New exit tabs on CA 57

[DTComposer]

And here's a pic of the new sign assembly:

<whistles> That is probably the best looking exit numbered BGS I have seen in California.  I sure hope that this is the new spec and they roll it out everywhere.  A lot of the jumbled signs that D4 has put up along I-680 would be MUCH clearer and legible without the inset exit tabs shoehorned in there.

Yeah, this is one of the cleanest signs I've seen come out in the last few years that wasn't a complete duplication of a previous sign.

That said, there's still inconsistencies:

- The directional differs in its vertical (and possible horizontal) position relative to the route shield on each panel;

- The shield/direction are positioned differently relative to the control city on each panel:
-57 North seems to be directly centered over Pomona
-91 West isn't centered over Los Angeles; nor is just 91 (which I could understand). It seems like 91 is centered over the ONLY block - maybe that's intentional?
-91 East isn't centered over Riverside nor is it centered within the panel

- 91 East/Riverside is just a bit higher than the counterparts on other panel;

- It also looks like the kerning between 5A and 5B is different, making the exit tabs different widths, but that may just be the angle of the photo.

[myosh_tino]

And here’s a pic of the new sign assembly:

Nice!  Probably some of the nicest signs I've seen in quite sometime.  I took a little time to draw the CA-91 west sign...

The exit tab is a standard 2-digit FHWA tab that is 30" tall and the sign panel is 120" tall making the total height, including the exit tab, 150".  This isn't all that crazy now because express lane signs showing the current toll rates are anywhere from 140" to 160" tall.

While I wasn't all that crazy about California having to number it's exits (call me a California traditionalist... I know), the crazy sign layouts that resulted from having to shoe-horn in an exit tab drove me absolutely bonkers.  If this is the future of freeway signage in California, I'm all for it 100%. 

[sparker]

Now -- if D4 would follow suit (wishful but merely speculative thinking!) signage up here would be infinitely better.  But they'd have to learn how to kern properly first or else we'd likely get some of the weirdest-looking BGS' in the state!

[jeffe]

I feel like the HOV Lane should get a down arrow on the pull through sign with a diamond on top indicating it's HOV. It's a little pet peeve of mine and what I suggested might be non-standard so carry on if it's not.

I recall this design being used in a few locations in the late 1990s.  It was similar to an ONLY plaque, except it had a white background with a diamond and a down arrow.

It seems like the proper way to sign the HOV lane would be with a separate panel with an HOV label at the top.  This is used in other locations; not sure why it wasn't done here.

As for this sign, it's good that it follows the standard of using a space between the number and the letter suffix.  Especially since the capital B can look like an 8 without the space.

The cardinal directions also properly use SMALL CAPS.  A lot of sign plans still omit the larger first letter.

[andy3175]

I'm sure someone else has reported this, but I couldn't find it so I thought I'd mention it here. Daniel probably already has this in his reports. 

When I reviewed the California Transportation Commission agenda, I noticed an item from July modifying the state MUTCD related to exit numbering.

https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/safety-programs/documents/ctcdc/july-9-2020/final-ctcdc-july9-2020-agenda-a11y.pdf

Section 2E.31: Interchange Exit Numbering
....
Standard:
02 Interchange numbering shall be used in signing each freeway interchange exit.
Interchange exit numbers shall be displayed with each Advance Guide sign, Exit Direction
sign, and Exit Gore sign. The exit number shall be placed on a separate plaque at above and abutting the top of the Advance Guide or Exit Direction sign.

I guess I wasn't aware of this change (I'm sure it's been reported elsewhere) and guess maybe these signs on SR 57 at ST 91 were the first application of this changed policy, assuming it was approved by the CTC?

[jrouse]

I'm sure someone else has reported this, but I couldn't find it so I thought I'd mention it here. Daniel probably already has this in his reports. 

When I reviewed the California Transportation Commission agenda, I noticed an item from July modifying the state MUTCD related to exit numbering.

https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/safety-programs/documents/ctcdc/july-9-2020/final-ctcdc-july9-2020-agenda-a11y.pdf

Section 2E.31: Interchange Exit Numbering
....
Standard:
02 Interchange numbering shall be used in signing each freeway interchange exit.
Interchange exit numbers shall be displayed with each Advance Guide sign, Exit Direction
sign, and Exit Gore sign. The exit number shall be placed on a separate plaque at above and abutting the top of the Advance Guide or Exit Direction sign.

I guess I wasn't aware of this change (I'm sure it's been reported elsewhere) and guess maybe these signs on SR 57 at ST 91 were the first application of this changed policy, assuming it was approved by the CTC?

Changes to the California MUTCD would be the responsibility of the California Traffic Control Devices Committee (CTCDC) which is a separate body from the California Transportation Commission (CTC). 

The California MUTCD permits the use of exit number tabs.  It always has. These edits now mandate that tabs be used and the signs which had the tab in the body of the sign itself have been eliminated. 

[andy3175]

Thanks Joe. Very helpful to confirm.

I'm just glad to see exit numbering implementation, and I'm glad to see it evolve as this effort moves forward.

[jrouse]

Thanks Joe. Very helpful to confirm.

I'm just glad to see exit numbering implementation, and I'm glad to see it evolve as this effort moves forward.

You're welcome.  I was at that meeting (if you look at the agenda I was a presenter and if you look at the minutes I spoke up several times during the meeting).  I'm not sure how I missed this item.  Particularly when you consider that I managed the exit number program for a short time several years ago.

[myosh_tino]

Both the document Andy linked to and the actual meeting minutes (which I found via the Caltrans website) were very informative.

One bit that caught my eye was the FHWA's insistence that Caltrans implement arrow-per-lane signs.  If this can be done using the shorter shafted arrows seen on westbound CA-180 at the CA-41 interchange in Fresno and limit it to freeway-to-freeway interchanges it's something I can live with.  I'm still of the opinion that the FHWA's implementation wastes a lot of sign panel space.

[ClassicHasClass]

Joe, good to have a Caltrans peep here. We love Caltrans, honest. We just love b*tching about it more.