Paving of the section northeast of downtown White Plains was going on this past weekend, leading me to look into what's coming next. Surprisingly, after 15+ years of work creeping from I-87 eastward, that's it.
Are there any plans to rebuild any of the comparatively shabby part between White Plains and the Hutch? I don't know the reach of the resurfacing that was going on, but the road surface from around 684 westward is just abysmal. The signage on the westbound C/D road (Westchester Ave?) coming from the Hutch southbound is of multiple eras, wearing out at different rates, and the cross-weave there is uncomfortable at best.
It puzzles me to read the pronouncements about what a success the job was when a) it took 15 years, and b) as far as I'm concerned, it's not done.
Oh, and for the sign standards fanatics, what's with the tiny letters on overhead signs on the parts most recently opened? Is it the best compromise they could manage in order to fit "Westchester Ave" and "Bloomingdale Rd" over one lane? Even the 287 shield and "EAST" seem to relate awkwardly.
It's New York. Everything takes forever here. It's also often the case that only part of an old road will be slated for reconstruction, and the rest will just sit.
I bet it didn't take them more than 3 years to build that road in the late 1950's! Of course that was when Pres. Eisenhower's Interstate Highway System program was paying 90% of the cost so it was easy to accomplish.
I moved to the NYC area (Stamford to be exact) in 1997, ever sense I can remember that road has been under construction. It is odd how maintenance takes longer than building, but it is done to limit commuters' disruptions.
Quote from: SignBridge on April 30, 2013, 08:45:00 PM
I bet it didn't take them more than 3 years to build that road in the late 1950's! Of course that was when Pres. Eisenhower's Interstate Highway System program was paying 90% of the cost so it was easy to accomplish.
Permitting and right-of-way acquisition were easier, population was lower, environmental issues less... noticed...
You're probably right, Pete. BTW, some of us actually remember seeing your I-84/I-86 sign in the East Hartford area when driving to Boston the first time as a young adult circa 1974. I remember being puzzled by it at the time, wondering why they bothered changing the number.
I recall those signs from the early 1980s.
Quote from: vdeane on April 30, 2013, 11:48:05 AM
It's New York. Everything takes forever here. It's also often the case that only part of an old road will be slated for reconstruction, and the rest will just sit.
100% true!
As I drove through tonight it's clear the resurfacing stops well short of covering the part that's so rutted it nearly launches me into the next lane. And the Westchester Ave signs are even worse than the last time I paid attention (but probably a great laboratory for studying NY sign standard history.
On that subject, under what circumstance does NY put a road name in a rectangular box in small caps instead of spelled out in full-size upper/lower case without the box?
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 03, 2013, 11:05:59 PM
On that subject, under what circumstance does NY put a road name in a rectangular box in small caps instead of spelled out in full-size upper/lower case without the box?
NYSDOT Region 8 started doing the box thing for street names a few years ago. Its silly and I don't think its MUTCD compliant.
Quote from: NJRoadfan on May 04, 2013, 02:07:18 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 03, 2013, 11:05:59 PM
On that subject, under what circumstance does NY put a road name in a rectangular box in small caps instead of spelled out in full-size upper/lower case without the box?
NYSDOT Region 8 started doing the box thing for street names a few years ago. Its silly and I don't think its MUTCD compliant.
Nor does it seem to be used consistently from one exit to the next.
NYSDOT region 8, who initially built I-287, did the box thing (not sure if they still do; it's now prohibited) but NYSTA, who currently maintains it, does not. NYSTA also does not replace signage very often.
It's on the new Central Westchester Parkway sign on the recently rebuilt Exit 7.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 03, 2013, 11:05:59 PM
As I drove through tonight it's clear the resurfacing stops well short of covering the part that's so rutted it nearly launches me into the next lane. And the Westchester Ave signs are even worse than the last time I paid attention (but probably a great laboratory for studying NY sign standard history.
On that subject, under what circumstance does NY put a road name in a rectangular box in small caps instead of spelled out in full-size upper/lower case without the box?
Amen! Headed west bound after getting on from the hutch; if you stay in the right lane there is a massive dip right before 684 that could cost you a rim and a tire if you have anything less than an SUV, if you stay in the center lane the ruts are so bad and good driver could easily lose control, the left lane is you only option, but good luck doing the double merge quick enough to get there.
It's really stupid since all we are talking about is roughly 1/2 mile of resurfacing. I imagine most out of staters coming east bound will be caught totally off guard since the road has been totally reconstructed from the Hudson River to this point.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 04, 2013, 12:07:38 PM
It's on the new Central Westchester Parkway sign on the recently rebuilt Exit 7.
You mean this monstrosity?
http://goo.gl/maps/Ljo4C
Looks like a contractor install. It occasionally happens with larger projects. There are some NYSDOT-spec signs for Thruway exit 39 heading east.
If it's what I think you're trying to show, it's one of them, alongside an arbitrarily-small-caps Tappan Zee Bridge sign.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 03, 2013, 11:05:59 PMOn that subject, under what circumstance does NY put a road name in a rectangular box in small caps instead of spelled out in full-size upper/lower case without the box?
Guess on my part, but the likely reason for that practice may be to keep the overall signboard width down to a reasonable size when dealing with a longish street name. Had they opted for the same-size lettering as the listed destinations, the sign-board would either need to be wider or an additional line would be required (making the sign taller). The box outline is intended to
mimic the border that's seen on stand-alone street blade signs.
It's also worth noting that some exit BGS further north along I-684 sport a similar style; Exit 8 comes to mind.
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 06, 2013, 09:04:58 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 03, 2013, 11:05:59 PMOn that subject, under what circumstance does NY put a road name in a rectangular box in small caps instead of spelled out in full-size upper/lower case without the box?
Guess on my part, but the likely reason for that practice may be to keep the overall signboard width down to a reasonable size when dealing with a longish street name. Had they opted for the same-size lettering as the listed destinations, the sign-board would either need to be wider or an additional line would be required (making the sign taller). The box outline is intended to mimic the border that's seen on stand-alone street blade signs.
It's also worth noting that some exit BGS further north along I-684 sport a similar style; Exit 8 comes to mind.
The issue isn't so much the smaller font for the street name (witness the smaller street names on some older exit signs on the Hutch, sans box). It is the box itself that makes the street name very difficult to read.
Someone once described the street name in a box as the equivalent to a "route shield" for an un-numbered route, essentially posting the street's blade sign, including border, on the BGS. I can sort of understand the logic, but when it is more difficult to read, it is useless.
Quote from: mtantillo on May 06, 2013, 11:44:31 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 06, 2013, 09:04:58 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 03, 2013, 11:05:59 PMOn that subject, under what circumstance does NY put a road name in a rectangular box in small caps instead of spelled out in full-size upper/lower case without the box?
Guess on my part, but the likely reason for that practice may be to keep the overall signboard width down to a reasonable size when dealing with a longish street name. Had they opted for the same-size lettering as the listed destinations, the sign-board would either need to be wider or an additional line would be required (making the sign taller). The box outline is intended to mimic the border that's seen on stand-alone street blade signs.
It's also worth noting that some exit BGS further north along I-684 sport a similar style; Exit 8 comes to mind.
The issue isn't so much the smaller font for the street name (witness the smaller street names on some older exit signs on the Hutch, sans box). It is the box itself that makes the street name very difficult to read.
Someone once described the street name in a box as the equivalent to a "route shield" for an un-numbered route, essentially posting the street's blade sign, including border, on the BGS. I can sort of understand the logic, but when it is more difficult to read, it is useless.
Contrarian that I am, as with a number of other hot-button issues such as Breezewood and sequential exit numbering, I've never had a problem with the boxed street names, and in fact I kind of like the look. I appreciate the attempt to make a street name look different from a destination city, and if the current method has readability issues (which I haven't noticed, if it does), then I bet there's a way to overcome that without abandoning the idea altogether.
To keep us semi-near the topic, around the corner from I-287 on the Hutch[inson River Parkway], there are signs apparently guiding you to "Harrison County Airport". If a better attempt had been made to visually distinguish the Westchester County Airport destination from the municipality of Harrison, then the resulting mythical location wouldn't be appearing on signs.
Don't Harrison and County Airport appear on different lines?
Quote from: mtantillo on May 06, 2013, 06:32:14 PM
Don't Harrison and County Airport appear on different lines?
Yes, but that visual cue alone isn't strong enough to outweigh the logical construct of the three words together (at least to me, and I a) know that there's no such place as "Harrison County Airport", and b) have above-average experience reading and parsing multi-line highway signs).
Quote from: empirestate on May 06, 2013, 03:19:36 PM
Contrarian that I am, as with a number of other hot-button issues such as Breezewood and sequential exit numbering, I've never had a problem with the boxed street names, and in fact I kind of like the look. I appreciate the attempt to make a street name look different from a destination city, and if the current method has readability issues (which I haven't noticed, if it does), then I bet there's a way to overcome that without abandoning the idea altogether.
I agree.
Quote from: hbelkins on May 07, 2013, 11:41:39 AM
Quote from: empirestate on May 06, 2013, 03:19:36 PM
Contrarian that I am, as with a number of other hot-button issues such as Breezewood and sequential exit numbering, I've never had a problem with the boxed street names, and in fact I kind of like the look. I appreciate the attempt to make a street name look different from a destination city, and if the current method has readability issues (which I haven't noticed, if it does), then I bet there's a way to overcome that without abandoning the idea altogether.
I agree.
Well there's something that doesn't happen every day! I've noticed the two of us seem to have opposite preferences on pretty much everything. Let's celebrate with a frosty craft beer! :-)
The old method of separating the street name and the destination worked far better in my opinion. I'll see if I can find some pictures.
Here on Long Island, NYS DOT has for the last 50 years mostly used signs with road names and destinations in the same font, and mixed case lettering. Road name on the top line. Destinations on one or two lines below. I never had a problem understanding which was what as far back as age 12. IMO, the boxed street names are another case of creating a problem where there wasn't one.
The boxed street names certainly vary by region. Region 8 uses them extensively. The boxes are like heroin to region 2's sign designers (as is the word "to"). Region 3 has a couple of I-81 but it's not standard.
The last section of 287 to be rebuilt was in the area of the Westchester Ave/Bloomingdale Rd. interchange. As I said in my original post, the signs there use typical MUTCD lettering conventions, but the signs and lettering are atypically small and cramped for a BGS.
Going eastbound, the earliest advance warning for those exits are in the previous section, and the signs there have three boxed street names, one on top of the other (Bloomingdale Ave, Westchester Ave., and a third that escapes me). Must have been a different contractor for that section, because the signs change to the aforementioned just before the exit.