Title says it all. Basically, it would have to be a sign placed at a bad location, whether it is a tree, an overpass, or even another sign.
Here's one in Gilroy, along 101 south. This BGS would be rather hard to see because of that overpass directly in front of it. And, sorry for the crookedness of the picture.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5338%2F7436700538_56f535c4e6_c.jpg&hash=e0e1b69ef41be46d42a7ccd22c80d6ab837fbf53)
I remember seeing a "blind child area" yellow sign with a utility pole right in front of it, making the sign itself pratically blind to you. They have fixed the problem however.
Here is a location in Joppa, Illinois, where Google Maps estimates the distance between STOP sign and STOP line to be 82 feet. The placement is due to a large gravel parking lot on the corner. The first time I drove through the intersection, I stopped at the STOP sign, then wondered what the heck to do next. So I drove forward to the STOP line and stopped again.
http://goo.gl/maps/gDhg (http://goo.gl/maps/gDhg)
Southbound SH 121 between Lewisville and Grapevine, Texas
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F04072011cc017.jpg&hash=24bd77afe9bbdcb632f03350df96cf771d0ce510)
Quote from: kphoger on June 24, 2012, 10:20:58 PM
Here is a location in Joppa, Illinois, where Google Maps estimates the distance between STOP sign and STOP line to be 82 feet. The placement is due to a large gravel parking lot on the corner. The first time I drove through the intersection, I stopped at the STOP sign, then wondered what the heck to do next. So I drove forward to the STOP line and stopped again.
http://goo.gl/maps/gDhg (http://goo.gl/maps/gDhg)
How I have observed this being normally resolved is by placing a small island at the corner so the stop sign can be at its expected location.
That road is actually called Grapevine Mills Parkway? Oh the Cronyism.
Quote from: blawp on June 25, 2012, 02:02:55 AM
That road is actually called Grapevine Mills Parkway? Oh the Cronyism.
Yes, it was changed to that when Grapevine Mills Mall was built. Similar to "Bass Pro Drive" just to the south of that (which of course, passes by Bass Pro Shops), even though east of TX 121 it's still "Bethel Road".
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.staticflickr.com%2F2846%2F10600824935_4e89075c72_o.jpg&hash=2b829f370103635d6d9b9bc22cc24b098cc1f298)
Those BGS' have been installed there for years, so I suppose the ever-increasing sizes of the intersections creates occasional bouts of dumb-assery such as this.
Two US 1 shields are in this photo. The second one is newer and probably unnecessary.
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-hny_VjsesFk/T7qkfjnWJ3I/AAAAAAAACLo/IpjlOXTC9ng/s816/DSC00794.JPG)
Idiotic placement for that street sign. What good is it to people on the other street?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2Feb379ffa.jpg&hash=24e5638162b5dde59c0d0ff430fedde366d40ff9)
Quote from: txstateends on August 05, 2012, 09:40:29 AM
Quote from: blawp on June 25, 2012, 02:02:55 AM
That road is actually called Grapevine Mills Parkway? Oh the Cronyism.
Yes, it was changed to that when Grapevine Mills Mall was built. Similar to "Bass Pro Drive" just to the south of that (which of course, passes by Bass Pro Shops), even though east of TX 121 it's still "Bethel Road".
Which is how DOTs get around the long-standing AASHTO and FHWA prohibitions on supplemental guide signs for shopping centers on Interstates and freeways. One of the early applications of this "loophole" in Massachusetts involved the then-new Independence Mall in Kingston. The original "Community Exits" signs on MA 3 for Kingston, which were installed shortly after the mall opened, included "Independence Mall Way 3 1/2" (in 13.33/10) on one line. As I recall (it's been awhile since I've gone down Route 3), the replacement signs put up as part of the Plymouth to Braintree MA 3 sign replacement were re-formatted so "Independence" and "Mall Way" were on two lines, and the distance was centered on the legend.
the only thing worse than a "Walmart Ave." is a traffic light holding you up so that other traffic may exit the "Walmart Ave."
Quote from: roadman on August 06, 2012, 06:32:41 PM
Quote from: txstateends on August 05, 2012, 09:40:29 AM
Quote from: blawp on June 25, 2012, 02:02:55 AM
That road is actually called Grapevine Mills Parkway? Oh the Cronyism.
Yes, it was changed to that when Grapevine Mills Mall was built. Similar to "Bass Pro Drive" just to the south of that (which of course, passes by Bass Pro Shops), even though east of TX 121 it's still "Bethel Road".
Which is how DOTs get around the long-standing AASHTO and FHWA prohibitions on supplemental guide signs for shopping centers on Interstates and freeways. One of the early applications of this "loophole" in Massachusetts involved the then-new Independence Mall in Kingston. The original "Community Exits" signs on MA 3 for Kingston, which were installed shortly after the mall opened, included "Independence Mall Way 3 1/2" (in 13.33/10) on one line. As I recall (it's been awhile since I've gone down Route 3), the replacement signs put up as part of the Plymouth to Braintree MA 3 sign replacement were re-formatted so "Independence" and "Mall Way" were on two lines, and the distance was centered on the legend.
I've never thought much of the reasoning behind it, but that totally makes sense! This is done all over Massachusetts to point people to malls without explicitly pointing them to the mall. The most local example I can think of is on 128 for North Shore Mall [Drive].
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on August 07, 2012, 12:08:24 AM
Quote from: roadman on August 06, 2012, 06:32:41 PM
Quote from: txstateends on August 05, 2012, 09:40:29 AM
Quote from: blawp on June 25, 2012, 02:02:55 AM
That road is actually called Grapevine Mills Parkway? Oh the Cronyism.
Yes, it was changed to that when Grapevine Mills Mall was built. Similar to "Bass Pro Drive" just to the south of that (which of course, passes by Bass Pro Shops), even though east of TX 121 it's still "Bethel Road".
Which is how DOTs get around the long-standing AASHTO and FHWA prohibitions on supplemental guide signs for shopping centers on Interstates and freeways. One of the early applications of this "loophole" in Massachusetts involved the then-new Independence Mall in Kingston. The original "Community Exits" signs on MA 3 for Kingston, which were installed shortly after the mall opened, included "Independence Mall Way 3 1/2" (in 13.33/10) on one line. As I recall (it's been awhile since I've gone down Route 3), the replacement signs put up as part of the Plymouth to Braintree MA 3 sign replacement were re-formatted so "Independence" and "Mall Way" were on two lines, and the distance was centered on the legend.
I've never thought much of the reasoning behind it, but that totally makes sense! This is done all over Massachusetts to point people to malls without explicitly pointing them to the mall. The most local example I can think of is on 128 for North Shore Mall [Drive].
There are actually freeway signs around the DFW area that say
Such-and-such Mall
EXIT ___
that originally were white-on-green, but suddenly without notice, they changed to white-on-blue. Here's one (http://goo.gl/maps/oSxkf) on I-635 WB before Preston Road (in the time just before the start of the redo of LBJ Freeway).
Quote from: us175 on August 07, 2012, 11:26:35 AM
There are actually freeway signs around the DFW area that say
Such-and-such Mall
EXIT ___
that originally were white-on-green, but suddenly without notice, they changed to white-on-blue. Here's one (http://goo.gl/maps/oSxkf) on I-635 WB before Preston Road (in the time just before the start of the redo of LBJ Freeway).
Yep, private businesses would fall under commercial/services as opposed to destination/guide.
Quote from: Steve on August 07, 2012, 07:02:07 PM
Quote from: us175 on August 07, 2012, 11:26:35 AM
There are actually freeway signs around the DFW area that say
Such-and-such Mall
EXIT ___
that originally were white-on-green, but suddenly without notice, they changed to white-on-blue. Here's one (http://goo.gl/maps/oSxkf) on I-635 WB before Preston Road (in the time just before the start of the redo of LBJ Freeway).
Yep, private businesses would fall under commercial/services as opposed to destination/guide.
Casinos seem like a tricky thing to categorize. In various states, I have seen them fall under green and brown (and shown on the blue Food/Gas/Lodging logo signs, as well).
Quote from: Scott5114 on August 07, 2012, 09:44:14 PM
Quote from: Steve on August 07, 2012, 07:02:07 PM
Quote from: us175 on August 07, 2012, 11:26:35 AM
There are actually freeway signs around the DFW area that say
Such-and-such Mall
EXIT ___
that originally were white-on-green, but suddenly without notice, they changed to white-on-blue. Here's one (http://goo.gl/maps/oSxkf) on I-635 WB before Preston Road (in the time just before the start of the redo of LBJ Freeway).
Yep, private businesses would fall under commercial/services as opposed to destination/guide.
Casinos seem like a tricky thing to categorize. In various states, I have seen them fall under green and brown (and shown on the blue Food/Gas/Lodging logo signs, as well).
Some agencies have tried harder than others to clarify. On the NJ Turnpike, they would go on a supplemental green sign, for example. On an NJDOT roadway, there's no set policy - Six Flags has been signed on brown, for example.
The Orlando-area theme parks are all on green. Universal has its own exit and Disney has several exits.
Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on June 24, 2012, 09:19:26 PM
Title says it all. Basically, it would have to be a sign placed at a bad location, whether it is a tree, an overpass, or even another sign.
Here's one in Gilroy, along 101 south. This BGS would be rather hard to see because of that overpass directly in front of it. And, sorry for the crookedness of the picture.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5338%2F7436700538_56f535c4e6_c.jpg&hash=e0e1b69ef41be46d42a7ccd22c80d6ab837fbf53)
I'd actually nominate that sign as a "worst of road signs" entry:
When I first glanced at the sign, I thought the sign was for either "152, East 10th St." or "152, 10th Street East".
a vertical white dividing line between 152 East and 10th St. would make the overhead more understandable as a 2-exit interchange.
Quote from: Steve on August 08, 2012, 08:17:40 PM
Some agencies have tried harder than others to clarify. On the NJ Turnpike, they would go on a supplemental green sign, for example. On an NJDOT roadway, there's no set policy - Six Flags has been signed on brown, for example.
NJDOT did it right. Even though it's a commercial business, Six Flags is still a recreational facility. So, unless your state DOT's sign policy calls for providing only Attractions LOGO signs on Interstates and freeways (instead of text signs) for such facliities, the signing should be white on brown.
Quote from: thenetwork on August 10, 2012, 05:48:22 PM
Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on June 24, 2012, 09:19:26 PM
Title says it all. Basically, it would have to be a sign placed at a bad location, whether it is a tree, an overpass, or even another sign.
Here's one in Gilroy, along 101 south. This BGS would be rather hard to see because of that overpass directly in front of it. And, sorry for the crookedness of the picture.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm6.staticflickr.com%2F5338%2F7436700538_56f535c4e6_c.jpg&hash=e0e1b69ef41be46d42a7ccd22c80d6ab837fbf53)
I'd actually nominate that sign as a "worst of road signs" entry:
When I first glanced at the sign, I thought the sign was for either "152, East 10th St." or "152, 10th Street East".
a vertical white dividing line between 152 East and 10th St. would make the overhead more understandable as a 2-exit interchange.
Actually it's pretty accurate. It's a one-exit interchange, and the left exiting lane turns left at the bottom of the ramp onto East 152.
This intersection in east Akron was redone into a standard T from a more channelized layout, in a strange order where the new signals were in place before the roadways were redone. The new signal mast was put up by the city right in front of ODOT's existing cantilever for I-76. When ODOT came around replacing the button copy with Clearview panels, they just went ahead and replaced without moving, so the new sign is still behind the mast like the old one was. Clap clap.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww2.uakron.edu%2Fgenchem%2FCIMG6016.JPG&hash=49d0b65270d3ad87ddfe944c51e88633dddb89d8)
Saw this last Monday. The EXIT 185 sign on WB I-64 in Cannonsburg, KY is about 150 ft down the offramp. It is nearly even with the gore sign. This happened after the interchange was reconstructed a few years ago.
Quotethe only thing worse than a "Walmart Ave." is a traffic light holding you up so that other traffic may exit the "Walmart Ave."
You may be joking about this, but such a sign was actually posted in Frisco, Texas. And TxDOT let it slip by; they typically do not allow this, especially considering that this is a parking lot entrance, and it should not be signed with a street sign.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2Fwmfrisco.png&hash=10f040100087ebbbb871842ef88054d125978640)
I love how they included block numbers as if the Wal-Mart parking lot entrance is a street.
Quote from: Brian556 on August 31, 2012, 08:46:26 PM
You may be joking about this, but such a sign was actually posted in Frisco, Texas. And TxDOT let it slip by; they typically do not allow this, especially considering that this is a parking lot entrance, and it should not be signed with a street sign
Oh, I've seen this in many places. I can't remember where because it is just too horrific to contemplate.
Quote from: amroad17 on August 31, 2012, 08:11:43 PM
Saw this last Monday. The EXIT 185 sign on WB I-64 in Cannonsburg, KY is about 150 ft down the offramp. It is nearly even with the gore sign. This happened after the interchange was reconstructed a few years ago.
And if I"m not mistaken, it was moved from an original location that was extremely hard to see.
There is something similar in Goldsby, OK–a street which leads to a Sonic, labeled, of course, Sonic Dr. Across the street was Bank Dr., which once led to a bank. The bank was torn down and the street was renamed "Bankers Drive".
I seem to remember the Holiday Inn chain in the 60's/70's having a lot of pull in naming streets where their new hotels were as "Holiday Drive" or similar.
Quote from: thenetwork on September 01, 2012, 02:17:33 PM
I seem to remember the Holiday Inn chain in the 60's/70's having a lot of pull in naming streets where their new hotels were as "Holiday Drive" or similar.
How about in Orlando, FL where the driveway into the Marriot World Center is given the name World Center Drive spite the fact that FL 536 ( the road the resort is on) is called locally and designated the same name by Orange County, FL.
Then you have Westgate Lakes Boulevard in Orlando that is the entrance to well Westgate Lakes. It is not even a street at all but a driveway into a timeshare property. Only the first response considers the implied street name for each individual building to have official address numbers for easier find in case of emergency. Thus it gets a street sign on a signal pole like it is a real street.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Westgate+Lakes+Resort+%26+Spa,+Orlando,+FL&hl=en&ll=28.427581,-81.475098&spn=0.004416,0.010107&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=9.097496,20.698242&oq=westg&t=h&hq=Westgate+Lakes+Resort+%26+Spa,+Orlando,+FL&z=17&layer=c&cbll=28.427581,-81.475098&panoid=wd6AnGQNe20F0FwvSXJNRQ&cbp=12,195.25,,0,0
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Westgate+Lakes+Resort+%26+Spa,+Orlando,+FL&hl=en&ll=28.427581,-81.475103&spn=0.004416,0.010107&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=9.097496,20.698242&oq=westg&t=h&hq=Westgate+Lakes+Resort+%26+Spa,+Orlando,+FL&z=17&layer=c&cbll=28.42759,-81.475466&panoid=gXKbyyTi4m50vflKVRDZ6w&cbp=12,303.99,,0,0
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Hunters+Creek,+FL&hl=en&ll=28.367689,-81.42634&spn=0.004418,0.010107&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=9.097496,20.698242&oq=hunters&t=h&hnear=Hunters+Creek,+Orange,+Florida&z=17&layer=c&cbll=28.367821,-81.426358&panoid=bJAmZ1WAqy4nTb243dPHMA&cbp=12,271.25,,0,0
You have a speed limit 25 sign before a stop sign. How can you accomplish 25 mph if you are braking for a STOP sign?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2F2008_Raleigh_meet%2FImages%2F298.jpg&hash=9bfa680c8e371e55a138a1ea76b8a01dc34ffa12)
Referring solely to the two sets of signs in the foreground, not the set of two over the ramp further back bearing the "Baltimore/Washington" and "Richmond" indicators. The signs in the rear were there first. Then they put up the other ones directly in front of them.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2F3d83ded3.jpg&hash=8e813967e3a0ad7faef84a84a812f2ac2640c463)
This one is–or was, as of Labor Day weekend in 2007 (I took this picture five years ago today to the day as I type this)–in Granby, Colorado. In case you can't read the sign, it says "Street Closed."
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2F6e2ccb70.jpg&hash=ac06db3d3f7ae6e0d895b0b68d0c8ed5fba393f6)
In St. Lawrence county there are a number of "bridge closed" signs for a bridge that hasn't been open for 40 years and won't be re-opening ever.
Quote from: hbelkins on September 02, 2012, 03:25:55 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2F2008_Raleigh_meet%2FImages%2F298.jpg&hash=9bfa680c8e371e55a138a1ea76b8a01dc34ffa12)
That's hilarious! :-D
By the way, where is that located?
Quote from: hbelkins on September 02, 2012, 03:25:55 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2F2008_Raleigh_meet%2FImages%2F298.jpg&hash=9bfa680c8e371e55a138a1ea76b8a01dc34ffa12)
if you intend to crash into the barrier,
keep it under 55! for safety!
That's in North Carolina, near the new US 70 bypass of Clayton. The speed limit sign was not removed when the road was dead-ended for the new route. This was one of the highlights of the spring 2008 meet in the Raleigh area. Floating around somewhere there will be a meet group picture taken at this location.
In southeast Columbus, one might turn from Lockbourne Road east onto a residential street called Koebel Road. It actually gets a fair amount of traffic, and has edge lines (not curbs) and a double yellow strripe down the middle. Traffic tends to go about 35 MPH. Though sidewalks were added a couple of years ago, there are still yellow diamond warning signs saying "pedestrians using roadway".
About 1000 feet down the street this week, in front of a high school, is a mobile "obey speed limit" / "your speed [ ]" display.
About 1000 feet further, one encounters the first speed limit sign (25 MPH).
If the city were really serious about slowing traffic on the street, why don't they put a speed limit sign at the start? Also, the street looks more like it should have a 35 MPH limit. 25 might have made sense before the sidewalks were installed, but not now. Unfortunately, I don't think City of Columbus is interested in raising speed limits anywhere, and even if it were proposed here, the city would just defer to the inevitable objections of the local residents.
To summarize and get back on topic: putting an "obey speed limit" sign before the first "speed limit" sign is poor placement.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fok%2Fbeckham%2Festop.jpg&hash=12144a99df13bf64ea04e84fd7f7151864e4d16e)
Faded, on the left side of a very wide road, behind a pole.
Quote from: deanej on September 02, 2012, 05:24:50 PM
In St. Lawrence county there are a number of "bridge closed" signs for a bridge that hasn't been open for 40 years and won't be re-opening ever.
To add insult to injury, said bridge is at the end of a less-than-quarter-mile-long stretch of narrow road pointlessly numbered with a county highway shield...when it connects to a town road! :pan:
Flower Mound, Tx. Year 2000: This sign was still standing even though FM 2499 moved to a new alignment in 1991. What makes it poor placement is that it a a reassurance signs posted just before the end of the route. The old FM 2499 ended at the pavement change in the background of the photograph. This was the Denton/Tarrant County line at the time. The county line has since moved north. The sign no longer stands.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2FOLD2499SIGN.jpg&hash=54a8a9aacb37833153226a86ec59c9558081e6e8)
Quote from: Brian556 on September 02, 2012, 11:08:37 PM
Flower Mound, Tx. Year 2000: This sign was still standing even though FM 2499 moved to a new alignment in 1991. What makes it poor placement is that it a a reassurance signs posted just before the end of the route. The old FM 2499 ended at the pavement change in the background of the photograph. This was the Denton/Tarrant County line at the time. The county line has since moved north. The sign no longer stands.
Why did the county line move?
Quote from: Brian556 on August 31, 2012, 08:46:26 PM
Quotethe only thing worse than a "Walmart Ave." is a traffic light holding you up so that other traffic may exit the "Walmart Ave."
You may be joking about this, but such a sign was actually posted in Frisco, Texas. And TxDOT let it slip by; they typically do not allow this, especially considering that this is a parking lot entrance, and it should not be signed with a street sign.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2Fwmfrisco.png&hash=10f040100087ebbbb871842ef88054d125978640)
Not only that, but the IKEA in Frisco has a BGS on the Sam Rayburn Tollway access road.
QuoteWhy did the county line move?
Tarrant County went to court saying that the county line was mis-surveyed whenever the counties were laid out god only knows how long ago, and they won. it was just about greed on their part.
Not sure why I haven't posted this sooner:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvidthekid.info%2Fimghost%2Fbadsign-straddle1.jpg&hash=cbc126e3f97fe166a4aebe453b24e559c28001f6)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvidthekid.info%2Fimghost%2Fbadsign-straddle2.jpg&hash=cc38bceba5c2c720055f085be0152722c136527f)
I'm not exactly sure which came first, but it doesn't seem terribly likely the sign was there before the sidewalk.
(Rickenbacker Pkwy W westbound, right before transition to 4-lane section on the north side of LCK airport. The "Franklin County" sign actually indicates one is leaving the City of Columbus, rather than crossing a county line.)
Quote from: Road Hog on September 03, 2012, 06:51:29 AM
Quote from: Brian556 on August 31, 2012, 08:46:26 PM
Quotethe only thing worse than a "Walmart Ave." is a traffic light holding you up so that other traffic may exit the "Walmart Ave."
You may be joking about this, but such a sign was actually posted in Frisco, Texas. And TxDOT let it slip by; they typically do not allow this, especially considering that this is a parking lot entrance, and it should not be signed with a street sign.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2Fwmfrisco.png&hash=10f040100087ebbbb871842ef88054d125978640)
Not only that, but the IKEA in Frisco has a BGS on the Sam Rayburn Tollway access road.
Similar signage in St. Charles, IL on Smith Road just north of IL-64 - eastbound is "Wal-Mart", westbound is "Charlestowne Mall."
Quote from: deanej on September 02, 2012, 05:24:50 PM
In St. Lawrence county there are a number of "bridge closed" signs for a bridge that hasn't been open for 40 years and won't be re-opening ever.
Seems like an accurate sign to me.
Quote from: Steve on September 02, 2012, 08:40:59 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fok%2Fbeckham%2Festop.jpg&hash=12144a99df13bf64ea04e84fd7f7151864e4d16e)
Faded, on the left side of a very wide road, behind a pole.
That looks like a temporary 4-way stop assembly to be pulled into the intersection and used if the signals malfunction (see how it's chained to the signal pole?).
Quote from: vtk on September 02, 2012, 07:54:43 PMputting an "obey speed limit" sign before the first "speed limit" sign is poor placement.
Ohio has statutory limits which drivers are supposed to know and which apply in the absence of posted limits. Lack of a sign is no excuse.
Page 206 at http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/30000/30100/30132/810826.pdf .
Quote from: SidS1045 on September 04, 2012, 10:59:57 AM
Quote from: vtk on September 02, 2012, 07:54:43 PMputting an "obey speed limit" sign before the first "speed limit" sign is poor placement.
Ohio has statutory limits which drivers are supposed to know and which apply in the absence of posted limits. Lack of a sign is no excuse.
Page 206 at http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/30000/30100/30132/810826.pdf .
That argument only makes sense if a driver can easily identify the road as "residential". In fact it looks a lot more like many other roads in the Columbus area that are "collectors" and have 35 MPH speed limits, which is probably why traffic is going so fast in the first place.
Quote from: Special K on September 04, 2012, 07:52:36 AM
Quote from: deanej on September 02, 2012, 05:24:50 PM
In St. Lawrence county there are a number of "bridge closed" signs for a bridge that hasn't been open for 40 years and won't be re-opening ever.
Seems like an accurate sign to me.
That bridge has been closed for 40 years and will remain closed for longer than the universe will continue to exist. There is no reason any motorist should expect it to be open. Those signs should just be replaced with dead end signs, because that's what it is (and the county should transfer the road to the town too...).
What were they smokin?
Dallas, Tx:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F51411021.jpg&hash=229d12780380563439f6b67f5c2b586a29704f83)
My first reaction to that photo was, "Damn, there's not much room for exiting traffic to get in the right lane."
Then I realized it's a photo made with a pretty long lens. On GSV there seems plenty of room to change lanes, although it's still kind of tight. http://maps.google.com/maps?q=regal+row+dallas+tx&hl=en&ll=32.836635,-96.875491&spn=0.000576,0.001206&hnear=Regal+Row,+Dallas,+Texas&gl=us&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=32.836517,-96.875495&panoid=d5PpXecnjaDgwicl5PXjxg&cbp=12,173.87,,0,1.5
As of 2008, the sign coming off the exit was different.
QuoteThen I realized it's a photo made with a pretty long lens. On GSV there seems plenty of room to change lanes, although it's still kind of tight
What? That sign definitely does not belong there. It is meant to be used for exit only lanes on freeways. Notice that the right lane is an optional lane (straight or right), so the error is not even understandable. It appears to me that TxDot employees had their heads pretty far up their butts.
GSV also shows the correct sign in that location: LEFT LANE MUST TURN LEFT. Which is more recent?
...or it's shopped...
Most likely, some twit grabbed the wrong square sign out of their truck and installed it without reading it. The wrong sign was up for a couple of days (weeks?) until someone reported it, and they sent out another truck to put the correct sign up.
(Doesn't look shopped to me.)
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 02, 2012, 04:26:11 PM
Referring solely to the two sets of signs in the foreground, not the set of two over the ramp further back bearing the "Baltimore/Washington" and "Richmond" indicators. The signs in the rear were there first. Then they put up the other ones directly in front of them.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2F3d83ded3.jpg&hash=8e813967e3a0ad7faef84a84a812f2ac2640c463)
Not only are they terribly placed, but the layout and font of those signs in the front is particularly cringe worthy!
how much of a zoom lens is that? it looks like perspective is shrunk by a whole lot.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on September 14, 2012, 05:15:51 PM
how much of a zoom lens is that? it looks like perspective is shrunk by a whole lot.
I have been through there a fair number of times (the perspective is indeed shrunk), and have not observed there to be a problem. This image was snapped from the elevated section of westbound Va. 644 (Franconia Road) in Springfield.
Quote from: zorb58 on September 14, 2012, 05:15:00 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 02, 2012, 04:26:11 PM
Referring solely to the two sets of signs in the foreground, not the set of two over the ramp further back bearing the "Baltimore/Washington" and "Richmond" indicators. The signs in the rear were there first. Then they put up the other ones directly in front of them.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2F3d83ded3.jpg&hash=8e813967e3a0ad7faef84a84a812f2ac2640c463)
Not only are they terribly placed, but the layout and font of those signs in the front is particularly cringe worthy!
Although the MUTCD doesn't specify it, I thought the intent of these combination destination/lane use signs was to use them upstream of the intersection or decision point, not at the intersection like this.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on September 14, 2012, 05:15:51 PM
how much of a zoom lens is that? it looks like perspective is shrunk by a whole lot.
iPhone camera, which explains why it's so blurry. I pulled over on the spur of the moment to take the picture. I see those signs all the time but it's hard to get a good picture if you're on the "local" lanes down below there. But that front row of signs is located very close in front of the second one. It's part of what makes it so poorly-placed.
Sadly, a telephone pole mixed with several other signs obscured this old and rare sign on A-10 in Richelieu, QC.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8304%2F7996397578_d42b598c19_z.jpg&hash=2470b8b1dc32e2cd743f0e1717cfe3e4fc6f8182)
Thankfully, I was able to get this shot:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8288%2F7866935222_b16ac8893c_z.jpg&hash=46fbb40d1a58125ebb8132374bca7cd6c8252f0f)
This is in Aiken County. Notice that they still have the crossbuck there, even though the road is no longer in use.
http://goo.gl/maps/dGNPI
The last time I went to Aiken and North Augusta (in August), they still had that there!
That seems less like poor sign placement and more like laziness in removing obsolete signs.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/alpsroads/8028660521/in/photostream
Look at the green guide signs. SB I-35E Frontage Road at SH 121, Lewisville, TX
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F10052012005.jpg&hash=e9014c116f42c1ca43eaf43674d47ba255d14a00)
Quote from: Brian556 on October 05, 2012, 09:43:48 PM
Look at the green guide signs. SB I-35E Frontage Road at SH 121, Lewisville, TX
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F10052012005.jpg&hash=e9014c116f42c1ca43eaf43674d47ba255d14a00)
Reminds me of an incident about 7 years ago when CDOT screwed up 2 sets of curve signs on EB I-70 in Grand Junction, CO:
The first set (on either side of the shoulders) had the two curve signs pointing towards each other, while the second set had the two curve signs pointing away from each other.
Before I had a chance to go by that stretch again w/ camera in tow, CDOT corrected the error. :-(
By the way, what's with the "/" for DFW Airport when pretty much EVERYONE knows it simply as "DFW" :pan:
QuoteBy the way, what's with the "/" for DFW Airport when pretty much EVERYONE knows it simply as "DFW
it's because D/FW is short for "Dallas/Fort Worth" The slash is omitted on newer signs.
A rather humourous error occoured in Fort Worth several years ago. The slash was put in the wrong place, so the sign read "DF/W Airport". Made the sign maker look like a real "DF".
There's a rather hilarious signing error on Griffin Rd immediately south of US 192 near Walt Disney World. Along this road in both directions I believe exists both a "Speed Limit 40" and a "Minimum Speed 40" sign. It's going to be extremely difficult to follow both at the same time.
Out of all the rare times I'm on that road, I usually do 50, hoping a cop would pull me over.
There's also an odd error on US 90 in Ocean Springs, MS. At a certain portion, southbound US 90's speed limit is 45, while the northbound direction's speed limit is 55. I'm debating on whether to call MDOT and ask them if there's a good reason why opposing directions of traffic are supposed to follow speed limits that differ by 10 mph.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8206%2F8173857421_bce6d5b8eb_c.jpg&hash=988b956e919c2db71881377f9cba98aa5c47a313)
Who'd want to go to Los Banos anyway? :sombrero:
rather go there than shopping, wineries, or visitor info. jury's out on downtown; probably similar to Los Banos.
Quote from: Road Hog on November 15, 2012, 08:36:05 AM
Who'd want to go to Los Banos anyway? :sombrero:
I know, right (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4969.0)?
Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on November 10, 2012, 09:51:51 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8206%2F8173857421_bce6d5b8eb_c.jpg&hash=988b956e919c2db71881377f9cba98aa5c47a313)
Quote from: Road Hog on November 15, 2012, 08:36:05 AM
Who'd want to go to Los Banos anyway? :sombrero:
Anyone from San Jose / Santa Clara County who wants to use CA 152 to get to I-5...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8485%2F8198513538_295f43f0e5_z.jpg&hash=af1fcfee594ff57171a496a17e66c7a0b54052f3)
Pretty poor placement on MLK Jr. Blvd in Fayetteville, AR. Supposed to give guidance for AR 180.
Salem, MA (Riley Plaza: MA 114/Washington St./Norman St./New Derby St. intersection):
Street light pole block paddle LGS assembly facing MA 114 Westbound (Washington St.) traffic.
Major LGS WEST 114 PEABODY 4 DANVERS 5 w/old style Left-arrow going through the 114 numerals (directing those to turn left onto Norman St.)
Minor LGS 1A NORTH BEVERLY w/an upward arrow placed to the right of the message (directing those to continue along Washington St.)
Note: the minor LGS is not completely accurate. MA 1A doesn't even touch Washington St. (114 breaks from 1A at the Washington St./Lafayette St. intersection) and 1A continues along Lafayette St. to Derby St. (where Northbound traffic turns right). LGS should read TO 1A NORTH BEVERLY.
A couple on I-10 east of Las Cruces
This is advance signage on I-10 east for FM 1905 in Texas. They built a soundwall but never replaced the sign.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corcohighways.org%2Fhighways%2Fnm%2F10%2F404totx%2F3.jpg&hash=9e435bef4b0fea01dd583d9c52445ef08ee99997)
Here's the streetview from the other side of the soundwall pre-soundwall
http://goo.gl/maps/UkmLG
And then there's this just after the I-10/I-25 junction
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corcohighways.org%2Fhighways%2Fnm%2F10%2F25to227%2F1.jpg&hash=246fc502aa2d7ee296b02f1f3fe3c9be07131e06)
How about many of the road signs along John Young Parkway in Orange County, FL? Many "NEXT SIGNAL" signs are placed behind preexisting trees that block view of the sign. In some places, even next to the sign makes it unreadable.
There's really no way to avoid this one other than turning it into a full interchange or finding a different wording for the yellow auxiliary sign. It's just a very unfortunate coincidence that this sign has to go with this destination....and it's made all the worse by FL-407 being named "Challenger Memorial Parkway." :-o
http://goo.gl/maps/1TBBt
^ Hmmmm...never thought of it like that.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.formulanone.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F05%2FNoReEntry.jpg&hash=4dd44e242b82d25a516db0c9fbd07b6a37141e24)
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 10:59:29 AM
There's really no way to avoid this one other than turning it into a full interchange
They're actually doing this as part of the current six-laning project.
They should have contacted NYSDOT for a solution. This is on NY 481 North between North Syracuse and Clay:
(https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_york400/ny-481_nb_exit_011_04.jpg)
Credit: AARoads
one of two '57 spec interstate shields in Arizona. the other one is on the other side of this gantry.
(//www.aaroads.com/shields/blog/photos/106019.jpg)
one is in terrible light, the other is next to impossible to photograph.
Coonabarabran, NSW
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ozroads.com.au%2FNSW%2FSpecial%2FMAB%2F507.jpg&hash=0e908bb124a1c9d1f5871890438c02d53f752946)
Is that seriously a sign placed backwards? :pan:
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 03, 2012, 07:52:31 AM
Is that seriously a sign placed backwards? :pan:
I assume your comment is TIC? The picture is from Australia and they drive on the left.
Quote from: 1995hoo on December 03, 2012, 08:02:29 AM
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 03, 2012, 07:52:31 AM
Is that seriously a sign placed backwards? :pan:
I assume your comment is TIC? The picture is from Australia and they drive on the left.
I knew they drive on the left, but is that two-way? I thought it was one-way and the other direction was shielded by trees or something. X-(
Come to think of it, there are two solid lines in the right half of that road...
(What does TIC stand for anyway?)
TIC = Tongue-In-Cheek.
And no, a double solid line generally indicates a two-way road. I believe the reason this sign was posted is because it's so far off to the side of the road.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on December 03, 2012, 03:05:05 PM
And no, a double solid line generally indicates a two-way road.
I knew that already.
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 03, 2012, 01:15:03 PM
Come to think of it, there are two solid lines in the right half of that road...
By that I meant I just now saw that.
This sign (and another in an identical spot a little further up the road) can be found on Eisenhower Avenue in Alexandria, Virginia. It's not so much "poor sign placement" as it is "utterly pointless sign placement," but this seemed like the proper thread. It's not like anyone would turn there without the "Do Not Enter" sign–maybe a "No Parking or Standing Anytime" sign might be more appropriate.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2FMiscellanousDecember2012018.jpg&hash=f4cd94ff3920cc1ef2df00f614a7bab9a86e33ab)
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 03, 2012, 01:15:03 PM
Come to think of it, there are two solid lines in the right half of that road...
Perhaps the left lane headed uphill is a climbing lane?
Might be especially needed if this segment of highway is used by road trains (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_train).
https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=46.869758,-113.986011&spn=0.000001,0.00066&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=46.869759,-113.986266&panoid=0T6q5yrQgDs3bCxXTy0Q2Q&cbp=13,326.62,,0,0
I think this one deserves Poor Sign Placement. The BGS hidden partially from the bushes say:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi917.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fad16%2FBJFRacing01%2FUS12_hamilton_lewiston_bgs-1.png&hash=50d07e166893f7399ef2483c7f9e8c698eb314a2)
This is posted just before the West Broadway/Madison Street junction of I-90 Business/US 12 Business and US 12 westbound.
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on December 04, 2012, 11:27:06 PM
https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=46.869758,-113.986011&spn=0.000001,0.00066&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=46.869759,-113.986266&panoid=0T6q5yrQgDs3bCxXTy0Q2Q&cbp=13,326.62,,0,0
I think that's more like "poor tree placement." :P
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on December 04, 2012, 11:27:06 PM
https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=46.869758,-113.986011&spn=0.000001,0.00066&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=46.869759,-113.986266&panoid=0T6q5yrQgDs3bCxXTy0Q2Q&cbp=13,326.62,,0,0
I think this one deserves Poor Sign Placement. The BGS hidden partially from the bushes say:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi917.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fad16%2FBJFRacing01%2FUS12_hamilton_lewiston_bgs-1.png&hash=50d07e166893f7399ef2483c7f9e8c698eb314a2)
This is posted just before the West Broadway/Madison Street junction of I-90 Business/US 12 Business and US 12 westbound.
Something tells me that particular BGS was placed
years prior to the tree being that large. Nothing that a good chainsaw wouldn't fix. :biggrin:
Quote from: Roadsguy on December 05, 2012, 07:58:39 AM
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on December 04, 2012, 11:27:06 PM
https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=46.869758,-113.986011&spn=0.000001,0.00066&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=46.869759,-113.986266&panoid=0T6q5yrQgDs3bCxXTy0Q2Q&cbp=13,326.62,,0,0
I think that's more like "poor tree placement." :P
Well, that problem never existed when that BGS was installed around '74 or '75. Most signs I see in Missoula have been dated as far back as 1975. I guess the tree was REALLY small but now it's at the same height as the post and covering half of that sign.
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on December 06, 2012, 01:41:35 PM
Well, that problem never existed when that BGS was installed around '74 or '75. Most signs I see in Missoula have been dated as far back as 1975. I guess the tree was REALLY small but now it's at the same height as the post and covering half of that sign.
is that a button copy sign? I've never seen button copy in Montana.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 06, 2012, 01:44:26 PM
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on December 06, 2012, 01:41:35 PM
Well, that problem never existed when that BGS was installed around '74 or '75. Most signs I see in Missoula have been dated as far back as 1975. I guess the tree was REALLY small but now it's at the same height as the post and covering half of that sign.
is that a button copy sign? I've never seen button copy in Montana.
I'm not quite sure. The clarity from the Google Street View vehicle isn't that good. I may have to go to that spot and photograph it.
It looks like button copy to me; especially given the old-school porcelain-green background of the signboard.
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on December 06, 2012, 05:23:12 PM
I'm not quite sure. The clarity from the Google Street View vehicle isn't that good. I may have to go to that spot and photograph it.
I'd like to find out for sure.
This yield sign has been in this spot forever, I'm thinking the town has completely forgotten about it. (It obviously less visible in spring and summer) And this is the only yield sign for this intersection. Though I took this pic from the sidewalk, it's just as invisible from the road. (It's in Bath, ME)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi867.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fab236%2Fjwadd13%2Fcaw001.jpg&hash=22b5c9a276e952a32d274fd620874aa2e6d15c86)
wow. first I thought it was just a photo of an unused pole, and the example would be of "poor former sign placement". then I read your caption, and only then did I spot the YIELD because I was looking for it.
I am hoping that in a moving-car context, it is a tad more visible just due to it appearing to move relative to the branches, because in this still photo it is definitely a "where's Waldo" of a sign.
I drive this route every day, and it is not any more visible on the road. In fact the first few months that I started taking this turn I had no idea there was a sign. I had only noticed it when I had to stop and yield for other cars. Spring and summer, forget about it cause the leaves on the tree obscure it even more.
My two cents would be to move the sign back a bit and shorten the pole.
I wonder if it's a case of poor vegetation control than poor sign placement? Perhaps the sign was clearly visible when it was first installed.
Good point Truvelo, especially seeing how faded that sign is. I suppose it's still there cause law requires it, not that the city is concerned about it. :-/
Quote from: Truvelo on December 07, 2012, 02:13:04 PM
I wonder if it's a case of poor vegetation control than poor sign placement? Perhaps the sign was clearly visible when it was first installed.
I think the same could be said for that Hamilton/Lewiston BGS in Missoula. Over time, that one area of brush had overgrown so much that half the sign is obscured from view.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on December 06, 2012, 01:44:26 PM
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on December 06, 2012, 01:41:35 PM
Well, that problem never existed when that BGS was installed around '74 or '75. Most signs I see in Missoula have been dated as far back as 1975. I guess the tree was REALLY small but now it's at the same height as the post and covering half of that sign.
is that a button copy sign? I've never seen button copy in Montana.
Button copy was already a rarity when I (briefly) lived in Montana back in 1992!!! If that is indeed button copy, it may be (one of) the last ones in the whole darn state!!!
I was looking around in Street View near Watkins Glen, NY the other day and came across a left-side supplementary stop sign (http://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=NY-414+S&daddr=NY-414+S&hl=en&ll=42.395361,-76.857293&spn=0.00068,0.00142&sll=42.39493,-76.857043&sspn=0.000684,0.00142&geocode=FcPmhgIdRkBr-w%3BFdHkhgIdhEFr-w&t=h&mra=dme&mrsp=1&sz=20&z=20&layer=c&cbll=42.39546,-76.857348&panoid=6REPngcFc7bUt7f7J8MhfQ&cbp=12,162.54,,0,6.03) that, according to Google's driving directions, is 200 feet before the stop line. For reference, the guardrail on the left side ends about 95 feet before the stop line due to the angle of the intersection.
I was going to say that it's more flat-out erroneous than poor placement -- it should just be a "stop ahead" sign -- but then I went back a few frames in Street View, and found the "stop ahead" sign, complete with bright orange flags. So this is just silly.
Quote from: thenetwork on December 07, 2012, 09:19:57 PM
Button copy was already a rarity when I (briefly) lived in Montana back in 1992!!! If that is indeed button copy, it may be (one of) the last ones in the whole darn state!!!
okay, so Montana did use button copy at some point? that is good to know. I'd never seen any example - historic or otherwise. I believe the only states in which I've never seen any evidence of button copy are Virginia, Delaware, and Mississippi.
Quote from: Michael on January 15, 2013, 11:22:05 PM
I was looking around in Street View near Watkins Glen, NY the other day and came across a left-side supplementary stop sign (http://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=NY-414+S&daddr=NY-414+S&hl=en&ll=42.395361,-76.857293&spn=0.00068,0.00142&sll=42.39493,-76.857043&sspn=0.000684,0.00142&geocode=FcPmhgIdRkBr-w%3BFdHkhgIdhEFr-w&t=h&mra=dme&mrsp=1&sz=20&z=20&layer=c&cbll=42.39546,-76.857348&panoid=6REPngcFc7bUt7f7J8MhfQ&cbp=12,162.54,,0,6.03)...
No, it's just on the side with the racing line... :sombrero:
In Orlando, FL we have a sign approaching I-4 from NB John Young Parkway that is placed behind the Orange County Correctional Facility's fence and is blocked from view. True the sign is not needed for the most part as overhead signs exist at the interchange itself, but why place a sign that cannot be read? The fence was there first and the sign was added when the interchange underwent reconfiguring in 2005.
No the sign is not imprisoned like Casey Anthony was (as that was her home for almost two years), the road widens and the new lane begins where the facility's property moves away from the road more and FDOT took advantage of that to add the lane.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Holden+Heights,+FL&hl=en&ll=28.505524,-81.417435&spn=0.004026,0.006899&sll=27.698638,-83.804601&sspn=8.300816,14.128418&oq=holden+he&t=h&hnear=Holden+Heights,+Orange,+Florida&z=17&layer=c&cbll=28.505345,-81.417436&panoid=BFpNdK84rUvCspN2Zarajw&cbp=12,341.35,,0,0
Ok, I get that this is a reference marker point. But is it really nessessary to install a reasurrance sign just a few feet from the end of the route? Wouldn't it have made more sense to put the reference marker on the reasurrance sign on the opposite side of the road? Just sayin'.
Ferris, TX
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F10142012SLR030.jpg&hash=73bd94dc0fce5345edd5c15a96bc48a7238e32cd)
^BUSINESS, but not BUSINESS LOOP. Also, no letter suffix, Texas style.
Isn't there some TxDOT saying that the reference markers have to be on alternating sides of the road?
Yes, that is standard practice. However, in this case, they should make a exeption, and put the reference marker on the resurrance sign on the other side of the road, or on a standalone post without any signs. This silliness is what happens when one follows the rules too much.
On FM 407, in Lewisville, there are two reference markers/reasurrance signs in a row on the same side of the road, and there is no good reason for it.
Typically TxDOT's practice on two-lane roads is to post reference markers and reassurance signs every 2 miles on opposite sides of the road, or as it works out, markers on one side every 4 miles.
And I too have seen the reassurance signs in many odd places, for example just feet from a junction.
The lane-use sign here:
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-7BSdff_ggII/USx80q3llpI/AAAAAAAACnM/y3e_74NtY3k/s800/IMG_20130114_171549.jpg)
First, it's on an approach with 6 lanes, but it's against the far right curb. It would be very difficult to see it from the leftmost lanes during heavy traffic.
Second, it's too close to the actual intersection! By the time you would see this and realize you're in the wrong lane, it would be too late to move over.
Seems to me there's usually a lane use sign near where the turn lanes begin, and another much closer to the intersection. Was there not a sign further upstream from this?
But yeah, with this many lanes, they really should have overhead lane use signs on wire span.
I can't remember if there was, honestly--I snapped the photo months ago and only found it again while cleaning out my phone this morning. I'd imagine there was, though.
This is on Airport RD/PA 987 S on the ramp for US 22 East(Street view: http://goo.gl/maps/0b2ZA), and the speed limit on Airport road is 50mph. That speed limit sign shouldn't be placed to the right of the ramp, especially considering it's a loop ramp.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi37.tinypic.com%2F2mo8fux.jpg&hash=33bec8eff98425d64648f12c463f81a725251d12)
Someone's not entirely clear on the concept of an "advance warning sign". (https://maps.google.com/?ll=39.899395,-83.082165&spn=0.003184,0.005284&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=39.899392,-83.082114&panoid=aHK1-P4l1dHvnsCfILeN3w&cbp=12,305.4,,0,7.04)
It's Urbancrest. They don't need advance warning signs because the only traffic is locals. They blocked the streets out of the west end of their community to make sure of that.
END 27 blocking JCT 4 sign in Massachusetts. You can find this on the AlpsRoads website.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fma%2Fma_27%2Fnend.jpg&hash=3b0c9e8ac9aa054a8660b6a647d897e3696bdfc4)
Any time a speed limit sign is placed directly before a stoplight.
Quote from: 1 on September 17, 2013, 02:15:36 PM
Any time a speed limit sign is placed directly before a stoplight.
Or this:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2F2008_Raleigh_meet%2FImages%2F298.jpg&hash=9bfa680c8e371e55a138a1ea76b8a01dc34ffa12)
at least that has reflective red diamonds. I was once driving around Atlanta at night, and 30 feet past a SPEED LIMIT 35 sign was a black tarp covering a pile of dirt that had been used to close off a road. I almost ran into it at full speed!
Quote from: hbelkins on September 17, 2013, 02:58:31 PM
Or this:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2F2008_Raleigh_meet%2FImages%2F298.jpg&hash=9bfa680c8e371e55a138a1ea76b8a01dc34ffa12)
...
That's just a little bit more than the law would allow...
Quote from: hbelkins on September 17, 2013, 02:58:31 PM
Quote from: 1 on September 17, 2013, 02:15:36 PM
Any time a speed limit sign is placed directly before a stoplight.
Or this:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.millenniumhwy.net%2F2008_Raleigh_meet%2FImages%2F298.jpg&hash=9bfa680c8e371e55a138a1ea76b8a01dc34ffa12)
A 55 MPH crash test out in the open! Oh, what a novel concept! :biggrin:
I mean, whoever put the SPEED LIMIT 55 sign near the armco barricade is a total whackjob and should refrain from working with the city's transportation division.
Well, just because it says "55" doesn't mean anyone is required to go that fast.....
In keeping with formulanone's comment, though, I also pictured Bo and Luke Duke jumping to the road on the far side.
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on September 17, 2013, 03:13:02 PM
I mean, whoever put the SPEED LIMIT 55 sign near the armco barricade is a total whackjob and should refrain from working with the city's transportation division.
...pretty sure that 55 sign was there long before the road was closed.
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on September 20, 2013, 11:11:39 PM
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on September 17, 2013, 03:13:02 PM
I mean, whoever put the SPEED LIMIT 55 sign near the armco barricade is a total whackjob and should refrain from working with the city's transportation division.
...pretty sure that 55 sign was there long before the road was closed.
It was. They didn't remove it when they barricaded the road. This is along the new US 70 alignment near Clayton, NC.
Quote from: Central Avenue on August 31, 2012, 09:11:42 PM
I love how they included block numbers as if the Wal-Mart parking lot entrance is a street.
Interestingly, when they built a Wal-Mart here a few years back, the entrance was
actually named as a street (named after the fellow who was County Commissioner at the time - still in the office, even). Some slight justification might be because it also provided access to the road network of a trailer park whose access road it replaced...
Quote from: Ace10 on October 05, 2012, 10:58:22 PMThere's also an odd error on US 90 in Ocean Springs, MS. At a certain portion, southbound US 90's speed limit is 45, while the northbound direction's speed limit is 55. I'm debating on whether to call MDOT and ask them if there's a good reason why opposing directions of traffic are supposed to follow speed limits that differ by 10 mph.
On US-319 here there's a place where southbound is 55, and northbound is 45, but that's because the northbound lanes swing out to an extra-wide median width so southbound 319 can have a left-bound "exit" for south FL-61 - which then has a traffic light where it crosses northbound 319, which I believe explains the lower limit. (This was billed through construction, it should be noted, as a "flyover"... :banghead:)
Quote from: NE2 on November 30, 2012, 02:29:41 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 30, 2012, 10:59:29 AM
There's really no way to avoid this one other than turning it into a full interchange
They're actually doing this as part of the current six-laning project.
They are? Finally? Is it a full freeway-to-freeway junction now or a more "conventional" one?
A simple folded diamond.
I assume this was installed by the New York State Department of Redundancy.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi787%2F100_5402.JPG&hash=866b29df977d2228b41f91297e6f50d58f8f969e)
Quote from: vdeane on October 03, 2013, 07:40:42 PM
I assume this was installed by the New York State Department of Redundancy.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi787%2F100_5402.JPG&hash=866b29df977d2228b41f91297e6f50d58f8f969e)
I thought it was the Department of Redundancy Department. Silly me.
Well, there's another Alanland moment for 'ya today! :biggrin:
Quote from: SidS1045 on October 03, 2013, 10:50:25 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 03, 2013, 07:40:42 PM
I assume this was installed by the New York State Department of Redundancy.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FNY%2Fi787%2F100_5402.JPG&hash=866b29df977d2228b41f91297e6f50d58f8f969e)
I thought it was the Department of Redundancy Department. Silly me.
The ground-mounted sign is most likely the original BGS from the days when the last section of Interstate 787 was opened north of 23rd Street at the Watervliet/Green Island municipal line. Therefore, this original southbound I-787 BGS probably was installed just after Interstate 787 was extended up to NY 7 at the Collar City Bridge into Troy. The exit tabs were added long afterward. For many years, Interstate 787 BGSs had no numbered exits. On my last few trips back up to New York, I noticed many new and quite substantially constructed sign bridges have been erected. This approximately 30-year old ground-mounted sign will probably be removed in time.
Here's a Philippine example of one:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm4.staticflickr.com%2F3673%2F11559465076_0cbe2ef9fe_c.jpg&hash=2efca5e2bf77078ee084395ebbc3848e2c24730d)
First of all, this is what the sign says:
"EXIT ->
MAGALLANES"
In this one, the sign is on the gore point. This would be some poor placement because this might lead to miss the exit due to the sign's location. This would've been avoided if this sign would be placed before the exit rather than on the gore point.
Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on December 26, 2013, 12:41:53 AM
In this one, the sign is on the gore point.
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images780/i-780_eb_exit_001a_01.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/texas/texas999/dnt_nb_exit_004_03.jpg)
Quote from: NE2 on December 26, 2013, 12:54:02 AM
Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on December 26, 2013, 12:41:53 AM
In this one, the sign is on the gore point.
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images780/i-780_eb_exit_001a_01.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/texas/texas999/dnt_nb_exit_004_03.jpg)
I know those, but the the problem with this one is that the sign (There's only one) is where the "Loop 12" sign would be, over the main road.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.staticflickr.com%2F2880%2F13424356315_156ca39bd7_z.jpg&hash=8e3b12892f569bf4f79710b6b2bc92101e3d4ae8) Both signs should be on the bridge instead of one up and the other down below. In fact the lower sign with the mileages to control points was there first as the overhead (sorry about the cut off) was erected with the overpass later on.
I guess contractors only do what they are supposed to even when engineers screw up.
Here's a brand new one, part of the US-31 upgrade on the south side of South Bend.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi59.tinypic.com%2F28u1ohw.jpg&hash=9a5cb51d76944455b860ad6737adf6e4d6dd93bf)
The photo was shot from a safe location, so it's not obvious that the new Kern Road exit sign is directly behind the Exit marker in the motorist's view. This ramp is not being relocated, so I doubt that the Exit sign is being moved. The sign could be confusing, coming right in the middle of US-20 exit. Just ahead is an overhead for the loop ramp for US-20 EB. If they wanted to mention Kern Road, that would be a good place to do so.
It could also be pointed out that this sign is posted on Business 31, while the exit is off of mainline 31. The mainline is physically straight ahead from here.
Where US 290 crosses Williamson Creek in southwest Austin, the City of Austin recently installed a street sign blade for Patton Ranch Road a foot or two in front of and at the same height as the first line of the sign for Williamson Creek, so it's impossible to tell in the dark that there's a street sign there and that the sign isn't indicating that the highway is going over Patton Ranch Creek.
Cross-posted from the thread about "No Passing Zone" pennants. Seen this past Friday on US-301 in Virginia somewhere between Bowling Green and the Richmond suburbs:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2FErrornopassingsigns_zpsd01ae162.png&hash=5c15212a268eeb95ce65d2c81330fba8ae7cd314)
Quote from: 1995hoo on May 05, 2014, 03:09:32 PM
Cross-posted from the thread about "No Passing Zone" pennants. Seen this past Friday on US-301 in Virginia somewhere between Bowling Green and the Richmond suburbs:
VDOT doing a good job making sure those being overtaken understand that they are not supposed to be overtaken anymore.
Quote from: NE2 on December 26, 2013, 12:54:02 AM
Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on December 26, 2013, 12:41:53 AM
In this one, the sign is on the gore point.
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images780/i-780_eb_exit_001a_01.jpg)
FWIW, this one has since been replaced by a sign about 1/8 mile upstream, and the gore point now only contains an EXIT sign on a post.
Quote from: NE2 on December 26, 2013, 12:54:02 AM
(https://www.aaroads.com/california/images780/i-780_eb_exit_001a_01.jpg)
These types of signs trusses (called a "butterfly truss") were quite common in California back in the day. Caltrans is slowly phasing out this type of truss for safety reasons.
FWIW, I believe the above truss and signs date back to when US 40 still existed in California because of the offset placement of the I-80 shields. I think, at one time, the signs had both I-80 and US 40 shields.
Baltimore is full of them!
The freeway formerly known as I-170:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fmd%2Fus_40%2Fw40_1.jpg&hash=156d094c6f7995ffa45fd9f3a486488cf268dc1b)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fmd%2Fus_40%2F170w2.jpg&hash=1ea80025e9490398235d0447b33582c9d74f22f2)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fmd%2Fus_40%2F170we.jpg&hash=7646baab110498be8cd467089c4651f06e39f6e1)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fmd%2Fus_40%2F170w8.jpg&hash=4acdaa96301792074501ce1646ec58475217d040)
Normally, the background for a lane closed sign would be orange, not yellow (as shown on the small diamond sign on the bottom left in the first photo). Also, the exit sign was totally unnecessary, as the pavement that followed after it was a complete waste of perfectly good concrete; and the Downtown/MLK Blvd/US 1 signs should not have been put up either, especially when it was known that I-70 was never going to come in from the west because of that pesky park, which the environmentalists successfully protected many decades ago.
I-83's southern end:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fmd%2Fi-83%2Fs1.jpg&hash=eb703ce17372a27dc121113d7bc7afcbc8ddd7bb)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Fmd%2Fi-83%2Fs2.jpg&hash=17536b30c11ecb94aba5b9720b2b5f873cedbdb6)
I-83's supposed "interchange" with Fayette Street is actually a five-way intersection where President Street picks up to the south, and the Fallsway branches off the northbound side; perhaps there would've been a diamond interchange at Gay/Pleasant Street (and no access for Fayette Street) had it been completed to I-95 as originally planned.
Quote from: Henry on May 06, 2014, 04:35:50 PM
Normally, the background for a lane closed sign would be orange, not yellow
Orange is for temporary conditions, such as lane closures due to construction. Yellow is for warnings, including where a lane ends as part of the highway's "permanent" design.
NJDOT placed a mileage sign for US 206 NB in a weird place in Somerville, NJ. It has the sign placed upon entering the Somerville Circle instead of after an intersection or in between as usually they are placed.
I imagine that to place is post Somerville Circle is not an option because there are many other signs from that point to the interchange with I-287 due to the interchanges with US 22 and Commons Way. To add this would create a safety concern there, but the sign could have been moved a few hundred feet back of its current location or even better yet just north of the previous major intersection which is a heavily traveled thoroughfare across the route.
Quote from: vtk on May 06, 2014, 10:51:09 PM
Quote from: Henry on May 06, 2014, 04:35:50 PM
Normally, the background for a lane closed sign would be orange, not yellow
Orange is for temporary conditions, such as lane closures due to construction. Yellow is for warnings, including where a lane ends as part of the highway's "permanent" design.
I know that, but my thing is, why build a freeway in a random location when it had absolutely no chance of connecting to another in the first place? (Thankfully, the western end of the old I-170 is gone forever.)
Quote from: Henry on May 07, 2014, 01:19:11 PM
Quote from: vtk on May 06, 2014, 10:51:09 PM
Quote from: Henry on May 06, 2014, 04:35:50 PM
Normally, the background for a lane closed sign would be orange, not yellow
Orange is for temporary conditions, such as lane closures due to construction. Yellow is for warnings, including where a lane ends as part of the highway's "permanent" design.
I know that, but my thing is, why build a freeway in a random location when it had absolutely no chance of connecting to another in the first place? (Thankfully, the western end of the old I-170 is gone forever.)
I'm not sure how that has anything to do with the color of the sign, unless you're suggesting traffic control devices should perpetually treat the stub of a cancelled freeway like a construction zone...
Just posted this on the main site (I-78 west in NJ):
(https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_jersey076/i-078_wb_exit_024_04.jpg) (https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_jersey076/i-078_wb_exit_024_04.jpg)
Quote from: 1995hoo on September 02, 2012, 04:26:11 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2F3d83ded3.jpg&hash=8e813967e3a0ad7faef84a84a812f2ac2640c463)
If you excuse this old sign here...
The first set of I-95 shields are Clearview.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi244.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fgg36%2Fjcm9572%2FIMG_2676_zpsdccb62fd.jpg&hash=38fe710b3ca9d563145267bc37b255fae8c4d9ba)
How recent is that picture? I'm pretty sure that's a US 25 sign, because Kentucky's signs have been known to fail like that, and there are a few black-on-white mileage signs left in District 6. The stick on "S" is an added bonus.
Couldn't be too recent as gas was showing $1.blank. It would be $3.xx now. My guess is late 1990's.
This sign looks like it is situated just north of Dry Ridge, KY, correct?
Could easily be as recent as mid-00's. Late 90's saw gas prices under $1/gal much of the time.
I suspect the highway signs were there first, anyway.
Also: I think that whiteout S is upside down.
Actually I took that picture last night. The gas station appeared long closed.
Yes US 25 (now US 25 Business) in Dry Ridge KY.
I've only driven 25 southbound there, so that's probably why I don't remember seeing that sign.
Joining the Pima Freeway near South Scottsdale . . .
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FbNCwAxE.png&hash=9607a51ca43d44602f978fdc4b643311949f9962)
DE 2 at Griffin Dr.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FpFy6d1w.jpg&hash=53842cf0b069d46941b41e56cbb52e74d83531bb)
EDIT: Replaced pic with one that I took.
While in Jackson, MS, I noticed that it's pretty hard to read the signs on Pascagoula Street as you approach I-55 until you are essentially right under them.
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.2964028,-90.1739533,3a,47.2y,84.76h,95.23t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sse1aUzVrgOuw0mket856tw!2e0
It's not terrible, since you can still see enough to get the message, but the OSU navigational sign obscures the OH 315 sign just enough to be irritating:
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3889/15025061050_33ab550a00_c.jpg)
That wayfinding sign should be on the near side of the intersection (relative to the SB exit traffic) anyway. I don't think its text is large enough to be read from the distance required to decide which way to turn.
Quote from: vtk on September 12, 2014, 04:17:34 PM
That wayfinding sign should be on the near side of the intersection (relative to the SB exit traffic) anyway. I don't think its text is large enough to be read from the distance required to decide which way to turn.
I had the same thought. Oddly enough, the one for the NB ramp
is placed on the near side, so it's a bit confusing that the posted the SB one where it is.
Half Street and Potomac Avenue SW in DC (picture taken from Half Street). The stop sign is in a horrible location. Lots of drivers don't even notice it, especially when traffic is heavy after a ballgame. OK, the wall on the right doesn't help in terms of where to put the sign, but.....
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2Fb9a5f2e0f984da2828ae954f61303837_zpsdcd1d785.jpg&hash=f6479f5131110499f22dedd5d06e4f990a0d80e9)
Currently, this sign (https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=34.705669,-86.673528&spn=0.000002,0.001032&t=h&z=21&layer=c&cbll=34.705593,-86.673484&panoid=1ob8SmoLhfT_pIaVTKXWcQ&cbp=12,227.84,,0,13.45) is covered by the hedge that's at the base of it. When I rode past it a little while back, I didn't even see it until I was about to pass it.
Spotted yesterday. The warning signs are placed directly in front of the route marker. I was zoomed in too far to get an overall look.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1028.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy348%2Fhbelkins%2FIMG_9366_zpse9082585.jpg&hash=d8beb89dbf7456785831164d9b02d5a0ee54356f)
I hope this is not permanent sign placement. Seen in the reversible HOV carriageway in Springfield, Virginia. The diamond-shaped sign facing the other way that blocks the new small green "Express Exit" sign is a standard sign for thru traffic when the lanes are going in the other direction denoting a merge from the left.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2FPoorsignplacementSpringfield_zpsd7bfdc42.png&hash=c7a8534e3c795f01f0465fcdde99507e664757a3)
Same spot going the other way a little over 90 minutes later. It's not nearly as bad in the other direction:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2FPoorsignplacementSpringfield2_zpsb5c7c3f4.png&hash=d9f0e705284caa1985986c230ee5031aee7f9583)
^^ WTF? These should have been placed back-to-back on the same pole.
Quote from: Brandon on October 17, 2014, 03:08:21 PM
^^ WTF? These should have been placed back-to-back on the same pole.
I am pretty certain the "merge" sign was there first and the "Express Exit" sign is new because Tuesday was the first time I'd seen the latter sign and because the whole "Express" usage on the signs through there is new as part of the HO/T conversion. But yeah, even if the merge sign was already there, they could and should have done exactly what you describe, or alternatively they could have moved the merge sign to where the exit sign is now and put the exit sign where the merge sign used to be.
Whatever the rationale, someone wasn't thinking. I might send the first picture to VDOT.
You should. That's a big boo boo on the contractor for not having them back to back. Some bonehead should be reprimanded for this error and fix the problem before people end up wrecking themselves.
Quote from: Billy F 1988 on October 17, 2014, 10:21:30 PM
You should. That's a big boo boo on the contractor for not having them back to back. Some bonehead should be reprimanded for this error and fix the problem before people end up wrecking themselves.
Last night I tweeted it to both VDOT and the contractor who's building the HO/T lanes. No reply yet, though of course it is the weekend.
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 17, 2014, 02:28:13 PM
I hope this is not permanent sign placement. Seen in the reversible HOV carriageway in Springfield, Virginia. The diamond-shaped sign facing the other way that blocks the new small green "Express Exit" sign is a standard sign for thru traffic when the lanes are going in the other direction denoting a merge from the left.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2FPoorsignplacementSpringfield_zpsd7bfdc42.png&hash=c7a8534e3c795f01f0465fcdde99507e664757a3)
....
Passed through there earlier today and the sign has been repositioned. I'd like to believe the tweet I sent in had something to do with that, though of course I can't verify that because they never replied. Behold the power of the AARoads.com forum!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FExitsignfixed_zps998d2c8a.png&hash=1d4591a35f152946c419d6cf435a4d41aa380f5b)
I'm not sure if this one exactly fits here, but I'll take a shot. It's on the ramp that carries EB I-80 from its concurrence with the I-94 on the Borman to its concurrence with I-90 on the Indiana Toll Road. I've seen the sign perhaps a hundred times and it never ceases to amaze me with its placement: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5855799,-87.231911,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sSUnjJNd2rFutXveJk-nPng!2e0?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5855799,-87.231911,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sSUnjJNd2rFutXveJk-nPng!2e0?hl=en)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi62.tinypic.com%2Fdwou89.png&hash=460168e8233eb81dd3000255313c7727eed9ad07)
In fact, what exactly is its purpose? When the sign comes clearly into view, the motorist is far beyond the decision point. If he wants to stay on 80, he is either on it or screwed. Before I learned this exit well, I know that at least once I found myself to the left of the concrete wall when that sign mocked me. All I could do is say, "How the hell I'm supposed to get there?"
This is a good one. My guess is that lane didn't used to be exit only and it went thru, especially because the "20 MPH RAMP" is in the same location/color where an "EXIT \/ ONLY" would be .
It's also curious that the I-90 shield is placed where it is - almost like an afterthought.
Quote from: theline on December 11, 2014, 07:37:48 PM
I'm not sure if this one exactly fits here, but I'll take a shot. It's on the ramp that carries EB I-80 from its concurrence with the I-94 on the Borman to its concurrence with I-90 on the Indiana Toll Road. I've seen the sign perhaps a hundred times and it never ceases to amaze me with its placement: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5855799,-87.231911,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sSUnjJNd2rFutXveJk-nPng!2e0?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5855799,-87.231911,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sSUnjJNd2rFutXveJk-nPng!2e0?hl=en)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi62.tinypic.com%2Fdwou89.png&hash=460168e8233eb81dd3000255313c7727eed9ad07)
In fact, what exactly is its purpose? When the sign comes clearly into view, the motorist is far beyond the decision point. If he wants to stay on 80, he is either on it or screwed. Before I learned this exit well, I know that at least once I found myself to the left of the concrete wall when that sign mocked me. All I could do is say, "How the hell I'm supposed to get there?"
The black on yellow 20 mph warning itself isn't totally unusual: On high speed roads with low speed ramps, you can often find something along these lines to alert people as to the advisory speed.
The placement of the I-90 is a bit unusual. And the entire sign location itself. Going back on the highway, the closest sign for this exit is attached to the overhead gantry for the previous exit, and best I could tell there was no other supplemental sign on the highway as to this exit's purpose...until you were well down the separated lane.
PS...Geez...paint that bridge!
I would guess the position of the I-90 shield is to eliminate directional confusion. The ramp is the continuation of I-80 East onto the Toll Road, but I-90 in both directions is accessible from the same ramp. Though the shields could have been side-by-side on top with the East over the I-80 shield only. FWIW . . .
I don't like how the sign looks, but that's not the problem with it.
http://goo.gl/maps/Fzmvk
You'd think they would just attach that small sign on the streetlight :hmmm:
Not that bad, just a nitpick of mine when "ahead" signs are basically 10 feet away from the "here" sign.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FsbpoLca.jpg&hash=92d07c81669f6f21d7d20deed6b7a239198225f9)
Quote from: SignGeek101 on December 25, 2014, 11:47:33 AM
I don't like how the sign looks, but that's not the problem with it.
http://goo.gl/maps/Fzmvk
You'd think they would just attach that small sign on the streetlight :hmmm:
Odd. I'm not sure
why how they expect anyone to read that going 110-120.
Quote from: jakeroot on January 02, 2015, 12:47:31 AM
Not that bad, just a nitpick of mine when "ahead" signs are basically 10 feet away from the "here" sign.
This one (http://goo.gl/maps/6tYbj) is great too. 5 meters make all the difference in the world, doesn't it? :-P
https://www.google.com/maps/@28.411758,-81.4767725,3a,75y,270h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sJXhMrFXyjkcmuL9_QWJ-bg!2e0
This sign for I-4 West needs to be placed before the curve leading into this intersection as there is a limited sight distance for viewing this sign in advance.
In fact many tourists bound for I-4 west use this part of Turkey Lake Road and will in fact do heavy weaving after seeing this sign. So either another advanced sign needs to be placed before the curve (as there used to be an LGS before) or this sign needs to be moved back.
Here's a sign at an entrance to a parking lot here in Huntsville that's starting to get covered over by a tree if they haven't cut the tree back already (this was taken back in August of 2014):
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7541/16126280509_d66b8c383b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/qz2pn8)Enter Here (https://flic.kr/p/qz2pn8) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/people/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Also, I have a photo of a traffic light that's partially covered by a tree up in Philadelphia that I took back in 2013 that I can post if it counts.
This one is new: http://goo.gl/maps/a0L9S
Another douse of stupidity.
http://goo.gl/maps/FrXow
Saw this today in Hallandale, FL right by I-95
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimagizer.imageshack.us%2Fa%2Fimg661%2F9610%2F7Ythae.jpg&hash=78ea384c19858b8019327239bc4a7a3733d4b9ed)
Quote from: bigboi00069 on January 24, 2015, 08:41:55 PM
Saw this today in Hallandale, FL right by I-95
If it was properly manicured, the tree would be above it today, and within a couple years, it will be above the sign without proper maintenance. It also doesn't look like it'd be as bad if you were in the lanes instead of the sidewalk.
Quote from: UCFKnights on January 24, 2015, 09:05:23 PM
Quote from: bigboi00069 on January 24, 2015, 08:41:55 PM
Saw this today in Hallandale, FL right by I-95
If it was properly manicured, the tree would be above it today, and within a couple years, it will be above the sign without proper maintenance. It also doesn't look like it'd be as bad if you were in the lanes instead of the sidewalk.
I agree if the tree were manicured it wouldn't be an issue, however that sign has been there for about 2 years or so and is usually blocked by the palm fronds. I took another picture of it from the road, just didn't post it since the message on the sign had disappeared by then. You can tell it still obstructs the sign though.
(https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/1043x685q90/661/37KJLi.jpg)
I guess the contractor that erected this brand new BGS (http://goo.gl/maps/vVqn1) didn't bring a pair of hedge trimmers with them. :rofl: If one scrolls back-and-forth; one can see an older view showing the previous BGS.
Quote from: jakeroot on January 02, 2015, 12:47:31 AM
Not that bad, just a nitpick of mine when "ahead" signs are basically 10 feet away from the "here" sign..
One of my pet peeves is Signal Ahead signs that are placed where the signal is in plain sight to the driver.
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 06, 2015, 06:18:56 PM
I guess the contractor that erected this brand new BGS (http://goo.gl/maps/vVqn1) didn't bring a pair of hedge trimmers with them. :rofl: If one scrolls back-and-forth; one can see an older view showing the previous BGS.
Unfortunately, tree trimming is often regarded by contractors as an "optional extra".
Quote from: roadman on February 06, 2015, 06:29:08 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 06, 2015, 06:18:56 PM
I guess the contractor that erected this brand new BGS (http://goo.gl/maps/vVqn1) didn't bring a pair of hedge trimmers with them. :rofl: If one scrolls back-and-forth; one can see an older view showing the previous BGS.
Unfortunately, tree trimming is often regarded by contractors as an "optional extra".
Personally, I'm surprised that the RE (Resident Engineer) on site for the project didn't flag this when the foundations for the posts were poured.
Guys, if you want people to follow a certain speed limit, at least post the sign towards traffic, not parallel to the road.
http://goo.gl/maps/no12n
Not going to mention the fact that this sign is black on yellow, non standard for sure.
Quote from: roadman on February 06, 2015, 06:26:51 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 02, 2015, 12:47:31 AM
Not that bad, just a nitpick of mine when "ahead" signs are basically 10 feet away from the "here" sign..
One of my pet peeves is Signal Ahead signs that are placed where the signal is in plain sight to the driver.
IIRC, it has been the practice within certain cities to put up that sign when a new traffic signal is installed with a "NEW" plate as well. After about 6 months, they may remove the "NEW" but the signal ahead sign is still there. For old timers, they may need a reminder that there is now a signal when they may be used to driving that way for 20 years without stopping there, but if you're just passing through, it may seem like just another signal and the sign placement is redundant.
But I agree, at a certain point, the extra sign is no longer helpful.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fexpressway.paulrands.com%2Fgallery%2Froads%2Fqld%2Fnumbered%2Falphanumeric%2Fm-a1%2F02_gatewaymwy%2F02_brisbanerivertobaldhills%2Fnorthbound%2Fimages%2F201107_33_deagon_depotrd_sr27_robtilley.jpg&hash=2ea19039db41fa3908a089c5d3e7ce82d68937b2)
Quote from: mrsman on February 08, 2015, 07:40:33 AM
Quote from: roadman on February 06, 2015, 06:26:51 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 02, 2015, 12:47:31 AM
Not that bad, just a nitpick of mine when "ahead" signs are basically 10 feet away from the "here" sign..
One of my pet peeves is Signal Ahead signs that are placed where the signal is in plain sight to the driver.
IIRC, it has been the practice within certain cities to put up that sign when a new traffic signal is installed with a "NEW" plate as well. After about 6 months, they may remove the "NEW" but the signal ahead sign is still there. For old timers, they may need a reminder that there is now a signal when they may be used to driving that way for 20 years without stopping there, but if you're just passing through, it may seem like just another signal and the sign placement is redundant.
But I agree, at a certain point, the extra sign is no longer helpful.
I have seen you drove US 27 from Moore Haven, FL to Haines City, FL. It seems every signal there has flashing yellow SIGNAL AHEAD signs. Yet where several miles go between signals on the same road nothing is signed.
For safety you would think that FDOT would do the opposite as long stretches, even if the signal is visible, without signals you have a tendency of not expecting them, so there the flashing yellow warning beacons would be posted. In fact NJ, PA, NY, and NC on divided highways post warning signs with beacons to inform you of a signal after long signal less stretches or at points where freeways become arterials.
Quote from: roadman65 on February 08, 2015, 08:04:46 PM
Quote from: mrsman on February 08, 2015, 07:40:33 AM
Quote from: roadman on February 06, 2015, 06:26:51 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 02, 2015, 12:47:31 AM
Not that bad, just a nitpick of mine when "ahead" signs are basically 10 feet away from the "here" sign..
One of my pet peeves is Signal Ahead signs that are placed where the signal is in plain sight to the driver.
IIRC, it has been the practice within certain cities to put up that sign when a new traffic signal is installed with a "NEW" plate as well. After about 6 months, they may remove the "NEW" but the signal ahead sign is still there. For old timers, they may need a reminder that there is now a signal when they may be used to driving that way for 20 years without stopping there, but if you're just passing through, it may seem like just another signal and the sign placement is redundant.
But I agree, at a certain point, the extra sign is no longer helpful.
I have seen you drove US 27 from Moore Haven, FL to Haines City, FL. It seems every signal there has flashing yellow SIGNAL AHEAD signs. Yet where several miles go between signals on the same road nothing is signed.
For safety you would think that FDOT would do the opposite as long stretches, even if the signal is visible, without signals you have a tendency of not expecting them, so there the flashing yellow warning beacons would be posted. In fact NJ, PA, NY, and NC on divided highways post warning signs with beacons to inform you of a signal after long signal less stretches or at points where freeways become arterials.
What I don't like is if you live in an area where they have lights that flash when the traffic light is going to change (a.k.a. Prepare To Stop When Flashing), then when those yokels go out to an area where there are permanently flashing Signal Ahead signs -- they slow to a crawl expecting the light to turn red when in fact it's just a cautionary light. I followed some moron into 3 intersections like that before I was able to pass them.
Remember we live in a society that cannot tell the difference between a protected left turn and the partially protected left turn that they had to invent the flashing left turn arrow.
Heck look at the EXIT ONLY warning on overhead exit guides and the total idiot proof dotted lines when a lane drops on a freeway for exit. Still you get drivers who cut back in as they are surprised to see their lane exit at the last moment. Truckers on I-287 in NJ are the worst as they should know the roads best, but at NJ 27 SB Exit 2B, they always cut over as many act like they have no idea the road narrows from 4 to 3 lanes with Exit 2B taking away one of the lanes.
You cannot make the roads safe enough no matter what you do.
Quote from: roadman65 on February 09, 2015, 02:46:02 AM
Remember we live in a society that cannot tell the difference between a protected left turn and the partially protected left turn that they had to invent the flashing left turn arrow.
Heck look at the EXIT ONLY warning on overhead exit guides and the total idiot proof dotted lines when a lane drops on a freeway for exit. Still you get drivers who cut back in as they are surprised to see their lane exit at the last moment. Truckers on I-287 in NJ are the worst as they should know the roads best, but at NJ 27 SB Exit 2B, they always cut over as many act like they have no idea the road narrows from 4 to 3 lanes with Exit 2B taking away one of the lanes.
You cannot make the roads safe enough no matter what you do.
Well, we could start by making the DOL driving test longer than 10 minutes.
Quote from: jakeroot on February 09, 2015, 03:30:30 AM
Well, we could start by making the DOL driving test longer than 10 minutes.
Driving tests in the US are only 10 minutes? :wow:
My test of 45 minutes included city driving, rural roads, motorway driving and reversing into a parking space between two cars, as well as inspecting some part of the car before driving (I got to check lights and brakes). And in addition to that, a theory exam (multiple-choice) where you need to get about 75-80 % right (out of 65 questions). They're very strict on passing the tests too, especially the actual driving where not stopping at a stop sign is an instant fail.
Quote from: riiga on February 09, 2015, 05:01:31 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 09, 2015, 03:30:30 AM
Well, we could start by making the DOL driving test longer than 10 minutes.
Driving tests in the US are only 10 minutes? :wow:
My test of 45 minutes included city driving, rural roads, motorway driving and reversing into a parking space between two cars, as well as inspecting some part of the car before driving (I got to check lights and brakes). And in addition to that, a theory exam (multiple-choice) where you need to get about 75-80 % right (out of 65 questions). They're very strict on passing the tests too, especially the actual driving where not stopping at a stop sign is an instant fail.
NJ's test:
50 questions; 80% or better is passing. A number of questions focus on DUI laws and effects. Failing to answer a Stop Sign question is no better or worse than failing to answer any other question on the test.
My test, many years ago, went like this: Make sure you are buckled in before turning on the car. Parallel park. Turn right onto 2 lane road - speed limit 40 mph. I still remember the instructor saying the speed limit for the test is 35 mph. Whatever. I did 35 mph for about 1/2 mile. Turn left onto side street. Go down, make K-Turn. Come back to stop sign. Make sure you stop at stop sign. Then inch forward to actually see into the intersection. Turn right back onto 40 mph road with driving test speed limit of 35 mph. Turn left back into DMV.
Passed.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 09, 2015, 06:36:19 AM
NJ's test:
50 questions; 80% or better is passing. A number of questions focus on DUI laws and effects. Failing to answer a Stop Sign question is no better or worse than failing to answer any other question on the test.
My test, many years ago, went like this: Make sure you are buckled in before turning on the car. Parallel park. Turn right onto 2 lane road - speed limit 40 mph. I still remember the instructor saying the speed limit for the test is 35 mph. Whatever. I did 35 mph for about 1/2 mile. Turn left onto side street. Go down, make K-Turn. Come back to stop sign. Make sure you stop at stop sign. Then inch forward to actually see into the intersection. Turn right back onto 40 mph road with driving test speed limit of 35 mph. Turn left back into DMV.
Passed.
1994, the now defunct Reading MA RMV, my test was the exact same as yours aside from the RMV being on the opposite side of the road. I thought it was so lazy, but (at the time) the state police did the tests, and they really didn't want to be bothered doing them.
2014, also NJ. You have to find the easiest place to take the test. Since they won't let you out on any sort of limited access highway, a facility wedged between US-46 and I-80 is super easy traffic-wise since all the driving is done within the facility's grounds, on a course used only for driving tests (never mind that I was actually behind the wheel getting there and back, including I-80 and US-46). Speed limit 25 and a bunch of stop signs. Of course, you still have to make a k-turn and parallel park.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 09, 2015, 06:36:19 AM
Quote from: riiga on February 09, 2015, 05:01:31 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on February 09, 2015, 03:30:30 AM
Well, we could start by making the DOL driving test longer than 10 minutes.
Driving tests in the US are only 10 minutes? :wow:
My test of 45 minutes included city driving, rural roads, motorway driving and reversing into a parking space between two cars, as well as inspecting some part of the car before driving (I got to check lights and brakes). And in addition to that, a theory exam (multiple-choice) where you need to get about 75-80 % right (out of 65 questions). They're very strict on passing the tests too, especially the actual driving where not stopping at a stop sign is an instant fail.
NJ's test:
50 questions; 80% or better is passing. A number of questions focus on DUI laws and effects. Failing to answer a Stop Sign question is no better or worse than failing to answer any other question on the test.
My test, many years ago, went like this: Make sure you are buckled in before turning on the car. Parallel park. Turn right onto 2 lane road - speed limit 40 mph. I still remember the instructor saying the speed limit for the test is 35 mph. Whatever. I did 35 mph for about 1/2 mile. Turn left onto side street. Go down, make K-Turn. Come back to stop sign. Make sure you stop at stop sign. Then inch forward to actually see into the intersection. Turn right back onto 40 mph road with driving test speed limit of 35 mph. Turn left back into DMV.
Passed.
Heh. Your test sounds more difficult than mine because Virginia did not require parallel parking–I believe they still don't, based on my observation of the number of people who have absolutely no clue how even to attempt such maneuver.
My road test consisted of about a one-mile drive through a trailer park behind the DMV. Speed limit there was 15 mph and it had a bunch of stop signs. I think they were just looking to see if you would speed or pull a rolling stop. I drove my mother's Volvo and shifted the automatic shift down to first gear to prevent myself from speeding.
The "knowledge test" was conducted four months earlier when I applied for my learner's permit. It was on paper back then, a 25-question multiple-guess exam. I think you were allowed to miss no more than five questions. I had to retake the knowledge test in 2003 due to two moving violations in a five-year period. By then, it was still multiple-guess but was done on a computer terminal and the computer stopped the test once you had enough correct answers such that you could no longer fail.
In NY, the driving test is basically a drive around the block on residential streets with 25/30 mph speed limits. The test includes a K turn and "parallel parking" (parking behind a car on the street, but they do it in an area where the next car is a ways back such that you don't need to worry about it). Failure to come to a complete stop is an automatic fail. One thing they like to do is start the test right on top of a stop sign and do an immediate turn right to see if people would bother to actually merge back into traffic or not.
The written test is 20 questions long and not at all difficult. When I took it, I remember one of the questions even contained the answer to a previous question.
We could probably improve roadway safety a lot by adopting European licencing standards. Our tests are so simple that anyone could pass with very little studying/practice (especially now that backup cameras exist, taking away the one last difficult part of the test - parallel parking). It would also be good to shift the testing priority from having perfect form to being a safe and non-annoying driver.
I've never taken a road test. The nearest DMV to where I grew up honored my school's driver's ed program. Turned in my driver's ed certificate, passed the written exam (by one question), got my learner's permit, age 14. I lived in a county of fewer than 4000 people. "City driving" involved driving an hour to another state, to a town of 8000. Expressway driving was a half-hour in the other direction, for a short stretch of I-70 in western Kansas.
We had exchange students from European countries take the driver's ed class, get an American license, then trade it in for a national one upon returning home.
When y'all say "K turn," do you mean what is also known as a "three-point turn" or (this is more European) "turning in the road"?
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 09, 2015, 09:26:45 PM
When y'all say "K turn," do you mean what is also known as a "three-point turn" or (this is more European) "turning in the road"?
A 3-point turn. And depends on the area as Wisconsin officially calls it a Y turn.
Quote from: Big John on February 09, 2015, 09:38:25 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 09, 2015, 09:26:45 PM
When y'all say "K turn," do you mean what is also known as a "three-point turn" or (this is more European) "turning in the road"?
A 3-point turn. And depends on the area as Wisconsin officially calls it a Y turn.
I was gonna ask the same question. I've never heard the term "K-turn". "Three-point turn" is the only term I ever learned.
I had never heard "K turn" either but the meaning seemed obvious from the context. I just wanted to confirm I was assuming correctly.
Quote from: bzakharin on February 09, 2015, 09:59:56 AM
2014, also NJ. You have to find the easiest place to take the test. Since they won't let you out on any sort of limited access highway, a facility wedged between US-46 and I-80 is super easy traffic-wise since all the driving is done within the facility's grounds, on a course used only for driving tests (never mind that I was actually behind the wheel getting there and back, including I-80 and US-46). Speed limit 25 and a bunch of stop signs. Of course, you still have to make a k-turn and parallel park.
Lodi?
When "The Sopranos" was on, I took great pleasure in telling folks I got my driver's license behind the Bada Bing.
http://goo.gl/maps/G2wHV (http://goo.gl/maps/G2wHV)
Kind of problematic if you can't see the which arrows are pointing where:
http://goo.gl/maps/bKM5H
^ It's crazy to me that that section of Autoroute 35 is already on streetview. Google is pretty on top of things these days.
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on February 18, 2015, 07:44:16 AM
^ It's crazy to me that that section of Autoroute 35 is already on streetview. Google is pretty on top of things these days.
Well, maybe. But Quebec (along with most of Canada) was recently due for an update, and of course we got it. The A35 is on there only because it was open in time for Google's arrival.
Sidewalks are just for decoration anyway, right?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi410%2Fkphoger%2FMorelos_zpscifwshfc.png&hash=2c285252b1547200aaaf3f56cc033e04edac1e84)
Looks to me like an average person could walk under that. Tall people may have to duck.
Quote from: vtk on February 24, 2015, 04:07:05 PM
Looks to me like an average person could walk under that. Tall people may have to duck.
If the sign is high enough to walk under, then I don't think it's a problem. This one near where I live never struck me as poor sign placement despite being over a sidewalk:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.76809,-77.124833,3a,75y,156.58h,80.16t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sndaQLQOa0Ii-NF12zUxwKA!2e0
The one kphoger posted looks to my eye–based primarily on the truck seen to the left of the sign–to be rather low to the ground, especially if it is indeed lopsided (rather than that being distortion from a wide-angle lens). Given that not all the poles appear distorted, I assume the sign is indeed crooked.
I remember one of the old cutout assemblies in Bristol being erected over the sidewalk.
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.837471,-69.287525,3a,75y,125.31h,86.05t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sZ2ka5LCtnlU7t6UBtRkq5A!2e0
This here is in Newport, ME on EB US 2. A directional guide for I-95 as this is the first intersection where US 2 EB begins its journey into the I-95 corridor eastward to Houlton, ME. Before this intersection US 2 is independent of I-95 from its split from I-89 at Montpelier, VT. However this is via SB ME 11 which is not signed here at all.
ME 11 is signed where it meets US 2 proper another 1000 feet beyond this cut off street. https://www.google.com/maps/@44.837206,-69.285977,3a,75y,125.31h,86.05t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1szlhaccaISkqBc5GD7OiA5A!2e0
I thought this is kind of weird because if I-95 via SB ME 11 is worthy to be signed here then it should also be signed for ME 11 SB here for those heading straight through on ME 11 SB as well. Considering that ME 11 and US 2 intersect at a shallow angle, it would be better to have the directional signs for ME 11 SB here anyway as to turn south is a 4:30 turn at the intersection ahead of this.
Speaking of signs that are placed over sidewalks... this one is on KY 8 eastbound as you approach the ramp to I-471 northbound in Newport, KY. That says "(up arrow) Dayton". It's even doubly poorly placed due to the trees.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FLm3wt89.jpg&hash=5091a234c69288facff726da5faa6aae6f46c817) (http://imgur.com/Lm3wt89)
I wouldn't necessarily consider a sign hanging over a sidewalk as poorly placed (although certainly not ideal), as long as there is adequate headroom between the bottom of the sign and the sidewalk--about 7-8 feet. That does not appear to be the case here.
Here's one I spotted Sunday, while EB on US 30, approaching I-65 in Merrillville, IN:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.470923,-87.334599,3a,75y,149.73h,90.08t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s9MJEwVaaoGHvGWYqtcMpkw!2e0 (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.470923,-87.334599,3a,75y,149.73h,90.08t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s9MJEwVaaoGHvGWYqtcMpkw!2e0)
Sorry for the poor quality of the GSV. I saw it too late to take a photo. The top of the sign has a black-on-yellow banner reading "Right Lane." Below that is the I-65 shield. Those are badly obscured by the tree limbs, but it's even worse when leaves are present.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftex.streetsblog.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fsites%2F9%2F2015%2F02%2Fsign-2.jpg&hash=bd87453fff5675435fc80555e4130f2044b2a6ed)
From: http://streetsmart.dmagazine.com/2015/02/26/lesson-learn/
http://goo.gl/maps/ix5Ji :bigass:
Yes, I know they're simply replacing the older sign, but still.
A couple of years ago, I took a crapload of sign replacement photos across US 50 (Corridor D) in West Virginia. I captured plenty of instances of this. In some cases, the new signs were in front of the old ones; in others, they were behind the old ones.
Quote from: SignGeek101 on December 25, 2014, 11:47:33 AM
I don't like how the sign looks, but that's not the problem with it.
http://goo.gl/maps/Fzmvk
You'd think they would just attach that small sign on the streetlight :hmmm:
The sign was there before the illumination, which was fairly new at the time of that photo. It was relocated soon after.
https://goo.gl/maps/XUApw (https://goo.gl/maps/XUApw)
Quote from: jakeroot on January 02, 2015, 12:47:31 AM
Odd. I'm not sure why how they expect anyone to read that going 110-120.
1. Traffic is not going that fast there.
2. Even if it were, in the field the text appears clearly enough that it isn't be a problem
Quote from: SignGeek101 on January 24, 2015, 12:44:35 PM
Another douse of stupidity.
http://goo.gl/maps/FrXow
Or, pull back one step and you can see the replacement sign was already installed.
https://goo.gl/maps/NCkOt
Quote from: cbeach40 on March 20, 2015, 02:38:39 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on December 25, 2014, 11:47:33 AM
I don't like how the sign looks, but that's not the problem with it.
http://goo.gl/maps/Fzmvk
You'd think they would just attach that small sign on the streetlight :hmmm:
The sign was there before the illumination, which was fairly new at the time of that photo. It was relocated soon after.
https://goo.gl/maps/XUApw (https://goo.gl/maps/XUApw)
Quote from: jakeroot on January 02, 2015, 12:47:31 AM
Odd. I'm not sure why how they expect anyone to read that going 110-120.
1. Traffic is not going that fast there.
2. Even if it were, in the field the text appears clearly enough that it isn't be a problem
Quote from: SignGeek101 on January 24, 2015, 12:44:35 PM
Another douse of stupidity.
http://goo.gl/maps/FrXow
Or, pull back one step and you can see the replacement sign was already installed. Nice try.
https://goo.gl/maps/NCkOt
About the last one, I didn't notice. I'm sure they replaced the old one afterwards. Sorry about that :-|
Quote from: cbeach40 on March 20, 2015, 02:38:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 02, 2015, 12:47:31 AM
Odd. I'm not sure why how they expect anyone to read that going 110-120.
1. Traffic is not going that fast there.
2. Even if it were, in the field the text appears clearly enough that it isn't be a problem
1. Why not? It's a freeway.
2. Someone looking for an alternate route probably isn't going to be looking for black on white regulatory signage right at the split (unless the OTM is different from the MUTCD), where it's basically useless to anyone outside of the outer lane. Why not an overhead BGS?
Quote from: jakeroot on March 20, 2015, 06:34:27 PM
Quote from: cbeach40 on March 20, 2015, 02:38:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 02, 2015, 12:47:31 AM
Odd. I'm not sure why how they expect anyone to read that going 110-120.
1. Traffic is not going that fast there.
2. Even if it were, in the field the text appears clearly enough that it isn't be a problem
1. Why not? It's a freeway.
2. Someone looking for an alternate route probably isn't going to be looking for black on white regulatory signage right at the split (unless the OTM is different from the MUTCD), where it's basically useless to anyone outside of the outer lane. Why not an overhead BGS?
1. The speed limit jumps from 100km/h to 70km/h about 100m upstream of that sign.
2. This sign is facing eastbound traffic, and basically tells traffic how to make a U-turn to get back onto the westbound lanes of the 402. Such a maneuver isn't exactly rocket science, even for a driver that lacks confidence. Overheads signs are quite expensive. I don't see this sign as a problem at all.
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on March 20, 2015, 07:29:19 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 20, 2015, 06:34:27 PM
Quote from: cbeach40 on March 20, 2015, 02:38:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 02, 2015, 12:47:31 AM
Odd. I'm not sure why how they expect anyone to read that going 110-120.
1. Traffic is not going that fast there.
2. Even if it were, in the field the text appears clearly enough that it isn't be a problem
1. Why not? It's a freeway.
2. Someone looking for an alternate route probably isn't going to be looking for black on white regulatory signage right at the split (unless the OTM is different from the MUTCD), where it's basically useless to anyone outside of the outer lane. Why not an overhead BGS?
1. The speed limit jumps from 100km/h to 70km/h about 100m upstream of that sign.
2. This sign is facing eastbound traffic, and basically tells traffic how to make a U-turn to get back onto the westbound lanes of the 402. Such a maneuver isn't exactly rocket science, even for a driver that lacks confidence. Overheads signs are quite expensive. I don't see this sign as a problem at all.
1. It's still a freeway, and road signs should reflect that (though the sign says 100 km/h "BEGINS" ... :hmmm:)
2. Fine.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FPA%2Fi81%2F101_1600-s.JPG&hash=f5f7b81745a4e74760d6599b12e87c0b9b801000)
Quote from: vdeane on March 22, 2015, 07:08:41 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FPA%2Fi81%2F101_1600-s.JPG&hash=f5f7b81745a4e74760d6599b12e87c0b9b801000)
Are you referring to the sign being placed in front of the exit sign, or after you're already off the bridge? :bigass:
^^ I assumed the warning sign referred to the bridge just after the exit.
Quote from: jakeroot on March 20, 2015, 07:55:23 PM
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on March 20, 2015, 07:29:19 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 20, 2015, 06:34:27 PM
Quote from: cbeach40 on March 20, 2015, 02:38:39 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 02, 2015, 12:47:31 AM
Odd. I'm not sure why how they expect anyone to read that going 110-120.
1. Traffic is not going that fast there.
2. Even if it were, in the field the text appears clearly enough that it isn't be a problem
1. Why not? It's a freeway.
2. Someone looking for an alternate route probably isn't going to be looking for black on white regulatory signage right at the split (unless the OTM is different from the MUTCD), where it's basically useless to anyone outside of the outer lane. Why not an overhead BGS?
1. The speed limit jumps from 100km/h to 70km/h about 100m upstream of that sign.
2. This sign is facing eastbound traffic, and basically tells traffic how to make a U-turn to get back onto the westbound lanes of the 402. Such a maneuver isn't exactly rocket science, even for a driver that lacks confidence. Overheads signs are quite expensive. I don't see this sign as a problem at all.
1. It's still a freeway, and road signs should reflect that (though the sign says 100 km/h "BEGINS" ... :hmmm:)
2. Fine.
The begins tab is to reflect the limit going to 100 at that point upstream of the sign. In any event, the sign is the large size that would be in place for a freeway. And having seen it in actual context, it and the advance sign are both clearly visible from even the leftmost lane there.
Quote from: Big John on March 22, 2015, 10:23:29 PM
^^ I assumed the warning sign referred to the bridge just after the exit.
Well yeah, me too, but there's no need to put another such sign between two bridges in such close succession.
Quote from: vdeane on March 22, 2015, 07:08:41 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FPA%2Fi81%2F101_1600-s.JPG&hash=f5f7b81745a4e74760d6599b12e87c0b9b801000)
Anyone else think that Clearview looks a bit odd? More odd than usual usage. Seems a bit thin to me...
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 26, 2015, 07:53:32 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 22, 2015, 07:08:41 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FPA%2Fi81%2F101_1600-s.JPG&hash=f5f7b81745a4e74760d6599b12e87c0b9b801000)
Anyone else think that Clearview looks a bit odd? More odd than usual usage. Seems a bit thin to me...
Thin-stroked, absolutely and the text height's too large as well.
I've seen quite a bit of that on Pennsylvania signage. Quite a bit of it on the US 22 freeway west of I-99.
Somewhere west of Hammond, LA, there is a billboard on the right-hand side of the road that is in a clearing right after a long line of trees. (No picture right now; I don't remember exactly where it is but will try to find it on my way to work tomorrow.) You probably won't notice it until you are zooming right past it. It currently has an annoying Creation billboard on it, so the placement actually helps the motorists.
My favorite billboards are the ones that say "You missed it, turn around at the next exit and drive five miles off the highway" or some such nonsense. Yeah, right. Put your billboard before I have to get off, why don't you? Turn around... Yeesh...
Quote from: kphoger on March 30, 2015, 11:35:04 PM
My favorite billboards are the ones that say "You missed it, turn around at the next exit and drive five miles off the highway" or some such nonsense. Yeah, right. Put your billboard before I have to get off, why don't you? Turn around... Yeesh...
Usually those make much more sense when viewed from the other direction.
Quote from: kphoger on March 30, 2015, 11:35:04 PM
My favorite billboards are the ones that say "You missed it, turn around at the next exit and drive five miles off the highway" or some such nonsense. Yeah, right. Put your billboard before I have to get off, why don't you? Turn around... Yeesh...
Better still are the ones that say 'take this exit', even though they're past the exit ramp. In all fairness, however, most of these type of billboards I've observed appear to be located "on premises", which is generally an automatic approval per current Federal and state outdoor advertising regulations for Interstates and freeways.
Quote from: kphoger on March 30, 2015, 11:35:04 PM
My favorite billboards are the ones that say "You missed it, turn around at the next exit and drive five miles off the highway" or some such nonsense. Yeah, right. Put your billboard before I have to get off, why don't you? Turn around... Yeesh...
Usually I find these are on bidirectional signs where one side faces traffic that still has an opportunity to exit. I kind of admire the almost playful resourcefulness in using the other side.
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 27, 2015, 02:43:35 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on March 26, 2015, 07:53:32 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 22, 2015, 07:08:41 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnysroads.com%2Fimages%2Fgallery%2FPA%2Fi81%2F101_1600-s.JPG&hash=f5f7b81745a4e74760d6599b12e87c0b9b801000)
Anyone else think that Clearview looks a bit odd? More odd than usual usage. Seems a bit thin to me...
Thin-stroked, absolutely and the text height's too large as well.
I think that might be signage from when Clearview was in "beta", as it were.
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.546873,-92.637736,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1snZcmMdACZ_plLYjWSA1GaA!2e0 (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.546873,-92.637736,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1snZcmMdACZ_plLYjWSA1GaA!2e0)
Almost too little too late. :wow:
http://goo.gl/maps/ewg7u
I want to say poor sign placement here because I think the ground mounted sign should be placed on the gantry if possible, or on a gantry further ahead. It could be a little difficult to see also; drivers are focused on the gantry, not the ground sign.
Quote from: SignGeek101 on April 10, 2015, 10:45:41 PM
http://goo.gl/maps/ewg7u
I want to say poor sign placement here because I think the ground mounted sign should be placed on the gantry if possible, or on a gantry further ahead. It could be a little difficult to see also; drivers are focused on the gantry, not the ground sign.
It would belong a little further downstream of the gantry. It's not vital information to have here at the decision point.
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7671/16910891628_56304d3da6_b.jpg)
Not exactly poor sign placement or enough to lose sleep over, but I somehow think that the STOP sign should be closer to the intersection.
Also to place the shields and the STOP sign at the same place, although maybe effective to do so as seeing the STOP sign will automatically let you see the shields, is kind of strange.
Anyway the STOP sign is a little too far away from the intersection as many of us normally treat them as yields and if any of us do come to a complete stop as the original law states, then its usually at the intersection proper where the best view of other traffic is.
Quote from: cjk374 on April 05, 2015, 09:16:32 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.546873,-92.637736,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1snZcmMdACZ_plLYjWSA1GaA!2e0 (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.546873,-92.637736,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1snZcmMdACZ_plLYjWSA1GaA!2e0)
Almost too little too late. :wow:
Like the old Bill Cosby joke from the mid 1960's...
My friend and I are driving around town. I see a sign. I ask, "What does the sign say?"
He says, "The sign says DIP."
BLAM!!!
Quote from: roadman65 on April 11, 2015, 05:17:01 PM
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7671/16910891628_56304d3da6_b.jpg)
Not exactly poor sign placement or enough to lose sleep over, but I somehow think that the STOP sign should be closer to the intersection.
I have seen a few intersections with this placement of the stop sign so far away from the intersection. One of them here in my hometown is about as far from the intersection as the one in the picture: https://www.google.com/maps/@32.529457,-92.776863,3a,75y,209.7h,83.83t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s1CkasZY_UTE1ZNkVb97OUQ!2e0 (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.529457,-92.776863,3a,75y,209.7h,83.83t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s1CkasZY_UTE1ZNkVb97OUQ!2e0)
But the reason for it here is because of a corner parking lot. So LaDOTD put a stop sign on the left side closer to the intersection.
Quote
Also to place the shields and the STOP sign at the same place, although maybe effective to do so as seeing the STOP sign will automatically let you see the shields, is kind of strange.
This has been SOP in Louisiana for as long as I can remember. To not have the shields with the stop sign would be considered a strange sight.
Interesting that that type of sign placement is normal in LA. I guess you can say that is the state um trademark like VA with its shield confirmation on top of a mileage sign.
However the STOP on the other side and that one not across from its counterpart is strange especially with no stop bar either. Not poor as the OP, but just unusual some.
Here is the streetview of the intersection in roadman's picture above looking in the opposite direction, so you can see just how far from the intersection is from the stop sign: https://www.google.com/maps/@29.372275,-90.713062,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1suqg9j0ITMTDXcjZofCrD8A!2e0 (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.372275,-90.713062,3a,75y,180h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1suqg9j0ITMTDXcjZofCrD8A!2e0)
As far as stop bars go...you will see them more in urban settings than rural.
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8820/17121203046_98f54f14af_z.jpg)
Here is another Junction shield along LA 1 in Napoleanville, LA that is placed a little too far off the main road. This one, as you can see is visible, but look at the car coming out of Washington Street. Its hood is in front of the sign. Then look at the sidewalk in front of Ace Hardware. See how much open space the shield could be placed. Supposing that car is a truck, then that sign would be blocked totally.
Shields should be in the cone of view of the driver and not off to the edge of it or in peripheral vision area like this sign, I would conclude, is on the line of those two definitions.
I see it is actually placed in front of the stop sign. I also see more dirt & grass behind the stop sign that the junction sign could be stuck in to put it closer to the road.
I don't know if I can post this here (I don't know if it counts), but I've never seen an exit tab on the side of the sign before:
http://goo.gl/maps/aGKrL
At a light rail station's only entrance, there's this sign:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8806/16741380013_9be74e4961_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/rvnX1Z)
SODO Station entrance (https://flic.kr/p/rvnX1Z) by SounderBruce (https://www.flickr.com/photos/sounderbruce/), on Flickr
Is there a MUTCD-compliant workaround to specify that pedestrians are prohibited on one side and not the other?
Quote from: Bruce on May 17, 2015, 06:18:18 PM
Is there a MUTCD-compliant workaround to specify that pedestrians are prohibited on one side and not the other?
My solution would be to install a downward left pointing arrow beneath the sign.
A two-shot here, on the ramp from Maine Ave SW to the 14th St Bridge:
This I-395 south sign is posted too far back. Once you see it, it's too late to make a decision which way to go.
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.883831,-77.032634,3a,30.3y,309.2h,83.79t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sKuBZ_cm0SEgX7qPLGwy9NA!2e0!5s20140801T000000 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.883831,-77.032634,3a,30.3y,309.2h,83.79t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sKuBZ_cm0SEgX7qPLGwy9NA!2e0!5s20140801T000000)
And just before the ramp enters a tunnel, this low clearance sign pops up, with no way out.
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.884497,-77.032514,3a,49.2y,41.6h,83.58t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sMcxrhDwhYu0gy9yf54ILpQ!2e0!5s20140801T000000 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.884497,-77.032514,3a,49.2y,41.6h,83.58t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sMcxrhDwhYu0gy9yf54ILpQ!2e0!5s20140801T000000)
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.170062,-74.108051,3a,75y,267.54h,93.57t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1suUayWGXPVgHKbAnCLCY-ow!2e0!6m1!1e1
Look at where NJDOT places the mileage sign for I-195 Westbound. Sorry I cannot get the sign in clearer, but the Ryder Truck that the Google was passing at the time of the caption made closeups impossible.
Anyway, it should be beyond the ramp merging in ahead and be at a better location that is much safer to the drivers. Most places install the mileage signs post interchange at a nice open straight away if possible or usually where the driver gets comfortable with his new surroundings so to speak. Here the sign crew just got careless and did not even think about where they were placing the sign.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fexpressway.paulrands.com%2Fgallery%2Froads%2Fnsw%2Fnumbered%2Fdecommissioned%2Fstateroutes%2Fsr40%2F02_rydalmeretosevenhills%2Finbound%2Fimages%2F201303_08_northparramatta_kissingptrd.jpg&hash=90561d20b731a53cdff12de4dd3b16bab8bb724e)
This lane allocation sign isn't positioned directly over the lane it's pointing to.
Quote from: national highway 1 on May 30, 2015, 08:23:55 AM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fexpressway.paulrands.com%2Fgallery%2Froads%2Fnsw%2Fnumbered%2Fdecommissioned%2Fstateroutes%2Fsr40%2F02_rydalmeretosevenhills%2Finbound%2Fimages%2F201303_08_northparramatta_kissingptrd.jpg&hash=90561d20b731a53cdff12de4dd3b16bab8bb724e)
This lane allocation sign isn't positioned directly over the lane it's pointing to.
Maybe a dancing arrow will suffice, if Australia uses those. I know I haven't seen any here in Canada.
Quote from: SignGeek101 on May 17, 2015, 01:18:23 AM
I don't know if I can post this here (I don't know if it counts), but I've never seen an exit tab on the side of the sign before:
http://goo.gl/maps/aGKrL
It would fit the standard for a cantilevered overhead sign support. Typically it's done as a single piece sign (comme ça: https://goo.gl/maps/wNxtC ) but in this case they went with a tab.
The variation stems from no being able to place the tab on top due to the aerodynamic damper up there.
Quote from: cbeach40 on June 08, 2015, 05:14:14 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on May 17, 2015, 01:18:23 AM
I don't know if I can post this here (I don't know if it counts), but I've never seen an exit tab on the side of the sign before:
http://goo.gl/maps/aGKrL
It would fit the standard for a cantilevered overhead sign support. Typically it's done as a single piece sign (comme ça: https://goo.gl/maps/wNxtC ) but in this case they went with a tab.
The variation stems from not being able to place the tab on top due to the aerodynamic damper up there.
I thought it had something to do with that.
When did Ontario start doing the "Caltrans exit tab style" (as seen here: http://goo.gl/maps/45t74)? I think it looks really neat.
Quote from: SignGeek101 on June 08, 2015, 11:28:11 PM
When did Ontario start doing the "Caltrans exit tab style" (as seen here: http://goo.gl/maps/45t74)? I think it looks really neat.
I think it's an isolated case. I've only seen one other instance up north on the 404.
Quote from: sammi on June 08, 2015, 11:44:13 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on June 08, 2015, 11:28:11 PM
When did Ontario start doing the "Caltrans exit tab style" (as seen here: http://goo.gl/maps/45t74)? I think it looks really neat.
I think it's an isolated case. I've only seen one other instance up north on the 404.
I've seen quite a few of them. I don't remember them when I lived in Hamilton from 2003-2010, but I wasn't a signgeek then.
https://goo.gl/maps/EBZbE
http://goo.gl/maps/mmmXE (doesn't work)
http://goo.gl/maps/OzGVe (doesn't work)
Again, I like them. With me being a bit of a critic of Ontario signs (even though I do like them!), it's nice to see Ontario do something that I don't have to scratch my head about (like Helvetica directional tabs).
Edit: Updated links
Quote from: SignGeek101 on June 09, 2015, 12:30:18 AM
Quote from: sammi on June 08, 2015, 11:44:13 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on June 08, 2015, 11:28:11 PM
When did Ontario start doing the "Caltrans exit tab style" (as seen here: http://goo.gl/maps/45t74)? I think it looks really neat.
I think it's an isolated case. I've only seen one other instance up north on the 404.
I've seen quite a few of them. I don't remember them when I lived in Hamilton from 2003-2010, but I wasn't a signgeek then.
http://goo.gl/maps/ZxbKK
http://goo.gl/maps/mmmXE
http://goo.gl/maps/OzGVe
Again, I like them. With me being a bit of a critic of Ontario signs (even though I do like them!), it's nice to see Ontario do something that I don't have to scratch my head about (like Helvetica directional tabs).
Why do all of your links open with My Places? Is this the only way to load the old Maps?
Quote from: jakeroot on June 09, 2015, 05:48:18 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on June 09, 2015, 12:30:18 AM
Quote from: sammi on June 08, 2015, 11:44:13 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on June 08, 2015, 11:28:11 PM
When did Ontario start doing the "Caltrans exit tab style" (as seen here: http://goo.gl/maps/45t74)? I think it looks really neat.
I think it's an isolated case. I've only seen one other instance up north on the 404.
I've seen quite a few of them. I don't remember them when I lived in Hamilton from 2003-2010, but I wasn't a signgeek then.
http://goo.gl/maps/ZxbKK
http://goo.gl/maps/mmmXE
http://goo.gl/maps/OzGVe
Again, I like them. With me being a bit of a critic of Ontario signs (even though I do like them!), it's nice to see Ontario do something that I don't have to scratch my head about (like Helvetica directional tabs).
Why do all of your links open with My Places? Is this the only way to load the old Maps?
Yup, Classic maps no longer works. My places is the only way to open Maps in the classic format.
Quote from: SignGeek101 on June 09, 2015, 05:49:29 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 09, 2015, 05:48:18 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on June 09, 2015, 12:30:18 AM
Quote from: sammi on June 08, 2015, 11:44:13 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on June 08, 2015, 11:28:11 PM
When did Ontario start doing the "Caltrans exit tab style" (as seen here: http://goo.gl/maps/45t74)? I think it looks really neat.
I think it's an isolated case. I've only seen one other instance up north on the 404.
I've seen quite a few of them. I don't remember them when I lived in Hamilton from 2003-2010, but I wasn't a signgeek then.
http://goo.gl/maps/ZxbKK
http://goo.gl/maps/mmmXE
http://goo.gl/maps/OzGVe
Again, I like them. With me being a bit of a critic of Ontario signs (even though I do like them!), it's nice to see Ontario do something that I don't have to scratch my head about (like Helvetica directional tabs).
Why do all of your links open with My Places? Is this the only way to load the old Maps?
Yup, Classic maps no longer works. My places is the only way to open Maps in the classic format.
Not sure if this gif is relevant, but I wanted to use it:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fuq4LP.gif&hash=de02a32bd6d9024a0d9d8b480a5d3ddb41883f69)
Brand new highway means brand new mess ups.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1291.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fb551%2Fslik_sh00ter%2FOops_zpspxvirtnk.jpg&hash=45fbbc6669e3de75e3bf09f47a8379d11074adf5)
https://goo.gl/maps/kFLEc
EDIT: This has since been corrected:
https://goo.gl/maps/r2JW0
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4045.msg2072374#msg2072374 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=4045.msg2072374#msg2072374)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.panoramio.com%2Fphotos%2Flarge%2F120671723.jpg&hash=9c6173c4337c4809a6cb9c7b4b1721cb4eb3475a)
Credit to Rover_0.
Poor placement on the Zakim bridge in Boston.
http://www.universalhub.com/2015/escher-would-have-liked-underside-zakim#comment-451509
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.sammdot.ca%2F1dd13e3a.jpg&hash=58473de778ccc7e4ad951042becbf24d942861f8)
Quote from: sammi on June 27, 2015, 12:06:45 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.sammdot.ca%2F1dd13e3a.jpg&hash=58473de778ccc7e4ad951042becbf24d942861f8)
Love the DIN 1451 usage on the bus stop. Looks much better than what Winnipeg uses (Clearview). The bus stop pole was probably put there after the shield was there. It could be moved to the next wood pole, or to its own.
Found this in Florence, AL; it should probably be placed before the crosswalk:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/414/19356859606_d7fc523535.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/vuuXYJ)Thanks For The Warning (https://flic.kr/p/vuuXYJ) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Along Zierdt Road in Huntsville/Madison, AL:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/511/19376784342_303822aba3.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/vwg5UE)Poor Sign Placement (https://flic.kr/p/vwg5UE) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Another one from Florence, AL:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/285/18762294203_0de569fc26.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/uzXEp6)Poor Sign Placement (https://flic.kr/p/uzXEp6) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Rogersville, AL:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/447/19196736469_9b73f82a9d.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/vfmhWZ)US 72/AL 207/CR 91 (https://flic.kr/p/vfmhWZ) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 03, 2015, 12:43:12 PM
Rogersville, AL:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/447/19196736469_9b73f82a9d.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/vfmhWZ)US 72/AL 207/CR 91 (https://flic.kr/p/vfmhWZ) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
UGH! Florida is LOADED with crap like this! I can't believe how many times I've told FDOT and various county DPW's they should combine some of their signs on fewer posts, but often they won't do it because one is state-maintained and the other is county-maintained, or Turnpike Authority-maintained. And this doesn't just apply to the route shields either. Westbound Jefferson Street in Brooksville was not only cluttered with route shields, but cluttered with small green signs that could be combined. I have an old pic of them somewhere.
Spotted this in Bell Buckle, TN today:
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/398/19769811220_d3efac19b1_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/w7Zs79)Pole in front of sign (https://flic.kr/p/w7Zs79) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
I don't know if anyone has posted this before but this sign on Storrow drive EB Rt 3 NB near Leverett Circle in Boston has to be one of the worst It is not only about 15 feet off the edge of the road, its also behind a tree! (You may have to pan to the right to see it)
http://goo.gl/maps/y0DQ9
Apparently NYSDOT forgot they were already on NY 245 when they posted this: https://goo.gl/maps/EJHk87kQjhT2
I can't show you this because the sign location in GSV is from around 2009, and so it's VERY blurry. But at the intersection of US 22/522, 10 miles from Huntingdon PA, behind the traffic light looks like a black on white sign, obscured by the trees. You can clearly see it if you're coming from US 522 north approaching the intersection.
Quote from: WNYroadgeek on February 23, 2016, 10:20:40 PM
Apparently NYSDOT forgot they were already on NY 245 when they posted this: https://goo.gl/maps/EJHk87kQjhT2
That is very Kentuckyish! :D
I find this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.5715102,-122.334159,3a,15y,60.52h,91.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVjVIwObZ4wn5aPduRtIb-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) funny. It's supposed to say "SODO" under the sign.
I'm going to assume this was temporary and was fixed:
https://goo.gl/maps/WZj7aYbN6GM2
Here's one from the 'why bother' department:
https://goo.gl/maps/tfY1JizTVU62
(supposed to be Louise Ave. at Malcolm X Blvd. in Dallas)
Spotted this here in Huntsville, AL today:
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1494/26443418106_75c901aacb.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GhHqVQ)Martin Road Overpass Construction 4-16-16 (https://flic.kr/p/GhHqVQ) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1447/25980845734_000edddd45_k_d.jpg)
Exit on I-41 South to Shawano Ave. Problem is traffic can't exit here and has to exit about 1/4 mile north of here.
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.5443343,-88.0723594,3a,75y,221.15h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVQta0efjT0UHJkLVEhuk_A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Yet, there's an exit sign and reflectors were placed to prevent people from exiting instead of removing the sign. Exit 168B is for Wis 29 west but traffic continuing straight on the off ramp defaults onto this exit so I don't know why this sign is here.
Quote from: peterj920 on April 22, 2016, 10:27:16 PM
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1447/25980845734_000edddd45_k_d.jpg)
Exit on I-41 South to Shawano Ave. Problem is traffic can't exit here and has to exit about 1/4 mile north of here.
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.5443343,-88.0723594,3a,75y,221.15h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVQta0efjT0UHJkLVEhuk_A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Yet, there's an exit sign and reflectors were placed to prevent people from exiting instead of removing the sign. Exit 168B is for Wis 29 west but traffic continuing straight on the off ramp defaults onto this exit so I don't know why this sign is here.
From what I see looking at the map, in this southbound direction exit 168B and 168C are really a single exit with a subsequent ramp divide. It looks like they used this gore sign to try to indicate that the straight ahead path goes to "exit 168C".
What should have been done instead is just call the whole thing exit 168B, and just relied on smaller directional signage at the gore point. Or alternately, they could have put the two gore signs next to each other in the gore and used a left facing arrow for exit 168C.
Quote from: roadfro on April 23, 2016, 01:26:22 PM
Quote from: peterj920 on April 22, 2016, 10:27:16 PM
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1447/25980845734_000edddd45_k_d.jpg)
Exit on I-41 South to Shawano Ave. Problem is traffic can't exit here and has to exit about 1/4 mile north of here.
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.5443343,-88.0723594,3a,75y,221.15h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVQta0efjT0UHJkLVEhuk_A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Yet, there's an exit sign and reflectors were placed to prevent people from exiting instead of removing the sign. Exit 168B is for Wis 29 west but traffic continuing straight on the off ramp defaults onto this exit so I don't know why this sign is here.
From what I see looking at the map, in this southbound direction exit 168B and 168C are really a single exit with a subsequent ramp divide. It looks like they used this gore sign to try to indicate that the straight ahead path goes to "exit 168C".
What should have been done instead is just call the whole thing exit 168B, and just relied on smaller directional signage at the gore point. Or alternately, they could have put the two gore signs next to each other in the gore and used a left facing arrow for exit 168C.
Here's a street view of both Exit 168B and 168C signs.
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.5416084,-88.0747381,3a,75y,215.33h,83.4t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svDKlNR8Fe4gThJrPC3tD3g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
The reflector posts were added a few months later probably because there may have been a few cases of people at night thinking that the exit sign was placed at the gore point and people were driving off of the road to get to the exit. I'm sure the sign was placed there to inform people of the exit, but it's poorly placed on a non-existent gore point and could confuse people traveling on mainline I-41. There is are exit tabs that distinguish the exits before they split so this sign is unnecessary, and traffic defaults onto the ramp anyways so what good does the sign do?
thou shalt not run this stop sign!
I believe steel tube is actually filled with concrete. It is on a private plaza, so I am not sure if they actually have to follow any rules...
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/42859851/stop%20sign.jpg)
MUTCD does indeed pretend" to govern some aspects of private parking lots, particularly regarding traffic control devices conveying the message "stop".
" I did not intend to imply that MUTCD's governance of private parking lots is false or illegitimate – or valid, for that matter – but I was unable to find a word that is neutral on that point.
Quote from: kalvado on April 23, 2016, 10:20:05 PM
thou shalt not run this stop sign!
I believe steel tube is actually filled with concrete. It is on a private plaza, so I am not sure if they actually have to follow any rules...
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/42859851/stop%20sign.jpg)
Forget the MUTCD...the municipality/county who permitted the parking lot design or approved the sign's location should have told them to remove it and place it where it belongs.
Quote from: JMoses24 on March 07, 2015, 07:24:02 AM
Speaking of signs that are placed over sidewalks... this one is on KY 8 eastbound as you approach the ramp to I-471 northbound in Newport, KY. That says "(up arrow) Dayton". It's even doubly poorly placed due to the trees.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FLm3wt89.jpg&hash=5091a234c69288facff726da5faa6aae6f46c817) (http://imgur.com/Lm3wt89)
Long before I drove I used to like where there were signs over a sidewalk. I would pretend they were BGSs on my imaginary network of roads
Before they were taken down and replaced, several of the old cutout assemblies at the intersection of VA 381 and US 11/11E/11W/19/421 in Bristol spanned the sidewalks.
WSDOT placed this speed limit sign too early (or maybe not -- keep reading). The ramp just after this photo has an advisory speed of 40, despite the limit of 35.
Just after the ramp (on the right), the freeway ends, and the road becomes a narrow urban arterial, hence the drop.
I'm not quite sure how to fix this problem. Washington doesn't permit signals on roads with a limit higher than 50, so you'd have to, somehow, drop the limit before the signal (which you can see on the far left edge of the photo). Perhaps they should drop the limit to 50 instead of 35, and then down to 40 or 35 after the freeway junction. This way, traffic going north towards Seattle isn't advised to exceed the speed limit.
Here's a GMaps link: https://goo.gl/fJkgNS
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FBsJuEog.png&hash=5f304e48b395ed7708981bbad0daca5061be0e82)
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2016, 01:42:11 PM
WSDOT placed this speed limit sign too early (or maybe not -- keep reading). The ramp just after this photo has an advisory speed of 40, despite the limit of 35.
Just after the ramp (on the right), the freeway ends, and the road becomes a narrow urban arterial, hence the drop.
I'm not quite sure how to fix this problem. Washington doesn't permit signals on roads with a limit higher than 50, so you'd have to, somehow, drop the limit before the signal (which you can see on the far left edge of the photo). Perhaps they should drop the limit to 50 instead of 35, and then down to 40 or 35 after the freeway junction. This way, traffic going north towards Seattle isn't advised to exceed the speed limit.
Here's a GMaps link: https://goo.gl/fJkgNS
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FBsJuEog.png&hash=5f304e48b395ed7708981bbad0daca5061be0e82)
Wow, 60 to 35 is a pretty drastic reduction in speed. This would be illegal in California as it could be constituted as a speed trap.
As far as how to fix this, I'd move the sign to immediately after the exit to WA-509 north and create a 50 MPH speed zone starting at Des Moines Memorial Drive. Alternately, you could just reduce the advisory speed to 35.
At least WSDOT put a warning sign up before the 60-35 change.
Quote from: myosh_tino on June 11, 2016, 02:07:17 PM
Wow, 60 to 35 is a pretty drastic reduction in speed. This would be illegal in California as it could be constituted as a speed trap.
That's nothing compared to the 509 in Tacoma, which drops from 60
to 25: https://goo.gl/HCCU36
Quote from: myosh_tino on June 11, 2016, 02:07:17 PM
As far as how to fix this, I'd move the sign to immediately after the exit to WA-509 north and create a 50 MPH speed zone starting at Des Moines Memorial Drive. Alternately, you could just reduce the advisory speed to 35.
The problem is that you need to give drivers some warning. There's about 25 feet between the end of the theoretical gore and the signal stop line. Any speed limit change would have to occur at least some distance before the stop line.
Maybe an overhead gantry with speed limit signs for each lane? Or is that too much?
Quote from: opspe on June 11, 2016, 02:32:08 PM
At least WSDOT put a warning sign up before the 60-35 change.
Credit where credit's due. WSDOT is excellent at using "speed limit xx" W-series warning signs.
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2016, 02:36:19 PM
That's nothing compared to the 509 in Tacoma, which drops from 60 to 25: https://goo.gl/HCCU36
:wow: :wow: :wow:
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2016, 02:36:19 PM
The problem is that you need to give drivers some warning. There's about 25 feet between the end of the theoretical gore and the signal stop line. Any speed limit change would have to occur at least some distance before the stop line.
Maybe an overhead gantry with speed limit signs for each lane? Or is that too much?
Yeah, I noticed that after I hit the "Post" button. I think your solution to post a 50 MPH speed limit instead of 35 is the best.
BC does a good job of advance speed drops:
https://goo.gl/maps/FnPdez9R9QH2 (https://goo.gl/maps/FnPdez9R9QH2) - From 80 to 60, shortly followed by another drop to 50.
https://goo.gl/maps/Dgh2Tcjjj7m (https://goo.gl/maps/Dgh2Tcjjj7m) then https://goo.gl/maps/U5FamBwzesw (https://goo.gl/maps/U5FamBwzesw) - From 90 to 20 around a really nasty hairpin, though technically an advisory speed, the same principle would apply to a drastic speed drop.
Best solution would probably be to use upcoming speed limit warning sign for 35 mph and then lower it just in time for the traffic lights, or alternatively lower from 60 to 50/45 to 35.
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2016, 02:36:19 PM
That's nothing compared to the 509 in Tacoma, which drops from 60 to 25: https://goo.gl/HCCU36
Just wow. Aren't there any regulations on how much you can lower the speed without warning? Our DOT requires direct drops of more than 20 km/h at a time to be signed in advance, except for off-ramps.
Quote from: riiga on June 11, 2016, 06:29:25 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2016, 02:36:19 PM
That's nothing compared to the 509 in Tacoma, which drops from 60 to 25: https://goo.gl/HCCU36
Just wow. Aren't there any regulations on how much you can lower the speed without warning? Our DOT requires direct drops of more than 20 km/h at a time to be signed in advance, except for off-ramps.
That speed zone ahead sign on SR 509 (R2-3a) is depreciated per MUTCD 2009, with a compliance deadline of December 22, 2018. The replacement look like the one below (W3-5), which is what WSDOT used on SR 518. The pertinent section says that W3-5 must be used for drops greater than 10 mph, or as engineering dictates.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1d/MUTCD_W3-5.svg/150px-MUTCD_W3-5.svg.png)
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2016, 01:42:11 PM
Washington doesn't permit signals on roads with a limit higher than 50,
I can think of at least 3 examples right off the top of my head where there are signals on Washington State Routes where the speed limit is higher than 50. S.R. 240 on the Richland bypass section, S.R. 500 at 42nd and 54th and S.R. 503 near Battle Ground. (All posted at 55 m.p.h.)
Quote from: riiga on June 11, 2016, 06:29:25 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2016, 02:36:19 PM
That's nothing compared to the 509 in Tacoma, which drops from 60 to 25: https://goo.gl/HCCU36
Just wow. Aren't there any regulations on how much you can lower the speed without warning? Our DOT requires direct drops of more than 20 km/h at a time to be signed in advance, except for off-ramps.
Um, the Speed Zone Ahead 25 mph sign IS the advanced warning sign.
There's also a similar 55 mph to 25 mph drop at the end of the AC Expressway in Atlantic City, NJ.
Quote from: Thunderbyrd316 on June 11, 2016, 07:23:15 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 11, 2016, 01:42:11 PM
Washington doesn't permit signals on roads with a limit higher than 50,
I can think of at least 3 examples right off the top of my head where there are signals on Washington State Routes where the speed limit is higher than 50. S.R. 240 on the Richland bypass section, S.R. 500 at 42nd and 54th and S.R. 503 near Battle Ground. (All posted at 55 m.p.h.)
Also SR 522 at Paradise Lake Road, just outside Maltby -- 60 mph.
To the best of my knowledge, the 50 mph "rule" is more of a guide. So I apologize for being slightly misleading.
Upon a further search of the web, I can't seem to find the article that mentions the 50 mph "rule".
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@46.9971284,-123.4482069,3a,26.4y,150.84h,85.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ssJ5ZmDUfStyXpiI9o8P3HA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) is perhaps less poor sign placement than just bizarre sign placement -- dueling Adopt A Highway signs, one of which is placed so that nobody driving would ever see it...
Maybe this isn't the best way to mount a BGS in a wooded area...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ften93.com%2F2016%2F20160618_150512.jpg&hash=8e4484e73205e33927e46147492b7aa3c5ca747a)
Looks like it would be fine, if only they'd trim the trees appropriately.
Looks like that's supposed to be mounted on a gantry overhead the roadway, but the gantry has been temporarily removed and the sign instead mounted on the gantry support post.
Quote from: vtk on June 18, 2016, 10:55:29 PM
Looks like that's supposed to be mounted on a gantry overhead the roadway, but the gantry has been temporarily removed and the sign instead mounted on the gantry support post.
Aha, sure enough, that's exactly what it is (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0085503,-84.5596815,3a,75y,11.98h,87.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szQDofLVqB6zBE5k1Kzim8A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Looks like they had to dismantle the gantry for construction.
BGS behind a fence spotted on Hopple Street in Cincinnati, OH
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Froads.mattmajewski.net%2Fimages%2F027127e.jpg&hash=61d9c754f157a968edb0e06c7686308b0a0c4ae7)
I always found this to be a pain. This doesn't look that bad, and now its not as big of a deal with the ultra-reflective BGS, but that BGS used to be an older non-reflective background BGS until just recently. At night, your headlights would pick up the Loop 360 shield and cast a shadow on the BGS, making it hard to read. There are still some shadows on the current sign, but you can at least read the BGS.
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.30986,-97.8262304,3a,15y,180h,85.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sTtJGiVhsy4J0ELrdVxSTMQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
I-64 in Richmond/Henrico County has a sign that's totally unreadable under foliage. I missed it, but it was before exit 183, if I remember. I can't expose it via GMSV.
Found this yesterday. GSV (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.9429168,-91.0257099,3a,75y,171.53h,75.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8waWStKtjO1l5xCNRkO0nw!2e0!7i3328!8i1664!6m1!1e1) predates the sign but it looks like they just put it the same place as the earlier sign, meaning they clearly could have at least cleared the power pole support.
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8527/28011689564_c0bd450d63_c.jpg)
From Lake Mary, FL.
What is the worst thing about this setup?
1) The sheer ugliness of that streetlamp product. I can't believe that anyone thought this was attractive.
2) The terrible installation job (not even considering the placement relative to the sign... Look at how out of plumb it is in second photo... Actually sign is bad too)
3) The thoughtless placement that takes a street named after an American author and turns it into, well, something altogether different.
(https://i.imgur.com/nWsgSjU.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/g5pgUhZ.jpg)
Quote from: Eth on June 19, 2016, 09:06:20 AM
Quote from: vtk on June 18, 2016, 10:55:29 PM
Looks like that's supposed to be mounted on a gantry overhead the roadway, but the gantry has been temporarily removed and the sign instead mounted on the gantry support post.
Aha, sure enough, that's exactly what it is (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0085503,-84.5596815,3a,75y,11.98h,87.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szQDofLVqB6zBE5k1Kzim8A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656). Looks like they had to dismantle the gantry for construction.
Yep, they're putting the Northwest Express Lanes in the median there, so the sign bridge had to go. I assume the sign's also eventually a goner in favor of a Series E sign when the new sign bridge is installed, given GDOT's push to get rid of Georgia D signs; I guess they're all at the end of their design life since they were all put up when GDOT transitioned to mileage-based exits in the early 2000s.
"Right lane ends" before the right lane even begins. This is the northbound approach to the Conowingo Dam on U.S. Route 1 in Darlington, Maryland.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FI6gjope.jpg&hash=861c469620ca80bc66f367bc77481686650f42fa)
North of West Chester, Pennsylvania, a pair of U.S. 322 shields partially covered by vine growth.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FybYDWK7.jpg&hash=f8a7806fcd23969a59ccf1aa233a3c2b78778d2c)
It took me a while to get that the "Except Bikes" nearly at ground level had to do with the "No left turns" at the top of the pole...
(https://c4.staticflickr.com/9/8570/28352988963_84325a03d7_k.jpg)
U.S. Route 1 at U.S. Route 30 in west Philadelphia, but at the Montgomery County line:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FE4evhxP.jpg&hash=d20cc1eba6bedf8e86e39ca98b1bae84bcb12f2c)
The I-476 Blue Route just north of the I-76 Schuylkill Expressway interchange in MontCo:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FBpFlplJ.jpg&hash=c45f460f2accd34625cba2956553c37a5cc08087)
I consider this one poor. This is Maryland Route 10 south at its northern terminus at I-695 north of Glen Burnie. Notice how the exit sign for MD-710 is partially covered by a tree branch. The sign on the left blends in too much with the trees, making it easy for drivers to ignore.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FzBz9kiD.jpg&hash=c6c6e3fe002eb6dc64959ee7b1014afcd8d04053)
And I've got yet another one. Maryland Route 88 shield behind a branch.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FbXEuCGf.jpg&hash=d259436c6fdfc646805e3d9947944b68462e9748)
these aren't examples of poor sign placement so much as failure to maintain to trim tree branches which have since grown in front of the signs.
Quote from: odditude on August 19, 2016, 06:15:10 PM
these aren't examples of poor sign placement so much as failure to maintain to trim tree branches which have since grown in front of the signs.
so should we rename this topic to "Poor Sign Placement and Overgrowth" or create a new thread?
This one might be a candidate. U.S. Route 1 north near Kennett Square, Pennsylvania.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FYQ11Adz.jpg&hash=c87f9a0fa1e87e5f0ff55346ded0af47594afc49)
slightly different aspect of poor placement:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7618223,-73.9496483,3a,75y,109.27h,96.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1st1cljuVco-WgUDNh4svGVg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
"right lane ends in 1 mile", ok.
if you look carefully, you can see a BGS a little bit down the road, maybe 0.1 mile. Here is a closer look:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7604682,-73.9469055,3a,75y,109.27h,96.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQd4WkZ64IV59-UsEFFfgsw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Exit 25 in 1 mile.
Which lane would you be using to get off the highway at that exit?
Quote from: kalvado on August 27, 2016, 10:18:37 PM
slightly different aspect of poor placement:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7618223,-73.9496483,3a,75y,109.27h,96.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1st1cljuVco-WgUDNh4svGVg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
"right lane ends in 1 mile", ok.
if you look carefully, you can see a BGS a little bit down the road, maybe 0.1 mile. Here is a closer look:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7604682,-73.9469055,3a,75y,109.27h,96.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQd4WkZ64IV59-UsEFFfgsw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Exit 25 in 1 mile.
Which lane would you be using to get off the highway at that exit?
Here's how the NJ Turnpike handles a similar situation:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9399608,-74.9423118,3a,75y,260.73h,82.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sa-gGh8S8rQD8l-37SnFnAQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1
That sign is just under 1 mile to where the right lane ends and about 0.3 miles after the One mile advance for the exit. It's still confusing, though, because it doesn't really tell you what happens to the right lane. Also, I've seen "Thru Traffic Keep Left" in places where there isn't a lane reduction, but just a 2-lane exit. I don't know how I would solve this other than just exit the right lane instead of ending it.
Quote from: bzakharin on August 29, 2016, 11:30:06 AM
Quote from: kalvado on August 27, 2016, 10:18:37 PM
slightly different aspect of poor placement:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7618223,-73.9496483,3a,75y,109.27h,96.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1st1cljuVco-WgUDNh4svGVg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
"right lane ends in 1 mile", ok.
if you look carefully, you can see a BGS a little bit down the road, maybe 0.1 mile. Here is a closer look:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7604682,-73.9469055,3a,75y,109.27h,96.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQd4WkZ64IV59-UsEFFfgsw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Exit 25 in 1 mile.
Which lane would you be using to get off the highway at that exit?
Here's how the NJ Turnpike handles a similar situation:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9399608,-74.9423118,3a,75y,260.73h,82.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sa-gGh8S8rQD8l-37SnFnAQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1
That sign is just under 1 mile to where the right lane ends and about 0.3 miles after the One mile advance for the exit. It's still confusing, though, because it doesn't really tell you what happens to the right lane. Also, I've seen "Thru Traffic Keep Left" in places where there isn't a lane reduction, but just a 2-lane exit. I don't know how I would solve this other than just exit the right lane instead of ending it.
In Thruway case someone did read that exit-only lanes are bad. So what they did, they have a 3-lane+4th exit lane until the gore point, and third travel lane ends 30 feet after gore point. Exit-only lane would be much less messy and quite a bit cheaper. But that is not what the book says.
Placing "lane end 1 mile" sign before "exit 1 mile" sign complicates things even further. Both are technically correct, though
Alanland warning signs:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQZQUzFF.jpg%3F1&hash=a8cfa04aa71bd064ac409cd3701ce0b1dfa812b9)
Quote from: Mr. Matté on August 29, 2016, 07:13:58 PM
Alanland warning signs:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQZQUzFF.jpg%3F1&hash=a8cfa04aa71bd064ac409cd3701ce0b1dfa812b9)
Now I have to wonder how you stop
and yield...
The same as a normal stop. The "yield" is implicit, as you're not supposed to go from a stop until it's safe to do so and you have right of way. The difference between the two signs is that yield doesn't require a full stop before resuming, and stop does. Other than that, the rules are the same.
Quote from: vdeane on August 30, 2016, 12:45:21 PM
The same as a normal stop. The "yield" is implicit, as you're not supposed to go from a stop until it's safe to do so and you have right of way. The difference between the two signs is that yield doesn't require a full stop before resuming, and stop does. Other than that, the rules are the same.
There has to be a bit more fine print - there is a (well-defined) 4-way stop routine, but I never heard about 4-way yield. Roundabouts are sort of close, but scope of each yield sign does not include interaction with other yields...
Quote from: kalvado on August 30, 2016, 01:09:31 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 30, 2016, 12:45:21 PM
The same as a normal stop. The "yield" is implicit, as you're not supposed to go from a stop until it's safe to do so and you have right of way. The difference between the two signs is that yield doesn't require a full stop before resuming, and stop does. Other than that, the rules are the same.
There has to be a bit more fine print - there is a (well-defined) 4-way stop routine, but I never heard about 4-way yield. Roundabouts are sort of close, but scope of each yield sign does not include interaction with other yields...
IIRC, at a 4-way yield, you yield to anyone who arrives at the intersection before you, and to the person on the right, if two people arrive at the same time.
Quote from: Mr. Matté on August 29, 2016, 07:13:58 PM
Alanland warning signs:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQZQUzFF.jpg%3F1&hash=a8cfa04aa71bd064ac409cd3701ce0b1dfa812b9)
Alanland--the corpse just opened its eyes! :D
Quote from: freebrickproductions on August 30, 2016, 07:27:40 PM
IIRC, at a 4-way yield, you yield to anyone who arrives at the intersection before you, and to the person on the right, if two people arrive at the same time.
Do you have any locations in mind with 4-way yield actually deployed? I don't think I have ever seen that..
I like the one in Wall Township, NJ where the points along I-195 are mentioned real well, but the sign is placed between the SB NJ 34 ramp and the merge from NJ 34 SB to I-195 WB. Those entering the freeway from NJ 34 SB cannot even see it as generally signs or that specific nature are usually post interchange.
Ditto in Somerville, NJ on US 22 W Bound as a mileage sign is placed within the US 202 & 206 interchange and not all entering the road can see it either.
Then here in Orlando, a new apartment complex planted trees along Palm Parkway blocking the view of a guide sign directing motorists to Sea World and Discovery Cove that was out in the open for years.
I'm not sure we need locations for 4-way yields (though aren't there some in Europe?)... we've already established that yields don't have any restrictions that stop signs don't, so there's no Alanlandian dilemma, which was my whole point in the first place.
Heck, many people cannot negotiate 4-way stops. Do you think they can negotiate 4-way yields?
There is absolutely no reason to ever have 4-way stops (or yields). If it's a lightly traveled intersection, pick a direction that has priority. If traffic is heavy, install a freakin' stop light.
Quote from: amroad17 on August 31, 2016, 10:59:36 PM
Heck, many people cannot negotiate 4-way stops. Do you think they can negotiate 4-way yields?
This. So much this. I was just talking to a friend yesterday about how I always prepare to wave people on or honk if need be when approaching a 4-way stop. No one knows how to handle them.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 01, 2016, 09:16:37 AM
Quote from: amroad17 on August 31, 2016, 10:59:36 PM
Heck, many people cannot negotiate 4-way stops. Do you think they can negotiate 4-way yields?
This. So much this. I was just talking to a friend yesterday about how I always prepare to wave people on or honk if need be when approaching a 4-way stop. No one knows how to handle them.
I do think there are people that freak out when they come to a 4-way stop and do not genuinely know what to do since our licensing requirements suck. However, I do think there's also general confusion at 4-way stops as to who got to the intersection first and how that's even defined.
Quote from: bzakharin on September 01, 2016, 09:10:19 AM
There is absolutely no reason to ever have 4-way stops (or yields). If it's a lightly traveled intersection, pick a direction that has priority. If traffic is heavy, install a freakin' stop light.
Most 4 way stop signs are, as some traffic engineers call it, a poor man's speed zone.
Quote from: roadman on September 01, 2016, 03:19:10 PM
Quote from: bzakharin on September 01, 2016, 09:10:19 AM
There is absolutely no reason to ever have 4-way stops (or yields). If it's a lightly traveled intersection, pick a direction that has priority. If traffic is heavy, install a freakin' stop light.
Most 4 way stop signs are, as some traffic engineers call it, a poor man's speed zone.
There are a lot of those along non-PennDOT roads in southeastern PA.
Whomever arrives first goes first. If two cars arrive at the same time, the car on the right goes first. My wife and I call this "Stop Sign Etiquette."
Some people can't figure out a 3-way stop. My wife just blows her top when someone doesn't follow the "etiquette." It's a bit amusing to watch her. If she is a passenger, she will yell at me to GO! if no one moves. If she is driving, she will stomp her foot on the accelerator if nobody moves, curse at the so-called idiots, and complain to me about them--"Don't they know anything?" :D
The arrow on this exit sign is covered by the trees.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F2a9qNgy.jpg&hash=2404317f05bb5882f7800a489af7f9694f32495b)
Heh. Burkittsville is probably preparing for another onslaught of sign thieves due to the new Blair Witch movie coming out.
Quote from: kalvado on August 29, 2016, 11:55:17 AM
Quote from: bzakharin on August 29, 2016, 11:30:06 AM
Quote from: kalvado on August 27, 2016, 10:18:37 PM
slightly different aspect of poor placement:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7618223,-73.9496483,3a,75y,109.27h,96.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1st1cljuVco-WgUDNh4svGVg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
"right lane ends in 1 mile", ok.
if you look carefully, you can see a BGS a little bit down the road, maybe 0.1 mile. Here is a closer look:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7604682,-73.9469055,3a,75y,109.27h,96.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQd4WkZ64IV59-UsEFFfgsw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Exit 25 in 1 mile.
Which lane would you be using to get off the highway at that exit?
Here's how the NJ Turnpike handles a similar situation:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9399608,-74.9423118,3a,75y,260.73h,82.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sa-gGh8S8rQD8l-37SnFnAQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1
That sign is just under 1 mile to where the right lane ends and about 0.3 miles after the One mile advance for the exit. It's still confusing, though, because it doesn't really tell you what happens to the right lane. Also, I've seen "Thru Traffic Keep Left" in places where there isn't a lane reduction, but just a 2-lane exit. I don't know how I would solve this other than just exit the right lane instead of ending it.
In Thruway case someone did read that exit-only lanes are bad. So what they did, they have a 3-lane+4th exit lane until the gore point, and third travel lane ends 30 feet after gore point. Exit-only lane would be much less messy and quite a bit cheaper. But that is not what the book says.
Placing "lane end 1 mile" sign before "exit 1 mile" sign complicates things even further. Both are technically correct, though
In the two situations described above (Schenectady along Thruway, Mount Holly along NJTP) the right thru lane ends mere feet after an exit. The preferred way would be to just simply force the right lane to exit. There are many ways where that condition can be warned ahead of time.
Thru traffic merge left
Right lane must exit 1 mile
Big BGS with exit only for the upcoming exit
Lane markings*
*Some states (notably Calif.) have different lane markers showing that the lane must turn soon. Essentially very staccato lane markings.
See this example along the 101 near the Hollywood Bowl, See how the right lane is different than the others:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1214703,-118.3399722,3a,75y,162.28h,68.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBppAnBl4wPEWysklbauAQw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Quote from: mrsman on September 04, 2016, 08:55:40 PM
Lane markings*
*Some states (notably Calif.) have different lane markers showing that the lane must turn soon. Essentially very staccato lane markings.
See this example along the 101 near the Hollywood Bowl, See how the right lane is different than the others:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1214703,-118.3399722,3a,75y,162.28h,68.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBppAnBl4wPEWysklbauAQw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
Such markings are in the 2009 MUTCD, and are referred to as a "dotted line". As a standard, they are to be used to separate through lanes from any of the following: acceleration/deceleration lanes, exit only lane drops, auxiliary lanes between adjacent entrance and exit ramps (< 2 miles long), or auxiliary lanes between adjacent intersections (< 1 mile long). Dotted lines are also used as lane extensions through intersections. (Note: A standard lane line is called a "broken line".)
Nevada is another area where these dotted lines are fairly standard practice on freeways, and well as where appropriate on major streets.
Quote from: mrsman on September 04, 2016, 08:55:40 PM
Quote from: kalvado on August 29, 2016, 11:55:17 AM
Quote from: bzakharin on August 29, 2016, 11:30:06 AM
Quote from: kalvado on August 27, 2016, 10:18:37 PM
slightly different aspect of poor placement:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7618223,-73.9496483,3a,75y,109.27h,96.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1st1cljuVco-WgUDNh4svGVg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
"right lane ends in 1 mile", ok.
if you look carefully, you can see a BGS a little bit down the road, maybe 0.1 mile. Here is a closer look:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7604682,-73.9469055,3a,75y,109.27h,96.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQd4WkZ64IV59-UsEFFfgsw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Exit 25 in 1 mile.
Which lane would you be using to get off the highway at that exit?
Here's how the NJ Turnpike handles a similar situation:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9399608,-74.9423118,3a,75y,260.73h,82.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sa-gGh8S8rQD8l-37SnFnAQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1
That sign is just under 1 mile to where the right lane ends and about 0.3 miles after the One mile advance for the exit. It's still confusing, though, because it doesn't really tell you what happens to the right lane. Also, I've seen "Thru Traffic Keep Left" in places where there isn't a lane reduction, but just a 2-lane exit. I don't know how I would solve this other than just exit the right lane instead of ending it.
In Thruway case someone did read that exit-only lanes are bad. So what they did, they have a 3-lane+4th exit lane until the gore point, and third travel lane ends 30 feet after gore point. Exit-only lane would be much less messy and quite a bit cheaper. But that is not what the book says.
Placing "lane end 1 mile" sign before "exit 1 mile" sign complicates things even further. Both are technically correct, though
In the two situations described above (Schenectady along Thruway, Mount Holly along NJTP) the right thru lane ends mere feet after an exit. The preferred way would be to just simply force the right lane to exit. There are many ways where that condition can be warned ahead of time.
I thought that *wasn't* the preferred way, as it causes people to quickly exit a lane they didn't know was ending. I thought the preferred method was a lane drop, downstream from the last exit or in an area without anything else going on.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on September 06, 2016, 06:20:20 AM
Quote from: mrsman on September 04, 2016, 08:55:40 PM
Quote from: kalvado on August 29, 2016, 11:55:17 AM
Quote from: bzakharin on August 29, 2016, 11:30:06 AM
Quote from: kalvado on August 27, 2016, 10:18:37 PM
slightly different aspect of poor placement:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7618223,-73.9496483,3a,75y,109.27h,96.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1st1cljuVco-WgUDNh4svGVg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
"right lane ends in 1 mile", ok.
if you look carefully, you can see a BGS a little bit down the road, maybe 0.1 mile. Here is a closer look:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7604682,-73.9469055,3a,75y,109.27h,96.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQd4WkZ64IV59-UsEFFfgsw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Exit 25 in 1 mile.
Which lane would you be using to get off the highway at that exit?
Here's how the NJ Turnpike handles a similar situation:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9399608,-74.9423118,3a,75y,260.73h,82.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sa-gGh8S8rQD8l-37SnFnAQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1
That sign is just under 1 mile to where the right lane ends and about 0.3 miles after the One mile advance for the exit. It's still confusing, though, because it doesn't really tell you what happens to the right lane. Also, I've seen "Thru Traffic Keep Left" in places where there isn't a lane reduction, but just a 2-lane exit. I don't know how I would solve this other than just exit the right lane instead of ending it.
In Thruway case someone did read that exit-only lanes are bad. So what they did, they have a 3-lane+4th exit lane until the gore point, and third travel lane ends 30 feet after gore point. Exit-only lane would be much less messy and quite a bit cheaper. But that is not what the book says.
Placing "lane end 1 mile" sign before "exit 1 mile" sign complicates things even further. Both are technically correct, though
In the two situations described above (Schenectady along Thruway, Mount Holly along NJTP) the right thru lane ends mere feet after an exit. The preferred way would be to just simply force the right lane to exit. There are many ways where that condition can be warned ahead of time.
I thought that *wasn't* the preferred way, as it causes people to quickly exit a lane they didn't know was ending. I thought the preferred method was a lane drop, downstream from the last exit or in an area without anything else going on.
I think mere feet is the operative phrase here. If the driver does not know a lane exits (despite "exit only" signs) then the driver won't know the lane ends for the same reason. If the lane drops significantly beyond the exit that's one thing, but if the lane ends just beyond the exit it creates more confusion not less.
Quote from: bzakharin on September 06, 2016, 11:01:05 AM
I think mere feet is the operative phrase here. If the driver does not know a lane exits (despite "exit only" signs) then the driver won't know the lane ends for the same reason. If the lane drops significantly beyond the exit that's one thing, but if the lane ends just beyond the exit it creates more confusion not less.
Just for the record: this is the spot which started the conversation:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7538043,-73.9336249,18z/data=!3m1!1e3
I believe "exit-only" lane is the way to go. There is a lot of eastbound commuting traffic coming from that exit, so shifting through traffic left makes perfect sense - but not the way it is done. Maybe shifting traffic was an afterthought after the number of commuters increased? Even then exit-only lane can be done with just stripping.
Yeah, it used to be three continuous lanes, and then the right was ended so that traffic coming from I-890 didn't have to merge. SB exit 23, though, is done the same way despite the third lane never continuing south of there. NYSTA just hates exit only lanes (also option lanes).
U.S. 322 in Pennsylvania again. This is along the U.S. 202 concurrency.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F2fg35tx.jpg&hash=dd6ad6768863eea402552fb36523c245519e2391)
www.google.com/maps/@40.7382373,-74.3682541,3a,37.5y,106.7h,89.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVShF9jFPVYPR3YzhFER54A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Should not this sign for MAPLEWOOD 6 be placed ahead beyond the merge? For some reason NJDOT when adding mileage points along state routes placed them anyplace even within interchanges instead of beyond the farthest merge areas like they're supposed to be.
Also why is NJ 124 getting a mileage sign anyway being its a service road to a freeway?
TREE MONSTER LIKES SIGNS!! OM NOM NOM
Quote from: epzik8 on September 27, 2016, 09:23:15 PM
U.S. 322 in Pennsylvania again. This is along the U.S. 202 concurrency.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F2fg35tx.jpg&hash=dd6ad6768863eea402552fb36523c245519e2391)
Come to Orlando along S. John Young Parkway where the trees planted along the side of the highway by our county for beautification has blocked views of many guide signs for the upcoming intersections. This is normal for JYP commuters to see.
Quote from: roadman65 on September 27, 2016, 09:32:43 PM
Also why is NJ 124 getting a mileage sign anyway being its a service road to a freeway?
Note that the sign is after the last time NJ 24 East had direct access to NJ 124 before the latter ceases to be a frontage road and goes off on its own.
On the other hand, though you could follow NJ 124 to Maplewood from here, the much faster way is to enter NJ 24, then I-78, then exit for NJ 124 from there, so the mileage sign is pretty pointless.
There's another Tree Monster sign along my usual bikeride loop. I'll get a picture to put on here :). I work at a road district and I'm actually in charge of keeping track of the status of all 4000+ signs in our system. There used to be a few Tree Monster examples but, per my recommendation our personnel already trimmed the trees where I asked them to :cool:
Signs obscured by trees or other overgrowth really shouldn't go here. Lack of maintenance doesn't equate to poor placement.
Quote from: bzakharin on September 28, 2016, 04:06:17 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on September 27, 2016, 09:32:43 PM
Also why is NJ 124 getting a mileage sign anyway being its a service road to a freeway?
Note that the sign is after the last time NJ 24 East had direct access to NJ 124 before the latter ceases to be a frontage road and goes off on its own.
On the other hand, though you could follow NJ 124 to Maplewood from here, the much faster way is to enter NJ 24, then I-78, then exit for NJ 124 from there, so the mileage sign is pretty pointless.
Not to derail this for long, but you are right, the majority would use Route 24 to I-78 and rejoin Route 124 later on. I believe this sign was part of a statewide signing project in 1998 that gave all NJ routes (including interstates) that picked various points along the route, and would list them and each time one point would be surpassed a new sign would be listing either a newly added point to replace the one just surpassed or just have one less community mentioned.
Probably leaving Morristown on NJ 124 there is another sign with Chatham and Maplewood on it as well. Being this is after the route leaves the first city on it, then the next sign comes to just solely Maplewood.
Highland Village, Texas:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F10.17.2016%2520001_zpsevrd0wd0.jpg&hash=fe44414a4936cff65950734f283658cad65a27ae) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/10.17.2016%20001_zpsevrd0wd0.jpg.html)
Quote from: Brian556 on October 18, 2016, 01:51:41 AM
Highland Village, Texas:
I don't get it. Is the sign on the wrong side of the crosswalk?
Quote from: jakeroot on October 18, 2016, 01:28:08 PM
Quote from: Brian556 on October 18, 2016, 01:51:41 AM
Highland Village, Texas:
I don't get it. Is the sign on the wrong side of the crosswalk?
Maybe you have to put your bike on your head and ride across that way....
Quote from: jakeroot on October 18, 2016, 01:28:08 PM
Quote from: Brian556 on October 18, 2016, 01:51:41 AM
Highland Village, Texas:
I don't get it. Is the sign on the wrong side of the crosswalk?
I'm assuming that's it. Fatalities are now skyrocketing.
Joppa, IL
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1092.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fi410%2Fkphoger%2Fjoppa_zpswyaompoj.png&hash=16d399e788e627f55cc915f418e204a6adb805f5)
^ Unfortunately, because of the parking lot, that is the closest the STOP sign could be placed--unless a small island could be built for a STOP sign in the parking lot nearer to the intersection. As it currently is, this placement cannot be helped.
^^ Put the stop sign across the road and install a stop bar at the proper location.
That will work--if drivers see the STOP sign is located across the road. It should be a fairly large STOP sign though.
Quote from: amroad17 on October 19, 2016, 04:50:28 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 19, 2016, 04:33:32 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on October 19, 2016, 03:59:13 PM
Unfortunately, because of the parking lot, that is the closest the STOP sign could be placed--unless a small island could be built for a STOP sign in the parking lot nearer to the intersection. As it currently is, this placement cannot be helped.
Put the stop sign across the road and install a stop bar at the proper location.
That will work--if drivers see the STOP sign is located across the road. It should be a fairly large STOP sign though.
If not, a small island could still be constructed
between the two lanes of travel, something like this (just between two directions, instead of one):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FbItTttf.png&hash=3b1126ebf26fc6fd2bf68cd260ae1aa461aebe50)
Quote from: jakeroot on October 19, 2016, 06:04:30 PM
If not, a small island could still be constructed between the two lanes of travel, something like this (just between two directions, instead of one):
Not sure what MUTCD says about it, but my impression was that regular signs on the left are often ignored.
Most common example would be "WRONG WAY" red sings at divided highway entrance. You do see ssign on your left - and you are supposed to happily ignore that.
Just a random example of such sign, if you didn't see one this morning..
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6344536,-73.777974,3a,66.8y,142.57h,94.42t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sONZliFennNPLhOnLKjEsJw!2e0
Quote from: hbelkins on October 19, 2016, 04:33:32 PM
^^ Put the stop sign across the road and install a stop bar at the proper location.
Quote from: amroad17 on October 19, 2016, 04:50:28 PM
That will work--if drivers see the STOP sign is located across the road. It should be a fairly large STOP sign though.
The MUTCD specifically requires that a STOP sign be installed on the near side of the intersection on the right side of the approach.
Quote from: spooky on October 20, 2016, 03:40:48 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 19, 2016, 04:33:32 PM
^^ Put the stop sign across the road and install a stop bar at the proper location.
Quote from: amroad17 on October 19, 2016, 04:50:28 PM
That will work--if drivers see the STOP sign is located across the road. It should be a fairly large STOP sign though.
The MUTCD specifically requires that a STOP sign be installed on the near side of the intersection on the right side of the approach.
Not always possible. So sometimes you have to improvise.
I see plenty of room for a stop sign in the right location. There is a pole along the edge of the parking lot on the mainline, why couldn't there be a stop sign on the side street?
Quote from: kalvado on October 20, 2016, 02:30:28 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 19, 2016, 06:04:30 PM
If not, a small island could still be constructed between the two lanes of travel, something like this (just between two directions, instead of one):
Not sure what MUTCD says about it, but my impression was that regular signs on the left are often ignored.
Most common example would be "WRONG WAY" red sings at divided highway entrance. You do see ssign on your left - and you are supposed to happily ignore that.
Just a random example of such sign, if you didn't see one this morning..
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6344536,-73.777974,3a,66.8y,142.57h,94.42t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sONZliFennNPLhOnLKjEsJw!2e0
Well, a sign that is five car lengths before the intersection
probably has a better chance of being ignored. If the center markings fattened near the junction with an island, the stop sign would appear to be roughly in the center of the lane on approach.
Quote from: hbelkins on October 20, 2016, 03:42:47 PM
Quote from: spooky on October 20, 2016, 03:40:48 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 19, 2016, 04:33:32 PM
^^ Put the stop sign across the road and install a stop bar at the proper location.
Quote from: amroad17 on October 19, 2016, 04:50:28 PM
That will work--if drivers see the STOP sign is located across the road. It should be a fairly large STOP sign though.
The MUTCD specifically requires that a STOP sign be installed on the near side of the intersection on the right side of the approach.
Not always possible. So sometimes you have to improvise.
I think where it's shown here is better than across the street. Most people are accustomed to stopping at or just beyond the stop sign. Across the street is too far away. Plus, that homeowner would have a big metal octogan to look at all the time.
I've known a few stop signs to be a carlength or two back from the actual stopping point due to driveways and such.
Quote from: jakeroot on October 19, 2016, 06:04:30 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on October 19, 2016, 04:50:28 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on October 19, 2016, 04:33:32 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on October 19, 2016, 03:59:13 PM
Unfortunately, because of the parking lot, that is the closest the STOP sign could be placed--unless a small island could be built for a STOP sign in the parking lot nearer to the intersection. As it currently is, this placement cannot be helped.
Put the stop sign across the road and install a stop bar at the proper location.
That will work--if drivers see the STOP sign is located across the road. It should be a fairly large STOP sign though.
If not, a small island could still be constructed between the two lanes of travel, something like this (just between two directions, instead of one):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FbItTttf.png&hash=3b1126ebf26fc6fd2bf68cd260ae1aa461aebe50)
That kind of setup wouldn't last one month in that location. The route sees heavy use by coal and gravel trucks as well as school buses, and both roads are simple two-lanes. Wide turns are common and often necessary. The adjacent property, however, is pretty insignificant, so I wonder why the city couldn't just curb a sliver of the parking lot and install a stop sign where it ought to go.
Quote from: kphoger on October 21, 2016, 02:46:50 PM
That kind of setup wouldn't last one month in that location. The route sees heavy use by coal and gravel trucks as well as school buses, and both roads are simple two-lanes. Wide turns are common and often necessary. The adjacent property, however, is pretty insignificant, so I wonder why the city couldn't just curb a sliver of the parking lot and install a stop sign where it ought to go.
Very well. I would agree then that the best proposal would be to post the sign off to the right. Better yet, pave the road, put down a stop line (plus the word STOP just before the line), and install an overhead flashing red beacon.
What's wrong with the current location? This issue wasn't even known to most of us till now...and now we're proposing a slew of corrections to a problem that never existed?
Have you mapped Joppa, IL? It's not even a state highway. How many of us on the board had even heard of the town before I brought it up?
What's wrong with the current placement is that state laws sets the stopping point (in absence of a painted line) adjacent to the stop sign itself. Legitimately stopping at that point is likely to get you rear-ended or possibly ticketed for 'running' the stop sign at the actual intersection.
Quote from: kphoger on October 21, 2016, 02:46:50 PM
That kind of setup wouldn't last one month in that location. The route sees heavy use by coal and gravel trucks as well as school buses, and both roads are simple two-lanes. Wide turns are common and often necessary. The adjacent property, however, is pretty insignificant, so I wonder why the city couldn't just curb a sliver of the parking lot and install a stop sign where it ought to go.
There's this little thing called right of way. If the agency that owns the road doesn't own the property, it can't install anything on it unless it buys the property or gets an easement.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on October 21, 2016, 03:08:05 PM
What's wrong with the current location? This issue wasn't even known to most of us till now...and now we're proposing a slew of corrections to a problem that never existed?
You have to like the way many of us jump on something that...
a. we cannot actually fix
b. we believe we have the definitive answer to
c. acts as if it affects us--even if we have never been to a certain place
I am guilty of this myself--but if we did not have opinions and suggestions, this would be one
boring forum. :colorful:
Been wanting to post this one for a while, but I hadn't been in the I-395 HOV lanes heading into DC for some time now. Veterans' Day, when HOV isn't in effect, finally allowed an opportunity. The dashcam makes this sign somewhat easier to see than it actually is when you're driving and paying attention to the road.
https://youtu.be/7_0ZEyJqI6g
(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5347/31204850102_f77a9b29e4_k_d.jpg)
Wrightstown, WI
Quote from: 1995hoo on November 13, 2016, 05:03:37 PM
Been wanting to post this one for a while, but I hadn't been in the I-395 HOV lanes heading into DC for some time now. Veterans' Day, when HOV isn't in effect, finally allowed an opportunity. The dashcam makes this sign somewhat easier to see than it actually is when you're driving and paying attention to the road.
https://youtu.be/7_0ZEyJqI6g
Large overhead signs immediately behind overpasses - always a bad idea.
I-65 South in Louisville crossing the Ohio River.
(https://c6.staticflickr.com/6/5656/30608369461_3e5b87594a_k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/NCKTRX)IMG_6629 (https://flic.kr/p/NCKTRX) by paulthemapguy (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
^ Really cannot be helped. Besides, this is the way the signs were on the Kennedy Bridge before the Lincoln Bridge was built.
I'm sorry. These signs are on the Kennedy Bridge. I did not realize the Lincoln Bridge was open (no trusses) until a few days after posting this. OOPS.
Spotted this today in Athens, AL:
(https://c5.staticflickr.com/1/776/31425811100_a862ce8cfb.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/PSZuMj)Overlapping signs (https://flic.kr/p/PSZuMj) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
In western Franklin County, on northbound Darby Creek Dr between Old Kropp Rd and Alkire Rd, there's a railroad crossing and a bike trail crossing at basically the same spot. Approaching that spot, for several seconds, the "bike crossing ahead" warning sign obscures the stop sign that was recently added to the railroad crossbuck.
These are on US 75 in and north of McKinney TX
This one is actually within the paved freeway shoulder:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2Fsign%2520in%2520shoulder%2520us%252075_zpsq4deqb9s.png&hash=af8c78a11eb8ceb6e1893bab181827f793845b53) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/sign%20in%20shoulder%20us%2075_zpsq4deqb9s.png.html)
NB Frontage Rd at FM 543/ SPUR 195:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F6.17.2017%2520068_zpsi4wlw6fv.jpg&hash=9c66fc09fc038e6204b2e779ea435e65ae2efdf7) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/6.17.2017%20068_zpsi4wlw6fv.jpg.html)
WB Melissa Rd. I don't think I've ever seen a stop sign that far to the right. The JCT sign is too close to the intersection:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F6.17.2017%2520087_zps99eonazp.jpg&hash=938d8b0599e5a4ac0555bb01b54d63b112537e4f) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/6.17.2017%20087_zps99eonazp.jpg.html)
Putting an exit sign in the median for a right exit is poor sign placement if you ask me:
https://goo.gl/maps/sz2ViZriMuq
Quote from: SignGeek101 on July 17, 2017, 01:32:26 AM
Putting an exit sign in the median for a right exit is poor sign placement if you ask me:
https://goo.gl/maps/sz2ViZriMuq
IMO, the stop sign up the ramp is just as guilty of being "poorly placed"...who the F are we stopping for?
https://goo.gl/PZFdqS
Quote from: SignGeek101 on July 17, 2017, 01:32:26 AM
Putting an exit sign in the median for a right exit is poor sign placement if you ask me:
https://goo.gl/maps/sz2ViZriMuq
Not if a wall of rock limits sign width. That being said, though, an overhead gantry would work.
And then there is the issue of the white-on-GREEN Hospital sign.
Quote from: jakeroot on July 17, 2017, 01:35:59 AM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on July 17, 2017, 01:32:26 AM
Putting an exit sign in the median for a right exit is poor sign placement if you ask me:
https://goo.gl/maps/sz2ViZriMuq
IMO, the stop sign up the ramp is just as guilty of being "poorly placed"...who the F are we stopping for?
https://goo.gl/PZFdqS
Looks like there was originally meant to be an intersection there, especially with this un-used road on the one leg:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@47.8120658,-69.5341205,3a,74.7y,86.03h,83.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfWbv0tByr_EaFei_w7kOhw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Quote from: thenetwork on July 17, 2017, 10:02:17 AM
And then there is the issue of the white-on-GREEN Hospital sign.
That's the official Canadian symbol.
Example from BC: https://goo.gl/EDH3rv
Quote from: freebrickproductions on July 17, 2017, 01:02:47 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on July 17, 2017, 01:35:59 AM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on July 17, 2017, 01:32:26 AM
Putting an exit sign in the median for a right exit is poor sign placement if you ask me:
IMO, the stop sign up the ramp is just as guilty of being "poorly placed"...who the F are we stopping for?
Looks like there was originally meant to be an intersection there, especially with this un-used road on the one leg:
Yeah, definitely. I'm just surprised that they kept up/put up the stop sign (not sure if the unused road was ever used). It conflicts with the road markings, which suggest a continuous movement.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4311/35723520380_72a72bbf01_o.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/WqLo2b)
Dawnadele-Daradele and Poor Sign Placement (https://flic.kr/p/WqLo2b) by Jay Bienvenu (https://www.flickr.com/photos/bienvenunet/), on Flickr
When this left turn onto I-90 near Seattle was replaced with a roundabout, the placement of this overhead guide sign became poor...
https://goo.gl/fttQkx
(https://i.imgur.com/J894C2P.png)
The stop sign in front of the Wal-Mart here in Kingstowne is weirdly placed, to say the least.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171030/22675ea80e03e3922b84ede530762e81.jpg)
Quote from: 1995hoo on October 30, 2017, 07:27:22 PM
The stop sign in front of the Wal-Mart here in Kingstowne is weirdly placed, to say the least.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171030/22675ea80e03e3922b84ede530762e81.jpg
I think a good substitute for that salad would be the R1-5c sign, because as you are alluding to, that stop sign is way too far up the pole to be effective.
Walmart does weird traffic control all the time. I seem to recall the Walmarts nearby having a similar setup, with the stop sign on the bottom. Which is still against the MUTCD, since it says stop signs can't share a pole with any other sort of sign (excepting street name signs). And then YIELD is painted on the asphalt...
I just ignore all the signs in parking lots. Stop for pedestrians, don't stop if there aren't any.
(https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/23331258_10155657802606469_681340252945717427_o.jpg?oh=c0da5457709a3af43e542b4d8060f9dc&oe=5A6B3B27)
Quote from: hbelkins on November 09, 2017, 03:54:04 PM
(https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/23331258_10155657802606469_681340252945717427_o.jpg?oh=c0da5457709a3af43e542b4d8060f9dc&oe=5A6B3B27)
The hill isn't the only thing blocking a view. :pan:
Here's a head scratcher: a TN 22 shield posted at the Tennessee/Kentucky state line, for traffic leaving Tennessee
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4973481,-89.4932173,3a,44.8y,57.04h,83.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2bByMRkgXztedDW0HrJEeg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Quote from: freebrickproductions on December 19, 2017, 10:55:29 PM
Here's a head scratcher: a TN 22 shield posted at the Tennessee/Kentucky state line, for traffic leaving Tennessee
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4973481,-89.4932173,3a,44.8y,57.04h,83.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2bByMRkgXztedDW0HrJEeg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
I wonder if it was supposed to be an END banner instead of a NORTH banner and the signing crew screwed up.
Notably, if you go north neither Kentucky nor the county seem to want to take credit for the houses or the first few hundred feet of roadway in their jurisdiction.
This situation used to exist at the south end of FM 2499 at the Denton/ Tarrant County Line. The sing even remained well over a decade after FM 2499 was moved to its new alignment
Quote from: kphoger on October 31, 2017, 10:32:01 AM
I just ignore all the signs in parking lots. Stop for pedestrians, don't stop if there aren't any.
I have a policy of following parking lot signs if they are MUTCD-compliant and ignoring them if they're not. If you can't be bothered to make your stop sign use the right font, I can't be bothered to stop. (This leads to really silly behavior when it comes to a hospital we frequent, because one stop sign is more or less compliant and the other isn't. I figure they're not too serious about people stopping there because there are stop signs for inbound traffic only, and outbound has no requirement to stop.)
Of course, I stop if there are pedestrians actively using the crosswalk regardless of the signs.
Quote from: freebrickproductions on December 19, 2017, 10:55:29 PM
Here's a head scratcher: a TN 22 shield posted at the Tennessee/Kentucky state line, for traffic leaving Tennessee
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4973481,-89.4932173,3a,44.8y,57.04h,83.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2bByMRkgXztedDW0HrJEeg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Technically, it
is TN 22 for another three feet. :D (and ducks)
Quote from: amroad17 on January 12, 2018, 04:26:24 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on December 19, 2017, 10:55:29 PM
Here's a head scratcher: a TN 22 shield posted at the Tennessee/Kentucky state line, for traffic leaving Tennessee
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4973481,-89.4932173,3a,44.8y,57.04h,83.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2bByMRkgXztedDW0HrJEeg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Technically, it is TN 22 for another three feet. :D (and ducks)
Interestingly, while the Tennessee State Line sign (knocked over) is right there, the "Welcome to Kentucky" sign is another 400 feet down the road - maybe it's some sort of DMZ between the states? :)
Quote from: DTComposer on January 12, 2018, 05:25:39 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on January 12, 2018, 04:26:24 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on December 19, 2017, 10:55:29 PM
Here's a head scratcher: a TN 22 shield posted at the Tennessee/Kentucky state line, for traffic leaving Tennessee
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4973481,-89.4932173,3a,44.8y,57.04h,83.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2bByMRkgXztedDW0HrJEeg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Technically, it is TN 22 for another three feet. :D (and ducks)
Interestingly, while the Tennessee State Line sign (knocked over) is right there, the "Welcome to Kentucky" sign is another 400 feet down the road - maybe it's some sort of DMZ between the states? :)
Well, Kentucky was one of the slave-holding "border" states that remained in the Union during the American Civil War, so maybe there's still a few old feelings that haven't died down yet? :-P
I guess the error would be the placement of the yield sign at all. Military @ S 200 St, Seatac, WA.
Setup is about a year old. The yield sign was updated with reflective tape along the post as well. :hmm:
(https://i.imgur.com/WDHomNu.jpg)
In case traffic lights are out perhaps? Or is that only an European thing?
Definitely a European thing. This kind of setup is definitely not allowed by the MUTCD, as the green right arrow contradicts the YIELD sign in terms of what type of movements are permitted. (A right green arrow is supposed to give me permission to proceed with a right turn without needing to yield to anything.)
Quote from: riiga on June 01, 2018, 05:27:44 PM
In case traffic lights are out perhaps? Or is that only an European thing?
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 01, 2018, 09:55:29 PM
Definitely a European thing. This kind of setup is definitely not allowed by the MUTCD, as the green right arrow contradicts the YIELD sign in terms of what type of movements are permitted. (A right green arrow is supposed to give me permission to proceed with a right turn without needing to yield to anything.)
Bingo. Some states (not Washington) do post signage for when traffic lights are out, but they are folded up for later use: https://goo.gl/6GeKsR.
Quote from: jakeroot on June 02, 2018, 06:48:21 PM
Quote from: riiga on June 01, 2018, 05:27:44 PM
In case traffic lights are out perhaps? Or is that only an European thing?
Quote from: MNHighwayMan on June 01, 2018, 09:55:29 PM
Definitely a European thing. This kind of setup is definitely not allowed by the MUTCD, as the green right arrow contradicts the YIELD sign in terms of what type of movements are permitted. (A right green arrow is supposed to give me permission to proceed with a right turn without needing to yield to anything.)
Bingo. Some states (not Washington) do post signage for when traffic lights are out, but they are folded up for later use: https://goo.gl/6GeKsR.
I saw that a bit up in PA when I was there around 5 years ago.
Hobson City, AL also had something similar where they had bagged-up stop signs posted around the one signal in the town. When they couldn't pay the power bill for the signal (and as such, the signal was shut off), the town would unbag the stop signs until they could get the money to pay the bill.
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6203682,-85.8371459,3a,60y,3.71h,89.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sw-sZfeDJC6zvLzFJAjU5kg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
IIRC, the town has since removed the signal so it's now a 24/7 four-way stop.
Quote from: freebrickproductions on June 03, 2018, 01:05:41 AM
Hobson City, AL also had something similar where they had bagged-up stop signs posted around the one signal in the town. When they couldn't pay the power bill for the signal (and as such, the signal was shut off), the town would unbag the stop signs until they could get the money to pay the bill.
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6203682,-85.8371459,3a,60y,3.71h,89.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sw-sZfeDJC6zvLzFJAjU5kg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
IIRC, the town has since removed the signal so it's now a 24/7 four-way stop.
Jesus, that's awful. Didn't realize some towns were that poor. Judging by the Street View images, that signal probably wasn't necessary. Though it was cool!
The 2008 imagery seems to show the signal in operation with the stop signs unbagged. Huh? https://goo.gl/43cg1d
Quote from: jakeroot on June 03, 2018, 02:44:33 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on June 03, 2018, 01:05:41 AM
Hobson City, AL also had something similar where they had bagged-up stop signs posted around the one signal in the town. When they couldn't pay the power bill for the signal (and as such, the signal was shut off), the town would unbag the stop signs until they could get the money to pay the bill.
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6203682,-85.8371459,3a,60y,3.71h,89.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sw-sZfeDJC6zvLzFJAjU5kg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
IIRC, the town has since removed the signal so it's now a 24/7 four-way stop.
Jesus, that's awful. Didn't realize some towns were that poor. Judging by the Street View images, that signal probably wasn't necessary. Though it was cool!
The 2008 imagery seems to show the signal in operation with the stop signs unbagged. Huh? https://goo.gl/43cg1d
I've noticed that as well I'm guessing the town either forgot to put the bags back on, or that was before they started bagging them. I'm willing to bet the signal was installed when the town was doing better and the area was still growing, as that part of Alabama's been quietly drying up for a while now...
Quote from: DTComposer on January 12, 2018, 05:25:39 PM
Quote from: amroad17 on January 12, 2018, 04:26:24 PM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on December 19, 2017, 10:55:29 PM
Here's a head scratcher: a TN 22 shield posted at the Tennessee/Kentucky state line, for traffic leaving Tennessee
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.4973481,-89.4932173,3a,44.8y,57.04h,83.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2bByMRkgXztedDW0HrJEeg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Technically, it is TN 22 for another three feet. :D (and ducks)
Interestingly, while the Tennessee State Line sign (knocked over) is right there, the "Welcome to Kentucky" sign is another 400 feet down the road - maybe it's some sort of DMZ between the states? :)
It's part of the Kentucky Bend, so I suppose TDOT takes care the single paved road in and out of that region.
This sign here
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.398897,-74.5610695,3a,37.5y,187.19h,92.96t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1stw6R7QQaOVPs29hvSBsMAw!2e0!5s20111001T000000!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1
was removed during construction. This morning, they put the sign back up at nearly the same location... except that location now looks like this:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3989077,-74.561102,3a,75y,173.25h,92.7t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWky7tn8FGo1iU-zRA41Nlg!2e0!5s20170701T000000!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1
So the sign is only visible to traffic entering from the Garden State Parkway. Oops. I suppose if they wanted to move the sign to near the thru lanes it wouldn't be 1000 feet any more...
There's this solution (https://goo.gl/maps/JVTUwY7wzYv) for when you can't put the stop sign close to the intersection. Have a smaller sign say "65 feet ahead", write "STOP" on the pavement, and put in a beacon.
Some more conflicting signage. One sign indicates the left lane turns left. The other indicates that it ends.
This image was taken several years ago in South Hill, WA -- both signs are long gone.
(https://i.imgur.com/iN03b5y.jpg)
Come on...did you have to put the reassurance marker RIGHT THERE??
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1789/42123728445_f41246a87f_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/27bk7U6)
IL-I-57X337NA1Z (https://flic.kr/p/27bk7U6) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on June 13, 2018, 12:04:03 AM
There's this solution (https://goo.gl/maps/JVTUwY7wzYv) for when you can't put the stop sign close to the intersection. Have a smaller sign say "65 feet ahead", write "STOP" on the pavement, and put in a beacon.
There is no reason that they couldn't build an island for the stop sign
Actually, this crossbuck is for a rail line that was recently converted to a trail. They removed most of them, but left this one up and even placed a new stop sign in front of it.
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1809/42841340504_ec43382ee8_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/28gK4XN)Too-close stop sign in front of unneeded Railroad Crossing sign (https://flic.kr/p/28gK4XN) by Arthur Allen (https://www.flickr.com/photos/116988743@N07/), on Flickr
Manistee, MI. This was taken shortly before the route assembly was replaced and relocated.
(https://i.imgur.com/5tcemVO.jpg)
This one is unsafe. In Ardmore, OK, where a two way street becomes one way in the opposing direction, the do not enter signs are too far back.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1720466,-97.1262418,3a,63.6y,295.71h,86.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soxHhUGrKNXK45UOOaGvnrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1720466,-97.1262418,3a,63.6y,295.71h,86.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soxHhUGrKNXK45UOOaGvnrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
They would be wise to fill in that flush gore area with concrete and a planter, and a centrally-located R5-1 sign.
Quote from: Brian556 on September 24, 2018, 04:13:31 PM
This one is unsafe. In Ardmore, OK, where a two way street becomes one way in the opposing direction, the do not enter signs are too far back.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1720466,-97.1262418,3a,63.6y,295.71h,86.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soxHhUGrKNXK45UOOaGvnrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.1720466,-97.1262418,3a,63.6y,295.71h,86.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soxHhUGrKNXK45UOOaGvnrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Agreed, where a two-way becomes a wrong-way one-way, or one-way streets change directions into a do not enter, the "Do not enter" and "wrong way" signs need to be very prominent.
Another bad one is in Sherman TX. There are no ground mounted do not enters, just the one on the signal arm
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6352606,-96.6101379,3a,75y,6.89h,83.82t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1s8qlps6vBGx7LddibKxp_Dg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D8qlps6vBGx7LddibKxp_Dg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D155.09552%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6352606,-96.6101379,3a,75y,6.89h,83.82t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1s8qlps6vBGx7LddibKxp_Dg!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo1.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D8qlps6vBGx7LddibKxp_Dg%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D155.09552%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100)
Not sure if this counts as "poor", as I think it's allowed in the US too, but this relatively-new roundabout diagrammatic sign in Hamilton, NZ is mounted directly over a footpath (https://goo.gl/AQbjRH) (with an unimpressive clearance). Watch your head!
Sidenote: love the white sign posts that New Zealand uses.
(https://i.imgur.com/PZ42iNk.png)
This (http://"https://www.google.com/maps/@30.715101,-90.5104181,3a,75y,13.67h,94.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syFF0fE1kLcPhdf-nwCk8tQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656") entering Amite, LA, on US 51.
Quote from: jbnv on October 08, 2018, 11:50:12 AM
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@30.715101,-90.5104181,3a,75y,13.67h,94.29t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syFF0fE1kLcPhdf-nwCk8tQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) entering Amite, LA, on US 51.
Link fixed.
Quote from: jakeroot on October 07, 2018, 06:14:42 PM
Not sure if this counts as "poor", as I think it's allowed in the US too, but this relatively-new roundabout diagrammatic sign in Hamilton, NZ is mounted directly over a footpath (https://goo.gl/AQbjRH) (with an unimpressive clearance). Watch your head!
Sidenote: love the white sign posts that New Zealand uses.
(https://i.imgur.com/PZ42iNk.png)
I bet that sign is taller than it looks. The bottom of the sign looks as though it's a lot taller than the roof of the house right beside it.
Not trying to be a dick, just saying.
I've seen roundabout signage straddling the sidewalk in Ontario too. There is a new roundabout in Listowel, ON where a bunch of the signs were affixed over the sidewalk.
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on October 08, 2018, 11:55:31 AM
I bet that sign is taller than it looks. The bottom of the sign looks as though it's a lot taller than the roof of the house right beside it.
I don't know what NZ's standards are, so I'm just guessing here, but if that destination text is even just 8 inches tall (and I imagine it's likely bigger than that), then it looks like this sign gives at least 9 feet of clearance. More likely closer to 10-12 feet.
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on October 08, 2018, 11:55:31 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 07, 2018, 06:14:42 PM
Not sure if this counts as "poor", as I think it's allowed in the US too, but this relatively-new roundabout diagrammatic sign in Hamilton, NZ is mounted directly over a footpath (https://goo.gl/AQbjRH) (with an unimpressive clearance). Watch your head!
Sidenote: love the white sign posts that New Zealand uses.
https://i.imgur.com/PZ42iNk.png
I bet that sign is taller than it looks. The bottom of the sign looks as though it's a lot taller than the roof of the house right beside it.
Not trying to be a dick, just saying.
I've seen roundabout signage straddling the sidewalk in Ontario too. There is a new roundabout in Listowel, ON where a bunch of the signs were affixed over the sidewalk.
The house next to the road is actually below the grade of the roadway. Really only noticeable in Street View, going back around the corner.
Don't worry about it. None of us are going to be able to actually verify anything here. It's all conjecture. The sign leading up to that Listowel roundabout looks to be a bit higher than what's pictured above: https://goo.gl/HYsuPv
Quote from: Eth on October 08, 2018, 01:57:22 PM
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on October 08, 2018, 11:55:31 AM
I bet that sign is taller than it looks. The bottom of the sign looks as though it's a lot taller than the roof of the house right beside it.
I don't know what NZ's standards are, so I'm just guessing here, but if that destination text is even just 8 inches tall (and I imagine it's likely bigger than that), then it looks like this sign gives at least 9 feet of clearance. More likely closer to 10-12 feet.
Google Maps suggests the footpath to be only 5.5 feet wide, +/- half a foot. I can't imagine the clearance being anymore than 7 or 8 feet, given that. Still room for most, but maybe some crouching required for taller folks.
It looks to me like the camera height is a bit taller for New Zealand's street view compared to that in North America. It could be a bit of an illusion, but it looks like you can see more of the tops of cars in New Zealand than you can in North America.
What's actually really interesting about this roundabout though is the underground pedestrian network leading to and through the central island. That's a nice feature for pedestrians.
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on October 08, 2018, 03:21:03 PM
It looks to me like the camera height is a bit taller for New Zealand's street view compared to that in North America. It could be a bit of an illusion, but it looks like you can see more of the tops of cars in New Zealand than you can in North America.
I noticed that too. The vehicles used by Google Maps in New Zealand were originally Holden Astra's, but I'm not sure if that's still the case. Normal hatchback utilized by Google (I think Imprezas are used here), but no idea why it appears higher.
Up north in Japan, the cameras are lower to avoid peering over garden fences. Glad they didn't find it easier to streamline the process and adopt the same height for the entirety of the Far East and Oceania. I seem to recall Singapore looking kind of low.
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on October 08, 2018, 03:21:03 PM
What's actually really interesting about this roundabout though is the underground pedestrian network leading to and through the central island. That's a nice feature for pedestrians.
I love that feature too. It's sometimes avoided by modern urban planners, as the undercrossings (another word for "dark area") can have crime issues, but as long as they're wide enough and not too long (half the case here -- tunnels are short but narrow), they're great for improving accessibility and reducing the feel of car-centrism that roundabouts tend to bring.
Lansdowne Center, Richmond, BC. Is in a parking lot but it's nevertheless confusing.
(https://i.imgur.com/WOpOTZf.png)
I came across this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.001641,-77.1333989,3a,39.8y,74.26h,90.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDY5TExQLtwRTK1DI4jVaGw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) on US 15 northbound at the NY border a few nights ago. Thankfully, the Cuomo sign is the one being blocked.
This used to be on westbound I-96 at M-39 in Detroit. Of course the intent was "don't turn right when merging into the C/D lanes," but the placement was bizarre. A vehicle took it out several years ago and it hasn't been replaced.
(https://i.imgur.com/llGqUxF.jpg)
Props to roadman (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=2059) for catching this poor juxtaposition of VMS and service sign in this picture of mine.
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7902/46601802715_794e4d1f22_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2e13qna)
Blinkers (https://flic.kr/p/2e13qna) by Jay Bienvenu (https://www.flickr.com/photos/bienvenunet/), on Flickr
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8094831,-83.4994872,3a,75y,92.41h,71.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVHqsp1zzaqLaCNA7i7YMRw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
This poorly placed sign actually blocks the railroad signals.
Quote from: JCinSummerfield on September 01, 2020, 02:22:29 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8094831,-83.4994872,3a,75y,92.41h,71.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVHqsp1zzaqLaCNA7i7YMRw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
This poorly placed sign actually blocks the railroad signals.
Why's the street name in Russian?
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 01, 2020, 02:36:26 PM
Quote from: JCinSummerfield on September 01, 2020, 02:22:29 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8094831,-83.4994872,3a,75y,92.41h,71.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVHqsp1zzaqLaCNA7i7YMRw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
This poorly placed sign actually blocks the railroad signals.
Why's the street name in Russian?
Another one of these...
Quote from: kphoger on July 16, 2020, 03:55:17 PM
Does anyone know what's up with some road segments being labeled in another language?
For example, here's a state highway in Mexico that thinks it's in Ethiopia.
(https://i.imgur.com/YXaruI7.png)
Quote from: MrManlet on July 19, 2020, 02:00:18 PM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on July 16, 2020, 04:04:44 PM
I remember seeing both Russian (or another cyrillic script language) and Japanese while going around Spain. Example (https://www.google.es/maps/@39.6368073,-0.433409,3a,75y,20.35h,87.04t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s8xlc48k1Zmqzqv6XOOPYtA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D8xlc48k1Zmqzqv6XOOPYtA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D105.471085%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)
Now its in Japanese!
Ethiopia is 135° east and slightly south of Nueva León. Japan is 135° east of Spain, and part of it is slightly south. It seems like it might be a constant offset.
Quote from: 1 on September 01, 2020, 03:00:25 PM
Ethiopia is 135° east and slightly south of Nueva León. Japan is 135° east of Spain, and part of it is slightly south. It seems like it might be a constant offset.
Exactly 135° east of Erie (MI) would be the Caspian Sea, so maybe you're onto something there...
Needs some judicious pruning.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50317529657_ba3fc19e51_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jEouwM)
Quote from: rte66man on September 07, 2020, 04:35:44 PM
Needs some judicious pruning.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50317529657_ba3fc19e51_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jEouwM)
But that's not the fault of the sign placement–just the tree trimming.
.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200909/02d616e964697ced2fe0373392edf976.jpg)
SM-G965U
Excuse the image quality, which is almost as bad as this sign's placement. The way the "wrong way" sign is set up here makes it appear as if this ramp is the wrong one to go on, when it is in fact the correct one. It was flipped to the correct side of the pole about a month later.
Something about this (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9222273,-122.2718691,3a,39.8y,257.92h,87.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8Vqk_whRKA242vSBIsopZQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) strikes me as a little off.
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 09, 2020, 09:11:02 PM
Something about this (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9222273,-122.2718691,3a,39.8y,257.92h,87.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8Vqk_whRKA242vSBIsopZQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) strikes me as a little off.
The chevron on the bottom should be flipped the other way, so the lines point down to the right.
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 10, 2020, 07:44:46 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 09, 2020, 09:11:02 PM
Something about this (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9222273,-122.2718691,3a,39.8y,257.92h,87.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8Vqk_whRKA242vSBIsopZQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) strikes me as a little off.
The chevron on the bottom should be flipped the other way, so the lines point down to the right.
You're right! Good catch! This is an OM3-R which should be on the
right side of the road.
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/images/fig2c_13.gif)
Quote from: kphoger on September 09, 2020, 02:31:49 PM
Quote from: rte66man on September 07, 2020, 04:35:44 PM
Needs some judicious pruning.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50317529657_ba3fc19e51_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jEouwM)
But that's not the fault of the sign placement–just the tree trimming.
While trimming would help, I think its bad placement as they should have put it in a different place as those trees aren't going anywhere and they will be pruning 2-3 times a year.
Quote from: rte66man on September 10, 2020, 02:03:24 PM
those trees aren't going anywhere and they will be pruning 2-3 times a year.
Are they not within the highway's r/o/w? Why not just clear that spot?
It's a very steep slope that is a relic of the original 1950's construction. To cut the slope back to a more reasonable slope would be expensive and you 'know' how much OTA likes to spend money. If they just stripped the vegetation, they would have serious erosion issues.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 10, 2020, 01:45:35 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 10, 2020, 07:44:46 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 09, 2020, 09:11:02 PM
Something about this (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9222273,-122.2718691,3a,39.8y,257.92h,87.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8Vqk_whRKA242vSBIsopZQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) strikes me as a little off.
The chevron on the bottom should be flipped the other way, so the lines point down to the right.
You're right! Good catch! This is an OM3-R which should be on the right side of the road.
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/images/fig2c_13.gif)
Well, it's on the right for traffic turning left, which would be 100% of vehicles coming off the freeway.
I think it should be the OM3-C, since traffic passes on either side of that column.
As to any perception that the Freeway Entrance sign unusually-placed: it's not unusual in Washington for two freeway entrance signs to be used. WSDOT's Northwest region is typically more comprehensive with markings and signage; their standard appears to be at least two signs for an entrance (
new example here) (https://goo.gl/maps/kMQTt23t5kMnHteB8)
Quote from: jakeroot on September 10, 2020, 03:56:25 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 10, 2020, 01:45:35 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 10, 2020, 07:44:46 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 09, 2020, 09:11:02 PM
Something about this (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9222273,-122.2718691,3a,39.8y,257.92h,87.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8Vqk_whRKA242vSBIsopZQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) strikes me as a little off.
The chevron on the bottom should be flipped the other way, so the lines point down to the right.
You're right! Good catch! This is an OM3-R which should be on the right side of the road.
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/images/fig2c_13.gif)
Well, it's on the right for traffic turning left, which would be 100% of vehicles coming off the freeway.
I think it should be the OM3-C, since traffic passes on either side of that column.
As to any perception that the Freeway Entrance sign unusually-placed: it's not unusual in Washington for two freeway entrance signs to be used. WSDOT's Northwest region is typically more comprehensive with markings and signage; their standard appears to be at least two signs for an entrance (new example here) (https://goo.gl/maps/kMQTt23t5kMnHteB8)
The orientation of the object marker is what's key here, because they are meant to be installed facing traffic and to direct that traffic around or away from the obstruction accordingly as one passes the sign longitudinally.
Given the current orientation of the object marker, OM3-L would be most accurate–an OM3-R or an OM3-C here would imply one could drive right through the bridge columns. An OM3-R would be appropriate if it were facing traffic coming from the right (if any existed at this intersection). Although I would probably have just used an OM2 marker here to avoid ambiguity.
Quote from: roadfro on September 11, 2020, 12:38:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 10, 2020, 03:56:25 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 10, 2020, 01:45:35 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 10, 2020, 07:44:46 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 09, 2020, 09:11:02 PM
Something about this (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9222273,-122.2718691,3a,39.8y,257.92h,87.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8Vqk_whRKA242vSBIsopZQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) strikes me as a little off.
The chevron on the bottom should be flipped the other way, so the lines point down to the right.
You're right! Good catch! This is an OM3-R which should be on the right side of the road.
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/images/fig2c_13.gif)
Well, it's on the right for traffic turning left, which would be 100% of vehicles coming off the freeway.
I think it should be the OM3-C, since traffic passes on either side of that column.
As to any perception that the Freeway Entrance sign unusually-placed: it's not unusual in Washington for two freeway entrance signs to be used. WSDOT's Northwest region is typically more comprehensive with markings and signage; their standard appears to be at least two signs for an entrance (new example here) (https://goo.gl/maps/kMQTt23t5kMnHteB8)
The orientation of the object marker is what's key here, because they are meant to be installed facing traffic and to direct that traffic around or away from the obstruction accordingly as one passes the sign longitudinally.
Given the current orientation of the object marker, OM3-L would be most accurate–an OM3-R or an OM3-C here would imply one could drive right through the bridge columns. An OM3-R would be appropriate if it were facing traffic coming from the right (if any existed at this intersection). Although I would probably have just used an OM2 marker here to avoid ambiguity.
I'm not sure I agree with your assessment.
OM3-L would imply that drivers should keep to the left of the bridge columns...good.
OM3-R would imply that drivers should keep to the right of the bridge columns...also good (because there is an on-ramp to the right of the columns).
You're implying that the object marker is meant to be for off-ramp traffic only. Even if it were, traffic is not required to turn left here. That "Freeway Entrance" and object marker sign are for both traffic continuing back onto the freeway, and traffic left to enter the freeway. Because traffic passes on both sides of that bridge column, depending on the maneuver, and the accompanying "Freeway Entrance" sign is directed at all traffic, whether turning left onto the on-ramp or continuing back onto the on-ramp from the off-ramp, it would be fair to say conclude that OM3-C is most appropriate here.
(https://i.imgur.com/NjPHgDY.jpg)
Quote from: jakeroot on September 11, 2020, 06:37:11 PM
Quote from: roadfro on September 11, 2020, 12:38:49 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 10, 2020, 03:56:25 PM
Quote from: paulthemapguy on September 10, 2020, 01:45:35 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on September 10, 2020, 07:44:46 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on September 09, 2020, 09:11:02 PM
Something about this (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.9222273,-122.2718691,3a,39.8y,257.92h,87.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8Vqk_whRKA242vSBIsopZQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192/) strikes me as a little off.
The chevron on the bottom should be flipped the other way, so the lines point down to the right.
You're right! Good catch! This is an OM3-R which should be on the right side of the road.
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/images/fig2c_13.gif)
Well, it's on the right for traffic turning left, which would be 100% of vehicles coming off the freeway.
I think it should be the OM3-C, since traffic passes on either side of that column.
As to any perception that the Freeway Entrance sign unusually-placed: it's not unusual in Washington for two freeway entrance signs to be used. WSDOT's Northwest region is typically more comprehensive with markings and signage; their standard appears to be at least two signs for an entrance (new example here) (https://goo.gl/maps/kMQTt23t5kMnHteB8)
The orientation of the object marker is what's key here, because they are meant to be installed facing traffic and to direct that traffic around or away from the obstruction accordingly as one passes the sign longitudinally.
Given the current orientation of the object marker, OM3-L would be most accurate–an OM3-R or an OM3-C here would imply one could drive right through the bridge columns. An OM3-R would be appropriate if it were facing traffic coming from the right (if any existed at this intersection). Although I would probably have just used an OM2 marker here to avoid ambiguity.
I'm not sure I agree with your assessment.
OM3-L would imply that drivers should keep to the left of the bridge columns...good.
OM3-R would imply that drivers should keep to the right of the bridge columns...also good (because there is an on-ramp to the right of the columns).
You're implying that the object marker is meant to be for off-ramp traffic only. Even if it were, traffic is not required to turn left here. That "Freeway Entrance" and object marker sign are for both traffic continuing back onto the freeway, and traffic left to enter the freeway. Because traffic passes on both sides of that bridge column, depending on the maneuver, and the accompanying "Freeway Entrance" sign is directed at all traffic, whether turning left onto the on-ramp or continuing back onto the on-ramp from the off-ramp, it would be fair to say conclude that OM3-C is most appropriate here.
(https://i.imgur.com/NjPHgDY.jpg)
I think you've got your L & R mixed up. An OM3-L means there is an obstruction on the left hand side/edge of the roadway and traffic needs to pass to the right of the object marker.
Type 3 object markers are meant to be oriented to the approaching driver, and the stripes are meant to convey the message of "as a driver passes the plane of this sign, they need to pass on which side to avoid the obstruction and remain on the roadway."
Look at the current orientation of the object marker and think about when the driver passes the plane of the object marker--in this case, it doesn't matter whether it is side road traffic turning left or off ramp traffic continuing straight. As you pass the plane of the object marker, you need to pass it on the right side to avoid the obstruction and remain on the roadway–if you pass the plane of the object marker on the left side, you are jumping the curb and heading up the bridge abutment. Thus, OM3-L is most appropriate given the orientation of the object marker.
Another way to look at this: You're saying that traffic passes on either side of that bridge column, and that the marker and freeway entrance sign is directed at all traffic. What about the off ramp traffic turning left to the side road--is the freeway entrance sign meant for them too? No, because they never pass the plane of the freeway entrance sign. So how does the object marker also apply to this movement? From my point of view, based on the orientation of the sign, traffic facing that sign either passes to the right of or in front of the column, so the object marker only applies to the traffic passing to the right of the column.
Uh, anyone have room to make this maneuver, let alone have two lanes make it?
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50448699766_8cc0a9970e_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jRYLQo)
This one (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.0603323,-123.0531467,3a,15y,314.69h,87.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slLL6imTn7AvIHJQgiYBawA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) always bugs me. The street name sign obscures the exit sign until you get fairly close to the intersection. The stop sign used to be much further back (https://www.google.com/maps/@48.0608987,-123.0540556,3a,33.4y,338.28h,87.93t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sTQVc_PoKy-5XDqfcrNxPig!2e0!5s20131001T000000!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en), even without a street name sign that would block the exit sign... yet when the street name sign was added, the stop sign assembly was moved to be right in front of the exit sign.
This is just dumb... :banghead:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.04738,-95.4638508,3a,37.6y,102.35h,85.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqCKmV8XVEaTAnLVeNrDEZw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Why they placed it where they did instead of where you're supposed to stop is beyond me.
By the time one reaches the intersection, one may have forgotten that they passed a STOP sign. The sign looks like it is closer to the beginning of the parking lot than the main road entryway. :rolleyes:
I've been waiting to post this till someone at TxDOT would notice this. Looks like they haven't noticed. Anyway, a recent project at the US 75/Bush Turnpike interchange that helped with geometry and merging/exiting issues recently wrapped up a few months ago. One part was an extension of the off-ramp from SB 75 toward the E/W Bush Turnpike ramp split. Originally, the ramp was quite short, but now it starts north of the Plano Pkwy. overpass. The problem (to me, at least)? The placement of the exit gore sign wasn't updated--it's still at the original gore point from before the reconstruction work.
New gore point:
(https://i.ibb.co/5v8GMVS/Screenshot-20201012-112939-Maps.jpg)
Old gore point:
(https://i.ibb.co/QYjpXQS/Screenshot-20201012-120416-Maps.jpg)
Shouldn't the exit sign have been moved when the gore point changed?
Quote from: -- US 175 -- on October 12, 2020, 01:06:41 PM
I've been waiting to post this till someone at TxDOT would notice this. Looks like they haven't noticed. Anyway, a recent project at the US 75/Bush Turnpike interchange that helped with geometry and merging/exiting issues recently wrapped up a few months ago. One part was an extension of the off-ramp from SB 75 toward the E/W Bush Turnpike ramp split. Originally, the ramp was quite short, but now it starts north of the Plano Pkwy. overpass. The problem (to me, at least)? The placement of the exit gore sign wasn't updated--it's still at the original gore point from before the reconstruction work.
<...>
Shouldn't the exit sign have been moved when the gore point changed?
Absolutely, the exit gore sign should have been moved or replaced. Probably an oversight not specified in the sign plans.
Yesterday in Kalamazoo, MI. Both routes no longer exist here as of a year ago but these overhead signs have not been removed.
(https://i.imgur.com/rLBwnit.jpg)
I thought we had a thread for signage that remains after the route's alignment moved, I but can't seem to find it.
About 5 years after Madison Boulevard at County Line Road was realigned in Huntsville, the original county line sign still remains. It's largely out of sight unless you approach the intersection from the south, then head eastbound.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50495662587_116f1e52ea_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2jW8tfc)
So it was in the right place before, but now it's about 200 feet away from the road, but was never moved to a more readable spot.
Quote from: -- US 175 -- on October 12, 2020, 01:06:41 PM
I've been waiting to post this till someone at TxDOT would notice this. Looks like they haven't noticed. Anyway, a recent project at the US 75/Bush Turnpike interchange that helped with geometry and merging/exiting issues recently wrapped up a few months ago. One part was an extension of the off-ramp from SB 75 toward the E/W Bush Turnpike ramp split. Originally, the ramp was quite short, but now it starts north of the Plano Pkwy. overpass. The problem (to me, at least)? The placement of the exit gore sign wasn't updated--it's still at the original gore point from before the reconstruction work.
New gore point:
(https://i.ibb.co/5v8GMVS/Screenshot-20201012-112939-Maps.jpg)
Old gore point:
(https://i.ibb.co/QYjpXQS/Screenshot-20201012-120416-Maps.jpg)
Shouldn't the exit sign have been moved when the gore point changed?
I say they intentionally omitted the exit sign here cause there just isn't room for one. They did this when they had a similar situation on I-35E in Lake Dallas. They freeway was since reconstructed, and the situation no longer exists. As for the old one, they probably forgot to puts its removal in the plans
Resurrecting this topic because of this stupidity on FM 1960 in NW Houston:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.9209306,-95.606963,3a,64.7y,296.62h,90.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svioJ8r8WSN0kV7wNXKJX2Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Put up within the last year, and already obscured by trees. Really? By the way, this is the only advance signage for US 290 from this direction.
^^ Side note: Are object markers needed for this sign?
Quote from: Big John on December 22, 2021, 08:28:49 PM
^^ Side note: Are object markers needed for this sign?
Uh, no. That's just a weird habit TxDOT District 12 has. I have no idea why they do it.
Not (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.4753854,-95.4063638,3a,75y,51.03h,80.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smrENtlq3aGmgi4pXYOR5Xg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
unprecedented (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.5274246,-95.5243735,3a,23y,104.95h,87.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s48z2_WqYRCnIEsF2GtYb6w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
at (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7883632,-95.2410632,3a,15y,250.98h,89.22t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDtzaNQNdyq0Q8IeOTQJIKA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
all. (https://www.google.com/maps/@29.2714061,-95.4435912,3a,34.4y,248.65h,85.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEInyD3T_0GapBy28VGI66A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Quote from: Big John on December 22, 2021, 08:28:49 PM
^^ Side note: Are object markers needed for this sign?
When the sign is hidden otherwise, yes. :bigass:
I have to say, this is a very poor sign placement...
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9502879,-80.9719383,3a,69.3y,70.65h,91.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZMCI2NwsTLQ526f7MvVVDg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 27, 2021, 06:17:40 PM
I have to say, this is a very poor sign placement...
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9502879,-80.9719383,3a,69.3y,70.65h,91.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZMCI2NwsTLQ526f7MvVVDg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
That irrationally bothers me. Or perhaps rationally, depending on placement rules.
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 27, 2021, 06:17:40 PM
I have to say, this is a very poor sign placement...
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9502879,-80.9719383,3a,69.3y,70.65h,91.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZMCI2NwsTLQ526f7MvVVDg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Reminds me of northbound I-5 at CA 99
https://goo.gl/maps/qrkKzxAiUxQWD2AY9
Looks like some engineer was not thinking straight...
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7804346,-78.5622215,3a,39.8y,211.52h,95.78t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sy4mQq1oyHAf7YLlDnRC_Qg!2e0!5s20210901T000000!7i16384!8i8192
Quote from: tolbs17 on January 01, 2022, 03:12:19 PM
Looks like some engineer was not thinking straight...
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7804346,-78.5622215,3a,39.8y,211.52h,95.78t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sy4mQq1oyHAf7YLlDnRC_Qg!2e0!5s20210901T000000!7i16384!8i8192
So they bothered to change the sign to be standard case, and move it to further from the intersection, but couldn't be bothered to find an appropriate place for it where it could actually be seen.
Quote from: MarkF on December 29, 2021, 02:34:50 AM
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 27, 2021, 06:17:40 PM
I have to say, this is a very poor sign placement...
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.9502879,-80.9719383,3a,69.3y,70.65h,91.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZMCI2NwsTLQ526f7MvVVDg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Reminds me of northbound I-5 at CA 99
https://goo.gl/maps/qrkKzxAiUxQWD2AY9
The difference is that the I-5/Route 99 signage is the actual main signage for that exit while the I-77 example is supplementary and the actual sign is standard signage at the ramp.
Quote from: JoePCool14 on January 01, 2022, 04:34:27 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on January 01, 2022, 03:12:19 PM
Looks like some engineer was not thinking straight...
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7804346,-78.5622215,3a,39.8y,211.52h,95.78t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sy4mQq1oyHAf7YLlDnRC_Qg!2e0!5s20210901T000000!7i16384!8i8192
So they bothered to change the sign to be standard case, and move it to further from the intersection, but couldn't be bothered to find an appropriate place for it where it could actually be seen.
The contractor could have cut some brush in front of the sign since it is on highway ROW.
Quote from: Big John on January 01, 2022, 05:06:42 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on January 01, 2022, 04:34:27 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on January 01, 2022, 03:12:19 PM
Looks like some engineer was not thinking straight...
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7804346,-78.5622215,3a,39.8y,211.52h,95.78t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sy4mQq1oyHAf7YLlDnRC_Qg!2e0!5s20210901T000000!7i16384!8i8192
So they bothered to change the sign to be standard case, and move it to further from the intersection, but couldn't be bothered to find an appropriate place for it where it could actually be seen.
The contractor could have cut some brush in front of the sign since it is on highway ROW.
But only if that was part of the contract. They are very specific, and what may appear to be common sense could be a serious contractual issue.
Quote from: Big John on January 01, 2022, 05:06:42 PM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on January 01, 2022, 04:34:27 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on January 01, 2022, 03:12:19 PM
Looks like some engineer was not thinking straight...
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7804346,-78.5622215,3a,39.8y,211.52h,95.78t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sy4mQq1oyHAf7YLlDnRC_Qg!2e0!5s20210901T000000!7i16384!8i8192
So they bothered to change the sign to be standard case, and move it to further from the intersection, but couldn't be bothered to find an appropriate place for it where it could actually be seen.
The contractor could have cut some brush in front of the sign since it is on highway ROW.
Going back in the earlier street view, the old sign was further up.
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.7801863,-78.5621785,3a,15y,171.79h,91.35t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s_9ucN4XN8XopwyXG5IAHCg!2e0!5s20160501T000000!7i13312!8i6656
https://www.google.com/maps/@35.5147057,-115.4319395,3a,15y,187.95h,88.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXJAMjZbDHicpciC3gw4LtA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
This is on I-15 southbound a few miles into CA, just south of the NV border. CA has agricultural inspection sit (AIS) at every major border crossing with other states. Basically, they inspect fruits and vegetables that you may carry to be sure that they are pest free.
[More details on that here: https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/plant/pe/ExteriorExclusion/borders.html ]
Anyway, this AIS was recently constucted a few years ago at this location. [The old one was about 90 miles further into CA in Yermo, very close to Barstow.] When building this, they basically built a brand new section of I-15 to the right of the pre-existing lanes. As a result, for about 2 miles around the AIS, the pre-existing lanes exist as ghost lanes.
Well, there is a mileage sign that is left facing the ghost lanes that you can see in the first link. Poor placement with respect to the current travel lanes, but quite an interesting relic.
And a little further north: a backwards advisory speed limit. (https://goo.gl/maps/Dvc3Zqs4phtSeHaYA)
This thread is a year old but this is too good not to share. From u/Loex_ on r/oklahoma.
(https://i.imgur.com/4zUdSEp.jpg)
Quote from: ErmineNotyours on January 05, 2022, 04:27:05 AM
And a little further north: a backwards advisory speed limit. (https://goo.gl/maps/Dvc3Zqs4phtSeHaYA)
40 MPH might be intended to buy you time to dodge the oncoming traffic rotfflmmfao
I didn't get photos, but Combination St. in Methuen MA is a dead end but has a "reduced speed ahead" sign in both directions including out of the dead end, while one of the roads leading south from (and visible on) MA 113 in West Newbury MA has a 35 MPH sign and a "slow children at play" sign on the same post.
This (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7388458,-71.1552107,3a,75y,176.04h,86.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYhifJCiu0JfLeFfxDmMfsQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) "trucks please seek alternate route" sign well past the decision point.
Quote from: 1 on March 22, 2023, 11:21:05 AM
I didn't get photos, but Combination St. in Methuen MA is a dead end but has a "reduced speed ahead" sign in both directions including out of the dead end
Judging by GSV, it looks like there isn't even a speed limit drop at all–not even heading into the dead end.
This NY 286 shield (https://goo.gl/maps/kgKimdtXQi6yMNy8A) placement gets a groan from me, a small annoyance resulting from an otherwise successful recent project to add turn lanes here. (Ironically, it looks fine in the above link because the Street View car is traveling northbound. But for southbound traffic, for whom the sign is intended for, it's blocked by the telephone pole until the very last second.)
This one (https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.3978391,-80.4568839,3a,19.2y,95.17h,89.14t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNqbRN7tGedjuvEp2KqRx1Q!2e0!5s20190701T000000!7i13312!8i6656) bothers me. There's a tree that blocks the sign until you're very close, and the text is pretty small too. It's also located right at the split, so it's a bit late to change lanes by the time you can even see it.
There's an orange construction sign about here (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.7325016,-71.1361415,3a,75y,238.97h,87.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seuxllnApbaQo1_Hhx7G4VA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) that says "SWEEPING NEXT 5 MILES". The road splits fairly quickly, and neither fork allows you to go five miles straight. (Canal St. in Lawrence just east of Amesbury St. is one-way wrong way.)
Quote from: jakeroot on June 03, 2018, 02:44:33 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on June 03, 2018, 01:05:41 AM
Hobson City, AL also had something similar where they had bagged-up stop signs posted around the one signal in the town. When they couldn't pay the power bill for the signal (and as such, the signal was shut off), the town would unbag the stop signs until they could get the money to pay the bill.
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6203682,-85.8371459,3a,60y,3.71h,89.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sw-sZfeDJC6zvLzFJAjU5kg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
IIRC, the town has since removed the signal so it's now a 24/7 four-way stop.
Jesus, that's awful. Didn't realize some towns were that poor. Judging by the Street View images, that signal probably wasn't necessary. Though it was cool!
The 2008 imagery seems to show the signal in operation with the stop signs unbagged. Huh? https://goo.gl/43cg1d
Oddly enough, 2022 GSV (https://goo.gl/maps/Lgmm57sMgDozBUPb7) now shows the signals were replaced (and in operation), but one stop sign is missing and the rest only have bags on the 4-WAY plaque.
For bonus oddity points: there's a signalized railroad crossing down the street with "2-WAY" stop signs (https://goo.gl/maps/Ve692aJNVGtdChyw9).
Quote from: CovalenceSTU on April 06, 2023, 03:31:06 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on June 03, 2018, 02:44:33 AM
Quote from: freebrickproductions on June 03, 2018, 01:05:41 AM
Hobson City, AL also had something similar where they had bagged-up stop signs posted around the one signal in the town. When they couldn't pay the power bill for the signal (and as such, the signal was shut off), the town would unbag the stop signs until they could get the money to pay the bill.
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.6203682,-85.8371459,3a,60y,3.71h,89.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sw-sZfeDJC6zvLzFJAjU5kg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
IIRC, the town has since removed the signal so it's now a 24/7 four-way stop.
Jesus, that's awful. Didn't realize some towns were that poor. Judging by the Street View images, that signal probably wasn't necessary. Though it was cool!
The 2008 imagery seems to show the signal in operation with the stop signs unbagged. Huh? https://goo.gl/43cg1d
Oddly enough, 2022 GSV (https://goo.gl/maps/Lgmm57sMgDozBUPb7) now shows the signals were replaced (and in operation), but one stop sign is missing and the rest only have bags on the 4-WAY plaque.
For bonus oddity points: there's a signalized railroad crossing down the street with "2-WAY" stop signs (https://goo.gl/maps/Ve692aJNVGtdChyw9).
The signals seem to have been taken from another location, unless this area is known to be tough on traffic signals lol, they seem pretty worn.
A new one in downtown Farmington, MI. Brand new streetscape, and they forgot to leave some room to post the "pedestrian crossing" sign where it can be seen. This will get worse as those new trees start filling out.
(https://i.imgur.com/i30pz3c.jpg)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/52844147190
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/52845437487
Two in Lakeland, FL on SR 572 WB.
When the boilerplate specs say to put the "Ramp Closed" sign X distance before the ramp, no matter what:
(https://i.imgur.com/249mVV6.jpg)
How bout poor sign REplacement.
The extruded aluminum warning sign is being replaced by a flimsy, and already warped, sheet metal sign. Meriden, CT
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53010723731_ede639361f_k.jpg)
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on June 29, 2023, 01:41:17 PM
How bout poor sign REplacement.
The extruded aluminum warning sign is being replaced by a flimsy, and already warped, sheet metal sign. Meriden, CT
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53010723731_ede639361f_k.jpg)
An all too common cost-cutting trend. Why are they even replacing the old one anyways? Just for updated retroreflectivity?
The old sign certainly seems to be a lot sturdier.
I think an incremental-panel (sheet metal) signage is usually just as sturdy as extruded-panel signage, though only when mounted properly. WSDOT uses incremental panel signage (like NYSDOT), and I don't recall major highway signage being warped on a normal basis. The exception being signage held up by posts normally used to mount a single sign, like a stop sign. As we can see the image above, the tiny posts are not adequate for holding up larger sign panels.
IMO, a spec-for-spec incremental-panel replacement of the original sign, using the original (much larger) posts, with proper rear bracing, would hold up as well as the original sign.
This all said, I'm speaking from a high-school physics perspective. Those who understand sign mounting may not agree with my assessment.
(https://i.imgur.com/hknqHG7.jpg)
Nbd Naperville Road at I-88 in Naperville, IL: The exit sign is on the left side of the road, and it's a divided highway to boot.
GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/ezxPTCGhmusE94238
Quote from: wanderer2575 on July 20, 2023, 09:39:37 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/hknqHG7.jpg)
Nbd Naperville Road at I-88 in Naperville, IL: The exit sign is on the left side of the road, and it's a divided highway to boot.
GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/ezxPTCGhmusE94238
Looks like the ISTHA had some money to burn, considering there's a BGS where it actually belongs too.
Quote from: wanderer2575 on July 20, 2023, 09:39:37 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/hknqHG7.jpg)
Nbd Naperville Road at I-88 in Naperville, IL: The exit sign is on the left side of the road, and it's a divided highway to boot.
GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/ezxPTCGhmusE94238
That would be a sign's design and placement for a movie or TV show "prop".
Quote from: thenetwork on July 21, 2023, 07:16:04 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on July 20, 2023, 09:39:37 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/hknqHG7.jpg)
Nbd Naperville Road at I-88 in Naperville, IL: The exit sign is on the left side of the road, and it's a divided highway to boot.
GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/ezxPTCGhmusE94238
That would be a sign's design and placement for a movie or TV show "prop".
While I would tend to agree, that sign has been there over 5 years. A movie/show prop would be there just for a short period of time to shoot the scenes they need.
Illinois: land of supplemental traffic signals and supplemental guide signs!
Seems clever to me - the road curves to the right before the exit (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8032825,-88.1198365,3a,28.5y,357.97h,91.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sUTXo5-jQ0wHMsGHeYuCHXg!2e0!5s20210901T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) so from a distance, the only sign you see is the one on the left. Though it is still kind of redundant with the one in that street view picture... and the angle is wrong because it's sharing the supports of the southbound sign.
Quote from: jay8g on July 23, 2023, 01:51:41 AM
Seems clever to me - the road curves to the right before the exit (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8032825,-88.1198365,3a,28.5y,357.97h,91.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sUTXo5-jQ0wHMsGHeYuCHXg!2e0!5s20210901T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) so from a distance, the only sign you see is the one on the left. Though it is still kind of redundant with the one in that street view picture... and the angle is wrong because it's sharing the supports of the southbound sign.
I might put it into the rare "needlessly clever" category of signage.
Quote from: jay8g on July 23, 2023, 01:51:41 AM
Seems clever to me - the road curves to the right before the exit (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8032825,-88.1198365,3a,28.5y,357.97h,91.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sUTXo5-jQ0wHMsGHeYuCHXg!2e0!5s20210901T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) so from a distance, the only sign you see is the one on the left. Though it is still kind of redundant with the one in that street view picture... and the angle is wrong because it's sharing the supports of the southbound sign.
Interesting how thanks to the arrangement of the ramps, that sign is mounted back-to-back with a completely identical sign for the opposite direction of Naperville Road. Did they buy 2 and get one free and just had to use it somewhere?
Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 20, 2023, 09:53:27 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on July 20, 2023, 09:39:37 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/hknqHG7.jpg)
Nbd Naperville Road at I-88 in Naperville, IL: The exit sign is on the left side of the road, and it's a divided highway to boot.
GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/ezxPTCGhmusE94238
Looks like the ISTHA had some money to burn, considering there's a BGS where it actually belongs too.
This extra sign is on the back of a properly located BGS, and is right down the street from the Illinois Tollway Central Sign Shop. Maybe they're testing something...
More like weird sign placement, since it's just a route shield.
A high-mounted shield on California 85. Maybe it's to see over the breakdown lane pocket on the right shoulder? (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.2541678,-121.8807719,3a,75y,239.53h,95.34t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s8vLz3eQ3mV6ZecBV0VoF2g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53067941436_46f02db215_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2oRr58w)
Quote from: davewiecking on July 23, 2023, 06:35:41 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 20, 2023, 09:53:27 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on July 20, 2023, 09:39:37 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/hknqHG7.jpg)
Nbd Naperville Road at I-88 in Naperville, IL: The exit sign is on the left side of the road, and it's a divided highway to boot.
GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/ezxPTCGhmusE94238
Looks like the ISTHA had some money to burn, considering there's a BGS where it actually belongs too.
This extra sign is on the back of a properly located BGS, and is right down the street from the Illinois Tollway Central Sign Shop. Maybe they're testing something...
The gore also gets a stand alone shield (https://goo.gl/maps/dcwrD9ZXdpxs2uGYA) as well, so it's redundant and weird.
Instead of placing this on the side of the light pole, like some other mile markers on the same highway, such as mile marker 71 (https://goo.gl/maps/Ma7rcwRjXsZMyK3N6), mile marker 80 on US Route 2 was placed in the middle of the light pole. Eastbound traffic can see it perfectly: https://goo.gl/maps/aBfTR5CkYFHQQjsF6 However, for westbound traffic: https://goo.gl/maps/AhdXY7FbnLxadi9Q9
I'll probably report this sign at some point.
This oldie on Rue Odette-Pinard SB at Boulevard des Chutes points to QC 360.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53100594195_4c70d4e427_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2oUjqE8)Old QC 360 shield - 1 (https://flic.kr/p/2oUjqE8) by Liliana Vess (https://www.flickr.com/photos/lilianauwu/), on Flickr
The reason it's poorly placed? Because the previous intersection is QC 360 (https://www.google.com/maps/dir/46.8681135,-71.180292/46.8668217,-71.1801541/@46.8674468,-71.1814512,17.58z/data=!4m2!4m1!3e0?entry=ttu).
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/53191345897
Hiding the shield behind the mile marker is a bad idea.
This is very, very partially obscured if driving in the eastbound lane of US 2 in Coulee City, Washington. What boggles my mind is why they didn't just attach the mile marker to the existing metal post for the speed limit sign, like they've done in other areas: https://maps.app.goo.gl/G4bQ6sGW86zexR8WA
Not a speed limit sign, but on the next mile marker (193), they attached it to the post an already-existing sign is using: https://maps.app.goo.gl/4ejCpmmMkZEFP6w29
Or like here on US 97: https://maps.app.goo.gl/vLrjxNT6UDCbarcK7
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 24, 2023, 01:24:41 PM
Quote from: davewiecking on July 23, 2023, 06:35:41 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 20, 2023, 09:53:27 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on July 20, 2023, 09:39:37 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/hknqHG7.jpg)
Nbd Naperville Road at I-88 in Naperville, IL: The exit sign is on the left side of the road, and it's a divided highway to boot.
GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/ezxPTCGhmusE94238
Looks like the ISTHA had some money to burn, considering there's a BGS where it actually belongs too.
This extra sign is on the back of a properly located BGS, and is right down the street from the Illinois Tollway Central Sign Shop. Maybe they're testing something...
The gore also gets a stand alone shield (https://goo.gl/maps/dcwrD9ZXdpxs2uGYA) as well, so it's redundant and weird.
Sorry to beat a dead horse here, but I think you guys are missing some context here. Check out this angle here, and see if you can figure out why the sign is there.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/gyEgnD3rp3tme67R7
That's not to say I agree with the placement, but I can at least see the logic of why it's there.
Quote from: JoePCool14 on November 08, 2023, 07:56:09 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on July 24, 2023, 01:24:41 PM
Quote from: davewiecking on July 23, 2023, 06:35:41 PM
Quote from: LilianaUwU on July 20, 2023, 09:53:27 PM
Quote from: wanderer2575 on July 20, 2023, 09:39:37 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/hknqHG7.jpg)
Nbd Naperville Road at I-88 in Naperville, IL: The exit sign is on the left side of the road, and it's a divided highway to boot.
GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/ezxPTCGhmusE94238
Looks like the ISTHA had some money to burn, considering there's a BGS where it actually belongs too.
This extra sign is on the back of a properly located BGS, and is right down the street from the Illinois Tollway Central Sign Shop. Maybe they're testing something...
The gore also gets a stand alone shield (https://goo.gl/maps/dcwrD9ZXdpxs2uGYA) as well, so it's redundant and weird.
Sorry to beat a dead horse here, but I think you guys are missing some context here. Check out this angle here, and see if you can figure out why the sign is there.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/gyEgnD3rp3tme67R7
That's not to say I agree with the placement, but I can at least see the logic of why it's there.
jay8g did address this up-thread...
Quote from: jay8g on July 23, 2023, 01:51:41 AM
Seems clever to me - the road curves to the right before the exit (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8032825,-88.1198365,3a,28.5y,357.97h,91.72t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sUTXo5-jQ0wHMsGHeYuCHXg!2e0!5s20210901T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) so from a distance, the only sign you see is the one on the left. Though it is still kind of redundant with the one in that street view picture... and the angle is wrong because it's sharing the supports of the southbound sign.
What I don't get is why it isn't just mounted overhead. Situations like this, where there's a ramp on the inside of a curve, aren't that unusual. Granted, having a tree-line that close may not be too common, and this isn't a freeway so overhead signage isn't automatically a given (though even then it's not a given). But still, it would be the most "normal" way to treat this situation.
In Kittitas, Washington: https://maps.app.goo.gl/KtDvZTrm4ehA5PkM6
The signs are literally touching each other. I checked, and they're mostly straight, so it's not really that. They just placed the posts too close to each other, not thinking about how wide the yellow sign is. I don't know why they didn't just use a single and taller post and have the yellow sign on top and the other ones below it. It used to be like this, where they weren't touching each other, but it was changed to its current way: https://maps.app.goo.gl/BMfX1kUwRnpssEq88
A few speed limit placements in the panhandle of FL could use some significant improvement...
I-10 at the Santa Rosa County Rest Area — on the EB off-ramp, the Speed Limit 15 sign is located BEFORE the theoretical gore point, on the main thoroughfare... the WB rest area does not have this configuration. https://maps.app.goo.gl/nxMqKT24oGZvYnzq5?g_st=ic :banghead:
US-29 SB approaching Pensacola — speed limit upstream of drop is 40mph and reduces to 30mph. This is the August '22 picture, which is more representative of what I saw in December of '23. The simple fix is ensuring the bushes get trimmed, but even with a trim, the sign is still hard to see around the corner. May not be an issue during peak hours, but definitely caught me by surprise during off-peak. https://maps.app.goo.gl/temec9Rep1H8jrbE8?g_st=ic
First off, the PA 660 signs are out of order. Second off, we are already on PA 660 so why a "JCT" banner. (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10219891186150555&set=a.10219891250752170)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53481381818_88e7093c44_c.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53481237661_c95a3fe430_c.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53481648400_31af0c7f4b_c.jpg)
US 6 WB at US 220 NB in Towanda, PA (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10219891798765870&set=a.10219892151334684)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53481525657_ac000ed679_c.jpg)
Not sure why the overhead sign in background wasn't just mounted to the RR bridge (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.985605,-78.8603284,3a,39.4y,335.23h,95.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWyoB4HpPQORB5ZBg8zycow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)...
Quote from: fillup420 on January 27, 2024, 03:15:18 PM
Not sure why the overhead sign in background wasn't just mounted to the RR bridge (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.985605,-78.8603284,3a,39.4y,335.23h,95.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWyoB4HpPQORB5ZBg8zycow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)...
A few reasons:
The bridge is much too sharp of an angle to mount signage this large (yeah, I'm sure there's an example or two, but it's not done often).
The bridge may be under the authority of the train line, which doesn't permit signage on their bridges.
Also, many transportation agencies have moved away from mounting signage on bridges altogether, often opting for gantries just in front of the bridge.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on January 27, 2024, 03:21:23 PM
Quote from: fillup420 on January 27, 2024, 03:15:18 PM
Not sure why the overhead sign in background wasn't just mounted to the RR bridge (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.985605,-78.8603284,3a,39.4y,335.23h,95.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sWyoB4HpPQORB5ZBg8zycow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)...
A few reasons:
The bridge is much too sharp of an angle to mount signage this large (yeah, I'm sure there's an example or two, but it's not done often).
Caltrans would like a word...
Quote
The bridge may be under the authority of the train line, which doesn't permit signage on their bridges.
Also, many transportation agencies have moved away from mounting signage on bridges altogether, often opting for gantries just in front of the bridge.
These are more likely.
Nevada DOT seems to have adopted such a policy, at least in urban areas. Off the top of my head, I can't think of more than two newly-installed overhead guide signs mounted to a bridge structure in the last 15 years in either the Reno or Las Vegas areas—and the two I'm thinking of are overhead for the side street, not freeway mainline. (The I-80 rebuild through Reno-Sparks circa 2012 actually removed all the signs attached to bridges and replaced them all on new sign gantries.) While a greater initial expense, I believe this policy has led to a drastic reduction in the amount of graffiti and sticker vandalism seen on signs.
With all that said, that exit direction sign probably should have been installed in front of the bridge...
Recognizing this is on private property and thus Wegmans probably posted them, these stop signs drive me crazy every week, especially when I'm coming in the other direction (each one has another stop sign on the back side):
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Y4G2tJR4SG9cXWBb6?g_st=ic
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 28, 2024, 02:15:47 PM
Recognizing this is on private property and thus Wegmans probably posted them, these stop signs drive me crazy every week, especially when I'm coming in the other direction (each one has another stop sign on the back side):
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Y4G2tJR4SG9cXWBb6?g_st=ic
I'd completely ignore them.
Quote from: kphoger on January 29, 2024, 01:56:44 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 28, 2024, 02:15:47 PM
Recognizing this is on private property and thus Wegmans probably posted them, these stop signs drive me crazy every week, especially when I'm coming in the other direction (each one has another stop sign on the back side):
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Y4G2tJR4SG9cXWBb6?g_st=ic
I'd completely ignore them.
Ditto.
That part is within the parking lot, and it's the far end of the lot where stops really shouldn't be necessary. That usage does not command respect for the signs. Interesting that the stop signs (and centerline) weren't there in 2019 Street View, which makes me think it's just trying to cut down on speeding through the lot—speed bumps would be more effective.
Also curious why they've used yellow paint on the curbing to indicate no parking as opposed to red.
Yellow curbs are the norm here. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any red curbs.
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 30, 2024, 12:06:40 PM
Yellow curbs are the norm here. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any red curbs.
I've never been somewhere that used yellow curbs for no parking—yellow usually indicates a (timed) loading zone around me.
(Perhaps a discussion for another thread...?)
Quote from: roadfro on January 30, 2024, 12:15:52 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 30, 2024, 12:06:40 PM
Yellow curbs are the norm here. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any red curbs.
I've never been somewhere that used yellow curbs for no parking—yellow usually indicates a (timed) loading zone around me.
(Perhaps a discussion for another thread...?)
I've hardly ever been anywhere that uses
red curbs for no parking.
Anyway, here's the thread for that: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6715.0
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 30, 2024, 12:06:40 PM
Yellow curbs are the norm here. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any red curbs.
I have a ton just in my neighborhood.
The red curb is more restrictive than a yellow curb. Yellow generally means no parking while red means no parking, standing or stopping.
Quote from: roadfro on January 30, 2024, 11:56:54 AM
Quote from: kphoger on January 29, 2024, 01:56:44 PM
Quote from: 1995hoo on January 28, 2024, 02:15:47 PM
Recognizing this is on private property and thus Wegmans probably posted them, these stop signs drive me crazy every week, especially when I'm coming in the other direction (each one has another stop sign on the back side):
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Y4G2tJR4SG9cXWBb6?g_st=ic
I'd completely ignore them.
Ditto.
That part is within the parking lot, and it's the far end of the lot where stops really shouldn't be necessary. That usage does not command respect for the signs. Interesting that the stop signs (and centerline) weren't there in 2019 Street View, which makes me think it's just trying to cut down on speeding through the lot—speed bumps would be more effective.
Also curious why they've used yellow paint on the curbing to indicate no parking as opposed to red.
The stop signs do seem annoying. I don't assume a shopping center would care about traffic engineering principles, but one has to realize that too many stop signs will just cause people to ignore them. The main aisle should not have a stop sign, unless it's a major decision point or otherwise has a good reason.
IIRC, while curb colors have a specific meaning in CA, they have no meaning in most other states. Simply painting a curb a color does not imply anything about whether I can park there. Painting it yellow, though, tends to be easier to see than red.
In NYC, you'd typically see people painting curbs yellow so that people are aware of a driveway entrance that maybe hard to spot. The homeowners do this, not DOT.
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7139033,-73.834533,3a,75y,352.16h,77.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKpsYFR-Bzc4nOQTkWeGU2A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
I think it would be extremely helpful if more states painted curbs to indicate no parking zones near intersections, driveways, and fire hydrants.
This confusing assembly is technically kind of correct, but it is so stupid:
(https://imgur.com/BBlICy0.jpg)
GSV: https://maps.app.goo.gl/5iBvw14Xy8zdRYoY7
Essentially what happened is that OK 66 was relocated to a new routing about a half-mile south of this intersection where it used to cross US 75 ALT in Sapulpa, OK. However, when it was realigned, the signs were not taken down (the historical imagery illustrates the old assembly nicely), and the arrows were turned to face up rather than sideways to indicate that. Now both arrows point to the new OK 66 intersection with US 75 ALT (without a TO banner, to boot!), so it looks like OK 66 East has a concurrency with OK 66 West. But then again, why should I expect anything different? This is OKLAHOMA, of course!
So, if I'm understanding correctly, then, OK-66 used to take the orange routing, but was switched to the blue:
(https://i.imgur.com/dG6iRJD.png)
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on February 03, 2024, 03:30:28 PM
So, if I'm understanding correctly, then, OK-66 used to take the orange routing, but was switched to the blue:
(https://i.imgur.com/dG6iRJD.png)
Correct. I've mentioned the realignment
here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=31006.msg2902223#msg2902223) if you want more information.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/51319352510
Placing the US 101 and I-80 shields behind a fence.
Quote from: roadman65 on March 11, 2024, 03:44:19 PM
https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/51319352510
Placing the US 101 and I-80 shields behind a fence.
The green sign is reasonable, but that Freeway Entrance assembly (including the shields) is practically useless here.
I wonder if the signs pre-date the fence.
Quote from: GaryA on March 11, 2024, 06:09:22 PM
The green sign is reasonable, but that Freeway Entrance assembly (including the shields) is practically useless here.
I wonder if the signs pre-date the fence.
Those were my two thoughts exactly.
And sure enough, GSV confirms that the sign long predates the fence:
September 2017, no fence (https://maps.app.goo.gl/qPEzDv4sasfTgzm78) →
April 2019, fence (https://maps.app.goo.gl/FpgHpaURgNKAWiV5A)
I note that the graffiti was removed from the sign in between GSV shots. Not that it did much good, as the
May 2021 (https://maps.app.goo.gl/N8jmXCycVADyRUL88) shot shows.
I guess this fits here. This sign blade has always been like this:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/2HoHszk58nKDXhh39
(https://i.imgur.com/UV6ERtd.jpeg)
Quote from: wanderer2575 on April 06, 2024, 11:23:19 PM(https://i.imgur.com/UV6ERtd.jpeg)
Oh look...just enough space for that TO I-196 sign to fit on the gantry...
I don't know if this is necessarily poor sign placement or failure to keep the trees trimmed: https://maps.app.goo.gl/cMSruEfVMYwqH2SQA
This, however, does seem to be poor, as you don't really appear to see it until you're right there, if you're heading westbound:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Gwex8SbWjmnwzeq5A
https://maps.app.goo.gl/JuB4jNLX9ZedNikV6
Heading eastbound is, of course, fine: https://maps.app.goo.gl/Ct1dxTM863VkCXJSA
Quote from: Amaury on April 12, 2024, 06:03:11 PMThis, however, does seem to be poor, as you don't really appear to see it until you're right there, if you're heading westbound:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/Gwex8SbWjmnwzeq5A
https://maps.app.goo.gl/JuB4jNLX9ZedNikV6
Heading eastbound is, of course, fine: https://maps.app.goo.gl/Ct1dxTM863VkCXJSA
It's a milepost... it kinda has to be where it is. And it's not like it's essential to have in view for 100 yards or anything...
They could move it like 50 feet farther way from the bridge, and it would still be fine.
Quote from: wanderer2575 on April 06, 2024, 11:23:19 PM(https://i.imgur.com/UV6ERtd.jpeg)
I have to take this one back. Having looked at it on Google Streetview, the post-mounted sign is farther along past the gantry than it appears here. (I was too focused on getting the photo to absorb that at the time.)