lee,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.857196,-73.974423&spn=0.002065,0.005284&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=9.892242,21.643066&oq=fort+lee&t=h&hnear=Fort+Lee,+Bergen,+New+Jersey&z=18&layer=c&cbll=40.857181,-73.975067&panoid=9UpeYmN4QsSVOP4Fzr0yVA&cbp=12,123.18,,0,0
Two routes here have been even combined as NJDOT considers US 1 & US 9 being concurrent as one route: US 1 & 9.
There also used to be an overhead here that was removed and had US 1 and US 9 separate shields, but google came by after its removal.
Also at the southern terminus of the Palisades Interstate Parkway has a nice overhead single panel colaboration of routes. Too bad US 1 & 9 are not listed as it would really be something.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Fort+Lee,+NJ&hl=en&ll=40.862564,-73.956985&spn=0.002081,0.005284&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=9.892242,21.643066&oq=fort+lee&t=h&hnear=Fort+Lee,+Bergen,+New+Jersey&layer=c&cbll=40.862564,-73.956985&panoid=jkmi1Z93quIWDPyfOlZCOA&cbp=12,204.87,,0,-22.5&z=18
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.staticflickr.com%2F2228%2F2472809926_d3004e2fed_z_d.jpg&hash=69b8f43e72d16cf5895fb0736e5ceec7373076b5)
If anyone has a photo of the (now sadly defunct) BGSs showing
I-94 US 10 US 12 US 61
I would be most grateful if you posted it.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.formulanone.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F11%2FInt71s%2BInt75s-5BGSs.jpg&hash=0d5a236aa3399765378ecce452d65f272eaea0a5)
http://goo.gl/maps/S88Ye
US 69, 96, 287, and I-10 in Beaumont, Texas.
Quote from: formulanone on December 19, 2012, 06:14:34 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.formulanone.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F11%2FInt71s%2BInt75s-5BGSs.jpg&hash=0d5a236aa3399765378ecce452d65f272eaea0a5)
While the four shields are very nice, I'm more impressed by the four exit tabs -- so many that they had to put one of the panels over the opposite-direction lanes. I'm kind of curious if
that's a record.
Here is one along I-196 & US 31 NB near Holland, MI.
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/5043172332/" title="I-196 & US 31 Holland, MI by jerseyman65, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4126/5043172332_e698fdb8d8.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="I-196 & US 31 Holland, MI"></a>
Here are two in Elizabeth, NJ along US 1 & 9 near Newark International Airport and the many highways that intersect at the giant spaghetti bowl.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/5085877033/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/5085876933/
Quote from: Kacie Jane on December 22, 2012, 05:23:06 AM
While the four shields are very nice, I'm more impressed by the four exit tabs -- so many that they had to put one of the panels over the opposite-direction lanes. I'm kind of curious if that's a record.
The five-wide assemblies on I-670 (http://www.roadfan.com/670signs.html) had four signs with exit tabs as well, both left and right (interestingly, also three left and one right). The assemblies even had two different groups of five across (5A, 5B, 5C, pull-through, 4A-B, and then a couple with 4C replacing 4A-B).
East Saint Louis:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi410%2Fkphoger%2Fesl_zpsd6be3f2e.png&hash=2ae81ee51d6d99e64374e30fe4ae384d88d17f96)
Montgomery, AL:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi244.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg36%2Fjcm9572%2F201209%2520-%2520Trip%2520to%2520KC%2FIMG_0151_zpsaad267e4.jpg&hash=97f6814c8cd004e6c4d7192c36930e69a7eb3285)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5248%2F5357673109_b7a8c20158.jpg&hash=b9be1f80dc11138d5be06c1d6547472e762d1e66)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8499%2F8315270039_44f0347252.jpg&hash=54fdce8dc46cfbd8b3bb85fc67ac6e6cda712d4d)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8079%2F8316322816_7032e8c67b.jpg&hash=3c035051837780e28e0e1aa8979279723ac520de)
Breezewood is a control city?
I guess with all those businesses...
Anyway, the middle-photo sign looks kinda weird.
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 31, 2012, 10:07:00 AM
Breezewood is a control city?
Unfortunately, some at Maryland SHA seem to think so. Of course, it is unworthy of that honor.
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 31, 2012, 10:07:00 AM
I guess with all those businesses...
Anyway, the middle-photo sign looks kinda weird.
Those businesses should not be there.
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 31, 2012, 10:07:00 AM
Breezewood is a control city?
I guess with all those businesses...
I don't think it has anything to do with the businesses, or the size of Breezewood itself (which is an unincorporated location)... I'm sure it's a control city just because it is a well-known (not just in the traditional traffic-lights-on-an-interstrate way) junction of 2 main routes (I-70 & I-76). Sort of like New Stanton to the west.
I'm also pretty sure that the location of the photo in question (Hancock, MD) is used as a control city in places, since it's a junction of I-70/68/US-522.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 31, 2012, 11:20:55 AM
Those businesses should not be there.
I'm gonna have to disagree with that. They set up where they were allowed to. Some might even pre-date I-70.
Hell... they even have the right to lobby / petition for policies they feel best help their business.
It's "The Powers That Be", that has chosen not to stand up and "do the right thing", and correct this anomaly (With what seems like would be two relatively easy ramps to the old TPK alignment, bypassing the traffic signals).
Here is one on US-101 south towards the 4-Level Interchange in LA:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8212%2F8341247578_4b5006c4f4_c.jpg&hash=8cc5ea80ba5e3d4948bd530bdd2685101b27d9c5)
And one of its CA-110 northbound counterparts:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8500%2F8340190223_5ab63850be_c.jpg&hash=606dc7e70f3bac681cab9cd1e9dceafc2f5c130e)
What is that funky building in the background that looks like the world's largest playground slide?
Quote from: BamaZeus on January 03, 2013, 12:02:04 PM
What is that funky building in the background that looks like the world's largest playground slide?
Ramón C. Cortines School of Visual and Performing Arts.
I was cruisin through street view and found one assembly with 5 shields on one large sign.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Wilmington,+NC&hl=en&ll=34.234051,-77.96731&spn=0.009101,0.021136&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=9.892242,21.643066&oq=wil&t=m&hnear=Wilmington,+New+Hanover,+North+Carolina&z=16&layer=c&cbll=34.23405,-77.967027&panoid=gtqg4DGT8-ZVHiNJ_LyN-Q&cbp=12,97.01,,0,0
On NB US 17, EB US 74, and EB US 76 entering Wilmington at the US 421 Interchange is this located.
Here's perhaps the only overhead in Nova Scotia containing 4 provincial highway shields on one sign:
http://goo.gl/maps/PVJK5
I suspect it's a relic of the days where the interchange just before this gantry was a rotary (roundabout, traffic circle, whatever...). Strange that it was never updated, since it implies that NS-111 exits itself. Doesn't really matter since all the other gantrys approaching Exit 4 are correct.
Quote from: roadman65 on January 05, 2013, 12:45:28 PM
I was cruisin through street view and found one assembly with 5 shields on one large sign.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Wilmington,+NC&hl=en&ll=34.234051,-77.96731&spn=0.009101,0.021136&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=9.892242,21.643066&oq=wil&t=m&hnear=Wilmington,+New+Hanover,+North+Carolina&z=16&layer=c&cbll=34.23405,-77.967027&panoid=gtqg4DGT8-ZVHiNJ_LyN-Q&cbp=12,97.01,,0,0
On NB US 17, EB US 74, and EB US 76 entering Wilmington at the US 421 Interchange is this located.
Here's a shot I took of this signage back in the summer.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8307%2F7887686714_8a3b334786_z.jpg&hash=54e4f971b16296ed1ca15c9fe2391087c4815853)
Quote from: hbelkins on January 05, 2013, 06:19:34 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 05, 2013, 12:45:28 PM
I was cruisin through street view and found one assembly with 5 shields on one large sign.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Wilmington,+NC&hl=en&ll=34.234051,-77.96731&spn=0.009101,0.021136&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=9.892242,21.643066&oq=wil&t=m&hnear=Wilmington,+New+Hanover,+North+Carolina&z=16&layer=c&cbll=34.23405,-77.967027&panoid=gtqg4DGT8-ZVHiNJ_LyN-Q&cbp=12,97.01,,0,0
On NB US 17, EB US 74, and EB US 76 entering Wilmington at the US 421 Interchange is this located.
Here's a shot I took of this signage back in the summer.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8307%2F7887686714_8a3b334786_z.jpg&hash=54e4f971b16296ed1ca15c9fe2391087c4815853)
Your shot is better!
I also noticed that there are seven control cities in addition to eight shields. Sine salad or overkill for sure! All you need is to be passing an 18 wheeler and you have missed the boat.
Quote from: hbelkins on January 05, 2013, 06:19:34 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 05, 2013, 12:45:28 PM
I was cruisin through street view and found one assembly with 5 shields on one large sign.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Wilmington,+NC&hl=en&ll=34.234051,-77.96731&spn=0.009101,0.021136&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=9.892242,21.643066&oq=wil&t=m&hnear=Wilmington,+New+Hanover,+North+Carolina&z=16&layer=c&cbll=34.23405,-77.967027&panoid=gtqg4DGT8-ZVHiNJ_LyN-Q&cbp=12,97.01,,0,0
On NB US 17, EB US 74, and EB US 76 entering Wilmington at the US 421 Interchange is this located.
Here's a shot I took of this signage back in the summer.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8307%2F7887686714_8a3b334786_z.jpg&hash=54e4f971b16296ed1ca15c9fe2391087c4815853)
Time to break out the binoculars while driving!
North end of the Maine Turnpike (https://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&t=k&vpsrc=6&ll=44.310921,-69.808803&spn=0.011623,0.01929&z=16&layer=c&cbll=44.311021,-69.808836&panoid=7LxiOAEHQ_9sBtsMnmW94g&cbp=12,345,,0,0).
Why the weird layout and empty greenspace? There used to be a TO [3] there, before the northern Augusta bypass and Exit 113 opened.
Quote from: Mr_Northside on December 31, 2012, 05:44:09 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on December 31, 2012, 11:20:55 AM
Those businesses should not be there.
I'm gonna have to disagree with that. They set up where they were allowed to. Some might even pre-date I-70.
Hell... they even have the right to lobby / petition for policies they feel best help their business.
It's "The Powers That Be", that has chosen not to stand up and "do the right thing", and correct this anomaly (With what seems like would be two relatively easy ramps to the old TPK alignment, bypassing the traffic signals).
Allow me to re-phrase - the businesses
would not be there (at least not in the quantities observed on the ground) if not for the presence of a breezewood.
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (PennDOT and PTC) should have followed the lead of other states that once had many breezewoods, but have remediated them - specific examples include Ohio and New York, where there were once quite a few of them (especially Ohio, but Ohio DOT and the Ohio Turnpike Commission have gotten rid of all of them). But Pennsylvania will not do anything about any of its breezewoods without a shove from Congress.
Other than Pennsylvania, the only states (I can think of) with breezewoods are New Jersey (Belmawr, with the non-connection between the Turnpike and I-76/N.J. 42/ACE) and Florida (the Sunshine State has a "semi-breezewood" at Fort Pierce where the northbound Turnpike and I-95 finally diverge from each other, with the Turnpike turning inland in the direction of Orlando and I-95 continuing along the Atlantic Coast toward Jacksonville (here (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=fort+pierce+fl&hl=en&ll=27.414291,-80.394173&spn=0.042591,0.058365&sll=27.397375,-80.381126&sspn=0.170391,0.233459&gl=us&hnear=Fort+Pierce,+St+Lucie,+Florida&t=m&z=14)).
Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 06, 2013, 11:35:02 PM
Other than Pennsylvania, the only states (I can think of) with breezewoods are New Jersey (Belmawr, with the non-connection between the Turnpike and I-76/N.J. 42/ACE) and Florida (the Sunshine State has a "semi-breezewood" at Fort Pierce where the northbound Turnpike and I-95 finally diverge from each other, with the Turnpike turning inland in the direction of Orlando and I-95 continuing along the Atlantic Coast toward Jacksonville (here (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=fort+pierce+fl&hl=en&ll=27.414291,-80.394173&spn=0.042591,0.058365&sll=27.397375,-80.381126&sspn=0.170391,0.233459&gl=us&hnear=Fort+Pierce,+St+Lucie,+Florida&t=m&z=14)).
Florida has a half at the Turnpike and SR 528, and a simple non-connection at SR 417. Ohio still has one at the Turnpike and I-475, and a non-connection at I-271. Kansas has one at the Turnpike and US 54-400. New York has one at the Thruway and I-790.
Quote from: NE2 on January 06, 2013, 11:42:58 PM
Kansas has one at the Turnpike and US 54-400.
Huh? The connection between the KTA and US-54/400 is (except for the toll booth) a full freeway connection. If you're referring to the stoplight at the Kellogg frontage road crossover, that's simply because that portion of Kellogg is not a freeway yet. The freeway portion of Kellogg ends at Rock Rd (or the Eastern St bridge, if you prefer), and doesn't resume until east of Augusta–a distance of 15 miles. At any rate, I believe the next construction project on the books includes the elimination of that stoplight as well as a few to the east.
Quote from: kphoger on January 07, 2013, 11:17:16 AM
If you're referring to the stoplight at the Kellogg frontage road crossover
Indeed. There's a single light between two freeways.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 06, 2013, 11:35:02 PM
Other than Pennsylvania, the only states (I can think of) with breezewoods are New Jersey (Belmawr, with the non-connection between the Turnpike and I-76/N.J. 42/ACE)...
The difference is that Breezewood contains the thru-routing of I-70 on local streets. One doesn't need to go thru a town to continue on the Turnpike or 76/42. There are dozens of examples of non-direct connections between two different routes.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 07, 2013, 01:44:24 PM
The difference is that Breezewood contains the thru-routing of I-70 on local streets.
This is really an accident of numbering. If I-78 were extended to Pittsburgh via 81-76-376, it wouldn't make the Carlisle breezewood any worse.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 07, 2013, 01:44:24 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 06, 2013, 11:35:02 PM
Other than Pennsylvania, the only states (I can think of) with breezewoods are New Jersey (Belmawr, with the non-connection between the Turnpike and I-76/N.J. 42/ACE)...
The difference is that Breezewood contains the thru-routing of I-70 on local streets. One doesn't need to go thru a town to continue on the Turnpike or 76/42. There are dozens of examples of non-direct connections between two different routes.
You are, of course, correct.
It's not
nearly as blatant as the breezewood in Breezewood.
But that still doesn't excuse the lack of a connection between the Turnpike and that collection of routes.
Quote from: NE2 on January 07, 2013, 12:36:48 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 07, 2013, 11:17:16 AM
If you're referring to the stoplight at the Kellogg frontage road crossover
Indeed. There's a single light between two freeways.
Five years ago, you couldn't have said that, because the intersection at Kellogg & Rock was also a stoplight. The only reason that one stoplight is noteworthy now is that the freeway portion of Kellogg is steadily being extended eastward, and that lone stoplight got left in between phases of construction. This is really the opposite of Breezewood, which is
against freeway-zation.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 07, 2013, 09:41:01 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 07, 2013, 01:44:24 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on January 06, 2013, 11:35:02 PM
Other than Pennsylvania, the only states (I can think of) with breezewoods are New Jersey (Belmawr, with the non-connection between the Turnpike and I-76/N.J. 42/ACE)...
The difference is that Breezewood contains the thru-routing of I-70 on local streets. One doesn't need to go thru a town to continue on the Turnpike or 76/42. There are dozens of examples of non-direct connections between two different routes.
You are, of course, correct.
It's not nearly as blatant as the breezewood in Breezewood.
But that still doesn't excuse the lack of a connection between the Turnpike and that collection of routes.
I would think there wouldn't be a direct connection between Florida's Turnpike and I-95 where they start paralleling each other south of Fort Pierce just to prevent (or at least deter) lots of southbound traffic from easily getting onto I-95 to shunpike. It's more of a deterrent if there is no freeway-to-freeway connection, though FDOT/FTE does make it easy because they post TO Turnpike/TO I-95 guide signs on the other roadways.
I do see the New Jersey Turnpike (I-95) and I-295 parallel each other for quite a distance, too, with at least one direct connection between the two just after crossing the Delaware. There aren't any other direct connections that I can see; the easiest fully-freeway one would be via I-195 near Trenton.
As said above, though, drivers aren't required to exit, go through non-controlled-access intersections, and then go back onto the freeway to continue on the same route in either of the cases above.
Quote from: Ace10 on January 18, 2013, 02:58:59 PM
I would think there wouldn't be a direct connection between Florida's Turnpike and I-95 where they start paralleling each other south of Fort Pierce just to prevent (or at least deter) lots of southbound traffic from easily getting onto I-95 to shunpike.
On the other hand, Jax-Miami traffic would be more likely to hop on the Turnpike if there were direct ramps.
Quote from: NE2 on January 18, 2013, 03:01:58 PM
On the other hand, Jax-Miami traffic would be more likely to hop on the Turnpike if there were direct ramps.
why is that? solely because 95 sucks through Fort Lauderdale?
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 18, 2013, 03:04:02 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 18, 2013, 03:01:58 PM
On the other hand, Jax-Miami traffic would be more likely to hop on the Turnpike if there were direct ramps.
why is that? solely because 95 sucks through Fort Lauderdale?
Been many years since I was in Florida, but given a choice between Florida's Turnpike and I-95 from Miami to Fort Pierce, I would
much rather pay the tolls and enjoy the lower number of interchanges on the Pike. Of course, it would be even nicer if the Florida toll roads would get with the program and join the E-ZPass Group.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 18, 2013, 03:04:02 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 18, 2013, 03:01:58 PM
On the other hand, Jax-Miami traffic would be more likely to hop on the Turnpike if there were direct ramps.
why is that? solely because 95 sucks through Fort Lauderdale?
It's not terrible until you hit the Golden glades. Boring, yes. Sucks...not as bad as the tolled rollerball match Miami-Dade has made most of I-95, or a free parking lot.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 18, 2013, 03:04:02 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 18, 2013, 03:01:58 PM
On the other hand, Jax-Miami traffic would be more likely to hop on the Turnpike if there were direct ramps.
why is that? solely because 95 sucks through Fort Lauderdale?
You haven't driven through West Palm Beach lately?
Bumping this for another six in North Carolina.
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-XMIc1qArHMk/UUN_Pf6jiMI/AAAAAAAAF2Q/HOKM0T576dM/s640/IMG_1254.JPG)
Needs more greenout, don't you think?
I'm bumping as well. Found this one taking some back roads back to Dallas today. And it's not on an interstate, which surprised me. On and approaching the Lufkin, TX loop:
http://maps.google.com/?ll=31.372376,-94.759285&spn=0.001154,0.00195&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=31.37213,-94.759166&panoid=V2N9cCAT8tLN7anAOGmlDA&cbp=12,144.65,,0,3.22
4 different designations as well: BUS US hwy, TX state hwy, TX loop, and FM hwy
Great find!
3 things:
1) Yay pulling up a dead thread!
2) I noticed this while driving today
3) It's not an overhead sign but close enough
http://goo.gl/maps/AKr8c
And a little further east... (IS an overhead sign!)
http://goo.gl/maps/8PAvp
Quote from: bassoon1986 on May 14, 2013, 07:09:07 PM
I'm bumping as well. Found this one taking some back roads back to Dallas today. And it's not on an interstate, which surprised me. On and approaching the Lufkin, TX loop:
http://maps.google.com/?ll=31.372376,-94.759285&spn=0.001154,0.00195&t=m&z=19&layer=c&cbll=31.37213,-94.759166&panoid=V2N9cCAT8tLN7anAOGmlDA&cbp=12,144.65,,0,3.22
4 different designations as well: BUS US hwy, TX state hwy, TX loop, and FM hwy
That was a recent-years redo of a somewhat complicated double intersection, which was part of the move of the US 69 designation to the north and east part of Loop 287. The BGS instance of 4 different types of roads on the same sign doesn't happen very often in TX.
Revisiting this topic...
This is a recently modified BGS for the combined Exit 21-22 ramp off of I-295 North in NJ. The former sign assembly is here (blame GSV for the bad image): http://goo.gl/maps/zU76Y
And the new one:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi225.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd144%2Froadnut%2F7D4C3DA0-B19C-4D58-8DB1-585DAF1361A0.jpg&hash=543c07dd506e2c40b71aef1914485795809f5a39) (http://s225.photobucket.com/user/roadnut/media/7D4C3DA0-B19C-4D58-8DB1-585DAF1361A0.jpg.html)
This is actually a modification of the old sign - 'North' & 'To" were removed, and the other 2 shields were added. While the advanced BGSs only had 2 routes, the BGSs after you took the ramp always had all 4 (on two signs) as shown here: http://goo.gl/maps/w5B5h
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 09, 2014, 06:27:56 PM
Revisiting this topic...
This is a recently modified BGS for the combined Exit 21-22 ramp off of I-295 North in NJ. The former sign assembly is here (blame GSV for the bad image): http://goo.gl/maps/zU76Y
And the new one:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi225.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fdd144%2Froadnut%2F7D4C3DA0-B19C-4D58-8DB1-585DAF1361A0.jpg&hash=543c07dd506e2c40b71aef1914485795809f5a39) (http://s225.photobucket.com/user/roadnut/media/7D4C3DA0-B19C-4D58-8DB1-585DAF1361A0.jpg.html)
This is actually a modification of the old sign - 'North' & 'To" were removed, and the other 2 shields were added. While the advanced BGSs only had 2 routes, the BGSs after you took the ramp always had all 4 (on two signs) as shown here: http://goo.gl/maps/w5B5h
They could have put the shields in chronological order... :-P
Looked better before