Looks like the moment we've been waiting for is about to begin. The much-discussed expansion and reconstruction project of currently four-lane I-35 in Norman, OK is apparently about to begin. A lane will be added, and many bridges and interchanges will be rebuilt. A new overpass will be constructed for Rock Creek Road. The first part of the expansion will affect the portion of I-35 from Main Street (MM 109) to the three-lane segment in Moore (MM 113).
ODOT has been distributing VMSes throughout the city. So far, they're blank. Also, the wide area of the median south of Indian Hills Road seems to be shaping up to be a staging area for the project–tons of temporary Jersey barrier segments have appeared there. I think the actual construction starts in March, so this is still prep work. Presumably the VMSes will start displaying the date construction starts as we get closer to the project. I'll keep everyone up to date here in this thread.
Any word on if the Main Street interchange will be SPUIified?
Interesting though, the traffic volumes are 67.900 to 71.700 and somewhat higher in the OKC southern suburbs. I wish they would reconstruct freeways in NL at such volumes...
I guess the current six-lane section north of I-77 will be extended southwards until the Canadian river?
Quote from: Chris on February 01, 2009, 03:06:25 PM
Interesting though, the traffic volumes are 67.900 to 71.700 and somewhat higher in the OKC southern suburbs. I wish they would reconstruct freeways in NL at such volumes...
I guess the current six-lane section north of I-77 will be extended southwards until the Canadian river?
Yes, that's the plan (though it's US-77. I-77 is in West Virginia. :-P ) I'd assume that at least part of the incentive for expanding the road isn't due to the average daily traffic volume, but due to the spikes in traffic that occur around University of Oklahoma football games.
Yeah I meant US 77 :)
I just checked Norman on Google Earth and I noticed the Canadian river bridge is already six-laned :nod:
When it hits capacity does that mean that's as much traffic as it can handle without starting to have backups and slowdowns?
Yeah, I think the most optimum volume per day is about 70,000 before traffic jams start to appear. (on a 4 lane freeway). We have 110,000 on a 4 lane freeway in NL, and it's jammed for most of the day X-(
Yep, there are multiple variables that influences the capacity of a highway;
* number of lanes
* composition of traffic (number of trucks for example)
* geometry (also called: alignment)
* number of onramps.
* offramp capacity
To name a few.
While the McCall Bridge (the official name) over the Canadian River is indeed six lanes, it's only useful as four, since the right hand lane becomes an exit-only lane on either side of the bridge. Going southbound, it's exit-only for SH-9 west, and going northbound it's exit-only for SH-74A. The right lane going southbound is typically backed up because more people usually want to take SH-9 west than I-35 south. There is a very large casino right next to the interchange (Google imagery was taken before it was built) that generates a lot of traffic. SH-9 is also how most people cut over to Blanchard and Newcastle and I-44 so they can visit towns such as Chickasha and Lawton.
Something will be done with the Main Street interchange; I'm not sure exactly what though. The two alternatives were a SPUI and a diamond. Unfortunately I haven't been able to find any sort of final plan on the ODOT website (it's somewhat badly designed, but what do you expect from ODOT). The project that's about to kick off will focus on the stretch north of Main Street; south of Main Street will be later. The southern section might be a bit more interesting, because ODOT was originally planning on eliminating the SH-74A interchange, which naturally caused a big flap around town.
I think this section of highway definitely needs expansion and reconstruction. While the road isn't so overcrowded so as to come to a standstill without provocation, it's heavy enough to make maneuvering a bit iffy. Plus, most of the bridges over the Interstate are showing their age. The US-77 overpass (http://www.denexa.com/roadgeek/road-photos/main.php?cmd=imageview&var1=ok%2Fcleveland%2F035i_ex113overp.jpg) is probably the worst, though the Main Street overpass is pretty bad. Also, I'm looking forward to getting concrete; I'm much more partial to it than asphalt :biggrin: Of course, we will also be getting new signage here, and it will most likely be all Clearview. Probably the largest batch of Clearview yet posted in Oklahoma.
While ODOT might certainly be taking OU football traffic into consideration, they're not designing for it. An ODOT person was quoted as saying in the paper that if they ran the numbers for OU football traffic levels, it would recommend that all the streets in Norman get ten lanes. Personally I wish they would have a ramp signed for OU football traffic that deposits all the fans into the Canadian River. :-P
UPDATE: As of today, all the VMSes have been switched on. They're now displaying "I-35 CONSTR BEGINS FEB 15". So apparently the project is beginning earlier than I thought.
It might "begin", but you don't see work done for another two weeks ;-) :-P :-D
Update: Today I saw work crews posting the typical construction signage (Road Work Next 6 Miles, CONSTRUCTION/Fines Double In Work Zones, Road Work 1 Mile, 1/2 Mile, etc). Looks like the project is indeed getting ready to start. :nod:
It's about bloomin' time!!!
Whats the current status of I-35 from Norman to downtown OKC? It is all 6 lanes now except for Norman stretch? How's the normal commute in rush-hour, where are the slow downs?
I remember as an OU student in the early 90's that it was all 4 lane except for section where it duplexed with US 77 (Shields to 77 exit in Norman). It was also treacherous b/c of the numerous suicide on-ramps (non-existent w/ no acceleration room) between downtown OKC and I-240.
Quote from: Gridlock on February 12, 2009, 12:01:52 PM
Whats the current status of I-35 from Norman to downtown OKC? It is all 6 lanes now except for Norman stretch? How's the normal commute in rush-hour, where are the slow downs?
I remember as an OU student in the early 90's that it was all 4 lane except for section where it duplexed with US 77 (Shields to 77 exit in Norman). It was also treacherous b/c of the numerous suicide on-ramps (non-existent w/ no acceleration room) between downtown OKC and I-240.
It is six lanes from I-40 south to U.S. 77. Between U.S. 77 & Tecumseh (Exit 112), there are currently three southbound lanes and two northbound lanes. From Tecumseh south to the South Canadian River, I-35 is currently four lanes.
Traffic usually slows down some around I-240, but not as much as it did before I-35 was widened through that interchange from approximately 2003 to 2005.
I just noticed today that coming off the McCall Bridge are the first signs for the construction zone. They read, bizarrely enough, "ROAD WORK, 1.8 MILES". I'll try to get a picture tomorrow.
OK, the project is underway now. Here's the scoop:
- Most lane closures will be at night, according to ODOT. Apparently this means this won't be a complete tear-out and rebuild–instead they're just adding lanes and redoing the interchanges. Still a lot of major work.
- Northbound traffic flows through the work zone so far unimpeded. I did notice that crews had removed the northbound sign gantry at Indian Hill Road for some reason, and appeared to be doing something with it in sections on the shoulder.
- Southbound traffic is seeing the brunt of the work so far. Approaching US-77, the left lane (#1) is closed off. I think the #2 lane is then an Exit Only lane for US 77 (I didn't get too good a look at this.) After the US-77 interchange, there are only two lanes left, and they occupy what was the permanent middle lane and the exit-only lane for Tecumseh Road. At Tecumseh Road, the thru lanes are shifted to the left to return traffic to the two lanes that run through Norman.
- South of Tecumseh Road, the grass has been torn up along the edge of the median a little bit.
- The VMSes are now displaying average traffic speed in the work zone. At 5:30 PM, the average speed was running between 30 to 40 MPH (which is about the worst a traffic jam typically gets in Oklahoma City). VMSes on cross streets at interchanges will apparently display travel times. The one on Lindsey Street said "NO DELAY ON I-35 N BOUND".
- The project is expected to be done by summer 2010. The ODOT press release didn't say whether this was the entire project, or just the north section. Probably just the north section.
Update as of today:
The northbound lanes have been shifted to the left about 1/4 of a lane width. The southbound lanes have had a temporary Jersey barrier placed along the right-hand edgeline. I'm guessing work to add the third lane will occur just beyond the barrier. Signage-wise, everything is the same; inapplicable portions of signs have been blocked out with white-painted boards. The northbound gantry for Indian Hill Road has disappeared; no temporary signage has replaced it.
Merging onto the freeway with a Jersey barrier looming at you is a pain in the tail. Signs proclaiming "Limited merging area" do not help.
Well, we got lost in Norman because of the construction last night. :banghead: I'm just happy we have a GPS in our car to get us back to the Interstate.
Quote from: un1 on February 24, 2009, 09:52:56 AM
Well, we got lost in Norman because of the construction last night. :banghead: I'm just happy we have a GPS in our car to get us back to the Interstate.
You have what?? :pan:
;-)
Quote from: un1 on February 24, 2009, 09:52:56 AM
Well, we got lost in Norman because of the construction last night. :banghead: I'm just happy we have a GPS in our car to get us back to the Interstate.
How did you manage that? o_O
Well it was dark and the baby was creaming and it was chaotic. :-D
Also, I was getting bad directions by everyone...
Well, I mean, how'd you manage to get off I-35 in the first place? Unless they're doing something at night I'm not aware of, there's not really anywhere northbound that you could exit thinking you're following the I-35 mainline...
Update: as of today, Jersey barriers have been added along the northbound carriageway too.
According to the Norman section of today's Oklahoman, the Main Street interchange will be a SPUI! This will be the first SPUI in Oklahoma. That will be as part of Phase Two. Phase One, which is the northern part of the project currently being worked on, is expected to be complete in August 2010.
Also, the article mentions that "Designers are leaning heavily toward building an overpass for southbound Interstate 35 traffic exiting east onto State Highway 9, to keep traffic from intersecting with 24th Avenue. I'm guessing how this will work is the bridge over I-35 will be extended so that the traffic is flown over 24th.
I'll take a look at slides from Thursday's meeting and see if I can find some diagrams.
Okay, way overdue for an update here!
Northbound traffic has shifted onto the southbound carriageway just north of Tecumseh Road. The old Exit 113 overpass has been demolished and a new overpass capable of allowing three lanes to pass beneath it is in the process of being built.
Exit 110A (SB I-35 to EB Robinson St.) was closed for no apparent reason.
the Rock Creek Road overpass has its pillars built now. The last time I went up there beams had yet to be placed for the bridge.
All in all, there will be a lot to see if you plan on attending Day 2 of the OKC meet!
Another way, way overdue bump with content!
The third lane is complete on both carriageways, and the new Exit 113 overpass is done and open. NB traffic stays on the NB carriageway. Now work has shifted to the median; all traffic has been shifted to what will eventually become the #2 and #3 lanes. The Jersey barriers are now lining the far left (#2) lane. Through gaps in the barrier and overpasses, the old Brifen cable barrier has been removed already. Looks like they're prepping to pave that median over and add a permanent Jersey barrier. Portions of the median north of Tecumseh are already done and lighting installed. Bad news for truss-arm fans: it appears to be the same T-shaped lighting with straight arms that appears around the Shields interchange.
No further work has occurred on the Rock Creek Road overpass.
With regard to signage: Since they needed the room for the new lane to go in, they've removed most signage except for the bridge-mounted signage at Robinson Street, and one random cantilever at Tecumseh Road (the one that's missing its exit-direction arrow). One removed sign is living in the space between the service road fence and the Interstate north of Tecumseh. Signage now consists of small green signs with mixed-case Series D. Wonder if they're going to leave the Robinson Street signage or replace it when they post all the signage after the project is done. And I wonder how it's going to look...will it be Clearview or not? The use of mixed-case D on the temp signage makes me wonder...
Signage is in the process of going up along the widened stretch of Interstate. In a first for the state of Oklahoma, the signage appears to be mounted on curved monotube half-gantries. No panels are up yet, but from the look of the z-bars on a few of the gantries, some of them are going to be massive. If J.N. Winkler is reading this, I'd be interested in getting the signage plans for this.
Widening work appears to be complete, they're just going over the asphalt with more and more layers (thickness/reinforcement?) The signs on the Robinson St. overpass have been removed... Ever see a bridge that's had a sign on it for years, and then the sign's suddenly removed? There's a lot of ickyness on that bridge...
Make sure you have a bucket nearby. The signing for this is awful--Clearview 6-W (not 5-W or 5-W-R), against both green and yellow "EXIT ONLY" bottom panels, bad centering, fraction rectangles not constructed correctly, Series E Modified in exit tabs, standard arrow instead of true downward arrow used as downward-pointing arrows, etc.
The job piece number for this is 09034(05).
Quote from: J N Winkler on May 18, 2010, 02:27:44 AM
Make sure you have a bucket nearby. The signing for this is awful--Clearview 6-W (not 5-W or 5-W-R), against both green and yellow "EXIT ONLY" bottom panels, bad centering, fraction rectangles not constructed correctly, Series E Modified in exit tabs, standard arrow instead of true downward arrow used as downward-pointing arrows, etc.
The job piece number for this is 09034(05).
Are the signing plans for the reconstruction of Skelly Drive (I-44) in Tulsa online?
Nope, afraid not--the plans go away soon after the letting.
Oh God, this is terrible. In addition, a few of the old signs that were removed will be re-set for the construction, meaning we're going to have a mishmash of overhead Clearview signage and ground-level FHWA Series. The directions are not mixed case, and there's one two random signs that is are set in all caps ("CHICKASHA", "S 19TH ST") and one is missing its exit tab. Also, one of the signs for exit 108AB makes reference to SH-74A, which was decommissioned over a year ago (perhaps these plans were prepared earlier). The milemarkers appear to be that weird Series E(M) compressed to Series D width thing (the "prison font"). And of course those damn monotubes.
I sincerely hope the fabricators of these signs took a few liberties with the plans.
But it's not all bad...there are some good things! There are going to be a lot of interchange sequence signs a la Kansas City. And a few of the exit direction panels don't look too bad in and of themselves.
The signage is sitting on a trailer in an interchange just south of the project. I can only see a couple of the signs, but it looks like at least the exit tabs are in Clearview to match the rest of the signs.
A few of the signs have been posted. Most of them NB, when I was going SB, alas. But I took some pictures:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Fforum_img%2F113_comparison.jpg&hash=7a5bd709f52d0aae3677610ed457fccaf65367b5)
A comparison between one of the signs that was posted and the sign drawing found in the plans. Looks like the contractor is taking some serious liberties with the plans, which in this case, is a good thing. Here's hoping "CHICKASHA" was corrected as well.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Froadgeek%2Froad-photos%2Fmain.php%3Fcmd%3Dimage%26amp%3Bvar1%3Dok%252Fcleveland%252Fimg_4328.jpg%26amp%3Bvar2%3D700_85&hash=c79343ce27ed201c9faf323d9d5264ba27d6efd7)
One of the monotube half-gantries, so far devoid of any signage. This particular one is slated to be an interchange sequence sign, thus the large height of the z-bars.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Froadgeek%2Froad-photos%2Fmain.php%3Fcmd%3Dimage%26amp%3Bvar1%3Dok%252Fcleveland%252Fimg_4329.jpg%26amp%3Bvar2%3D700_85&hash=5acb52ddfd2a611e8c746ae91b93ac0fcee98982)
And a full gantry. This will house the Robinson Street Westbound (110A) exit direction sign on the right. I'm not sure whether a 110B sign is going to go on the left or one for 109.
yeah, the mixed-case South looks a lot better than the widely spaced all-caps version. Too bad the exit tab got changed to Clearview.
Personally, I'd prefer that if they're going to do one part of the sign in Clearview, they should do it all in Clearview. Having part of the sign in a different font is discordant. (Did they ever mix the square fonts and round fonts on the same sign?)
As they post more signs, I get to see the lower layers of the sign trailer behind the signs they're posting. Looks like back up in there they still have all of the 2003-era (FHWA series) gore signs back up in there, unharmed and ready to be re-posted. Along with the incidental signage along the side of the road ("Cleveland Co. Fairgrounds, Exit 110B", etc.) at least the FHWA series fonts will maintain a presence along this section of the interstate.
They also constructed the fraction rectangle correctly on the as-installed sign, which is good.
This may not necessarily be a result of the contractor "taking liberties"--the plans I sent are the as-lets, and Oklahoma DOT has the option of changing them after award through change order (though typically not without added cost because the contractor can charge a premium for changes to a binding contract).
The sign truck was busy last night. Here's some more photos from this morning:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Froadgeek%2Froad-photos%2Fmain.php%3Fcmd%3Dimage%26amp%3Bvar1%3Dok%252Fcleveland%252Fimg_4332.jpg%26amp%3Bvar2%3D700_85&hash=29502b9f233cf4577f6c60c4043d2c0f70c6926c)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Fforum_img%2Fsigns%2Fspecial_sign_10.png&hash=afb8413403cccbaf4c54333dc48e4c11cf764ac7)(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Fforum_img%2Fsigns%2Fspecial_sign_11.png&hash=4945c61ea92c2197383aa47002a1dfc8f3e01fb2)
This is the same full gantry posted above with no signs on it. Slight technical glitch here: the loops of the "9"s shouldn't have the state outline within them. (Also, what's up with the "y" in "Lindsey"?) "WESTBOUND" (and "EASTBOUND" below) have been centered appropriately.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Froadgeek%2Froad-photos%2Fmain.php%3Fcmd%3Dimage%26amp%3Bvar1%3Dok%252Fcleveland%252Fimg_4337.jpg%26amp%3Bvar2%3D700_85&hash=503d596cef0fa05eed3bc037e78db3afeca1a2fb)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.denexa.com%2Fforum_img%2Fsigns%2Fspecial_sign_09.png&hash=faee71d85f5bfbf6e93c33a466b1cb5d86ac68a6)
Looks like the negative-contrast Clearview has survived. Negative-contrast Clearview is not particularly uncommon in Oklahoma, on both ODOT-installed and contractor signage; it seems ODOT doesn't take the prohibition against it in the FHWA preliminary approval seriously. Also, note how on both this and the preceding sign, the Type D (straight-edged) arrow has been replaced by a Type A tapered arrow.
Some more observations, not yet photographed: "CHICKASHA" has been fixed. The "[9] WEST" text at the top, however, remains left-aligned. This gantry was supposed to have all-new signs on a monotube bridge, but the old, FHWA Series signs for Exit 108AB and Exit 109 have been shunted to the right (preservation of greenout!) and the new Clearview sign placed to the left. Last-minute cost-saving measure, perhaps?
Also, the down-pointing Type D arrows on pull-thru signage remain :ded: One of these signs is an oddity, as well: going northbound, there is a sign posted for "Oklahoma City" -- only the second sign in the state that I know of that actually spells out the full name of the city instead of abbreviating to "Okla. City".
BUMP OF THE CENTURY
After two years, Phase Two of this project is about to begin. VMSes are up stating that "I35/MAIN ST ROADWORK BEGINS JAN 7TH". Unsure if this is just the Main Street interchange or if the I-35 widening is happening too. In any event, the OKC area's second SPUI is going to be taking shape soon.
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 29, 2012, 09:55:50 AM
BUMP OF THE CENTURY
After two years, Phase Two of this project is about to begin. VMSes are up stating that "I35/MAIN ST ROADWORK BEGINS JAN 7TH". Unsure if this is just the Main Street interchange or if the I-35 widening is happening too. In any event, the OKC area's second SPUI is going to be taking shape soon.
It's both.
rte66man
Is there a projected end date?
No idea what the end date is.
Construction has started with the loop ramps at the I-35/Main Street cloverleaf closing; straight-line ramps will remain open. Signage hints that there is a posted detour, but I have yet to take I-35 through the zone since it started.
Mr. Winkler, would you happen to have the signage plans for this sitting around, if they have been made available yet?
I have the construction plans for this job, which has job piece number 09031(08). It covers just the Main Street cloverleaf-to-SPUI conversion, although the I-35 typical cross-sections call for three lanes in each direction. This project has a resubmission date (handwritten in an obviously feminine hand at the upper left-hand corner of the title plan sheet) of September 12, 2012, and the file timestamps of my TIFF copy are all dated September 27, so I think this was advertised for the October 2012 letting.
(Goes and looks on the Oklahoma DOT server)
As it happens, the construction plans are still online:
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/contracts/a2012/plans1210/095_1810_IM-NHIY-0035-2%28289%29_0903108/
Permanent signing and pavement marking plans are the "k" part of the plans distribution--sheets "k 007" through "k 011" are sign panel detail and sign elevation sheets, while "k 001" through "k 006" are sign layouts. The sign designs are significantly cleaner than has been the case for recent ODOT projects in the Oklahoma City area. There is also one page of details for mast arm signs ("m 023") and several of custom detour signs ("n 005" through "n 006"). (Gotta love that negative-contrast Clearview!)
Update...
The majority of the work is going on at Main Street. The cloverleaf ramps are closed and have been stripped of their pavement. ODOT plans to leave the diamond ramps in place and open throughout the project. Lanes are narrowed within the vicinity of Main Street, which causes a spectacularly bad merging situation going from the SH-9/Lindsey C/D lane to NB I-35.
Further south, a collection of cranes has shown up at the bridge over the Canadian River. They have removed the gantry containing signs for exits 108A-B NB and 106 SB, making up for it with some tiny orange signs.
The I-35 bridge over the Canadian River has been narrowed to 4 lanes (from six) so that the bridge can be widened where the Ed Noble Parkway ramp can come in. Strangely enough, the northbound lanes are getting the same treatment–are they widening the entire bridge to 8 lanes for some unknown reason?
Some updates:
- All ramps at Main Street are now closed and torn up (though for the most part signage still reads as if the interchange is open). The new bridge for the SPUI is taking shape.
- Widening continues on the Canadian River bridge. The deck appears to be mostly done, and rebar is in place for the permanent Jersey barrier at the edge (no concrete work for the barrier yet).
- And now for the rant: this project is a major safety disaster. Both northbound and southbound, the SH-9/Lindsey onramps have extremely truncated acceleration lanes; i.e. you have about 10 feet to merge into traffic before hitting a temporary Jersey barrier. I have already been involved in 2 minor accidents due to this work zone, and everyone you talk to around here knows someone that has a similar story. ODOT's response is that they are working in a constrained space and that the design was signed off on by FHWA, so they're not interested in doing much about it. They blame the safety problems on people speeding on mainline I-35. ODOT and/or their contractor needs to be investigated for the negligence on display here.
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 17, 2013, 12:40:18 AMi.e. you have about 10 feet to merge into traffic before hitting a temporary Jersey barrier.
what is the real amount of feet? 10 is
shorter than a parking spot. when the Templin Highway entrance to I-5 southbound had a Jersey barrier (and trucks bombing down the Grapevine doing 90 that you had to merge into), I measured the length of runway before the barrier at 120 feet. I wonder if this is shorter.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 17, 2013, 01:34:06 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 17, 2013, 12:40:18 AMi.e. you have about 10 feet to merge into traffic before hitting a temporary Jersey barrier.
what is the real amount of feet? 10 is shorter than a parking spot. when the Templin Highway entrance to I-5 southbound had a Jersey barrier (and trucks bombing down the Grapevine doing 90 that you had to merge into), I measured the length of runway before the barrier at 120 feet. I wonder if this is shorter.
I have no way of measuring, as there is no satellite imagery of the project available and it's impossible to get near the project site on foot.
It is possible to "cheat" and cut over early by crossing a painted gore, but that is dangerous as well because not all people are willing to do such a thing, so you have some people merging early and some following the lines.
Here's a video still from a news site of the NB merge:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fkwtv.images.worldnow.com%2Fimages%2F20808050_BG2.jpg&hash=ae79937fdbc996f294884682edaf1fc0b613c0d5)
News articles on the problems, with video:
http://kfor.com/2013/01/28/multiple-accidents-force-construction-changes/
http://www.news9.com/story/20808050/odot-working-to-change-dangerous-portion-of-i-35-north
Both of these news articles focus on the NB merge, but the SB merge (the one I had problems with) is just as bad.
Sometime this past week, traffic has been shifted onto the new bridge, and demolition started on the old one.
I guess the completed SPUI at Main & I-35 will give Main Street a strange northward bend as it crosses the interstate.
The Morgan Road crossing over I-40 in Yukon has a westerly bend in that SPUI.
These bends aren't very pleasing looking from an aesthetic sense, but I suppose it's a far lesser evil than putting the new street bridges directly in place of the old ones (which would require completely shutting down that crossing for months).
I suspect the current configuration of the bend is temporary–the pavement markings look temporary, and the plans seem to include new stoplights at the intersections on either side of the interchange, so perhaps there will be further relocation of Main Street to make the bend less noticeable.
The contractor has made quick work of the old Main Street spans–the decks (girders and all) have been totally removed, leaving just the piers to be removed. Then it'll just be some quick widening work for I-35 and construction of the new ramps.
Bizarrely, going southbound, there is a channel coned off along the future #3 lane (beyond the temporary Jersey barriers) all through the work zone, complete with signs, running out at the exact point that the Exit 108AB c/d lane diverges. Surely they are not planning to open some sort of temporary entrance ramp there...?
Further south, the southbound Canadian River bridge looks essentially finished except for striping, so of course they have diverted all of the workers to the northbound bridge and leave half of the perfectly good bridge closed off. Extremely frustrating.
Updates...
At Main Street, not much has changed. One pier of the old bridge is gone. It appears the channel through the work zone I mentioned above is used by construction vehicles, although it is extremely bizarre that it has full signage for every little curve and such.
There is a new configuration at the Canadian River bridge. A portion of the curb separating the Exit 108AB c/d lane from the mainline has been removed and paved over, leading to a slightly more generous merging situation for Exit 108AB traffic. However, just downstream of here, the traffic has been shunted over two lanes onto the new part of the bridge; workers are taking chunks out of the median barrier at regular intervals. This makes me believe that perhaps they will be installing lighting on the bridge. The new configuration was installed on Saturday, causing a horrific traffic backup that went well past Robinson Street, possibly up to Rock Creek and beyond.
Meanwhile, here's what's planned for the future (south is up for some reason)...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.staticflickr.com%2F2855%2F9720446228_52bb3e8749_c.jpg&hash=8782a9c5eb45aec2613d2fa4c2406cce105bcbc7)
Killing existing access to Lindsey and making more traffic follow a loop than before. Even just briefly looking at it I have better ideas.
Looks like traffic to Lindsey would use "Ed Noble Pkwy" and avoid I-35 altogether.
I think you may be misinterpreting the diagram. There's a SPUI at Lindsey replacing the old configuration (which is shown as gray lines with Xs).
We're talking about traffic from SH 9 to Lindsey.
Ed Noble Parkway deadends south of Lindsey. You would have to use 24th Ave SE (the north-south arterial to the east/left of the interstate). This is what I already do when going from 9 to Lindsey. It is no worse than the interstate since there are no stoplights on that stretch of 24th, and you don't have to deal with merging with interstate traffic. Keeping that movement on 24th keeps local traffic flow on local roads and out of the way of through traffic.
I'm not too crazy about the loop ramp but other than that the design makes sense, and losing the access between the two interchanges is worth it to get the benefits of the ramp braiding.
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 29, 2013, 01:24:01 PM
Ed Noble Parkway deadends south of Lindsey.
Not after construction, according to a June 2011 public hearing (http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/meetings/a2011/110622/presentation.pdf) ("Provides a SH 9E/Ed Noble Parkway direct connection", p. 22). This presentation includes (on p. 20) practically the same map as the one you posted. In particular, note the red road with white arrow outside the loop to I-35 south and the pink road with white arrow coming north off that loop.
Ah. The only plan I was familiar with was to have Ed Noble feed into SB I-35 (going through the space where the new loop ramp is on the final plan) so that direct access to SB I-35 at Lindsey could be elimitanted. I had assumed since they were going with the ramp-braiding plan that they were going to leave Ed Noble alone.
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 29, 2013, 02:37:43 PM
Ah. The only plan I was familiar with was to have Ed Noble feed into SB I-35 (going through the space where the new loop ramp is on the final plan) so that direct access to SB I-35 at Lindsey could be elimitanted. I had assumed since they were going with the ramp-braiding plan that they were going to leave Ed Noble alone.
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 29, 2013, 02:37:43 PM
Ah. The only plan I was familiar with was to have Ed Noble feed into SB I-35 (going through the space where the new loop ramp is on the final plan) so that direct access to SB I-35 at Lindsey could be elimitanted. I had assumed since they were going with the ramp-braiding plan that they were going to leave Ed Noble alone.
Does that mean the trarfic will flow more freely?
If you're going to cover up the fact that your project is running late, at least make sure you change the name of the month in the body of the copy to match the altered header...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FwfqIdX2.png&hash=8d772ec3be19708bf444e677bc60808032d69c47)
Running two months late now...OKC Traffax says the bridge is now narrowed "through December".
There's a lot of dirt being moved around at the SH-9 interchange. I wonder if they are planning on launching its reconfiguration immediately after the bridge is complete.
Google Maps has updated their satellite view with images of the partially completed interchange at Main Street (https://maps.google.com/?ll=35.218478,-97.485058&spn=0.005119,0.010568&t=h&z=17). I haven't been over that way in a long time, so I don't know how recent that image is, though.
The imagery is dated October 5, 2013 in Google Earth. I'm kind of surprised they're not farther along with this project. How long did it take to build the SPUI at I-40 & S. Morgan Road?
Several areas in Oklahoma have new satellite imagery. Even Lawton had its imagery updated. The new shopping center on 82nd Street is visible as well as the construction progress on the new shopping center and hotel at 2nd Street. :D
They've also updated the imagery in Moore, showing the tornado-damaged areas. If you zoom in far enough, it goes to an older picture showing what the area looked like before the tornado.
If you use the "Historical Imagery" feature in Google Earth, you can toggle the slider from at least three levels of recently dated imagery of Moore, OK.
The current, Oct 5, 2013, imagery shows a lot of empty building foundations and some new construction in progress.
The May 21, 2013 imagery was taken just 1 day after the EF-5 tornado struck. The level of devastation is pretty horrific.
The November 6, 2012 imagery is a very good look at Moore before all the destruction took place.
The southbound bridge over the Canadian is DONE! ...and it still has three lanes going southbound, same as it did when the project started. The shoulder is just really wide now :banghead:
We also have two new Clearview signs on monotube cantilevers now. They don't look *awful* from what I saw, but I was too busy focusing on the new traffic pattern to give them all that close of a look.
All signage on the bridge is installed now. Going northbound, there is a cantilever with advance signage for exits 108A and 108B on the same panel (separated by a vertical line). The exit direction signs for the exit lanes north and southbound both have the arrows in the yellow field per the new MUTCD. However, the northbound exit for eastbound SH-9 features a down arrow being used as an up arrow.
Strangely, the exit direction sign for Exit 106 going southbound is a brand new truss-style cantilever, while everything else is monotube. Perhaps ODOT is limiting monotubes to Cleveland and Oklahoma counties, and McClain County is supposed to use trusses for some reason?
There are tubes in Tulsa and Rogers Counties on I-44 and the BA.
Here's some sign photos...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FhfoJDj1.jpg&hash=dcbf047d0ffa32d335a5287888365b423f7dd1db)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fe8A4gvL.jpg&hash=53001aab6acd7093190e9173e7df5a6cea8b7e85)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FVDWiVxt.jpg&hash=d819109236c313dbfa3a7f24b691c9d864d26e5f)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fct3PajL.jpg&hash=93460cd0c77356bf14a15f7c46c0307897fef46f)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FhKzG6vQ.jpg&hash=1d8c37a037b04ce82f58743d946c5c436baefebf)
The Main Street interchange is planned to open tonight: Norman Transcript article (http://www.normantranscript.com/new/x749158124/Normans-Main-Street-bridge-over-interstate-to-open-tonight)
Went through a couple of hours ago. The left turn signals were blinking red, but everything else was shut off. The signals are on a black monotube gantry much like the one in the photo above.
Oklahoma's new signage is a lot like Pennsylvania's. In Pennsylvania, they keep the exit tabs, route direction and mileage distance Highway Gothic while the actual destinations are Clearview. And the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission uses exclusively tube gantries now, though PennDOT has been slower to pick them up.
how about going around it so we don't have to go through it at all?
Quote from: Gnutella on April 17, 2014, 05:48:53 PM
Oklahoma's new signage is a lot like Pennsylvania's. In Pennsylvania, they keep the exit tabs, route direction and mileage distance Highway Gothic while the actual destinations are Clearview. And the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission uses exclusively tube gantries now, though PennDOT has been slower to pick them up.
Good luck making an accurate general statement about Oklahoma signage practices. The signage put up on the south side of Norman follows that rule–which more or less is the federal guidelines for Clearview–but north of Main Street, the signage put up in 2010 has Clearview everything.
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 18, 2014, 12:55:37 AM
Quote from: Gnutella on April 17, 2014, 05:48:53 PM
Oklahoma's new signage is a lot like Pennsylvania's. In Pennsylvania, they keep the exit tabs, route direction and mileage distance Highway Gothic while the actual destinations are Clearview. And the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission uses exclusively tube gantries now, though PennDOT has been slower to pick them up.
Good luck making an accurate general statement about Oklahoma signage practices. The signage put up on the south side of Norman follows that rule–which more or less is the federal guidelines for Clearview–but north of Main Street, the signage put up in 2010 has Clearview everything.
Well I was just going by what I saw.
ODOT and the OK Turnpike Commission have a hit and miss execution in how they design and build highway signs. They'll do a good job on some signs and then do terrible work on another. Their use of Clearview is right in line with this inconsistency.
I think ODOT & OTC are trying to copy how Clearview is used in Texas, but apparently some of the people involved in creating the designs or fabricating the signs are missing key details or just not caring about the details.
Texas uses FHWA Series Gothic 2000 for the lettering and numerals on exit tabs, numerals on route markers and other negative contrast (black lettering) items -like "exit only" boxes on overhead signs. Usually they use the "D" weight. The primary sign message, white letters on green background, is supposed to be set in Clearview (usually 5-W-R).
It's a pretty simple model to follow, but there are Clearview signs across Oklahoma that don't follow the model.
I see a lot of exit tab lettering set in Clearview 4W rather than Series Gothic D. A bunch of signs around Lawton have this. Those new signs along I-35 in Norman seem more like an exception rather than the rule.
The OTC has put up white signs in a few places featuring black Clearview 3W copy. Clearview hasn't been approved for black lettering on yellow or white backgrounds and even if it was the OTC is using the thinner "W" weights rather than the slightly bolder "B" weights of Clearview meant for negative contrast use. I guess they didn't want to spend the extra couple hundred bucks for the full Clearview font set. BTW, Texas has done the same thing on some highways, but at least they're setting the type on properly sized signs and with the wider, more legible 5W & 5WR weights. A small sign panel with condensed Clearview 3W lettering isn't very legible when you're speeding by it at 75mph.
ODOT has made a mess with some of the Clearview based signs here in Lawton. There's one sign along I-44 Eastbound near Comanche Nation Casino that honestly looks like its lettering was squeezed in the computer to fit a more narrow, less expensive sign panel. It really looks like someone set the lettering in CV 5W or 4W and squeezed it to fit. I expect that terrible practice in graphic design from lots of commercial sign companies, but I'm surprised to see it on a highway sign. There's a couple signs that look like Clearview 6W, but stretched a little wider. There's another sign along I-44 Westbound just before the Cache Road exit that has some of the letters in its message set in different sizes. It's like the fabricators had a bunch of spare letters in different sizes and were just grabbing whatever was handy at the moment.
One of my biggest complaints with ODOT's use of Clearview: terrible letter spacing. Some of the signs here in Lawton look terrible because the fabricators obviously placed the lettering without proper use of the spacing tables or even a pattern. Clearview has the proper spacing built into the font files. Some of the signs around here just like the lettering was eye-balled onto the panel and drilled into place right then. Some of the legends aren't even properly aligned.
Texas, in general, does a much better job using Clearview. TXDOT has some other practices I can't stand though -like putting 3 digit interstates on 2 digit shields and 2 digit interstates on 3 digit shields. That's just backward.
I know plenty of road geeks cannot stand Clearview. I think it looks pretty good, but only if the type is properly placed and spaced. Bad line spacing and bad letter spacing will make just about any typeface look bad. Even Series Gothic looks downright terrible when mishandled. There's still a number of old Series Gothic-based signs on the H.E. Bailey Turnpike that have all sorts of design problems.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 18, 2014, 04:55:38 PMTexas uses FHWA Series Gothic 2000 for the lettering and numerals on exit tabs, numerals on route markers and other negative contrast (black lettering) items -like "exit only" boxes on overhead signs. Usually they use the "D" weight.
My experience with recent TxDOT freeway signing plans has differed in a few regards. Usually all positive-contrast legend other than shields is in Clearview (normally 5-W-R, as you note), including the exit tab, while negative-contrast legend is in Series E or E Modified.
QuoteI see a lot of exit tab lettering set in Clearview 4W rather than Series Gothic D. A bunch of signs around Lawton have this. Those new signs along I-35 in Norman seem more like an exception rather than the rule.
Oklahoma DOT's contractors also seem not to be fabricating signs exactly as shown in the plans. Some errors in the plans have been cleaned up. The plans also call for Clearview 6-W for primary destination legend (Oklahoma is the only Clearview-using state I know of that does this), but aside from the examples you mention near Lawton, I am not sure signs have actually been fabricated with it rather than 5-W.
QuoteTxDOT has some other practices I can't stand though -like putting 3 digit interstates on 2 digit shields and 2 digit interstates on 3 digit shields. That's just backward.
That practice is being phased out, actually.
In general, my impression is that with Texas, WYSIWYG--the signs as installed tend to match the plans fairly closely. With Oklahoma, on the other hand, there are apparently quality assurance failures at multiple levels, so what gets installed in the field is often the result of an abortive attempt to fix a bad design in the plans.
What I would do is clean house at ODOT, then establish a consistent set of signage design guidelines, and require a specialist QA engineer to sign off on the plans before contracts are let. Eliminate OTA's signage design offices and have them contract design work out to ODOT. That should take care of most problems, since the contractors would no longer have any reason to muddle around with the plans. If problems persist, make a sign QA engineer (maybe the same one that signed off on the plans, if practicable) inspect all signage prior to its installation to verify that it matches the spec. If it doesn't, require the contractor to redo the work at their own expense.
As for the SPUI...I used the new Exit 109 for the first time this evening. The third northbound lane begins where Lindsey/SH-9 traffic merges into I-35, then there is a long decel lane for the exit, probably long enough to be signed as an Exit Only. The only signage up on northbound I-35 is the gore sign. On the exit ramp, there are signs for Main St westbound (Left 2 Lanes) and eastbound (Right Lane). At the split, there is a ground-mounted sign in the physical gore with a stippled-arrow diagrammatic (rare in Oklahoma!). The eastbound ramp has a yield line on it (maybe a first for Oklahoma?), but one wonders why they bothered, since the ramp resolves in an accel lane. I didn't pass under the signal but from what I saw the signal heads are angled properly. Lighting has yet to be installed, and it will definitely improve the interchange when it comes. Overall I would give the project an A–it is really nice seeing something like this in Oklahoma, and Manhattan Bridge did a great job on the project.
I don't even understand why they have so many deviations.
Let me stress this: I work at a commercial sign manufacturing company. I design signs for a living. Getting specs like this straight is not difficult at all. Actually my job designing commercial work is arguably more difficult since I'm having to do all sorts of reinventing of the wheel. Highway sign designers do not have to do that. They have a very limited formula to follow.
OTOH, I'm not going to leave it at the grunt level positions. Honestly, especially looking at it with my more than 20 years doing this kind of work, this problem smells like something happening higher up. Some "boss" somewhere dictates some odd order on how a sign has to look. Or rather he wants a certain friend's company contracted to do the job, and that company couldn't give the first damn about following the specs of anything in the latest MUTCD manual or even making the sign look proper. There is more than a few large highway sign displays here in Oklahoma that definitely fall in that latter area. Or maybe they say "we don't need a sign panel that big (and expensive). Let's do what we can to make it cost less." And that's where the practice of setting high speed freeway sign legends in something other than Clearview 5W or 5WR comes into play (not to mention making the 4W or 3W lettering even smaller to fit the cheaper panels).
Let me frame this talk by saying I legally own font licenses to the full Clearview font set and Series 2000. I know how this stuff is supposed to look and fit. Somebody somewhere is making calls on doing the job on the cheap. And a bunch of the signs around Lawton just plain look like the fabricators didn't give the first popcorn fart on how the end result would look.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 20, 2014, 03:46:25 AMOTOH, I'm not going to leave it at the grunt level positions. Honestly, especially looking at it with my more than 20 years doing this kind of work, this problem smells like something happening higher up. Some "boss" somewhere dictates some odd order on how a sign has to look. Or rather he wants a certain friend's company contracted to do the job, and that company couldn't give the first damn about following the specs of anything in the latest MUTCD manual or even making the sign look proper. There is more than a few large highway sign displays here in Oklahoma that definitely fall in that latter area. Or maybe they say "we don't need a sign panel that big (and expensive). Let's do what we can to make it cost less." And that's where the practice of setting high speed freeway sign legends in something other than Clearview 5W or 5WR comes into play (not to mention making the 4W or 3W lettering even smaller to fit the cheaper panels).
Oklahoma DOT construction contracts are competitively bid, so I really don't see an opportunity for corruption to come into the picture unless some signing is done through a statewide contract awarded by RFP where unit prices are not the primary consideration for contract award.
You could argue that someone along the food chain is receiving kickbacks, but where does the money to pay them come from? Even if a corrupt individual at Oklahoma DOT assures company X that shoddy work will not be rejected in exchange for an under-the-table payment, company X still has to submit a bid, still has to win on price, and still has to supply the items specified in the contract, otherwise the contract won't survive an audit and whistleblowers will come out of the woodwork.
It costs almost as much in materials and labor to do signing work shoddily as it does to do it properly--the main difference in final cost to the contractor is the risk of the shoddy work being rejected and having to be re-done at his sole expense. That is not enough of a margin to make it worthwhile for someone to risk fines, jail, restitution, and indefinite professional blacklisting. The foregone income from blacklisting alone over a working lifetime is more than the total value of a signing contract, let alone the profit a contractor typically makes on it.
My personal theory as to Oklahoma DOT's signing QA failures (which was originally Randy Hersh's) has more to do with the reason the DOT tends to do small construction contracts in general: maintaining capacity in the construction industry. There is probably a quite conscious decision (ratified by multiple stakeholders within the DOT) to go easy on signing plans and fabricated signs that are defective and ugly but in ways that do not compromise safety, rather than to raise costs for consultants and contractors by requiring do-overs and thus risk them dropping out of bidding for the DOT altogether.
QuoteLet me frame this talk by saying I legally own font licenses to the full Clearview font set and Series 2000. I know how this stuff is supposed to look and fit. Somebody somewhere is making calls on doing the job on the cheap. And a bunch of the signs around Lawton just plain look like the fabricators didn't give the first popcorn fart on how the end result would look.
Let me ask you this: why don't you bid on Oklahoma DOT signing contracts yourself?
Why don't we bid on the jobs? The short answer is governmental red tape. There's too much of it to make the jobs worth doing. We would have to hire more people just to deal with that part of the work. There's nothing wrong with that, but that's only so long as the work is coming in dependably. Our company considered it back in the 1990s, but hasn't bothered with it since, even with the switch to Clearview based legends.
Most traffic signs are made by city/state run departments, prisons or sign companies that specialize only in that type of work. It's not very accessible to commercial custom sign companies that concentrate on manufacturing signs for businesses.
Corruption is a pretty strong word. I don't think anything criminal is happening. The problem is the sign industry is filled with too many people who really don't care all that much about getting details right. They want to take short cuts. Or cut corners to increase a profit margin, even if it means violating the standards for design and material specifications. That sort of careless attitude is common across many industries.
QuoteIt costs almost as much in materials and labor to do signing work shoddily as it does to do it properly--the main difference in final cost to the contractor is the risk of the shoddy work being rejected and having to be re-done at his sole expense.
Too many pursue their easier, faster & cheaper short cuts with the following gamble:
no one is going to notice.It's faster and easier to eye-ball place routed aluminum letters on a highway sign panel without using a large paper pattern or the letter spacing table chart. Unfortunately the end results aren't going to look very good.
The errors stand out to me like puke on a white shirt. But I'm a graphic designer who specializes in outdoor design. The average motorist probably wouldn't notice the worst problems and even if he did chances are slim he would complain to ODOT or anybody else about it. In the end the signs get designed/built wrong and stay that way until a storm, car, etc. damages it enough to need replacement.
Here in Lawton a couple or so months ago a vehicle accident took out a fairly large green panel sign next to Gore Blvd in front of the entrance to I-44 westbound. That panel was probably around 8' X 8,' mounted on two breakaway posts (which broke away when the car hit it). ODOT just replaced it with a tiny sign with Clearview 2W lettering (actually it could be 1W). It's barely any bigger than a street name sign. I hope that cheap sign is a temporary solution.
Funding issues could be a source for some of these sign goofs. The companies building these signs may have stock parts & materials laying around that need to be used. An order comes in for a new sign, but the design of the sign panel is longer than a bunch of the 12" aluminum extrusion bars they have in stock. So they modify the design, even if it violates MUTCD specs, in order to avoid ordering more materials.
I guess the thing I can't understand is the companies building these signs are handling all that PITA governmental red tape yet they can't manage to get the look of these signs right. It's not difficult at all to design these signs. They just have to follow through properly.
I would complain about it but I haven't the foggiest idea who I should contact, and I get the impression from my limited interaction with ODOT that I wouldn't be heard, anyway.
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 21, 2014, 01:36:49 AMI would complain about it but I haven't the foggiest idea who I should contact, and I get the impression from my limited interaction with ODOT that I wouldn't be heard, anyway.
You have to start somewhere. You might not see tangible results until after the fifth letter that is followed up with a phone call, or until you get a major daily newspaper or TV station involved, but eventually the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Look at it this way: a badly fabricated sign is something tangible that people will notice when it is pointed out to them ("Our state DOT has a nice sideline in ransom notes" is a nice lead-in). It is not like you are campaigning for construction plans to be put online (I wrote a letter on this once to the Colorado DOT executive director--ignored), or for as-builts to be put in a publicly accessible EDMS (I wrote to the KDOT secretary about this--also ignored), or even for a clear statement that highway construction plans aren't covered by exemptions in the state open-records law (Randy Hersh and I made separate attempts at this in Pennsylvania, with mixed results).
I'm trying to remember who I wrote at ODOT years ago about two outdated ground-mounted green signs along I-44 in Lawton. The signs listed the Percussive Arts Society HQ and McMahon Auditorium, but the Percussive Arts Society relocated their HQ to Indianapolis. I did get a response from someone at ODOT about the matter. He did say the signs eventually would be replaced and that such signs often involve collecting some money from the listed attraction to help fund the replacement.
Both outdated signs were replaced, but both have some graphic design issues.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 21, 2014, 02:08:30 PM
I'm trying to remember who I wrote at ODOT years ago about two outdated ground-mounted green signs along I-44 in Lawton. The signs listed the Percussive Arts Society HQ and McMahon Auditorium, but the Percussive Arts Society relocated their HQ to Indianapolis. I did get a response from someone at ODOT about the matter. He did say the signs eventually would be replaced and that such signs often involve collecting some money from the listed attraction to help fund the replacement.
Both outdated signs were replaced, but both have some graphic design issues.
I worked for the OK Legislature back in the 90's. My chairman wanted BGS's for the Gene Autry Museum placed on I35 at the Springer exit. It cost him $5,000 in earmarks to get them.
I got to work with the ODOT sign shop to design them:
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/traffic/index.htm
09031(05) 3 IS035 0.340 $30,212,200
GRADE,DRAINING,BRIDGE & SURFACE
CLEVELAND I-35: 6 LANE FROM RIVER, NORTH 0.34 MI IN NORMAN (SH-9 INTERCHANGE)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
09031(09) 3 IS035 0.780 0 $27,587,500
GRADE,DRAINING,BRIDGE & SURFACE
CLEVELAND I-35: 6 LANE FROM 0.34 MI NORTH OF RIVER, NORTH 0.78 MI IN NORMAN
(LINDSEY STREET INTERCHANGE)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you thought the Main Street rebuild was messy, just wait until these 2 start. They are listed on the tentative September bid opening list. As they will have to CLOSE Lindsey to take down the old bridge, the traffic on the Main St bridge will only triple or more. There is no practical way for Normanites to get to the development on Ed Noble. :bigass:
Quote from: rte66man on May 09, 2014, 07:26:05 PM
There is no practical way for Normanites to get to the development on Ed Noble. :bigass:
Oh, I can't go to Red Lobster or OfficeMax? I think I'll be okay. :-D
I am just hoping that the SH-9 interchange will not be closed or given a ridiculously short merge this time. If I have to cross the river on I-44, I'll do it.
Quote from: Scott5114 on May 10, 2014, 01:19:08 PM
I am just hoping that the SH-9 interchange will not be closed or given a ridiculously short merge this time. If I have to cross the river on I-44, I'll do it.
I can't see how they could do that with Lindsey being closed. There is no practical detour for OK9 traffic.
24th W up to Main, or else Robinson, depending on how far east you're coming from. I doubt it will be closed entirely. I'm just afraid of some boneheaded configuration like we got last time that makes it impossible to use the ramp without dying several times per week.
QuoteThere is no practical way for Normanites to get to the development on Ed Noble.
It looks like early in the project they will connect 28th St/Ed Noble Parkway to the new Hwy 9 overpass, so at least we'll have some access to west Lindsey from Hwy 9.
If I'm not mistaken, that ramp is one way from Lindsey to SH-9. From SH-9 one will have to take 24th Avenue SW north to Lindsey. (Not that the development along Ed Noble is much of a hot spot anymore...there's a lot of vacancies as businesses pack up and move to the University North Park development up at 24th and Robinson.)
Looking at the plans, it appears to be two-way, so you will be able to travel to Lindsey from Hwy 9 as well. However, I don't see any direct access to I-35 coming from 28th Ave SW, you would have to go east to 24th Ave SW and make a U-turn.
Do you have a link to the plan you're looking at? I'm having a heck of a time figuring out how a two-way ramp there is going to work...
The list of plans is here: http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/contracts/index-list.php?year=14&month=11&day=0 (http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/contracts/index-list.php?year=14&month=11&day=0)
It's J/P#: 09031(05)
Sheet #157 shows the phase where the 28th Ave SW ramp is fully open.
J/P#: 09031(09) is the Lindsey St. project
Oh, cool, thanks. I guess I was looking at a preliminary planning document that didn't have two-way access to Lindsey.
Signing information begins at sheet 142 and for the most part is not pattern accurate, with Arial substituting for Clearview. When FHWA is shown, it is pattern accurate, and Clearview makes an appearance on a few panels. Notably, the diverge just west of 24th Avenue SE is signed only for I-35 NB/I-35 SB and SH-9 WB, with no mention of access to Lindsey Street until you are on the loop ramp. Likewise, only Lindsey Street is mentioned, not Ed Noble Parkway, which I would like to see because that is probably going to be the destination for most of the cars using this ramp.
Unfortunately, I think ODOT biffed the signing here, since there is no way to know that the new ramp to Lindsey exists until after you get on the ramp for south I-35, which is an entirely unintuitive movement to make if you're trying to go north to Lindsey.
"Univ of Okla" is shown as a destination for eastbound Lindsey St. This was one of the control cities for eastbound SH-9 until the late 1990s, when it was removed in favor of leaving Tecumseh to stand alone. "Univ of Okla" does not appear until you have already exited I-35, however.
I think I hate the I-35 NB to SH-9 EB ramp, since it involves two lane changes to continue east on SH-9 rather than being forced to turn right at 24th Ave SW or drive in the grass. Traffic volumes can be heavy on this stretch of SH-9 and this just unduly favors traffic from the north over that from the south.
Oh, and then there's this in the temporary traffic control section:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FrDQaYI6.png&hash=876a8f3340a05a170229847fd61106633d5048cd)
With whatever typeface ODOT uses on the finished signs, be it FHWA Series Gothic or Clearview, I just hope they don't screw around with the lowercase letters. I recently saw a couple newer signs along I-244 in Tulsa using Series Gothic, with the lowercase letters reduced to 75% of their normal size.
:angry: :banghead:
The City of Lawton has been repeating the same stupid mistake on all its newer street name sign panels. The only logical reason for shrinking lowercase characters in a legend: saving money by not having to use taller street name sign panels. They just keep using the skinny, less expensive ones made strictly for uppercase only legends.
Honestly, the FHWA needs to completely delete that verbiage from the MUTCD regarding approved typefaces and the size of the lowercase characters (the requirement of lowercase letters having an X-height at least 75% the M-height of the uppercase characters). Too many sign shops misunderstand this rule, thinking they have to modify the lowercase characters, shrinking them to 75% of their normal size. The FHWA should have either worded this rule more clearly or just dictated a specific type family. That would have been easier.
The Series Gothic lowercase letters don't quite have that X-height equal to 75% of the capital letter height in their native form (it's really 73%). Reduced to 75% of the normal size the lowercase letters have an X-height equal to only 54% of the cap height, not to mention the letter strokes are no longer uniform.
This is rich: an apparently permanent BGS has been posted on northbound I-35 between the SH-9 and Lindsey St. ramps. A sign was needed there because the signage on the current SH-9 bridge is occluded by the bridge under construction. But this sign includes a SH-74A shield, despite the fact that that highway was decommissioned in 2008!
Photo of the above:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FgM79eeN.jpg&hash=afd3ce107919c01c6a32d932e11857bf6e655dbe)
The project is about to ramp up next month:
http://www.news9.com/story/27579607/odot-to-begin-71-million-project-on-i-35-in-cleveland-county
The contract is for $71 million, the highest ever approved by the transportation commission:
http://www.news9.com/story/27575968/transportation-panel-approves-record-71m-contract
http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/newsmedia/press/2015/15-006_I-35_SH-9_East_Lindsey_St_project_in_Norman_beginning_in_March_public_invited_to_informational_meeting.pdf
Signs are up saying the Lindsey Street interchange work is beginning in early March. Hilariously, they all say "Lindsay St".
Is ODOT doing any funky, stupid things with the lettering on those signs -such as shrinking the size of the lowercase letters to 75% of their normal size?
Recently ODOT finished some road work on I-44 near the Red River. The Grandfield and Randlett exits have new big green signs set in Clearview, but with the lowercase letters shrank to 75% of their normal size. It's yet another example of some "designer" completely misinterpreting rules in the 2009 MUTCD. The end result is extremely stupid looking signage.
I still collect ODOT signing plan sheets and, judging from the recent ones, they have given up all hope of satisfying the sign nerds (myself included) on this forum. It's hard to say though what will happen once all the change orders are in. Probably a minority of the recent work on OKC freeways has been plotted with correct fonts, and occasionally they do catch mistakes.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on February 23, 2015, 02:46:24 PM
Is ODOT doing any funky, stupid things with the lettering on those signs -such as shrinking the size of the lowercase letters to 75% of their normal size?
The signs in question are VMSes, so they don't have the opportunity, fortunately.
Update on the current situation: SH-9 traffic over I-35 has been shifted onto the new bridge that was built during the Canadian River bridge widening project (and sat unused until now). The old bridge already has a good chunk of its concrete stripped away.
That was quick: the old bridge is toast. The NB I-35 ramp to Lindsey is closed, presumably so the piers can be taken out.
At the time that the SPUI at Main Street was announced, the Morgan Road SPUI had not been constructed.
Update on construction: NB I-35 ramp to Lindsey is open again. NB I-35 has been shifted onto the c/d road.
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 22, 2015, 05:42:19 PM
At the time that the SPUI at Main Street was announced, the Morgan Road SPUI had not been constructed.
They still got it wrong. It would never have been the first given the construction schedules of both projects. I would be curious to know which one was announced first.
Not quite. The only new ramps that have been constructed are NB I-35 to EB SH-9 (open) and SB I-35 to EB SH-9 (not yet open). The traffic is actually on the north side of the jersey wall on the SH-9 overpass; temporary ramps are connecting it to I-35 at present while the old ramps are being demolished. The retaining walls for the bridge that will carry the WB SH-9 to SB I-35 movement over the SB I-35 to EB SH-9 movement have been built but no girders have been put in place as of yet. That will have to be completed before the new SB I-35 to EB SH-9 ramp can open.
One retaining wall for the new Lindsey Street bridge, on the west side of the interchange near the car lot, has been built. Presumably they're planning on using the same pattern they did for the Main Street rebuild: build half the bridge, demo the old bridge, build the other half.
The work that seems to be the furthest along is the portion of SH-9 east of I-35. That has all been torn up and I believe they are currently working on the asphalt base layer that the concrete will sit on top of. Traffic is shifted outward to what will eventually be the #2/#3 lanes when the project wraps up. They've also almost completed sound walls along this portion.
I would like to provide pictures but this is a rather tricky project to drive through sometimes so I don't feel safe driving and photographing here, and the area isn't really conducive to visiting on foot.
Quote from: Scott5114 on September 04, 2015, 05:56:35 AM
Presumably they're planning on using the same pattern they did for the Main Street rebuild: build half the bridge, demo the old bridge, build the other half.
The plans show that Lindsay will be closed and the entire bridge will be removed then new one built. By this time they should have 28th Ave SW open so that we will be able to access West Lindsay from SH 9.
Current state of the project follows. Use this image as reference (click it to zoom in if you can't read the labels).
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmKR4zKy.jpg&hash=4d61e4c360625310b8ab973949bcf283e2ef6712)
- Traffic on mainline I-35 is shifted outward to what was once the c/d roads through the area (and the medians between the c/d roads and the old mainlines, which have been torn out and covered with asphalt. The median barrier is currently being constructed; it currently begins a few dozen feet north of the river bridge and extends about midway between SH-9 and Lindsey.
- Traffic on mainline SH-9 is also shifted outward between the interchange and just east of 24th Avenue SW; this intersection is fully open after having had various closures for a few months. Final pavement (concrete) is mostly in place here, it's just blocked off. There are a few slabs missing closer to Bridge C. A sound barrier has been built along the north side of SH-9 between 24th Avenue SW and McGee Drive.
- Bridge C–I know there's two Bridge C's on this map, but I'll use that to refer to the one carrying SH-9–is open to one lane of traffic each way, on the correct sides of the median barrier. It was constructed during a previous project. This project just finished its paint job.
- Traffic exiting from I-35 NB to SH-9 EB is using the new, final ramp. Traffic exiting from I-35 NB to Lindsey Street, as well as traffic entering I-35 NB from both SH-9 WB and Lindsey Street, is still using the old ramps, yet to be touched (although they now merge directly into the mainline and not c/d roads as they did before).
- Traffic exiting from I-35 SB to Lindsey Street and entering I-35 SB from Lindsey Street is still using the old ramps.
- Traffic exiting from I-35 SB to SH-9 EB is using the old ramp (shown in gray) up to the point where it intersects the embankment Ramp D will sit on; it detours around it on a temporary ramp until it reaches the approximate point where the ramp to/from 28th Avenue SW will merge in, at which point it transitions to that ramp and follows it to Bridge C.
- Traffic entering I-35 SB from SH-9 WB is using the old ramp east of the interstate, shifts slightly to use Bridge C (which was built south of the old bridge it replaced), shifts back onto the old ramp, then shifts onto a temporary ramp with a smaller radius inside what will be the loop of Ramp D.
- Bridge E1 has all of its beams in place. They are probably decking it, but it's hard to see from the ground. The embankment for Ramp D is partially done, but it's not high enough to actually connect to Bridge E1 yet, although you can get a rough idea of its final size and shape already.
- Ramp A was completed by a prior project. It isn't accessible, although the temporary ramp to SB I-35 crosses it and uses a little bit of its pavement as a result. Otherwise, it seems to be contractor parking for now.
- Part of the wall that will hold up the west side of Bridge A is under construction.
- The following have not been started: Bridges D and E2, Ramps C, E, F, G, H. I would imagine Bridge E2 will not be constructed until after Ramp D is ready to go, since that would allow Ramp A to be opened and the detour for that ramp removed (since I think that is right where E2 will sit). No idea when Ramp C/Bridge D are planned for, since I think they could do that right now and not interfere with anything, though maybe that will be done when things get closer on the SPUI and Ramp F is closer to being ready.
Looks good, Paul. Thanks.
I'm not sure where the exact point the Lindsey-to-I-35 SB ramp merges in is since I hardly ever approach the project from the north (and when I'm heading past it NB it's often dark) but the general layout is correct as of right now.
Some updates on this:
[ul]
- I-35 SB has been shifted inward to what I assume will be the permanent #1 and #2 lanes. I haven't been able to take a look at NB I-35 in the light to see if it was shifted as well.
- The traffic flow for Ramp D has changed slightly. Now, instead of crossing Ramp A and merging into the Interstate, Ramp D loops around, joins the unopened Ramp A, and follows it until just upstream of the Canadian River bridge, and cuts over on a temporary ramp. When this ramp joins I-35, a third lane is added, forming the three lanes of traffic on the bridge.
- Bridge E1 looks, for the most part, done, and the embankment leading up to it is mostly complete. Should be in a good position to construct the final Ramp D. Bridge E2 is also under construction, but it's hard to get a good angle to look at it and gauge how far along it is.
- There is grading for what looks to be a temporary ramp to replace Ramp C while the new ramp is constructed.
[/ul]
I wasn't seeing any difference, even in edit mode, so I went ahead and edited the map to reflect the changes (as well as the opening of the aforementioned temporary ramp C and traffic shift onto the permanent pavement for WB SH-9 in that area). You might want to double-check my tagging and such.
More updates:
- Ramp from Lindsey Street to I-35 SB is closed and torn up, presumably to make way for the new bridge embankment and Ramp H. Detour posted to follow Ed Noble Parkway to Main Street. The ramp from I-35 SB to Lindsey is still open.
- I-35 NB has been shifted inward to use what I believe to be the permanent #1/#2 lanes.
I will attempt to edit OSM to reflect the changes shortly. Again, Paul, if you'd like to double-check everything it would be appreciated.
Ramp A is now open to traffic. Ramp D is still using the detour, so there is a brief two-lane section of Ramp A between the point where the detour merges with it and the temporary ramp cutting over to I-35 SB. The new Ramp D is coming along nicely; the only thing still being worked on is the embankment after it crosses Bridge E1 that will take it back down to meet with I-35.
Also, northbound exit 108B has a c/d road once again.
Same here. Yeah, it's all back. It'll get deleted eventually...just not until later, it looks like.
NB I-35 ramp to Lindsey Street is closed for the remainder of the year.
Just wanted to break up the streak you 2 had going. :bigass:
New Ramp D is open now, including the ramp to Lindsey Street/Ed Noble. I went ahead and updated OSM to reflect this change.
ODOT is planning to close Lindsey Street over I-35 and all of the remaining ramps on Tuesday.
from May 7:
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7535/27072710246_2befcc7e41_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/HfjHyj)IMG_1477 (https://flic.kr/p/HfjHyj) by rte66man (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/), on Flickr
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7719/27105993115_a16623fbfb.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/HigioT)IMG_1495 (https://flic.kr/p/HigioT) by rte66man (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/), on Flickr
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7082/26831821340_aa0bd24bc5.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GT36Fj)IMG_1483 (https://flic.kr/p/GT36Fj) by rte66man (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/), on Flickr
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7418/26831820760_d6b5798ff7.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GT36vj)IMG_1486 (https://flic.kr/p/GT36vj) by rte66man (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/), on Flickr
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7195/26831820210_0bdc3b9a45.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GT36kQ)IMG_1490 (https://flic.kr/p/GT36kQ) by rte66man (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/), on Flickr
Great pictures. Check out the Lindsey sign in the first one, where instead of putting a MUTCD-style CLOSED banner on, they were trying to black everything out with electrical tape, but ran out of tape and ended up having to do it the correct way anyway. (There was a few days between when the tape and the CLOSED banner went up)
Eastbound OK9 at NW 24th St:
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7778/26854985820_78c784e954.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/GV5PEU)IMG_1480 (https://flic.kr/p/GV5PEU) by rte66man (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/), on Flickr
Westbound OK9 at I35. You can see where the permanent northbound ramp will be:
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7679/27096078546_5387121e71.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/Hhou93)IMG_1483 (https://flic.kr/p/Hhou93) by rte66man (https://www.flickr.com/photos/rte66man/), on Flickr
Some new signs have gone up, including this one:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FBIxVhLW.jpg&hash=8142de89bdd755eaf179fb2a324769e339741e2c)
(Pardon the bad image due to the rain and not expecting this sign to be up yet.) This appears to be Oklahoma's first attempt at an APL. Looks like a change order went through at some point here, since all of the rest of the signs in this project use Clearview. Of note here is that 1) the capital of Oklahoma is "Oklahoma C ity" now, 2) "EXIT ONLY" is apparently regulatory 3) there's no real need to make sure that the sign is level before you bolt it to the gantry.
Incredibly annoying. I usually won't even look at the signs when I'm in Oklahoma or I get angry.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FBIxVhLW.jpg&hash=8142de89bdd755eaf179fb2a324769e339741e2c)
Quote from: Scott 5114This appears to be Oklahoma's first attempt at an APL. Looks like a change order went through at some point here, since all of the rest of the signs in this project use Clearview. Of note here is that 1) the capital of Oklahoma is "Oklahoma C ity" now, 2) "EXIT ONLY" is apparently regulatory 3) there's no real need to make sure that the sign is level before you bolt it to the gantry.
I'm guessing that the people doing the traffic sign design work and fabrication work (either for ODOT or for subcontractors) probably aren't getting paid worth a damn. They're obviously not using the two wet, round things on their faces to observe whether the sign's layout, fabrication and installation look correct. They're just punching in and punching out without any regard to actually doing a good job.
The "Oklahoma C ity" spacing is another hint that seems to confirm the sign fabricators are actually applying vinyl letters one at a time to the sign panel. Notice how badly off-center "Oklahoma C ity" is placed. It's flush to the right edge of the sign panel rather than centered in its portion of the layout. They obviously placed the I-35 shield and "North" later, centering both elements above the "Oklahoma C ity" letters. The "Exit Only" and arrow elements are hugged over to the right even farther rather than being centered with the other OKC elements on the sign panel. Maybe they did this odd-ball graphics placement as an attempt to center the copy and arrow over the right lane. Doing so would require a longer (and more expensive) sign panel for the display to look properly balanced. Yet it still disregards the effect of the middle lane. Overall it's a crappy layout.
But there's at least one positive thing to it: at least the lowercase letters weren't shrank to 75% of of their normal size. There's a bunch of horrible new signs bearing that glaring error on the first few miles of I-44 North of the Red River.
Actually, I think that this sort of error is more indicative of some sort of software problem encountered when fabricating the sign–bad kerning on the FHWA series font file is most likely, but it could be an issue with the program itself, or even an error like the sheeting slipping while being cut. Then someone just weeded the vinyl, slapped the transfer tape on, and stuck it to the panel. Even if they noticed the kerning error, what can you do? The vinyl's cut, it's too late to fix now, and they're not going to bother to re-cut it.
The tell-tale signs of manually-applied elements tend to look more like the subtle errors you find on button copy signs (which were usually manually assembled)–you might get slight vertical displacement of letters here or there, or rounded letters, especially 's', are sometimes rotated a few degrees. But the kerning is usually good–people have an intuitive instinct of what properly kerned text looks like. It's one of those things that's easy to do by eye but gets complicated when you try to work it out mathematically.
My theories about this being the result of a change order have been strengthened: the next panel (on the gantry behind this one) has gone up and it now references Ed Noble Parkway, which I explicitly remember the plans on the as-bid sheets not doing. My guess, entirely unsupported by any actual evidence, is that the city of Norman made a request to include Ed Noble on the sign, as the construction (along with some important but unrelated outside factors) has been absolutely slaughtering the businesses along Ed Noble Parkway, and the city is desperate to keep the area from becoming a long-term blight.
Another fun thing about this sign: it lies. You cannot reach I-35 from the left lane. That lane splits off to Ed Noble/Lindsey.
Someone has gone by and installed yellow patches over the black-and-white EXIT ONLY patches, though.
Quote from: Scott5114Actually, I think that this sort of error is more indicative of some sort of software problem encountered when fabricating the sign–bad kerning on the FHWA series font file is most likely, but it could be an issue with the program itself, or even an error like the sheeting slipping while being cut.
Given my 20+ years of experience dealing with vinyl graphics, I say they're applying the letters one at a time. If the vinyl plotter is so badly out of whack that vinyl material is slipping while a cut job is in progress you will lose the entire job. Letters and other graphics elements won't get cut completely. You'll lose any sense of the baseline. As far as glitchy fonts are concerned, I don't know what software ODOT and its subcontractors use for creating traffic sign panels, but getting the tracking right is a very basic thing for any vector graphics application. I've used a lot of different traffic sign fonts since the early 1990's and never saw kerning errors on the magnitude of that "Oklahoma C ity" legend. That's just an example of a "designer" sleep walking through his job, or the likelihood fabricators are slapping traffic sign legends onto sign panels one letter at a time and doing a crappy job at it.
I also say they're doing the one letter at a time application approach given some of the odd-ball sign monstrosities here in the Lawton area. We're talking sign panels with letters of different sizes applied to the same legend. And not all of those letters are applied perfectly vertical either. You're not going to do that by accident. They're eye-ball placed on the panel, and badly at that. I don't care how much someone hates Clearview Highway, that kind of error is absolutely impossible for a font to deliver by itself. Even a bad piece of design software will at least keep the text object letters all the same height and same vertical level. It's like the ODOT sign makers are pulling individual letters out of a cardboard box and just sticking them to the sign in what ever manner they see fit.
I believe the software package OkDOT uses is called GuidSIGN, and if I am remembering right it is actually a plugin to AutoCAD, rather than a vector graphics program of its own. They definitely don't use anything like Inkscape or Illustrator.
Actually, the plans as produced by OkDOT include a table that lists each letter along with its X-axis position. If there's some sort of manual translation of those coordinates into the plotter, kerning errors like this could simply be the result of a typo or transposed digits.
Quote from: Scott5114I believe the software package OkDOT uses is called GuidSIGN, and if I am remembering right it is actually a plugin to AutoCAD, rather than a vector graphics program of its own. They definitely don't use anything like Inkscape or Illustrator.
Inkscape has its own primitive issues. But Adobe Illustrator has far more advanced type handling than most other professional-level design applications. Adobe InDesign goes a little farther in some respects; Illustrator has some of its own exclusive bells and whistles as well. Sign industry specific design applications have lagged behind in areas like full support of OpenType features. Adobe has been way ahead in this regard for over a decade. CorelDRAW only finally started fully supporting OpenType in 2012 at version X6.
Regardless of the type technology used, the designer can always convert the type object to outlines, then check and fine tune kerning before the job is output to a vinyl cutting plotter or large format printer. It's not difficult to get the stuff right in the computer
if the "designer" cares about those kinds of details.I usually convert all the type in a completed sign layout to outlines to avoid font loading & substitution problems if a certain layout is pulled up years later to be reproduced again. There are many different "flavors" of the same named typeface, yet each build will have subtle differences in how characters are drawn and kerned. Character sets may be radically different. For example, the version of Times New Roman bundled in with Windows 10 is not the same Times New Roman included with Windows XP. Programs like CorelDRAW or FlexiSign Pro can deliver unexpected results with type when opening archived files made with a much older version.
Quote from: Scott5114Actually, the plans as produced by OkDOT include a table that lists each letter along with its X-axis position. If there's some sort of manual translation of those coordinates into the plotter, kerning errors like this could simply be the result of a typo or transposed digits.
When a cut job is sent to a vinyl plotter the plotter itself doesn't see any fonts. It's all just shapes to cut, usually in some form of HPGL code. The same goes for sending jobs to computerized routing tables, except that's often G-code being sent to the machine. If the position of glyphs is out of whack then it's an issue in the design software (and maybe a bug in the font itself). But it's an issue that can be overcome by inspecting the layout. When routing letters out of aluminum or other materials those shapes are "nested" in routing software to get the most letters onto one sheet of material. Things like plotted paper patterns are used to get routed letters correctly positioned on the final surface.
I think we may be arguing the same thing from different ends. My impression of what is happening is that there's a bug in the software, or possibly operator error, causing kerning issues, and nobody is doing the QA to notice or correct the errors. Therefore, when it's sent to the plotter to produce the paper pattern (or the spacing table), it contains errors that are preserved if the assembler faithfully follows it.
Then again, the "bag of letters" theory has some merit to it: there was a sign briefly posted in OKC for the "kilpatricK" turnpike. Someone switched the Ks, which is unlikely to happen by any other way than if they were just grabbing letters and nailing them down willy-nilly. (They later sent someone out with a bucket truck to swap the letters.)
Of course, it could be one thing in one situation and another on another panel. The root cause is carelessness or incompetence at OkDOT; the exact mechanism by which it manifests itself is not so important.
Hey Scott (or anyone in the Norman area), is the bridge deck on Lindsey St finished yet? I seem to remember they were nearly done when ODOT had the press conference about funding shortfalls.
I don't go over there much during daylight hours, but if I do tomorrow I'll try to remember to swing by there.
Last I remember is that some concrete had been poured, but the sites of the barricades makes it difficult to get a really good look at what's going on.
My brother drives through there on a regular basis. He said all lanes in both direction are now open. Not sure if that means 3x3 or just 2x2 but it's at least progress.
I just heard that the Lindsey overpass and all ramps will be open in the late afternoon/evening of Friday, July 21st.
Was just by there today. Definitely sounds believable–the deck looks totally done and the signals on the bridge are in place (though off, obviously).
Mainline I-35 is now striped for three lanes but every time I've been through there one or more lanes has been closed for whatever reason. They were still doing some kind of work on the underside of the bridge Monday night. There is no median lighting in place south of Lindsey yet.
There's an opening event Friday morning. Breea Clark, Ward 6, posted on Facebook: "Join us in celebration of the much anticipated opening of the Lindsey Street Bridge over I-35. Grab your bike, rollerblades, skateboard, or walking shoes and join Mayor Lynne Miller and your Norman neighbors in the first crossing of the Lindsey Street Bridge over I-35! All ages and any form of non-motorized transportation, with the exception of motorized wheelchairs, are welcome. The bridge and on ramps will formally open to motor traffic on the evening of July 21st. Parking available at Lander's Chevrolet of Norman, please meet on the west side of the Lindsey Street Bridge over I-35. 9:00am-10:00am, July 21st."
If anyone could grab an pics that would be appreciated!
Just drove over the new Lindsey I-35 overpass. It's open.
When they took off the electrical tape from the Lindsey Street sign, the tape ended up damaging it, so now it's barely reflective at night :banghead:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F66RfWdd.jpg%3F1&hash=0d5d41d2cfc5070160c93426b015fc5936797973)
Did you know Dallas is west of Norman now?
Quote from: Scott5114 on July 23, 2017, 02:35:21 AM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F66RfWdd.jpg%3F1&hash=0d5d41d2cfc5070160c93426b015fc5936797973)
Did you know Dallas is west of Norman now?
<sigh> Oh, ODOT, how could you miss that one?
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on July 18, 2017, 09:14:28 PM
If anyone could grab an pics that would be appreciated!
https://www.ok.gov/odot/I-35_SH-9_Lindsey_Street_Project.html
http://www.koco.com/article/crowds-gather-to-celebrate-reopening-of-lindsey-street-bridge-in-norman/10340230
That's just a crappy sign all the way around. Even if they avoided the mistake with cardinal directions over the OK-9 and I-35 shields the whole layout looks poorly composed. The legends for Ed Noble Parkway and Lindsey Street are tiny compared to the Dallas legend on the right half of the panel. The I-35 shield appears to be using E-Modified for the numerals (rather than Series D). The shield is needlessly neutered. The OK state highway sign design continues to stink; I'd rather they go back to the generic white circle with numerals inside.
Overall this sign was about saving money. A larger, wider, overhead display would have been more effective, but cost more money to build & install. I guess people in Norman should be happy ODOT at least installed a ground mounted sign of substantial size. Here in Lawton at the I-44 & Gore intersection a large ground mounted sign like that was taken out by a vehicle. ODOT replaced it with a tiny sign more appropriate for a junction of 2-lane roads. I guess that's what we get with our "anti big government" state government and how they've totally wrecked the state's budget.
Quote from: rte66man on July 24, 2017, 08:17:24 AM
Since OK9 is East-West, I am going to assume the contractor mistakenly switched the directionals.
They actually switched the shields–I-35 is supposed to be listed first, after all (and as of Monday the shields have indeed been swapped to their proper location).
Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 24, 2017, 10:21:49 AM
Overall this sign was about saving money. A larger, wider, overhead display would have been more effective, but cost more money to build & install.
There's an overhead sign further back containing the same information, but with "left lane" and "right lane" instead of the arrows.
Was in Norman yesterday and had time to grab the following shots:
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4436/36314199792_567c812425.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/XjXLqY)
Westbound OK9 has a marvelous collection of button copy BGS's.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4388/36314201902_8d51c51209.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/XjXM4m)
Westbound OK9 approaching 24th Ave SW
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4430/36314203622_751d31acec.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/XjXMz1)
At 24th Ave SW
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4346/36314205672_5355f26655.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/XjXNbm)
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4338/35674132703_57e6c5e4d0.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/WmpfMv)
Sign referred to just upthread.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4369/36085762970_778faf6ce5.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/WYLY85)
Looking at the signage for the NB 35 exit to Lindsey St.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4366/36085764630_1e9dd207f3.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/WYLYBG)
The Lindsey St SPUI.
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4421/36085766170_4b537fbaf6.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/WYLZ5f)
Third lane on SH-9 WB begins just after McGee and continues to the I-35 NB ramp.