Poor Sign Placement

[1995hoo]

You should. That's a big boo boo on the contractor for not having them back to back. Some bonehead should be reprimanded for this error and fix the problem before people end up wrecking themselves.

Last night I tweeted it to both VDOT and the contractor who's building the HO/T lanes. No reply yet, though of course it is the weekend.

[1995hoo]

I hope this is not permanent sign placement. Seen in the reversible HOV carriageway in Springfield, Virginia. The diamond-shaped sign facing the other way that blocks the new small green "Express Exit" sign is a standard sign for thru traffic when the lanes are going in the other direction denoting a merge from the left.



....

Passed through there earlier today and the sign has been repositioned. I'd like to believe the tweet I sent in had something to do with that, though of course I can't verify that because they never replied. Behold the power of the AARoads.com forum!

[theline]

I'm not sure if this one exactly fits here, but I'll take a shot. It's on the ramp that carries EB I-80 from its concurrence with the I-94 on the Borman to its concurrence with I-90 on the Indiana Toll Road. I've seen the sign perhaps a hundred times and it never ceases to amaze me with its placement: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5855799,-87.231911,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sSUnjJNd2rFutXveJk-nPng!2e0?hl=en


In fact, what exactly is its purpose? When the sign comes clearly into view, the motorist is far beyond the decision point. If he wants to stay on 80, he is either on it or screwed. Before I learned this exit well, I know that at least once I found myself to the left of the concrete wall when that sign mocked me. All I could do is say, "How the hell I'm supposed to get there?"

[DevalDragon]

This is a good one. My guess is that lane didn't used to be exit only and it went thru, especially because the "20 MPH RAMP" is in the same location/color where an "EXIT \/ ONLY" would be .

It's also curious that the I-90 shield is placed where it is - almost like an afterthought.

I'm not sure if this one exactly fits here, but I'll take a shot. It's on the ramp that carries EB I-80 from its concurrence with the I-94 on the Borman to its concurrence with I-90 on the Indiana Toll Road. I've seen the sign perhaps a hundred times and it never ceases to amaze me with its placement: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5855799,-87.231911,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sSUnjJNd2rFutXveJk-nPng!2e0?hl=en


In fact, what exactly is its purpose? When the sign comes clearly into view, the motorist is far beyond the decision point. If he wants to stay on 80, he is either on it or screwed. Before I learned this exit well, I know that at least once I found myself to the left of the concrete wall when that sign mocked me. All I could do is say, "How the hell I'm supposed to get there?"

[jeffandnicole]

The black on yellow 20 mph warning itself isn't totally unusual: On high speed roads with low speed ramps, you can often find something along these lines to alert people as to the advisory speed.

The placement of the I-90 is a bit unusual. And the entire sign location itself.  Going back on the highway, the closest sign for this exit is attached to the overhead gantry for the previous exit, and best I could tell there was no other supplemental sign on the highway as to this exit's purpose...until you were well down the separated lane.

PS...Geez...paint that bridge! 

[akotchi]

I would guess the position of the I-90 shield is to eliminate directional confusion.  The ramp is the continuation of I-80 East onto the Toll Road, but I-90 in both directions is accessible from the same ramp.  Though the shields could have been side-by-side on top with the East over the I-80 shield only.  FWIW . . .

[SignGeek101]

I don't like how the sign looks, but that's not the problem with it.

http://goo.gl/maps/Fzmvk

You'd think they would just attach that small sign on the streetlight 

[jakeroot]

Not that bad, just a nitpick of mine when "ahead" signs are basically 10 feet away from the "here" sign.

I don't like how the sign looks, but that's not the problem with it.

http://goo.gl/maps/Fzmvk

You'd think they would just attach that small sign on the streetlight 

Odd. I'm not sure why how they expect anyone to read that going 110-120.

[riiga]

Not that bad, just a nitpick of mine when "ahead" signs are basically 10 feet away from the "here" sign.

This one is great too. 5 meters make all the difference in the world, doesn't it? 

[roadman65]

https://www.google.com/maps/@28.411758,-81.4767725,3a,75y,270h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sJXhMrFXyjkcmuL9_QWJ-bg!2e0
This sign for I-4 West needs to be placed before the curve leading into this intersection as there is a limited sight distance for viewing this sign in advance.

In fact many tourists bound for I-4 west use this part of Turkey Lake Road and will in fact do heavy weaving after seeing this sign.  So either another advanced sign needs to be placed before the curve (as there used to be an LGS before) or this sign needs to be moved back.

[freebrickproductions]

Here's a sign at an entrance to a parking lot here in Huntsville that's starting to get covered over by a tree if they haven't cut the tree back already (this was taken back in August of 2014):
Enter Here by freebrickproductions, on Flickr

Also, I have a photo of a traffic light that's partially covered by a tree up in Philadelphia that I took back in 2013 that I can post if it counts.

[SignGeek101]

This one is new: http://goo.gl/maps/a0L9S

[SignGeek101]

Another douse of stupidity.

http://goo.gl/maps/FrXow

[bigboi00069]

Saw this today in Hallandale, FL right by I-95

[UCFKnights]

Saw this today in Hallandale, FL right by I-95

If it was properly manicured, the tree would be above it today, and within a couple years, it will be above the sign without proper maintenance. It also doesn't look like it'd be as bad if you were in the lanes instead of the sidewalk.

[bigboi00069]

Saw this today in Hallandale, FL right by I-95

If it was properly manicured, the tree would be above it today, and within a couple years, it will be above the sign without proper maintenance. It also doesn't look like it'd be as bad if you were in the lanes instead of the sidewalk.

I agree if the tree were manicured it wouldn't be an issue, however that sign has been there for about 2 years or so and is usually blocked by the palm fronds. I took another picture of it from the road, just didn't post it since the message on the sign had disappeared by then. You can tell it still obstructs the sign though.

[PHLBOS]

I guess the contractor that erected this brand new BGS didn't bring a pair of hedge trimmers with them.   If one scrolls back-and-forth; one can see an older view showing the previous BGS.

[roadman]

Not that bad, just a nitpick of mine when "ahead" signs are basically 10 feet away from the "here" sign..

One of my pet peeves is Signal Ahead signs that are placed where the signal is in plain sight to the driver.

[roadman]

I guess the contractor that erected this brand new BGS didn't bring a pair of hedge trimmers with them.   If one scrolls back-and-forth; one can see an older view showing the previous BGS.

Unfortunately, tree trimming is often regarded by contractors as an "optional extra".

[PHLBOS]

I guess the contractor that erected this brand new BGS didn't bring a pair of hedge trimmers with them.   If one scrolls back-and-forth; one can see an older view showing the previous BGS.

Unfortunately, tree trimming is often regarded by contractors as an "optional extra".

Personally, I'm surprised that the RE (Resident Engineer) on site for the project didn't flag this when the foundations for the posts were poured.

[SignGeek101]

Guys, if you want people to follow a certain speed limit, at least post the sign towards traffic, not parallel to the road.

http://goo.gl/maps/no12n

Not going to mention the fact that this sign is black on yellow, non standard for sure.

[mrsman]

Not that bad, just a nitpick of mine when "ahead" signs are basically 10 feet away from the "here" sign..

One of my pet peeves is Signal Ahead signs that are placed where the signal is in plain sight to the driver.

IIRC, it has been the practice within certain cities to put up that sign when a new traffic signal is installed with a "NEW" plate as well.  After about 6 months, they may remove the "NEW" but the signal ahead sign is still there.  For old timers, they may need a reminder that there is now a signal when they may be used to driving that way for 20 years without stopping there, but if you're just passing through, it may seem like just another signal and the sign  placement is redundant.

But I agree, at a certain point, the extra sign is no longer helpful.

[national highway 1]

[roadman65]

Not that bad, just a nitpick of mine when "ahead" signs are basically 10 feet away from the "here" sign..

One of my pet peeves is Signal Ahead signs that are placed where the signal is in plain sight to the driver.

IIRC, it has been the practice within certain cities to put up that sign when a new traffic signal is installed with a "NEW" plate as well.  After about 6 months, they may remove the "NEW" but the signal ahead sign is still there.  For old timers, they may need a reminder that there is now a signal when they may be used to driving that way for 20 years without stopping there, but if you're just passing through, it may seem like just another signal and the sign  placement is redundant.

But I agree, at a certain point, the extra sign is no longer helpful.

I have seen you drove US 27 from Moore Haven, FL to Haines City, FL.  It seems every signal there has flashing yellow SIGNAL AHEAD signs.  Yet where several miles go between signals on the same road nothing is signed.

For safety you would think that FDOT would do the opposite as long stretches, even if the signal is visible, without signals you have a tendency of not expecting them, so there the flashing yellow warning beacons would be posted.  In fact NJ, PA, NY, and NC on divided highways post warning signs with beacons to inform you of a signal after long signal less stretches or at points where freeways become arterials.

[thenetwork]

Not that bad, just a nitpick of mine when "ahead" signs are basically 10 feet away from the "here" sign..

One of my pet peeves is Signal Ahead signs that are placed where the signal is in plain sight to the driver.

IIRC, it has been the practice within certain cities to put up that sign when a new traffic signal is installed with a "NEW" plate as well.  After about 6 months, they may remove the "NEW" but the signal ahead sign is still there.  For old timers, they may need a reminder that there is now a signal when they may be used to driving that way for 20 years without stopping there, but if you're just passing through, it may seem like just another signal and the sign  placement is redundant.

But I agree, at a certain point, the extra sign is no longer helpful.

I have seen you drove US 27 from Moore Haven, FL to Haines City, FL.  It seems every signal there has flashing yellow SIGNAL AHEAD signs.  Yet where several miles go between signals on the same road nothing is signed.

For safety you would think that FDOT would do the opposite as long stretches, even if the signal is visible, without signals you have a tendency of not expecting them, so there the flashing yellow warning beacons would be posted.  In fact NJ, PA, NY, and NC on divided highways post warning signs with beacons to inform you of a signal after long signal less stretches or at points where freeways become arterials.

What I don't like is if you live in an area where they have lights that flash when the traffic light is going to change (a.k.a. Prepare To Stop When Flashing),  then when those yokels go out to an area where there are permanently flashing Signal Ahead signs -- they slow to a crawl expecting the light to turn red when in fact it's just a cautionary light.  I followed some moron into 3 intersections like that before I was able to pass them.