Interstate 93 Signing Work

[spooky]

Is there some equivalent of an "editor" in these decisions?  Someone, in other words, whose job is to ensure the primary criteria of clarity, consistency, and accuracy are being met, rather than simply replicating a previous decision?  I worked in publishing for quite a while, and in that realm, there is always a seasoned set of eyes reviewing for those criteria.   Highway departments seem to seldom apply the most basic ability to exercise this kind of judgement to good visual/verbal communications decision-making. 

That person does exist, but it is naive to think that they are immune to political decision making that happens above their pay grade. That person also loses any sense of authority once a project goes to construction and decisions are left to the resident engineer and the District office.

[Pete from Boston]

The Turnpike Authority was responsible for the building of that tunnel, and it continues the Mass Pike exit numbers.  Seems odd to arbitrarily need to distinguish it.

Do keep in mind that the exit numbers are also those of I-90. 

Roadman summoned earlier:

I've also been told that the principal reason the MassPike shield was not included on the Exit 20 signs was political.  When the Big Dig project management was taken away from MassDPW, it was not handed to the Mass. Turnpike Authority.  Rather, a separate entity - the Metropolitan Highway System - was created by the Legislature instead.  For all practical purposes, the MHS could have been considered a subsidiary of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, but the politicians wanted to 'hide' that fact.

Yes, I saw his response.  I get it, yet reporting at the time strongly indicated the responsibility for the Big Dig was handed to the Turnpike Authority because it has an independent revenue stream.  You'll remember the Extension tolls then went up around 2000 or so. 

Is there some equivalent of an "editor" in these decisions?  Someone, in other words, whose job is to ensure the primary criteria of clarity, consistency, and accuracy are being met, rather than simply replicating a previous decision?  I worked in publishing for quite a while, and in that realm, there is always a seasoned set of eyes reviewing for those criteria.   Highway departments seem to seldom apply the most basic ability to exercise this kind of judgement to good visual/verbal communications decision-making. 

That person does exist, but it is naive to think that they are immune to political decision making that happens above their pay grade. That person also loses any sense of authority once a project goes to construction and decisions are left to the resident engineer and the District office.

For god's sake, it's a goddamn highway sign we're talking about.  Its job is to get people from A to B the best it can and not do anything else.  It is a reasonable expectation that this should not be a realm of political meddling.

[SidS1045]

It is a reasonable expectation that this should not be a realm of political meddling.

Excuse me, but what rock have you been living under for the past X years?

This is Massachusetts.  EVERYTHING is political.

[Pete from Boston]

It is a reasonable expectation that this should not be a realm of political meddling.

Excuse me, but what rock have you been living under for the past X years?

This is Massachusetts.  EVERYTHING is political.

Charming insult.  Just because it happens and everyone seems to take pride in dirty, crooked government, it doesn't make it unreasonable to expect issues of basic common sense to be immune to it. 

In fact, it's sad and pathetic to not expect better.

[AMLNet49]

Okay to clarify: I was the one that emailed MassDOT several years ago. The MassPike branding is not going away. Any place that the "Mass Pike" text was on a sign it was replaced with a MassPike shield. The Turnpike Authority does not exist any longer but the "Mass Turnpike" branding is not going away any time soon, because according to my sources, nothing has changed within the power structure of MassDOT since the initial merger in 2009 that would change that decision. The Pike extends from Exit 1 in West Stockbridge to Exit 26 in East Boston. The tunnels are part of the MassPike. Before the merger they were technically a separate entity but for all practical purposes, it was still a part of the Pike from 2003-2008. Why there is no MassPike shield on the sign from I-93 I don't know, but I can tell you that it is the Mass Pike both east and west of the interchange. Also, no exit numbers on the Pike are skipped, like a lot of closed circuit toll roads all 26 interchanges have individual names, including those that only have entrances and not exits. The only real exception is the Allston-Brighton Interchange. Exit 18 is the eastbound exit, Exit 19 is the main toll, Exit 20 is the westbound exit.

[SectorZ]

Okay to clarify: I was the one that emailed MassDOT several years ago. The MassPike branding is not going away. Any place that the "Mass Pike" text was on a sign it was replaced with a MassPike shield. The Turnpike Authority does not exist any longer but the "Mass Turnpike" branding is not going away any time soon, because according to my sources, nothing has changed within the power structure of MassDOT since the initial merger in 2009 that would change that decision. The Pike extends from Exit 1 in West Stockbridge to Exit 26 in East Boston. The tunnels are part of the MassPike. Before the merger they were technically a separate entity but for all practical purposes, it was still a part of the Pike from 2003-2008. Why there is no MassPike shield on the sign from I-93 I don't know, but I can tell you that it is the Mass Pike both east and west of the interchange. Also, no exit numbers on the Pike are skipped, like a lot of closed circuit toll roads all 26 interchanges have individual names, including those that only have entrances and not exits. The only real exception is the Allston-Brighton Interchange. Exit 18 is the eastbound exit, Exit 19 is the main toll, Exit 20 is the westbound exit.

It seems like the unofficial idea of the 'Mass Pike' goes from the NY border to the Allston tolls (with east of I-95 being the extension). The commonwealth seems to be reinforcing that in the signage; whether that's intentional or coincidental who knows. It's like with 128, old habits die hard.

[Pete from Boston]

It seems like the unofficial idea of the 'Mass Pike' goes from the NY border to the Allston tolls (with east of I-95 being the extension). The commonwealth seems to be reinforcing that in the signage; whether that's intentional or coincidental who knows. It's like with 128, old habits die hard.

There is more to this than simply "old habits die hard."  People consider the full road to be the Mass Pike because to a typical human brain, that is a logical concept.

To have some sort of administrative distinction of the road no longer being the Mass Pike after a certain exit a few miles from its end defies the one job of road designation and signage — to make sense with as little necessary extra thought on the part of the driver as is possible.

If there is indeed some kind of desire on the part of those making these decisions to have signs instead make subtle administrative distinctions that have no meaningful bearing on the use of the road, those people should be replaced with people who understand what signs are for.

[AMLNet49]

It seems like the unofficial idea of the 'Mass Pike' goes from the NY border to the Allston tolls (with east of I-95 being the extension). The commonwealth seems to be reinforcing that in the signage; whether that's intentional or coincidental who knows. It's like with 128, old habits die hard.

There is more to this than simply "old habits die hard."  People consider the full road to be the Mass Pike because to a typical human brain, that is a logical concept.

To have some sort of administrative distinction of the road no longer being the Mass Pike after a certain exit a few miles from its end defies the one job of road designation and signage — to make sense with as little necessary extra thought on the part of the driver as is possible.

If there is indeed some kind of desire on the part of those making these decisions to have signs instead make subtle administrative distinctions that have no meaningful bearing on the use of the road, those people should be replaced with people who understand what signs are for.

I really don't think it has anything to do with any kind of hidden agenda or anything like that. The Pike goes from the NY border to East Boston, and I dont think there is some sort of secret hidden agenda to make it only go to Allston/Brighton. I think it is quite simply a decision based on the fact that within city limits, they probably felt the need to simplify information because there are exactly zero people who call that road "I-90" even within Boston. East of the South Bay Interchange (also a term nobody used), they just call it the Ted Williams Tunnel. Zero people would distinguish the Fort Point Tunnel from the Ted Williams Tunnel. So because of this fact, it was just easier to list it as I-90, but its no conspiracy or culture change, the I-90 name east of  Allston/Brighton is very much alive and well.

[shadyjay]

It's also worth noting that the last incarnation of pre-Big Dig-completion signage had an I-90 shield and "Mass. Pike", in addition to signage for South Station.  It wasn't until the present generation signage came about when reference to the 'Pike was removed.  By that time, the anti-Pike "movement" was underway.  There was talk of merging the original pike (west of 128) into the state highway system and abolishing its tolls, but keeping the "Boston Extension" as part of the MHS.  Hence, control cities/points were added.  I think Logan and Worcester make sense.  A Mass Pike shield next to the I-90 shield would be cool, but for some reason, would seem kind of odd in Boston. 

Anyway, here's a shot of the sign I referenced at the top of this post.  Note the I-93 control cities....

[roadman]

It is a reasonable expectation that this should not be a realm of political meddling.

Excuse me, but what rock have you been living under for the past X years?

This is Massachusetts.  EVERYTHING is political.

Charming insult.  Just because it happens and everyone seems to take pride in dirty, crooked government, it doesn't make it unreasonable to expect issues of basic common sense to be immune to it. 

In fact, it's sad and pathetic to not expect better.

With respect, if insisting on a certain legend for a highway sign, instead of going with a person's (or group's) request that still conforms to standards instead, potentially jepoardizes approvals or permits for the project, would YOU stand your ground?  Unfortunately, these are some of the realities that people who oversee signing for state DOTs have to deal with.

As the saying goes - there are certain battles not worth fighting.

[PurdueBill]

The old-old 128 South signs inside the North Shore (then-Shopping Center) that you speak of listed BOSTON as its control destination (with no TO RTE. 1 reference) were not DPW-spec'd and were likley erected when the shopping center first opened in the 50s.  IIRC, the 114/128 cloverleaf was expanded to its current configuration around the same time-frame. 

You're right, one or two of them indeed survived into the 1990s.  The 128 South paddles near Sears Auto (I remember when those were erected in the 80s) were indeed DPW-spec'd.  Those were placed at an entrance ramp to 128 South that merged with the 128 South ramp from 114 East.  Since that ramp was part of the overall cloverleaf interchange, the DPW saw fit to replace all the signs at once.

Noodling around just now with regard to the mile marker thread, I noticed that the footing for the late 80s paddle sign for 128 south near Sears Auto still lives.  Amazing that they haven't taken it out if the sign isn't going to be replaced, but there it is. 

The old paddle sign was much better than the mall-erected signage that is there now.  Bummer that the paddle is gone.

As far as the Mass Pike name being omitted from the signage on the Southeast Expressway and the yellow TOLL banner appearing, it doesn't seem like a huge deal but something about the contractor doing what they like vs. what they were asked to is still irksome.  I know that print shops always say that they will not correct anything and will print what you give them, typos and all.  While the contractor probably should mention if they see something obviously misspelled or an erroneous shield in the plans, changing other things seems out of bounds.

[roadman]

@PurdueBill  MassDOT practice for old sign foundations is to excavate the foundation to six inches below grade, then backfill the area.  They do not completely remove the foundation.

[southshore720]

author=PurdueBill link=topic=6633.msg2017476#msg2017476
As far as the Mass Pike name being omitted from the signage on the Southeast Expressway and the yellow TOLL banner appearing, it doesn't seem like a huge deal but something about the contractor doing what they like vs. what they were asked to is still irksome.  I know that print shops always say that they will not correct anything and will print what you give them, typos and all.  While the contractor probably should mention if they see something obviously misspelled or an erroneous shield in the plans, changing other things seems out of bounds.

What's worse than the print shop printing whatever's on the paper (just like Ron Burgundy reading whatever's presented on the TelePrompTer) is the fact that they will actually erect a BGS/LGS with incorrect spelling.  When they prepare to install these signs, doesn't anyone take three steps back and say, "Hey, wait a minute!  That doesn't look right!  Maybe we should call someone and not hang this one..."??   

[PurdueBill]

@PurdueBill  MassDOT practice for old sign foundations is to excavate the foundation to six inches below grade, then backfill the area.  They do not completely remove the foundation.

I'm guessing the mall ownership took it down (or never put it back up if knocked down)...then-DPW forces installed the sign on the mall property way back when but probably haven't had anything to do with it since.  I am surprised that to this day the base sticks up out of the grass like that, stopping at the breakaway point. 

As far as Ron Burgundy reading whatever's on the prompter, I can hear Bobbie Battista right now, at least once reading "full screen!" which was a note that a map would be shown full-screen at that point.  I remember a character in Annie reading "drop page!" as well, but forget who that was.  You'd think that when it comes to something like a big highway sign, someone would ask if "NORHT" is really supposed to be on there like that--but that hasn't stopped NORHT from appearing in more than one state.

[Pete from Boston]

@PurdueBill  MassDOT practice for old sign foundations is to excavate the foundation to six inches below grade, then backfill the area.  They do not completely remove the foundation.

I'm guessing the mall ownership took it down (or never put it back up if knocked down)...then-DPW forces installed the sign on the mall property way back when but probably haven't had anything to do with it since.  I am surprised that to this day the base sticks up out of the grass like that, stopping at the breakaway point. 

As far as Ron Burgundy reading whatever's on the prompter, I can hear Bobbie Battista right now, at least once reading "full screen!" which was a note that a map would be shown full-screen at that point.  I remember a character in Annie reading "drop page!" as well, but forget who that was.  You'd think that when it comes to something like a big highway sign, someone would ask if "NORHT" is really supposed to be on there like that--but that hasn't stopped NORHT from appearing in more than one state.

I blame the unions.  Too much delimiting of personal responsibility.

[mass_citizen]

Note that in this case since this is a private mall it is most likely the work was done by a non-union contractor on the cheap. Also, the private mall owner probably didn't want to pay for the foundation to be removed since he doesn't really care about state construction practices.

[roadman]

Until somebody trips over the exposed foundation and stub post.  Then let's see how quickly the mall cries "But that's STATE property. not ours."

[Pete from Boston]

Note that in this case since this is a private mall it is most likely the work was done by a non-union contractor on the cheap. Also, the private mall owner probably didn't want to pay for the foundation to be removed since he doesn't really care about state construction practices.

I was more referring to having the authority to interrupt the process when something like "NORHT" appears (or "OLNY"),  but I suppose there are lots of potential failings possible. 

[bob7374]

Until somebody trips over the exposed foundation and stub post.  Then let's see how quickly the mall cries "But that's STATE property. not ours."

Contractors were at work Wed. night in Quincy removing, or based on previous posts, guess I should say partially removing the exposed above ground portion of, one of the former overhead sign foundations for the Furnace Brook Parkway exit southbound.

No new overhead signs to report this week, but plenty of new reassurance markers along the SE Expressway in both directions. I'll try to get some photos over the weekend.

[Pete from Boston]

Why is it that the HOV lanes on the north side have new overhead signs that are white (regulatory/restricted) and the new ones on the south side are green (guide)?

[mass_citizen]

There are new all white ground mounted HOV signs heading NB which only tell the hour restrictions. The new overhead signs NB are green guide signs which tell you "HOV 1 mile" etc. They do have a white background strip that specify the hours.

[bob7374]

There are new all white ground mounted HOV signs heading NB which only tell the hour restrictions. The new overhead signs NB are green guide signs which tell you "HOV 1 mile" etc. They do have a white background strip that specify the hours.

Here's a photo of the NB I-93 HOV sign in Quincy, for those who haven't seen the signs in person:

[bob7374]

No new overhead signs to report this week, but plenty of new reassurance markers along the SE Expressway in both directions. I'll try to get some photos over the weekend.

Here's one of the new 3-shield reassurance markers along the SE Expressway:


Feel free to check out of the remainder of the latest photos:
http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i93photos.html

The MassDOT listing indicates the I-93 project is 90% complete (meanwhile the I-95 project between Newton and Lexington is 80% done, the I-95 project from Peabody to Georgetown is 39%).

[Pete from Boston]

I was very surprised today to see how much new signage there is on Morrissey Boulevard and the adjacent part of Gallivan Boulevard where they meet 93.  I didn't realize there would be such extensive work there as part of this project.

[roadman]

Everything on Morrissey and Gallivan Boulevards that was just replaced under the Randolph to Boston project was installed during the 1984-1985 Southeast Expressway reconstruction project.  As it was all overdue for replacement, inclusion in the current project was the most logical course of action.

But Pete is correct - it is rare for a MassDOT freeway signing project to include so much secondary road signing.