Erroneous road signs

[mrsman]

I am from Illinois, and I already get confused enough when I go to states that have a separate yield sign for a right turn at a signalized intersection!  Wisconsin or Kentucky, for example:  https://goo.gl/maps/U3FKWKTu9KP2

The example you show is a right-turn lane that splits away from the other lanes before the intersection. I think a YIELD sign makes complete sense here, even with the signal. The person making this turn should check oncoming traffic before making the turn, not assume right-of-way because the road he is coming from has the green.

And also the seaparate yield sign will remind the driver to yield to pedestrians as well, even when you have a green light.

[mrsman]

I would be surprised if not all 50 states had yield signs for right turning traffic at at least a few intersections

How about a stop sign for right turning traffic?

Bugs the fire out of me...  The light is green, why the %^@# should I have to stop?

Even when I'm coming the other direction!!!

One of the worst examples I can think of with a stop sign at the right turn is here (Los Angeles):

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0541573,-118.3434425,3a,75y,4.12h,68.74t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNbp2mmWvZS0atmJ_FjsdFA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

From the point of view of right turning traffic, it is very easy to see the main traffic light.  Plus there are a lot of people who make the turn here as this is a great shortcut from La Brea to Edgewood to reach Highland.  All the people stopping at the stop signs do cause backups on La Brea at busy times.

I would replace the stop sign with a traffic light.  Red, YA, GA.  Red when La Brea has the red, and it allows for peds to cross in front of right turners safely and for traffic on Edgwood to continue across. Right turn on red OK after stop. Green right arrow when La Brea has green, and when the corresponding left turners from Edgewood to southbound La Brea have a green left arrow. 

[roadfro]

The MUTCD specifically prohibits use of the in-street/overhead pedestrian crossing signs at signalized intersections.

Seattle has been using pedestrian crossing signs at signalized intersections for quite some time. They probably didn't get the memo:

There's two different but closely related conversations going on... One is regarding the tall narrow sign directed at all traffic (not just turning traffic) and is placed at a crosswalk across the road you're on (not the road you're turning onto). It's ideal midblock crossing, but can be placed at an unsignalized intersection... The second is the one in your second photo, meant for turning traffic at an intersection, including intersections with signals.

In other words, your second photo is fine. The sign in your first one should be replaced with the one in the second one.

Agreed with Kacie Jane's comments

For reference: The "In-Street Pedestrian Crossing" sign is the R1-6 sign shown below (mounted on a removeable/bendable/crashworthy support in the road at the crosswalk). The "Overhead Pedestrian Crossing" sign is the R1-9 shown below, mounted on a mast arm above the crosswalk. Both are used at unsignalized crosswalks.

[jeffandnicole]

Visibility should play no role when deciding on channelized right turn lane signage...

LOL...wow!  Visibility is probably one of the most important criteria in deciding whether to use a Stop or Yield sign!

And yes, a stop sign does help in visibility, because it forces the driver to stop and look for a few seconds to make sure there isn't another vehicle or other road user suddenly appearing from behind that tree.

[jakeroot]

Visibility should play no role when deciding on channelized right turn lane signage...

LOL...wow!  Visibility is probably one of the most important criteria in deciding whether to use a Stop or Yield sign!

And yes, a stop sign does help in visibility, because it forces the driver to stop and look for a few seconds to make sure there isn't another vehicle or other road user suddenly appearing from behind that tree.

If visibility is a problem, install a signal that can operate in conjunction with the the signal. A stop sign presents a whole slew of new problems, from cars who are going to ignore it anyways, to purely functional problems such that every right turning car needs to stop.

[jeffandnicole]

Visibility should play no role when deciding on channelized right turn lane signage...

LOL...wow!  Visibility is probably one of the most important criteria in deciding whether to use a Stop or Yield sign!

And yes, a stop sign does help in visibility, because it forces the driver to stop and look for a few seconds to make sure there isn't another vehicle or other road user suddenly appearing from behind that tree.

If visibility is a problem, install a signal that can operate in conjunction with the the signal. A stop sign presents a whole slew of new problems, from cars who are going to ignore it anyways, to purely functional problems such that every right turning car needs to stop.

You know you're basically diagreeing with every transportation agency in the entire world, right? Feel free to become a traffic engineer and tell everyone they've been doing it wrong.

[jakeroot]

Visibility should play no role when deciding on channelized right turn lane signage...

LOL...wow!  Visibility is probably one of the most important criteria in deciding whether to use a Stop or Yield sign!

And yes, a stop sign does help in visibility, because it forces the driver to stop and look for a few seconds to make sure there isn't another vehicle or other road user suddenly appearing from behind that tree.

If visibility is a problem, install a signal that can operate in conjunction with the the signal. A stop sign presents a whole slew of new problems, from cars who are going to ignore it anyways, to purely functional problems such that every right turning car needs to stop.

You know you're basically diagreeing with every transportation agency in the entire world, right? Feel free to become a traffic engineer and tell everyone they've been doing it wrong.

In what way??? I'm not aware of any other countries **with proficient engineering departments** that use the stop sign as much as we do. Most countries in Europe seem to signalized their slip lanes, whereas Australia and New Zealand, who are in my opinion the best users of slip lanes, almost always use yield signs. The rest of their slip lanes are signals.

[jeffandnicole]

Yeah, the US does overuse the Stop sign by quite a bit. But in instances of visual obstructions, a stop sign is almost always going to be utilized.

[jakeroot]

Yeah, the US does overuse the Stop sign by quite a bit. But in instances of visual obstructions, a stop sign is almost always going to be utilized.

I'm talking about slip lanes (i.e. channelized right turns), not any ol' junction. I'm not against using stop signs in instances of poor visibility.

[noelbotevera]

This should be a yield sign.

[PHLBOS]

This should be a yield sign.

You might want to look in the opposite direction; there's another entrance ramp just prior to that location.  Both ramps have STOP signs & bars.  Given that scenario, those STOP signs are actually appropriate & warranted.

[jakeroot]

This should be a yield sign.

You might want to look in the opposite direction; there's another entrance ramp just prior to that location.  Both ramps have STOP signs & bars.  Given that scenario, those STOP signs are actually appropriate & warranted.

I'm torn about the second entrance ramp (posted by Noel), but the first entrance ramp being posted with a stop sign is just unnecessary. The ramp has conflicting signage, for one (the stop line is for both the signal and the stop sign, evidently). But more importantly, there's no merge occurring. Why should traffic stop? If people tend to slide into the number 2 lane instead of staying in their lane, install some flexible bollards to keep traffic in line.

[paulthemapguy]

This should be a yield sign.

I would revise this to "there should actually be an acceleration lane for this on-ramp especially considering the ramp is just coming out of a tight curve!"  This is dangerous!  I understand why it's a stop sign and not a yield because of the poor sight distance granted to the on-ramp traffic.  But moreover, it's just dangerous!

[noelbotevera]

This should be a yield sign.

I would revise this to "there should actually be an acceleration lane for this on-ramp especially considering the ramp is just coming out of a tight curve!"  This is dangerous!  I understand why it's a stop sign and not a yield because of the poor sight distance granted to the on-ramp traffic.  But moreover, it's just dangerous!

This section of I-280 was built in and around 1949. This was also for cross river traffic wishing to cross the Passaic here rather than the NJ Turnpike further south. Thus, this is not meant for cross town traffic crossing Newark and is a substandard interchange, which is why this is dangerous. There are plans to reconstruct this interchange.

[74/171FAN]

Me, Steve, and Lou came across this one yesterday on I-78 eastbound in Allentown; a PA Turnpike 476 shield. There were several of them going east and one going west (approaching exit 53).

Thanks Ian, I saw those signs about a week and a half ago heading that way for work-related stuff and could not get a photo of it. I also could not find it on GSV or the VideoLog since they are so recent.  I just wonder how a "PA TURNPIKE" shield made it out in the field since the NE Extension has been I-476 since 1996.  (For the most part, PA seems to have very few sign errors in comparison to VA.  I have not even seen any US 230 or US 309 shields yet surprisingly.)

I asked some colleagues at PennDOT about this, and they contacted the PTC, which stated that it should be posted basically as you would see on this overhead on I-81 SB near the north end of I-476 at Clarks Summit(with the I-476 and PENNA TURNPIKE shields you would expect).  Note that at this location a wider sign would have been required to do that and still have the "TO NORTH PA 309" on there.

[PHLBOS]

I wasn't able to get a pic of such this past weekend and the latest GSV likely predated the erection of such; but there is a US 119 shield (with the smallish Series D digits placed very close together) along NY 119 in the White Plains area... westbound direction.

[roadman65]

This here VMS on I-75 Northbound in Fort Myers, FL.

It is not Exit 58 for Tuckers Grade.

[1995hoo]

It's Exit 158, right? Exit 58, if it existed, would be in the middle of the Everglades. I assume the sign was just malfunctioning or the "1" was burned out?

[Eth]

Not even that. The 1 is there; it's just dimmer than the other characters.

[US71]

This has been here for over 10 years


North 43 should be Missouri, South should be Arkansas.

The road is actually OK 20/AR 43, but ODOT has their own way of doing things.

[thenetwork]

Despite the error, that group of signs should go under the Best of Road Signs, or at least Unique Road Signs, simply because I have never seen a sign installation with more than two different state shields.  A tri-state install is extremely rare!!!

[SD Mapman]

North 43 should be Missouri, South should be Arkansas.

Shouldn't they both be Arkansas at this junction?

[US71]

North 43 should be Missouri, South should be Arkansas.

Shouldn't they both be Arkansas at this junction?

Yes, ODOT seem to have their own way of doing things

[hbelkins]

Something's not quite right.

[paulthemapguy]

Here's a classic.  Look at the sign on the right.  What's wrong with it?  https://goo.gl/maps/Xv5wTNg8ivT2