Logo signs in urban areas - for or against?

[roadman65]

Many urban areas do not even have tall mast signs that usually appear at most interchanges that we rely on.  This is another factor to consider. 

My hometown was one that had an ordinance against high signs facing the Garden State Parkway after Howard Johnson put theirs up.  The Ramada Inn (now Holiday Inn) could not put up such an assembly when opening in 1974.  So signs like these would help a situation like the Ramada faced (I am talking elsewhere as the GSP is a toll road not ever considering these logo signs) in a big way.

[Pete from Boston]

Cities' restaurants don't cluster at exits like rural and suburban ones do.

Wanna bet?  There are some serious clusters of restaurants and gas stations at exits in Chicago.  Yes, well within the municipal limits.  A classic example is 87th Street and the Dan Ryan Expressway (I-94).

Street View.

This is generally not the case here in the Northeast, and it's a giant clusterfuck getting off and on in many places local to me (and, say, in New York).

Moreover, in a city with a thriving real estate market, fast chain anything (the type that unfamiliar motorists tend to gravitate toward) is generally not going to cover the cost of the lot.  To my knowledge, there's one fast food place adjacent to I-93 south of Stoneham until you get to... Quincy?  Braintree?  And not a heck of a lot of easy-off-and-on gas. 

Maybe that's how it is in the Northeast, but most other areas I've seen do have fast chains, even in thriving real estate markets.  Some municipalities make parking a requirement.

Parking is increasingly discouraged in neighborhoods here; along highways, not as much, but it's only part of the issue.  Development just doesn't favor the convenience-service market much.  And even just based on casual unscientific questioning here on these forums (where I think folks are more adventurous than most), people don't generally want to go hunt out the little mom-and-pops off the beaten path when they're trying to get someplace.

[cl94]

Many urban areas do not even have tall mast signs that usually appear at most interchanges that we rely on.  This is another factor to consider. 

My hometown was one that had an ordinance against high signs facing the Garden State Parkway after Howard Johnson put theirs up.  The Ramada Inn (now Holiday Inn) could not put up such an assembly when opening in 1974.  So signs like these would help a situation like the Ramada faced (as the GSP is a toll road not ever considering these logo signs) in a big way.

A lot of toll roads do feature logo signs for hotels. For example, NYSTA has logophobia (not wanting to undermine service plazas), even past the last service areas (west of Angola, south of Ramapo, or EB Berkshire Spur). Yet, they typically post logo signs for hotels and attractions, as there are no such facilities present at service areas (unlike much of Europe).

[freebrickproductions]

Are signs like this one "logo signs?", because if so, then I don't mind them (I need an admin to change my vote to "for" if that's the case).

[Zeffy]

Are signs like this one "logo signs?", because if so, then I don't mind them (I need an admin to change my vote to "for" if that's the case).

Yes, those are logo signs (you can also have FOOD or LODGING instead of GAS, or you can have a combination of them of the sign). Also, it isn't possible to change a user's vote directly without resetting the entire vote count.

[cl94]

Are signs like this one "logo signs?", because if so, then I don't mind them (I need an admin to change my vote to "for" if that's the case).

Yes

[freebrickproductions]

Ah. Then I support them. They can be quite useful for people who are from out of town.

[vdeane]

I favor logo signs, as long as they aren't a means for generating revenue. I'll point to my previous post for a detailed explanation. Nutshell is that I believe if you start pricing the cost of advertising based on demand then some serious equity issues arise where chains have a significant advantage over non-chains, and that attempting to charge user fees disproportionate to the cost of providing service for advertising on government signs in a public right of way as a means to generate revenue would fail in court if ever challenged.

Many states agree with that thinking by charging only the cost of sign erection, maintenance, and a reasonable administration fee for their logo sign programs. Arizona is trying to use it as a revenue generator, and I maintain that that will be found illegal when somebody challenges it in court. I also believe that even if it were found to be a legal revenue generator, it still doesn't generate enough revenue to be worth the equity issues.

As long as the fees are such that Joe's Newly-Opened Cafe has just as much an opportunity to buy a logo sign as McDonald's (where even if the franchise can't afford it, corporate can provide low to no interest loans to supply the up-front costs for that ad space), I support logo signs. Beyond that, I do not.

Chains have a significant advantage anyways.  At least here in NY, the minimum level of service/maximum distance needed to be eligible to appear on the sign means that they tend to be dominated by chains.  For example, restaurants are required to serve breakfast, gas stations need to be within three miles (food 6, lodging 9, and attractions 15), etc.

And yes, NY is one of the states that bans the use of logo signs other than Attractions in urban areas.

Many urban areas do not even have tall mast signs that usually appear at most interchanges that we rely on.  This is another factor to consider. 

My hometown was one that had an ordinance against high signs facing the Garden State Parkway after Howard Johnson put theirs up.  The Ramada Inn (now Holiday Inn) could not put up such an assembly when opening in 1974.  So signs like these would help a situation like the Ramada faced (as the GSP is a toll road not ever considering these logo signs) in a big way.

A lot of toll roads do feature logo signs for hotels. For example, NYSTA has logophobia (not wanting to undermine service plazas), even past the last service areas (west of Angola, south of Ramapo, or EB Berkshire Spur). Yet, they typically post logo signs for hotels and attractions, as there are no such facilities present at service areas (unlike much of Europe).

NYSTA posts the logo signs for Attractions/Camping/Lodging and the generic food/gas availability sign at interchanges that have them nearby.

[roadman65]

Many urban areas do not even have tall mast signs that usually appear at most interchanges that we rely on.  This is another factor to consider. 

My hometown was one that had an ordinance against high signs facing the Garden State Parkway after Howard Johnson put theirs up.  The Ramada Inn (now Holiday Inn) could not put up such an assembly when opening in 1974.  So signs like these would help a situation like the Ramada faced (as the GSP is a toll road not ever considering these logo signs) in a big way.

A lot of toll roads do feature logo signs for hotels. For example, NYSTA has logophobia (not wanting to undermine service plazas), even past the last service areas (west of Angola, south of Ramapo, or EB Berkshire Spur). Yet, they typically post logo signs for hotels and attractions, as there are no such facilities present at service areas (unlike much of Europe).

Florida the same on the Florida Turnpike as all services are listed regardless of their many plazas on the road itself.  The CFX (the agency that took over for the now defunct OOCEA) does not have service plazas on any of its roadways, but they will not post them on their expressway system which is so ironic.

[cl94]

And yes, NY is one of the states that bans the use of logo signs other than Attractions in urban areas.

That's recent. I just checked GSV and Region 1 took out the logo signs that used to adorn the Northway in Albany County. They were there less than 2 years ago. I distinctly remember the crazy ones for Exits 2 and 4. Still haven't replaced the (incorrect) overheads at Exits 2 (NB) and 6-7 (SB).

[Scott5114]

Quoting my post from the other thread:

The problem with logo signs in an urban area is that the signs greatly contribute to message loading and can overwhelm the driver. In a rural area, exits are generally at least 1 mi apart, giving you lots of room to interleave the logo signs with advance destination signage. In urban areas, that's usually not possible. Imagine sticking logo signs on Mile 51 of I-94 in Chicago. Yeah.

And even when you don't have closely spaced exits, urban area exits are more likely to have more important destinations than services. As a case study, lets look at the sequence of guide signs on I-35 North as you approach Exit 218 in Olathe, Kansas:

*Exit 218-Santa Fe, 2¼ miles
*[entrance ramp]
*Assurance (I-35/US-50/US-56/US-169)
*Attractions/Lodging
*Historic Mahaffie Stagecoach Stop/Deaf Cultural Center/Travel Info
*Food
*Santa Fe (1 mile)/119th Street/I-435/US-169 (median signage)
*(more) Food/Gas
*[entrance ramp]
*Assurance (I-35/US-50/US-56)
*Exit 218 - Santa Fe, Exit Only
*MidAmerica Nazarene University/Kansas State School for the Deaf
*Exit direction sign

That's four supplemental destinations and three logo signs. As a result, the only true advance signage for the exit itself is 2¼ miles(!) away from the exit. We do kind of get a 1-mile advance destination sign in the form of a median next-three-exits sign, but there's no standalone 1-mile advance sign. Notably, there are two entrance ramps along this stretch of road, both of which join after the 2¼ mile sign, and one of them (from the Old Hwy 56 partial interchange) falls less than a mile away from the exit. Their only notification of Exit 218 comes in the form of an Exit Only sign!

KDOT could not add more advance mileage signs on this stretch of highway because of the risk of message overloading. If the three logo signs were gone there would be a little more room to fit in guide signs.

[Pink Jazz]

And yes, NY is one of the states that bans the use of logo signs other than Attractions in urban areas.

That's recent. I just checked GSV and Region 1 took out the logo signs that used to adorn the Northway in Albany County. They were there less than 2 years ago. I distinctly remember the crazy ones for Exits 2 and 4. Still haven't replaced the (incorrect) overheads at Exits 2 (NB) and 6-7 (SB).

It's unfortunate that NY is removing them from urban areas while other states (most recently Arizona) are adding them in. NY needs to realize their benefits to both the state and to travelers.  That proves how backwards NY lawmakers are.

[Scott5114]

Having different opinions from you doesn't make them "backward".

[roadman65]

And yes, NY is one of the states that bans the use of logo signs other than Attractions in urban areas.

That's recent. I just checked GSV and Region 1 took out the logo signs that used to adorn the Northway in Albany County. They were there less than 2 years ago. I distinctly remember the crazy ones for Exits 2 and 4. Still haven't replaced the (incorrect) overheads at Exits 2 (NB) and 6-7 (SB).

It's unfortunate that NY is removing them from urban areas while other states (most recently Arizona) are adding them in. NY needs to realize their benefits to both the state and to travelers.  That proves how backwards NY lawmakers are.

Do not even get me started there.  I cannot agree with you on that one more.  That is a story that needs to be told off of aaroads.

[Pink Jazz]

Having different opinions from you doesn't make them "backward".

Sure, but they are doing the opposite of most other states by removing them from urban areas rather than adding them in.  The MUTCD has included provisions for logo signs in urban areas since 2000 as long as adequate sign spacing can be maintained.  There is nothing to suggest that there wasn't adequate sign spacing on the Northway.  NY urban highways are in a time warp without logo signs.

[TheStranger]

Sure, but they are doing the opposite of most other states by removing them from urban areas rather than adding them in.  The MUTCD has included provisions for logo signs in urban areas since 2000 as long as adequate sign spacing can be maintained.  There is nothing to suggest that there wasn't adequate sign spacing on the Northway.  NY urban highways are in a time warp without logo signs.

As a counterexample, I generally don't see those logo signs on urban freeways in California either, much more on rural stretches (i.e. I-80 in Dixon, I-5 south of Stockton).

[Pink Jazz]

Sure, but they are doing the opposite of most other states by removing them from urban areas rather than adding them in.  The MUTCD has included provisions for logo signs in urban areas since 2000 as long as adequate sign spacing can be maintained.  There is nothing to suggest that there wasn't adequate sign spacing on the Northway.  NY urban highways are in a time warp without logo signs.

As a counterexample, I generally don't see those logo signs on urban freeways in California either, much more on rural stretches (i.e. I-80 in Dixon, I-5 south of Stockton).

California has its own state MUTCD, and it probably doesn't include provisions for logo signs in urban areas unlike the national MUTCD.  And as far as I know, California never had them on urban freeways unlike New York who is actually removing them from urban freeways.

[Pete from Boston]

It's unfortunate that NY is removing them from urban areas while other states (most recently Arizona) are adding them in. NY needs to realize their benefits to both the state and to travelers.  That proves how backwards NY lawmakers are.

First of all, where do you get the idea that "lawmakers" make decisions on things like where signs go?

Secondly, "backward" would be blindly adhering to some manual without using local conditions as a guideline for decision-making.

There are differences between cities in the Northeast and cities in Arizona — urban organization here generally predates automobiles, nevermind interstate highways. We don't have situations where you just bring in water from 500 miles away and open up some empty flat tract of desert where there's plenty of room for a McDonald's at every exit.

[briantroutman]

While it's less common to have a services cluster at an urban exit in the Northeast, it does happen. Such as: I-90 at Everett Rd. in Albany, I-91 at Jennings Rd. in Hartford, I-95 at Bartow Ave. in the Bronx, and I-76 at City Ave. in Philadelphia. All of which are within city limits, offer a combination of at least ten G/F/L services, and allow relatively easy access in all directions.

There may be other compelling reasons not to sign these services (overloading messages in a traffic dense area), but it isn't that they're not there or not accessible.

If it hasn't yet been tried, perhaps the MUTCD could initiate a pilot program for abbreviated services signing practices in selected urban areas–where warranted. I'm thinking of a sort of "services strip"  that could be appended directly below a guide sign. Obviously the number of posted services would have to be limited. I think this approach would avoid the visual clutter of a separate services signing sequence...as well as motorist confusion over which services signs apply to which exit.

[cl94]

While it's less common to have a services cluster at an urban exit in the Northeast, it does happen. Such as: I-90 at Everett Rd. in Albany

And at I-87 exits 2 and 4 (Wolf Rd) a short distance away. All of these actually had logo signs at one point. Shame that they got taken out, because they were popular with travelers.

[vdeane]

I don't recall seeing logo signs in other cities around here, and I've only been in the Albany area for the past six months, so I don't know anything about what was there.  Street view, even the oldest years, doesn't show anything but the generic symbol signs that are still there.  But if Albany really was the only city with them, it's possible they weren't supposed to be there in the first place.  NYSDOT isn't supposed to be consistently inconsistent, but until recently the Main Office didn't care to enforce the rules as much as they do now.

[cl94]

I don't recall seeing logo signs in other cities around here, and I've only been in the Albany area for the past six months, so I don't know anything about what was there.  Street view, even the oldest years, doesn't show anything but the generic symbol signs that are still there.  But if Albany really was the only city with them, it's possible they weren't supposed to be there in the first place.  NYSDOT isn't supposed to be consistently inconsistent, but until recently the Main Office didn't care to enforce the rules as much as they do now.

I checked and I was wrong for that exit. I will note that Exit 6 had a full set of logo signs before the SPUIfication.

[roadfro]

If it hasn't yet been tried, perhaps the MUTCD could initiate a pilot program for abbreviated services signing practices in selected urban areas–where warranted. I'm thinking of a sort of "services strip"  that could be appended directly below a guide sign. Obviously the number of posted services would have to be limited. I think this approach would avoid the visual clutter of a separate services signing sequence...as well as motorist confusion over which services signs apply to which exit.

The flaw with that idea is that adding logo strips to below the guide signs could increase the sign clutter in a different way...by adding too much info to one sign display (this is part of the reason why the MUTCD says only one destination city on guide signs).

[cjk374]

West Monroe & Monroe just had some installed last year for the following exits:

West Monroe:  exit 112-Well Rd., exit 113-Downing Pines Rd., exit 114-Thomas Rd.

Monroe:  exit 117B-Texas St./18th St. (WB only), exit 120-Garrett Rd./Pecanland Mall

[cpzilliacus]

In strictly urban areas such as a motorway through downtown, I'm against their use since it only adds to the clutter, and you shouldn't encourage people to stop where there's already such a high AADT. In semi-urban or rural areas though they're very useful, mostly at exits. In Sweden we've been using them for at least 20 years along motorways and major roads, and they're very useful when taking a break or you need to refuel your car.

Distance example and at exit example (not the same location as first example).

These are not the same thing as U.S. logo signage (full disclosure: I have driven a lot in Sweden and speak the language fluently).

These are more analogous to the signage that one would see approaching a toll road service plaza (such "full service" rest stops with food and fuel are almost unknown in the U.S. except on motorways where a toll is charged - though they can be found on "free" motorways in some Canadian provinces).