Snow-Buried Signs in the Winter

[Amaury]

So, I came across this article today: https://highways.dot.gov/safety/local-rural/guide-street-and-highway-maintenance-personnel/ii-repair-and-replacement-sign

This section, in particular, interested me:

Field Repair of Damaged Signs

7. If the sign is subject to snow burial and the replacement sheeting extends to the top edge of the sign, place transparent film along the top edge to seal out any moisture. Of course, if signs can be relocated to an area to avoid burial, they should be.

The Snoqualmie Pass and Stevens Pass areas, in particular, have a lot of signs that get buried not so much in the snow itself, but the plowing of the snow after the snowplows plow the roads. Stevens Pass has a lot of signs that are either missing—presumably they were picked up by the DOT and not yet repaired for whatever reason—or are still damaged or downed, even partially, out on the field (example: https://maps.app.goo.gl/wCo4g3deqCARb16d9).

For example, this Kittitas County sign on Snoqualmie Pass in winter 2020–21 on I-90 eastbound:



My question is if according to that article from the FHA it's preferred that signs that can be snow-buried should be relocated, shouldn't the location of many of these signs in Washington—I don't know about other states—be adjusted? Now, I realize relocating could be difficult, so instead of relocating, I think in areas like Snoqualmie Pass, all signs where the snow covers half or more of their support posts alone should be or should have been mounted on either a full gantry (https://maps.app.goo.gl/MPrcTaaYqtufmWQL6) or a partial gantry (https://maps.app.goo.gl/8zGnU2VHyYE4hUrx8), even smaller signs like mileposts, county line signs, exit gore point signs, etc. Or if there's a light pole in the area, utilize that, too, but put the signs higher up. A sign that cannot be seen because it is covered with snow is not very useful.

Not that overhead signs are immune from damage, but it's less likely, and I feel it would reduce both signs being damaged or falling down from natural causes, such as wood rot for the signs with wooden posts or getting heavily bent for the signs with telespar posts, or vehicles crashing into them, as well as maintenance costs. Overhead signs would still need repairs eventually from sun damage, for example, but it would still save costs from having to repair several signs from winter damage, sometimes the same sign multiple times. For example, the Kittitas County sign in my image, from looking at Google Maps and from seeing it in person, has had to be repaired at least twice from winter damage—in this case from the plowed snow—with the most recent one being earlier this year.

[Rothman]

Federal Housing Administration being pulled into another transportation discussion against their will.

[Amaury]

Ah, I wasn't aware of that; I just came across the article and found it interesting.

But even putting the article and FHA aside, in areas of any state where a sign could become snow-covered, whether by snow itself or from the plowing of it—or a combination of both—it seems like it would be a good idea to reinstall the sign on gantry or partial gantry, or perhaps it should have been installed that way to begin with, though I realize it's probably not always easy to tell when a particular sign, even on a pass, will easily become snow-covered prior to the initial installation of the sign.

[Bitmapped]

Gantries easily cost tens of thousands of dollars. That's hella expensive for a mile marker or county line sign, which might convey useful information for some road users but isn't that important in the grand scheme of things.

[Amaury]

I would argue a milepost is toward the top of importance, such as if you break down or get into a crash, whether it's just you or there's another vehicle involved, especially at night when it's not as busy and especially if you're in an unfamiliar area because you're on a trip, for example. Having said that, I can certainly understand the costs perspective. It's probably cheaper to repair winter damaged signs, some even multiple times, than installing a full or partial gantry. Another option, regardless of whether they're on wooden or metal posts, could be to install taller signs, such as this one for WA 22 and WA 221: https://maps.app.goo.gl/BqtgeLwuQFU3VJzq6

Although for this particular sign, I actually feel the tallness was a bit of overkill. I do also acknowledge, though, that the taller a ground-mounted sign is, the more susceptible it is to breaking from stress, such as from wind or snow being plowed on it.

Here's another example of a snow-buried sign, and this one I feel is more important than a county line sign: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/weather/snoqualmie-pass-sees-most-snowfall-in-20-years/

[Bitmapped]

I would argue a milepost is toward the top of importance, such as if you break down or get into a crash, whether it's just you or there's another vehicle involved, especially at night when it's not as busy and especially if you're in an unfamiliar area because you're on a trip, for example. Having said that, I can certainly understand the costs perspective. It's probably cheaper to repair winter damaged signs, some even multiple times, than installing a full or partial gantry. Another option, regardless of whether they're on wooden or metal posts, could be to install taller signs, such as this one for WA 22 and WA 221: https://maps.app.goo.gl/BqtgeLwuQFU3VJzq6

Mileposts could easily be moved onto the center median barrier if there are concerns about visibility. That would be much cheaper than gantries.

[kirbykart]

Here's another example of a snow-buried sign, and this one I feel is more important than a county line sign: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/weather/snoqualmie-pass-sees-most-snowfall-in-20-years/

1) The snow didn't even cover up any information.
2) That individual sign is not that important. There will at least be some shields to direct drivers.

[ErmineNotyours]

British Columbia mounts snow country signs on much more modest "gantries", small poles that wrap around to above the sign with the sign suspended from them.  This sets the pole far enough back so it won't get hit by the snow plow and sticks the sign out so it can be visible.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/eZQcPSySFkkd1AYk9

[Road Hog]

British Columbia mounts snow country signs on much more modest "gantries", small poles that wrap around to above the sign with the sign suspended from them.  This sets the pole far enough back so it won't get hit by the snow plow and sticks the sign out so it can be visible.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/eZQcPSySFkkd1AYk9

I love everything about this photo. Not just the ingeniousness of what I call "shepherd hooks" but also the general scenery and the fact there is ONE car visible in either direction on Canada's national road!

[ErmineNotyours]

British Columbia mounts snow country signs on much more modest "gantries", small poles that wrap around to above the sign with the sign suspended from them.  This sets the pole far enough back so it won't get hit by the snow plow and sticks the sign out so it can be visible.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/eZQcPSySFkkd1AYk9

I love everything about this photo. Not just the ingeniousness of what I call "shepherd hooks" but also the general scenery and the fact there is ONE car visible in either direction on Canada's national road!

At this point, most traffic would have diverted to the Coquihalla Highway.  When I went through here in 1999, I was prepared to pay a toll to stay on a limited access freeway, but the pass report said that the Trans Canada was better.  I went off the freeway to see much less traffic, and hitchhikers.  Haven't seen hitchhikers in decades.

[gonealookin]

I don't think we have even one overhead sign anywhere in the Lake Tahoe Basin, except for VMS.

Caltrans has this one on SR 4 at Bear Valley; that's a real oddity though.