AARoads Forum

Well, I noticed quite a lot of new things on the roads in and around the Northwest last week.





_______

I'll put up Washington and BC observations later...

The Oregon SPEED signs are certainly unique to Oregon but on a recent trip (3 years ago), I did notice more standard SPEED LIMIT signs going up on I-5 and I-205.

Something else Oregon does that California does not is putting a period after abbreviations like on the Terwilliger Blvd. exit sign above.

I would also be curious to see if Oregon continues the practice of centering exit tabs because that has become a no-no according to the latest MUTCD.

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on July 30, 2012, 03:43:36 PMNext , I like the fact that gas stations in Oregon have gas boys. Only if California had these, there would be more jobs...

...and I have the opposite feeling.  I would rather pump my own gas rather than having to wait for an attendant to come out to pump my gas.  I wish Oregon would change this law.

I very much dislike the forced gas attendant policy in Oregon. 

the worst is when a station is closed (as opposed to reverting to self-service with pay-at-the-pump) during off-hours.

I try to wave the attendants off as often as I can.  it works about half the time, especially if the station is busy.  once, it was just me, at a rare 24-hour station in Klamath Falls (the only one open!).  it was about 23 below, and the operator was quite grateful for the chance to stay inside the booth!

btw, native reservations in Oregon are self-serve.  and cheaper! 

Quote from: myosh_tino on July 30, 2012, 04:31:00 PM
The Oregon SPEED signs are certainly unique to Oregon but on a recent trip (3 years ago), I did notice more standard SPEED LIMIT signs going up on I-5 and I-205.

That's mostly due to FHWA pressure in the mid-2000s.  The state statutes formerly forbid the use of the word "limit" on speed signs, though with the FHWA pressure, a bill was passed sometime around that same time removing that restriction, and forbidding the use of the Oregon-style speed signs on interstates.  A few jurisdictions have since taken to posting "un-Oregonian" speed limit signs since then as well (mostly Roseburg, Salem and Beaverton).

Beyond being a native Oregonian and used to the "limitless" versions, I find them vastly more readable than the MUTCD standard.  The number is the pertinent part of the sign, so why clutter it up with extraneous verbiage?  Heck, most other countries seem to be doing alright with no verbiage at all.

Regarding the gas attendant policy, I don't like pumping gas, and when I lived in Washington, I purposely sought out a station where I didn't have to do self-serve--it also happened to be the cheapest station in town, coincidentally.  It doesn't really bother me that we have that restriction, and it doesn't seem to really affect the prices.

The reason Oregon speed signs omitted "LIMIT" was because it was not, in fact, a legal limit. The maximum speed was not enforceable as such, but you could be cited for other driving offenses if driving over that limit. (Then again, you could be cited for offenses at any speed.) As Tarkus says, now that state law has been rewritten, the word "LIMIT" applies. Oregon was certainly within its rights to post "SPEED 35," as the MUTCD allows for state-specific exceptions where state law directly contravenes articles in the MUTCD.

I believe the off-centered destinations are one single place name rather than the usual 'one line per destination/control city' setup, so the BGS above would denote "Tri City" and "Myrtle Creek." Apparently it would cost more to manufacture a wider sign, or a wider sign would be too near the shoulder of the highway and would more likely be damaged.

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on July 30, 2012, 03:43:36 PM
Well, I noticed quite a lot of new things on the roads in and around the Northwest last week.

Oregon Observations:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8165%2F7678856646_9103db5b34_c.jpg&hash=bea9fb2741af78b440dd0aef232bd1ea919ea2cf)
*As a bonus, this image is just south of the Terwillger curves

The image is smack in the center of the Curves, actually.

QuoteFinally, I have a question. What is all the construction being done on I-5 in downtown Portland? They closed I-5 between both I-405 interchanges for southbound traffic there. [/center]

Pavement rehab.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 30, 2012, 04:48:34 PMI try to wave the attendants off as often as I can.  it works about half the time, especially if the station is busy.  once, it was just me, at a rare 24-hour station in Klamath Falls (the only one open!).  it was about 23 below, and the operator was quite grateful for the chance to stay inside the booth!...btw, native reservations in Oregon are self-serve.  and cheaper!

The gas stations can get into huge trouble with the State Fire Marshall (which is part of Oregon State Police) if caught allowing customers to pump their own gasoline.  A number of years ago one particular gas station decided it would allow customers to do so and they subsequently got a pretty hefty fine.

Diesel is OK for self-service.  Go figure.  Apparently the driver of a Volkswagen Jetta TDI is smarter than the driver of a gasoline engined Jetta.

As for the gas stations on tribal lands being cheaper, I dare you to go buy gas at the Shell station in front of Spirit Mountain Casino on Highway 18 (on the Grand Ronde indian reservation).  I made that mistake once, paid probably 20 cents a gallon more than I would have had I just duked it out to McMinnville (or Lincoln City, going the other way).  Of course it helps that the nearest gas station is in Willamina, which isn't even on Highway 18 mainline but a business loop, seven miles away, then Sheridan (again on the business loop, another six or seven miles past Willamina), and then it's Dallas or McMinnville depending on whether you take 22 or 18.  And west, it's about 20 or so miles to Lincoln City.

Quote from: Steve on July 30, 2012, 08:45:20 PM
The reason Oregon speed signs omitted "LIMIT" was because it was not, in fact, a legal limit. The maximum speed was not enforceable as such, but you could be cited for other driving offenses if driving over that limit.

You would not be charged with "violation of the speed limit" but rather "violation of the Basic Rule" (ORS 811.100), of which you are in violation of if you operate your vehicle at a speed greater than reasonable and prudent given a number of factors including traffic, weather, road surface, etc.

It wasn't until 2003 that ORS 811.111, "Violating a speed limit" was enacted into law, and if I recall correctly it's because it was discovered that the 65 MPH posted limit was unenforceable under the existing laws.  That law also establishes speed limits on roads not posted, such as 20 MPH limits in business districts and 25 MPH in residential districts.  ORS 811.105 also specifies that driving in excess of those speeds is evidence of violating the Basic Rule, along with 55 MPH anywhere not otherwise described in 811.105.

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on July 30, 2012, 03:43:36 PM

Fourth, I wonder why Oregon has a lot of off-center signs like these:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8163%2F7678805546_eba65b0fa9_c.jpg&hash=de27bf72898e3342df150559748a3b7d84b2136d)

They use that "left-aligned, cascading indent" style whenever the destination spans multiple lines.  In other words, while it's relatively obvious on that sign, it's meant to distinguish between "Tri City / Myrtle Creek" , "Tri City / Myrtle / Creek", or "Tri City Myrtle / Creek".

Some more now (Sorry for being SO late on these).

^Your flashing yellow arrow above is a 3-section installation that does not provide a protected left turn. Normally you would see those at intersections where the oncoming direction of traffic has a protected left turn cycle, so the left turn lane will get a FYA while through traffic has a red. It doesn't look like there is a left turn for oncoming traffic at all there - or maybe nothing more than a driveway - so the FYA at that corner might as well have been a solid green.

QuoteFinally, can someone explain to me the "delay of 5 or more cars is illegal" rule along 101 in the Olympic Peninsula?

Five cars seems excessive- in Idaho it's three cars.

The point of the rule is that if there are five cars behind you, you're required to pull into marked turnouts to let other cars go by. Even if you're going the speed limit, you're still required to pull over. Helps alleviate road rage and facilitates traffic flow, forcing cars that may not consider themselves to be "slow" to use the turnouts by trying to apply some objectivity to what "slow" is. Without the law, slow but not terribly slow moving traffic tends to just ignore the turnouts, developing a line of cars behind them.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7268%2F7761139858_72de1110e0_c.jpg&hash=4a3d3170c8d4c6a0117f62e626b96b529157500c)

That's kind of a bummer, because that's sign's predecessor had an TO I-84 trailblazer on it.

Wait...raised caps, a directional tab (heck, ANY tab) on a WA interstate?  Interesting!

Quote from: OracleUsr on August 11, 2012, 08:54:10 PM
Wait...raised caps, a directional tab (heck, ANY tab) on a WA interstate?  Interesting!

It looks like that new arrow-per-lane sign may also signal the end of Washington's full-width exit tabs... bummer.

Regarding the "delay of 5 cars" law, this also applies in California.  Just as corco explains, if you've got 5 or more cars behind you, you are obligated to use the next turnout to allow these cars to pass.

The Check Mile signs in the last photo, I believe, were meant to allow the people to check their odometers for accuracy.  These were very common in California but have all but disappeared from California's freeways.

The "Oregon-style" gore point sign is what I consider to be the "national" standard and while California still uses their significantly smaller signs, I am seeing more signing plans calling for the installation of the larger gore signs found in most parts of the U.S.

Quote from: The High Plains Traveler on August 11, 2012, 05:52:50 PM
^Your flashing yellow arrow above is a 3-section installation that does not provide a protected left turn.

Actually, that's a "dual arrow" FYA signal.  The bottom light can actually change colors, between green and flashing yellow, providing for both protected and permitted operations.



Most of the installations since the start of 2011 have been 3-light "dual arrow" setups.  Washington County has been the biggest adopter--they've replaced hundreds of standard protected green signals with 3-light dual arrow FYAs, as well as replacing many doghouses and sticking them on previously unprotected intersection approaches.

Quote from: OracleUsr on August 11, 2012, 08:54:10 PM
Wait...raised caps, a directional tab (heck, ANY tab) on a WA interstate?  Interesting!

Tabs are relatively common in WSDOT's "Southwest Region" (south of MP 85, the Thurston County line).  However, even then, they're not always done correctly, frequently landing Oregon-style in the center.

Similarly, "Texas-style" gores are typically only found in the SW, with California-style the most common elsewhere.

Re: the "check miles"... I think the signs say they're actually intended to check the speedometer.  Since I know I always drive with a stopwatch handy to make sure I drive 5 miles in exactly 5 minutes.  :spin:

Quote from: Tarkus on August 12, 2012, 03:29:43 AM

Quote from: The High Plains Traveler on August 11, 2012, 05:52:50 PM
^Your flashing yellow arrow above is a 3-section installation that does not provide a protected left turn.

Actually, that's a "dual arrow" FYA signal.  The bottom light can actually change colors, between green and flashing yellow, providing for both protected and permitted operations.

.
Most of the installations since the start of 2011 have been 3-light "dual arrow" setups.  Washington County has been the biggest adopter--they've replaced hundreds of standard protected green signals with 3-light dual arrow FYAs, as well as replacing many doghouses and sticking them on previously unprotected intersection approaches.

That's interesting. Somehow I thought the dual arrows within a single section (which I remember seeing in Arizona in the 1990s) were an experiment that FHWA ultimately rejected due to brightness, or maybe ambiguity for color perception-impaired drivers. Any reason why they wouldn't have used a standard 4-section head to provide these functions? EDIT: To answer my own question I viewed the video and it appears that the existing 3-section heads were modified, saving cost of new equipment.   

Quote from: myosh_tino on July 30, 2012, 04:31:00 PMI would also be curious to see if Oregon continues the practice of centering exit tabs because that has become a no-no according to the latest MUTCD.

Actually, no, that is not quite true.  What the latest MUTCD now bans is the use of anything but a left-aligned tab for left exits.  Ordinary right exits can continue to have center-justified exit tabs, though the MUTCD shows part-width right-justified exit tabs.

Quote from: corco on August 11, 2012, 06:15:27 PM

QuoteFinally, can someone explain to me the "delay of 5 or more cars is illegal" rule along 101 in the Olympic Peninsula?

Five cars seems excessive- in Idaho it's three cars.

The point of the rule is that if there are five cars behind you, you're required to pull into marked turnouts to let other cars go by. Even if you're going the speed limit, you're still required to pull over. Helps alleviate road rage and facilitates traffic flow, forcing cars that may not consider themselves to be "slow" to use the turnouts by trying to apply some objectivity to what "slow" is. Without the law, slow but not terribly slow moving traffic tends to just ignore the turnouts, developing a line of cars behind them.

In my experience, turnout signs (which have now been added to the national MUTCD) do not work well unless drivers are already familiar with them.  I still remember being the first car behind another with Iowa plates on the twisty stretch of US 34 just east of Estes Park, Colorado in 2003.  There were multiple turnouts and signs indicating that they had to be used, but the Iowa car drove past at least a dozen of them without slowing down, while a queue of at least 20 cars built up behind it.  I finally lost patience and put my foot to the floor in an area of marginal visibility, and once I finished my overtaking maneuver, there were no cars in my rearview mirror for about 15 minutes.

In Washington, turnout signs were state-specific standard signs for at least a decade before they were added to the national MUTCD.  In California, they have been standard signs since the Great Redrawing of 1971 at the very least.  But in both states (and also in Idaho, in my experience), turnout signs are not used unless paved turnouts are actually provided and topography makes it impractical or expensive to provide continuous full-width shoulders.  US 101 in the Olympic Peninsula has a very constrained alignment for much of its length (essentially mountains to one side, the Pacific Ocean to the other), and it also has a much higher volume of interurban bicycle traffic than most rural state highways.  In fact, there are special warning signs which cater specifically to cyclists.

Quote from: Tarkus on July 30, 2012, 08:02:16 PMRegarding the gas attendant policy, I don't like pumping gas, and when I lived in Washington, I purposely sought out a station where I didn't have to do self-serve--it also happened to be the cheapest station in town, coincidentally.  It doesn't really bother me that we have that restriction, and it doesn't seem to really affect the prices.

I am not foolish enough to imagine that Oregon or, for that matter, New Jersey will abandon compulsory full-service because out-of-staters dislike it.  Indeed, I suspect that each bit of criticism from out of state only strengthens Oregonians' and New Jerseyans' determination to keep it.

This said, however, I prefer self-service even though I dislike pumping gas.  First, I am deaf, so it is infinitely more cumbersome for me to get out of my car and start negotiating with an attendant than it is to pump my own gas.  Second, I have owned cars which trigger pump shutoffs prematurely when gas is pumped in at full volume, which most attendants do by default since they think, incorrectly, that that will get me in and out faster.

The one gas station attendant I have met in Oregon who seemed clued in to the possibility of premature pump shutoff was a retiree working in Baker City, and if all pump attendants in the state were like him, I could live happily with a full-service policy.  But it was more usual for me to drive into a station with just a pint left in a 15.5-gallon tank, request a complete fillup (leaving Bend for Burns, say), and then be presented with a chit to sign for just 2.5 gallons because that was when the pump shutoff tripped.

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 11, 2012, 04:55:22 PM

This sure is a weird set of "LANE ENDS" and pull-through signs. There isn't even an exit around.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8307%2F7760832398_0d39db2e45_c.jpg&hash=32404e698c406f9e29d4cd7852508f65283e0c87)

This is the approach to the Toutle River bridge on I-5, which is one end of a length of I-5 in Lewis County which I believe is the last portion of I-5 in Washington state to be just four lanes.

Quote from: The High Plains Traveler on August 12, 2012, 09:48:49 AM

Quote from: Tarkus on August 12, 2012, 03:29:43 AM
Most of the installations since the start of 2011 have been 3-light "dual arrow" setups.  Washington County has been the biggest adopter--they've replaced hundreds of standard protected green signals with 3-light dual arrow FYAs, as well as replacing many doghouses and sticking them on previously unprotected intersection approaches.

That's interesting. Somehow I thought the dual arrows within a single section (which I remember seeing in Arizona in the 1990s) were an experiment that FHWA ultimately rejected due to brightness, or maybe ambiguity for color perception-impaired drivers. Any reason why they wouldn't have used a standard 4-section head to provide these functions? EDIT: To answer my own question I viewed the video and it appears that the existing 3-section heads were modified, saving cost of new equipment.   

I think also the fact that the signal is flashing under yellow and steady under green gives the appropriate cues to a color-blind person.

Quote from: J N Winkler on August 12, 2012, 11:40:22 AM

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 11, 2012, 04:55:22 PM

This sure is a weird set of "LANE ENDS" and pull-through signs. There isn't even an exit around.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8307%2F7760832398_0d39db2e45_c.jpg&hash=32404e698c406f9e29d4cd7852508f65283e0c87)

This is the approach to the Toutle River bridge on I-5, which is one end of a length of I-5 in Lewis County which I believe is the last portion of I-5 in Washington state to be just four lanes.

Your last statement is not entirely true. There are long stretches of I-5 north of the Seattle area to Vancouver that are four lanes.

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 11, 2012, 04:55:22 PM
Some more now (Sorry for being SO late on these).

More Oregon Observations

First, what does this sign mean? These are pretty common in Oregon.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8439%2F7760791284_ba9289f88c_c.jpg&hash=be4fba63821000a804390097391e1935b9c4fdf5)

The road will either divide, or if not, you're approaching a Do Not Pass (double yellow line) segment.

Quote

Second, I've noticed that Lincoln City uses these "banner" mile markers instead of the normal mile markers.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8308%2F7760783500_6bea19f7da_c.jpg&hash=b35ee0786a3fc28e06dc1daafb49fe29af7c1228)

First I've seen those.

Quote

Speaking of mile markers, why is the mileage messed up along 101 in Oregon? What I mean by this is that Mile 1 on 101 looks to be in Astoria instead of the California border. What's the reasoning for this?

All non-interstate north-south highways in Oregon have their origin at the Columbia River/Washington border, not the California/Nevada border. All east-west highways (interstates included) have their origin at the Pacific Ocean. Exception: US 30's Lower Columbia River Highway segment (Astoria-Portland) originates at I-405, not at US 101.

Quote

What are these "Check Miles" that I kept on seeing along I-5?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8308%2F7761288118_67b59c579a_c.jpg&hash=5d63d72996925a5dfa33f9ef06cdae54c2596d27)

These are speedometer check sections, where you're meant to gauge your speedometer's accuracy during the five mile stretch. If you're driving at 60 mph, it should take five minutes to clear the five miles.

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 12, 2012, 01:40:30 PM

I forgot to mention that I think WSDOT just doesn't know what a 3dus shield is, as noted by numerous reassurance shields such as this in Port Angeles (Though I have seen some in the proper widths):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7125%2F7767194542_71c1fd0850_c.jpg&hash=907546029ae99c4177f0ceb819b8b12867fc0198)

Quote from: J N Winkler on August 12, 2012, 11:40:22 AM

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 11, 2012, 04:55:22 PM

This sure is a weird set of "LANE ENDS" and pull-through signs. There isn't even an exit around.

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8307%2F7760832398_0d39db2e45_c.jpg&hash=32404e698c406f9e29d4cd7852508f65283e0c87)

This is the approach to the Toutle River bridge on I-5, which is one end of a length of I-5 in Lewis County which I believe is the last portion of I-5 in Washington state to be just four lanes.

Your last statement is not entirely true. There are long stretches of I-5 north of the Seattle area to Vancouver that are four lanes.

WSDOT's in the process of widening I-5 between Hazel Dell and I-205. This picture you posted shows this intent:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7268%2F7761139858_72de1110e0_c.jpg&hash=4a3d3170c8d4c6a0117f62e626b96b529157500c)

WSDOT's also planning on widening the four-lane portion between Centralia and Olympia at some point.
Note that I-5 north of Everett (I think north of Marysville) is four-lanes all the way onto BC 99, which is four laned all the way onto Oak Street in Vancouver.

Quote from: Bickendan on August 12, 2012, 02:13:58 PMWSDOT's also planning on widening the four-lane portion between Centralia and Olympia at some point.
Note that I-5 north of Everett (I think north of Marysville) is four-lanes all the way onto BC 99, which is four laned all the way onto Oak Street in Vancouver.

It's six lanes all the way to Exit 224 (for Old 99) just south of Mount Vernon, but yes, four lanes north of there to the border (and beyond).

Quote from: Bickendan on August 12, 2012, 02:10:48 PM

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 11, 2012, 04:55:22 PM

More Oregon Observations

First, what does this sign mean? These are pretty common in Oregon.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8439%2F7760791284_ba9289f88c_c.jpg&hash=be4fba63821000a804390097391e1935b9c4fdf5)

The road will either divide, or if not, you're approaching a Do Not Pass (double yellow line) segment.

If you look at the top of the divided highway sign, the "median" is not solid, it's hashed.  If there was a "physical" median, such as a concrete or unpaved median, the normal divided highway sign with the "solid" median would be used.  But when the road widens to accomodate a left turn lane, for example, and there is a "painted" median with yellow-painted diagonal lines in the middle, the sign you posted is used.

I've only ever seen this in OR, and it took me several intersections to figure it out.

QuoteIn my experience, turnout signs (which have now been added to the national MUTCD) do not work well unless drivers are already familiar with them.  I still remember being the first car behind another with Iowa plates on the twisty stretch of US 34 just east of Estes Park, Colorado in 2003.  There were multiple turnouts and signs indicating that they had to be used, but the Iowa car drove past at least a dozen of them without slowing down, while a queue of at least 20 cars built up behind it.  I finally lost patience and put my foot to the floor in an area of marginal visibility, and once I finished my overtaking maneuver, there were no cars in my rearview mirror for about 15 minutes.

In Washington, turnout signs were state-specific standard signs for at least a decade before they were added to the national MUTCD.  In California, they have been standard signs since the Great Redrawing of 1971 at the very least.  But in both states (and also in Idaho, in my experience), turnout signs are not used unless paved turnouts are actually provided and topography makes it impractical or expensive to provide continuous full-width shoulders.  US 101 in the Olympic Peninsula has a very constrained alignment for much of its length (essentially mountains to one side, the Pacific Ocean to the other), and it also has a much higher volume of interurban bicycle traffic than most rural state highways.  In fact, there are special warning signs which cater specifically to cyclists.

That's definitely the case in Washington and Idaho.

In my experience, Idaho's signage for those turnouts is much more extensive than other states. Typically as you enter a corridor with them, there is a sign, and then half a mile and a quarter mile before every turn out is a sign indicating that there is a turnout ahead and vehicles with more than three cars behind them must pull out.

Washington's signage is much more vague- I'm not sure that I would know what exactly it meant had I not already been familiar with Idaho's law. There definitely aren't nearly as many "VEHICLES DELAYING X CARS MUST TURN OUT" signs.

On multiple occasions on Idaho 55, I've seen cars behind cars that fail to use pullouts start to pass those cars anyway, and then those vehicles quickly realize they need to get in the pullout. That's pretty dangerous though.

On a related note, Washington has some setups on the Olympic Peninsula (definitely on 109 and 112, maybe 101 too) with a full shoulder where the shoulder is designated as a passing lane but still striped as a shoulder with a daylight only restriction.

Quote from: Bickendan on August 12, 2012, 02:13:58 PMWSDOT's also planning on widening the four-lane portion between Centralia and Olympia at some point.

The widening is now complete to the north end of Centralia, just north of the Harrison exit, with active construction starting south of there.  The Grand Mound interchange (U.S. 12 West) is substantially complete; at least it was the last time I was there a few weeks ago.

Quote from: corco on August 12, 2012, 11:23:04 PMWashington's signage is much more vague- I'm not sure that I would know what exactly it meant had I not already been familiar with Idaho's law. There definitely aren't nearly as many "VEHICLES DELAYING X CARS MUST TURN OUT" signs.

My experience is that in Oregon the law is virtually ignored; in Washington it's largely ignored.  Oregon 6 has a few pullouts but even ODOT doesn't consistently mark the pullout (sometimes it's marked as a shoulder with an "entrance" and an "exit", sometimes it's marked as a passing lane, sometimes it's a hybrid of the two).

Quote from: J N Winkler on August 12, 2012, 11:40:22 AM

Quote from: myosh_tino on July 30, 2012, 04:31:00 PMI would also be curious to see if Oregon continues the practice of centering exit tabs because that has become a no-no according to the latest MUTCD.

Actually, no, that is not quite true.  What the latest MUTCD now bans is the use of anything but a left-aligned tab for left exits.  Ordinary right exits can continue to have center-justified exit tabs, though the MUTCD shows part-width right-justified exit tabs.

ODOT installed some new signs on U.S. 26 (Sunset Highway) in Hillsboro that have right-justified exit tabs.  Looks odd.

The new "LGS" (little green sign) for 185th Avenue also looks odd, it's a very small sign for a major north-south arterial.  But this is because "PCC Rock Creek" is removed from the exit signs and shows up only on a secondary sign.

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 11, 2012, 04:55:22 PM(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7268%2F7761139858_72de1110e0_c.jpg&hash=4a3d3170c8d4c6a0117f62e626b96b529157500c)

Using Salem as a control city is so much better than Oregon's use of Oregon City, rather than Seattle, as the control city for the southern end of I-205.

Quote from: sp_redelectric on August 15, 2012, 07:43:12 PM
Using Salem as a control city is so much better than Oregon's use of Oregon City, rather than Seattle, as the control city for the southern end of I-205.

That change at the southern end happened when they replaced the signs recently.  I wondered when they changed the control city to Oregon City if ODOT decided that either no through traffic was using 205 to avoid downtown Portland, or that there isn't really much advantage to doing so, since traffic on 205 is really no better than I-5 anymore.

Quote from: xonhulu on August 15, 2012, 08:39:17 PMeither no through traffic was using 205 to avoid downtown Portland, or that there isn't really much advantage to doing so, since traffic on 205 is really no better than I-5 anymore.

Which is why ODOT needs to install a "Travel Time via..." sign down there...or at least use the existing VMS to display that information.  I-205 is often the better alternative on some weekends if there is a major event going on downtown and if you're travelling opposite the direction of the Vancouver to downtown commute (i.e. in the mornings northbound).  But if traffic is good, why bother with 205?

Or...ODOT can do what WSDOT does with SR 500 - no control city at all.

Quote from: J N Winkler on August 12, 2012, 11:40:22 AM

Quote from: Tarkus on July 30, 2012, 08:02:16 PMRegarding the gas attendant policy, I don't like pumping gas, and when I lived in Washington, I purposely sought out a station where I didn't have to do self-serve--it also happened to be the cheapest station in town, coincidentally.  It doesn't really bother me that we have that restriction, and it doesn't seem to really affect the prices.

I am not foolish enough to imagine that Oregon or, for that matter, New Jersey will abandon compulsory full-service because out-of-staters dislike it.  Indeed, I suspect that each bit of criticism from out of state only strengthens Oregonians' and New Jerseyans' determination to keep it.

This said, however, I prefer self-service even though I dislike pumping gas.  First, I am deaf, so it is infinitely more cumbersome for me to get out of my car and start negotiating with an attendant than it is to pump my own gas.  Second, I have owned cars which trigger pump shutoffs prematurely when gas is pumped in at full volume, which most attendants do by default since they think, incorrectly, that that will get me in and out faster.

The one gas station attendant I have met in Oregon who seemed clued in to the possibility of premature pump shutoff was a retiree working in Baker City, and if all pump attendants in the state were like him, I could live happily with a full-service policy.  But it was more usual for me to drive into a station with just a pint left in a 15.5-gallon tank, request a complete fillup (leaving Bend for Burns, say), and then be presented with a chit to sign for just 2.5 gallons because that was when the pump shutoff tripped.

I've read that the auto-shutoff thing is especially annoying for motorcyclists, since the tank might only be half-full at that point.  My experience with statewide full-service gas stations is limited to México.  I actually tell the attendants to stop at the click, because gas tends to spill out when you go past that point in our car.  Sometimes they say yes and then forget by the time it's done filling up, so they keep going anyway.  It seems to be common procedure there to squeeze every possible drop into the tank.  I keep half-expecting them to shake the vehicle to get the foam to settle just so they can put in one more dL.

Personally, I have no preference between self- and full-service gas.  I will say that truck station diesel pumps usually pump fuel at such a high rate that you'll get sprayed when it clicks off, and I'd rather have someone else get sprayed.  Never had that problem with octane pumps, though.

Quote from: sp_redelectric on July 31, 2012, 12:18:04 AM
Diesel is OK for self-service.  Go figure.  Apparently the driver of a Volkswagen Jetta TDI is smarter than the driver of a gasoline engined Jetta.

diesel fuel is much less flammable.  if it's the fire marshal who wags the green finger at gas stations, then Oregon is assuming that drivers do not know how to pump gas without setting themselves on fire. 

just another wacky Oregon nanny-state policy.  even here, in fire-paranoid southern California, we're allowed to pump our own gas.

Quote from: J N Winkler on August 12, 2012, 11:40:22 AM
In my experience, turnout signs (which have now been added to the national MUTCD) do not work well unless drivers are already familiar with them.

California has had them since 1971 (if not earlier), and I've had maybe two cars obey them in my entire history of driving in the state, which is many hundreds of thousands of miles.

slow drivers tend to be the "can't be arsed" sort of personality style that doesn't give a shit about other people who may be impeded by his obnoxiousness.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on August 17, 2012, 01:48:10 PM

Quote from: sp_redelectric on July 31, 2012, 12:18:04 AM
Diesel is OK for self-service.  Go figure.  Apparently the driver of a Volkswagen Jetta TDI is smarter than the driver of a gasoline engined Jetta.

diesel fuel is much less flammable.  if it's the fire marshal who wags the green finger at gas stations, then Oregon is assuming that drivers do not know how to pump gas without setting themselves on fire. 

just another wacky Oregon nanny-state policy.  even here, in fire-paranoid southern California, we're allowed to pump our own gas.

Interesting how, in México, attendants wear long-sleeved fire-retardant uniforms; whereas I've pumped gas at stations in Nevada and Colorado that didn't even have any employees on-site at all.

Quote from: agentsteel53 on July 30, 2012, 04:48:34 PM
btw, native reservations in Oregon are self-serve.  and cheaper!

"Where's the freakin' att -- oh, right! I'm not actually in Oregon when I'm on the rez!" I try to buy tribal whenever I can -- but noticing exactly what you did (last year when I was there) is even more incentive. It's bad enough everywhere else having to go inside for just the receipt when the printer won't print.. but you end up with this drawn-out ordeal just to pump and pay at some of the busier stations in Portland. When it works it works; when it doesn't it really doesn't.

I've never had a dirtier windshield than the time I've passed in "full service" states.

Also: NO U-TURN in Oregon unless it says so! A policeman in Lake Oswego politely explained the state's clear-as-mud policy without ticketing me. But basically unless there's a sign on the signal stating "U-TURN PERMITTED" it's a no-no. I forget what the rule was at intersections controlled by a sign rather than a signal.. but I remember the whole thing being a nuisance.

Yep, if it ain't marked, don't U-turn. There are a few that specifically forbid it, though (iirc, Barbur at Terwilliger, may be mistaken on this one).

Last installment to this...

BC uses different signage than Ontario for some of this.  Some of these signs may be BC-specific.
1. I've never seen dashed borders in Ontario.  I may be wrong about them not being there.
2. Ontario tends to stick with the FHWA series more often, or Clearview on newer signage.
3. Ontario uses a lot more down arrows than up arrows.
4. The MTO drops the word "exit" from the BGSs and just uses the number in a tab.

Quote from: Bickendan on August 18, 2012, 02:29:44 PMYep, if it ain't marked, don't U-turn. There are a few that specifically forbid it, though (iirc, Barbur at Terwilliger, may be mistaken on this one).

U-Turns are permitted by sign at Terwilliger (both northbound and southbound), as well as at Bertha (northbound only, for access to Fred Meyer).  I think you are right in that there is a NO U-Turn sign somewhere but I can't think of where it is.

What's more common are the U-Turn Permitted/"Cars Only", or U-Turn Permitted/No Trucks (symbol).

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 18, 2012, 04:55:52 PM
Last installment to this...

Are signs like this cut out for any special reason? (Also with one of the few BC-99 shields I've seen in Highway Gothic)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8303%2F7767536180_55a067be0a_c.jpg&hash=fba00ef004f4ac785a5fc5d560541ac7031dd5ca)

It's a Canadian thing, primarily used in Ontario as demonstrated here (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=3294.msg141397;topicseen#msg141397). The angle on the sign refers to which way the split goes.

Quote from: AsphaltPlanetAngled exit signs were common in Ontario until the late 1970s or so when their use was phased out.  A few still exist.  Not the best photo (and the old king's highway crowns have been covered over as a result of highway downgrading), but a contender nevertheless:

(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.asphaltplanet.ca%2FON%2Fhwy_401_images%2F401_dv_814_east_Jul05.jpg&hash=3c77851a04aa58556cdba2bc781e1e9d15b5165e)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thekingshighway.ca%2FPHOTOS%2Fhwy401-1069_lg.jpg&hash=86c16de7000733d9271d597b82a44e88162c9cd1)

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 18, 2012, 04:55:52 PM

Is this the Canadian version of the "no parking" sign?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm8.staticflickr.com%2F7111%2F7767608678_4814dd4e5c_c.jpg&hash=ceec830fe1fe2c0da48806b6df230dee9099ad07)

I believe that the P in a green circle does allow 2 hour parking between 9am and 3pm from Monday to Saturday in that direction.
Notice how the red crossed-circle signs have the stop-sign octagon inside? I'm pretty sure they're for 'No Stopping' between the times indicated. ;-)

Angled signs like that are/were not just a Canadian thing.  The Ohio Turnpike had them until the 1980s, and the Indiana Toll Road used to have them at least until the late 1970s as seen here (//www.aaroads.com/shields/show.php?image=IN19610692).

I'm not aware of any metric countries using fractional distances.  Usually they're expressed in tenths of kilometers or whole meters.  Anyone have pictures of fractional kilometer signs, especially in Canada?

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 18, 2012, 04:55:52 PM
Last installment to this...

So are the flashing green lights in Canada similar to the flashing yellows I've mentioned earlier?

Flashing green is exactly equivalent to a U.S. green arrow. Fully protected turn. Short interval after the flashing stops before oncoming traffic gets their green, but no yellow arrow equivalent.

BC has slightly different signage than other parts of Canada, so things like the white city limits signs, dashed borders, and overhead cutout signs would be considered things that are more-or-less unique to British Columbia.  Canada does have both "no stopping" and "no parking" signs and other provinces have started using blue hospital signs (for example, they're used in Calgary).

Quote from: The High Plains TravelerFlashing green is exactly equivalent to a U.S. green arrow. Fully protected turn. Short interval after the flashing stops before oncoming traffic gets their green, but no yellow arrow equivalent.

That is true for all other provinces in Canada (more-so seen in Ontario, Quebec, and points east), however this is not the case in British Columbia.  BC uses flashing greens at pedestrian controlled signals (i.e. the cross street has a stop sign, not a red light) and so you will not be protected from oncoming traffic when you see a BC flashing green.  You can debate the wisdom behind being different from virtually the rest of North America, but that is the case in BC.

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeekThis sure is unique. I wonder what the leftmost sign would say... If you're wondering, this is approaching the George Massey Tunnel south of Richmond.

The George Massey Tunnel on Hwy 99 has Counterflow (i.e reversable) lanes during rush hour, so on weekdays from 6 am-9 am it's 3 NB lanes, 1 SB and from 3:20 pm-6 pm it's 3 SB and 1 NB lane.  The variable signage will reflect these changes and the blank panel likely refects the 3rd lane.

Quote from: mp_quadrillion on August 18, 2012, 09:22:15 AM
Also: NO U-TURN in Oregon unless it says so! A policeman in Lake Oswego politely explained the state's clear-as-mud policy without ticketing me. But basically unless there's a sign on the signal stating "U-TURN PERMITTED" it's a no-no. I forget what the rule was at intersections controlled by a sign rather than a signal.. but I remember the whole thing being a nuisance.

Interesting. In Wisconsin, it's U-turn permitted unless a sign says otherwise.

Quote from: JREwing78 on August 21, 2012, 08:42:46 PM

Quote from: mp_quadrillion on August 18, 2012, 09:22:15 AM
Also: NO U-TURN in Oregon unless it says so! A policeman in Lake Oswego politely explained the state's clear-as-mud policy without ticketing me. But basically unless there's a sign on the signal stating "U-TURN PERMITTED" it's a no-no. I forget what the rule was at intersections controlled by a sign rather than a signal.. but I remember the whole thing being a nuisance.

Interesting. In Wisconsin, it's U-turn permitted unless a sign says otherwise.

Wisconsin just changed that as of 2011-01-01, too.  Before then, U-turns were prohibited at all signalized intersections statewide.  That law was being increasingly ignored, so the legislature changed it.

Mike

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 18, 2012, 04:55:52 PM
....

Does the rest of Canada use decimals (as in 2.2 km) instead of fractions (as in 2 1/4 km) on their mileage signs?

....

Metric is a decimal (base-10) system, so the use of quarters and thirds and the like is deprecated and uncommon. As "kphoger" said, usually distances under a kilometre are posted as a whole number of metres; distances over a kilometre are usually posted as a decimal, although off the top of my head most such signs I've seen use half-kilometre intervals (for example, an advance sign for an exit reading either "1.5 km" or, in Quebec, "1,5 km" because in French the comma is used as the decimal point).

I don't ever remember seeing a fractional metric measurement anywhere. There's really no point in it when everything is in tenths anyway.

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 18, 2012, 04:55:52 PM
...

Is this the Canadian version of the "no parking" sign?

....

As "national highway 1" noted, the green circle is used to indicate that something is permitted. For prohibitions they normally use the red circle with the slash. I've seen things like a green circle containing an arrow indicating "straight or left." It means it's OK to turn left or go straight out of that lane, but not turn right; I've also seen a green circle with just a right-turn arrow, which is the functional equivalent of "right-turn only" because the only movement the sign is allowing is a right turn. To a lot of American drivers those sorts of signs are alien because the signs here are tailored more towards telling you what you CANNOT do, rather than the approach of "you can do what the sign allows and nothing else."

At least in Quebec I'm sure part of the theory behind that kind of sign comes from the French civil-law tradition, under which you are allowed to do only what the law says you are allowed to do. In common-law countries like the USA, Australia, UK, and most of Canada, the basic principle is that an action is allowed unless the law prohibits it. (Both of those sentences are way oversimplified to make just the basic point.)

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 22, 2012, 11:11:15 AM

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 18, 2012, 04:55:52 PM
....

Does the rest of Canada use decimals (as in 2.2 km) instead of fractions (as in 2 1/4 km) on their mileage signs?

....

Metric is a decimal (base-10) system, so the use of quarters and thirds and the like is deprecated and uncommon. As "kphoger" said, usually distances under a kilometre are posted as a whole number of metres; distances over a kilometre are usually posted as a decimal, although off the top of my head most such signs I've seen use half-kilometre intervals (for example, an advance sign for an exit reading either "1.5 km" or, in Quebec, "1,5 km" because in French the comma is used as the decimal point).

I don't ever remember seeing a fractional metric measurement anywhere. There's really no point in it when everything is in tenths anyway.

In much of Europe, IIRC, they post 'meters' on many signs, such as interchange approach signs, up to 10km and 'km' above.  For example, an exit ramp that is 3.5 km away will be signed as "3500 m".

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 22, 2012, 11:11:15 AM

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 18, 2012, 04:55:52 PM
...

Is this the Canadian version of the "no parking" sign?

....

As "national highway 1" noted, the green circle is used to indicate that something is permitted. For prohibitions they normally use the red circle with the slash. I've seen things like a green circle containing an arrow indicating "straight or left." It means it's OK to turn left or go straight out of that lane, but not turn right; I've also seen a green circle with just a right-turn arrow, which is the functional equivalent of "right-turn only" because the only movement the sign is allowing is a right turn. To a lot of American drivers those sorts of signs are alien because the signs here are tailored more towards telling you what you CANNOT do, rather than the approach of "you can do what the sign allows and nothing else."

At least in Quebec I'm sure part of the theory behind that kind of sign comes from the French civil-law tradition, under which you are allowed to do only what the law says you are allowed to do. In common-law countries like the USA, Australia, UK, and most of Canada, the basic principle is that an action is allowed unless the law prohibits it. (Both of those sentences are way oversimplified to make just the basic point.)

I like the European logic of 'red circle' = 'prohibited', 'green circle' = 'permitted but not mandatory' and 'blue disk with white image/lettering/numbers' = 'mandatory action'.

Mike

Quote from: dmuzika on August 21, 2012, 06:28:56 PM

Quote from: The High Plains TravelerFlashing green is exactly equivalent to a U.S. green arrow. Fully protected turn. Short interval after the flashing stops before oncoming traffic gets their green, but no yellow arrow equivalent.

That is true for all other provinces in Canada (more-so seen in Ontario, Quebec, and points east), however this is not the case in British Columbia.  BC uses flashing greens at pedestrian controlled signals (i.e. the cross street has a stop sign, not a red light) and so you will not be protected from oncoming traffic when you see a BC flashing green.  You can debate the wisdom behind being different from virtually the rest of North America, but that is the case in BC.

That's astounding. I say that, having (as you can probably tell from my comment) driven mostly in central and eastern Canada. I have noted some minor differences in signal design and signage conventions among provinces, but I am surprised that something as uniform across Canada as the spasmodically flashing green meaning protected left turn would have a different meaning in one province.

Quote from: mgk920 on August 22, 2012, 12:45:36 PM

In much of Europe, IIRC, they post 'meters' on many signs, such as interchange approach signs, up to 10km and 'km' above.  For example, an exit ramp that is 3.5 km away will be signed as "3500 m".

Wow, that must really confuse them to have to always be converting in their head like that.  ;)

I've always thought of decimal miles on the odometer or on highway signs as evidence that the US isn't really committed to the fundamental logic of the Olde English system, that we really intuitively see the need for decimal measurements but we're too stuck in our ways to actually adopt good ones, so instead we use decimiles. My favorite signs in this regard are the occasional improper fraction: "EXIT 2/10 MILE".

To better reflect the philosophy of the Olde English system, I insist that we replace signs for 1 1/2 mile with signs for 2640 yards.

Quote from: 1995hoo on August 22, 2012, 11:11:15 AM
At least in Quebec I'm sure part of the theory behind that kind of sign comes from the French civil-law tradition, under which you are allowed to do only what the law says you are allowed to do. In common-law countries like the USA, Australia, UK, and most of Canada, the basic principle is that an action is allowed unless the law prohibits it. (Both of those sentences are way oversimplified to make just the basic point.)

Wouldn't that result in a LOT more signs being needed?

I don't know if anyone has stated how the pay by mail system works before I posted this, but I'm hoping no one didn't so I don't look like a fool. The pay by mail system works on toll highways (namely the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge) in Washington, where a camera takes a picture of a vehicles liscense plate, where the liscense registration is sent through a system to match it with the vehicle owner's address and then a bill is sent to the address for the person to pay. People I know usually just get the Good2Go passes (Washington's version of the E-Z Pass for those who don't know) as they are uncomfortable with the idea of having their liscense plates being seen by unkown persons. I have to agree with them as the Pay-By-Mail system is very intrusive, but it is easier construction wise than fitting several toll booths on existing highways.

Quote from: 707 on September 04, 2012, 11:59:30 PM
I don't know if anyone has stated how the pay by mail system works before I posted this, but I'm hoping no one didn't so I don't look like a fool. The pay by mail system works on toll highways (namely the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge) in Washington, where a camera takes a picture of a vehicles liscense plate, where the liscense registration is sent through a system to match it with the vehicle owner's address and then a bill is sent to the address for the person to pay. People I know usually just get the Good2Go passes (Washington's version of the E-Z Pass for those who don't know) as they are uncomfortable with the idea of having their liscense plates being seen by unkown persons. I have to agree with them as the Pay-By-Mail system is very intrusive, but it is easier construction wise than fitting several toll booths on existing highways.

Pretty useful, thanks! Just how does it work for out-of-staters though?

Quote from: 707 on September 04, 2012, 11:59:30 PMPeople I know usually just get the Good2Go passes (Washington's version of the E-Z Pass for those who don't know) as they are uncomfortable with the idea of having their liscense plates being seen by unkown persons. I have to agree with them as the Pay-By-Mail system is very intrusive, but it is easier construction wise than fitting several toll booths on existing highways.

Hopefully the following sincere questions don't make me sound like a smart alec!

How do you ever leave the garage without license plates being seen by unknown persons? I guess the objection might be to having the photo taken, or to having a photographic record of where you were at such and such time on such and such day. Even so, I don't see how the G2G fixes anything. Do the cameras take photos of entering cars regardless, or are they somehow clever and quick enough to only snap the photo when no transponder data comes in before your car has sped away? And isn't the electronic record left by your transponder an equal or greater invasion of privacy than a photo, especially if you forget to turn it off after passing the toll point?

Now for a more immediate question about pay-by-mail: My car has plates that are way way way out of state (but still from the US). I drove the 520 bridge once a month or so ago and haven't yet received a notice at my address of registration (where family members live). If it takes them, say, 9 months to get me the notice, am I still going to accrue penalties for non-payment?

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on September 05, 2012, 12:12:14 AM

Quote from: 707 on September 04, 2012, 11:59:30 PM
I don't know if anyone has stated how the pay by mail system works before I posted this, but I'm hoping no one didn't so I don't look like a fool. The pay by mail system works on toll highways (namely the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge) in Washington, where a camera takes a picture of a vehicles liscense plate, where the liscense registration is sent through a system to match it with the vehicle owner's address and then a bill is sent to the address for the person to pay. People I know usually just get the Good2Go passes (Washington's version of the E-Z Pass for those who don't know) as they are uncomfortable with the idea of having their liscense plates being seen by unkown persons. I have to agree with them as the Pay-By-Mail system is very intrusive, but it is easier construction wise than fitting several toll booths on existing highways.

Pretty useful, thanks! Just how does it work for out-of-staters though?

I'm not sure, but I'm guessing they track down the out of state drivers using other states' liscense databases. Sorry I couldn't be more straightforward.

And for the fellow who is new to Seattle, it is supposed to take 14 days for the bill to arrive. I would send the city or state a letter right away telling them you didn't recieve the bill. Apparently if the bill isn't paid within 80 days, the driver will recieve a $40 fine.

I'll take the pay-by-mail option any day over the psychotic scheme ODOT has worked up for the Interstate Bridge (if, and when, tolls are implemented) - by forcing you to either have a transponder (like Good to Go or EZ-Pass), OR...you will be forced to exit the freeway, locate a business (yes, a business - not a tollbooth) that will sell you a one-time pass.  Once you find the business and buy the pass then you will get back onto the freeway.

Because the CRC planners are flat out insistent that there will BE NO TOLLBOOTHS.  Never mind that the Interstate Bridge is a major north-south highway used by a LOT of non-local drivers, and interstate trucks...unlike SR 520, or SR 16 (Tacoma Narrows Bridge).

Quote from: sp_redelectric on September 05, 2012, 11:49:32 PM
I'll take the pay-by-mail option any day over the psychotic scheme ODOT has worked up for the Interstate Bridge (if, and when, tolls are implemented) - by forcing you to either have a transponder (like Good to Go or EZ-Pass), OR...you will be forced to exit the freeway, locate a business (yes, a business - not a tollbooth) that will sell you a one-time pass.  Once you find the business and buy the pass then you will get back onto the freeway.

Because the CRC planners are flat out insistent that there will BE NO TOLLBOOTHS.  Never mind that the Interstate Bridge is a major north-south highway used by a LOT of non-local drivers, and interstate trucks...unlike SR 520, or SR 16 (Tacoma Narrows Bridge).

Yeah, that doesn't make sense at all and the whole exit-the-freeway-find-a-business to pay the toll is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of.  When (if?) this ever gets built, tollbooths are a must and any kind of ETC system should be compatible with both the "Good to Go" system in Washington and the "FasTrak" system in California.  As tolling becomes more prevalent on the west coast, I can see Washington, Oregon (if CRC is tolled), California and perhaps Nevada (Boulder City Bypass) standardize on a single ETC system.. probably California's FasTrak system due to the large number of tolled facilities that already use the system.

QuoteI'll take the pay-by-mail option any day over the psychotic scheme ODOT has worked up for the Interstate Bridge (if, and when, tolls are implemented) - by forcing you to either have a transponder (like Good to Go or EZ-Pass), OR...you will be forced to exit the freeway, locate a business (yes, a business - not a tollbooth) that will sell you a one-time pass.  Once you find the business and buy the pass then you will get back onto the freeway.

Because the CRC planners are flat out insistent that there will BE NO TOLLBOOTHS.  Never mind that the Interstate Bridge is a major north-south highway used by a LOT of non-local drivers, and interstate trucks...unlike SR 520, or SR 16 (Tacoma Narrows Bridge).

That makes sense if the idea is to push traffic onto I-205 and away from downtown Portland, which would fit well with the Portland planning MO, agree with it or not. Only local traffic terminating in downtown Portland would use the bridge if that were the case, so I see what they're trying to do.

The reason I don't use pay-by-mail toll roads is that there's always the chance the DMV doesn't have my current address on file at any given time.  As we have recently seen here in Wichita, that is a very real possibility that might not even be my fault.  It is for this reason that I never take the new toll bypass around Austin, Texas–especially since we usually have someone else's car following us, and I have no idea how well they keep their address up to date with the DMV.

Quote from: myosh_tino on September 06, 2012, 01:09:56 AM

Quote from: sp_redelectric on September 05, 2012, 11:49:32 PM
I'll take the pay-by-mail option any day over the psychotic scheme ODOT has worked up for the Interstate Bridge (if, and when, tolls are implemented) - by forcing you to either have a transponder (like Good to Go or EZ-Pass), OR...you will be forced to exit the freeway, locate a business (yes, a business - not a tollbooth) that will sell you a one-time pass.  Once you find the business and buy the pass then you will get back onto the freeway.

Because the CRC planners are flat out insistent that there will BE NO TOLLBOOTHS.  Never mind that the Interstate Bridge is a major north-south highway used by a LOT of non-local drivers, and interstate trucks...unlike SR 520, or SR 16 (Tacoma Narrows Bridge).

Yeah, that doesn't make sense at all and the whole exit-the-freeway-find-a-business to pay the toll is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of.  When (if?) this ever gets built, tollbooths are a must and any kind of ETC system should be compatible with both the "Good to Go" system in Washington and the "FasTrak" system in California.  As tolling becomes more prevalent on the west coast, I can see Washington, Oregon (if CRC is tolled), California and perhaps Nevada (Boulder City Bypass) standardize on a single ETC system.. probably California's FasTrak system due to the large number of tolled facilities that already use the system.

I have to agree on the system sounding stupid. At least almost every state I've been in gives you the option of a ETC system or just flat out paying the toll.

Quote from: myosh_tino on September 06, 2012, 01:09:56 AM
As tolling becomes more prevalent on the west coast, I can see Washington, Oregon (if CRC is tolled), California and perhaps Nevada (Boulder City Bypass) standardize on a single ETC system.. probably California's FasTrak system due to the large number of tolled facilities that already use the system.

So would we have to pay for all new transponders and receivers in Washington and Oregon? Any chance of getting a national standard set up so we don't have to pay for them all yet again?

Quote from: kkt on September 06, 2012, 07:13:49 PM

Quote from: myosh_tino on September 06, 2012, 01:09:56 AM
As tolling becomes more prevalent on the west coast, I can see Washington, Oregon (if CRC is tolled), California and perhaps Nevada (Boulder City Bypass) standardize on a single ETC system.. probably California's FasTrak system due to the large number of tolled facilities that already use the system.

So would we have to pay for all new transponders and receivers in Washington and Oregon? Any chance of getting a national standard set up so we don't have to pay for them all yet again?

You have to pay for your transponders?  When I signed up for FasTrak in the S.F. Bay Area, I am allowed two transponders at no cost as long as I open an account with a $25 minimum deposit for tolls.

While a national standard would be the best solution, trying to get the hundreds (thousands?) of tolling agencies to settle on a single standard would be rather difficult.  Since tolling is still a relatively new concept on the west coast and there aren't that many systems (2 to be exact... Good to Go and FasTrak), it's something that ought to be explored for the sake of interoperability and convenience.  I would love to be able to use my FasTrak transponder to pay tolls on the CRC or WA-520 or WA-167 when I visit relatives in Seattle.

How hard could it be?  We already have a conglomerate - E-ZPass.  With NC and FL adding interoperability, I would say that it's the de facto standard out there.  The other agencies should follow suit.

Quote from: myosh_tino on September 07, 2012, 03:01:53 AM
You have to pay for your transponders?  When I signed up for FasTrak in the S.F. Bay Area, I am allowed two transponders at no cost as long as I open an account with a $25 minimum deposit for tolls.

While a national standard would be the best solution, trying to get the hundreds (thousands?) of tolling agencies to settle on a single standard would be rather difficult.  Since tolling is still a relatively new concept on the west coast and there aren't that many systems (2 to be exact... Good to Go and FasTrak), it's something that ought to be explored for the sake of interoperability and convenience.  I would love to be able to use my FasTrak transponder to pay tolls on the CRC or WA-520 or WA-167 when I visit relatives in Seattle.

Yes, we have to pay for our transponders in addition to putting money in the account.  It varies depending on the type.  For WA-167, use of the HOV lane is free for car pools or toll for single-occupant vehicles.  So if sometimes you might have a carpool on 167, you can buy a transponder that can be switched off.  That cost about $8 instead of the $2 or so for the nonswitchable kind.

Regarding the external tabs on the arrow-per-lane, Clark County has been using exit tabs on new signs for the past 3 years (i.e. Exit 9, 11 and 14) .  But the Mill Plain exit still used full-width in its 2010 update.

It's a little silly to have full-width on arrow-per-lanes.

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on August 18, 2012, 04:55:52 PM
Last installment to this...

British Columbia Observations

First of all, what is this custom font that BC used on their older signs?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm9.staticflickr.com%2F8304%2F7767501356_6ee46f7fd0_c.jpg&hash=bcb9bba975cfe22a06b3923782582a0ec6b1e47c)

I have cut-outs of this unique BC font.  I went to the BC Sign Shop and copied as many as I could.  I would love, however, to know the name and real details of this font.

I always found it interesting that the custom BC font for width B is completely different than the C, D, and E styles.  C, D, E look like something you'd find in the US in the 1950s - a combination of Massachusetts and Michigan.

(//www.aaroads.com/shields/blog/photos/085667.jpg)

Bumping my old thread because I have a question.

On a trip to Oregon the past two days, I noticed that mile markers on US-199 and US-97 are increasing as they go south. I know that miles markers usually start at the highway's southernmost or westernmost point, so what's up with this?

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on July 20, 2014, 11:56:12 AM
Bumping my old thread because I have a question.

On a trip to Oregon the past two days, I noticed that mile markers on US-199 and US-97 are increasing as they go south. I know that miles markers usually start at the highway's southernmost or westernmost point, so what's up with this?

101 is the same way.  What's weird is that due to realignments done during the postwar years that the original mileage is used instead of what it really should be.

Keep Oregon Weird...LOL!

Rick

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on July 20, 2014, 11:56:12 AMOn a trip to Oregon the past two days, I noticed that mile markers on US-199 and US-97 are increasing as they go south. I know that miles markers usually start at the highway's southernmost or westernmost point, so what's up with this?

Milepointing on Oregon state routes is based on the origin and milepost progression of the underlying highway designation.  As an example, the mileposts on US 101 (Highway No. 9, Oregon Coast Highway) increase from north to south because its origin point is actually in Astoria (on the Columbia River, just south of the Oregon/Washington state line) rather than near Brookings (Oregon/California state line).

US 97 in Oregon increases from north to south too.

Quote from: J N Winkler on July 20, 2014, 12:55:30 PM

Quote from: CentralCAroadgeek on July 20, 2014, 11:56:12 AMOn a trip to Oregon the past two days, I noticed that mile markers on US-199 and US-97 are increasing as they go south. I know that miles markers usually start at the highway's southernmost or westernmost point, so what's up with this?

Milepointing on Oregon state routes is based on the origin and milepost progression of the underlying highway designation.  As an example, the mileposts on US 101 (Highway No. 9, Oregon Coast Highway) increase from north to south because its origin point is actually in Astoria (on the Columbia River, just south of the Oregon/Washington state line) rather than near Brookings (Oregon/California state line).

In addition to using the Oregon Highway mileage, you may also see the Oregon Route's mileage listed separately.  Plus if a route switches between highways, you may pass the same mileage a couple of time, reverse direction, or there will be a "Mileage Correction" because part of the highway was bypassed and changed the length, but ODOT didn't want to redo the numbering on the entire highway or route.

Quote from: kkt on July 21, 2014, 12:18:02 AM
US 97 in Oregon increases from north to south too.

With few exceptions, all north south highways in Oregon base their origin at the Columbia River and east west highways at the coast.
An exception is the Lower Columbia River Highway portion of US 30 (Astoria-Portland), which puts its zero point at I-405.