Adventures in Utah signage

[Quillz]

I indeed found another photo of the so called compromise design, and it does look nice. From what I've seen so far, UDOT has some nice looking BGS.

[CL]

Where'd you find that other photo? I'd love to see it.

__________________________________

Here's all three designs (early 2000s, 2009, and 2011/"compromise") side-by-side.




And here's the same route (though only the early 2000s and 2011 designs), so one can do a completely apples-to-apples comparison.




And here's Utah's first arrow-per-lane (or whatever it's called) diagrammatic, installed at a new DDI in northern Utah County.

[Quillz]

Yeah, I agree with you for sure on the "compromise" design being the best. That SR-154 shield is very nice looking.

[Ian]

I definitely like the UT 154 shield on the right better. But why does it need that many screws to mount it onto the pole? I know that there are those horizontal bars on the back of it, but I don't think it needs that many screws.

[CL]

Early Christmas present:

A state-name, non-neutered shield has been posted in Salt Lake City. Interstate 80 eastbound just east of Redwood Road. I should be able to get a photo tomorrow. It's not a '57-spec shield or anything, but... wow.

[agentsteel53]

I've eaten my hat.

I have purchased an entire hat factory and am now purchasing and eating one week of their manufacturing capability.

[CL]

Ladies and gentlemen, if you wish to follow Jake's lead then please prepare your ready-to-eat hats.

[corco]

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

HOLY SHIT

[J N Winkler]

Huge huge digits, small small state name:  not the work of true believers.

[NE2]

True believers would put ZION instead.

[corco]

Deseret!

[agentsteel53]

at this time, I have a physiological condition involving blood rushing to a highly specific anatomical area.

[CL]

I'm glad that you all appreciate the magnitude of this occurrence. Utah–a state that has been wholly devoid of non-neutered shields for some five years–has done something that I thought I would never again see in my lifetime. Now, I use "Utah" loosely; I suspect that it was some contractor using odd specs that installed this. As Jonathan mentioned, the dimensions to this shield are way off: numbers are huge (typical Utah style) and the state name is perched in the space between the "8" and the "0" (aka "Massachusetts" would overlap with the numerals if placed). Also, shields were installed this week in another location as well, and they were neutered.

Well, I still consider this a wicked thing, especially considering that for the past decade or more it's been either a vast improbability or an impossibility to find a non-neutered shield. Here's hoping that whoever this contractor is continues to make this "mistake."

Well, here's more photos:



So much for any hope that one shield variant would prevail. This week, that left-most SR-171 shield was installed, along with several others. Who's the idiot that keeps stipulating that series B be used for a three-digit width shield?




Second arrow-per-lane diagrammatic in the state.





The top image is 2005-spec signage; the bottom is 2011-spec. Differences abound, including exit tabs and–most lamentably–the lack of overhead lighting. UDOT has officially decided that they aren't going to illuminate their overhead signage anymore. Just another side effect of the inhibited economy.

[Quillz]

Isn't overhead lighting unnecessary on BGS that are retroreflective, though?

[CL]

Well, yeah. That's the rationale the UDOT is giving. But overhead lighting is a pretty nice thing nonetheless, especially where there is no street lighting.

[Scott5114]

This thread is pretty much the zenith of the AARoads forum.

[CL]

This thread is pretty much the zenith of the AARoads forum.

Hey. That's great of you. I really enjoy the exchange of thought that takes place on this thread, and on the entire forum. Here's to more zenith-like days.

It looks like Utah is making a wholesale switch to arrow-per-lane diagrammatics. Here's plans for BGSs to be installed at an auxiliary lane addition in Davis County (the county north of Salt Lake):





I'm not sure what to think.

[NE2]

If we can't have our V [EXIT V ONLY] that's not half bad as a replacement. Though there's no reason the bottom row can't be moved up, placing the tip of the up arrow to the left of the distance.

[Brandon]

Second arrow-per-lane diagrammatic in the state.

Nice sign, but there's a bit much green space under the I-215 South part.  Maybe a destination should go there?
I do like the "Left Only" for the left turn arrows on the sign.

[Scott5114]

Ehhhh... I don't know about those sign plans that were just posted. They're not too clear. In the left lane you have a splitting arrow; sure, the lane goes to the right, but where does going straight put you? It almost points up to the same destination that turning indicates! Sure it's parsable with common sense but we all know how well that works for some people...

[CL]

Yeah, that was the first thing that popped into my mind as well. However, it amazes me how many people I drive with don't realize that if an arrow isn't emblazoned with "exit only," that it's an option exit lane. Maybe this'll help. Plus, throwing any desire of practicality away, I like how European it looks.

[agentsteel53]

there are now 10 new state-named shields in Utah.  all on the same segment of I-80 (between the western 215 and the 15 junctions).  that reassurance, and then three sets of green signs for 80/15, each of which has 80/15 and 15 shields, so nine altogether.

all the shields are the same style, with the huge number and tiny state name.

[OracleUsr]

Well, yeah. That's the rationale the UDOT is giving. But overhead lighting is a pretty nice thing nonetheless, especially where there is no street lighting.

I've seen those retroreflective signs in the dead of night on an unlit highway, such as I-85 in Henderson, NC at US 1 South.  Believe me, the sheeting makes the sign stand out just fine.

[CL]

there are now 10 new state-named shields in Utah.  all on the same segment of I-80 (between the western 215 and the 15 junctions).  that reassurance, and then three sets of green signs for 80/15, each of which has 80/15 and 15 shields, so nine altogether.

all the shields are the same style, with the huge number and tiny state name.

This is true. I just about peed my pants when I saw them. Here's the disappointing thing, though. There is maybe one set of BGSs that are made with standards in mind; the rest have something wrong with them in terms of following specs.

[CL]

More non-neutered shields have been posted, folks! I-215, around the Union Park Ave and Highland Dr exits. They're just signs posted on temporary posts, however (directing motorists through a detour), so I don't know if they'll stick around. They have basically the same specs as the I-80 shield posted above (huge numerals, etc), except on a three-digit shield. I hope to get some photos tomorrow.