Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Austin
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-12-2019, 09:38 PM
 
127 posts, read 297,855 times
Reputation: 39

Advertisements

I remember for a very long time, there was a sign in the direction of from airport to 183 north, and it read to south 183. Every time I was driving from the airport back to north Austin, I was confused. It is supposed to be correct, but it didn't seem to be. After a few years of not traveling that often, I was surprised to see it was corrected...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-12-2019, 11:16 PM
 
Location: Avery Ranch, Austin, TX
8,977 posts, read 17,544,472 times
Reputation: 4001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivory Lee Spurlock View Post
Are you saying there should be a small case letter "L" where the "r" is in the street name Parmer Lane? Are you serious? I wonder how that happened. It looks like a QA inspector would have caught the error at final inspection before signing off on it and sending it to the customer. The customer, I suppose would be the Austin City Street Department. It looks somebody at the street department would have caught the mis-spelling. Sounds like there's plenty of blame to go around as it slipped passed all quality and accuracy inspection points. It should be obvious to anybody who knows how to spell that Parmer and Palmer are not pronounced the same way. It's a way more obvious mis-spelling than the Manchaca-Menchaca controversy.

I've heard and repeated often enough that it was a cartographer's mistake that was accepted as correct...way the heck back in the olden days....Parmer printed on maps and assumed to be correct.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2019, 08:40 AM
 
Location: Austin, TX
15,268 posts, read 35,622,212 times
Reputation: 8614
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10scoachrick View Post
I've heard and repeated often enough that it was a cartographer's mistake that was accepted as correct...way the heck back in the olden days....Parmer printed on maps and assumed to be correct.
Several folks have dug into this and no 'real' answer to why it is named that or whether there is a 'typo' in the naming. Kind of along the lines of the 'Manchaca' issue....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Austin
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top