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

[formulanone]

If it's not county maintained, then what the hell is a blue pentagon with the name of the county doing on it?

Chilton County (and Chilton Not County Maintained) don't use street names, but instead county routes on all of their roads.

So why isn't it township route 400 or whoever-maintains-this-road route 400 then?

Because it's Alabama; county shields for everything. Probably just used for Emergency / 911 wayfinding.

Also: "township"  is a derelict sea vessel near the outskirts of the city limits.

[vdeane]

It's an interesting case.  While I've never heard of a county signing a non-county road before, states do it all the time, so I'm having a hard time finding a reason to be against it.

[US 89]

It's an interesting case.  While I've never heard of a county signing a non-county road before, states do it all the time, so I'm having a hard time finding a reason to be against it.

I'm not familiar with the practice of states signing non-state roads. Utah doesn't do it, and the concept definitely seems weird to me.

[hotdogPi]

It's an interesting case.  While I've never heard of a county signing a non-county road before, states do it all the time, so I'm having a hard time finding a reason to be against it.

I'm not familiar with the practice of states signing non-state roads. Utah doesn't do it, and the concept definitely seems weird to me.

In Massachusetts, being numbered and being state-maintained have nothing to with each other. Many segments of numbered roads are town-maintained, and there are a few state-maintained unnumbered roads.

[jakeroot]

It's an interesting case.  While I've never heard of a county signing a non-county road before, states do it all the time, so I'm having a hard time finding a reason to be against it.

I'm not familiar with the practice of states signing non-state roads. Utah doesn't do it, and the concept definitely seems weird to me.

Same here. The only numbered routes in Washington are state routes (Interstates and US routes are still state routes). I've personally never seen a county route shield before.

[US 89]

It's an interesting case.  While I've never heard of a county signing a non-county road before, states do it all the time, so I'm having a hard time finding a reason to be against it.

I'm not familiar with the practice of states signing non-state roads. Utah doesn't do it, and the concept definitely seems weird to me.

In Massachusetts, being numbered and being state-maintained have nothing to with each other. Many segments of numbered roads are town-maintained, and there are a few state-maintained unnumbered roads.

In Utah, all numbered routes are state maintained, and all state maintained roads are numbered. This results in weird routes which are hard (impossible?) to clinch. Routes like SR-282, which is a three segment route serving the University of Utah, and SR-298 and 299 which are driver's license test courses.

It's an interesting case.  While I've never heard of a county signing a non-county road before, states do it all the time, so I'm having a hard time finding a reason to be against it.

I'm not familiar with the practice of states signing non-state roads. Utah doesn't do it, and the concept definitely seems weird to me.

Same here. The only numbered routes in Washington are state routes (Interstates and US routes are still state routes). I've personally never seen a county route shield before.

Exact same for Utah, and additionally, all state-maintained roads are defined by the state legislature. This makes the common error where US highways are posted as state routes technically correct by the strictest definition, but still quite annoying. I don't think I've ever seen a CR shield in Utah, but some of the southern counties might post them.

[Rothman]

I don't see how the legislature defining which roads are state-maintained makes the signing of US routes as state routes correct.  All US routes are the responsibility of states or localities.  Heck, even most interstates outside of those sections maintained by public authorities.

For example, US 9 in NY is mostly maintained by NYSDOT, but it is still signed as US 9 and not NY 9.

[KEVIN_224]

June 1996 called...they want their original fine sign back! I THINK it used to say $35 to $112 underneath. Berlin Turnpike (US 5/CT 15) North in Berlin, CT.

[tckma]

June 1996 called...they want their original fine sign back! I THINK it used to say $35 to $112 underneath. Berlin Turnpike (US 5/CT 15) North in Berlin, CT.

$219 fine?  That's a strange amount.  Why not $200, $225, or even $220?

[PHLBOS]

June 1996 called...they want their original fine sign back! I THINK it used to say $35 to $112 underneath. Berlin Turnpike (US 5/CT 15) North in Berlin, CT.

$219 fine?  That's a strange amount.  Why not $200, $225, or even $220?

Guess on my part, the listed fine does not include taxes and/or fees; adding such would probably yield to an even amount.

[kphoger]

June 1996 called...they want their original fine sign back! I THINK it used to say $35 to $112 underneath. Berlin Turnpike (US 5/CT 15) North in Berlin, CT.

$219 fine?  That's a strange amount.  Why not $200, $225, or even $220?

Guess on my part, the listed fine does not include taxes and/or fees; adding such would probably yield to an even amount.

Or said fees increased, while the base price stayed the same.

[kkt]

Perhaps they set up increases in fines to reflect inflation?

[KEVIN_224]

Walking by that sign again today, I think it may have read $35 to $90 at first. The oldest Google Street View image of it from 2007/2008 shows the same attached plate or whatever.

[tckma]

In Utah, all numbered routes are state maintained, and all state maintained roads are numbered. This results in weird routes which are hard (impossible?) to clinch. Routes like SR-282, which is a three segment route serving the University of Utah, and SR-298 and 299 which are driver's license test courses.

Just drive each of the three segments.  As for the road test routes... I *think* the road test area behind the Westminster MVA here in Maryland is open/drivable at night.  I never understood why some states don't give the road test on real roads here... in New York, I had to take my road test on open, public roads, amongst public traffic.  Yes, there was a defined start and end point and a defined route, but, it wasn't some closed off kiddie area... you take your road test like a big boy or girl alongside people who already have their licenses.

[Roadsguy]

This abomination seems to be PennDOT's early attempt at an APL back in 2009-2010 or so, around the time I-376 was extended, the missing moves at I-79/376 were added, and all the signage around the 376/22/30/60 interchange was replaced.

[MNHighwayMan]

This abomination seems to be PennDOT's early attempt at an APL back in 2009-2010 or so, around the time I-376 was extended, the missing moves at I-79/376 were added, and all the signage around the 376/22/30/60 interchange was replaced.

Now THAT is a special kind of ugly. I'm including that weird warning sign beside the sign gantry with my statement, too.

[Roadsguy]

This abomination seems to be PennDOT's early attempt at an APL back in 2009-2010 or so, around the time I-376 was extended, the missing moves at I-79/376 were added, and all the signage around the 376/22/30/60 interchange was replaced.

Now THAT is a special kind of ugly. I'm including that weird warning sign beside the sign gantry with my statement, too.

I don't know if it's in the MUTCD, but PennDOT uses that as a weave warning sign in various places.

[MNHighwayMan]

Take it for what you will, but I'd never seen it and had no idea what it meant before now.

[KEVIN_224]

Traffic Sign - Northeast Corner - Broad Street and Roosevelt Boulevard - April 13, 1932.

Taken from the Old Images Of Philadelphia Facebook group.

[roadfro]

This abomination seems to be PennDOT's early attempt at an APL back in 2009-2010 or so, around the time I-376 was extended, the missing moves at I-79/376 were added, and all the signage around the 376/22/30/60 interchange was replaced.

Now THAT is a special kind of ugly. I'm including that weird warning sign beside the sign gantry with my statement, too.

I don't know if it's in the MUTCD, but PennDOT uses that as a weave warning sign in various places.

Definitely not in the MUTCD...

[Hurricane Rex]

Traffic Sign - Northeast Corner - Broad Street and Roosevelt Boulevard - April 13, 1932.

Taken from the Old Images Of Philadelphia Facebook group.

Don't care about the quality but I gotta love me a good old road sign pre 1970s.

[jakeroot]

This abomination seems to be PennDOT's early attempt at an APL back in 2009-2010 or so, around the time I-376 was extended, the missing moves at I-79/376 were added, and all the signage around the 376/22/30/60 interchange was replaced.

I actually really like that sign. Apart from the lowercase text, which is too small, and the right-facing arrows' awkward angles, it gets the point across quite nicely. It actually reminds of some of the signs I'm used to seeing in BC, such as these: https://goo.gl/DVpH5c  /  https://goo.gl/DbmhSu

[kphoger]

This abomination seems to be PennDOT's early attempt at an APL back in 2009-2010 or so, around the time I-376 was extended, the missing moves at I-79/376 were added, and all the signage around the 376/22/30/60 interchange was replaced.

I actually really like that sign. Apart from the lowercase text, which is too small, and the right-facing arrows' awkward angles, it gets the point across quite nicely. It actually reminds of some of the signs I'm used to seeing in BC, such as these: https://goo.gl/DVpH5c  /  https://goo.gl/DbmhSu

I too like the APL/diagrammatic hybrid sign.  The warning sign, OTOH, is another matter.

[J N Winkler]

The symbolic weave warning sign under discussion is a PennDOT standard sign.  It appears in Publication 236M (PennDOT's Standard Highway Signs equivalent) as W4-13.

[jakeroot]

This abomination seems to be PennDOT's early attempt at an APL back in 2009-2010 or so, around the time I-376 was extended, the missing moves at I-79/376 were added, and all the signage around the 376/22/30/60 interchange was replaced.

I actually really like that sign. Apart from the lowercase text, which is too small, and the right-facing arrows' awkward angles, it gets the point across quite nicely. It actually reminds of some of the signs I'm used to seeing in BC, such as these: https://goo.gl/DVpH5c  /  https://goo.gl/DbmhSu

I too like the APL/diagrammatic hybrid sign.  The warning sign, OTOH, is another matter.

If there were to be a weave symbol, it does seem pretty damn good, tbh. My only wish were for it to be aligned straight up and down, rather than at an angle, as it is now.

There's also the small matter of the general public not necessarily knowing what the road term "weave" means. This sign doesn't leave much to the imagination.