The Worst of Road Signs

[Ian]

What looks to be stenciled text on this sign:

[Quillz]

Would be a nice sign, color wise, if it used the standard fonts.

[Central Avenue]

What looks to be stenciled text on this sign:

I'll be honest, I kinda like it. Just 'cause it's different.

Though admittedly, I read the "6" as a "G" at first.

[InterstateNG]

I believe that's NB before the split in Hillsboro.

[JREwing78]

This one is in Madison, WI at US151 and I39/90/94.  Guess they thought it would be cheaper to put up a blank rather than a sign for each of the 3 interstates.

They do this throughout the city for both US and interstate routes, both on city-produced signs and WisDOT signage. It's simpler than listing all 4 US highways on the Beltline and all 3 interstates that go along the east side of town.

[Brian556]

This sign has since been replaced with an overhead sign, and the railroad bridge in the background has been removed. I-35 is now four lanes approaching the split.

Look closely at the east end of the railraod bridge. Look at how dirt has been removed from around it. Wierd looking.

I think this sign would look good with a split diagramatic.

The new sign is the same exept that it has proper wide shields, and there is an "s" after "mile"

[Quillz]

Another example...



I don't think using a wide shield for a 2di looks bad, but I don't get why TXDOT would think it's a good idea to squeeze a 3di into a standard shield.

[Alex]

Another example...

I don't think using a wide shield for a 2di looks bad, but I don't get why TXDOT would think it's a good idea to squeeze a 3di into a standard shield.

That was the standard for years, but in more recent sign installations, they have gone back to doing 2di's in 2di's and 3di's in 3di's. The reversal was a trend throughout the 2000-2010's.

[J N Winkler]

I don't think using a wide shield for a 2di looks bad, but I don't get why TxDOT would think it's a good idea to squeeze a 3di into a standard shield.

Look a bit more closely at this image--the IH 30 and US 75 shields are 36" high, while the IH 35E shield is 48" high.  This was another component of the standard.  Even on interchange sequence signs, where different standard heights for shields are used, the three-digit-in-two-digit shields were always taller than the normal-height shields.  This difference in height at least partly offsets the compromises that have to be made to fit three-digit designations into a two-digit shield:  smaller digits, possibly in Series C rather than Series D.

I think the original rationale for "reversing" shield usage was to establish a clear distinction in shape and size between "through" Interstate routes and their loops and spurs.  It was a TxDOT standard for many, many years, probably going back all the way to the early 1960's.  Yes, it was weird, but given that the use of a larger size for the three-digit routes meant that the actual legibility penalty was minimal to nonexistent, it was no more harmful than other eccentricities such as Michigan DOT using underlined cardinal directions or Caltrans ranging destination legend to the side rather than bottom of a shield.

That was the standard for years, but in more recent sign installations, they have gone back to doing 2di's in 2di's and 3di's in 3di's. The reversal was a trend throughout the 2000-2010's.

TxDOT used to have traffic standard sheets which gave basic design details for "standard" TxDOT signs, including regulatory, guide, warning, and route marker signs.  From the perspective of TxDOT contracting, these standard sheets were the legal reference for the design of the signs involved, while TxDOT's Standard Highway Sign Designs for Texas was considered advisory.  These traffic standard sheets were included in every TxDOT plans set which had signs, and the route marker sheets laid down the policy of using two-digit for three-digit routes and vice versa.  This, BTW, was true only for Interstate shields on guide signs.  Independent-mount Interstate shields were used with two-digit routes in two-digit shields and so on, just as in other US states.  Two in two and three in three applied for US routes both on independent mounts and on guide signs, again as in most other US states.  Meanwhile, state route shields followed separate sizing and digit height policies:  for independent mount, always square with variable Series D digit height; for guide sign mount, always in Series D at a set digit height with variable width of shield.

In 2003, TxDOT cancelled the standard sign sheets and replaced them with the Typical Sign Requirements (TSR) series of sheets.  SHSD also became the controlling authority for design of the signs themselves.  At the same time, TxDOT revised SHSD (also, in 2004, putting it online for the first time--prior to that it had been a print publication only, first published in 1980 and significantly revised in 1995) and eliminated many TxDOT-specific aspects of route shield design.  This meant providing for two in two and three in three for guide-sign Interstate shields, reducing the standard height for three-in-two guide-sign Interstate shields from 48" to 36", and eliminating "BUSINESS" from the US route shield for US business routes.

What this means in practice is that TxDOT has had "normal" sizing policies for guide-sign Interstate shields on the books for at least seven years, but you can still see the occasional throwback to old standards because TxDOT sign design is handled at the district level and districts tend to vary somewhat in how aggressively they update plans to current standards when they pull them off the shelf.  I am sure that in the last three years I have seen at least one TxDOT plans set with the old signing standard sheets instead of the TSR sheets, for example.

[apeman33]

KDOT goof that's been up for a few years after one of the freeway exits west of Wichita (eastbound east of Garden Plain, IIRC):

[nyratk1]

What looks to be stenciled text on this sign:

I'll be honest, I kinda like it. Just 'cause it's different.

Though admittedly, I read the "6" as a "G" at first.

It looked almost like a 0 too. And then I was thinking poor Hague got shut out.

(That 6 is really bad.)

[Rover_0]

KDOT goof that's been up for a few years after one of the freeway exits west of Wichita (eastbound east of Garden Plain, IIRC):

You've got to take what you can get, right?   We need more US Route cutout shields.  All that US-54 sign needs is an outline and it's excellent.

[Ian]

KDOT goof that's been up for a few years after one of the freeway exits west of Wichita (eastbound east of Garden Plain, IIRC):
<snip>

You've got to take what you can get, right?   We need more US Route cutout shields.  All that US-54 sign needs is an outline and it's excellent.

There are a handful of outline-less cutout US 3 shields on the US 3 freeway that runs between the NH line and Burlington, MA.

[apeman33]

KDOT goof that's been up for a few years after one of the freeway exits west of Wichita (eastbound east of Garden Plain, IIRC):
<snip>

You've got to take what you can get, right?  We need more US Route cutout shields.  All that US-54 sign needs is an outline and it's excellent.

There are a handful of outline-less cutout US 3 shields on the US 3 freeway that runs between the NH line and Burlington, MA.

I wouldn't mind cutouts. But using the shields that should be on a BGS is kinda cheating

Then on top of that, you have the compressed Helvetica looking "400" on the lower sign. There are many of those in Kansas, too.

[geronimoabn]

This one is interesting.   Indiana Route 49 where it crosses over US 12 north of Chesterton.

[6a]

Indiana is using state-shaped shields now?

[geronimoabn]

They are at this intersection.  I don't know if this is the wave of the future or just a fluke.   


edit:  They may be just temporary given the construction equipment in the background.   I looked and they were posted just like this at all four corners of the intersection.  They are all good quality signs and looked to be long term.

[6a]

I like it if their numbers will grow up into big boy sizes lol

[geronimoabn]

That's why I put this pic under "worst" instead of "best."   Numbers are too small and the sign is huge, especially horizontally.

[Brandon]

Indiana is using state-shaped shields now?

They used to.  What is old is new again?

[1995hoo]

Saw this on Friday night on a new street at the far end of our neighborhood. I don't know if I'd really consider it among "The Worst of Road Signs," but I find the words "at all" to be annoying because they're unnecessary. I was probably more amused by the sign than irritated, though.

[RJ145]

Looks like something that might have been put up by an irritated neighbor lol.

[tdindy88]

This one is interesting.   Indiana Route 49 where it crosses over US 12 north of Chesterton.

This isn't the only one, but it is the first I've heard of this one up north. Bloomington has a couple of these near SR 37 with a state outline. Sounds like I need to head back to Porter County.

[Michael in Philly]

Saw this on Friday night on a new street at the far end of our neighborhood. I don't know if I'd really consider it among "The Worst of Road Signs," but I find the words "at all" to be annoying because they're unnecessary. I was probably more amused by the sign than irritated, though.

Reminds me of New York City's "Don't even THINK of parking here" signs.

[Central Avenue]

I find it amusing, if only because the "AT ALL" doesn't actually make the message sound any more forceful or demanding; it just makes it sound like...well, like RJ145 said, an irritated neighbor.