New CA tollway entry ramp signing

[MarkF]

They put these up a week or two ago along the 241, adding the yellow TOLL sign:


Getting a bit cluttered.

[theroadwayone]

From TCA.
https://thetollroads.com/news/newsroom/press-release/1879

[Max Rockatansky]

Cluttered but yet conveys the point.  I ended up on 73 once years ago and was completely unaware that it was a toll facility.  I entered from a surface street and missed all the signage.  I barely had enough cash on hand for the monster (and not worth it) toll rate, signage that would stood out to warn me would have greatly appreciated. 

[jdbx]

That 241 shield looks way too small and out of scale to the rest of the assembly, same with the TOLL banner.  I agree that it looks very cluttered.  I think maybe it would look cleaner if the TOLL and 241 shield were combined into a monosign OR modified shield like they do in other states.  A great example would be Florida, where there is no mistaking whether a state highway is tolled or not.

[Max Rockatansky]

That 241 shield looks way too small and out of scale to the rest of the assembly, same with the TOLL banner.  I agree that it looks very cluttered.  I think maybe it would look cleaner if the TOLL and 241 shield were combined into a monosign OR modified shield like they do in other states.  A great example would be Florida, where there is no mistaking whether a state highway is tolled or not.

As a former Floridian I can attest to the different shields being pretty handy.  That said, even Florida is starting to use the yellow toll placard now. 

[jakeroot]

Seems a bit redundant.

Maybe a more elegant approach might be changing the color format of the "ENTRANCE" sign to either black-on-yellow or white-on-purple? I assume the former would be preferred if the 241 accepts pay-by-plate.

[sparker]

If it were my decision, the "spade" shields on toll facilities would be white-on-purple as well; this goes for the toll lanes on CA 91 -- delineate them with purple spades.  The shape alone has defined state highways for about 90 years, so differentiation of toll vs. free by color shouldn't pose an issue.  Obviously purple Interstate shields might not fly with FHWA (wouldn't hurt to ask, though!), so standard R/W/B I-shields on a purple background might suffice for those instances (such as the nascent toll lanes on I-15). 

[Revive 755]

Maybe a more elegant approach might be changing the color format of the "ENTRANCE" sign to either black-on-yellow or white-on-purple? I assume the former would be preferred if the 241 accepts pay-by-plate.

Except the current MUTCD doesn't allow purple for pay by plate systems - it would only allow purple for signs denoting a lane, road, and/or ramp only for FasTrak users.

Use of the color purple on any sign shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1A.12 and 2A.10.  Except as provided in Sections 2F.12 and 2F.16, purple as a background color shall be used only when the information associated with the appropriate ETC account is displayed on that portion of the sign. The background color of the remaining portion of such signs shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1A.12 and 2A.10 as appropriate for a regulatory, warning, or guide sign. Purple shall not be used as a background color to display a destination, action message, or other legend that is not a display of the requirement for all vehicles to have a registered ETC account.

If only vehicles with registered ETC accounts are allowed to use a highway lane, a toll plaza lane, an open-road tolling lane, or all lanes of a toll highway or connection, the signs for such lanes or highways shall incorporate the pictograph (see Chapter 2A) adopted by the toll facility's ETC payment system and the regulatory message ONLY. Except for ETC pictographs whose predominant background color is purple, if incorporated within the green background of a guide sign, the ETC pictograph shall be on a white rectangular or square panel set on a purple underlay panel with a white border. For rectangular ETC pictographs whose predominant background color is purple, a white border shall be used at the outer edges of the purple rectangle to provide contrast between the pictograph and the sign background color.

If an ETC pictograph is used on a separate plaque with a guide sign or on a header panel within a guide sign, the plaque or the header panel shall have a purple background with a white border and the ETC pictograph shall have a white border to provide contrast between the pictograph and the background of the plaque or header panel.

Purple underlay panels for ETC pictographs or purple backgrounds for plaques and header panels shall only be used in the manner described in Paragraphs 1 through 3 to convey the requirement of a registered ETC account on signs for lanes reserved exclusively for vehicles with such an account and on directional signs to an ETC account-only facility from a non-toll facility or from a toll facility that accepts multiple payment forms.

[jakeroot]

Maybe a more elegant approach might be changing the color format of the "ENTRANCE" sign to either black-on-yellow or white-on-purple? I assume the former would be preferred if the 241 accepts pay-by-plate.

Except the current MUTCD doesn't allow purple for pay by plate systems - it would only allow purple for signs denoting a lane, road, and/or ramp only for FasTrak users.

I'm well aware. I said as much in my post. But I was not sure if the 241 accepted pay-by-plate.

If it were my decision, the "spade" shields on toll facilities would be white-on-purple as well; this goes for the toll lanes on CA 91 -- delineate them with purple spades.  The shape alone has defined state highways for about 90 years, so differentiation of toll vs. free by color shouldn't pose an issue.  Obviously purple Interstate shields might not fly with FHWA (wouldn't hurt to ask, though!), so standard R/W/B I-shields on a purple background might suffice for those instances (such as the nascent toll lanes on I-15).

I would be fine with this! Even if purple is ETC-only, I think it's a nice distinction that's worth exploring.

[jdbx]

I wonder when District 4 will start making this change around the Bay Area's toll bridges.  Right now the entrance assemblies look identical to a typical freeway entrance assembly, aside from a "Toll Crossing Entrance" sign substituting for the standard "Freeway Entrance" sign.  I have seen the yellow "TOLL" banner added at the 80/580 westbound split BGS in Emeryville.

[SeriesE]

I would've gone with making the TOLL ROAD ENTRANCE part black on yellow and skipping out on the TOLL sign.

[roadfro]

I imagine the "Toll road entrance" sign being white on green is used, in part, to emulate the "freeway entrance" sign used in California's typical freeway entrance assembly package. Meanwhile, the yellow "toll" banner is a national MUTCD item for toll roads.

[stevashe]

I imagine the "Toll road entrance" sign being white on green is used, in part, to emulate the "freeway entrance" sign used in California's typical freeway entrance assembly package. Meanwhile, the yellow "toll" banner is a national MUTCD item for toll roads.

That's definitely the intention. would be nice to somehow combine the two though since the setup shown seems a bit redundant with both "Toll Road Entrance" and a separate "Toll" banner. Maybe just put the "Toll Road" on the Toll Road Entrance sign on an inset yellow panel similar to what is done on signs like this one for the 520 toll bridge near Seattle?

[theroadwayone]

On the 125 toll road in SD, the entrance signs say "South Bay Expressway Toll Road," no "entrance." They do have the black-on-yellow "Toll Road" above the signs pointing to where the entrance ramps are.

[jakeroot]

I imagine the "Toll road entrance" sign being white on green is used, in part, to emulate the "freeway entrance" sign used in California's typical freeway entrance assembly package. Meanwhile, the yellow "toll" banner is a national MUTCD item for toll roads.

That's definitely the intention. would be nice to somehow combine the two though since the setup shown seems a bit redundant with both "Toll Road Entrance" and a separate "Toll" banner. Maybe just put the "Toll Road" on the Toll Road Entrance sign on an inset yellow panel similar to what is done on signs like this one for the 520 toll bridge near Seattle?

That's a clean install.

At the actual entrance, WSDOT also uses these giant signs to warn drivers that they'll pay a toll:

[mrsman]

While that sign is clear, there is definitely a lot to process there, probably too much at high speeds at a fwy enterance ramp.

Also, there is a mistaken notion that "freeway" refers to being free of money and tolls.  As we know, "freeway" means free of cross-traffic, traffic signals, etc. not the cost, but not all of the general public is fully aware of that.

So I like the solution mentioned above of having the "TOLL" of the "TOLL ROAD ENTRANCE" be with a yellow highlight on black letters and removing the standalone "TOLL"

So as a general rule:

First line will indicate how tolls are paid, if cash is not accepted (So purple FASTRACK only OR the GOOD TO GO/ PAYBY MAIL on white backgrond line in WA)
Second line will be TOLL ROAD, with TOLL in YELLOW
Third line will be ENTRANCE.

Maybe the signage is a candidate for "Redesign This" in the Illustrations board and we can get some feedback from those who don't frequent this regional forum.

[theroadwayone]

While that sign is clear, there is definitely a lot to process there, probably too much at high speeds at a fwy enterance ramp.

Also, there is a mistaken notion that "freeway" refers to being free of money and tolls.  As we know, "freeway" means free of cross-traffic, traffic signals, etc. not the cost, but not all of the general public is fully aware of that.

So I like the solution mentioned above of having the "TOLL" of the "TOLL ROAD ENTRANCE" be with a yellow highlight on black letters and removing the standalone "TOLL"

So as a general rule:

First line will indicate how tolls are paid, if cash is not accepted (So purple FASTRACK only OR the GOOD TO GO/ PAYBY MAIL on white backgrond line in WA)
Second line will be TOLL ROAD, with TOLL in YELLOW
Third line will be ENTRANCE.

Maybe the signage is a candidate for "Redesign This" in the Illustrations board and we can get some feedback from those who don't frequent this regional forum.

The only downside to this is that you can put up all the signage you want, make it as visible as you want and everything, and yet still get complaints from people saying "I didn't know I was on a toll road."

[jakeroot]

Maybe the signage is a candidate for "Redesign This" in the Illustrations board and we can get some feedback from those who don't frequent this regional forum.

Without going into too much detail with shields and arrows, my first thought was something like this:

[rte66man]

Maybe the signage is a candidate for "Redesign This" in the Illustrations board and we can get some feedback from those who don't frequent this regional forum.

Without going into too much detail with shields and arrows, my first thought was something like this:

I see those as a contradiction. To me, a toll road is NOT a freeway in that the word "freeway" implies there is no cost to drive on it. I suspect many non-road geeks would say the same thing.

Moved reply outside of quote code. –Roadfro

[sprjus4]

A -freeway- does not imply it's -free- of charge to drive on. It has to do with the design of the roadway.

The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) (7) defines a freeway as a divided highway with full control of access and two or more lanes for the exclusive use of traffic in each direction. Freeways provide uninterrupted flow (Note: "Uninterrupted"  is used to describe the type of facility, not the quality of the traffic flow at any given time. A freeway experiencing extreme congestion, for example, is still an uninterrupted-flow facility because the causes of congestion are internal.) Opposing directions of flow are continuously separated by a raised barrier, an at-grade median, or a continuous raised median (Figure 1-4). Operating conditions on a freeway primarily result from interactions among vehicles and drivers in the traffic stream and among vehicles, drivers, and the geometric characteristics of the freeway.

The AASHTO "Green Book" (13) defines freeways as "arterial highways with full control of access. They are intended to provide for high levels of safety and efficiency in the movement of large volumes of traffic at high speeds. With full control of access, preference is given to through traffic by providing access connections with selected public roads only and by prohibiting crossings at grade and private driveway connections".

Several physical attributes of the freeway facility impact its capacity and operational characteristics as summarized in Table 1-3. Additional factors include level of enforcement, lighting conditions, pavement conditions, pavement markings and signing, and weather.

A tollway or toll road is similar to a freeway, except that tolls are collected at designated points along the facility, either electronically, manually, or some combination. Although the collection of tolls may involve interruptions of traffic flow (Figure 1-5), these facilities should generally be treated as "freeways", particularly with respect to strategies and technologies for management and operations. Special attention should be given to the unique characteristics, lane management opportunities, and constraints associated with toll collection facilities. Accordingly, the term "freeway" as used in this Handbook refers to any limited access facility, including the interstate system, expressways, toll roads, and connecting bridges and tunnels.

https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freewaymgmt/publications/frwy_mgmt_handbook/chapter1_02.htm

[sprjus4]

That's a clean install.

At the actual entrance, WSDOT also uses these giant signs to warn drivers that they'll pay a toll:

Here on the East Coast, the same thing was done with the recently completed US-17 Dominion Blvd freeway project in Virginia that utilizes tolls to help repay bonds & loans, though obviously without the "Freeway Entrance" signage. It was not initially included, though was added later due to complaints of poor signage despite the umpteenth amount of "Toll" banners present.

https://www.google.com/maps/@36.7281178,-76.3042219,3a,19.2y,77.64h,90.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1smRu-3JpfXamjLPioC87RMw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[jakeroot]

Without going into too much detail with shields and arrows, my first thought was something like this:

I see those as a contradiction. To me, a toll road is NOT a freeway in that the word "freeway" implies there is no cost to drive on it. I suspect many non-road geeks would say the same thing.

Hope I'm getting this quote correct. Looks to have been screwed up.

"Free" (or "free of") is entirely contextual: "free of charge", "free of interruption", etc. All mean "without". Freeways are "without interruption" [by signals, left turns, etc] (as noted in the definition by sprjus4 above).

Then again, it might be a geographic misunderstanding. "Freeway" is the absolute normal term for any grade-separated roadway along the entire west coast (regardless of route status), and certainly many other states. There's no expectation that freeways have a charge or not; they are simply roads without signals, turns, etc. I don't think people hear the "free" in "freeway" and immediately assume "no charge!". In fact, I might go so far as to assume that most people don't even recognize the word "free" in "freeway". There might be that one guy who's like "uhh it says 'free'", but they're the 1% here; most people aren't fools and do recognize the actual meaning of the word.

[roadfro]

Maybe the signage is a candidate for "Redesign This" in the Illustrations board and we can get some feedback from those who don't frequent this regional forum.

Without going into too much detail with shields and arrows, my first thought was something like this:

For use in California, I wonder if "Freeway Entrance" signage is required for freeway facilities based on California having a defined freeway & expressway system...

I like it your sign design Jake, but it also has a bit of wordplay dichotomy between "road" and "freeway". Perhaps "Tollway Entrance" (with "tollway" getting the black on yellow treatment) could work for these situations, assuming such meets any California legal requirements?

[jdbx]

Maybe the signage is a candidate for "Redesign This" in the Illustrations board and we can get some feedback from those who don't frequent this regional forum.

Without going into too much detail with shields and arrows, my first thought was something like this:

For use in California, I wonder if "Freeway Entrance" signage is required for freeway facilities based on California having a defined freeway & expressway system...

I like it your sign design Jake, but it also has a bit of wordplay dichotomy between "road" and "freeway". Perhaps "Tollway Entrance" (with "tollway" getting the black on yellow treatment) could work for these situations, assuming such meets any California legal requirements?

I think that is exactly right.  Back East, a lot of the first limited access highways opened as tolled facilities.  Many of these were given the name "turnpike", which in the very name suggests that there is a barrier where a toll is collected.  It wouldn't be too great of a stretch for them then to hear "freeway" and draw the conclusion that the route must be free, since it says so in the name, and it's not a "turnpike".

Out here, the only limited access highways where tolls were collected tended to be the toll bridges.  I don't know of any example of a non-bridge freeway collecting a toll until the Orange County toll roads opened in the 1990's.  I have never heard anybody refer to any of those roads as a turnpike either.  Any 4+ lane road with no signals or cross traffic is a freeway to Californians. 

[mrsman]

Maybe the signage is a candidate for "Redesign This" in the Illustrations board and we can get some feedback from those who don't frequent this regional forum.

Without going into too much detail with shields and arrows, my first thought was something like this:

For use in California, I wonder if "Freeway Entrance" signage is required for freeway facilities based on California having a defined freeway & expressway system...

I like it your sign design Jake, but it also has a bit of wordplay dichotomy between "road" and "freeway". Perhaps "Tollway Entrance" (with "tollway" getting the black on yellow treatment) could work for these situations, assuming such meets any California legal requirements?

I think that is exactly right.  Back East, a lot of the first limited access highways opened as tolled facilities.  Many of these were given the name "turnpike", which in the very name suggests that there is a barrier where a toll is collected.  It wouldn't be too great of a stretch for them then to hear "freeway" and draw the conclusion that the route must be free, since it says so in the name, and it's not a "turnpike".

Out here, the only limited access highways where tolls were collected tended to be the toll bridges.  I don't know of any example of a non-bridge freeway collecting a toll until the Orange County toll roads opened in the 1990's.  I have never heard anybody refer to any of those roads as a turnpike either.  Any 4+ lane road with no signals or cross traffic is a freeway to Californians.

That's right.  This is why most of the current entrance signs for the toll roads don't even have the word "freeway" anywhere near them.  And that's why freeway does have a popular perception of being free of charge in California.  And when highway names were popular, you can utilize Santa Ana Freeway or Long Beach Freeway on roads that were in fact free, but the names of the OC toll roads were "San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor" and "Foothill Transportation Corridor", etc.

I like Jake's sign.  My only suggestion is to remove the middle line.  So you have a green sign that says "TOLL ROAD / ENTRANCE", with ENTRANCE in white lettering and "TOLL ROAD" in black lettering with a yellow background.