The Worst of Road Signs

[Brandon]

I'm fairly confident Oklahoma has won the infamous distinction of having the worst signs ever made.

Is it something in the water there?  Or is it how they spend their lunch breaks (at the bar with mass quantities of alcohol)?  Or are they on some sort of mind-altering substance that they think shit like that looks OK?  Or do they just not give two shits?

I don't know, but Oklahoma does indeed have the worst signs I have ever seen.

[cjk374]

Taken during the Walker County bridge tour yesterday:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/130771900@N08/20026983521/in/dateposted-public/

   

[Zeffy]

As I was testing the new Shield Gallery PHP code this morning, I came across this:

[vtk]

As I was testing the new Shield Gallery PHP code this morning, I came across this:

I don't see anything there that's Worst Of. Sure, the silk screen pattern doesn't quite match the die cut on that Interstate shield, and some might say the number's too big, but it took me several seconds to spot those minor defects.

[noelbotevera]

I'm fairly confident Oklahoma has won the infamous distinction of having the worst signs ever made.

Is it something in the water there?  Or is it how they spend their lunch breaks (at the bar with mass quantities of alcohol)?  Or are they on some sort of mind-altering substance that they think shit like that looks OK?  Or do they just not give two shits?

I don't know, but Oklahoma does indeed have the worst signs I have ever seen.

Nah, they might spend all of their time crying in bars in Tulsa. Or maybe they cover their eyes, and play "pin the elements on the sign", and end up with absolute crap.

[jakeroot]

I'm fairly confident Oklahoma has won the infamous distinction of having the worst signs ever made.

Is it something in the water there?  Or is it how they spend their lunch breaks (at the bar with mass quantities of alcohol)?  Or are they on some sort of mind-altering substance that they think shit like that looks OK?  Or do they just not give two shits?

I don't know, but Oklahoma does indeed have the worst signs I have ever seen.

Nah, they might spend all of their time crying in bars in Tulsa. Or maybe they cover their eyes, and play "pin the elements on the sign", and end up with absolute crap.

Jokes aside, are there approval stamps on the back of all these signs? I can't help but think that there's some step that Oklahoma is forgetting, like approval by state engineers or something of the like. If I had to wager, a lot of overhead signage is designed by the engineering firms themselves, and then sent to the state for final editing for approval and assembly -- perhaps that step isn't followed through with often enough?

[iBallasticwolf2]

Today on the way back from a roadtrip I saw a couple signs I think fit in this category. I have no pictures but someone might be able to help me. It is on I-270 westbound on the southern part of the Columbus Outerbelt near I-71. Basically the sign has no content except the control city Cincinnati. I believe it should have an I-71 or I-270 shield on it but all it says is Cincinnati.
Anyone have any pictures of some help?

[SignGeek101]

This one?

https://goo.gl/maps/Ga9cx

or this one?

https://goo.gl/maps/Du9bP

They're both button copy. The first sign had it's shield (I-270), but it fell off sometime between 2007 and 2009. The second sign probably had a shield, but it fell off prior to 2007.

[Zeffy]

They're both button copy.

That alone disqualifies it from the 'worst of' category.

[iBallasticwolf2]

This one?

https://goo.gl/maps/Ga9cx

or this one?

https://goo.gl/maps/Du9bP

They're both button copy. The first sign had it's shield (I-270), but it fell off sometime between 2007 and 2009. The second sign probably had a shield, but it fell off prior to 2007.

Those are exactly what I was talking about. Poor Old Button Copy signs getting tear. I had thought that they were newly installed signs that were badly designed.

[mwb1848]

New Mexico is the Land of Enchantment. It's also the land of really bad road-signs. As part of the recent reconstruction of the I-10/I-25 interchange in Las Cruces, NMDOT re-placed two overhead sign assemblies on I-10 West. For the first time, one of the signs used Tucson as the westbound control city, the other continued NMDOT's long-standing use of Deming (at the junction of I-10 and US 180) as the westbound control city.

While I would dump Deming altogether, I was happy to see Tucson enter into the mix. Until I passed through the interchange recently and saw the NMDOT has installed these, featuring not-quite-right arrow-per-lane markings and a slate of control cities that made me yearn for the good old days of Deming:

• Tucson vanishes,
• Mesilla, a historic village (population 2,180) two exits away, gets somehow involved, and
• even though the interchange is within the city limits, NMDOT feels like they need to let you know going either way will get you to some part of Las Cruces.

Mesilla is a village two exits away. Population; 2,180. No junction with a US highway.

[corco]

Interesting - when I was there in 2011 this was the sign



So it got replaced and then replaced again? Weird.

But...yeah, "Las Cruces/Mesilla" is probably worse even than "Hermiston/Umatilla" for I-82 on I-84 in Oregon, and I had previously thought that to be the most asinine set of control cities in the country.

[SignGeek101]

Interesting, I thought there was a mention in the MUTCD that only two control cities are allowed at one time on a BGS. There's three here of course.

[roadfro]

Interesting, I thought there was a mention in the MUTCD that only two control cities are allowed at one time on a BGS. There's three here of course.

There is. It's a guidance statement though, so not binding:

Section 2E.10 Amount of Legend on Guide Signs

Guidance:
01 No more than two destination names or street names should be displayed on any Advance Guide sign or Exit Direction sign. A city name and street name on the same sign should be avoided. Where two or three signs are placed on the same supports, destinations or names should be limited to one per sign, or to a total of three in the display. Sign legends should not exceed three lines of copy, exclusive of the exit number and action or distance information.

[dfwmapper]

What's the MUTCD say about using the same control city for multiple routes?

[thenetwork]

New Mexico is the Land of Enchantment. It's also the land of really bad road-signs. As part of the recent reconstruction of the I-10/I-25 interchange in Las Cruces, NMDOT re-placed two overhead sign assemblies on I-10 West. For the first time, one of the signs used Tucson as the westbound control city, the other continued NMDOT's long-standing use of Deming (at the junction of I-10 and US 180) as the westbound control city.

While I would dump Deming altogether, I was happy to see Tucson enter into the mix. Until I passed through the interchange recently and saw the NMDOT has installed these, featuring not-quite-right arrow-per-lane markings and a slate of control cities that made me yearn for the good old days of Deming:

• Tucson vanishes,
• Mesilla, a historic village (population 2,180) two exits away, gets somehow involved, and
• even though the interchange is within the city limits, NMDOT feels like they need to let you know going either way will get you to some part of Las Cruces.

Mesilla is a village two exits away. Population; 2,180. No junction with a US highway.

New Mexico also doesn't quite "get" the new One Arrow Per Lane idea yet.  According to the bottom photo, the BGS on the right says you can either turn right OR continue straight to access I-25 North.

EPIC FAIL!!!

[PurdueBill]

New Mexico also doesn't quite "get" the new One Arrow Per Lane idea yet.  According to the bottom photo, the BGS on the right says you can either turn right OR continue straight to access I-25 North.

EPIC FAIL!!!

Indeed, at this point the gantry might as well be a little further downstream at the gore and then they could have had two arrows over the exit lanes and three over I-10, which would be passable.  As is, it's completely bonkers.

[kkt]

The signs are messed up, but the gantry is real sleek and pretty!

[vtk]

What's the MUTCD say about using the same control city for multiple routes?

It says not to do that, but I can't remember if that's a Standard or just Guidance.

[vdeane]

They're both button copy.

That alone disqualifies it from the 'worst of' category.

What if you had a button copy sign that was also in clearview (including clearview numerals) with a healthy dose of crAiG coUntY thrown in?

[hbelkins]

What's the MUTCD say about using the same control city for multiple routes?

It says not to do that, but I can't remember if that's a Standard or just Guidance.

Happens where I-35 northbound splits off the Kansas Turnpike. Kansas City is listed for both I-35 and I-335.

[Brandon]

What's the MUTCD say about using the same control city for multiple routes?

It says not to do that, but I can't remember if that's a Standard or just Guidance.

Happens where I-35 northbound splits off the Kansas Turnpike. Kansas City is listed for both I-35 and I-335.

And again for I-94 and I-90 in Indiana for Chicago.  One is Chicago via I-80/94, and the other is Chicago via I-90/Toll Road.

[PurdueBill]

The Northern State Pkwy. and L.I.E. share a control city at the former's exit 29:

Disclaimer: this sign is NOT a candidate for Worst Of.  It only illustrates same control city on two signs in the same assembly.

What seems in my mind to make the Chicago and New York examples OK is that both involve essentially parallel routes from a far enough distance away.  Heck, I-90 and 94 will intersect and join before downtown, and the Northern State Pkwy. will become the Grand Central and intersect the LIE before reaching Manhattan, so either is OK in the big picture.  What makes the New Mexico one such a mess is that I-10 and I-25 point to different parts of Las Cruces, with I-10 leaving pretty quickly actually (except that it serves the airport, which doesn't have commercial flights anyway).  Same control city for two routes seems to be something that must be considered case by case, and in the NM case, it's bad.

[ethanhopkin14]

This one?

https://goo.gl/maps/Ga9cx

or this one?

https://goo.gl/maps/Du9bP

They're both button copy. The first sign had it's shield (I-270), but it fell off sometime between 2007 and 2009. The second sign probably had a shield, but it fell off prior to 2007.

Those are exactly what I was talking about. Poor Old Button Copy signs getting tear. I had thought that they were newly installed signs that were badly designed.

I have no photographic evidence, but in downtown Dallas at the I-35E and I-30 mixmaster, years ago, the overhead signs at the exits for the interstates in all directions just had control cities on them, no shields.

For example, they read on southbound Stemmons (I-35E) Ft. Worth      Texarkana    Waco
                                                                                         |                     |              |
                                                                                         V                    V             V

Instead of having an EAST Interstate 30 shield for Ft. Worth, a WEST Interstate 30 shield for Texarkana and a SOUTH Interstate 35E shield for Waco.

Does anyone else remember this?

[thenetwork]

The Northern State Pkwy. and L.I.E. share a control city at the former's exit 29:

Disclaimer: this sign is NOT a candidate for Worst Of.  It only illustrates same control city on two signs in the same assembly.

What seems in my mind to make the Chicago and New York examples OK is that both involve essentially parallel routes from a far enough distance away.  Heck, I-90 and 94 will intersect and join before downtown, and the Northern State Pkwy. will become the Grand Central and intersect the LIE before reaching Manhattan, so either is OK in the big picture.

Maybe one little change to make on such scenarios is to label the "weaker" route of the two as "New York -- Alt Route" for example on the Northern Parkway BGS.  For those not familiar with an area, that may tell them the best way to take (I-495).   Obviously, "locals" will take whichever route they deem is the fastest at the time based on the traffic reports &/or GPS.

The Chicago scenario is a little more defined on their BGSs -- one way is via a Toll Road(s) while the other way is free.