AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Corinth,TX: Unbelievable: US 77 Co-siged with I-35E at Corinth Pkwy  (Read 6012 times)

txstateends

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1067
  • Location: north TX, not far from an interstate interchange and a US terminus
  • Last Login: March 21, 2019, 02:35:12 PM
Re: Corinth,TX: Unbelievable: US 77 Co-siged with I-35E at Corinth Pkwy
« Reply #25 on: September 04, 2017, 02:23:16 PM »

So far, all the permanent new-install shields on poles along the parts of the Dallas-Denton I-35E redo project are being put up with US 77 shields included.  This is in Carrollton and Farmers Branch, that I've seen--I haven't gotten any close-up looks farther north.  The installs are both along main lanes as well as those on service roads (cross streets and ramps). 

I don't know if the contractor is doing this as a big sign goof, or if someone out there has a secret campaign to bring US 77 back to equal signage prominence with I-35E.  I've *never* understood the lack of shields (mainly in overlap-concurrency examples) on some stretches of road.  If a route (like US 77 in this case) is part of a highway, sign it as such.  Don't be lazy or inconsistent about it.  The only reason for shields not appearing on a highway should be that it's decommissioned and no longer along that highway (US 66 is an obvious, prime example).  US 67 disappears at the Hunt County line and suddenly reappears in southern Dallas--dumb.  US 77 appears and disappears between the OK border and Waco--dumb.  US 287 is not well-represented along I-45 between Ennis and Corsicana.  I don't get it.  One part of a DOT's/agency's focus should be making things *clear* to drivers, no matter what part of the process.  We have enough confused, distracted people on the road as it is.  Leaving off what route is part of a highway helps no one.  If a route is generally seen as duplicative (or unnecessary), decommission it.  If it is not, sign it.  DOTs/agencies need to wake up and realize this.
Logged
\/ \/ click for a bigger image \/ \/

Brian556

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2041
  • Location: Lewisville, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 01:58:41 AM
Re: Corinth,TX: Unbelievable: US 77 Co-siged with I-35E at Corinth Pkwy
« Reply #26 on: September 06, 2017, 01:14:48 PM »

So far, all the permanent new-install shields on poles along the parts of the Dallas-Denton I-35E redo project are being put up with US 77 shields included.  This is in Carrollton and Farmers Branch, that I've seen--I haven't gotten any close-up looks farther north.  The installs are both along main lanes as well as those on service roads (cross streets and ramps). 

I don't know if the contractor is doing this as a big sign goof, or if someone out there has a secret campaign to bring US 77 back to equal signage prominence with I-35E.  I've *never* understood the lack of shields (mainly in overlap-concurrency examples) on some stretches of road.  If a route (like US 77 in this case) is part of a highway, sign it as such.  Don't be lazy or inconsistent about it.  The only reason for shields not appearing on a highway should be that it's decommissioned and no longer along that highway (US 66 is an obvious, prime example).  US 67 disappears at the Hunt County line and suddenly reappears in southern Dallas--dumb.  US 77 appears and disappears between the OK border and Waco--dumb.  US 287 is not well-represented along I-45 between Ennis and Corsicana.  I don't get it.  One part of a DOT's/agency's focus should be making things *clear* to drivers, no matter what part of the process.  We have enough confused, distracted people on the road as it is.  Leaving off what route is part of a highway helps no one.  If a route is generally seen as duplicative (or unnecessary), decommission it.  If it is not, sign it.  DOTs/agencies need to wake up and realize this.

The new route marker assemblies on FM 407/ Lake Park Rd omit US 77, while all other new ones have it.

I was ok with it not being signed. I felt it was easy enough for drivers to understand, especially considering that drivers are not likely to enter I-35 from US 77 and then exit when it exits in order to stay on it. US 77 has no real relevance in Texas north of Waco. In Oklahoma, its relevance is relatively minor.

And, yes, it does look like TxDOT is trying to unhide US 77. Another member posted a pic of a I-35/US 77 assembly in the Waco area a while back.

As far as the I-45/US 287 multiplex goes, there is no sign telling NB traffic on US 287 to turn right on I-45. There is also no multiplex reassurance north or that intersection. Farther up, there are several multiplex reassurance assemblies. Another big issue in Corsicana is that BUSINESS US 287 does not have any BUSINESS plaques. It is still signed as regular 287. Also, the city of Corsicana has a lot of "Highway 75" street signs on the I-45 Business Loop, despite US 75 having been decommissioned in 1987. Some of them are new. The Corsicana area is a disaster signage-wise. (These observations are from 2012)

Shorter multiplexes with interstates, in my opinion, however, should always be signed.

All non-interstate multiplexes should be fully signed
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.