The Best of Road Signs

[kendancy66]

Yet again another amazing sign from LA, this one is a varible message panel! https://www.google.com/maps/@34.074901,-118.2322674,3a,15y,37.78h,101.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sA5BBY74XsetVEouVhx2Dng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Great sign indeed.  One thing I cannot figure out is why this arrangement is only available in rush hour.  Certainly, the main connection from Downtown LA to I-5 north would justify having 2 lanes at all times.  The second lane from the left should be an option lane to either I-5 north or CA-110 north at all times. 

Then the VMS can be converted to an APL.

During "rush hour" they only want that lane as be used left turn only to I-5 North. At other times, you can still make that left, but also continue straight onto to Pasadena.  Anyone who regularly drives through there going to Pasadena know if you to stay to the right there, those lanes are much less congested.

[ThatTenneseeRoadgeek]

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.3750196,-106.6930117,3a,24.1y,151.14h,107.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1st_nhZcyc-aAG2x1JOO3krg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 I don't think this needs an explanation. (Buffalo, WY)

[hotdogPi]

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.3750196,-106.6930117,3a,24.1y,151.14h,107.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1st_nhZcyc-aAG2x1JOO3krg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 I don't think this needs an explanation. (Buffalo, WY)

I need an explanation. I'm seeing a state-named shield, but nothing else exceptionally good.

[jeffandnicole]

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.3750196,-106.6930117,3a,24.1y,151.14h,107.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1st_nhZcyc-aAG2x1JOO3krg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 I don't think this needs an explanation. (Buffalo, WY)

I need an explanation. I'm seeing a state-named shield, but nothing else exceptionally good.

Center exit tab; bad kerning for Casper; single up arrow for 2 lanes when an arrow isn't needed in the first place. It's actually bad signage, not good.

[mrsman]

Yet again another amazing sign from LA, this one is a varible message panel! https://www.google.com/maps/@34.074901,-118.2322674,3a,15y,37.78h,101.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sA5BBY74XsetVEouVhx2Dng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Great sign indeed.  One thing I cannot figure out is why this arrangement is only available in rush hour.  Certainly, the main connection from Downtown LA to I-5 north would justify having 2 lanes at all times.  The second lane from the left should be an option lane to either I-5 north or CA-110 north at all times. 

Then the VMS can be converted to an APL.

During "rush hour" they only want that lane as be used left turn only to I-5 North. At other times, you can still make that left, but also continue straight onto to Pasadena.  Anyone who regularly drives through there going to Pasadena know if you to stay to the right there, those lanes are much less congested.

Unless,something has changed more recently, I think it's the other way around.  There is a regular sign posted on GSV saying that from 3-7 PM left lane turns left, second lane is an option lane.  I assume that means that at other times (non-rush hour) only the left lane turns left and the second lane must continue on 110.

But you are correct that given the traffic volumes, the 110 to I-5 north should have at least 2 optional lanes at most times (and not just one during non-rush hour).  That was at the heart of my question.

[roadfro]

Yet again another amazing sign from LA, this one is a varible message panel! https://www.google.com/maps/@34.074901,-118.2322674,3a,15y,37.78h,101.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sA5BBY74XsetVEouVhx2Dng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Great sign indeed.  One thing I cannot figure out is why this arrangement is only available in rush hour.  Certainly, the main connection from Downtown LA to I-5 north would justify having 2 lanes at all times.  The second lane from the left should be an option lane to either I-5 north or CA-110 north at all times. 

Then the VMS can be converted to an APL.

During "rush hour" they only want that lane as be used left turn only to I-5 North. At other times, you can still make that left, but also continue straight onto to Pasadena.  Anyone who regularly drives through there going to Pasadena know if you to stay to the right there, those lanes are much less congested.

Unless,something has changed more recently, I think it's the other way around.  There is a regular sign posted on GSV saying that from 3-7 PM left lane turns left, second lane is an option lane.  I assume that means that at other times (non-rush hour) only the left lane turns left and the second lane must continue on 110.

But you are correct that given the traffic volumes, the 110 to I-5 north should have at least 2 optional lanes at most times (and not just one during non-rush hour).  That was at the heart of my question.

Sign in question: https://goo.gl/maps/ZcT95CkwUj42

Note by definition, you can only ever have one option lane...

The possible breakdowns for this scenario are:
5 EXIT | 5 EXIT | 110 NB | 110 NB
5 EXIT | Option | 110 NB | 110 NB
5 EXIT | 110 NB | 110 NB | 110 NB

A more interesting question is why isn't it just marked as an option lane all the time? The geometry is set up as an option lane, and there are no physical devices or markings present that would prohibit a vehicle from going one direction or the other.

Going back to the 2009 Street View, it appears that the exit had previously been marked to just have the #1 lane exit only to I-5 and the painted gore was much wider, but the variable signs existed at this time as well. So it appears the variable signage existed to allow drivers in the #2 lane to cross the painted gore and exit to I-5 when activated. (2012 street view also indicates that there were in-roadway lane lights in the pavement that may have helped delineate this.) However, the striping was changed sometime between 2009 and 2011 to permanently allow the option lane. So the variable signage doesn't seem to be necessary any longer.

[Mergingtraffic]

Hilton Pkwy in Baltimore, MD.

[ClassicHasClass]

Hey. That's a lovely old beast. Hope it stays up for a long time; it looks like it should last.

[kendancy66]

Yet again another amazing sign from LA, this one is a varible message panel! https://www.google.com/maps/@34.074901,-118.2322674,3a,15y,37.78h,101.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sA5BBY74XsetVEouVhx2Dng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Great sign indeed.  One thing I cannot figure out is why this arrangement is only available in rush hour.  Certainly, the main connection from Downtown LA to I-5 north would justify having 2 lanes at all times.  The second lane from the left should be an option lane to either I-5 north or CA-110 north at all times. 

Then the VMS can be converted to an APL.

During "rush hour" they only want that lane as be used left turn only to I-5 North. At other times, you can still make that left, but also continue straight onto to Pasadena.  Anyone who regularly drives through there going to Pasadena know if you to stay to the right there, those lanes are much less congested.

Unless,something has changed more recently, I think it's the other way around.  There is a regular sign posted on GSV saying that from 3-7 PM left lane turns left, second lane is an option lane.  I assume that means that at other times (non-rush hour) only the left lane turns left and the second lane must continue on 110.

But you are correct that given the traffic volumes, the 110 to I-5 north should have at least 2 optional lanes at most times (and not just one during non-rush hour).  That was at the heart of my question.

After reviewing google street view myself, and now seeing the regulatory black on white sign that precedes the VMS sign.  I did have it backwards.  The #2 lane is option lane during rush hour (3-7-PM) and straight ahead all other times.  I guess what I was saying before was that is the way I THINK IT SHOULD BE.  Which is #2 lane turns left only during rush hour.  The purpose of this would be to get traffic continuing to Pasadena to stay to the right, to have then #1 and #2 lane for I-5 north traffic.  My two personal experiences driving here was that I stayed left the whole time from downtown only to find out at the left turn that If I had stayed right I would have saved about 10-15 minutes of dealing with traffic.  The other time I actually wanted to turn left to go the Griffith Park, and patiently waited in #1 lane, only to realize I could have saved time being in number 2 lane.

[formulanone]

Hilton Pkwy in Baltimore, MD.

^ Mmmm...gratuitously-rounded corners.

[mrsman]

Yet again another amazing sign from LA, this one is a varible message panel! https://www.google.com/maps/@34.074901,-118.2322674,3a,15y,37.78h,101.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sA5BBY74XsetVEouVhx2Dng!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Great sign indeed.  One thing I cannot figure out is why this arrangement is only available in rush hour.  Certainly, the main connection from Downtown LA to I-5 north would justify having 2 lanes at all times.  The second lane from the left should be an option lane to either I-5 north or CA-110 north at all times. 

Then the VMS can be converted to an APL.

During "rush hour" they only want that lane as be used left turn only to I-5 North. At other times, you can still make that left, but also continue straight onto to Pasadena.  Anyone who regularly drives through there going to Pasadena know if you to stay to the right there, those lanes are much less congested.

Unless,something has changed more recently, I think it's the other way around.  There is a regular sign posted on GSV saying that from 3-7 PM left lane turns left, second lane is an option lane.  I assume that means that at other times (non-rush hour) only the left lane turns left and the second lane must continue on 110.

But you are correct that given the traffic volumes, the 110 to I-5 north should have at least 2 optional lanes at most times (and not just one during non-rush hour).  That was at the heart of my question.

Sign in question: https://goo.gl/maps/ZcT95CkwUj42

Note by definition, you can only ever have one option lane...

The possible breakdowns for this scenario are:
5 EXIT | 5 EXIT | 110 NB | 110 NB
5 EXIT | Option | 110 NB | 110 NB
5 EXIT | 110 NB | 110 NB | 110 NB

A more interesting question is why isn't it just marked as an option lane all the time? The geometry is set up as an option lane, and there are no physical devices or markings present that would prohibit a vehicle from going one direction or the other.

Going back to the 2009 Street View, it appears that the exit had previously been marked to just have the #1 lane exit only to I-5 and the painted gore was much wider, but the variable signs existed at this time as well. So it appears the variable signage existed to allow drivers in the #2 lane to cross the painted gore and exit to I-5 when activated. (2012 street view also indicates that there were in-roadway lane lights in the pavement that may have helped delineate this.) However, the striping was changed sometime between 2009 and 2011 to permanently allow the option lane. So the variable signage doesn't seem to be necessary any longer.

I think what you say is correct.  When they first set this up as a way to alleviate the traffic that backed up the left lane far more than the other three, they were permitting an otherwise illegal action (turning into the gore) to spread the traffic load over more lanes.  But, when they did some repainting and now it is easy to allow traffic from the #2 lane to go either to 110 or 5.  What I beleive is unnecessary is having the restriction limited to only 3-7PM.  It is good to allow 2 lanes to I-5 and 3 lanes to 110 - this should be allowed at all times.  If the option lane were permanent (not limited to only 3-7PM), the VMS would not be needed, the sign by the highway would not be needed, and traffic would generally move better on 110 NB through the tunnels at all times.

[ThatTenneseeRoadgeek]

This one has to be one of my favorites. (Fairmont City, IL/Near Saint Louis, MO) https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6363717,-90.1376414,3a,15y,207.04h,98.53t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1saRBIdSar5kfF_vCg4T2I0Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DaRBIdSar5kfF_vCg4T2I0Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.TACTILE.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D215.73994%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

[billpa]

That is nice. I think the Metro logo looks good on that sign.

Pixel 2

[empirestate]

This one has to be one of my favorites. (Fairmont City, IL/Near Saint Louis, MO) https://www.google.com/maps/@38.6363717,-90.1376414,3a,15y,207.04h,98.53t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1saRBIdSar5kfF_vCg4T2I0Q!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DaRBIdSar5kfF_vCg4T2I0Q%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.TACTILE.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D215.73994%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656

If you think of it, using a shortened link, or just adding a blank line after the URL, will help make it clickable without being blocked by scroll bars.

[ThatTenneseeRoadgeek]

Hmmm...  (Gary, IN) https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5651697,-87.3045689,3a,15y,217.16h,100.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBuZTQwPblUHoI-iewUz6NA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

[hotdogPi]

Hmmm...  (Gary, IN) https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5651697,-87.3045689,3a,15y,217.16h,100.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBuZTQwPblUHoI-iewUz6NA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

How is that best of?

[kphoger]

I don't get it either.  It's a rather boring sign.

[formulanone]

Hmmm...  (Gary, IN) https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5651697,-87.3045689,3a,15y,217.16h,100.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBuZTQwPblUHoI-iewUz6NA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Help us out; start with complete sentences which include adjectives.

[MNHighwayMan]

I'm half-convinced that this thread should be locked due to all the "good" stuff already being posted, and/or a mass failure to understand what qualifies as "best of."

[Roadsguy]

Well this thread and its worst-of counterpart are already nowhere near as active as they used to be for that reason. Don't see why we need to lock it. You could always just ignore this thread like I do with all the photo games. :P

[hbelkins]

"Best" and "worst" are very subjective. One person's "man this is so cool I love it" might be another person's "meh." And one person's, "this sign is putrid" can be another's "hey I kinda like it."

[kphoger]

Well this thread and its worst-of counterpart are already nowhere near as active as they used to be for that reason. Don't see why we need to lock it. You could always just ignore this thread like I do with all the photo games.

But then I wouldn't have gotten to see that eye candy in reply #2357.

[ThatTenneseeRoadgeek]

Hmmm...  (Gary, IN) https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5651697,-87.3045689,3a,15y,217.16h,100.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBuZTQwPblUHoI-iewUz6NA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

How is that best of?

It has a rare white "BUISNESS" banner on top of the US-6.

[kphoger]

meh.  I can think of three others on US highways in Missouri right off the top of my head.

Nixa
Poplar Bluff
Springfield

edited to add one more I thought of a minute later

[ThatTenneseeRoadgeek]

This green backround sign in Auburn, ME. That US-202 shield though.. https://www.google.com/maps/@44.097832,-70.231345,3a,15y,205.32h,91.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAUnsgnRsorSn7MFYeVnpnQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656