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

[mrsman]

Acctttuallllyyy.... I watched a YouTube video a year or so ago advocating for moving handicap spots to the back of the lot. Around me, handicap parking abuse is completely rampant... I personally know 4 people in my community with a tag: 1) A construction worker who says his knees are awful from climbing up and down ladders and being on his knees all the time. I frequently see him on roofs, etc... I know he's had knee surgery a few times, but... you're running around for work, on a roof... 2) A "Disabled Veteran" neighbor who literally runs for like 3 hours a day. In way better shape then me. 3) A minority who has literally told me she deserves it as reparations, clearly no lack of ability to walk... and the most valid one... 4) an 90+ year old who can't see (no DL), has a caretaker... and every time she goes out, she's ALWAYS dropped off at the door as the parking lot is too dangerous for her. Then the perfectly abled caretaker parks in the handicap spot and walks in to help her inside.

I can't find the video now, but their arguments were basically as follows:
1) Making it the very best, premium spot encourages rampant abuse, so they are less likely to be available to those who need it. This is both by those who get it without really needing it, and the likelihood of the spot getting blocked by those picking others up or just ignoring the signs.
2) It creates envy and resentment of the handicapped and makes the incentives in the wrong direction.
3) These days the handicap generally can qualify for electric scooters and other assistive devices that actually makes it easier for them to park further away
4) They're likely to have much more room around their vehicle to be able to safely operate said devices or wheelchairs

Tesla also realized basically the same set of issues with their supercharger spots. Early stations were built in premium spots, trying to make an advantage of owning a Tesla being that you get upfront, better parking... but in the end, it led to resentment, abuse, vandalism, and EV owners parking in them even when they don't need the spots, reducing the availability for those that do. Tesla moving the spots to the back of the lots pretty much solved all those issues. And stores around here who didn't learn that lesson yet, such as Whole Foods, I can never park my EV at because their is pretty much always an ICE vehicle in them.

In the case of the first three, what the hell are their doctors doing? Do they even need a medical rationale backed by a doctor to get one of the placards?

You make extremely valid points, but unfortunately, a lot of this stuff is muddled by government and activists.  By law, a certain number of handicapped spaces must be reserved in locations that are close to an entrance, and also leaving a wide aisle for a wheelchair to pass through.  And disability activists will scream bloody murder if you take away any of their "priveleges".  So there is no fix to the problem.

The big cheat with placard has been that in many places they allow you to park free at a meter.  Around here, a number of local jurisdictions have put in place an "all may park all must pay" rule.  Essentially, even those with placards will pay the meter, but if you have a placard you can stay for twice the time (at twice the price).  Abuse is a lot less in these circumstances.

[kphoger]

Yeah, I don't care how much abuse of the system there is, I'm certainly not in favor of putting them in the back of the lot.  I've seen enough people barely able to walk, shuffling into the store, and I certainly wouldn't want them to have to do so all the way from the other end.

And, really, if you put them in the back of the lot, then what's the point of having handicap spots at all?

[odditude]

my sister doesn't qualify for anything but her cane - and if she has to park in the back of a parking lot instead of a close handicapped spot when she's having a bad day, it's not happening.

she's also one of those people that on days that she doesn't need her cane (at that moment), she gets berated for "abusing" her handicap placard because she looks like a thirtysomething in good shape. looks can deceive, folks.

[Jim]

she's also one of those people that on days that she doesn't need her cane (at that moment), she gets berated for "abusing" her handicap placard because she looks like a thirtysomething in good shape. looks can deceive, folks.

Obviously drifting off the topic here, but I want to echo that this is important to keep in mind when you think you see someone abusing a handicap spot.  Consider the person with a heart condition who otherwise looks healthy but it supposed to limit carrying of items.  I personally know of a person who has a problem with leg circulation which makes him go from walking normally to extreme pain when going too far too quickly.  For that person, a close handicap spot is the difference between being able to go into a store or restaurant on his own or relying on someone to help.  Sure, there's a lot of abuse out there, but don't judge every "able bodied" person you see using a handicap spot.

[UCFKnights]

Acctttuallllyyy.... I watched a YouTube video a year or so ago advocating for moving handicap spots to the back of the lot. Around me, handicap parking abuse is completely rampant... I personally know 4 people in my community with a tag: 1) A construction worker who says his knees are awful from climbing up and down ladders and being on his knees all the time. I frequently see him on roofs, etc... I know he's had knee surgery a few times, but... you're running around for work, on a roof... 2) A "Disabled Veteran" neighbor who literally runs for like 3 hours a day. In way better shape then me. 3) A minority who has literally told me she deserves it as reparations, clearly no lack of ability to walk... and the most valid one... 4) an 90+ year old who can't see (no DL), has a caretaker... and every time she goes out, she's ALWAYS dropped off at the door as the parking lot is too dangerous for her. Then the perfectly abled caretaker parks in the handicap spot and walks in to help her inside.

I can't find the video now, but their arguments were basically as follows:
1) Making it the very best, premium spot encourages rampant abuse, so they are less likely to be available to those who need it. This is both by those who get it without really needing it, and the likelihood of the spot getting blocked by those picking others up or just ignoring the signs.
2) It creates envy and resentment of the handicapped and makes the incentives in the wrong direction.
3) These days the handicap generally can qualify for electric scooters and other assistive devices that actually makes it easier for them to park further away
4) They're likely to have much more room around their vehicle to be able to safely operate said devices or wheelchairs

Tesla also realized basically the same set of issues with their supercharger spots. Early stations were built in premium spots, trying to make an advantage of owning a Tesla being that you get upfront, better parking... but in the end, it led to resentment, abuse, vandalism, and EV owners parking in them even when they don't need the spots, reducing the availability for those that do. Tesla moving the spots to the back of the lots pretty much solved all those issues. And stores around here who didn't learn that lesson yet, such as Whole Foods, I can never park my EV at because their is pretty much always an ICE vehicle in them.

In the case of the first three, what the hell are their doctors doing? Do they even need a medical rationale backed by a doctor to get one of the placards?

I'm sure part of it is that the people are probably lying to their doctors. Florida's standards for getting one include very subjective things, such as "the ability to walk 200 feet without stopping to rest", which is allowed to include reasons such as breathing issues, heart issues, etc. Or if a doctor recommends you wear a brace while walking, you're set for a handicap decal. And if a doctor says no, you just shop for another doctor who will say yes. I mean, is this issue not in other areas? If you sit in the parking lot at a big box store and watch the handicap spots, usually at least 9 out of 10 people will have no visible reason to need the decal.

Even in the case of the 4th example, why does she really need a decal? She is literally always dropped off. The person parking has the perfect ability to walk. Dropping off a disabled person at the door seems like it'd be preferred so they don't have to cross streets. Thats what the caretaker is doing anyways. If a person who needs a wheelchair and is alone needs the spot, its not going to be available to the caretaker of a disabled person could park there instead?

Yeah, I don't care how much abuse of the system there is, I'm certainly not in favor of putting them in the back of the lot.  I've seen enough people barely able to walk, shuffling into the store, and I certainly wouldn't want them to have to do so all the way from the other end.

And, really, if you put them in the back of the lot, then what's the point of having handicap spots at all?

The purpose would be for exactly what is depicted on the picture of the sign, people who need extra room around their vehicle so they can easily access their assistive devices and operate it around their vehicle. It also wouldn't necessarily preclude making other changes, such as stores stocking their electric scooter carts at the location of the handicap parking spots so those who park in them don't need to walk through the lot at all. It also helps to make sure those spots are really, really available to those who really need them by stopping the abuse.

my sister doesn't qualify for anything but her cane - and if she has to park in the back of a parking lot instead of a close handicapped spot when she's having a bad day, it's not happening.

she's also one of those people that on days that she doesn't need her cane (at that moment), she gets berated for "abusing" her handicap placard because she looks like a thirtysomething in good shape. looks can deceive, folks.

The interesting thing about placing it in the back of the lot is it doesn't require someone who has a decal to actually utilize those spots... it encourages those who have it for more benign or intermittent issues and don't need the extra space to just grab a regular, smaller parking spot up front if they are mostly able to walk. Because modern handicap spaces are almost double the size of regular ones, there will be a lot more parking available closer to the building for everyone. Again, the same thing happened with EVs. Many people felt those spots were just a privilege, they didn't need the charger. Then when another EV actually needs the plug to get somewhere, the spot is taken up by someone who just wanted it as a preferred spot. Tesla tried to fix this by implementing idling charges, but people would just "fake" plug in the vehicle and nobody would know (other then the screen in the car showing you a spot is available and its not). The fix that worked was installing the spots in a less desirable location.

Infact, Tesla's newest installations also have added "handicapped preferred" spots (not enforceable by law, but a spot or 2 with much more room around the vehicle, and if other spots are all taken its considered ok to take this handicap spot so you can get your needed charge instead of waiting with one sitting empty).... they're placing the handicapped spots the furthermost away of their already far away spots... and my anecdotal experience has been almost 100% of the people using those marked spots need the extra handicap space, so we do have small scale example of this theory working well.

Don't worry, there's a powerful lobby against this idea (the disabled) and at least half the country would have no willingness to so much hear and try to understand the idea. Its not happening.

[kphoger]

It also wouldn't necessarily preclude making other changes, such as stores stocking their electric scooter carts at the location of the handicap parking spots so those who park in them don't need to walk through the lot at all. It also helps to make sure those spots are really, really available to those who really need them by stopping the abuse.

...which would require building a weatherproof structure at the back of the parking lot, as well as possibly a charging station (I'm not sure how those carts stay charged).

I've thought about different layouts that involve splitting the handicap spots up, with some at the front and some at the back, but I don't like any layout I've thought of.  I guess I think the current situation is best, even if people abuse it.  And, honestly, I don't personally see so many people abusing it to make me think a change is needed.  I know some do, and I personally at least one who does, but the majority of people I see using handicap spots appear legit.

[D-Dey65]

I'm sure plenty of us here hate it when Interstate Highways have to close, although sometimes they have to. But on the other hand it does create the opportunity for the existence of somewhat unique signage, like this one at an on-ramp to I-90 in Mitchell, South Dakota.

https://www.mitchellrepublic.com/news/4584284-mitchell-drivers-urged-use-caution-i-90-closed-wall-chamberlain

Although I keep thinking perhaps the lights on that gate should be a little bigger.


(Not sure I should post this without permission from the photographer, so if it's deleted I'll accept it)

[D-Dey65]

That thumbnail is so tiny it's hard to even see the sign. Here's a version cropped from the original.

That reminds me; I have to crop two other pictures I took along I-95 in 2019. One is in St. John's County, Florida from April, and the other is in Hampton County, South Carolina in November, which I might have to do a second time.

[vdeane]

Even in the case of the 4th example, why does she really need a decal? She is literally always dropped off. The person parking has the perfect ability to walk. Dropping off a disabled person at the door seems like it'd be preferred so they don't have to cross streets. Thats what the caretaker is doing anyways. If a person who needs a wheelchair and is alone needs the spot, its not going to be available to the caretaker of a disabled person could park there instead?

Keep in mind that the more time the caretaker is getting to/from the parking spot, the more time the disabled person is stuck standing in front of the store.

[jakeroot]

The roundabout diamond is not unique, but perhaps the accompanying sign is a bit more unique:

Eastbound Columbia Park Trail @ Steptoe Street, Richland, WA.

[kphoger]

The roundabout diamond is not unique, but perhaps the accompanying sign is a bit more unique:

Eastbound Columbia Park Trail @ Steptoe Street, Richland, WA.

What's the standard sign an upcoming ramp meter otherwise?

[jakeroot]

The roundabout diamond is not unique, but perhaps the accompanying sign is a bit more unique:

Eastbound Columbia Park Trail @ Steptoe Street, Richland, WA.

What's the standard sign an upcoming ramp meter otherwise?

It's just a diamond that says "RAMP METERED AHEAD WHEN FLASHING".

[mrsman]

The roundabout diamond is not unique, but perhaps the accompanying sign is a bit more unique:

Eastbound Columbia Park Trail @ Steptoe Street, Richland, WA.

What's the standard sign an upcoming ramp meter otherwise?

It's just a diamond that says "RAMP METERED AHEAD WHEN FLASHING".

While not too common, it is a good idea in some cases to meter the flow into a roundabout or circle.  It will help even out the flow of traffic and make it easier to merge into the traffic stream of the circle.

Here's a weird application of a metering signal at a traffic circle in Maryland:

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2122574,-76.7957173,3a,75y,80.07h,75.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOUYHAEc070FrwrWrcPk1QA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[Amtrakprod]

I'm sure plenty of us here hate it when Interstate Highways have to close, although sometimes they have to. But on the other hand it does create the opportunity for the existence of somewhat unique signage, like this one at an on-ramp to I-90 in Mitchell, South Dakota.

https://www.mitchellrepublic.com/news/4584284-mitchell-drivers-urged-use-caution-i-90-closed-wall-chamberlain

Although I keep thinking perhaps the lights on that gate should be a little bigger.


(Not sure I should post this without permission from the photographer, so if it's deleted I'll accept it)

Aurora Gate leds. Should've gotten some 7inch ones.


iPhone

[US 89]

Interesting transposition on this sign on I-80 near Green River, Wyoming:

[roadman65]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/49894934153/in/dateposted-public/
This is very odd even for Florida.  Bring back the kodacolor shields and this would not be.

[csw]

Who knew that in the road map of emotions, Desire and Panic were just down the road from Paradise? From US 119 south of DuBois, PA.

[CoreySamson]

I don't think I've ever seen the phrase "these lanes" used on a sign in this context:

US-90 in Patterson:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6800089,-91.2958751,3a,75y,120.66h,78.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6MSD3hsiltRfLHhG2ACGNw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[Brian556]

Misprinted two way traffic symbols used sideways tells drivers to drive London-style.  Jackson & 5th, Alexandria, LA:
https://www.google.com/maps/@31.3114812,-92.4470502,3a,16.4y,176.76h,86.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2ZGoKgIyBlqnS9tolRAfyw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[J3ebrules]

I don't think I've ever seen the phrase "these lanes" used on a sign in this context:

US-90 in Patterson:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6800089,-91.2958751,3a,75y,120.66h,78.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6MSD3hsiltRfLHhG2ACGNw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

That combo made no sense. It wasn't saying "no left turn In the left lane, but use these lanes here to make the left" . My interpretation was, "No left turn. Also, these lanes here exist."

[1995hoo]

I don't think I've ever seen the phrase "these lanes" used on a sign in this context:

US-90 in Patterson:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6800089,-91.2958751,3a,75y,120.66h,78.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6MSD3hsiltRfLHhG2ACGNw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

That combo made no sense. It wasn't saying "no left turn In the left lane, but use these lanes here to make the left" . My interpretation was, "No left turn. Also, these lanes here exist."

I understood what it meant, but I found it strange. A better sign might point to the lane to the left of the curb and say "Left turns from this lane only." Or use a New Jersey type sign that says "U and Left Turns" with an arrow pointing to that lane.

[roadfro]

I don't think I've ever seen the phrase "these lanes" used on a sign in this context:

US-90 in Patterson:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6800089,-91.2958751,3a,75y,120.66h,78.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6MSD3hsiltRfLHhG2ACGNw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

That combo made no sense. It wasn't saying "no left turn In the left lane, but use these lanes here to make the left" . My interpretation was, "No left turn. Also, these lanes here exist."

I understood what it meant, but I found it strange. A better sign might point to the lane to the left of the curb and say "Left turns from this lane only." Or use a New Jersey type sign that says "U and Left Turns" with an arrow pointing to that lane.

The combo made sense to me as well. But in my opinion, the assembly is not even necessary, given the left turn pocket and channelization provided (and a left/U-turn symbol sign provided upstream of it).

[roadfro]

Misprinted two way traffic symbols used sideways tells drivers to drive London-style.  Jackson & 5th, Alexandria, LA:
https://www.google.com/maps/@31.3114812,-92.4470502,3a,16.4y,176.76h,86.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2ZGoKgIyBlqnS9tolRAfyw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

5th St is a typical two-way street–a warning isn't needed for that.

Even though it does appear that 5th Street is the lone two-way street within the network of numbered one-way streets in this segment of the city, I wouldn't think a warning sign would be necessary. But, lo and behold, this warning treatment exists at every intersecting street.

[jakeroot]

I don't think I've ever seen the phrase "these lanes" used on a sign in this context:

US-90 in Patterson:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.6800089,-91.2958751,3a,75y,120.66h,78.89t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6MSD3hsiltRfLHhG2ACGNw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

That combo made no sense. It wasn't saying "no left turn In the left lane, but use these lanes here to make the left" . My interpretation was, "No left turn. Also, these lanes here exist."

I understood what it meant, but I found it strange. A better sign might point to the lane to the left of the curb and say "Left turns from this lane only." Or use a New Jersey type sign that says "U and Left Turns" with an arrow pointing to that lane.

The combo made sense to me as well. But in my opinion, the assembly is not even necessary, given the left turn pocket and channelization provided (and a left/U-turn symbol sign provided upstream of it).

That's what I'm thinking. If they truly have issues, perhaps paint a straight arrow on the left through lane? The current assembly looks like something waiting to get hit/ripped away.

[Stephane Dumas]

There's a street in Edmonton who have a forest of street signs who frustrated drivers.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/street-signs-everywhere-edmonton-1.4693399
https://globalnews.ca/news/5020069/edmonton-106-street-signs-removed-reduced/