Poll
Question:
Do you like the signs mounted on the bridge?
Option 1: Yes
votes: 14
Option 2: No
votes: 5
Option 3: Don't care
votes: 17
Personally, I do not like them mounted on the bridges.
North Carolina stopped sometime in the late 90s. Although there's still many on older highways like here (https://www.google.com/maps/@35.8339927,-78.3144707,3a,25.3y,95.39h,97.95t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLJU9Rz69I02KQYmQz5PdIQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), but they are slowly fading away.
I don't know when Virginia stopped but they definitely do not mount them on the bridges anymore.
I know Nebraska, Florida (and many other states), still mount them on the bridge.
Old signs from 1994 - https://www.google.com/maps/@35.6076203,-77.438818,3a,50.1y,95.7h,89.38t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sS2YJNVFZo6hOnSqhf_MrQg!2e0!5s20190601T000000!7i13312!8i6656
Newer signs from 2019 - https://www.google.com/maps/@35.6076546,-77.4388554,3a,75y,95.7h,89.38t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sodgcb834bQj2ZFMysrErJg!2e0!5s20210601T000000!7i16384!8i8192
I'm not really sure why it would be a problem to mount signage on a bridge structure? California does mount signage sometimes where it really isn't appropriate like the off center overhead gantry on I-5 northbound approaching CA 99 near Wheeler Ridge. The sign is mounted onto the bridge carrying Wheeler Ridge Road is somewhat well known for being off angle:
https://flic.kr/p/2fHciww
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 12, 2021, 05:24:19 PM
I'm not really sure why it would be a problem to mount signage on a bridge structure? California does mount signage sometimes where it really isn't appropriate like the off center overhead gantry on I-5 northbound approaching CA 99 near Wheeler Ridge. The sign is mounted onto the bridge carrying Wheeler Ridge Road is somewhat well known for being off angle:
https://flic.kr/p/2fHciww
Ew, gross.
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 12, 2021, 06:28:27 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 12, 2021, 05:24:19 PM
I'm not really sure why it would be a problem to mount signage on a bridge structure? California does mount signage sometimes where it really isn't appropriate like the off center overhead gantry on I-5 northbound approaching CA 99 near Wheeler Ridge. The sign is mounted onto the bridge carrying Wheeler Ridge Road is somewhat well known for being off angle:
https://flic.kr/p/2fHciww
Ew, gross.
Yes, very much a vegan sign. Let's see if anyone gets that forum reference...
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 12, 2021, 06:38:59 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 12, 2021, 06:28:27 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 12, 2021, 05:24:19 PM
I'm not really sure why it would be a problem to mount signage on a bridge structure? California does mount signage sometimes where it really isn't appropriate like the off center overhead gantry on I-5 northbound approaching CA 99 near Wheeler Ridge. The sign is mounted onto the bridge carrying Wheeler Ridge Road is somewhat well known for being off angle:
https://flic.kr/p/2fHciww
Ew, gross.
Yes, very much a vegan sign. Let's see if anyone gets that forum reference...
We shall see... that's exactly my point of why I'm opposed to the signs mounted on the bridges.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 12, 2021, 05:24:19 PM
I'm not really sure why it would be a problem to mount signage on a bridge structure? California does mount signage sometimes where it really isn't appropriate like the off center overhead gantry on I-5 northbound approaching CA 99 near Wheeler Ridge. The sign is mounted onto the bridge carrying Wheeler Ridge Road is somewhat well known for being off angle:
https://flic.kr/p/2fHciww
Because it causes problems for the bridge itself, such as the drilled holes for sign mounting hardware resulting in the structure being compromised or for allowing a location that becomes easily susceptible to corrosion and other weather effects, also, tall signs can affect how the bridge handles strong winds, etc.
It's weird that CA mounts it at an angle like that, there are states that I've seen where they will include some kind of additional bracketing/hardware when the bridge is at an angle so that the sign will be at the correct angle, for example https://goo.gl/maps/miEbQKjdpUHUPMBg7 . This is in Georgia but I think Georgia is one of the states that no longer mounts signs to bridges.
Quote from: ran4sh on December 12, 2021, 06:44:43 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 12, 2021, 05:24:19 PM
I'm not really sure why it would be a problem to mount signage on a bridge structure? California does mount signage sometimes where it really isn't appropriate like the off center overhead gantry on I-5 northbound approaching CA 99 near Wheeler Ridge. The sign is mounted onto the bridge carrying Wheeler Ridge Road is somewhat well known for being off angle:
https://flic.kr/p/2fHciww
Because it causes problems for the bridge itself, such as the drilled holes for sign mounting hardware resulting in the structure being compromised or for allowing a location that becomes easily susceptible to corrosion and other weather effects, also, tall signs can affect how the bridge handles strong winds, etc.
It's weird that CA mounts it at an angle like that, there are states that I've seen where they will include some kind of additional bracketing/hardware when the bridge is at an angle so that the sign will be at the correct angle, for example https://goo.gl/maps/miEbQKjdpUHUPMBg7 . This is in Georgia but I think Georgia is one of the states that no longer mounts signs to bridges.
Here's another example.
Dan K. Moore Fwy
https://maps.app.goo.gl/un3dUJ5iW5ae18B99
Quote from: ran4sh on December 12, 2021, 06:44:43 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 12, 2021, 05:24:19 PM
I'm not really sure why it would be a problem to mount signage on a bridge structure? California does mount signage sometimes where it really isn't appropriate like the off center overhead gantry on I-5 northbound approaching CA 99 near Wheeler Ridge. The sign is mounted onto the bridge carrying Wheeler Ridge Road is somewhat well known for being off angle:
https://flic.kr/p/2fHciww
Because it causes problems for the bridge itself, such as the drilled holes for sign mounting hardware resulting in the structure being compromised or for allowing a location that becomes easily susceptible to corrosion and other weather effects, also, tall signs can affect how the bridge handles strong winds, etc.
It's weird that CA mounts it at an angle like that, there are states that I've seen where they will include some kind of additional bracketing/hardware when the bridge is at an angle so that the sign will be at the correct angle, for example https://goo.gl/maps/miEbQKjdpUHUPMBg7 . This is in Georgia but I think Georgia is one of the states that no longer mounts signs to bridges.
FWIW the sign I posted is from Caltrans District 6. Suffice to say corrosion probably isn't exactly a big issue for District 6 given the lack of precipitation.
Most bridges that are used as sign-mounting structures are designed to do so, so concerns about wind loading, the bridge being compromised, etc, are specious and spurious.
I think it's a totally acceptable practice because it's economical. It's cheaper to mount a sign on a bridge than it is to build a separate gantry. Why waste money that you don't need to waste?
Nevada DOT used to mount BGSs to bridge structures, but it seems this is no longer their practice starting about 15 years ago. I can cite cases where signage was removed from a bridge and replaced with a new sign on a sign structure instead (generally as part of another larger project).
My hunch is that they are using separate sign structures in an attempt to deter vandalism. Signs attached to bridges sometimes tend to be graffiti targets, whether the vandals just tag the back of the sign or the front face–even when the bridge itself has arched pedestrian fencing.
I can think of just three instances of overhead signage being installed on a bridge within the last 15 years. For two of them, they are interchange conversions in the Reno area where the signage is for the side road affixed to the freeway bridge, and the other is freeway pull-through signage affixed on a rural overpass–note in all instances that these are locations where pedestrians are not likely to be prevalent on the bridges.
The only
Another common problem with bridge-mounted signs: They're easier to tag. Just need to have some coordination to get your cans over the sign and start spraying the front.
An example on I-5 in Shoreline, WA: https://goo.gl/maps/YE3VhxrdzKonCBb97
I can't think of any off hand in Texas that I have seen (though that doesn't mean anything other than I haven't seen one..dunno how many there may be) but I do remember several in Louisiana when I lived there. Immediately one on IH 55 for the town of independence I believe. And there are several in and around New Orleans and Baton Rouge like Sherwood Forest Blvd on IH 12 (I think)
New Orleans has a big one: the sign for US 90/Business US 90 for superdome/Claiborne Avenue/Westbank.
CTDOT is moving away from bridge mounted signs with most replaced by single chorded trusses. However, a couple of placements in an I-84 sign replacement contract retained bridge mounted signs (eastbound Exit 36 exit now and 1 mile Exit 39 come to mind).
I think it's okay, as long as the sign is mounted on a bridge that crosses at a perfect right angle (+/-5°).
This is fine:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/4327/35584601350_ac47a15996_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Wduoeu)
IL-I-57X237AN (https://flic.kr/p/Wduoeu) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
This is not. The skew is maybe 10-15°, but that's enough to screw up readability, especially considering the right-hand curve making the skewed-left sign very difficult to read farther upstream. The skew will also screw up your lane arrow spacings, which needed to be widened by a factor of (1/sin) of the skew angle. The spacings on the APL below are too narrow.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/4534/38127060354_8a585f2e3b_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/216a9Hy)
IL-I-355X20ANG (https://flic.kr/p/216a9Hy) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
If it's done properly, angled overpasses can support a sign.
On another bad bridge example, the Garden State Parkway SB at Exit 129 did once have two signs on the CR 514 overpass for the left Turnpike ramp, and one for NJ 440 and US 9 to Woodbridge and Perth Amboy service road that both were not turned straight. It was readable to the Exit 129 motorists easily still but also seen on the NJ Turnpike NB outer roadway below it. However it works as the overhead panel for Routes 9 and 440 are so placed right before Exit 11 departing interestingly enough for US 9 and NJ 440.
I don't know if it was done on purpose or ended up being that way and became a de facto extra set of guides for the Turnpike as well, but interesting that the guide signs can control the interest of two roadways simultaneously.
Well Michigan just got done with the I-75 construction in Saginaw County where they widened it from six lanes to eight lanes between MM 148 and 150. During this reconstrucion of I-75 they rebuilt the M-46 interchange and it includes a new bridge which doesn't feature any signage on it. instead they have it mounted about 50 feet south of the bridge not on the bridge at all. So with that said I'm not sure if they still do it or not but if they do it doesn't really matter. I would say it's a good use of a bridge.
In practice, I don't believe New York still does this. There's evidence to support this on I-490 westbound:
2018 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1576311,-77.6641417,3a,23.3y,274.05h,90.37t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sgI_Nti9C-pOKKZkrRMfGDg!2e0!5s20180801T000000!7i13312!8i6656!5m1!1e1) vs.
2021 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1577276,-77.6641636,3a,75y,277.93h,91.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siRQtpMPZaZXt6n8nNCfCiw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1). There's definitely still examples out there, though;
mostly (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1446103,-77.5561126,3a,90y,86.2h,93.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH-bvkrNMQhmOlJ2-L8X76Q!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1)
older (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1374593,-77.5353827,3a,75y,306.21h,94.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxd9pxX0nGiQRCpE2ill6CA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1)
signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.2138133,-77.47576,3a,18.1y,93.47h,90.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJFavk7YbhsygwnIVQ0IFKg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1) that will hopefully move to gantries if/when they're replaced.
Quote from: roadman65 on December 14, 2021, 01:07:39 PM
If it's done properly, angled overpasses can support a sign.
Yes, take a look at my second example above to see how a sign on an angled overpass can be installed properly. It should be perpendicular to the roadway even when the overpass is angled.
Here's another sign mount with an angular bridge:
(https://i.imgur.com/yl8hmK3.png)
https://goo.gl/maps/KB3GvGo3avngmjSS7
Quote from: paulthemapguy on December 14, 2021, 12:42:35 PM
(https://live.staticflickr.com/4534/38127060354_8a585f2e3b_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/216a9Hy)
IL-I-355X20ANG (https://flic.kr/p/216a9Hy) by Paul Drives (https://www.flickr.com/photos/138603251@N02/), on Flickr
Which is weird, since the sign is offset a bit:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7859484,-88.0557484,38m/data=!3m1!1e3
Minnesota still does. MnDOT may have stopped doing it for a brief time when the concerns about bridge load management came to a head a few years ago, but appear to have resumed putting new sign installs on bridges,
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 14, 2021, 07:45:31 PM
Minnesota still does. MnDOT may have stopped doing it for a brief time when the concerns about bridge load management came to a head a few years ago, but appear to have resumed putting new sign installs on bridges,
Is it related to the I-35W bridge collapse that happened on August 1st, 2007?
A pretty high up and angled bridge mounted sign on MO 364 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.705971,-90.4788,3a,40.8y,95.03h,97.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss_DDqYTd9U6OLsx0cAfkwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
Quote from: SkyPesos on December 14, 2021, 08:19:17 PM
A pretty high up and angled bridge mounted sign on MO 364 (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.705971,-90.4788,3a,40.8y,95.03h,97.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss_DDqYTd9U6OLsx0cAfkwg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
For that, NCDOT would put a cantilever in the middle and it would be like this (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.0935926,-80.2427636,3a,66.8y,275.83h,102.75t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snBiqD6a4MREHYWSYQjgkYA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 12, 2021, 05:15:29 PM
I know Nebraska, Florida (and many other states), still mount them on the bridge.
Does Florida still mount new signs on bridges? I haven't seen a sign mounted to a newer bridge in like 10 years, and they now build sign structures right in front of new bridges on many projects.
Quote from: UCFKnights on December 15, 2021, 07:41:17 AM
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 12, 2021, 05:15:29 PM
I know Nebraska, Florida (and many other states), still mount them on the bridge.
Does Florida still mount new signs on bridges? I haven't seen a sign mounted to a newer bridge in like 10 years, and they now build sign structures right in front of new bridges on many projects.
University Pkwy
https://maps.app.goo.gl/qi1mpjV8NSieGEgt9
This interchange was rebuilt like 4 years ago so therefore they still do.
Unless something has changed VERY recently, PA will still use bridges to mount signs.
A sign mounted on a fairly new overpass on US-119 in the Indiana area (replaced between 2019 & 2020) - https://goo.gl/maps/VNeNV8WKwAwnyCpK7
They mounted these signs on the overpass @ the 31st St. bridge during the PA-28 upgrade back in 2013 - https://goo.gl/maps/ek1su9Vxvsekmptv8
South Carolina, Tennessee, and Kentucky still mount signs on bridges.
I want to say Georgia has stopped, and I believe they have also fully phased out cantilever gantries, and only use full gantries and single tall posts (which IMO only belong in the median for "Next 3 Exits" signage, and have no business being used on the outside shoulders for regular guide signage).
Quote from: wriddle082 on December 15, 2021, 07:49:18 PM
single tall posts (which IMO only belong in the median for "Next 3 Exits" signage, and have no business being used on the outside shoulders for regular guide signage).
In North Carolina, we have a few of those, which are becoming increasingly more common. And yes, they are mounted on the outside shoulders.
I don't think that Indiana put new overhead signs on the bridge, although there are still a few relics hanging out on the freeways.
EDIT: I-69 in southern Indiana is the newest highway that I've seen that put signs on a couple of newer bridges, and that was built/opened in 2012.
Michigan is all over the board. Of recent replacements I have seen some that both the previous and new signs are bridge-mounted, some that removed a sign from a bridge and put the new one on a cantilever or gantry structure, and some that eliminated the structure and mounted the new sign on a bridge.
New Hampshire definitely still mounts signs on bridges. A very high example here: https://goo.gl/maps/t8jrtLbkRJb2LkPZ7
West Virginia is moving away from bridge-based mounting, but it's not been universal. Some recent sign replacement and bridge repair projects have resulted in new sign structures being installed, but DOH has also replaced existing signs on bridges as part of the western Corridor H sign replacement project and I-79 Exit #99 reconstruction in the past year.
WVDOH used to be really big on using bridges, sometimes to the extreme. There used to be a sign for I-68 Exit #1 mounted in the bridge structure that was so high up it became hard to read: https://goo.gl/maps/KWbeMDiPLwDDJPzV6 It was replaced with a new cantilever-mounted sign as part of a sign replacement project.
When looking at some Street View pics on the new highways, it appears that Delaware, Ohio, and New Jersey have all stopped.
So I'm going to break down the list to see which states still mount the signs on the bridges and which don't
_________________________________________
28 states: 15 yes, 12 no and 1 unknown
Arizona: Yes
California: Yes
Connecticut: No
Delaware: No
Florida: Yes
Georgia: No
Illinois: Yes
Indiana: No
Kentucky: Yes
Louisiana: Yes
Maryland: No
Michigan: Yes
Minnesota: Yes
Missouri: Yes
Nebraska: Yes
Nevada: No
New Hampshire: Yes
New Jersey: No
New York: No
North Carolina: No
Ohio: No
Pennsylvania: Yes
South Carolina: Yes
Tennessee: Yes
Texas: No
Virginia: No
Washington: Yes
West Virginia: Sometimes
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 16, 2021, 02:26:38 PM
When looking at some Street View pics on the new highways, it appears that Delaware, Ohio, and New Jersey have all stopped.
So I'm going to break down the list to see which states still mount the signs on the bridges and which don't
_________________________________________
West Virginia: No
West Virginia still does in some cases. New signs have been mounted to overpasses along US 33/Corridor H in the past year.
Quote from: Bitmapped on December 18, 2021, 07:01:32 PM
Quote from: tolbs17 on December 16, 2021, 02:26:38 PM
When looking at some Street View pics on the new highways, it appears that Delaware, Ohio, and New Jersey have all stopped.
So I'm going to break down the list to see which states still mount the signs on the bridges and which don't
_________________________________________
West Virginia: No
West Virginia still does in some cases. New signs have been mounted to overpasses along US 33/Corridor H in the past year.
In that case, I'll change it to sometimes.
Maryland stopped it looks like.
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1821008,-76.8743734,3a,77.6y,213.19h,92.42t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sWbP3G6__Uf1OxMCQOQhUXQ!2e0!5s20190701T000000!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1
Utah has been moving away from bridge-mounted signs on freeways. I can't think of any new locations for bridge-mounted freeway signs recently, but if there were signs there already often times they won't have a problem replacing them. This set of bridge-mounted signs (https://goo.gl/maps/euTXxTAgUKK2hDho7), for example, was replaced in 2013 (https://goo.gl/maps/2xFZugDxKLcZeT3E8) and then again in 2017 (https://goo.gl/maps/C2Jy4Q9tx1Vp78Fx5).
Quote from: US 89 on January 15, 2022, 10:02:18 AM
Utah has been moving away from bridge-mounted signs on freeways. I can't think of any new locations for bridge-mounted freeway signs recently, but if there were signs there already often times they won't have a problem replacing them. This set of bridge-mounted signs (https://goo.gl/maps/euTXxTAgUKK2hDho7), for example, was replaced in 2013 (https://goo.gl/maps/2xFZugDxKLcZeT3E8) and then again in 2017 (https://goo.gl/maps/C2Jy4Q9tx1Vp78Fx5).
NCDOT will replace the bridge mounted signs on the same overpass unless if it's not a major highway improvement. Examples include segments of the Fayetteville bypass and the US-64/I-95 interchange.
MnDOT placed two signs at an awkward angle after some bridge and road realignment a couple years ago. The signs are logically right next to each other, which means one actually obscures the other when you're in the rightmost lane as seen here:
https://goo.gl/maps/dkFTXbfB1LNHTFaU6
Interestingly enough, a sign a little ways before this was originally on a Canadian Pacific bridge and was moved to a gantry as can be seen in Google Maps history:
https://goo.gl/maps/zvw4JDSUhurVp8dL8
I think MnDOT should just stop mounting signs on bridges.
This setup (https://goo.gl/maps/6QBWLp2MDnaeBsAX8) on I-77 in Columbia always bothers me. The bridge is at such a sharp angle, yet this is the only spot around with bridge mounted signs. classic south carolina.
Quote from: fillup420 on January 18, 2022, 07:19:02 AM
This setup (https://goo.gl/maps/6QBWLp2MDnaeBsAX8) on I-77 in Columbia always bothers me. The bridge is at such a sharp angle, yet this is the only spot around with bridge mounted signs. classic south carolina.
That's straight from the Caltrans playbook!
Quote from: roadfro on January 18, 2022, 11:06:55 AM
Quote from: fillup420 on January 18, 2022, 07:19:02 AM
This setup (https://goo.gl/maps/6QBWLp2MDnaeBsAX8) on I-77 in Columbia always bothers me. The bridge is at such a sharp angle, yet this is the only spot around with bridge mounted signs. classic south carolina.
That's straight from the Caltrans playbook!
Very Wheeler Ridge:
https://flic.kr/p/QFhTXL
^^^
Note the bridge date stamp on the left, that tells you all you need to know about Caltrans stance on mounting signs to bridges.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 18, 2022, 11:09:59 AM
Very Wheeler Ridge:
https://flic.kr/p/QFhTXL
^^^
Note the bridge date stamp on the left, that tells you all you need to know about Caltrans stance on mounting signs to bridges.
There was one thing about the older button-copy version of this sign that I don't think carried over to the current sign (at least not to the same extent).
The designers knew it would be mounted at an angle to the roadway, so the I-5 and CA-99 shields were stretched horizontally such that they looked relatively normal when viewed by a driver. The sign looked very strange if you ever did view it head-on.
I used to like NJ mounting shields to overpasses. In fact the I-280 and NJ 21 (Exit 15) reconfiguring project added NJ 21 shields on the I-280 overpass on Route 21 S Bound.
https://goo.gl/maps/PAcBSkxmieAyJdvQ7
Quote from: roadman65 on January 18, 2022, 12:05:03 PM
I used to like NJ mounting shields to overpasses. In fact the I-280 and NJ 21 (Exit 15) reconfiguring project added NJ 21 shields on the I-280 overpass on Route 21 S Bound.
https://goo.gl/maps/PAcBSkxmieAyJdvQ7
In a tight area like there I'm sure it will be done.
Quote from: tolbs17 on January 18, 2022, 12:09:47 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 18, 2022, 12:05:03 PM
I used to like NJ mounting shields to overpasses. In fact the I-280 and NJ 21 (Exit 15) reconfiguring project added NJ 21 shields on the I-280 overpass on Route 21 S Bound.
https://goo.gl/maps/PAcBSkxmieAyJdvQ7
In a tight area like there I'm sure it will be done.
Sayreville once had them on US 9 and NJ 35 on the overpass south of the former Victory Circle. SB it was NJ 35 positioned over the left lane while a U.S. 9 shield pointed down at the right lane. NB it had two US 9 shields over the left through lanes and a NJ 35 shield over the exit lane where the state designation exited the expressway there.
Just based on a quick glance around Milwaukee, and personal knowledge, I think WisDOT avoids the practice of installing BGS on bridges, though they will attach cross-street guide signs and maybe a lane ends sign still. But not always.
Here's an example from I-41/I-94 South at the Mitchell Airport Interchange.
https://goo.gl/maps/wzAbWnXmX8ZmsasZ7
IDOT and ISTHA both are very much okay with the practice, which I suspect is primarily done for cost-reduction (not a bad reason).
As for my opinion on the practice, as long as DOTs incorporate sufficient graffiti-prevention techniques where necessary (Arizona is good for doing this) and that they account for angles, especially on signs with arrows, it's fine. But I also don't care if they don't.
Quote from: GaryA on January 18, 2022, 11:47:41 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 18, 2022, 11:09:59 AM
Very Wheeler Ridge:
https://flic.kr/p/QFhTXL
^^^
Note the bridge date stamp on the left, that tells you all you need to know about Caltrans stance on mounting signs to bridges.
There was one thing about the older button-copy version of this sign that I don't think carried over to the current sign (at least not to the same extent).
The designers knew it would be mounted at an angle to the roadway, so the I-5 and CA-99 shields were stretched horizontally such that they looked relatively normal when viewed by a driver. The sign looked very strange if you ever did view it head-on.
I used to love that old 99 sign. Can't find a picture of it in my archives, though.
Quote from: GaryA on January 18, 2022, 11:47:41 AM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 18, 2022, 11:09:59 AM
Very Wheeler Ridge:
https://flic.kr/p/QFhTXL
^^^
Note the bridge date stamp on the left, that tells you all you need to know about Caltrans stance on mounting signs to bridges.
There was one thing about the older button-copy version of this sign that I don't think carried over to the current sign (at least not to the same extent).
The designers knew it would be mounted at an angle to the roadway, so the I-5 and CA-99 shields were stretched horizontally such that they looked relatively normal when viewed by a driver. The sign looked very strange if you ever did view it head-on.
Like this?
https://goo.gl/maps/CSd913ThWiPUuq5L7
Quote from: ran4sh on December 12, 2021, 06:44:43 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 12, 2021, 05:24:19 PM
I'm not really sure why it would be a problem to mount signage on a bridge structure? California does mount signage sometimes where it really isn't appropriate like the off center overhead gantry on I-5 northbound approaching CA 99 near Wheeler Ridge. The sign is mounted onto the bridge carrying Wheeler Ridge Road is somewhat well known for being off angle:
https://flic.kr/p/2fHciww
Because it causes problems for the bridge itself, such as the drilled holes for sign mounting hardware resulting in the structure being compromised or for allowing a location that becomes easily susceptible to corrosion and other weather effects, also, tall signs can affect how the bridge handles strong winds, etc.
It's weird that CA mounts it at an angle like that, there are states that I've seen where they will include some kind of additional bracketing/hardware when the bridge is at an angle so that the sign will be at the correct angle, for example https://goo.gl/maps/miEbQKjdpUHUPMBg7 . This is in Georgia but I think Georgia is one of the states that no longer mounts signs to bridges.
It really depends on the agency. The San Francisco Bay Area's district does adjust the mounting location to so the sign is at the correct angle: https://www.google.com/maps/@37.4038183,-121.9066151,3a,75y,254.65h,78.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss9e1kipf650NpkgUhA2r7w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on January 18, 2022, 11:09:59 AM
Quote from: roadfro on January 18, 2022, 11:06:55 AM
Quote from: fillup420 on January 18, 2022, 07:19:02 AM
This setup (https://goo.gl/maps/6QBWLp2MDnaeBsAX8) on I-77 in Columbia always bothers me. The bridge is at such a sharp angle, yet this is the only spot around with bridge mounted signs. classic south carolina.
That's straight from the Caltrans playbook!
Very Wheeler Ridge:
https://flic.kr/p/QFhTXL
^^^
Note the bridge date stamp on the left, that tells you all you need to know about Caltrans stance on mounting signs to bridges.
Might be a whoosh moment here: the date stamp says 2010 but it appears that was painted over the old date stamps?
The bridge style looks too old to be built in 2010 too.
^^ The contractor sometimes put in the year of rehabilitation.
Quote from: DRMan on December 16, 2021, 08:28:24 AM
New Hampshire definitely still mounts signs on bridges. A very high example here: https://goo.gl/maps/t8jrtLbkRJb2LkPZ7
NHDOT does still mounts BGSs on bridges, albeit rarely these days, as they have been either preferring gantries or ground mounted signs. Here's a more recent one at Exit 4 Southbound (2020-08-23):
(https://i.ibb.co/FW5qPng/Screenshot-2020-08-23-at-23-18-32.png) (https://ibb.co/pPfrmnJ)
In Maine, the Maine Turnpike Authority does still mount BGSs on bridges, like
this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6215814,-70.3550659,3a,64.4y,49.75h,96.78t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sGhZwLFkd66DWl1sIfHyWqQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DGhZwLFkd66DWl1sIfHyWqQ%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D159.11887%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) one on Exit 44 and
this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6250214,-70.3517668,3a,23.9y,55.37h,90.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sn0t0-IKLd0G3zKXosdpTog!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) ½ Mile one for Exit 45, but as far as MaineDOT, I think they prefer ground mounts or gantries. Exit 22 (Southbound
old (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.8647129,-70.1079269,3a,75y,214.24h,92.06t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s1eVh4WQvin6Dfj7J8a5P1w!2e0!5s20130801T000000!7i13312!8i6656),
new (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.864999,-70.1076148,3a,75y,220.2h,93.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJj_gq9XqXMfeJwjsb2pypw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)), (Northbound
old (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.8640879,-70.1081303,3a,28.1y,30.74h,97.04t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0LKEcETKoT_vc2wqNKD8Mw!2e0!5s20130801T000000!7i13312!8i6656),
new (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.8637575,-70.1083531,3a,21.3y,39.78h,92.49t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1stb6Uca_fUBchrL2Fkt7I4g!2e0!5s20190501T000000!7i16384!8i8192)) on I-295 are prime examples of such conversions.
These also count. No longer practiced in North Carolina, Virginia, and more states I'm sure.
https://goo.gl/maps/uKcUgME9ZE4wjqa56
https://goo.gl/maps/AVkfCoWZe7vosQm88
https://goo.gl/maps/8vHZkmTm7ZAnVAUf8 (And as you can tell, more signs were attached to this bridge). Here are the faded spots: https://goo.gl/maps/UE9iRfEZ3pbn4hUj6
I'm guessing they put those razor blades around the sign to prevent vandalism to it. Like it getting graffiti.
Christopher Columbus Transcontinental Hwy
https://maps.app.goo.gl/irqQy8xEmH4mqybr9
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 04, 2022, 02:18:56 AM
Christopher Columbus Transcontinental Hwy
https://maps.app.goo.gl/irqQy8xEmH4mqybr9
This freeway has a number that's much more well known than the name you apparently thought is the primary designation of the road...
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on March 04, 2022, 04:44:38 AM
Quote from: tolbs17 on March 04, 2022, 02:18:56 AM
Christopher Columbus Transcontinental Hwy
https://maps.app.goo.gl/irqQy8xEmH4mqybr9
This freeway has a number that's much more well known than the name you apparently thought is the primary designation of the road...
I think there was a thread once in Pacific Southwest where we talked about this being the only freeway name in California not being signed anywhere.
I may have been imagining this, but I really do remember a Columbus sign just past the McClure Tunnel back in the day.