I was wondering if anyone had any info on the type of traffic signals the city of Phoenix tends to install. I saw a Facebook post referencing over 1100 traffic signals installed within city limits. Most of the newer ones tend to have straight mast arms, as opposed to the ADOT-style signals with curved mast arms seen mostly everywhere else in Arizona.
Also, Phoenix is apparently still using Clearview for its illuminated street blades. Most other cities in the Phoenix area stopped using it after the interim approval was rescinded.
I think Phoenix has been using the same kind of lighted signs on their traffic signals for as long as I can remember (late 1990s).
Quote from: Roadwarriors79 on February 28, 2018, 05:35:48 PM
I think Phoenix has been using the same kind of lighted signs on their traffic signals for as long as I can remember (late 1990s).
The interim approval for Clearview wasn't until 2003, so it couldn't have been any earlier than 2003, unless the faceplates were changed out with ones in Clearview.
And actually, some intersections are now using slim LED lighted signs.
Regarding Phoenix using Clearview: Do local street signs have to meet FHWA font standards (or just state highways)?
I ask, because there are some suuuuuuuuper ugly non-compliant fonts in California:
(https://i.imgur.com/oWlxMwG.png)
Quote from: i-215 on March 07, 2018, 02:35:58 AM
Regarding Phoenix using Clearview: Do local street signs have to meet FHWA font standards (or just state highways)?
All roads open to public travel are supposed to follow the MUTCD (or approved state version in substantial conformance to the national version). This includes using the FHWA font on street signs.
Quote from: roadfro on March 07, 2018, 12:37:49 PM
Quote from: i-215 on March 07, 2018, 02:35:58 AM
Regarding Phoenix using Clearview: Do local street signs have to meet FHWA font standards (or just state highways)?
All roads open to public travel are supposed to follow the MUTCD (or approved state version in substantial conformance to the national version). This includes using the FHWA font on street signs.
In addition, the 2009 MUTCD limited the background colors on street name signs to green, blue, brown, or white, with white text if the background is green, blue, or brown, or with black text if the background is white.
Quote from: roadfro on March 07, 2018, 12:37:49 PM
Quote from: i-215 on March 07, 2018, 02:35:58 AM
Regarding Phoenix using Clearview: Do local street signs have to meet FHWA font standards (or just state highways)?
All roads open to public travel are supposed to follow the MUTCD (or approved state version in substantial conformance to the national version). This includes using the FHWA font on street signs.
But unless I'm mistaken, the FHWA generally turns a blind-eye to street blades. Not officially of course, but street blades with custom fonts have been around for a
long time, and I don't recall the FHWA ever having taken issue with it.
Quote from: Roadwarriors79 on February 28, 2018, 05:35:48 PM
I think Phoenix has been using the same kind of lighted signs on their traffic signals for as long as I can remember (late 1990s).
I think the illuminated signs at major intersections (with the City of Phoenix logo on them) go back to the late 1970s.
Their street blades are finally being updated as they get replaced -- still black letters on a white blade, but with a larger, mixed-case font. They started about 5 years ago or so, but it's been a gradual, as-need basis. The old style signs that are still used in most of the city were first installed in around 1960.
Quote from: jakeroot on March 07, 2018, 03:40:48 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 07, 2018, 12:37:49 PM
Quote from: i-215 on March 07, 2018, 02:35:58 AM
Regarding Phoenix using Clearview: Do local street signs have to meet FHWA font standards (or just state highways)?
All roads open to public travel are supposed to follow the MUTCD (or approved state version in substantial conformance to the national version). This includes using the FHWA font on street signs.
But unless I'm mistaken, the FHWA generally turns a blind-eye to street blades. Not officially of course, but street blades with custom fonts have been around for a long time, and I don't recall the FHWA ever having taken issue with it.
I don't know that they turn a "blind eye" to street blades or any other MUTCD violations–it's hard to imagine that someone at FHWA would say "Hey City X, your street name signs don't use the FHWA fonts, but we'll let it slide." There's not really a easily viable mechanism for FHWA to police/enforce MUTCD standards at the local level.
Quote from: roadfro on March 07, 2018, 07:55:04 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on March 07, 2018, 03:40:48 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 07, 2018, 12:37:49 PM
Quote from: i-215 on March 07, 2018, 02:35:58 AM
Regarding Phoenix using Clearview: Do local street signs have to meet FHWA font standards (or just state highways)?
All roads open to public travel are supposed to follow the MUTCD (or approved state version in substantial conformance to the national version). This includes using the FHWA font on street signs.
But unless I'm mistaken, the FHWA generally turns a blind-eye to street blades. Not officially of course, but street blades with custom fonts have been around for a long time, and I don't recall the FHWA ever having taken issue with it.
I don't know that they turn a "blind eye" to street blades or any other MUTCD violations–it's hard to imagine that someone at FHWA would say "Hey City X, your street name signs don't use the FHWA fonts, but we'll let it slide." There's not really a easily viable mechanism for FHWA to police/enforce MUTCD standards at the local level.
Well that's kind of what I meant by "not enforced". The difficulty level of enforcing street blade rules on every agency would be so immensely high, that they indirectly take a "no s*** given" approach. However, enforcing the rules (if they truly wished to do so) wouldn't be impossible. Difficult, yes, but if the FHWA truly cared about street blade legibility, they would have discovered an enforcement method by now. Instead, they've mostly taken a backseat.
Pfft. Most federal-aid projects do not require full FHWA oversight and full review by the FHWA area engineer. They would slow every state's capital program way down to do this kind of enforcement just to go after MUTCD "violations" on street blades. Tax money not well spent to give them the resources to do so.
Quote from: Rothman on March 07, 2018, 09:27:09 PM
Pfft. Most federal-aid projects do not require full FHWA oversight and full review by the FHWA area engineer. They would slow every state's capital program way down to do this kind of enforcement just to go after MUTCD "violations" on street blades. Tax money not well spent to give them the resources to do so.
I think we can both agree that the FHWA is aware of at least some level of disobedience on the part of local agencies. Last I checked, DC used Helvetica on its street blades. It's hard to believe FHWA employees don't notice. So, assuming that they
do notice, but choose to take no action, is effectively turning a blind eye.
Think of it like this: until recently, very few police services enforced "keep right" laws (in states that have them -- WA for example). To the best of my knowledge, there was little-to-no enforcement because "keep right" rules generally don't (or didn't) represent a hazard worthy of their attention. Nevermind the level of difficulty in enforcing the rules. But local police services have found a way to begin budgeting for "keep right" enforcement for various reasons. Until recently, you could say that they didn't care. They turned a "blind eye" to the issue because it wasn't worth the effort. It's hard to argue against the merits of keeping right (reducing road rage), but it wasn't a major issue. It's the same thing with street blades. The FHWA is aware of at least some level of disobedience, but takes no action because it isn't worth their time or money. They could find a way if they really wanted to. But they don't bother because...who gives a shit?
Quote from: KeithE4Phx on March 07, 2018, 05:52:32 PM
Quote from: Roadwarriors79 on February 28, 2018, 05:35:48 PM
I think Phoenix has been using the same kind of lighted signs on their traffic signals for as long as I can remember (late 1990s).
I think the illuminated signs at major intersections (with the City of Phoenix logo on them) go back to the late 1970s.
Their street blades are finally being updated as they get replaced -- still black letters on a white blade, but with a larger, mixed-case font. They started about 5 years ago or so, but it's been a gradual, as-need basis. The old style signs that are still used in most of the city were first installed in around 1960.
And I do know that some of the early runs of the new style white street blades were also in Clearview, but this was eventually corrected.
Quote from: Rothman on March 07, 2018, 09:27:09 PM
Pfft. Most federal-aid projects do not require full FHWA oversight and full review by the FHWA area engineer. They would slow every state's capital program way down to do this kind of enforcement just to go after MUTCD "violations" on street blades.
Then the respective state DOT's, who
are supposed to be keeping an eye on the local federal aid projects via their local roads/local systems/federal-aid departments, should be doing better.
Quote from: Revive 755 on March 09, 2018, 05:38:09 PM
Quote from: Rothman on March 07, 2018, 09:27:09 PM
Pfft. Most federal-aid projects do not require full FHWA oversight and full review by the FHWA area engineer. They would slow every state's capital program way down to do this kind of enforcement just to go after MUTCD "violations" on street blades.
Then the respective state DOT's, who are supposed to be keeping an eye on the local federal aid projects via their local roads/local systems/federal-aid departments, should be doing better.
There is also the possibility that the blades are being installed without the use of federal funding.
And, you still have the issue of whether State DOT engineers want to go to the mat with a local or possibly an MPO over a mere font decision. I guess I see State DOTs being more hands on than FHWA is on state oversight jobs, but wouldn't be surprised if a local really stood their ground that something would slip through in some cases.
When the city of Phoenix experimented with Clearview street blades, it looks like they were mostly installed along Indian School Rd and 35th Ave within the city limits.
Quote from: roadfro on March 07, 2018, 12:37:49 PM
Quote from: i-215 on March 07, 2018, 02:35:58 AM
Regarding Phoenix using Clearview: Do local street signs have to meet FHWA font standards (or just state highways)?
All roads open to public travel are supposed to follow the MUTCD (or approved state version in substantial conformance to the national version). This includes using the FHWA font on street signs.
Hmmm... here's a small sample of some street blades in my area that do not use the FHWA font...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.markyville.com%2Faaroads%2FcaBladeMenagerie.png&hash=f4f21c6aff46b3073528244134a811434627f62b)
Starting in the upper left and going clockwise: Monte Sereno, Los Altos, Cupertino, Los Gatos.
As far as I know, the Monte Sereno, Los Gatos and Cupertino examples are the current standard in their respective communities and do meet letter height and reflectivity standards. The Los Altos blade does not meet the letter height requirement nor is it mixed case. In the city of Cupertino, the big street name signs mounted on traffic signal mast arms use the same blade color and typeface (Bookman) as the smaller street blades.
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 03, 2018, 12:28:29 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 07, 2018, 12:37:49 PM
Quote from: i-215 on March 07, 2018, 02:35:58 AM
Regarding Phoenix using Clearview: Do local street signs have to meet FHWA font standards (or just state highways)?
All roads open to public travel are supposed to follow the MUTCD (or approved state version in substantial conformance to the national version). This includes using the FHWA font on street signs.
Hmmm... here's a small sample of some street blades in my area that do not use the FHWA font...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.markyville.com%2Faaroads%2FcaBladeMenagerie.png&hash=f4f21c6aff46b3073528244134a811434627f62b)
Starting in the upper left and going clockwise: Monte Sereno, Los Altos, Cupertino, Los Gatos.
As far as I know, the Monte Sereno, Los Gatos and Cupertino examples are the current standard in their respective communities and do meet letter height and reflectivity standards. The Los Altos blade does not meet the letter height requirement nor is it mixed case. In the city of Cupertino, the big street name signs mounted on traffic signal mast arms use the same blade color and typeface (Bookman) as the smaller street blades.
Blue and Brown backgrounds do not have minimum established retroreflectivity values in the 2009 MUTCD, however, since then there have been studies on recommended values that will probably be standardized in the next edition of the MUTCD.
Quote from: Pink Jazz on April 03, 2018, 03:33:26 PM
Blue and Brown backgrounds do not have minimum established retroreflectivity values in the 2009 MUTCD, however, since then there have been studies on recommended values that will probably be standardized in the next edition of the MUTCD.
I would think if black were allowed, brown certainly ought to be.
Quote from: jakeroot on April 03, 2018, 09:15:42 PM
Quote from: Pink Jazz on April 03, 2018, 03:33:26 PM
Blue and Brown backgrounds do not have minimum established retroreflectivity values in the 2009 MUTCD, however, since then there have been studies on recommended values that will probably be standardized in the next edition of the MUTCD.
I would think if black were allowed, brown certainly ought to be.
Actually, black backgrounds are not allowed for street blades per the 2009 MUTCD. A draft version of the 2009 MUTCD was supposed to include them, but it was dropped in the final rule due to black sheeting being non-retroreflective. ATSSA actually had concerns with allowing blue and brown backgrounds due to the lack of studies at the time for recommended retroreflectivity values, suggesting that they should not be allowed as background colors for street blades, but the FHWA disagreed, letting DOTs do their own judgment on retroreflectivity of those background colors, plus mentioning that retroreflectivity values for those colors will likely be added in a future edition of the MUTCD.