Wisconsin is moving towards putting route signs all on one panel (directional, JCT, Arrows etc). I have examples below.
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1538/24943842421_1d9845da81_k_d.jpg)
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1555/24669504039_9d01478d92_k_d.jpg)
Where there would normally be gaps, WISDOT places black panels. I was wondering if any other states are using assemblies such as these and what you think of these signs?
This is all WSDOT does now, except, for the most part, interstate re-assurance markers (LGS's are the preferred method for directing traffic to freeways, though uni-signs with more typical arrows are plentiful). There are a couple of different styles, depending on the region:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FMJ7oNWR.jpg&hash=17f1a3b498c37cfdfde58426e6dd82f8eed7e0fa)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FNKqdG01.png&hash=d19ef22d24f2b75e130840eee591c3d941fe3336)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FdvcNFT3.jpg&hash=a1ec142bc0c45b5411d247a9f158b9cdf959f0a4)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FLp81stwh.jpg&hash=e24030b0def28110fe3fb5f17b49887026c6e65d)
I like WisDOTs unisigns. They are pleasant to the eye and are overall better quality. However, they aren't really necessary if it's just a simply reassurance marker on an interstate.
iPhone
Honestly, I don't particularly like them. I saw them a pretty fair bit when I lived in Maryland, where they were used exclusively at signalized intersections (like this one) (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1921724,-77.2427296,3a,75y,310.69h,87.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sgoCBAtdTuLaYlis-6rN1iw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).
IMO, if a unisign is desired, I think it looks much better as an LGS, as in jakeroot's third and fourth examples above.
Unisigns join bubblers on the list of similarities between Wisconsin and Rhode Island.
(https://i.imgur.com/YAP2l58.png)
Those are all water fountains.
I know NMDOT District 3 in recent years has been installing more green background unisigns. They are very common on the freeways, and more recently it appears they are being installed on state routes on surface streets as well.
Virginia went through a period of time in the 90s where they used unsigns. Most of what I saw was in southern parts of the state and the Petersburg area:
(https://www.aaroads.com/mid-atlantic/virginia001/us-001_sb_460b_wb_app_va-226.jpg)
New Hampshire is another state that does a variant of unisigns, placing signs for overlaps and junctions within small green signs:
(https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_hampshire089/i-089_sb_exit_017_01.jpg)
Iowa's rapid replacement of signs at various interchanges across the state with Clearview resulted in most junction assemblies and shields posted at on-ramps with small guide signs (similar to NH).
(https://www.aaroads.com/midwest/iowa999/cr-f12_eb_app_i-380.jpg)
Delaware also briefly used unsigns in the 1990s/early 2000s, mostly in the Middletown and Odessa area:
(https://www.aaroads.com/mid-atlantic/delaware300/us-301_sb_at_de-015_299_22.jpg)
Alex beat me to it on Virginia and New Hampshire.
I've seen a few scattered versions in Kentucky, but they're a rarity and an anomaly for sure.
North Carolina also uses them occasionally on interstates where there are concurrencies with other routes. I've seen them most often in the Greensboro area.
Virginia's foray into unisigns was mainly in District 4 and goes back to the early-70s at least (1972 photo of Franklin St just east of I-95 below). District 4 replacement signs are not all unisigns but District 8 (roughly the Shenandoah Valley) is slowly introducing them including interstate signage...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vahighways.com%2Fmapscans%2Fagnes5-33-60-360close.jpg&hash=ba2b323aa9d3f66768849412665bc1327436b689)
Mike
Loooooong ago, at some point PA used unisigns in gantries. This (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Walnut+St+Bridge,+Harrisburg,+PA+17101/@40.2508147,-76.8927405,3a,15.2y,49.58h,97.14t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s94cS_ja-8zq9aioGqF1qcw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D94cS_ja-8zq9aioGqF1qcw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D6.6120777%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x89c8c10ed09861cd:0xe744e9d9d56cc16f) for example shows a left (or right?) arrow and TO US 11/15 on the back of the left sign. The other sign which is barely visible shows TO I-83 and a right arrow (or left?).
Ontario sometimes does, but I've only seen them at junctions:
https://goo.gl/maps/GGqUnWutwFt
https://goo.gl/maps/eeF5jTwmc1H2
I believe I've seen it in their traffic manual, so it might be standard there. But for reassurance markers, I've never seen them anywhere.
Unisigns? Don't you mean "RIDOT signs"?
Quote from: cl94 on February 15, 2016, 06:34:07 PM
Unisigns? Don't you mean "RIDOT signs"?
In the Midwest, they're "WisDOT signs". Wisconsin has been using them for at least 20 years, even for interstate shields.
Indiana doesn't use them often, but here's one (sorry for the blurry GSV): https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4228843,-85.5512269,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZ1uoYjeIP0xdbANEFhLgGQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4228843,-85.5512269,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZ1uoYjeIP0xdbANEFhLgGQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Quote from: theline on February 15, 2016, 06:51:27 PM
Indiana doesn't use them often, but here's one (sorry for the blurry GSV): https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4228843,-85.5512269,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZ1uoYjeIP0xdbANEFhLgGQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4228843,-85.5512269,3a,75y,90h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sZ1uoYjeIP0xdbANEFhLgGQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
The IN 22 interchange with I-69 has those as well (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.4804684,-85.5476047,3a,23.7y,315.22h,88.3t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sIPkoRIfVpH0vzlBBCY5UHg!2e0), with US 35 entering/leaving I-69 so some arrows go different ways.
About the water fountain, it was very common in school north of Boston growing up to hear at least a significant minority talk about the bubblah to get a drink of watah.
Quote from: PurdueBill on February 15, 2016, 07:07:39 PM
About the water fountain, it was very common in school north of Boston growing up to hear at least a significant minority talk about the bubblah to get a drink of watah.
Growing up outside of Boston in the 1960s and early 1970s, we used to call the water fountains in elementary school "bubblers".
Do these signs here in Huntsville count as a "unisign" or a single panel sign?
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.719672,-86.5920988,3a,29.6y,351.32h,90.8t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sgtlGl0Q7fMnmlnz_XD_-Og!2e0
Philly has some as well.
Newer example (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9547621,-75.1826323,3a,75y,132.9h,75.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm-M4cAQ7qi-fOFpWJ4zH0A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) near 30th St. Station.
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 16, 2016, 01:18:39 PM
Philly has some as well.
Newer example (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9547621,-75.1826323,3a,75y,132.9h,75.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm-M4cAQ7qi-fOFpWJ4zH0A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) near 30th St. Station.
These are not only new(ish), there was nothing preceding them. There were literally no signs whatsoever in University City about how to get onto 76 when I went to college there. So, I'm just thankful they were put up at all.
Quote from: Brandon on February 15, 2016, 06:45:52 PM
Quote from: cl94 on February 15, 2016, 06:34:07 PM
Unisigns? Don't you mean "RIDOT signs"?
In the Midwest, they're "WisDOT signs". Wisconsin has been using them for at least 20 years, even for interstate shields.
Can confirm. I try to get photos of individual route shields, and that is impossible in the state of Wisconsin (frustrating for me). Even simple reassurance markers are composite sign faces. So I have to cheat and just crop the directional label out of the photo to get an image of a shield. https://www.google.com/maps/@44.2865828,-90.8421072,3a,75y,228.79h,83.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sk5z1p0ayon0iTvC_4WdAwg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
But at least it's a nice economical way to create larger sign assemblies.
https://www.google.com/maps/@44.2949829,-90.8477579,3a,26.5y,109.51h,87.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sESAEDFp2MpL2a6NTT-9kGA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Quote from: cl94 on February 15, 2016, 06:34:07 PM
Unisigns? Don't you mean "RIDOT signs"?
RIDOT signs have white backgrounds, not black.
VDOT has been installing new unisigns in places, mainly on concurrent routes. A few new ones have popped up at some intersections (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.6488599,-77.4027097,3a,30y,16.78h,89.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sq2fk0jpzEbPg1hjUKpSfng!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) on US 301/VA 2 in Hanover County, and this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.520445,-77.3027114,3a,75y,189.54h,86.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1spiSS60yTbpTfUBs446OTCQ!2e0!5s20150701T000000!7i13312!8i6656) where VA 33 joins US 60 and VA 156 in Henrico County - all of these were individual shields in 2014. It seems they may be looking into this as a more cost-effective way of signing concurrencies rather than using individual shields, banners, and arrows on a sign tree.
Quote from: WillWeaverRVA on February 16, 2016, 03:57:05 PM
Quote from: cl94 on February 15, 2016, 06:34:07 PM
Unisigns? Don't you mean "RIDOT signs"?
RIDOT signs have white backgrounds, not black.
VDOT has been installing new unisigns in places, mainly on concurrent routes. A few new ones have popped up at some intersections (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.6488599,-77.4027097,3a,30y,16.78h,89.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sq2fk0jpzEbPg1hjUKpSfng!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) on US 301/VA 2 in Hanover County, and this one (https://www.google.com/maps/@37.520445,-77.3027114,3a,75y,189.54h,86.89t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1spiSS60yTbpTfUBs446OTCQ!2e0!5s20150701T000000!7i13312!8i6656) where VA 33 joins US 60 and VA 156 in Henrico County - all of these were individual shields in 2014. It seems they may be looking into this as a more cost-effective way of signing concurrencies rather than using individual shields, banners, and arrows on a sign tree.
Rhode Island is moving away from the unisign anyway.
They are rare in CT, but not unknown. On US 44 in Winchester there's a "Junction [183][8]" sign, green, that long ago was "JCT [8][183]", black:
https://goo.gl/maps/yT4AbinC4vj
In Ohio, ODOT has a psuedo-unisign sometimes used at intersections with US and state routes to show the cardinal directions: https://goo.gl/maps/zotDbw2XFD92
Here's a good Rhode Island example. I can deal with them unless they start using rogue fonts...that's when things get ugly.
https://goo.gl/maps/jyTdGmY6BWT2
They may be different items, but up here they have the same name. No amount of arguing is going to change that fact.
Northbound on New Hampshire Avenue NW in DC between 20 Street and Dupont Circle. This isn't on Street View yet. Picture taken this afternoon.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2FC243DE13-A3F8-4CFF-88B4-D895AEC13B93_zpsufawbwiu.jpg&hash=9295c20c17cb4468ae3c7553e7c34e412f44958a)
Philly loves their unisigns. You can find them all over the city in various forms although this one with the green backdrop is the most common:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9744877,-75.194897,3a,17.9y,37.39h,87.21t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soeTEeuquIncSLm2zJrvAmQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1
This one's rare in that it actually acknowledges a pair of surface level US highways that go through the city, something that doesn't happen often.
This thing is a unisign:
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1545/25134001166_f781935d8b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Ei1jTG)Ugly, Erroneous Shield (https://flic.kr/p/Ei1jTG) by freebrickproductions (https://www.flickr.com/photos/96431468@N06/), on Flickr
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 29, 2016, 01:48:16 PM
Northbound on New Hampshire Avenue NW in DC between 20 Street and Dupont Circle. This isn't on Street View yet. Picture taken this afternoon.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2FC243DE13-A3F8-4CFF-88B4-D895AEC13B93_zpsufawbwiu.jpg&hash=9295c20c17cb4468ae3c7553e7c34e412f44958a)
This seems odd. IIRC, the current routing of US 29 through DC is Whitehurst Fwy - K Street-11 Street-RI Ave-6th-Florida-Georgia. This sign would seem to support an old routing of US 29 via Whitehurst Fwy - K Street - NH Ave - 16th - Alaska - Georgia.
The first reassurance shield on VA 145 westbound is a unisign. The distance sign wasn't there when I checked it out last week.
https://goo.gl/maps/N6jX613VjhG2
Quote from: Takumi on March 06, 2016, 10:10:31 AM
The first reassurance shield on VA 145 westbound is a unisign. The distance sign wasn't there when I checked it out last week.
https://goo.gl/maps/N6jX613VjhG2
There's one just behind the streetview car:
https://goo.gl/maps/o6GP4282K342
Quote from: mrsman on March 06, 2016, 06:50:50 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on February 29, 2016, 01:48:16 PM
Northbound on New Hampshire Avenue NW in DC between 20 Street and Dupont Circle. This isn't on Street View yet. Picture taken this afternoon.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi31.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fc378%2F1995hoo%2FRoad%2520sign%2520pictures%2FC243DE13-A3F8-4CFF-88B4-D895AEC13B93_zpsufawbwiu.jpg&hash=9295c20c17cb4468ae3c7553e7c34e412f44958a)
This seems odd. IIRC, the current routing of US 29 through DC is Whitehurst Fwy - K Street-11 Street-RI Ave-6th-Florida-Georgia. This sign would seem to support an old routing of US 29 via Whitehurst Fwy - K Street - NH Ave - 16th - Alaska - Georgia.
Yeah, I thought instead of "North" it should say "To." Setting that aside, on the whole it's one of the better-looking unisigns I've seen.
I've seen them a few times in Louisiana in construction signage (see below). I think I've seen a unisign in normal signage somewhere, but have no idea where.
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3748/19385940704_e9610b55de_n.jpg)
Texas has some small green signs for JUNCTION and TO (https://www.google.com/maps/@32.494595,-94.1613992,3a,75y,293.42h,88.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spOmdJnKRZAKdc0xxh8y3nQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1), but I wouldn't call those unisigns.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 06, 2016, 01:13:54 PM
Setting that aside, on the whole it's one of the better-looking unisigns I've seen.
I personally like that design a lot - everything flows together nicely all within a single sign panel.
Richmond is (in)famous for its unique unisigns.
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-zuGc5pVklWw/T4XGRGqcS0I/AAAAAAAAB6o/c3QgguRvbsQ/s816/DSC00658.JPG)
In true Richmond fashion, this VA 33 shield should be US 33.
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-8RceWO3d0po/T4XFvouAfNI/AAAAAAAAB2k/E71NdPHOmdA/s816/DSC00622.JPG)
Quote from: Takumi on March 06, 2016, 09:32:48 PM
Richmond is (in)famous for its unique unisigns.
(https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-zuGc5pVklWw/T4XGRGqcS0I/AAAAAAAAB6o/c3QgguRvbsQ/s816/DSC00658.JPG)
In true Richmond fashion, this VA 33 shield should be US 33.
(https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-8RceWO3d0po/T4XFvouAfNI/AAAAAAAAB2k/E71NdPHOmdA/s816/DSC00622.JPG)
Hilariously, there was a WEST US 33/WEST US 250 unisign above this one, but when both of them were blown down in a thunderstorm, Richmond only replaced the incorrect one.
WSDOT-style reassurance marker for a duplex, in typical unisign fashion:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fk1D4E7Q.png&hash=ca0c958d49bf12a0cff079d53da2809bf63ed5a6)
Blue background unisign? (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.2390092,-122.4068542,3a,15y,120.85h,89.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOlxMn-C5thAVIPx0AQP63A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) I'm hoping it's temporary. (And, yes, it is still there; I just saw it today.)
Quote from: jay8g on March 17, 2016, 12:44:47 AM
Blue background unisign? (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.2390092,-122.4068542,3a,15y,120.85h,89.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOlxMn-C5thAVIPx0AQP63A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) I'm hoping it's temporary. (And, yes, it is still there; I just saw it today.)
I've heard the excuse for that kind of thing before as "separate NORTH, shield, and arrow signs (if any) would all be blue, so this should be blue", which isn't correct--but the unisign thing enables it. Got to be careful with unisigns when they leave an opening like this.
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 17, 2016, 09:14:20 PM
I've heard the excuse for that kind of thing before as "separate NORTH, shield, and arrow signs (if any) would all be blue, so this should be blue", which isn't correct
Since interstate shields have always been cutouts, I don't know how you can call any color background incorrect. That being said, blue wouldn't have been my first choice.
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 17, 2016, 09:14:20 PM
Quote from: jay8g on March 17, 2016, 12:44:47 AM
Blue background unisign? (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.2390092,-122.4068542,3a,15y,120.85h,89.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOlxMn-C5thAVIPx0AQP63A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) I'm hoping it's temporary. (And, yes, it is still there; I just saw it today.)
I've heard the excuse for that kind of thing before as "separate NORTH, shield, and arrow signs (if any) would all be blue, so this should be blue", which isn't correct--but the unisign thing enables it. Got to be careful with unisigns when they leave an opening like this.
What's the regulation or standard regarding unisign background colors?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 18, 2016, 01:33:04 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 17, 2016, 09:14:20 PM
Quote from: jay8g on March 17, 2016, 12:44:47 AM
Blue background unisign? (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.2390092,-122.4068542,3a,15y,120.85h,89.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOlxMn-C5thAVIPx0AQP63A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) I'm hoping it's temporary. (And, yes, it is still there; I just saw it today.)
I've heard the excuse for that kind of thing before as "separate NORTH, shield, and arrow signs (if any) would all be blue, so this should be blue", which isn't correct--but the unisign thing enables it. Got to be careful with unisigns when they leave an opening like this.
What's the regulation or standard regarding unisign background colors?
There probably isn't--couldn't find one in any MUTCD. Which means that it should probably default to what appearance it would have if it were separate signs (like the US 29 one above, very nicely done imo) or if it were a guide sign (i.e., not a blue background behind a blue I-shield).
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 18, 2016, 01:40:32 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 18, 2016, 01:33:04 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 17, 2016, 09:14:20 PM
Quote from: jay8g on March 17, 2016, 12:44:47 AM
Blue background unisign? (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.2390092,-122.4068542,3a,15y,120.85h,89.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOlxMn-C5thAVIPx0AQP63A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) I'm hoping it's temporary. (And, yes, it is still there; I just saw it today.)
I've heard the excuse for that kind of thing before as "separate NORTH, shield, and arrow signs (if any) would all be blue, so this should be blue", which isn't correct--but the unisign thing enables it. Got to be careful with unisigns when they leave an opening like this.
What's the regulation or standard regarding unisign background colors?
There probably isn't--couldn't find one in any MUTCD. Which means that it could probably default to what appearance it would have if it were separate signs (like the US 29 one above, very nicely done imo) or if it were a guide sign (i.e., not a blue background behind a blue I-shield).
Well, that's my point. Here's a US 29 sign on a guide sign...which means it could have a green background, not a black background. https://goo.gl/maps/afiL9woc6UU2
Since there isn't any standard or guidance on unisigns, how can a blue background not be correct, when you provided conflicting answers to the US 29 sign, where both a black background matching the color of the sign and a green guidesign background could both be correct?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 18, 2016, 01:48:34 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 18, 2016, 01:40:32 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on March 18, 2016, 01:33:04 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on March 17, 2016, 09:14:20 PM
Quote from: jay8g on March 17, 2016, 12:44:47 AM
Blue background unisign? (https://www.google.com/maps/@47.2390092,-122.4068542,3a,15y,120.85h,89.39t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOlxMn-C5thAVIPx0AQP63A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1?hl=en) I'm hoping it's temporary. (And, yes, it is still there; I just saw it today.)
I've heard the excuse for that kind of thing before as "separate NORTH, shield, and arrow signs (if any) would all be blue, so this should be blue", which isn't correct--but the unisign thing enables it. Got to be careful with unisigns when they leave an opening like this.
What's the regulation or standard regarding unisign background colors?
There probably isn't--couldn't find one in any MUTCD. Which means that it could probably default to what appearance it would have if it were separate signs (like the US 29 one above, very nicely done imo) or if it were a guide sign (i.e., not a blue background behind a blue I-shield).
Well, that's my point. Here's a US 29 sign on a guide sign...which means it could have a green background, not a black background. https://goo.gl/maps/afiL9woc6UU2
Since there isn't any standard or guidance on unisigns, how can a blue background not be correct, when you provided conflicting answers to the US 29 sign, where both a black background matching the color of the sign and a green guidesign background could both be correct?
It is hard to verbalize, but the "unisign" being one piece begs for it either to depict what three separate signs would look like, or else look like a guide sign with proper colors. A guide sign like the I-5 one wouldn't have a blue background.
I guess maybe the way to describe what it should be is if you sliced the unisign into parts to make individual signs, would they appear as proper signs standing alone? The DC US 29 one would. The I-5 with blue background wouldn't. (A RIDOT-style white backround would be better than the blue, especially to make the shield visible.)
Somewhere in a photo on Steve's site there is an example of such--if I could ever remember what route/state/page it was on.
There are quite a few of these (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0184883,-83.0383577,3a,41.2y,13.85h,83.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEDCq6mUcJSU8Zk1sc-sdEA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) and similar ones for other routes scattered around Columbus. I'm assuming they were all put up by the city, as I doubt ODOT would post a unisign.
ODOT uses a lot of unisigns at intersections, with the route marker, direction and destination all in one panel.
Quote from: hbelkins on March 19, 2016, 10:13:53 PM
ODOT uses a lot of unisigns at intersections, with the route marker, direction and destination all in one panel.
The Columbus ones look more like a Maryland-type unisign, though, with depictions of direction plate, shield, and arrow on a black background. Usual ODOT unisign fare is the type with the direction and arrow on the same side, with shield usually 3-digit width whether it needs to be or not (probably so they can have just two templates for these; one for US and one for state shields).
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Foh%2Fi-70%2Fw36r.jpg&hash=56d9a93c320ef468d1c84a7ff42b32c2a0ca9bd7) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Foh%2Fbus_62%2F41sw.jpg&hash=e9b134ecee3c31c094c705313c849285146ef70c) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Foh%2Fbus_62%2Feoh.jpg&hash=febbff4b3a20b7637d60dc905d62a4ea57cb4e73) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Foh%2Fus_224%2F127n.jpg&hash=7193ac9e73cf3ef6e12257cb153f4af389409df2) (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Foh%2Foh_3%2F768n.jpg&hash=a73b794e3a57e270e208a17e81039ff189441b8b)
From Steve's I-70 WB, US 52, US 52, US 127, and OH 3 pages respectively. The US 202 one was an error that was corrected eventually, although they should have sold it to Delaware or Massachusetts or something.
The weird thing about these Ohio unisigns, though, is that the shield in the middle is always an extra-wide one (36x24). Obviously there's no reason you need an extra-wide sign for a single digit number like 3 haha
I was referring to the fact that the Columbus example I posted was more of a "traditional" unisign we'd see from RIDOT or WISDOT than the ODOT ones.
Quote from: cl94 on March 19, 2016, 11:37:44 PM
I was referring to the fact that the Columbus example I posted was more of a "traditional" unisign we'd see from RIDOT or WISDOT than the ODOT ones.
Yep--it doesn't look like ODOT issue but maybe a city thing. Funny thing is that it looks better than a state issue!
Quote from: paulthemapguy on March 19, 2016, 11:05:42 PM
The weird thing about these Ohio unisigns, though, is that the shield in the middle is always an extra-wide one (36x24). Obviously there's no reason you need an extra-wide sign for a single digit number like 3 haha
Indeed, ODOT unisigns of this type are almost always 3-digit width (there are examples that counter this, but they may be one-offs not using the template or city installs like some in Cincinnati). When they are one-offs with square shield areas, they actually have the potential to look WORSE than if they just used the template.....
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Foh%2Fus_33%2Fe278.jpg&hash=7bad01270e3688864d5647dfd48c44dc49fb4283)
Fwiw, here are the ODOT specs for the unisigns mentioned above--they do have a two-digit shield version, but appear to almost never use it, instead putting one or two digits in a 3-digit shield. Medina's town square is full of them for OH 3, OH 18, OH 57, and US 42. All in 3-digit shields. U-G-L-Y, they don't have no alibi.
(https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtl1/t31.0-8/s960x960/12087912_10106105303145488_7176168782461980994_o.jpg)
Those US 52 signs in Aberdeen are about the only constants on those signs. Things have changed a lot over the years with the various routings and reroutings of US 62 and US 68. If I had the inclination I'd do a page showing all the different versions. Sometimes Ohio was slow catching up to the changes made on the Kentucky side of the river.
https://goo.gl/maps/MyybJDfCwKD2
An ugly unisign erected by a contractor instead of the local agency, in Kane County, IL
https://goo.gl/maps/1P94533GKjt
Here's one of Atlantic County's more egregious unified signs. Usually it's simple like a set of shields and directions, but this is just awful.
In response to above post: I have never seen a green unisign with a county pentagon shield on it...that's a first for me, and yeah it's pretty egregious hehe. Nice word for that!
From what I saw of Maine last October, I noticed that Maine seems to prefer sign salads, but I did happen to find this unisign going west toward NH...
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1676/25948630161_f2ea4e5b2a_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/FwZvHc)
Quote from: CrystalWalrein on April 01, 2016, 06:13:15 PM
https://goo.gl/maps/1P94533GKjt
Here's one of Atlantic County's more egregious unified signs. Usually it's simple like a set of shields and directions, but this is just awful.
That's just awful, in that it is combining guide information with completely unrelated regulatory signs. I've not seen anything so bad...
A unisign of sorts that I drove past last night: https://goo.gl/maps/QXudnsAR7rs (https://goo.gl/maps/QXudnsAR7rs) (depending on your browser, you may have to spin the view to the right)
Some may say it comes close to a traditional BGS, but I think it qualifies due the lack of control cities and combining opposing directions in a single panel.
Quote from: theline on May 19, 2016, 06:54:27 PM
A unisign of sorts that I drove past last night: https://goo.gl/maps/QXudnsAR7rs (https://goo.gl/maps/QXudnsAR7rs) (depending on your browser, you may have to spin the view to the right)
Some may say it comes close to a traditional BGS, but I think it qualifies due the lack of control cities and combining opposing directions in a single panel.
Our term "unisign" refers to a route marker assembly (shield, directional banner, arrow placard, etc.) that is specifically designed to look like it is composed of the typical multiple small signs, but is in actuality one single sign panel. In states where this is common, there is minimal background on the sign, and that background is usually black.
What you've linked to is a traditional BGS.
Rare non-standard unisign on OR 99E in Woodburn. c/o Wikipedia - not my pic but I've driven by there. Don't think I've seen any other ones in Oregon.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/82/Oregon_99E%2C_211_and_214_Direction_Sign.JPG/640px-Oregon_99E%2C_211_and_214_Direction_Sign.JPG)
An observation about WisDOT unisigns: there appears to be a transition in progress between older unisigns with black inner borders on tab elements and newer ones without the inner border. I assume the relevant sign plates changed, but I am not sure how to do versioning since WisDOT buries its sign plate manual on a separate server for which login is required.
Two more examples of usage of unisigns in Louisiana.
The first is a set of detour signs for I-12. These signs are popping up along the corridor, on rotatable poles/mounts so that they can be turned away from the road when not actually detouring traffic from I-12. Here are a pair at US 190 (both turned 90-degrees to the street) in Denham Springs:
(https://c6.staticflickr.com/6/5483/31285618005_ef06b442e9.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/PEAYfZ)
I-12 Detour Unisigns (https://flic.kr/p/PEAYfZ) by Jay Bienvenu (https://www.flickr.com/photos/bienvenunet/), on Flickr
All of these detour signs are metal panels.
Then I happened to find this one today, and be able to get good pictures of it. For some reason, this particular sign wasn't covered today. Lucky me. There's another one at the intersection that was covered today that I assume is of the same style as this sign.
(https://c8.staticflickr.com/6/5490/31170430671_c6bdd5cc22.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/PuqB5t)
LA 445 Temporary Unisign (https://flic.kr/p/PuqB5t) by Jay Bienvenu (https://www.flickr.com/photos/bienvenunet/), on Flickr
This sign and its companion at the intersection are wood panels.
Might DOTD be figuring out how to make a unisign? Might we see more unisigns, particularly of a permanent nature, in Louisiana? I personally think it would be a good idea if it can help them be more consistent with formatting.