Unique, Odd, or Interesting Signs aka The good, the bad, and the ugly

[formulanone]

It's a very hungry caterpillar. Apparently, that one green leaf just wasn't enough after that Saturday binge.

I see what you did there.

Cool. I wish my kids were still young enough to enjoy that story.

[kphoger]

It's a very hungry caterpillar. Apparently, that one green leaf just wasn't enough after that Saturday binge.

I see what you did there.

Cool. I wish my kids were still young enough to enjoy that story.

There's an animated video of the story with dramatic reading that's pretty cool.  Netflix or Amazon, I think, but I can't remember.

[wanderer2575]

Not a unique sign, but a unique perspective.  This is on northbound M-10 approaching US-24 and I-696 in Southfield MI.  The road curves slightly to the right just before the gantry, so from a distance the left Exit Only sign for I-696 appears to indicate the SECOND left lane.  This sign replaced a larger diagrammatic last year (another of which appears in the background).

[amroad17]

^ OMG! Not in Clearview? 

[wanderer2575]

^ OMG! Not in Clearview? 

^  These are among a couple dozen FHWA-font BGSs that have gone up in spot locations over the past couple years around metro Detroit.  There are plans for replacement signage this year on M-5 in Farmington and Farmington Hills, and the entire length of M-6 in the Grand Rapids area, and those sign plans indicate use of Clearview.  I suspect Michigan very briefly switched back to FHWA and then switched back again to Clearview, but of course I don't know that for a fact.

[Michael]

A similar situation happens on I-690 westbound before the NY 695 exit.  This is the best angle I can get, but especially from the second lane, it looks like you need to move to the far right to exit to NY 695, but that's actually the exit lane for NY 297.  Also, the second lane is actually an option lane, but you don't know until you're at the exit (note the double arrows on the exit sign in the background).

[roadfro]

A similar situation happens on I-690 westbound before the NY 695 exit.  This is the best angle I can get, but especially from the second lane, it looks like you need to move to the far right to exit to NY 695, but that's actually the exit lane for NY 297.  Also, the second lane is actually an option lane, but you don't know until you're at the exit (note the double arrows on the exit sign in the background).

Your situation with the option lane hidden till the exit is an unfortunate result of the 2009 MUTCD not allowing down arrows over an option lane, something I'm still not totally on board with...

[Sam]

I-90/I-290 In Buffalo - 4 arrows over 3 lanes. The center lane is actually an option lane.

[jeffandnicole]

I-90/I-290 In Buffalo - 4 arrows over 3 lanes. The center lane is actually an option lane.

That was the normal way of signing such option lanes until the APL came along.

[US 89]

I-90/I-290 In Buffalo - 4 arrows over 3 lanes. The center lane is actually an option lane.

That was the normal way of signing such option lanes until the APL came along.

Except the second arrow from the right would have been a white arrow against a green background since it was an option lane, which means this is a post-2009 sign. Unless the 2009 MUTCD predated APLs...?

[vdeane]

I-90/I-290 In Buffalo - 4 arrows over 3 lanes. The center lane is actually an option lane.

That was the normal way of signing such option lanes until the APL came along.

Except the second arrow from the right would have been a white arrow against a green background since it was an option lane, which means this is a post-2009 sign. Unless the 2009 MUTCD predated APLs...?

Have you ever heard of "replace in kind"?

[csw]

On my way back from South Bend a few weeks ago I decided to hop on Old US 31 and look for some old signs. And I got pretty lucky.

This sign looks pretty standard...


...but upon looking back it's clear that it has been repurposed.


I also found a pair of old black on white directional signs. Here's one of them.


Nothing terribly spectacular, but it definitely reinforces the fact that it's not too hard to find old signs in Indiana.

[chays]

I traveled down to Mt. Vernon from Alexandria on the George Washington Parkway recently, and found a few unique signs.

The first two are warning signs for an upcoming bridge.  I'd never seen the right lane called "Curb Lane" before.  This is a GSV image as my wife was tired of me stopping for pics (I'm not much of a picture taker when driving as you can probably deduce from my lack of content here).

Later, for the same bridge, we have a diagram that is one I've never seen before.  Someone really thought it necessary to depict the stonework on the bridge!

Finally, I spotted this on the bike path that parallels the road.  I had never seen this before either.

[ThatTenneseeRoadgeek]

I-90/I-290 In Buffalo - 4 arrows over 3 lanes. The center lane is actually an option lane.

I've seen the exact same thing here in Florida... https://www.google.com/maps/@27.5169442,-80.4482853,3a,70.5y,355.9h,107.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGR7qCAI_RZ7j5JZ6qi9Nbg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@27.6344181,-80.5159862,3a,45.3y,14.07h,103.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syRLauS4BUv45X_4OyiL1rQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[ThatTenneseeRoadgeek]

Apologies for the absolute dogshit quality, but apparently there was more salt on the windshield than I originally thought. I know construction signs aren't that great to begin with but... it looks like someone stuck a north plaque from another sign onto this sign and called it a day.

Yeesh...That is ugly..

[roadfro]

Finally, I spotted this on the bike path that parallels the road.  I had never seen this before either.

The "slippery when wet" with bike symbol is actually an MUTCD standard sign (W8-10). The other sign is not in the MUTCD, but is a logical extension of the "Bridge Freezes Before Road" warning used in some states.

[ipeters61]

Saw a fairly interesting/older sign on MD-213 approaching the Chesapeake City Bridge today.  Screenshot is from northbound, there's the same thing southbound.

[jakeroot]

The other sign is not in the MUTCD, but is a logical extension of the "Bridge Freezes Before Road" warning used in some states.

Aren't all text-only signs technically in the MUTCD?

[roadfro]

The other sign is not in the MUTCD, but is a logical extension of the "Bridge Freezes Before Road" warning used in some states.

Aren't all text-only signs technically in the MUTCD?

Not technically, but the MUTCD includes a provision that allows agencies to develop text-only messages, without needing to request official experimentation, when there is not a preexisting standard sign that addresses the issue (see 2A.06, ¶11-13).

What I meant by this was that the message is not a standard sign message already found in the MUTCD. By contrast, something like "New Traffic Pattern Ahead" is a text-only sign, but it's also already a standard sign (W23-2).

[jakeroot]

The other sign is not in the MUTCD, but is a logical extension of the "Bridge Freezes Before Road" warning used in some states.

Aren't all text-only signs technically in the MUTCD?

Not technically, but the MUTCD includes a provision that allows agencies to develop text-only messages, without needing to request official experimentation, when there is not a preexisting standard sign that addresses the issue (see 2A.06, ¶11-13).

What I meant by this was that the message is not a standard sign message already found in the MUTCD. By contrast, something like "New Traffic Pattern Ahead" is a text-only sign, but it's also already a standard sign (W23-2).

Gotcha. I should have said "technically *permitted* by...", since all those custom signs obviously couldn't be in the MUTCD.

[J N Winkler]

In the case of warning, regulatory, and construction signs with custom text messages that are erected under the provision Roadfro quotes (there are similar provisions in Chapters 2B and 2C), I generally say that they are "not diagrammed in the MUTCD."

The real no-no, which many agencies violate nevertheless, is to use a custom symbol that is not approved by FHWA.  Many states, for example, had symbolic crossing signs for horsedrawn carriages and the symbol design varied from state to state, with none being shown in the MUTCD.  A symbolic sign is now in the MUTCD (as of the 2009 edition for sure--maybe 2003?).

[Revive 755]

Not sure if this Yield to Peds/Pedestrians have the right of way sign in New York City has been mentioned before.  So the City is officially allowing pedestrians to cross against the traffic light?

[jeffandnicole]

Not sure if this Yield to Peds/Pedestrians have the right of way sign in New York City has been mentioned before.  So the City is officially allowing pedestrians to cross against the traffic light?

Signs like these show up randomly from time to time. It in no way gives peds the right to walk against the light.

[ipeters61]

Not sure if this Yield to Peds/Pedestrians have the right of way sign in New York City has been mentioned before.  So the City is officially allowing pedestrians to cross against the traffic light?

Signs like these show up randomly from time to time. It in no way gives peds the right to walk against the light.

Is it always in front of a midblock or stoplight crossing though?

[roadman65]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/33642153378/in/dateposted-public/
North end of US 69 ALT in Cherokee County, KS has the arrow for US 69 & 160 all wrong!  It goes not only left but straight ahead as well.