Signage pet peeves

[Brian556]

Use of a T-intersection sign mounted sideways in place of a side street sign

If you think that's bad, the town of Double Oak, Texas uses T intersection ahead signs in place of double arrow signs. This error exists at multiple interesctions within the town.

[pianocello]

If you think that's bad, the town of Double Oak, Texas uses T intersection ahead signs in place of double arrow signs. This error exists at multiple interesctions within the town.
(image)

I've seen those "Captain Obvious" signs in central IL as well.

[1995hoo]

I hate it when the traffic light mast arm is positioned on the near side of the intersection so close that you have to bend down to see the light. This light is about two miles from my house and when I took the picture I was stopped at the stop bar. I held the camera at eye level to take the picture.

[Roadman66]

Where is that located, 1995hoo?

[yakra]

Seconded. Practically every light in Westbrook ME is mounted on the near side of the intersection, causing me to scrunch way down in my seat in order to see. Grrrr!

[1995hoo]

Where is that located, 1995hoo?

In that particular photo I'm on westbound Franconia Road (Virginia secondary route 644 in Fairfax County) at the intersection with Fleet Drive; the overpass in front of me carries the road over the railroad and Metrorail tracks. If you look at the pavement in front of my car you'll see that the stop bar used to be closer to the intersection. Notice the pole located on the far side to the right (under my SunPass that's taped to the windshield). The lights used to be suspended diagonally across the intersection using span wire, which is what you'll see if you look at that intersection on Google Street View (link provided below if you care).

I'm all for replacing ugly span wire with mast arms whenever it's feasible to do so, but the mast arms need to be positioned properly. I hate it when they make you scrunch way down to see the lights.

Here's the Street View link as close as I could get it to where I was stopped. Notice they redid the pedestrian crosswalk to look more like a zebra crossing as well. The new stop bar is maybe half to two-thirds of the way back on the solid line between the second and third lanes. The far left lane is a left-only lane and I took the picture shown above from the middle of the three straight-ahead lanes. The pole I referred to above that supported the span wire is behind the white Peapod truck.

(BTW, the light was red when I raised the camera to take the picture and it went green right as I clicked the shutter.)

[Eth]

Pet peeve:  states that can't seem to figure out what their state route markers are supposed to look like.

Here are a few examples from a trip I took last weekend in Rockdale, Walton, and Barrow Counties (apologies for poor image quality; these are captures of a video taken on my phone):


The GA 8 shield here used to be the standard; I think most shields from the 1990s and earlier are of this style.
The GA 81 shield is a 2000s style.


This is a newer style, one I think I've only seen in the past couple years.


This one is...well, it's just straight up ugly.


This is the style that I hope catches on statewide, as I think it's the best-looking option, probably because it's an actual accurate state outline.

Examples of all four of these styles (and probably a couple others I've missed) are plentiful.  Seriously, Georgia, pick one and stick with it.

[SteveG1988]

I hate it when the traffic light mast arm is positioned on the near side of the intersection so close that you have to bend down to see the light. This light is about two miles from my house and when I took the picture I was stopped at the stop bar. I held the camera at eye level to take the picture.

We have one like that here, but its problem is...its a programmable visablity type....so it is barely able to be seen to begin with.

[CL]

Pet peeve:  states that can't seem to figure out what their state route markers are supposed to look like.

[photos]

Examples of all four of these styles (and probably a couple others I've missed) are plentiful.  Seriously, Georgia, pick one and stick with it.

Yeah. Utah has the same problem. Several different variations of the state highway shield have come out; before 2000 there was one consistent design. But, I digress. I've already discussed the problem at length.

[1995hoo]

I hate it when the traffic light mast arm is positioned on the near side of the intersection so close that you have to bend down to see the light. This light is about two miles from my house and when I took the picture I was stopped at the stop bar. I held the camera at eye level to take the picture.

....

We have one like that here, but its problem is...its a programmable visablity type....so it is barely able to be seen to begin with.

I don't believe I'm familiar with that term. Could you clarify for me?

Edited: Never mind, I did a Google search. I hadn't heard the term "programmable visibility" before, but when I saw a picture of such a traffic light I instantly recognized the style (just not the name). I hate those too, especially at this very time of year in the late afternoon when the sun makes driving very difficult in the first place. Thankfully there aren't very many of them around here on roads I use regularly.

[SignBridge]

Why did they position that mast-arm on the near-side unlike usual practice? I assume they had a reason........... The only place I normally see that done is at fire stations.

[Quillz]

I've noticed that most states tend to have non-standard US Route shields, as opposed to state route shields. I've seen a fair share of strange Interstate shields, too.

One of the reasons I like that California uses its own shield standards is that they're quite consistent. For the most part, the proper Interstate, US Route and state route shields are used correctly. The main inconsistencies I've seen are BGS shields being used independently, as well as various BGS shield practices (some borderless, some with one border, others with two borders, etc.)

I think it comes down to manufacturers. I believe Safeway Signs is the only company that does California shield signage, whereas most states probably have multiple, correct? I remember being in Oregon and seeing a number of odd looking state route shields. Some would use Series B, others C and still more D. I saw wide shields being used for one- and two-digit numbers, etc.

[agentsteel53]

Edited: Never mind, I did a Google search. I hadn't heard the term "programmable visibility" before, but when I saw a picture of such a traffic light I instantly recognized the style (just not the name). I hate those too, especially at this very time of year in the late afternoon when the sun makes driving very difficult in the first place. Thankfully there aren't very many of them around here on roads I use regularly.

I despise that sort of light.  I have to spend all kinds of rarely-used mental cycles trying to figure out whether the light is off due to a power outage, what the law is in this jurisdiction for that situation, how likely the drivers are to obey the law as opposed to devolving to anarchy, etc etc...

[agentsteel53]

One of the reasons I like that California uses its own shield standards is that they're quite consistent. For the most part, the proper Interstate, US Route and state route shields are used correctly.

I could find you a maybe 20-mile stretch of I-5 in Kern County with six or seven different styles of independent-mount shield on the mainline and side streets.  

* 36 inch "triangular" reassurance, otherwise 1957 spec
* 36 inch "triangular" reassurance, 61 spec neutered
* 24 inch state named standard
* 24 inch neutered, 61 spec
* 24 inch neutered, 70 spec
* 24 inch neutered, 70 spec, Series C digit
* 21x18 61 spec

I'm probably forgetting a few styles.  the California MUTCD calls for two styles: '57 spec, 36 inch mainline, 24 inch side streets.

[Quillz]

One of the reasons I like that California uses its own shield standards is that they're quite consistent. For the most part, the proper Interstate, US Route and state route shields are used correctly.

I could find you a maybe 20-mile stretch of I-5 in Kern County with six or seven different styles of independent-mount shield on the mainline and side streets. 

* 36 inch "triangular" reassurance, otherwise 1957 spec
* 36 inch "triangular" reassurance, 61 spec neutered
* 24 inch state named standard
* 24 inch neutered, 61 spec
* 24 inch neutered, 70 spec
* 24 inch neutered, 70 spec, Series C digit
* 21x18 61 spec

I'm probably forgetting a few styles.  the California MUTCD calls for two styles: '57 spec, 36 inch mainline, 24 inch side streets.

The "triangular neutered shield" is probably the most common error Interstate shield I've seen. There are also a lot of them along the stretch of I-5 near Dodger Stadium. I also have seen some BGS that use independent shields, and independent shields that are lacking the "California" and are intended for BGS. But still, most of the shields I've seen throughout the state are built to standard.

What I find most odd is some states that use extremely simple shields (like a square or circle) will still have tons of variants, whether it be bad stretching, different font weights (using B when C will fit just fine, etc.)

[agentsteel53]

But still, most of the shields I've seen throughout the state are built to standard.

the independent-mount state routes tend to be extra consistent, with the most common error being the use of a two-digit shield for a three-digit number, and (more rarely) vice versa.  this is especially prevalent in the northeast corner of the state.



CA very, very rarely uses a font weight other than D (or DM) on their state or US route shields.

[Brandon]

Why did they position that mast-arm on the near-side unlike usual practice? I assume they had a reason........... The only place I normally see that done is at fire stations.

Or at railroad crossings where the RR is next to the cross street.

[national highway 1]

I'm not a particular fan of how Texas aligns their arrows at the bottom of exit signs:

[Takumi]

I hate improperly used Series B...


...and everything about this sign.

[agentsteel53]

apart from the Clearview and the goofy-looking shield, that isn't a bad guide sign.  its overall layout is quite appealing.  maybe switch the two control cities for aesthetics.

[Takumi]

OK, everything except the green part!

(I think Rocky Mount may be first because you get to the southbound exit first.)

[rawmustard]

apart from the Clearview and the goofy-looking shield, that isn't a bad guide sign.  its overall layout is quite appealing.  maybe switch the two control cities for aesthetics.

If this is I-85's northern terminus, the controls have to be listed in that order because the ramp to Rocky Mount departs first.

[agentsteel53]

OK, everything except the green part!

actually, if the sign were black, I would somehow find myself strangely unoffended.

[pctech]

Signs on interstate exits that identify a destination (civic center, etc.) then no follow up signs after you exit. (I guess they figure that you have ESP)

Lack of proper signs approaching an an intersection to alert you of the correct lane and direction that you should use. ( La DODT is bad about this one)

Damaged missing signs not replaced. (in Louisiana sometimes years)

[kphoger]

On Wichita's street blades, they use the hundred block rather than the actual reference point.  So, rather than street blades on both sides of 21st Street North saying 2200 N (by which I could safetly assume houses south of it will be between 2100 and 2199, while houses north of it will be between 2200 and 2299), signs on the south side say 2100 N and signs on the north side say 2200 N.  It confused the heck out of me when we first moved here.