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

[jakeroot]

Is it correct for the shield to separate a single statement [toll road]? Seems like the 476 shield should be to the left, with [toll road] to its right.

Shouldn't it just be "TOLL I-476" / "I-476 TOLL" anyway?

Yes, I suppose it should be. Wouldn't be an eye-catching error to me, though. Just an old standard operating procedure in Pennsylvania (according to PHLBOS above me).

And by 2009 MUTCD standards, that "TOLL" wording is supposed to be a black on yellow placard (like the "LEFT" for left exits).

As long as we're being finicky , I believe yellow would be used only if the road accepted license plate or physical payments. Otherwise, purple, right?

[Roadsguy]

Is it correct for the shield to separate a single statement [toll road]? Seems like the 476 shield should be to the left, with [toll road] to its right.

Shouldn't it just be "TOLL I-476" / "I-476 TOLL" anyway?

Yes, I suppose it should be. Wouldn't be an eye-catching error to me, though. Just an old standard operating procedure in Pennsylvania (according to PHLBOS above me).

And by 2009 MUTCD standards, that "TOLL" wording is supposed to be a black on yellow placard (like the "LEFT" for left exits).

PennDOT and the PTC seem to be moving in that direction, but it seems old habits die hard. That sign's definitely new enough to be Highway Gothic again instead of Clearview, so it should have the yellow TOLL indicator and ideally the Turnpike shield as well.

EDIT: It's also not the primary exit sign. This is. The one pictured should have said something along the lines of "To TOLL I-476 / Clarks Summit, Allentown / Use Exit 175".

[PHLBOS]

That sign's definitely new enough to be Highway Gothic again instead of Clearview.

It is and apparently using oversized text for the control cities is becoming the new SOP as far as post-Clearview Turnpike signage installs are concerned.  Not sure if such is intentional or determined by the awarded design engineer of record; but such has recently occurred elsewhere along the Turnpike.

The recently-installed eastbound (I-76) signage for the Harrisburg West (I-83) interchange uses larger-sized Highway Gothic Series E(M) than the roughly one-year old signs for the same interchange along I-76 westbound.  As a result, the eastbound BGS' are all larger than the westbound ones.

Sidebar: the newer post-Clearview exit westbound BGS at the Carlisle (US 11 to I-81) interchange appears to use standard-size lettering.

[Scott5114]

Is it correct for the shield to separate a single statement [toll road]? Seems like the 476 shield should be to the left, with [toll road] to its right.

Shouldn't it just be "TOLL I-476" / "I-476 TOLL" anyway?

Yes, I suppose it should be. Wouldn't be an eye-catching error to me, though. Just an old standard operating procedure in Pennsylvania (according to PHLBOS above me).

And by 2009 MUTCD standards, that "TOLL" wording is supposed to be a black on yellow placard (like the "LEFT" for left exits).

As long as we're being finicky , I believe yellow would be used only if the road accepted license plate or physical payments. Otherwise, purple, right?

My understanding is that TOLL is always in yellow. Purple is used only to denote specific directions relating to electronic toll tag (lane usage, etc).

[jakeroot]

Is it correct for the shield to separate a single statement [toll road]? Seems like the 476 shield should be to the left, with [toll road] to its right.

Shouldn't it just be "TOLL I-476" / "I-476 TOLL" anyway?

Yes, I suppose it should be. Wouldn't be an eye-catching error to me, though. Just an old standard operating procedure in Pennsylvania (according to PHLBOS above me).

And by 2009 MUTCD standards, that "TOLL" wording is supposed to be a black on yellow placard (like the "LEFT" for left exits).

As long as we're being finicky , I believe yellow would be used only if the road accepted license plate or physical payments. Otherwise, purple, right?

My understanding is that TOLL is always in yellow. Purple is used only to denote specific directions relating to electronic toll tag (lane usage, etc).

I see. WSDOT uses yellow for all toll references, but only because none of the facilities require a toll tag (though it's the cheapest payment method).

Up in BC, total opposite. Virtually all (or, all) toll signs were purple (no more tolls with new government), even though all of the facilities permitted payment via non-decal methods. Obviously BC does not conform to standards of other countries, but they take quite a lot of cues from the US (alongside Transport Canada).

[KEVIN_224]

The town-made welcome sign for Franklin, CT along CT Route 32, coming in from Norwich (near 32's junction with CT Route 2):

[jay8g]

There used to be a aircraft crossing on N Harbor Dr between the San Diego airport and the Coast Guard base. Looking at Google Maps, it isn't clear to me whether it's still in use:
https://goo.gl/maps/RXC5DVRpkSP2

But here's a YouTube video that shows it in action:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eG1s8-RDxJM

Other than the Buckley example above, this appears to be the closest example, since it's an actual crossing (not just a low-flying aircraft situation).

The Spanaway example is still a bit strange since there's no signal, and the road is a rather major one. I guess, if you see a plane, yield the right of way? Do planes have the ROW at intersections between taxiways and roadways?

The major Anchorage airport has a taxiway for (private) planes that crosses a couple major roads. The bigger one has "AIRCRAFT XING" approach signs and railroad-style gates and signs at the crossing. Interestingly, the smaller one is signed pretty much as if it was just a normal road intersection, with standard stop and stop ahead signage and what appears to be non-actuated beacons.

Then there are several more minor road-taxiway junctions: some pretend it's a normal intersection (complete with a street name sign for the taxiway!), some have "YIELD TO AIRCRAFT" diamond signs, and there are also a few different square yellow signs, plus some that don't have any signage!

On the other side of the little bay (used for seaplane operations), there's a remote runway, which requires another taxiway crossing of Lakeshore Dr. This one has stop/stop ahead signage with static beacons again, but this time it at least has aircraft crossing-related plaques. Beyond that, there's a section where the (fairly major) road is actually shared with airplanes (!), identified with "CAUTION - YIELD TO ALL AIRCRAFT" diamond signs with beacons and even a green "AIRCRAFT HAVE RIGHT OF WAY ON ROADS" sign. (As a side note, the shared-use roadways have required some humorously, almost uselessly, close to the ground signage. Better keep that grass mowed!)

[formulanone]

^ Sounds like the situation Gibraltar International Airport, which is well and truly nuts.

[jakeroot]

Holy shit, that's hilarious! I've never seen such good faith by an airport operator in the US.

Love that "AIRCRAFT CROSSING" cross-buck.

^ Sounds like the situation Gibraltar International Airport, which is well and truly nuts.

The only thing Gibraltar has over this would be much larger planes using the crossing. These crossings and signage around the Ted Stevens airport is unlike anything I've ever seen before. What kind of public road anywhere else is shared with airplanes?!? Maybe some unique situations in small isolated areas, but certainly none in a city as big as Anchorage.

[Kniwt]

Fruita, Colorado: An already-weird grid numbering system gone awry. The junction of "J 3/10 Road" and "J 2/10 Road."

[US 89]

Figured I'd post this here:



The 157 patch is there because that segment of road was renumbered from 244 a few years back. But the weird thing about it is that everything that should be black on that patch is green, even the numbers. I've never seen that before.

Also, did they really have to make the letters in "Business Loop" so narrow?

[US 89]

Fruita, Colorado: An already-weird grid numbering system gone awry. The junction of "J 3/10 Road" and "J 2/10 Road."

It gets weird where the county grid overlaps with the Grand Junction city grid. For example, 12th St is 27 Rd, 7th St is 26 1/2 Rd, and 1st St is 26 Rd, but 28th St is also 28 Rd. That caused some confusion when I was there a month ago.

[csw]

Here's the only cutout shield I've ever seen, a strange US 6 just before the Indiana state line on the Kingery Expressway eastbound (I-80/I-94/US 6). I believe it's a standard 36x36 just...cut out.



And a GSV link.

Edit: a closer look.

[freebrickproductions]

Here's the only cutout shield I've ever seen, a strange US 6 just before the Indiana state line on the Kingery Expressway eastbound (I-80/I-94/US 6). I believe it's a standard 36x36 just...cut out.



And a GSV link.

Edit: a closer look.

Looks like a shield meant for use on a BGS. I've seen other examples of that happening around the US, not entirely sure why...

[MNHighwayMan]

I've certainly seen route markers put on mast arms before (a Minnesota specialty), but I'm not so sure I've seen destinations put up there before. This is at the south end of MN-84 at MN-371 in Pine River.

[paulthemapguy]

Fail.

Found on Steger Road near Steger, IL


20180720_104709 by Paul Drives, on Flickr

[hotdogPi]

Fail.

Found on Steger Road near Steger, IL


20180720_104709 by Paul Drives, on Flickr

What are you trying to point out: the misspelling, the letters peeling off, or the lack of a cemetery ahead?

[jakeroot]

I think the misspelling is qualification enough. Definitely a "bad" sign.

[chays]

Street blades in Fort Bend County, TX.  I feel the multiple colors are distracting to optimum legibility.

[plain]

Street blades in Fort Bend County, TX.  I feel the multiple colors are distracting to optimum legibility.

Yeah I really don't like these blades at all. It's just too much going on with them. Plus something inside me says that red is a no-no.

[MNHighwayMan]

Not too long ago the FHWA banned the use of background colors besides green, blue, brown, and white for use on street name signs, IIRC.

[roadman65]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/43563547702/in/dateposted-public/
I always find Missouri's overhead assemblies like these to be very cool!

[MNHighwayMan]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/43563547702/in/dateposted-public/
I always find Missouri's overhead assemblies like these to be very cool!

I don't get what's so special about this one. It looks like a normal, plain old BGS setup to me.

[Scott5114]

It's typical, but it's tastefully done. It does fit into "the good" category.

Maybe we need a thread for "well-executed signs"–nothing special about them, just nice-looking signs.

[J N Winkler]

It is an example of what is possible when you have signs designed by a specialist unit with good quality assurance practices.  Most of MoDOT's large panel guide signs are designed by such a group in Jefferson City, invariably using SignCAD, and look very clean on the plan sheet.  The only real weakness in their work product is that they tend to include information (such as US route overlaps) that doesn't really need to be there, but always with impeccable space padding.