Regional Boards > Pacific Southwest
Is California the only state to use cutout shields, and why?
Henry:
--- Quote from: cl94 on December 04, 2022, 09:01:07 PM ---
--- Quote from: US 89 on December 02, 2022, 08:42:41 PM ---
--- Quote from: oscar on December 02, 2022, 08:17:52 PM ---
--- Quote from: Bickendan on December 01, 2022, 11:43:53 PM ---
--- Quote from: Scott5114 on November 30, 2022, 04:41:55 AM ---California also has a massive base of installed signage using their preferred standards. Even if FHWA did want to drop the hammer on them, it would take decades and a billion dollars to bring them into compliance.
It would also be pretty hard for FHWA to justify dinging Caltrans for their deviations from standard while turning a blind eye to TxDOT's use of Clearview against the terms of the 2011 Clearview circular and ODOT and NMDOT's everything.
--- End quote ---
Which ODOT? I'm assuming you meant Ohio and not Oregon?
--- End quote ---
Probably Oklahoma, where Scott5114 lives.
--- End quote ---
And known along with neighboring New Mexico to produce some of the strangest signs known to man.
--- End quote ---
Ohio isn't that much better. They've gone from land of the dancing arrows to land of hostile compliance with the MUTCD. All four are worse than California IMO. The only gripe I have against Caltrans is squeezing shields into weird places to make signs smaller.
--- End quote ---
Caltrans isn't the only one putting shields into strange places either. NYCDOT (as opposed to NYSDOT) and MDOT (the one in MI) do it too, although for the latter, if two freeways meet at an interchange, then the regular signage is used instead.
ClassicHasClass:
--- Quote from: TheStranger on December 05, 2022, 05:27:28 AM ---
--- Quote from: ClassicHasClass on December 03, 2022, 06:11:13 PM ---Less of a thing nowadays, but it's still fun to see multiple shapes on a post, too. I don't think there's an alignment in California that currently signs a US highway, an Interstate and a state highway simultaneously, but there are plenty of twosies.
--- End quote ---
Not concurrencies per se, but the BGS examples of 3 route types on one sign in this state:
50/99/(formerly Business 80) in downtown Sacramento
101 TO 5/10/60 along the Santa Ana Freeway in downtown Los Angeles (a signage change that occurred in the last few years)
--- End quote ---
Right, but there's no reassurance shields for these; they're just on BGSes, as you say.
jakeroot:
--- Quote from: 1 on December 05, 2022, 09:08:01 AM ---
--- Quote from: cl94 on December 04, 2022, 09:01:07 PM ---The only gripe I have against Caltrans is squeezing shields into weird places to make signs smaller.
--- End quote ---
Lack of permissive lefts is a big issue for me.
--- End quote ---
Living in a country now where permissive signals are pretty much the only type used, I would concur. I cannot imagine waiting for a green arrow just to make a simple turn across traffic.
Techknow:
--- Quote from: jakeroot on December 06, 2022, 12:50:36 AM ---
--- Quote from: 1 on December 05, 2022, 09:08:01 AM ---
--- Quote from: cl94 on December 04, 2022, 09:01:07 PM ---The only gripe I have against Caltrans is squeezing shields into weird places to make signs smaller.
--- End quote ---
Lack of permissive lefts is a big issue for me.
--- End quote ---
Living in a country now where permissive signals are pretty much the only type used, I would concur. I cannot imagine waiting for a green arrow just to make a simple turn across traffic.
--- End quote ---
I third this, close to my residence there's a green left arrow with a sign that says no turn on red light, so yeah no permissive signal. This is also one of those left turn lanes that are short so it's possible there are too many cars on the adjacent lane for me to be able to get in the lane to turn left.
TheStranger:
--- Quote from: ClassicHasClass on December 05, 2022, 09:08:58 PM ---
--- Quote from: TheStranger on December 05, 2022, 05:27:28 AM ---
--- Quote from: ClassicHasClass on December 03, 2022, 06:11:13 PM ---Less of a thing nowadays, but it's still fun to see multiple shapes on a post, too. I don't think there's an alignment in California that currently signs a US highway, an Interstate and a state highway simultaneously, but there are plenty of twosies.
--- End quote ---
Not concurrencies per se, but the BGS examples of 3 route types on one sign in this state:
50/99/(formerly Business 80) in downtown Sacramento
101 TO 5/10/60 along the Santa Ana Freeway in downtown Los Angeles (a signage change that occurred in the last few years)
--- End quote ---
Right, but there's no reassurance shields for these; they're just on BGSes, as you say.
--- End quote ---
50/99/Business 80 trio signposts did exist along W and X Streets in Sacramento for a while, though not on the WX Freeway itself as far as I can remember - I feel like in the time I lived in Sacramento, there weren't any trailblazer shields along the WX at all (but some on the West Sacramento portion of what was Business 80 and is now just solely US 50).
I-5 and I-10 at the East Los Angeles Interchange might be the other example of a concurrency whose entire signage was relegated to BGSes with no trailblazer usage, but that would not be easy to prove unless there were 1960s-1970s Caltrans photos of that southernmost part of the Golden State Freeway. (This can be contrasted with the Eastshore Freeway in Berkeley, which has always had a concurrency of some sort: US 40/Route 17, US 40/Route 17/I-80, Route 17/I-80, and now I-580/I-80 - the latter of which is DEFINITELY signed with trailblazers)
When was the last three-route-type concurrency with reassurance shields in CA - the old 15/18/91/395 setup near Colton (now 215)?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version