California Observations

[SignBridge]

Actually, that looks pretty darned good for a California sign.

[roadman65]

I was noticing that on GSV that there is a one size fits all with signal backplates.  I see that the 8 inch signal heads use the same size backplate as the 12 inch, but with a smaller cut out in the middle for the smaller sized signal heads.

[CentralCAroadgeek]

So I'm back after a period of inactivity (although I did lurk here and there) because of a lack of road trips until this month.

Anyways, last weekend en route to Phoenix, I noticed strange exit tabs on signs around San Fernando on I-210:

[AndyMax25]

CentralCAroadgeek, do not be surprised, this is district 7...anything can happen!  Expect the unexpected, and be frustrated by inconsistencies.


iPhone

[andy3175]

At least this is better than no exit number at all...

[CentralCAroadgeek]

CentralCAroadgeek, do not be surprised, this is district 7...anything can happen!  Expect the unexpected, and be frustrated by inconsistencies.


iPhone

It's safe to say that I'm not all too familiar with SoCal, then...

[sdmichael]

That exit number oddity is only on the 210 from the 118 to the 5. I haven't seen it on any other freeway in D7 or the greater Los Angeles area.

[pctech]

Aren't they (Caltrans) afraid that the exit number will be blown off the sign bridge and cause mayhem? 

[myosh_tino]

So I'm back after a period of inactivity (although I did lurk here and there) because of a lack of road trips until this month.

Anyways, last weekend en route to Phoenix, I noticed strange exit tabs on signs around San Fernando on I-210:

There's going to be more signs along I-210 that are going to have exit numbers added in that fashion.  See the discussion about Caltrans District 7 project 07-1W2204 here... https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=11603.0

[andy3175]

Found this piece while looking for something else and thought I'd share with you all:

http://www.foxandhoundsdaily.com/2015/08/7-key-measures-of-californias-transportation-challenges/

7 Key Measures of California's Transportation Challenges
Senator John MoorlachBy Senator John Moorlach
California State Senate, 37th District
Friday, August 7th, 2015

1. CA's gas taxes are the 4th highest in the nation.
According to the American Petroleum Institute, California's 61-cent-per-gallon gas taxes are the 4th highest in the nation, behind only Pennsylvania, New York and Hawaii. This does not include the recent addition of extra cap-and-trade taxes resulting from bringing fossil fuels under California's AB 32 law.
2. CA's gas prices are the nation's highest.
According to AAA, the current national average price for a gallon of "˜regular' gasoline is $2.63. California's current average price is $3.69 per gallon (as of 8/5/15).
3. CA's gas tax & transportation fees yield $10.6 billion annually.
According to the State of California, Department of Transportation, Division of Budgets, 2014/2015 Fiscal Year estimates, the State brings in at least $10.6 billion in taxes and fees "dedicated to transportation purposes."
4. Caltrans spends just 20% of that revenue on state road repair & new construction. 
Last year, Caltrans spent $1.2 billion in state road maintenance & repair, and $850 million in new construction.  Similar amounts are planned for the 2015/2016 CA State budget.
5. Caltrans wastes half a billion $$ annually on extra staffing.
The Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) report on the review of the Caltrans' Capital Outlay Support Program found that the agency is overstaffed by 3,500 positions at a cost of $500 million per year.
6. CA's roads rank near the bottom in every category, including:
46th in rural interstate pavement condition
49th in urban interstate pavement condition
46th in urban interstate congestion
7. Poor road conditions cost Californians $17 billion yearly in vehicle repairs.
34% of CA's major roads are rated to be in "poor"  condition. Driving on roads in need of repair costs California motorists $17 billion a year in extra vehicle repairs and operating costs — $702.88 per motorist.

[nexus73]

Here is a great example of your tax dollars working poorly in California:

http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist1/d1projects/potter_vallet_road_safety/

The timeline from start to finish is 7 years for what amounts to a very minor highway improvement project going less than half a mile.  Notice how neither major party puts out a platform calling for bureaucratic reform?  Expect more news of the same kind.

Rick

[J N Winkler]

A few observations:

*  John Moorlach is an Orange County Republican, as is his predecessor.

*  FoxAndHoundsDaily.com is nominally a "business and politics" blog, but the name itself is an indirect reference to the Conservatives in England and most of the commenters on this particular piece seem to be coming from the right--"Good luck with that with the liberals in control of everything" and so on.

*  It would be helpful to know what exactly are being counted as "taxes and transportation fees," and what exactly is considered "state road new construction" and "state road maintenance & repair."  The clear implication from the post is that ~80% of revenues are just going up in smoke, but (1) in California, as in most other states, the gas tax presumably funds some construction/maintenance/repair activity on non-state systems, and (2) it would not be reasonable to expect farebox revenues from mass transit systems--which are a "transportation fee"--to go to roads, state-owned or otherwise.

*  About ten years ago, California had a proposition to require all transportation-related taxes and fees to be dedicated to transportation-related purposes.  Did this not pass?  Is it not being followed?  If it is not being followed, why not?

[oscar]

*  About ten years ago, California had a proposition to require all transportation-related taxes and fees to be dedicated to transportation-related purposes.  Did this not pass?  Is it not being followed?  If it is not being followed, why not?

That sounds like a rejected proposition on the same ballot as the 2003 recall election which elected Gov. Schwarzenegger.

I remember that election well. I drove my mother to the polling place. That was the last election in which she voted, before she passed away the following year.

[J N Winkler]

It looks like there were several propositions at around the same time that were plausibly transportation-related.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_California_ballot_propositions_2000%E2%80%9309

The one voted on in the recall election was Proposition 53, which would have required the spending of 3% of general fund revenues annually on state and local infrastructure projects (excluding school and community college projects).  As you say, it failed.  However, the one I am thinking of is Proposition 42, which did pass on March 5, 2002.  Wikipedia subtitles it "Allocation of Existing Motor Vehicle Fuel Sales and Use Tax Revenues for Transportation Purposes Only," but does not have an article on it.

Proposition 51, which failed on November 5, 2002, would have allocated the proceeds of motor vehicle sales and use taxes to a school bus safety set-aside fund and to certain specific infrastructure projects.

California does have a high fuel tax with pretty bad outcomes in terms of road surface quality, congestion, and so on.  However, land prices and the cost of living are both quite high, and that may have knock-on effects on the cost of doing business in the highway/publicly funded general transportation infrastructure sector.  Given that Proposition 42, if not abrogated, means that California has a hypothecation rule comparable to that existing in other states (such as Kansas) whose roads are better by all of the usual quality measures, I would like to know if Proposition 42 is in fact breaking down and, if so, how.

[SignBridge]

I'm from New York and very surprised to learn that NY's gas tax is actually higher than Calif. I would have figured the opposite. I've been to Calif. many times and I always had the feeling that more money was being spent there on road projects than New York.

Although Calif's freeway signing is sloppy compared to New York's, Calif. spends a lot more money on good traffic signal configurations than New York does. Calif. has far more left-turn arrows and pedestrian signals at signalized intersections than NY does. So for that reason alone I always figured there's more money available for this stuff in Calif.

[Rothman]

NY lets its tax-funded transportation funds be raided for non-transportation-related initiatives.

[SignBridge]

You are correct. And so must Pennsylvania 'cause their transportation infrastructure makes New York look good by comparison.

[Desert Man]

Valley Blvd is also former US 70/99 from Colton to just east of Etiwanda Ave. Ontario Mills Pkwy is just another roadway.

The former US route 60-70-99 combo goes past Kaiser Hospital in Fontana where I was born, also faces I-10. Too bad it wasn't officially an US highway in 1980 when I was born, but that goes past my hometown Indio CA. Indio Blvd. is now a historic route (99) from I-10 junction to Coachella (now State routes 86 in Indio and 111 in Coachella), but it's next to the Union or Southern Pacific railroad. Part of our lives before and after route designation, may the "99" be part of our personal and local histories.

[national highway 1]

Anyways, last weekend en route to Phoenix, I noticed strange exit tabs on signs around San Fernando on I-210:

They could mount the exit number sign to the right of the Roxford St sign.

[SignGeek101]

Anyways, last weekend en route to Phoenix, I noticed strange exit tabs on signs around San Fernando on I-210:

They could mount the exit number sign to the right of the Roxford St sign.

Like this? I don't think it looks much better personally. But it might be easier to see, and that's what's important in the end I guess.

https://goo.gl/maps/F14oa

[roadfro]

Anyways, last weekend en route to Phoenix, I noticed strange exit tabs on signs around San Fernando on I-210:

They could mount the exit number sign to the right of the Roxford St sign.

That probably wouldn't happen due to wind loading calculations...

[The Ghostbuster]

Does anyone know if there are any freeway exits in California that still do not have exit numbers?

[myosh_tino]

Does anyone know if there are any freeway exits in California that still do not have exit numbers?

Oh, there are a ton of exits that still do not have numbers.  Too many to mention.

[rschen7754]

Does anyone know if there are any freeway exits in California that still do not have exit numbers?

Oh, there are a ton of exits that still do not have numbers.  Too many to mention.

LA is doing pretty badly in this regard. But for a lot of exits, there is one advance guide sign and the gore point sign with the exit number, which is enough to be compliant.

[pctech]

Could the vertical post of these sign supports (on I- 210) be used with a new sign mounting assembly to meet the wind loading standards? It would be more economical than replacing the entire sign support . How far behind is Caltrans in installing freeway exit numbers through out CA?