Erroneous road signs

[tckma]

Directional sign to the Morgan Run Natural Environment Area.  What's with the slash?

[paulthemapguy]

Directional sign to the Morgan Run Natural Environment Area.  What's with the slash?

I think they were trying to differentiate "Run NEA" from "Run DMC" 

[tckma]

A bunch of these have started appearing throughout Carroll County, Maryland -- and ONLY in Carroll County.  New installations of this sign in other counties in the state have the correct grammar.



This one's on MD-140 eastbound approaching Hughes Shop Road in Westminster.  Two other locations I can think of off-hand are MD-140 westbound approaching the Taneytown Rotary, and MD-97 northbound just after the Howard/Carroll County Line and the CSX tracks.  I'm sure there are others.

[tckma]

A few years ago, during a sign replacement project, MD SHA posted an MD-832 reassurance marker on what is clearly MD-140.  It was up for about three days.  I submitted a signage error request at the SHA website, and the wayward reassurance marker was silently replaced that day, without comment to me.

I took a photo:

[KEVIN_224]

And up in Meriden, CT, on US 5 just north of I-691, you have another US 15...

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5441353,-72.7848341,3a,41.1y,46.78h,75.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sz-6LfPscWDAd-zGBiTnywA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

And then there's these, on CT 68 East a few miles south in Wallingford, CT:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.485644,-72.8089413,3a,21.5y,121.44h,80.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm7b_jChfYt6hgjiwdxay8w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

The CT 5 shield should be US 5.  And the same occurs in the other direction (CT 68 West), where there used to be a CT 5 and US 15 shield, before the US 15 shield was corrected with a CT 15 shield.

Let's not forget about I-84 and US Route 6 in West Hartford, CT. ConnDOT got lazy and used a few upside down CT Route 9 signs, which ends not too far west of this sign:

https://goo.gl/maps/KdCfqPe4ZTu

[Tom958]

Did they cut this sign in two with a freaking chop saw? Sure looks like it,lol.  GDOT's lack of comprehension of signage design principles reaches a new pinnacle.



Watch the infuriating story here:
http://www.cbs46.com/story/31893090/wild-video-of-confused-drivers-on-i-285-misplaced-sign-to-blame

Here's the pre-APL condition:



And its badly flawed replacement. Notice how it's located well behind the conventional sign even though it needed to be placed ahead.

[jakeroot]

Did they cut this sign in two with a freaking chop saw? Sure looks like it,lol.  GDOT's lack of comprehension of signage design principles reaches a new pinnacle.

http://i.imgur.com/S7sxMEL.jpg?1

If they cleaned up the cut-job, it's actually quite a nice sign. Rather reminiscent of some of the British Columbia APLs:



Photo mine.

[US71]

Noel, MO. The correct shield in in the background

[freebrickproductions]

Did they cut this sign in two with a freaking chop saw? Sure looks like it,lol.  GDOT's lack of comprehension of signage design principles reaches a new pinnacle.



Watch the infuriating story here:
http://www.cbs46.com/story/31893090/wild-video-of-confused-drivers-on-i-285-misplaced-sign-to-blame

Here's the pre-APL condition:



And it's badly flawed replacement. Notice how it's located well behind the conventional sign even though it needed to be placed ahead.

I also noticed that drivers had run over the gore-point sign due to how badly designed it was.

[machias]

Did they cut this sign in two with a freaking chop saw? Sure looks like it,lol.  GDOT's lack of comprehension of signage design principles reaches a new pinnacle.



Watch the infuriating story here:
http://www.cbs46.com/story/31893090/wild-video-of-confused-drivers-on-i-285-misplaced-sign-to-blame

Here's the pre-APL condition:



And it's badly flawed replacement. Notice how it's located well behind the conventional sign even though it needed to be placed ahead.

It's obvious that the new APL signs are extreme overkill for their application in many cases. I think the older installation worked much better for the application that that APL monstrosity. I can't help but think that APLs are economically motivated to increase revenue for the manufacturing companies.  Too large, too much green space, too much of a waste of money.

[myosh_tino]

Did they cut this sign in two with a freaking chop saw? Sure looks like it,lol.  GDOT's lack of comprehension of signage design principles reaches a new pinnacle.



Watch the infuriating story here:
http://www.cbs46.com/story/31893090/wild-video-of-confused-drivers-on-i-285-misplaced-sign-to-blame

Are you f'n kidding me?

The fact that GDOT says the sign is technically correct makes me want to  !

Just another example of how APLs cannot be the sole way for signing multi-lane exits with an option lane.  DOTs should have the flexibility to install traditional down-arrow signs if APLs don't work for any reason.

[jakeroot]

Just another example of how APLs cannot be the sole way for signing multi-lane exits with an option lane.

The CBS affiliate said the after-sign resulted in zero last-second decisions. Hardly scientific, but that says more about the placement of the sign than the APL itself.

DOTs should have the flexibility to install traditional down-arrow signs if APLs don't work for any reason.

Not to sound uppity, but APLs can work anywhere (see basically every redesign of mine in the "redesign this" thread). There just needs to be more flexibility in terms of how the signs can be laid out. The manual is far too imperious as-is.

[cl94]

The Georgia example is nothing more than dumb sign placement. Gantry should have been placed 500 feet earlier. GDOT has been notoriously bad with their implementation of APLs.

[Tom958]

The Georgia example is nothing more than dumb sign placement. Gantry should have been placed 500 feet earlier.

True, except... a pretty good case could be made that there's a need to display legends for both 85 north and 85 south plus their respective control destinations since the divergence in the 85 ramp is so close. That's why there was a split sign when the conventional signage was there. In fact, IIRC, that split sign was installed after a few years for that very reason. And of course the control city for the left fork couldn't be something nice and short like Macon, could it? 

On the one piece APL, the 85 south/Columbus/Montgomery legend was too big to fit where it needed to go. As a result, in addition to the obvious "crap, I just passed my exit!" problem, there may have also been confusion as to whether 85 south was to the right or straight ahead.

GDOT has been notoriously bad with their implementation of APLs.

Yes, bad, and MUTCD noncompliant, but also creative. Months ago I posted about this signage sequence twenty miles further along 285. It's not directly comparable, but it demonstrates the appropriate-- and necessary-- level of creativity.

There's another possibility, too: perhaps the sign was intended to be installed at the correct location, but then it was decided to install it much further back, behind the existing sign instead of in front. GDOT has been doing that a lot lately. Then... they didn't bother to redesign the sign accordingly. I know from firsthand experience that it's happened before. 

[JJBers]

https://goo.gl/maps/MuTUbqHDzTF2
Sign is crooked, the road it points you to is dead ends at a river

[roadfro]

Did they cut this sign in two with a freaking chop saw? Sure looks like it,lol.  GDOT's lack of comprehension of signage design principles reaches a new pinnacle.



Watch the infuriating story here:
http://www.cbs46.com/story/31893090/wild-video-of-confused-drivers-on-i-285-misplaced-sign-to-blame

Are you f'n kidding me?

The fact that GDOT says the sign is technically correct makes me want to  !

Ditto. While the arrows are correct, the sign text layout was just bad and not in keeping with APL designs. Also, APL signs should be placed at the theoretical gore point, and this was downstream of that.

Just another example of how APLs cannot be the sole way for signing multi-lane exits with an option lane.  DOTs should have the flexibility to install traditional down-arrow signs if APLs don't work for any reason.

I don't know about giving blanket flexibility for down arrows. But I do agree that some flexibility on APLs may be needed in cases of quick successive exits, etc.

[Jet380]

If you want to stay on State Route 77, you need to... do anything you like apparently!

https://www.google.com.au/maps/@-31.8595323,115.8110964,3a,75y,221.94h,83.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sT6YZkBKgeRiv1LBV-PA5MA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
The cross road is meant to be SR 78.

[formulanone]

The cross road is meant to be SR 78.

I wonder if they just pulled too many 77s from the rack...do they keep some in stock?

[WillWeaverRVA]

So VDOT's Richmond district has been experimenting with miniature unisigns in various places. Unfortunately, this one upgraded SR 638 to a primary route. I'm not sure if it's still there; all the other signs at this intersection are correct.

[74/171FAN]

So VDOT's Richmond district has been experimenting with miniature unisigns in various places. Unfortunately, this one upgraded SR 638 to a primary route. I'm not sure if it's still there; all the other signs at this intersection are correct.

Are you sure this is somewhat new?  I do have a photo of the correct shields taken in 2013 coming from US 360 Business EB.

[WillWeaverRVA]

So VDOT's Richmond district has been experimenting with miniature unisigns in various places. Unfortunately, this one upgraded SR 638 to a primary route. I'm not sure if it's still there; all the other signs at this intersection are correct.

Are you sure this is somewhat new?  I do have a photo of the correct shields taken in 2013 coming from US 360 Business EB.

Yeah, it's fairly new - this is actually on US 360 Business WB. The EB signs have always been correct. I think these signs were put up late in 2014.

[tckma]

Saw this on Wednesday, when I was running errands in this part of Columbia (which I rarely am).

WTF is this?!?!?!?

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1750252,-76.8606512,3a,75y,17.16h,91.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suXVTlszuFV4_jhcJ8KW9pQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

They realized that US-29 is not a Maryland state route, but instead of grabbing a US Route shield, they replaced "Maryland" with "Route" in the Maryland state highway shield?  What a half-assed job.  "But I was using my WHOLE ass!" -Homer Simpson

[HTM Duke]

An error with the directional banners on this assembly (express lanes exit from I-495 to Gallows Rd); it should be south-north instead of east-west.
https://goo.gl/maps/PmLcUa9Dpq62

[roadfro]

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1750252,-76.8606512,3a,75y,17.16h,91.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suXVTlszuFV4_jhcJ8KW9pQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1

They realized that US-29 is not a Maryland state route, but instead of grabbing a US Route shield, they replaced "Maryland" with "Route" in the Maryland state highway shield?  What a half-assed job.  "But I was using my WHOLE ass!" -Homer Simpson

Looks like they probably produced the MD 29 shield, recognized the error, then put on a "white out" patch to correct before posting in the field--path of least resistance? Notice how the white background within the "route" section is brighter/different.

[freebrickproductions]

The AL 20 shield should have a JCT plaque above it, since you're intersection AL 20, and not actively on it at this point:
AL 20/ALT US 72 by freebrickproductions, on Flickr
This is in Courtland, AL.