AARoads Forum

National Boards => General Highway Talk => Topic started by: Ian on April 11, 2011, 06:15:30 PM

Title: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Ian on April 11, 2011, 06:15:30 PM
How many cases can you think of where state/county/town DOT's have "copied" other states by putting up their style of signage, etc? Here are a few examples of what I mean...

-California style "FREEWAY ENTRANCE" signs appearing on I-77 entrances in West Virginia

-Western US style "bent" traffic signal mast arms making their appearance in Maryland (and now becoming a state standard).

-NYSDOT style "top hat" sign showing up on I-95 southbound in Peabody, MA:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=peabody,+ma&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=39.047881,79.013672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Peabody,+Essex,+Massachusetts&ll=42.545414,-70.982924&spn=0.004442,0.009645&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=42.545723,-70.982727&panoid=e2hOSWkl9kV4qfM6CMnQRQ&cbp=12,196.35,,0,2.1

-Vermont copying New Hampshire's (or vise versa, not sure which state came up with the design first) "grooved shoulder" sign with the skidding motorcycle

-Massachusetts blank square designs popping up in Connecticut, and in the less common case, vise versa. Rhode Island also has a lot of MA shields around.

-Delaware using the Maryland style LANE ENDS sign with the double arrows.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Quillz on April 11, 2011, 06:25:37 PM
California-style "FREEWAY ENTRANCE" signs are also showing up in Oregon.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: NE2 on April 11, 2011, 06:51:15 PM
Wyoming copied Colorado's shape.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: agentsteel53 on April 11, 2011, 06:51:53 PM
Quote from: NE2 on April 11, 2011, 06:51:15 PM
Wyoming copied Colorado's shape.

not really.  Colorado is clearly hexagonal. 
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Michael on April 11, 2011, 06:55:30 PM
Quote from: PennDOTFan on April 11, 2011, 06:15:30 PM
-NYSDOT style "top hat" sign showing up on I-95 southbound in Peabody, MA:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=peabody,+ma&aq=&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=39.047881,79.013672&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Peabody,+Essex,+Massachusetts&ll=42.545414,-70.982924&spn=0.004442,0.009645&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=42.545723,-70.982727&panoid=e2hOSWkl9kV4qfM6CMnQRQ&cbp=12,196.35,,0,2.1

I've only seen that used near the Tappan Zee Bridge,  so I'm thinking it might be a NYSTA thing.  EZ-Pass falls in that same category.

We can thank Pennsylvania for Clearview. (me) --> :pan: <-- (Pennsylvania)
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: cu2010 on April 11, 2011, 06:58:59 PM
Quote from: Michael on April 11, 2011, 06:55:30 PM
I've only seen that used near the Tappan Zee Bridge,  so I'm thinking it might be a NYSTA thing.

A similar sign exists along I-87 NB north of Albany with a control city of Montreal.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Ian on April 11, 2011, 07:01:46 PM
Quote from: cu2010 on April 11, 2011, 06:58:59 PM
Quote from: Michael on April 11, 2011, 06:55:30 PM
I've only seen that used near the Tappan Zee Bridge,  so I'm thinking it might be a NYSTA thing.

A similar sign exists along I-87 NB north of Albany with a control city of Montreal.

There is also one on I-787 SB in downtown Albany, as well as one on the Taconic State Parkway NB at Saw Mill River Parkway in Hawthorne.

Quote from: NE2 on April 11, 2011, 06:51:15 PM
Wyoming copied Colorado's shape.

:ded:
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: ctsignguy on April 11, 2011, 07:14:39 PM
Quote from: PennDOTFan on April 11, 2011, 06:15:30 PM
How many cases can you think of where state/county/town DOT's have "copied" other states by putting up their style of signage, etc? Here are a few examples of what I mean...

-Massachusetts blank square designs popping up in Connecticut, and in the less common case, vise versa. Rhode Island also has a lot of MA shields around.


Jeff admits that ConnDOT needs to be more consistent with route markers...i think what happens is one of the Signs and Lines in the field needs some replacement shields, and someone on the shop crew just grabs some blanks with the outlines (intended for "No Left/Right/U Turn signs) slaps a number on them, and ships them out...
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: deathtopumpkins on April 11, 2011, 07:16:34 PM
Quote from: PennDOTFan on April 11, 2011, 06:15:30 PM
-Delaware using the Maryland style LANE ENDS sign with the double arrows.

These are popping up in Virginia now too. Can't remember exactly where, but I saw one on my last trip through the D.C. area (295 SB to 95 SB)
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: froggie on April 11, 2011, 07:58:35 PM
QuoteThese are popping up in Virginia now too. Can't remember exactly where, but I saw one on my last trip through the D.C. area (295 SB to 95 SB)

I-95, I-66, VA 28, just to name a few.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: myosh_tino on April 11, 2011, 08:11:32 PM
How about Pennsylvania mimicking California's style of numbering exits on guide signs...

(https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/pennsylvania001/pa-060_nb_exit_001_02.jpg)

*and*

(https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/pennsylvania300/i-376_wb_exit_002b_01.jpg)
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Ian on April 11, 2011, 08:40:39 PM
Quote from: froggie on April 11, 2011, 07:58:35 PM
QuoteThese are popping up in Virginia now too. Can't remember exactly where, but I saw one on my last trip through the D.C. area (295 SB to 95 SB)

I-95, I-66, VA 28, just to name a few.

Now that you mention it, I do remember seeing one on I-95 southbound in Dumfries last April.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: J N Winkler on April 11, 2011, 09:13:46 PM
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 11, 2011, 08:11:32 PMHow about Pennsylvania mimicking California's style of numbering exits on guide signs...

A lot of that has to do with both states using laminated-panel signs (which they have since the 1960's at least).
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: thenetwork on April 12, 2011, 12:15:22 AM
Back in the days when Trapezoids were in style, the Indiana Toll Road mimicked the Ohio Turnpike's "exit" BGSs.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Scott5114 on April 12, 2011, 12:18:34 AM
I-240 in Oklahoma has a lot of Texas Turnarounds.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: roadfro on April 12, 2011, 04:32:31 AM
Quote from: PennDOTFan on April 11, 2011, 06:15:30 PM
-California style "FREEWAY ENTRANCE" signs appearing on I-77 entrances in West Virginia

This style of signing is prevalent in Nevada as well, since at least the mid 1980s. I imagine NDOT borrowed the concept from CalTrans back in the day...NDOT's "Freeway Entrance" sign is significantly smaller than what CalTrans uses, though.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: froggie on April 12, 2011, 07:58:37 AM
QuoteA lot of that has to do with both states using laminated-panel signs (which they have since the 1960's at least).

Correct me if I'm wrong, but MnDOT also uses laminated-panel signs...and they still use separate exit tabs exclusively.

As does PennDOT for the most part.  The examples shown (and there's at least one or two more around Harrisburg) are to me the exceptions rather than the rule.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: PAHighways on April 12, 2011, 01:36:57 PM
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 11, 2011, 08:11:32 PM
How about Pennsylvania mimicking California's style of numbering exits on guide signs...

(https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/pennsylvania001/pa-060_nb_exit_001_02.jpg)

That was more of a fluke than outright copying of another state.  When the Southern Expressway was built to provide access to the new Pittsburgh International Airport terminals, these guide signs and accompanying downward-facing lights appeared on it and the signage on PA 60 replaced from the southern Southern Expressway/Airport Parkway interchange to the US 22/US 30 cloverleaf.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Quillz on April 12, 2011, 01:46:06 PM
I wish more states would copy California and Virginia and use cutout route shields.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: architect77 on April 12, 2011, 02:55:10 PM
I wish Georgia WOULD copy any other state and get rid of those ridiculous elevated-shoulder substitutes for cantilevered signs, quit saying "EXIT 1 MILE" instead of just "1 MILE", put colored shield pavement markings where I-75/I-85 split on the Downtown Connector (Northbound) instead of using words to describe the split, and quit saying "3 LEFT LANES" when they should be saying "LEFT 3 LANES". Georgia always wants to reinvent the wheel rather than studying how other states do things.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Scott5114 on April 12, 2011, 03:30:19 PM
Quote from: architect77 on April 12, 2011, 02:55:10 PM
quit saying "EXIT 1 MILE" instead of just "1 MILE",

What kind of highway are you seeing this on? "EXIT 1 MILE" is indeed the correct legend for unnumbered exits per MUTCD. For numbered exits, "1 MILE" is used because EXIT appears in the exit tab.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: J N Winkler on April 12, 2011, 05:17:22 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 12, 2011, 03:30:19 PMWhat kind of highway are you seeing this on? "EXIT 1 MILE" is indeed the correct legend for unnumbered exits per MUTCD. For numbered exits, "1 MILE" is used because EXIT appears in the exit tab.

Architect77 is complaining about a distinctive approach to freeway signing which GDOT now seems to have abandoned.  This style is distinguished by mixed-case Series D legend at 20" UC/15" LC on overhead signs in lieu of 16" UC/12" LC Series E Modified, full-width exit tabs, and the word "EXIT" appearing redundantly both in the exit tab legend and the distance expression.  Before this style was rolled out sometime in the late 1980's/early 1990's, GDOT used button copy and sign formats were much more conventional with Series E Modified for primary destination legend and no repetition of "EXIT" on the main sign panel.  Indeed, when GDOT introduced exit numbering in the mid-1960's, many guide signs had to be retrofitted with exit tabs and GDOT went to considerable trouble to remove "EXIT" and recenter the distance expression on those signs.

For its current signing, GDOT is retaining the 20" UC/15" LC combination for primary destination legend on overhead guide signs, but is using Series E Modified instead of Series D.  Tabs are independent of the main sign panel and are no longer full-width--judging by the signing plans I have seen, GDOT has settled on a default width of 11'.  Redundant "EXIT" on the main sign panel is no longer used.  GDOT is still using the balanced cantilevers ("elevated-shoulder substitutes" as Architect77 calls them), and I think they are right to continue doing so because this prevents signs from being obscured by large trucks (which they can be if they are mounted on posts and truck traffic is heavy) while also making the sign structures less vulnerable to wind load.

GDOT has let four large signing contracts in the past year, all of which call for signs in the new style.  Sign design sheets so far total 120.  I suspect that GDOT has more signing contracts in the pipeline, but I don't read GDOT STIPs or letting schedules, so I cannot confirm either that this is the case or even that GDOT will be rolling out the new style across its entire freeway network.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Brandon on April 13, 2011, 09:34:26 AM
Quote from: Quillz on April 12, 2011, 01:46:06 PM
I wish more states would copy California and Virginia and use cutout route shields.

Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and Texas (primary, loops), pretty much do have cutouts.  Granted they're squares, but their route shields are squares.  X-(
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: codyg1985 on April 13, 2011, 09:55:39 AM
Quote from: architect77 on April 12, 2011, 02:55:10 PM
I wish Georgia WOULD copy any other state and get rid of those ridiculous elevated-shoulder substitutes for cantilevered signs...

This is a practice that Alabama has copied on some of the widened to six-lane portion of interstates. I-65 north of Birmingham, I-20/59 southwest of Birmingham, and I-65 north of Mobile has the elevated-shoulder mounted BGS.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: LeftyJR on April 13, 2011, 10:43:10 AM
Quote from: PAHighways on April 12, 2011, 01:36:57 PM
Quote from: myosh_tino on April 11, 2011, 08:11:32 PM
How about Pennsylvania mimicking California's style of numbering exits on guide signs...

(https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/pennsylvania001/pa-060_nb_exit_001_02.jpg)

That was more of a fluke than outright copying of another state.  When the Southern Expressway was built to provide access to the new Pittsburgh International Airport terminals, these guide signs and accompanying downward-facing lights appeared on it and the signage on PA 60 replaced from the southern Southern Expressway/Airport Parkway interchange to the US 22/US 30 cloverleaf.

Wasn't this done because of the proximity to the airport, so pilots wouldn't get confused?
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: J N Winkler on April 13, 2011, 11:28:36 AM
Quote from: froggie on April 12, 2011, 07:58:37 AMCorrect me if I'm wrong, but MnDOT also uses laminated-panel signs...and they still use separate exit tabs exclusively.

As does PennDOT for the most part.  The examples shown (and there's at least one or two more around Harrisburg) are to me the exceptions rather than the rule.

Yes, PennDOT has historically used proper exit tabs, as did Caltrans for the 1970's exit numbering experiment and the early exit tab retrofits in 2002 in District 2.  I don't know, though, whether PennDOT made exit tabs the same way as Caltrans and MnDOT.  The basic approach (at least for Caltrans) was to build the exit tab as a separate panel and fasten it to the main sign panel by bolting both main panel and tab to two metal ribs behind the sign.  However, I think that instead of this method, PennDOT may at one time have "blocked out" the tab by running the sign panel frame around the tab border instead of fabricating the tab as a separate panel.

My underlying point is that because the design of laminated panel signs is so heavily focused on the panel frame, there is more of an incentive to cut corners by incorporating the exit tab legend into the main sign panel.  The added length of panel frame is negligible, laminated panel signs do not use thick sheet metal so the added cost in panel substrate is also not large, and while the excess sheeting is a significant cost, it is partly offset by there being at most one or two panels (comprising the main sign) instead of two or three, one of the two or three being the tab.

I know of no examples of this kind of corner-cutting with extrusheet or extruded panel signs, where the cost penalties of excess panel height are heavier.

You would not expect to see this kind of corner-cutting with MnDOT, which is and historically has been so conscientious about freeway guide signing that well over 99% of freeway signing plans from 1959 onward have been pattern-accurate, even back in the 1950's and early 1960's when this involved much tedious work with pen sets and dupe film.  PennDOT in the past has not cut corners this way either--before traffic design was devolved to the districts around 1985, there was a traffic design unit in Harrisburg which produced signing plans for the entire state, all in the same style with pattern-accurate and carefully dimensioned sign panel detail sheets.  I think this involved much tedious work with dupe film too (no signs of computerization like route shields with plotter fonts, letters always filled in rather than outlined, letter alignment tables in typescript).  However, these days both Caltrans and PennDOT are socks-down-leg state DOTs where signing is concerned.

P.S.  Downlighting with proper exit tabs is possible--this is how Arizona DOT lights sign panels in Phoenix.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: oscar on April 13, 2011, 11:34:11 AM
Hawaii DOT apes Caltrans in many ways, including call box signage, and Botts dots lane markings, among other things.  But I think the "teardrop" shape of state route markers was inspired not by California's vaguely-similar miner's spade marker, but rather by the fact (not emphasized in the tourist brochures) that it rains a lot in many parts of Hawaii.

Alaska DOT&PF seems to follow Washington DOT to some extent, including identical tsunami evacuation signage.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Scott5114 on April 13, 2011, 11:48:58 AM
AK and WA seem to share a higher-than-normal density of Series E signage rather E(M), as far as I can tell.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: PAHighways on April 13, 2011, 12:56:41 PM
Quote from: LeftyJR on April 13, 2011, 10:43:10 AMWasn't this done because of the proximity to the airport, so pilots wouldn't get confused?

Yes, but it has become a moot point now with all of the other light pollution in the approach corridor.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: PAHighways on April 13, 2011, 01:01:20 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 13, 2011, 11:28:36 AMHowever, I think that instead of this method, PennDOT may at one time have "blocked out" the tab by running the sign panel frame around the tab border instead of fabricating the tab as a separate panel.

From the 60s into the 70s, the exit tabs continued the border (http://mutcd.pahighways.com/guide.html) of the guide sign.  It wasn't until the 80s when the exit tabs and guide signs had separate borders.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Brandon on April 13, 2011, 01:48:26 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 13, 2011, 11:28:36 AM
My underlying point is that because the design of laminated panel signs is so heavily focused on the panel frame, there is more of an incentive to cut corners by incorporating the exit tab legend into the main sign panel.  The added length of panel frame is negligible, laminated panel signs do not use thick sheet metal so the added cost in panel substrate is also not large, and while the excess sheeting is a significant cost, it is partly offset by there being at most one or two panels (comprising the main sign) instead of two or three, one of the two or three being the tab.

The solution to this is found in Illinois and Georgia by continuing the exit tab across the width of the sign.  IMHO, IDOT does it best by justifying the text of the tab to the side the exit is on.  Why CalTrans can't do this is beyond me if they're so worried about wind loading.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: J N Winkler on April 13, 2011, 02:17:15 PM
Quote from: PAHighways on April 13, 2011, 01:01:20 PMFrom the 60s into the 70s, the exit tabs continued the border (http://mutcd.pahighways.com/guide.html) of the guide sign.  It wasn't until the 80s when the exit tabs and guide signs had separate borders.

What I am talking about is separate from that.  It is my belief that at roughly the same time that border style was in use, PennDOT bent the sign panel frame (which is behind the signface) around the outline of the exit tab, so that the exit tab was an integral part of the main sign panel.

Quote from: Brandon on April 13, 2011, 01:48:26 PMThe solution to this is found in Illinois and Georgia by continuing the exit tab across the width of the sign.  IMHO, IDOT does it best by justifying the text of the tab to the side the exit is on.  Why CalTrans can't do this is beyond me if they're so worried about wind loading.

Caltrans does not like that approach because the intent is to retrofit exit numbering (and, where warranted, replacement sign panels) onto existing posts and trusses.  That generally means the new or retrofitted sign has to fit within the same dimensions as the original sign.  In many cases that means shifting the main legend to the side so it avoids the exit tab, or even using a reduced letter size for the main legend.  The Illinois DOT approach (which, as noted upthread, Georgia DOT seems to have abandoned) would work for few if any of these signs because the main legend would conflict with the bottom border for a full-width exit tab.

I disagree with this approach, but I don't see a scenario where Caltrans receives both the funding and the political mandate to adopt a more vanilla MUTCD approach.  I don't think the wind loading concern would disappear unless Caltrans adopted new sign panel designs allowing more flexibility in size and new truss designs with extra capacity to accommodate reasonable variations in sign panel size.  That would leave about 5,000 miles of freeway with obsolete sign support infrastructure, in the charge of an agency whose mindset has been obsessively focused on salvage and reuse since the 1980's.  Plus California in general is full of people who see exit numbering (if they are even aware exits are numbered at all) as a technical change which does not justify spending large sums (possibly in excess of the billion mark) for a start-from-scratch approach.  It is possible to get sign work funded at generous percentages, even up to 100%, by the federal government, but that is a zero-sum game because the total federal funding available to Caltrans is fixed--federal share spent on signs is, generally speaking, federal share that can't be spent on pavement maintenance, capacity upgrades, etc.

That said, I think Caltrans' excuses for not using conventional tabs are at their thinnest for signs installed on new posts in rural areas.  Wind loading is not a pressing constraint for these signs, and indeed conventional tabs have more favorable wind performance than the "strip-style" tabs Caltrans tends to use with laminated-panel signs in these areas.  This is why I say the mentality of treating the sign panel frame as a rigid constraint leads to corner-cutting.  It is also true that a cleanly formatted sign with conventional tab (per MnDOT's usual style) is a drop in the ocean compared to the retrofitted ugliness in urban areas.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: agentsteel53 on April 13, 2011, 02:41:56 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 13, 2011, 02:17:15 PMan agency whose mindset has been obsessively focused on salvage and reuse

explain what the fuck possessed them to go Nuclear Option on the 110, then!?
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: architect77 on April 14, 2011, 07:18:14 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 12, 2011, 05:17:22 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on April 12, 2011, 03:30:19 PMWhat kind of highway are you seeing this on? "EXIT 1 MILE" is indeed the correct legend for unnumbered exits per MUTCD. For numbered exits, "1 MILE" is used because EXIT appears in the exit tab.

Architect77 is complaining about a distinctive approach to freeway signing which GDOT now seems to have abandoned.  This style is distinguished by mixed-case Series D legend at 20" UC/15" LC on overhead signs in lieu of 16" UC/12" LC Series E Modified, full-width exit tabs, and the word "EXIT" appearing redundantly both in the exit tab legend and the distance expression.  Before this style was rolled out sometime in the late 1980's/early 1990's, GDOT used button copy and sign formats were much more conventional with Series E Modified for primary destination legend and no repetition of "EXIT" on the main sign panel.  Indeed, when GDOT introduced exit numbering in the mid-1960's, many guide signs had to be retrofitted with exit tabs and GDOT went to considerable trouble to remove "EXIT" and recenter the distance expression on those signs.

For its current signing, GDOT is retaining the 20" UC/15" LC combination for primary destination legend on overhead guide signs, but is using Series E Modified instead of Series D.  Tabs are independent of the main sign panel and are no longer full-width--judging by the signing plans I have seen, GDOT has settled on a default width of 11'.  Redundant "EXIT" on the main sign panel is no longer used.  GDOT is still using the balanced cantilevers ("elevated-shoulder substitutes" as Architect77 calls them), and I think they are right to continue doing so because this prevents signs from being obscured by large trucks (which they can be if they are mounted on posts and truck traffic is heavy) while also making the sign structures less vulnerable to wind load.

GDOT has let four large signing contracts in the past year, all of which call for signs in the new style.  Sign design sheets so far total 120.  I suspect that GDOT has more signing contracts in the pipeline, but I don't read GDOT STIPs or letting schedules, so I cannot confirm either that this is the case or even that GDOT will be rolling out the new style across its entire freeway network.
When there are only 2 lanes in each direction, a shoulder sign is the standard. When there are 3 lanes, OVERHEAD signage is mandated to provide visibility to all lanes. In other words, the left lane cannot easily see a shoulder mounted sign. Now, Atlanta has some of the widest interstates in the country with usually a MINIMUM of 5 travel lanes. Those left-most lanes cannot easily interpret signage almost 100' over to the right. Their vision is much MORE IMPEDED by high-profile trucks as they attempt to read shoulder mounted signage.

But for me, Georgia's "balanced butterfly" poles are more of engineering back-tracking than anything else. It's like giving up on building the Golden Gate Bridge because an earlier weaker structure collapsed. It's an absurd argument that the 1% of cantilevered signs that have collapsed are reason to give up on a such a simple, primitive engineering feat. You just beef up the trusses like NC is doing. I mean come on, which of the following examples is better providing information to all travel lanes?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2Fgaped2.jpg&hash=4632d362418cb89227a417e945efefbe39137a18)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2FUntitled.jpg&hash=211932bf36b08f29290372788aed45158afff6ea)
This photo came from this site: aaroads
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Henry on April 15, 2011, 09:24:55 AM
Quote from: architect77 on April 14, 2011, 07:18:14 PM
I mean come on, which of the following examples is better providing information to all travel lanes?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2Fgaped2.jpg&hash=4632d362418cb89227a417e945efefbe39137a18)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2FUntitled.jpg&hash=211932bf36b08f29290372788aed45158afff6ea)
This photo came from this site: aaroads
Easily the third photo. Even though the gantry shown there is not a sign bridge because its post exists only on the right side, at least those in the left lanes can see it better than the signs in the first two. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the third photo from that new I-74 freeway?

And speaking of NC, I've seen a few urban freeways there take on the Southern California practice of having guide signs mounted in the median. This has been done in Charlotte and Raleigh; I'm not too sure about the other cities, though.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: mightyace on April 15, 2011, 06:13:18 PM
The North Carolina sign would definitely qualify for the old topic Cantilevers from hell (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=2136.0)

When cantilevers get that wide, IMHO, they should be replaced by a sign bridge.  Yes, they obviously work but you end up with absurdly strong posts to support them versus sign bridge posts.

Quote from: architect77 on April 14, 2011, 07:18:14 PM
It's an absurd argument that the 1% of cantilevered signs that have collapsed are reason to give up on a such a simple, primitive engineering feat. You just beef up the trusses like NC is doing. I mean come on, which of the following examples is better providing information to all travel lanes?

Well, that's your opinion and your entitled to it.  To me, a 1% failure rate is too high given the consequences of failure.  Do signbridges have a 1% failure rate.  If you can prove they do, I'll keep quiet.  And, single BGS cantilevers are just fine with me.

One of the latest cantilevers to fail was on I-65 south near the Cool Springs Blvd. exit.  Fortunately, no one was hurt when it fell, but the highway was closed for many hours for cleanup causing near gridlock on the south side of Nashville that day.

I may be overreacting to the risk of cantilever failure but I cringe every time I go under one of those monstrosities here in TN.

Architect77 do you live somewhere that has extreme cantilevers?
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: national highway 1 on April 15, 2011, 07:08:24 PM
Quote from: architect77 on April 14, 2011, 07:18:14 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2Fgaped2.jpg&hash=4632d362418cb89227a417e945efefbe39137a18)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi174.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fw102%2Farchitect77%2FUntitled.jpg&hash=211932bf36b08f29290372788aed45158afff6ea)
The top two signs should not be used anywhere at all. Series C, and full width exit tabs should not belong on freeway BGSs. And, that style of gantry should not be used either.
:ded:
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Quillz on April 15, 2011, 07:46:46 PM
I don't find Series C on BGSs unreadable, do you? I wouldn't use something as narrow as Series B, but I can find C-E(M) very readable.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: national highway 1 on April 15, 2011, 07:55:50 PM
It doesn't look aesthetically good as Series D.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: J N Winkler on April 15, 2011, 07:59:45 PM
Series D is actually what Georgia DOT uses.  Legibility (expressed as feet of reading distance per inch of letter height) is still measurably inferior to that of Series E Modified.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Ian on April 15, 2011, 08:02:58 PM
I've always liked GDOT's use of series D lettering. It's not something you see everyday (unless of course you live in Georgia).

OT: What is the story with Georgia's exit tabs? Are they still using the full width tabs? I've seen photos of some new signs in Atlanta with normal exit tabs, yet the new signs on I-95 have the full width tabs (which I actually enjoy).
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Eth on April 15, 2011, 08:59:50 PM
New sign installations in Georgia are no longer using full-width exit tabs, plus they have abandoned Series D in favor of E(M).

As a Georgia native, I always preferred that state's use of Series D when I was a kid, but as I got older that changed; I'm happy to see them returning to E(M) now.  Never did like the full-width exit tabs; the first time I left the state I fell in love with the "normal" style, and I'm also happy to see that changing there.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: kharvey10 on April 15, 2011, 09:15:12 PM
IDiOT using series D font for 3di shields.  It looks so condensed that its hard to read.  Add in the Clearview crap and it looks even crappier.  So far they only done it in the Metro East by installing brand new signs last month on 55 between 255 and 270.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Quillz on April 15, 2011, 09:54:01 PM
Do you have a picture of an IDiOT 3di shield? CalTRANS uses Series D for 3di, as well, but it sort of works because it's essentially a 1957 design, so you have small Series D numerals on either a 21×18 or 30×25 template.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: kharvey10 on April 15, 2011, 10:58:49 PM
wb 55/70 east of 157 (http://maps.google.com/maps?q=collinsville,+il&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Collinsville,+Madison,+Illinois&gl=us&ll=38.689158,-90.002882&spn=0.0005,0.001321&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=38.689085,-90.002958&panoid=YQWQIQ4dKvpXYiiD1qBdIw&cbp=12,238,,0,11.1)

don't have a good usable photo but here is google street view using both clearview and the font for the I-255 shield more consistent on BGS in Missouri.  there is other signs on 55/70 and 64 in the Metro-East that have this font as well.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Quillz on April 16, 2011, 12:44:21 AM
Wow, yeah, it's really crammed in there. Forcing in Series D like that probably makes it less legible than just using Series C, which i supposed to be used in 3di shields.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: architect77 on April 16, 2011, 08:23:58 AM
Due to the projected rise in the number of senior drivers in the coming decades, I believe that Georgia and the Federal Highway Administration have concluded that Georgia's narrow font is too hard for them to read. Indeed, Georgia's new signage on the Downtown Connector (75/85) has oversized fat fonts and separate exit tabs.

The new HOT lane signage on I-85 will also return to the more traditional fatter fonts and interestingly will designate the one HOT lane as "EXPRESS" with the other 5 lanes labeled "LOCAL".
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Brandon on April 16, 2011, 11:36:09 AM
Quote from: ausinterkid on April 15, 2011, 07:08:24 PM
The top two signs should not be used anywhere at all. Series C, and full width exit tabs should not belong on freeway BGSs. And, that style of gantry should not be used either.
:ded:

Full width exit tabs are just fine as long as the text is properly aligned.  GDOT (along with WSDOT and a certain IDOT district that shall go unnamed but kharvey10 lives in) did not align the text.  I agree about the billboard style of sign.  Those are fugly, and I would be afraid of that gantry failing in high winds.  A full width sign bridge would be better.

See the IDOT District 1 sign below for a proper full width tab.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi837.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fzz298%2Fmidamcrossrds%2F100_0833.jpg&hash=4e9871179a56e9a9c2fa5dc6b7768bb3fe0d6524)
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: national highway 1 on April 16, 2011, 06:28:17 PM
The US 30 shield has a weird shape and looks a bit too small for the BGS.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Alps on April 16, 2011, 11:44:55 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 13, 2011, 02:41:56 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 13, 2011, 02:17:15 PMan agency whose mindset has been obsessively focused on salvage and reuse

explain what the fuck possessed them to go Nuclear Option on the 110, then!?
Is CA 110 referred to only as the Parkway? Since the Clearview demons only invaded I-110, and you say that's THE 110, thought I'd ask.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Alps on April 16, 2011, 11:47:23 PM
More on topic - I've noticed that LA's and FL's freeway bridges (and other bridges, I suppose) have the same railing style (concrete, rectangular). They also have similar wildlife in their bayous and swamps (anhingas, for example). Question is, which state is copying which?
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: J N Winkler on April 17, 2011, 11:49:57 AM
Quote from: AlpsROADS on April 16, 2011, 11:44:55 PMIs CA 110 referred to only as the Parkway? Since the Clearview demons only invaded I-110, and you say that's THE 110, thought I'd ask.

Jake is talking about the Arroyo Seco Parkway segment of Route 110 (formerly Pasadena Freeway, before that Arroyo Seco Parkway).  There was a major sign replacement on it a year or two ago as part of an effort to develop it as a historic resource which has been ongoing since the late 1990's.  The signing plans all show Series E Modified.  I am aware of no examples of Clearview which have actually been installed by Caltrans (any Clearview on I-110 was likely installed by a local or regional measure agency working in coordination with Caltrans' Office of Special Funded Projects).
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: J N Winkler on April 17, 2011, 11:52:35 AM
Quote from: AlpsROADS on April 16, 2011, 11:47:23 PMMore on topic - I've noticed that LA's and FL's freeway bridges (and other bridges, I suppose) have the same railing style (concrete, rectangular). They also have similar wildlife in their bayous and swamps (anhingas, for example). Question is, which state is copying which?

Can you describe the railing style in more detail?  "Concrete, rectangular" could, for example, fit Kansas corral rail, which notwithstanding the name, is a very common style used well outside the Midwest and indeed the tropical South.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: US71 on April 27, 2011, 09:21:11 AM
Quote from: NE2 on April 11, 2011, 06:51:15 PM
Wyoming copied Colorado's shape.

??
Please explain
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: national highway 1 on April 27, 2011, 06:08:42 PM
Wyoming and Colorado are the only rectangular states of the US.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: US71 on April 27, 2011, 06:22:09 PM
Quote from: ausinterkid on April 27, 2011, 06:08:42 PM
Wyoming and Colorado are the only rectangular states of the US.

So what? :confused:
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: J N Winkler on April 27, 2011, 06:39:16 PM
Actually Colorado isn't rectangular, if the Chama jog is taken into account.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: agentsteel53 on April 27, 2011, 06:41:32 PM
Quote from: ausinterkid on April 27, 2011, 06:08:42 PM
Wyoming and Colorado are the only rectangular states of the US.

you forgot Kansas.  well, that's shaped like a Jello mold, but close enough.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Alps on April 27, 2011, 07:45:04 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 17, 2011, 11:49:57 AM
Quote from: AlpsROADS on April 16, 2011, 11:44:55 PMIs CA 110 referred to only as the Parkway? Since the Clearview demons only invaded I-110, and you say that's THE 110, thought I'd ask.

Jake is talking about the Arroyo Seco Parkway segment of Route 110 (formerly Pasadena Freeway, before that Arroyo Seco Parkway).  There was a major sign replacement on it a year or two ago
For one small piece of it, yes, now I remember. For the Parkway part to the north that's still four curvy lanes, all the signs are very much button copy.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Alps on April 27, 2011, 07:46:05 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 17, 2011, 11:52:35 AM
Quote from: AlpsROADS on April 16, 2011, 11:47:23 PMMore on topic - I've noticed that LA's and FL's freeway bridges (and other bridges, I suppose) have the same railing style (concrete, rectangular). They also have similar wildlife in their bayous and swamps (anhingas, for example). Question is, which state is copying which?

Can you describe the railing style in more detail?  "Concrete, rectangular" could, for example, fit Kansas corral rail, which notwithstanding the name, is a very common style used well outside the Midwest and indeed the tropical South.

www.alpsroads.net/roads/la/i-10/clears.jpg Copy and paste that in your browser.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: J N Winkler on April 27, 2011, 11:27:44 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 27, 2011, 06:41:32 PMyou forgot Kansas.  well, that's shaped like a Jello mold, but close enough.

By that "close enough" criterion, you could also let in both Dakotas.  Oregon would be stretching it though.

Quote from: AlpsROADS on April 27, 2011, 07:45:04 PMFor one small piece of it, yes, now I remember. For the Parkway part to the north that's still four curvy lanes, all the signs are very much button copy.

I double-checked the construction plans for the project in question.  (The Caltrans contract number is 07-4T0304 and I am pretty sure the plans can still be downloaded from the Caltrans Office Engineer website if you're interested.)  Quite a few mainline signs were changed out between the Four Level (where the Arroyo Seco Parkway ends and the Harbor Freeway, formerly Harbor Parkway, begins) and the slip ramps which connect to I-5.  North of there the plans show no changes to mainline signs but what appears to be a complete changing-out of crossroad signs leading to the freeway.  In terms of the installed base of historic signs this is actually worse than if the mainline signs had been replaced instead.  The mainline signs are, IIRC, 1960's porcelain enamel with mid-1970's epoxy button retrofits, while the crossroad signs included numerous instances of slot-hole button copy.

Quote from: AlpsROADS on April 27, 2011, 07:46:05 PMwww.alpsroads.net/roads/la/i-10/clears.jpg Copy and paste that in your browser.

Thanks for this.  This is not, in fact, Kansas corral rail, though I can't identify the exact railing style.
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: agentsteel53 on April 28, 2011, 12:26:48 AM
Quote from: J N Winkler on April 27, 2011, 11:27:44 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 27, 2011, 06:41:32 PMyou forgot Kansas.  well, that's shaped like a Jello mold, but close enough.

By that "close enough" criterion, you could also let in both Dakotas.  Oregon would be stretching it though.

as would Connecticut, Pennsylvania ... now Hawaii; there's a square state if I've ever seen one. 
Title: Re: States "Mimicking" Other States
Post by: Quillz on April 29, 2011, 07:39:13 PM
Quote from: ausinterkid on April 16, 2011, 06:28:17 PM
The US 30 shield has a weird shape and looks a bit too small for the BGS.
It's the typical 1970 shield shape, I think it's the numerals that were made too large.