Signs With Design Errors

[jakeroot]

Maybe instead of pushing APLs in situations where their use is awkward at best, we should investigate other options, like traditional diagrammatics, or even something more Worboys-ish.

I have not yet found a situation where an APL, or a slight modification there-of, wouldn't work better than traditional arrows. If you know of any particular junction near you that you think would be awkward with an APL, please point me to it, and I'll show you how one might work.

Traditional diagrammatics are informative, if not hard to read (due to the lane lines embedded in the arrow). I've suggested in the past that we ought to split the arrow up into several closely-spaced arrows pointing in various directions, but the consensus seemed to be that they were hard to read. They would have looked something like how South Africa signs their motorway junctions: https://goo.gl/7h5Q7J --&-- https://goo.gl/qacn6q. British Columbia has also used a ground-mounted variation of it here: https://goo.gl/rpY7WB

I like the British motorway signs (with the down arrows over each lane, with the relevant guide signs placed appropriately) but the amount of information we often put on our signs could lead to some fantastically large/tall guide signs, perhaps larger than *current* APL signs (which are stupidly large due to regulations).

[paulthemapguy]

It's an easy fix. Just replace the up arrow on the right with a right arrow.

AND move the sign gantry farther ahead, even just a few hundred feet, so as not to confuse drivers with the adjacent exit.

[freebrickproductions]

I have not yet found a situation where an APL, or a slight modification there-of, wouldn't work better than traditional arrows. If you know of any particular junction near you that you think would be awkward with an APL, please point me to it, and I'll show you how one might work.

I-565 eastbound, exits 19A-19C. I'd recommend doing the APLs as potential replacements for this sign:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7245603,-86.6097444,3a,75y,64.59h,88.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1aT9_aEBM1c3A0EN900Wsg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
And this sign (though being located right before Exit 19A, rather than on top of it):
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7286601,-86.602161,3a,16.9y,39.07h,91.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sledcFPN_4A0WxOhOoehagg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

No need to stick strictly to the MUTCD, because I'm pretty sure that this would be impossible to do should you try to stick to the MUTCD's guidelines.

[SignBridge]

Well I confess to being an old school sign guy who mostly believes in the MUTCD with some notable exceptions. Those I-565 signs work for me, though I would make a few minor changes. I think converting them to APL would be more confusing, but if Jakeroot wants to take a crack at it, I'm sure it'll be interesting to look at.

Re: the earlier photos of the South Africa signs. Interesting and clear in some cases but not others. Funny, the landscape in those photos looks a lot like Southern California.

[jakeroot]

It's an easy fix. Just replace the up arrow on the right with a right arrow.

AND move the sign gantry farther ahead, even just a few hundred feet, so as not to confuse drivers with the adjacent exit.

Assuming we have to follow the MUTCD, yes that might be the best course of action. Although the APL has a distance message on it, so I think drivers understand that it's a separate exit.

I have not yet found a situation where an APL, or a slight modification there-of, wouldn't work better than traditional arrows. If you know of any particular junction near you that you think would be awkward with an APL, please point me to it, and I'll show you how one might work.

I-565 eastbound, exits 19A-19C. I'd recommend doing the APLs as potential replacements for this sign:
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7245603,-86.6097444,3a,75y,64.59h,88.1t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1aT9_aEBM1c3A0EN900Wsg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
And this sign (though being located right before Exit 19A, rather than on top of it):
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.7286601,-86.602161,3a,16.9y,39.07h,91.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sledcFPN_4A0WxOhOoehagg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I will post my designs in the "Redesign This" thread.

[jakeroot]

Well I confess to being an old school sign guy who mostly believes in the MUTCD with some notable exceptions. Those I-565 signs work for me, though I would make a few minor changes. I think converting them to APL would be more confusing, but if Jakeroot wants to take a crack at it, I'm sure it'll be interesting to look at.

The way the MUTCD works right now is quite good. There's a way to sign just about anything. My problem with the MUTCD is a lack of consistency. Some signs have down arrows, some have up arrows. Some signs have no arrows at all. I just want a consistent message from sign to sign. I don't know if that's possible with down arrows.

Re: the earlier photos of the South Africa signs. Interesting and clear in some cases but not others. Funny, the landscape in those photos looks a lot like Southern California.

It's a testament to how drivers can get used to almost anything given enough time to adjust. South African signs used Highway Gothic at one point (instead of the current German DIN 1451), so besides the blue, it looked even more like California at one point.

[J N Winkler]

In regard to the I-565 signs, the MUTCD would not allow APLs or, for that matter, stippled-arrow diagrammatics, because no option lanes are involved.  Exits 19A and 19B are simple diverges, while Exit 19C is a two-lane exit without option lane.  The main thing I would change about the existing signs is to add a second downward-pointing arrow to the sign panels for Exit 19C.

I can see why Alabama DOT omits the second arrow on the right--having just one arrow marshals traffic into the left lane for Exit 19C, and so takes it out from behind traffic that is slowing to take Exits 19A and 19B--but it still amounts to not telling motorists the truth about where lanes go, and leads to unnecessary lane changes.  For example, the signs can easily fool a driver in the right-hand lane wishing to go south on Jefferson Street (no lane changes required) into changing lanes twice:  once to the left to avoid a possible drop at Exit 19A or 19B, and once again to the right to be in the correct lane for the turn south onto Jefferson Street.

[7/8]

This sign in the parking lot at the Hampton Inn in Dorval, QC misspelled "vehicle" as "vehicule". I didn't even notice the error until my Mom pointed it out.

[tckma]

This sign in the parking lot at the Hampton Inn in Dorval, QC misspelled "vehicle" as "vehicule". I didn't even notice the error until my Mom pointed it out.

Could be a native Canadian French speaker attempting English.  Although, they use the French "voiture" which specifically means "car," not "vehicle."

[PHLBOS]

Thread bump:
Last night, while detouring the traffic-jammed I-90/Mass Pike & US 20 in the Auburn area; I came across this gem along Old Worcester Road in Oxford.

[jakeroot]

This one is long gone, but when the McCallum Road Roundabouts were first installed in Abbotsford, BC, the southbound roundabout diagrammatic accidentally labelled both entrances to Hwy 1 as "WEST". I noticed the greenout on the current sign just a couple days ago, so I was curious to see what this relatively-new sign had wrong. Not an error I'm used to seeing. Gone since 2011.

https://goo.gl/jvJ2AZ

https://i.imgur.com/JFGTnbL.png

Unless I'm missing something; there's no design errors on the sign, only erroneous information.

This thread is better suited for that photo.

I think you're right. I get the two mixed up far too often. I viewed it as a design error initially because they used WEST twice (copy-paste error?) but, because it involves the information, you would be correct. I'll go throw it over there (and delete my post here).

[Buck87]

The y in Sandusky is lined up wrong.
This is at OH 58 in Amherst.


VS988

[kphoger]

The y in Sandusky is lined up wrong.
This is at OH 58 in Amherst.

Those drive me nuts!  We have one like that near me, over in El Dorado.

[SignBridge]

Ya' really have to wonder how in heck that can happen. Do people build these things with their eyes closed?

[jakeroot]

Ya' really have to wonder how in heck that can happen. Do people build these things with their eyes closed?

I think these errors can be attributed to either the installer not knowing any better, or, in the designer's case, a misinterpretation of the design standards. That said, the improbability of either of these being the case is probably the reason such errors are relatively unusual.

[kphoger]

Who could possibly think that it's OK for a lowercase y to not descend below the baseline?

[jakeroot]

Who could possibly think that it's OK for a lowercase y to not descend below the baseline?

It may very well be that they weren't thinking at all.

[Scott5114]

In the case of the El Dorado example, a lack of willingness to get a bigger sign blank is likely the problem.

[kkt]

Some cheap computer monitors and printers had lowercase letters with descenders up too high like that.  Of course, that was in the 1970s.

[tckma]

Driving through Virgilina, VA on the night of 12/27, at the intersection of southbound VA-49 and VA-96, I noticed the center "VA-96"  shield was installed upside-down (so that it looked like California's spade rather than Virginia's... whatever the heck shape that is).  GMSV at the intersection (I'm on an iPad since I'm still traveling so I'm not sure how to get a link to share) shows the shield installed correctly, but it looks like the road was undergoing some construction the last time the Google Street View camera went through.  My guess is that the sign was taken down temporarily and then reinstalled incorrectly.  Since the route number (96) looks the same whether the shield is upside down or not, the error went unnoticed (though given that Virginia's state route shield points down, I'm not sure how).

If I go back home that way (which is unlikely) during the daylight hours (also unlikely), I shall try to get a photo.  But if someone lives in or near that area, or is driving by that way in the near future, please feel free to take a photo for me instead.

[freebrickproductions]

As formulanone has stated, the AL 279 shield posted earlier in the thread ain't the only one that has the numbers going past the shield. Here's the other sign on AL 255 here in Huntsville, AL:
Erroneous Signage by freebrickproductions, on Flickr
Erroneous Signage by freebrickproductions, on Flickr
Erroneous Signage by freebrickproductions, on Flickr
Erroneous Signage by freebrickproductions, on Flickr
Erroneous Signage by freebrickproductions, on Flickr

Also, this sign just to the north of it (on the other side of AL 53) is still here. I had previously thought that the shields were demountable and the I-565 shield was just tacked-on afterwards, but it appears that it was actually made this way, as they're all printed on there! How ALDOT ever approved this and put it up without noticing this glaring error is beyond me:
Erroneous Signage by freebrickproductions, on Flickr
Erroneous Signage by freebrickproductions, on Flickr
Erroneous Signage by freebrickproductions, on Flickr

[US 89]

Here are a few I can think of off the top of my head, all within a few miles of each other.

-First, there's this one, with series B numbers used against a 3-digit background...on a 2-digit route! There are several others just like this one in the immediate area.
-The arrows on here just seem a little bit too long to me.
-And finally, this sign, featuring the biggest down arrows ever.

EDIT: fixed second link.

[Big John]

Here are a few I can think of off the top of my head, all within a few miles of each other.

First, there's this one, with series B numbers used against a 3-digit background...on a 2-digit route! There are several others just like this one in the immediate area.

The arrows on here just seem a little bit too long to me.

And finally, this sign, featuring the biggest down arrows ever.

The first post looks like series C numbers. And check your links as the 2nd and 3rd links are the same.

[formulanone]

As formulanone has stated, the AL 279 shield posted earlier in the thread ain't the only one that has the numbers going past the shield. Here's the other sign on AL 255 here in Huntsville, AL:
Erroneous Signage by freebrickproductions, on Flickr

(I've been meaning to post that for about forever-and-a-half, but can't seem to find it in my mess of images.)

[US 89]

Here are a few I can think of off the top of my head, all within a few miles of each other.

First, there's this one, with series B numbers used against a 3-digit background...on a 2-digit route! There are several others just like this one in the immediate area.

The arrows on here just seem a little bit too long to me.

And finally, this sign, featuring the biggest down arrows ever.

The first post looks like series C numbers. And check your links as the 2nd and 3rd links are the same.

Fixed.