I was on I-40 a couple weeks ago between Holbrook and Winslow and noticed they were re-signing everything to Clearview :ded:
First of all: Is this a normal way to do re-signing? There were double signs everywhere! I've never seen that before
The only good thing that's going on is correctly signing SR 87 and old 66 through Winslow and marking SR 99 ,for whatever that's worth
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F40%2F40josephcityto87%2F4a.jpg&hash=1d38c6222b25c992c573e0a63478415312d63bd5)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F40%2F40josephcityto87%2F5a.jpg&hash=6915e7ae428f2f7a11166e7f71d8634430e3495b)
(suddenly you should get off sooner for Old 66, which makes sense since 257 is where the 66 alignment starts, not 255)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F40%2F40josephcityto87%2F6a.jpg&hash=3194357eaf58c3db4a82e0c4b384f30911054d2f)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F40%2F40josephcityto87%2F8a.jpg&hash=ac9b5d21053c269ceb3592802a23dc4ac2445da9)
in Winslow, where 40 business is for whatever reason no longer the preferred route to Payson:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F40%2F87to40winslow%2F0.jpg&hash=c187303a8a376c3afad6729290b49642bc95cde3)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F40%2F87to40winslow%2F1a.jpg&hash=b922f787e5148a4afc8fb65a3c0362e0fd4489b7)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F40%2F87to40winslow%2F3a.jpg&hash=9229126926d536160f6dc4b0edbeff8d810e2059)
It looks like everything but reassurance shields have been doubled up, even mile markers!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fazresigning1.jpg&hash=21d0d15e7c6f8f76e5c656fe6c2d3d99c2a5f0b1)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fazresigning2.jpg&hash=8b4cde9744baa0b0b1d430ee69da06da88b7d802)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fazresigning3.jpg&hash=ca1262cdd592103ac7551ccad27f56bcf35ca392)
(attribute all good grammar/spelling to Scott5114, all bad grammar/spelling to corco)
Please tell I-40 that we regretfully accept its resignation.
All kidding aside this is pretty sad. The old signs appear to be pretty good, so replacing them with Clearview is particularly bletcherous
Ha! I'm a bit drunk. Re-sign would be correct. Allow me to edit and give you full credit.
Seriously though- I probably have 20 more photos of the same thing and then saw a few more and only maybe that Exit 255 Route 66 sign needed to be replaced. Maybe. That one is by far the worst.
But this was one of the best stretches of button copy in Arizona. It's a shame to see it go.
I've seen the double signing during sign replacements before. But not to the extent seen here. The double signing I've seen has typically been where one or two signs were being replaced as part of a widening or other major construction--and most of these were where the old post-mounted sign was left in place while a new sign was installed overhead). Nevada doesn't often do wholesale sign replacement contracts, so something like this is unusual to see here.
Gotta agree with Scott. Most of those old button copy signs look pretty good, so it's a shame to see them replaced when they're still fairly serviceable--Clearview or not. That new guide sign for AZ 99 & Historic US 66 looks somewhat odd, though...
Quote from: roadfro on September 14, 2011, 06:21:13 AMI've seen the double signing during sign replacements before. But not to the extent seen here. The double signing I've seen has typically been where one or two signs were being replaced as part of a widening or other major construction--and most of these were where the old post-mounted sign was left in place while a new sign was installed overhead). Nevada doesn't often do wholesale sign replacement contracts, so something like this is unusual to see here.
In my experience, it is more common for a new sign to be placed on the same posts as the existing sign than for a "double signing" situation to exist where the new sign is either in front of or behind the existing sign. In some of Corco's photographs, reuse of existing posts is clearly not possible either because the sign has been redesigned and is much larger (as is the case with the Exit 257 sign) or because the message on the new sign is almost the same as on the existing sign but at a larger type size (I spot one example of what appears to be a change from 16" uppercase to 20" uppercase for primary destination legend). But there seem to be plenty of other examples where old and new signs are approximately the same size.
These new signs on I-40 have been erected as part of Arizona DOT project TRACS H775401C. This was one of seven pure signing contracts which Arizona DOT awarded through a fast-track procurement process in September 2010 to two signing vendors. This is an enormous amount of signing work for two companies to do within a relatively short period of time: a more typical pace for Arizona DOT is two sign rehabilitation contracts per year, each awarded to different contractors. I suspect the "double vision" signing on I-40 may result from the company which was assigned H775401C being short on workers to take down the existing signs.
QuoteGotta agree with Scott. Most of those old button copy signs look pretty good, so it's a shame to see them replaced when they're still fairly serviceable--Clearview or not. That new guide sign for AZ 99 & Historic US 66 looks somewhat odd, though...
The signing plans for H775401C were consultant-developed (TransCore ITS, IIRC) and are a little overcomplicated compared to the existing signs, which were designed in-house by Arizona DOT and erected in the mid-1990's.
RReevveerrbb anyone? That's a hilarious sequence of photos...LOL!
Rick
Quote from: corco on September 14, 2011, 04:17:51 AM
But this was one of the best stretches of button copy in Arizona. It's a shame to see it go.
I would count I-17 in Phoenix on this list, as well as most of the other Phoenix freeways. Quite a show there!
QuoteI would count I-17 in Phoenix on this list, as well as most of the other Phoenix freeways. Quite a show there!
Sooo much has changed since you passed through- not even joking. They re-signed all of I-17! There's no button copy to be found. 10 still has some nice button copy, but that's disappearing.
Since I've moved to Arizona I'd bet they've replaced 60% of the button copy signs in Phoenix
That's a real shame on the button copy replacement. But I will admit, I like Arizona's implementation of Clearview.
Quote from: corco on September 14, 2011, 07:50:27 PMQuoteI would count I-17 in Phoenix on this list, as well as most of the other Phoenix freeways. Quite a show there!
Sooo much has changed since you passed through- not even joking. They re-signed all of I-17! There's no button copy to be found. 10 still has some nice button copy, but that's disappearing.
I-10 Dysart to 3rd St. and the entire Maricopa Freeway length of I-17 (basically, I-17 between the two I-10 interchanges) were another two of the jobs in the September 2010 procurement. Of the remaining four jobs, one covered I-8 (California state line-Ligurta), another covered the older part of Loop 202, and the remaining two both covered noncontiguous lengths of I-17. I think Anthem Way-Cherry (basically, far outskirts of Phoenix to the SR 69 interchange) has already been done, while Rocky Park-McConnell is still left to do. Better hurry up before the signs get changed out.
QuoteI think Anthem Way-Cherry (basically, far outskirts of Phoenix to the SR 69 interchange) has already been done, while Rocky Park-McConnell is still left to do.
Yep- I drove through Anthem Way-Cherry in January and again 2 weeks ago and the signs are all new. I haven't been on the other stretch since January, so I don't know.
I think the Black Canyon Freeway part of I-17 must have already been done- although looking again it appears those signs were FHWA non-button copy signs, except right by the Maricopa junction where it's definitely all Clearview
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F17%2F60to17%2F1.jpg&hash=8d1fda17cc23d8cbccebc8bdcfb6c3193291f69e)
I-8 is weird- I was over there in July and it was a mix of button copy and Clearview, sometimes both on the same gantry!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F8%2F95toca%2F1.jpg&hash=d508cb17116e72edc30751d0e3725d2b69bb7743)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F8%2F195to95%2F7.jpg&hash=d905afe37373236ec1d0c0d044e0e5d0a9fbff4c)
what's even weirder is seeing Clearview and a '57 spec shield on the same sign
(//www.aaroads.com/shields/blog/photos/106019.jpg)
and yes, those two back-to-back signs feature the only two '57 spec shields I know of in Arizona.
That "COMMERCIAL VEHICLES" black guide sign looks really sharp. Too bad those usability tests in the 1950s ended up going with white on green. I really think white on black looks a lot better.
I only know of one other, but it's kind of a technicality
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fi8cali.jpg&hash=e0f1f38227b8be5a77652b7f4c60d49152bdd6ab)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F8yuma%2F95toca%2F6.jpg&hash=d464c2727b77525f86edfd567e070cf399e5b39e)
I think there's also a 57 spec I-10 trailblazer on...Litchfield? It's west of 101 and south of the freeway- I recall seeing it a couple years ago when I came down to visit one year. I'm up that way often; I'll hunt around for it.
I did not know that California example existed.
the one I-10 would be quite the find.
there were some BL 40 shields of '57 spec, with 1985 stickers, on the Williams business loop in 2007, but they were gone by 2009.
Quote from: corco on September 14, 2011, 09:35:55 PM
I think the Black Canyon Freeway part of I-17 must have already been done- although looking again it appears those signs were FHWA non-button copy signs, except right by the Maricopa junction where it's definitely all Clearview
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F17%2F60to17%2F1.jpg&hash=8d1fda17cc23d8cbccebc8bdcfb6c3193291f69e)
Perfect example of Clearview horror on the two left signs (well, more so on the middle one) and proper Clearview implementation on the right. In general, Arizona's done well with Clearview but errors have slipped through the cracks.
QuotePerfect example of Clearview horror on the two left signs (well, more so on the middle one) and proper Clearview implementation on the right. In general, Arizona's done well with Clearview but errors have slipped through the cracks.
Yeah, I'm not sure what happened. All the signs on that approach are like that, but from the other direction they're fine
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F60%2F10to10%2F10a.jpg&hash=63eaf1717dd128ed987872378013e1316a4489dd)
not as nice as
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F60%2F10to10%2F10.jpg&hash=897542aa0564a1d2fcb4a8744ac479ffc04dbd8d)
but whatever.
Quote from: corco on September 14, 2011, 09:35:55 PMI think the Black Canyon Freeway part of I-17 must have already been done- although looking again it appears those signs were FHWA non-button copy signs, except right by the Maricopa junction where it's definitely all Clearview
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F17%2F60to17%2F1.jpg&hash=8d1fda17cc23d8cbccebc8bdcfb6c3193291f69e)
I-17 at the Stack and further north has received a series of widenings through the nineties and noughties, so most of the signing is new (albeit using Series E Modified) and so is not a prime candidate for comprehensive replacement. Your photograph shows Clearview signs at the stack which were erected as part of an auxiliary lane improvement (TRACS number H746501C) ADOT did about a year ago. The middle sign uses Clearview 3-W (instead of the Clearview 5-W one would expect, which ADOT indeed uses for signs in rural areas) in order to allow capital letter size to be increased from 16" to 20" without increasing the overall sign panel area.
QuoteI-8 is weird- I was over there in July and it was a mix of button copy and Clearview, sometimes both on the same gantry!
The contractor was at work in July, so you were seeing half-done work. Taking pictures one by one:
Quote(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F8%2F95toca%2F1.jpg&hash=d508cb17116e72edc30751d0e3725d2b69bb7743)
All three panels were slated for replacement with new panels using Clearview (TRACS number H774701C, part of the September 2010 signing procurement). This picture shows the new left-hand panel and the original (still to be replaced) two right-hand panels.
Quote(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F8%2F195to95%2F7.jpg&hash=d905afe37373236ec1d0c0d044e0e5d0a9fbff4c)
As in the previous example, all three panels (
including the commercial vehicles sign--sigh) were to be replaced with new Clearview panels, but only the left-hand one had actually been changed out when you passed through.
The panels scheduled for replacement were all installed as part of the last I-8 California state line-Ligurta signing contract, which was carried out in 1998. The current project covers only signs erected on Arizona's side of the Colorado River. The 1998 contract had several pages' worth of signs erected by ADOT to its own standards--which, at the time, included button copy--on the California side of the border, by agreement with Caltrans. Caltrans is unlikely to have touched them, so they should still be there.
Just out of curiosity, are they putting an exit tab on the new sign for Business 8 in California?
Quote from: corco on September 16, 2011, 07:12:53 PMJust out of curiosity, are they putting an exit tab on the new sign for Business 8 in California?
Exit 172? Yup. It is being done to Arizona standards though, which means 36" tab height with Clearview legend. "Winterhaven" will also appear in Clearview 4-W rather than 5-W. On the existing sign it appears in Series E Modified but at reduced intercharacter spacing (this attracted attention in MTR back around 1999 or so when the sign was new).
The plans also call for an Exit 172 tab on a supplemental guide sign for Fort Yuma Indian Reservation. This is because Arizona's approach to supplemental signing is to place the primary destination on the main sign panel by itself and to use an exit tab instead of putting an "EXIT XXX" message on the main panel.
QuoteThe plans also call for an Exit 172 tab on a supplemental guide sign for Fort Yuma Indian Reservation. This is because Arizona's approach to supplemental signing is to place the primary destination on the main sign panel by itself and to use an exit tab instead of putting an "EXIT XXX" message on the main panel.
You mean this one?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F8%2F95toca%2F2.jpg&hash=1df05995ef1eaf358336fdf84f807042414fb852)
Yup, that one precisely.
BTW, I need to correct a few of my own mistakes. I looked through my Arizona DOT "witching directory" and it turns out the TRACS number for the I-40 Hipkoe to Goodwater contract giving rise to the signs shown in the OP is H775501C, not H775401C (which, as it happens, is I-17 Anthem Way to Cherry). The northern limit for the Anthem Way-Cherry contract is actually SR 169 rather than SR 69.
I also looked more closely at the signing plans for H774701C. The sign layout sheets, which I looked at first, suggest that the white-on-black commercial vehicles sign (part of the gantry at the US 95/16th St. exit) would be replaced with a new Clearview sign. However, the sign design sheet, which is probably more authoritative as regards the actual appearance of the sign panel, shows Series E Modified.
I should add that my favorite part of the re-signing is this new sign
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F40%2F40winslowto99%2F0.jpg&hash=4f6bdcf72bb61b890eee93c7385ca25505d69da6)
While I love seeing concurrencies signed, I don't really get the lovegasm for SR 99. Arizona 99 is about as unimportant a route as they come!
^ That assembly makes US 180 seem like such an afterthought...
Quote from: corco on September 18, 2011, 11:15:39 AM
I should add that my favorite part of the re-signing is this new sign
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidjcorcoran.com%2Fhighways%2Faz%2F40%2F40winslowto99%2F0.jpg&hash=4f6bdcf72bb61b890eee93c7385ca25505d69da6)
While I love seeing concurrencies signed, I don't really get the lovegasm for SR 99. Arizona 99 is about as unimportant a route as they come!
It may not be a very important route, but at 40+ miles it seems worthwhile to at least sign.
QuoteIt may not be a very important route, but at 40+ miles it seems worthwhile to at least sign.
It's weird- because it's not signed anywhere in Winslow where it concurs with 40 Business (including on the approach to I-40), and then BOOM there's this sign once you get on I-40
It's pretty much two different highways connected by a strange concurrency. It serves two totally different corridors- I'm not entirely sure why it isn't two different numbers.
You mean to freaking tell me that I'm going to see nothing but clearview when I arrive in Arizona this Saturday?
NO BUTTON COPY???
EWW!!!
:banghead:
There is still some button copy left. I would look first at I-19 (whole length), I-8 (Ligurta-Dateland), and the lengths of rural I-17 between Phoenix and Flagstaff which were left untouched by the 2010 signing procurement contracts. For that matter, there is a fair amount of sheeting-only Series E Modified since Arizona DOT did a number of large sign replacements on I-8, I-40, Loop 101, and Loop 202 between 2000 (when button copy was dumped) and 2007 (when Clearview was adopted).
I saw plenty of button copy among the PHX freeways. Some had them, some didn't, and some had it in sections (like the 202). You can still spy colored loop shields at the 101/202 interchange and on some side streets intersecting either road - even on distance signs!
Steve, You came at the right time- besides the occasional colored shields on side roads and the 202/101 junction you mentioned, pretty much all the button copy is gone now- they've been replacing it like crazy- every time I go up there (every 2-3 weeks), more is gone. The 60 is pretty much all Clearview now too- it wasn't just a month ago. The signage landscape is dramatically different compared to May.
101/202 might be gone too now- I haven't been that direction in a while
But yeah Scott, enjoy the button copy you do see. It's not quite super-rare yet, but it's getting that way very quickly.
Are you talking about the Superstition Freeway portion of US 60? There is nothing in the award listings for the past year which corresponds to that length of US 60, and I haven't heard of any new signing procurements. I wonder if this is an in-house job.
QuoteAre you talking about the Superstition Freeway portion of US 60? There is nothing in the award listings for the past year which corresponds to that length of US 60, and I haven't heard of any new signing procurements. I wonder if this is an in-house job.
Unless I'm nuts (I have been known to be nuts), yeah. I'm headed up there next week- I'll confirm, but I'm 90% sure the signs were now Clearview, at least between Price and I-10- 85% sure of east of thereI'm thinking I'm nuts- I'm going through photos from February when I last photographed it and the signs were a mix of Clearview and Series E(M), which I have a hunch is what's still on the ground. There was already no button copy on the 60.
I'm still fairly certain I saw Clearview where there didn't use to be when I was there two weeks ago- maybe it was along I-10 somewhere. I'll re-investigate.
Yup, I was thinking most of the button copy on US 60 bit it when Arizona DOT did the HOV lane additions in the early noughties. There was at least one contract, maybe two, and the one covering US 60 from I-10 east to Loop 101 (H573001C, engineers' seals on signing sheets mostly dated 2003-07-26) was ADOT's first major design-build contract. The signing was all Series E Modified since Clearview was then still about three to four years in the future. With the exception of knock-down replacements and the like, I wouldn't have expected to see wholesale Clearview conversion on US 60 just yet because the current signs are no more than eight or nine years old. Of course, Arizona DOT occasionally does loopy stuff.
In any case, thanks for having a look at pictures to help clear this up. The September 2010 signing procurement has made me paranoid about missing sign replacement contracts in Arizona.
Quote from: J N Winkler on November 02, 2011, 09:12:45 PM
Are you talking about the Superstition Freeway portion of US 60? There is nothing in the award listings for the past year which corresponds to that length of US 60, and I haven't heard of any new signing procurements. I wonder if this is an in-house job.
As has been resolved?, (what a situation for the question comma, if ever) US 60 was already fully reflective when I got there.
Quote from: Steve on November 03, 2011, 07:19:10 PMAs has been resolved?, (what a situation for the question comma, if ever) US 60 was already fully reflective when I got there.
That was already accepted as a given. It would have been surprising if Arizona DOT had replaced the eight-year-old Series E Modified reflective signs with new Clearview signs. I, for one, would not have been pleased about having to chase down another procurement signing contract--the seven I know about were already difficult enough to find.
BTW, last Friday ADOT opened bids on an I-8 Ligurta-Dateland signing contract (H773901C). I think this stretch still has button copy since I don't think ADOT included it in any sign replacements after they abandoned button copy. So that's more button-copy signs going up in smoke. The latest I have heard about I-19 is that Arizona DOT will be replacing just the exit direction signs and other signs that do not have metric distance expressions in an upcoming contract, but I do not know if the signs that do have explicit units will be replaced in a later contract. I am kind of hoping that local opposition will have dissuaded ADOT from re-signing I-19 in English units.
I just drove I-40 from US-93 West to Flagstaff and I have to say that I'm glad that nearly all the signs were button copy still. Also Steve's right. Some freeways in Phoenix still have Button copy on them (10, 17) Last time I was in Phoenix, 10, 17 and US 60 (which had the freeway only to Gilbert Road) were the only freeways.
I visited Arizona for the first time (excepting an airport stopover in the mid-1980's) in 1998. At that time, button copy was used for everything and considerable lengths of SR 51 and Loops 101 and 202 were open. I-19 still had the metric signs that had been installed in 1981; it was not until a year later that two contracts were awarded to replace all the 1981 signs and bell the metric cat.
I-19 is very confusing with the metric BGSs and the miles for the call boxes and speed limits.
Quote from: Master son on November 11, 2011, 01:08:08 AM
I-19 is very confusing with the metric BGSs and the miles for the call boxes and speed limits.
Not sure about the call boxes but posting speed limits in metric would have, at least initially, been a bad idea..
"But officer, I saw a sign the said the speed limit was '110', I thought it was 110 MPH, not 110 km/h!"
Quote from: myosh_tino on November 12, 2011, 03:24:50 PMNot sure about the call boxes . . .
I was under the impression that the call box numbering was keyed to the reference location markers along I-19, which are kilometer-based.
Quote. . . but posting speed limits in metric would have, at least initially, been a bad idea..
"But officer, I saw a sign the said the speed limit was '110', I thought it was 110 MPH, not 110 km/h!"
The initial plan
was to post speed limits in metric. In 1981, when the metric signs went up, I-19 was subject to the double-nickel speed limit and the signing plans called for special metric speed limit signs containing "88" in a red circle above "km/h." These signs would have been impossible to confuse with ordinary speed limit signs. However, these sheets were cancelled by change order. (I don't know the reason--the plans set I have, which is a scanned copy of the original in Arizona DOT Engineering Records, does not have a notation explaining the reason for the change.)
Some people have said in one or another of the roadgeek forums (possibly even this one) that these metric speed limit signs were installed briefly in 1980 or 1981. Photographic proof so far is lacking.
When you say '"88" in a red circle above "km/h"', do you mean the international speed limit sign?
Quote from: Bickendan on November 13, 2011, 09:59:30 PMWhen you say '"88" in a red circle above "km/h"', do you mean the international speed limit sign?
Not that specifically (it is on a circular blank)--rather, black digits in a red circle on a rectangular blank, as on the standard Australian speed limit sign. There were also advisory speed signs of similar design, but with the circle black instead of red. I drew these mockups from the original construction plans:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sabre-roads.org.uk%2Fgallery%2Falbums%2Fuserpics%2F10050%2Fi-19-signs-page-09.png&hash=e52c424fb4aacfbf352794279e38a95d91cfbf6b)
Note that the proposed speed limit sign is similar to that shown in the
MUTCD since 2003 (as part of FHWA's continuing effort to provide a metric signing option) but omits the words "SPEED LIMIT." In view of the fact that Oregon DOT has been pressured to use "SPEED LIMIT" signs (rather than "SPEED" signs) on Interstates, I think the metric regulatory speed limit sign may have been omitted in Arizona because it did not explicitly state "SPEED LIMIT." The plans do not have a notation saying that the advisory speed signs were cancelled by change order and they may very well have been installed at some point.
Quote from: J N Winkler on November 14, 2011, 01:30:30 PM
Note that the proposed speed limit sign is similar to that shown in the MUTCD since 2003 2003 edition (as part of FHWA's continuing effort at the time to provide a metric signing option) but omits the words "SPEED LIMIT." ...
Fixed that for ya... The 2009 manual doesn't include metric versions of the sign. In fact, there's pretty much no metric units in the text of the manual at all--where I believe the 2000 and 2003 versions used metric as the primary units of measure.
Thanks for this--when the 2009 manual came out, there was such a fuss about street name blades and the new philosophy for handling lane drops that I actually didn't notice the attempt to provide a "metric option" had been discontinued. Frankly, this is something that could have been done with the 2003 edition because the metrication initiative (which covered just how highway components were specified for construction, not visible things like the explicit units on signfaces, and so was less controversial) was already moribund by then.