Overhead sign assembly with 3 left exits in a row

[bugo]

Are there any other sign assemblies that list 3 left exits? What about 4 left exits?

[vdeane]

I'll take a stab at the bleeding obvious, though LHD countries are definitely not in the spirit of the thread... https://www.google.com/maps/@-36.864387,174.76652,3a,33.4y,307.21h,89.68t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sYMnnYRZhVw8l3ma3uHvN1w!2e0

EDIT: But wait, there's more!  From the same pot of spaghetti even... https://www.google.com/maps/@-36.864933,174.750789,3a,75y,25.58h,76.62t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1skGvDQYJtLTL6Atb4VP8FeQ!2e0

[shadyjay]

You'd almost think there were 3 left exits in a row if you look at this sign on I-91 NB in Hartford CT. 

http://goo.gl/maps/8vdti

But while I-84 West and Trumbull Street are separate exits, they leave I-91 NB together, hence the same mileage to the exit, and then the ramp splits into two left exits (32A and 32B), with the right lane being a return to I-91 North.  So there are kind of 3 left exits in a row.

Going back into the 1980s, I-91 NB Exits 29, 29A, 31, and 32 were all left exits.  Exit 30 had to be on the right to break up the 4 lefties.  Exits 30 and 31 were removed as part of various projects and Exit 29 was moved to the right.  Of course now there's talk of making it on the left again to avoid the chronic Exit 29 backup.  And until mile-based exits come to I-91, we have the sequential nightmare of 28, 29, 29A, 32AB, 33, 34, etc.

[6a]

This has since been rebuilt, but I-670 in Columbus (pics from roadfan.com)





Edit: holy hell, a lot has changed since that first pic was taken

[vtk]

Note the 5C in those pictures should have been 5B, as the ramp to Broad St branched off the ramp to 71 S. The ramp to 71 N had been exit 5B before those signs went up in '03, and remained exit 5B at the gore point until '11 (and to the present, though the gore point has moved a couple of times since then).

[PurdueBill]

It's remarkable how fast that was built and then changed around.  Those signs weren't even old enough to be button copy (but were old enough to have been installed with lighting) and are already outdated and gone.  Poor planning?

I don't get why the existing 5B that became 5C didn't change on the older signs.  Separate letters since they are separate lanes (even if the gore points weren't all at exactly the same place) was sensible.  5C magically becoming 5B, less sensible.

[GCrites]

^ Not poor planning per se, the 670 completion project was a completely different project than the East Innerbelt Corridor project which required them to be changed again. I don't think anything involving the latter was conceptualized when the second set of signs went up in 2003. The East Innerbelt is design build.

[vtk]

Those signs weren't even old enough to be button copy

They almost were. That part of 670 reopened in early '03, the first year District 6 used full reflective sheeting for ordinary freeway signs.

[PurdueBill]

Those signs weren't even old enough to be button copy

They almost were. That part of 670 reopened in early '03, the first year District 6 used full reflective sheeting for ordinary freeway signs.

Indeed, the westernmost signs on 670 are just young enough to be button copy (and hopefully they will last a while).  The earliest District 4 (Akron) signage to be all reflective didn't use the larger initial capital in directions so there is a good variety of lingering leftover button copy, reflective copy with larger initial and without, and Clearview (bleah).