Lighted BGS's

[PAHighways]

I've assumed that the 43/I-70 junction BGS-lighting was installed by PennDOT.

That cloverleaf was built by the PTC.

[Alex]

We found one fully lit sign bridge along Interstate 459 south at Interstate 20 that is still functioning. That may be the only left in Alabama for all I know...

[BigMattFromTexas]

One on I-10 going to San Antonio.

Another one on I-10

Thats all I have.
BigMatt

[joseph1723]

Ontario used to light their overhead BGSs with strip fluorescent lighting and later with square mercury vapour lights before switching to using sodium lights in similar fixtures as the mercury ones. Some of the gantries still have lights attached to the catwalk but have long been disconnected. Others have their electrical boxes still attached on the gantry, the newer BGS gantries don't have a catwalk for lights.

Here's an example of a gantry with the square mercury or sodium lights still attached but disconnected.


Nowadays they just use reflective sheeting on the signs. (Can't remember which kind but the letters are more reflective than the background)

[shoptb1]

Here's a completely strange assembly on O'ahu...not sure if the overhang contains a lighting element, but I would guess that's the point of these things?

[wytout]

Odd to see ground mounted signs with any type of lighting structure.

[joseph1723]

^^^I've seen ground mounted signs in Hong Kong with lighting fixtures attached on the top edge of the sign.

Here's picture of a ground mounted BBS I found on Wikipedia with lights attached:

[wytout]

In my quest for ConnDOT working lighted overhead signs, THIS is the best I could come up with. The terminal roads at Bradley International Airport.  Ironically it's 4 minutes from my house. It's strange that the overheads have UP-lighting at the airport, where DOWN-lighting is usually standard in such a vicinity.  I didn't get shots but there are also a couple more Big Blue Signs that are Ground-mounted with standard highway-sign-type DOWN-lighting (as I commented seemed so strange to see at all in my above post).  I went this morning at 6am and checked, they all worked too.  Some are white mercury type light, a couple seem to have newer sodium "yellowy" light.  It's not a highway, but its a ConnDOT transportation facility roadway, so I'm happy to see some working lighted signs in CT. 

Apologies for crappy pictures.  I wasn't going to take pictures, just going to see if they still had lighting, but decided to whip out the blackberry as I was driving through!

[leonontheroad]

I've always been annoyed at the lack of lighting on the BGS here in Georgia, particularly in the Atlanta area. The lack of lighting on many of the freeways here too.

[shoptb1]

When I lived in Arkansas, I was told by the engineer in my region that the AHTD had "determined" that lighting on intersections and BGSs wasn't proven to improve driver sight at all, and that they believed that it might actually be detrimental.  I was laughing to myself during this conversation, but apparently that was their mantra for avoiding any type of lighting expenditures for a long time.  I wonder if that same vein flows through several DOTs.

[TheStranger]

It seems like in SF, several of the South of Market district internally lit BGSes (from the 1960s) are no longer being actively lighted...the ramp at 1st Street has been dark for months now, I haven't seen it on in my semi-regular drives through that area.

[Alex]

I've always been annoyed at the lack of lighting on the BGS here in Georgia, particularly in the Atlanta area. The lack of lighting on many of the freeways here too.

Almost all Georgia overheads were lit until the 1999-exit numbering conversion.

[Mergingtraffic]

For you CT peeps, another BGS light on a gantry has been found.  This time on I-95 NB just past Exit 16, but the sign is long gone.

http://www.google.com/maps?q=east+main+st+norwalk,+ct&hl=en&ll=41.109931,-73.402437&spn=0,0.013915&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=52.68309,113.994141&z=17&layer=c&cbll=41.109981,-73.402315&panoid=8grhFwPPPqlUAPqx1kqdZQ&cbp=12,74.87,,0,1.94

[shadyjay]

I'm guessing that may have been for a 2-mile advance BGS for Exit 17 (Westport/Saugatuck).  Back when the signs were Phase III (button copy), there was no sign posted there, so it may date back to the 1980s if "Phase II" signage was ever installed in this area (non reflective button copy, with traditional state route markers (non-outline)).  Some sections of the turnpike lost their original all blue all text signage as new interchanges/expressways sprung up (US 7, CT 8/25, I-91, etc).

That's kind of a "retro" section of the turnpike... one of the few on the west end with an original grass median, and a nice old school truss gantry (one gantry just west of this location was replaced with a truss gantry about 6 or 7 years ago). 

[roadfro]

I detailed Nevada practices in an earlier post in the thread. One part to update, though...

Recently, NDOT has changed out a few signs in the downtown Reno area on I-80, replacing several older signs that had lost their reflectivitiy (or were the older dark green signs that never had reflective elements) with newer highly reflective sheeting. As they did this, they removed the lighting fixtures so that these signs are unlit. Another sign on US 395 received similar treatment.  I'm not sure whether or not NDOT is looking at this as a case study for removing sign lighting on a larger scale.

There has been more activity on this trend of removing lights since my original post. At least three other signs on US 395 in Reno were replaced with highly reflective signs and had the associated light fixtures removed.

Additionally, all new sign structures that have been put in as part of the US 395 NB widening project in Reno have been installed with no lighting fixtures whatsoever. These are the same set of signs that, to my knowledge, feature the first use of Clearview on freeway signs in Nevada. Example from forum member kniwt: