West Virginia thinks drivers using southbound I-79 are to stupid to realize which exit they should take if they plan to take ARC Corridor L to Beckley and hit I-77, bypassing Charleston.
This sign appears on I-79 prior to the US 19 Morgantown/Westover exit just south of the Pennsylvania state line.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2Freturning_home_from_national%2Freturning_home_from_national-Images%2F44.jpg&hash=3c9c31abf2b78b75bf8fb4ff241a2f789887e2b1)
On the signage for the US 19 exit at Roanoke, just south of Weston, the US 19 route markers have been removed so drivers won't think this is the exit they should take to get to Beckley. There are US 19 markers on the northbound signage.
An example can be seen here: (mods, feel free to resize if desired)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2FWashington_CD_2004%2FPICT1219.JPG&hash=65be43a22641b0e7d1ae0ab1cac6e962876922cd)
Any other examples where DOTs seem to think motorists are stupid and don't know which exit to take?
I don't know- I'm sure people have made that mistake on plenty of occasions. I was driving from Fryeburg, ME to Brentwood, NH without a map once and got off NH 16 onto NH 125 all the way up where the Spaulding Turnpike began instead of following 16 down to Rochester- before I left I just looked at a map real quick and said "16 to 125, got it" without realizing that 16 intersected 125 multiple times.
I would have appreciated a sign like that. Maybe that's on me for not having a map (in fairness, we had a map. My friend went from Brentwood to Boston with his girlfriend in her car and took the map, and I borrowed his car to go up to Maine), but I'm also probably not the first person ever to be relying on verbal directions without having a map. If I were driving from Erie to Beckley and somebody said "take 79 to 19" and I didn't have time or access to a map, I could see myself making that mistake.
Also on southbound I-79: At exit 139, there is no route number shield on the BGS. Northbound, you do see one - for CR 33. I assume that's so southbound traffic doesn't mistake it for US 33, which you encounter at exit 99.
I was in the parking lot of the Buckhannon Lowe's a few years ago when someone who was lost approached me, saying that their friend told them to get off I-79 at the 119 exit and go right. Problem was, she wanted to go to Bridgeport; I told her she should have stayed on the interstate until she got to Exit 119, not US Route 119. So I gave her better directions and she went on her way.
I do think there are some people who might take the wrong exit, especially if somebody gives them directions that aren't detailed enough like "Take 79 into West Virginia then onto 19 south until you get to the WV Turnpike". I'll bet they had a number of confused truck drivers in that area before they erected that sign!
We are stupid.
Quote from: hbelkins on February 09, 2013, 08:41:25 PM
West Virginia thinks drivers using southbound I-79 are to stupid to realize which exit they should take if they plan to take ARC Corridor L to Beckley and hit I-77, bypassing Charleston.
This sign appears on I-79 prior to the US 19 Morgantown/Westover exit just south of the Pennsylvania state line.
On the signage for the US 19 exit at Roanoke, just south of Weston, the US 19 route markers have been removed so drivers won't think this is the exit they should take to get to Beckley. There are US 19 markers on the northbound signage.
I noted this last summer and had wondered why the shields on those Roanoke signs were removed. :banghead:
Okay, so you get off at US 19 in Roanoke (Jeez, why don't they say Roanoke, WV, while they're at it?) and take that to Beckley, is it really THAT bad? You bypass the Turnpike completely that way.
US 19 between the Roanoke exit and where it joins I-79 at Flatwoods, prior to the Beckley exit, is your typical West Virginia two-lane road. It's not a route intended for through traffic or truck traffic when I-79 is available. Only reason I've driven it was to clinch US 19 in WV and I have no plans to ever drive it again.
You'd have to take US 19 all the way past Beckley to Princeton to bypass the turnpike.
Yeah, but if you're only GOING to Beckley or Tamarack...
Still I see your point.
Quote from: hbelkins on February 09, 2013, 10:17:48 PM
US 19 between the Roanoke exit and where it joins I-79 at Flatwoods, prior to the Beckley exit, is your typical West Virginia two-lane road. It's not a route intended for through traffic or truck traffic when I-79 is available. Only reason I've driven it was to clinch US 19 in WV and I have no plans to ever drive it again.
Well that sounds like a sure sign that I would love it!
Years ago, Delaware DOT did not post any reference to U.S. 301 on the southbound side of I-95 (Delaware Turnpike) approaching Del. 896 (Exit 1), presumably because they did not want motorists to realize that they could leave I-95 and avoid the Turnpike tolls by taking 301 south into Maryland (there is at least one reference to U.S. 301 posted now).
They don't think we're stupid, just the average non-road enthusiast motorist.
Quote from: OracleUsr on February 09, 2013, 09:57:22 PM
Okay, so you get off at US 19 in Roanoke (Jeez, why don't they say Roanoke, WV, while they're at it?) and take that to Beckley, is it really THAT bad?
Yes.
Quote from: OracleUsr on February 09, 2013, 10:47:30 PM
Yeah, but if you're only GOING to Beckley or Tamarack...
then you still really don't want to get off at Exit 91. It's 1.5 times longer by mileage, and twice as long by time according to the Goog.
Just saw that sign today, actually.
The reason is, not everybody makes note of 'Take I-79 to exit 57, Take US19 south to Beckley, etc'. Most would say: Take I-79 South to US19 South to Beckley. When two roads parallel for so long, and then suddenly diverge so drastically, it is rather important to make sure you post exactly when the best point is.
Really, the multiple US19 crossings with I-79 is no different than the signs in Maryland advising you of MD68 and I-68, just so that motorists know which one they should be looking for.
How about when Toll Road names are written on the same sign as their official shields? Like the New Jersey Turnpike guide signs which feature both a NJT trailblazer and "NJ TURNPIKE" or "NJ Turnpike" spelled out in some places. Even in Florida on the FL 528 Toll Road, the Exit 4 guides for the FL Turnpike that had a shield only to denote the Turnpike now has the word "Turnpike" added to it.
Of course in Florida's case, it most likely has to do with the fact many tourists travel that part of FL 528 and the Turnpike Enterprise who maintains that road feel that most people are not familiar with the official shield of Florida' Turnpike. However, some may feel that in New Jersey it may be redundant and even one member here on his personal website expressed that fact.
Quote from: roadman65 on February 10, 2013, 02:03:22 AM
How about when Toll Road names are written on the same sign as their official shields? Like the New Jersey Turnpike guide signs which feature both a NJT trailblazer and "NJ TURNPIKE" or "NJ Turnpike" spelled out in some places. Even in Florida on the FL 528 Toll Road, the Exit 4 guides for the FL Turnpike that had a shield only to denote the Turnpike now has the word "Turnpike" added to it.
Of course in Florida's case, it most likely has to do with the fact many tourists travel that part of FL 528 and the Turnpike Enterprise who maintains that road feel that most people are not familiar with the official shield of Florida' Turnpike. However, some may feel that in New Jersey it may be redundant and even one member here on his personal website expressed that fact.
Not a toll road, but similar:
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-NF0EBha1hA8/UReO8-BZmBI/AAAAAAAAClc/6ObGYPqkEYk/s800/DSCN4797.JPG)
Westbound I-70 in Maryland approaching the Clear Spring exit (I think it's Clear Spring–it's the exit where Ski Whitetail is) has a sign reading, "NEXT EXIT IS [MD-68 shield] [Horizontal separator line] FOR [I-68 shield] National Freeway STAY ON [I-70 shield]" I know there are pictures of the sign online, but I don't know of a good way to grab image properties when posting by iPad.
I've always thought you have to be kinda stupid to need that warning, but I guess some people just say things like "Take 70 to 68." I always use multiple references when giving directions ("Take I-70 west towards Hancock, then take Exit 1 onto I-68 west. The sign will list Cumberland."), but I guess a lot of people don't.
I've also never heard that road called the "National Freeway" except on that sign.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 10, 2013, 09:17:50 AM
I've also never heard that road called the "National Freeway" except on that sign.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2FWashington_CD_2004%2FPICT1062.JPG&hash=f1e04c6820e38045bf82d878bd85046034711dcb)
from http://www.millenniumhwy.net/Washington_CD_2004/index.html
Quote from: Central Avenue on February 10, 2013, 07:15:56 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 10, 2013, 02:03:22 AM
How about when Toll Road names are written on the same sign as their official shields? Like the New Jersey Turnpike guide signs which feature both a NJT trailblazer and "NJ TURNPIKE" or "NJ Turnpike" spelled out in some places. Even in Florida on the FL 528 Toll Road, the Exit 4 guides for the FL Turnpike that had a shield only to denote the Turnpike now has the word "Turnpike" added to it.
Of course in Florida's case, it most likely has to do with the fact many tourists travel that part of FL 528 and the Turnpike Enterprise who maintains that road feel that most people are not familiar with the official shield of Florida' Turnpike. However, some may feel that in New Jersey it may be redundant and even one member here on his personal website expressed that fact.
Not a toll road, but similar:
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-NF0EBha1hA8/UReO8-BZmBI/AAAAAAAAClc/6ObGYPqkEYk/s800/DSCN4797.JPG)
Steve has one similar on alpsroads.net of one entering NJ on US 9 from the Cape May Ferry for the Garden State Parkway.
It probably be more effective to say"FOLLOW THIS SHIELD *** FOR THIS ROAD" as that is what they are trying to point out.
The situation HB describes is why the ARCs should be signed with their own signs.
To flesh out the situation, US 19 is a local road of poor quality that roughly parallels I-79 from until one reaches Exit 57, where it becomes Corridor L and heads directly south to I-77 at Beckley (while I-79 goes more west than south, to Charleston), where it again becomes an unimportant road that parallels I-77. By taking US 19 one saves 42 miles, reduces one's Turnpike toll from $6 to $2.40 and avoids the malpractice of design that is the 60 MPH SL, crashfest northern 40% of the Turnpike (and Charleston's "urban" traffic, such as it is). This is the way to Florida for Toronto, Buffalo, Pittsburgh.
So people have directions of "take I-79 to US 19 to I-77...". but the problem is there are dozens of exits between the PA line and Exit 57 which are for US 19, none of which are the right one. So WV puts up the sign mentioned and then omits the US 19 shield for southbound exits between Morgantown and the proper exit (and the Turnpike omits the US 19 shiled at Exit 20 northbound for the same reason in reverse).
The whole thing could be solved if the ARCs were simply signed. Directions would be "take I-79 to Corridor L to I-77".
I drive the route in question a lot, and the number of people who get lost by taking the first US 19 exit and get hopelessly lost in the confusing web of roads in Morgantown or Fairmont is more than you would think.
Another solution, since US 19 likewise simply parallels I-79 in Pennsylvania, would be to decommission the road north of Exit 57, as it serves no through highway purpose north of that point.
A similar situation exists as one approaches Charleston on I-79, as it mostly parallels the unimportant US 119, with most exits being US 119. Until one reaches the one and only one exit where US 119 becomes Corridor G.
As to the I-68 situation, again this is a problem that could have been solved by ARC signage. The road was originally US 40 in the east and then US 48 in the west. WV and MD didn't like that and "backfilled" it as I-68. The problem being that Maryland already had a MD 68, it being an exit from I-70, just as I-68 was to be. If they had just signed the road as "ARC E", no problems.
Returning to the I-79 Roanoke example: I object to the design, but not because I think it insults motorists' intelligence:
* The sign message is oriented toward "TRUCKS" whereas the potential for confusion makes the message equally useful to passenger car drivers. "TRUCKS," on the other hand, will prompt those drivers to ignore the sign message.
* "Route 19" instead of shield looks awful.
* "To Beckley" looks awful ("To" is a particle, not part of primary destination legend).
* White background implies the message is regulatory, when it is not. (Presumably trucks are still allowed to use the unimproved portion of US 19 although it is not recommended for them.)
* The sign message as a whole uses jussive language to spell out a route which the driver has the option of not following.
I have devised the following sign designs as attempts to resolve all of these objections.
Option 1:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sabre-roads.org.uk%2Fwiki%2Fimages%2Fa%2Faa%2FWv-preferred-route-to-beckley-1.png&hash=05bb140a1c619b9991aee666b357d0c10e439ac6)
Option 2:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sabre-roads.org.uk%2Fwiki%2Fimages%2Fa%2Fa2%2FWv-preferred-route-to-beckley-2.png&hash=d1905a000a6ab1f6b096318708eef32c33f2fc6d)
Option 1 does not altogether avoid the use of jussive language but is economical in use of words and visually reasonably well balanced. Option 2 spells out the reason the US 19 route is preferred (which it is, per Google Maps--1 hour 38 minutes via US 19 versus 2 hours 3 minutes via the alternative route), but is verbose and less well-balanced visually.
Either of these signs should work well to keep Beckley-bound traffic off the unimproved length of US 19, but there is some risk that they may mislead traffic which wants a comprehensively access-controlled route (and thus is willing to accept the time penalty of the Interstate routing) to exit onto US 19 at Exit 57.
I would not remove US 19 from the Roanoke advance guide and exit direction signs. There are two solutions which appear to me better than suppressing the route number: US 19 on these signs with a "SLOW ROUTE" banner, or a separate supplemental guide sign with an US 19 shield, "SLOW ROUTE," and "EXITS 91-57."
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 10, 2013, 09:17:50 AM
Westbound I-70 in Maryland approaching the Clear Spring exit (I think it's Clear Spring–it's the exit where Ski Whitetail is) has a sign reading, "NEXT EXIT IS [MD-68 shield] [Horizontal separator line] FOR [I-68 shield] National Freeway STAY ON [I-70 shield]" I know there are pictures of the sign online, but I don't know of a good way to grab image properties when posting by iPad.
I've always thought you have to be kinda stupid to need that warning, but I guess some people just say things like "Take 70 to 68." I always use multiple references when giving directions ("Take I-70 west towards Hancock, then take Exit 1 onto I-68 west. The sign will list Cumberland."), but I guess a lot of people don't.
I've also never heard that road called the "National Freeway" except on that sign.
The Maryland State Highway Administration's Highway Location Reference does show it having a name of National Freeway.
Something similar could be experienced on the Mountain Parkway and KY 15. There are two interchanges with KY 15 before the exit for what is generally considered to be the southeastern extension of the parkway, at Campton, leading to Jackson, Hazard and Whitesburg. Yet Kentucky signs KY 15 at Exit 16 and Exit 40.
Another example where this similar signage should be in place is on OH2 east of Port Clinton. If you want to take OH163 west to OH420 and the I-280/I-80/I-90), you want to make sure you take the SECOND exit heading west. If you take the first exit, you will drive right through the small town before crossing OH2 again.
Quote from: Sykotyk on February 10, 2013, 03:38:30 PM
Another example where this similar signage should be in place is on OH2 east of Port Clinton. If you want to take OH163 west to OH420 and the I-280/I-80/I-90), you want to make sure you take the SECOND exit heading west. If you take the first exit, you will drive right through the small town before crossing OH2 again.
There is very little traffic using the routing you suggest though.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 10, 2013, 09:17:50 AM
Westbound I-70 in Maryland approaching the Clear Spring exit (I think it's Clear Spring–it's the exit where Ski Whitetail is) has a sign reading, "NEXT EXIT IS [MD-68 shield] [Horizontal separator line] FOR [I-68 shield] National Freeway STAY ON [I-70 shield]" I know there are pictures of the sign online, but I don't know of a good way to grab image properties when posting by iPad.
I've always thought you have to be kinda stupid to need that warning, but I guess some people just say things like "Take 70 to 68." I always use multiple references when giving directions ("Take I-70 west towards Hancock, then take Exit 1 onto I-68 west. The sign will list Cumberland."), but I guess a lot of people don't.
I've also never heard that road called the "National Freeway" except on that sign.
It amuses me each time I drive past it on my way to "Ohio and Points West" (in reference to another sign on I-70 West describing upcoming I-68).
https://maps.google.com/?ll=39.653119,-77.90343&spn=0.008855,0.021136&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=39.653111,-77.907404&panoid=e6VSNYwgzRm4fK7I2EExUw&cbp=12,311.18,,1,-4.28
Quote from: cpzilliacus on February 10, 2013, 12:58:05 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 10, 2013, 09:17:50 AM
Westbound I-70 in Maryland approaching the Clear Spring exit (I think it's Clear Spring–it's the exit where Ski Whitetail is) has a sign reading, "NEXT EXIT IS [MD-68 shield] [Horizontal separator line] FOR [I-68 shield] National Freeway STAY ON [I-70 shield]" I know there are pictures of the sign online, but I don't know of a good way to grab image properties when posting by iPad.
I've always thought you have to be kinda stupid to need that warning, but I guess some people just say things like "Take 70 to 68." I always use multiple references when giving directions ("Take I-70 west towards Hancock, then take Exit 1 onto I-68 west. The sign will list Cumberland."), but I guess a lot of people don't.
I've also never heard that road called the "National Freeway" except on that sign.
The Maryland State Highway Administration's Highway Location Reference does show it having a name of National Freeway.
Perhaps I should phrase it this way: I have never heard any
person (as opposed to a sign or state map) call that road the "National Freeway," including anyone in any town along that road (or at Rocky Gap State Park).
In other words, when I typed my prior comment I meant the word "heard" literally.
Similarly, on I-77 further south, if one is heading to Winston-Salem, the proper routing is to remain on I-77 into NC, and then take the first exit in the state for "I-74" which then "ends" at US 52 and continue on 52 into W-S. However, US 52 (which is an unimportant local road in Virginia, paralleling I-77) is signed at the exits. However there is a sign advising truckers to use 77 and not 52 down Fancy Gap Mountain.
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 10, 2013, 04:30:19 PM
Perhaps I should phrase it this way: I have never heard any person (as opposed to a sign or state map) call that road the "National Freeway," including anyone in any town along that road (or at Rocky Gap State Park).
In other words, when I typed my prior comment I meant the word "heard" literally.
Correct as usual. I have discussed I-68 a few times (informally) with Maryland DOT/SHA staff, and they always called it either "U.S. 48" (prior to about 1989) or after that, "I-68."
Never National Freeway.
FWIW, there are a few signs along I-68 that read "National Freeway" in addition to an I-68 shield.
I suppose the one on I-70 reads that way for emphasis. GSV of that sign is here (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=big+pool,+md&hl=en&ll=39.653119,-77.9074&spn=0.018602,0.038581&safe=off&hnear=Big+Pool,+Washington,+Maryland&gl=us&t=h&z=15&layer=c&cbll=39.653104,-77.907284&panoid=eEE04n6796QO2N85505dTw&cbp=12,287.12,,0,7.41).
Another example along these lines is the sign on I-95 southbound approaching I-295, where the "pull through" sign on the right for I-95 SOUTH reads Richmond and Petersburg, while the sign for I-295 (which also takes you to Petersburg) reads Rocky Mount NC. GSV here (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=hanover+county,+va&hl=en&ll=37.679541,-77.450781&spn=0.037973,0.077162&safe=off&hnear=Hanover,+Virginia&gl=us&t=h&z=14&layer=c&cbll=37.679469,-77.450774&panoid=6ep1YLvBZ-JLZ4mDhrF-SQ&cbp=12,165.38,,0,2.1).
Next overhead gantry says nothing about Rocky Mount, just the I-64 control cities here (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=hanover+county,+va&hl=en&ll=37.675601,-77.449236&spn=0.037975,0.077162&safe=off&hnear=Hanover,+Virginia&gl=us&t=h&z=14&layer=c&cbll=37.675766,-77.449318&panoid=nANAT1WZCamPvKgFWZJ56Q&cbp=12,174.09,,0,11.31).
The next gantry finally (IMO) mentions Rocky Mount NC again, and finally (IMO) tells traffic headed for I-85 and Durham NC to stay on I-95 here (https://maps.google.com/maps?q=hanover+county,+va&hl=en&ll=37.672815,-77.448549&spn=0.037976,0.077162&safe=off&hnear=Hanover,+Virginia&gl=us&t=h&z=14&layer=c&cbll=37.672974,-77.448617&panoid=-lvk4FBlnuuTNmfxBd6Byw&cbp=12,178.8,,0,6.51).
I passed my favorite one of these signs today...on US 11/15 NB north of Harrisburg PA, at the junction of PA 17, there is a LGS that states "New York Route 17" with a straight arrow...even though at that point, you're approx 125 miles from the NY State line. (I know a few people here have a pic of that sign).
Quote from: hbelkins on February 09, 2013, 08:41:25 PM
West Virginia thinks drivers using southbound I-79 are to stupid to realize which exit they should take if they plan to take ARC Corridor L to Beckley and hit I-77, bypassing Charleston.
This sign appears on I-79 prior to the US 19 Morgantown/Westover exit just south of the Pennsylvania state line.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2Freturning_home_from_national%2Freturning_home_from_national-Images%2F44.jpg&hash=3c9c31abf2b78b75bf8fb4ff241a2f789887e2b1)
On the signage for the US 19 exit at Roanoke, just south of Weston, the US 19 route markers have been removed so drivers won't think this is the exit they should take to get to Beckley. There are US 19 markers on the northbound signage.
An example can be seen here: (mods, feel free to resize if desired)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2FWashington_CD_2004%2FPICT1219.JPG&hash=65be43a22641b0e7d1ae0ab1cac6e962876922cd)
Any other examples where DOTs seem to think motorists are stupid and don't know which exit to take?
If this sign is just south of the PA/WV line, drivers entering I-79 from I-68 will not know this, especially those coming from Uniontown, PA, who may have taken the Mon-Fayette to get to the Morgantown area. The above sign should be posted south of exit 148 (I-68), south of exit 119 (US 50), and just after the 1 mile advance sign at exit 91. :)
The WV Tpk will never post anything like this because they would lose revenue if motorists were given enough information to use this route as the shortcut around Charleston. That is why you will not see a supplemental guide sign for Morgantown or even Pittsburgh at exit 48 on the turnpike in Beckley.
BTW, when I came back from Raleigh, NC, I did notice the US 19 shield was not on the exit 20 guide sign; I thought it had just fallen off.
The newest updates to the AA Roads I-77 West Virginia page show a US 19 marker on the Exit 20 sign.
(https://www.aaroads.com/mid-atlantic/west_virginia077/i-077_nb_exit_020_03.jpg)
Quote from: Central Avenue on February 10, 2013, 07:15:56 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 10, 2013, 02:03:22 AM
How about when Toll Road names are written on the same sign as their official shields? Like the New Jersey Turnpike guide signs which feature both a NJT trailblazer and "NJ TURNPIKE" or "NJ Turnpike" spelled out in some places. Even in Florida on the FL 528 Toll Road, the Exit 4 guides for the FL Turnpike that had a shield only to denote the Turnpike now has the word "Turnpike" added to it.
Of course in Florida's case, it most likely has to do with the fact many tourists travel that part of FL 528 and the Turnpike Enterprise who maintains that road feel that most people are not familiar with the official shield of Florida' Turnpike. However, some may feel that in New Jersey it may be redundant and even one member here on his personal website expressed that fact.
Not a toll road, but similar:
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-NF0EBha1hA8/UReO8-BZmBI/AAAAAAAAClc/6ObGYPqkEYk/s800/DSCN4797.JPG)
That sign seems redundant and makes no sense. "Follow Bluegrass Parkway to Bluegrass Parkway." Of course you would follow the Bluegrass Parkway to drive on it.
Quote from: ilvny on February 11, 2013, 11:25:53 PM
Quote from: Central Avenue on February 10, 2013, 07:15:56 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 10, 2013, 02:03:22 AM
How about when Toll Road names are written on the same sign as their official shields? Like the New Jersey Turnpike guide signs which feature both a NJT trailblazer and "NJ TURNPIKE" or "NJ Turnpike" spelled out in some places. Even in Florida on the FL 528 Toll Road, the Exit 4 guides for the FL Turnpike that had a shield only to denote the Turnpike now has the word "Turnpike" added to it.
Of course in Florida's case, it most likely has to do with the fact many tourists travel that part of FL 528 and the Turnpike Enterprise who maintains that road feel that most people are not familiar with the official shield of Florida' Turnpike. However, some may feel that in New Jersey it may be redundant and even one member here on his personal website expressed that fact.
Not a toll road, but similar:
................
That sign seems redundant and makes no sense. "Follow Bluegrass Parkway to Bluegrass Parkway." Of course you would follow the Bluegrass Parkway to drive on it.
Reminds me of this gem:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fnj%2Fus_9%2Fntogsp.jpg&hash=35c9b7e8d6f12c5691c91595e17b84787f0d869f)
Photo from Steve's site. (http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/nj/us_9/0.html)
I'm pretty sure what it means is "Follow these green circular signs to find the Garden State Parkway," rather than the literal "Follow the Garden State Parkway to the Garden State Parkway." I think this can be applied to similar signs in other states.
This reminder is a good thing, because we are used to looking for a red-white-and-blue interstate sign or a black-and-white US or state route sign. These oddball shields are less visible until we are alerted to look for them.
Makes sense to me. Follow this unreadable-at-highway-speeds shield for this road.
You know when you are dealing with non road geeks it is a total different world. I remember my neighbor complaining about "Alexandria" being used as a control city for US 1 on the 14th Street Bridge Southbound across the Potomac River at Washington. She was staying at a hotel at the I-395 Duke Street interchange in Alexandria, and said when leaving DC the sign confused her because here it saying for Alexandria to use US 1, but her hotel is not on US 1, but on I-395 that was signed for "Richmond."
Her solution was to sign "Alexandria" for both routes being that they both go there.
Apparently we all know as road geeks that large cities are mostly signed to Downtown areas for it being the city center in most cases, but if not usually the center part of town or main intersection, but a non road geek may not understand that concept as did my neighbor at the time.
Quote from: Central Avenue on February 10, 2013, 07:15:56 AM
Not a toll road, but similar:
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-NF0EBha1hA8/UReO8-BZmBI/AAAAAAAAClc/6ObGYPqkEYk/s800/DSCN4797.JPG)
in that case, they don't think we're stupid as much as they think that Martha Layne Collins is more important than legibility.
in a similar vein, why do the Kansas Turnpike shields say "KTA" in the middle, if not for advertising purposes?
Its like the NJ Turnpike or Garden State Parkway having shields erected all over New Jersey. Its for advertising unlike the interstates that do not even have directional shields on other major roads near them that supports this fact.
With the exception of the I-65/WK Parkway interchange, all the Kentucky parkways have the name of the parkway spelled out on the interstate exit signage, next to the parkway route marker. It's possible the BG Parkway signage above was done in lieu of that. The sign had the old route marker on it before Kentucky changed the parkway shields.
These signs patronize me. Look again? Really?
http://goo.gl/maps/qk5Ey (http://goo.gl/maps/qk5Ey)
Does anyone have a real picture of one of these? I can't seem to find one by searching online, for some reason.
Quote from: kphoger on February 12, 2013, 09:50:04 PMThese signs patronize me. Look again? Really?
http://goo.gl/maps/qk5Ey (http://goo.gl/maps/qk5Ey)
Does anyone have a real picture of one of these? I can't seem to find one by searching online, for some reason.
"Look Again" is a bit of overkill, but many states had standard sign designs (or recurring special designs) for these signs long before they were added to the
MUTCD--I think in 2009. I think in most, if not all, of these states, there was a "death warrant" for these signs (i.e., installation is considered when there is at least one right-angle crash at the intersection that results in a fatality, within the standard observation window).
In Kansas the standard terminology was "US-50 Does NOT Stop" (message in all caps on the actual sign, but "NOT" in taller letters), intersecting route varied as appropriate.
Quote from: roadman65 on February 12, 2013, 09:57:19 AM
Its like the NJ Turnpike or Garden State Parkway having shields erected all over New Jersey. Its for advertising unlike the interstates that do not even have directional shields on other major roads near them that supports this fact.
I used to think that, but my friends here quickly dissuaded me of that notion. Off the top of my head, here's a trailblazer for I-5 in Bellingham that's not spectacularly close to the nearest interchange. http://goo.gl/maps/7JysJ
Quote from: Kacie Jane on February 12, 2013, 11:19:03 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 12, 2013, 09:57:19 AM
Its like the NJ Turnpike or Garden State Parkway having shields erected all over New Jersey. Its for advertising unlike the interstates that do not even have directional shields on other major roads near them that supports this fact.
I used to think that, but my friends here quickly dissuaded me of that notion. Off the top of my head, here's a trailblazer for I-5 in Bellingham that's not spectacularly close to the nearest interchange. http://goo.gl/maps/7JysJ
The agency itself will admit it's pretty close to advertising, in the case of the Turnpike/Parkway. On the other hand, in South Jersey, those are your two north-south freeways.
Also, it's "disabuse" you of the notion. Or, they can just dissuade you "from" the notion, but dissuade means to discourage, not to cause you to change your mind.
On US 33 a few miles west (north) of Athens, OH, there's an interchange for OH 682. Signs say something like "Ohio University follow {33} to Athens", and just before the exit, "↑ Ohio University 7". Then in Athens, along the wrong-way overlap with US 50, there's another interchange with OH 682, the preferred way to reach OU. Actually, I've heard taking the first exit is a good way to avoid congestion on move-in day. Anyway, this could be resolved by truncating OH 682 at OH 56, and extending the latter east to US 33/50.
Quote from: J N Winkler on February 12, 2013, 10:33:18 PM
"Look Again" is a bit of overkill, but many states had standard sign designs (or recurring special designs) for these signs long before they were added to the MUTCD--I think in 2009. I think in most, if not all, of these states, there was a "death warrant" for these signs (i.e., installation is considered when there is at least one right-angle crash at the intersection that results within the fatality, within the standard observation window).
In Kansas the standard terminology was "US-50 Does NOT Stop" (message in all caps on the actual sign, but "NOT" in taller letters), intersecting route varied as appropriate.
Florida's railroad crossings used to have, for the longest time, a secondary sign which said "LOOK OUT FOR THE CARS". Apparently, there was a problem with people assuming that when the engine had passed, the whole train was done?
Quote from: agentsteel53 on February 13, 2013, 09:39:55 AM
Florida's railroad crossings used to have, for the longest time, a secondary sign which said "LOOK OUT FOR THE CARS". Apparently, there was a problem with people assuming that when the engine had passed, the whole train was done?
http://www.rxrsignals.net/Phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=1823
Florida apparently required them at one time at crossings without signals.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fserr.railfan.net%2Fmow%2F169-A-18.gif&hash=37c35a3a7204c338903973a3b9f8fb3ed32b0e94)
Quote from: ilvny on February 11, 2013, 11:25:53 PM
That sign seems redundant and makes no sense. "Follow Bluegrass Parkway to Bluegrass Parkway." Of course you would follow the Bluegrass Parkway to drive on it.
It says "FOLLOW (shield)
FOR", as in "these signs mark the BGP route".
Quote from: agentsteel53 on February 13, 2013, 09:39:55 AM
Quote from: J N Winkler on February 12, 2013, 10:33:18 PM
"Look Again" is a bit of overkill, but many states had standard sign designs (or recurring special designs) for these signs long before they were added to the MUTCD--I think in 2009. I think in most, if not all, of these states, there was a "death warrant" for these signs (i.e., installation is considered when there is at least one right-angle crash at the intersection that results within the fatality, within the standard observation window).
In Kansas the standard terminology was "US-50 Does NOT Stop" (message in all caps on the actual sign, but "NOT" in taller letters), intersecting route varied as appropriate.
Florida's railroad crossings used to have, for the longest time, a secondary sign which said "LOOK OUT FOR THE CARS". Apparently, there was a problem with people assuming that when the engine had passed, the whole train was done?
It can sometimes look like the train has finished going by, when really it's just a long string of empty flatcars. ...?
Quote from: J N Winkler on February 12, 2013, 10:33:18 PM
Quote from: kphoger on February 12, 2013, 09:50:04 PMThese signs patronize me. Look again? Really?
http://goo.gl/maps/qk5Ey (http://goo.gl/maps/qk5Ey)
Does anyone have a real picture of one of these? I can't seem to find one by searching online, for some reason.
"Look Again" is a bit of overkill, but many states had standard sign designs (or recurring special designs) for these signs long before they were added to the MUTCD--I think in 2009. I think in most, if not all, of these states, there was a "death warrant" for these signs (i.e., installation is considered when there is at least one right-angle crash at the intersection that results in a fatality, within the standard observation window).
In Kansas the standard terminology was "US-50 Does NOT Stop" (message in all caps on the actual sign, but "NOT" in taller letters), intersecting route varied as appropriate.
I tried finding it in the 2009 MUTCD, but couldn't; do you have a reference? And yes, I tried finding an example of that kind of signage along US-50, but gave up guessing at a location in favor of my Illinois one that I
knew existed.
Quote from: Steve on February 12, 2013, 11:57:50 PM
Also, it's "disabuse" you of the notion. Or, they can just dissuade you "from" the notion, but dissuade means to discourage, not to cause you to change your mind.
The word "dissuade" cost me a trip to the Kentucky state spelling bee when I was a kid. I'd never heard the word before when I got it in a regional spelling bee, and I don't remember how I misspelled it. Probably with only one "s." I think I asked for both a definition and for it to be used in a sentence, but if they'd said "opposite of 'persuade'" I probably would have gotten it right.
That word has haunted me ever since.
for me, the word was "formicine". a thousand curses unto the schwa!
Quote from: Steve on February 12, 2013, 11:57:50 PM
Quote from: Kacie Jane on February 12, 2013, 11:19:03 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 12, 2013, 09:57:19 AM
Its like the NJ Turnpike or Garden State Parkway having shields erected all over New Jersey. Its for advertising unlike the interstates that do not even have directional shields on other major roads near them that supports this fact.
I used to think that, but my friends here quickly dissuaded me of that notion. Off the top of my head, here's a trailblazer for I-5 in Bellingham that's not spectacularly close to the nearest interchange. http://goo.gl/maps/7JysJ
The agency itself will admit it's pretty close to advertising, in the case of the Turnpike/Parkway. On the other hand, in South Jersey, those are your two north-south freeways.
I recall seeing Turnpike trailblazers along N.J. 70 not far from its Parkway interchange.
That's between 40 and 50 miles from Exit 4 (N.J. 73) on the Turnpike.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on February 13, 2013, 11:37:32 AM
for me, the word was "formicine". a thousand curses unto the schwa!
I once lost a spelling bee because they misheard how I'd spelled the word. I'd spelled it right. Then the other girl came to the microphone for a shot at the same word, and
she spelled it right too. Blast it! The word was
savvy.
Quote from: kphoger on February 13, 2013, 11:27:14 AMI tried finding it in the 2009 MUTCD, but couldn't; do you have a reference? And yes, I tried finding an example of that kind of signage along US-50, but gave up guessing at a location in favor of my Illinois one that I knew existed.
The one I know of on US 50 (at US 77 just north of Florence) is long gone since a roundabout was installed there almost ten years ago. Another one I remember, however, is presumably still there:
US 24 and US 77 near Riley, Kansas (http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=39.303823,-96.830835&spn=0.002105,0.004823&t=m&z=18&vpsrc=6&layer=c&cbll=39.303931,-96.830838&panoid=_xjUrLKXgvY4K_-PtdQAKA&cbp=12,189.32,,0,4.74)
As to the
MUTCD, the standard sign for this application is W4-4P ("Cross Traffic Does Not Stop"), with a variant (W4-4aP) designed to deal with tee junctions where the itinerary having priority takes a right-angle turn. The two signs are diagrammed on page 168 (out of 864 in the PDF file) of the 2009
MUTCD, and the language concerning application is at § 2C.59.
Right. I had looked at those portions of the MUTCD, but found nothing that said 'Look Again' or anything similar. I thought I remembered seeing something like that before, but maybe not.
Mom has told me a story about a spelling bee she lost by misspelling "ventilation". She was unfamiliar with the word, and it didn't help that the sister running the bee clearly enunciated it as "vennilation" – so Mom spelled it that way.
This is starting to smell off-topic.
Quote from: Kacie Jane on February 12, 2013, 11:19:03 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on February 12, 2013, 09:57:19 AM
Its like the NJ Turnpike or Garden State Parkway having shields erected all over New Jersey. Its for advertising unlike the interstates that do not even have directional shields on other major roads near them that supports this fact.
I used to think that, but my friends here quickly dissuaded me of that notion. Off the top of my head, here's a trailblazer for I-5 in Bellingham that's not spectacularly close to the nearest interchange. http://goo.gl/maps/7JysJ
In Florida you can find interstate shields miles from it, but in New Jersey you have US 46 close to I-80 where common crossroads have no shields where if I-80 were the Turnpike of Parkway it would have shields at NJ 17, Green Street, CR 503, and even Midland Avenue. Then US 22, has only a few locations with I-78 shields at common road intersections that the toll roads would gladly sign. CR 523 in Whitehouse is real close to I-78 and no signs at its intersection and then you have CR 531 in North Plainfield that is close, but because Trucks cannot climb the CR 531 hill north of the Watchung Circle they will not post any sign even though a CARS ONLY sign would work. Then other major roadways near I-78 in Somerset, Union, and Essex counties could use them, and would if I-78 were part of the Turnpike and Parkway system.
The farthest in New Jersey an interstate is signed that I know of is on Westbound I-78 for I-287 in Springfield via NJ 24 at Exit 48, and on a mileage sign hung over the inner roadway on the CR 577 overpass that is 18 miles away.
Re: "Look out for the cars" railroad crossing signs, I believe the issue was seeing the cars at night at unprotected crossings, since they have no lights on them and are often painted dark colors. This is why a few years ago the FRA began requiring railroads affix reflective strips to all freight cars.
Quote from: hbelkins on February 13, 2013, 11:34:28 AM
Quote from: Steve on February 12, 2013, 11:57:50 PM
Also, it's "disabuse" you of the notion. Or, they can just dissuade you "from" the notion, but dissuade means to discourage, not to cause you to change your mind.
The word "dissuade" cost me a trip to the Kentucky state spelling bee when I was a kid. I'd never heard the word before when I got it in a regional spelling bee, and I don't remember how I misspelled it. Probably with only one "s." I think I asked for both a definition and for it to be used in a sentence, but if they'd said "opposite of 'persuade'" I probably would have gotten it right.
That word has haunted me ever since.
What's funny is that I looked up the word to check how to spell it (for some reason my brain was saying "dissuage" even though I knew it wasn't right), but didn't think to check the definition to realize that it didn't quite fit.
Quote from: vtk on February 13, 2013, 03:21:05 PM
Mom has told me a story about a spelling bee she lost by misspelling "ventilation". She was unfamiliar with the word, and it didn't help that the sister running the bee clearly enunciated it as "vennilation" – so Mom spelled it that way.
This is starting to smell off-topic.
Not at all. "They think we're stupid."
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Ff%2Ff7%2FI-12_eastbound_ramp_at_LA_59_Clarification_for_I-59.jpg%2F800px-I-12_eastbound_ramp_at_LA_59_Clarification_for_I-59.jpg&hash=ef0ac3226b10d733032d6fdce1db554e686e5f74) (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:I-12_eastbound_ramp_at_LA_59_Clarification_for_I-59.jpg)
Quote from: SP Cook on February 10, 2013, 10:29:55 AM
The whole thing could be solved if the ARCs were simply signed. Directions would be "take I-79 to Corridor L to I-77".
It would be less confusing to give this section of US 19 a state route number, similar to what Iowa has been doing as of late.
Quote from: NE2 on November 25, 2013, 04:22:23 AM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Ff%2Ff7%2FI-12_eastbound_ramp_at_LA_59_Clarification_for_I-59.jpg%2F800px-I-12_eastbound_ramp_at_LA_59_Clarification_for_I-59.jpg&hash=ef0ac3226b10d733032d6fdce1db554e686e5f74) (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:I-12_eastbound_ramp_at_LA_59_Clarification_for_I-59.jpg)
In fairness, when the state route was assigned its number in 1955, the modern interstate system and its numbering had not yet been formulated.
Some drivers, not the majority but enough to matter, would probably be confused by this despite the differing route shields.
Quote from: Urban Prairie Schooner on November 25, 2013, 08:51:13 AM
In fairness, when the state route was assigned its number in 1955, the modern interstate system and its numbering had not yet been formulated.
That's true about MD 68 and probably most other examples. I wonder if there are any conflicts that postdate the Interstate number (there have definitely been some with U.S. Routes, such as AL 31 crossing US 31 at Cullman, designated in 1927 or 1928).
And yes, that I-59 shield is on the offramp, telling you to get back on I-12.
Looks like the shield changers haven't gotten to those LA 59 markers yet.
So what is prohibited? Aircraft and spacecraft? Goats?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.formulanone.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F11%2FVehiclePedestrianEquineUseOnly.jpg&hash=f673783d9d2a9344d2328647188cd632a4ac7abd)
my guess would be fishing, but it is certainly a strange way to word it.
That's a Nimbyan sign trying to keep out goats by confusing them.
The actual ordinance is no clearer:
QuoteSEC. 72.75. RESTRICTING USE OF OR CLOSING COUNTY HIGHWAY.
The Road Commissioner is hereby authorized to restrict the use of, or close, any County highway whenever he considers such closing or restriction of use necessary:
(a) For the protection of the public.
(b) For the protection of such county highway from damage during storms.
(c) During construction, improvement or maintenance operations thereon.
No liability shall attach to the County, the Road Commissioner or to the Board of Supervisors of the County, for the restriction of use, or closing, of any County highway for the above public purposes.
(Added by Ord. No. 3148 (N.S.), effective 1-11-68)
Quote from: hbelkins on November 25, 2013, 11:14:59 AM
Looks like the shield changers haven't gotten to those LA 59 markers yet.
About half of LA 5 is still green/white.
Quote from: formulanone on November 25, 2013, 03:28:17 PM
So what is prohibited? Aircraft and spacecraft? Goats?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.formulanone.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F11%2FVehiclePedestrianEquineUseOnly.jpg&hash=f673783d9d2a9344d2328647188cd632a4ac7abd)
Pedestrians are fine as long as they remain on their feet. Pedestrians that take flight via bungee cord are prohibited.
Quote from: NE2 on November 25, 2013, 08:58:38 AM
I wonder if there are any conflicts that postdate the Interstate number (there have definitely been some with U.S. Routes, such as AL 31 crossing US 31 at Cullman, designated in 1927 or 1928).
I-520 had already been around for nearly a decade when GA 520 was created, though those are far enough apart that I doubt there'd be any need for such signage.
I seem to remember a sign assembly in Siloam Springs with a US 412 (straight ahead) shield, to US 59 (straight ahead), and AR 59 (right).
AR 59 is one of those deliberately confusing routes near a state line, where the DOT tries to siphon traffic from the U.S. Route.
Quote from: NE2 on November 25, 2013, 09:05:49 PM
AR 59 is one of those deliberately confusing routes near a state line, where the DOT tries to siphon traffic from the U.S. Route.
Part of AR 59 was originally AR 80, but became Detour US 59 in the 1930's. Why it was never changed back to AR 80, only AHTD knows (if anyone).
Quote from: formulanone on November 25, 2013, 03:28:17 PM
So what is prohibited? Aircraft and spacecraft? Goats?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.formulanone.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F11%2FVehiclePedestrianEquineUseOnly.jpg&hash=f673783d9d2a9344d2328647188cd632a4ac7abd)
Aircraft and spacecraft are also vehicles. I guess you can't ride any animal except a horse, or do things other than walking or riding a horse or vehicle.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8510%2F8499729925_fc524d09b2_z.jpg&hash=c437144547dfa69c687b14394593cc7ecf6033cf)
Of course the truck route for route 1 & 9 is for trucks to use.
An aside...what is with the E.I.L on the word "TRUCK?"
Quote from: OracleUsr on December 01, 2013, 12:19:24 AM
An aside...what is with the E.I.L on the word "TRUCK?"
Enlarged Initial Letter? Shouldn't be there.
Michigan thinks we're stupid as they have to put tiny backlit signs above the signal heads identifying which signal head is for which lanes such as "LEFT RIGHT THRU" on installations that have left turn signals.
I know someone mentioned this before, but this one really takes the cake as if we could not figure that one for ourselves.
Quote from: roadman65 on December 12, 2013, 12:13:28 PM
Michigan thinks we're stupid as they have to put tiny backlit signs above the signal heads identifying which signal head is for which lanes such as "LEFT RIGHT THRU" on installations that have left turn signals.
I know someone mentioned this before, but this one really takes the cake as if we could not figure that one for ourselves.
They're not always obvious, and it's no different than placing a "LEFT TURN SIGNAL" sign next to the left turn signal.
Those LEFT TURN SIGNAL signs are being phases out in many places. They were erected mainly when LTS were becoming popular as back in the 70s they were not. This was to alert motorists of the change, however I think we all know what the signal is by now.
I think there are other such issues that could use Michigan Tax Dollars towards.
Quote from: roadman65 on December 12, 2013, 12:13:28 PM
Michigan thinks we're stupid as they have to put tiny backlit signs above the signal heads identifying which signal head is for which lanes such as "LEFT RIGHT THRU" on installations that have left turn signals.
I know someone mentioned this before, but this one really takes the cake as if we could not figure that one for ourselves.
http://goo.gl/maps/iHD37
I disagree. If there are three red balls like this, there's no way the driver knows there's a protected left without the signal head or the sign without prior knowledge of the intersection.
Common sense. The one that is in front of you is the one for you. If it does not change for you when the adjacent lane signal does then it must mean for you to stay.
What about the other 49 States that DON'T use those little signs? Then you have THRU signs above a green arrow that stays on 24/7. I mean if the arrow does not say enough, then you should not be driving. Then you could use red arrows too.
I can see maybe the LEFT sign, but on the straight through it almost ridiculous. Having one for the left turn signals is the same as the LEFT TURN SIGNAL signs or MOVE ON GREEN ARROW ONLY!
Quote from: roadman65 on December 13, 2013, 07:55:01 AM
Those LEFT TURN SIGNAL signs are being phases out in many places. They were erected mainly when LTS were becoming popular as back in the 70s they were not. This was to alert motorists of the change, however I think we all know what the signal is by now.
I think there are other such issues that could use Michigan Tax Dollars towards.
Where? In Illinois, they are a required standard, typically with the legend "LEFT TURN ON GREEN ARROW ONLY". This is because there is NO difference in state law between a red arrow and a red ball. Right turns are similar. "NO TURN ON RED" or "NO TURN ON RED EXCEPT RIGHT LANE" must be posted to prohibit right turns on red.
It's rather nice, IMHO, that MDOT aids you in determining which signal is for which direction.
We're still stupid.
Quote from: pianocello on December 13, 2013, 10:35:44 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 12, 2013, 12:13:28 PM
Michigan thinks we're stupid as they have to put tiny backlit signs above the signal heads identifying which signal head is for which lanes such as "LEFT RIGHT THRU" on installations that have left turn signals.
I know someone mentioned this before, but this one really takes the cake as if we could not figure that one for ourselves.
http://goo.gl/maps/iHD37
I disagree. If there are three red balls like this, there's no way the driver knows there's a protected left without the signal head or the sign without prior knowledge of the intersection.
Here's another example from Hancock, Michigan, M-203 and US-41.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi837.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fzz298%2Fmidamcrossrds%2Fm203-3.jpg&hash=aa0c5d96a54896fe6458b8ed996ac969015d1a2b) (http://s837.photobucket.com/user/midamcrossrds/media/m203-3.jpg.html)
A winter view.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi837.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fzz298%2Fmidamcrossrds%2Fm203-2.jpg&hash=b9a5a9abfb63067ce3c598e64054779a358e181f) (http://s837.photobucket.com/user/midamcrossrds/media/m203-2.jpg.html)
Basically, it's letting you know that you do not have to stop for a right turn.
This is better than PA having a stop sign with a white sign below reading EXCEPT RIGHT TURN.
I do think that their backlit signs are kind of cute though.
Quote from: roadman65 on December 13, 2013, 05:10:45 PM
This is better than PA having a stop sign with a white sign below reading EXCEPT RIGHT TURN.
I do think that their backlit signs are kind of cute though.
Why is this better? The PA method is explicit instead of implicit. Much better that way.
Why is it better in Michigan than in Pennsylvania? Because you have drivers who, I know, will stop even for the right turns despite it being all there in black and white.
Some drivers will see the STOP, but not see what is underneath it just the same way people stop for a green arrow saying its okay to turn right where the turn is protected. They see the yellow, but either do not see the green right arrow, or they think that turning is optional with a right green arrow and make it their choice to stay.
Quote from: Brandon on December 13, 2013, 04:27:41 PM
It's rather nice, IMHO, that MDOT aids you in determining which signal is for which direction.
Because a signal with left arrows on it isn't sufficient to communicate this? (I know, I know, that's another thread.)
They have us bullshitted into believing that we can't make a move without a frickin' arrow to tell us what to do. :banghead:
Quote from: roadman65 on December 12, 2013, 12:13:28 PM
Michigan thinks we're stupid as they have to put tiny backlit signs above the signal heads identifying which signal head is for which lanes such as "LEFT RIGHT THRU" on installations that have left turn signals.
I know someone mentioned this before, but this one really takes the cake as if we could not figure that one for ourselves.
Isn't this a holdover from when Michigan first introduced separate left turn signals?
IIRC, back then these used all normal circular displays and the "left" sign would light up when that signal turned green (and the through movement was still red) to signify the difference that it was an active left turn movement. Eventually they phased in green arrows, but red balls were still used also so the left sign stayed above (other states would use a "Left turn on green arrow only" static sign in such cases). In recent years, the left sign persisted in some locations even with an all arrow display.
(Not sure where I might've read this, and I could have facts wrong...)
As far as I remember, Virginia did not use signs nor red arrows at left turn signal intersections. It had the red ball too. Being from NJ, I thought that was so odd as we used the left turn signal signs and 3M signal lenses back when I was young. I thought VA was expecting too much for drivers to use common sense even then.