Inconsistencies in signing

[corco]

There is another one now that I think about it, also 50 vs 40. It's been there as long as I can remember:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.924802,-74.959959,3a,75y,222.61h,69.22t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5KjAV7eOkdKhOBq-0FDYsQ!2e0
and I assume it's supposed to be 40 seeing as it's a pretty populated area.

Not an inconsistency, but speaking of high speed limits in populated areas, check out Eagle Rd (ID-55) in Meridian, ID: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.634545,-116.35423,3a,75y,359.11h,88.53t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sZu7C0DpvHoiueT6MrD2M8g!2e0

55 speed limit, on a road that would probably be around 40 typically (traffic moves at 40-45 normally, except during rush hour where, good luck moving at all). Meridian has grown so fast, that a lot of this area was undeveloped not too long ago, but now it's suburbia and there's big box stores and shopping centers lining it from I-84 all the way to ID-44. I guess this is a case of the speed limit not keeping up with the development. As nice as it is to be able to go 55 in light traffic, I fully expect the limit to lower down to 45 or 40 sometime.

Even looking at the most recent street view (Oct 2011) at the intersection of Fairview and Eagle, it is completely unrecognizable to me. https://www.google.com/maps/@43.620015,-116.354418,3a,75y,10.75h,80.95t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sB2vRtX_2WjbeUWCROpuJLA!2e0 It's farm land, less than 4 years ago. There is a huge shopping center there on the east side of Eagle now, as you can see if you go into satellite view. (I don't remember if there's currently anything on the west side of the highway).

Also odd that if you continue on Eagle Rd. south of I-84 (where it's no longer a state highway), the road stays generally similar (though less congested), but the speed limit drops to 40 (well, there is a 50 zone between Fairview and I-84 but still): https://www.google.com/maps/@43.589658,-116.354557,3a,75y,180.59h,75.16t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1scvuHlsQkC6xa2ne7VRCejg!2e0

44/State St also goes up to 55 just past Walmart, which is pretty deep into Boise/Garden City. When we moved there in the late 90s, that was all cow pasture, but now...yeah.

What I've noticed though is that nobody drives 55 on State St or on Eagle Rd, but given how proactive Idaho has been lately with lowering speed limits in rural areas (stupid 45 zones north of Smith's Ferry and north of New Meadows in the first canyon before Pinehurst) it's surprising that they're not doing the same in urban areas.

My sister lives right off Eagle Rd at an uncontrolled intersection north of Chinden, and making the left turn is terrifying. What I have heard is that they are going to be putting a median barrier in, eliminating the two way left turn lane, which would help to make the 55 MPH speed limit safer, and might be why the limit is still 55.

The new Idaho 16 extension between 44 and 20/26 is actually posted at 65, which really surprised me.

[doorknob60]

There is another one now that I think about it, also 50 vs 40. It's been there as long as I can remember:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.924802,-74.959959,3a,75y,222.61h,69.22t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s5KjAV7eOkdKhOBq-0FDYsQ!2e0
and I assume it's supposed to be 40 seeing as it's a pretty populated area.

Not an inconsistency, but speaking of high speed limits in populated areas, check out Eagle Rd (ID-55) in Meridian, ID: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.634545,-116.35423,3a,75y,359.11h,88.53t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sZu7C0DpvHoiueT6MrD2M8g!2e0

55 speed limit, on a road that would probably be around 40 typically (traffic moves at 40-45 normally, except during rush hour where, good luck moving at all). Meridian has grown so fast, that a lot of this area was undeveloped not too long ago, but now it's suburbia and there's big box stores and shopping centers lining it from I-84 all the way to ID-44. I guess this is a case of the speed limit not keeping up with the development. As nice as it is to be able to go 55 in light traffic, I fully expect the limit to lower down to 45 or 40 sometime.

Even looking at the most recent street view (Oct 2011) at the intersection of Fairview and Eagle, it is completely unrecognizable to me. https://www.google.com/maps/@43.620015,-116.354418,3a,75y,10.75h,80.95t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sB2vRtX_2WjbeUWCROpuJLA!2e0 It's farm land, less than 4 years ago. There is a huge shopping center there on the east side of Eagle now, as you can see if you go into satellite view. (I don't remember if there's currently anything on the west side of the highway).

Also odd that if you continue on Eagle Rd. south of I-84 (where it's no longer a state highway), the road stays generally similar (though less congested), but the speed limit drops to 40 (well, there is a 50 zone between Fairview and I-84 but still): https://www.google.com/maps/@43.589658,-116.354557,3a,75y,180.59h,75.16t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1scvuHlsQkC6xa2ne7VRCejg!2e0

44/State St also goes up to 55 just past Walmart, which is pretty deep into Boise/Garden City. When we moved there in the late 90s, that was all cow pasture, but now...yeah.

What I've noticed though is that nobody drives 55 on State St or on Eagle Rd, but given how proactive Idaho has been lately with lowering speed limits in rural areas (stupid 45 zones north of Smith's Ferry and north of New Meadows in the first canyon before Pinehurst) it's surprising that they're not doing the same in urban areas.

My sister lives right off Eagle Rd at an uncontrolled intersection north of Chinden, and making the left turn is terrifying. What I have heard is that they are going to be putting a median barrier in, eliminating the two way left turn lane, which would help to make the 55 MPH speed limit safer, and might be why the limit is still 55.

The new Idaho 16 extension between 44 and 20/26 is actually posted at 65, which really surprised me.

Yeah, both State St (ID-44) and Chinden (US-20/26) have higher than expected speed limits in sections, for the same reasons.

I partially like Oregon's policy on rural highways: 55 regardless of situation. Wide open road, or curvy mountain/coastal road, consistent posting. The reason I say partially, is because while it's nice that it doesn't randomly drop to 45 or have otherwise similar highways be different speed limits (which is common in WA and ID), the 55 maximum kills it in the straight sections. Do cops here enforce these rural speed limit drops (I've mostly only driven on I-84 and small parts of US-95, in terms of highways in Idaho)?

They recently (as in, a couple years ago) added median barriers on Eagle Rd. from Chinden to at least Ustick. Won't surprise me if they extend that all the way up to ID-44. I'd never want to turn left onto Eagle Rd without a signal. I don't even like using the U-Turn lanes they added if I can help it. Too much traffic.

Yeah, the final design is a full limited access freeway from ID-44 to I-84, so it makes sense they'd sign it with the default freeway limit of 65. This road (in combination with US-20/26 and Can-Ada Rd.) serves as a nice shortcut from Nampa into Eagle and NW Boise (especially with the construction mess going on with I-84 in Meridian).

[corco]

Yes, rural Idaho cops are absolute dicks. My Dad has gotten 3 speeding tickets in the last two years on US-12 between Idaho 13 and the Montana line. That highway is posted at 50 for about 66 miles for no explicable reason, and he's always been ticketed for less than 60.

I never, ever go more than five over in rural Idaho (grew up in and family still resides in McCall) for that reason. I've lived/been engaged with that state since 1997 and just know way too many people that have been burned by overzealous police officers in Idaho to feel comfortable going more than five over.

Oregon...no. I agree on having reasonably consistent speeds and prohibiting what seem like arbitrary changes. Montana works with a blanket speed of 70 off-interstate, because that's actually a reasonable speed. Oregon encourages clumping, which is dangerous- to avoid getting a ticket in Oregon, you have to get yourself into a pack of other cars all going about 70 on roads that really should be posted at at least 65, particularly in the eastern part of the state.

[Big John]

Are you allowed to make a left turn from this left-turn lane in Bellingham WA?  https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7564631,-122.4650424,3a,75y,270.78h,86.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scdP_UNwghzxKeU9Uu9i8Bg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

[Kacie Jane]

Are you allowed to make a left turn from this left-turn lane in Bellingham WA?  https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7564631,-122.4650424,3a,75y,270.78h,86.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scdP_UNwghzxKeU9Uu9i8Bg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

I've posted a picture of that sign on another thread I think.  The answer is that you're not allowed to make a 90° left onto James Street (which is one-way the wrong way), but you are allowed to make a soft left onto State Street.

It really just needs a little "TO JAMES" plaque under the no left turn sign.

[jeffandnicole]

Are you allowed to make a left turn from this left-turn lane in Bellingham WA?  https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7564631,-122.4650424,3a,75y,270.78h,86.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scdP_UNwghzxKeU9Uu9i8Bg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

I've posted a picture of that sign on another thread I think.  The answer is that you're not allowed to make a 90° left onto James Street (which is one-way the wrong way), but you are allowed to make a soft left onto State Street.

It really just needs a little "TO JAMES" plaque under the no left turn sign.

Or really, eliminate that sign completely.  The sign on the traffic light pole shown on the link below, along with a One Way arrow, should suffice.  https://goo.gl/maps/QsW0L

[PHLBOS]

Note: I was originally thinking of making this either a spearate thread or piggy-back it onto the I-95 MA signing thread; but thought it might be better suited here due to this thread subject.

For years the MA stretch of I-95 and US 1 in Peabody & Danvers (where both run nearly parallel & adjacent to each other between Exits 46 and 50) hasn't always been consitent with destination listings for ramp signage; particularly the southbound ramp signs (where duplicate destinations are used for separate southbound I-95 and US 1 ramps).

Here's how the various interchanges along I-95 and US 1 are presently signed:

Current entrance ramp signage I-95:
Exit 47A-B (MA 114)
Salisbury/Portsmouth, NH for northbound

TO 128 Waltham/Boston for southbound

No issues, can leave as is.  Option to change southbound legend to Boston/Providence, RI

Exit 48 (Centre St.)
Topsfield/Portsmouth, NH for northbound I-95 and US 1

Waltham/Boston for southbound I-95

No issues, can leave as is.  Option to change southbound legend to either Peabody*/Boston or Boston/Providence, RI.

*US 1 South destination signage would need to change to W. Peabody

Exit 49 (MA 62)
Topsfield/Portsmouth, NH for northbound I-95 and US 1

Peabody/Boston for southbound I-95

Change I-95 south signage to either just Boston, Waltham/Boston or Boston/Providence, RI.

Reason: US 1 South is signed for Peabody as well.

Current entrance ramp signage for US 1:
Lowell St.
TO 95 Danvers for northbound

Change to include Portsmouth, NH

Reason: no direct access to adjacent I-95 North

Lynnfield/Boston for southbound

Completely change to include TO 95 (south) and use Waltham instead of Lynnfield (or change to Boston/Providence, RI)

Reason: no direct access to nearby I-95 South

MA 114
Topsfield for northbound (one advance BGS includes Newburyport)

Peabody for southbound

Change Peabody to W. Peabody

Reason: 114 eastbound heads into Peabody.

Dayton/Centre Sts.
Topsfield/Portsmouth, NH for northbound US 1 and I-95

Boston for southbound US 1

Change Boston to either Peabody or W. Peabody

Reason: a direct ramp to I-95 southbound exists.

MA 62
Topsfield/Portsmouth, NH for northbound US 1 and I-95

Peabody for southbound US 1 (westbound signage)

Lynnfield/Boston for southbound US 1 (eastbound signage)

Change signage to read "1 SOUTH W. Peabody"

Reasons: I-95 South draws closer to Peabody's center 
________________________________________________
Somewhat Fictional Territory but here would is my proposal to rationalize the destination signing for I-95 and US 1.  The intent here is to sign I-95 in this vicinity with the more distant and/or prominent destinations (Boston/Waltham/Providence, RI/Salisbury/Portsmouth, NH) and US 1 in this area with the more local destinations (W. Peabody/Saugus/Danvers/Topsfield)

Option 1: start I-95 southbound Waltham/Boston destination combo at Exit 50 (such will continue until Exit 46) & change exit signage from Topsfield/Danvers to Danvers/Peabody.

MA 62 (northbound Exit 49)
Change I-95 southbound signage to either Waltham/Boston or Boston

Change US 1 southbound signage from eastbound MA 62 to Peabody.

Dayton/Centre Sts. (Exit 48)
Change US 1 southbound signage to Peabody.

MA 114 (northbound Exits 47A-B)
Change US 1 southbound signage to W. Peabody

Reason: 114 eastbound heads into Peabody

Lowell St. (off US 1)
Change northbound US 1 TO I-95 North signage to include Portsmouth, NH along w/Danvers

Change southbound US 1 signage to include TO I-95 South reference and use Waltham/Boston destination combination.

Option 2: start I-95 southbound Boston/Providence, RI destination combo at Exit 50 (such will continue until Exit 46) & change exit signage from Topsfield/Danvers to Danvers/Peabody. 

MA 62 (northbound Exit 49)
Change I-95 southbound signage to either Boston/Providence, RI or Boston

Change US 1 southbound signage from eastbound MA 62 to Peabody.

Dayton/Centre Sts. (Exit 48)
Change I-95 southbound signage to either Boston/Providence, RI or just Boston.

Change US 1 southbound signage to Peabody.

MA 114 (northbound Exits 47A-B)
Change I-95 southbound TO MA 128 signage to Boston/Providence, RI

Change US 1 southbound signage to W. Peabody

Reason: 114 eastbound heads into Peabody

Lowell St. (off US 1)
Change northbound US 1 TO I-95 North signage to include Portsmouth, NH along w/Danvers

Change southbound US 1 signage to include TO I-95 South reference and use Boston/Providence, RI destination combination.

Option 3: continue with signing Peabody/Boston combo for I-95 southbound until Exit 46 & change Exit 50 signage from Topsfield/Danvers to Danvers/W. Peabody. 

MA 62 (northbound Exit 49)
Change US 1 southbound signage to W. Peabody.

Dayton/Centre Sts. (Exit 48)
Change I-95 southbound signage to either Peabody/Boston or just Boston.

Change US 1 southbound signage to W. Peabody.

MA 114 (northbound Exits 47A-B)
Signage for I-95 southbound would change to either just Boston or Boston/Providence, RI combo.

Change US 1 southbound signage to W. Peabody

Reason: 114 eastbound heads into Peabody

US 1 South (Exit 46)
Exit signage could include Saugus along w/Boston.  Through I-95 South To MA 128 signage could list Peabody/Providence, RI combo.

MA 128 North (Exit 45)
Exit signage could include Peabody along with Gloucester.  Through I-95 South signage could list Waltham/Providence, RI combo.

[roadman65]

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Flushing,+Queens,+NY/@40.754107,-73.899727,3a,66.8y,102.39h,101.18t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sqU4nd1q8r0us8YVdtxnrzQ!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x89c260054dc0633f:0xfaec24d1b474281e

The Westbound ramp to I-278 is signed with the boroughs of Brooklyn and Staten Island, while EB I-278 is signed with the Triborough Bridge.  Considering that NYC has finally stopped using the Verrazano Bridge for the WB control city on I-278 in favor of the boroughs it services, so should they have done it going the other way.

If you also look up on the bridge that carries I-278 over NY 25A, you will see Manhattan used along with the Triborough Bridge on the pull through sign up there. 

This is totally inconsistent not to mention violating the MUTCD rules.

[PurdueBill]

The MA 62 WB paddle sign for US 1 SB is one of my favorites anywhere.  Beside it being still a text sign, it's one of the few out there to call out "So. Lynnfield" versus just plain Lynnfield.  The WB BGSs read Peabody, but that one paddle sign has to be different.  Always loved it.

[noelbotevera]

The MA 62 WB paddle sign for US 1 SB is one of my favorites anywhere.  Beside it being still a text sign, it's one of the few out there to call out "So. Lynnfield" versus just plain Lynnfield.  The WB BGSs read Peabody, but that one paddle sign has to be different.  Always loved it.

How is it inconsistent?

[PurdueBill]

The 62 WB signs for US 1 SB otherwise say Peabody (and the 95 SB sign ALSO says Peabody to boot)...I actually am fond of the paddle sign and its unusual reference to So. Lynnfield; it's a rare destination to be on a sign at all.

PHLBOS is correct that the big signs for US 1 SB from 62 WB ought to say W. Peabody if the ones for 95 SB say Peabody.  If I'm going to Peabody Square or Northshore Mall, I need to use 95 to 128.  If I'm going to West Peabody, I need to use US 1 to Lowell St/Pine St./Lake St. etc.  If W. Peabody isn't deemed appropriate by TPTB, then I could see Saugus or Lynnfield (maybe not So. Lynnfield).  They have Boston on the 95 sign to put traffic to Boston on 95 down to Exit 46 where it needs to get on US 1 anyway, so Boston (or Revere or something south of Saugus) wouldn't make sense for US 1.

The WB paddle sign having two different destinations than the BGS for the same exit is inconsistent but not the end of the world.  It could be argued that it even supplements the BGS with additional destinations that otherwise wouldn't fit.  It is a shame that the sign in question is gone, replaced with a non-text sign with Peabody and Boston.  So. Lynnfield was a fun destination with its abbreviation and all.  As I recall, the paddle sign in that street view was a successor to a much older one with the same text.

[PHLBOS]

The MA 62 WB paddle sign for US 1 SB is one of my favorites anywhere.  Beside it being still a text sign, it's one of the few out there to call out "So. Lynnfield" versus just plain Lynnfield.  The WB BGSs read Peabody, but that one paddle sign has to be different.  Always loved it.
...
So. Lynnfield was a fun destination with its abbreviation and all.  As I recall, the paddle sign in that street view was a successor to a much older one with the same text.

I remember the late 60s/early 70s era cut-corner version of that LGS quite well.  The SO. LYNNFIELD/BOSTON notation is obviously a carry-over (note the SO. abbreviation for SOUTH) from how the US 1 southbound ramps from MA 62 were originally signed (long before I-95 was built in this area).