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

[roadman65]

Even For three digits on Georgia outlines this is stretching it.

[UCFKnights]

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6017999,-81.1946328,3a,15y,70.46h,94.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s32oM3y3LQiFz1EN68wXkfw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The center sign has ONLY with both left and right. To make matters worse, the roadway was restriped to only permit left turns in the middle lane, meaning now the sign is also wrong, along with the signal, and has been that way for years.

[jakeroot]

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6017999,-81.1946328,3a,15y,70.46h,94.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s32oM3y3LQiFz1EN68wXkfw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The center sign has ONLY with both left and right. To make matters worse, the roadway was restriped to only permit left turns in the middle lane, meaning now the sign is also wrong, along with the signal, and has been that way for years.

March 2020 GSV shows a double arrow in the center lane.

In that case, I would assume the sign would override the pavement markings, since the sign is the last thing you'd see.

The use of "ONLY" with multiple arrows reminds me of this old setup in Seattle. One way street with two through lanes. Both lanes have a double arrow showing either 'left/straight' or 'straight/right', but with ONLY markings below each of them. Everything is redundant, since (A) those are the normal movements at every intersection for that kind of setup, and (B) "ONLY" should be used exclusively with lanes that go "ONLY" one direction. It was painted like this for over ten years, despite all the other changes around it. If I recall correctly, it was only recently removed as part of the street improvements for the Key Arena renovations.

[JoePCool14]

Even For three digits on Georgia outlines this is stretching it.

Looks like we found a couple companions for this lovely specimen:

Off topic kind of, but what happened to this US shield lol? Is this some Penn DOT thing??? This is on the same freeway that has the redesign target.

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0893615,-80.1184731,3a,15y,337.01h,97.61t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJiNzbgrA-h1TD3gcXk3TSA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[EpicRoadways]

Not the worst thing I've ever seen, but this sign that I stumbled across on the MN/WI border is pretty bad. I'm assuming it's a township install.

[kphoger]

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6017999,-81.1946328,3a,15y,70.46h,94.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s32oM3y3LQiFz1EN68wXkfw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The center sign has ONLY with both left and right.

It appears going straight is prohibited, as that's a RIRO with a porkchop.

[jakeroot]

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6017999,-81.1946328,3a,15y,70.46h,94.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s32oM3y3LQiFz1EN68wXkfw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The center sign has ONLY with both left and right.

It appears going straight is prohibited, as that's a RIRO with a porkchop.

Generally speaking, "ONLY" is used only on panels where only one direction of movement is permitted. The left/right arrow is enough to indicate that through traffic is not permitted. Since two directions are allowed from that lane (I pointed this out a couple posts above, in the GSV link for March 2020), it would not be appropriate to use "ONLY" as you can go more than one direction.

[mrsman]

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6017999,-81.1946328,3a,15y,70.46h,94.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s32oM3y3LQiFz1EN68wXkfw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The center sign has ONLY with both left and right.

It appears going straight is prohibited, as that's a RIRO with a porkchop.

Generally speaking, "ONLY" is used only on panels where only one direction of movement is permitted. The left/right arrow is enough to indicate that through traffic is not permitted. Since two directions are allowed from that lane (I pointed this out a couple posts above, in the GSV link for March 2020), it would not be appropriate to use "ONLY" as you can go more than one direction.

I think generally "ONLY" in this context refers to only one direction is permitted.  California will use "OK" when there are at least two permitted movements.

This sign in Oakland shows this.  It is also interesting in that it is mounted on a signal mast arm that doesn't contain a signal and that even though it is overhead, the lane directions are not over the referred lanes.  [IMO only the directions for the two right lanes are required here.]

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7976579,-122.2694231,3a,30y,140.98h,92.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBgJUfz6-h2aeYHg82K6NIA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[jakeroot]

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6017999,-81.1946328,3a,15y,70.46h,94.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s32oM3y3LQiFz1EN68wXkfw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The center sign has ONLY with both left and right.

It appears going straight is prohibited, as that's a RIRO with a porkchop.

Generally speaking, "ONLY" is used only on panels where only one direction of movement is permitted. The left/right arrow is enough to indicate that through traffic is not permitted. Since two directions are allowed from that lane (I pointed this out a couple posts above, in the GSV link for March 2020), it would not be appropriate to use "ONLY" as you can go more than one direction.

I think generally "ONLY" in this context refers to only one direction is permitted.  California will use "OK" when there are at least two permitted movements.

This sign in Oakland shows this.  It is also interesting in that it is mounted on a signal mast arm that doesn't contain a signal and that even though it is overhead, the lane directions are not over the referred lanes.  [IMO only the directions for the two right lanes are required here.]

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7976579,-122.2694231,3a,30y,140.98h,92.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBgJUfz6-h2aeYHg82K6NIA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Correct, yes, "ONLY" is used when only one direction is permitted. It is incorrect to use it on signs with more than one permitted movement.

The usage of "OK" on advanced intersection lane control signs (R3-8) is an option that is sometimes ticked. WSDOT has occasionally used "OK" on guide signs.

[roadfro]

Generally speaking, "ONLY" is used only on panels where only one direction of movement is permitted. The left/right arrow is enough to indicate that through traffic is not permitted. Since two directions are allowed from that lane (I pointed this out a couple posts above, in the GSV link for March 2020), it would not be appropriate to use "ONLY" as you can go more than one direction.

I think generally "ONLY" in this context refers to only one direction is permitted.  California will use "OK" when there are at least two permitted movements.

This sign in Oakland shows this.  It is also interesting in that it is mounted on a signal mast arm that doesn't contain a signal and that even though it is overhead, the lane directions are not over the referred lanes.  [IMO only the directions for the two right lanes are required here.]

https://www.google.com/maps/@37.7976579,-122.2694231,3a,30y,140.98h,92.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBgJUfz6-h2aeYHg82K6NIA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Correct, yes, "ONLY" is used when only one direction is permitted. It is incorrect to use it on signs with more than one permitted movement.

The usage of "OK" on advanced intersection lane control signs (R3-8) is an option that is sometimes ticked. WSDOT has occasionally used "OK" on guide signs.

I remember frequently seeing the "OK" on lane assignment signs in the Vegas area when I was younger (like 20-30 years ago), but I haven't this on a new installation in Nevada in a long time...

I actually like that use of "OK" on the guide sign. Back when the 2009 MUTCD came out and prohibited the use of down arrows for signing option lanes at intermediate exits (the "non-Lunenfeld & Alexander" approach NDOT uses, as J N Winkler has termed it), I thought putting an "OK" next to a down arrow in this scheme might have been a good compromise to keep the existing signing scheme. (Turns out, changing the option exit design seems to be the one thing in the 2009 MUTCD that NDOT has balked at, cause there haven't been any major changes to how they sign intermediate option lanes in the last 11 years.)

[1995hoo]

The only time I've ever seen "OK" on a sign is on regulatory signs for HOV lanes in Maryland. In addition to stating the rule for regular passenger vehicles, they usually have a small auxiliary sign that says "Motorcycles OK."

Never seen it used to sign an option lane, though. I have seen Maryland use just the word "Only" in what would normally be an "Exit Only" reference when there are two exit lanes and one of them is optional. They seem to be getting away from that, though, because newer signs seem to stack the words "Exit Only."

[MCRoads]

This clearance sign in a bridge outside Tulsa warns of a 25Ft 7in hight restriction...

[plain]

This clearance sign in a bridge outside Tulsa warns of a 25Ft 7in hight restriction...

Lmao I always find those funny... states that absolutely have to sign bridge clearances no matter what

[STLmapboy]

Here's a sign on I-20 in Texas (near Tyler) with the control city in all caps.

[MCRoads]

This clearance sign in a bridge outside Tulsa warns of a 25Ft 7in hight restriction...

Lmao I always find those funny... states that absolutely have to sign bridge clearances no matter what

Usually OK stops at ≈20Ft, but sometimes they go a bit beyond reasonable... I can just imagine the High Five in Tx with a 120Ft 0 in sign, lol.

[CoreySamson]

This clearance sign in a bridge outside Tulsa warns of a 25Ft 7in hight restriction...

I shared this clearance sign in another thread: 23ft, 9in:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.124172,-95.4304301,3a,15y,4.51h,91.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sO0MCnHjnhTkVrKbYZ1tLEw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Highest I've seen in Texas. (also note the county pentagons!)

[ErmineNotyours]

44 feet!  Sure, it's for boats, but I rarely see yellow diamond signs used for marine clearances.  Taken of old 520 bridge from new 520 bridge, Seattle.

[Scott5114]

Would someone on a boat that big be able to see a sign that size with enough time to not hit it?

[MCRoads]

This clearance sign in a bridge outside Tulsa warns of a 25Ft 7in hight restriction...

I shared this clearance sign in another thread: 23ft, 9in:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.124172,-95.4304301,3a,15y,4.51h,91.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sO0MCnHjnhTkVrKbYZ1tLEw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Highest I've seen in Texas. (also note the county pentagons!)

Haha, mine is still taller!
At least Oklahoma can beat another state at SOMETHING to do with signage!

Would someone on a boat that big be able to see a sign that size with enough time to not hit it?

From my experience, boats tend to slow down near bridges. If a boat over 44 ft tall is going too fast to read it, you may have underestimated the, ahem, gravity of the situation.

[wxfree]

This clearance sign in a bridge outside Tulsa warns of a 25Ft 7in hight restriction...

I shared this clearance sign in another thread: 23ft, 9in:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.124172,-95.4304301,3a,15y,4.51h,91.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sO0MCnHjnhTkVrKbYZ1tLEw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Highest I've seen in Texas. (also note the county pentagons!)

The highest I've seen is 30 feet.  It's on what appears to be a conveyor belt at an industrial facility.

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.2457225,-97.5503542,3a,75y,241.9h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sE6Bf4MSNyST3c8CjL5mS_Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

[Scott5114]

This clearance sign in a bridge outside Tulsa warns of a 25Ft 7in hight restriction...

I shared this clearance sign in another thread: 23ft, 9in:
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.124172,-95.4304301,3a,15y,4.51h,91.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sO0MCnHjnhTkVrKbYZ1tLEw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Highest I've seen in Texas. (also note the county pentagons!)

The highest I've seen is 30 feet.  It's on what appears to be a conveyor belt at an industrial facility.

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.2457225,-97.5503542,3a,75y,241.9h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sE6Bf4MSNyST3c8CjL5mS_Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

Most likely posted by the owner of the conveyor; that sign's font is Tahoma (one of the Windows default fonts).

[D-Dey65]

While I mentioned the reconstruction of Beach Road at Lake George Battlefield State Park and the "Million Dollar Beach" in Lake George, New York, I noticed this non-MUTCD compliant "Do Not Enter" sign at the exit from the Million Dollar Beach:
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4175878,-73.7050127,3a,75y,67.48h,98.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNajWdJaoclNYgXvsjSQ0Sg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

[1995hoo]

While I mentioned the reconstruction of Beach Road at Lake George Battlefield State Park and the "Million Dollar Beach" in Lake George, New York, I noticed this non-MUTCD compliant "Do Not Enter" sign at the exit from the Million Dollar Beach:
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4175878,-73.7050127,3a,75y,67.48h,98.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNajWdJaoclNYgXvsjSQ0Sg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

I'm sure I've posted this before: https://goo.gl/maps/H8eHrvDUd5nkc4L26

[MCRoads]

While I mentioned the reconstruction of Beach Road at Lake George Battlefield State Park and the "Million Dollar Beach" in Lake George, New York, I noticed this non-MUTCD compliant "Do Not Enter" sign at the exit from the Million Dollar Beach:
https://www.google.com/maps/@43.4175878,-73.7050127,3a,75y,67.48h,98.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNajWdJaoclNYgXvsjSQ0Sg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

I'm sure I've posted this before: https://goo.gl/maps/H8eHrvDUd5nkc4L26

The first sign is reasonable (ish, a DO NOT ENTER sign would work just as well(and probably be cheaper, lol)) in design, even if redundant in placement, but that second one... WHAT ON EARTH?!?! What were they thinking!!

[roadman65]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/50562263747/in/dateposted-public/
This is not only redundant with the use of the prefix "I", but is got a really weird arrow.