Erroneous road signs

[cpzilliacus]

How do I post pictures again?  Promise I will print the instructions this time.  I have a few from our trip to post.

Upload them to some kind of hosting site that allows direct linking and embedding. Then take the URL for the image and wrap it in "IMG" tags here (meaning put "IMG" in square brackets before the URL and "/IMG" in square brackets after the URL).

How do I post pictures again?  Promise I will print the instructions this time.  I have a few from our trip to post.

Dang I can't figure it out.  Oh well.

The tags are: "[_IMG_]" and "[_/IMG_]".  Remove the spaces "_" for the actual tags.

I suspect the problem might be finding a site to upload to, and getting the right URL to the image.

Seems like this is a topic that should be covered in public school computer skills classes.

Some of us are old enough where computer classes were consisted of DOS programming on green screens & no such thing as the internet, URL, USB, IMG, LOL, OMG, etc.     

Some of us are old enough to remember when computer class meant learning how to use an IBM 029 or 129 keypunch machine, and the only DOS out there was IBM's Disk Operating System, which ran on the System/360 and later System/370 mainframe computers.

[texaskdog]

It's so dumbed down now.  On Facebook you just click a button and it does it for you.  Of course I have the world's slowest computer at home

[Big John]

It's so dumbed down now.  On Facebook you just click a button and it does it for you.  Of course I have the world's slowest computer at home

Timex Sinclair series?

[Michael]

I didn't think this one was bad at all!

I think the old font on this sign is kind of neat.

Also, those "Slow Down" signs are just pathetic.

P.S.: Thanks for lagging my browser with multiple 3000+ pixel images scaled to fit! 

[cpzilliacus]

I didn't think this one was bad at all!

Looks O.K., but I don't think it can be enforced. 

I don't think that such a sign can be found in the MUTCD.  The entrances to the Baltimore-Washington Parkway (not far from these signs - one of its overpasses can be seen in the background of the "27 Ton" sign) are posted with compliant signs.

I think the old font on this sign is kind of neat.

Agreed.

Also, those "Slow Down" signs are just pathetic.

They were what "inspired" me to take these photographs.

P.S.: Thanks for lagging my browser with multiple 3000+ pixel images scaled to fit! 

I used Photoshop's "save for Web" to make them better for others to see.

I take it they were still too large for your browser? 

Having Verizon's FIOS, I cannot tell if an image is "slow to load" because of the network.

[Takumi]

I personally thought these signs should be in the Worst Of Road Signs and/or Signs With Design errors, but I agree with the consensus otherwise.

[Central Avenue]

All of these images are from public roads under maintenance of the U.S. Government, Department of Agriculture (USDA), in Beltsville, Prince George's County, Maryland.

This is the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center (BARC), which occupies a huge swath of land in northern Prince George's County.  The federal Baltimore-Washington Parkway ("secret" Md. 295) runs through BARC reservation, as does U.S. 1 (Baltimore Avenue).

I think several of these (perhaps all of them) qualify as "crimes against the MUTCD:"

[snip]



[snip]

Most of those are inexcusable, but I really like this one. What can I say? I'm a sucker for that old-fashioned lettering.

Central, the lettering on that one is admittedly pretty cool. 

This is on Research Road, which connects Eleanor Roosevelt's City of Greenbelt (where more than a few BARC employees have traditionally lived) with the BARC reservation.  There is indeed a gate at the boundary between the federal property and the corporate limits of Greenbelt, and it is indeed closed during the hours shown on the sign.

But the dunderheads installed the sign in the wrong place (and obviously a long time ago)!  It is on a segment of Research Road north of Beaver Dam Road (another road through the BARC property that is open to the public) (here).  Traffic on Beaver Dam Road that turns south onto Research  Road does not see that sign!

Fair enough. No point in installing a pretty sign if you can't put it in the right place.

[vtk]

P.S.: Thanks for lagging my browser with multiple 3000+ pixel images scaled to fit! 

I used Photoshop's "save for Web" to make them better for others to see.

I take it they were still too large for your browser? 

Having Verizon's FIOS, I cannot tell if an image is "slow to load" because of the network.

I think the issue is probably the sheer number of pixels, not bytes.  After downloading the compressed data and decoding it, the browser must store the image uncompressed in memory and redraw a scaled-down version as the page scrolls, causing laggy response in user interaction, particularly scrolling.

PS – Having a super-fast Internet connection is no excuse for putting needlessly large image files online to share with others.  Some folks have DSL, a slow mobile data connection, or even dial-up.  I'm sure Save For Web tells you how big a file it's making; 100kB is where you start to push the patience of such unlucky souls.

[cpzilliacus]

I think the issue is probably the sheer number of pixels, not bytes.  After downloading the compressed data and decoding it, the browser must store the image uncompressed in memory and redraw a scaled-down version as the page scrolls, causing laggy response in user interaction, particularly scrolling.

I willl keep that in mind for future reference.

PS – Having a super-fast Internet connection is no excuse for putting needlessly large image files online to share with others.  Some folks have DSL, a slow mobile data connection, or even dial-up.  I'm sure Save For Web tells you how big a file it's making; 100kB is where you start to push the patience of such unlucky souls.

I use mobile Internet myself sometimes, and yes, it is a lot slower than what I have at home.  I can tell the image sizes after doing "save for Web" - these ranged from 163 KB to 550 KB.  I will downsize them some more in a minute.

[agentsteel53]

yeah, there isn't much of a point in having images larger than about 600-800 pixels wide on discussion forums.  I must confess sometimes I post 1024 wide, but whenever I save an image myself, I'll make it 500 wide.  (that's what fits on the AARoads blog.  each 500-wide thumbnail may be clicked for the largest possible version, which ranges from 2000 to 4000 pixels, depending on how much I cropped from the camera.)

[cpzilliacus]

yeah, there isn't much of a point in having images larger than about 600-800 pixels wide on discussion forums.  I must confess sometimes I post 1024 wide, but whenever I save an image myself, I'll make it 500 wide.  (that's what fits on the AARoads blog.  each 500-wide thumbnail may be clicked for the largest possible version, which ranges from 2000 to 4000 pixels, depending on how much I cropped from the camera.)

Just re-sized and reloaded all of the USDA images as 500 pixels wide. 

[exit322]

It's so dumbed down now.  On Facebook you just click a button and it does it for you.  Of course I have the world's slowest computer at home

Timex Sinclair series?

I believe all Alanland laws are written on one of these.

[cpzilliacus]

I personally thought these signs should be in the Worst Of Road Signs and/or Signs With Design errors, but I agree with the consensus otherwise.

I actually mulled over where to put them, and decided this the best "compromise" location. 

If the moderators disagree, they can certainly move it to one of the other forums.

[Alps]

Internet connection discussion has been moved to Off-Topic.

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=8507.0

[corco]

ZOMG Secondary Montana route shield posted as primary

[Billy F 1988]

ZOMG Secondary Montana route shield posted as primary

Well. That's a first for me. Never seen a MT 347 shield before. Although, you never know. Someday, SR 347 could end up MT 347. Erroneous, yes, but, hey, not as bad as the MT 39 and 47 shields. Those were erroneously posted as "US 39" and "US 47", and those numbers don't exist in the AASHTO catalog of US highway digits in commission.

[okroads]

Taken in Elko, NV by me on July 18, 2012

[bassoon1986]

well it looks like they at least got a correct blue interstate shield on the green sign far back left

[OracleUsr]

SOUTH US 70????   



West Fifth St./Old US 64 offramp from I-85 Bus. northbound?

[Scott5114]

I didn't think this one was bad at all!

Looks O.K., but I don't think it can be enforced. 

I don't think that such a sign can be found in the MUTCD.  The entrances to the Baltimore-Washington Parkway (not far from these signs - one of its overpasses can be seen in the background of the "27 Ton" sign) are posted with compliant signs.

MUTCD says you can basically "create your own" when it comes to all-text regulatory and warning signs. You just can't invent your own symbols.

[1995hoo]

This sign wasn't always erroneous, but it is now. See the one below the blade. It directs people headed to the National Mall and downtown DC to make a left turn. But you can't do that because the federal government closed the street, purportedly in the name of security. The sign's never been removed.

[cpzilliacus]

MUTCD says you can basically "create your own" when it comes to all-text regulatory and warning signs. You just can't invent your own symbols.

But is it reasonable to assume that someone is going to know what BARC means if someone gets a ticket from a federal law enforcement officer on these USDA lands?  Such tickets, if challenged, lead to a trial before a U.S. magistrate judge, in a form of federal traffic court, but at least around the D.C. area, the tickets are often issued for violating a state law on federal land, as allowed under the Assimilative Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. § 13).

I am not especially interested in finding out the answer, but I think a driver charged with violating that sign would have decent chance of getting  it tossed out in court.

One interesting exemption is drunk/impaired driving.  If someone gets stopped on a road or parkway that is under federal jurisdiction, then federal law applies (not state laws against DWI).  One aspect of those federal laws means that someone who gets locked up on a federal highway under suspicion of being under the influence cannot refuse to take a breath test (or maybe some other test for intoxication), since refusal to take the test is itself a separate federal charge.

[cpzilliacus]

This sign wasn't always erroneous, but it is now. See the one below the blade. It directs people headed to the National Mall and downtown DC to make a left turn. But you can't do that because the federal government closed the street, purportedly in the name of security. The sign's never been removed.

This sort of thing is especially irritating to me, for federal agencies (in this case the U.S. State Department) have simply "helped themselves" to streets that were once open to the public, and assigned armed rent-a-cops (I believe the State Department uses private security guards instead of real sworn federal law enforcement officers) to patrol those streets and deny the public access to them.

[Revive 755]

Lake County IL seems to be somewhat defiant on signing the directions on I-94 properly.  Here is one example at the Deerfield Road access to EB I-94:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=42.167523,-87.87569&spn=0.006719,0.016512&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=42.167524,-87.875958&panoid=DaGOB2NQIAhNPzmVz5Uplg&cbp=12,300.55,,0,-1.52

Another on O'Plaine Road at IL 120:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=42.347158,-87.914529&spn=0.013464,0.033023&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.347243,-87.91453&panoid=Cwf4K5c_cZsxG5FsSkJs5g&cbp=12,216.32,,0,14.97

And another on EB Washington Street at IL 21:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=42.363649,-87.930579&spn=0.013461,0.033023&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.363681,-87.930824&panoid=kBt0CNnF8sEhBSh--X5jWg&cbp=12,125.79,,1,-0.67

And one for I-94 north on EB Washington Street W/O IL 21; this one seems to have a white Toll banner:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=42.363808,-87.933047&spn=0.013461,0.033023&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.363795,-87.93273&panoid=byXFVs67Z0z-DNOh4alsBA&cbp=12,114.21,,0,-0.29

[StogieGuy7]

Lake County IL seems to be somewhat defiant on signing the directions on I-94 properly.  Here is one example at the Deerfield Road access to EB I-94:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=42.167523,-87.87569&spn=0.006719,0.016512&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=42.167524,-87.875958&panoid=DaGOB2NQIAhNPzmVz5Uplg&cbp=12,300.55,,0,-1.52

Another on O'Plaine Road at IL 120:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=42.347158,-87.914529&spn=0.013464,0.033023&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.347243,-87.91453&panoid=Cwf4K5c_cZsxG5FsSkJs5g&cbp=12,216.32,,0,14.97

And another on EB Washington Street at IL 21:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=42.363649,-87.930579&spn=0.013461,0.033023&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.363681,-87.930824&panoid=kBt0CNnF8sEhBSh--X5jWg&cbp=12,125.79,,1,-0.67

And one for I-94 north on EB Washington Street W/O IL 21; this one seems to have a white Toll banner:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=42.363808,-87.933047&spn=0.013461,0.033023&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.363795,-87.93273&panoid=byXFVs67Z0z-DNOh4alsBA&cbp=12,114.21,,0,-0.29

I disagree.  The examples that you cite include a mix of ISTHA, IDOT and Lake County DOT signage.  For example, the example at Deerfield Rd and I-94 is an ISTHA-issued sign.  Furthermore, the construction related "to 94" signage was temporary and has already been replaced.