Sign changes submitted to DOT by roadgeeks that actually got changed

[Ned Weasel]

ARDOT will never admit I was right, but the  "split" exit at 71B/ 112 off I-49 was confusing so I suggested guide signs to supplement the exit sign. "Not needed" is what they told me, but a few months later guide signs DID appear.

What about the missing number in "EXITS          MPH"?

[US71]

ARDOT will never admit I was right, but the  "split" exit at 71B/ 112 off I-49 was confusing so I suggested guide signs to supplement the exit sign. "Not needed" is what they told me, but a few months later guide signs DID appear.

What about the missing number in "EXITS          MPH"?

That was right after the signs had been installed and ARDOT(or likely the contractor) hadn't finished the signs.

[Max Rockatansky]

Not a signage change but there was a closure on CA 198 recently west of Coalinga due to a fire.  Originally Caltrans District 6 had their social media alert post say there was no detour available.  Subsequently I posted Los Gatos Creek Road and Sign County Route J1 as alternates on a reply tab.  I was surprised to find out later in the day they actually ran with it and posted them as detours around the fire. 

[Ned Weasel]

I've mentioned this several times as one of my least favorite things KDOT has done sign-wise, but it actually used to be worse:

https://goo.gl/maps/VEMVBcj7FVYxdgdt7

On southbound US 69 approaching the 135th Street exit in Overland Park, KS, there used to be no mention whatsoever of the right-hand lane being dropped at the exit.  I did mention it to the city, and possibly the state, although my suggestion was to go with the MUTCD-standard overhead signs, or at the very least, install a sign saying "RIGHT LANE EXIT ONLY" or "RIGHT LANE MUST EXIT."  I still dislike the vague "RIGHT LANE ONLY" wording, but I haven't said anything about it to Overland Park or KDOT, because at least those signs are an improvement over no mention at all.

It's worth noting that the earlier southbound configuration of the US 69 interchanges at Blue Valley Parkway and 135th Street was such that both southbound lanes of Blue Valley Parkway continued onto US 69, and US 69 was tapered down to a single lane in advance of the convergence, and the single lane coming from US 69 was dropped at 135th Street.  Also, back when this configuration was present, US 169 was routed along K-150/135th Street from I-35 to US 69, ran concurrently with US 69 for that approximately 3/4-mile distance, and ran along Blue Valley Parkway and then Metcalf Avenue north to US 56.  Blue Valley Parkway only received its name when US 169 was re-routed, because the street needed a name, and I guess Overland Park didn't want to do what Olathe did when US 56 was re-routed to follow I-35 all the way south to Gardner (https://goo.gl/maps/fhWf8NJQ7hGGxCdQ7).

[US71]

I caught an error in North Little Rock 3 years ago that ARDOT denied was there. Right after the new Arkansas River Bridge was opened,,the sign contractor posted a US 10 instead of ARKANSAS 10. ARDOT denied the error until I showed them a photo

[-- US 175 --]

Years ago, after a newer set of BGSes were installed in the Dallas area, I noticed the US 175 EB exit to Second Ave.-Bruton Rd. had the BGS at the exit as "Second Ave.-Burton Rd.".  I called some office, likely the Dallas regional TxDOT office, to tell somebody about the sign being misspelled.  IIRR, the person taking the call didn't sound too interested, and likely thinking that I was bothering them.  But, within the next couple of weeks, I noticed that the "u" and "r" had been greened-out with an "ru" over it.  So it was fixed, but not completely replaced.

I also did something similar in the city of Dallas, while the city was in the process of rolling out new street blades that used the Clearview style.  A street at the end of my block, Herschel, had a replacement street blade one day.  It looked strange, and I looked at it again--there were 2 "L"s at the end.  So I got with the city about it.  They didn't sound like they'd jump up right then and change it.  But within about 3 weeks, I noticed a replacement "Herschel" with the correct spelling.

In more recent years, a similar thing happened, as a replacement Clearview street blade went up on Oates Dr., but Dallas crews put up, of course, "Oats", on the sign.  I did the same thing as before to report it, but I believe it took longer to get the corrected "Oates" sign out there and up.

[Avalanchez71]

I advised TDOT that maybe they should have a transition sign showing the US 412 ends and the SR 99 begins (technically US 412 is SR 99).  They ended up putting US 412 End signage and in the opposite direction they put up a BEGIN sign.  I complained that in the opposite direction there is no US 412 sign for miles after one turns on to it if they get off the I-65 exit.  US 412 begins as I-65.

[MCRoads]

To be honest, I haven't found enough of a mistake to warrant contacting the DOT, but I have reported downed signs and signs blocked by trees, etc. the only real mistake I have ever reported to the DOT (it might just have been the city roads department) was at an intersection where the cross street changes names. The sign did not indicate this, so I sent an email about it. I received an automated "Thank you for your concern, well look into it"  email, then an email that basically said "yeah, your right. We are about to redo the intersection, so we will be sure to fix it then."  Sure enough, after construction finished, there was a new sign, acknowledging both roads.

[machias]

I like to think I facilitated quite a few changes to signs in New York State:

1. Interstate to Thruway approach guide signs now include Albany and Buffalo in Regions 3 and 4 after I had a lengthy discussion with NYSDOT about this
2. I helped get numerous signs corrected, especially in Region 2. One set of overhead signs in Rome, N.Y. for "WEST 46"  were patched to the correct "SOUTH 46" .  "NORTH NY 8 -12 / Downtown Utica-Watertown"  was corrected to remove the cardinal directions
3. In Region 4, left Exit 4 from I-590 used to point to the mainline instead of the exit ramp

[MarkF]

I emailed CalTrans that the third exit arrow (leftmost on the sign) on the 2 lane NB 405 exit to CA 55 shouldn't be there, and they greened it out:
https://goo.gl/maps/tS7qjTFgSC72PNbs9

[jakeroot]

I had WSDOT fix the lettering on a bunch of signs:

This sign was posted a while back, and received several redesigns. WSDOT has gone and fixed the signs, plus several others:

Washington's first DDI is getting god-awful signs. 

Source

Screenshot from my dashcam. Note both the original and redesigned signs use one letter size for the Marvin Road cardinal direction. Haven't seen that for a while:

[Tom958]

In Atlanta when the new I-85-285 interchange was opened, GDOT erected a new, grossly misleading overhead assembly on eastbound 285 not quite a mile from the first 85 offramp. I went downtown to GDOT's offices to meet with them about it in person. Turns out that not only was the designed layout misleading, but the gantry was installed several hundred feet upstream from its intended location, before the added right lane that the assembly referred to had been developed, causing the entire assembly to be, in effect, shifted one lane to the left. The taper for that added right lane was in a curve; I suspect that it was decided that if the gantry was placed at its original location, it'd be unclear to which lane each down arrow referred to. So they decided to move the whole thing upstream to a tangent section, but forgot to redesign the signage accordingly.

A few weeks later, the gantry was gone, to be replaced a few days later with something completely different. Specifically, while the original installation included exit only panels over each of the two rightmost lanes, the new one had none at all.

This happened in 1987. The gantry is now gone, victim of the pre-Olympic widening of 285.

[TEG24601]

I have informed WSDOT about the mis-labeling of SR 525 from N/S to E/W on the LSGs on Alderwood Mall Parkway.  They said the would look into it, but haven't seen a change yet.


In my city, I got the city to install sharrows on a road frequently used by bikes, with no shoulders.  I have tried and failed to get "Share the Road" signs posted, or at least the Horse/Bike warning signs.  I did get general pedestrian crossing signs replaced with school crossing signs... only to have the school close a few years later.  Also got some of the skinny "Stop for Pedestrian" signs for the crosswalks adjacent to the school, only for them to be mounted on the poles under the crossing signs, instead of in the middle of the road.  So some small victories.


Still want WSDOT too rotate our FYA light they installed, from being on the Highway to being on the Cross Street, and to add it to our other intersections in a similar manner, and implement flashing lights after 9pm, when there isn't ferry traffic.

[jakeroot]

Still want WSDOT too rotate our FYA light they installed, from being on the Highway to being on the Cross Street, and to add it to our other intersections in a similar manner, and implement flashing lights after 9pm, when there isn't ferry traffic.

Which intersection is that? WSDOT seems to have a fetish with protected-only signals along two lane state highways, changing them to FYAs only as necessary.

[TEG24601]

Still want WSDOT too rotate our FYA light they installed, from being on the Highway to being on the Cross Street, and to add it to our other intersections in a similar manner, and implement flashing lights after 9pm, when there isn't ferry traffic.

Which intersection is that? WSDOT seems to have a fetish with protected-only signals along two lane state highways, changing them to FYAs only as necessary.

SR 525 and Fish Rd/Main St. in Freeland.  The entire reason the community rallied around getting a traffic signal in the first place was to stop people cutting in front of ferry traffic, from the oncoming lane (true for most of our traffic signals), and adding the FYA seemed like such a bad idea.  However, since this intersection has protected lefts from Fish/Main, it makes much more sense for the FYAs to be on those roads, and keep the lefts fully protected from 525.

[thenetwork]

My greatest contribution to the roadgeekery world was about 10-15 years ago in Cleveland, Ohio...

ODOT had always listed in their records SR-3 duplexing with US-42 from Ridge Road in Parma to Detroit Avenue just west of downtown.  However, actual signage since at least the early 70s always stated that SR-3 ENDED at US-42/Pearl Road in Parma.

At the time there was a weekly column in the Cleveland Plain Dealer which covered the where's and whys of Road issues in NEOH.  I posed the question to the column and they got a hold of ODOT.

Not too long after that, the decades-old error was fixed and SR-3 was officially co-signed along US-42 to Downtown -- although the BGSs along I-71 and I-90 have yet to include the SR-3 shield at their respective exits with US-42.

Not a bad accomplishment at an intersection I once lived by for a few years!!

[Mdcastle]

In Minnesota signs for US 169 north of Virginia were removed after I reported them.

With the US 14 project, a plaque reading "To" instead of "South" US 218 was appeared. That caused a minor stir here with us wondering if the terminus had moved and it wound up being a MnDOT mistake that they fixed when we asked them about it.

[jakeroot]

Still want WSDOT too rotate our FYA light they installed, from being on the Highway to being on the Cross Street, and to add it to our other intersections in a similar manner, and implement flashing lights after 9pm, when there isn't ferry traffic.

Which intersection is that? WSDOT seems to have a fetish with protected-only signals along two lane state highways, changing them to FYAs only as necessary.

SR 525 and Fish Rd/Main St. in Freeland.  The entire reason the community rallied around getting a traffic signal in the first place was to stop people cutting in front of ferry traffic, from the oncoming lane (true for most of our traffic signals), and adding the FYA seemed like such a bad idea.  However, since this intersection has protected lefts from Fish/Main, it makes much more sense for the FYAs to be on those roads, and keep the lefts fully protected from 525.

I see. Are you saying people are turning left onto Main and cutting through Freeland to jump ahead of slow-moving WA-525 traffic?

The area doesn't seem like it needs any protected signals, for any roads. Just a bunch of two-lane roads. Hardly worth protecting a left turn from a single lane of oncoming traffic.

[JoePCool14]

Recently I sent in a notice to IDOT to fix two "IL-45" shields installed by a contractor at the intersection of Milwaukee Ave. and Deerfield Rd. in Riverwoods that should've been US-45. One in each direction. Surprisingly, they responded and fixed the signs fairly quickly after notifying them. IDOT finally gets a positive point from me!

[hbelkins]

Recently I sent in a notice to IDOT to fix two "IL-45" shields installed by a contractor at the intersection of Milwaukee Ave. and Deerfield Rd. in Riverwoods that should've been US-45. One in each direction. Surprisingly, they responded and fixed the signs fairly quickly after notifying them. IDOT finally gets a positive point from me!

Most of us would have preferred that the errors be left unchanged. There are a few folks who hesitate to post pictures of old signs for fear some public servant will see the post and have the signs replaced.

[JoePCool14]

Recently I sent in a notice to IDOT to fix two "IL-45" shields installed by a contractor at the intersection of Milwaukee Ave. and Deerfield Rd. in Riverwoods that should've been US-45. One in each direction. Surprisingly, they responded and fixed the signs fairly quickly after notifying them. IDOT finally gets a positive point from me!

Most of us would have preferred that the errors be left unchanged. There are a few folks who hesitate to post pictures of old signs for fear some public servant will see the post and have the signs replaced.

The errors were there for easily over a year. I had had enough of seeing them there, sorry.

And no need to worry about losing any sign relics in this case. IDOT is pretty aggressive on replacing signs, and this intersection had been rebuilt recently anyways.

[ilpt4u]

Seeing some of these posts, makes me think I should try contacting MoDOT again about the I-70 EB Express Lane Entrance signage in St Louis. This gives me hope that an email might make it to someone who understands that the current signage is at least lacking and at most misleading

The sign bothers me every time I pass under it, usually coming back to Southern Illinois from STL Airport

[crispy93]

I've gotten NYSDOT R11 to correct a brand-new overhead sign that had an I-295 shield instead of I-278. It's since been fixed. Also got the NYCDOT to remove an erroneous NY 27 shield on the West Side Highway (NY 9A). Don't know how that got there or how no one noticed in the two years it was there.

I've gotten NYSDOT to replace some missing signs here and there, nothing spectacular. Also had them installed a RIGHT LANE MUST EXIT sign in Poughkeepsie. The overhead Exit Only sign is right AT the exit even though there's ample room in the preceding 1/2 mile for an overhead sign.

[machias]

Years ago I advised NYSDOT of "State Speed Limit 65" signs on Interstate 81 in Oswego County. They were replaced within a week with standard "Speed Limit 65" signs.

[silverback1065]

I got INDOT to correctly sign US 35 at the interchange with US 31, they forgot to show 35 turning up the ramps to join 31. I tried to get them to fix the "East Blvd" signs for another exit on that road, it was supposed to be called "boulevard street" but they said they knew it was wrong, but noone else seems to have noticed and the cost is too high to fix.