News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered at https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33904.0
Corrected several already and appreciate your patience as we work through the rest.

Main Menu

Caltrans External Exit Tabs & 240 Inch Tall Overhead Signs

Started by jeffe, April 18, 2021, 03:48:13 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Bobby5280

#200


That's just too much crap on one overhead gantry. I mean, damn. One of the most basic rules in sign design is you include only so many elements in a layout. If there are too many pieces of information to read then whole layout can turn into visual static that is actually easier to ignore.

BTW, the old overhead sign it replaced wasn't any better either.

First, that whole thing should have been divided up into at least three separate signs. The major exit messages for US-101 South to Los Angeles and US-101 North to San Francisco should be alone on one overhead sign. The US-101 HOV left exit message should be on another pole structure, in the median at left and in a different location. The exit sign for Great Oaks Blvd could have been handled with a ground mounted sign off to the right. The same goes for Bernal Road.

The other thing I really can't stand about these signs: the sign panels aren't big enough for their messages. The layout elements are crammed in there however they can fit. That's all because they're trying to make everything work on one single overhead gantry structure. They can't stick "North" to the right of the US-101 shield on the San Francisco panel because there is no room for it. So they just omitted the element. The old sign had "North" listed above the US-101 shield, but I think that might violate current design rules.

In general Caltrans uses sign panels that aren't tall enough on lots of sign structures. Aside from the importance of negative space around the lettering and other elements the cramped layouts can have portions literally blocked by features on the sign structure, like those flood lights on catwalks mounted under an overhead sign panel.

I guess there is some kind of philosophy at work with these sign panels. It appears they have some rules against really big or tall green sign panels. Because maybe that would be ugly? Unfortunately so many freeway signs in California just look terrible because the sign layouts look cramped and disorganized.


US 89

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 28, 2022, 08:50:35 PM
It's like watching an elderly family member who just learned how to use Microsoft Word proudly showing off her first ever church bulletin, clip art and all. Grandma finally figured out how to use the exit tab function of SignCAD and now she wants to use it on everything...

To be fair, I've seen this other places too, so it isn't just a California weirdness. Utah's HOT lane on I-15 is full of this kind of thing.

jakeroot

#202
Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 28, 2022, 11:15:40 PM
I guess there is some kind of philosophy at work with these sign panels. It appears they have some rules against really big or tall green sign panels. Because maybe that would be ugly? Unfortunately so many freeway signs in California just look terrible because the sign layouts look cramped and disorganized.

California has previously had strict wind-loading requirements which meant, at max, 120-inch sign panels. I think many signs were shorter, can't confirm though.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 28, 2022, 11:15:40 PM
The old sign had "North" listed above the US-101 shield, but I think that might violate current design rules.

WOAH WOAH hold up, what?! I've never heard this.

Quote from: US 89 on November 28, 2022, 11:31:32 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 28, 2022, 08:50:35 PM
It's like watching an elderly family member who just learned how to use Microsoft Word proudly showing off her first ever church bulletin, clip art and all. Grandma finally figured out how to use the exit tab function of SignCAD and now she wants to use it on everything...

To be fair, I've seen this other places too, so it isn't just a California weirdness. Utah's HOT lane on I-15 is full of this kind of thing.

Washington State too. Any left exit without an inset left exit message (eg Northbound I-5 Exit 167 for Mercer Street in Seattle) got a left exit tab. This resulted in almost every HOV sign having a LEFT tab. It looks insanely ridiculous, especially since WSDOT does not use external exit tabs, so now all these single-panel signs have an extra LEFT tab on them.

Scott5114

California also has their ridiculous "all sign panels on a gantry must be the same size" policy (in the button copy era it was always 90"), which doesn't do them any favors.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

on_wisconsin

Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2022, 03:24:27 AMWashington State too. Any left exit without an inset left exit message (eg Northbound I-5 Exit 167 for Mercer Street in Seattle) got a left exit tab.
But wouldn't this be the exact situation where the MUTCD calls for using a LEFT tab...
"Speed does not kill, suddenly becoming stationary... that's what gets you" - Jeremy Clarkson

abqtraveler

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 29, 2022, 04:48:39 AM
California also has their ridiculous "all sign panels on a gantry must be the same size" policy (in the button copy era it was always 90"), which doesn't do them any favors.
That's just a waste of materials and taxpayer money, particularly for signs with short street or destination names.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

roadfro

Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2022, 03:24:27 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 28, 2022, 11:15:40 PM
The old sign had "North" listed above the US-101 shield, but I think that might violate current design rules.

WOAH WOAH hold up, what?! I've never heard this.

I've not heard anything to this effect.

Quote from: abqtraveler on November 29, 2022, 09:31:02 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on November 29, 2022, 04:48:39 AM
California also has their ridiculous "all sign panels on a gantry must be the same size" policy (in the button copy era it was always 90"), which doesn't do them any favors.
That's just a waste of materials and taxpayer money, particularly for signs with short street or destination names.

More often than not, it was a conservation of materials. Sign legends and layouts were often crammed to fit the 90" or 120" height (whatever the truss and wind loading standards were) across the gantry when some of the signs could've been designed taller with adequate legend spacing/padding. Caltrans was not afraid to use shorter signs across the gantry (especially on two-sign gantries at an exit direction location) if they could make it work.
Roadfro - AARoads Pacific Southwest moderator since 2010, Nevada roadgeek since 1983.

Bobby5280

Quote from: jakerootWOAH WOAH hold up, what?! I've never heard this.

I can't quote anything specific in the MUTCD, but listing the cardinal direction to the right of a highway marker on a big green sign seems like a rule. I can't recall seeing any cardinal directions listed above (or below) a route shield on any new big green signs. That might explain why "North" is missing on that US-101 to San Franciso sign panel. There is physically enough space on that panel for "North" above the US-101 shield. They just chose not to place the word there.

Quote from: Scott5114California also has their ridiculous "all sign panels on a gantry must be the same size" policy (in the button copy era it was always 90"), which doesn't do them any favors.

It really doesn't help when they choose a common height for all panels that isn't tall enough for the messages.

It looks like they're using a one size fits all width for the exit tab panels. The panels in the photo are a little too wide for "Exit 1A" messages; they look like they would accomodate an "Exit 299B" style message. BTW, I just hate that Left Exit tab design with "left" in a yellow box. I would just make the whole tab yellow so "left exit" can work as a proper phrase.

Quote from: abqtravelerThat's just a waste of materials and taxpayer money, particularly for signs with short street or destination names.

In Caltrans case they seem to be doing things on the cheap, which means specifying a shorter common height for all sign panels on the gantry and constraining panel widths too. I'm used to seeing too much copy crammed into an inadequate sized panel or space when it involves commercial signs for businesses. Highway signs should be expected to uphold some kind of consistent standard.

ClassicHasClass

QuoteMore often than not, it was a conservation of materials. Sign legends and layouts were often crammed to fit the 90" or 120" height (whatever the truss and wind loading standards were) across the gantry when some of the signs could've been designed taller with adequate legend spacing/padding.

And then there's "short skirt" things like this:

https://goo.gl/maps/cj2nTNomjcMaKiZ37

SeriesE

Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 29, 2022, 01:56:13 PM
It looks like they're using a one size fits all width for the exit tab panels. The panels in the photo are a little too wide for "Exit 1A" messages; they look like they would accomodate an "Exit 299B" style message. BTW, I just hate that Left Exit tab design with "left" in a yellow box. I would just make the whole tab yellow so "left exit" can work as a proper phrase.

Unless someone can measure the panel size and prove otherwise, that seems to be the spec as defined in the federal MUTCD.

I do agree with you the tabs are too wide. Just next state over, the Nevada spec exit tabs look much better because there's no excessive padding.

jakeroot

Quote from: on_wisconsin on November 29, 2022, 04:53:15 AM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2022, 03:24:27 AMWashington State too. Any left exit without an inset left exit message (eg Northbound I-5 Exit 167 for Mercer Street in Seattle) got a left exit tab.
But wouldn't this be the exact situation where the MUTCD calls for using a LEFT tab...

WSDOT doesn't seem to do external LEFT tabs unless the exit doesn't have a number, or it was added after the sign was already made. Exit signs in WA are all inset and centered, so the design I linked to is in-keeping with design practices (MUTCD be-damned).

jakeroot

Quote from: roadfro on November 29, 2022, 01:14:32 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2022, 03:24:27 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 28, 2022, 11:15:40 PM
The old sign had "North" listed above the US-101 shield, but I think that might violate current design rules.

WOAH WOAH hold up, what?! I've never heard this.

I've not heard anything to this effect.

*breathes sighs of relief*

Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 29, 2022, 01:56:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2022, 03:24:27 AM
WOAH WOAH hold up, what?! I've never heard this.

I can't quote anything specific in the MUTCD, but listing the cardinal direction to the right of a highway marker on a big green sign seems like a rule. I can't recall seeing any cardinal directions listed above (or below) a route shield on any new big green signs. That might explain why "North" is missing on that US-101 to San Franciso sign panel. There is physically enough space on that panel for "North" above the US-101 shield. They just chose not to place the word there.

I've never heard of the cardinal direction placement being any more than a judgement based on panel size and proximity of nearby legend.

This decently new sign in Tacoma, WA has both adjacent and "stacked" cardinal directions: https://goo.gl/maps/vRyESjAJQhVXnsHk6

WSDOT overall has a lot of new signs with "stacked" cardinal directions.

SeriesE

Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2022, 07:11:59 PM
Quote from: roadfro on November 29, 2022, 01:14:32 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2022, 03:24:27 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 28, 2022, 11:15:40 PM
The old sign had "North" listed above the US-101 shield, but I think that might violate current design rules.

WOAH WOAH hold up, what?! I've never heard this.

I've not heard anything to this effect.

*breathes sighs of relief*

Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 29, 2022, 01:56:13 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on November 29, 2022, 03:24:27 AM
WOAH WOAH hold up, what?! I've never heard this.

I can't quote anything specific in the MUTCD, but listing the cardinal direction to the right of a highway marker on a big green sign seems like a rule. I can't recall seeing any cardinal directions listed above (or below) a route shield on any new big green signs. That might explain why "North" is missing on that US-101 to San Franciso sign panel. There is physically enough space on that panel for "North" above the US-101 shield. They just chose not to place the word there.

I've never heard of the cardinal direction placement being any more than a judgement based on panel size and proximity of nearby legend.

This decently new sign in Tacoma, WA has both adjacent and "stacked" cardinal directions: https://goo.gl/maps/vRyESjAJQhVXnsHk6

WSDOT overall has a lot of new signs with "stacked" cardinal directions.

I think it might be something more mundane like they forgot to put it in the new sign or they chose to not put it in because both US-101 directions can be accessed via the exit

Bobby5280

Quote from: ClassicHasClassAnd then there's "short skirt" things like this:

https://goo.gl/maps/cj2nTNomjcMaKiZ37

That overhead gantry does look pretty ridiculous. The HOV 2+ panel is the only thing that looks acceptable. But the choice to have the bottom edges of the sign panels positioned a few feet above the catwalk level is an admission those catwalks and external flood lamps do obstruct sign messages.

With Caltrans shifting to green panels covered with type III high intensity reflective sheeting the external flood lights and catwalks would no longer be necessary.

Scott5114

Quote from: SeriesE on November 29, 2022, 06:25:22 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 29, 2022, 01:56:13 PM
It looks like they're using a one size fits all width for the exit tab panels. The panels in the photo are a little too wide for "Exit 1A" messages; they look like they would accomodate an "Exit 299B" style message. BTW, I just hate that Left Exit tab design with "left" in a yellow box. I would just make the whole tab yellow so "left exit" can work as a proper phrase.

Unless someone can measure the panel size and prove otherwise, that seems to be the spec as defined in the federal MUTCD.

I do agree with you the tabs are too wide. Just next state over, the Nevada spec exit tabs look much better because there's no excessive padding.

Yes and no. That is a federal spec tab...but the federal spec includes a number of different tab widths to accommodate different exit number widths. In this case, Caltrans seems to be using one of the wider ones when a narrower one would do.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

bootmii

Quote from: Scott5114 on March 17, 2022, 12:30:47 PM
The MUTCD requires exit numbers on all freeways, full stop. So eventually Caltrans will be required to add them, the same way they were obliged to fix the exit tabs. It's only a matter of when FHWA decides to show their teeth on that particular provision of the MUTCD.
Or what, they lose federal funding that CA 33 never got in the first place?
Born again roadgeek from California.

bootmii

Quote from: myosh_tino on August 19, 2022, 08:55:57 PM
Quote from: roadfro on August 19, 2022, 11:33:35 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on August 19, 2022, 09:20:17 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 17, 2022, 12:30:47 PM
The MUTCD requires exit numbers on all freeways, full stop. So eventually Caltrans will be required to add them, the same way they were obliged to fix the exit tabs. It's only a matter of when FHWA decides to show their teeth on that particular provision of the MUTCD.
With that said, I'm curious as to if or when the FHWA will require CALTRANS to start installing standard mileposts on its highways in lieu of the current county postmile system the state currently uses. I recall that there are stretches of CA-58 and CA-14 in the Mojave area that use the green mileposts we're all familiar with, but those are the only two stretches of road I've seen them on in California.
I seem to recall CalTrans also has MUTCD-style standard milepost signs on US 6.


Not sure about US 6 but the green mileposts on CA-58 were removed in 2016 at the request of the local Caltrans district.  IIRC the reason was they were too confusing for local law enforcement and the CHP when it came to locating incidents on the highway.

But then in late 2020, these appeared on a 3.5 mile stretch of CA-17 from the Santa Clara/Santa Cruz county line to just before the Lexington Reservoir...



Link to that particular discussion: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=27944.0

If you're gonna use that sign, don't put 0 at the county line. If you hadn't told me, I would have thought that sign was in southern Scotts Valley.
Born again roadgeek from California.

bootmii

Quote from: SeriesE on August 24, 2022, 02:54:08 PM
Quote from: joshI5 on August 24, 2022, 01:38:50 PM


Exhibit A of why I don't like the excess padding in MUTCD spec exit tabs. The minimum width of the sign is much larger. When the sign gets too narrow, the tab is going to be as wide as the regular sign, so that the visual hint of the left/right exit tabs won't work.

At least with the older California-spec tabs (when mounted separately), the sign can be much narrower before the same issue shows up.
That one is also noticeably off-center to the left without being aligned to either edge of the sign.
Born again roadgeek from California.

kkt

Quote from: kphoger on September 01, 2022, 02:55:11 PM
Am I the only one who doesn't care about the alignment of the exit tab?  Doesn't matter one bit to me.

I like the ones that spell out "right" or "left" so I know if it's one of those annoying exits where I have to get over way ahead.

kkt

Quote from: jakeroot on September 03, 2022, 11:23:17 PM
When 99.5% of your freeway exits on the right, there is really nothing to be gained from justified exit tabs. The half dozen left exits can have those "LEFT"  plaques to the left of "EXIT" .

I get why the FHWA is mental about this. Some states have a ridiculous number of left exits. Washington is not one of those states.

I still like to know for sure if I'm coming up to one of the 1/2 of 1%.  How hard it is to spell it out either way?

bootmii

Quote from: Scott5114 on November 29, 2022, 10:27:05 PM
Quote from: SeriesE on November 29, 2022, 06:25:22 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on November 29, 2022, 01:56:13 PM
It looks like they're using a one size fits all width for the exit tab panels. The panels in the photo are a little too wide for "Exit 1A" messages; they look like they would accomodate an "Exit 299B" style message. BTW, I just hate that Left Exit tab design with "left" in a yellow box. I would just make the whole tab yellow so "left exit" can work as a proper phrase.

Unless someone can measure the panel size and prove otherwise, that seems to be the spec as defined in the federal MUTCD.

I do agree with you the tabs are too wide. Just next state over, the Nevada spec exit tabs look much better because there's no excessive padding.

Yes and no. That is a federal spec tab...but the federal spec includes a number of different tab widths to accommodate different exit number widths. In this case, Caltrans seems to be using one of the wider ones when a narrower one would do.
I'd probably use the narrowest one up to 9C/99 and one more digit than FMUTCD on the other widths if I worked in Caltrans' sign department
Born again roadgeek from California.

vdeane

Quote from: bootmii on December 04, 2022, 02:41:06 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on March 17, 2022, 12:30:47 PM
The MUTCD requires exit numbers on all freeways, full stop. So eventually Caltrans will be required to add them, the same way they were obliged to fix the exit tabs. It's only a matter of when FHWA decides to show their teeth on that particular provision of the MUTCD.
Or what, they lose federal funding that CA 33 never got in the first place?
Just because something isn't an interstate doesn't mean it doesn't get federal funding.  The freeway part of CA 33 is on the NHS, and the remainder is all federal aid eligible.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

jakeroot

Quote from: kkt on December 04, 2022, 03:04:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 03, 2022, 11:23:17 PM
When 99.5% of your freeway exits on the right, there is really nothing to be gained from justified exit tabs. The half dozen left exits can have those "LEFT"  plaques to the left of "EXIT" .

I get why the FHWA is mental about this. Some states have a ridiculous number of left exits. Washington is not one of those states.

I still like to know for sure if I'm coming up to one of the 1/2 of 1%.  How hard it is to spell it out either way?

I'm just saying that they don't need to scream it at you. A "LEFT"  legend against a yellow background should be sufficient no matter if it's above or adjacent to the "EXIT"  legend.

roadfro

Quote from: jakeroot on December 04, 2022, 11:03:30 PM
Quote from: kkt on December 04, 2022, 03:04:55 PM
Quote from: jakeroot on September 03, 2022, 11:23:17 PM
When 99.5% of your freeway exits on the right, there is really nothing to be gained from justified exit tabs. The half dozen left exits can have those "LEFT"  plaques to the left of "EXIT" .

I get why the FHWA is mental about this. Some states have a ridiculous number of left exits. Washington is not one of those states.

I still like to know for sure if I'm coming up to one of the 1/2 of 1%.  How hard it is to spell it out either way?

I'm just saying that they don't need to scream it at you. A "LEFT"  legend against a yellow background should be sufficient no matter if it's above or adjacent to the "EXIT"  legend.

I agree with this. There's really no need for a two-line exit tab. A left-aligned one-line exit tab with yellow "LEFT" panel before the word "EXIT" would convey the same information with less wasted sign area.
Roadfro - AARoads Pacific Southwest moderator since 2010, Nevada roadgeek since 1983.

Scott5114

I would imagine the reason they went with a two-line tab is because, with a one line tab, it is too easy to get into a situation where the tab is wider than the main panel is. (LEFT EXIT 149A ... Jones)
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef



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.