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

[mrsman]

Frankly, I don't think this sign is likely to be a good engineering countermeasure and may indeed be one of the poster children for controlled experimentation.  The symbol design is not simple and probably would not survive tachistoscope testing.  If the owning agency (City of Omaha, presumably) doesn't wish to address the conflict by installing a raised island (which can cause queuing issues at peak periods), I think it would be appropriate to consider converting the less important side road (Nicholas Street) into a cul-de-sac, as the subdivision it feeds has other outlets.

Perhaps they could totally eliminate the dedicated left turn lane for traffic towards Nicholas St? Have a break in the line to allow traffic to enter the left turn lane for Miracle Hills Dr, but then have a regular TWLTL south of that point. There might be some times of the day when left-turning traffic backs up into the TWLTL-portion of the roadway, forcing northbound traffic to turn left from the left through lane, but I hardly think this would be a major issue.

Worst-case scenario, just install a raised curb with flexi-posts along the double-yellow line. Traffic could enter Nicholas Street from southbound only, but could exit Nicholas St in either direction (using the TWLTL to merge into northbound traffic, local laws permitting).

Side-note: can anyone confirm for me that the double turns off Miracle Hills Dr have to yield to pedestrians? They use green orbs, but I suppose they could stay red during the WALK phase.

I beleive the sign is merely left as a warning.  If traffic on 120th wants to make a left on Miracle Hills, they should be aware that they should not drive in the TWLTL to reach the left turn lane.  There could be traffic that wants to make the opposing turn on Nichols.  At the same time, there may be good reasons why putting in posts or an island is not appropriate.

If I had to caption the sign, I would suggest "OPPOSING LEFT TURNS".  The picture itself is very descriptive of the situation and definitely unique.

A somewhat analagous situation happens at Sunset/Beverly Glen in Los Angeles.  Due to BG being broken up, there is heavy left turns.  But the left to northbound BG is heaviest in afternoon rush hour and the left to southbound BG is heavies in morning rush hour.  I can tell you from experience driving by this intersection regularly 20 years ago that local custom is during busy times to use the TWTL as a staging area for the left turners.  This provides more space for turning cars when needed and mitigates any backup on the thru traffic on Sunset.  As can be seen in the GSV link, the postal truck and the SUV are using the TWTL as staging for the upcoming left turn.  The thru lanes are clear.  IF there were an island here, the staging left turn cars would be blocking the left lane.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0814833,-118.435026,3a,37.5y,17.68h,81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s93cWuSiMKHIyQxhiytPhcw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-US


As far as Jake's qn about the pedestrians, I have never been to this intersection, but it is interesting that the cross-walks are not marked.  I don't remember seeing before a signalized intersection, with pedestrian signals, that doesn't mark out the crosswalks.  I also note that there is an electronic no right turn sign.  Presumably this is lit while pedestrians are crossing, but I don't know if it will mean the peds crossing Miracle Hills or the peds crossing 120th.  (Sort of a no turn on red, but only while peds are present, provided they push the button.)  There is nothing similar on the left side though.  I would imagine that peds crossing will likely be at the same time as the green light, which is why there are no left arrows present, and right arrows are in doghouse form [presumably right arrow is lit while corresponding left arrow from 120th to Miracle Hills is lit].

[MNHighwayMan]

Posting signs modified due to construction is almost cheating. Nevertheless, here's one with the normal right arrow covered with a custom u-turn arrow made from what appears to be an advance left arrow.



This is on US-63 at MN-16 west of Spring Valley.

[J3ebrules]

Came across this lovely specimen outside the Dunkin in Westmont, NJ...


https://photos.app.goo.gl/yT7NZENzJyTNsqCx8

[Rothman]

From NYSDOT Main Office:

[Kniwt]

US 59 near Atchison, Kansas. Don't let anyone tell you there's nothing to see in Kansas.

[J3ebrules]

US 59 near Atchison, Kansas. Don't let anyone tell you there's nothing to see in Kansas.

I mean, New York and Chicago have pizza tourism.

[Michael]

I was driving westbound on the Arterial in Auburn today, and I noticed that the left-side supplemental pedestrian crossing sign seen here is mirrored from the standard sign to show the figure pointing toward the road.  I've never noticed this before, and kept an eye out for other signs like this.  The left-side sign at the far side crosswalk is mirrored as well.  In the other direction, I saw at least one set of signs with a mirrored left-side school sign, but they're too new and aren't in Street View.

I thought I'd look in Weedsport on NY 34 where I know there's a set of pedestrian crossing signs with left-side supplemental signs, and they're mirrored too (northbound, southbound).

[hbelkins]

Posted this in the Road Sign Uno thread, but thought it ought to go on display here. Tennessee used to have some very funky looking US route markers, like this one for US 70N. I've seen them in this area of the state, and back east near Pigeon Forge as well. I suspect they've all been replaced by now.

[roadfro]

I was driving westbound on the Arterial in Auburn today, and I noticed that the left-side supplemental pedestrian crossing sign seen here is mirrored from the standard sign to show the figure pointing toward the road.  I've never noticed this before, and kept an eye out for other signs like this.  The left-side sign at the far side crosswalk is mirrored as well.  In the other direction, I saw at least one set of signs with a mirrored left-side school sign, but they're too new and aren't in Street View.

I thought I'd look in Weedsport on NY 34 where I know there's a set of pedestrian crossing signs with left-side supplemental signs, and they're mirrored too (northbound, southbound).

This isn't so unique, or at least not for me. Many areas in Nevada do this almost every time a ped crossing sign is posted on the left side of the road out in the median. For Reno-Sparks area, and increasingly elsewhere, a reversed ped crossing symbol is posted at virtually every intersection at which an RRFB has been installed.

The national MUTCD allows this as a blanket option for symbol signs in 2A.06 Design of Signs:

09 All symbols shall be unmistakably similar to, or mirror images of, the adopted symbol signs, all of which are shown in the "Standard Highway Signs and Markings" book. Symbols and colors shall not be modified unless otherwise provided in this Manual. All symbols and colors for signs not shown in the "Standard Highway Signs and Markings" book shall follow the procedures for experimentation and change described in Section 1A.10.

Option:
10 Although the standard design of symbol signs cannot be modified, the orientation of the symbol may be changed to better reflect the direction of travel, if appropriate.

[jakeroot]

I was driving westbound on the Arterial in Auburn today, and I noticed that the left-side supplemental pedestrian crossing sign seen here is mirrored from the standard sign to show the figure pointing toward the road.  I've never noticed this before, and kept an eye out for other signs like this.  The left-side sign at the far side crosswalk is mirrored as well.  In the other direction, I saw at least one set of signs with a mirrored left-side school sign, but they're too new and aren't in Street View.

I thought I'd look in Weedsport on NY 34 where I know there's a set of pedestrian crossing signs with left-side supplemental signs, and they're mirrored too (northbound, southbound).

This isn't so unique, or at least not for me. Many areas in Nevada do this almost every time a ped crossing sign is posted on the left side of the road out in the median. For Reno-Sparks area, and increasingly elsewhere, a reversed ped crossing symbol is posted at virtually every intersection at which an RRFB has been installed.

I will have to echo Michael's sentiments. Most ped crossing signs in my area of WA face the same direction. There are some mirrored examples, but they're not too common from what I've seen. British Columbia, on the other hand, does use mirrored crossing signs. There, it seems to be the norm.

[jakeroot]

Not sure I've seen this before. This left turn in Seattle, which is a simple yield, has a "LEFT TURN MUST YIELD" sign. My understanding was that these, at least in practice, were reserved for left turns at traffic lights. There used to be a yield sign in the median (with an accompanying "THIS LANE" plaque), but it was inexplicably removed a couple years ago.

[kphoger]

US 59 near Atchison, Kansas. Don't let anyone tell you there's nothing to see in Kansas.

I grew up in a small Kansas town, where the only chain restaurant was a Pizza Hut.  Even still, I'm not sure I could call it a tourist activity.

(Side note:  Pizza restaurants are usually busy places on a Friday night.  But, in my hometown, the Pizza Hut closed early on Fridays in the Fall..  Why?  Because practically the entire town was at the high school football game, so Pizza Hut got hardly any business then.  They'd re-open after the game was over.)

[plain]

Not sure I've seen this before. This left turn in Seattle, which is a simple yield, has a "LEFT TURN MUST YIELD" sign. My understanding was that these, at least in practice, were reserved for left turns at traffic lights. There used to be a yield sign in the median (with an accompanying "THIS LANE" plaque), but it was inexplicably removed a couple years ago.

Did the left turn here formally have the right of way but then changed? That's the only thing I can think of.

[Jovet]

Never seen anything like this before.
Only thing I can think of to explain it is that you've got a two-way left turn lane for a little bit before this point, but the marking suddenly changes at this intersection right before the signal. Perhaps for the instance where there could be backups in the signalized left turn, this indicates that you might encounter opposing traffic trying to turn left? Not sure that it's actually needed.

Yeah, I think it's more of a warning about the traffic/direction conflict in the left turn lane with the short turn lanes.  Since there is a sign in only one direction, I think it's a specific warning for traffic turning left onto Miracle Hills Drive to not cross the center line into and blocking the other left turn lane.

Frankly, I don't think this sign is likely to be a good engineering countermeasure and may indeed be one of the poster children for controlled experimentation.  The symbol design is not simple and probably would not survive tachistoscope testing.  If the owning agency (City of Omaha, presumably) doesn't wish to address the conflict by installing a raised island (which can cause queuing issues at peak periods), I think it would be appropriate to consider converting the less important side road (Nicholas Street) into a cul-de-sac, as the subdivision it feeds has other outlets.

As a resident, it makes me curious why the (warning) sign was warranted in the first place.  I'm curious what the problem it's warning about actually is, and how common it is.  I am skeptical that there is a "huge problem" that warrants some of the costly measures discussed here.  I don't think the symbol is bad, it just may not be obvious to most people what it is or represents.  Once you know, it should be easy to recognize–the thick double curved line representing the center line is pretty distinctive.

Side-note: can anyone confirm for me that the double turns off Miracle Hills Dr have to yield to pedestrians? They use green orbs, but I suppose they could stay red during the WALK phase.

I could find out.  If I remember correctly, there is no pedestrian phase across 120th street without pedestrian actuation.  I don't see pedestrians ever in this area, so I can't say what happens for sure without studying it some more.  By law turning traffic always has to yield to pedestrians, so I suspect any pedestrian phase coincides with green balls to turn right.  However, there is a NO RIGHT TURN blank-out sign which forbids all right turns, even when Red.  Visibility of traffic coming up the hill from the left is poor, so turns are only permitted when the light is Green.  That is not the case at a few other similar intersections in the city.

[Jovet]

Not sure I've seen this before. This left turn in Seattle, which is a simple yield, has a "LEFT TURN MUST YIELD" sign. My understanding was that these, at least in practice, were reserved for left turns at traffic lights. There used to be a yield sign in the median (with an accompanying "THIS LANE" plaque), but it was inexplicably removed a couple years ago.

That looks to me like a reminder that all left turns must yield to oncoming traffic because it does not stop.  Should be common sense, but accident history there might indicate otherwise.

[jakeroot]

Not sure I've seen this before. This left turn in Seattle, which is a simple yield, has a "LEFT TURN MUST YIELD" sign. My understanding was that these, at least in practice, were reserved for left turns at traffic lights. There used to be a yield sign in the median (with an accompanying "THIS LANE" plaque), but it was inexplicably removed a couple years ago.

Did the left turn here formally have the right of way but then changed? That's the only thing I can think of.

Not as far back as I can tell. GSV shows the left turn as yielding back through 2007, with that same sign still there (though on the left, beneath the "FREEWAY ENTRANCE" sign).

That looks to me like a reminder that all left turns must yield to oncoming traffic because it does not stop.  Should be common sense, but accident history there might indicate otherwise.

The sign may be the result of the many frontage roads in the area. (The off-ramp immediately to the south) has priority over the frontage road (5th Ave NE), so my assumption was that people may mistake the on-ramp as also having priority over the frontage road. Also, this is the only frontage road along this stretch of I-5 that is two-way, so people may not be realizing that 5th does have cars coming towards them that do have priority.

All of these things should be obvious, but sometimes drivers do amaze me.

[jakeroot]

Side-note: can anyone confirm for me that the double turns off Miracle Hills Dr have to yield to pedestrians? They use green orbs, but I suppose they could stay red during the WALK phase.

As far as Jake's qn about the pedestrians, I have never been to this intersection, but it is interesting that the cross-walks are not marked.  I don't remember seeing before a signalized intersection, with pedestrian signals, that doesn't mark out the crosswalks.  I also note that there is an electronic no right turn sign.  Presumably this is lit while pedestrians are crossing, but I don't know if it will mean the peds crossing Miracle Hills or the peds crossing 120th.  (Sort of a no turn on red, but only while peds are present, provided they push the button.)  There is nothing similar on the left side though.  I would imagine that peds crossing will likely be at the same time as the green light, which is why there are no left arrows present, and right arrows are in doghouse form [presumably right arrow is lit while corresponding left arrow from 120th to Miracle Hills is lit].

I could find out.  If I remember correctly, there is no pedestrian phase across 120th street without pedestrian actuation.  I don't see pedestrians ever in this area, so I can't say what happens for sure without studying it some more.  By law turning traffic always has to yield to pedestrians, so I suspect any pedestrian phase coincides with green balls to turn right.  However, there is a NO RIGHT TURN blank-out sign which forbids all right turns, even when Red.  Visibility of traffic coming up the hill from the left is poor, so turns are only permitted when the light is Green.  That is not the case at a few other similar intersections in the city.

Thanks, guys. I got the feeling based on the lack of marked crosswalks that pedestrians probably weren't walking through here in large numbers, but double-yields to pedestrians (at least for left turns) are relatively uncommon, so I felt I should inquire. Usually in these situations, the crosswalk against the left turn would be eliminated, so props to them for leaving it in. Although I'm thinking that the engineers weren't really considering how pedestrians would interact with the traffic at all (especially with a double-left yield), hence the lack of crosswalk markings; they (perhaps) unintentionally left in that crossing signal when other engineers might have otherwise deleted it when that double left turn got involved.

Funny thing to me, based on your reply Jovet, is that perhaps there has never been a pedestrian who crossed (with a walk sign) against that double left turn. Perhaps traffic does have to yield, but it has yet to happen! No one truly knows what would happen.

[hbelkins]

US 59 near Atchison, Kansas. Don't let anyone tell you there's nothing to see in Kansas.

I grew up in a small Kansas town, where the only chain restaurant was a Pizza Hut.  Even still, I'm not sure I could call it a tourist activity.

(Side note:  Pizza restaurants are usually busy places on a Friday night.  But, in my hometown, the Pizza Hut closed early on Fridays in the Fall..  Why?  Because practically the entire town was at the high school football game, so Pizza Hut got hardly any business then.  They'd re-open after the game was over.)

Businesses pay to have their names on those signs.

[D-Dey65]

I'm still trying to find anything in MUTCD on off-color Type 3 object markers. I've still seen recent versions of black and white ones, along with red and white ones, and non-construction use of orange and white ones.

http://www.trafficsign.us/shs/om/om3.pdf

Woodbine Avenue in Northport, NY has some of the red and white ones, but I can't find it on GSV.

[jakeroot]

Woodbine Avenue in Northport, NY has some of the red and white ones, but I can't find it on GSV.

I've also seen red and white object markers, but only along one street on Mercer Island, near Seattle.

[roadman65]

https://goo.gl/maps/2KFwjkndqyDPPQ3n8
Downtown Brattleboro with route shields posted on top of a store has to be the most odd I have ever seen.

[roadfro]

I'm still trying to find anything in MUTCD on off-color Type 3 object markers. I've still seen recent versions of black and white ones, along with red and white ones, and non-construction use of orange and white ones.

http://www.trafficsign.us/shs/om/om3.pdf

Woodbine Avenue in Northport, NY has some of the red and white ones, but I can't find it on GSV.

You won't find anything in the MUTCD about Type 3 object markers that aren't black and yellow. Chapter 6 discusses the white and orange ones–referred to there as "vertical panels", in the context of other channelizing devices for temporary traffic control (such as cones, drums, tubular markers and barricades).

[hbelkins]

Black and white object markers are an old standard. Kentucky used them years ago.

[D-Dey65]

Black and white object markers are an old standard. Kentucky used them years ago.

So did a lot of the country, usually along any shoulder of a road with white stripes. Most of the ones I've seen in recent times have been old ones on concrete bridges and overpasses, but to my surprise even newer ones get those.

The standard used to be that the black and white ones were for the right sides of the roads, and the black and yellow ones were for the left sides of the roads, assuming they were on a divided highway.

You won't find anything in the MUTCD about Type 3 object markers that aren't black and yellow. Chapter 6 discusses the white and orange ones—referred to there as "vertical panels", in the context of other channelizing devices for temporary traffic control (such as cones, drums, tubular markers and barricades).

Guess that explains the ones on the gate to the Juniper Springs Recreational Area off of FL 40 in Ocala National Forest:


https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Juniper_Springs_Recreation_Area_Gate-3.jpg


https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Juniper_Springs_Recreation_Area_Gate-4.jpg

And here I was thinking the orange and white was to contrast the brown and white Road Closed signs and make them more visible.

[relaxok]

Someone posted a U-Turn Only sign & signal to reddit: