Where to get Road Stencils (huge white letters)?

Page 8 of 9  
On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 00:07:05 +0100, James Wilkinson wrote:

Sorry about that. I have my capslock key disabled because it drives me nuts, so, I had to hold down the shift key while typing that.
Overall, I think we have the solution, although I wish I had thought of everything you guys brought up *before* I wasted two days blocking the road.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Here is a summary...
PROBLEM: - People trespass
PROPOSED SOLUTION: A. Fix the maps B. Improve the signage (include input from local utility & county parks) C. Police the property
FIX THE MAPS: - Private-road related maps apparently *start* at the deed! - The County Assessor's office turns the deed into a County Map! - The assessor correctly shows the road with a dotted line - On an Assessor's map a dotted line is a private road, no public access - However, Google, DeLorme, Egri, Here, etc. use the GIS maps - The County Geographic Information Services use the Assessor's maps - Unfortunately GIS shows the road with a solid line (aka ambiguous) - So the GIS guys will fix that by adding a PVT attribute to our road - Over time, that will propagate to Google, DeLorme, etc. - In addition, I filed a Google map error complaint on the web - Google won't do anything over the phone (trust me, I tried) - The police get their maps from GIS so that will also propagate
IMPROVE THE SIGNAGE: - Work with local police, utility, & local county parks - Understand California Penal Code 602L signage requirements - Sign 3-to-a-mile and at entrances & exits - One-foot square, 2-inch letters saying either: a. Mandated: "TRESPASSING/LOITERING FORBIDDEN BY LAW" b. Acceptable: "PRIVATE PROPERTY (or Private Road or Private Drive, etc.) NO TRESPASSING" c. Preferred: "PRIVATE PROPERTY (or Private Road or Private Drive, etc.) TRESPASSING/LOITERING FORBIDDEN BY LAW VIOLATORS WILL BE PROSECUTED CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE 602"
I'm not sure about the use of the road stencils, but if it doesn't look too ugly, it should work to better inform the public.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/27/2016 11:16 AM, Henry Jones wrote:

Good luck with that... We have to deal with county GIS departments all the time. Some are good, some are bad, and some are pretty much non-existent. You'd be surprised at the havoc they can wreak with ArcMap.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 19:47:22 -0600, rbowman wrote:

Thanks for that advice. I had never dealt with the GIS guys before. They didn't understand the assessor's map, so, that's strange 'cuz I can't be the only person in the entire county with a private road.
Nonetheless, they "said" they'd add the PVT attribute, and, well, that's all I can hope for.
Google is more problematic.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/28/2016 11:54 AM, Henry Jones wrote:

Counties can have many little fiefdoms that rarely talk to each other if they're not actively trying to block each other. We do computer aided dispatch for emergency responders so it's nice to have accurate data. It can be painful replicating the county GIS's data. Like I said, some a very good, some go to work everyday trying their best not to break anything.

I don't know if Google is very involved with ownership. As long as they can show Unicorn Lane in the right place they're happy. BTW, are you on the Google street view :)
A real problem is accurate digital data is expensive to maintain. Most of it can be traced back the the census department's TIGER/Line as a distant ancestor that have been tweaked many times. Sometimes the agencies doing the edits aren't willing to share. Geodata doesn't come cheap. Imagery is even worse. Projects like Open Street Maps allow the community to make edits so their data may be better than Google's. Or worse.
I gather you're in a relatively rural area which doesn't help. Keeping downtown Sacramento accurate is a priority; rural areas not so much. You can even see that with Google's satellite views. Often new construction in town shows up rapidly. Out my way watching trees grow isn't too interesting so there will be a greater lag.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 22:11:34 -0600, rbowman wrote:

Luckily, in this case, the GIS/ISD guy thanked me for teaching him how the Assessor guy indicated private roads (and they communicated with each other in turn).
So, in "my" county, the two guys work together well, it seems.
The main problem is that my county's GIS/ISD map guy tells me they don't have the *concept* of a dotted-line road; they only have a database "attribute" of "PVT".
Apparently they give these databases to the map companies (e.g., Google), I think, which, I think, means that Google can get the attribute from them.

Google cars drive right past our road. They never go down. So, the google street view stops at the entrance where you can look around from the main street, but their cars don't go down our road (so they must have seen the sign saying it's private).

From "my" conversations with the county, accurate map data starts at the deed, and then goes to the assessor and then to GIS/ISD and then to map companies.
I don't know if that's true - but that's what they told me.

Yes. Very rural.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/28/2016 11:08 PM, Henry Jones wrote:

Yeah, there really isn't a 'dotted line' road. The segments of a road are just a geometry collection of points that define the centerline. The attributes are fields in the database record in addition to the geometry of the feature.
Where the 'dotted line' comes in is when the data is rendered in a visual format either traditional paper maps or electronic maps. Someone has to develop and apply the symbology based on selected attributes. For example, many data sets have a speed attribute so you could say everything 25 mph or less will be narrow and black, 26 - 44 will be black but a little wider, above 45 - 64 is blue, and the 65 and higher roads are red. Makes it look pretty. The local GIS people could certainly do broken lines for a PVT attribute. Give the exact same data to Google, and they will render it differently.
The real PITA when working with a number of agencies is the schema of the data varies. One place may have a 'speed' attribute in mph, another may have road_class with 1, 2, 3, 4 etc.

Google can gt the raw data and convert it to their format. The problem is in the rendering. I don't know if I've ever seen them show private roads in a special way.

Definitely, as far as ownership. This county puts their data on line if you know where to look. It's public information but some people might not be happy if they knew you could look up the assessed value of their property, etc. I use it to check ownership for cases like yours. There is a lot of public land in the county but finding a way to get to it can be difficult.
The assessors generally deal with polygons, mapping out the parcel boundaries and in some cases building footprints. Streets and roadways are often someone else's problem. Then you get the hydrology guys who only see stuff if it is wet, the utility people who know where their piplines are, and so forth. Getting it all to come together is a project.
It's getting better. It used to take years to get maps updated.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 08:07:16 -0600, rbowman wrote:

The implication from the GIS/ISD guy was that the map companies get the data from *them*. Is that true?
The assessor's office said "it all starts with us". Is that true?

In California, the "assessed" value is a number based on the original costs, which is also online (where the assessed value goes up over time, but since it's based on the original cost, one person could be paying $1000 per year in property taxes while the next could be paying $50,000 per year for a duplicate property.

On the maps the Assessor gave me, the houses are NOT shown. Just the property lines and roadways.

Yes. The GIS/ISD guys had soil maps, and other maps online, so I know what you mean. You seem to have experience in this. It's all new to me.

Well, the police said it would take time before they get the GIS/ISD data updated in their maps, and I've filed a google request to fix the maps once each day for the past three days, so, we'll see how long it takes. :)
You do seem to have experience with this, but it's all brand new to me so any advice you've earned over time is welcome.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
so are the other neighbors upset about people driving on their lane?
might be better to try and relocate the lane just enough so you cant see those you dont want there
like put up a solid fence/
your property then gets protected however you want......
gate with guard shack etc etc
everyone else uses a relocated lane etc
in general installing some cameras with signs saying you are being recorded
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 27 Jul 2016 16:07:03 -0700 (PDT), bob haller wrote:

I am thinking about the trail cameras. I can run a cord on the ground so electricity isn't a problem. I just want a camera that I won't cry about if it's stolen.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
fence off the far end of the drive.....
once people go down your private drive once and cant get to the park they will loose interest/
at you end a big sign stating the road no longer connects to the park should help too
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/28/2016 4:02 PM, bob haller wrote:

I would never admit that it did connect to the park.
NO PARK ACCESS is what I would say, along with anything else about PRIVATE PROPERTY, etc.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thursday, July 28, 2016 at 7:03:43 PM UTC-4, Taxed and Spent wrote:

Two signs:
This one...
http://www.cityofloveland.org/modules/showimage.aspx?imageid 07
...along with this one.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/content/images/articles/307/307042/zika-virus-warning-sign.jpg
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 17:20:48 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03 wrote:

We're not gonna get cute. It's all gonna be California mandated signage.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
A hedgerow of thorny bushes and poison ivy can go a long way to discouraging trespassers.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 04:50:46 -0400, Achmed Aabzaar wrote:

Funny you mention that, because at the gate that separates the trail from the paved road is a "beaten path" around the gate by foot or bicycle traffic.
My plan is to put *something* there. I might snap a picture for you as I was gonna look today at it (it's on my neighbor's property so I don't go there often myself).
He's OK with a chain and maybe a thorny bush but I love the idea of poison oak, which is something that is super plentiful in these here parts.
I'm thinking of a chain though, which the determined bikers and pedestrians will cross but which sends a message.
I'm learning more and more that diligence by the property owners is rewarded, so, diligence we will continue.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/29/2016 12:08 PM, Henry Jones wrote:

I know a guy that has a hidden motion-activated poison ivy mister that sprays a urushiol concentrate on trespassers. His property is clearly marked with No Trespassing signs yet people ignore them or tear them down.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 19:36:37 -0400, Bert wrote:

I put up a few more no trespassing signs, but I'm afraid they're all easy to tear down.
I put about a dozen roofing nails in them though! :)
http://i.cubeupload.com/IhWH62.gif
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/29/2016 7:54 PM, Henry Jones wrote:

Get them solid enough to bolt/screw onto the posts. Coat them with satin poly and lay them in clear glass from broken bottles. Tough love!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 28 Jul 2016 16:03:39 -0700, Taxed and Spent wrote:

We're gonna stick with the California Penal Code 602 legally mandated text.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.