Overkill in Road Sign Use

[kphoger]

^ This is likely a temporary situation due to sign replacement.

This is a common occurrence with wholesale road sign replacement projects, especially if old signs are on now non-spec posts or mounting hardware. New signs are installed (left, in this case) before old signs (right) are removed, to avoid having a period of missing critical signage.

So it's sort of like this.

The "WORK ZONE" plaque likely lets the driver know that special work zone laws are in effect (extra speeding fines etc.).  Perhaps it was just as easy to drive the post as it would have been to find some other way of attaching the plaque to the existing sign–especially if they would have to move it to a different location later in the project.

[Alex]

So it's sort of like this.

This kind of signing scenario is typically done in a construction zone in Florida. Even if the construction speed limit does not change the regular speed limit, or if the construction speed limit end coincides with the regular speed limit resumption, contractor based speed limit signs follow regular speed limit signs.

I have also noted this practice on some ALDOT construction zones, most recently on a portion of I-10 in Baldwin County that is to be resurfaced. You get a set of contractor 70 mph speed limit signs just as you exit the construction area, followed immediately by ALDOT-posted 70 mph signs.

[mobilene]

I live in Indianapolis, where we're trying to become more bicycle-friendly. The main road off my subdivision was repaved last year and "Share the Road" signs went up about every 100 feet on the road. You turn onto the road and along the right it's a neat row of these signs as far as the eye can see.  Seems like they could have gotten away with them far, far less frequently.

[cjk374]

I live in Indianapolis, where we're trying to become more bicycle-friendly. The main road off my subdivision was repaved last year and "Share the Road" signs went up about every 100 feet on the road. You turn onto the road and along the right it's a neat row of these signs as far as the eye can see.  Seems like they could have gotten away with them far, far less frequently.

Let the bill come in to pay for those signs & they probably will be spread out!   

[formulanone]

I-35E northbound in St. Paul, where it gets away from the I-94 multiplex:



(This photo was taken with a 55mm lens, which is not a zoom lens.)

[roadman]

I-35E northbound in St. Paul, where it gets away from the I-94 multiplex:



(This photo was taken with a 55mm lens, which is not a zoom lens.)

I've actually driven through this area - my best friend used to live in the Twin CIties.  And I can't decide what's worse here - the number of identical sign assemblies or the duplicate "EAST 94 10" on all of the pull thrus.

Also note that on the Exit 242B signs, the fabricator failed to square off the upper left corner of the main sign panel border where it meets the exit tab - a pet peeve of mine when it comes to sign design.

[kphoger]

As an outsider who occasionally drives through downton MSP, I am never annoyed at having a lot of reassurance as to which lane I need to be in.  I'm always constantly checking my mirrors, changing lanes, all while trying to not end up in an exit-only lane.

[PHLBOS]

I-35E northbound in St. Paul, where it gets away from the I-94 multiplex:



(This photo was taken with a 55mm lens, which is not a zoom lens.)

I've actually driven through this area - my best friend used to live in the Twin CIties.  And I can't decide what's worse here - the number of identical sign assemblies or the duplicate "EAST 94 10" on all of the pull thrus.

Also note that on the Exit 242B signs, the fabricator failed to square off the upper left corner of the main sign panel border where it meets the exit tab - a pet peeve of mine when it comes to sign design.

I'm assuming the reasoning for that is likley due to the Exit panel was added either just after the main sign was fabricated or after the main sign was erected.

[Alps]

Also note that on the Exit 242B signs, the fabricator failed to square off the upper left corner of the main sign panel border where it meets the exit tab - a pet peeve of mine when it comes to sign design.

That's typically only done for separate-panel installations in West Virginia. (Massachusetts at least seems to be unipanel.)

[roadman]

Also note that on the Exit 242B signs, the fabricator failed to square off the upper left corner of the main sign panel border where it meets the exit tab - a pet peeve of mine when it comes to sign design.

That's typically only done for separate-panel installations in West Virginia. (Massachusetts at least seems to be unipanel.)

Actually, exit tabs in Massachusetts are fabricated separately and attached to the main sign when the sign panel is installed on the structure.  Older Mass. exit tabs (so-called "integral' design) appear to be unipanel because the top border of the main sign panel was omitted beneath the exit tab (this allowed the number to overlap onto the main sign - so 18 inch high panels could be used instead of 24 inch), however, the fabrication and installation methods were identical to the present-day (since 2004) full exit tabs.

And I personally know of at least one new "full tab" sign in Massachusetts where the intersecting border isn't squared off - this was apparently a fabricator error.

[1995hoo]

I-35E northbound in St. Paul, where it gets away from the I-94 multiplex:



(This photo was taken with a 55mm lens, which is not a zoom lens.)

This is similar to what I was referring to in Delaware earlier in this thread, although in their case all the BGSs were pull-through signs bigger than the ones shown here.

[Michael]

I just stumbled on this huge monotube for some turn lane signs on NY 92 just west of the western end of the NY 5/92 duplex in DeWitt.

[roadman]

I just stumbled on this huge monotube for some turn lane signs on NY 92 just west of the western end of the NY 5/92 duplex in DeWitt.

Interesting that there is a center two-way turn lane adjacent to a left turn lane.   Usually the center two-way turn lane becomes a left turn lane at intersections.

[The High Plains Traveler]

I-35E northbound in St. Paul, where it gets away from the I-94 multiplex:



(This photo was taken with a 55mm lens, which is not a zoom lens.)

If they had made the sign a little higher, MnDOT could have put a line under a single EAST 94/10 pair. This is a good example of how major interstate junctions in the Twin Cities often have no control cities.

EDIT: (Is the record for interval between posting and edit?) I failed to adequately analyze the comment above about exit tab and sign borders. The exit tabs on these signs used to be in the center, like they were all Minnesota interstate exit signs. They have since begun to move them to the right or left side of the sign as appropriate.

[Kacie Jane]

I just stumbled on this huge monotube for some turn lane signs on NY 92 just west of the western end of the NY 5/92 duplex in DeWitt.

Interesting that there is a center two-way turn lane adjacent to a left turn lane.   Usually the center two-way turn lane becomes a left turn lane at intersections.

It's no longer adjacent to it at the intersection.  That should probably be a "center lane ends" sign.

[kphoger]

This is a good example of how major interstate junctions in the Twin Cities often have no control cities.

It is indicative, though, of how people in the area navigate.  They religiously refer to highways by number–even down to the county road level.

[Ian]

Are the "35 M.P.H." signs underneath every chevron sign really necessary? This is on the ramp from I-476 south to I-95 north near Chester, PA.

[PHLBOS]

Are the "35 M.P.H." signs underneath every chevron sign really necessary? This is on the ramp from I-476 south to I-95 north near Chester, PA.

Judging by the difference in color, those 35 MPH advisory panels are likely recent additions (I don't believe those were there the last time I used that ramp a month or two ago).  I'm guessing that PennDOT erected those speed advisory panels in reaction to somebody taking that turn too fast and going off the road recently.  Are there any guiderail replacements outside of your photo?

Ian, since you & I were up in New England this past Christmas; the erection of those signs & related accident may have taken place while we were both up north.

I believe that the ramp for I-684 north to I-84 east in Brewster, NY has a lot more chevrons w/speed (20 mph) advisory panels than that Chester ramp.

[Ian]

Judging by the difference in color, those 35 MPH advisory panels are likely recent additions (I don't believe those were there the last time I used that ramp a month or two ago).  I'm guessing that PennDOT erected those speed advisory panels in reaction to somebody taking that turn too fast and going off the road recently.  Are there any guiderail replacements outside of your photo?

Ian, since you & I were up in New England this past Christmas; the erection of those signs & related accident may have taken place while we were both up north.

I believe that the ramp for I-684 north to I-84 east in Brewster, NY has a lot more chevrons w/speed (20 mph) advisory panels than that Chester ramp.

I actually took this photo this past summer, but when even when I took the photo, those advisory speed signs couldn't have been more that a few months old. I didn't recall seeing any guardrail replacements these past several times I've whizzed by on this curve, but the idea that they were erected after a few rollovers is a good theory.

[Michael]

While browsing in Street View last night, I stumbled on a sign I was aware of, and I can't believe I never posted it!  I-690 westbound near the NY Fairgrounds has two signs for Exit 7.  One is ground-mounted, and one is on a sign bridge at the gore.  Note the sign bridge in the background of the first Street View link.  The sign bridge at the gore was replaced in the mid-2000s (2004 if the EXIF data on Doug's photos I linked below is correct), and the sign from the original sign bridge was moved to temporary posts next to the sign bridge.  When the sign bridge was replaced several years later, the temporary sign was moved to permanent posts further east.  If I remember correctly, there was a period of time when both the temporary and gore signs were installed, but I can't remember if it was with the old or new sign bridge.

Here's links to Doug's photos of the old signs:
Old sign bridge
Temporary sign

At the east end of I-690, I-481 northbound has duplicate signs for the I-690 exit.  Here's Street View links to the first and second signs.  Again, note the second set of signs in the background of the first Street View link.  This interchange goes even further by having a third set of signs at the gore, which are visible in the background of the second Street View link.  The only difference between the signs at the gore point and the other two sets of signs is the usage of up/left arrows instead of down arrows on the I-690 exit sign.

Lastly, I found this double-sided sign on NC 540.  At first, I thought it belonged in the "Signs With Design Errors" thread since it's on the right shoulder, but I decided to look in the median and on the right shoulder in the other direction.  I found another double-sided sign on the right shoulder in the other direction.

[amroad17]

NYSDOT seems to do this a lot.  Along I-84, there are ground-mounted BGS's installed along with sign bridge BGS's at Exits 3 and 4.  A similar occurrence happens at Exit 29N southbound on I-81 where the ground-mounted BGS is around 1/4 mile from the gore.