Caltrans External Exit Tabs & 240 Inch Tall Overhead Signs

[SeriesE]

In this video, SB CA 133 approaching the I-405 junction has the new signs (as well as new gantries)!

Oh interesting. I thought they were merely repaving the ramp but they actually widened it.

Not sure why though as I've never seen that ramp congested even during peak periods.

Also interesting that they chose to widen by adding to the right (and cutting the right retaining walls) instead of paving the median and moving the lanes over for a short bit.

[abqtraveler]

I just came back from a trip to Lake Tahoe and saw several external exit tabs, here they are! These are all dashcam photos that I don't mind sharing, the GPS coordinates basically geolocate them on any Maps application.

Honestly these exit tabs are like the ones I have seen from other posters and those that I have posted myself, and they all look oversized and more or less terrible. I have yet to see an exit tab like the one discovered on CA 57

All of them were in I-80 going westbound:

Exit 184 at Truckee



Exit 94 at Sacramento (it was posted here first!)







Exits 14B and 15 at Richmond

Looks like CALTRANS might actually be standardizing their signage to what the rest of the country uses.

[Great Lakes Roads]

I'm kind of surprised that this one didn't get mentioned, but the 110 approaching the 105 interchange heading SB has a new gantry and signs that replaced the previous one sometime in 2023...

[Scott5114]

Now if only they'd ditch that ridiculous "all signs must be the same height" rule. You could fit two more lines of text on that Imperial Highway sign.

[Great Lakes Roads]

Found another pair on the 405 SB approaching the 73 interchange...

I guess that Caltrans forgot to put an exit number on the signs.

[vdeane]

Found another pair on the 405 SB approaching the 73 interchange...

I guess that Caltrans forgot to put an exit number on the signs.

So there's a real tab for exit 10 but an "internal tab" for exit 11A.  That's wild.

[jdbx]

I keep forgetting to add this abomination to this thread. This is a rare occasion where I think an old-fashioned internal tab would have actually looked better.

[ClassicHasClass]

There's a nice new set of tabbed exits at CA 12 and I-5 north of Stockton.

[Scott5114]

I keep forgetting to add this abomination to this thread. This is a rare occasion where I think an old-fashioned internal tab would have actually looked better.

The problem here is—again—the Caltrans "everything has to be the same height" rule (which is against the MUTCD), not the exit tab. That, combined with the MUTCD-standard extra-large tab for left exits, means they don't have much room left for things like margins.

Hell, they're not even consistent with its application. Scroll up a few posts and look at that I-80 exit 94 sign. There, the height of the sign, matched to the other panels on the same (non-versatile!) truss, does not include the exit tab.

[Bobby5280]

Dammit I hate Caltrans' green freeway signs. The funny thing is the people dictating the design decisions at that agency probably think their highway signs look better than anything else in the nation.

So many freeway signs in California look dilapidated and patched together. Even when they're brand new the damned sign panels are often too small to hold the lettering and other elements. It's just so shitty.

[Max Rockatansky]

A lot of the button copy gantries are five-six decades old.  Me personally, I much rather look at something from another era when I visit places.  But then again, I'm not in the business of really give much a shit about modern MUTCD compliance.

I don't know, I'd think more of you would want to see signs that aren't the same as the rest of the country.  It just seems strange to me that the opposite seems to be true.

[Henry]

Well, Caltrans' freeway signs seem to stand out most, for both good and bad reasons. While it's nice that they're finally beginning to phase out the internal exit tabs for external ones, they still insist on following their own rules (all signs must be the same height). But still, you should give them credit for adopting a piece of the MUTCD into their own, as I liked it better when there were no exit numbers at all.

[Quillz]

I probably missed it, but why did California get the whole "wind" exception thing to begin with? Surely it's windy in other states.

(all signs must be the same height)

Something else I learned recently is all the copy must be on the same base, as well. This is why some route shields sometimes look off, because they placed the number first, then put the shield around it. (As opposed to the bottom of the shield being aligned with the copy).

[Bobby5280]

I don't know, I'd think more of you would want to see signs that aren't the same as the rest of the country.  It just seems strange to me that the opposite seems to be true.

These displays are often failing the basics in proper sign design. It doesn't matter if it's an overhead sign on a freeway or a sign for a commercial business. Basic layout rules still apply. Highway signs that have panels that are too small to hold the elements in an effective, legible manner just suck.

It's not good enough for the lettering and other elements to just barely squeeze into the panel. A comfortable amount of negative space needs to surround the design elements so they don't look crammed together. This isn't just about making things look good. Negative space helps improve legibility. It's every bit as true for highway signs as it is for commercial signs. It's another reason why I despise neutered Interstate shields with oversized numerals. The lack of negative space around the numerals makes them less legible than a state-named shield with smaller numerals.

I doubt the trashy-on-average look of Caltrans' highway signs is all the fault of Caltrans. I'm sure the state legislature and the funding they provide for highway signage is a factor too. Despite California being famous for car culture I'm under the impression the state government has a somewhat anti-roads ideology in effect. The terrible look of highway signs in California imply the glory days of the state's freeway system are in the past.

[wanderer2575]

Now if only they'd ditch that ridiculous "all signs must be the same height" rule. You could fit two more lines of text on that Imperial Highway sign.

I don't mind the "uniform height" rule so much if it gets the multiple signs lined up for easy reading.  The signs on that 110 @ 105 gantry have the shields at the same height across, the control cities at the same line across, and the pull-through arrows at the same line across.  Your eyes don't have to jump around to take it all in.  As opposed to shit like this that's happening more and more in Michigan and also is common in some other states.

I keep forgetting to add this abomination to this thread. This is a rare occasion where I think an old-fashioned internal tab would have actually looked better.

Or carry the exit tab across the entire sign to cover the face of the gantry (which maybe is the same thing).  Michigan does that when the sign otherwise isn't tall enough.

[Bobby5280]

I don't care if two or more sign panels on an overhead gantry or monotube structure are all the same height. If one panel needs to be taller to hold more lines of lettering then so be it. The "shitty" example mentioned on I-96 in Michigan is more effective than a lot of the uniform-yet-crammed signs in California because the panels are (barely) large enough to preserve some negative space around the legends. I would have made the sign panels a bit larger since the elements in that Michigan example are still just a touch crowded. The pull-thru sign panel for I-96 doesn't need to be as tall as the more complicated sign panel to the right of it.

[Scott5114]

I don't know, I'd think more of you would want to see signs that aren't the same as the rest of the country.

I'd like to see good signs that aren't the same as the rest of the country. Much of Caltrans' recent output is just poorly executed.

I don't mind the "uniform height" rule so much if it gets the multiple signs lined up for easy reading.  The signs on that 110 @ 105 gantry have the shields at the same height across, the control cities at the same line across, and the pull-through arrows at the same line across.  Your eyes don't have to jump around to take it all in.  As opposed to shit like this that's happening more and more in Michigan and also is common in some other states.

Having proper margins has a much bigger effect on how easy a sign is to read than vertical alignment of information. (If you start at the top and work your way down, the information is presented in the same order no matter how high it is off the bottom of the gantry.)

The problem with that Michigan sign is that each panel is centered on the gantry. The correct way to do it is to align all the panels to the bottom of the gantry. Something like this presents no readability challenge at all.

[TheStranger]

Didn't have a chance to get any pics of them yet, but some new external-tab installations are now in place along westbound I-80 near Richmond Parkway as of Thanksgiving weekend.

[jdbx]

I don't know, I'd think more of you would want to see signs that aren't the same as the rest of the country.

I'd like to see good signs that aren't the same as the rest of the country. Much of Caltrans' recent output is just poorly executed.

I feel the same way.  I love our unique signage, and I especially like the legacy button copy that is still around in so many places. Signage that is unique can still show pride in workmanship, and care for legibility. Unfortunately, many of the recent signage practices result in frankensigns with a hodge-podge of different font sizes, layouts, and spacing within the same panel or gantry which suggests that the signage designers simply don't give a shit.

[Bobby5280]

Unfortunately, many of the recent signage practices result in frankensigns with a hodge-podge of different font sizes, layouts, and spacing within the same panel or gantry which suggests that the signage designers simply don't give a shit.

That could be the case. Designers not giving a shit is a big problem in the commercial sign industry. It's also common for sign companies to hire people not qualified to do design work, but who are willing to work for shit pay.

Another scenario that's even more likely: lawmakers in California and bosses at Caltrans limiting the highway signage budget and handing down bad design-related decisions based on cutting costs. That means smaller/cheaper sign panels and cramming the copy into an ever-cramped space. The people doing the actual design work have to follow those orders no matter how stupid the finished sign looks. Corner cutting is also a very common problem in the commercial sign industry.

At least the highway sign departments in various states have to follow at least some rules regarding lettering. If they didn't we would see a lot of green signs with artificially squeezed and stretched lettering set in default Arial.

[jakeroot]

At least the highway sign departments in various states have to follow at least some rules regarding lettering. If they didn't we would see a lot of green signs with artificially squeezed and stretched lettering set in default Arial.

Probably quite a few set in Segoe or Myriad, too.

This sign in WA uses Frutiger, for no obvious reason.

[jdbx]

Unfortunately, many of the recent signage practices result in frankensigns with a hodge-podge of different font sizes, layouts, and spacing within the same panel or gantry which suggests that the signage designers simply don't give a shit.

That could be the case. Designers not giving a shit is a big problem in the commercial sign industry. It's also common for sign companies to hire people not qualified to do design work, but who are willing to work for shit pay.

Another scenario that's even more likely: lawmakers in California and bosses at Caltrans limiting the highway signage budget and handing down bad design-related decisions based on cutting costs. That means smaller/cheaper sign panels and cramming the copy into an ever-cramped space. The people doing the actual design work have to follow those orders no matter how stupid the finished sign looks. Corner cutting is also a very common problem in the commercial sign industry.

At least the highway sign departments in various states have to follow at least some rules regarding lettering. If they didn't we would see a lot of green signs with artificially squeezed and stretched lettering set in default Arial.

You have made excellent points, and have probably identified the main reason.  I have worked on many projects in the past in my career where I have been hamstrung by budget or other managerial constraints, resulting in work that was not my best, but the best that could be mustered under the imposed limitations.

[Bobby5280]

Probably quite a few set in Segoe or Myriad, too.

Since Arial begins with the letter "A" it's near the top of the font menu. Many applications set Arial as the default font. Selecting another typeface requires the extra effort of scrolling down the font menu to that typeface. Segoe would be well down the menu.

Most of Adobe's applications default to some version of Myriad Pro.

I dislike Arial enough in its normal form. Arial Nova doesn't look much better either. Arial really gets rancid looking when a hack-quality graphics person squeezes and stretches type set in Arial to fit in a certain space. Distorted type set in Arial is one of the most common features I see in badly designed signs.

I kind of wish Monotype and Microsoft would create an OpenType Variable version of Arial. But even if they did so the jerks doing bush-league quality graphic design would probably be too damned lazy to open a variable font control panel and adjust the weight or width of the type in a more natural looking manner. They would still keep squeezing and stretching the shit in the same way they've always been doing. Google Fonts has more than 500 variable fonts, all available for free. Adobe Fonts has quite a few commercial variable fonts that are available to anyone with a Creative Cloud subscription. Yet I still see just as much squeezy-stretchy lettering in Arial in bullshit graphic design as I have seen in the past. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

[cockroachking]

This sign in WA uses Frutiger, for no obvious reason.

Maybe you shouldn't hire a Swiss consultant to design American signs 

[roadfro]

I keep forgetting to add this abomination to this thread. This is a rare occasion where I think an old-fashioned internal tab would have actually looked better.

You're right...that is an abomination.

The problem here is—again—the Caltrans "everything has to be the same height" rule (which is against the MUTCD), not the exit tab. That, combined with the MUTCD-standard extra-large tab for left exits, means they don't have much room left for things like margins.

Hell, they're not even consistent with its application. Scroll up a few posts and look at that I-80 exit 94 sign. There, the height of the sign, matched to the other panels on the same (non-versatile!) truss, does not include the exit tab.

The MUTCD doesn't really say anything about sign height and whether they can/should be the same. Looking at various figures implies they don't care.

I think the issue is not so much the uniform sign height as it is the maximum sign height CalTrans has allowed on older trusses (which I think is related to the "wind loading" issue). Doing a normal height sign here with the external exit tab would exceed the max height for this truss.

That, and the modern FHWA exit tab is much bigger than it needs to be, and doesn't allow for the "left" plaque to be on the same line as the rest of the tab, which unnecessarily increases the size of the tab. For this abominable sign, they should have taken steps to reduce the size of the exit tab so that the main portion of the sign (you know, the most important part) could have bigger with reasonable margins and spacing (even if reduced from ideal).

But you're right, CalTrans has been inconsistent with this application, despite everything I just said...

I don't mind the "uniform height" rule so much if it gets the multiple signs lined up for easy reading.  The signs on that 110 @ 105 gantry have the shields at the same height across, the control cities at the same line across, and the pull-through arrows at the same line across.  Your eyes don't have to jump around to take it all in.  As opposed to shit like this that's happening more and more in Michigan and also is common in some other states.

Having proper margins has a much bigger effect on how easy a sign is to read than vertical alignment of information. (If you start at the top and work your way down, the information is presented in the same order no matter how high it is off the bottom of the gantry.)

The problem with that Michigan sign is that each panel is centered on the gantry. The correct way to do it is to align all the panels to the bottom of the gantry. Something like this presents no readability challenge at all.

I actually prefer signs to be the same height. But I think I'm preconditioned to that because I hail from Nevada where this practice is also common.

Where Nevada differs from California is that Nevada (1) has a taller maximum sign height than California, and (2) has had no qualms about making the signs taller than the truss when warranted. So Nevada generally has much cleaner signage.

When signs are different heights, I'm kinda torn on how they should be vertically aligned. I think you can make a case multiple ways. But for some states that use shorter trusses, tall signs look like they're going to blow over when aligned at the bottom. And I think center aligning looks better with monotube gantries.