Signs With Design Errors

[Brandon]

I don't think this is an "error" per se, but there's a yield sign in Burnaby, BC with the word "Yield" on it. I know for Americans that's completely normal. But in BC, as well as the rest of Canada, and much of the civilized world, the "Yield" word or other equivalent is absent.

Not always.  The Brits, Aussies, and Kiwis use "Give Way".  The Irish use "Yield" or its Gaelic equivalent.  The Thais use "Give Way" in Thai.  Many Spanish speaking areas use "Ceda" or "Ceda el Paso".  And so on and so forth.  The Canucks are the odd ones out here for the Americas.  My guess is that it is due to the language laws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yield_sign

[jakeroot]

I don't think this is an "error" per se, but there's a yield sign in Burnaby, BC with the word "Yield" on it. I know for Americans that's completely normal. But in BC, as well as the rest of Canada, and much of the civilized world, the "Yield" word or other equivalent is absent.

Not always.  The Brits, Aussies, and Kiwis use "Give Way".  The Irish use "Yield" or its Gaelic equivalent.  The Thais use "Give Way" in Thai.  Many Spanish speaking areas use "Ceda" or "Ceda el Paso".  And so on and so forth.  The Canucks are the odd ones out here for the Americas.  My guess is that it is due to the language laws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yield_sign

Absolutely. And the language laws thing makes sense to me...though the Lower Mainland is majority led by foreigners, so it would seem odd to re-enforce a yield sign by putting a language on it that less than 50% speak *natively*:

http://www.welcomebc.ca/Live/about-bc/people/language-in-bc.aspx (83% of BC residents speak English)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver#Demographics (52% do not speak English as their first language)

Also, I could probably re-state what I said about other "civilized countries" and instead put "international standard", as is said on the Wikipedia article.

[Brandon]

I don't think this is an "error" per se, but there's a yield sign in Burnaby, BC with the word "Yield" on it. I know for Americans that's completely normal. But in BC, as well as the rest of Canada, and much of the civilized world, the "Yield" word or other equivalent is absent.

Not always.  The Brits, Aussies, and Kiwis use "Give Way".  The Irish use "Yield" or its Gaelic equivalent.  The Thais use "Give Way" in Thai.  Many Spanish speaking areas use "Ceda" or "Ceda el Paso".  And so on and so forth.  The Canucks are the odd ones out here for the Americas.  My guess is that it is due to the language laws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yield_sign

Absolutely. And the language laws thing makes sense to me...though the Lower Mainland is majority led by foreigners, so it would seem odd to re-enforce a yield sign by putting a language on it that less than 50% speak *natively*:

http://www.welcomebc.ca/Live/about-bc/people/language-in-bc.aspx (83% of BC residents speak English)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver#Demographics (52% do not speak English as their first language)

Also, I could probably re-state what I said about other "civilized countries" and instead put "international standard", as is said on the Wikipedia article.

It's really more of a continental European standard.  For some reason the mainland Euros like to claim their standards as "international" when they apply to maybe half the world at best.  And even then, the yield signs there have auxiliary signs underneath in France and other places stating "Yield" in the local language.

[jakeroot]

I don't think this is an "error" per se, but there's a yield sign in Burnaby, BC with the word "Yield" on it. I know for Americans that's completely normal. But in BC, as well as the rest of Canada, and much of the civilized world, the "Yield" word or other equivalent is absent.

Not always.  The Brits, Aussies, and Kiwis use "Give Way".  The Irish use "Yield" or its Gaelic equivalent.  The Thais use "Give Way" in Thai.  Many Spanish speaking areas use "Ceda" or "Ceda el Paso".  And so on and so forth.  The Canucks are the odd ones out here for the Americas.  My guess is that it is due to the language laws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yield_sign

Absolutely. And the language laws thing makes sense to me...though the Lower Mainland is majority led by foreigners, so it would seem odd to re-enforce a yield sign by putting a language on it that less than 50% speak *natively*:

http://www.welcomebc.ca/Live/about-bc/people/language-in-bc.aspx (83% of BC residents speak English)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouver#Demographics (52% do not speak English as their first language)

Also, I could probably re-state what I said about other "civilized countries" and instead put "international standard", as is said on the Wikipedia article.

It's really more of a continental European standard.  For some reason the mainland Euros like to claim their standards as "international" when they apply to maybe half the world at best.  And even then, the yield signs there have auxiliary signs underneath in France and other places stating "Yield" in the local language.

Lol, no shit. They used to rule the world...NOT ANYMORE!! MURICA!

[NE2]

They are international by definition. So are most US-standard signs.

[doogie1303]

It gets a bit more interesting when you go to an Asian country like Japan. When I went to Japan several years ago for work, I noticed that their traffic signs seemed to be a mix of the European model, red bordered circular speed signs, signs with pictogram in most cases, but with some mixed in American style yellow caution diamond pictograms. At unsignaled intersections, the side roads would have a solid red triangular sign with the point facing down with something written in kanji.

In most countries, a triangular red sign with the point facing down is a "yield" or "give way" type of condition, in Japan that's a stop sign. To make things more confusing, a triangular red bordered sign with white background point facing down is not a yield but a "slow down" sign.

[jbnv]

Apparently Texas A&M does not like the Clearview ampersand. There are several signs that have this strange glyph. (GSV)



Line spacing error: (GSV)

[colinstu]

Have noticed this so many times but kept forgetting to post it.

location: https://goo.gl/maps/z3Guc

[cjk374]

Translation:  Entering snobbish neighborhood that doesn't give a rat's @$$ about your safety.

Welcome to Monroe & West Monroe, Louisiana!  This is along the Kansas City Southern Railroad near the Ouachita River.  The one thing that isn't located along this railroad (or any other railroad in Monroe) is a snobbish type of neighborhood....instead, just think of HOOD!!   

[hbelkins]

Have noticed this so many times but kept forgetting to post it.

location: https://goo.gl/maps/z3Guc

What's wrong with this? I've seen the larger initial letter in "To" several times, most often on auxiliary banners in Virginia.

[Zeffy]

What's wrong with this? I've seen the larger initial letter in "To" several times, most often on auxiliary banners in Virginia.

If I'm looking at it correctly, the 'To' is in the wrong font - looks to be either series C or maybe even B.

[colinstu]

Looks like the wrong series font, shouldn't both letters be capitalized? Wrong size too IMO.

[vtk]

The other day I saw on I-376 between Beaver and New Castle, PA, some non-destination text in mixed-case negative-contrast Clearview.

[Scott5114]

What's wrong with this? I've seen the larger initial letter in "To" several times, most often on auxiliary banners in Virginia.

That doesn't make it right–larger initial letters are for cardinal directions only, not banners and trailblazers.

[jbnv]

What's wrong with this? I've seen the larger initial letter in "To" several times, most often on auxiliary banners in Virginia.

That doesn't make it right–larger initial letters are for cardinal directions only, not banners and trailblazers.

Same thing with using Clearview in shields. I think it generally looks good, but that doesn't change the fact that it doesn't conform to spec.

[myosh_tino]

Same thing with using Clearview in shields. I think it generally looks good, but that doesn't change the fact that it doesn't conform to spec.

Really?  The one thing I hate the most about Clearview are the numbers!  I think they look hideous in all applications especially in route shields. 

[US71]

Same thing with using Clearview in shields. I think it generally looks good, but that doesn't change the fact that it doesn't conform to spec.

Really?  The one thing I hate the most about Clearview are the numbers!  I think they look hideous in all applications especially in route shields. 

Like in Baton Rouge?

[vtk]

Several questionable design choices within a short distance on I-75 NB north of Dayton:


Poorly-angled dancing arrows, and an auxilliary guide sign with redundant "airport" message, poorly-conveyed message, and poor placement.


Poorly-angled dancing arrow.  In fact, it's directly over the lane it's supposed to point at, so why is it angled at all?  Or, why did they need to put it directly over the lane, causing all that excess width?  Also, the distance message, being less than one mile, should not appear on a sign using EXIT ONLY message, and it adds to the height of the very wide sign.


Here's an auxilliary guide sign with much better message conveyance and placement, though it's still redundant with the airport icon.


Commemorative / memorial interchange naming is stupid.  This one in particular sounds outright patronizing to the enthusiastic flag-wavers.  And what's with the off-center bottom line of legend?


More poorly-angled dancing arrows, and inconsistent sizes of arrows and other elements.


The poorly-placed, lazily-phrased auxilliary guide sign makes its return.  Why not just add "Airport" and/or the airport icon to the other guide sign that's right there already?


Making the exit direction arrow part of a line of destination text is kind of old-school, but there's no need for it here.  There's already enough width on this sign to accommodate the arrow vertically centered and completely to the right of the block containing the route marker and destinations.  Or, since the arrow is trying so hard not to take up extra space for itself, why not make the sign less wide?


Again, exit direction arrow is part of one of the lines of text.  Except it's the bottom line, not the middle line, and this time there's even more extra horizontal space on the sign.  Seriously, shrink the sign to fit its content!  Or, move the arrow to the right of the main block of sign content, center it vertically, and you can still then shrink the sign width some!  Also, I don't think this or the previous BGS are using the correct Ohio state route marker design as specified in the Ohio Sign Design Manual. *runs away*

[6a]

Hey, vtk, have you noticed some of the new signs in the Columbus area aren't level? One that comes to mind is SB 270 exiting to 70, west side. I can't really see any reason for it, it's not like the road is banked at that point. I've noticed it in a couple other places with new signs, wondered if you had any more knowledge as to why.

[SignBridge]

Vtk, many of your comments are well founded including the "dancing arrows" that could more correctly be pointing straight down, and the 1/2 mile reference being uncalled for by the MUTCD. Interestingly the 2009 Manual no longer permits 2 down arrows over the same lane. Now either a diagrammatic sign or an overhead-arrow-per-lane sign is required at major interchanges with optional lane exits. And I agree with you about the supplemental Airport signs adding to the confusion.

I noticed something else too. At the split for I-70 east and west a wrong type arrow was used on the 70-East sign. Ya' have to wonder how the heck that happened without being noticed.

[Zeffy]

The poorly-placed, lazily-phrased auxilliary guide sign makes its return.  Why not just add "Airport" and/or the airport icon to the other guide sign that's right there already?

What the hell kind of mutant arrow is that? It literally looks like someone printed an arrow out from MS Paint or Microsoft Office and slapped it on the sign.

[PurdueBill]

What the hell kind of mutant arrow is that? It literally looks like someone printed an arrow out from MS Paint or Microsoft Office and slapped it on the sign.

What's sad about that one is that the sign was originally made with a normal arrow, then it was greened out during the nearly-decade-long construction at that interchange, and then was patched with THAT!  Why not just cover it temporarily and then remove the cover?  Nope, green it out with sheeting and replace it later with crap.

ODOT or its contractors really got sloppy with dancing arrows the past decade or so.  There are still examples of tasteful dancing arrows out there but usually on button copy signs.  Reflective signs seemed to always have two options for downward arrows: straight-down or 45 degrees, which is way too much.  I-70 at OH 4 also had a severely over-angled arrow that was already over the correct lane and instead pointed one lane too far to the left.  I wouldn't be surprised if ODOT ruined dancing arrows for everyone.

The excessive separate Airport signs are bonkers too.  Why not just add the plane symbol atop the existing BGSs as is done throughout the rest of Ohio? 

[vtk]

Hey, vtk, have you noticed some of the new signs in the Columbus area aren't level? One that comes to mind is SB 270 exiting to 70, west side. I can't really see any reason for it, it's not like the road is banked at that point. I've noticed it in a couple other places with new signs, wondered if you had any more knowledge as to why.

I haven't noticed. I do notice when the road is banked and the sign not, so I don't think they'd intentionally tilt a sign even for that reason...

[thenetwork]

The poorly-placed, lazily-phrased auxilliary guide sign makes its return.  Why not just add "Airport" and/or the airport icon to the other guide sign that's right there already?

What the hell kind of mutant arrow is that? It literally looks like someone printed an arrow out from MS Paint or Microsoft Office and slapped it on the sign.

Not to worry, they way ODOT is replacing fairly new Highway Gothic BGS with Clearview BGS, this should only be an issue for maybe another year or two.   

[vtk]

The poorly-placed, lazily-phrased auxilliary guide sign makes its return.  Why not just add "Airport" and/or the airport icon to the other guide sign that's right there already?

What the hell kind of mutant arrow is that? It literally looks like someone printed an arrow out from MS Paint or Microsoft Office and slapped it on the sign.

Not to worry, they way ODOT is replacing fairly new Highway Gothic BGS with Clearview BGS, this should only be an issue for maybe another year or two.   

The crappy Airport aux guide is already Clearview. Does that mean we're stuck with it?