Logo signs and the temptation to Google/Yelp while driving at highway speeds

[SD Mapman]

Wichita has them at a few locations, so I guess you can add Kansas.

Might as well add South Dakota, too, as we don't really have urban areas.

[adventurernumber1]

I personally support logo signs (including within urban areas). Looking at logo signs is far less distracting then being on your phone. At least you've got your eye out the windshield when you're looking at a logo sign (opposed to looking down at your phone). And it can't possibly be that distracting, for all that should be necessary is a fairly quick glance. Also, I've always found that Subway one to be very funky indeed (I've usually seen the one with 3 "Subways" stacked on one another).

[GCrites]

That could lead to smaller towns' economies losing out on income if people see only the knife-and-fork, assume the town only has a Subway and sit-down, and driving on to the next one or a truck stop.

[Brandon]

Better solution: Just use signs with vague service terms ("Accommodation", "Gasoline", "Food", etc.) that might never be changed when a chain re-brands or closes one of its branches.

Even better, just use the symbols.

Apparently, this style of signing excludes specific types of restaurants like those with Chinese food and Kosher meals.

Yes I think that's a stupid argument, and yes I would prefer to just see symbols and/or generic service terms.

Speaking of which, I found two states which do not use logo signs - North Dakota (at least on all of I-29), and South Dakota.  They put the symbols under the exit signage or on the exit signage.

[Pink Jazz]

Sorry to bump, but going back to the subject of how the Subway logo is displayed on logo signs, this brings up an interesting fact: Here in the Phoenix area, Firehouse Subs is using a double stacked logo on many of its logo signs.  This is a similar idea to the triple stacked Subway logo.

[mrfoxboy]

New Brunswick uses blue standalone  signs with symbols on them, usually 3-4 KM from the exit, to show basic services. Ex:
From this sign one wouldn't know that there are two huge fuel stations, Subway, Tim Hortons, Dairy Queen, a country market, and even a liquor store.
https://goo.gl/maps/UbkSMvGmNjn

Nova Scotia uses logo signs, useful for people like me who collect Esso points.
https://goo.gl/maps/e6EVGTXDpXH2

[Pink Jazz]

New Brunswick uses blue standalone  signs with symbols on them, usually 3-4 KM from the exit, to show basic services. Ex:
From this sign one wouldn't know that there are two huge fuel stations, Subway, Tim Hortons, Dairy Queen, a country market, and even a liquor store.

In fact, New Brunswick actually did once have a logo sign program, but it was discontinued due to extremely low participation rates.

[SD Mapman]

Speaking of which, I found two states which do not use logo signs - North Dakota (at least on all of I-29), and South Dakota.  They put the symbols under the exit signage or on the exit signage.

That is very wrong.

[mrfoxboy]

New Brunswick uses blue standalone  signs with symbols on them, usually 3-4 KM from the exit, to show basic services. Ex:
From this sign one wouldn't know that there are two huge fuel stations, Subway, Tim Hortons, Dairy Queen, a country market, and even a liquor store.

In fact, New Brunswick actually did once have a logo sign program, but it was discontinued due to extremely low participation rates.

Was not aware of that, however it was never something I really noticed until this thread. Do you have any pictures or something? I'd love to see how NB approached it.

[Pink Jazz]

As for states that continue to restrict the installation of logo signs only to rural highways, I hope someday there is a restaurant/gas/hotel chain that has the guts to file lawsuits against these states to overturn such outdated restrictions.  California's policy of not allowing them in cities with a population more than 5000 is just plain ridiculous and should be overturned immediately.

[US71]

Colorado doesn't allow logo signs. They use the standard blue square symbol signs

[Pink Jazz]

Colorado doesn't allow logo signs. They use the standard blue square symbol signs

What do you mean?:
http://www.colorado.interstatelogos.com/state/

They even have several in Denver and Colorado Springs.

[jakeroot]

California's policy of not allowing them in cities with a population more than 5000 is just plain ridiculous and should be overturned immediately.

Forcing people off the highway to locate local businesses sounds like an economic policy more than anything. I can see some benefit to it. Gas stations are so close to the freeway in urban areas, you don't really need logo signs to spot them. Plus, unless there's less than six or nine local business, there's going to be an issue with not enough space to advertise all the businesses nearby.

overturn such outdated restrictions

Right, because logo signs are such a newfangled way of getting to your next destination. That Google Maps crap is so silly. Thank god for the blue signs!! /s

[shadyjay]

No logo signs in VT whatsoever.  We just have the service symbols on the interstates (most now on a separate BBS, were originally tacked onto the "exit now" sign) and on the ramps themselves, text readouts say FOOD #->, GAS  # ->, etc.  Don't think I've ever seen a logo sign in New Hampshire, either.  Maine has a few, especially on the Maine Turnpike.   CT has some logo signs mostly in more-rural-than-urban areas.  What is interesting about CT is that sometimes the logo signs will only appear in a single direction.  (example:  CT 9 NB for Exit 19 has logo signs for gas and food, but heading SB only has a blue sign for "FOOD-PHONE-GAS-LODGING".

[Pink Jazz]

Right, because logo signs are such a newfangled way of getting to your next destination. That Google Maps crap is so silly. Thank god for the blue signs!! /s

Unless the national MUTCD reinstates the restriction of logo signs to rural areas (which probably will never happen due to the potential economic consequences to states that allow them in urban areas), logo signs are just as useful (if not more) in urban areas than they are in rural areas, and any such restriction is a disservice to the businesses and the general public. 

I have zero doubt that when Arizona launched their urban logo sign program, they factored in the competition with smartphones.  Participation is very strong here in the Phoenix area and shows no signs of decline.  In fact, two exits in north Phoenix on I-17 will be the first in the Valley to get three logo signs per direction beginning next year.

Again, I hope some major chain has the guts to file lawsuits against states that continue to restrict logo signs to rural highways, since such restrictions are totally meritless nanny state laws.

[noelbotevera]

PA posts them randomly. I see some on I-81 when I go down that way, but in Harrisburg, logo signs kind of reappear and disappear.

[myosh_tino]

Again, I hope some major chain has the guts to file lawsuits against states that continue to restrict logo signs to rural highways, since such restrictions are totally meritless nanny state laws.

... or the state DOT could choose to eliminate LOGO signs all together.  I'm sorry but I would rather have a few potholes filled than LOGO signs in urban areas.  It's a much better use of my tax dollars IMO.

[vdeane]

Again, I hope some major chain has the guts to file lawsuits against states that continue to restrict logo signs to rural highways, since such restrictions are totally meritless nanny state laws.

Would you also want some chain to sue the states that don't do logo signs at all?

[Pink Jazz]

Again, I hope some major chain has the guts to file lawsuits against states that continue to restrict logo signs to rural highways, since such restrictions are totally meritless nanny state laws.

... or the state DOT could choose to eliminate LOGO signs all together.  I'm sorry but I would rather have a few potholes filled than LOGO signs in urban areas.  It's a much better use of my tax dollars IMO.

Actually, little to no taxpayer money goes to logo signs because in most states the logo sign program generates revenue, thus it actually benefits taxpayers.  Much of the costs are covered by the businesses who pay to be on the signs.

[noelbotevera]

Maybe non-roadgeeks who do this have IQs that are the same as a rock. Seriously, how can you not a miss a four foot sign compared to a 5 inch phone.

[TravelingBethelite]

One of them is them is stationary, and one of them is moving along at 65 mph with you. Guess which is which.

[noelbotevera]

One of them is them is stationary, and one of them is moving along at 65 mph with you. Guess which is which.

I can see a four foot sign at 65 mph. I can't see a phone that's stationary, or else I'm distracted.

[Pete from Boston]

Better solution: Just use signs with vague service terms ("Accommodation", "Gasoline", "Food", etc.) that might never be changed when a chain re-brands or closes one of its branches.

Even better, just use the symbols.

Apparently, this style of signing excludes specific types of restaurants like those with Chinese food and Kosher meals.

Yes I think that's a stupid argument, and yes I would prefer to just see symbols and/or generic service terms.

It excludes any restaurant without a logo.

[Pink Jazz]

I have this strange feeling that once logo signs are installed in the Tucson area there will be heavy opposition.  Tucson is opposed to any road improvements and always tries to be the opposite of Phoenix.  I am willing to bet that none of the Tucson area cities will allow the installation of trailblazer signs for businesses that are not located directly off the freeway.

[theline]

Better solution: Just use signs with vague service terms ("Accommodation", "Gasoline", "Food", etc.) that might never be changed when a chain re-brands or closes one of its branches.

Even better, just use the symbols.

Apparently, this style of signing excludes specific types of restaurants like those with Chinese food and Kosher meals.

Yes I think that's a stupid argument, and yes I would prefer to just see symbols and/or generic service terms.

It excludes any restaurant without a logo.

Perhaps the remark was just in jest, but I've seen logo signs that just displayed in text the name of restaurants that didn't have a logo.