Level5 Update: California - Oakland (I-80/580/880 signage)

My Level: 4
Reason for request: Caltrans put up new signs :') – updating the previously very confusing signs in the MacArthur Maze.

Update:

880 entering the maze (Dwarflord has updated this)


80 entering the maze

“Exit 8A: I-880 S / Alameda / San Jose” (I suppose we can also add " / Airport", I’ll leave that to the R5s to pick)
Counting the lanes now, I believe we don’t need a wayfinder here. The bridge itself is 5 lanes, and at the exit, there remains to be 5 lanes (the two exiting lanes were spawned right before the exit)…which leaves us more space for:

“Exit 8B: I-580 E / Downtown Oakland / Hayward-Stockton / to SR-24”, and we can do away with the freeway wayfinder stub. Please also check the gore point.

Oakland is not on this sign.


580 entering the maze
see footnote of this post as well

TIO left “Exit 19A: I-80 W / Toll /San Francisco”


see footnote of this post
“to I-80 W / Toll / San Francisco”
https://www.waze.com/editor/?env=usa&lon=-122.29437&lat=37.83280&zoom=7&segments=71629120

https://www.waze.com/editor/?env=usa&lon=-122.26287&lat=37.82318&zoom=6&segments=67918120
“Exit 19D: I-980 / to I-880 / Downtown Oakland”

“Exit 19C: I-980 / to I-880 / Downtown Oakland”

This is probably not a bad time to bring up if we should / where we should announce “Toll”"
My proposal is always after the route number and cardinal “I-80 W / Toll / San Francisco”. It’s usually in close proximity of the shield.

Can we come back to work this one right after we finish the Sacramento thread?

I reviewed this part and agree with the proposal, so I’ve done as you suggested. I haven’t looked at the remainder of the request yet.

I am not following you here on either part.

The existing ramp instruction is “Exit 8A: I-880 S / Alameda / San Jose / Oakland Airport”. Is the purpose of this part of the post only to suggest removing the word “Oakland” from the phrase “Oakland Airport” (or removing “Oakland Airport” altogether, as the sign now has just an airplane icon)? If so, in the future, it is really helpful to know specifics if it is just a very minor detail being requested to limit the wild geese that get chased trying to sort out the request. Or maybe I’m missing something, which is known to happen.

And, there doesn’t appear to have been a wayfinder here since October 23 if not before. There is a wayfinder structure left over because the adjacent segments of I-80 E are locked at 6. But the road naming defeats any wayfinder instruction. What am I missing?

Yes. That being said, these two segments should be named the same: https://www.waze.com/editor/?env=usa&lon=-122.30871&lat=37.82437&zoom=8&segments=71629418,79726337

You’re not missing anything, but that segment should probably be cleaned up for good form (and maybe the geonodes re-aligned so it doesn’t look like a wayfinder).