Signs With Design Errors

[national highway 1]

The vertical alignment of these shields on a sign in Melbourne, Australia, seems a bit off.

[paulthemapguy]

Hahaha, this is a brand-new sign, too.


IL-390X07ER by Paul Drives, on Flickr

[cjk374]

Hahaha, this is a brand-new sign, too.


IL-390X07ER by Paul Drives, on Flickr

This spelling will keep people from adding the "ess" sound where it is most unwelcome.     

[tckma]

Hahaha, this is a brand-new sign, too.

"Illinois: Please don't pronounce the 'S'."

[jakeroot]

Are the numbers normally pushed to the edge like ^that^? Seems to be another blunder (although that alone would not qualify it for "worst-of").

[jakeroot]

The vertical alignment of these shields on a sign in Melbourne, Australia, seems a bit off.

http://www.expressway.online/gallery/roads/vic/numbered/metropolitanroutes/mr83/westbound/images/201601_04_fitzroy_georgest_robtilley.jpg

Is it normal to see a "City" designation on guide signs down under? (Perhaps it's an equivalent to our "Downtown" or "City Center").

[paulthemapguy]

Are the numbers normally pushed to the edge like ^that^? Seems to be another blunder (although that alone would not qualify it for "worst-of").

This sign, unlike all other state highway shields in Illinois, was furnished by the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority (a separate entity from IDOT, in case you didn't know).  Every other toll highway in Illinois is an Interstate--the ISTHA has no experience with state highway shields up until the recent designation of IL-390.  So this oddly-proportioned sign is the result of some improvisation at the sign shop, no doubt.    Though, ISTHA's Interstate shields usually look pretty distinctive from IDOT's, in the first place.

[SignBridge]

Ironic how some of these toll road authorities can't get signing done right, unlike state DOT's. NY Thruway Authority is famous for signing that's always a little out-of-step too, while New York State DOT gets it reasonably right. On the other hand the NJ Turnpike Authority had an excellent sign system all their own.   

[Quillz]

The vertical alignment of these shields on a sign in Melbourne, Australia, seems a bit off.

Seems they went for a flush bottom alignment, so it's "correct" in that sense, even though aesthetically, center aligning the elements would be better. Either way, I don't find that sign all that ugly looking. It certainly could have turned out much worse.

[7/8]

This was taken on Formosa Gardens Blvd at US 192 in the Orlando area. The I-4 shield incorrectly uses black-on-white "to" and arrow tabs.

[cjk374]

This was taken on Formosa Gardens Blvd at US 192 in the Orlando area. The I-4 shield incorrectly uses black-on-white "to" and arrow tabs.

Back in the day, that was the norm back when interstates were first created.

Near downtown Grambling, LA. by Jess Kilgore, on Flickr

This sign, with a 1964 date on the back (hard to read), does show a blue arrow, but a white & black (& short) TO banner. I have always liked the short TO banners, especially over interstate shields.

[jbnv]

The white-on-black arrows isn't a design error. The 4 may be, though.

This was taken on Formosa Gardens Blvd at US 192 in the Orlando area. The I-4 shield incorrectly uses black-on-white "to" and arrow tabs.

[jakeroot]

This was taken on Formosa Gardens Blvd at US 192 in the Orlando area. The I-4 shield incorrectly uses black-on-white "to" and arrow tabs.

http://i.imgur.com/ziqJCqF.jpg

The white-on-black arrows isn't a design error. The 4 may be, though.

We don't really know for sure if the design called for white-on-black banners, or if the contractor erroneously installed them. But either way, it is a mistake, and I think this is the best thread for such.

[Quillz]

Not a real sign, but I was at Jalama Beach yesterday, and they've got for sale replica ("WELCOME TO") signs with US-1 shields. Even though Jalama Beach would be closer to US-101, and isn't even on CA-1, but rather via an access road that branches off CA-1.

[rlb2024]

I brought this up in another thread, and I'm not sure if it's covered elsewhere, but I saw a state-named shield Friday . . . for an interstate that's not even in that state.  Getting onto I-10 westbound at Exit 2 in Mississippi (from MS 607) there were a couple of "To I-12" signs -- with the Mississippi state name on the I-12 shield.  The signs must be new, as the GSV image for that interchange is dated November 2016 and all of the signs were neutered then.  Wish I had gotten a picture . . .

[formulanone]

This was taken on Formosa Gardens Blvd at US 192 in the Orlando area. The I-4 shield incorrectly uses black-on-white "to" and arrow tabs.

http://i.imgur.com/ziqJCqF.jpg

The white-on-black arrows isn't a design error. The 4 may be, though.

We don't really know for sure if the design called for white-on-black banners, or if the contractor erroneously installed them. But either way, it is a mistake, and I think this is the best thread for such.

Formosa Gardens wasn't constructed all that long ago, so I think it's a contracting or design error, than a holdover from a time when Florida used white directional banners/arrows on everything.

Happens all the time with CR shields in place of the state roads:

[jakeroot]

This was taken on Formosa Gardens Blvd at US 192 in the Orlando area. The I-4 shield incorrectly uses black-on-white "to" and arrow tabs.

http://i.imgur.com/ziqJCqF.jpg

The white-on-black arrows isn't a design error. The 4 may be, though.

We don't really know for sure if the design called for white-on-black banners, or if the contractor erroneously installed them. But either way, it is a mistake, and I think this is the best thread for such.

Formosa Gardens wasn't constructed all that long ago, so I think it's a contracting or design error, than a holdover from a time when Florida used white directional banners/arrows on everything.

Happens all the time with CR shields in place of the state roads:

I quite like the white-on-black banners/arrows, even with interstate/CR shields. Although part of a roadgeek's natural OCD is that all colors must match their shields, part of my OCD wants everything to be same color. I'm lucky I live in the state that I do, since WSDOT almost never (if ever) posts sign salads at intersections. All intersections have guide signs with their respective shields on them, with white-on-green arrows and (sometimes) place names (since it's a guide sign). The only stand-alone shields are re-assurance assemblies. Having two or more reassurance assemblies would require concurrencies, which aren't common here, so seeing anything like what you posted above is incredibly uncommon.

Here's WSDOT's SW region's attempt at a dual-color reassurance assembly:



And here's some typical guide signs at intersections of various routes (used in place of sign salads):

https://goo.gl/9ayHyY -- & -- https://goo.gl/fta2UK -- & -- https://goo.gl/XyDbz9 -- & -- https://goo.gl/QtFrhm -- & -- https://goo.gl/kA9A1w

[Quillz]

I've seen those in a few places in Washington, and I actually don't mind them. I still much prefer two cutout shields side-by-side, but since most states don't use them, that implementation is probably one of the cleaner ones I've seen.

[paulthemapguy]

Sometimes these signs with diagrammatic arrows just aren't a good idea.


IMG_8269 by Paul Drives, on Flickr

[SignBridge]

The Federal Highway Admin. thought they were so friggin' smart when they mandated this.......... and created a monster.

[jakeroot]

It's an easy fix. Just replace the up arrow on the right with a right arrow.

The Federal Highway Admin. thought they were so friggin' smart when they mandated this.......... and created a monster.

True. But the monster is due to the MUTCD's tight grip on the design.

[SignBridge]

So Jakeroot, do I correctly understand that your thinking is APL signing could work better if the FHWA loosened up the design rules to allow more flexible signing for these oddball situations?

[jakeroot]

So Jakeroot, do I correctly understand that your thinking is APL signing could work better if the FHWA loosened up the design rules to allow more flexible signing for these oddball situations?

Correct. There are far too many oddball situations out there for the APL to totally replace the traditional down arrow, at least in its current incarnation. If the FHWA loosened up, and allowed different arrow angles, shields and text to be placed elsewhere, use when there is no option lane, deletion of the redundant "EXIT ONLY" panel, etc, the APL would be a very effective signing solution. Right now, in states that more closely adhere to the MUTCD, you have this mish-mash of up and down arrows. Just from an aesthetic point of view, it looks silly. From a practical standpoint, it would make the most sense to just use one type of arrow.

I think you know just from the "Redesign-this" thread, I have not yet found an interchange that I couldn't adapt to APL. Granted, I have never followed MUTCD specifications, but that's kind of the point.

[SignBridge]

Interesting point-of-view. The FHWA's purpose for APL signing was only for option-lanes. It was to eliminate the practice of having down arrows from two different routes over the same lane. They didn't intend for APL to completely replace down arrows, only for option-lanes. But I understand your point, that APL could be expanded/modified to include other signing situations as well.

It could happen. It'll be interesting to see what if any changes are put into the next edition of the MUTCD. You might get some of your wishes. LOL It's something to eagerly anticipate anyway.

[Scott5114]

Maybe instead of pushing APLs in situations where their use is awkward at best, we should investigate other options, like traditional diagrammatics, or even something more Worboys-ish.