AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs  (Read 32794 times)

Pink Jazz

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1497
  • Real Men Wear Pink

  • Age: 32
  • Location: Queen Creek, AZ
  • Last Login: Today at 08:10:51 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #100 on: July 17, 2018, 11:56:42 AM »

ADOT has installed its first APL signage in the Phoenix area, on the US 60 WB in Tempe.  This is due to a lane restriping.
Logged

roadman

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4158
  • Age: 59
  • Location: Boston, MA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:02:09 AM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #101 on: July 24, 2018, 04:31:59 PM »

I agree with you that diagrammatics are kind of bad at what APLs are good at, which is illustrating option lanes. Where diagrammatics excel is giving a driver an idea of how an interchange or interchange complex works, such as when multiple ramps are involved or are on opposite sides of the highway.


This diagrammatic doesn't even involve any option lanes—it's just there to emphasize that a major system junction is coming up, and that traffic wishing to take I-635 NORTH needs to be in the left lane.
IIRC, wasn't this location the first multi-arrow diagrammatic (as opposed to the normal two on such signs) that the DOT got a special waiver from FHWA to install (not this specific sign, but the one originally installed at this location)?
Logged
"And ninety-five is the route you were on.  It was not the speed limit sign."  - Jim Croce (from Speedball Tucker)

"My life has been a tapestry
Of years of roads and highway signs" (with apologies to Carole King and Tom Rush)

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6839
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas/Oxford, Great Britain
  • Last Login: Today at 06:46:59 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #102 on: July 24, 2018, 04:54:50 PM »

IIRC, wasn't this location the first multi-arrow diagrammatic (as opposed to the normal two on such signs) that the DOT got a special waiver from FHWA to install (not this specific sign, but the one originally installed at this location)?

I don't know about that.  I think Christmas tree diagrammatics were in the original Mast & Kolsrud study alongside the much more common fork diagrammatics, and there have been examples of very long standing in Akron, Ohio (I-77/I-76/SR 8) and Birmingham, Alabama (I-20/I-65/I-59), though I believe both have fallen victim to replacement--Clearview conversion in Akron and freeway widening in Birmingham.
Logged
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12264
  • U/Wash | GIS & Urban Design

  • Age: 24
  • Location: Seattle and Tacoma, WA Vancouver, BC | Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 07:49:46 PM
    • Flickr
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #103 on: November 25, 2019, 06:48:40 PM »

Washington's first APL at a location with an HOV lane (and exit) was slowly installed over the last couple weeks, and is almost completely unveiled. Seeing genuine exit tabs is a bit unusual for me!

Logged
Check out my Flickr  |  Comments which I make here do not reflect positions of the University of Washington ("UW"), anyone employed by UW, nor any other students of UW. All comments are my own, and reflect my own ridiculous opinions.

Pink Jazz

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1497
  • Real Men Wear Pink

  • Age: 32
  • Location: Queen Creek, AZ
  • Last Login: Today at 08:10:51 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #104 on: February 21, 2020, 02:17:23 PM »

ADOT has installed more APLs in the Phoenix area at the Loop 202 South Mountain Freeway interchanges.

I wonder what are the remaining states or US territories without APLs. I have yet to see any in Puerto Rico.
Logged

fwydriver405

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 214
  • UMaine - Civil Engineering and MBB Student Asst.

  • Location: Maine and southeastern NH
  • Last Login: Today at 08:08:45 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #105 on: May 02, 2020, 07:19:39 PM »

New Hampshire, as part of of the Spaulding Turnpike project, recently put up it's third APL set for the Exit 6 interchange. The arrows don't align with the lanes just yet because they need to do some final touches to the area before the road is complete in the summer. US 4 is a TOTSO movement in order to continue WB while NH 16 continues as a partial toll road. Here's some new vs old signage:

Logged

Pink Jazz

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1497
  • Real Men Wear Pink

  • Age: 32
  • Location: Queen Creek, AZ
  • Last Login: Today at 08:10:51 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #106 on: September 12, 2020, 11:57:12 PM »

Just as an update, there are a few APL installations in the Phoenix area now, including at the L-202 SMF interchanges, as well as one at the I-10/L-101 Agua Fria interchange in the West Valley.  I wonder if in the future when ADOT decides to update the signs on the US 60 Superstition will there be APL signs installed at the US 60/L-202 interchange (this interchange in the US 60 EB direction confuses a lot of drivers in my experience, getting off at L-202 North when they meant to go South).

I kind of like ADOT's take on APL signage, with a more compact design than most other states.  I know one of the reasons ADOT originally balked at the idea of APL signage was due to higher costs since it would have required the signs to be much larger.
Logged

mrsman

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 3164
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Silver Spring, MD
  • Last Login: Today at 08:49:58 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #107 on: September 14, 2020, 06:54:21 AM »

Just as an update, there are a few APL installations in the Phoenix area now, including at the L-202 SMF interchanges, as well as one at the I-10/L-101 Agua Fria interchange in the West Valley.  I wonder if in the future when ADOT decides to update the signs on the US 60 Superstition will there be APL signs installed at the US 60/L-202 interchange (this interchange in the US 60 EB direction confuses a lot of drivers in my experience, getting off at L-202 North when they meant to go South).

I kind of like ADOT's take on APL signage, with a more compact design than most other states.  I know one of the reasons ADOT originally balked at the idea of APL signage was due to higher costs since it would have required the signs to be much larger.

Any pics available?

I feel that APL signage is usually very clear at conveying the message of what lane to be in, but it is important to address some of the downsides.  The size and cost of the signs.  That they do not work well for really complicated interchanges.

Perhaps AZ can be a model for other states in their signage practices.
Logged

fwydriver405

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 214
  • UMaine - Civil Engineering and MBB Student Asst.

  • Location: Maine and southeastern NH
  • Last Login: Today at 08:08:45 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #108 on: November 17, 2020, 10:02:26 PM »

Sorry to revive an old thread but just had to bring this up. How common is it for APL's to be signed when there even isn't a dedicated exit only lane? NHDOT recently replaced the Exit 1 signs on I-93 N last October and the 1-mile advance for Exit 1 coming from Massachusetts features this:



Older signage, this former assembly used to be the only indication of Exit 1 before the APL's.
Logged

SignBridge

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1550
  • Location: Long Island, New York
  • Last Login: November 22, 2020, 10:07:47 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #109 on: November 17, 2020, 10:17:33 PM »

I don't know how common it is, but APL signing is only required where there is an option lane involved. It was for that situation that APL signing was designed. Not for a normal exit or a simple lane-drop configuration.
Logged

fwydriver405

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 214
  • UMaine - Civil Engineering and MBB Student Asst.

  • Location: Maine and southeastern NH
  • Last Login: Today at 08:08:45 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #110 on: November 17, 2020, 10:30:47 PM »

I don't know how common it is, but APL signing is only required where there is an option lane involved. It was for that situation that APL signing was designed. Not for a normal exit or a simple lane-drop configuration.

After the rest area a little bit less than 1 mile from that sign assembly, a 5th lane is added as an exit-only lane for exit 1. In that case, between the rest area and Exit 1 NB, the #4 lane is an option lane, and the #5 for Exit 1 only.

Logged

jakeroot

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12264
  • U/Wash | GIS & Urban Design

  • Age: 24
  • Location: Seattle and Tacoma, WA Vancouver, BC | Arlington, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 07:49:46 PM
    • Flickr
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #111 on: November 17, 2020, 10:50:43 PM »

Not too common. Pretty rare, I shall imagine. I believe the APL is only "permitted" when one of the exits is at least two lanes and involves an option lane.

That said, I feel there is still value in using up arrows when there is only a single option lane, such as above (even if, in reality, there is another exit lane that simply hasn't shown up yet).

As well, given the circumstances of this interchange, I think this is quite a nice setup. I think standard practice elsewhere would be not use an APL until the fifth lane were added, but I like this approach too.
Logged
Check out my Flickr  |  Comments which I make here do not reflect positions of the University of Washington ("UW"), anyone employed by UW, nor any other students of UW. All comments are my own, and reflect my own ridiculous opinions.

CardInLex

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 93
  • Location: Louisville, KY
  • Last Login: Today at 04:24:14 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #112 on: November 18, 2020, 06:08:51 PM »

New signs along I-71 N approaching I-264 in Louisville, feature APL’s of “LEFT | LEFT/UP.” The thru movement is the LEFT movement because of a sharp curve at I-264. The exit is the UP movement. A dropped lane is added beyond the assemblies. No Streetview yet, signs are only a few months old.

Also, I-71 N to I-265 S ramp features the opposite where the thru movement is only a single lane.
https://goo.gl/maps/G6E5ra7RfzQKGzGVA

KYTC has been doing a lot APL work around Louisville in recent months. Saw new ones on I-264 at US 60 tonight.
Logged

TheHighwayMan394

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3145
  • Age: 30
  • Location: Twin Ports/North Shore
  • Last Login: Today at 06:18:52 PM
    • Patrick Lilja's Minnesconsin Highways
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #113 on: November 18, 2020, 06:14:29 PM »

Minnesota installed its second sets over the last year at the Forest Lake split of 35E/35W. Interestingly, they replaced the signs at the Burnsville split around the same time but those installs are similar to standard MnDOT practice with a line over the option lane arrow, except to now sign the I-35W "exit" as a left exit with an exit only lane.
Logged
Drive slow on the left. Pass on the right. Live your life the way you want.

cabiness42

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 2300
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Munster, IN
  • Last Login: Today at 08:46:55 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #114 on: November 18, 2020, 06:49:48 PM »

New signs along I-71 N approaching I-264 in Louisville, feature APL’s of “LEFT | LEFT/UP.” The thru movement is the LEFT movement because of a sharp curve at I-264. The exit is the UP movement. A dropped lane is added beyond the assemblies. No Streetview yet, signs are only a few months old.

Also, I-71 N to I-265 S ramp features the opposite where the thru movement is only a single lane.
https://goo.gl/maps/G6E5ra7RfzQKGzGVA

KYTC has been doing a lot APL work around Louisville in recent months. Saw new ones on I-264 at US 60 tonight.

Which US 60 exit, Shelbyville Rd or Dixie Hwy?
Logged

CardInLex

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 93
  • Location: Louisville, KY
  • Last Login: Today at 04:24:14 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #115 on: November 18, 2020, 08:08:53 PM »

New signs along I-71 N approaching I-264 in Louisville, feature APL’s of “LEFT | LEFT/UP.” The thru movement is the LEFT movement because of a sharp curve at I-264. The exit is the UP movement. A dropped lane is added beyond the assemblies. No Streetview yet, signs are only a few months old.

Also, I-71 N to I-265 S ramp features the opposite where the thru movement is only a single lane.
https://goo.gl/maps/G6E5ra7RfzQKGzGVA

KYTC has been doing a lot APL work around Louisville in recent months. Saw new ones on I-264 at US 60 tonight.

Which US 60 exit, Shelbyville Rd or Dixie Hwy?

Sorry, should have been more specific. Shelbyville Road. They were on I-264 east heading toward exit 20.

Edit: replacing the signs on this gantry: https://goo.gl/maps/DH2f7hH6QZ8qEEK87
Logged

wanderer2575

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 968
  • Location: Farmington Hills, MI
  • Last Login: Today at 07:07:13 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #116 on: November 21, 2020, 11:00:50 PM »

MDOT (Michigan) is usually good with sign design so I was surprised with a pair of new APLs that went up a couple weeks ago on the newly-reconstructed northbound I-75 in Hazel Park.

(1)  Two exits on the same sign, which apparently is a no-no per the MUTCD.

(2)  An EXIT ONLY banner across the bottom of the entire sign.  The second lane (with an option to I-696) doesn't become exit-only at 11 Mile Road.


Logged

fwydriver405

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 214
  • UMaine - Civil Engineering and MBB Student Asst.

  • Location: Maine and southeastern NH
  • Last Login: Today at 08:08:45 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #117 on: November 21, 2020, 11:46:56 PM »

Not too common. Pretty rare, I shall imagine. I believe the APL is only "permitted" when one of the exits is at least two lanes and involves an option lane.

That said, I feel there is still value in using up arrows when there is only a single option lane, such as above (even if, in reality, there is another exit lane that simply hasn't shown up yet).

As well, given the circumstances of this interchange, I think this is quite a nice setup. I think standard practice elsewhere would be not use an APL until the fifth lane were added, but I like this approach too.

When I posted that assembly to the New Hampshire thread, some people thought the Exit 1 signs were a bit overkill, however, what you said gave me a second opinion about those APL signs at Exit 1 and I actually agree with your statement. It's worth noting that this exit in the NB direction hasn't had a proper advance sign (1 or ½ mile) for quite a while now ever since the Cross Street Bridge was replaced in 2008-09ish...

Also, I've noticed that most APL's in New Hampshire (except for one) and Massachusetts (except at 495/90) display two destinations per movement... last time I checked, this was under the guidance section in the MUTCD, is one or two destinations permitted per movement?

Quote from: MUTCD Section 2E.21 Design of Overhead Arrow-per-Lane Guide Signs for Option Lanes
Guidance:
08 Overhead Arrow-per-Lane guide signs used on freeways and expressways should be designed in accordance with the following additional criteria:

No more than one destination should be displayed for each movement, and no more than two destinations should be displayed per sign.
Logged

stridentweasel

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1340
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Kansas
  • Last Login: November 22, 2020, 09:32:28 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #118 on: November 22, 2020, 01:54:40 PM »

MDOT (Michigan) is usually good with sign design so I was surprised with a pair of new APLs that went up a couple weeks ago on the newly-reconstructed northbound I-75 in Hazel Park.

(1)  Two exits on the same sign, which apparently is a no-no per the MUTCD.

That didn't stop this from happening: https://goo.gl/maps/PMdnpAumiaN3MWG2A

Quote
(2)  An EXIT ONLY banner across the bottom of the entire sign.  The second lane (with an option to I-696) doesn't become exit-only at 11 Mile Road.

I get that that's technically wrong, but I think they wanted to show that the #3 lane is actually dropped and doesn't continue on I-75.
Logged
"Signs, signs, everywhere there's signs," and I kind of like them.

Disclaimer: Views I express are my own and don't reflect any employer or associated entity.

Roadsguy

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1735
  • Age: 21
  • Location: Here
  • Last Login: Today at 04:36:56 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #119 on: November 22, 2020, 04:18:56 PM »

Quote
(2)  An EXIT ONLY banner across the bottom of the entire sign.  The second lane (with an option to I-696) doesn't become exit-only at 11 Mile Road.

I get that that's technically wrong, but I think they wanted to show that the #3 lane is actually dropped and doesn't continue on I-75.

The lane doesn't drop, though; it's continuous, and the lane that drops at 11 Mile Road is an auxiliary lane added by the I-696 on-ramp. At least that's what wanderer2575 seems to be saying, which is backed up by pre-reconstruction satellte imagery.

While still not allowed by the MUTCD, the two-exit APL might make some sense if the third lane did drop at the immediate next exit, but at that location it makes no sense, and 11 Mile Road has no business being on an APL here.
Logged

stridentweasel

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1340
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Kansas
  • Last Login: November 22, 2020, 09:32:28 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #120 on: November 22, 2020, 05:17:17 PM »

The lane doesn't drop, though; it's continuous, and the lane that drops at 11 Mile Road is an auxiliary lane added by the I-696 on-ramp. At least that's what wanderer2575 seems to be saying, which is backed up by pre-reconstruction satellte imagery.

While still not allowed by the MUTCD, the two-exit APL might make some sense if the third lane did drop at the immediate next exit, but at that location it makes no sense, and 11 Mile Road has no business being on an APL here.

Oh, crap.  I should have checked.  And looking at this again, I misread this:

The second lane (with an option to I-696) doesn't become exit-only at 11 Mile Road.

I thought it said, "The second lane...doesn't become exit-only until 11 Mile Road."  My bad.
Logged
"Signs, signs, everywhere there's signs," and I kind of like them.

Disclaimer: Views I express are my own and don't reflect any employer or associated entity.

SignBridge

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1550
  • Location: Long Island, New York
  • Last Login: November 22, 2020, 10:07:47 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #121 on: November 22, 2020, 08:27:46 PM »

MDOT (Michigan) is usually good with sign design so I was surprised with a pair of new APLs that went up a couple weeks ago on the newly-reconstructed northbound I-75 in Hazel Park.


(1)  Two exits on the same sign, which apparently is a no-no per the MUTCD.

(2)  An EXIT ONLY banner across the bottom of the entire sign.  The second lane (with an option to I-696) doesn't become exit-only at 11 Mile Road.



Where does the MUTCD say that you can't have two exits on an APL sign? It's possible but I haven't found it yet.
Logged

SignBridge

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1550
  • Location: Long Island, New York
  • Last Login: November 22, 2020, 10:07:47 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #122 on: November 22, 2020, 08:31:31 PM »

Not too common. Pretty rare, I shall imagine. I believe the APL is only "permitted" when one of the exits is at least two lanes and involves an option lane.

That said, I feel there is still value in using up arrows when there is only a single option lane, such as above (even if, in reality, there is another exit lane that simply hasn't shown up yet).

As well, given the circumstances of this interchange, I think this is quite a nice setup. I think standard practice elsewhere would be not use an APL until the fifth lane were added, but I like this approach too.

When I posted that assembly to the New Hampshire thread, some people thought the Exit 1 signs were a bit overkill, however, what you said gave me a second opinion about those APL signs at Exit 1 and I actually agree with your statement. It's worth noting that this exit in the NB direction hasn't had a proper advance sign (1 or ½ mile) for quite a while now ever since the Cross Street Bridge was replaced in 2008-09ish...

Also, I've noticed that most APL's in New Hampshire (except for one) and Massachusetts (except at 495/90) display two destinations per movement... last time I checked, this was under the guidance section in the MUTCD, is one or two destinations permitted per movement?

Quote from: MUTCD Section 2E.21 Design of Overhead Arrow-per-Lane Guide Signs for Option Lanes
Guidance:
08 Overhead Arrow-per-Lane guide signs used on freeways and expressways should be designed in accordance with the following additional criteria:

No more than one destination should be displayed for each movement, and no more than two destinations should be displayed per sign.

The guidance re: only one destination for each route is a "should" meaning it is only a recommendation, not a standard. So it doesn't have to be followed if engineers have a reason for deviating from it.
Logged

wanderer2575

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 968
  • Location: Farmington Hills, MI
  • Last Login: Today at 07:07:13 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #123 on: November 22, 2020, 09:57:06 PM »

MDOT (Michigan) is usually good with sign design so I was surprised with a pair of new APLs that went up a couple weeks ago on the newly-reconstructed northbound I-75 in Hazel Park.


(1)  Two exits on the same sign, which apparently is a no-no per the MUTCD.

(2)  An EXIT ONLY banner across the bottom of the entire sign.  The second lane (with an option to I-696) doesn't become exit-only at 11 Mile Road.



Where does the MUTCD say that you can't have two exits on an APL sign? It's possible but I haven't found it yet.

Section 2E.21, paragraph 09:  "Overhead Arrow-per-Lane guide signs shall not be used to depict a downstream split of an exit ramp on a sign located on the mainline."

I also need to amend my earlier post to say this sign might correctly reflect a future alignment (multiple exits on a single sign ignored).  As the northbound I-75 reconstruction continues, the exit to 11 Mile Road will be moved about 2/3 mile south to braid with the entrance ramp from I-696, thus eliminating the current weave/merge.  It's possible lane #3 (I misnumbered it earlier) might become exit-only to 11 Mile Road, with a new lane #3 coming from the entrance ramp from I-696.  But that is at least a couple years away.  Post correct signs now and change them when the lane alignments change.
Logged

SignBridge

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1550
  • Location: Long Island, New York
  • Last Login: November 22, 2020, 10:07:47 PM
Re: Arrow-Per-Lane (APL) signs
« Reply #124 on: November 22, 2020, 10:06:14 PM »

I think you might be misinterpreting that MUTCD section. I believe it refers to one exit that splits into two routes further down the ramp, such as a cloverleaf with a collector-distributor road or a freeway transition that splits for each direction after leaving the original freeway.

I don't think it was meant to apply to two separate exits from the main road, but again that's just my interpretation.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.