Author Topic: UT: UT 34 pedantry  (Read 459 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline lkefct

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
  • Last Login:March 20, 2019, 11:28:12 am
UT: UT 34 pedantry
« on: January 01, 2018, 11:38:30 am »
Greetings!

It appears UT 34 extends east of I-15 to the River Road/Red Cliffs Dr. interchange. This only adds about 200ft of “mileage” but it is signed! For the record the signage upon exiting I-15 indicates that you can go either East or West on UT 34.

- Chris

Offline US 89

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Last Login:Today at 02:14:30 am
Re: UT: UT 34 pedantry
« Reply #1 on: August 15, 2018, 05:08:01 pm »
Can confirm. In addition, the End 34 sign is at the River Rd intersection, and the first westbound reassurance marker is posted immediately after the River Rd intersection, before the I-15 interchange.

Here's a GSV of the eastbound signage just before the I-15 intersection: https://goo.gl/maps/ebz3Tntc2xL2

And now that I think about it, the same thing happens for UT 92 at I-15. The short segment of 92 west of the interstate is signed from both I-15 and UT 92 westbound at the interchange.
« Last Edit: August 15, 2018, 05:17:39 pm by roadguy2 »

Offline Duke87

  • TM Collaborator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 215
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:23:40 pm
Re: UT: UT 34 pedantry
« Reply #2 on: August 15, 2018, 08:25:23 pm »
UT 34 is clearly and consistently signed as extending east the extra block. So I'll go ahead and make that change.

UT 92 however, I'm less gung ho about. HRO does indeed show it officially extends west another block, and there are signs on the ramps showing UT 92 with an arrow pointing both ways... but there is no end sign (or signage of any sort) at the intersection down the road like there is with UT 34. And guide signage on I-15 specifically calls out UT 92 east with no mention of west.

I'm leaning towards making the change here too (since it does extend the extra block on paper and some albeit not all signage supports this), but I'll leave this open a bit if anyone has any arguments to the contrary they'd like to make.

Offline US 89

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
  • Last Login:Today at 02:14:30 am
Re: UT: UT 34 pedantry
« Reply #3 on: August 15, 2018, 09:06:36 pm »
For what it's worth, NickCPDX mentioned that he made the change to 92 in the GitHub issues thread. However, it appears that he never actually went through with it.

Offline Duke87

  • TM Collaborator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 215
  • Last Login:Yesterday at 06:23:40 pm
Re: UT: UT 34 pedantry
« Reply #4 on: August 18, 2018, 04:08:44 pm »