The Worst of Road Signs

[amroad17]

The "Norfolk Derp Disease" is spreading!!!     Soon to encompass the entire area of southeastern Virginia!

[Alex]

GSV caught it. Looks like a normal shield, but the oversized digits make the shield look stretched. Also looks like the 165 signs are larger than the 90 sign.

(BTW, I found that I could overcome some of the windshield glare by ramping up the contrast and lowering the brightness. You can do both of these in the iPhone's photo editor.)

Sorry for the awful iPhone quality, but this ugly set of signs is off of exit 44 on I-10 near Iowa, LA. I'm not even sure if that qualifies as an acorn shield for the 165 shields. And the 90 shield should say "TO US 90" not South.


Untitled by Josh Bumgardner, on Flickr

We caught it two years ago and even posted it in this same thread:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3521.msg301348;topicseen#msg301348

The pixelation is due to digital zoom. I try not to zoom in with my camera phone as the quality degrades to much. I do realize that the wide aspect of the photos are not to good when trying to show details like this sign, so I try to pull over for shots or wait til I am right under a sign bridge to take it.

[paulthemapguy]

GSV caught it. Looks like a normal shield, but the oversized digits make the shield look stretched. Also looks like the 165 signs are larger than the 90 sign.

(BTW, I found that I could overcome some of the windshield glare by ramping up the contrast and lowering the brightness. You can do both of these in the iPhone's photo editor.)

Sorry for the awful iPhone quality, but this ugly set of signs is off of exit 44 on I-10 near Iowa, LA. I'm not even sure if that qualifies as an acorn shield for the 165 shields. And the 90 shield should say "TO US 90" not South.


Untitled by Josh Bumgardner, on Flickr

We caught it two years ago and even posted it in this same thread:

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3521.msg301348;topicseen#msg301348

The pixelation is due to digital zoom. I try not to zoom in with my camera phone as the quality degrades to much. I do realize that the wide aspect of the photos are not to good when trying to show details like this sign, so I try to pull over for shots or wait til I am right under a sign bridge to take it.

Wow!  I got off at that exit to snap a US165 shield to add to my collection in October 2014.  The signs there were so terrible that I decided to wait until my drive home through Arkansas to get a picture.  That's why the US165 in my collection comes from Stuttgart, AR instead of Mississippi Louisiana.  These definitely qualify as some of the worst imo.

[jbnv]

Wow!  I got off at that exit to snap a US165 shield to add to my collection in October 2014.  The signs there were so terrible that I decided to wait until my drive home through Arkansas to get a picture.  That's why the US165 in my collection comes from Stuttgart, AR instead of Mississippi.  These definitely qualify as some of the worst imo.

I didn't know US 165 passed through Mississippi.

[J N Winkler]

How the hell do I read these tiny shields?

Photos from okroads.com


Also, what is with the shape of that US 218 shield on the sign on the right for exit 239A?

Silly Iowa.

This set of signs was replaced following the decommissioning of IA 965 along old US 218. The other set still has the micro shields

Replacement of the other set is included in Call 351 in the Iowa DOT letting for this coming month.  The same contract also includes an item to replace the 30 MPH overlay on the newish sign (shown above) with the loop arrow.

I am frankly not thrilled with the design of some of the proposed Exit 239A/Exit 239B replacement signs, which call for one instance of cardinal direction word "NORTH" to apply to I-380, US 218, and SR 27.  Inevitably (order of precedence being what it is) it is positioned directly above the US 218 shield, so it appears to apply to US 218 only, and to be saying that only northbound US 218 can be reached from the upcoming exit, while both directions of I-380 and SR 27 are available.  Other signs have the same problem but with "SOUTH."  Meanwhile, still other signs in the same contract have the same cardinal direction word above all three routes.

The sheeting will be fresh, but from the standpoint of driver comprehension I see no real improvement.

[WillWeaverRVA]

The City of Suffolk, VA providing a lesson on how not to make a sign:

[amroad17]

Whatever signs has ever been put up around the Suffolk Bypass have never been totally correct.  In the above case, other than the ugly US shields, is the omission of NORTH US 13.  Am I correct in saying that this sign is on VA 10 eastbound?

When the Suffolk Bypass first opened around 1974, it was signed as US 58 only.  The BGS's would have TO XX along with US 58, directing one to another route, at the VA 10/32 and US 460 interchanges.  It was a few years later that US 460 was signed along with US 58.  Now that US 13 is aligned this way the BGS's need to be updated/replaced to reflect this.

[74/171FAN]

Whatever signs has ever been put up around the Suffolk Bypass have never been totally correct.  In the above case, other than the ugly US shields, is the omission of NORTH US 13.  Am I correct in saying that this sign is on VA 10 eastbound?

When the Suffolk Bypass first opened around 1974, it was signed as US 58 only.  The BGS's would have TO XX along with US 58, directing one to another route, at the VA 10/32 and US 460 interchanges.  It was a few years later that US 460 was signed along with US 58.  Now that US 13 is aligned this way the BGS's need to be updated/replaced to reflect this.

From the US 460 Entry on the VA Highways Project: 

In 1973, US 460 was given its freeway bypass of Suffolk, leaving behind US 460 Business. AT first it was just US 460 as the freeway wasn't open west of there back to US 58.

With due respect to Mike and Froggie, but why/how would US 58 and US 460 have not been signed together once the entire Suffolk Bypass was open?

[MNHighwayMan]

I'm pretty sure these count as ugly:



These were posted on Sibley CR-8 leading to the junction with US-169 and MN-93 outside Le Sueur.

[7/8]

[andrepoiy]

I'm not sure if someone mentioned this already (since I didn't go through the 188 pages) but a few bad signs I seen I remember was on I-190 in NY where they used Helvetica...

[national highway 1]

I'm not sure if someone mentioned this already (since I didn't go through the 188 pages) but a few bad signs I seen I remember was on I-190 in NY where they used Helvetica...

[Scott5114]

The City of Suffolk, VA providing a lesson on how not to make a sign:

That's not even FHWA Series, that's friggin' Blue Highway, Ray Larabie's take on FHWA Series/Interstate. You used to see a lot of road sign illustrations done in it...in 2005, which stopped whenever Michael Adams released the first Roadgeek fonts.

[amroad17]

Whatever signs has ever been put up around the Suffolk Bypass have never been totally correct.  In the above case, other than the ugly US shields, is the omission of NORTH US 13.  Am I correct in saying that this sign is on VA 10 eastbound?

When the Suffolk Bypass first opened around 1974, it was signed as US 58 only.  The BGS's would have TO XX along with US 58, directing one to another route, at the VA 10/32 and US 460 interchanges.  It was a few years later that US 460 was signed along with US 58.  Now that US 13 is aligned this way the BGS's need to be updated/replaced to reflect this.

From the US 460 Entry on the VA Highways Project: 

In 1973, US 460 was given its freeway bypass of Suffolk, leaving behind US 460 Business. AT first it was just US 460 as the freeway wasn't open west of there back to US 58.

With due respect to Mike and Froggie, but why/how would US 58 and US 460 have not been signed together once the entire Suffolk Bypass was open?

I do not recall US 460 signs posted the first two or three years the Suffolk Bypass was open.  I lived in Chesapeake when it opened and my parents, my brother, and I would go that way to vacation in Florida in 1975 and 1976.  I believe it had only US 58 signs then.

Anyway, the above sign is only one of a few along that highway.

[jbnv]

The City of Suffolk, VA providing a lesson on how not to make a sign:

That's not even FHWA Series, that's friggin' Blue Highway, Ray Larabie's take on FHWA Series/Interstate. You used to see a lot of road sign illustrations done in it...in 2005, which stopped whenever Michael Adams released the first Roadgeek fonts.

The cardinal directions look like Clearview.

[WillWeaverRVA]

The City of Suffolk, VA providing a lesson on how not to make a sign:

That's not even FHWA Series, that's friggin' Blue Highway, Ray Larabie's take on FHWA Series/Interstate. You used to see a lot of road sign illustrations done in it...in 2005, which stopped whenever Michael Adams released the first Roadgeek fonts.

The cardinal directions look like Clearview.

I think they are.

[JoePCool14]

The City of Suffolk, VA providing a lesson on how not to make a sign:

That's not even FHWA Series, that's friggin' Blue Highway, Ray Larabie's take on FHWA Series/Interstate. You used to see a lot of road sign illustrations done in it...in 2005, which stopped whenever Michael Adams released the first Roadgeek fonts.

The cardinal directions look like Clearview.

Yeah, I'd say so as well. But seriously, is it really that hard to get the right font? Or the right shield? Apparently, it is.

Blue Highway, coming in the next MUTCD.

[Mapmikey]

Whatever signs has ever been put up around the Suffolk Bypass have never been totally correct.  In the above case, other than the ugly US shields, is the omission of NORTH US 13.  Am I correct in saying that this sign is on VA 10 eastbound?

When the Suffolk Bypass first opened around 1974, it was signed as US 58 only.  The BGS's would have TO XX along with US 58, directing one to another route, at the VA 10/32 and US 460 interchanges.  It was a few years later that US 460 was signed along with US 58.  Now that US 13 is aligned this way the BGS's need to be updated/replaced to reflect this.

From the US 460 Entry on the VA Highways Project: 

In 1973, US 460 was given its freeway bypass of Suffolk, leaving behind US 460 Business. AT first it was just US 460 as the freeway wasn't open west of there back to US 58.

With due respect to Mike and Froggie, but why/how would US 58 and US 460 have not been signed together once the entire Suffolk Bypass was open?

I will research this further upon my return from Norway in a couple weeks.

Mike
Bergen Norway

[Takumi]

That Suffolk monstrosity has been there since at least 2012, but there used to be a couple of nice 70s vintage signs there not long before that. Last time I was out that way, there was still an old sign on eastbound 460 where it joins the bypass. US 13 is posted on its own there, with some normal trailblazers separate from the 58 and 460 ones. Also, when I first started going to the beach in the early 90s, the 70s signs were still plentiful on the bypass, and I distinctly remember VA 10 being signed North/South there.

[paulthemapguy]

From Bill Burmaster's site.


source: http://www.billburmaster.com/rmsandw/illinois/misc/dist3.html

[paulthemapguy]

From Bill Burmaster's site.  Miscolored library sign, misshapen offset side road sign, tiny unreadable text on placard.


source: http://www.billburmaster.com/rmsandw/illinois/misc/dist3.html

[jbnv]

From Bill Burmaster's site.  Miscolored library sign, misshapen offset side road sign, tiny unreadable text on placard.


source: http://www.billburmaster.com/rmsandw/illinois/misc/dist3.html

Where's the pure undulterated suck?

I wasn't aware that library icon signs aren't supposed to be blue. It's a service, after all.

The tiny text is an issue but more of a design flaw than a mistake.

[Big John]

^^ I've seen blue library signs most of the time, but MUTCD shows it (I-8) as green http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/fig2h_01_longdesc.htm

[jbnv]

^^ I've seen blue library signs most of the time, but MUTCD shows it (I-8) as green http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/fig2h_01_longdesc.htm

This section of the MUTCD is a mess.

There are several symbols for transportation facilities. It makes sense to have these in green and give them directional arrows.

Then you have the textual signs. State line and rivers are good in green, but don't need directional arrows. The "signal set" is regulatory in nature and should be white. It also won't have a directional arrow.

Then you have the signs for libraries and recycling centers(!). These are service facilities, not transportation facilities. Why is the symbol for a library green and the "H" symbol for a hospital blue?

[roadfro]

^^ I've seen blue library signs most of the time, but MUTCD shows it (I-8) as green http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/fig2h_01_longdesc.htm

This section of the MUTCD is a mess.

There are several symbols for transportation facilities. It makes sense to have these in green and give them directional arrows.

Then you have the textual signs. State line and rivers are good in green, but don't need directional arrows. The "signal set" is regulatory in nature and should be white. It also won't have a directional arrow.

Then you have the signs for libraries and recycling centers(!). These are service facilities, not transportation facilities. Why is the symbol for a library green and the "H" symbol for a hospital blue?

Note that this link was to a figure in the MUTCD which shows a collection of sign designs for "General Information Signs". It is not a single section of the MUTCD, but rather the signs described over several sections.

As general information signs, they all are appropriate in the white-on-green color scheme.

• The "Signals Set for XX mph" sign is not regulatory in nature (does not describe law or mandatory action, it is information only) so black on white is not appropriate.
  
• The river/jurisdiction crossing signs are not meant to be used with the arrows. The arrows are to be used with the symbol signs as a trailblazer assembly.
  
• Library and Recycling are not "General Service" or "Specific Service" signs, which are signs meant to be services for the typical traveling public ("motorist services", if you will) and not so much for local people. So the green is more appropriate than blue for this. (I had actually forgotten the recycling sign existed–doubtful this is used anywhere in any meaningful capacity...)