FHWA-spec exit gore signage going up in Los Angeles

[mrsman]

To the point where they should always never go crazy using wrong retroreflectivity level and the density of the FHWA series fonts used on exit signs as well as forbidding the use of three/four-digit exit signs when there's a one/two-digit exit (i.e. exit 25 on CA SR 92 in Hayward) or vice versa (i.e. exit 47A on Interstate 280 in Daly City and exit 414B on U.S. 101 in San Mateo), and that it should be abided by Caltrans original technical specs before they recently began using FHWA shenanigans. Even the use of FHWA gore points along with the double post exit signs should be phased out and banned, too. Also, the Telespars used on exit signs in gore points should be wood only. Anyone have more suggestions? I'd be happy to reply. BTW on some areas like Alemany Maze and the Bay Bridge near Treasure Island, there are FHWA-style highway speed limit signs (small numbers) as supposed to the normal ones (large numbers) used in general. I won't mean to offend people, but I think we need to hire people who pays a lot of attention to detail who is really qualified to work for Caltrans if they die-hard want to.

I agree.  The old Caltrans standards were far better than what they are doing now, and IMO even better than the standard FHWA approach.

But I would qualify and say that what they are doing now is attempting to qualify for FHWA, but still missing the mark in many areas.

Case in point, exit numbering on signs.  This is a good idea, especially if the exit number is tied in to the highway mileage - CA is a very late adapter on these.  But the implementation in CA is ugly compared to how it is done in most other states.

[roadfro]

To the point where they should always never go crazy using wrong retroreflectivity level and the density of the FHWA series fonts used on exit signs as well as forbidding the use of three/four-digit exit signs when there's a one/two-digit exit (i.e. exit 25 on CA SR 92 in Hayward) or vice versa (i.e. exit 47A on Interstate 280 in Daly City and exit 414B on U.S. 101 in San Mateo), and that it should be abided by Caltrans original technical specs before they recently began using FHWA shenanigans. Even the use of FHWA gore points along with the double post exit signs should be phased out and banned, too. Also, the Telespars used on exit signs in gore points should be wood only. Anyone have more suggestions? I'd be happy to reply. BTW on some areas like Alemany Maze and the Bay Bridge near Treasure Island, there are FHWA-style highway speed limit signs (small numbers) as supposed to the normal ones (large numbers) used in general. I won't mean to offend people, but I think we need to hire people who pays a lot of attention to detail who is really qualified to work for Caltrans if they die-hard want to.

Some of what you desire should be aspired to for every state DOT. Adherence to specific design standards, making sure signs are appropriately sized, ensuring adopted standards make sense, etc.

However, I would disagree with some of your thoughts. I see no issue with the FHWA exit gore signs (they are bigger and more visible), but I do see issue with Caltrans' policy regarding the placement of these signs–as we've seen in this thread, the 200 foot setback in Caltrans' standard for these does not make sense in many applications. I also don't see an issue with using metal supports for exit gore signage (or other signage for that matter). In the case of exit gore signage, the use of breakaway metal posts is quicker to fix and reset a struck sign than wood posts–which is part of the reason for the change.

I agree.  The old Caltrans standards were far better than what they are doing now, and IMO even better than the standard FHWA approach.

But I would qualify and say that what they are doing now is attempting to qualify for FHWA, but still missing the mark in many areas.

Case in point, exit numbering on signs.  This is a good idea, especially if the exit number is tied in to the highway mileage - CA is a very late adapter on these.  But the implementation in CA is ugly compared to how it is done in most other states.

Yes, some older Caltrans standards are quite nice.

I certainly agree with the thought on exit numbering though. When they were first implementing it, I could somewhat understand the initial approach for their exit "tab" design given certain constraints and wanting to replace signs within dimensions of the original panels. But it's been roughly 18 years since Caltrans started numbering exits...they need to get better on this now since exit numbering is now the standard rather than the exception–perhaps it's time they adopt external exit tabs.

[stevashe]

forbidding the use of three/four-digit exit signs when there's a one/two-digit exit (i.e. exit 25 on CA SR 92 in Hayward)

I'm seeing exits 25A and 25B on CA 92 there, which should use the 3/4 digit design, do you have a different example of this happening? (Totally agree with you that CA should stick to their own standards and install the proper signage though)

[JUHSD-rvalencia]

forbidding the use of three/four-digit exit signs when there's a one/two-digit exit (i.e. exit 25 on CA SR 92 in Hayward)

I'm seeing exits 25A and 25B on CA 92 there, which should use the 3/4 digit design, do you have a different example of this happening? (Totally agree with you that CA should stick to their own standards and install the proper signage though)

Exit 27 on southbound Interstate 880 (Nimitz Fwy) in Hayward, near the interchange with CA SR 92. Note the mismatching retroreflectivity and the wrong position of the arrow. A Caltrans employee who has excellent attention to detail can do better than a inexperienced one. Holy mother of pearl! What does the world gonna have to do with these constant problems and rampant corruption? 

[myosh_tino]

Just wanted to add my two cents.

I really don't have a problem with Caltrans switching to metal posts.  The primary reason given was to increase worker safety because it takes less time to reinstall the metal post over the wood post.

Caltrans has installed FHWA-style gore signs on US 101 in San Mateo county and while and they've started to pop up on I-680 in San Jose and Milpitas.  While I did say this back in 2018...

That's awful.

It makes me wonder why Caltrans abandoned their usual single-post gore signage, which can be placed closer to the actual gore point, in favor of the FHWA-standard signs that were placed in very inappropriate locations.

... I'm not so opposed to Caltrans using the FHWA-spec signs given how they've butchered their own signs as pointed out by JUHSD-rvalencia.  I think was was more appalling and the reason for my post above was the placement of those signs posted by AndyMax25.  The placement of the FHWA-spec signs up here in the S.F. Bay Area isn't all that bad IMO and at least the layout is correct.

[SeriesE]

I don't mind FHWA-spec gore signs or metal posts, but I prefer California-spec signs as they're more aesthetically pleasing in many ways. Examples: route shields - FHWA spec digits are too big, and no cutout US route shields; no raised first letter for cardinal directions (though this changed to match the FHWA specs in the recent versions)

That said, Caltrans really need to adhere to their own published MUTCD regarding exit signs.
Left justified exit tabs for left exits (making the yellow LEFT panel on the exit number panel redundant), indicating the correct number of arrows for pull through and exit signs, and always post exit numbers for all relevant BGSs for example.

[abqtraveler]

Here are some photos from the eastbound side. [img width=800 height=599]

And there's a very rare occurrence of a striped gore area on a California interstate.

[myosh_tino]

Here are some photos from the eastbound side. [img width=800 height=599]

And there's a very rare occurrence of a striped gore area on a California interstate.

That became standard in the latest California MUTCD dated March 27, 2020.  See page 9 of the linked document from Caltrans... https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/traffic-operations/documents/ca-mutcd/rev-5/summary-of-changes_2014-camutcd-rev-5-a11y.pdf

[abqtraveler]

Here are some photos from the eastbound side. [img width=800 height=599]

And there's a very rare occurrence of a striped gore area on a California interstate.

That became standard in the latest California MUTCD dated March 27, 2020.  See page 9 of the linked document from Caltrans... https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/traffic-operations/documents/ca-mutcd/rev-5/summary-of-changes_2014-camutcd-rev-5-a11y.pdf

Now I'm curious as to whether the FHWA is now mandating states to stripe the exit gore areas because in addition to California, Connecticut recently started adding striping to its exit gores and updated its standard drawings to require the striping of exit gores.

[myosh_tino]

Here are some photos from the eastbound side. [img width=800 height=599]

And there's a very rare occurrence of a striped gore area on a California interstate.

That became standard in the latest California MUTCD dated March 27, 2020.  See page 9 of the linked document from Caltrans... https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/traffic-operations/documents/ca-mutcd/rev-5/summary-of-changes_2014-camutcd-rev-5-a11y.pdf

Now I'm curious as to whether the FHWA is now mandating states to stripe the exit gore areas because in addition to California, Connecticut recently started adding striping to its exit gores and updated its standard drawings to require the striping of exit gores.

According to the current national MUTCD, that type of striping is still optional (Sec 3B.05).

[mrsman]

And there's a very rare occurrence of a striped gore area on a California interstate.

Striped gore area is what is mostly common in other states, along with Canada (MUTCDC) and most countries under the Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals. However, the latter (Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals) has the striped area mostly thicker for extra safety. I think if we revise the MUTCD for 2021, the thicker striped exit gore area would add extra safety along with the directional arrows on each lanes just right before an exit, just like southbound Interstate 280 intersecting with CA SR 1 in Daly City, and the upper deck of the Bay Bridge on the San Francisco terminus.

I like the idea of striped arrows in the lanes in theory, as I don't generally see a harm.  But the difficulty that exists at many freeway to freeway transitions, especially in California is that there are two different  exits that are represented by right turns.  I mentioned this recently on another thread with respect to APL signs and I believe the same issues would apply here.  (Basically the pavement markings would mimic the arrows that are present on the arrow per lane signs).

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26433.msg2508378#msg2508378

Not used too widely in California, but arrow per lane (APL) signs do make it easier to follow arrows.  They work well at places where 2 highways split, a functional Y. 

Like this:
https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FTGepOKu.jpg&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aaroads.com%2Fforum%2Findex.php%3Ftopic%3D14459.50&tbnid=TMKUIK6fahEdbM&vet=12ahUKEwj-sIuMpYbqAhXHT98KHaDCAooQMygEegUIARDOAQ..i&docid=V_-gJTnu5OAr1M&w=1600&h=1200&itg=1&q=arrow%20per%20lane%20signs%20california&ved=2ahUKEwj-sIuMpYbqAhXHT98KHaDCAooQMygEegUIARDOAQ



The problem is that it is really hard to make such signs work at typical freeway to freeway interchanges that we see in CA:

Lanes 1,2,3 stay on Fwy A
Lane 4 on Fwy A or exit onto Fwy B northbound
Lane 5 Fwy B northbound or Fwy B southbound

Both Fwy B northbound and Fwy B southbound are right turns off the main highway.  How do you distinguish them on an APL sign?  (No good way)

Also, many on here note that arrows are used extensively on the "expressway" portions of US 101 as it transitions from freeway to expressway along the Central Coast.  (This can be found on other major expressways as well, but US 101 is by far the most travelled of these in CA.)  These are usually at intersections and the arrows are quite large.  I never understood the need for these arrows as the lanes generally go where you expect them to, straight ahead.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.4657312,-120.1030918,3a,75y,292.86h,59.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDazVKt_MiE7FaPEIQjxE3w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Yes, there is a left turn lane at this point, but I'm questioning using arrows on the main lanes of the highway.

[abqtraveler]

Here are some photos from the eastbound side. [img width=800 height=599]

And there's a very rare occurrence of a striped gore area on a California interstate.

That became standard in the latest California MUTCD dated March 27, 2020.  See page 9 of the linked document from Caltrans... https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/traffic-operations/documents/ca-mutcd/rev-5/summary-of-changes_2014-camutcd-rev-5-a11y.pdf

Now I'm curious as to whether the FHWA is now mandating states to stripe the exit gore areas because in addition to California, Connecticut recently started adding striping to its exit gores and updated its standard drawings to require the striping of exit gores.

According to the current national MUTCD, that type of striping is still optional (Sec 3B.05).

Out here in New Mexico they stripe the gore areas with chevrons during resurfacing projects, but they aren't always maintained afterwards. Some places keep them up, while other let the gore striping fade away until the next resurfacing project.

[myosh_tino]

Also, many on here note that arrows are used extensively on the "expressway" portions of US 101 as it transitions from freeway to expressway along the Central Coast.  (This can be found on other major expressways as well, but US 101 is by far the most travelled of these in CA.)  These are usually at intersections and the arrows are quite large.  I never understood the need for these arrows as the lanes generally go where you expect them to, straight ahead.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.4657312,-120.1030918,3a,75y,292.86h,59.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDazVKt_MiE7FaPEIQjxE3w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Yes, there is a left turn lane at this point, but I'm questioning using arrows on the main lanes of the highway.

Maybe to prevent a wrong-way driver?  Granted if said driver is drunk or high it doesn't really matter but if someone makes a honest mistake, then seeing those arrows pointing the wrong way should make he/she realize something is amiss.

[Scott5114]

I am all for the safety of the highway workers but they need to find a way to keep the exit Gore signs at the exit Gore.

In Oklahoma, ODOT will park a truck that has a crash-attenuator attachment on the back in the gore, so that any errant vehicles will crash into the truck and not the workers.

The fact that I'm citing ODOT practice as something to emulate means something has gone terribly wrong at Caltrans.

[heynow415]

Also, many on here note that arrows are used extensively on the "expressway" portions of US 101 as it transitions from freeway to expressway along the Central Coast.  (This can be found on other major expressways as well, but US 101 is by far the most travelled of these in CA.)  These are usually at intersections and the arrows are quite large.  I never understood the need for these arrows as the lanes generally go where you expect them to, straight ahead.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.4657312,-120.1030918,3a,75y,292.86h,59.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDazVKt_MiE7FaPEIQjxE3w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Yes, there is a left turn lane at this point, but I'm questioning using arrows on the main lanes of the highway.
[/quote]

The giant straight arrows are an indicator to thwart wrong way drivers, particularly on multilane roads, some with medians that sometimes can be quite large. They are used in combination with one-way signs, giant do-not-enter/wrong-way signs, and red RPM's.  It's all about redundancy in hopes that an errant/confused driver, intoxicated or not, will clue in on at least one of the indicators that they're not doing it right.  Wrong way drivers are bad news on any kind of roadway but on high-speed highways/expressways are often deadly. 

[roadfro]

Also, many on here note that arrows are used extensively on the "expressway" portions of US 101 as it transitions from freeway to expressway along the Central Coast.  (This can be found on other major expressways as well, but US 101 is by far the most travelled of these in CA.)  These are usually at intersections and the arrows are quite large.  I never understood the need for these arrows as the lanes generally go where you expect them to, straight ahead.

https://www.google.com/maps/@34.4657312,-120.1030918,3a,75y,292.86h,59.72t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDazVKt_MiE7FaPEIQjxE3w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Yes, there is a left turn lane at this point, but I'm questioning using arrows on the main lanes of the highway.

Maybe to prevent a wrong-way driver?  Granted if said driver is drunk or high it doesn't really matter but if someone makes a honest mistake, then seeing those arrows pointing the wrong way should make he/she realize something is amiss.

Those straight ahead arrows are, in fact, wrong way arrows. They are depicted in the MUTCD in Figure 3B-24. The use of these is as myosh_tino speculated, per the option statement in 3B.20:

Option:
37 The wrong-way arrow markings shown in Drawing D in Figure 3B-24 may be placed near the downstream terminus of a ramp as shown in Figures 2B-18 and 2B-19, or at other locations where lane-use arrows are not appropriate, to indicate the correct direction of traffic flow and to discourage drivers from traveling in the wrong direction.

It is not uncommon to see these placed on off ramps in California, especially in places with unusual geometry and/or high potential for or previous issues with wrong way movements. I just picked a random interchange on I-80 in Auburn, CA and found them on the off ramp.

[stevashe]

It is not uncommon to see these placed on off ramps in California, especially in places with unusual geometry and/or high potential for or previous issues with wrong way movements. I just picked a random interchange on I-80 in Auburn, CA and found them on the off ramp.

That example is also good in that it has both wrong-way arrows and normal straight arrows so you can easily see the difference, namely that the heads of wrong-way arrows are not filled in.

[myosh_tino]

The only downside is that the U.S. right now, has no plans for the Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals, which has some advantages over the MUTCD such as more symbols than text and directional arrows on freeway / expressway markings. P.S. my mention of "Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals" should be on the "International Highways" section or some sort of topic that is appropriate for it (MUTCD revision 2021). 

The Vienna Convention has been discussed ad nauseam on this forum and the general consensus is there's little to no chance of the US adopting it (same with us going metric... which has also been discussed here) because the costs will most certainly outweigh the benefits (new signage, retraining drivers, etc).

[Alps]

I think we're gonna have to start calling/emailing Caltrans' customer service and start complaining to them! Since I often pay attention to detail, it takes a very good eye to carefully and slowly place something straight without misaligning. The same is true however for the retroreflectivity level used on letters and numbers.

Do not use excessive emoticons. Read our rules.