Virginia also biffs the state/US distinction a lot, as well as the primary/secondary.
do you know of any erroneous cutouts in Virginia?
I don't recall offhand any shields in the wild that are a) old enough to be cutouts, and b) erroneous - they would have had to survive quite a long time in their mistaken form...
I do have, on my wall, a NH/US/102 cutout shield. I've also seen an embossed 1930s North Dakota state route 85 but alas when it was on eBay, I failed to land it.
where is that?? I don't know of any CA-11s left in the wild. they switched over to I-110 and CA-110 in 1980.
for all the snarking he does about Caltrans errors, he sure makes a lot of them himself ;)
(http://www.artistjake.com/lj/w10786.jpg)
no comment.
what is a CHPW? I know what a CHP is ...
Wow. Caltrans records their mistakes. :banghead:no, a guy named Joel does.
It is on the north end of the business loop, but the pic is coming from the southbound off-ramp from I-75. I just took this picture on December 27, and it was correctly signed as a business loop on all the BGSs approaching the exit.
Lake Moses, WA biffing the business loop specs.
the 71 may have been replaced ... at least, I don't recall seeing it when I was there last May. Then again I had gone 60+ hours without sleep and had to make a flight in Houston ten hours later, so there's a lot that I may not have remembered. US-71 in Arkansas, that's a fun route doing 85 around the curves!
I mean the part south of Fort Smith, the two-lane road!
abandoned business loops are a good thing - they lead to forgotten old signs. there are some lovely old Business Loop 5 shields all over California, including one a few blocks from my house.
Interesting part of Texarkana is the Arkansas-maintained signs on one side of US-71, and the Texas-maintained ones on the other. I wonder if at any time there were Texas US 71 shields down one side and Arkansas US 71 shields up the other.
Is that pic actually at the border of the three states!? Or is that Missouri one supposed to be an Arkansas one?
wait, I thought that south of Missouri, it was signed exclusively OK-20/AR-43... with the last Missouri shields showing up at the state line.
That funny, Voyager...because the 680 font seem too small for Caltrans FHWA font.. should be enlarge FHWA font for "680" to able the driver to see it even better as well.
Also a bit of an error on the New Jersey Turnpike
This has been up since 2000 and its still in place as of late December 2008:
(http://www.aaroads.com/delaware/delaware200/us-202_de-141_nb_exit_001b_01.jpg)
It should be the first U.S. 202 shield, but they got Delaware 141 mixed up on its classification!
I don't think this really counts because Wisconsin made an "attempt" to show it's a MN shield, but on the US 8 crossing westbound into MN on the St. Croix River, the "JCT MN 95 shield" is a WI 95 shield with "MINN" inside it. Don't know if it's still there anymore, just thought it would be interesting to note.Correct...here is my pic of this sign from July 2005:
Since WI and US shields look annoyingly similar, there are several places where a WI shield is used where a US shield should. Coming westbound on I-90 into MN from WI, I remember the BGSs having "WI 61" shields. I think the US 14 shield was right though.
In Ashland, Virginia, for some reason there are I-95 trailblazers that lead traffic down Hill Carter Parkway, which is right before I-95 on VA 54. However, the trailblazers on Hill Carter Parkway actually lead traffic right into the parking lot of a Wal-Mart. I've already emailed the mayor about this, because I know her personally and she has a grudge against Wal-Mart. ;)
Interestingly, if you go the OTHER way on Hill Carter Parkway, there are tons of I-95 trailblazers telling you to turn around. You know, in case you missed the big overheads right past the intersection. :P
I don't think this really counts because Wisconsin made an "attempt" to show it's a MN shield, but on the US 8 crossing westbound into MN on the St. Croix River, the "JCT MN 95 shield" is a WI 95 shield with "MINN" inside it. Don't know if it's still there anymore, just thought it would be interesting to note.
Since WI and US shields look annoyingly similar, there are several places where a WI shield is used where a US shield should. Coming westbound on I-90 into MN from WI, I remember the BGSs having "WI 61" shields. I think the US 14 shield was right though.
really? there are definitely New Jersey I-276 shields in existence.
There is no official mileage (Route Log Finder List) within the state of New Jersey, which corroborates the fact that Interstate 276 ends at the Delaware River Bridge. The signs on the N.J. Turnpike that reflect Interstate 276 were newer installs (early 2000s?). They probably included the designation as a convenience as Interstate 276 has gained recognition with replacement of original button copy signs along the PA Turnpike.
that is an magnificently terrible sign - can we use it in the AARoads shield gallery?
I don't have pictures, but Ohio's been recently replacing a number of US signs (30 and 250 in particular, as that's where I'm at) with OH signs. I know in Wilmot there's a US 250 intersection sign on 62 that's in an Ohio shield (it us US 30 and US 250), and the JCT 30/250 sign on OH 3 northbound near Wooster has both route in Ohio shields.
Seems pretty common also to see 3-digit route numbers in 2-digit shields, both interstate and U.S. Erroneous, perhaps, only to designers like me . . .
On another note, the American Map street atlas for the Lower Hampton Roads region misidentifies VA 239 between US 17 and VA 337 (near the Jordan Bridge) as part of VA 337.
wait, I thought that south of Missouri, it was signed exclusively OK-20/AR-43... with the last Missouri shields showing up at the state line.
It's complicated :crazy:
Technically, it's OK 20/AR 43 since the road runs (mostly) along the OK/AR State Line. BUT it appears as if someone (Missouri?) has posted MO 43 going north (though the general sign assembly is from Oklahoma).
Weird-looking US-11 shield in Roanoke, VA. Photo credits to nerdly_dood on Simtropolis, who says that most US route signs in downtown Roanoke look like that.
Thanks for the answer, though he didn't believe the explanation. :rolleyes:
There are many of them still around in Roanoke, and they include state routes as well. I also found a couple more white-box I-581 VA shields of the same vintage.
I looked at MapQuest a little while back to check out the I-77/81/US 11/52 multiplex. It actually makes sense, in a strange way, although the routes are going due east/west.The multiplex is going east-west there but throughout VA all four roads are signed north-south throughout their VA stay :nod:
Richmond, it's on Laburnum Avenue southbound. I did a double-take when I saw it. :spin:Well at least this wasn't VDOT's fault but the infamous Henrico County
I looked at it closely, and I don't think there has EVER been a 5 on that VA shield!
Richmond, it's on Laburnum Avenue southbound. I did a double-take when I saw it. :spin:Well at least this wasn't VDOT's fault but the infamous Henrico County
I looked at it closely, and I don't think there has EVER been a 5 on that VA shield!
I remember reading about a sign goof in Massachusetts that was big enough to have a newspaper article written about it. There was a need for a state highway marker to be put up and the guy making it flipped to the state highway section of his sign plan book and made the first sign he saw there.
Apparently his book had all the states' diagrams in it, in alphabetical order, because what got made and put up was an Alabama state route marker!
That must be because it seems that VDOT maintains the US Routes in Henrico County(at least the traffic lights :-|)?????Richmond, it's on Laburnum Avenue southbound. I did a double-take when I saw it. :spin:Well at least this wasn't VDOT's fault but the infamous Henrico County
I looked at it closely, and I don't think there has EVER been a 5 on that VA shield!
Actually, the sign has a VDOT decal on the back of it.
I found this today near Idabel, OK
I found this today near Idabel, OKIdabelOklahoma is like a nexus of poor signing.
Idabel is like a nexus of poor signing. Same for Hugo.
I remember reading about a sign goof in Massachusetts that was big enough to have a newspaper article written about it. There was a need for a state highway marker to be put up and the guy making it flipped to the state highway section of his sign plan book and made the first sign he saw there.
Apparently his book had all the states' diagrams in it, in alphabetical order, because what got made and put up was an Alabama state route marker!
I remembered that well. Fortunately the article that reported the goof (complete with a photo) is still online!
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/07/26/word_to_road_crews_tuscaloosa_is_over_1000_miles_thataway/ (http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/07/26/word_to_road_crews_tuscaloosa_is_over_1000_miles_thataway/)
Christiansburg, VA is a treasure trove of odd signs and goofs.
I have a lot more of them.
Sign geeks love Virginia. :spin:
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-10/1085993/us250-11-va254-stauton-summa-2000.jpg)
QuoteThe detail for the state highway shield in the Standard Highway Signs book happens to be an Alabama shield. I suspect that had something to do with it . . .
From what I recall, that had everything to do with it.
Between C'burg and Radford - state secondary route - the road to nowhere.
what's so bad about the Texas? other than no state name on the I-20 shields?
Seems pretty common also to see 3-digit route numbers in 2-digit shields, both interstate and U.S. Erroneous, perhaps, only to designers like me . . .
... I hate ... absolutely HATE ... the wide shields that sprang into use in Kentucky in the 1970s. I much prefer the square shields with the smaller numbers.
I don't consider that to be a goof. I hate ... absolutely HATE ... the wide shields that sprang into use in Kentucky in the 1970s. I much prefer the square shields with the smaller numbers.
... I hate ... absolutely HATE ... the wide shields that sprang into use in Kentucky in the 1970s. I much prefer the square shields with the smaller numbers.
You'll see plenty in Arkansas along I-40 between West Memphis and Little Rock :-D
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2060/2179278710_42db7b8c10.jpg)
Between C'burg and Radford - state secondary route - the road to nowhere.
(http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-10/1085993/va144-toblank-elkins.JPG)
Not only that, but VA 114 doesn't go east here. This is the eastern terminus of the route.
I prefer Series A to Series B.
I don't think anyone uses that anymore - it's been officially deprecated for about 20 years now since it was too thin and hard to read. That said, I think it's just a more aesthetically pleasing font than B.
Here's one from Oklahoma
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2165/2285229536_246c947b8b.jpg)
HAHA!! Only you would think of that!! Very cleaver...guess I'd better turn my head right side up now that the blood has rushed to it!! :colorful:yep that about sums up how 69 works!
Here are two from the same road, but different states...Wow those sign goofs at VDOT allowed an SR 301(ironically I do live on SR 1301)
That's only the second posting of a US highway in a secondary route shield I know of in Virginia, other than the SR 220 shields in Rocky Mount that the Virginia Hwys Project has photos of.
This was taken on southbound I-75
(http://farm1.static.flickr.com/19/105198746_353e989058_b.jpg)
A new one I noticed this morning: we apparently have a "US 233" in Arlington, VA. Even has a white border...
and another rawmustard pic...from the department of redundancy department :rofl:
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2345/2325291760_2069c67c9a_b.jpg)
and another rawmustard pic...from the department of redundancy department :rofl:
{gosh, I actually quoted an image in the past? Mere oversight}
what is the error on the Candy Mountain sign? other than that it is aesthetically displeasing, and features a surface-level TO banner nailed up there?
I wouldn't call sign that erroneous - I'd call that funny as hell! :-D
(http://www.doingitwrong.com/wrong/20070924-000448.gif)
I'm confused
(http://www.doingitwrong.com/wrong/no-no.jpg)
Well, so much for the car.
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3386/3564881823_da72c7617c_b.jpg)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2021/2195869871_75e8e6dae0.jpg)
Supposed to be US-202!
Unless it's different in that part of NY, isn't US 202 North/South and not East/West? (At least it is in DE/PA/NJ)
OR 82 in La Grande
(http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/OR82LaGrandesigngoof1.jpg?t=1247029427)
Milwaukie
NY's got quite a few US/state route signage errors. I actually remember driving up I-81, and pulling off of the freeway to get gas, and right at the bottom of the ramp, I saw a nice, shiny, sparkly, brand new...NY 11 shield.
The offramp from the other direction? Also had a nice, shiny, sparkly, brand new NY 11 shield. :D
I probably won't be driving, so we'll probably miss that one. But iirc, there is a standalone US 82 trailblazer further east past OR 207.
Be careful you don't miss the US 82 sign. If you exit the freeway and head east, you'll never see it -- it's on eastbound 82 one block after the highway's start off US 30, posted on a railroad overpass. It's been there for years, so they don't seem to be in a hurry to fix the mistake.
U.S. 62 is signed as NY 62 a few times in Niagara Falls.
NY's got quite a few US/state route signage errors. I actually remember driving up I-81, and pulling off of the freeway to get gas, and right at the bottom of the ramp, I saw a nice, shiny, sparkly, brand new...NY 11 shield.
The offramp from the other direction? Also had a nice, shiny, sparkly, brand new NY 11 shield. :D
The black line around (US route) shields is also a South Carolina thing.
How's about these US-101 shields erected around Port Angeles?
(http://www.davidjcorcoran.com/highways/101/20to117/1.JPG)
and for that matter, these US-2 shields erected around Monroe
(http://www.davidjcorcoran.com/highways/2/522to203/1.JPG)
I'm not too sure if there's any errors here but is it normal for the font to be different in shields on the same gantry? Also the 1 at the bottom of the left sign seems a little small. And finally the black line around white shields, I guess this is just an Iowa thing.
(http://www.speedcam.co.uk/d70/exit239.jpg)
The black line around (US route) shields is also a South Carolina thing.
Oklahoma does that, too.
(http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/128928674886416044.jpg)there is certainly nothing wrong with that sign. Surely one must get to ... something ... if they take that right turn!
This one in Wisconsin (http://www.wausaudailyherald.com/article/20090724/WDH0101/90724123/1981/WDHopinion) made the news in my area (albeit it was probably stock footage from the local station there)
Incorrect BGS on westbound WA 14 entering Washougal, signing for Bus US 14. Saw it and barely missed the photo-op :banghead:
The black line around (US route) shields is also a South Carolina thing.
Oklahoma does that, too.
I'm not too sure if there's any errors here but is it normal for the font to be different in shields on the same gantry? Also the 1 at the bottom of the left sign seems a little small. And finally the black line around white shields, I guess this is just an Iowa thing.
(http://www.speedcam.co.uk/d70/exit239.jpg)
I noticed that the route signs on the left BGS are much smaller than the ones on the right. (I guess to squeeze them in.) Does this happen often?
AASHTO and FHWA should get onto the makers of those erroneous signs.
AASHTO and FHWA should get onto the makers of those erroneous signs.
Why would you want this to happen? The roads would be boring if all signage conformed with the standard. Would I have stopped to take a picture of that ND 52 error had it been a standard US 52 marker? I wouldn't have even noticed it. Errors, non-standard signage and other quirks are what make this hobby fun. If everything looked the same there would be nothing interesting about roads.
AASHTO and FHWA should get onto the makers of those erroneous signs.
Why would you want this to happen? The roads would be boring if all signage conformed with the standard. Would I have stopped to take a picture of that ND 52 error had it been a standard US 52 marker? I wouldn't have even noticed it. Errors, non-standard signage and other quirks are what make this hobby fun. If everything looked the same there would be nothing interesting about roads.
I agree. Look at anything that people collect. What are some of the most valuable stamps, baseball cards, dolls, coins, etc.? The GOOFS!
AASHTO and FHWA should get onto the makers of those erroneous signs.
Why would you want this to happen? The roads would be boring if all signage conformed with the standard. Would I have stopped to take a picture of that ND 52 error had it been a standard US 52 marker? I wouldn't have even noticed it. Errors, non-standard signage and other quirks are what make this hobby fun. If everything looked the same there would be nothing interesting about roads.
I agree. Look at anything that people collect. What are some of the most valuable stamps, baseball cards, dolls, coins, etc.? The GOOFS!
I still feel bad about that pair of OK 82 meatcleavers I inadvertently got removed from US 59 near Sallisaw.
I did not remember CA-266 ended at a *white* Welcome to Nevada sign! I drove that entire silly loop (NV-266, CA-168, CA-266, NV-264) in 2007.
AASHTO and FHWA should get onto the makers of those erroneous signs.
Why would you want this to happen? The roads would be boring if all signage conformed with the standard. Would I have stopped to take a picture of that ND 52 error had it been a standard US 52 marker? I wouldn't have even noticed it. Errors, non-standard signage and other quirks are what make this hobby fun. If everything looked the same there would be nothing interesting about roads.
I agree. Look at anything that people collect. What are some of the most valuable stamps, baseball cards, dolls, coins, etc.? The GOOFS!
I still feel bad about that pair of OK 82 meatcleavers I inadvertently got removed from US 59 near Sallisaw.
I once got an erroneous "To Exit #351C" tab on a I-95 BGS removed. However, they had permanently closed that exit in Jacksonville, FL as part of the I-10/I-95 interchange reconstruction.
AASHTO and FHWA should get onto the makers of those erroneous signs.
Why would you want this to happen? The roads would be boring if all signage conformed with the standard. Would I have stopped to take a picture of that ND 52 error had it been a standard US 52 marker? I wouldn't have even noticed it. Errors, non-standard signage and other quirks are what make this hobby fun. If everything looked the same there would be nothing interesting about roads.
I agree. Look at anything that people collect. What are some of the most valuable stamps, baseball cards, dolls, coins, etc.? The GOOFS!
I still feel bad about that pair of OK 82 meatcleavers I inadvertently got removed from US 59 near Sallisaw.
I once got an erroneous "To Exit #351C" tab on a I-95 BGS removed. However, they had permanently closed that exit in Jacksonville, FL as part of the I-10/I-95 interchange reconstruction.
Wow, I didn't think that my thought wouldn't have been taken that way. :ded:
AASHTO and FHWA should get onto the makers of those erroneous signs.
Why would you want this to happen? The roads would be boring if all signage conformed with the standard. Would I have stopped to take a picture of that ND 52 error had it been a standard US 52 marker? I wouldn't have even noticed it. Errors, non-standard signage and other quirks are what make this hobby fun. If everything looked the same there would be nothing interesting about roads.
I agree. Look at anything that people collect. What are some of the most valuable stamps, baseball cards, dolls, coins, etc.? The GOOFS!
I still feel bad about that pair of OK 82 meatcleavers I inadvertently got removed from US 59 near Sallisaw.
I once got an erroneous "To Exit #351C" tab on a I-95 BGS removed. However, they had permanently closed that exit in Jacksonville, FL as part of the I-10/I-95 interchange reconstruction.
Wow, I didn't think that my thought wouldn't have been taken that way. :ded:
There aren't not a not insufficient quantity of negatives not present in the post that is not this one.
Every Word Except "Exit" Spelled Wrong on Wisconsin Highway Sign
A sign pointing southbound travelers onto Business Highway 51 in Rothschild and Schofield bears an incorrect spelling for every word except “exit.”
David Vieth, director of the bureau of highway operations for the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, said the mistake was made by Decker Supply Company of Madison, which printed the sign.
The sign for exit 185 on southbound Highway 51 reads “Buisness 51 Rothschield Schofeild.”
“How do I politely say it shows some incompetence on someone’s part?” said Rothschild Village President Neal Torney.
(http://www.godbitesman.com/storage/bilde-1.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1248619009112)
QuoteEvery Word Except "Exit" Spelled Wrong on Wisconsin Highway Sign
A sign pointing southbound travelers onto Business Highway 51 in Rothschild and Schofield bears an incorrect spelling for every word except “exit.”
David Vieth, director of the bureau of highway operations for the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, said the mistake was made by Decker Supply Company of Madison, which printed the sign.
The sign for exit 185 on southbound Highway 51 reads “Buisness 51 Rothschield Schofeild.”
“How do I politely say it shows some incompetence on someone’s part?” said Rothschild Village President Neal Torney.
(http://www.godbitesman.com/storage/bilde-1.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1248619009112)
:pan:
Poor US 40, downgraded to State Route status.
This was so bad it was actually shown on Headline News a couple of days before even though it has reportedly been fixed :-D Anyway now looking at the access road for US 17 Business SB from US 501 SB (http://i622.photobucket.com/albums/tt304/24DIDNOTWIN/US501SOUTHAT8THAVENANDUS17BUSINESS.jpg) I know at one point US 17 Business was US 17 but US 17 was moved onto its "Myrtle Beach Bypass" over 20 years ago :-o :wow:QuoteEvery Word Except "Exit" Spelled Wrong on Wisconsin Highway Sign
A sign pointing southbound travelers onto Business Highway 51 in Rothschild and Schofield bears an incorrect spelling for every word except “exit.”
David Vieth, director of the bureau of highway operations for the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, said the mistake was made by Decker Supply Company of Madison, which printed the sign.
The sign for exit 185 on southbound Highway 51 reads “Buisness 51 Rothschield Schofeild.”
“How do I politely say it shows some incompetence on someone’s part?” said Rothschild Village President Neal Torney.
(http://www.godbitesman.com/storage/bilde-1.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1248619009112)
:pan:
And where the heck is the exit arrow?!?!? I'm surprised they didn't use a state shield by mistake. :banghead:
That's the one.Incorrect BGS on westbound WA 14 entering Washougal, signing for Bus US 14. Saw it and barely missed the photo-op :banghead:
I didn't:
(http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/WA14SignGoof1.jpg?t=1248593525)
The US 82's on OR 82 have been replaced with the correct trailblazer shields.
did you happen to come across any state named I-5 shields? I've heard there's one supposedly somewhere in Grants Pass but I've never been able to find it. Similarly, I've heard there's one supposedly somewhere in Ashland.
White I-80 shield posted on BL-80 in Elko:
(http://www.aaroads.com/west/nevada080/bl-080_nv-535_eb_app_jennings_way_02.jpg)
Not really an error, as the concurrency was intentional, but if you turn left to go northbound it is posted as MO-43 as well, even though it's still a few miles out from the tripoint. But it is AR-43 that goes into Oklahoma. I'm sure the curve in the road is to avoid some problem that ODOT didn't feel was worth paving over.
Do you have a higher-resolution version of the US 15 shield?
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2259/2283115720_f6dd49d17d.jpg)Route sign fail.
...I wish U.S. 15 still traveled to Rochester...Me too!
that 15 might also be an old shield.US 15 was truncated to Painted Post in 1974, and that shield looks too new.
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2259/2283115720_f6dd49d17d.jpg)Route sign fail.
And FWIW, I remember that being a U.S. 15 shield in the late 1980s. So either it was carbon copied later, or its held up incredibly over the years...
I just happened to stumble across this one on Google...There are multiple possible answers for this sign...There's your pop quiz for the day ;-)
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Great+Falls,+MT&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=34.396866,53.789062&ie=UTF8&ll=47.472007,-111.361182&spn=0.000896,0.001642&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=47.472068,-111.361088&panoid=6z6B27Nom7GlFSzs-FOcSg&cbp=12,41.14,,0,5 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Great+Falls,+MT&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=34.396866,53.789062&ie=UTF8&ll=47.472007,-111.361182&spn=0.000896,0.001642&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=47.472068,-111.361088&panoid=6z6B27Nom7GlFSzs-FOcSg&cbp=12,41.14,,0,5)
(http://<iframe width="425" height="240" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" src="http://maps.google.com/maps/sv?cbp=12,41.14,,0,5&cbll=47.472068,-111.361088&panoid=&v=1&hl=en&gl=us"></iframe><br /><small><a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=embed&hl=en&geocode=&q=Great+Falls,+MT&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=34.396866,53.789062&ie=UTF8&ll=47.516621,-111.301718&spn=0.000896,0.001642&t=h&z=14&layer=c&cbll=47.472068,-111.361088&panoid=6z6B27Nom7GlFSzs-FOcSg&cbp=12,41.14,,0,5" style="color:#0000FF;text-align:left">View Larger Map</a></small>)
Either a Business I-15 or I-315?
Either a Business I-15 or I-315?
Nailed it.
Probably Business 15, as I-315 isn't signed.
It gets worse on the other side of I-95, with overheads showing US 33 going in BOTH directions on Broad. I emailed VDOT two years ago and they feel that the exit doesn't see enough traffic to warrant them coming out to fix it.How is there not enough traffic???? That's one of the main exits into downtown which isn't a freeway or toll road :colorful:
We reviewed the location yesterday, and found your complaint to be
valid; the signs for Rte 250 / 33 will be changed to the Rte 33 state
primary shields whenever our budget allows. Although theses signs have
been inappropriately marked, since they do not directly affect travelers
ability to identify what stretch of road they are located or their
immediate traveling safety, this is not one of our main priorities at
the time. Especially considering the number of improvement and safety
projects we are currently engaged in. Nonetheless, we will address these
concerns as soon as possible.
Also, I found another one:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/nyends/images/perry/ny20.jpg)
NY 20 should be US 20.
None of those shields is in error, Hellfighter. The I-195 shield looks a little strange, but it's not wrong. :p
http://www.upstatenyroads.com/submit/region-5/HPIM3142.JPG (http://www.upstatenyroads.com/submit/region-5/HPIM3142.JPG)
So you're telling me I have to go on NY 16 North in order to detour NY 16 North?
I've also seen detours that have to go the opposite direction. For example, when a bridge on NY 31 was being replaced, there was a long detour. To follow it, people trying to go east on NY 31 east of the start of the detour had to go in the opposite (west) direction to get to the "beginning". Signs in that area said "NY 31 WEST/DETOUR NY 31 EAST".
I've also seen detours that have to go the oppositedirection. For example, when a bridge on NY 31 was being replaced, there was a long detour. To follow it, people trying to go east on NY 31 east of the start of the detour had to go in the opposite (west) direction to get to the "beginning". Signs in that area said "NY 31 WEST/DETOUR NY 31 EAST".
I noticed this NY 20A shield for US 20A on one of my recent updates:
(http://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_york020/us-020a_ny-039_eb_split.jpg)
I found US 15 in Oklahoma this past weekend ;)
there was a US-11 error somewhere in Oklahoma in late 2006. I cannot remember where, but it was part of a construction zone. I'd love to say I have a photo of it on the shield gallery, but I appear to be some sort of a demon slug so I do not.
There's a US 51 sign near Stilwell and an OK 64 circle shield near Tulsa.
there was a US-11 error somewhere in Oklahoma in late 2006. I cannot remember where, but it was part of a construction zone. I'd love to say I have a photo of it on the shield gallery, but I appear to be some sort of a demon slug so I do not.
I always like "state routes signed with a US shield" errors more than their converse, for some reason. Could you get me photos of each, especially the US 51?
http://picasaweb.google.com/Iansignal/MaineTrafficSignalsAndRoadSigns#5377391089234192162
I always like "state routes signed with a US shield" errors more than their converse, for some reason.
I always like "state routes signed with a US shield" errors more than their converse, for some reason.
Then this will be right up your alley:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/nyends/images/nitzman/us-62a.jpg)
US 62A should be NY 62A. (Note that NY 62A has since been redesignated as Business US 62.)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2456/3847074744_e397e93e2c.jpg)
BTW Where exactly was that sign found?
RE: Master son (I can't get the quote button to work)
This was the "WIS" 14 error (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2543/3909050182_f033e58788_b.jpg) that was posted before. I had to go out and find it myself. (almost easier than finding it in the forums :ded: )
That WIS 14 error (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2585/3909051090_f68a5db3ab_b.jpg) is part of old City US 14, now Business US 14, north of Janesville. Three assemblies (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2672/3909074214_5b0e0b0ddf_b.jpg) along Bus 14 north of Janesville city limits have this error. This one (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3517/3908269437_8e9c5f3e1d_b.jpg) doesn't even have the "Business" sign.
Bonus WIS 14 errors:
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2600/3879793255_89ffd215b3_o.jpg)
Found in Janesville, not on City US 14. The design is relatively new and the traffic is usually heavy, but I suppose it costs too much to fix it right now.
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2665/3879793465_0dec190013.jpg)
This one was in Middleton while some entrance ramps along the beltline were closed. Also should be US 14.
Another construction sign (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2604/3880590192_b6901c8eed_o.jpg) shows state 12 instead of US. This kind of error is fairly common with DOT construction signs; I recall seeing TO WIS-14 shields along 39/90 when the road east of Janesville was closed, and there were probably plenty around the Marquette interchange in Milwaukee. I also saw WIS-43 on some side road in south Milwaukee, didn't occur to take a picture then. I bet there will be more once the construction on 94 gets underway south of Milwaukee.
The rest of the ones I found and took pictures on are in my flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/wandering_drive/tags/error/ (http://www.flickr.com/photos/wandering_drive/tags/error/)
There's no longer a VA 305 here.
sweet, can we put that on the gallery?
Here's one from Synthetic Dreamer...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3434/3891886482_576bcde05a.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3434/3891886482_576bcde05a.jpg)
Here's one from Synthetic Dreamer...
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3434/3891886482_576bcde05a.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3434/3891886482_576bcde05a.jpg)
I can't figure out what's wrong with that one... :confused: I-64 is north of US-60 and VA 5 is south of US-60. Though that might be more evident if I knew where exactly the sign was.
very nice! I will get a picture of it next week when I am in the area.
now, the real question is, are there any 880 remnants anywhere? I believe there is an 880 paddle on current 80, and some of the signs show evidence of a wider shield having been scraped off, but I have never seen an actual 880 shield in Sacramento.
^^^ I've also seen detours that have to go the opposite direction. For example, when a bridge on NY 31 was being replaced, there was a long detour. To follow it, people trying to go east on NY 31 east of the start of the detour had to go in the opposite (west) direction to get to the "beginning". Signs in that area said "NY 31 WEST/DETOUR NY 31 EAST".
that one is indeed an old US-104 sign. A couple float around.
Q: What do you do when you need to replace a green arrow panel on a shield assembly, but you're just fresh out of them in the sign shop?
A: you use one of those blue ones that you ordered too many of and have a million of lying around, figuring no one will ever notice.
throughout Roanoke, VA, there are several US-11 signs that are white with the shield outline, not black with the white shield in it... Like this:
(http://i460.photobucket.com/albums/qq330/nerdlydood/foe_toez/DSC01021.jpg)
Is that entirely wrong? The signs are all reflective, and they aren't particularly old - some are only a year or two old.
US 93 near Texarkana
Actually, I like seeing a US-99 sign, because it's another way of keeping the memory of US-99 alive. :coffee:
At first, I was thinking "there's nothing wrong with using a temporary construction exit tab" before I realized it was US 93 signed next to a Texas FM route. I assume that should be Texas SH 93?
Poor US 40, downgraded to State Route status.
Ditto US 62
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3209/2474259353_da7ee29c71.jpg)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2259/2283115720_f6dd49d17d.jpg)
Uh...an infamous one is my avatar. Check it out!
(It was taken down, the last time I checked.)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3640/3996085434_3aa374e81d.jpg)
There's no BL-I-29 in Fargo, this should be I-29
was that the OR-82 on the railroad overpass?
That stoplight ahead sign in the background is also mounted upside down
That stoplight ahead sign in the background is also mounted upside down
'nother one, from Ogden, UT:
UT-79's east end at "US-203":
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3035/2383196719_074a35b53b.jpg)
alas, the oldest shadow is not that of a cutout ... just looks to be a larger square.
as for US-127, there is a US-123 as well in Washington.
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/WA/WA19861231i1.jpg)
I showed you that US 52 sign on Pasco CR 583 & Florida SR 52, and those incorrect cardinal direction banners on I-75 at Exit 309. Now I'm going to show you one of many signs placed southbound along I-75 and the Suncoast Parkway.Ah, but the sign is telling us that it's 52 miles to I-275 (which takes us to St Pete) not to St Pete itself. Probably would have been better to leave any city designation off from that part of the sign though to avoid any confusion.
(http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3706/suncoastpkwyerroneousde.jpg)
There's no way in hell that you'll reach St. Petersburg before you reach Tampa.
This one's been in place for a good 20 years at least:What's wrong with that? :hmmm:
(http://img198.imageshack.us/img198/470/dscn5972.jpg)
The "TO" should go with 295, not 695.
Also, it's a diagrammatic on a major freeway... in button copy.
Yup, it's a real die hard all right!
Ah, but the sign is telling us that it's 52 miles to I-275 (which takes us to St Pete) not to St Pete itself. Probably would have been better to leave any city designation off from that part of the sign though to avoid any confusion.
Ah, but the sign is telling us that it's 52 miles to I-275 (which takes us to St Pete) not to St Pete itself. Probably would have been better to leave any city designation off from that part of the sign though to avoid any confusion.
But you don't reach the airport before reaching I-275 (as that route is what gets you to TPA). This is only an educated guess, but they may have calculated the distance to Tampa via I-4, which is silly since I-275 is more direct. The difference between the airport and St. Pete looks to be correct given the length of the Howard Frankland Bridge.
Unless otherwise noted these signs usually indicate the mileage using the most direct route, but after consulting my trusty Rand McNally Atlas I don't see any route that is going to get you to the Tampa airport before you reach I-275, so something with the sign does indeed seem to be amiss. :hmmm:Ah, but the sign is telling us that it's 52 miles to I-275 (which takes us to St Pete) not to St Pete itself. Probably would have been better to leave any city designation off from that part of the sign though to avoid any confusion.
But you don't reach the airport before reaching I-275 (as that route is what gets you to TPA). This is only an educated guess, but they may have calculated the distance to Tampa via I-4, which is silly since I-275 is more direct. The difference between the airport and St. Pete looks to be correct given the length of the Howard Frankland Bridge.
it's a diagrammatic on a major freewayWhat's wrong with that? :hmmm:
nice reuse of the exit tab! :-D
I am assuming the sign is on 95 SB, at the 95/695 split
I don't believe there is even a direct connection between 95SB and 295 - the whole point of 695 is to cut off the triangle.
to omit the "TO" on 295 isn't too significant of an error
no average driver thinks of 695 as going anywhere... there are no exits to the street off 695
alas, the oldest shadow is not that of a cutout ... just looks to be a larger square.
as for US-127, there is a US-123 as well in Washington.
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/WA/WA19861231i1.jpg)
Can somebody please tell me how the hell NYSDOT screwed this up?
(http://i37.tinypic.com/5oxkk0.png)
Can somebody please tell me how the hell NYSDOT screwed this up?
During my stay in Ohio last week I strayed into Kentucky where I saw the US shields are a little different with the bottoms being pointy compared to the one in the picture above.
(http://www.speedcam.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/kentucky23.jpg)
that or the awkwardly long domain name. What, was ky.gov.us too easy to remember?
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ec/394-430.jpg)
Wait, so which way do I go to get to I-86\NY 17?
what is the error in that sign pair? Is that the DC beltway, aka I-495?
I assumed that there were supposed to be Control Cities instead of the Freeway Name
do all three possibilities work?
here is a goof from Litchfield, Illinois.
(http://www.artistjake.com/f/ca/x4520.jpg)
A second one, eh? I got one about 3-4 years ago in Litchfield
A second one, eh? I got one about 3-4 years ago in Litchfield
there were indeed two in 2006, about two blocks apart.
Litchfield also signed this well after the road was decommissioned:
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/IL/IL19700662i1.jpg)
I believe the NORTH is an error.
I have seen it signed in Illinois as CHICAGO and ST. LOUIS.
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/IL/IL19600661i1.jpg)
(http://i37.tinypic.com/5oxkk0.png)
Can somebody please tell me how the hell NYSDOT screwed this up?
what is the error in that sign pair? Is that the DC beltway, aka I-495?
But since SR's do not exist in Virginia Beach or any other independent city not named Suffolk
having the freeway name instead of the cities is an old California tradition that DC seems to have picked up on.
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/IL/IL19700662i1.jpg)
In California, "END CONSTRUCTION" signs are still commonly used to mark the end of a construction/road work zone. "ROAD CONSTRUCTION AHEAD" signs are also still common in California. Given all that, I am starting to see more and more signs that say "ROAD WORK" instead of "ROAD CONSTRUCTION".
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/IL/IL19700662i1.jpg)
Also, the sign in the back says "end CONSTRUCTION"....when was the last time you saw that!?!? Most signs say ROAD WORK!
In California, "END CONSTRUCTION" signs are still commonly used to mark the end of a construction/road work zone. "ROAD CONSTRUCTION AHEAD" signs are also still common in California. Given all that, I am starting to see more and more signs that say "ROAD WORK" instead of "ROAD CONSTRUCTION".
--
Also, the sign in the back says "end CONSTRUCTION"....when was the last time you saw that!?!? Most signs say ROAD WORK!
Hey Im the center for my football team...(http://i37.tinypic.com/5oxkk0.png)
Can somebody please tell me how the hell NYSDOT screwed this up?
Ummm, Australian at work?
Or maybe a guy who played the center position on a football team? (Those guys see EVERYTHING upside down and backwards!)
(http://i37.tinypic.com/5oxkk0.png)
Can somebody please tell me how the hell NYSDOT screwed this up?
Ummm, Australian at work?
Or maybe a guy who played the center position on a football team? (Those guys see EVERYTHING upside down and backwards!)
A second one, eh? I got one about 3-4 years ago in Litchfield
there were indeed two in 2006, about two blocks apart.
Litchfield also signed this well after the road was decommissioned:
<Snip>
(http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/ny/us_15/nroch.jpg)
Since when was I-390 an east\west route?
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/IL/IL19700662i1.jpg)
The way the sign is worded seems funky to me. I think that the sign could be rephrased. How does "TO Rochester, USE Interstate 86/NY 17 WEST TO Interstate 390 NORTH" sound?(http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/ny/us_15/nroch.jpg)
Since when was I-390 an east\west route?
A sign-design error is evident as well. The MUTCD does either discourages or flat out disallows the use of independent-use directional banners on a guide sign like this (i.e. the west banners underneath the I-86 & NY 17 shields should be a printed in white directly on the green area of the sign above/next to the shields).
(http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/ny/us_15/nroch.jpg)
A sign-design error is evident as well. The MUTCD does either discourages or flat out disallows the use of independent-use directional banners on a guide sign like this (i.e. the west banners underneath the I-86 & NY 17 shields should be a printed in white directly on the green area of the sign above/next to the shields).
I've always wondered if that "extra large initial capital letter" style was ever a federal spec, because it pops up more often than expected. It was a California state spec ... before 1958!
Here's a good one:
(Interstate 65/CR 17)
(http://www.alpsroads.net/roads/ny/us_15/nroch.jpg)
A sign-design error is evident as well. The MUTCD does either discourages or flat out disallows the use of independent-use directional banners on a guide sign like this (i.e. the west banners underneath the I-86 & NY 17 shields should be a printed in white directly on the green area of the sign above/next to the shields).
I am willing to bet that that BGS is a sign that was around during the pre-I-86 days, and there was probably a larger NY-17 shield which was where the current 86 & 17 shields are now.
And as far as the wording, I would think that saying "Rochester via I-390" would be sufficient for the first half of the BGS, no?
I've always wondered if that "extra large initial capital letter" style was ever a federal spec, because it pops up more often than expected. It was a California state spec ... before 1958!
(Image removed - see quoted post)
the style pops up in California every so often, but to see it in another state is odd. I've seen it somewhere else, but cannot remember where - neither California nor Alabama though.
It looks like the I-390 shield was tacked on after the fact as well.
Ah, on closer inspection I see evidence of where a larger shield may have been placed where the I-86 shield is now. They probably could have done without the I-390 shield or used some greenout to make the "via I-390" legend a bit clearer.
Ah, yes. Some of them have the word "TO" placed in them.I showed you that US 52 sign on Pasco CR 583 & Florida SR 52, and those incorrect cardinal direction banners on I-75 at Exit 309. Now I'm going to show you one of many signs placed southbound along I-75 and the Suncoast Parkway.Ah, but the sign is telling us that it's 52 miles to I-275 (which takes us to St Pete) not to St Pete itself. Probably would have been better to leave any city designation off from that part of the sign though to avoid any confusion.
(http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/3706/suncoastpkwyerroneousde.jpg)
There's no way in hell that you'll reach St. Petersburg before you reach Tampa.
^^^
That mix of Clearview and FHWA on the EXIT 49 sign doesn't help much either.
I think the sign is all Highway Gothic, but just a mix of type heaviness, etc... I do remember when the sign was Ann St, High St. only a few years ago. The sign changed in 2007 I think?
(If anyone wants to use this for some reason I do have a watermark-free version that's the same size.)
(If anyone wants to use this for some reason I do have a watermark-free version that's the same size.)
So, then, how far along is your "Operation Watermark?" :-D :-D :-D
How on Earth did you do that?
Unfortunately that picture is too small to see the tell tale artifacts of a doctored image.
shoptb1, the first two images in your post above are the same. :P
Is it the lack of an exit only plaque?
Lets see if anyone can figure this one out:
(http://s761.photobucket.com/albums/xx260/jdbarnes1234/100_0365.jpg)
Another interesting sighting driving around today....not sure which shield is correct...look a little further down the street. :-D
North Nelson Rd (US-62 East or North) at Broad Street (US-40 / OH-16)
Google Maps Link --> http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=columbus,+oh&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=52.418008,101.953125&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Columbus,+Franklin,+Ohio&ll=39.967939,-82.950536&spn=0.001573,0.003111&t=h&z=19 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=columbus,+oh&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=52.418008,101.953125&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Columbus,+Franklin,+Ohio&ll=39.967939,-82.950536&spn=0.001573,0.003111&t=h&z=19)
Actually, the error is that Exit 255 is not for Lakeshore Drive. The exit is actually for Lakeshore Parkway. Lakeshore Drive begins about a half-mile east of here.
I was driving around the Columbus area today, and I found some erroneous signage right in our local neck o' the woods. Thought I'd post:
3) At the gore point from I-270, the sign shows exit only in two lanes, and notates Ohio State Route 710 as 'North-South'.
(http://lh6.ggpht.com/_vV2-Fg-7T40/S0kxSEyM67I/AAAAAAAABHQ/PuaFs818T0Y/s800/IMG_9258.JPG)
4) However, further on the exit ramp at the C/D split for the cloverleaf, it seems that only North Cleveland Avenue is marked as Ohio State Route 710, not South? The Advance Signs don't match this sign.
(http://lh3.ggpht.com/_vV2-Fg-7T40/S0kxSkCfSKI/AAAAAAAABHU/VKnKm0Bim6s/s1024/IMG_9259.JPG)
Another interesting sighting driving around today....not sure which shield is correct...look a little further down the street. :-D
North Nelson Rd (US-62 East or North) at Broad Street (US-40 / OH-16)
Google Maps Link --> http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=columbus,+oh&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=52.418008,101.953125&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Columbus,+Franklin,+Ohio&ll=39.967939,-82.950536&spn=0.001573,0.003111&t=h&z=19 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=columbus,+oh&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=52.418008,101.953125&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Columbus,+Franklin,+Ohio&ll=39.967939,-82.950536&spn=0.001573,0.003111&t=h&z=19)
Honestly, neither is ODOT. The old north-east/south-west/etc. routes are very inconsistently signed as one or the other, so this doesn't surprise me. US 33 is another example, which I think switched from N-S to E-W.
The explanation I got from an ODOT worker was that most of the time, the routes are signed in the general direction they are headed at that moment by the locals who control the signs (In Columbus, the city is responsible for signing and maintenance of Interstate, state and US routes). Officially, Ohio considers US 33 and US 35 to be more E-W as both routes travel in more of those directions than N-S. US 62 is officially N-S, as it's meandering pathway through Ohio is more north-south than east-west (even though nationally, US 62 is deemed E-W)....
I actually wish they would still be able to sign the routes as NE, NW, SE, and SW considering that 33, 35, and 62 all move primarily in these directions in the state of Ohio vs. N, S, E, or W. It would be nice, however, if they would pick a ordinal and go with it.
US 62 is officially N-S, as it's meandering pathway through Ohio is more north-south than east-west (even though nationally, US 62 is deemed E-W)....
Actually, everywhere I can recall seeing US 62 signed in Ohio, it's E-W. I know it certainly is after it crosses from Kentucky into Ohio. In Kentucky, both US 62 and US 68 are E-W routes. Upon crossing into the Worthless Nut State, 62 remains E-W but 68 becomes N-S.
I found this gem while trolling around Casper yesterday
Now, this route only lasts for another block (to 20/26/87), so it seems a tad ridiculous to mark it so well, but that's not the error.
I found this gem while trolling around Casper yesterday
(http://davidjcorcoran.com/what58.jpg)
Loaf 'n Jug- it's also a Kroger product. Out here that logo can be found on Loaf 'n Jug, King Soopers, City Market, Fred Meyer, and Smith's gas stations. Then there's a few others (Kwik Stop, I think, or something along those lines, and then Turkey Hill out in Pennsylvania, and then a couple others).
A few years ago Kroger bought a bunch of regional gas station chains and commonized them all with that logo and you can buy Kroger branded products in the store
The Tom Thumb chain in the southeast also uses the same logo.
The Tom Thumb chain in the southeast also uses the same logo.
Interesting, considering that they are owned by Safeway (just as Dominick's is). The Food 4 Lesses here in Chicagoland use it due to their Kroger ownership.
The Tom Thumb chain in the southeast also uses the same logo.
Interesting, considering that they are owned by Safeway (just as Dominick's is). The Food 4 Lesses here in Chicagoland use it due to their Kroger ownership.
The Tom Thumb chain in the southeast also uses the same logo.
Interesting, considering that they are owned by Safeway (just as Dominick's is). The Food 4 Lesses here in Chicagoland use it due to their Kroger ownership.
Doesn't Kroger own Safeway?
Here is an error I saw this past weekend:
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4026/4433375067_ca4f2e74d0_b.jpg)
Here's another one:
(http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/8686/on401407.jpg)
Who ever decided that 407 ETR was a King's Highway and should use a crown shield like ON 401 and using helvetica for shield is a big no no.
:banghead:
And unfortunately, the font on those shields is worse than Helvetica: it's Arial! Check out that horrible one.
Way wrong and way too good!
(http://epicwinftw.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/129133520522393318.jpg)
Might have something to do with the guy who looks like he's gonna nunchuck Hoboken...
(not to mention where Hoboken and Secaucus are in relation to I-76....in other words, not even close...)
.. I don't get it?
Although, I have no idea why that gantry in particular was photoshopped. The actual sign (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=New+York&ll=39.902938,-75.116422&spn=0,359.98071&z=16&layer=c&cbll=39.902957,-75.116543&panoid=LU4Hqa1LOnhwvAdz9pbzeA&cbp=12,110.61,,0,-11.57) says "Atlantic City", not "Secaucus Hoboken".
The actual exit doesn't. The sign was erected by the bridge commission. Blame them for inventing it.Although, I have no idea why that gantry in particular was photoshopped. The actual sign (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=New+York&ll=39.902938,-75.116422&spn=0,359.98071&z=16&layer=c&cbll=39.902957,-75.116543&panoid=LU4Hqa1LOnhwvAdz9pbzeA&cbp=12,110.61,,0,-11.57) says "Atlantic City", not "Secaucus Hoboken".
OBTopic: Why does a New Jersey exit have a Pennsylvania number?
Way wrong and way too good!
(http://epicwinftw.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/129133520522393318.jpg)
Way wrong and way too good!
(http://epicwinftw.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/129133520522393318.jpg)
And the original (http://www.aaroads.com/northeast/pennsylvania075/i-076_eb_exit_354_11.jpg) was taken by AARoads.
and here I had been starting to think (yes, I thought about this way too much) that down, diagonal, over, and fist was standard New Jersey merging behavior, to be executed in the three miles before the off-ramp!Yeah, I have to admit that sign had me fooled. When I read your post, I started to think that sequence of arrows and symbols meant to...
U.S. 22 in Arkansas?
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4024/4470885055_7ceed60311_b.jpg)
Then it got extended further west to Stayton, OR:
I wasn't able to get a good picture because I didn't notice it, but I just caught a glimpse of it out of the margins of one of the pictures I took- here we have a circular highway shield on a stoplight street name panel designating WYO 220. Check out the upper right:
The google street view image is slightly better:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=casper+wy&sll=35.576917,-95.421753&sspn=1.796013,5.410767&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Casper,+Natrona,+Wyoming&ll=42.808426,-106.413713&spn=0.012657,0.042272&z=15&layer=c&cbll=42.808406,-106.413846&panoid=fa7X2VFzP4H6a3rl5l0DkA&cbp=12,153.28,,0,-9.98
Here's a goof that has been driven by dozens of times but may have gone unnoticed (I didn't notice until I looked at the high res photo just now and I've driven by it several times)- AARoads doesn't mention it in their photo caption of the gantry- this is I-76 WB at I-270. I guess it's just a leftover and not so much an error.
(http://davidjcorcoran.com/future270.jpg)
Question: How do the shields fall off?
Spotted this Mississippi 278 error (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=tupelo,+ms&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=43.983628,106.787109&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Tupelo,+Lee,+Mississippi&ll=34.115375,-88.699815&spn=0.011352,0.034246&z=16&layer=c&cbll=34.115294,-88.699862&panoid=c3GA-QmHKFhV80VenEQ7Bg&cbp=12,40.58,,0,-0.75) yesterday along the U.S. 45 Alt off-ramp to U.S. 45 & 278.
Not sure whether this falls under "Damaged Signs" or Erroneous road signs" so I'll put it here, cause it could be fixed but it hasn't been.
BGS in San Antonio is missing the I-10 shield.
(http://lh5.ggpht.com/_WYYeXvkUoUE/S-iX0mRys-I/AAAAAAAAFGs/mDnYd0FjMWA/s800/SANY0785.JPG)
BigMatt
In this case:Question: How do the shields fall off?
I guess the rivets come loose. That's one of the problems with "demountable" shields that you don't get with ones that are directly applied to the reflective sheeting, but it's easier to replace them without needing a "greenout."
U.S. 265 in Utah?! (taken 5/27/10)
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4013/4646866834_f825a8a077_b.jpg)
U.S. 265 in Utah?! (taken 5/27/10)
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4013/4646866834_f825a8a077_b.jpg)
I wish contractors would get their act together.
That makes three states with US-92!
Didn't get a photo but saw a US 89 off of US 93 southbound the other day.
Didn't get a photo but saw a US 89 off of US 93 southbound the other day.
is that in Arizona? If so, is that an error, or - could it be? - a remnant of old US-89?
Here's a recent one (http://www.wtop.com/?nid=712&sid=1985886). It'll be fixed by tomorrow, so no photo opportunity.
The I-85 shield doesn't appear to be the only error on that sign...I spot at least two more...
yep, this photo is much better quality. I wonder if they'll let us use it on the shield gallery.
yep, this photo is much better quality. I wonder if they'll let us use it on the shield gallery.
indeed, the two K's need to be swapped! Wonder how that happens on a retroreflective sign - a button copy sign I could understand, if one person selects the set of letters that need to be applied to a given sign, and another actually rivets them in place.
I believe Maryland uses demountable copy. Certainly seemed that way whenever I was there in 2007.
Also, does anyone know what the original Ohio shield was that was covered up (and not very well) by the US-33 shield in this picture?This (as of January 2004)
This (as of January 2004)
That's cool! I would buy one.
hm, I actually find it more palatable than that damn green-shielded freeway.
Would be better if it were signed as US 50 though!
Would be better if it were signed as US 50 though!
I thought 50 ended at 51 (the other segment of business 80) and the eastbound signs were wrong. Does 50 go all the way through to the western junction of 80 and business 80?
As defined in 1963, Route 50 was the route from Route 80 in Sacramento to the Nevada state line near Lake Tahoe via Placerville. The "Route 80" referred to in this routing is what is now Route 51, i.e., Business Route 80.
In 1981, Chapter 292 changed Route 50 to run from "Route 80 in West of Sacramento". The Route 80 referred to in this definition was the new definition of Route 80 that was the bypass around Sacramento, so this effectively added the former portion of Route 80 between Route 51 and the new junction with Route 80 to Route 50. The segment added is FAI 305, meaning it is acually interstate milage, but isn't signed as interstate milage. Note that the added segment is signed as Business Route 80 ("Capitol City Freeway").
hm, I actually find it more palatable than that damn green-shielded freeway.
Seconded. "Green 80" needs to go. Just split it up between 50 and 51.
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2779/4511668888_7cffc068d5.jpg)
I don't think the arrows are MUTCD standard, but its funny nonetheless - IDOT in Chicago. I've seen instances of this on US 12 and 45 as well.
O. i c :-D<image removed for bandwitdh's sake
I don't think the arrows are MUTCD standard, but its funny nonetheless - IDOT in Chicago. I've seen instances of this on US 12 and 45 as well.
The diagonal arrows *is* a MUTCD standard sign (M6-6 is the sign designation in the 2009 MUTCD), although it's granted that this particular arrangement probably doesn't get much use.
There is also a standard sign that uses a straight ahead and and angled arrow.
Those GMSV views are almost impossible to see...any better photos?
This one? (http://www.ajfroggie.com/roadpics/wi/i090/i090w-wi61signgoof.jpg)
Link says "forbidden."
QuoteLink says "forbidden."
Hit refresh. I've disabled direct hot-linking to my site, but hitting refresh usually works.
QuoteLink says "forbidden."
Hit refresh. I've disabled direct hot-linking to my site, but hitting refresh usually works.
STILL 403
Copy the URL into a new browser window and it will work.
So, VDOT finally fixed the "Exit 11" error on an exit tab on I-95 in Richmond!
(http://lh5.ggpht.com/_vGM7FtU3Pdk/TEaJ4WIxTgI/AAAAAAAAEtg/DtLtO-e7XY4/IMG_0300.jpg)
...sort of. Right exit number, just nearly impossible to read.
OK, worked that time. :banghead:
QuoteLink says "forbidden."
Hit refresh. I've disabled direct hot-linking to my site, but hitting refresh usually works.
It's not the one I shot. Where was your pic taken? Westbound on I-90 in Wisconsin approaching the first exit in Minnesota?
ONE WAY -> <- ONE WAY (across the street from each other)
ONE WAY -> <- ONE WAY (across the street from each other)
I have seen the fabled "ONE WAY" pointing down a dead-end street. In Cleveland and in Kansas City.
ONE WAY -> <- ONE WAY (across the street from each other)
I know of one intersection like that in my home town of Bloomsburg, PA at the intersection of Main and West Streets. South of Main, West St. is one way northbound. North of Main, it is one way southbound. This leads to a situation where if you're on west street, you must turn onto Main. And, you can't turn onto West St. from Main.
You can see the "NO TURNS" sign on Main St. at the light and if you look to the left and right, you can see the one way signs pointing at each other.
I have seen the fabled "ONE WAY" pointing down a dead-end street. In Cleveland and in Kansas City.
It figures that Cleveland would be one of them. There's so much about the town that's dead end. :sombrero:
(And as I live near Cleveland for 10 years and worked in it for 5, I think I'm allowed to make Cleveland jokes.)
Then again, Connecticut does have a problem with putting US shields on signs when they are multiplexed with other routes. Just look at I-84 from Farmington to Manchester. US 6 is paired with I-84 the entire length, but you'll have to look for the occasional reassurance markers to list US 6, but not one BGS in that distance makes note of US 6.Generally somewhat better signed from intersecting roads than on the mainline, so I've found at least. US 6 does NOT need to be multiplexed with 84 nearly as long as it is in CT, especially the first time in the Exits low-teens when the old road is continuous.
US 6 does NOT need to be multiplexed with 84 nearly as long as it is in CT, especially the first time in the Exits low-teens when the old road is continuous.
Generally somewhat better signed from intersecting roads than on the mainline, so I've found at least. US 6 does NOT need to be multiplexed with 84 nearly as long as it is in CT, especially the first time in the Exits low-teens when the old road is continuous.
One of my favorites was back in the late '80s on the Ambassador Bridge, Canada-Bound:
The sign originally said:
MEN WORKING ABOVE (referring to cable inspectors or bridge painters),
but someone (Probably one of the workers) added the words:
SO FLASH 'EM.
:wow:
U.S. 265 in Utah?! (taken 5/27/10)
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4013/4646866834_f825a8a077_b.jpg)
With all of the summer work on southbound OH-315 in Columbus, I suppose it was bound to happen sooner or later...315 has become a US highway! :)
(http://lh3.ggpht.com/_vV2-Fg-7T40/TF8A29qkIGI/AAAAAAAAB5w/vSfm65XRcRE/s720/IMG_2109.JPG)
IMO, every state should follow California's lead and number ALL exits.
IMO, every state should follow California's lead and number ALL exits.
California's about the last state to feature exit numbers! :-D
U.S. 265 in Utah?! (taken 5/27/10)
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4013/4646866834_f825a8a077_b.jpg)
I was back in Provo this past weekend, and this sign goof has been corrected. :(
U.S. 265 in Utah?! (taken 5/27/10)
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4013/4646866834_f825a8a077_b.jpg)
I was back in Provo this past weekend, and this sign goof has been corrected. :(
Well, I did let the signing engineer know about this, so I guess I'm to blame on this one, right? :/
that's way better than Helvetica. It vaguely resembles old Maryland. Significantly uglier of course, but not nearly as bad as Helvetica.
1. The long-standing black-and-white, Interstate-shaped, route 9 symbol at Exit 29 on the Parkway north.
can anyone get a really good detailed closeup of this for the shield gallery? I once attempted to get a photo but I was driving southbound and the rearward facing shot failed in every way imaginable.
I have a halfway decent shot of it, taken back in June. I haven't uploaded my hundreds of pictures from my travels this summer, but once I get them up you are welcome to make use of it.
One more - my favorite. Can anyone guess what it means?Did you see my image of the sign at the mini-golf course on Portion Road boasting of "F***king For All Ages?"
It is on a chain-link fence.
GO OUTSIDE FENCE TO GET SHOT
1. The long-standing black-and-white, Interstate-shaped, route 9 symbol at Exit 29 on the Parkway north.
can anyone get a really good detailed closeup of this for the shield gallery? I once attempted to get a photo but I was driving southbound and the rearward facing shot failed in every way imaginable.
I don't have pictures, but I saw 2 while I was in NJ last week:
1. The long-standing black-and-white, Interstate-shaped, route 9 symbol at Exit 29 on the Parkway north.
This one? (taken by me on 8/4/03)
(http://www.okroads.com/080403/gspexit29.JPG)
:hmmm: I'm not so sure. I-99 may break the grid, but its signs are within spec.
Here's one I found on Onthighways.com (http://www.asphaltplanet.ca/ON/hwy_10-19_images/16_shield_401assembly.jpg) of a now removed US 37 sign that's supposed to be NY 37 on the ON 401 offramp:
*ON 16/416/US 37 assembly*
The one on the other ramp is still there in streetview though:
*GSV link*
I like the size of the text on the orange tape jobs through the construction zone there.
CLOSED
I thought we had an auto-resize script as a stopgap, or did we knock it out since it was masking the problem, and not solving it?
Well, one of his images somehow bypassed it and was full size in the forums. The other one had javascript resizing and was freaking out my browser.
I noticed the one, that is why I was wondering if our countermeasure had been taken away. The other one was not freaking out the browser for me. I'm running firefox 3.5.3.
RMF67, does the image linking code allow resizing in the image tag?
Not too much of an error, but DelDOT messed up the colors for the E-ZPass logo! The text is supposed to be white and the background is supposed to be purple. I-95 southbound approaching the Newark toll plaza.
Not too much of an error, but DelDOT messed up the colors for the E-ZPass logo! The text is supposed to be white and the background is supposed to be purple. I-95 southbound approaching the Newark toll plaza.
This one is subtle:
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4096/4867117017_1b0c55506f_z_d.jpg)
should be 1-5?
should be 1-5?
Anyway, several signs on I-405 in CA refer to a junction with State Route 42. This was true... A long, long time ago. State Route 42 was deleted entirely at least 20 years ago, yet signage continues to this very day.
I thought I posted this already, but I can't find it...
Anyway, several signs on I-405 in CA refer to a junction with State Route 42. This was true... A long, long time ago. State Route 42 was deleted entirely at least 20 years ago, yet signage continues to this very day.
But the presser is that the opposite is also true. For example, you won't find signage in Weed for when I-5 and CA-265 intersect, because the latter isn't signed, despite the fact it is fully funded and exists.
WISDOT can't even get it right on their own website. This page is about WIS 33. There is no US 33 in Wisconsin, mind you.
http://www.dot.wi.gov/projects/swregion/wis33corridorpas/index.htm
I drove through Weed in August 2009, and I didn't see any signs on I-5. I even went down Weed Boulevard and didn't see one, although it may have been added in the past year.I thought I posted this already, but I can't find it...
Anyway, several signs on I-405 in CA refer to a junction with State Route 42. This was true... A long, long time ago. State Route 42 was deleted entirely at least 20 years ago, yet signage continues to this very day.
Aren't there 42 references on other freeways as well? 42 actually was deleted way before that - in 1968!!! (the west portion becoming I-105, east portion becoming part of Route 90) - but remained signed while its replacement (I-105) was under construction, and for some years afterward.
Likewise, I-405 still refers to Route 91 on Artesia Boulevard, which I'm not sure is still part of the state highway.Quote from: Quillz
But the presser is that the opposite is also true. For example, you won't find signage in Weed for when I-5 and CA-265 intersect, because the latter isn't signed, despite the fact it is fully funded and exists.
Supposedly a Route 265 sign has been added in recent years though I haven't seen it.
That's what happens when you refer to everything as simply "Highway" as they do behind the Cheddar Curtain. :rofl:
Supposedly a Route 265 sign has been added in recent years though I haven't seen it.
And yes, CalTRANS redefined Route 91 a few years back so that it no longer officially connects to I-405. It just ends at the Gardena city limits, I think, or is the Artesia city limits? There a few other routes like that, CA-2 comes to mind, that have been officially defined to end at city limits, rather than at other state highways. (CA-91 and CA-2 used to end at state highways, they don't anymore.)
I know that for many years, signage continued for CA-126 between I-5 and CA-14, although this has finally been removed in recent years.And yes, CalTRANS redefined Route 91 a few years back so that it no longer officially connects to I-405. It just ends at the Gardena city limits, I think, or is the Artesia city limits? There a few other routes like that, CA-2 comes to mind, that have been officially defined to end at city limits, rather than at other state highways. (CA-91 and CA-2 used to end at state highways, they don't anymore.)
Yeah, this is a major drawback of the legislative route-assignment system: in almost all cases, route signing is not based on what is navigationally logical, but whether a city or county or the state maintains a stretch of road. Some legislative definitions now specify that truncated segments must still be signed, but this is not true for all of them.
However, almost all signage continues to exist for CA-2, Santa Monica Boulevard, west of the Los Angeles city limits where the route is supposed to officially terminate. This is most likely done because CA-2 used to end at CA-1 and the signage, though wrong, just makes things easier for motorists. But in the case of CA-91, the same was not done... You won't too many CA-91 shields west of Gardena or Artesia nowadays.
I believe there are some 1/2 green signs at the western terminus. No stand-alones, though. That would be a highly tempting gantry to steal!
Well, "fully signed" was probably too strong a word. I have definitely seen some CA-2 shields on Santa Monica Blvd. quite recently, though. It's possible they'll be removed eventually, but I think the idea is to imply that CA-2/SMB leads to CA-1, even if the former is not legally true anymore.
However, almost all signage continues to exist for CA-2, Santa Monica Boulevard, west of the Los Angeles city limits where the route is supposed to officially terminate. This is most likely done because CA-2 used to end at CA-1 and the signage, though wrong, just makes things easier for motorists. But in the case of CA-91, the same was not done... You won't too many CA-91 shields west of Gardena or Artesia nowadays.
I actually don't recall finding any Route 2 shields left in Santa Monica in February - definitely tried to look around for them the two times I went down that street. Both trips were at night though so I could have missed seeing them.
Is there any mention of 2 off of Interstate 10?
Couldn't agree more. The way I see it, a state route, especially a valuable single- or two-digit one, should always clearly terminate at another numbered highway, not at some artificial city limit. I still wish CA-126 continued east along Magic Mountain Parkway to CA-14, and I also wish some of the planned state route extensions, such as the eastern CA-118 extension, would be built or signed.
Is there any mention of 2 off of Interstate 10?
don't remember - have not driven 10 in that area in a while.
the fact that we're having this debate on where the route is signed and where it isn't ... that just makes it eminently clear how hosed California's system is. of course it should be signed! 2 should go down that boulevard, regardless of who maintains it.
Couldn't agree more. The way I see it, a state route, especially a valuable single- or two-digit one, should always clearly terminate at another numbered highway, not at some artificial city limit. I still wish CA-126 continued east along Magic Mountain Parkway to CA-14, and I also wish some of the planned state route extensions, such as the eastern CA-118 extension, would be built or signed.
I think they were, yeah. There was one in NorCal and one in SoCal. Numbers were assigned in pairs in NorCal and SoCal. Someone had a really good post not too long ago explaining the numbering scheme.Quote from: QuillzCouldn't agree more. The way I see it, a state route, especially a valuable single- or two-digit one, should always clearly terminate at another numbered highway, not at some artificial city limit. I still wish CA-126 continued east along Magic Mountain Parkway to CA-14, and I also wish some of the planned state route extensions, such as the eastern CA-118 extension, would be built or signed.
118 east of 210 would need to be built first! :-D (which is basically dependent on if 249 is ever constructed between Sunland and Palmdale)
I know that the surface road between I-5 and Route 14 along the 126 corridor was recently built to arterial standards - logically, this should be 126!
I wonder how many DOTs actually do sign routes based on navigation only, as opposed to maintenance (I want to say Massachussetts is one of them). Prior to the 1964 renumbering (actually, prior to the 1950s), the auto clubs were the ones who did this in California - were they the ones who came up with the route numbers?
I think they were, yeah. There was one in NorCal and one in SoCal. Numbers were assigned in pairs in NorCal and SoCal. Someone had a really good post not too long ago explaining the numbering scheme.
as for who came up with California's route numbers - one of the old articles (August '34 or Sept '34) might have that info.
the thing is, California already has a near-useless set of internal route designations (the LRNs... shudder) so implicitly they recognize that the signed routes are for navigation - so then sign the damn things!
That's the single most annoying thing about California's route system... All the gaps that will likely never be filled in. I hate that Routes 39, 65, 178, 190, etc. are all incomplete.
as for who came up with California's route numbers - one of the old articles (August '34 or Sept '34) might have that info.
I'll check and see. It's kinda interesting that whoever was in an office deciding those numbers back then decided the identity of some of the roads we still have today (namely, major state routes like 1, 49, and plenty of the San Diego-area numbers)!the thing is, California already has a near-useless set of internal route designations (the LRNs... shudder) so implicitly they recognize that the signed routes are for navigation - so then sign the damn things!
a short form history of the convoluted nature of California route numbering:
1910s - LRNs created, useful in navigation to absolutely nobody
1926 - US routes created, auto clubs start signing them in the next few years
1934 - state routes numbered, auto clubs sign them
1956 - interstates created, I think these were always signed by DOH/CalTrans
1964 - renumbering removes any duplicate US/Interstate situations, theoretically makes state sign routes their legislative #, but introduces such great situations as:
242 (built as 24, signed as 24 until the late 1980s)
260, 112 (signed as 61 thereafter)
164 (built as 19, signed as 19 to present day)
and others over time where a perfectly serviceable road exists on the corridor, but since it is not state-maintained or state-constructed, remains unsigned:
93 (Richmond Parkway/San Pablo Dam Road)
148 (Cosumnes River Boulevard)
258 (Western Avenue)
77 (a myriad of streets from Walnut Creek to Oakland)
87 between 101 and 237
251 (Sir Francis Drake Boulevard)
128 between I-505 and Davis
the north-south segment of 84 between Livermore and Rio Vista
And let's not forget the Route 39 gap between Fullerton and I-10 - in existence in the 1940s, seemingly corrected by 1964, but then reintroduced by the late 1980s AFTER a new improved road was built!?
1934 - state routes numbered, auto clubs sign them
1956 - interstates created, I think these were always signed by DOH/CalTrans
That's the single most annoying thing about California's route system... All the gaps that will likely never be filled in. I hate that Routes 39, 65, 178, 190, etc. are all incomplete.
For routes like 178, 190...honestly the two segments of such should be entirely different routes. (For that matter, now that the two segments of Route 16 are seperated by a 30 mile gap, why should this be one numbered route if the implied concurrencies with I-5 and US 50 will not be signed?)
For routes like 178, 190...honestly the two segments of such should be entirely different routes. (For that matter, now that the two segments of Route 16 are seperated by a 30 mile gap, why should this be one numbered route if the implied concurrencies with I-5 and US 50 will not be signed?)
178 and 190 can be connected. 178 through Death Valley and 190 across Sherman Pass.
Ah, you're right, forgot about Sherman Pass! (It's what, the only non-state highway Sierra pass?)
178...the direct routing through Death Valley isn't buildable because of the national park boundaries, though one can reconnect both segments using part of 190 (albeit a very indirect connection).
Quote178...the direct routing through Death Valley isn't buildable because of the national park boundaries, though one can reconnect both segments using part of 190 (albeit a very indirect connection).
yep, up Trona-Wildrose Rd and down Badwater Rd. I've driven that road in pitch black wondering just why the Hell they can't bother to throw me a bone and a 178 reassurance. There, I would argue that the lack of guide signage is dangerous - to have 178 clearly labeled on either side of the gap on the map, and then to lead the driver through about 100 miles of completely uncertain navigational features... the road is labeled as a gray line, but after about 40 miles of absolutely no reassurance, one does start to wonder if they've made a bad turn.
I just think that, why not number the part going back to 190 on the west end as 178 (instead of an unnumbered road with no clue where to go), and use one of the currently unusued three digit numbers on the east half, like 212 or 214?
Knowing CalTrans, if they were to use another number, it'll be 21. :p
I just think that, why not number the part going back to 190 on the west end as 178 (instead of an unnumbered road with no clue where to go), and use one of the currently unusued three digit numbers on the east half, like 212 or 214?
Knowing CalTrans, if they were to use another number, it'll be 21. :p
the way it is right now, with a big old-fashioned gap in the middle is utterly senseless. I know people are supposed to exercise caution in Death Valley but really would a few competent sets of 178/190 guide signs in the Badwater area, and a reassurance marker oh about every 10 miles, be that bad an idea??
Reassurance markers!?
For one extreme example...between Winters and Route 121, Route 128 has almost NO reassurance markers whatsoever - the only way one remembers they're on a state highway is to check out the postmiles! And this is supposed to be a fully-acknowledged, fully-signed state route in this segment!
Reassurance markers!?
For one extreme example...between Winters and Route 121, Route 128 has almost NO reassurance markers whatsoever - the only way one remembers they're on a state highway is to check out the postmiles! And this is supposed to be a fully-acknowledged, fully-signed state route in this segment!
I'm pretty sure that one does not go more than 40 miles between reassurance markers anywhere in California.
Even on Route 62? That just might be the loneliest road in California.
Reassurance markers!?
For one extreme example...between Winters and Route 121, Route 128 has almost NO reassurance markers whatsoever - the only way one remembers they're on a state highway is to check out the postmiles! And this is supposed to be a fully-acknowledged, fully-signed state route in this segment!
I'm pretty sure that one does not go more than 40 miles between reassurance markers anywhere in California.
and, besides, between Winters and Route 121, you're not nervously eyeing your gas gauge even in the worst of darkness...
and, besides, between Winters and Route 121, you're not nervously eyeing your gas gauge even in the worst of darkness...Even on Route 62? That just might be the loneliest road in California.
I believe there are some 1/2 green signs at the western terminus. No stand-alones, though. That would be a highly tempting gantry to steal!
Is there any mention of 2 off of Interstate 10?
I think 2 is still signed from 405, but that's in the Los Angeles city limits - even there, the shield count is rather scant.
I found another one in Google Images of the interchange with US 6 & NY 293 in Harriman State Park
PA 322 shield errors on PA 261 at its northern terminus at US 322 in Bethel Township, PA...
PA 322 shield errors on PA 261 at its northern terminus at US 322 in Bethel Township, PA...
I saw those several years ago, lame that they are still wrong. What is even sadder, they were correct in 2001:
http://www.aaroads.com/northeast/pennsylvania200/pa-261_nb_end.jpg
Massachusetts indeed signs routes based on navigation, as does Vermont. I think VT even has a few town-maintained stretches of interstate freeway!
Talking of, I think I saw somewhere that town-maintained state highways in Vermont continue to use Boring Circles instead of Bitchen Green. Is that true, to your (or anyone's) knowledge? I haven't been up there myself in a few years and it's not happening this side of October. If then. I don't remember noticing significant numbers of circles, although if I did I might just have dismissed them as old signs.
Massachusetts indeed signs routes based on navigation, as does Vermont. I think VT even has a few town-maintained stretches of interstate freeway!
The circle is used for numbered routes that are entirely town-maintained. If it's mixed, the green shield is used throughout for continuity's sake.
An ugly photo for an ugly sign.
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4126/4974003761_cf83899907.jpg)
Ohio 158 NB between Lancaster and Baltimore. There were about three or four of these I spotted along the way.
Mmm. One has to wonder what ODOT has against Ashtabula and Conneaut.
No photo, but every workday I pass the exit from WA 522 EB for WA 202 either East or South. The bgs at the exit reads east, the bgs near the intersection at the end of the ramp reads south. The road does go SouthEast... but that's kind of loony.
No photo, but every workday I pass the exit from WA 522 EB for WA 202 either East or South. The bgs at the exit reads east, the bgs near the intersection at the end of the ramp reads south. The road does go SouthEast... but that's kind of loony.
Interestingly, I can think of one distinct California example of this: Route 91 in Riverside, where some signs point to it going "SOUTH" and others "WEST." (91 has not had a true north-south segment since the portion north of Riverside was dropped in favor of I-15 and US 395, later I-215.)
Maryland splits the difference -- the Pennsylvania Avenue exit on I-95/495 is signed for MD 4 "SOUTH/EAST" and "NORTH/WEST". I'm not sure how it's signed along MD 4 itself, though.
Another carbon copy error:
http://www.aaroads.com/west/hawaii050/hi-061_sb_at_pacific_hts_lookout.jpg - should include "Junction" or "Ahead" or "1/2 Mile" or something that alludes to the fact that one is not on I-H1, but actually on HI-61 south ahead of I-H1. They had it wrong before, but at least kept the state-name in the funky looking shield: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=honolulu,+hi&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=43.528905,107.138672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Honolulu,+Hawaii&ll=21.323359,-157.84637&spn=0.012553,0.034332&z=16&layer=c&cbll=21.32347,-157.846156&panoid=t67GjDUJPNSUua28OJ5H4g&cbp=12,212.41,,0,9.61
Another carbon copy error:
http://www.aaroads.com/west/hawaii050/hi-061_sb_at_pacific_hts_lookout.jpg - should include "Junction" or "Ahead" or "1/2 Mile" or something that alludes to the fact that one is not on I-H1, but actually on HI-61 south ahead of I-H1. They had it wrong before, but at least kept the state-name in the funky looking shield: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=honolulu,+hi&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=43.528905,107.138672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Honolulu,+Hawaii&ll=21.323359,-157.84637&spn=0.012553,0.034332&z=16&layer=c&cbll=21.32347,-157.846156&panoid=t67GjDUJPNSUua28OJ5H4g&cbp=12,212.41,,0,9.61
The signage on O'ahu is about the most haphazard and non-standard as it comes, but come on, how can anyone complain....you're in Hawaii! I remember this sign on the Pali Hwy and it would eerk me from time to time, but it was the Pali Hwy, so I was happy anyway. :)
Another carbon copy error:
http://www.aaroads.com/west/hawaii050/hi-061_sb_at_pacific_hts_lookout.jpg - should include "Junction" or "Ahead" or "1/2 Mile" or something that alludes to the fact that one is not on I-H1, but actually on HI-61 south ahead of I-H1. They had it wrong before, but at least kept the state-name in the funky looking shield: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=honolulu,+hi&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=43.528905,107.138672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Honolulu,+Hawaii&ll=21.323359,-157.84637&spn=0.012553,0.034332&z=16&layer=c&cbll=21.32347,-157.846156&panoid=t67GjDUJPNSUua28OJ5H4g&cbp=12,212.41,,0,9.61
The signage on O'ahu is about the most haphazard and non-standard as it comes, but come on, how can anyone complain....you're in Hawaii! I remember this sign on the Pali Hwy and it would eerk me from time to time, but it was the Pali Hwy, so I was happy anyway. :)
I have yet to go there (it is planned), but had a slew of photos taken to me by a contributor that I am adding, and noticed the errors when comparing them to Kevin's photos from 2004. I likely won't care when I am there either. :) But for now, the errors have made me wonder. :hmmm:
Found even more weirdness when seeing that HI-750 is signed as HI-76 at the north end along HI-99. Was HI-750 originally HI-76 and they just never got around to changing the signs?
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=hartstown+pa&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hartstown,+Crawford,+Pennsylvania&gl=us&ei=OMOaTIzxGML_lge998jMCg&ved=0CBgQ8gEwAA&ll=41.552474,-80.380193&spn=0.001186,0.004292&z=19&layer=c&cbll=41.552494,-80.380077&panoid=FP-0hjBnapOuCk4z3iVNxg&cbp=12,271.2,,0,6.13
I don't have a picture of this, but I've seen it several times. This abortion of a sign is just west of the US322-PA18 intersection in Hartstown, PA
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=hartstown+pa&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hartstown,+Crawford,+Pennsylvania&gl=us&ei=OMOaTIzxGML_lge998jMCg&ved=0CBgQ8gEwAA&ll=41.552514,-80.379962&spn=0.001186,0.004292&z=19&layer=c&cbll=41.552472,-80.380205&panoid=LUe106Q97hNOmPWJsTHFcQ&cbp=12,314.96,,0,-2.2
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=hartstown+pa&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hartstown,+Crawford,+Pennsylvania&gl=us&ei=OMOaTIzxGML_lge998jMCg&ved=0CBgQ8gEwAA&ll=41.552474,-80.380193&spn=0.001186,0.004292&z=19&layer=c&cbll=41.552494,-80.380077&panoid=FP-0hjBnapOuCk4z3iVNxg&cbp=12,271.2,,0,6.13
It's hard to see, but it looks a lot like the "NFL" shield that curves the top points out to the sides.
Next time I'm there I'll definitely take a picture.
Where was a US 165 shield? All the ones I've found from VA 337 or VA 168 have been correct, even if misshapen.
Nothing wrong with the first photo is correct, except for missing the "TO" above I-81 as you mentioned. By the book, the second photo is in error for missing the ALT with 220, though I can understand VDOT's intent there since I-81 is just beyond (the overpass in the background) and mainline US 220 picks up the roadway right there.Thanks for the verification. I get to go through that intersection all the time now whenever I am going to/leaving Blacksburg as I take US 460 most of the way since I'm from the Petersburg area. I was actually through there last Sunday but I was on the way back from Lynchburg that time.
Coincidentally, I was through that same intersection last Saturday, though heading southbound.
Nothing wrong with the first photo...it's correct, except for missing the "TO" above I-81 as you mentioned. By the book, the second photo is in error for missing the ALT with 220, though I can understand VDOT's intent there since I-81 is just beyond (the overpass in the background) and mainline US 220 picks up the roadway right there.
Technically yes but that is obviously not even the point of why I posted that :nod: ;-)Nothing wrong with the first photo...it's correct, except for missing the "TO" above I-81 as you mentioned. By the book, the second photo is in error for missing the ALT with 220, though I can understand VDOT's intent there since I-81 is just beyond (the overpass in the background) and mainline US 220 picks up the roadway right there.
I thought the route in question is actually VA Alternate 220 but is signed as a US route.
But what I would have done was reduced the kerning between the numbers and even made them smaller so you could fit both 2- and 3di onto a shield meant for one or two numerals.
Inner black borders are superior.But what I would have done was reduced the kerning between the numbers and even made them smaller so you could fit both 2- and 3di onto a shield meant for one or two numerals.
that's ODOT practice from before 1970, when the feds mandated wide shields. Oklahoma immediately stepped up and implemented the new specifications.
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/OH/OH19673221i1.jpg)
this style was used 1967-1970 or so. before that, the shields had an additional inner black border.
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/OH/OH19640231i1.jpg)
When did US 322 and US 23 pass through Oklahoma? I think you have the wrong ODOT!
that's ODOT practice from before 1970, when the feds mandated wide shields. Oklahoma immediately stepped up and implemented the new specifications.
When did US 322 and US 23 pass through Oklahoma? I think you have the wrong ODOT!
To some of us, ODOT is Ohio, not Oklahoma.
The mileage is wrong and a 3dus shield shouldn't be used for a 1dus.The mileage is correct. Where's your source of being incorrect? (I was just at the other end, where 6 is signed "from Long Beach," and I don't have a problem with that)
I wouldn't really consider that error "infamous", seeing as US-202 switches to DE-202 not too far north of there. It's a fairly silly switch in route importance; why not call the whole thing US-202 all the way to the end? especially since at least three or four signs are in error.AFAIK, at exit 8, US 202 goes north on the Concord Pike and west multiplexed with I 95. DE 202 goes south on Concord Road. The sign error is that US 202 continues on I 95 and does not exit. Where US 202 transitions to DE 202 depends on the direction of travel.
I wouldn't really consider that error "infamous", seeing as US-202 switches to DE-202 not too far north of there. It's a fairly silly switch in route importance; why not call the whole thing US-202 all the way to the end? especially since at least three or four signs are in error.
Meanwhile for your run-of-the-mill sign error
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4006/5162404899_ee2da57cb8_b.jpg
What I like about this sign mistake, ODOT district 6 office is 200 yds behind this sign.
It must be a Delaware city, not ODOT, problem because theres another US 37 shield a mile back also.
Meanwhile for your run-of-the-mill sign error
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4006/5162404899_ee2da57cb8_b.jpg
What I like about this sign mistake, ODOT district 6 office is 200 yds behind this sign.
It must be a Delaware city, not ODOT, problem because theres another US 37 shield a mile back also.
There's another incorrect sign on 37, near the interchange with 23 showing 37 multiplexed with 42 and 36. Since when has that been in place?
Meanwhile for your run-of-the-mill sign error.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4006/5162404899_ee2da57cb8_b.jpg
What I like about this sign mistake, ODOT district 6 office is 200 yds behind this sign.
It must be a Delaware city, not ODOT, problem because theres another US 37 shield a mile back also.
There's another incorrect sign on 37, near the interchange with 23 showing 37 multiplexed with 42 and 36. Since when has that been in place?
1988
Meanwhile for your run-of-the-mill sign error.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4006/5162404899_ee2da57cb8_b.jpg
What I like about this sign mistake, ODOT district 6 office is 200 yds behind this sign.
It must be a Delaware city, not ODOT, problem because theres another US 37 shield a mile back also.
There's another incorrect sign on 37, near the interchange with 23 showing 37 multiplexed with 42 and 36. Since when has that been in place?
1988
Last time I checked, 36 wasn't concurrent until further east, and 42 is never concurrent with 37 at all. I didn't mean the sign, I meant the nonexistent concurrency.
Maybe the sign should include a "to" in the signs, so it says, "37 EAST TO 36 AND 42."
Quite possible.
Last time I checked, 36 wasn't concurrent until further east, and 42 is never concurrent with 37 at all. I didn't mean the sign, I meant the nonexistent concurrency.
I think I see a shadow behind the tail of the G. Are they using demountable copy?
On the garden state parkway south of the great egg harbor bridge exists several signs for "when flashing tune to 1640AM for urgent message" Problem is, there are no flashing lights on any of these signs
There's one on I-90 at Rapid City that says "Do Not Enter When Flashing" , but has no lights. Maybe the sign itself flashes? ;)
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2532/3979840475_b4c5b8aeb6_z_d.jpg)
What's that down near the bottom of the leftmost post on that sign? Is it some sort of box connected to an underground power source? If so, the sign might have LED flashers embedded in the border or somewhere else.
Quite possible.
Must be. Highway departments never make mistakes ;)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3213/2943867931_63e80bc6c0_z_d.jpg?zz=1)
And you would think that someone working for a DOT or contractor would have a bit of roadgeek in them and know the difference.
nope. drones in sign shops are just like drones everywhere else. go in, get some work done, go to lunch, work some more, go home, collect a paycheck. no pride in their work; it's just a way to keep the bills paid.Unfortunately, you are quite right. Specs are many times, not proof-read, never checked against established standards or the lame excuse of "these are same [specs] we always had and they were fine before. Who changed them?" I have been battling this poor mindset in the public sector for years.
nope. drones in sign shops are just like drones everywhere else. go in, get some work done, go to lunch, work some more, go home, collect a paycheck. no pride in their work; it's just a way to keep the bills paid.Unfortunately, you are quite right. Specs are many times, not proof-read, never checked against established standards or the lame excuse of "these are same [specs] we always had and they were fine before. Who changed them?" I have been battling this poor mindset in the public sector for years.
quote
Not so much an error as just plain ugly:
(http://www.picdrop.net/uploads/RI19882952i1.jpg) (http://"http://www.picdrop.net/pictures/RI19882952i1.jpg")
Use a wide shield and/or Series C, please don't compress Series D. Also seems to have the "lazy 9" thing going on, too.
All sign lettering shall be in upper-case letters as provided in the “Standard Highway Signs and Markings” book (see Section 1A.11), unless otherwise provided in this Manual for a particular sign or type of message.(Chapter 2A, Section 13, Paragraph 10, Page 35)
The unique letter forms for each of the Standard Alphabet series shall not be stretched, compressed, warped, or otherwise manipulated.(Chapter 2A, Section 13, Paragraph 14, Page 36)
I'm not really a fan of the newer white/black versions of the Louisiana route shield. :no: I like the older green design better.
Subtle, yet erroneous:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/virtual_freeway_tours/2202448851/in/set-72157601881964599/
what is "pre-erosion"? do you refer to the level of detail, or lack thereof, in the state outline?
I got mostly older pictures to show, almost all these signs been removed or corrected
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5086/5380265873_55305d7caf_s.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/29886127@N02/5380265873/)
upsidedown (http://www.flickr.com/photos/29886127@N02/5380265873/) by Kimmy1978 (http://www.flickr.com/people/29886127@N02/), on Flickr
The upper left corner is a little thinner than the rest of the outline, though.
Technically an error shield as it's not really shaped properly, but I think it actually looks quite nice:
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/AL/AL19600901i1.jpg)
The upper left corner is a little thinner than the rest of the outline, though.
QuoteThe upper left corner is a little thinner than the rest of the outline, though.
I'm 92% sure that's an optical illusion
I would say yes, because that shield dates to 1965, and didn't follow the 1961 specifications, or even the 1948 specifications, the last one to put the shield against a white background.Technically an error shield as it's not really shaped properly, but I think it actually looks quite nice:
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/AL/AL19600901i1.jpg)
The upper left corner is a little thinner than the rest of the outline, though.
Given the very wide variety of shield shapes that are out there, and the way they vary not only from state to state but even within a state, is there really such a thing as "not really shaped properly?"
It's near the mall in Gaithersburg.
I would say yes, because that shield dates to 1965, and didn't follow the 1961 specifications, or even the 1948 specifications, the last one to put the shield against a white background.
Given the very wide variety of shield shapes that are out there, and the way they vary not only from state to state but even within a state, is there really such a thing as "not really shaped properly?"
Shield Generator shows this as a 1955 Alabama variant.
Arkansas used white backgrounds until the mid-60's.
That's a "uni-sign" which I do not recall having previously seen in Ohio. Virginia, yes; Maryland, yes; even in Kentucky, yes, but heretofore never in Ohio.They were around Columbus, though not in great numbers, before I left for Louisiana.
That's a "uni-sign" which I do not recall having previously seen in Ohio. Virginia, yes; Maryland, yes; even in Kentucky, yes, but heretofore never in Ohio.They were around Columbus, though not in great numbers, before I left for Louisiana.
(http://www.roadfan.com/1pieceg.JPG)
(This one was at Main & Front St. and according to my notes, photographed in 2003)
Now we have them around the OSU campus, along 315 near 270 and along 750 through Polaris (From what I've seen. Could be more)
I was not in position to take a picture of it, but I saw a glaring sign error in South Georgia today. I was heading south on I-75 just north of the town of Sparks, which is about 30 miles north of Valdosta.
There is a brand new exit sign in the southbound direction onto a small road that actually shows I-75 exiting off the freeway on the BGS. It might had been intended to be a "Business Loop 75 shield, (there are still a few down there), I am not sure. But the sign was brand new, being this stretch of interstate is being widened and reconstructed.
If anybody in the area is interested, you may want to get a photo before they fix the error.
I was not in position to take a picture of it, but I saw a glaring sign error in South Georgia today. I was heading south on I-75 just north of the town of Sparks, which is about 30 miles north of Valdosta.
There is a brand new exit sign in the southbound direction onto a small road that actually shows I-75 exiting off the freeway on the BGS. It might had been intended to be a "Business Loop 75 shield, (there are still a few down there), I am not sure. But the sign was brand new, being this stretch of interstate is being widened and reconstructed.
If anybody in the area is interested, you may want to get a photo before they fix the error.
I will refrain any comments about GDOT since I do work from them.
I heard they did the same think over on I-95 with it's sole Business route. Somebody posted a picture of it, but I can't remember where. If I can find that post, I'll edit this and post the link to it.
I heard they did the same think over on I-95 with it's sole Business route. Somebody posted a picture of it, but I can't remember where. If I can find that post, I'll edit this and post the link to it.
Here? (http://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2724.msg62336#msg62336)
Do Georgia signs normally omit the tittle on the I, or is that something particular to this sign?
4) Generally, signs with a white border extend all the way out to the edge. The outer green border is unnecessary.
At least in California, it's generally a standard that I've observed. Signs with a black or other dark color border are usually inset by at least half an inch, while those with a white border extend all the way out. I think the MUTCD even recommends something to that effect. That's why signs (at least regarding CA route shields) are generally in error if they have an unnecessary outer border.
Personally, I've never found this to be a hard and fast rule with "banners" and arrows.
Why don't U.S. Route and most state route shields have a white border to offset the outer black area, then?At least in California, it's generally a standard that I've observed. Signs with a black or other dark color border are usually inset by at least half an inch, while those with a white border extend all the way out. I think the MUTCD even recommends something to that effect. That's why signs (at least regarding CA route shields) are generally in error if they have an unnecessary outer border.
this is a federal standard. It seems to go back almost to the very beginnings of things; at least as dark-background signs got popular in the 30s, California was consistently making them have a white outermost border.
the reason for this is because a black outer border would have almost no differentiating effect against any background except snow. Most backgrounds are darker than signs, especially when signs are made retroreflective. The sign border, if made a dark color, would blend in and be wasted metal.
(some 1920s shields intended for snowy places did indeed have the black border outermost. But this is quite rare, early, and experimental.)
Why don't U.S. Route and most state route shields have a white border to offset the outer black area, then?
Personally, I've never found this to be a hard and fast rule with "banners" and arrows.
the reason for this is because the sign shop on occasion has only one screen for, say, a "TO" banner, which does have the outer border, and they use it in both positive- and negative-contrast applications.
or they do have both styles, but the worker assigned to the task isn't paying attention.
other styles of signs tend not to come in both positive- and negative-contrast forms, so you're more likely to see the consistent application of the light-colored outer border there.
the banner phenomenon is exacerbated by the changing interstate standards between 1957 and 1961: the first interstate standard of '57 specified white-background arrows and banners, while the 1961 standard switched to the blue-background style we know today. Some sign shops simply kept the old screens and changed ink colors. I wouldn't be surprised if that I-5 gantry in your link is old enough that they were still using the 1957 screens.
Also, does the shield that ausinterkid posted have a thin white border outside the black, or is it just my eyes?I almost see what you're talking about, but I can't tell if it's an actual white border or just an artifact from the compression of the picture.
Also, does the shield that ausinterkid posted have a thin white border outside the black, or is it just my eyes?I almost see what you're talking about, but I can't tell if it's an actual white border or just an artifact from the compression of the picture.
Also, what's with the tiny "SOUTH" banner?
Also, does the shield that ausinterkid posted have a thin white border outside the black, or is it just my eyes?
I don't mind that error so much because at least NYS has some nice looking state route shields.
While I like the standard NYS route shield, the same cannot be said for the wide version, which I assume is being erroneously used in the second pic.
This might just be me, but other than the old-style nonstandard font, I don't see a significant difference between the 157 shield and the 62 shield.
Excuse me for bumping an old post, but I found this I-422 sign at the Philadelphia Premium Outlet Mall in Limerick, PA yesterday:
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5256/5500695501_ea7d1d6141_z.jpg)
Excuse me for bumping an old post, but I found this I-422 sign at the Philadelphia Premium Outlet Mall in Limerick, PA yesterday:
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5256/5500695501_ea7d1d6141_z.jpg)
You're right as to why they did that. Before Easton was built, there were only exits for 161 and Morse. The problem really presents itself when you're northbound, as you see an 'Exit 30 & 33' sign, while Morse is exit 32 (you stay on the mainline for it.) Everyone was getting confused when the new configuration was opened.
Secondly, exit 33 is for Easton Way, not Morse Rd--that's exit 32. I kinda understand why they've done this, as drivers coming onto the C/D lanes can't use exit 32, and there are signs on Easton Way guiding traffic to Morse Rd, but there are better ways to indicate this on the guide sign. Also, the letters are too small--you can't tell in the picture, but it appears this was patched over something else, presumably just "Easton".
It appears that US 20 has been extended way south to Alabama.
(http://i.imgur.com/3Y7wG.jpg)
I also note the rather small octagon on the "stop ahead" sign in the background of the playground sign with rather small see-saw.
Isn't it actually wrong, though? I thought NYS route shields were supposed to lack the black background and use Series F numerals.Right, but the black background and Series D numerals are correct for a New Jersey shield (which is what that one should be).
(http://www.speedcam.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/rockford.jpg)
I guess California was jealous of Pennsylvania...
(http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/9009/ca099errorjctsign.jpg) (http://img839.imageshack.us/i/ca099errorjctsign.jpg/)
I'm pretty sure this was fixed several years back. And while it's an error shield, at least it's a nice looking one.
I found a nice one today, at the stoplight at the end of the ramp from north I-275 to Michigan Avenue. There is a new Clearview guide sign at that location that for some reason has an M-12 shield on it instead of the correct US 12 shield. Not sure where that came from as there is no such road as M-12. Unfortunately the photo I took didn't come out very well...
(http://jimgrey.net/fileserver/37error.jpg)
Found by a buddy of mine on the south side of Indianapolis.
Is that recent with the construction in that area? Speaking of which, just north of the exit there are SR 37 signs hovering over Harding Street that are Kentucky-style and not Indiana-style.
I believe the Major Deegan Expressway is I-87, not I-78 (I-78 hardly enters NY)
someone took a photo in the early 2000s of an I-78 shield more than halfway across Queens!!! looked like a late 50s vintage route marker.
The I-78 shield was in the Bronx, near I-295 (Randall Ave. exit). The shield has since been removed, if I recall correctly. I've looked for it a few times, to no avail.
I wouldn't call sign that erroneous - I'd call that funny as hell! :-D
There is of course exit 69 Big Beaver Road in Michigan. And KY 420 uses High Street in Frankfort (not sure if there's any way to get a photo with both a route shield and a street sign).
I wouldn't call sign that erroneous - I'd call that funny as hell! :-D
Then you'll like this one
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2354/2267717817_bd6f0871dd_z_d.jpg)
Or maybe we need a separate thread for humorous signs? ;)
It's especially funny since I'm currently in my friends' dorm and the arrow from the sign is pointing right at Johnson Hall :-DI wouldn't call sign that erroneous - I'd call that funny as hell! :-D
Then you'll like this one
Or maybe we need a separate thread for humorous signs? ;)
(insert Beavis & Butthead laughter here) :hyper:
I wouldn't call sign that erroneous - I'd call that funny as hell! :-D
Then you'll like this one
Or maybe we need a separate thread for humorous signs? ;)
(insert Beavis & Butthead laughter here) :hyper:
Just like in 2004...Took 7 years, but the US 3 shield at Spring-Cleveland (in Columbus) is no more. :-(
(http://www.roadfan.com/us3err.JPG)
(with the alluded Oh 3 shield shown)
Is your name Tim? If so, don't park in the hourly "C" garage at Reagan Airport in Virginia:
that is horrific! why do so many people default to the Arial variants? that font is terrible.
that is horrific! why do so many people default to the Arial variants? that font is terrible.
I don't think I've used Arial (or Helvetica, or Arial Black, or the like) since I was about 6.
I don't think I've seen this one posted, from I-81 South in Virginia.Ah, and after 41 pages we have finally come full circle!! lol This was the first sign I posted starting this thread long, long ago in a galaxy far, far away... :spin:
(http://www.teresco.org/pics/signs/20101226/exit317-1mile.jpg)
The US Shields on the Clearview sign look particularly fugly.
Here is one sign on US 1 southbound I photographed in Westerly, RI a few weeks ago:
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5303/5650698736_476c3a8096_z.jpg)
The font is obviously off, but the US 1A shield is supposed to be an RI 1A shield.
U.S. 59 shield instead of AR 59
(http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4034/4471338686_d0b16e7af1_b.jpg)
I was in this area today, and this sign goof has been corrected with an AR 59 shield.
Ohio Department of Transportation spokeswoman Jackie Schafer says the contractor fixed the error in the Cleveland suburb of Strongsville yesterday by placing an overlay over the word, with the correct spelling. She tells the Associated Press the contractor will pay to have a new sign made.
The Plain Dealer of Cleveland was first to report about the problem with the sign, on eastbound Rt. 82 at I-71.
So the sign wasn't "fixed" like the ODOT district spokeswoman claimed it was this morning?QuoteOhio Department of Transportation spokeswoman Jackie Schafer says the contractor fixed the error in the Cleveland suburb of Strongsville yesterday by placing an overlay over the word, with the correct spelling. She tells the Associated Press the contractor will pay to have a new sign made.
The Plain Dealer of Cleveland was first to report about the problem with the sign, on eastbound Rt. 82 at I-71.
They could have also left the N uncovered.
The words NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, and WEST shall not be abbreviated when used with route signs to indicate cardinal directions on guide signs.Chapter 2E.17, Paragraph 4, Page 192
That would not be possible, because the MUTCD contains the following "standard" statement:Quote from: MUTCDThe words NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, and WEST shall not be abbreviated when used with route signs to indicate cardinal directions on guide signs.Chapter 2E.17, Paragraph 4, Page 192
That would not be possible, because the MUTCD contains the following "standard" statement:Quote from: MUTCDThe words NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, and WEST shall not be abbreviated when used with route signs to indicate cardinal directions on guide signs.Chapter 2E.17, Paragraph 4, Page 192
actually, it would be allowed, since the MUTCD doesn't say anything about abbreviating the word "NORHT" :sombrero:
(more practically: in this case, leaving the N instead of entirely covering up the misspelled word would be a more useful temporary fix.)
I don't see how that's too specific or anal-retentive. If you have a random "N" floating around a sign, especially a complex one with multiple shields (which is probably the most likely scenario for abbreviation) it could be difficult at first glance to connect just that single letter to a specific shield and realize it's supposed to be a cardinal direction. In most cases it would be obvious, yes, but I could see ODOT horribly botching it.
This one speaks for itself:
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-mn4YJ-uqdmU/TfaubUxu3SI/AAAAAAAAIQU/RKmPJ3nMd-M/s640/100_5461.JPG)
^^^ Pardon my ignorance, but is it the wrong directional banner or a wrong shield?
^^^ Pardon my ignorance, but is it the wrong directional banner or a wrong shield?
Error: U.S. 10 is nowhere near New York state.
I was just in the Albany/Schenectady area yesterday and noticed that the DOT has taken to signing NY 890 as I-890.
http://www.wsfa.com/global/story.asp?S=3642053This is from 2005.
Alabama Route shields in Northampton mass
US 62 apparently got a downgrade in Gahanna:You take that photo before or after the downpour we had at rush hour Friday (just before the Creekside festival started)? ;-)
US 62 apparently got a downgrade in Gahanna:
This breed of mistake is extremely common on Ohio.
This breed of mistake is extremely common on Ohio.
It's pretty common in Oregon, too.Instead of downgrading routes, California has a tendency to upgrade routes...
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/CA/CA19800991i1.jpg)And to think we though that I-99 in PA was bad...
Instead of downgrading routes, California has a tendency to upgrade routes...
I've never seen a non-interstate in Oregon marked as interstate. Has anybody?
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/CA/CA19800991i1.jpg)And to think we though that I-99 in PA was bad...
kinda sorta close in a way maybe ish
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/OR/OR20000991i1.jpg)
I know the shield gallery has an I-530 from Washington, but IIRC, it's not really an error shield. It was done as a joke at the DOT shop, and is posted at the exit of said shop.
I know the shield gallery has an I-530 from Washington, but IIRC, it's not really an error shield. It was done as a joke at the DOT shop, and is posted at the exit of said shop.
I have never been able to find that. You'd imagine 530 isn't all that long of a route, too...
is it visible from mainline 530?
I have yet to find an error shield in Michigan.
at one point, there was a Pennsylvania state route 31 (!) posted on US-31 in Michigan. I do not have a picture.
at one point, there was a Pennsylvania state route 31 (!) posted on US-31 in Michigan. I do not have a picture.
I saw it in my rear-view mirror while driving south on I-196 after the Grand Rapids meet a few years ago. I know there are some photos of it floating around out there because I have seen them. It was in the northbound lanes of I-196.
I have yet to find an error shield in Michigan.
Here's another from OK:
[US-325]
Here's another from OK:
(http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/th_OK325BoiseCitySignGoof1.jpg?t=1279910871)
How old is that? There was a circle there when I went in 2007.
Speaking of erroneous shields...Now I know parts of upstate NY are backwoods and rural but since when did it literally become Oklahoma? Welp, enjoy all those tornadoes, guys. :-P
***US 9 shield in Oklahoma***
<snip>
[snip map image]Here shown is shown as 'hown'.
Here I-69 is hown as 'I-96'.
(snip Wikipedia map image)
Here I-69 is hown as 'I-96'.
And that's a perfect example of why making all the signs on one gantry the same height is ridiculous.Not really. Why not put the control cities on the advance guide sign (exit 75) next the route shield instead of under it. That will prevent the exit direction sign (exit 77) from having too much wasted space. Kind of like this...
Because that means the region of the sign that the control cities are found in is not consistent from sign to sign. In nearly all the states I have driven extensively in, the signs place the shields on top and the control cities immediately beneath (with any distance information immediately below that).Then I guess you haven't done much driving in California then because there are a fair number of overhead guide signs that place the control cities (especially if there are two of them) next to the route shield. There are cases where the route shield is placed above the control city but in almost all of these cases, there is only a single control city on the sign. The reasons for the two different layouts is because California follows the all-signs-must-be-the-same-height rule and the maximum height of a guide sign is 120 inches. In California, overhead guide sign heights are dependent on the type and size of truss the sign is being installed on.
Okay, we've all seen them and did a double-take when we did. Yup, I'm talking about sign goofs. We know they're out there, now let's see how many sign errors the DOT's and sign companies have put up across the country. Here's one to get it started (which I have already posted on another thread)
(http://www.aaroads.com/forum_images/mid-atlantic/VA_37.jpg)
A US 37 in Virginia?? No, don't get your hopes up, it's actually suppose to be VA 37. This is located along southbound I-81 in Virginia. The other signs at this interchange show the correct VA 37 but whoever crafted this particular sign didn't read the full instructions and decided to make all the numbers with US highway shields...
I was going to say, this would have semi-validated the erroneous US 288 shield that briefly existed in Chesterfield County, Virginia. (never mind that there's no US 88 :P)
the sign reads 289 to Miami and should say 298.
What went here?
(http://i837.photobucket.com/albums/zz298/midamcrossrds/100_1335.jpg)
I don't think it just blew off into the Iowa cornfields either. The other signs for this exit were like that.
that's bad, but not fatally awful. It's unlikely you'd miss an exit based on that sign.
Why do they always have trouble with the state route 37s? In Delaware, OH, there are two (previously three) erroneous road shields for OH-37. They fixed one. Another case is in ALSO in Delaware, where a sign says "E US-36, N US-42, E OH-37 (right shield this time). The problem with this is US-36 doesn't concur with 37 until about a mile east. The US-42 signage is correct. But why is this so? Delaware has an ODOT office right where 36 and 37 split!
I'm not sure if this qualifies as erroneous more than FLDOT just saying "FL 880 barely exists period, let's just sign its 18.5 mile CR extension instead." This is on FL 15 / 80 at the intersection with Dr. ML King Blvd (FL 880) in Belle Glade.
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6050/5910017297_16684bef49_z.jpg)
I'm not sure if this qualifies as erroneous more than FLDOT just saying "FL 880 barely exists period, let's just sign its 18.5 mile CR extension instead." This is on FL 15 / 80 at the intersection with Dr. ML King Blvd (FL 880) in Belle Glade.
Noticed that on the road recently, it used to say SR880 along the entire route, then just the little section from SR15, but it may have actually fallen out of state-maintenance for that tiny little stretch, like the tiny part of SR717, versus the longer stretch of CR717 (Muck City Road).
Why do they always have trouble with the state route 37s? In Delaware, OH, there are two (previously three) erroneous road shields for OH-37. They fixed one. Another case is in ALSO in Delaware, where a sign says "E US-36, N US-42, E OH-37 (right shield this time). The problem with this is US-36 doesn't concur with 37 until about a mile east. The US-42 signage is correct. But why is this so? Delaware has an ODOT office right where 36 and 37 split!
You're probably referring to the exit signage from the short freeway section of US-23. That signage is for a split diamond interchange which attempts to serve two or three cross-streets. US 36 and US 42 are on one of those streets, and SR 37 is on another. There's also a SR 521 or something on one of those streets, but signage for that one is rather incomplete.
I suppose you could eventually get to US 60 that way, but the destination should be US 160.
(http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5235/5915880884_d54b74732a_z_d.jpg)
This is wrong on a technicality: it's Alternate US 69
(http://www.sanduskyregister.com/files/www2.sanduskyregister.com/imagecache/fullsize_art/FEA_Cleveland_Closed_07182011.jpg)I like the idea of the city of Cleveland being closed for 65 days. Apparently they are having their own "lockout".
The sign should say "Cleveland Road" (US 6) :)
Apparently the NB Lake Shore Drive [sic] exit for Irving Park is for US 19. Who knew?
Speaking of the 23 bypass, at the southern end, where US 42 splits off, you'll see pavement markings directing you to SR 42.
Ohio Straight line diagram shows Oh 521 following US 36 (Williams St) into DT Delaware. However, 521 has not been signed, west from it's junction with US 36/Oh 37 since the US 23 "bypass" has been opened (mid 60s).
Possibly this sign - which is missing the route marker altogether?
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=North+Lake+Shore+Drive,+Chicago,+IL&hl=en&ll=41.950498,-87.644109&spn=0.004261,0.007178&sll=39.436193,-91.845703&sspn=18.099096,29.399414&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=41.950279,-87.643973&panoid=PVT-8Bl1UssSLr243INa0w&cbp=12,352.66,,1,6.13
Why no, we are not in Immokalee, we are the farthest you can get in the same state from it!
Speaking of the 23 bypass, at the southern end, where US 42 splits off, you'll see pavement markings directing you to SR 42.
Speaking of the 23 bypass, at the southern end, where US 42 splits off, you'll see pavement markings directing you to SR 42.
Apparently not. US 23 has been resurfaced recently from the 23/42 split all the way to the south end of the "Experimental Test Pavement" section. There are hardly any pavement markings at all: just a broken white line separating the two lanes in each direction.
Speaking of the 23 bypass, at the southern end, where US 42 splits off, you'll see pavement markings directing you to SR 42.
Apparently not. US 23 has been resurfaced recently from the 23/42 split all the way to the south end of the "Experimental Test Pavement" section. There are hardly any pavement markings at all: just a broken white line separating the two lanes in each direction.
How recent was this? When I was up there earlier this month the lanes on the very southern portion of Sandusky Street (just off US 23) were still marked "SR 42"
Maybe the road used to be 2-way and they just changed it recently. They also probably just didn't feel like taking down the old signs in case they wanted to undo the one way conversion.
Speaking of the 23 bypass, at the southern end, where US 42 splits off, you'll see pavement markings directing you to SR 42.
Apparently not. US 23 has been resurfaced recently from the 23/42 split all the way to the south end of the "Experimental Test Pavement" section. There are hardly any pavement markings at all: just a broken white line separating the two lanes in each direction.
How recent was this? When I was up there earlier this month the lanes on the very southern portion of Sandusky Street (just off US 23) were still marked "SR 42"
I've been through there a few times in the last couple of weeks, but only on US 23 & US 42. I haven't been on Sandusky Street so I can't verify or dispute the existence of "SR 42" pavement markings there.
The MUTCD does allow for standard symbols to be flipped or oriented in different directions where applicable and warranted. The hill sign is usually oriented downhill to the left. However, since it appears the road in the picture makes a sharp turn to the right ahead, having the hill sign downhill to the right makes some sense, if it was done deliberately.
Apparently the NB Lakeshore Drive exit for Irving Park is for US 19. Who knew?
(http://s761.photobucket.com/albums/xx260/jdbarnes1234/100_0391.jpg)What is with those US Route Shields?
(snip pic)What is with those US Route Shields?
https://picasaweb.google.com/108051035264643954872/PublicPhotos?authkey=Gv1sRgCNqrhpvs0sCCUg#5640442194698539266 "US" 19 in Chicago, as mentioned previously.
"US 933" street sign in South Bend/Notre Dame, IN
And Google Maps says it's County 28.
And Google Maps says it's County 28.
And that is an erroneous mistake on their part. I'm gonna log in and change it.
And Google Maps says it's County 28.
And that is an erroneous mistake on their part. I'm gonna log in and change it.
Good luck. I've already read stories of people trying to make Google maps more accurate and the morons who oppose them.
The sign on the right should say "Sand Springs'...
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6088/6091521160_0eb8106d06_b.jpg)
(snip)
On the same trip, I finally got to see this infamous pair of goofs in Medford:
(http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/I5MedfordSignGoof1.jpg?t=1314591662)
(http://i572.photobucket.com/albums/ss166/xonhulu/Sign%20Goofs/I5MedfordSignGoof2.jpg?t=1314591556)
The sign on the right should say "Sand Springs'...
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6088/6091521160_0eb8106d06_b.jpg)
The sign on the right should say "Sand Springs'...
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6088/6091521160_0eb8106d06_b.jpg)
Is that the southbound Tisdale Interchange at I-244/US412? Good job, ODOT! LOL.
This is a really dumb question, but how do such obvious errors go unnoticed? I mean, the people who are contracted to make these signs, don't they at least look at a map and realize Interstate 5 and US Route 5 are different roads and in different corners of the country?
Wow, talk about massive fail. US-5 in on the wrong side of the country, the never-existed US-39 apparently exists only in Klamath Falls, the 97 shield using Series B, etc. Wow.
And at least they picked the nice '61 spec for "US 140."
I posted some pics a while back of some '61-era shields on some guide signs in Astoria. That's the only other area I've seen them. I don't recall seeing any in Portland.And at least they picked the nice '61 spec for "US 140."
yes, those are getting tough to find in general in Oregon. there's a couple actual old '61 spec shields on green signs at the 97/Business 97 split just north of town.
I am pretty sure Oregon did not ever use '61 spec black square shields: they went straight from the state-named cutouts to '70 spec in 1974.
I think the US 26 shields mounted above the BGS overheads as you approach the Vista Ridge tunnels from the west are '61 spec, but I'm not 100% sure. If so, those are standalone shields, and they are on square signs. Maybe some of our Portland-area colleagues can speak on this.
I checked Google Street View and you may very well be right. tough to tell because of the Series D digits and the distortion of the camera angle, but it's likely to be a '61 spec shield.
There is an old stop sign about a block from my house that has the design of the old black-on-yellow signs (complete with button copy "STOP" legend), but it's the familiar white-on-red. I don't have a pic of it yet (will get one very soon), but I'm wondering if that's technically an error? Because it seems 1954 was when the old design gave way to the current one, with no stopgap in between. (Which this one appears to be.)
Hmm... Well, given the location of the school and the age of the neighborhood (there really wasn't anything here prior to the 1960s), my guess is it's probably a refurbished sign. Next time I go by it, I'll be sure to get a pic.
I've seen this leftover NY 495 shield at the Roslyn Clock Tower, and tried to take a picture of it years ago. It turned out like crap. But this one didn't:Two other NY 495 signs still up - one on Nicolls Rd. southbound near Hawkins Rd. in Centereach (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Nicolls+Road+and+hawkins+rd,+centereach,+ny&hl=en&ll=40.882225,-73.080089&spn=0.00855,0.017531&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=36.642161,71.806641&vpsrc=0&z=16&layer=c&cbll=40.882279,-73.080212&panoid=VWQuPR94fbeuqtgt2qctXw&cbp=12,173.23,,0,12.01) and one on Mill Rd. in Yaphank (http://g.co/maps/tvf3)
http://www.panoramio.com/photo/55016974
Beyond the fact all the movies in the series were rather dumb, I believe the "180" was a reference to the flight number in the original film.
Beyond the fact all the movies in the series were rather dumb,
How about in Final Destination 2? The wreck happened on a Route 23, a four-lane divided road with possible access control, supposedly somewhere in the state of New York. The route marker shown was clearly a US 23 shield. Of course, US 23 doesn't enter New York — or Canada, where the film was shot. Maybe the film portrays an example of an error by NYSDOT.
That still doesn't explain why later films refer to it as a crash on Route 180.
I can't find it now, but KYTV in Springfield, MO ran a story this past week about the widening of US 65, but posted an Interstate 65 shield.
If you pause "Groundhog Day", set in PA, at the right time, you'll see an IL-120 sign.
A couple in Flagstaff
(http://www.davidjcorcoran.com/b40.jpg)
There was once a shield for K-89 at Halstead that actually said "K-89" with all four characters (hyphen included) crammed into a 2-digit shield. I didn't have a digital camera back then, so I wasn't ever able to get a shot for it.
| Interstate I- | (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/82/I-270.svg/25px-I-270.svg.png) |
This is not technically incorrect. It is, however, improper style.
(http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/6874/arrowabove.jpg)
Arrow goes below the shield, not above! :pan:
Plus, isn't that a wrong-way multiplex between a main US route and its unofficial alternate? I could see people being confused by this.
I also see a California-style US Route shield on that BGS. That black outline makes it look really sharp.
Very much so.QuoteThere was once a shield for K-89 at Halstead that actually said "K-89" with all four characters (hyphen included) crammed into a 2-digit shield. I didn't have a digital camera back then, so I wasn't ever able to get a shot for it.
Like this?
(http://www.davidjcorcoran.com/highways/co/25/70to70bus/2.JPG)
I also see a California-style US Route shield on that BGS. That black outline makes it look really sharp.
This is not technically incorrect. It is, however, improper style.
(http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/6874/arrowabove.jpg)
Arrow goes below the shield, not above! :pan:
You didn't happen to go through Lake George, did you?
This is not technically incorrect. It is, however, improper style.
(http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/6874/arrowabove.jpg)
Arrow goes below the shield, not above! :pan:
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3523/3308403372_093da05f36_d.jpg)
Missouri is just as guilty.
You mean this one?
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2675/5792399144_4276e70e41.jpg)
Got that pic when I was in Kansas back in the spring.
Arrow goes below the shield, not above! :pan:
US 62 became OH 62 somewhere north of New Albany, going northbound.
US 62 became OH 62 somewhere north of New Albany, going northbound.
Ooh, did you see the mailbox with the button copy house number on it? It would have been on your left, if still there at all.
Also, you (perhaps accidentally) pointed out another error in that sign assembly: It says "east" where it should say "north". This error persists for most of US 62's length from Mexico to Canada.
62 is an even number.
My favorite goof of all time are the signs when the U.S. 400 bypass first opened around Parsons.
(http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/9833625/sn/1879221281/name/n_a) (http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/9833625/sn/968492112/name/n_a)
About six of them in each direction. In Kansas.
62 is an even number.
You're right: the number 62 is also wrong.
There are several US routes that change cardinal directions along their alignments -- a couple tend to change at or near the Ohio border:
US 24: N-S in MI, E-W in OH and West.
US 42: N-S in OH, E-W in KY
Were the number assigned to the route today, I would call it 50-50, but considering the history, I would say the number 62 was appropriate.
62 is an even number.
You're right: the number 62 is also wrong.
I don't agree. 62's original extent was Carlsbad NM to Maysville KY; this is obviously more E-W than N-S. The extension to Niagara Falls muddies the issue significantly, but by a visual estimation on a map El Paso and Niagara Falls appear to be separated further E-W than they are N-S. SW-NE routes are always a crapshoot as to their numbering, but in the end, one or the other has to be picked. Were the number assigned to the route today, I would call it 50-50, but considering the history, I would say the number 62 was appropriate.
US 62 really should not be a continuous route. In many places it's an alternate to another route or just a minor road. For example US 68 is a better road from Lexington-Versailles to Maysville, and it looks to do way too much stairstepping northeast of Canton.
When in doubt, sign it as both.
[picture]
Nelson Road, just north of Broad St. in Bexley. 2003
My first thought is "why do you need two reassurance markers so close together in the first place?"
My first thought is "why do you need two reassurance markers so close together in the first place?"
New York does that almost as a matter of course. You'll see a route marker with the directional banner, then just a few feet down the road the route sign without the directional banner. Seems awfully redundant to me.
The last couple hundred yards of NV 28 along the east shore of Lake Tahoe seems like an odd place to put a "Begin" sign in reference to US 50.
No, US 301 doesn't begin anywhere near here.
The last couple hundred yards of NV 28 along the east shore of Lake Tahoe seems like an odd place to put a "Begin" sign in reference to US 50.
(http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r302/ilikeem102/aaroads/EndofNV28.jpg)
The sign that one replaced had the more conventional "Junction" reference:
http://www.aaroads.com/west/nevada028/nv-028_eb_lake_tahoe_75.jpg (http://www.aaroads.com/west/nevada028/nv-028_eb_lake_tahoe_75.jpg)
Here's one I've managed to fix: In Salina, UT, at the junction of UT-24 and US-50, an erroneous "UT-50" shield was placed there (http://g.co/maps/dny3n). I got in touch with a regional employee, and this has been replaced. I'm actually going to see if I can get it.
Does the erroneous Utah beauty pictured below still exist?
I don't have a picture because it caught me off guard, but as i was driving the usual route on 80/94 WB towards Chicago I did notice the sign at the 2mi mark prior to the split off has 94 listed as NB to Chicago. First time I've noticed it and I've been taking that route for almost 5 yrs. Is this new or is it me?
I don't have a picture because it caught me off guard, but as i was driving the usual route on 80/94 WB towards Chicago I did notice the sign at the 2mi mark prior to the split off has 94 listed as NB to Chicago. First time I've noticed it and I've been taking that route for almost 5 yrs. Is this new or is it me?
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6219/6252394226_5062db8dfc.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ssoworld/6252394226/)
Such large numbers - not standard for sure
...and one which cannot make up its mind:
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/WI/WI19700083i1.jpg)
At least they made the effort...
Looks like the sign maker painted that sign :/ :pan: :eyebrow:
Looks like the sign maker painted that sign :/ :pan: :eyebrow:Looks more like sharpie marker.
Looks like the sign maker painted that sign :/ :pan: :eyebrow:Looks more like sharpie marker.
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6219/6252394226_5062db8dfc.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ssoworld/6252394226/)
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6219/6252394226_5062db8dfc.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ssoworld/6252394226/)
Such large numbers - not standard for sure
I don't know if it's MUTCD-standard, but New York uses numbers that size in it's new Speed Zone Ahead signs...
Michigan has signs like those now, especially on state highways.(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6219/6252394226_5062db8dfc.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ssoworld/6252394226/)
Such large numbers - not standard for sure
I don't know if it's MUTCD-standard, but New York uses numbers that size in it's new Speed Zone Ahead signs...
So does Alabama, Tennessee, and Mississippi. Although, with that said I don't think the numbers that those states use are quite as large as the ones in your original picture, but they are larger than on a standard speed limit sign.
Sign W3-5 in the MUTCD 2009 shows larger numerals as well:
(http://i.imgur.com/WoYuc.png)
What shield is that '961'?"Home access road program", basically a shared driveway.
On the plus side, UDOT chose to use a three-digit width shield...
Is Ohio a state that classifies all numbered highways, regardless of actual class, as state routes? If so, that would not technically be an error shield.Yes, Ohio does that as well. So admittedly, it's not technically incorrect, but I still count it as an error because OH 40 is supposed to be signed as US 40.
Some states, like California, do that. That is, I-5 is actually maintained as "CA-5."
Is Ohio a state that classifies all numbered highways, regardless of actual class, as state routes? If so, that would not technically be an error shield.
Some states, like California, do that. That is, I-5 is actually maintained as "CA-5."
Most of the toute classification errors I've seen in Ohio have been classifying US routes as state routes.
VA does all kinds of them. State primaries with US shields, state primaries with secondary shields, US routes with state primary shields, secondaries with primary shields...my theory as to why this happens so much is that the VA primary route shield looks like the halfway point between the US shield and a secondary shield (a circle).
While this is geographically accurate, I-278 is technically an east-west route, so this sign is not following proper convention.
While this is geographically accurate, I-278 is technically an east-west route, so this sign is not following proper convention.
It is? 3dis can go any direction, and are not limited by the even-odd rules. I-294 is a north-south 3di here, and I-196 is a north-south 3di in Michigan, thus I-278 can be north-south in New York.
And that's a funky shape for the NY shield in the bottom photo, too.
I-196 runs BOTH north-south (with US-31) and east-west (without US-31).While this is geographically accurate, I-278 is technically an east-west route, so this sign is not following proper convention.
It is? 3dis can go any direction, and are not limited by the even-odd rules. I-294 is a north-south 3di here, and I-196 is a north-south 3di in Michigan, thus I-278 can be north-south in New York.
Is Ohio a state that classifies all numbered highways, regardless of actual class, as state routes? If so, that would not technically be an error shield.Yes, Ohio does that as well. So admittedly, it's not technically incorrect, but I still count it as an error because OH 40 is supposed to be signed as US 40.
Some states, like California, do that. That is, I-5 is actually maintained as "CA-5."
I-196 runs BOTH north-south (with US-31) and east-west (without US-31).While this is geographically accurate, I-278 is technically an east-west route, so this sign is not following proper convention.
It is? 3dis can go any direction, and are not limited by the even-odd rules. I-294 is a north-south 3di here, and I-196 is a north-south 3di in Michigan, thus I-278 can be north-south in New York.
MN 95 is signed with a Wisconsin shield before the state line.
Some of Canada's sign bilingualism is really just silly. Even an English speaker who's never heard a word of French in their lives should be able to figure out what "Est", "Ouest", "Sud", and "Nord" mean in context, and the same goes for a French speaker with "East", "West", "South", and "North". Quebec only posts the French and nobody from outside has trouble with it.
Attempting to do "East/Est" and messing it up as depicted is hilarious, though. :-D
(http://shields.aaroads.com/img/MN/MN19800951i1.jpg)
MN 95 is signed with a Wisconsin shield before the state line.
Even an English speaker who's never heard a word of French in their lives should be able to figure out what "Est", "Ouest", "Sud", and "Nord" mean in context
Some of Canada's sign bilingualism is really just silly. Even an English speaker who's never heard a word of French in their lives should be able to figure out what "Est", "Ouest", "Sud", and "Nord" mean in context, and the same goes for a French speaker with "East", "West", "South", and "North". Quebec only posts the French and nobody from outside has trouble with it.
Attempting to do "East/Est" and messing it up as depicted is hilarious, though. :-D
I do like that Ontario sign using square corners rather than the fake rounded ones most American signs use.
The sign on the right should say "Sand Springs'...
(http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6088/6091521160_0eb8106d06_b.jpg)
Is that the southbound Tisdale Interchange at I-244/US412? Good job, ODOT! LOL.