AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: 605 Sign Replacement Project  (Read 750 times)

Occidental Tourist

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 271
  • Last Login: May 18, 2017, 12:53:48 AM
605 Sign Replacement Project
« on: April 19, 2017, 12:40:43 PM »

Spot all the errors in this picture:



If I weren't used to it from District 7 by now, I'd be flabbergasted.
Logged

DTComposer

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 654
  • Location: San Jose
  • Last Login: Today at 12:02:18 AM
Re: 605 Sign Replacement Project
« Reply #1 on: April 20, 2017, 01:50:24 PM »

I'm also no longer flabbergasted by District 7 at this point, but I do find it curious that, with their tendency to remove freeway names from new signage, that not only did they leave the name, but it's the same incorrect (or incomplete) name as before!
Logged

Occidental Tourist

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 271
  • Last Login: May 18, 2017, 12:53:48 AM
Re: 605 Sign Replacement Project
« Reply #2 on: April 20, 2017, 04:43:53 PM »

For the whole replacement project, particularly around the 91 interchange, they've made no attempt to update the signs to reflect lane reconstruction that has occurred since the original button copy signs that are now being replaced were first installed.

For example, in the portion of the interchange depicted in the above picture, about 20 years ago a second transition lane was added for the movement to the 91 north.  It is visible on the far right of the picture. 

For the northbound 605 to 91 interchange, an option lane for the 91 west was removed and the freeway was restriped to have dedicated exit lanes to the eastbound and westbound 91, yet the signage was not updated then or now to reflect these "Exit Only" lanes.

For the southbound 605 to 91 interchange, an option lane for the 91 east movement was added many years ago, yet the approach signs were never changed to reflect this option lane, and the replacement signs ape the old, incorrect signage that was there.

The worst part about this is that almost all of the prior button copy signs in this area were installed in the 90's as part of the conclusion of the 105 interchange construction.  They were in excellent condition.  So if District 7 wasn't even going to update the signs to reflect the various changes to the roadway, there was hardly a reason to replace the existing button copy.
Logged

Occidental Tourist

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 271
  • Last Login: May 18, 2017, 12:53:48 AM
Re: 605 Sign Replacement Project
« Reply #3 on: April 20, 2017, 04:44:40 PM »

I'm also no longer flabbergasted by District 7 at this point, but I do find it curious that, with their tendency to remove freeway names from new signage, that not only did they leave the name, but it's the same incorrect (or incomplete) name as before!

They also left "Artesia Freeway" on the southbound 605 signs.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1542
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: May 23, 2017, 04:38:20 PM
Re: 605 Sign Replacement Project
« Reply #4 on: April 20, 2017, 06:04:02 PM »

Spot all the errors in this picture:



If I weren't used to it from District 7 by now, I'd be flabbergasted.
I'm also no longer flabbergasted by District 7 at this point, but I do find it curious that, with their tendency to remove freeway names from new signage, that not only did they leave the name, but it's the same incorrect (or incomplete) name as before!

They also left "Artesia Freeway" on the southbound 605 signs.

San Gabriel (minus the "River") Freeway on 605, Artesia on the 91 -- when D7 does a fubar, they do it completely!  This is one instance in which the less the better -- if they just signed the numbers & direction with appropriate directional arrows for both freeways it would be an improvement!  Since both facilities traverse suburbs that are -- at least to anyone who doesn't reside there -- indistinguishable from one another, control cities and/or named freeways aren't going to be of particular help to navigation!
Logged

MarkF

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 116
  • Location: Orange County, California
  • Last Login: May 20, 2017, 12:20:10 AM
Re: 605 Sign Replacement Project
« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2017, 01:47:45 AM »

I thought the 605 just went to THRU TRAFFIC. :)
Logged

Occidental Tourist

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 271
  • Last Login: May 18, 2017, 12:53:48 AM
Re: 605 Sign Replacement Project
« Reply #6 on: April 21, 2017, 02:02:47 AM »

Since both facilities traverse suburbs that are -- at least to anyone who doesn't reside there -- indistinguishable from one another, control cities and/or named freeways aren't going to be of particular help to navigation!

The suburbs are indistinguishable to those who live here as well.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1542
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: May 23, 2017, 04:38:20 PM
Re: 605 Sign Replacement Project
« Reply #7 on: April 21, 2017, 03:58:15 AM »

Since both facilities traverse suburbs that are -- at least to anyone who doesn't reside there -- indistinguishable from one another, control cities and/or named freeways aren't going to be of particular help to navigation!

The suburbs are indistinguishable to those who live here as well.

Yeah, I know -- lived down there for about 60% of my life, all in various 'burbs.  Just trying to be a bit diplomatic about the whole thing.
Logged

Occidental Tourist

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 271
  • Last Login: May 18, 2017, 12:53:48 AM
Re: 605 Sign Replacement Project
« Reply #8 on: April 23, 2017, 10:54:11 AM »

Yeah, I know -- lived down there for about 60% of my life, all in various 'burbs.  Just trying to be a bit diplomatic about the whole thing.

I can appreciate that.  Diplomacy can be difficult to find on message boards.  Like trying to find the exit for Artesia off the 91.
Logged

mrsman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1486
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Silver Spring, MD
  • Last Login: May 23, 2017, 10:59:22 PM
Re: 605 Sign Replacement Project
« Reply #9 on: April 23, 2017, 03:33:56 PM »

Yeah, I know -- lived down there for about 60% of my life, all in various 'burbs.  Just trying to be a bit diplomatic about the whole thing.

I can appreciate that.  Diplomacy can be difficult to find on message boards.  Like trying to find the exit for Artesia off the 91.

Another victim of the message loading requirements.  The old signs would have listed a city (or two) for each exit and it was not confusing.

And it is true that many of the cities down there are sort of indistinguishable.  Known in some contexts as "Gateway cities".

That being said, I believe that Riverside should be signed as the control for 91 East, regardless of the merits for displaying controls in the other directions.  (I like control cities and would put them here, even though historically this interchange had none.  My choices: 91 W Gardena, 605 S Seal Beach, 605 N Duarte)
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1542
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: May 23, 2017, 04:38:20 PM
Re: 605 Sign Replacement Project
« Reply #10 on: April 23, 2017, 08:47:42 PM »

That being said, I believe that Riverside should be signed as the control for 91 East, regardless of the merits for displaying controls in the other directions.  (I like control cities and would put them here, even though historically this interchange had none.  My choices: 91 W Gardena, 605 S Seal Beach, 605 N Duarte)

Wholly agree with Riverside being a consistent control city for CA 91 east of I-5; from its functional terminus at I-110 to I-5, I'd use Anaheim.  Westbound on 91 from its I-215/CA60 terminus in Riverside I'd also use Anaheim as far west as CA 57; west of there Gardena would in fact suffice (unless one really wants to go "straight into Compton!).  605's tricky as its alignment along the San Gabriel riverbed places it in between most of the "gateway" cities in the area.  SB, I'd use Long Beach from its northern reaches all the way down to CA 91; south of there I'd reference "TO I-405/CA 22".  NB's even more difficult; so far, no San Gabriel Valley city (save Pasadena, if considered as such) has warranted inclusion anywhere as a control city.  It would be a matter of "take your pick" of any one of several 'burbs.  Azusa might be a "least bad" option -- at least folks have probably heard of it, and it's just east of the north end of 605.  Unfortunately, there's not a lot with which to work here!   
Logged

DTComposer

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 654
  • Location: San Jose
  • Last Login: Today at 12:02:18 AM
Re: 605 Sign Replacement Project
« Reply #11 on: April 25, 2017, 12:31:28 AM »

That being said, I believe that Riverside should be signed as the control for 91 East, regardless of the merits for displaying controls in the other directions.  (I like control cities and would put them here, even though historically this interchange had none.  My choices: 91 W Gardena, 605 S Seal Beach, 605 N Duarte)

Wholly agree with Riverside being a consistent control city for CA 91 east of I-5; from its functional terminus at I-110 to I-5, I'd use Anaheim.  Westbound on 91 from its I-215/CA60 terminus in Riverside I'd also use Anaheim as far west as CA 57; west of there Gardena would in fact suffice (unless one really wants to go "straight into Compton!).

I believe in the use of two control cities whenever message loading isn't an issue.
For CA-91 Westbound I would do the following.
From CA-60/I-215: Downtown Riverside, Anaheim
From Mission Inn Avenue: Corona, Anaheim
From Main Street: Anaheim, Long Beach
From Harbor Blvd/Lemon Blvd: Cerritos, Long Beach
From Bloomfield Avenue: Long Beach, Gardena
From I-710: Gardena, Redondo Beach

605's tricky as its alignment along the San Gabriel riverbed places it in between most of the "gateway" cities in the area.  SB, I'd use Long Beach from its northern reaches all the way down to CA 91; south of there I'd reference "TO I-405/CA 22".

I'm OK with Long Beach SB from I-210 (especially if the I-710 connection is never completed), but only if Long Beach is then signed as a control onto WB CA-91 (see above). Otherwise, you're directed towards a control city which is then dropped before you reach the city itself.

That said, when I went home to downtown Long Beach from I-605, I usually found it faster to cut over on I-105 to I-710 rather than CA-91.

(I would also make the control on SB I-710 Downtown Long Beach starting at CA-91).

NB's even more difficult; so far, no San Gabriel Valley city (save Pasadena, if considered as such) has warranted inclusion anywhere as a control city.  It would be a matter of "take your pick" of any one of several 'burbs.  Azusa might be a "least bad" option -- at least folks have probably heard of it, and it's just east of the north end of 605.  Unfortunately, there's not a lot with which to work here!   

I would use Whittier and San Gabriel Valley until the Whittier Blvd exit, then just San Gabriel Valley until CA-60, then To I-10/I-210.

Logged

SeriesE

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 33
  • Location: CA
  • Last Login: May 16, 2017, 03:10:20 AM
Re: 605 Sign Replacement Project
« Reply #12 on: April 25, 2017, 04:50:36 AM »

For example, in the portion of the interchange depicted in the above picture, about 20 years ago a second transition lane was added for the movement to the 91 north.  It is visible on the far right of the picture. 

The second lane from CA-91 West to I-605 North begins after the fork, so the sign is technically correct. :)
Though the sign gantry should be moved east a bit so it's before the fork, per current standards.
Logged

joshI5

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12
  • Location: California
  • Last Login: May 22, 2017, 10:02:31 PM
Re: 605 Sign Replacement Project
« Reply #13 on: April 27, 2017, 01:16:47 AM »

Glad to hear at the very least there was a sign replacement project for this freeway. As far as I remember, and as much as I appreciate button copy, this freeway had some of the most deteriorated, illegible signage I've seen in the entire L.A. area....I've been hoping for a major replacement for a long time. As I haven't been down there in quite a while, how much did the project cover? Are all the old button copy signs replaced?
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.