Why did the highway shield standards move away from cutout designs?

[Quillz]

Have some specs. These say "OKLAHOMA" is spelled out.

can you please email me that?  my browser is having a hell of a time with the FTP protocol.

Try this: ||ftp://ftp.pikepass.com/Original%20Construction%20Drawings/HE%20Bailey/cont271/SH009.tif||

[agentsteel53]

I managed to bring that up.  Very interesting!  1961 US shields photocopied directly out of the AASHO manual.  as for the state route: that one has a border, so it's gotta be different than the older style.  I believe that is to be an independent-mount sign, as opposed to one on a green sign, mainly because OK was using button copy at the time (see, again, those 1961 US shields) and there would be no point in the outer margin and inner border, as well as the words OKLAHOMA STATE, on a button copy shield.

do you have any idea what year that spec is from?

[Brian556]

I read and article for the mid 1960's about the upgrading of Texas route marker assemblies. It stated that the black background on the US and Farm Road signs would improve their visibility, making them stand out better against whatever was behind them. This upgrade also took the arrows out of the trailblazers and placed them on seperate plaques that you see today. This was in my opinion the more important factor to improving legibility.

[J N Winkler]

do you have any idea what year that spec is from?

Go to SH001.tif (same FTP directory).  The plans approval date is 1963-04-26.  Also, take a look at what the road is called and whose name is in the consultant's signature block . . .

[agentsteel53]

Go to SH001.tif (same FTP directory).  The plans approval date is 1963-04-26.

great!  so we've narrowed down the switch from squares to circles to have taken place between 1963 and 1970.  (though on that page 1 diagram, the state routes are drawn with ... circles.

Also, take a look at what the road is called and whose name is in the consultant's signature block . . .

unfortunately, that is meaningless to me.  I am not an Oklahomageek so I would not be able to discern the date from that info.

but I do wonder if the US-277 sign (1961 spec, Series A numbers) that ScottN photographed the other day dates back to this project!

[Scott5114]

I think he was referring to the fact that it's called "Southwestern Turnpike" in there. And signed off on by some guy named H.E. Bailey.

[agentsteel53]

I think he was referring to the fact that it's called "Southwestern Turnpike" in there. And signed off on by some guy named H.E. Bailey.

that means very little to me.  I have a vague recollection that there is (was?) a Bailey Turnpike in Oklahoma, and I can even infer from the fact that it's a point of discussion that said turnpike is indeed the 62-277... but from there I would not be able to divine that the plans for it were from 1963.

[Scott5114]

You're not supposed to infer anything from it but "Haha. That's hilarious, that some guy would sign off on a turnpike plan, and that turnpike would later be named after him! Oklahoma politics sure are weird!"

[Scott5114]

Okay, so the square was still in use on 1963-04-26, this is certain. The 1962 official state map uses diamonds as the route marker, while the 1963 is the first to use circles for that purpose. (This could be of no consequence. Most states don't actually change the map markers when the actual marker changes; ODOT is still using circles on the current maps.) The 1966 official state map, however, shows the title "Oklahoma" surrounded by an Interstate shield, U.S. route shield, and circle, which wouldn't make much sense unless circles were actually being posted. So I'd say this narrows things down to between April 1963 and 1966.

[Tom]

Another thing I miss about the cut-out shields is that they had the state name and U S along with the number.  Those are more impressive.

[agentsteel53]

Another thing I miss about the cut-out shields is that they had the state name and U S along with the number.  Those are more impressive.

signs have to be dumbed down or else people won't understand them.  same with the bloated shield shapes - if you don't get the number as huge as possible, distorting the frame, then you're doing something wrong.

[Alps]

(Incidentally that has to be the most infuriating way to store construction drawings. Just put all of them in folders corresponding to the contract number! That way people looking for something specific like signs will certainly know they need to click the "271" folder and not just guess randomly at where it is. I swear, they have like 25 contracts just for guardrails in here...)

There's a government agency I know of with a file structure like that, although at the very least the project numbers have descriptive names.  Once you get inside the project folder, though, it's up to whoever used it, so a lot of times you have to wade through random numbered and lettered folders to get to your prize.

[fredmcain]

Has anyone ever contacted the FHWA to find out?

Well, actually,  I did.  Although my question was not "why" the cut-out shield was abandoned but rather if the MUTCD would consider amending their guidelines to establish the California style as standard.  I cited the appealing appearance and, most of all, the fact that the characters "US" were missing from the current MUTCD design.  I stated that the characters "INTERSTATE" are included in Interstate Highway shields, so, shouldn't "US" be included in U.S. Highway  shields?

Their response was some riggamarole about me having to supply them with "data" to support my contention. If I had no data then they would not even consider the suggestion.  I thought this was rather stupid since how much "data" to you have to have to prove that the letters "US" are missing from the current shields?

I waited a few years and wrote again.  They still had my original correspondence on file and stated emphatically that NOTHING had changed.  That last time was back in 2012, I think.  So, I decided that I wouldn't make a nuisance out of myself and keep pestering them.

It might be neat, though, if someone else on this forum would take the initiative to write and see what they say.  You never know.  "The wheel that squeaks the loudest gets the grease".

Regards,
Fred M. Cain

[hbelkins]

There's nothing stopping any state from adopting California's standard and using cutouts.

However, I'd think that cost would be a prohibitive factor, especially since taxpayers are demanding more and more fiscal responsibility from governments. You're going to have the same cost for materials vs. a square marker, plus the labor in trimming the excess from the cutout and then you have to deal with the wasted material. Even recycling it would incur a cost.

[fredmcain]

There's nothing stopping any state from adopting California's standard and using cutouts.

<snip>

This is true.  It is my understanding that the MUTCD guidelines are just that,  "guidelines" that are not necessarily enforced.  However, if those guidelines were ever to be changed, I think that would encourage a lot of states to take a look at it.  As far as I'm concerned, they wouldn't necessarily have to adopt the California design but I would like to see a new U.S. Highway shield.  Simply adding the four characters "U.S." would be nice.  A few years ago I saw a picture online where Rhode Island was actually doing that.  I don't know if I could find it again or not.  In any event, they took it upon themselves to do that and that's fine.  However, I don't think that an adoption by MUTCD would be a bad idea.

Here is a link to a page that shows the MUTCD guideline for U.S. Numbered Highway markers (scroll down three frames).

https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/SHSe/Guide.pdf

I assume that most of the folks on this list have already seen this.

Regards,
Fred M. Cain

[AMLNet49]

The California US shields are definitely the nicest, but the regular one wouldn't be quite as bad if it had "US" in the crown.

I almost feel like the current regular US shields are more like BGS plates as opposed to standalone shields, despite the fact that the actual BGS plates are indeed cutouts (in most states)! How can the BGS plate be more odd-shaped and better-looking than the standalone version? It's the only shield I know of where thats the case. Usually the standalone version is more intricate and the BGS version is simplified.

On another note, I love that California and a few other states outline the BGS versions in black, I like the cutouts either way, but it really looks like a cutout shield when you add in the black border. The only complaint I have about California is that I wish the BGS version of 3DUS shields was actually the correct shape, but I also appreciate that they kept the shape from the button copy days and it has a throwback character in itself.

[Kulerage]

I had a feeling it was so should they make too many signs, they could easily be rebranded as State Highway shields or other similarly shaped signs

[US71]

Oklahoma has used cut-out style signs in the past for some Bannered Routes.

[roadman65]

There's nothing stopping any state from adopting California's standard and using cutouts.

<snip>

This is true.  It is my understanding that the MUTCD guidelines are just that,  "guidelines" that are not necessarily enforced.  However, if those guidelines were ever to be changed, I think that would encourage a lot of states to take a look at it.  As far as I'm concerned, they wouldn't necessarily have to adopt the California design but I would like to see a new U.S. Highway shield.  Simply adding the four characters "U.S." would be nice.  A few years ago I saw a picture online where Rhode Island was actually doing that.  I don't know if I could find it again or not.  In any event, they took it upon themselves to do that and that's fine.  However, I don't think that an adoption by MUTCD would be a bad idea.

Here is a link to a page that shows the MUTCD guideline for U.S. Numbered Highway markers (scroll down three frames).

https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/SHSe/Guide.pdf

I assume that most of the folks on this list have already seen this.

Regards,
Fred M. Cain

Well FL had to give up the colored route shields for fear of the feds not reimbursing them for the replacement costs when they fail or need replacement.   So I imagine then Caltrans is funding their shields solo, or the fact that the black on white can last longer than those FL colored shields did as that also was an issue.  Colored shields in the Sunshine State used to have a short life as the sun would bleach them so bad (especially the yellow ones for US 17, 231, 301, and 319).

However, does not Virginia still have some around in the independent cities?  If I am not mistaken VDOT won't maintain highways that are not freeway in the cities except for Arlington  of course only because Arlington is not an independent city due to it being an unincorporated county run by a county level government.  Therefore the cities do not follow higher up guidelines and keep the tradition of before.

[US71]

There's nothing stopping any state from adopting California's standard and using cutouts.

<snip>

This is true.  It is my understanding that the MUTCD guidelines are just that,  "guidelines" that are not necessarily enforced.  However, if those guidelines were ever to be changed, I think that would encourage a lot of states to take a look at it.  As far as I'm concerned, they wouldn't necessarily have to adopt the California design but I would like to see a new U.S. Highway shield.  Simply adding the four characters "U.S." would be nice.  A few years ago I saw a picture online where Rhode Island was actually doing that.  I don't know if I could find it again or not.  In any event, they took it upon themselves to do that and that's fine.  However, I don't think that an adoption by MUTCD would be a bad idea.

Here is a link to a page that shows the MUTCD guideline for U.S. Numbered Highway markers (scroll down three frames).

https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/SHSe/Guide.pdf

I assume that most of the folks on this list have already seen this.

Regards,
Fred M. Cain

Yet, Arkansas mostly uses the older style square US shields.

[Mapmikey]

However, does not Virginia still have some around in the independent cities?  If I am not mistaken VDOT won't maintain highways that are not freeway in the cities except for Arlington  of course only because Arlington is not an independent city due to it being an unincorporated county run by a county level government.  Therefore the cities do not follow higher up guidelines and keep the tradition of before.

VDOT does not maintain the roads in Arlington or Henrico Counties other than interstates.  VDOT sends each county a check every year and they maintain their own roads.

Cutouts in Virginia are just about gone.  I can report that as of April this year, Covington and Clifton Forge are still full of them.

[MNHighwayMan]

Colored shields in the Sunshine State used to have a short life as the sun would bleach them so bad (especially the yellow ones for US 17, 231, 301, and 319).

A problem Minnesota still struggles with for its state highway markers. Although it's supposed to be "gold" and not yellow, they still struggle with finding an ink that doesn't fade terribly.

Yet, Arkansas mostly uses the older style square US shields.

I assume you're talking about the shape of the shield on the US Route marker? Minnesota used the original 1961 design for the longest time, too. I have a US-59 shield made in 1990 that still used the tighter curves on the sides, while I also have a US-10 shield from 1999 that uses the more modern, broad style. Compare here. I'm not sure exactly when the shape officially was changed, but Minnesota was definitely a holdout for quite a while. Not precisely certain when they switched it up, either.

[oscar]

However, does not Virginia still have some around in the independent cities?  If I am not mistaken VDOT won't maintain highways that are not freeway in the cities except for Arlington  of course only because Arlington is not an independent city due to it being an unincorporated county run by a county level government.  Therefore the cities do not follow higher up guidelines and keep the tradition of before.

Cutouts in Virginia are just about gone.  I can report that as of April this year, Covington and Clifton Forge are still full of them.

Falls Church still has some cutouts. However, none of them are new. Some of them have been replaced with regular route markers. Others have been completely removed, like a beautiful cutout assembly replaced with a stupid "Arts in the Little City" banner.

[Beltway]

VDOT does not maintain the roads in Arlington or Henrico Counties other than interstates.  VDOT sends each county a check every year and they maintain their own roads.
Cutouts in Virginia are just about gone.  I can report that as of April this year, Covington and Clifton Forge are still full of them.

Rather substantial intergovernmental transfers from the state to the municipalities for road maintenance.

Are you referring to US shield cutouts being rare?  There are Interstate shield cutouts on Thompson Street in Richmond for I-95 and I-195 and I-64, near my church.

[Mapmikey]

VDOT does not maintain the roads in Arlington or Henrico Counties other than interstates.  VDOT sends each county a check every year and they maintain their own roads.
Cutouts in Virginia are just about gone.  I can report that as of April this year, Covington and Clifton Forge are still full of them.

Rather substantial intergovernmental transfers from the state to the municipalities for road maintenance.

Are you referring to US shield cutouts being rare?  There are Interstate shield cutouts on Thompson Street in Richmond for I-95 and I-195 and I-64, near my church.

Yes...referring to non-interstate cutouts.  Interstate cutouts are widespread in Virginia except for District 4 although I believe the unisigns are going away slowly there.  Conversely, unisigns are on the rise in District 8 for all types of routes.