AARoads Forum

National Boards => General Highway Talk => Traffic Control => Topic started by: vtk on April 01, 2015, 12:16:16 AM

Title: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: vtk on April 01, 2015, 12:16:16 AM
Not exactly erroneous, the sign itself looks alright, the meaning is fairly obvious, but this just isn't right*:

Chestnut St & Leader St, Marion, OH
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fvidthekid.info%2Fimghost%2Fbadsign-t-marion.jpeg&hash=959d24ce28743e8e5cac6e5d7e31233240bd707a) (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.592042,-83.137168,3a,24.8y,273.69h,84.9t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sU3SuQACXYdCNJ_2iuz5L2Q!2e0)

It's possible there was once (before 2007) a proper W1-7 sign there on two posts, and something happened to the left post, so they put up this W2-4 on the remaining post.

*After looking in the MUTCD for a couple minutes, I couldn't find any passage that says they can't do it this way.  Is this actually permissible?
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: KEK Inc. on April 01, 2015, 05:36:41 AM
Doubtful; a sign like that is used to indicate that the road will end at a T-intersection before the fact.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Brian556 on April 02, 2015, 11:08:32 AM
There are several intersections like this in Double Oak, Texas. This is what happens when people who don't know much about signs are allowed to install them.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F100511012.jpg&hash=e70df7db4a5b5d30d48e46d9d895cd2260dfc272) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/100511012.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: kphoger on April 02, 2015, 02:42:04 PM
Man, I had a few examples to post from back in Illinois, but they all seem to have been removed. One is simply no longer there, one of them is no longer a T intersection due to reconstruction, etc.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: adventurernumber1 on April 03, 2015, 10:14:42 AM
That's like stepping into a room with toxic gas then inside the room, noticing a sign that warns you of it.  :rofl:  :pan:

I don't think I've ever seen that before..
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: spooky on April 03, 2015, 10:18:51 AM
Saw an intersection like that where the stop sign was mounted on the opposite side of the intersection.

Sucks for the older driver at night who maybe can't see what's ahead of them very well, but knows they are supposed to stop adjacent to the stop sign.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Big John on April 03, 2015, 01:12:22 PM
Quote from: spooky on April 03, 2015, 10:18:51 AM
Saw an intersection like that where the stop sign was mounted on the opposite side of the intersection.

Sucks for the older driver at night who maybe can't see what's ahead of them very well, but knows they are supposed to stop adjacent to the stop sign.
example of this: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.960851,-84.548731,3a,75y,103.91h,77.21t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sbsSYFUwVdc-3NBMgBeY5qg!2e0
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Scott5114 on April 03, 2015, 01:35:12 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FEvhMsln.png&hash=031a0f623d8497789ef593e215eaa26746d54240)
This is on a service road to OK-9 in Newcastle. I'm guessing they don't really want you to stop here; there is no cross street here, no sign in the other direction, and this is displayed right after turning onto the service road and going around a curve so you can run parallel to OK-9.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: vtk on April 03, 2015, 01:37:11 PM
Quote from: spooky on April 03, 2015, 10:18:51 AM
Saw an intersection like that where the stop sign was mounted on the opposite side of the intersection.

Sucks for the older driver at night who maybe can't see what's ahead of them very well, but knows they are supposed to stop adjacent to the stop sign.

I think there's one of those in Chatfield, Ohio, but GSV didn't get close enough to capture it. On a street leading east from OH 4, ending a block later: if you continue straight through the intersection, you crash into first a stop sign and then a barn.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: kphoger on April 03, 2015, 05:27:33 PM
Quote from: vtk on April 03, 2015, 01:37:11 PM
Quote from: spooky on April 03, 2015, 10:18:51 AM
Saw an intersection like that where the stop sign was mounted on the opposite side of the intersection.

Sucks for the older driver at night who maybe can't see what's ahead of them very well, but knows they are supposed to stop adjacent to the stop sign.

I think there's one of those in Chatfield, Ohio, but GSV didn't get close enough to capture it. On a street leading east from OH 4, ending a block later: if you continue straight through the intersection, you crash into first a stop sign and then a barn.

I see STOP signs posted on the far side of intersections all the time in Mexico. It's actually the best way to do it in some locations because the street is very narrow and there's no good place to put a sign between the pavement and the buildings, so they just mount it directly onto a building across the street. I'll dig up a GSV example in a few minutes.

My favorite one, though, is from Herrin, IL, but it appears to have been removed. It was a dead end street, and at the end of the street was a STOP sign, dead center at the terminus.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: kphoger on April 03, 2015, 05:52:21 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 03, 2015, 05:27:33 PM
STOP signs posted on the far side of intersections in Mexico

As promised...

It turns out I'm having a hard time finding one that's actually mounted to a building.  I guess I forgot how many telephone poles there are in that town!

Far side - http://goo.gl/maps/sNWiz
Yield sign from the other direction as that one - http://goo.gl/maps/0DwHw
Far side, left side of the street - http://goo.gl/maps/QbTtr
Far side of a T intersection - http://goo.gl/maps/jqfi8
Far side, left side of the street - http://goo.gl/maps/TEohp
Far side of a T intersection (sort of) - http://goo.gl/maps/wTgqM
Near-side Yield and Far-side Stop, same intersection - http://goo.gl/maps/ARj4P
Far side of a T intersection - http://goo.gl/maps/qbQHy

I'm sure I could come up with more, just from this one town.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: SignGeek101 on April 03, 2015, 07:12:55 PM
http://goo.gl/maps/UiojO

'JCT' is supposed to be used before the intersection, not at it.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: freebrickproductions on April 03, 2015, 08:05:31 PM
Here's a similar situation in a traffic circle at a shopping center here in Huntsville:
(https://scontent-atl.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/t31.0-8/1799123_1816155305276656_2673106354014332285_o.jpg)
(https://scontent-atl.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfa1/t31.0-8/11089008_1816155301943323_6922323388787043008_o.jpg)

This was put up after the shopping center decided to finally fix most of the knocked down signage in this traffic circle. The sign in the picture actually replaced a sign like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.722942,-86.590468,3a,15.9y,85.09h,85.47t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s0vDsmPjHYFOZZ5laex_t4g!2e0?hl=en) that was mounted at a 45° angle (so it was a square rather than a diamond, I can also post pictures of the sign on the other side, which is still the same). I think the only reason they decided to "fix" the signage here is because the City of Huntsville put up "end city maintenance/enter private property" signs at the entrances to this shopping center.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Eth on April 03, 2015, 08:51:37 PM
Quote from: SignGeek101 on April 03, 2015, 07:12:55 PM
http://goo.gl/maps/UiojO

'JCT' is supposed to be used before the intersection, not at it.

Got one of those (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.769926,-84.348971,3a,75y,344.98h,84.18t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sa8CuvF7HvravUh2FvR_qjw!2e0) around here too:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmaps.googleapis.com%2Fmaps%2Fapi%2Fstreetview%3Fsize%3D640x400%26amp%3Blocation%3D33.769926%2C-84.348971%26amp%3Bheading%3D350%26amp%3Bsensor%3Dfalse&hash=c06e90edd0c18c285f07f338534e56485fe077aa)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: JoePCool14 on April 04, 2015, 10:08:19 AM
I could see this contractor sign being a slight problem. (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.106082,-87.806263,3a,21.7y,48.07h,82.24t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sz-i13gwNk_TGcATM-GuV3Q!2e0)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: KEK Inc. on April 04, 2015, 10:47:29 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on April 04, 2015, 10:08:19 AM
I could see this contractor sign being a slight problem. (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.106082,-87.806263,3a,21.7y,48.07h,82.24t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sz-i13gwNk_TGcATM-GuV3Q!2e0)


I'm sure Best Buy wasn't opposed to that.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: TrevorB on April 05, 2015, 06:43:43 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.934924,-89.988607,3a,37.9y,187.11h,82.74t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sGzz_FHRoTaqA6GK54QP_5Q!2e0

This sign was never changed when the stop sign was converted to a traffic light around 2007.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: JoePCool14 on April 05, 2015, 07:23:07 PM
Maybe the sign is assuming the light is red ahead  :bigass:
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: countysigns on April 05, 2015, 07:30:39 PM
Quote from: TrevorB on April 05, 2015, 06:43:43 PM
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.934924,-89.988607,3a,37.9y,187.11h,82.74t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sGzz_FHRoTaqA6GK54QP_5Q!2e0

This sign was never changed when the stop sign was converted to a traffic light around 2007.

Another example of that situation: http://tinyurl.com/nfwc5ad
Corner of Curtice Road and Wheeling Street in Northwood, Ohio
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: kphoger on April 06, 2015, 02:01:26 PM
I hate these goofs. It's not a lane merge, it's a turn-only lane. Why can't Wichita seem to figure out the difference?

http://goo.gl/maps/FsuyR
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: vtk on April 06, 2015, 02:08:13 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 06, 2015, 02:01:26 PM
I hate these goofs. It's not a lane merge, it's a turn-only lane. Why can't Wichita seem to figure out the difference?

http://goo.gl/maps/FsuyR

It doesn't appear to be marked as a turn only lane. Taking the sign literally, I'd say it would be permitted to proceed straight through the intersection from the right lane, of course yielding to any traffic already in the other lane. But that's probably not what the city wants people to do, hence, wrong sign.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Big John on April 06, 2015, 02:13:29 PM
^^ Need to re-mark the pavement and replace the sign wit a R3-7.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fc%2Fca%2FMUTCD_R3-7R.svg%2F281px-MUTCD_R3-7R.svg.png&hash=9eec8f4e409a76e729081c0f783ef7bd3ecc8e27)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: briantroutman on April 06, 2015, 02:15:09 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 06, 2015, 02:01:26 PM
I hate these goofs. It's not a lane merge, it's a turn-only lane. Why can't Wichita seem to figure out the difference?

http://goo.gl/maps/FsuyR

Similarly, I've seen places in California where turn only lanes are marked with the large diagonal "lane reduction"  arrows. I don't recall having encountered this elsewhere.

https://goo.gl/maps/WuUVU
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: JoePCool14 on April 06, 2015, 05:33:25 PM
Something like that shown here...

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.114477,-87.848889,3a,75y,322.46h,67.39t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s7UnT00dWyukDobPK6MpEPA!2e0

To the right is a lane ends sign, and if you rotate left there is a Right Turn Only lane. The entire signage here is illogical.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on April 06, 2015, 06:19:46 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on April 06, 2015, 02:15:09 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 06, 2015, 02:01:26 PM
I hate these goofs. It's not a lane merge, it's a turn-only lane. Why can't Wichita seem to figure out the difference?

http://goo.gl/maps/FsuyR

Similarly, I've seen places in California where turn only lanes are marked with the large diagonal "lane reduction"  arrows. I don't recall having encountered this elsewhere.

https://goo.gl/maps/WuUVU

I don't actually mind that. The DOT is basically saying "To stay on this road, merge left...otherwise, prepare to turn right".
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: JKRhodes on April 07, 2015, 08:01:43 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 06, 2015, 06:19:46 PM
Quote from: briantroutman on April 06, 2015, 02:15:09 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 06, 2015, 02:01:26 PM
I hate these goofs. It's not a lane merge, it's a turn-only lane. Why can't Wichita seem to figure out the difference?

http://goo.gl/maps/FsuyR

Similarly, I've seen places in California where turn only lanes are marked with the large diagonal "lane reduction"  arrows. I don't recall having encountered this elsewhere.

https://goo.gl/maps/WuUVU

I don't actually mind that. The DOT is basically saying "To stay on this road, merge left...otherwise, prepare to turn right".

Those are somewhat common in Arizona as well, moreso around Tucson as I recall.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: elsmere241 on April 07, 2015, 08:10:10 AM
Quote from: spooky on April 03, 2015, 10:18:51 AM
Saw an intersection like that where the stop sign was mounted on the opposite side of the intersection.

Sucks for the older driver at night who maybe can't see what's ahead of them very well, but knows they are supposed to stop adjacent to the stop sign.

My town has these at every T-intersection.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: bzakharin on April 07, 2015, 10:09:02 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on April 04, 2015, 10:08:19 AM
I could see this contractor sign being a slight problem. (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.106082,-87.806263,3a,21.7y,48.07h,82.24t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sz-i13gwNk_TGcATM-GuV3Q!2e0)

There is a "Keep Right Pass Left" sign on the Exit 7S ramp from Atlantic City Expressway Westbound to Garden State Parkway South. The ramp starts out with two lanes, which merge into one after the ramp turns right immediately following this sign (but not visible until you're in the turn). I can't imagine what possessed them to place the sign at that particular location, where it causes confusion at best and accidents at worst. Even worse, the just merged ramp becomes an an exit only lane for exit 37, so if you keep right, you actually leave the Parkway. Unfortunately Google doesn't have this, but here's a Bing link: http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=39.412624~-74.555800&lvl=15&sty=x~lat~39.412624~lon~-74.5558~alt~-16.859~z~30~h~-201~p~-5.1~pid~5082&app=5082&FORM=LMLTCC
You need silverlight
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: kphoger on April 07, 2015, 10:59:36 PM
I'm still, to this day, trying to figure out why Kansas posts "Do Not Pass" signs at every construction zone, even when the zone is on a divided multi-lane highway. It's particularly stupid on the canal route here in Wichita, which has three lanes in each direction and is elevated with a waterway in between. Ain't no way the possibility of head-to-head traffic can be the reason in that scenario. So what exactly is the "right reason" for these "wrong signs"?
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadfro on April 09, 2015, 10:21:48 PM
^ The "pass" could be referring to "overtaking" (as in passing a car going in the same direction). Not sure why that would be an issue in most situations though, except on a narrow curve or something...
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: vtk on April 10, 2015, 11:43:32 AM
Quote from: roadfro on April 09, 2015, 10:21:48 PM
^ The "pass" could be referring to "overtaking" (as in passing a car going in the same direction).

Yeah, that's usually what that sign means...
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jeffandnicole on April 10, 2015, 12:39:53 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 07, 2015, 10:59:36 PM
I'm still, to this day, trying to figure out why Kansas posts "Do Not Pass" signs at every construction zone, even when the zone is on a divided multi-lane highway. It's particularly stupid on the canal route here in Wichita, which has three lanes in each direction and is elevated with a waterway in between. Ain't no way the possibility of head-to-head traffic can be the reason in that scenario. So what exactly is the "right reason" for these "wrong signs"?

Is there a solid strip dividing the lanes, or are they still passing zones? 

Usually, "Stay in Lane" is the proper sign for such cases.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: mhh on April 10, 2015, 06:41:50 PM
The regulatory sign in front of the yellow bollards isn't quite right:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.627633,-82.951069,3a,15y,76.33h,85.43t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1smeaqQogNJPA4KCwnZ8U3RQ!2e0 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.627633,-82.951069,3a,15y,76.33h,85.43t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1smeaqQogNJPA4KCwnZ8U3RQ!2e0)

The world's largest bump:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Hazel+Park+Bowl/@42.470532,-83.091558,3a,15y,359h,87.94t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sfW6k4vt8d84r7KUkg9WKqw!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x8824cfc57dba3993:0xfd07c84251339243 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Hazel+Park+Bowl/@42.470532,-83.091558,3a,15y,359h,87.94t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sfW6k4vt8d84r7KUkg9WKqw!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x8824cfc57dba3993:0xfd07c84251339243)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on April 10, 2015, 06:55:05 PM
Quote from: mhh on April 10, 2015, 06:41:50 PM
The regulatory sign in front of the yellow bollards isn't quite right:\

I'm thinking this might be a better sign:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F1%2F12%2FMUTCD_W12-1.svg%2F200px-MUTCD_W12-1.svg.png&hash=56cd2e46525356b470b1a5a7c1d641219d346945)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Scott5114 on April 10, 2015, 07:56:22 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 07, 2015, 10:59:36 PM
I'm still, to this day, trying to figure out why Kansas posts "Do Not Pass" signs at every construction zone, even when the zone is on a divided multi-lane highway. It's particularly stupid on the canal route here in Wichita, which has three lanes in each direction and is elevated with a waterway in between. Ain't no way the possibility of head-to-head traffic can be the reason in that scenario. So what exactly is the "right reason" for these "wrong signs"?
Outside of urban areas, Kansas work zones tend to take the form of a single carriageway being converted to head to head traffic while the other is closed entirely. The Do Not Pass sign makes sense in that context. I'm guessing that somehow a directive or drawing for that situation is being applied to work zones that make less sense for its application.

That, or cars changing lanes in work zones makes KDOT antsy for some reason.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Big John on April 22, 2015, 03:08:39 PM
From the stop signs that make no sense thread: https://www.google.com/maps/@32.413467,-87.005586,3a,75y,85.71h,70.44t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sRl33LBfo3VtMzAy9sUAMwQ!2e0?hl=en

Even though it a signalized T intersection, a double arrow (W1-7) instead of a Dead End sign would work better:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffirstsign.com%2Fimages%2Fw1-7-double-arrow-traffic-sign-firstsign.gif&hash=67f364c5910fb731ca31205b62db1f831c14d32e)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: JKRhodes on April 22, 2015, 11:27:33 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv436%2Froadiejay%2FAARoads%2520Misc%2FLas%2520Cruces.png&hash=2c9679ae6dddea8de177935d2f4d280ff5d54415)

It's an acceleration lane(coming from I-25 south to University Ave West) that merges across the bike lane into the mainline. The sign gets the message across well enough, even though it's inaccurate to call it a right turn lane..
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: sdmichael on April 24, 2015, 12:42:48 AM
Being a DMV employee that gives tests about signs, seeing things like this is troubling...
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: J N Winkler on April 24, 2015, 01:46:12 AM
Quote from: Big John on April 06, 2015, 02:13:29 PM
^^ Need to re-mark the pavement and replace the sign wit a R3-7.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fc%2Fca%2FMUTCD_R3-7R.svg%2F281px-MUTCD_R3-7R.svg.png&hash=9eec8f4e409a76e729081c0f783ef7bd3ecc8e27)

That is the by-the-book solution, but I don't particularly care for it because this text-only sign is very difficult to tell apart from its left-hand twin at a distance.  This particular intersection has the lane drop on the right but there are others in Wichita (such as this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.687787,-97.352223,3a,75y,260.83h,85.55t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1stGby92mvEzOAdC1Fdda0rA!2e0)) where the drop is on the left, so drivers cannot rely on consistency to avoid getting swept into turn lanes.

I much prefer the Arizona solution, which is to use one of the lane assignment signs (turning arrow above word "ONLY") on a ground mount, often with no lane assignment signs for any of the through lanes.  It is easier to interpret at a distance but it is not necessarily MUTCD kosher.

Quote from: kphoger on April 07, 2015, 10:59:36 PMI'm still, to this day, trying to figure out why Kansas posts "Do Not Pass" signs at every construction zone, even when the zone is on a divided multi-lane highway. It's particularly stupid on the canal route here in Wichita, which has three lanes in each direction and is elevated with a waterway in between. Ain't no way the possibility of head-to-head traffic can be the reason in that scenario. So what exactly is the "right reason" for these "wrong signs"?

As Scott5411 says, they are called for in KDOT standard drawings for lane closures on multilane highways.  "Stay In Lane" is not a substitute because vehicles have to merge out of the lane being closed.  "Do Not Pass" is positioned after "Road Work Ahead," "X Lane Closed," "Speed Limit XX Ahead," but before the actual workzone speed limit sign.  Its purpose is to discourage aggressive drivers from speeding toward the merge point to try to get around vehicles which are coasting down to bring themselves into compliance with the reduced limit.  If a road carries a lot of traffic, the slowdown for the reduced limit will often extend quite far back from the first actual speed limit sign.

I don't remember offhand whether "Do Not Pass" is used in workzones with head-to-head traffic where one half of a divided highway is closed, but in that context it is arguably redundant (though its use may be a legal requirement) because KDOT requires its contractors to use channel delineators to prevent passing.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: bzakharin on April 29, 2015, 06:35:27 PM
Just noticed this yesterday:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.388628,-74.566496,3a,37.5y,55.93h,87.41t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sGfY25P2ZYmM4k0bTtDhLQA!2e0
Does this qualify as a ramp? It's just the beginning of Hingston Ave. And that 25 speed limit becomes non-advisory under the tree near where that stop sign is visible. I suppose it's there to tell you the speed limit right away before making the turn, but it's still not the right sign.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadfro on May 01, 2015, 03:02:51 AM
Quote from: bzakharin on April 29, 2015, 06:35:27 PM
Just noticed this yesterday:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.388628,-74.566496,3a,37.5y,55.93h,87.41t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sGfY25P2ZYmM4k0bTtDhLQA!2e0
Does this qualify as a ramp? It's just the beginning of Hingston Ave. And that 25 speed limit becomes non-advisory under the tree near where that stop sign is visible. I suppose it's there to tell you the speed limit right away before making the turn, but it's still not the right sign.

I don't think this is trying to warn of the upcoming speed limit, but rather establishing an advisory speed for the turn. In that case, this is an appropriate application. Better to use "ramp" than "exit".
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: bzakharin on May 01, 2015, 07:31:34 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 01, 2015, 03:02:51 AM
Quote from: bzakharin on April 29, 2015, 06:35:27 PM
Just noticed this yesterday:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.388628,-74.566496,3a,37.5y,55.93h,87.41t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sGfY25P2ZYmM4k0bTtDhLQA!2e0
Does this qualify as a ramp? It's just the beginning of Hingston Ave. And that 25 speed limit becomes non-advisory under the tree near where that stop sign is visible. I suppose it's there to tell you the speed limit right away before making the turn, but it's still not the right sign.

I don't think this is trying to warn of the upcoming speed limit, but rather establishing an advisory speed for the turn. In that case, this is an appropriate application. Better to use "ramp" than "exit".
Generally advisory speeds are lower than the actual speed limit. The speed limit on that road is already 25 as signed a few hundred feet away. Are you saying the speed limit is not 25 until the speed limit sign? What kind of sense would that make?
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Alps on May 01, 2015, 07:58:12 PM
Quote from: Big John on April 06, 2015, 02:13:29 PM
^^ Need to re-mark the pavement and replace the sign wit a R3-7.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fc%2Fca%2FMUTCD_R3-7R.svg%2F281px-MUTCD_R3-7R.svg.png&hash=9eec8f4e409a76e729081c0f783ef7bd3ecc8e27)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.funnysigns.net%2Ffiles%2Fright-lane-must-right-left-400x333.jpg&hash=3e88cab90ec2882c310279a1854cdb64d6f89a0d)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: SignGeek101 on May 01, 2015, 10:29:48 PM
Quote from: Alps on May 01, 2015, 07:58:12 PM
Quote from: Big John on April 06, 2015, 02:13:29 PM
^^ Need to re-mark the pavement and replace the sign wit a R3-7.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Fc%2Fca%2FMUTCD_R3-7R.svg%2F281px-MUTCD_R3-7R.svg.png&hash=9eec8f4e409a76e729081c0f783ef7bd3ecc8e27)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.funnysigns.net%2Ffiles%2Fright-lane-must-right-left-400x333.jpg&hash=3e88cab90ec2882c310279a1854cdb64d6f89a0d)

I think that one is probably fake. Still funny though.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadfro on May 02, 2015, 12:20:07 AM
Quote from: bzakharin on May 01, 2015, 07:31:34 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 01, 2015, 03:02:51 AM
Quote from: bzakharin on April 29, 2015, 06:35:27 PM
Just noticed this yesterday:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.388628,-74.566496,3a,37.5y,55.93h,87.41t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sGfY25P2ZYmM4k0bTtDhLQA!2e0
Does this qualify as a ramp? It's just the beginning of Hingston Ave. And that 25 speed limit becomes non-advisory under the tree near where that stop sign is visible. I suppose it's there to tell you the speed limit right away before making the turn, but it's still not the right sign.

I don't think this is trying to warn of the upcoming speed limit, but rather establishing an advisory speed for the turn. In that case, this is an appropriate application. Better to use "ramp" than "exit".
Generally advisory speeds are lower than the actual speed limit. The speed limit on that road is already 25 as signed a few hundred feet away. Are you saying the speed limit is not 25 until the speed limit sign? What kind of sense would that make?

An advisory speed is usually lower than the speed limit, but I have seen a couple instances of advisory speeds being the same as the normal posted speed. But that is besides the point.

According to street view, the road that this sign is posted on has a speed limit of 45. This sign is simply implying that the turn "ramp" is to be taken at 25 mph. I can't tell for certain, but it seems like the ramp here might appear as if it is a wider curve than it actually is...

Although I can believe that the sign might have been (incorrectly) used as a warning for the speed limit downstream. What I learned is that a speed limit does not go into effect until you pass the plane of the actual sign.
Title: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: 6a on May 02, 2015, 06:38:44 PM
Not sure which thread this best fits so here we go. The sun wasn't cooperating so if it isn't obvious, the sign is white.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F15%2F05%2F02%2F1a964ad8cdce818faf244b47dff5c510.jpg&hash=55a6dd6aa96b405d8b5958d87dde61739a73caf6)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jeffandnicole on May 02, 2015, 07:13:06 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 02, 2015, 12:20:07 AM
Quote from: bzakharin on May 01, 2015, 07:31:34 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 01, 2015, 03:02:51 AM
Quote from: bzakharin on April 29, 2015, 06:35:27 PM
Just noticed this yesterday:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.388628,-74.566496,3a,37.5y,55.93h,87.41t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sGfY25P2ZYmM4k0bTtDhLQA!2e0
Does this qualify as a ramp? It's just the beginning of Hingston Ave. And that 25 speed limit becomes non-advisory under the tree near where that stop sign is visible. I suppose it's there to tell you the speed limit right away before making the turn, but it's still not the right sign.

I don't think this is trying to warn of the upcoming speed limit, but rather establishing an advisory speed for the turn. In that case, this is an appropriate application. Better to use "ramp" than "exit".
Generally advisory speeds are lower than the actual speed limit. The speed limit on that road is already 25 as signed a few hundred feet away. Are you saying the speed limit is not 25 until the speed limit sign? What kind of sense would that make?

An advisory speed is usually lower than the speed limit, but I have seen a couple instances of advisory speeds being the same as the normal posted speed. But that is besides the point.

According to street view, the road that this sign is posted on has a speed limit of 45. This sign is simply implying that the turn "ramp" is to be taken at 25 mph. I can't tell for certain, but it seems like the ramp here might appear as if it is a wider curve than it actually is...

Although I can believe that the sign might have been (incorrectly) used as a warning for the speed limit downstream. What I learned is that a speed limit does not go into effect until you pass the plane of the actual sign.

A "signed" speed limit.  Otherwise it defaults to the statutory speed limit, which in this case could either be 25 or 35.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on May 02, 2015, 07:34:31 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 02, 2015, 12:20:07 AM
What I learned is that a speed limit does not go into effect until you pass the plane of the actual sign.

I was taught at driving school to go the speed indicated on the sign at the point you reach it. So, if you're in a 30 mph-zone, and you come upon a sign indicating a 40 mph-zone, you should be at 40 when you hit that sign.

That does appear to be adverse to much of what I've read online. Though, the educators at my school are/were former police, so I'm tempted to believe what they say.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadfro on May 02, 2015, 08:16:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 02, 2015, 07:34:31 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 02, 2015, 12:20:07 AM
What I learned is that a speed limit does not go into effect until you pass the plane of the actual sign.

I was taught at driving school to go the speed indicated on the sign at the point you reach it. So, if you're in a 30 mph-zone, and you come upon a sign indicating a 40 mph-zone, you should be at 40 when you hit that sign.

That does appear to be adverse to much of what I've read online. Though, the educators at my school are/were former police, so I'm tempted to believe what they say.

The example you gave is a bit backward, in that it implies you should be breaking the limit before the new higher limit takes effect. The other way around works though and makes sense: In a 40 going down to 30, you should be at 30 by the time you hit the sign.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: signalman on May 02, 2015, 10:28:37 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 02, 2015, 08:16:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 02, 2015, 07:34:31 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 02, 2015, 12:20:07 AM
What I learned is that a speed limit does not go into effect until you pass the plane of the actual sign.

I was taught at driving school to go the speed indicated on the sign at the point you reach it. So, if you're in a 30 mph-zone, and you come upon a sign indicating a 40 mph-zone, you should be at 40 when you hit that sign.

That does appear to be adverse to much of what I've read online. Though, the educators at my school are/were former police, so I'm tempted to believe what they say.

The example you gave is a bit backward, in that it implies you should be breaking the limit before the new higher limit takes effect. The other way around works though and makes sense: In a 40 going down to 30, you should be at 30 by the time you hit the sign.
Plus, to cite Jake's example; it's a speed limit.  There is nothing illegal about going 35 or 37 in a 40.  Though it may piss off other drivers, but that's another subject.  Hell, some drivers are annoyed by getting stuck behind someone going the speed limit.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on May 02, 2015, 11:02:40 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 02, 2015, 08:16:55 PM
The example you gave is a bit backward, in that it implies you should be breaking the limit before the new higher limit takes effect. The other way around works though and makes sense: In a 40 going down to 30, you should be at 30 by the time you hit the sign.

I don't remember them drawing a line between a raising or lowering speed limit, but I'm sure you are correct. It was a few years ago.

Quote from: signalman on May 02, 2015, 10:28:37 PM
Hell, some drivers are annoyed by getting stuck behind someone going the speed limit.

Driver's who don't drive like everyone else present an inherent danger to other drivers.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: signalman on May 02, 2015, 11:13:46 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 02, 2015, 11:02:40 PM
Driver's who don't drive like everyone else present an inherent danger to other drivers.
I never said that traveling below the speed limit is not a potential hazard.  I was just making a point that one isn't required to do so.  Not everyone drives the same nor travels at the same speed.  It is a driver's responsibility to drive safely and be accommodating to others.  Driving is a privilege, not a right.  Still, there is a calculated risk every time someone gets behind the wheel.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jeffandnicole on May 02, 2015, 11:37:03 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 02, 2015, 07:34:31 PM
Quote from: roadfro on May 02, 2015, 12:20:07 AM
What I learned is that a speed limit does not go into effect until you pass the plane of the actual sign.

I was taught at driving school to go the speed indicated on the sign at the point you reach it. So, if you're in a 30 mph-zone, and you come upon a sign indicating a 40 mph-zone, you should be at 40 when you hit that sign.

That does appear to be adverse to much of what I've read online. Though, the educators at my school are/were former police, so I'm tempted to believe what they say.

I wasn't there to overhear that conversation, but i would actually want to hear that from a judge, not a cop. Unless you are familiar with the route, how do you know the speed limit will increase? And what would constitute a distance at which you could start exceeding the speed limit of the current zone you are in?

Quote from: signalman on May 02, 2015, 11:13:46 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 02, 2015, 11:02:40 PM
Driver's who don't drive like everyone else present an inherent danger to other drivers.
I never said that traveling below the speed limit is not a potential hazard.  I was just making a point that one isn't required to do so.  Not everyone drives the same nor travels at the same speed.  It is a driver's responsibility to drive safely and be accommodating to others.  Driving is a privilege, not a right.  Still, there is a calculated risk every time someone gets behind the wheel.

Unless you have the ability to drive exactly at the limit (ie: 40.0 in a 40, not 40.1, not 41), then you should be driving below the limit.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on May 02, 2015, 11:48:13 PM
Quote from: signalman on May 02, 2015, 11:13:46 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on May 02, 2015, 11:02:40 PM
Driver's who don't drive like everyone else present an inherent danger to other drivers.

I never said that traveling below the speed limit is not a potential hazard.  I was just making a point that one isn't required to do so.  Not everyone drives the same nor travels at the same speed.  It is a driver's responsibility to drive safely and be accommodating to others.  Driving is a privilege, not a right.  Still, there is a calculated risk every time someone gets behind the wheel.

I was responding to your point that people get annoyed by drivers going the speed limit, by saying that drivers get angry because drivers going the speed limit are presenting a risk to the 85th percentile (which speeds limits should reflect but often do not).

Quote from: jeffandnicole on May 02, 2015, 11:37:03 PM
I wasn't there to overhear that conversation, but i would actually want to hear that from a judge, not a cop. Unless you are familiar with the route, how do you know the speed limit will increase? And what would constitute a distance at which you could start exceeding the speed limit of the current zone you are in?

I've wondered that since the day I heard it. Even in like school zones, they say to be going the normal speed limit by the time the zone ends. Trust me, I'm completely baffled. I'm gonna stop in and talk to them again some day.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: vdeane on May 03, 2015, 06:51:58 PM
A guy I knew during my internship said that he once got pulled over by a cop sitting right at the sign, pulling over people who start accelerating before the sign.  The embarrassing twist was that the guy was wearing nothing but his underwear when he was pulled over (because it was 80 degrees out and he didn't expect to be pulled over, he said).
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: SignGeek101 on May 17, 2015, 01:27:46 PM
A standard directional arrow should be used here, not a one way arrow (not going to even mention the lazy patch over the sign).

http://goo.gl/maps/LH9Sq
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Scott5114 on May 17, 2015, 01:36:15 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 24, 2015, 01:46:12 AM
I don't remember offhand whether "Do Not Pass" is used in workzones with head-to-head traffic where one half of a divided highway is closed, but in that context it is arguably redundant (though its use may be a legal requirement) because KDOT requires its contractors to use channel delineators to prevent passing.

It is (the use of the sign in this context is what I remember, coming from workzones reconstructing free I-35 in the late 90s). I seem to recall the delineators being placed far enough apart that someone could conceivably squeeze through to attempt an ill-advised pass, although such work zones incorporate double-yellow lines as well, so legally the signs are redundant to the stripes anyway.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: yakra on May 18, 2015, 12:51:46 AM
Quote from: spooky on April 03, 2015, 10:18:51 AM
Saw an intersection like that where the stop sign was mounted on the opposite side of the intersection.

Sucks for the older driver at night who maybe can't see what's ahead of them very well, but knows they are supposed to stop adjacent to the stop sign.
Or how about this stroke of jeenyus?
https://www.google.com/lochp?ie=UTF8&t=m&vpsrc=0&layer=c&cbll=43.658307,-70.262933&panoid=J7EDgVneR2VUiPQlC4x3Gg&cbp=11,92.63,,1,1.17&ll=43.658307,-70.262933&spn=0.002554,0.009559&z=17
Note the placement of the stop line. Stop there, and you've already cleared the intersection. If you have a long enough vehicle (anything), you're probably still *blocking* the intersection a bit too. (I doubt I'll ever get bored enough, but if I do I might wander down there with a tape measure...)
It's `cuz of things like this that I (frequently) say: "if I ever meet our city traffic engineer, I will take away his crayons."

Quote from: kphoger on April 03, 2015, 05:27:33 PM
My favorite one, though, is from Herrin, IL, but it appears to have been removed. It was a dead end street, and at the end of the street was a STOP sign, dead center at the terminus.
Ayuh. Portland has these too:
https://www.google.com/lochp?ie=UTF8&t=m&vpsrc=6&layer=c&cbll=43.661008,-70.282986&panoid=HLQEHSqbho_d5PtKvE6f0A&cbp=11,240.3,,0,11.41&ll=43.661011,-70.282996&spn=0.005107,0.019119&z=16
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: HTM Duke on May 18, 2015, 04:20:56 AM
Quote from: yakra on May 18, 2015, 12:51:46 AM
Quote from: spooky on April 03, 2015, 10:18:51 AM
Saw an intersection like that where the stop sign was mounted on the opposite side of the intersection.

Sucks for the older driver at night who maybe can't see what's ahead of them very well, but knows they are supposed to stop adjacent to the stop sign.
Or how about this stroke of jeenyus?
https://www.google.com/lochp?ie=UTF8&t=m&vpsrc=0&layer=c&cbll=43.658307,-70.262933&panoid=J7EDgVneR2VUiPQlC4x3Gg&cbp=11,92.63,,1,1.17&ll=43.658307,-70.262933&spn=0.002554,0.009559&z=17 (https://www.google.com/lochp?ie=UTF8&t=m&vpsrc=0&layer=c&cbll=43.658307,-70.262933&panoid=J7EDgVneR2VUiPQlC4x3Gg&cbp=11,92.63,,1,1.17&ll=43.658307,-70.262933&spn=0.002554,0.009559&z=17)
Note the placement of the stop line. Stop there, and you've already cleared the intersection. If you have a long enough vehicle (anything), you're probably still *blocking* the intersection a bit too. (I doubt I'll ever get bored enough, but if I do I might wander down there with a tape measure...)
It's `cuz of things like this that I (frequently) say: "if I ever meet our city traffic engineer, I will take away his crayons."
Said engineer should have started with STOP FOR PEDS IN X-WALK signage first, then used other measures as needed.

Here's a similar setup in DC:
https://www.google.com/lochp?ie=UTF8&t=m&vpsrc=0&layer=c&cbll=43.658307,-70.262933&panoid=J7EDgVneR2VUiPQlC4x3Gg&cbp=11,92.63,,1,1.17&ll=43.658307,-70.262933&spn=0.002554,0.009559&z=17 (https://www.google.com/lochp?ie=UTF8&t=m&vpsrc=0&layer=c&cbll=43.658307,-70.262933&panoid=J7EDgVneR2VUiPQlC4x3Gg&cbp=11,92.63,,1,1.17&ll=43.658307,-70.262933&spn=0.002554,0.009559&z=17)
This one's really fun after Washington Nationals games, since traffic that's parked in lots nearby either don't see the sign, or don't care (betting on the latter), and thus turn right without stopping.


Given the problems with drivers trying to turn right onto Key Bridge from I-66 and pedestrians and cyclists trying to cross at the same time, Arlington created a brief no turn on red phase utilizing an electric no right turn sign (http://www.arlnow.com/2015/02/06/no-turn-on-red-signal-installed-at-intersection-of-doom/) as an interim measure.  Consider that it only operates for about 10 seconds a cycle (with an advance walk signal), I can see some drivers being confused about this.  Perhaps not the best use of such a sign, but it would probably prove beneficial for that sign to be active before traffic on N Lynn St is stopped so that drivers on the off-ramp don't think they have an imminent green.



VDOT changed this sign (merge from US-50/Gallows Rd to I-495 north) (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.867658,-77.219885,3a,25.3y,13.37h,90.96t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suj7Lc_xlyyq6canFYJh98Q!2e0!5s20121001T000000) after I reported it, but continues to insist that this sign (merge from Gallows Rd north to I-495 south) (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.855929,-77.220363,3a,25.8y,226.22h,87.25t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sD6J2AGT93_oQhtPBceoIOw!2e0!5s20140901T000000) is correct.  I've pointed out the LANE ENDS MERGE RIGHT signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.853278,-77.220338,3a,25.6y,201.42h,89.43t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1s0A0HsluQCdK-pQ2-wJVLOg!2e0!5s20141001T000000) that immediately follow, and suggested that they were studying the wrong ramp (US-50 to I-495 south) (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.862536,-77.220519,3a,75y,169.75h,89.38t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suFpkrPZNlbIzdES_Okn7Ag!2e0!5s20141001T000000), but to no avail.


A couple of honorary examples (think right sign, wrong idea how to use it).
At the I-495/US-50 interchange, VDOT posted the merge sign for the on-ramp from US-50 west after rotating it 45 degrees counter-clockwise:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.863547,-77.220928,3a,49.4y,185.33h,87.33t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1stysOSeWltxR5XMaXyolYFg!2e0!5s20141001T000000 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.863547,-77.220928,3a,49.4y,185.33h,87.33t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1stysOSeWltxR5XMaXyolYFg!2e0!5s20141001T000000)

Similar situation in Maryland, I-495 north to westbound Clara Barton Pkwy:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.974457,-77.177214,3a,18.6y,329.86h,84.45t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sYFtUf5lGhmS28pVlzJS5ag!2e0!5s20140901T000000 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.974457,-77.177214,3a,18.6y,329.86h,84.45t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sYFtUf5lGhmS28pVlzJS5ag!2e0!5s20140901T000000)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadfro on May 18, 2015, 11:12:02 PM
Quote from: HTM Duke on May 18, 2015, 04:20:56 AM
VDOT changed this sign (merge from US-50/Gallows Rd to I-495 north) (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.867658,-77.219885,3a,25.3y,13.37h,90.96t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suj7Lc_xlyyq6canFYJh98Q!2e0!5s20121001T000000) after I reported it, but continues to insist that this sign (merge from Gallows Rd north to I-495 south) (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.855929,-77.220363,3a,25.8y,226.22h,87.25t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sD6J2AGT93_oQhtPBceoIOw!2e0!5s20140901T000000) is correct.  I've pointed out the LANE ENDS MERGE RIGHT signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.853278,-77.220338,3a,25.6y,201.42h,89.43t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1s0A0HsluQCdK-pQ2-wJVLOg!2e0!5s20141001T000000) that immediately follow, and suggested that they were studying the wrong ramp (US-50 to I-495 south) (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.862536,-77.220519,3a,75y,169.75h,89.38t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1suFpkrPZNlbIzdES_Okn7Ag!2e0!5s20141001T000000), but to no avail.


A couple of honorary examples (think right sign, wrong idea how to use it).
At the I-495/US-50 interchange, VDOT posted the merge sign for the on-ramp from US-50 west after rotating it 45 degrees counter-clockwise:
https://www.google.com/maps/@38.863547,-77.220928,3a,49.4y,185.33h,87.33t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1stysOSeWltxR5XMaXyolYFg!2e0!5s20141001T000000 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.863547,-77.220928,3a,49.4y,185.33h,87.33t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1stysOSeWltxR5XMaXyolYFg!2e0!5s20141001T000000)

For part one... I think there is some ambiguity on how to use the "merge ahead" sign versus the "added lane ahead" sign. I've seen a couple DOTs use it different ways. Generally though, if the ramp joins the freeway and doesn't merge immediately, and a lane exists for 500+ feet, then the "added lane" sign seems appropriate, even if it ends in short order.

In part two, they have used the right signs...(the variants that are made to display conditions from the ramp perspective, as opposed to the original signs displaying the situation from the freeway perspective, which were introduced in the 2009 MUTCD). They simply just hung incorrectly.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: freebrickproductions on May 23, 2015, 09:40:35 PM
Here's one I found while browsing streetview near Decatur, AL:
https://www.google.com/lochp?ll=34.642713,-86.91533&spn=0.000994,0.002064&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=34.642622,-86.915335&panoid=liz-3SoJeowLydDK7gm-Mg&cbp=12,353.04,,0,8.36
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: freebrickproductions on July 18, 2015, 04:52:19 PM
Saw this in Auburn, AL at the beginning of a closed section of road:
(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3718/19781608976_241072cc45.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/w92VaJ)Traffic Circle Sign on a Construction Barrier (https://flic.kr/p/w92VaJ) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr

It makes sense considering that the traffic will have to turn around because of the road being closed, but they didn't provide the traffic circle to do it in. :spin:
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: briantroutman on August 25, 2015, 11:22:27 PM
This is posted currently in Larkspur, CA. This hairpin ramp connects to a pedestrian/bicycle overpass that's still under construction but not open in any sense–to local, through, or any other form of "traffic" .

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/607/20861501056_3a0b67a960_o.jpg)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: SignGeek101 on October 11, 2015, 07:32:37 PM
This: https://goo.gl/maps/R3J4Zyh285N2
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadfro on October 11, 2015, 08:40:11 PM
^ I've seen some similar applications of chevrons at the end of the road, where the big arrow should be used instead. Don't have an example off hand, but they were using four chevrons right next to each other, two pointing left and two pointing right.

In addition with that link, there's a old school black-on-white "3-WAY" plaque under the stop sign.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on October 11, 2015, 08:50:30 PM
Quote from: roadfro on October 11, 2015, 08:40:11 PM
In addition with that link, there's a old school black-on-white "3-WAY" plaque under the stop sign.

That's the standard plaque in BC. But, it is old -- it does seem to use the old BC font, as opposed to the Clearview "DO NOT ENTER" just behind the camera car.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: SignGeek101 on October 11, 2015, 09:23:33 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on October 11, 2015, 08:50:30 PM
Quote from: roadfro on October 11, 2015, 08:40:11 PM
In addition with that link, there's a old school black-on-white "3-WAY" plaque under the stop sign.

That's the standard plaque in BC. But, it is old -- it does seem to use the old BC font, as opposed to the Clearview "DO NOT ENTER" just behind the camera car.

The stop sign across the street is also in Clearview, and has a Helvetica '3 way' sign below it.

Not to mention, the other Stop sign (and BGS behind link) is in classic font.

An intersection with a Classic BC Font, FHWA, and Clearview stop signs!
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: andrepoiy on December 30, 2019, 09:46:04 PM
https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.8527138,-79.5221743,3a,42.1y,142.79h,80.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6hAY-hACpg_e4LxUZE7xvA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This sign is supposed to be used to denote which ways you can turn from a lane. The chevron sign is supposed to be used to denote which way the road is in case there's an obstruction (for example, you use it when there's a traffic island).
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Revive 755 on January 01, 2020, 06:46:00 PM
I'm thinking the bottom sign should be an arrow instead of a symbolic no right turn for SB Bloomingdale Road at Schick Road in Bloomingdale, IL. (https://goo.gl/maps/5THv49pfG4PEcxHdA)

(edited to fix link)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: GenExpwy on January 02, 2020, 03:05:00 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 01, 2020, 06:46:00 PM
I'm thinking the bottom sign should be an arrow instead of a symbolic no right turn for SB Bloomingdale Road at Schick Road in Bloomingdale, IL. (https://goo.gl/maps/B2pEa2MWCuJGm4M69)

Try this link
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9545178,-88.0810842,3a,75y,186.74h,92.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slsMF4JOl5vMzPVV6veCBwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: bcroadguy on January 03, 2020, 04:16:07 AM
I think this is a pretty good example of right idea, wrong sign

https://www.google.com/maps/@48.443862,-123.5266725,3a,25.2y,264.24h,87.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-MOvRIXpyU6KqyHIELrEjw!2e0!5s20180501T000000!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on January 03, 2020, 05:19:19 PM
Quote from: bcroadguy on January 03, 2020, 04:16:07 AM
I think this is a pretty good example of right idea, wrong sign

https://www.google.com/maps/@48.443862,-123.5266725,3a,25.2y,264.24h,87.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-MOvRIXpyU6KqyHIELrEjw!2e0!5s20180501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

I would say that's the textbook definition of "right idea, wrong sign".

Such a good example, in fact, that it took me several moments to realize the issue.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: kphoger on January 03, 2020, 09:18:12 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 03, 2020, 05:19:19 PM

Quote from: bcroadguy on January 03, 2020, 04:16:07 AM
I think this is a pretty good example of right idea, wrong sign

https://www.google.com/maps/@48.443862,-123.5266725,3a,25.2y,264.24h,87.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-MOvRIXpyU6KqyHIELrEjw!2e0!5s20180501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

I would say that's the textbook definition of "right idea, wrong sign".

Such a good example, in fact, that it took me several moments to realize the issue.

Yes.  It's like the ones (https://goo.gl/maps/h27jYwLhbrX6eDUe6) in Anson, TX (https://goo.gl/maps/fU8uHLjmQ8fVe5aq5), which I had driven past a handful of times but never noticed as wrong until someone on this forum pointed them out.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: ilpt4u on January 03, 2020, 09:23:13 PM
Quote from: bcroadguy on January 03, 2020, 04:16:07 AM
I think this is a pretty good example of right idea, wrong sign

https://www.google.com/maps/@48.443862,-123.5266725,3a,25.2y,264.24h,87.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-MOvRIXpyU6KqyHIELrEjw!2e0!5s20180501T000000!7i13312!8i6656
What sign would you rather have there? "Keep Right" Black/White Sign?

I guess that yellow sign implies a Divided Highway

kphoger's examples look like "Traffic Circle" signs would be more appropriate, or Right Turn Only
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: CtrlAltDel on January 03, 2020, 09:30:36 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 03, 2020, 09:23:13 PM
What sign would you rather have there? "Keep Right" Black/White Sign?

I guess that yellow sign implies a Divided Highway

Well, the yellow sign is for the end of a divided highway. In the instance in question, it's been placed upside down at the beginning of one.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: kphoger on January 03, 2020, 09:54:01 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 03, 2020, 09:23:13 PM

Quote from: bcroadguy on January 03, 2020, 04:16:07 AM
I think this is a pretty good example of right idea, wrong sign

https://www.google.com/maps/@48.443862,-123.5266725,3a,25.2y,264.24h,87.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-MOvRIXpyU6KqyHIELrEjw!2e0!5s20180501T000000!7i13312!8i6656
What sign would you rather have there? "Keep Right" Black/White Sign?

I guess that yellow sign implies a Divided Highway

kphoger's examples look like "Traffic Circle" signs would be more appropriate, or Right Turn Only

Should be R4-7 instead.  A yellow diamond is a warning sign telling you about an upcoming hazard.

Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: GenExpwy on January 04, 2020, 04:03:28 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.408343,-77.6161798,3a,37.5y,269.58h,91.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfwmHCGKp4G9yadxlQ_O5nQ!2e0!7i3328!8i1664

About 15 years ago, NYSDOT posted these on NY 21 in each direction approaching the Hornell reservoirs. If GSV is too blurry, it says:
CAUTION
REDUCED SALT
AREA
NEXT 1.5 MILES

The sign guy apparently forgot that white on a blue rectangle is for services; warning is black on a yellow diamond. They were taken away a few years ago.
(Also, Helvetica.)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: ErmineNotyours on January 05, 2020, 12:22:28 AM
Quote from: GenExpwy on January 02, 2020, 03:05:00 AM
Quote from: Revive 755 on January 01, 2020, 06:46:00 PM
I'm thinking the bottom sign should be an arrow instead of a symbolic no right turn for SB Bloomingdale Road at Schick Road in Bloomingdale, IL. (https://goo.gl/maps/B2pEa2MWCuJGm4M69)

Try this link
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9545178,-88.0810842,3a,75y,186.74h,92.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slsMF4JOl5vMzPVV6veCBwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

A since-removed example in North Bend, WA. (https://goo.gl/maps/vsh3KrdtkTd4VYCn8)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadfro on January 05, 2020, 02:58:15 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on January 03, 2020, 09:30:36 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 03, 2020, 09:23:13 PM
What sign would you rather have there? "Keep Right" Black/White Sign?

I guess that yellow sign implies a Divided Highway

Well, the yellow sign is for the end of a divided highway. In the instance in question, it's been placed upside down at the beginning of one.

The yellow warning sign shown here can be used to signal the beginning of or end of a divided highway, depending on the orientation. The MUTCD specifies separate sign codes, W6-1 and W6-2, for warning of the beginning and end of a divided highway, respectively.

The MUTCD (Sec 2C.22) explicitly prohibits using the W6-1 begin divided highway sign instead of a R4-7 "Keep Right" series sign on a median island.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: kphoger on January 06, 2020, 11:27:20 AM
Quote from: roadfro on January 05, 2020, 02:58:15 PM

Quote from: CtrlAltDel on January 03, 2020, 09:30:36 PM

Quote from: ilpt4u on January 03, 2020, 09:23:13 PM
What sign would you rather have there? "Keep Right" Black/White Sign?

I guess that yellow sign implies a Divided Highway

Well, the yellow sign is for the end of a divided highway. In the instance in question, it's been placed upside down at the beginning of one.

The yellow warning sign shown here can be used to signal the beginning of or end of a divided highway, depending on the orientation. The MUTCD specifies separate sign codes, W6-1 and W6-2, for warning of the beginning and end of a divided highway, respectively.

The MUTCD (Sec 2C.22) explicitly prohibits using the W6-1 begin divided highway sign instead of a R4-7 "Keep Right" series sign on a median island.

For the sake of the lazy or unaccustomed, here is the pertinent verbiage:

Quote from: MUTCD 2009 Edition
Section 2C.22 Divided Highway Sign (W6-1)

Guidance:
01 A Divided Highway (W6-1) sign (see Figure 2C-5) should be used on the approaches to a section of highway (not an intersection or junction) where the opposing flows of traffic are separated by a median or other physical barrier.

Standard:
02   The Divided Highway (W6-1) sign shall not be used instead of a Keep Right (R4-7 series) sign on the approach end of a median island.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: marleythedog on January 06, 2020, 12:19:28 PM
And since the original example was from British Columbia... Manual of Standard Traffic Signs& Pavement Markings (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/transportation-infrastructure/engineering-standards-and-guidelines/traffic-engineering-and-safety/traffic-engineering/traffic-signs-and-pavement-markings/manual_signs_pavement_marking.pdf) PDF page 85

Quote
The  W-48  DIVIDED  HIGHWAY  ENDS  sign  warns  motorists  of  an impending  transition  from  divided  highway  operation  to  undivided highway operation.This  sign  shall  only  be  used  on  multi-lane  highways.    This sign shall not be used at a channelized intersection or in place of the R-14 KEEP RIGHT sign.

TBH, I don't see anywhere in that manual that allows for that diagram to be used as a Divided Highway Begins sign in BC.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on January 06, 2020, 03:02:57 PM
Quote from: marleythedog on January 06, 2020, 12:19:28 PM
And since the original example was from British Columbia... Manual of Standard Traffic Signs& Pavement Markings (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/transportation-infrastructure/engineering-standards-and-guidelines/traffic-engineering-and-safety/traffic-engineering/traffic-signs-and-pavement-markings/manual_signs_pavement_marking.pdf) PDF page 85

Finally. I was starting to worry that people had forgotten about the example being in Canada.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: kphoger on January 06, 2020, 03:27:08 PM
Sorry, I saw palm trees in the GSV shot and assumed I didn't need to even look at the location.   :sombrero:
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: CtrlAltDel on January 06, 2020, 04:06:33 PM
Quote from: roadfro on January 05, 2020, 02:58:15 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on January 03, 2020, 09:30:36 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 03, 2020, 09:23:13 PM
What sign would you rather have there? "Keep Right" Black/White Sign?

I guess that yellow sign implies a Divided Highway

Well, the yellow sign is for the end of a divided highway. In the instance in question, it's been placed upside down at the beginning of one.

The yellow warning sign shown here can be used to signal the beginning of or end of a divided highway, depending on the orientation. The MUTCD specifies separate sign codes, W6-1 and W6-2, for warning of the beginning and end of a divided highway, respectively.

The MUTCD (Sec 2C.22) explicitly prohibits using the W6-1 begin divided highway sign instead of a R4-7 "Keep Right" series sign on a median island.

Quote from: marleythedog on January 06, 2020, 12:19:28 PM
And since the original example was from British Columbia... Manual of Standard Traffic Signs& Pavement Markings (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/transportation-infrastructure/engineering-standards-and-guidelines/traffic-engineering-and-safety/traffic-engineering/traffic-signs-and-pavement-markings/manual_signs_pavement_marking.pdf) PDF page 85

Quote
The  W-48  DIVIDED  HIGHWAY  ENDS  sign  warns  motorists  of  an impending  transition  from  divided  highway  operation  to  undivided highway operation.This  sign  shall  only  be  used  on  multi-lane  highways.    This sign shall not be used at a channelized intersection or in place of the R-14 KEEP RIGHT sign.

TBH, I don't see anywhere in that manual that allows for that diagram to be used as a Divided Highway Begins sign in BC.

So, in the US, I was right but for the wrong reason, and in Canada, I was right for the right reason. Since the sign was in Canada, then, I was technically correct . . . the best kind of correct.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on January 06, 2020, 05:34:26 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 06, 2020, 03:27:08 PM
Sorry, I saw palm trees in the GSV shot and assumed I didn't need to even look at the location.   :sombrero:

Vancouver Island, BC's Lower Mainland, and the Okanagan are basically the only three places in Canada where you'll find palm trees. Everywhere else gets too cold, IIRC (with the Okanagan just barely being warm enough). Not natural to any of those places, of course. But the climate does work well enough for them.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadfro on January 07, 2020, 11:19:09 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 06, 2020, 03:02:57 PM
Quote from: marleythedog on January 06, 2020, 12:19:28 PM
And since the original example was from British Columbia... Manual of Standard Traffic Signs& Pavement Markings (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/transportation-infrastructure/engineering-standards-and-guidelines/traffic-engineering-and-safety/traffic-engineering/traffic-signs-and-pavement-markings/manual_signs_pavement_marking.pdf) PDF page 85

Finally. I was starting to worry that people had forgotten about the example being in Canada.
To be fair, there was no location context mentioned in the original post. I just looked at the street view image without examining location details.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on January 07, 2020, 11:34:48 PM
Quote from: roadfro on January 07, 2020, 11:19:09 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 06, 2020, 03:02:57 PM
Quote from: marleythedog on January 06, 2020, 12:19:28 PM
And since the original example was from British Columbia... Manual of Standard Traffic Signs& Pavement Markings (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/driving-and-transportation/transportation-infrastructure/engineering-standards-and-guidelines/traffic-engineering-and-safety/traffic-engineering/traffic-signs-and-pavement-markings/manual_signs_pavement_marking.pdf) PDF page 85

Finally. I was starting to worry that people had forgotten about the example being in Canada.
To be fair, there was no location context mentioned in the original post. I just looked at the street view image without examining location details.

There were some contextual clues: the slightly narrow arrows on the warning sign, and the cross-hatching between single-yellow lines (relatively unusual in the US apart from some occasions), and (for car-geeks) a five-door Toyota Echo hatch (not sold in the US) off to the left in the parking lot.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadman on January 08, 2020, 09:51:12 AM
Quote from: bcroadguy on January 03, 2020, 04:16:07 AM
I think this is a pretty good example of right idea, wrong sign

https://www.google.com/maps/@48.443862,-123.5266725,3a,25.2y,264.24h,87.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-MOvRIXpyU6KqyHIELrEjw!2e0!5s20180501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

Noted similar installations in the Champaign/Urbana area on my past couple of trips to visit relatives out there.  Not sure if they're local installations or ID(i)OT though.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Brian556 on January 08, 2020, 08:42:45 PM
This one has to be the most creative sign misuse I've ever seen:https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5069368,-97.1111665,3a,15y,23.53h,84.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D3.0297606%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5069368,-97.1111665,3a,15y,23.53h,84.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D3.0297606%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: 7/8 on January 09, 2020, 07:18:59 AM
Quote from: Brian556 on January 08, 2020, 08:42:45 PM
This one has to be the most creative sign misuse I've ever seen:https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5069368,-97.1111665,3a,15y,23.53h,84.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D3.0297606%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5069368,-97.1111665,3a,15y,23.53h,84.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D3.0297606%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)

Wow that's awesome, and it works surprisingly well :-D
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadman on January 09, 2020, 09:31:12 AM
Quote from: Brian556 on January 08, 2020, 08:42:45 PM
This one has to be the most creative sign misuse I've ever seen:https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5069368,-97.1111665,3a,15y,23.53h,84.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D3.0297606%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5069368,-97.1111665,3a,15y,23.53h,84.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D3.0297606%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)


A graphic Stop Line sign.  I kind of like it myself.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: kphoger on January 09, 2020, 11:16:46 AM
meh.  Some white paint on the road would work better.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadman on January 09, 2020, 11:26:22 AM
Quote from: kphoger on January 09, 2020, 11:16:46 AM
meh.  Some white paint on the road would work better.

Until the early 1980s, it was common practice in Massachusetts to put a separate sign reading STOP LINE at the actual stop line, where one was marked on the pavement.   
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on January 09, 2020, 03:54:03 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 09, 2020, 11:26:22 AM
Quote from: kphoger on January 09, 2020, 11:16:46 AM
meh.  Some white paint on the road would work better.

Until the early 1980s, it was common practice in Massachusetts to put a separate sign reading STOP LINE at the actual stop line, where one was marked on the pavement.

At all stop lines (stop-control, signals)?
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: hotdogPi on January 09, 2020, 04:03:03 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/879/40336069625_b659718328_c.jpg)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadman on January 09, 2020, 04:32:10 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 09, 2020, 04:03:03 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/879/40336069625_b659718328_c.jpg)

First time I've seen a white on green Stop Line sign.  The ones in MA were black on white.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadman on January 09, 2020, 04:34:58 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2020, 03:54:03 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 09, 2020, 11:26:22 AM
Quote from: kphoger on January 09, 2020, 11:16:46 AM
meh.  Some white paint on the road would work better.

Until the early 1980s, it was common practice in Massachusetts to put a separate sign reading STOP LINE at the actual stop line, where one was marked on the pavement.

At all stop lines (stop-control, signals)?

Generally used only at signalized intersections, but occasionally used at stop-controlled locations where the Stop sign and the Stop line were offset from each other as well.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on January 09, 2020, 09:10:30 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 09, 2020, 04:34:58 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2020, 03:54:03 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 09, 2020, 11:26:22 AM
Quote from: kphoger on January 09, 2020, 11:16:46 AM
meh.  Some white paint on the road would work better.

Until the early 1980s, it was common practice in Massachusetts to put a separate sign reading STOP LINE at the actual stop line, where one was marked on the pavement.

At all stop lines (stop-control, signals)?

Generally used only at signalized intersections, but occasionally used at stop-controlled locations where the Stop sign and the Stop line were offset from each other as well.

Gotcha. I was thinking that using them at all intersections, stop and signal controlled, would have been overkill. Still overkill to use them at every intersection IMO (then again, the practice died off, so I must not have been alone in thinking that).
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: bcroadguy on January 10, 2020, 04:23:53 AM
Quote from: Brian556 on January 08, 2020, 08:42:45 PM
This one has to be the most creative sign misuse I've ever seen:https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5069368,-97.1111665,3a,15y,23.53h,84.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D3.0297606%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5069368,-97.1111665,3a,15y,23.53h,84.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D3.0297606%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)

I actually kinda like this
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadman on January 10, 2020, 09:12:36 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2020, 09:10:30 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 09, 2020, 04:34:58 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2020, 03:54:03 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 09, 2020, 11:26:22 AM
Quote from: kphoger on January 09, 2020, 11:16:46 AM
meh.  Some white paint on the road would work better.

Until the early 1980s, it was common practice in Massachusetts to put a separate sign reading STOP LINE at the actual stop line, where one was marked on the pavement.

At all stop lines (stop-control, signals)?

Generally used only at signalized intersections, but occasionally used at stop-controlled locations where the Stop sign and the Stop line were offset from each other as well.

Gotcha. I was thinking that using them at all intersections, stop and signal controlled, would have been overkill. Still overkill to use them at every intersection IMO (then again, the practice died off, so I must not have been alone in thinking that).

MassDPW discontinued use of Stop Line signs in the late 1980s, although the MDC continued to use them into the DCR era.  I encounter a straggler out there every so often, but I haven't seen a new install in some time.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 10, 2020, 09:51:24 AM
Quote from: roadman on January 10, 2020, 09:12:36 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2020, 09:10:30 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 09, 2020, 04:34:58 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 09, 2020, 03:54:03 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 09, 2020, 11:26:22 AM
Quote from: kphoger on January 09, 2020, 11:16:46 AM
meh.  Some white paint on the road would work better.

Until the early 1980s, it was common practice in Massachusetts to put a separate sign reading STOP LINE at the actual stop line, where one was marked on the pavement.

At all stop lines (stop-control, signals)?

Generally used only at signalized intersections, but occasionally used at stop-controlled locations where the Stop sign and the Stop line were offset from each other as well.

Gotcha. I was thinking that using them at all intersections, stop and signal controlled, would have been overkill. Still overkill to use them at every intersection IMO (then again, the practice died off, so I must not have been alone in thinking that).

MassDPW discontinued use of Stop Line signs in the late 1980s, although the MDC continued to use them into the DCR era.  I encounter a straggler out there every so often, but I haven't seen a new install in some time.

And quite often they're usually so far back from the intersection that they're meaningless anyway.  When they're in the proper spot, you usually see a supplemental "Stop Here On Red" to show that it's actually in the appropriate place.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 23, 2020, 08:47:21 PM
Here are some weird signs for the message: left turn yield to oncoming traffic:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4166844,-71.157...384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5973587,-71.435...384!8i8192


iPhone
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: TheGrassGuy on March 24, 2020, 09:31:40 AM
This route must've been a bully in high school (https://www.alpsroads.net/roads/ma/ma_16/route.jpg)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: deathtopumpkins on March 24, 2020, 10:19:37 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 23, 2020, 08:47:21 PM
Here are some weird signs for the message: left turn yield to oncoming traffic:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4166844,-71.157...384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5973587,-71.435...384!8i8192


iPhone

Those are both the exact same broken link, FYI
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on March 24, 2020, 04:51:00 PM
Quote from: deathtopumpkins on March 24, 2020, 10:19:37 AM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 23, 2020, 08:47:21 PM
Here are some weird signs for the message: left turn yield to oncoming traffic:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4166844,-71.157...384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5973587,-71.435...384!8i8192

Those are both the exact same broken link, FYI

Here's the original quote...looks like his phone screwed up the links:

Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 23, 2020, 04:29:42 PM
I started a new topic where you post a google maps link or photo of a sign with the right words for the message but said in a non-compliant or strange way. Here are some examples for the left turn yield to oncoming traffic sign:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4166844,-71.1579648,3a,16.6y,184.72h,90.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYBRg2wq9m_R2gzxdyjTqiw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5973587,-71.4351066,3a,20.7y,14.64h,85.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shGhNN1-mMGkbCh8jqQRxpA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Amtrakprod on March 24, 2020, 06:44:14 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on March 23, 2020, 08:47:21 PM
Here are some weird signs for the message: left turn yield to oncoming traffic:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4166844,-71.157...384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5973587,-71.435...384!8i8192


iPhone
It worked before so idk. Prolly since I sent it from my phone. Let's try this:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4166844,-71.1579648,3a,15y,184.92h,91.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYBRg2wq9m_R2gzxdyjTqiw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5973587,-71.4351066,3a,15y,11.09h,88.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shGhNN1-mMGkbCh8jqQRxpA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: cjk374 on April 05, 2020, 06:26:18 PM
Quote from: 7/8 on January 09, 2020, 07:18:59 AM
Quote from: Brian556 on January 08, 2020, 08:42:45 PM
This one has to be the most creative sign misuse I've ever seen:https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5069368,-97.1111665,3a,15y,23.53h,84.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D3.0297606%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@34.5069368,-97.1111665,3a,15y,23.53h,84.56t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DqU-mTHExCwPEIG4jGLL83g%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D3.0297606%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656)

Wow that's awesome, and it works surprisingly well :-D

Magnolia, AR would like to say, "Hold my beer!"

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.2671453,-93.2243924,3a,15y,229.58h,82.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBR67eXd-zwEBziD7yhDunw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: cjk374 on April 05, 2020, 06:32:06 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 03, 2020, 09:54:01 PM
Quote from: ilpt4u on January 03, 2020, 09:23:13 PM

Quote from: bcroadguy on January 03, 2020, 04:16:07 AM
I think this is a pretty good example of right idea, wrong sign

https://www.google.com/maps/@48.443862,-123.5266725,3a,25.2y,264.24h,87.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-MOvRIXpyU6KqyHIELrEjw!2e0!5s20180501T000000!7i13312!8i6656
What sign would you rather have there? "Keep Right" Black/White Sign?

I guess that yellow sign implies a Divided Highway

kphoger's examples look like "Traffic Circle" signs would be more appropriate, or Right Turn Only

Should be R4-7 instead.  A yellow diamond is a warning sign telling you about an upcoming hazard.


LADOTD is bad about doing this. Many examples of this can still be seen up and down US 167 north of Alexandria where the road was widened/divided under the TIMED program. US 167 was finished and signed around 2011, and many medians are still signed this way today:

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.480348,-92.6425763,3a,75y,233.68h,93.61t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1smdwjyBR8WWmH9Fh9i58-sw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DmdwjyBR8WWmH9Fh9i58-sw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D299.21655%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: CoreySamson on April 05, 2020, 07:44:34 PM
FM 2004 in Lake Jackson:

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.0584586,-95.4561804,3a,86.2y,220.7h,71.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGqTlQydyCpKZVXI46adZwQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Here, they wanted to indicate that the left lane merges into the right lane, but it ended up conveying the opposite message of what's actually happening.

The signs were recently flipped and moved to the other side of the road.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: JKRhodes on April 28, 2020, 01:04:35 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on April 05, 2020, 07:44:34 PM
FM 2004 in Lake Jackson:

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.0584586,-95.4561804,3a,86.2y,220.7h,71.73t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGqTlQydyCpKZVXI46adZwQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Here, they wanted to indicate that the left lane merges into the right lane, but it ended up conveying the opposite message of what's actually happening.

The signs were recently flipped and moved to the other side of the road.


I see stuff like that occasionally on Phoenix area freeway onramps: a "Left (or right) lane ends" sign is posted, but the seams in the concrete or jogs in the striping make it obvious other lane is ending contrary to what's indicated by the sign:

https://goo.gl/maps/oXMTPNuvUEaR2iCKA

This one starts as a three lane on-ramp. The two left lanes drop off sequentially over a fairly long distance before the ramp enters thed mainline, but ADOT chose to sign it as a "left lane ends" followed by "right lane ends."
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: D-Dey65 on April 28, 2020, 10:14:53 AM
Quote from: Brian556 on April 02, 2015, 11:08:32 AM
There are several intersections like this in Double Oak, Texas. This is what happens when people who don't know much about signs are allowed to install them.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1209.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fcc395%2FBrian5561%2F100511012.jpg&hash=e70df7db4a5b5d30d48e46d9d895cd2260dfc272) (http://s1209.photobucket.com/user/Brian5561/media/100511012.jpg.html)
Okay, seriously. Do they not know what this one is for?

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1c/MUTCD_W1-7.svg/640px-MUTCD_W1-7.svg.png)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 28, 2020, 02:50:27 PM
  TXdot even has their own version for it! (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200428/744fc65b37864caedc736f1dfc069b78.jpg)


iPhone
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on April 28, 2020, 06:06:23 PM
^^
Is that "W1-7[Texas]"? :-D
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Amtrakprod on April 28, 2020, 07:02:05 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 28, 2020, 06:06:23 PM
^^
Is that "W1-7[Texas]"? :-D
Yep. Texas loves themself that's for sure!


iPhone
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: D-Dey65 on April 29, 2020, 09:44:42 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 28, 2020, 07:02:05 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 28, 2020, 06:06:23 PM
^^
Is that "W1-7[Texas]"? :-D
Yep. Texas loves themself that's for sure!


iPhone
Actually, I don't think that's such a bad idea. I'm sure they have their own criteria for when to use this version as opposed to the standard W1-7.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: CoreySamson on April 30, 2020, 09:27:48 PM
Quote from: D-Dey65 on April 29, 2020, 09:44:42 PM
Quote from: Amtrakprod on April 28, 2020, 07:02:05 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on April 28, 2020, 06:06:23 PM
^^
Is that "W1-7[Texas]"? :-D
Yep. Texas loves themself that's for sure!


iPhone
Actually, I don't think that's such a bad idea. I'm sure they have their own criteria for when to use this version as opposed to the standard W1-7.

I think they must use W1-7Ts as warning signs for three way highway intersections, and use W1-7s for local streets and county routes. That seems to me like the general rule, but I may be wrong.
Here's one of many examples of a W1-7T:

https://goo.gl/maps/i4mP4dTnsJC5HpiCA

Edit: Fixed link
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: kphoger on July 10, 2020, 04:35:49 PM
Something about this (https://goo.gl/maps/pHLfuCqeG2rRL2vt8) looks a little fishy.  Is it just me?
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: GaryA on July 10, 2020, 05:13:01 PM
On the two-lane portion of CA-118 eastbound, there is a black-on-white sign reading "35 ZONE AHEAD" (GSV: https://goo.gl/maps/b7aDeVhug2XQG4Xw9 )

The problem with this is that there is no speed limit of 35 MPH.  There is an S-curve coming up that has an advisory speed of 35, and which has had many accidents over the years.  You can understand the desire to get drivers' attention, but that's still the wrong sign for this situation.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadfro on July 12, 2020, 09:15:53 PM
Quote from: kphoger on July 10, 2020, 04:35:49 PM
Something about this (https://goo.gl/maps/pHLfuCqeG2rRL2vt8) looks a little fishy.  Is it just me?

It's not just you. Those Keep Right signs are meant to go on a median nose. The correct way of doing this would have been to just make one sign: "Wide Loads Keep Right".
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Roadrunner75 on July 12, 2020, 09:48:42 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 12, 2020, 09:15:53 PM
Quote from: kphoger on July 10, 2020, 04:35:49 PM
Something about this (https://goo.gl/maps/pHLfuCqeG2rRL2vt8) looks a little fishy.  Is it just me?

It's not just you. Those Keep Right signs are meant to go on a median nose. The correct way of doing this would have been to just make one sign: "Wide Loads Keep Right".
A little bit further down that road:
https://www.google.com/maps/@27.7074233,-99.7349476,3a,54.6y,45.19h,95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s31saRHvnRpF9J13tcCkfrg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@27.7074233,-99.7349476,3a,54.6y,45.19h,95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s31saRHvnRpF9J13tcCkfrg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en)
Loads over 18' high??   I wouldn't expect to be able to drive down just about any road with a load over 18' and not smack into something.

Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: CardInLex on July 13, 2020, 08:35:57 PM
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on July 12, 2020, 09:48:42 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 12, 2020, 09:15:53 PM
Quote from: kphoger on July 10, 2020, 04:35:49 PM
Something about this (https://goo.gl/maps/pHLfuCqeG2rRL2vt8) looks a little fishy.  Is it just me?

It's not just you. Those Keep Right signs are meant to go on a median nose. The correct way of doing this would have been to just make one sign: "Wide Loads Keep Right".

A little bit further down that road:
https://www.google.com/maps/@27.7074233,-99.7349476,3a,54.6y,45.19h,95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s31saRHvnRpF9J13tcCkfrg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en (https://www.google.com/maps/@27.7074233,-99.7349476,3a,54.6y,45.19h,95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s31saRHvnRpF9J13tcCkfrg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en)
Loads over 18' high??   I wouldn't expect to be able to drive down just about any road with a load over 18' and not smack into something.

I have several questions. The main one being why are the thru lanes separated with delineators just to end a little bit down the road for no reason.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: kphoger on July 14, 2020, 01:30:28 PM
Quote from: CardInLex on July 13, 2020, 08:35:57 PM
I have several questions. The main one being why are the thru lanes separated with delineators just to end a little bit down the road for no reason.

Signs upstream state that the separated lane is for wide loads, although I don't know why that has to be physically separated.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Revive 755 on November 08, 2020, 10:08:50 PM
Cross Road signs (W2-1) instead of the correct Type 4 object markers at the end of a road south of Wauconda, IL (https://goo.gl/maps/Md4SxshF9XCBaeAp9)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: kphoger on November 09, 2020, 01:57:05 PM
Quote from: Revive 755 on November 08, 2020, 10:08:50 PM
Cross Road signs (W2-1) instead of the correct Type 4 object markers at the end of a road south of Wauconda, IL (https://goo.gl/maps/Md4SxshF9XCBaeAp9)

That's a first for me.  I've seen a T-intersection warning sign used at the end of a street before, but not that type.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Scott5114 on November 09, 2020, 03:00:01 PM
I mean, if you turned them 45° so that they were square instead of diamond, then they'd show X's, which would get the point across.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: lepidopteran on November 12, 2020, 09:59:41 PM
How about this one (https://goo.gl/maps/12ytauLVPzfssuJB9), in Laurel, MD?

The "Right Turn Only" sign is typically used at the likes of a parking lot exit, where an impassable median and/or the angle make turning right the only practical option.  The usual signage for this setup is the curved "Only" arrow.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on November 13, 2020, 01:49:24 PM
Quote from: lepidopteran on November 12, 2020, 09:59:41 PM
How about this one (https://goo.gl/maps/12ytauLVPzfssuJB9), in Laurel, MD?

The "Right Turn Only" sign is typically used at the likes of a parking lot exit, where an impassable median and/or the angle make turning right the only practical option.  The usual signage for this setup is the curved "Only" arrow.

I would agree. This could also be used leading up to an intersection where the right lane is right-only, mounted on a post. "Right lane must turn right" is more common but I've seen "right turn only" used for that purpose before.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: STLmapboy on November 14, 2020, 02:48:52 PM
This isn't even the right idea. What the hell is this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.5886044,-93.3425635,3a,23.7y,86.49h,88.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLICJvhsK0y3Rpo0Rp38_yg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) (W4-1) doing in front of the exit?
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on November 14, 2020, 05:40:48 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 14, 2020, 02:48:52 PM
This isn't even the right idea. What the hell is this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.5886044,-93.3425635,3a,23.7y,86.49h,88.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLICJvhsK0y3Rpo0Rp38_yg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) (W4-1) doing in front of the exit?

I think it's to warn of the merge just past the exit.

That reminds me of this sign (https://goo.gl/maps/BE6JXX9xT6B2iL1V9) in Tacoma, WA that warns of the right lane ending. Oh, that right lane? Yeah, it's the one joining on the right. As in, none of the lanes visible when you see the sign. Just stupid, and yet further evidence that we continually shoot ourselves in the foot when it comes to encouraging zipper merging by signing merges and lane endings three hundred miles in advance.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: cjk374 on November 16, 2020, 06:51:11 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 14, 2020, 02:48:52 PM
This isn't even the right idea. What the hell is this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.5886044,-93.3425635,3a,23.7y,86.49h,88.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLICJvhsK0y3Rpo0Rp38_yg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) (W4-1) doing in front of the exit?

Dixie Inn, LA. This merge sign is located at the required distance from the merging on-ramp. It looks weird, but it is proper & correct.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: STLmapboy on November 16, 2020, 09:34:21 AM
Quote from: cjk374 on November 16, 2020, 06:51:11 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 14, 2020, 02:48:52 PM
This isn't even the right idea. What the hell is this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.5886044,-93.3425635,3a,23.7y,86.49h,88.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLICJvhsK0y3Rpo0Rp38_yg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) (W4-1) doing in front of the exit?

Dixie Inn, LA. This merge sign is located at the required distance from the merging on-ramp. It looks weird, but it is proper & correct.
Would it really be that hard to put it after the offramp though?
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jakeroot on November 16, 2020, 04:02:59 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 16, 2020, 09:34:21 AM
Quote from: cjk374 on November 16, 2020, 06:51:11 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 14, 2020, 02:48:52 PM
This isn't even the right idea. What the hell is this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.5886044,-93.3425635,3a,23.7y,86.49h,88.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLICJvhsK0y3Rpo0Rp38_yg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) (W4-1) doing in front of the exit?

Dixie Inn, LA. This merge sign is located at the required distance from the merging on-ramp. It looks weird, but it is proper & correct.
Would it really be that hard to put it after the offramp though?

It would be easy enough, of course, but the stupid rules say to place it a certain distance prior to a merge.

Then again, there could be an exception for situations like this, since I normally only see those merge signs (for RIRO-style ramps) after the off-ramp, like this (https://goo.gl/maps/ooFSWetPK5X8A1Np8)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: wanderer2575 on November 16, 2020, 10:45:04 PM
Quote from: roadfro on July 12, 2020, 09:15:53 PM
Quote from: kphoger on July 10, 2020, 04:35:49 PM
Something about this (https://goo.gl/maps/pHLfuCqeG2rRL2vt8) looks a little fishy.  Is it just me?

It's not just you. Those Keep Right signs are meant to go on a median nose. The correct way of doing this would have been to just make one sign: "Wide Loads Keep Right".

A contractor did something similar with a detour "assembly" on I-696 in Pleasant Ridge some years ago:

(https://i.imgur.com/7XZz8wS.jpg)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: wanderer2575 on November 16, 2020, 10:48:42 PM
Northbound US-127 in Addison MI before a sign replacement project several years ago:

(https://i.imgur.com/uTSb1oj.jpg)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadfro on November 19, 2020, 11:23:16 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 16, 2020, 04:02:59 PM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 16, 2020, 09:34:21 AM
Quote from: cjk374 on November 16, 2020, 06:51:11 AM
Quote from: STLmapboy on November 14, 2020, 02:48:52 PM
This isn't even the right idea. What the hell is this (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.5886044,-93.3425635,3a,23.7y,86.49h,88.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLICJvhsK0y3Rpo0Rp38_yg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656/) (W4-1) doing in front of the exit?

Dixie Inn, LA. This merge sign is located at the required distance from the merging on-ramp. It looks weird, but it is proper & correct.
Would it really be that hard to put it after the offramp though?

It would be easy enough, of course, but the stupid rules say to place it a certain distance prior to a merge.

Then again, there could be an exception for situations like this, since I normally only see those merge signs (for RIRO-style ramps) after the off-ramp, like this (https://goo.gl/maps/ooFSWetPK5X8A1Np8)

Yeah, I'm sure it's a distance requirement issue, or perhaps incorrectly-interpreted distance

It doesn't seem entirely clear based on MUTCD Table 2C-4 what distance should be used... For that Dixie Inn one, if we were to use 65mph, footnote 2 indicates it would be the table's Condition A resulting in a 1200 foot placement for a merge–which is still before the exit, and seems quite unusual...


There's a lot of this phenomenon along Nevada's US 50 & US 50 Alt between Fernley & Fallon. This stretch is mostly four-lane divided, with many High-T intersections. So you'll see the merge/added lane warning sign notifying of the traffic entering on the left side from the side roads. In most (if not all) of these cases, the merge sign comes before the point of the mainline turn–and due to lack of space in the median, is often posted on the right side of the carriageway instead of the left (example (https://goo.gl/maps/mGPnG8f3aJKxuJYZ8)).

By comparison, my US 50 Alt example is also 65mph. The measure tool in Google Maps indicated roughly 400 feet from the sign to the physical gore, which seems to correspond to the Table 2C-4 result for a Condition B 20mph deceleration.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: andrepoiy on December 10, 2020, 05:00:03 PM
Here is a sign somewhere near me. This sign in Ontario is used to indicate which lanes are exit lanes and are really only found on freeways. However, it appears this sign here is being used to indicate that the right lane becomes a turn lane. The correct sign would be a "RIGHT LANE MUST EXIT", so yeah, wrong sign right idea.

The smaller image on the bottom is an example of the correct usage of the sign.

(https://i.imgur.com/6GAWmmX.png)

(https://i.imgur.com/xwt9o8x.png)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: PurdueBill on December 12, 2020, 01:38:53 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 13, 2020, 01:49:24 PM
Quote from: lepidopteran on November 12, 2020, 09:59:41 PM
How about this one (https://goo.gl/maps/12ytauLVPzfssuJB9), in Laurel, MD?

The "Right Turn Only" sign is typically used at the likes of a parking lot exit, where an impassable median and/or the angle make turning right the only practical option.  The usual signage for this setup is the curved "Only" arrow.

I would agree. This could also be used leading up to an intersection where the right lane is right-only, mounted on a post. "Right lane must turn right" is more common but I've seen "right turn only" used for that purpose before.

One could do what Peabody, Mass does a lot and make a custom job for two lanes (https://goo.gl/maps/fuJVCxhCcxwat67p9)....it existed from when they redid the intersection and added the signal (late 80s I think I remember? If not, very early 90s) and there were signs on Lowell Street that also had "TURN ONLY".  The westbound LEFT TURN ONLY was changed to a LEFT LANE MUST TURN LEFT in very short order.  The RIGHT TURN ONLY sign eastbound is still there all these years later. (https://goo.gl/maps/kbJZwjfL7huNzQYZ7)  Other boobery when they added the signal included the cabinet being attached to the mast such that it completely blocked the sidewalk.  It was moved to its present location afterward.  The original ground-mounted eastbound signal, an 8-8-8 like the overheads, only lasted a year or two before being knocked down and replaced with a 12-12-12.   
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: JoePCool14 on January 10, 2022, 11:47:04 AM
Bringing this thread back from the dead!

IDOT has apparently never heard of chevrons, at least for Sheridan Rd here. I really don't like the practice of spamming these big arrow signs.

https://goo.gl/maps/fwQD1D4PnNBihLXf6
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Scott5114 on January 12, 2022, 12:47:27 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on January 10, 2022, 11:47:04 AM
Bringing this thread back from the dead!

IDOT has apparently never heard of chevrons, at least for Sheridan Rd here. I really don't like the practice of spamming these big arrow signs.

https://goo.gl/maps/fwQD1D4PnNBihLXf6

This vantage point is pretty confusing. https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1202712,-87.737,3a,75y,55.9h,87.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sG3GY1cMfTn6t_Qq0IsTNiw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: jeffandnicole on January 12, 2022, 01:09:01 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 12, 2022, 12:47:27 AM
Quote from: JoePCool14 on January 10, 2022, 11:47:04 AM
Bringing this thread back from the dead!

IDOT has apparently never heard of chevrons, at least for Sheridan Rd here. I really don't like the practice of spamming these big arrow signs.

https://goo.gl/maps/fwQD1D4PnNBihLXf6

This vantage point is pretty confusing. https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1202712,-87.737,3a,75y,55.9h,87.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sG3GY1cMfTn6t_Qq0IsTNiw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Hopefully the driver is looking to their left at the upcoming road, rather than to the right to see the trees.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: LilianaUwU on January 14, 2022, 09:35:00 PM
A "30 km" distance banner used as a 30 km/h advisory speed sign:

https://goo.gl/maps/o4XZPcJ3oChC4tQ4A

(https://i.imgur.com/f4KUc4a.png)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: 7/8 on March 14, 2023, 02:53:30 PM
Cross-posting from "erroneous road signs" since kphoger reminded me this thread exists. :)

Quote from: 7/8 on March 14, 2023, 02:24:09 PM
Here's one on Huron Road in Kitchener, ON (street view (https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.3840917,-80.4787338,3a,15y,105.65h,90.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sVNDguaD1hY2c82FUC_CrTw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)):

The current sign is a Wa-14 "T-Intersection Sign (Uncontrolled)" rotated 90 degrees CCW. The proper sign would be a Wa-13A "Intersection Sign (Controlled)":
(https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/2464/4005/products/Screen_Shot_2018-12-21_at_9.58.23_AM_352x.png?v=1545404327)

In reality, it's a pretty minor difference that most people wouldn't notice, but as a roadgeek, it bugs me a bit. :)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: bcroadguy on April 25, 2023, 04:10:52 AM
I think this is an EXCELLENT example of "right idea, wrong sign."

Here, there are two lanes, and the right lane becomes a RIGHT turn only lane at the intersection ahead. After the intersection, the road curves to the LEFT. However, as of 2019, there was a "road curves to the RIGHT yellow diamond" sign. (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2704372,-122.7753526,3a,30.8y,17.36h,87.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0SF2lDClKmMX3epFKAGWyQ!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

In 2020 when the road was repaved, this sign was replaced with the standard white-on-black Canadian "right turn only" sign. (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.2704387,-122.7753482,3a,15y,31.48h,90.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDz5p-UVSwYLCfPVOj7L3OQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: bcroadguy on April 25, 2023, 05:45:19 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on January 03, 2020, 05:19:19 PM
Quote from: bcroadguy on January 03, 2020, 04:16:07 AM
I think this is a pretty good example of right idea, wrong sign

https://www.google.com/maps/@48.443862,-123.5266725,3a,25.2y,264.24h,87.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-MOvRIXpyU6KqyHIELrEjw!2e0!5s20180501T000000!7i13312!8i6656

I would say that's the textbook definition of "right idea, wrong sign".

Such a good example, in fact, that it took me several moments to realize the issue.

I posted this over 3 years ago. Originally, a "divided highway begins" sign was posted in the median (instead of a "median: keep right" sign). Now, this sign has been replaced with a "divided highway ends" sign. The "divided highway" does not end until several (new) intersections / roundabouts later. I think Langford, BC needs to learn about "median: keep right" signs.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: CoreySamson on June 11, 2023, 12:38:03 AM
Huh, looks like this road dead ends ahead:
https://goo.gl/maps/1AZSdBHfniGqv7HK9
Hold up, wait, that's totally the wrong sign for this sort of situation. Maybe a dead end sign would work better. But wait, the sign was right! (https://goo.gl/maps/CmEs9Lgv5NkzUE2N8)

I wonder if this situation counts as wrong idea, right sign.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Big John on June 11, 2023, 01:41:50 AM
^^ Should be DEAD END sign, red diamond marker
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: roadfro on June 11, 2023, 11:41:15 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on June 11, 2023, 12:38:03 AM
Huh, looks like this road dead ends ahead:
https://goo.gl/maps/1AZSdBHfniGqv7HK9
Hold up, wait, that's totally the wrong sign for this sort of situation. Maybe a dead end sign would work better. But wait, the sign was right! (https://goo.gl/maps/CmEs9Lgv5NkzUE2N8)

I wonder if this situation counts as wrong idea, right sign.

To be fair, there is a "Road Ends" sign upstream: https://goo.gl/maps/6KQjS8k7gqs2BLsa7

But yeah, "stop ahead" and use of the stop sign on the end of road marker is just bizarre.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: PurdueBill on June 16, 2023, 11:03:43 PM
Quote from: roadfro on June 11, 2023, 11:41:15 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on June 11, 2023, 12:38:03 AM
Huh, looks like this road dead ends ahead:
https://goo.gl/maps/1AZSdBHfniGqv7HK9
Hold up, wait, that's totally the wrong sign for this sort of situation. Maybe a dead end sign would work better. But wait, the sign was right! (https://goo.gl/maps/CmEs9Lgv5NkzUE2N8)

I wonder if this situation counts as wrong idea, right sign.

To be fair, there is a "Road Ends" sign upstream: https://goo.gl/maps/6KQjS8k7gqs2BLsa7

But yeah, "stop ahead" and use of the stop sign on the end of road marker is just bizarre.

At least they got rid of the yellow diamond "no parking" and "tow away" signs that were present in the 2016 view. 
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: Revive 755 on February 03, 2024, 10:33:47 PM
Left Turn Only At Signal (https://maps.app.goo.gl/2BX9ZjQ451eJo9dc6) on IN 51 in Hobart instead of a No Left Turn sign near the channelized right turn for the SB to WB right turn.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: wanderer2575 on February 18, 2024, 07:48:09 PM
W1-2R signs used as route direction arrows in Carey, OH:

(https://i.imgur.com/ltfoNWl.jpg)
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: mglass87 on March 15, 2024, 10:45:13 AM
Hopefully this belongs here. Stop signs being used for school crosswalks:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/21gYaeyaXoQv3fXU9

https://maps.app.goo.gl/Kp7WA8t2FPN6TfxM8
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: epzik8 on March 15, 2024, 03:49:21 PM
Quote from: mglass87 on March 15, 2024, 10:45:13 AM
Hopefully this belongs here. Stop signs being used for school crosswalks:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/21gYaeyaXoQv3fXU9

https://maps.app.goo.gl/Kp7WA8t2FPN6TfxM8

There barely even are crosswalks there.
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: andrepoiy on March 16, 2024, 10:56:16 AM
These kinds of stop signs are the ones that probably get disregarded the most
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: ElishaGOtis on March 16, 2024, 09:10:22 PM
Quote from: andrepoiy on March 16, 2024, 10:56:16 AM
These kinds of stop signs are the ones that probably get disregarded the most

Unless of course, someone is watching...  :pan:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/R1gx3RyubD5yQ2z88

There's not even a proper sidewalk on the other side of the crosswalk, just a little park fee payment booth...
Title: Re: Right Idea, Wrong Sign
Post by: mglass87 on March 21, 2024, 08:27:53 PM
At a hospital exit:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/2g6kWuzatekTq2E8A