Signs That Point Toward a Highway That You're Already On

[JayhawkCO]

Did a little camping this weekend, and as I was heading back coming north on I-25 near Walsenburg, I saw this sign which was a little strange.

GSV Link here

It points towards US 160 West, but you're already driving on US 160 West which is multiplexed from Trinidad to Walsenburg.  If you take BL 25, you actually go off US 160 just to reconnect to it downtown.  I feel like they could have done better any of these ways:

• Make the southern portion of BL 25 also US 160, then extend CO 10 into town
• Shorten BL 25 and create a Business US 160
• Fix the damn sign

Are there other examples out there where a BGS points "to" a highway you're already driving on?

Chris

[zzcarp]

Did a little camping this weekend, and as I was heading back coming north on I-25 near Walsenburg, I saw this sign which was a little strange.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.5888528,-104.7408764,3a,75y,342.77h,68.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sW8wQbrOo4C5BMbA4zX5QGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

It points towards US 160 West, but you're already driving on US 160 West which is multiplexed from Trinidad to Walsenburg.  If you take BL 25, you actually go off US 160 just to reconnect to it downtown.  I feel like they could have done better any of these ways:

• Make the southern portion of BL 25 also US 160, then extend CO 10 into town
• Shorten BL 25 and create a Business US 160
• Fix the damn sign

Are there other examples out there where a BGS points "to" a highway you're already driving on?

Chris

US 160 is actually co-signed w/Business 25 (and unsigned US 85-87) from Exit 49 north to 7th street in downtown Walsenburg. It's the BGS "TO"  that's incorrect. GSV

[JayhawkCO]

Did a little camping this weekend, and as I was heading back coming north on I-25 near Walsenburg, I saw this sign which was a little strange.

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.5888528,-104.7408764,3a,75y,342.77h,68.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sW8wQbrOo4C5BMbA4zX5QGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

It points towards US 160 West, but you're already driving on US 160 West which is multiplexed from Trinidad to Walsenburg.  If you take BL 25, you actually go off US 160 just to reconnect to it downtown.  I feel like they could have done better any of these ways:

• Make the southern portion of BL 25 also US 160, then extend CO 10 into town
• Shorten BL 25 and create a Business US 160
• Fix the damn sign

Are there other examples out there where a BGS points "to" a highway you're already driving on?

Chris

US 160 is actually co-signed w/Business 25 (and unsigned US 85-87) from Exit 49 north to 7th street in downtown Walsenburg. It's the BGS "TO"  that's incorrect. GSV

But, interestingly, that sign you sent the link to on GSV is also incorrect.  US 160 connects to CO 10 according to CDOT. 

See here.

It's also signed at the end of CO10.

Crazy, huh?

Chris

[zzcarp]

But, interestingly, that sign you sent the link to on GSV is also incorrect.  US 160 connects to CO 10 according to CDOT. 

See here.

It's also signed there.

Crazy, huh?

Chris

That is crazy! I've spent a bunch of time in Walsenburg on projects, and I remember signage being dodgy.

It's very obviously signed coming from the west on Eastbound US 160 to turn south on BL 25 to Exit 49. GSV

It's also not signed on the BGS along I-25 to exit at Exit 50 for US 160 west, just for CO 10. And, southbound, it signs exit 49 as "North BL-25 and West US 160". GSV

I agree that CDOT should update their route logs to what's signed in the field. I'd be for an extended CO 10 to the Business Loop.

Dave

[Elm]

I wasn't sure what to make of that the last time I went by Walsenburg, either! At first, I wondered if CDOT had turned back the middle part of 160, since they like shedding highways, and I'd add my vote to cleaning it up somehow. (I like just extending Hwy 10.)

To throw out another possibility for how things are arranged now, the situation could be that "US 160" between Main St/BL 25 is a business "loop" of US 160. Its inner number is 160B–mainly to say "really it's a highway," since the letter admittedly doesn't mean anything aside from another route beating it for the multiplex's number–but there are a few references to "160 Business" in other places online that seem to fit it.

Walsenburg's Street Department webpage has an item for "US 160: Business Loop" under State Transportation Plan.

In a "2040 Corridor Profiles" doc that the webpage might be based on, there's a page for "US 160 B" with "Description: US 160 Business Loop (Walsenburg)." It goes on to refer to a "Vision for the US 160 - I-25 Business Loop," though, which muddies things.

[JayhawkCO]

But, interestingly, that sign you sent the link to on GSV is also incorrect.  US 160 connects to CO 10 according to CDOT. 

See here.

It's also signed there.

Crazy, huh?

Chris

That is crazy! I've spent a bunch of time in Walsenburg on projects, and I remember signage being dodgy.

It's very obviously signed coming from the west on Eastbound US 160 to turn south on BL 25 to Exit 49. GSV

It is all crazy down there.  That sign is saying to turn off of US 160 to get back to US 160 just like the "To" sign on I-25 NB.  The even dumber part is that that way is, indeed, quicker.

It's also not signed on the BGS along I-25 to exit at Exit 50 for US 160 west, just for CO 10. And, southbound, it signs exit 49 as "North BL-25 and West US 160". GSV

I agree that CDOT should update their route logs to what's signed in the field. I'd be for an extended CO 10 to the Business Loop.

Dave

I agree.  I think that's probably the easiest move.  In fact, if you notice on the CDOT website that I linked to earlier, even the map underneath the highlight has CO10 going into Walsenburg and stopping at BL 25.

I know they grow a lot of weed down in that part of the state, but man...

Chris

[JayhawkCO]

I wasn't sure what to make of that the last time I went by Walsenburg, either! At first, I wondered if CDOT had turned back the middle part of 160, since they like shedding highways, and I'd add my vote to cleaning it up somehow. (I like just extending Hwy 10.)

To throw out another possibility for how things are arranged now, the situation could be that "US 160" between Main St/BL 25 is a business "loop" of US 160. Its inner number is 160B–mainly to say "really it's a highway," since the letter admittedly doesn't mean anything aside from another route beating it for the multiplex's number–but there are a few references to "160 Business" in other places online that seem to fit it.

Walsenburg's Street Department webpage has an item for "US 160: Business Loop" under State Transportation Plan.

In a "2040 Corridor Profiles" doc that the webpage might be based on, there's a page for "US 160 B" with "Description: US 160 Business Loop (Walsenburg)." It goes on to refer to a "Vision for the US 160 - I-25 Business Loop," though, which muddies things.

Now that you brought that up, I suppose from I-25 to BL 25, that could be signed as a Business Spur US 160 and that would make some lick of sense...

Chris

[Brian556]

In the Chattanooga area, there are two examples of JCT assemblies for the route that you are already on, if that somehow counts

[zzcarp]

Another Colorado example is CO Highway 14 at its multiplex with US 287 north of Fort Collins. Both in downtown Fort Collins at the south end and at the north end at Ted's Place, CO 14 is marked as "TO" when it is actually the route between the two segments. Even along US 287 it's well signed as "TO" CO 14 in many instances.

[Brandon]

I-355 south at 75th Street.  It's an error, but goes with this thread.
https://goo.gl/maps/4SgT5FSh5o2LgTNJA

[jmacswimmer]

Here's an example from Damascus MD that I've always found interesting:

On both directions of MD 27 entering downtown, there are 'TO' signs telling you to turn off 27, take a small shortcut along Lewis Drive & High Corner Street that bypasses the 27/108 intersection, and then rejoin 27 on the other side of downtown.  (In both directions, the signs directing you to 108 is the way 27 technically goes.)

NB: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2882297,-77.2064469,3a,45.3y,69.11h,86.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snkQUApccvljisxcBbp2YwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en

SB: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.29057,-77.2050165,3a,49.1y,195.02h,88.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5RIGFzq-ezA-zV7B3FBgFw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1?hl=en

[Roadrunner75]

A good example extracted from the "Interstates where one direction has a single lane" thread:

I-76 EB in Philly, going from the Schuykill Expressway to the Walt Whitman Expressway.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/QNYMe8QRVW79PSTT6

It's just for a moment, and even the sign isn't correct here. You're already on I-76 East, so you're not going "To" I-76 East.

I've always wondered if there was more significance to that "TO" than just a sign error, such as the Walt Whitman approach freeway on the PA side (DRPA owned?) not being formally I-76 or something like that....similar to that I-90 / Chicago Skyway thing.

[jmacswimmer]

Breezewood is another good example, with all the Turnpike signs directing you "TO 70 EAST" (such as this and this).

To be fair, I get the rationale behind signing it that way....but you are technically on I-70 the entire time!

[US 89]

The portion of US 191 in Arizona north of US 160 is signed by ADOT as "Indian 12 TO US 191", even though you're already on US 191 as you pass that sign.

That road is probably signed as such because it is maintained by the Navajo and isn't even considered part of Arizona's state highway system. But AASHTO considers it to be part of US 191, and it connects directly to state-maintained US 191 in Utah, so as far as I'm concerned that makes it a rare example of an Indian-maintained US route.

[bugo]

Here, you're already on US 59 and US 271:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2329101,-94.6729304,3a,15.6y,43.23h,89.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTfIuFP-sppbWkOo94p2-eA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[GaryV]

Here, you're already on US 59 and US 271:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.2329101,-94.6729304,3a,15.6y,43.23h,89.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTfIuFP-sppbWkOo94p2-eA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Yes, but both 59 and 271 turn at the junction.  I think that's a reasonable sign.

What I find weird is the TO I-40 sign nearer the junction, pointing left.  That's fine if you are headed to I-40 westbound.  But if you're going eastbound, it would be better to follow 271 to Ft Smith.

[bassoon1986]

https://goo.gl/maps/EmhZWCRfVcDEa6in8

Southbound MacArthur Dr (US 71 & 165) just before the major traffic circle. Already on 165 here. The junction 165 sign would make more sense on Northbound MacArthur where it's only US 71.


iPhone

[hbelkins]

Winchester, Va. You are actually on the three US routes pictured here in this great cutout assembly that was still up two years ago.

2018 Ohio River bridges-US 522 trip Day 2 - 314 by H.B. Elkins, on Flickr

[Scott5114]

The cutouts are neat, but lose points due to the squished text on the banners and the US-522 shield.

[hbelkins]

The cutouts are neat, but lose points due to the squished text on the banners and the US-522 shield.

Those banners were standard for Virginia long after they started moving away from cutouts. You can still find them in more modern installation.

[Scott5114]

The other ones I've seen were the same size, but they didn't squish the text down to fit.

[plain]

TO I-295 even though you're already on I-295, though it's the C/D lanes

https://maps.app.goo.gl/FScREeJDhBUSA7Gu5

[bing101]

Winchester, Va. You are actually on the three US routes pictured here in this great cutout assembly that was still up two years ago.

2018 Ohio River bridges-US 522 trip Day 2 - 314 by H.B. Elkins, on Flickr

Yes these cutout US shields are rare to see outside of California though.

[WNYroadgeek]

You're already on I-90 here: https://goo.gl/maps/owFz5cswEwfq1DVR6

[jeffandnicole]

This is the start of the 295/130 multiplex, so you're already on 130.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/Sm2SZ774NuyNnzhY6