Opinion: Danger ahead: Road signs that are too small or too confusing

[cpzilliacus]

Washington Post opinion column: Danger ahead: Road signs that are too small or too confusing

Do you sometimes have difficulty with "way-finding" – knowing exactly where you are and selecting a new or alternative route to your intended destination in places where you don't routinely travel?

The urban and suburban environments we inhabit and use should be beautiful, functional, economically viable, sustainable and safe. But they also should facilitate way-finding. Whether walking, biking or driving, locational and directional signs for way-finding are often a navigational necessity.

Yet many way-finding signs are poorly designed, written and positioned. Occasionally, signage is missing altogether or so excessive as to produce sensory overload.

Way-finding deficiencies are especially problematic and dangerous on roads where drivers have only a few seconds to see, read, interpret and respond appropriately to way-finding information.

[Hurricane Rex]

I find many of the speed limit signs are too small in general. Like why the freak are the numbers 16 inches tall in a 48*60 road sign. Logic? Also there is a lot of white space on the signs.

[PHLBOS]

I mentioned this in your FB post & I'll repost similar here.

Lower Merion Township (Montgomery County), PA is one of the worst offenders of this with their old, cast-iron street blade signs.

Photo from a related article

While these signs are both vintage & nostalgic; they are an absolute bear to read while driving and completely unreadable at night.

Since the article that featured the above-photo was written; there have been larger, modern, reflective, MUTCD-complaint signage erected to supplement the old iron signs; however, not all intersections have received the new signage.

[paulthemapguy]

Those quotes are all very good guidelines used by professionals to establish traffic control design elements.  Glad an outsider is taking notice of the purposes behind traffic control BMP's, and of what we geeks recognize every day 

[JasonOfORoads]

I find many of the speed limit signs are too small in general. Like why the freak are the numbers 16 inches tall in a 48*60 road sign. Logic? Also there is a lot of white space on the signs.

This is why Oregon's "SPEED XX" signs are so much better -- the numerals are more than half the height of the sign. Plus, despite "SPEED XX" and "SPEED LIMIT XX" meaning two different things in Oregon law, 99.9% of drivers will treat the former like the latter, so why not drop the mostly superfluous "LIMIT" from the sign and make the numbers larger?

[DaBigE]

I find many of the speed limit signs are too small in general. Like why the freak are the numbers 16 inches tall in a 48*60 road sign. Logic? Also there is a lot of white space on the signs.

Somewhere along the way, someone decided 16-IN was good enough for the desired legibility (typically accepted to be 30-40-FT per 1-IN of letter height). In any case, the speed limit isn't critical information to the driver; therefore, increasing it has rarely been brought up outside of forums like this. Larger or not, drivers will continue to ignore the sign just the same.

[1995hoo]

I do agree with that article's author that a lot of street signs in the DC area are too small, poorly positioned, or both. I don't know why the local jurisdictions have an aversion to overhead street signs hung from the traffic light span wire (well, I know why the District doesn't do it–they rarely have overhead street lights). Other places I've been–Raleigh comes most readily to mind because I lived in the area for three years–have no problem whatsoever with hanging a street sign from their span wire, yet Virginia in particular seems to refuse to do so, preferring those dinky signs mounted either on one of the traffic light poles or on a separate pole at one corner of the intersection. He's correct that signage like that is inadequate and hard to see, especially as the number of larger vehicles like SUVs that block your view of the signage has increased over the years. (Thankfully, as Virginia replaces span wire with mast arms they've gotten better about mounting signs on the arms, although they don't do it everywhere.)

The white-on-blue street signs we have in Fairfax County are a big improvement over the tiny old white-on-green signs, although I can think of some intersections–mostly lower-volume VDOT System neighborhood streets–where the old signs survive.

[SidS1045]

I mentioned this in your FB post & I'll repost similar here.

Lower Merion Township (Montgomery County), PA is one of the worst offenders of this with their old, cast-iron street blade signs.

Photo from a related article

While these signs are both vintage & nostalgic; they are an absolute bear to read while driving and completely unreadable at night.

Since the article that featured the above-photo was written; there have been larger, modern, reflective, MUTCD-complaint signage erected to supplement the old iron signs; however, not all intersections have received the new signage.

Newton MA's old street signs are far worse:  embossed cast iron, black lettering on a gray background.  They tend to blend into the scenery during the day and are completely invisible at night.  At least the ones you posted have some contrast between the letters and the background.

[DrSmith]

Plenty of the speed limit signs in Connecticut use large bold numerals
Here's an example https://www.google.com/maps/@42.015986,-72.5869169,3a,75y,167.24h,86.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spbMNDsSjDFQSmP4WUZ_PyA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[odditude]

At least the sign isn't cluttered with unused white space. That is my main problem with the US signs.

white space is critical for legibility. are there any signs in particular that you think have too much?

[Hurricane Rex]

At least the sign isn't cluttered with unused white space. That is my main problem with the US signs.

white space is critical for legibility. are there any signs in particular that you think have too much?

Miosh Tino had a good comparison of 3 60x48 road signs:

LEFT: Oregon SPEED sign (60x48, 30-inch Series C digits)
MIDDLE: California SPEED LIMIT sign (60x48, 20-inch Series E or E(M) digits)
RIGHT: FHWA/SHSM SPEED LIMIT sign (60x48, 16-inch Series E digits

The middle one still has ample legibility while increase the size of the letters compared to the typical one on the right. My favorite is still the Idaho sign (Oregon second) but that's another topic. Minor improvements can make a big difference (right sign to middle sign).

Edit: I'm 99% sure the middle sign is also the standard for the 30x24 signs (half the size of the 60x48)

[myosh_tino]

At least the sign isn't cluttered with unused white space. That is my main problem with the US signs.

white space is critical for legibility. are there any signs in particular that you think have too much?

Miosh Tino had a good comparison of 3 60x48 road signs:

LEFT: Oregon SPEED sign (60x48, 30-inch Series C digits)
MIDDLE: California SPEED LIMIT sign (60x48, 20-inch Series E or E(M) digits)
RIGHT: FHWA/SHSM SPEED LIMIT sign (60x48, 16-inch Series E digits

The middle one still has ample legibility while increase the size of the letters compared to the typical one on the right. My favorite is still the Idaho sign (Oregon second) but that's another topic. Minor improvements can make a big difference (right sign to middle sign).

Edit: I'm 99% sure the middle sign is also the standard for the 30x24 signs (half the size of the 60x48)

Yeah, I have no idea why the FHWA-spec 48x60 speed limit sign calls for 16-inch numerals but I do have a preference for the California version with the larger digits.  Sadly, there are more and more speed limit signs in California that conform to the FHWA spec.

Oh and it's myosh_tino, not miosh_tino... 

[J N Winkler]

I think FHWA should never have permitted the use of mixed-case FHWA series other than Series E Modified (and possibly Series E) on D-series signs.  I would also like to see the minimum height requirement jacked up to lowercase loop height of 6 in, rather than capital letter height of 6 in, at least for primary state highways and other important through highways.  I don't care what FHWA says about engineering judgment:  there is no shortage of agencies willing to use Series D or thinner (Vermont AOT uses Series B) to stick with unreinforced single-sheet construction for D-series signs.

[vdeane]

It's not fair. The second sign does not exist. It's always accompanied by a directional banner, effectively dictating the sign to mean 'Route [XX] [cardinal direction]'.

The sign above (obviously) has no current meaning in America. A sign on its own, with just numbers (and nothing else), accompanied by no supplementary plaque, is not a thing that I've seen before.

It's very common in NY.

[jakeroot]

It's not fair. The second sign does not exist. It's always accompanied by a directional banner, effectively dictating the sign to mean 'Route [XX] [cardinal direction]'.

The sign above (obviously) has no current meaning in America. A sign on its own, with just numbers (and nothing else), accompanied by no supplementary plaque, is not a thing that I've seen before.

It's very common in NY.

I assume that's an error. How could you have a shield without a cardinal direction?

[webny99]

A sign on its own, with just numbers (and nothing else), accompanied by no supplementary plaque, is not a thing that I've seen before.

It's very common in NY.

I know Such signs are the bane of my existence. There are enough of them that I'm not at all convinced they're posted in error.

[DaBigE]

It's not fair. The second sign does not exist. It's always accompanied by a directional banner, effectively dictating the sign to mean 'Route [XX] [cardinal direction]'.

The sign above (obviously) has no current meaning in America. A sign on its own, with just numbers (and nothing else), accompanied by no supplementary plaque, is not a thing that I've seen before.

It's very common in NY.

I assume that's an error. How could you have a shield without a cardinal direction?

There's a ton of county highways signed without a cardinal direction around Wisconsin. A few have had a cardinal added as part of reconstruction projects, but the rationalization for not having them I heard was due to how often county highways change direction, so assigning a single cardinal isn't too helpful.

[vdeane]

It's not fair. The second sign does not exist. It's always accompanied by a directional banner, effectively dictating the sign to mean 'Route [XX] [cardinal direction]'.

The sign above (obviously) has no current meaning in America. A sign on its own, with just numbers (and nothing else), accompanied by no supplementary plaque, is not a thing that I've seen before.

It's very common in NY.

I assume that's an error. How could you have a shield without a cardinal direction?

There's one with the direction posted just a tenth of a mile back.  Posting a shield with the cardinal direction followed by one without is practically standard operating procedure in NY (I'm not sure what the official policy is, but they're everywhere).  There's even a part of NY 28 where the directional banners are omitted entirely because the route has an odd shape - NY 28 actually spends 22 miles with the "northbound" direction pointed south before ending.

[Scott5114]

It's not fair. The second sign does not exist. It's always accompanied by a directional banner, effectively dictating the sign to mean 'Route [XX] [cardinal direction]'.

The sign above (obviously) has no current meaning in America. A sign on its own, with just numbers (and nothing else), accompanied by no supplementary plaque, is not a thing that I've seen before.

It's very common in NY.

I assume that's an error. How could you have a shield without a cardinal direction?

Such was the standard for reassurance back in the day (I think as late as 1948, possibly 1961 too). Some agencies just never got into the practice, anyway.

Do you really expect a dumbass who can't figure out how to work a credit card terminal to know the difference between a circle 50 shield and a circle 50 speed limit because there's no banner on the speed limit, though?

[jakeroot]

Do you really expect a dumbass who can't figure out how to work a credit card terminal to know the difference between a circle 50 shield and a circle 50 speed limit because there's no banner on the speed limit, though?

There's a lot of signs in the MUTCD. The only other circular cutout sign is the railroad crossing sign, and that's yellow with a very clear legend. I don't think people are that stupid.

That said, I prefer Australia's approach anyway, which is the generic speed limit sign covered up with a red circle in the center. If the US ever switches to metric, it would be wise to consider an alternative design like Australia's.

FWIW, I did not know states posted shields without cardinal directions. That's definitely not a thing where I'm from.

[Scott5114]

Do you really expect a dumbass who can't figure out how to work a credit card terminal to know the difference between a circle 50 shield and a circle 50 speed limit because there's no banner on the speed limit, though?

I don't think people are that stupid.

Having worked nothing but customer service jobs, I assure you they are.

[webny99]

FWIW, I did not know states posted shields without cardinal directions. That's definitely not a thing where I'm from.

It shouldn't be a thing anywhere. But, it definitely is.

Do you really expect a dumbass who can't figure out how to work a credit card terminal to know the difference between a circle 50 shield and a circle 50 speed limit because there's no banner on the speed limit, though?

I don't think people are that stupid.

Having worked nothing but customer service jobs, I assure you they are.

Sometimes, I do have trouble convincing myself that "the customer is always right". I don't envy those of you with customer service positions.

[jakeroot]

Do you really expect a dumbass who can't figure out how to work a credit card terminal to know the difference between a circle 50 shield and a circle 50 speed limit because there's no banner on the speed limit, though?

I don't think people are that stupid.

Having worked nothing but customer service jobs, I assure you they are.

I also deal in customer service (I work at a hotel). It's not quite the same thing, though. Customer service jobs exist to help those who aren't trained to understand whatever it is they are using (or need help using). Driver's licenses, despite popular opinion, are not just handed out. Drivers are trained to understand shapes, colors, understand markings and signals, what certain symbols mean and how to drive defensively. Are American drivers not as well trained as their European counterparts? Probably. But they're not retarded.

[kalvado]

Do you really expect a dumbass who can't figure out how to work a credit card terminal to know the difference between a circle 50 shield and a circle 50 speed limit because there's no banner on the speed limit, though?

There's a lot of signs in the MUTCD. The only other circular cutout sign is the railroad crossing sign, and that's yellow with a very clear legend. I don't think people are that stupid.

That said, I prefer Australia's approach anyway, which is the generic speed limit sign covered up with a red circle in the center. If the US ever switches to metric, it would be wise to consider an alternative design like Australia's.

FWIW, I did not know states posted shields without cardinal directions. That's definitely not a thing where I'm from.

I would say circular is not the main point of it. European traffic signage does not rely on words for immediate control functions - and MUTCD spells out everything. I suspect that european signage was developed under assumption that drivers do not have to be literate, and memorizing some pictograms is relatively easy. Sort of pointless by now...

[webny99]

Customer service jobs exist to help those who aren't trained to understand whatever it is they are using (or need help using).

I agree with the rest of your post. But this is up for debate.