Signage pet peeves

[papaT10932]

Here's an example of something I see occasionally here in Oregon that annoys me a little bit:



Wouldn't it make more sense for the 223 shield to be on the right?

How does one continue straight on US 20 there? It looks like there is a guard rail and a parking lot in the way.

[CL]

{removed images}

and the lack of exit tabs.

They do have exit tabs, full-width exit tabs a la Illinois, but only one of them (the California Ave exit) is done right, IMHO, by aligning it to the side of the exit ramp.

Utah exit tabs have been full-width from about the late 1970s to the mid 2000s, and they've been aligned based on what side of the road the exit's on since the late '80s (sporadically from then, always since the mid '90s). This is what Utah exit tabs look like nowadays:



(I used this photo because I especially like that way of marking left exits - much less cumbersome than the "left" shaded in yellow and then having the "Exit ##" below, like on I-379 in Pennsylvania...)

Also, while I've been in California for the past week, I've really come to like its old signage, but my only caveat is the way it marks exit only lanes (if at all marked) - terrible for those unfamiliar with the area. This is what I'm talking about:


(AARoads)

EDIT: here's a better example. Looking solely at this sign and being somewhat used to California signing practices, I'd think only the right lane would be required to exit. After all, wouldn't they stick that cryptic "only" next to the left arrow too if that were the case? Just stick those arrows inside the exit only shading like the rest of the country does. But I guess it wouldn't be a true California sign then.

[MDRoads]

York College of PA is guilty of this, too. Exit 15 (Business 83) is a direct shot, but yet, the interstate signs the college at Exit 16, which is Queen St (PA 74.) This is not only an indirect shot, but reassurance signage completely disappears.

That's a relic from when Business 83 wasn't accessible directly from southbound I-83, and you had to use the Queen Street exit to get there.  Only with the recent interchange rebuild did that become possible.  Somewhere back there, too, is Penn State York Campus, which is closest to Exit 16.

Several colleges in Baltimore are near the Charles Street corridor (MD 139) inside I-695 Exit 25.  Towson University, Loyola College, Johns Hopkins University, and Notre Dame of MD are all along there. So the directional signage on the off ramp just says "Colleges", in the same spirit as "Shore Points."

Someone mentioned irregular mile markers... US 1 in Harford County has mileage from the southern county line.  Most other US highways here use cumulative state mileage.

[xonhulu]

How does one continue straight on US 20 there? It looks like there is a guard rail and a parking lot in the way.

Sign's off the right side of the road a bit, they don't really expect you to drive over the guard rail!

[Quillz]

Today, on a day trip to Ojai, I was taking an alternate route (CA-118 -> CA-23 -> CA-126 -> CA-150). Anyway, I was on CA-150 when I noticed a very odd reassurance marker... It appeared that the "1" and "0" were in Series C while the "5" was in D(M), as if the original reassurance marker was a "CA-5" error shield but they decided to reuse it. I didn't get a picture of it, but it really stood out, it was very awkward... I think it was just north of Santa Paula.

Here's an example of something I see occasionally here in Oregon that annoys me a little bit:



Wouldn't it make more sense for the 223 shield to be on the right?

Here's another goofy arrow arrangement not too far away:

And yes, I agree... "Lesser" routes (Interstate trumps U.S. which trumps state which trumps county) should always be as far right as possible, and then ordered by number. At least, that's how I always do any fictitious sign gantries.

[xonhulu]

And yes, I agree... "Lesser" routes (Interstate trumps U.S. which trumps state which trumps county) should always be as far right as possible, and then ordered by number. At least, that's how I always do any fictitious sign gantries.

I agree with you, but that wasn't my point: 223 should be on the right because it's a right turn to get on it.

[Michael in Philly]

York College of PA is guilty of this, too. Exit 15 (Business 83) is a direct shot, but yet, the interstate signs the college at Exit 16, which is Queen St (PA 74.) This is not only an indirect shot, but reassurance signage completely disappears.

That's a relic from when Business 83 wasn't accessible directly from southbound I-83, and you had to use the Queen Street exit to get there.  Only with the recent interchange rebuild did that become possible.  Somewhere back there, too, is Penn State York Campus, which is closest to Exit 16.

Several colleges in Baltimore are near the Charles Street corridor (MD 139) inside I-695 Exit 25.  Towson University, Loyola College, Johns Hopkins University, and Notre Dame of MD are all along there. So the directional signage on the off ramp just says "Colleges", in the same spirit as "Shore Points."

Someone mentioned irregular mile markers... US 1 in Harford County has mileage from the southern county line.  Most other US highways here use cumulative state mileage.

US 40 in Cecil County does that too.  I don't pay lots of attention to off-Interstate mile markers, but with those two examples I just assumed it was standard practice in Maryland to start at the county line.

- Subject Change Alert - talking of mileage in Maryland, what's the official starting point for mileage on I-95, the Maryland/DC line?  I always have an urge not to recognize the DC segment's existence....

[MDOTFanFB]

1. Misuse of Clearview on route shields. There are several Clearview I-96 shields in Detroit, MI, there is a pic of one in the shield gallery here on AARoads: www.aaroads.com/shields/show.php?image=MI19880962

2. Using a 2-digit shield for a 3-digit route, especially on business Interstate shields, as is the case here, also in the gallery: www.aaroads.com/shields/show.php?image=MI19721961

3. Using the federal default circle shield instead of the normal state route shield for a state: www.aaroads.com/shields/show.php?image=MI19880752

4. Whenever a route is decomissioned, failure to take down signs that still mention said route even though said route no longer is in the vicinity: www.aaroads.com/shields/show.php?image=MI19800102

[Quillz]

I also don't like 1970 specification Interstate and U.S. Route shields.

[Ian]

1. Misuse of Clearview on route shields. There are several Clearview I-96 shields in Detroit, MI, there is a pic of one in the shield gallery here on AARoads: www.aaroads.com/shields/show.php?image=MI19880962

2. Using a 2-digit shield for a 3-digit route, especially on business Interstate shields, as is the case here, also in the gallery: www.aaroads.com/shields/show.php?image=MI19721961

3. Using the federal default circle shield instead of the normal state route shield for a state: www.aaroads.com/shields/show.php?image=MI19880752

4. Whenever a route is decomissioned, failure to take down signs that still mention said route even though said route no longer is in the vicinity: www.aaroads.com/shields/show.php?image=MI19800102

I agree with numbers 1, 3, and 4 but number 2 is old style, and it looks better IMO, especially with states that continue to use the 2-digit shield for all routes (NH, CT, etc.).

[MDOTFanFB]

but number 2 is old style, and it looks better IMO, especially with states that continue to use the 2-digit shield for all routes (NH, CT, etc.).

Here in MI, they are still using 2-digit shields for all M-xx routes. All except for M-553 and the now-decomissioned M-554. But a 2-digit Interstate shield for a 3-digit Interstate looks just wrong for me.

OT: Only one more minute until 2011! We're now in 2011!

[Ian]

But a 2-digit Interstate shield for a 3-digit Interstate looks just wrong for me.

It looks pretty good to me.

[Quillz]

I also don't care for 3di numbers squeezed into 2di shields, but I do like the opposite: 1- and 2di numbers placed into 3di shields. While I'm not normally a fan of wide shields, I happen to like the wide Interstate shield and I have no qualms about any kind of number being in one.

[NE2]

My pet peeve is how most people here have rather trivial peeves. When you visit an area where signage is missing to the point of not being able to follow a route, you'll stop fretting about the small things.

[deathtopumpkins]

My pet peeve is how most people here have rather trivial peeves. When you visit an area where signage is missing to the point of not being able to follow a route, you'll stop fretting about the small things.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the term "pet peeve" by definition imply something small or trivial?

[NE2]

Which is what signs in general are to most locals.

[deathtopumpkins]

Which is what signs in general are to most locals.

Not the point I was getting at...

[MDRoads]

US 40 in Cecil County does that too.  I don't pay lots of attention to off-Interstate mile markers, but with those two examples I just assumed it was standard practice in Maryland to start at the county line.

- Subject Change Alert - talking of mileage in Maryland, what's the official starting point for mileage on I-95, the Maryland/DC line?  I always have an urge not to recognize the DC segment's existence....

I figured the situation there with US 40 in Cecil Co. was due to the presence of the Hatem Bridge and its toll status.  The current mile markers would have been preceded by the cryptic mile markers that MDTA used on toll facilities.

The official SHA inventory of I-95 begins at the western end of the Wilson Bridge.  However, the mile markers are noted in the inventory, and they differ by between .15-.30 miles from the inventory in the first several miles, possibly due to the DC segment.

[froggie]

Presumably because bridge maintenance is now a joint venture between VDOT and SHA.

On a related note to that, about a year ago SHA installed new 0.2 milemarkers on the Beltway between the perceived state line and St. Barnabas Rd (MD 414).  Of note is that the new milemarkers are roughly 0.7mi off from the old milemarkers.

[bulldog1979]

Here in MI, they are still using 2-digit shields for all M-xx routes. All except for M-553 and the now-decomissioned M-554.

M-554 was never signed, except on City of Marquette street sign blades. The new M-553 markers placed along McClellan Avenue are squares, not rectangles.

[yakra]

JCT the route you're already on.  Connecticut seems to be the worst offender, but I found out Kentucky will do it every time the route you're on makes a turn, so maybe they'll take over as worst.

NH consistently does this wherever multiplexes are involved. JCT [16] {302} when you're already on 16 and 302 is about to join, and again when you're already on both routes and they're about to split up.

Also, ditto to Kurumi's "Cardinal directions omitted". Maine is very bad with this.

When on a two lane exit, with an optional lane and the BGS signs don't recognize the optional lane.  They only sign one lane as an "exit only" when there are two lanes that can exit (including the option lane).  They make drivers unfamiliar with the area change lanes for no reason.

Thsi is the big one that's really cheesed me off lately.
MDOT already had enough problems signing their exit only vs optional exit lanes.
And now, after the recent rebuild of I-295 in downtown Portland & SoPo, there are many aux lane / exit only lane / optional exit lane scenarios. So MDOT has of course gone apeshit signing them all... incorrectly.
In most cases, both lanes are signed as "exit only", implying a single thru lane on the freeway mainline. (Not exactly up to freeway standards, that, and complete rubbish when you look at the actual physical layout of the road! (This particular gaffe has even made it as far north as Exit 28 in Brunswick.))
Worse yet, there's a 2-lane exit at Exit 3 southbound, where the long-time bottleneck from the Exit 4 interchange has been widened out with an auxiliary lane. Here, the old signage is still in place. This would lead drivers to think they're on a wide-open new highway, free to put the pedal down all the way to the Turnpike. They're in for a rude surprise when they find their lane peeling off onto an exit with no warning, and having to weave left into another lane full of exiting traffic to continue.
I haven't witnessed any yet, but I can only foresee this causing a great deal of ugliness.
The only place (in the state!) MDOT gets it right, with one black arrow on yellow and one white arrow on white, is the replacement for this sign, at the Scarborough Connector's left exit from US1.

[Mikeroburst]

When on a two lane exit, with an optional lane and the BGS signs don't recognize the optional lane.  They only sign one lane as an "exit only" when there are two lanes that can exit (including the option lane).  They make drivers unfamiliar with the area change lanes for no reason.

I'll add a third vote for this one. Another MDOT (Michigan) usually gives no indication that the second right lane is an optional exit lane. Example (complete with negative contrast clearview):


Ironically Caltrans usually does a decent job in these situations, but there are a handful of examples around the bay area where the exit only plaque is omitted entirely and replaced with a RIGHT LANE MUST EXIT and/or a RIGHT LANE MUST TURN RIGHT (??) sign. In this photo from I-280 at Page Mill Rd. the right lane is exit only and the 2nd lane from the right is an option.

[Mergingtraffic]

When on a two lane exit, with an optional lane and the BGS signs don't recognize the optional lane.  They only sign one lane as an "exit only" when there are two lanes that can exit (including the option lane).  They make drivers unfamiliar with the area change lanes for no reason.

I'll add a third vote for this one. Another MDOT (Michigan) usually gives no indication that the second right lane is an optional exit lane. Example (complete with negative contrast clearview):

I also don't like the solid white line at the two lane exit.  the right lane and the option lane is separated by a solid white line.  I think it should stay broken.   

[codyg1985]

How about exit only tabs used when the lane doesn't actually exit? I know that link doesn't clearly show it, but the right most lane is indicated as an exit-only lane, when it actually continues straight. This sign has since been modified.

[MDOTFanFB]

I'll add a third vote for this one. Another MDOT (Michigan) usually gives no indication that the second right lane is an optional exit lane. Example (complete with negative contrast clearview):

Notice the NJDOT-style M-39 shield on the "FREEWAY ENDS" sign!

Also, the Michigan MDOT sometimes puts two shields for the same route on the same sign. I caught one of these on Sunday (the sign on the left):