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

[paulthemapguy]

The MUTCD states that curves warranting speeds of 30mph or less are to use the sharp turn sign rather than the curve sign, but I don't see anything in the MUTCD for turn signs with added intersection elements.  Though I have seen them in the wild, signs for sharp turns with added intersection elements don't seem to appear in the manual itself, oddly.  So the agency probably stuck with the sign designs specifically designated as the W1-10 series as shown in the MUTCD, to ensure compliance.

https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/fig2c_01_longdesc.htm

As for the second pair, I have no idea what the heck is going on there.  But I like that they threw something together that looks decent and clearly depicts the situation.

[MNHighwayMan]

I didn't know that the signs in my first example are actually in the MUTCD (W1-10b and c). Interesting.

Since we're on the subject, the city of Des Moines once posted a W1-4 sign with an advisory speed in one of the blank spaces. It was posted right here, and I wanted to get a picture of it since that's a non-standard sign, but by the time I remembered to get out there for a pic it had already been replaced with a standard W1-4 sign.

[TBKS1]

I actually have something similar to that.

This is in Jacksonville, Arkansas.



I don't know what this is by TheInstrumentalist, on Flickr

[jakeroot]

I think using the extra markings makes sense. The signs are warning you of a road feature ahead. If that includes a side street, it should be on the sign.

I like that thinner strokes are used for the side streets (common for this type of sign). Very reminiscint of UK junction layout signs, which use strokes of varying widths to indicate importance.

[MNHighwayMan]

I think using the extra markings makes sense. The signs are warning you of a road feature ahead. If that includes a side street, it should be on the sign.

I like that thinner strokes are used for the side streets (common for this type of sign). Very reminiscint of UK junction layout signs, which use strokes of varying widths to indicate importance.

I agree. It's just that there isn't any provision for these signs in the MUTCD, except for a handful of specific designs. I think it would be nice to see those prescribed signs (the W1-10 series) replaced with some generalized language that specifies ways to create unique warning signs—like my second example pair, or TBKS1's example—to fit unique situations.

[jakeroot]

I think using the extra markings makes sense. The signs are warning you of a road feature ahead. If that includes a side street, it should be on the sign.

I like that thinner strokes are used for the side streets (common for this type of sign). Very reminiscint of UK junction layout signs, which use strokes of varying widths to indicate importance.

I agree. It's just that there isn't any provision for these signs in the MUTCD, except for a handful of specific designs. I think it would be nice to see those prescribed signs (the W1-10 series) replaced with some generalized language that specifies ways to create unique warning signs–like my second example pair, or TBKS1's example–to fit unique situations.

Even if there aren't any special provisions per se, custom warning signs should be allowed, and generally have been. Custom regulatory signage is cumbersome because of laws and whatnot. But warning signs are (or should be) different.

[MNHighwayMan]

I think using the extra markings makes sense. The signs are warning you of a road feature ahead. If that includes a side street, it should be on the sign.

I like that thinner strokes are used for the side streets (common for this type of sign). Very reminiscint of UK junction layout signs, which use strokes of varying widths to indicate importance.

I agree. It's just that there isn't any provision for these signs in the MUTCD, except for a handful of specific designs. I think it would be nice to see those prescribed signs (the W1-10 series) replaced with some generalized language that specifies ways to create unique warning signs–like my second example pair, or TBKS1's example–to fit unique situations.

Even if there aren't any special provisions per se, custom warning signs should be allowed, and generally have been. Custom regulatory signage is cumbersome because of laws and whatnot. But warning signs are (or should be) different.

I thought it was a general rule across all sign types that the MUTCD allows custom messages, but only in text form.

[Max Rockatansky]

I'm finding most shields/signs in Washington to be a huge departure from the norm I'm used to seeing in California and Arizona.  I don't know if this was particularly unique but I found this sign for the city of Bremerton on WA 303 to be somewhat curious.

0 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

[jakeroot]

I'm finding most shields/signs in Washington to be a huge departure from the norm I'm used to seeing in California and Arizona.

The only real similarity between WA and CA is the early use of mixed case legends on signs, and the lack of exit tabs. Also similar pavement markings for a long time, but WSDOT has been using some more of the optional bits of the MUTCD lately, so that's not as obvious these days.

[roadfro]

The MUTCD states that curves warranting speeds of 30mph or less are to use the sharp turn sign rather than the curve sign, but I don't see anything in the MUTCD for turn signs with added intersection elements.  Though I have seen them in the wild, signs for sharp turns with added intersection elements don't seem to appear in the manual itself, oddly.  So the agency probably stuck with the sign designs specifically designated as the W1-10 series as shown in the MUTCD, to ensure compliance.

https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/fig2c_01_longdesc.htm

The guidance statement in section 2C.11 seems to suggest that horizontal alignment/intersection warning signs can be customized to approximate the actual road configurations, subject to a couple restrictions.

[Max Rockatansky]

US 99 at the Columbia Street on ramp for the Alaska Way Viaduct in downtown Seattle:

0 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

[mrpablue]

US 99 at the Columbia Street on ramp for the Alaska Way Viaduct in downtown Seattle:

0 by Max Rockatansky, on Flickr

Nice photo. I was there last summer and I didn't take a picture. Ugh!!

[MCRoads]

Cross post from the Daily Picture Challenge.

And this is what you call a quick improvisation. (I took this on April 11th, 2018)



AR-5 + AR-321 + AR-367 by TheInstrumentalist, on Flickr

Yes, this was taken in a construction zone. At least it works. 

Oh no, it's the second coming of Frankensign!

LMAO!!!! I saw this sign in the daily challenge, and said EXACTLY THAT!!!!!

Btw, anyone got a picture of the original VDOT frankinsign? The one up thread was photobucketed....

[jakeroot]

Nice photo. I was there last summer and I didn't take a picture. Ugh!!

Don't worry, there's a million photos (thankfully).

I think it's probably the oldest sign in Washington. Any others that might be older that anyone knows of?

[WillWeaverRVA]

Cross post from the Daily Picture Challenge.

And this is what you call a quick improvisation. (I took this on April 11th, 2018)



AR-5 + AR-321 + AR-367 by TheInstrumentalist, on Flickr

Yes, this was taken in a construction zone. At least it works. 

Oh no, it's the second coming of Frankensign!

LMAO!!!! I saw this sign in the daily challenge, and said EXACTLY THAT!!!!!

Btw, anyone got a picture of the original VDOT frankinsign? The one up thread was photobucketed....

[TBKS1]

I took this earlier today.

I-40 Eastbound.

[Scott5114]

Button copy exit tab with direct-applied sign body. Sounds like something ODOT would do. (I've also seen them take the tab off a FHWA Series sign that was crashed into and stick it on top of its Clearview replacement.)

[MNHighwayMan]

Button copy exit tab with direct-applied sign body. Sounds like something ODOT would do. (I've also seen them take the tab off a FHWA Series sign that was crashed into and stick it on top of its Clearview replacement.)

Eh, I mean, as long as it's usable/legible, I don't really see a problem with that. I've seen a number of mixed installs in Iowa here, usually with a Clearview tab and the main panel being in FHWA. It's a mixed bag as to whether the main panel is newer, or if the tab was replaced more recently.

[chays]

Do Not Enter on octagonal signs

[1995hoo]

Saw this on Twitter. I don't know where it is.

[TBKS1]

Is this Series A?



CR-87 (Polk County, AR) by TheInstrumentalist, on Flickr

[ErmineNotyours]

This is on Washington State 542 on the way to a ski area near Mt. Baker.  Seriously, who drives out to the mountains without a map hoping there might be a mountain pass?  The northern most mountain pass in Washington State is Highway 20, which is the only access through North Cascades National Park.  North of that is Canada.



I got this from WSDOT's SR Web, a road image service which is simpler than Street View, which means it can animate fast enough to simulate driving.  http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/mapsdata/tools/srweb.htm  It also has details about mile marker locations, which gives clues about highway construction.  The only other similar state service I've found is Oregon's, but there must be more of them.

[jakeroot]

I think this temporary street blade in Federal Way, WA qualifies as "bad" and "ugly". The permanent one ain't much better looking with those cut out corners.

[freebrickproductions]

I think this temporary street blade in Federal Way, WA qualifies as "bad" and "ugly". The permanent one ain't much better looking with those cut out corners.

Department of Redundancy Department as well? (South South 348th Street)

[jakeroot]

I think this temporary street blade in Federal Way, WA qualifies as "bad" and "ugly". The permanent one ain't much better looking with those cut out corners.

Department of Redundancy Department as well? (South South 348th Street)

Which reminds me. SS...Mueller...this sign might be a little too German.