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

[Scott5114]

US-377 is a bit of an anomaly. Oklahoma had been submitting requests for that extension for decades at the behest of a local booster organization. AASHTO kept rejecting it, as they were using a point system at the time, and both the proximity of US-177 and the fact the request was driven by a non-DOT organization. Finally, the local Congressman had the designation written into federal law. Oklahoma submitted it to AASHTO one last time. They rejected it again. ODOT shrugged and posted the signs under the authority of the law, rather than AASHTO.

[zachary_amaryllis]

See? Even back then, Limon was in use as a control city. 

And don't forget Calhan. Calhan makes Limon look like New York.

[kphoger]

See? Even back then, Limon was in use as a control city. 

And don't forget Calhan. Calhan makes Limon look like New York.

Calhan isn't a control city in that figure.

[Declan127]

Edit: fixed the quote string at the start

This one gives directions to both US 101 and Crescent City two different ways despite it takes the use of US 101 to reach the city from US 199.

Could it be that 199 is faster? In some cases when the direct route is slower the
Bypass or indirect rote like 95/495 in Wilmington. Sorry if this looks like a mess, my iPad is on the fritz...

[Kniwt]

On the CA 237 frontage road in Milpitas, there's this odd wayfinding instruction ... which, given the surroundings, wasn't especially helpful at all.

[ClassicHasClass]

Edit: fixed the quote string at the start

This one gives directions to both US 101 and Crescent City two different ways despite it takes the use of US 101 to reach the city from US 199.

Could it be that 199 is faster? In some cases when the direct route is slower the
Bypass or indirect rote like 95/495 in Wilmington. Sorry if this looks like a mess, my iPad is on the fritz...

Yeah, I don't think this sign is odd at all. Being rather familiar with this area, CA 197 is the cutoff for points north to Oregon, and Crescent City and other southbound traffic would continue on US 199. The only potential irregularity is that Crescent City is indeed reached by US 101 (US 199 terminates at US 101) but that point is not very far north of the city.

[J N Winkler]

The thing about the sign that strikes me as unusual is the destination legend in mixed-case Series D rather than Series E Modified.

[roadman65]

This No U Turn sign is odd.



Is this Caltrans normal?

Edit: Autocorrect sucks.

[roadman65]

Here is one with two arrows to make one.


Then there is the empty Alabama MP bridge identification sign. As always an empty interstate shield on it as others in the state have them.

[Scott5114]

Here is one with two arrows to make one.

So...like...Section 2E.22 of the MUTCD?

[JoePCool14]

Here is one with two arrows to make one.

So...like...Section 2E.22 of the MUTCD?

I guess diagrammatic signs really are a dying breed.

[Tom958]

This guy had been kicking around the i-285-GA 400 construction site for the last several months. It's made of the modified top half of this sign and the modified bottom half of this one. Below is my photo from a few weeks ago, but here's a Streetview from December 2021 when it was literally coming apart.



The last time I was there, the old battleaxe had been replaced with this new, temporary masterpiece, in the Series C text now used for temporary signage on this project. No exit number tab, pointless divider line, two arrows for one exit. MUTCD? What's that? 

[snowc]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/52064897131/in/photostream/
I am always partial to the existence of cut out shields.

I mean, it's cool, but that's statewide standard for California.

So, they're not just leftover from "olden times?"

Nope. That's still in their MUTCD. The most recent update to that particular standard was in 2002.

No, in fact they are an updated design.  They are a hybrid of the current US highway shield standard with text on it to give it an "faux" old shield feel.

This standard was actually in use in the 1950s, it just wasn't part of the federal MUTCD. I think AASHTO may have created it, actually. California is just the only state that didn't switch to the 1961 and 1970 (present-day) MUTCD designs.

For example, here's one from Colorado. Michael Summa took the picture in 1983, Jake Bear identified the shield as being from 1952:


Said Colorado 1952 standards. It looks like cutouts were to be used for reassurance shields, and everything else used non-cutout shields. (This was a distinction that the MUTCD made between 1948 and 1961 for some reason. Most states used smaller cutouts with the state name for reassurance during this time period.)

Where can you find images from Michael Summa? I really like his images!
The only one I can find is the one from VA.
https://www.millenniumhwy.net/summa/summa.html
Bryce

[roadman65]

Here is one with two arrows to make one.

So...like...Section 2E.22 of the MUTCD?

I’m guessing pasting one arrow over the other was cheaper than greening out the original arrow.  The sign designers had no idea that someone here would photograph it at highway speed as it isn’t noticeable otherwise. Not that I’m complaining, which I am not, but I think it’s interesting the way they amended the arrow to reflect the wider I-10 here.

[jakeroot]

This No U Turn sign is odd.



Is this Caltrans normal?

Edit: Autocorrect sucks.

Yeah, this sign is pretty common in California. Although I'm not sure it's the standard sign these days.

[Max Rockatansky]

This No U Turn sign is odd.



Is this Caltrans normal?

Edit: Autocorrect sucks.

Yeah, this sign is pretty common in California. Although I'm not sure it's the standard sign these days.

R73-3 in the Caltrans MUTCD:

https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/safety-programs/documents/signs/ca-sign-poster-2014rev2-a11y.pdf

[kphoger]

This guy had been kicking around the i-285-GA 400 construction site for the last several months. It's made of the modified top half of this sign and the modified bottom half of this one. Below is my photo from a few weeks ago, but here's a Streetview from December 2021 when it was literally coming apart.

[img

The last time I was there, the old battleaxe had been replaced with this new, temporary masterpiece, in the Series C text now used for temporary signage on this project. No exit number tab, pointless divider line, two arrows for one exit. MUTCD? What's that? 

[img

Nobody expects temporary construction zone signage to be up to spec.

[Max Rockatansky]

This guy had been kicking around the i-285-GA 400 construction site for the last several months. It's made of the modified top half of this sign and the modified bottom half of this one. Below is my photo from a few weeks ago, but here's a Streetview from December 2021 when it was literally coming apart.

[img

The last time I was there, the old battleaxe had been replaced with this new, temporary masterpiece, in the Series C text now used for temporary signage on this project. No exit number tab, pointless divider line, two arrows for one exit. MUTCD? What's that? 

[img

Nobody expects temporary construction zone signage to be up to spec.

Almost every road Facebook group does.

[Mapmikey]

Got something similar to this.

The sign is orange, indicating a detour.

Which it is.  SR 1811 is exit 70 which is unusable during this portion of the construction.

[Rothman]

This guy had been kicking around the i-285-GA 400 construction site for the last several months. It's made of the modified top half of this sign and the modified bottom half of this one. Below is my photo from a few weeks ago, but here's a Streetview from December 2021 when it was literally coming apart.

[img

The last time I was there, the old battleaxe had been replaced with this new, temporary masterpiece, in the Series C text now used for temporary signage on this project. No exit number tab, pointless divider line, two arrows for one exit. MUTCD? What's that? 

[img

Nobody expects temporary construction zone signage to be up to spec.

Almost every road Facebook group does.

FreewayJim doesn't count.

[Max Rockatansky]

This guy had been kicking around the i-285-GA 400 construction site for the last several months. It's made of the modified top half of this sign and the modified bottom half of this one. Below is my photo from a few weeks ago, but here's a Streetview from December 2021 when it was literally coming apart.

[img

The last time I was there, the old battleaxe had been replaced with this new, temporary masterpiece, in the Series C text now used for temporary signage on this project. No exit number tab, pointless divider line, two arrows for one exit. MUTCD? What's that? 

[img

Nobody expects temporary construction zone signage to be up to spec.

Almost every road Facebook group does.

FreewayJim doesn't count.

Not just FWJ, I've seen similar comments in Roadgeekery and There is no way that is MUTCD Compliant. 

[Scott5114]

Where can you find images from Michael Summa? I really like his images!

http://shields.aaroads.com/ has a bunch, and so does Alpsroads.

[roadman65]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/51298501487/in/album-72157719513492163/

This shield has seen better days.

Time for Caltrans to put it to rest.

[roadman65]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/52082493784/
Another one in Texas though the 7 is just peeling away some.


Though the "8"  seems of a different font altogether.

[Big John]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/52082493784/
Another one in Texas though the 7 is just peeling away some.


Though the "8"  seems of a different font altogether.

The peeling 7 does make the 8 look different, but I think an unpeeled 7 would make the 8 the same font.