News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

Massachusetts

Started by hotdogPi, October 12, 2013, 04:50:12 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

southshore720

Quote from: southshore720 on November 27, 2013, 12:42:39 PM
Quote from: southshore720 on November 25, 2013, 03:10:12 PMWhy hasn't that been replaced?  Those signs are very old!
Those BGS' & gantry are from 1977.  At the time, when MassHighway was replacing signs along I-95 circa 2001; they were likely only interested in replacing ones that involve interchanges that are actually located in Massachusetts.

Another thing about these oldies...the Exit 29 sign only references RI 114 and neglects US 1.  It really should say US 1 to RI 114 as the subsequent signs in RI indicate.


Beeper1

What's really odd is that MA is usually really good about sigining upcoming exits in neighboring states.  There is very clear signage on I-395, I-84, I-91, and I-95 (approaching the NH border) for upcoming rest areas and exits in the next state.  So to have this pretty obvious snub of RI is unusual.  The only other place I can think of with this bad of a snub is on US-3 heading into NH, where MA has no sign for NH Exit 1, which is only 1/4 mile over the line.   Not sure about I-93 heading to NH, as I very rarely go north that way. 

hotdogPi

I-93 has a 1.6 mile difference between the state border and Exit 1, so it's no problem.


Note: I-95 is a slight problem, because it shows MA 107 and not NH 107.
Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.

roadman

Quote from: Beeper1 on November 27, 2013, 10:54:45 PM
What's really odd is that MA is usually really good about sigining upcoming exits in neighboring states.  There is very clear signage on I-395, I-84, I-91, and I-95 (approaching the NH border) for upcoming rest areas and exits in the next state.  So to have this pretty obvious snub of RI is unusual.  The only other place I can think of with this bad of a snub is on US-3 heading into NH, where MA has no sign for NH Exit 1, which is only 1/4 mile over the line.   Not sure about I-93 heading to NH, as I very rarely go north that way. 

I took a closer look at the Canton to Attleboro project plans the other day and compared it to GSV at the sign location.  I noted that the MA/RI state line at this location takes a bizarre angle in relation to the highway, which is excerbated by the presense of the bridge - which also results in having the "Entering Pawtcket Rhode Island" LGS placed within Massachusetts in front of the structure.  Because of this, I suspect what happened is that the project designer presumed the Exit 30 -29 signs and support were in Rhode Island, without doing any detailed survey or other investigation first.
"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)

KEVIN_224

It may not mean much, but I noticed that some of the signs on I-91 between the Connecticut state line to Exit 14 at the West Springfield/Holyoke town line (I-90/Massachusetts Turnpike) are either new or different, such as the town line signs and the usual restrictions for no U-turn, etc.

cpzilliacus

Quote from: southshore720 on November 27, 2013, 12:38:36 PM
I do appreciate PHLBOS' point about bordering state snubbing.  Can't all the DOTs just get along?  Haha...

Along those lines, when I drove all of I-95 in Connecticut (and Rhode Island and Massachusetts, too) last summer, I don't recall seeing even one sign with the place name Boston on it anywhere in Connecticut. First one I noticed was in Rhode Island.
Opinions expressed here on AAROADS are strictly personal and mine alone, and do not reflect policies or positions of MWCOG, NCRTPB or their member federal, state, county and municipal governments or any other agency.

NE2

Quote from: cpzilliacus on November 30, 2013, 11:47:16 PM
Along those lines, when I drove all of I-95 in Connecticut (and Rhode Island and Massachusetts, too) last summer, I don't recall seeing even one sign with the place name Boston on it anywhere in Connecticut. First one I noticed was in Rhode Island.
That's because I-95 isn't the route to Boston.
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

PHLBOS

#57
Quote from: 1 on November 27, 2013, 10:59:49 PMNote: I-95 is a slight problem, because it shows MA 107 and not NH 107.
It is worth noting that NH used to use square/rectangular shields for their state route markers decades ago.

Since the only difference between a MA and a NH shield shapewise is only with the left side (for the Old Man of the Mountain NH shield); MassHighway/DOT's using a generic rectangle for the the Route 107 shield is somewhat forgiveable in this case IMHO.  You may recall that there's another thread that covers border-state DOT signing for interchanges located outside of their respective jurisdictions.  Some states take the time to copy the shape/look of an adjacent state shield and in other instances, they don't.

Quote from: roadman on November 29, 2013, 09:23:19 AMI took a closer look at the Canton to Attleboro project plans the other day and compared it to GSV at the sign location.  I noted that the MA/RI state line at this location takes a bizarre angle in relation to the highway, which is excerbated by the presense of the bridge - which also results in having the "Entering Pawtcket Rhode Island" LGS placed within Massachusetts in front of the structure.  Because of this, I suspect what happened is that the project designer presumed the Exit 30 -29 signs and support were in Rhode Island, without doing any detailed survey or other investigation first.
While I certainly don't doubt the above happening at all or being the reason why that BGS gantry was ignored, I have to ask the following question; did anybody pull the previous DPW signing contract for that section of I-95 that erected the older BGS' and look over the limits of work?  That would've been the first thing I'd have done.

If memory serves, MassDPW signing of Entering Pawtucket Rhode Island appeared to be SOP back then.  A similar-vintage Mass DPW-spec'd BGS reading Entering East Providence Rhode Island was also erected along I-195 at the RI border.

Note: that particular BGS was replaced with a MassHighway-spec'd Welcome to Rhode Island BGS but the WEST 195 through-BGS is of the 1977-vintage (and it shows wearwise).

http://goo.gl/maps/L2PCQ
GPS does NOT equal GOD

Pete from Boston

MassDOT is installing permanent travel-time signs to supplant the portable ones we've had the last few years.

http://m.wcvb.com/news/massachusetts-drivers-get-real-time-traffic-info/25431808

Meanwhile, the Herald's reporting on the regular VMSs being plagued by malfunction:

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2014/04/ritzy_signs_on_fritz_43_busted_digital_highway_boards_leave

roadman

Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 11, 2014, 06:40:41 PM
MassDOT is installing permanent travel-time signs to supplant the portable ones we've had the last few years.

http://m.wcvb.com/news/massachusetts-drivers-get-real-time-traffic-info/25431808

This is a continuation (although on a much larger scale) of the travel time sign installations on Cape Cod that were just turned on today.

Quote

Meanwhile, the Herald's reporting on the regular VMSs being plagued by malfunction:

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2014/04/ritzy_signs_on_fritz_43_busted_digital_highway_boards_leave


Most of the signs in the Herald's report were installed under the Big Dig project, or the pre-Big Dig "zipper lane" mitigation.  A number of these signs - including the one that was featured on the Herald front page this morning - are designed to only activate when an overheight vehicle trips the sensors.  And all of these signs, which are a combination of early LED and fiber-optic flip disc technology, are at least 20 years old.  But the Herald doesn't let facts get in the way of "shock horror" reporting.
"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)

mass_citizen

The MassDOT-Highway administrator doesn't help by claiming "most" of the signs are only eight years old.

roadman

Wonder haw that number was derived by whomever provided it to the Administrator.  Even given the recent CMS installations north of Boston on I-93 and I-95, the average age of all the CMS boards on MassDOT highways (including the Big Dig and the Pike) is still greater than eight years.
"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)

SidS1045

Quote from: roadman on April 11, 2014, 07:43:37 PM
Most of the signs in the Herald's report were installed under the Big Dig project, or the pre-Big Dig "zipper lane" mitigation.  A number of these signs - including the one that was featured on the Herald front page this morning - are designed to only activate when an overheight vehicle trips the sensors.  And all of these signs, which are a combination of early LED and fiber-optic flip disc technology, are at least 20 years old.  But the Herald doesn't let facts get in the way of "shock horror" reporting.

The one in that picture, if I'm not mistaken, is on the sign bridge on the southbound I-93/Zakim Bridge just before the tunnel entrance.  (The giveaway is the BGS, on the same bridge, for the half-mile warning to the 1A-Airport exit.)  That is not just an overheight warning and is in good working order.  (Great example of a broken sign, Herald.)  It regularly carries other messages, such as alerts about the weekend work on the I-90/Pru Tunnel or generic messages such as "State Law - Move Over/Slow Down for Emergency Vehicles."
"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves." - Edward R. Murrow

roadman

Quote from: SidS1045 on April 12, 2014, 10:53:58 PM
Quote from: roadman on April 11, 2014, 07:43:37 PM
Most of the signs in the Herald's report were installed under the Big Dig project, or the pre-Big Dig "zipper lane" mitigation.  A number of these signs - including the one that was featured on the Herald front page this morning - are designed to only activate when an overheight vehicle trips the sensors.  And all of these signs, which are a combination of early LED and fiber-optic flip disc technology, are at least 20 years old.  But the Herald doesn't let facts get in the way of "shock horror" reporting.

The one in that picture, if I'm not mistaken, is on the sign bridge on the southbound I-93/Zakim Bridge just before the tunnel entrance.  (The giveaway is the BGS, on the same bridge, for the half-mile warning to the 1A-Airport exit.)  That is not just an overheight warning and is in good working order.  (Great example of a broken sign, Herald.)  It regularly carries other messages, such as alerts about the weekend work on the I-90/Pru Tunnel or generic messages such as "State Law - Move Over/Slow Down for Emergency Vehicles."

Thanks for the clarification.  I was unaware that the use of that particular board was expanded to include regular MassDOT VMS messages.
"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)

bob7374

Quote from: roadman on April 11, 2014, 07:43:37 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 11, 2014, 06:40:41 PM
MassDOT is installing permanent travel-time signs to supplant the portable ones we've had the last few years.

http://m.wcvb.com/news/massachusetts-drivers-get-real-time-traffic-info/25431808

This is a continuation (although on a much larger scale) of the travel time sign installations on Cape Cod that were just turned on today.
Here, from the MassDOT press release, is an image of the new permanent travel time signs:

From the mile marker in the background, this is on MA 25 East. It will be interesting to see what 3 exits show up on the signs along I-93 north and south of Boston. For example, at Exit 6 NB the current VMS reports the time to I-90, would they add exits before or after, perhaps Neponset Ave or Morrissey Blvd before and/or US 1/Tobin Bridge after?

hotdogPi

Quote from: bob7374 on April 16, 2014, 11:30:12 AM
From the mile marker in the background, this is on MA 25 East. It will be interesting to see what 3 exits show up on the signs along I-93 north and south of Boston. For example, at Exit 6 NB the current VMS reports the time to I-90, would they add exits before or after, perhaps Neponset Ave or Morrissey Blvd before and/or US 1/Tobin Bridge after?

I would think every freeway would be listed, as well as MA 3A/203 and MA 16.
Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.

PHLBOS

Quote from: bob7374 on April 16, 2014, 11:30:12 AM
From the mile marker in the background, this is on MA 25 East.
The EAST 25 assurance shield in the background is even a bigger give-away.  :sombrero:

Quote from: 1 on April 16, 2014, 03:28:53 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 16, 2014, 11:30:12 AMIt will be interesting to see what 3 exits show up on the signs along I-93 north and south of Boston. For example, at Exit 6 NB the current VMS reports the time to I-90, would they add exits before or after, perhaps Neponset Ave or Morrissey Blvd before and/or US 1/Tobin Bridge after?
I would think every freeway would be listed, as well as MA 3A/203 and MA 16.
Given that these new Travel-Time Display BGS' are not full-blown VMS'; listing more than 3 locations/interchanges per sign (if I'm interpreting what you're stating correctly) would be a bit overkill IMHO.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

hotdogPi

Quote from: PHLBOS on April 16, 2014, 03:53:18 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 16, 2014, 11:30:12 AM
From the mile marker in the background, this is on MA 25 East.
The EAST 25 assurance shield in the background is even a bigger give-away.  :sombrero:

Quote from: 1 on April 16, 2014, 03:28:53 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 16, 2014, 11:30:12 AMIt will be interesting to see what 3 exits show up on the signs along I-93 north and south of Boston. For example, at Exit 6 NB the current VMS reports the time to I-90, would they add exits before or after, perhaps Neponset Ave or Morrissey Blvd before and/or US 1/Tobin Bridge after?
I would think every freeway would be listed, as well as MA 3A/203 and MA 16.
Given that these new Travel-Time Display BGS' are not full-blown VMS'; listing more than 3 locations/interchanges per sign (if I'm interpreting what you're stating correctly) would be a bit overkill IMHO.

Every freeway crossing I-93, as well as MA 3A/203 and MA 16, would be on at least one. Each sign would only have the closest 3, though.
Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.

roadman

As I understand it, not all of the proposed signs under the "statewide" GoTime project (to use MassDOT's new branding) will have three destinations, especially on roads like I-90 and the lower end of I-495 where there is some distance between interchanges.  I've been told this is because, once you get beyond a certain distance (20 miles?), the travel time information does not quickly update and will become unreliable.
"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)

Pete from Boston

#69
How about this?



Are they serious about signing the Cape here, on Morrissey Blvd barely into Dorchester, or is this another case of replacement in kind over the years?

PHLBOS

Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 21, 2014, 12:19:39 PM
How about this?



Are they serious about signing the Cape here, on Morrissey Blvd barely into Dorchester, or is this another case of replacement in kind over the years?
It's likely the latter.  Prior to the Expressway being built, this was the main route to the South Shore & Cape from Boston (MA C37).
GPS does NOT equal GOD

bob7374

Quote from: roadman on April 16, 2014, 06:16:14 PM
As I understand it, not all of the proposed signs under the "statewide" GoTime project (to use MassDOT's new branding) will have three destinations, especially on roads like I-90 and the lower end of I-495 where there is some distance between interchanges.  I've been told this is because, once you get beyond a certain distance (20 miles?), the travel time information does not quickly update and will become unreliable.
I have been testing the accuracy of the temporary GoTime signs along MA 3 and I-93 into and out of Boston for the past month. There seems to be a wide difference in accurate times between signs. For example, the VMS just beyond the Brighton tolls heading east constantly overestimates the time it will get to Exit 15/Columbia Rd on I-93, sometimes by more than 50%. Yesterday, it indicated it would take 34 minutes to go the 5 miles, it took 17. A day the previous week it said it would take 26 minutes, it took 12. Could this vast discrepancy be do to the need to calculate speeds on two different highways.

The portable VMSs on I-93 South typically are more accurate with time estimates close to 5 minutes of the actual travel time. The time measured is that going from just after Mass Ave (Exit 18) the 10 miles to Exit 6 in Braintree. There is another sign at the 1/2 point, 5 miles to Exit 6 between off-ramps for Exits 11A and 11B. There is usually a lower estimated time from the 5 mile sign than you would expect from the Exit 18 estimate. For example, if at Exit 18 it says it would take 30 minutes to get to Exit 6, you would expect the 5 mile sign to indicate about 15 minutes, but usually that sign takes off a few minutes and would say 11 or 12, this despite the backups that occur approaching the Braintree Split which tend to increase the travel time to beyond what was indicated on the first sign. The VMS on MA 3 at I-93 seems fairly accurate, but typically overestimates the time by 5 to 10 minutes. Given that this is at off-peak, being the middle of the day, and traffic is typically going 5 to 10 mph over the speed limit, you would expect this overestimation (assuming time is calculated as if the max speed is the speed limit).

SidS1045

Quote from: bob7374 on May 21, 2014, 09:28:19 PMthe VMS just beyond the Brighton tolls heading east constantly overestimates the time it will get to Exit 15/Columbia Rd on I-93, sometimes by more than 50%. Yesterday, it indicated it would take 34 minutes to go the 5 miles, it took 17. A day the previous week it said it would take 26 minutes, it took 12.

By contrast, during the PM rush the travel time to the Zakim Bridge on I-93 northbound, shown on the same sign, is pretty consistently *under*-estimated.  I've lost count of the number of times it shows travel times at ten minutes or less and the actual times are 30 minutes or more.
"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves." - Edward R. Murrow

Pete from Boston

Are the speeds calculated by cell phone signals?  And if so, are they rounded down to the speed limit?

Pete from Boston

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 21, 2014, 03:29:37 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 21, 2014, 12:19:39 PM
How about this?



Are they serious about signing the Cape here, on Morrissey Blvd barely into Dorchester, or is this another case of replacement in kind over the years?
It's likely the latter.  Prior to the Expressway being built, this was the main route to the South Shore & Cape from Boston (MA C37).

Almost more puzzling is this sign a few hundred yards north of there on Mt. Vernon St>:

http://goo.gl/maps/KOYkQ

Route 3?  When was the last time Route 3 ran separately from 93?



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.