Poor Sign Placement

[theline]

Here's one I spotted Sunday, while EB on US 30, approaching I-65 in Merrillville, IN:

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.470923,-87.334599,3a,75y,149.73h,90.08t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s9MJEwVaaoGHvGWYqtcMpkw!2e0

Sorry for the poor quality of the GSV. I saw it too late to take a photo. The top of the sign has a black-on-yellow banner reading "Right Lane." Below that is the I-65 shield. Those are badly obscured by the tree limbs, but it's even worse when leaves are present.

[Ray_Stantz]

From: http://streetsmart.dmagazine.com/2015/02/26/lesson-learn/

[SignGeek101]

http://goo.gl/maps/ix5Ji 

Yes, I know they're simply replacing the older sign, but still.

[hbelkins]

A couple of years ago, I took a crapload of sign replacement photos across US 50 (Corridor D) in West Virginia. I captured plenty of instances of this. In some cases, the new signs were in front of the old ones; in others, they were behind the old ones.

[cbeach40]

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 

The sign was there before the illumination, which was fairly new at the time of that photo. It was relocated soon after.
https://goo.gl/maps/XUApw

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

1. Traffic is not going that fast there.
2. Even if it were, in the field the text appears clearly enough that it isn't be a problem

Another douse of stupidity.

http://goo.gl/maps/FrXow

Or, pull back one step and you can see the replacement sign was already installed.
https://goo.gl/maps/NCkOt

[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 

The sign was there before the illumination, which was fairly new at the time of that photo. It was relocated soon after.
https://goo.gl/maps/XUApw

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

1. Traffic is not going that fast there.
2. Even if it were, in the field the text appears clearly enough that it isn't be a problem

Another douse of stupidity.

http://goo.gl/maps/FrXow

Or, pull back one step and you can see the replacement sign was already installed. Nice try.
https://goo.gl/maps/NCkOt

About the last one, I didn't notice. I'm sure they replaced the old one afterwards. Sorry about that

[jakeroot]

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

1. Traffic is not going that fast there.
2. Even if it were, in the field the text appears clearly enough that it isn't be a problem

1. Why not? It's a freeway.
2. Someone looking for an alternate route probably isn't going to be looking for black on white regulatory signage right at the split (unless the OTM is different from the MUTCD), where it's basically useless to anyone outside of the outer lane. Why not an overhead BGS?

[AsphaltPlanet]

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

1. Traffic is not going that fast there.
2. Even if it were, in the field the text appears clearly enough that it isn't be a problem

1. Why not? It's a freeway.
2. Someone looking for an alternate route probably isn't going to be looking for black on white regulatory signage right at the split (unless the OTM is different from the MUTCD), where it's basically useless to anyone outside of the outer lane. Why not an overhead BGS?

1.  The speed limit jumps from 100km/h to 70km/h about 100m upstream of that sign.
2.  This sign is facing eastbound traffic, and basically tells traffic how to make a U-turn to get back onto the westbound lanes of the 402.  Such a maneuver isn't exactly rocket science, even for a driver that lacks confidence.  Overheads signs are quite expensive.  I don't see this sign as a problem at all.

[jakeroot]

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

1. Traffic is not going that fast there.
2. Even if it were, in the field the text appears clearly enough that it isn't be a problem

1. Why not? It's a freeway.
2. Someone looking for an alternate route probably isn't going to be looking for black on white regulatory signage right at the split (unless the OTM is different from the MUTCD), where it's basically useless to anyone outside of the outer lane. Why not an overhead BGS?

1.  The speed limit jumps from 100km/h to 70km/h about 100m upstream of that sign.
2.  This sign is facing eastbound traffic, and basically tells traffic how to make a U-turn to get back onto the westbound lanes of the 402.  Such a maneuver isn't exactly rocket science, even for a driver that lacks confidence.  Overheads signs are quite expensive.  I don't see this sign as a problem at all.

1. It's still a freeway, and road signs should reflect that (though the sign says 100 km/h "BEGINS" ... )
2. Fine.

[vdeane]

[hbelkins]

Are you referring to the sign being placed in front of the exit sign, or after you're already off the bridge? 

[Big John]

^^ I assumed the warning sign referred to the bridge just after the exit.

[cbeach40]

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

1. Traffic is not going that fast there.
2. Even if it were, in the field the text appears clearly enough that it isn't be a problem

1. Why not? It's a freeway.
2. Someone looking for an alternate route probably isn't going to be looking for black on white regulatory signage right at the split (unless the OTM is different from the MUTCD), where it's basically useless to anyone outside of the outer lane. Why not an overhead BGS?

1.  The speed limit jumps from 100km/h to 70km/h about 100m upstream of that sign.
2.  This sign is facing eastbound traffic, and basically tells traffic how to make a U-turn to get back onto the westbound lanes of the 402.  Such a maneuver isn't exactly rocket science, even for a driver that lacks confidence.  Overheads signs are quite expensive.  I don't see this sign as a problem at all.

1. It's still a freeway, and road signs should reflect that (though the sign says 100 km/h "BEGINS" ... )
2. Fine.

The begins tab is to reflect the limit going to 100 at that point upstream of the sign. In any event, the sign is the large size that would be in place for a freeway. And having seen it in actual context, it and the advance sign are both clearly visible from even the leftmost lane there.

[hbelkins]

^^ I assumed the warning sign referred to the bridge just after the exit.

Well yeah, me too, but there's no need to put another such sign between two bridges in such close succession.

[JoePCool14]

Anyone else think that Clearview looks a bit odd? More odd than usual usage. Seems a bit thin to me...

[PHLBOS]

Anyone else think that Clearview looks a bit odd? More odd than usual usage. Seems a bit thin to me...

Thin-stroked, absolutely and the text height's too large as well.

[hbelkins]

I've seen quite a bit of that on Pennsylvania signage. Quite a bit of it on the US 22 freeway west of I-99.

[jbnv]

Somewhere west of Hammond, LA, there is a billboard on the right-hand side of the road that is in a clearing right after a long line of trees. (No picture right now; I don't remember exactly where it is but will try to find it on my way to work tomorrow.) You probably won't notice it until you are zooming right past it. It currently has an annoying Creation billboard on it, so the placement actually helps the motorists.

[kphoger]

My favorite billboards are the ones that say "You missed it, turn around at the next exit and drive five miles off the highway" or some such nonsense. Yeah, right. Put your billboard before I have to get off, why don't you? Turn around... Yeesh...

[hotdogPi]

My favorite billboards are the ones that say "You missed it, turn around at the next exit and drive five miles off the highway" or some such nonsense. Yeah, right. Put your billboard before I have to get off, why don't you? Turn around... Yeesh...

Usually those make much more sense when viewed from the other direction.

[roadman]

My favorite billboards are the ones that say "You missed it, turn around at the next exit and drive five miles off the highway" or some such nonsense. Yeah, right. Put your billboard before I have to get off, why don't you? Turn around... Yeesh...

Better still are the ones that say 'take this exit', even though they're past the exit ramp.  In all fairness, however, most of these type of billboards I've observed appear to be located "on premises", which is generally an automatic approval per current Federal and state outdoor advertising regulations for Interstates and freeways.

[Pete from Boston]

My favorite billboards are the ones that say "You missed it, turn around at the next exit and drive five miles off the highway" or some such nonsense. Yeah, right. Put your billboard before I have to get off, why don't you? Turn around... Yeesh...

Usually I find these are on bidirectional signs where one side faces traffic that still has an opportunity to exit.  I kind of admire the almost playful resourcefulness in using the other side.

[Scott5114]

Anyone else think that Clearview looks a bit odd? More odd than usual usage. Seems a bit thin to me...

Thin-stroked, absolutely and the text height's too large as well.

I think that might be signage from when Clearview was in "beta", as it were.

[cjk374]

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.546873,-92.637736,3a,75y,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1snZcmMdACZ_plLYjWSA1GaA!2e0

Almost too little too late. 

[SignGeek101]

http://goo.gl/maps/ewg7u

I want to say poor sign placement here because I think the ground mounted sign should be placed on the gantry if possible, or on a gantry further ahead. It could be a little difficult to see also; drivers are focused on the gantry, not the ground sign.