The Worst of Road Signs

[luokou]

They used the down-arrow instead of a standard arrow. 

...and it might be one of the first instances where Caltrans used a black-on-yellow slanted up arrow on an EXIT ONLY panel.  Too bad they used a down-arrow instead of a regular arrow.

And here's an instance where they get it right:

The new 7th St. ramp, opened at the beginning of this month.

[Scott5114]

What a pity the kerning on "Beach" is fucked up.

[luokou]

Hahhahhah, I just noticed that shortly after posting it! Guess it would still qualify for worst of.

[Takumi]

Another "big lazy unisign", as formulanone called it, in Colonial Heights. Like its sibling with the US 144 shield, this was moved earlier this year. Here is its original location in 2008.

[national highway 1]

From the 'Pacific Southwest' Thread: (credits to luokou)
Also note the external exit tabs, inherited from the original 1971 exit numbering trial.

[bulkyorled]

... and that illuminated "7" street blade easily belongs under the Best of Road Signs!

I concur.  Erroneous... but still best, not worst.

Well it can go in both.  But in real life it looks a bit crusty.... and potentially burnt out if i recall. Its likely to be replaced soon. Most of the ones in the area are just cheapo reflective ones now 

[agentsteel53]

From the 'Pacific Southwest' Thread: (credits to luokou)
Also note the external exit tabs, inherited from the original 1971 exit numbering trial.

in the background, however, there you can see the best of road signs: a 1965 Mission Road sign on a 1940s single-post gantry!

[luokou]

Another "big lazy unisign", as formulanone called it, in Colonial Heights. Like its sibling with the US 144 shield, this was moved earlier this year. Here is its original location in 2008.

Those are some tiny cardinal direction tabs above the US route shields! And was it really necessary for them to horizontally stretch (or vertically compress) the '1' in the US 1 shield as well? XD

[Truvelo]

This sign has been patched since the Google image was taken. It now says Eagle Blvd but the word Eagle is stretched and looks terrible. I should have taken a picture when I had the opportunity.

[KEK Inc.]

From the 'Pacific Southwest' Thread: (credits to luokou)
Also note the external exit tabs, inherited from the original 1971 exit numbering trial.

Pretty sure the tabs are external due to space issues in the sign.

[vtk]

Maybe I should have posted this one in the exit number thread.

Besides the tacked-on Waverly, I think that's just about perfect.

[Scott5114]

I'm not too fond of the two arrows being so different.

[PurdueBill]

I'm not too fond of the two arrows being so different.

It's an on-off Ohio convention to use the narrower arrows for dancing (non-straight-down) arrows that point to the same lane from different signs; it's common to not see it but still frequent to see.  It happened on button-copy as well as reflective signs. Not sure if it's a deliberate thing or just random.

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

I wasn't concerned about the arrows (the worst example of angled arrows on overhead signs I can think of is along I-71 on either side of I-275, north of Cincy).
It was the usage of Waverly above the main sign (thus my reference to the 'odd exit number thread') that warrented it's inclusion in this thread.

[WillWeaverRVA]

Another "big lazy unisign", as formulanone called it, in Colonial Heights. Like its sibling with the US 144 shield, this was moved earlier this year. Here is its original location in 2008.

Just for the sake of completion, the one with the US 144 shield:

[Alps]

I'm not too fond of the two arrows being so different.

It's an on-off Ohio convention to use the narrower arrows for dancing (non-straight-down) arrows that point to the same lane from different signs; it's common to not see it but still frequent to see.  It happened on button-copy as well as reflective signs. Not sure if it's a deliberate thing or just random.

Not allowed to use down arrows unless they point straight down and are over the lane in question. That said, this is also an illegal use of the Type A arrows - the MUTCD wants you to use arrow per lane for this situation. (Personally, I'd rather just see the slanted down arrow.)

[Scott5114]

That sign probably predates the 2009 edition, which introduced both arrow per lane and the prohibition on dancing arrows.

[PurdueBill]

That sign probably predates the 2009 edition, which introduced both arrow per lane and the prohibition on dancing arrows.

Yes, there are lots of signs in Ohio with dancing arrows (Down ones, Type B ones pointing down, even Type A ones pointing down here and there) but I don't know if there are new ones going up after the 2009 edition went into force. 

[Central Avenue]

That sign probably predates the 2009 edition, which introduced both arrow per lane and the prohibition on dancing arrows.

IIRC, Ohio didn't even adopt the 2009 MUTCD until last month (when the 2012 Ohio MUTCD went into effect), so it almost certainly predates that.

[Kacie Jane]

Maybe I should have posted this one in the exit number thread.

Besides the tacked-on Waverly, I think that's just about perfect.

Add me to the list of anti-dancing arrows people.

I have another problem with that sign, though -- and if I'm alone here, that's fine.  It's the green space at the top of the right panel.  Personally, I'd much rather have extra horizontal space, by putting the TO either between the two shields, or between the SOUTH and WEST banners (so that the top line would read SOUTH TO WEST)

[Alps]

Maybe I should have posted this one in the exit number thread.

Besides the tacked-on Waverly, I think that's just about perfect.

Add me to the list of anti-dancing arrows people.

I have another problem with that sign, though -- and if I'm alone here, that's fine.  It's the green space at the top of the right panel.  Personally, I'd much rather have extra horizontal space, by putting the TO either between the two shields, or between the SOUTH and WEST banners (so that the top line would read SOUTH TO WEST)

What about Waverly? Take the TO and put it between the shields (no extra width needed), then move them up and put Waverly on the sign (no extra height needed).

[bigboi00069]

This sign has since been replaced, but it is still ugly

https://maps.google.com/?ll=25.963114,-80.161582&spn=0.001628,0.00284&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=25.963119,-80.161482&panoid=_XDV6jos4HB6CT8AltOv5g&cbp=12,282.76,,1,0.76

And here's another... plus the signs are facing different ways and the US1 north sign makes no sense there

https://maps.google.com/?ll=25.961103,-80.141863&spn=0.003275,0.005681&t=h&layer=c&cbll=25.960842,-80.14188&panoid=__aX8dBM8ku3ZDxOCg_BSg&cbp=12,53.46,,1,3.06&z=18

[CentralCAroadgeek]

Not that the sign itself is bad, but I think this is just lazy...

[Kacie Jane]

Not sure how I feel about that one.  There have been similar assemblies mentioned on this board -- possibly/probably elsewhere this very thread -- that I find perfectly serviceable but others did not.  (To each their own, that sort of thing.)

What makes this different from those assemblies is the placement of the directional banners and arrows.  IMHO, this one would be better if the banners were under the shield, directly above the arrows.  Obviously, that's backwards from normal practice, but I think in a single-shield layout, it makes the assembly easier to read.

[roadfro]

If you're gonna do something like this, it's better to just make it a little green sign...