MUTCD gripes

[Quillz]

California seems to be doing quite well holding on to the 1961 MUTCD for its route markers, and adding a nonstandard color scheme for state routes.  Other states have colored markers as well (South Carolina's blue text on white background comes to mind) and I think it would enhance the local character to have shields and guide signs be varied to local flavor, as is done in Canada.  (yes, that includes using white/black, black/white, blue/white, etc for guide signs.)

It just occurred to me that Wyoming uses black-on-yellow route shields. Isn't black-on-yellow generally reserved for cautionary signs? I'm not sure if Wyoming has been using that color scheme since the beginning or if they switched from black-on-white, like some other states have.

[J N Winkler]

It just occurred to me that Wyoming uses black-on-yellow route shields. Isn't black-on-yellow generally reserved for cautionary signs? I'm not sure if Wyoming has been using that color scheme since the beginning or if they switched from black-on-white, like some other states have.

Wyoming actually uses brown on yellow, which is pretty easy to distinguish from warning signs.  Black-on-yellow shields are generally errors.

[Alps]

It just occurred to me that Wyoming uses black-on-yellow route shields. Isn't black-on-yellow generally reserved for cautionary signs? I'm not sure if Wyoming has been using that color scheme since the beginning or if they switched from black-on-white, like some other states have.

Wyoming actually uses brown on yellow, which is pretty easy to distinguish from warning signs.  Black-on-yellow shields are generally errors.

I find it tougher to spot route shields in California. Kansas, actually, no trouble at all - much different black/yellow ratio than a warning sign.

[mgk920]

A few little changes that I would make:

-Replace the standard 'ONE WAY' signs that are directly under the 'YIELD' signs at roundabout entrances with black-on-white roundabout arrow-circle signs, similar to what is done in Europe.

-Require that there be blade signs identifying every street at all intersections.

-Replace the 'keep right/left' signs at median or other dividers with lower-mounted down-pointing arrow signs ('drive on this side of the sign'), also as is normally done in Europe and elsewhere.  The current signs are too 'busy' looking to me.

-Adopt a symbol similar to my avatar to denote freeways, both at the entrances ('begin freeway driving rules') and for navigation.  Also look into using the same symbol with a red diagonal slash to denote 'end of freeway' and look into the use of the European front car profile sign image to denote non-freeway expressways.

-Look into transitioning to the 'red circle' style of speed limit signs that are used everywhere else Worldwide outside of Canada and the USA.

Mike

[DaBigE]

A few little changes that I would make:

-Replace the standard 'ONE WAY' signs that are directly under the 'YIELD' signs at roundabout entrances with black-on-white roundabout arrow-circle signs, similar to what is done in Europe

For the record, Wisconsin is one of the only states/the only state to mount ONE WAY signs like that at a roundabout. Nearly every other location I've worked with places them above the YIELD sign, instead using the horizontally-oriented version (like in Figures 2B-16 & 2B-17 in the MUTCD)

[Brandon]

A few little changes that I would make:

-Replace the standard 'ONE WAY' signs that are directly under the 'YIELD' signs at roundabout entrances with black-on-white roundabout arrow-circle signs, similar to what is done in Europe

For the record, Wisconsin is one of the only states/the only state to mount ONE WAY signs like that at a roundabout. Nearly every other location I've worked with places them above the YIELD sign, instead using the horizontally-oriented version (like in Figures 2B-16 & 2B-17 in the MUTCD)

An example, at I-94 and Exit 66, Mattawan, Michigan: https://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=42.223459,-85.78537&spn=0.008501,0.021136&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=42.223459,-85.78537&panoid=LuaLQ7PWiADIKoRkxog50g&cbp=12,39.11,,0,10.87

[elsmere241]

A few little changes that I would make:

-Replace the standard 'ONE WAY' signs that are directly under the 'YIELD' signs at roundabout entrances with black-on-white roundabout arrow-circle signs, similar to what is done in Europe.

-Require that there be blade signs identifying every street at all intersections.

-Replace the 'keep right/left' signs at median or other dividers with lower-mounted down-pointing arrow signs ('drive on this side of the sign'), also as is normally done in Europe and elsewhere.  The current signs are too 'busy' looking to me.

-Adopt a symbol similar to my avatar to denote freeways, both at the entrances ('begin freeway driving rules') and for navigation.  Also look into using the same symbol with a red diagonal slash to denote 'end of freeway' and look into the use of the European front car profile sign image to denote non-freeway expressways.

-Look into transitioning to the 'red circle' style of speed limit signs that are used everywhere else Worldwide outside of Canada and the USA.

Mike

And replace the "green circle" with the European white on blue.  Consider other European-style signs that make more sense than what we use.

[Brandon]

A few little changes that I would make:

-Replace the standard 'ONE WAY' signs that are directly under the 'YIELD' signs at roundabout entrances with black-on-white roundabout arrow-circle signs, similar to what is done in Europe.

-Require that there be blade signs identifying every street at all intersections.

-Replace the 'keep right/left' signs at median or other dividers with lower-mounted down-pointing arrow signs ('drive on this side of the sign'), also as is normally done in Europe and elsewhere.  The current signs are too 'busy' looking to me.

-Adopt a symbol similar to my avatar to denote freeways, both at the entrances ('begin freeway driving rules') and for navigation.  Also look into using the same symbol with a red diagonal slash to denote 'end of freeway' and look into the use of the European front car profile sign image to denote non-freeway expressways.

-Look into transitioning to the 'red circle' style of speed limit signs that are used everywhere else Worldwide outside of Canada and the USA.

Mike

And replace the "green circle" with the European white on blue.  Consider other European-style signs that make more sense than what we use.

They do?  I don't think that most of them make more sense.  In fact, I think they could stand to adopt some of our standards: black-on-yellow diamonds for warning signs (black and yellow are natural warning colors), yellow paint to divide directions of traffic flow, a proper railroad advance warning sign like our yellow circle with a black X on it, etc, etc.  They did adopt our stop sign to replace their stop sign that looked like any other circle sign they had.

[Scott5114]

A few little changes that I would make:

-Replace the standard 'ONE WAY' signs that are directly under the 'YIELD' signs at roundabout entrances with black-on-white roundabout arrow-circle signs, similar to what is done in Europe.

-Require that there be blade signs identifying every street at all intersections.

-Replace the 'keep right/left' signs at median or other dividers with lower-mounted down-pointing arrow signs ('drive on this side of the sign'), also as is normally done in Europe and elsewhere.  The current signs are too 'busy' looking to me.

-Adopt a symbol similar to my avatar to denote freeways, both at the entrances ('begin freeway driving rules') and for navigation.  Also look into using the same symbol with a red diagonal slash to denote 'end of freeway' and look into the use of the European front car profile sign image to denote non-freeway expressways.

-Look into transitioning to the 'red circle' style of speed limit signs that are used everywhere else Worldwide outside of Canada and the USA.

Mike

And replace the "green circle" with the European white on blue.  Consider other European-style signs that make more sense than what we use.

White on blue is already in use in the US to denote motorist services. A green circle saying "you must do X" is a lot more natural of a counterpart to a red circle with a line through it denoting "you must not do X" anyway.

[elsmere241]

White on blue is already in use in the US to denote motorist services. A green circle saying "you must do X" is a lot more natural of a counterpart to a red circle with a line through it denoting "you must not do X" anyway.

Not to someone who's colorblind.

[NE2]

White on blue is already in use in the US to denote motorist services. A green circle saying "you must do X" is a lot more natural of a counterpart to a red circle with a line through it denoting "you must not do X" anyway.

Not to someone who's colorblind.

That's what the slash is for.

[vtk]

A green circle saying "you must do X"

Must, or may?  Does this mean that, in order to drive on I-270, I must carry hazardous materials?



PS – this is how borders should be done with exit tabs.  I don't think the MUTCD explicitly prohibits this style, but it certainly doesn't promote it.  And it's quite possible I've already mentioned this at or near the top of the thread.

[Alps]

A green circle saying "you must do X"

Must, or may?  Does this mean that, in order to drive on I-270, I must carry hazardous materials?



PS – this is how borders should be done with exit tabs.  I don't think the MUTCD explicitly prohibits this style, but it certainly doesn't promote it.  And it's quite possible I've already mentioned this at or near the top of the thread.

Agree with the borders, disagree with the lack of sign cutout.

[DaBigE]

A green circle saying "you must do X"

Must, or may?  Does this mean that, in order to drive on I-270, I must carry hazardous materials?



PS – this is how borders should be done with exit tabs.  I don't think the MUTCD explicitly prohibits this style, but it certainly doesn't promote it.  And it's quite possible I've already mentioned this at or near the top of the thread.

Agree with the borders, disagree with the lack of sign cutout.

Agreed. IMO, not cutting it out is a waste of money/material.

[Alps]

A green circle saying "you must do X"

Must, or may?  Does this mean that, in order to drive on I-270, I must carry hazardous materials?



PS – this is how borders should be done with exit tabs.  I don't think the MUTCD explicitly prohibits this style, but it certainly doesn't promote it.  And it's quite possible I've already mentioned this at or near the top of the thread.

Agree with the borders, disagree with the lack of sign cutout.

Agreed. IMO, not cutting it out is a waste of money/material.

It's probably waste material anyway, and the cost may be slightly higher to cut it out. (Depends if the tabs are integral or machined separately, which varies by state.) My concern is with the aesthetics of a large blank field outside the sign borders.

[mgk920]

The logic in Europe is red circle = 'prohibition, restriction or limit' (ie, speed or dimensional limit or a prohibited action or use); green circle = 'permitted but NOT mandatory' and blue disk with white legend = 'mandatory action' (ie, required turn, keep right/left 'drive on this side of the sign', minimum speed in clear traffic, etc).

I like it - and I seriously doubt that anyone 'across the pond' ever mistakes those regulatory signs for motorway Big Blue Signs.



BTW, under that logic, those Ohio BGSes would be interpreted as 'hazmats CAN use that route'.

Mike

[J N Winkler]

It's probably waste material anyway, and the cost may be slightly higher to cut it out. (Depends if the tabs are integral or machined separately, which varies by state.) My concern is with the aesthetics of a large blank field outside the sign borders.

If this were an ordinary Ohio DOT extrusheet sign, then the material would definitely be wasted, as there is provision in Ohio DOT's extrusheet sign standards for separate fabrication and mounting of exit tabs.  However, these signs rather unusually have sign lighting fixtures secured to the top edge of the main sign panel, which makes me wonder if Ohio DOT recycled sign substrates (probably dating from the 1960's before exit numbering became prevalent) that don't allow inclusion of separately mounted exit tabs.

Arizona DOT similarly lights freeway guide signs from above, but uses a different mounting standard for the luminaires, which allows the use of extruded aluminum panel signs of conventional design.

[vtk]

It's probably waste material anyway, and the cost may be slightly higher to cut it out. (Depends if the tabs are integral or machined separately, which varies by state.) My concern is with the aesthetics of a large blank field outside the sign borders.

If this were an ordinary Ohio DOT extrusheet sign, then the material would definitely be wasted, as there is provision in Ohio DOT's extrusheet sign standards for separate fabrication and mounting of exit tabs.  However, these signs rather unusually have sign lighting fixtures secured to the top edge of the main sign panel, which makes me wonder if Ohio DOT recycled sign substrates (probably dating from the 1960's before exit numbering became prevalent) that don't allow inclusion of separately mounted exit tabs.

That would explain the slightly darker shade of green in that area, which I suspect is not retroreflective.

[Central Avenue]

A green circle saying "you must do X"

Must, or may?  Does this mean that, in order to drive on I-270, I must carry hazardous materials?

No, but it does mean that, if you're carrying hazardous materials, you must drive on I-270.

(Yes, I realize that, taken at its literal meaning, it only means that hazmat carriers may use I-270, but in context with other signs more explicitly spelling out the restrictions it's clear the intended message is a compulsory one. Also, I just thought it would be amusing to phrase it that way.)

PS – this is how borders should be done with exit tabs.  I don't think the MUTCD explicitly prohibits this style, but it certainly doesn't promote it.  And it's quite possible I've already mentioned this at or near the top of the thread.

Definitely agreed. That's my preferred style of border for "exit only" panels too--I like the look of one continuous border that just happens to change color.

It's probably waste material anyway, and the cost may be slightly higher to cut it out. (Depends if the tabs are integral or machined separately, which varies by state.) My concern is with the aesthetics of a large blank field outside the sign borders.

If this were an ordinary Ohio DOT extrusheet sign, then the material would definitely be wasted, as there is provision in Ohio DOT's extrusheet sign standards for separate fabrication and mounting of exit tabs.  However, these signs rather unusually have sign lighting fixtures secured to the top edge of the main sign panel, which makes me wonder if Ohio DOT recycled sign substrates (probably dating from the 1960's before exit numbering became prevalent) that don't allow inclusion of separately mounted exit tabs.

Arizona DOT similarly lights freeway guide signs from above, but uses a different mounting standard for the luminaires, which allows the use of extruded aluminum panel signs of conventional design.

FWIW, in the Columbus area at least, those signs with the lights mounted overhead seem restricted largely (though not exclusively) to the eastern stretch of I-70, from downtown out to Reynoldsburg or so. They came about at an odd time (ODOT had evidently discontinued button copy but was still including lighting with new signs), so I had always assumed they represented some strange one-off signing project.

[vtk]

FWIW, in the Columbus area at least, those signs with the lights mounted overhead seem restricted largely (though not exclusively) to the eastern stretch of I-70, from downtown out to Reynoldsburg or so. They came about at an odd time (ODOT had evidently discontinued button copy but was still including lighting with new signs), so I had always assumed they represented some strange one-off signing project.

They're also on I-670 east of I-71 and a decent portion of I-270.  But I'm pretty sure the lights were there when those signs were still button copy.  I assume the sign support structure and lighting were left in place when the new signs were installed.

[Central Avenue]

FWIW, in the Columbus area at least, those signs with the lights mounted overhead seem restricted largely (though not exclusively) to the eastern stretch of I-70, from downtown out to Reynoldsburg or so. They came about at an odd time (ODOT had evidently discontinued button copy but was still including lighting with new signs), so I had always assumed they represented some strange one-off signing project.

They're also on I-670 east of I-71 and a decent portion of I-270.  But I'm pretty sure the lights were there when those signs were still button copy.  I assume the sign support structure and lighting were left in place when the new signs were installed.

My bad, I meant to specify retroreflective signs with lights overhead. I think most of the ones on I-670 east of I-71 are (or at least were at one point) button copy.

[Mr_Northside]

FWIW, in the Columbus area at least, those signs with the lights mounted overhead seem restricted largely (though not exclusively) to the eastern stretch of I-70, from downtown out to Reynoldsburg or so. They came about at an odd time (ODOT had evidently discontinued button copy but was still including lighting with new signs), so I had always assumed they represented some strange one-off signing project.

They're also on I-670 east of I-71 and a decent portion of I-270.  But I'm pretty sure the lights were there when those signs were still button copy.  I assume the sign support structure and lighting were left in place when the new signs were installed.

Around Pittsburgh, a lot of lit overhead signs have the lights above in the airport area.  I've always assumed the airport was the reasoning behind it here.  Not 100% sure that's why, or if it could possibly have anything to do with those Columbus signs.

[ARMOURERERIC]

A green circle saying "you must do X"

Must, or may?  Does this mean that, in order to drive on I-270, I must carry hazardous materials?



PS — this is how borders should be done with exit tabs.  I don't think the MUTCD explicitly prohibits this style, but it certainly doesn't promote it.  And it's quite possible I've already mentioned this at or near the top of the thread.

Agree with the borders, disagree with the lack of sign cutout.

Agreed. IMO, not cutting it out is a waste of money/material.

It's probably waste material anyway, and the cost may be slightly higher to cut it out. (Depends if the tabs are integral or machined separately, which varies by state.) My concern is with the aesthetics of a large blank field outside the sign borders.

Note that this sign assembly is top lit, something I do not recall as being common in Ohio.  Usually when top lit, you would expect this to be near an airport or some background light sensitive facility, hence cutting out the non tab area would be counterproductive.

[hbelkins]

Given modern reflectivity standards, I'm surprised that anyone lights their overhead signs anymore. None that I know of in Kentucky are lit, although there are still some lighting brackets existing on some of the overheads in Louisville.

[SignBridge]

On Long Island, NYS DOT has recently replaced many overhead signs and taken down all the light fixtures. I'm not sure if the new signs are any more reflective than the old ones were.