Currently, the MUTCD specifies two reserved but unassigned colors: Coral and Light Blue. I don't see Coral being used anytime soon since it can be confused with both Orange and Fluorescent Pink (Coral was one of the original proposals for incident management signs, but the FHWA latter settled on the pinker Fluorescent Pink in the 2003 MUTCD to make them more distinctive from Orange). However, Light Blue is distinctive enough to warrant its own use (clearly different from the blue used for logo signs).
So, I was wondering, what would be your ideas for potential uses for Light Blue?
One of my ideas for a potential use would be for variable speed limit signs, where the light blue color can give extra emphasis to such signs.
What potential uses does anyone here think?
I think Coral (rather than Light Blue) could be used for historical monuments. Such as the Bunker Hill memorial, Old North Church, etc. or major Civil War sites and campaigns (Battle of Chancellorsville, Sherman's March to the Sea, etc.).
Light Blue could be used for emergency signs. For example, there's a pileup and thus signs in light blue could say "Crash Site - Do Not Rubberneck". These would be obviously temporary.
Quote from: noelbotevera on March 14, 2016, 07:44:54 PM
Light Blue could be used for emergency signs. For example, there's a pileup and thus signs in light blue could say "Crash Site - Do Not Rubberneck". These would be obviously temporary.
That is basically what Fluorescent Pink is for.
I guess the next big thing we'll be seeing on the roads will be driverless cars, so perhaps a colour might end up being used for special lanes or other facilities that relate to those.
The only other emerging thing I can think of is electric cars - as they become more mainstream a colour could be used to denote charging stations etc?
Also, in Australia a special colour scheme is used for directional signage to make it clear when a toll applies:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.travelvictoria.com.au%2Fimages%2Fvictoria%2Ftollroads%2Feastlink.jpg&hash=847b8ccaeef3da61f847d525876b14a93c0b3083)(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7176%2F6832595762_509f15a45d.jpg&hash=92ab407805d1e709cdf747171892456ad6227cf1)
It's such an assault on the eyes that you can't miss that you're about to enter a tollway! Perhaps a new reserved colour could be used in the USA for a similar purpose.
I have always thought that signs that are for truck drivers only should have a unique color so that drivers of private vehicles know that they don't need to pay attention to them. I have always had purple in mind for these, however.
This includes:
Clearance
Truck Route
No Trucks
Weight Limit
That's a lot of signs that private vehicle drivers have to look at unnecessarily.
Quote from: noelbotevera on March 14, 2016, 07:44:54 PM
I think Coral (rather than Light Blue) could be used for historical monuments. Such as the Bunker Hill memorial, Old North Church, etc. or major Civil War sites and campaigns (Battle of Chancellorsville, Sherman's March to the Sea, etc.).
Brown is already in use for tourist attractions. Getting so specific as to the nature of the attraction's significance is beyond a road sign's calling.
Coral, light blue, and purple were used to distinguish different types of tolling lanes at toll booths. Signs with banners in these three colors were used on Illinois tollways to indicate different lanes for different payment options, when electronic express tolling was more of an option than a perceived necessity. This was common around, say, 2000-05. A google search turned up this image:
http://c8.alamy.com/comp/AJMJF6/toll-boothschicago-illinois-usa-directional-signs-for-traffic-flow-AJMJF6.jpg
The three payment options were
-Manual (interact with a human)--------Coral
-Automatic (throw coins in a basket)----Purple
-Electronic I-Pass/EZ-Pass----------------Light Blue
Perhaps something in an old MUTCD from the early 2000s might show this?
I'm not sure if Coral will ever be used, since it can be confused with both Orange and Fluorescent Pink. After all, Coral was originally supposed to be the color for Incident Management, but after numerous tests, the FHWA found that the pinker shade of Fluorescent Pink was more effective than Coral for such application, leaving Coral unassigned. This means that Coral is largely a remnant of an earlier proposal.
Quote from: paulthemapguy on March 15, 2016, 10:30:07 AM
Coral, light blue, and purple were used to distinguish different types of tolling lanes at toll booths. Signs with banners in these three colors were used on Illinois tollways to indicate different lanes for different payment options, when electronic express tolling was more of an option than a perceived necessity. This was common around, say, 2000-05. A google search turned up this image:
http://c8.alamy.com/comp/AJMJF6/toll-boothschicago-illinois-usa-directional-signs-for-traffic-flow-AJMJF6.jpg
The three payment options were
-Manual (interact with a human)--------Coral
-Automatic (throw coins in a basket)----Purple
-Electronic I-Pass/EZ-Pass----------------Light Blue
Perhaps something in an old MUTCD from the early 2000s might show this?
The Garden State Parkway in NJ uses Red for Cash & Receipts, Blue for Exact Change, and Green for EZ Pass (with the white on purple EZ Pass logo).
Electronic tolling was in its infancy prior to 2000, and even within the 2003 MUTCD a color had not been chosen yet.
The colors any toll agency used prior to 2009 were simply colors the toll agency or state DOT preferred to use, as there was no standard at the time. While today Purple is the sign color for electronic tolling, there's still no standardized color for cash, mixed mode and exact change lanes. White lettering on a green background (typical BGS) and black lettering on a white background are commonly used for the various payment methods.
Light Blue should be the custom signs, such as "$750 fine for littering" or "Welcome to Alanland". Coral should be the color of non-crucial road work signs (lane shifts) and leave the complete abominations (such as what's going on between Utah County and Salt Lake county) for the orange signs.
I think light blue could be used for general informational signs–some of what's currently in Chapter 2H of the national MUTCD. Currently, these types of signs use a mix of green and blue, but they're not really guide signs or motorist service signs. I'm thinking of "non-essential" signs, which could just as simply not be posted and wouldn't have adverse impact on road operations. So things like:
- state/county/city line
- river crossing
- mountain summits/passes
- memorial designations
- the "Signals Set For xx MPH" sign
- "Sponsor A Highway" signs
- other miscellaneous information signs, such as a time zone crossing
- possibly mileposts (although a case can be made to leave these green)
Quote from: roadfro on March 20, 2016, 03:12:13 PM
I think light blue could be used for general informational signs—some of what's currently in Chapter 2H of the national MUTCD. Currently, these types of signs use a mix of green and blue, but they're not really guide signs or motorist service signs. I'm thinking of "non-essential" signs, which could just as simply not be posted and wouldn't have adverse impact on road operations. So things like:
- state/county/city line
- river crossing
- mountain summits/passes
- memorial designations
- the "Signals Set For xx MPH" sign
- "Sponsor A Highway" signs
- other miscellaneous information signs, such as a time zone crossing
- possibly mileposts (although a case can be made to leave these green)
The first three seem to be guide signs, as well as the time zone crossings and mileposts, since they aid in letting a driver know where they are, thus green is perfectly appropriate for such signs. I would think that white (or black with white text) would actually be more appropriate for Signals Set For xx MPH signs.
However, there is really no standardized color for Adopt/Sponsor A Highway signs. Blue seems to be the most widely used color for such signs, even though they are not service signs, however, green, brown, and white are also in use by some DOTs. Perhaps this may be a potential use for Light Blue if there is ever a need to standardize the color of such signs. This could potentially be useful for DOTs that place a logo of the sponsor on such signs (such as Arizona) to make them clearly distinguishable from logo service signs from a distance (even though logo signs are much larger).
Quote from: Pink Jazz on March 20, 2016, 07:39:13 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 20, 2016, 03:12:13 PM
I think light blue could be used for general informational signs–some of what's currently in Chapter 2H of the national MUTCD. Currently, these types of signs use a mix of green and blue, but they're not really guide signs or motorist service signs. I'm thinking of "non-essential" signs, which could just as simply not be posted and wouldn't have adverse impact on road operations. So things like:
- state/county/city line
- river crossing
- mountain summits/passes
- memorial designations
- the "Signals Set For xx MPH" sign
- "Sponsor A Highway" signs
- other miscellaneous information signs, such as a time zone crossing
- possibly mileposts (although a case can be made to leave these green)
The first three seem to be guide signs, as well as the time zone crossings and mileposts, since they aid in letting a driver know where they are, thus green is perfectly appropriate for such signs. I would think that white (or black with white text) would actually be more appropriate for Signals Set For xx MPH signs.
However, there is really no standardized color for Adopt/Sponsor A Highway signs. Blue seems to be the most widely used color for such signs, even though they are not service signs, however, green, brown, and white are also in use by some DOTs. Perhaps this may be a potential use for Light Blue if there is ever a need to standardize the color of such signs. This could potentially be useful for DOTs that place a logo of the sponsor on such signs (such as Arizona) to make them clearly distinguishable from logo service signs from a distance (even though logo signs are much larger).
You can argue it either way. A state/county/city line sign or a river/summit sign might let a driver know where they are, but do they really aid in navigation? Time zone crossing is not something that aids in navigation, but just information that the driver may need to adjust his watch.
Signal speed sign isn't regulatory, it's informational. So black on white or white on black isn't necessarily the right scheme.
While the MUTCD doesn't specify the color or design of the sponsored highway signs, the examples it shows use blue backgrounds.
Quote from: Jet380 on March 14, 2016, 11:30:16 PM
I guess the next big thing we'll be seeing on the roads will be driverless cars, so perhaps a colour might end up being used for special lanes or other facilities that relate to those.
The only other emerging thing I can think of is electric cars - as they become more mainstream a colour could be used to denote charging stations etc?
Also, in Australia a special colour scheme is used for directional signage to make it clear when a toll applies:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.travelvictoria.com.au%2Fimages%2Fvictoria%2Ftollroads%2Feastlink.jpg&hash=847b8ccaeef3da61f847d525876b14a93c0b3083)(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7176%2F6832595762_509f15a45d.jpg&hash=92ab407805d1e709cdf747171892456ad6227cf1)
It's such an assault on the eyes that you can't miss that you're about to enter a tollway! Perhaps a new reserved colour could be used in the USA for a similar purpose.
Like this? Houston at one point (maybe still does) uses purple guide signs for toll roads.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ftexasfreeway.com%2FHouston%2Fconstruction%2Fwestpark%2Fimages%2F12Apr04%2F105-107%2FWestpark_OldWestheimerTollplazaA_EB_Le_12Apr04_hres.JPG&hash=1a32f43d620f2f0a44c1571e8837704ad1079957)
That purple color has been standardized as the color for cashless tolls in the US. I haven't seen it used on guide signs outside of Houston though. Most of the places I see it use it for the transponder lanes at toll booths, or as a backdrop to the transponder logo, like this:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.trbimg.com%2Fimg-54d3fc2d%2Fturbine%2Fsfl-i95-express-lane-work-in-broward-delayed-20150205%2F650%2F650x366&hash=508ade8f9756a2afe24d8c8a19f7de4b59ebb8d6)
Quote from: roadfro on March 22, 2016, 02:40:09 AM
Time zone crossing is not something that aids in navigation, but just information that the driver may need to adjust his watch.
What about yellow then? Yellow signs are advisory, and crossing a time zone would advise the driver to change his watch.
Quote from: Pink Jazz on March 22, 2016, 03:22:51 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 22, 2016, 02:40:09 AM
Time zone crossing is not something that aids in navigation, but just information that the driver may need to adjust his watch.
What about yellow then? Yellow signs are advisory, and crossing a time zone would advise the driver to change his watch.
Yellow signs are warning, not advisory.
I would make light blue the color for freeway/expressway-related signage, leaving current green for regular roads/highways. Here in Europe we do that way, different colors for freeways and regular roads.
Quebec used it back in the day to distinguish toll roads, similar to how ON 407 is now, but their current toll bridges use normal signage. Ontario also uses it for the express/collector system on ON 401
Quote from: spooky on March 22, 2016, 03:30:31 PM
Quote from: Pink Jazz on March 22, 2016, 03:22:51 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 22, 2016, 02:40:09 AM
Time zone crossing is not something that aids in navigation, but just information that the driver may need to adjust his watch.
What about yellow then? Yellow signs are advisory, and crossing a time zone would advise the driver to change his watch.
Yellow signs are warning, not advisory.
And the yellow is meant to warm of a particular road condition (alignment, intersection, ped crossing, stop ahead, etc). Time zone change does not fall in to this.
Quote from: roadfro on March 22, 2016, 02:40:09 AM
Quote from: Pink Jazz on March 20, 2016, 07:39:13 PM
Quote from: roadfro on March 20, 2016, 03:12:13 PM
I think light blue could be used for general informational signs–some of what's currently in Chapter 2H of the national MUTCD. Currently, these types of signs use a mix of green and blue, but they're not really guide signs or motorist service signs. I'm thinking of "non-essential" signs, which could just as simply not be posted and wouldn't have adverse impact on road operations. So things like:
- state/county/city line
- river crossing
- mountain summits/passes
- memorial designations
- the "Signals Set For xx MPH" sign
- "Sponsor A Highway" signs
- other miscellaneous information signs, such as a time zone crossing
- possibly mileposts (although a case can be made to leave these green)
The first three seem to be guide signs, as well as the time zone crossings and mileposts, since they aid in letting a driver know where they are, thus green is perfectly appropriate for such signs. I would think that white (or black with white text) would actually be more appropriate for Signals Set For xx MPH signs.
However, there is really no standardized color for Adopt/Sponsor A Highway signs. Blue seems to be the most widely used color for such signs, even though they are not service signs, however, green, brown, and white are also in use by some DOTs. Perhaps this may be a potential use for Light Blue if there is ever a need to standardize the color of such signs. This could potentially be useful for DOTs that place a logo of the sponsor on such signs (such as Arizona) to make them clearly distinguishable from logo service signs from a distance (even though logo signs are much larger).
You can argue it either way. A state/county/city line sign or a river/summit sign might let a driver know where they are, but do they really aid in navigation? Time zone crossing is not something that aids in navigation, but just information that the driver may need to adjust his watch.
Signal speed sign isn't regulatory, it's informational. So black on white or white on black isn't necessarily the right scheme.
While the MUTCD doesn't specify the color or design of the sponsored highway signs, the examples it shows use blue backgrounds.
This is interesting, I never thought of it that way, but signs at county/city lines here in Ontario are indeed blue, and that is a question, is there a need for such a sign to be green? As it's not really guidance in that sense, just letting you know you are in a new city or county:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi59.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg313%2FMrSG-1%2F410Brampton_zpsbczwkhrp.png&hash=30c2b667bfeb99494f6c74d4470f37014cef0ef1)
One could argue that this sign could be green as this also shows a bit of guidance as well, for instance, the MUTCD equivalent of this sign should be:
"Brampton Next 7 Exits"
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi59.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg313%2FMrSG-1%2F401Peel_zpsr6lokvxt.png&hash=3255e3db0294947d6a9b5765b078892eeff6e25b)
This is a simple county line, or in this case region line sign.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi59.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg313%2FMrSG-1%2F401Brampton_zpspp0ejzm5.png&hash=fafbb62a4736e35fdf1ad98622e379640e47ab5c)
Now you could easily say that this sign should be green, as this sign is definitely guidance in my opinion.
But anyways, let's get to the point, the Coral Blue sign could be used in lieu the way the yellow on blue signs are used in Ontario. They are used here for Safety Messages, such as this example on the Gardiner Expressway:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffightyourtickets.ca%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F09%2F2013-06-23_0125.jpg&hash=e1a6c3a7e41d2064159207d39ab5d4114abee757)
Quote from: vdeane on March 23, 2016, 12:48:18 PM
Quebec used it back in the day to distinguish toll roads, similar to how ON 407 is now, but their current toll bridges use normal signage. Ontario also uses it for the express/collector system on ON 401
You forgot about the express/collector system on ON 427, ON 400, ON 403, ON 404, and the Gardiner Expressway :D Those ones, even the 404 example use blue signs despite how short it is.
The only thing really unusual about Quebec signage is that they don't use exit tabs, but rather the exit number appears on the BGS on a yellow trapezoid.
Quote from: MisterSG1 on March 24, 2016, 08:27:15 PM
You forgot about the express/collector system on ON 427, ON 400, ON 403, ON 404, and the Gardiner Expressway :D Those ones, even the 404 example use blue signs despite how short it is.
I don't recall those roads having express/collector systems.
Quote from: vdeane on March 24, 2016, 11:10:35 PM
Quote from: MisterSG1 on March 24, 2016, 08:27:15 PM
You forgot about the express/collector system on ON 427, ON 400, ON 403, ON 404, and the Gardiner Expressway :D Those ones, even the 404 example use blue signs despite how short it is.
I don't recall those roads having express/collector systems.
In my video that I took a few days ago, I ride the 427 and Gardiner downtown, at 4:30 you can see the point where the 427 Collector Lanes exist (Highway 27 becomes the 427 Collectors south of the 401) and at 4:45 you can see my "bounce" over to the 427 collectors just for the hell of it, similarly you can see at 5:40, the Gardiner Collectors with blue signs, I of course stay in the core lanes in this case.
Here is one on ON 403:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi59.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg313%2FMrSG-1%2F403Coll_zpsgsgoyo92.png&hash=7d0d0d951779a2015bf297640d4b468e802fa84e)
The one on ON 404, notice the HOV signs as well:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi59.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg313%2FMrSG-1%2F404Coll_zpsoj5oebhp.png&hash=15d746c208fda3471d49e54c84da35db6732c3b1)
The one on ON 400, there is blue signage in the express for the 407ETR as you can see:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi59.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg313%2FMrSG-1%2F400Coll_zpsiqgnuk0u.png&hash=4bf17ffeb3a64f03ff5e0026790ee9d58699d43d)
I think Coral will be used for some sort of warning or alert. Perhaps it will replace Detour (for emergency situations) to differentiate it from construction.
The color is so close to others used in this type of signaling. They're all in the same family
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fr3wRW6e.png&hash=9c8b9ca8d7a35a498f7bcdc15b4fc5735458b76a)
Or maybe this. I don't know what it's called...its a kind of detour in see in North Carolina when you have to go over the median during construction. It's different than regular orange construction signs
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FIW17MME.png&hash=dac0a5dc589a2a6424bfe51cd12266d7682f7c5a)
Had to make a bad mockup in paint, sorry.
Quote from: Dustin DeWinn on June 20, 2017, 04:22:05 PM
I think Coral will be used for some sort of warning or alert. Perhaps it will replace Detour (for emergency situations) to differentiate it from construction.
Had to make a bad mockup in paint, sorry.
I really don't think Coral will ever be used. It was originally supposed to be used for Incident Management, however, Fluorescent Pink was found to be more effective. Since Coral is too similar to other MUTCD-approved colors, there really isn't a use case where it would be effective. It is just a remnant of an old proposal that the FHWA is simply hanging onto for some unknown reason.
Light Blue for bike lanes, paths & trails
You are missing the point of a "reserved color" in the first place. You do not split up a current catagory into two just to use up a color. Rather the colors were assigned and several "reserved" for things not then existing.
Therefore, IF (the largest word in the world) self-driving cars ever actually exist in the real world, it seems that the next color would be a series related to whatever differences apply to such.
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2066/2528162029_8d7226b0c7_z_d.jpg)
Texas
I've always liked the use of different colors to distinguish carriageway-specific signs along the lines of what vdeane cited in Toronto.
Quote from: SP Cook on June 23, 2017, 11:27:39 AM
You are missing the point of a "reserved color" in the first place. You do not split up a current catagory into two just to use up a color. Rather the colors were assigned and several "reserved" for things not then existing.
Therefore, IF (the largest word in the world) self-driving cars ever actually exist in the real world, it seems that the next color would be a series related to whatever differences apply to such.
Arguably the Incident Management was a split of a category, although no color was reserved prior to then. It was originally supposed to use Coral, however, Fluorescent Pink was found to be more effective, leaving Coral unassigned.
Also, was FYG ever a reserved color, or was it assigned from the start? The problem is that DOTs can't agree on what is its purpose - should it be the color to warn of non-motorized traffic, or should it be exclusive to school zones?
I would guess that coral and light blue probably won't be used for anything just because they look like faded versions of more commonplace signs. If they are, I'd imagine it would be for something where the difference is trivial–there's not really much difference in meaning if you mistake yellow-green for yellow, for instance. So I would imagine if light blue were to be used, it would be for some kind of subset of service signage. Likewise for coral and orange.
You could probably get away with gray/white without it being mistaken for anything else, especially since there aren't many black-background signs around.
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 23, 2017, 02:15:28 PM
You could probably get away with gray/white without it being mistaken for anything else, especially since there aren't many black-background signs around.
VDOT has a lot of black background signs (the infamous "Speed Monitored by Aircraft" signs).
My guess the reason for the lack of black background signs in general is due to the fact that black is a non-retroreflective sheeting color. This is the reason why it was deleted from the final rule of the 2009 MUTCD as one of the allowable background colors for street name signs.
I'm not sure how you would make retroreflective gray sheeting. Would it be a dark silver instead?
This is a narrow application, but I think it could be used for temporary traffic management so would be a large (like the orange and pink ones) when warnings are not the primary signal. For instance, it could be used to indicate where to proceed, where to enter, or be used in for wayfinding and navigation.
So if you're trying to direct traffic (not re-direct as you would in a detour) at a large event, such as at a stadium or convention center, and want people to know where to park or enter (if there are multiple options), it could help direct traffic.
Hope that makes sense...
I also have one separate question. I've seen some sites say that (even though they're very different) fluorescent pink was chosen over coral....so coral was apparently found to be ineffective and now we have the pink signs instead.
Is that true, or are they still open to using coral should an appropriate application be found?
I wonder if there would be any value in using light blue to designate different regulatory/guide signs for HOV/HOT lanes in close proximity to the primary carriageway, instead of using the white-on-black lozenge commonly used today.
Other possibilities would be:
* Temporary special-event guide signage ("Superbowl Parking »»»»")
* Signage pertaining to flying cars (it could happen, someday....)
Quote from: Dustin DeWinn on November 28, 2017, 10:09:52 AM
I also have one separate question. I've seen some sites say that (even though they're very different) fluorescent pink was chosen over coral....so coral was apparently found to be ineffective and now we have the pink signs instead.
Is that true, or are they still open to using coral should an appropriate application be found?
Coral remains a reserved color, however, as for it being ever used for anything, I am not sure about that.
Note that Fluorescent Pink still remains optional for Incident Management, with Orange still being allowed.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on November 28, 2017, 12:39:00 PM
* Signage pertaining to flying cars (it could happen, someday....)
Or self-driving cars, which is more likely to happen sooner.
Quote from: Pink Jazz on June 23, 2017, 05:06:56 PM
I'm not sure how you would make retroreflective gray sheeting. Would it be a dark silver instead?
The same way you make green sheeting, but instead of using green pigments you use a watered-down black that still lets most light through.
Since airports are such a huge hub for automobile transportation, I think we could use the light blue color to indicate airports and their related infrastructure. Light blue makes people think of the sky...airplanes use the sky. It's pretty intuitive I think.
Maybe, but I don't think there's enough airport related signage that a separate color would be all that useful. Most of the time it's just a one-off supplementary sign like "KCI Airport/Exit 418A" or something like that.
Perhaps it could be used for things that involve laws/police/police checks/etc or border crossings, or both?
I can't really think of any examples at the moment, but I know there are definitely some cases in which this could be used.
Quote from: index on December 01, 2017, 12:30:58 PM
Perhaps it could be used for things that involve laws/police/police checks/etc or border crossings, or both?
I can't really think of any examples at the moment, but I know there are definitely some cases in which this could be used.
MIGRANT SERVICE CENTER (https://goo.gl/maps/exhRrd3zopG2) on I-57 in Illinois
IMMIGRATION CHECK POINT (https://goo.gl/maps/XhSPXEqvStT2) on US-277/US-377 in Texas
WARNING | ILLEGAL TO CARRY FIREARMS/AMMUNITION INTO MEXICO | PENALTY - PRISON BY MEXICAN LAW (https://goo.gl/maps/YFNBgJMwbgF2) on Loop-239 in Texas
INSPECTION STATION | ALL VEHICLES STOP (https://goo.gl/maps/r4CHz74ec2T2) on I-10/US-95 in California
ALL LIVESTOCK VEHICLES STOP | LIVESTOCK | POULTRY - EXOTICS | INSPECTION STATION NEXT EXIT (https://goo.gl/maps/8HuvywwHH7o) on I-35/US-77 in Texas
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on November 28, 2017, 12:39:00 PM
I wonder if there would be any value in using light blue to designate different regulatory/guide signs for HOV/HOT lanes in close proximity to the primary carriageway, instead of using the white-on-black lozenge commonly used today.
Other possibilities would be:
* Temporary special-event guide signage ("Superbowl Parking »»»»")
* Signage pertaining to flying cars (it could happen, someday....)
I have to imagine flying cars won't really "need" signage.
But I like the HOV signs idea as light blue. I feel like all signs for the HOT lanes should be purple though.
I feel like temporary special event guide signage should be pink as well, as it is, the few uses of the pink incident management signs are so rare and so close to the construction uses, that expanding it to that would be great.
Quote from: UCFKnights on December 01, 2017, 09:31:41 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on November 28, 2017, 12:39:00 PM
I wonder if there would be any value in using light blue to designate different regulatory/guide signs for HOV/HOT lanes in close proximity to the primary carriageway, instead of using the white-on-black lozenge commonly used today.
Other possibilities would be:
* Temporary special-event guide signage ("Superbowl Parking »»»»")
* Signage pertaining to flying cars (it could happen, someday....)
I have to imagine flying cars won't really "need" signage.
But I like the HOV signs idea as light blue. I feel like all signs for the HOT lanes should be purple though.
I feel like temporary special event guide signage should be pink as well, as it is, the few uses of the pink incident management signs are so rare and so close to the construction uses, that expanding it to that would be great.
I see pink around here as temp signs warning of logging trucks
One thing that I don't understand is that why the MUTCD doesn't make Fluorescent Pink mandatory for incident management. As of the 2009 MUTCD it still remains as an option as an alternative to the traditional Orange. I know that Minnesota initially refused to adopt it in its State MUTCD, and didn't adopt it until much later after it was added to the national MUTCD as an option.
Probably to allow agencies to save on cost. Incidents that require signage are so rare that it's hard for some states to justify having a set of pink signs ready to go when they have hundreds of orange ones with the same messages sitting around.
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 03, 2017, 12:50:58 PM
Probably to allow agencies to save on cost. Incidents that require signage are so rare that it's hard for some states to justify having a set of pink signs ready to go when they have hundreds of orange ones with the same messages sitting around.
Of course, usually these signs are typically made of flexible mesh or vinyl, and don't really have a very long life. Here in the Phoenix area Fluorescent Pink seems to be the norm here for incident management nowadays, probably as the older Orange signs have been replaced by Fluorescent Pink ones.