Relinquishing California State Routes & signing portions thereof

[ACSCmapcollector]

I was gonna start a new thread about why continuation signage on California's non-freeway state routes was so abysmal, but I found this one instead. Seems no one really has any answers. Finding a standalone green spade anywhere that's not a freeway or expressway is like finding a unicorn these days.

It's also comical that 14U appears to be the most well-signed route in the entire state.

Seriously though, does anyone have any idea why the requirement to maintain continuation signage is apparently not enforced?

I guess it's just such a low-priority thing to enforce, it's rarely done. I mean, if you're Caltrans, you've got roads to pave, potholes to fix, etc. I guess they figure most people got GPS these days, so there's no need to force some town or city to maintain visible route signage.

Why are these relinquishing California state routes with "To" signs happening, is it because of Caltrans districts all over the state of California?

[Max Rockatansky]

I was gonna start a new thread about why continuation signage on California's non-freeway state routes was so abysmal, but I found this one instead. Seems no one really has any answers. Finding a standalone green spade anywhere that's not a freeway or expressway is like finding a unicorn these days.

It's also comical that 14U appears to be the most well-signed route in the entire state.

Seriously though, does anyone have any idea why the requirement to maintain continuation signage is apparently not enforced?

I guess it's just such a low-priority thing to enforce, it's rarely done. I mean, if you're Caltrans, you've got roads to pave, potholes to fix, etc. I guess they figure most people got GPS these days, so there's no need to force some town or city to maintain visible route signage.

Why are these relinquishing California state routes with "To" signs happening, is it because of Caltrans districts all over the state of California?

Basically those get thrown up sometimes on relinquished sections of a route that still exists.  I know there is some To CA 1 signs along the coast somewhere between Santa Monica and Long Beach.  In fairness California isn't the only state that does stuff like that.  While not a relinquishment Arizona 238 basically stops at Mobile but the implied route is to Gila Bend.  But from AZ 85 in Gila Bend you get a "To AZ 238" since ADOT doesn't maintain the route until Mobile whereas Maricopa County does.

[Quillz]

I was gonna start a new thread about why continuation signage on California's non-freeway state routes was so abysmal, but I found this one instead. Seems no one really has any answers. Finding a standalone green spade anywhere that's not a freeway or expressway is like finding a unicorn these days.

It's also comical that 14U appears to be the most well-signed route in the entire state.

Seriously though, does anyone have any idea why the requirement to maintain continuation signage is apparently not enforced?

I guess it's just such a low-priority thing to enforce, it's rarely done. I mean, if you're Caltrans, you've got roads to pave, potholes to fix, etc. I guess they figure most people got GPS these days, so there's no need to force some town or city to maintain visible route signage.

Why are these relinquishing California state routes with "To" signs happening, is it because of Caltrans districts all over the state of California?

Because many routes officially exist between towns, but not within them. So saying "to" CA-# leads you to the official, Caltrans-maintained sections. Again, it's largely a dumb practice, a route should just be signed as a route regardless of who maintains it, but that's why.

[djsekani]

I guess they figure most people got GPS these days, so there's no need to force some town or city to maintain visible route signage.

Problem with that is that some GPS systems (like Google Maps Navigation) rely on the route numbers for turn-by-turn guidance. It's confusing and annoying to be told to turn onto "California 90" (Imperial Hwy) for example when there's no visible indication that a Route 90 exists.

[Max Rockatansky]

I guess they figure most people got GPS these days, so there's no need to force some town or city to maintain visible route signage.

Problem with that is that some GPS systems (like Google Maps Navigation) rely on the route numbers for turn-by-turn guidance. It's confusing and annoying to be told to turn onto "California 90" (Imperial Hwy) for example when there's no visible indication that a Route 90 exists.

Think that's bad?  In Florida almost every GPS will give you the hidden State Road number for every Interstate and U.S. route.  For me it was amusing to listen to but I'm sure a lot of people were confused as all hell when their GPS said "turn right onto to State Road 400" when they are trying to get on Interstate 4.