Unpopular Anything Road-Related Opinions

[kirbykart]

Unpopular opinion: I like Clearview. And always have. And I don't understand the hatred it still gets. I think the main issue I had with it was when signs would combine it with the FHWA series fonts, but that's not really the fault of the font itself. Newer signs that are all Clearview look much better. Last time I was in Alaska, they had a lot of Clearview signage (especially in the Kenai Peninsula), and it looked great.

It can look fine, but it can also look bad.  The numbers look like ass, though.  This is a much better than this.  And this just makes my eyes bleed.

All of those look pretty good. This is horrible.


What the hell, PennDOT? And here we have the 3/4 error in Clearview. Yuck.

[machias]

All of those look pretty good. This is horrible.


What the hell, PennDOT? And here we have the 3/4 error in Clearview. Yuck.

The "s" in Pittsburgh and the "s" in south were swapped during fabrication.

[algorerhythms]

I mean, you're talking about a state that makes signs like this... https://maps.app.goo.gl/rBQQYM5CDQwhB38v7?g_st=ic

[kirbykart]

I mean, you're talking about a state that makes signs like this... https://maps.app.goo.gl/rBQQYM5CDQwhB38v7?g_st=ic

I mean, the only error there is the 3/4 error, it would look beautiful without that dumb sizing error.

And NYSTA makes signs like this: Apparently "Pk" is an adjective and it describes Beaver perfectly. And the road we are on junctions with itself in 5 miles? So many errors, and to top it off the sign is in Helvetica!

[kphoger]

This is horrible.

Overstatement?  I literally have no idea what's wrong with that sign.

[kirbykart]

^It's a lot worse than those others, and it looks worse in person than in StreetView. Clearview can be done right, but this one isn't great.

[kphoger]

^It's a lot worse than those others

I still have no idea what you're even talking about.  It looks fine to me.

[JoePCool14]

This is horrible.

Overstatement?  I literally have no idea what's wrong with that sign.

There's a handful of minor errors:

• Incorrect usage of Clearview in the directions, exit tab, and Exit Only plaques.
• The Exit Only plaques should not have a black border.
• The APL arrows do not follow the correct specs. Particularly the curved arrows.
• The sign should be placed slightly upstream where the option lane is still only one lane.

I wouldn't call that sign horrible, per say. I could see ISTHA fabricating something like that a few years ago.

[webny99]

Not related to the Clearview, but also...

-Rochester should be listed before Albany (or maybe not at all, since it's not a control city beyond Buffalo).
-You're still outside Buffalo city limits here, so there's no need to specify "Downtown". Buffalo alone would suffice.

[VTGoose]

(Many states do have an additional law that requires drivers to evacuate the left lane if someone faster wants to pass–and such laws generally don't say anything about whether either vehicle is obeying the speed limit or not.)

And most reasonable drivers will do this, completing their pass in a timely manner and moving out of the way when it is safe to do so.

The genesis of this was the assholes (usually in big pickup trucks, but can be any vehicle) who come roaring up onto one's rear bumper and tailgate to force their way ahead. If slowing down a bit in reaction to the unsafe following distance is what it takes to feel more comfortable in the situation, then so be it. Too bad if someone is inconvenienced for 30 seconds.

[RobbieL2415]

(Many states do have an additional law that requires drivers to evacuate the left lane if someone faster wants to pass–and such laws generally don't say anything about whether either vehicle is obeying the speed limit or not.)

And most reasonable drivers will do this, completing their pass in a timely manner and moving out of the way when it is safe to do so.

The genesis of this was the assholes (usually in big pickup trucks, but can be any vehicle) who come roaring up onto one's rear bumper and tailgate to force their way ahead. If slowing down a bit in reaction to the unsafe following distance is what it takes to feel more comfortable in the situation, then so be it. Too bad if someone is inconvenienced for 30 seconds.

When people in CT say, "keep right except to pass" I have to remind them that this doesn't apply if the road has three or more lanes and that in that case, it's "slower traffic keep right"

[kphoger]

... who come roaring up onto one's rear bumper and tailgate to force their way ahead ...

You've just described every single driver in Mexico who wants to pass any other driver.   

[Techknow]

^It's a lot worse than those others, and it looks worse in person than in StreetView. Clearview can be done right, but this one isn't great.

Here's my unpopular opinion...

This BGS is horrible compared to that! The font used is an anomaly with Caltrans, no other Caltrans sign AFAICT other than the one in the Southbound direction of I-5 has this font. And then the usual Caltrans sign features, internal exit tabs and the CA 1 sign crammed with info and I think the route symbol is not centered with respect to the text

[kphoger]

Is that not one of the usual FHWA fonts–just sized incorrectly?

[Scott5114]

Yeah, that's the classic 3/4 error, caused by misinterpreting a particular line of text in the MUTCD. Hating signs with it is not an unpopular opinion–J.N. Winkler and I both submitted public comments to get the offending passage clarified in the 2023(?) MUTCD.

[JoePCool14]

Yeah, that's the classic 3/4 error, caused by misinterpreting a particular line of text in the MUTCD. Hating signs with it is not an unpopular opinion–J.N. Winkler and I both submitted public comments to get the offending passage clarified in the 2023(?) MUTCD.

Rightfully so. It's a very common error that could be easily clarified. The solution is just to not change your font size in CAD!

[kirbykart]

^It's a lot worse than those others, and it looks worse in person than in StreetView. Clearview can be done right, but this one isn't great.

Here's my unpopular opinion...

This BGS is horrible compared to that! The font used is an anomaly with Caltrans, no other Caltrans sign AFAICT other than the one in the Southbound direction of I-5 has this font. And then the usual Caltrans sign features, internal exit tabs and the CA 1 sign crammed with info and I think the route symbol is not centered with respect to the text

I mean, CalTrans just has horrible standards in general. Their method of signage is unique and bizarre. They're going for like a "modern" look, coincidentally like the kind of thing you'd expect from Southern California. I don't like it.

Internal exit tabs are even worse than Clearview done incorrectly.

[kirbykart]

This is horrible.

Overstatement?  I literally have no idea what's wrong with that sign.

There's a handful of minor errors:

• Incorrect usage of Clearview in the directions, exit tab, and Exit Only plaques.
• The Exit Only plaques should not have a black border.
• The APL arrows do not follow the correct specs. Particularly the curved arrows.
• The sign should be placed slightly upstream where the option lane is still only one lane.

I wouldn't call that sign horrible, per say. I could see ISTHA fabricating something like that a few years ago.

It wasn't captured very well in StreetView. Aside from those errors which I may have subconsciously noticed but not thought about, the whole thing has a very plasticky look in person.

[Scott5114]

I mean, CalTrans just has horrible standards in general. Their method of signage is unique and bizarre.

The Caltrans Cinematic Universe, I like to call it. I've designed stuff to Caltrans spec for work. It's...different, I'll give you that.

But I don't think it's fair to paint it as horrible in general. There's some stuff in there that's genuinely awesome. Like the route shields in general.

But yes, there's some stuff that is horrible.

They're going for like a "modern" look, coincidentally like the kind of thing you'd expect from Southern California. I don't like it.

Assuming you're talking about the sign in the photo...no, the person who put the sign together just lacks reading comprehension. It's a common problem. It's not a California problem; you see it across the country. I'll be in Kansas City, KS this week–their 2009-spec signs look just like that one. Every single one of them.

Internal exit tabs are even worse than Clearview done incorrectly.

You'll be happy to learn that Caltrans has finally deprecated them. All it took was redesigning their standard gantry to include gusset plates–something the Kansas standard gantry has had since before I was born. (And which Oklahoma's standard gantry I guess doesn't need.)

[PurdueBill]

Unpopular opinion: I like Clearview. And always have. And I don't understand the hatred it still gets. I think the main issue I had with it was when signs would combine it with the FHWA series fonts, but that's not really the fault of the font itself. Newer signs that are all Clearview look much better. Last time I was in Alaska, they had a lot of Clearview signage (especially in the Kenai Peninsula), and it looked great.

It can look fine, but it can also look bad.  The numbers look like ass, though.  This is a much better than this.  And this just makes my eyes bleed.

All of those look pretty good. This is horrible.


What the hell, PennDOT? And here we have the 3/4 error in Clearview. Yuck.

The eastbound side just into PA from the Ohio line had an even worse example of switching letters around on a sign...small capital A and larger lowercase one, and ditto with a pair of Os.  Made for it looking quite comical.  It has since been corrected after years being posted.
https://goo.gl/maps/hvCbSFCdjGhpfzeY8

[thenetwork]

Unpopular opinion: I like Clearview. And always have. And I don't understand the hatred it still gets. I think the main issue I had with it was when signs would combine it with the FHWA series fonts, but that's not really the fault of the font itself. Newer signs that are all Clearview look much better. Last time I was in Alaska, they had a lot of Clearview signage (especially in the Kenai Peninsula), and it looked great.

It can look fine, but it can also look bad.  The numbers look like ass, though.  This is a much better than this.  And this just makes my eyes bleed.

All of those look pretty good. This is horrible.


What the hell, PennDOT? And here we have the 3/4 error in Clearview. Yuck.

The eastbound side just into PA from the Ohio line had an even worse example of switching letters around on a sign...small capital A and larger lowercase one, and ditto with a pair of Os.  Made for it looking quite comical.  It has since been corrected after years being posted.
https://goo.gl/maps/hvCbSFCdjGhpfzeY8

Perhaps Mr. Confair was born in Craig County, OK?

[kirbykart]

I mean, CalTrans just has horrible standards in general. Their method of signage is unique and bizarre.

The Caltrans Cinematic Universe, I like to call it. I've designed stuff to Caltrans spec for work. It's...different, I'll give you that.

But I don't think it's fair to paint it as horrible in general. There's some stuff in there that's genuinely awesome. Like the route shields in general.

But yes, there's some stuff that is horrible.

They're going for like a "modern" look, coincidentally like the kind of thing you'd expect from Southern California. I don't like it.

Assuming you're talking about the sign in the photo...no, the person who put the sign together just lacks reading comprehension. It's a common problem. It's not a California problem; you see it across the country. I'll be in Kansas City, KS this week–their 2009-spec signs look just like that one. Every single one of them.

No, I'm not talking about that sign in particular, but their standards in general make their signs look modern.

[Scott5114]

That has no meaning, though.

[kirbykart]

^Let me ask you this: Do you like the look of modern things?

[Scott5114]

The problem is that the phrase "modern things" has an undefined value.

"Modern" becomes even more meaningless when you try to apply it to Caltrans signage, which often combines exit tabs with 2005 specs with shield specs from the 60s printed on reflective sheeting standards from the 2010s. Are they "trying to make it look modern?" Hell if I know. If they are, they're not doing a very good job of it.