What is the largest road sign that you have seen?

[PHLBOS]

If you're talking surface-mounted route markers, Massachusetts has some of the biggest I've ever seen. I've seen some I-495 and Mass 128 signs that look like they are 6 feet wide.

I've even seen some of those large trailblazer signs on local roads.  

In Marblehead, MA (my hometown); large trailblazer signs for MA 114 (Lafayette Street) were erected near the Maple Street intersection when a new traffic signal for said-intersection was erected several years ago.  Serious overkill IMHO.

This one isn't very large per se, but it isn't everyday you come across a ground mounted diagrammatic sign...

In Canton, MA; prior to the current signage erected at the I-95/93 interchange; the MassDPW did have a couple of small ground-mounted diagrammatic signs mounted along I-95 North to supplement the 1977-era exit signs.  These were erected AFTER to the main exit signs were put up: one around 1979, the other in 1982-83.  No control destinations were listed, just the NORTH 95 & NORTH 93 listings.

[hbelkins]

There's a ground-mounted diagrammatic for I-79 and I-68. I'm too lazy to look for one of my pictures to link to. 

[Michael]

This one is on I-690 in Syracuse, NY just before its interchange with I-81:

Credit: AARoads

Buffalo, NY:

Image is not displaying. I see there is a massive string of characters within the "IMG" tags, but I don't know where to begin trying to edit it!

Fixed it.  It looks like thenetwork tried to use the embed code and missed a colon, which messed it up by making it use html encoding for special characters.

[Alex]

There's a ground-mounted diagrammatic for I-79 and I-68. I'm too lazy to look for one of my pictures to link to. 

There's one on I-77 northbound ahead of the merge with I-64 as well:

[Scott5114]

I almost wish there were some unambiguous way to put "Newark" and "Baltimore" on the same line to make for a smaller sign panel.

My first thought was "Newark | Baltimore", but that could potentially be misread as indicating to keep left for Newark and keep right for Baltimore.

British practice seems to be to use a comma: "Newark, Baltimore". I imagine that's the best that you could do.

[Alps]

[roadman]

My first thought was "Newark | Baltimore", but that could potentially be misread as indicating to keep left for Newark and keep right for Baltimore.

[/quote]

"Newark - Baltimore" on a single line might work.  Might require a slightly wider panel, but the greater width would be more than offset by the reduced panel height.

[1995hoo]

"Newark - Baltimore" on a single line might work.  Might require a slightly wider panel, but the greater width would be more than offset by the reduced panel height.

DC has a sign sort of in that vein on the inbound 14th Street Bridge. "Capitol Hill" appears on the first line and then "Nationals Park [dot] Verizon Center" on the second line. By "[dot]" I mean it looks as though they literally used a small dot, similar to the alternate sign for multiplication shown here ·  , but I suppose it could be a small hyphen instead because they ALSO used a different typeface to cram in the text. Google Street View image here. This assembly is all-around ugly in my opinion.

I think if a DOT were to put two cities on the same line, a better way to separate them would be with a full-sized em dash (the "long dash" that in typography is normally set against the surrounding words with either no space or else a "small space"–it looks like the one I just used in this sentence after "small space"). I recognize that wouldn't have fit on the DC sign, though they could have used a bigger sign too.

[Alex]

"Newark - Baltimore" on a single line might work.  Might require a slightly wider panel, but the greater width would be more than offset by the reduced panel height.

Simply eliminating Newark is all that is needed.

[roadman]

they ALSO used a different typeface to cram in the text. Google Street View image here. This assembly is all-around ugly in my opinion.

The smaller lettering (looks like 13.3/10) on the retrofitted legend is a classic example of trying to accommodate legend changes within existing panel dimensions - presumably so the existing structure can be retained.   However, if they had abbrievated "Verizon Ctr.", they probably could have gotten away with a series Em font.

And what's the deal with not trimming off the tops of the sign hangers?  Detracts from the sign appearance almost as much as the goofy font does.

[1995hoo]

they ALSO used a different typeface to cram in the text. Google Street View image here. This assembly is all-around ugly in my opinion.

The smaller lettering (looks like 13.3/10) on the retrofitted legend is a classic example of trying to accommodate legend changes within existing panel dimensions - presumably so the existing structure can be retained.   However, if they had abbrievated "Verizon Ctr.", they probably could have gotten away with a series Em font.

And what's the deal with not trimming off the tops of the sign hangers?  Detracts from the sign appearance almost as much as the goofy font does.

I don't think sticking to the same sign size was the issue there. That sign assembly has gone through several versions over the years, and adding destinations to the sign is only a very recent innovation for DC. That sign went up sometime during the Fenty Administration (2007 to 2011), which of course is rather obvious if you know Nationals Park opened in March 2008! When I was growing up, I recall the sign for I-395 had a shield with two or three big arrows pointing diagonally down and to the right (the arrows were kind of similar to the late lamented old sign assembly on the southbound New Jersey Turnpike at Exit 6). I don't recall what the US-1 (14th Street) sign said. Then sometime in the 1990s they changed to a diagrammatic sign–see below for a June 2005 image of that sign from AARoads.com (the Verizon Center used to be called the MCI Center). BTW, the signs on the HOV bridge have always been different and there used to be a sign there that listed 12th Street as the "control city"!



Incidentally, the sign shown above mentions the 12th Street exit. Part of DC's sign-replacement project involved replacing the signs for that exit and in doing so they eliminated all the signs that notified you that the right lane is exit-only at that exit. A lot of local drivers are just jackasses who would use the exit-only lane to try to get around everyone else anyway, but because DC is the nation's capital we get an awful lot of tourists who get caught unaware there (and the fact that there are two exit lanes, one of them optional, makes the omission of the exit-only warning a real hazard).

Ultimately, from my point of view as someone who's lived in this area since 1974 what it amounts to is that DC had the noble intent of FINALLY improving their road signs but did their usual half-assed job of it where they improved a couple of things but in the process screwed up others.

I suppose this is turning into a threadjack.....


Edited to add:

BTW, the untrimmed sign hangers are seemingly a DC tradition too. This sign assembly was located above southbound I-395 in DC for many years and was only recently replaced (the bubble shield, however, was a more recent addition to a much older sign). Again from AARoads.com:

[myosh_tino]

I almost wish there were some unambiguous way to put "Newark" and "Baltimore" on the same line to make for a smaller sign panel.

My first thought was "Newark | Baltimore", but that could potentially be misread as indicating to keep left for Newark and keep right for Baltimore.

"Newark - Baltimore" on a single line might work.  Might require a slightly wider panel, but the greater width would be more than offset by the reduced panel height.

Instead of messing around with hyphens or "pipes" (it's the only word I can think of to describe the "|" character... thanks UNIX), why not do something California's been doing for quite some time.  In the case of the I-95 pull through, why not put the control cities next to the route shield with the cardinal direction above the shield.  Kind of like this...

[Kacie Jane]

Is the complaint with the Newark/Baltimore sign actually the height, or is it more the empty space on either side?

Because if we're complaining solely about the height, there's no need to combine the lines of text (or delete one).  The other sign on that gantry has three lines of text, yet is slightly shorter (not counting the exit tab).  There appears to be extra vertical space between the text and the shield/arrows, not to mention larger text and shield, on the pull-through.

If the complaint is more about the empty space, then that's something you'd have to combine the lines of text to solve.  But that's a problem that I think is common to all pull-throughs, save for California-style ones as myosh_tino mentioned.

[1995hoo]

....

If the complaint is more about the empty space, then that's something you'd have to combine the lines of text to solve.  But that's a problem that I think is common to all pull-throughs, save for California-style ones as myosh_tino mentioned.

The other alternative would be to follow the example of the unique (in my observation, anyway) sign on I-87 north of Albany. I can't imagine this would ever become common, though. I've always kind of liked this sign.




The original objection to the Delaware pull-through signs that Alex and I were getting at was that if you look at the old sign (see my first post that started this discussion), you have to realize that sign was one of about four or five such signs all in rapid succession with no exits in the area. That string of signs was located just to the south of where I-295 merges into I-95 south of Wilmington, Delaware. Because of the merge there were five lanes across that narrowed down to four about half a mile later. Instead of just putting up a "Lane Ends 1/2 Mile" sign and then another "Lane Ends/Merge Right" sign, the Delaware DOT felt the need to post a series of these enormous pull-through signs with the arrows. Notice how Alex called the series of signs "overkill" and "ridiculous." The road was widened in recent years, which in theory would have eliminated the need for those signs because you no longer have that lane drop. Alex points out that they took down several of them but then put up this new one further down the road.

My objection to the new sign in Delaware, aside from thinking it's probably unnecessary, is that it's ugly. I don't mind Clearview at all and I think a lot of the new Clearview signs on the Beltway here in Virginia look pretty sharp and are well-done. But I think the Delaware pull-through sign Alex posted is ugly. As I said before, I can't quite put my finger on WHY I think it's ugly.

[roadman65]

On US 192 in Kissimmee, FL there is a large sign on the EB side that is the one mile guide sign for the Disney World exit (World Drive) that is super huge.

[Snappyjack]

The other alternative would be to follow the example of the unique (in my observation, anyway) sign on I-87 north of Albany. I can't imagine this would ever become common, though. I've always kind of liked this sign.

I believe these style signs are just a New York thing. I haven't seen them anywhere else. Other than this one, there's one on I-787 southbound at the circle stack interchange, one on I-87/NY Thruway northbound just past the Tappan Zee Bridge, and there might be a couple others.

[1995hoo]

I believe these style signs are just a New York thing. I haven't seen them anywhere else. Other than this one, there's one on I-787 southbound at the circle stack interchange, one on I-87/NY Thruway northbound just past the Tappan Zee Bridge, and there might be a couple others.

Ah, thanks for that. I haven't been on I-787 since August 1984 on the way home from Quebec City and the Saguenay River area and I guess I just didn't notice the one near the Tappan Zee Bridge the last time I went that way. I remember wondering if the one in the picture I posted was done that way due to high winds or the like, but I quickly dismissed that idea because of the standard-shaped sign located next to it.

[Snappyjack]

Actually, your first assumption was correct. That is indeed why those signs are the way they are. Apparently that design reduces wind drag on the panels. However, I believe it was just an experiment on NYSDOT's part because I have never seen another one put up since these were.

[cpzilliacus]

"Newark - Baltimore" on a single line might work.  Might require a slightly wider panel, but the greater width would be more than offset by the reduced panel height.

DC has a sign sort of in that vein on the inbound 14th Street Bridge. "Capitol Hill" appears on the first line and then "Nationals Park [dot] Verizon Center" on the second line. By "[dot]" I mean it looks as though they literally used a small dot, similar to the alternate sign for multiplication shown here ·  , but I suppose it could be a small hyphen instead because they ALSO used a different typeface to cram in the text. Google Street View image here. This assembly is all-around ugly in my opinion.

Hoo, at that same location, the sign used to read "I-395 North - Baltimore - New York." 

IMO, the ugly sign is an improvement.

[1995hoo]

"Newark - Baltimore" on a single line might work.  Might require a slightly wider panel, but the greater width would be more than offset by the reduced panel height.

DC has a sign sort of in that vein on the inbound 14th Street Bridge. "Capitol Hill" appears on the first line and then "Nationals Park [dot] Verizon Center" on the second line. By "[dot]" I mean it looks as though they literally used a small dot, similar to the alternate sign for multiplication shown here ·  , but I suppose it could be a small hyphen instead because they ALSO used a different typeface to cram in the text. Google Street View image here. This assembly is all-around ugly in my opinion.

Hoo, at that same location, the sign used to read "I-395 North - Baltimore - New York." 

IMO, the ugly sign is an improvement.

I was pretty sure I remembered the Baltimore/New York sign being the old diagrammatic sign for the 12th Street exit. You're right, it made no sense; I'm sure it was descended from the days when that was I-95. BTW, there is still a sign with an I-95 shield if you know where to look (it's not on the highway).

I do have to admit I've used that road so many times (including commuting that way for nine years when I worked downtown) that I often don't notice the signs unless I'm specifically thinking about such things or a new sign is posted.

[PHLBOS]

I believe these style signs are just a New York thing. I haven't seen them anywhere else. Other than this one, there's one on I-787 southbound at the circle stack interchange, one on I-87/NY Thruway northbound just past the Tappan Zee Bridge, and there might be a couple others.

In Massachusetts, there's a pull-through sign along I-95 South at Exit 46 (US 1 South) in Peabody that has the same layout.  It was erected during the mid-90s.

[Central Avenue]

Is the complaint with the Newark/Baltimore sign actually the height, or is it more the empty space on either side?

Because if we're complaining solely about the height, there's no need to combine the lines of text (or delete one).  The other sign on that gantry has three lines of text, yet is slightly shorter (not counting the exit tab).  There appears to be extra vertical space between the text and the shield/arrows, not to mention larger text and shield, on the pull-through.

If the complaint is more about the empty space, then that's something you'd have to combine the lines of text to solve.  But that's a problem that I think is common to all pull-throughs, save for California-style ones as myosh_tino mentioned.

Funny, in the sign I was picturing in my head I had already eliminated the excess vertical space, so I hadn't even considered that.

That said, wouldn't doing both (removing the excess vertical space and combining the two lines of text) make for an even smaller panel than either alone?

Instead of messing around with hyphens or "pipes" (it's the only word I can think of to describe the "|" character... thanks UNIX), why not do something California's been doing for quite some time.  In the case of the I-95 pull through, why not put the control cities next to the route shield with the cardinal direction above the shield.  Kind of like this...

Ah. I do like that. It seems it would work well for a lot of pull-through signs, honestly.

[rmsandw]

This one is not tall but it is wide...


SB I-294 at I-80...spans over 4 lanes and shoulders.

[Stratuscaster]

Similar sign on I-88 - spans 4 lanes. (And the text sizing seems to be off, but I digress).
http://g.co/maps/fgd6s

[deathtopumpkins]

I believe these style signs are just a New York thing. I haven't seen them anywhere else. Other than this one, there's one on I-787 southbound at the circle stack interchange, one on I-87/NY Thruway northbound just past the Tappan Zee Bridge, and there might be a couple others.

In Massachusetts, there's a pull-through sign along I-95 South at Exit 46 (US 1 South) in Peabody that has the same layout.  It was erected during the mid-90s.

https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/massachusetts050/i-095_sb_exit_046_04.jpg

I think the signs have since been replaced but retained the same layout though, as I don't remember the US 1 shield having a Jersey-style black background. I'll be taking that exit in about 20 minutes though, so I'll check on it.