Signs With Design Errors

[Alps]

White border around a yellow background is a design error, but that's reaching.

[PurdueBill]

Is the off-center "EXIT ONLY" on the left sign the major design error?  (Maybe also nit-picky but possibly avoidable)

[roadfro]

Going I-35 South by going onto I-35 north...

I've seen this sign a number of times, and I fail to see the design error here.  I-35 North goes with I-80 East, which you are already on.  I-35 South is an exit from I-80 East at this point.

The I-235 panel is missing a "Left" plaque in the exit tab, and does not accurately reflect that the middle lane is an option lane.

I think the arrows used on the 80/35 panel seem to be out of place. Yes, the "through" route curves at this point, so the up arrows are appropriate--it just seems at odds with the "right lane" message on the 35 south panel. They could have simply referred to I-35 on the sign (as they did with the advance diagrammatic sign upstream) and had a supplemental sign stating the southbound traffic should keep right.

I think the overall sign isn't in error, it's just not the best design.

[vtk]

Is there a green gap between the yellow panels and the white border? If so, then the continuous white border is not an error. 

But I do think it's problematic to use a yellow panel for the "right lane" action message on the I-35 south sign.  That would sort of make sense if one was already on I-35 south and all through traffic must get in the right lane (kind of a converse of "exit only") but that's not the case here.  A simple white on green action message of "right lane" or, even better, "keep right", would be sufficient.

Also, the middle lane is an option for I-235.  I know it's not the current standard, but I'd want to see a white-on-green down arrow in the bottom right corner of the I-235 guide sign.  Or a full Arrow-Per-Lane sign might be reasonable here, retaining the I-35 South panel with a white-on-green action message as I described mounted just to the right of the APL.

[1995hoo]

Is the off-center "EXIT ONLY" on the left sign the major design error?  (Maybe also nit-picky but possibly avoidable)

It looks to me like they did that to ensure the arrow would line up correctly whilst also allowing them to keep the sign edges flush with each other. The alternatives are to space out the signs or to have the arrow not line up over the proper lane.

[ET21]

Going I-35 South by going onto I-35 north...

There's only one error here, and it's you.

I guess you didn't read the explanation on this page above this post 

[Alps]

Going I-35 South by going onto I-35 north...

There's only one error here, and it's you.

I guess you didn't read the explanation on this page above this post 

I guess you don't know what a design error is.

[agentsteel53]

I don't find it to be a bad sign assembly.  not great - and it does omit the fact that the #2 lane is an option lane - but it's really tough to sign two splits in one intersection.

I can figure out, quite fast, that I need to get to the left for 235E, stay in the middle or use the right lane for 80E/35N, and get over to the far right for 35S.

that "speed limit 55", though.  something there, somewhere, has a design error if a freeway junction needs to be slowed down like that. 

[hbelkins]

that "speed limit 55", though.  something there, somewhere, has a design error if a freeway junction needs to be slowed down like that.

Probably not for the junction per se, but because you're entering the Des Moines metro area.

[jeffandnicole]

that "speed limit 55", though.  something there, somewhere, has a design error if a freeway junction needs to be slowed down like that.

Could also have been 55 mph before that point as well, and the flags serve to point out it's still 55 mph.

Or...the road was designed when the NMSL was in effect,  the designers decided to go with a design speed of 60 mph (which would thus be posted 55 mph).

[Brandon]

I don't find it to be a bad sign assembly.  not great - and it does omit the fact that the #2 lane is an option lane - but it's really tough to sign two splits in one intersection.

I can figure out, quite fast, that I need to get to the left for 235E, stay in the middle or use the right lane for 80E/35N, and get over to the far right for 35S.

that "speed limit 55", though.  something there, somewhere, has a design error if a freeway junction needs to be slowed down like that. 

It's for I-235, but I agree about it being a major design error.  But then again, Iowa seems to think all urban areas need speed limits of 65 mph or slower (I-35/80 is 65 mph around Des Moines - it could handle 70 mph easily).

[roadman65]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/9144318929/
Not exactly a design error, but did not want to open a new thread just for this one sign and its almost close to being a design flaw as this assembly should have been another type for its use.  This here is, I think, supposed to have a double headed arrow beneath it as US 17 & 92 do indeed cross at this intersection in Lake Mary, FL.

[deathtopumpkins]

That's not a design error. That's an arrow that fell off.

[burgess87]

This one might qualify . . . street blade sign in yellow and Arial Black, it looks like?

[Scott5114]

Helvetica. Note the curved leg on the capital R. On Arial and its variants, the leg comes straight out.

Also, nobody noticed one of the tittles in "Minneapolis" appears to be trying to escape on that Des Moines sign...

[ET21]

Going I-35 South by going onto I-35 north...

There's only one error here, and it's you.

I guess you didn't read the explanation on this page above this post 

I guess you don't know what a design error is.

*shrug* 

[kphoger]

that "speed limit 55", though.  something there, somewhere, has a design error if a freeway junction needs to be slowed down like that.

Could also have been 55 mph before that point as well, and the flags serve to point out it's still 55 mph.

Or...the road was designed when the NMSL was in effect,  the designers decided to go with a design speed of 60 mph (which would thus be posted 55 mph).

Iowa uses the flags (like any other place I've seen them) at the beginning of speed zones, not in the middle of them.  Google Street View comfirms that the speed limit for westbound traffic at that point goes up to 65 mph.

[1995hoo]

This is on private property in Alexandria, Virginia, and I'm not sure it's a "design error" so much as it is a misplaced sign, but I found it amusing and this thread seemed like the most appropriate place for it. I was looking east on Green Street and the white truck in the distance was heading south on Washington Street (VA-400).

[Zeffy]

This is on private property in Alexandria, Virginia, and I'm not sure it's a "design error" so much as it is a misplaced sign, but I found it amusing and this thread seemed like the most appropriate place for it. I was looking east on Green Street and the white truck in the distance was heading south on Washington Street (VA-400).

What, you mean to tell me I can't drive on that? But parking is that way!

[Billy F 1988]

I would say a placement fault. If the sign behind it leads up to the parking, that DO NOT ENTER sign should not be placed there except if there is an exit lane on that same driveway that has an entry lane going in to the establishment and an exit lane going out.

[Alps]

Helvetica. Note the curved leg on the capital R. On Arial and its variants, the leg comes straight out.

Also, nobody noticed one of the tittles in "Minneapolis" appears to be trying to escape on that Des Moines sign...

You mean "Mìnneapolis."

[kphoger]

Helvetica. Note the curved leg on the capital R. On Arial and its variants, the leg comes straight out.

Also, nobody noticed one of the tittles in "Minneapolis" appears to be trying to escape on that Des Moines sign...

You mean "Mìnneapolis."

M^·ınneapolis

[KEK Inc.]

Yellow street blades aren't really a design error...

[vtk]

I'm pretty sure the newest MUTCD doesn't allow yellow street blades.  Even under older manuals when it was allowed, it wasn't a good aesthetic choice.

[Brandon]

I'm pretty sure the newest MUTCD doesn't allow yellow street blades.  Even under older manuals when it was allowed, it wasn't a good aesthetic choice.

Yellow street blades are always used, IIRC, with a warning sign in the MUTCD.