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

I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work

Started by bob7374, August 14, 2015, 06:53:07 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

PHLBOS

Quote from: bob7374 on June 28, 2017, 12:10:14 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on June 28, 2017, 11:20:19 AMI did not see any auxiliary route shields for 128, on either BGS's or ground-mounts, at or before exit 15A, except on older signs that haven't been replaced.  Maybe MassDOT is finally getting the hint, or are they still in the works?
Did the exit tabs look like they could hold a future milepost based number (123 to be exact)?

Good question about the lack of 128 shields. According to the sign replacement project plans there are only to be auxiliary signs for MA 30 at the Weston exit. Looking through the list of shields to be put up, there is no reference to 128 at all while it does list auxiliary trailblazers for MA 146, MA 122, and US 20. For comparison, 26 new shields for I-90 will be going up between Auburn and Boston, 15 paired with Mass Pike logo signs.
Is it possible that the supplemental 128 signs might be added later; as either an addendum/change notice or as a separate package?

Wouldn't be the first time.  IIRC, a supplemental NORTH 128 trailblazer sign was added at the northbound c-d ramp signage at MA 30 (Exit 24). Scroll down to see before & after pics.
GPS does NOT equal GOD


SidS1045

#176
Quote from: bob7374 on June 28, 2017, 12:10:14 PMDid the exit tabs look like they could hold a future milepost based number (123 to be exact)?
Using the current numbering scheme, EXIT 15A or EXIT 15B and EXIT 123 have the same number of characters and should, in theory anyhow, take up the same amount of space.  But the new exits, rendered as mileage-based, could end up as EXIT 123A or EXIT 123B, and I don't believe they left enough room for that on the new tabs.  I'll have to take another look to be sure.

The exit tabs on the 1-mile-to-exit and 1/2-mile-to-exit BGS's have been replaced (the green sheeting on the tabs is definitely a different shade of green from the rest of the BGS).  The new ones read EXIT 15B-A.
"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves." - Edward R. Murrow

PHLBOS

Quote from: SidS1045 on June 28, 2017, 01:34:37 PMUsing the current numbering scheme, EXIT 15A or EXIT 15B and EXIT 123 have the same number of characters and should, in theory anyhow, take up the same amount of space.  But the new exits, rendered as mileage-based, could end up as EXIT 123A or EXIT 123B, and I don't believe they left enough room for that on the new tabs.  I'll have to take another look to be sure.
It's worth noting that the current MUTCD standards (MassDOT doesn't always follow this) call for a space between the exit numeral(s) and the lettered suffix(es).  So Exits 15A & 15B would actually be signed as EXIT 15 A & EXIT 15 B; and Exits 123A & 123 B would actually be signed as EXIT 123 A & EXIT 123 B respectively.

The supposed reason for the space is to reduce/eliminate a motorist confusing EXIT XB (signed EXIT X B) for EXIT X8.

That said, there may not be room for the longer mile-marker based numerals if spaced per MUTCD standards.  I'd have to see the actual exit tabs to be sure.

Quote from: SidS1045 on June 28, 2017, 01:34:37 PMThe exit tabs on the 1-mile-to-exit and 1/2-mile-to-exit BGS's have been replaced (the green sheeting on the tabs is definitely a different shade of green from the rest of the BGS).  The new ones read EXIT 15B-A.
Are those signs still the older ones from the 1990s(?) or the newer ones (last year or two)?
GPS does NOT equal GOD

Beeper1

They went with Exits 15A and 15B?  The new ramp to 95/128 should have been numbered Exit 14, to match the eastbound exit, since they go to the same place and no longer have to deal with different numbered toll plazas. 

The remaining ramp to Park Road/Route 30 could have stayed as just Exit 15.

roadman

Quote from: PHLBOS on June 28, 2017, 05:29:42 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on June 28, 2017, 01:34:37 PMUsing the current numbering scheme, EXIT 15A or EXIT 15B and EXIT 123 have the same number of characters and should, in theory anyhow, take up the same amount of space.  But the new exits, rendered as mileage-based, could end up as EXIT 123A or EXIT 123B, and I don't believe they left enough room for that on the new tabs.  I'll have to take another look to be sure.
It's worth noting that the current MUTCD standards (MassDOT doesn't always follow this) call for a space between the exit numeral(s) and the lettered suffix(es).  So Exits 15A & 15B would actually be signed as EXIT 15 A & EXIT 15 B; and Exits 123A & 123 B would actually be signed as EXIT 123 A & EXIT 123 B respectively.

The supposed reason for the space is to reduce/eliminate a motorist confusing EXIT XB (signed EXIT X B) for EXIT X8

That is precisely the reason for the space.  It's also a detail that I note many designers and fabricators ignore.

Quote

That said, there may not be room for the longer mile-marker based numerals if spaced per MUTCD standards.  I'd have to see the actual exit tabs to be sure.

Excellent observation.  When I get a chance, I'll have to check that out myself.

QuoteThe exit tabs on the 1-mile-to-exit and 1/2-mile-to-exit BGS's have been replaced (the green sheeting on the tabs is definitely a different shade of green from the rest of the BGS).  The new ones read EXIT 15B-A.
Are those signs still the older ones from the 1990s(?) or the newer ones (last year or two)?

Yes, new exit tabs have been placed on the existing westbound advance signs for I-95 and MA 30 for now.  These signs and structures will be replaced as part of the I-90 Auburn to Boston sign replacement project presently under construction.
"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)

Benlonghighway

I really don't like that they're doing this. I mean, is it really necessary?

1. I-495 control cities should remain "NH-Maine and Cape Cod." Makes more sense, since most people exiting the Pike are probably headed to these areas.
2. The MA-128 designation should stay, as this is what's unique to the Pike; currently, it is the only highway to have the MA-128 designation remaining.
3. Why the overhead signs, and not the ground signs? I thought ground signs would be better for this highway, especially the two lane stretch between Sturbridge and West Stockbridge.
4. The guide signs for the maintenance centers just say "not an exit." This doesn't specifically state that only authorized vehicles are allowed to use these ramps, and people may just use these ramps as turnarounds.

What do you guys think?

hotdogPi

Quote from: Benlonghighway on July 01, 2017, 04:50:26 PM
I really don't like that they're doing this. I mean, is it really necessary?

1. I-495 control cities should remain "NH-Maine and Cape Cod." Makes more sense, since most people exiting the Pike are probably headed to these areas.
2. The MA-128 designation should stay, as this is what's unique to the Pike; currently, it is the only highway to have the MA-128 designation remaining.
3. Why the overhead signs, and not the ground signs? I thought ground signs would be better for this highway, especially the two lane stretch between Sturbridge and West Stockbridge.
4. The guide signs for the maintenance centers just say "not an exit." This doesn't specifically state that only authorized vehicles are allowed to use these ramps, and people may just use these ramps as turnarounds.

What do you guys think?

1. The MUTCD (which is nationwide, unlike my answers to questions 2 and 3) says that state names cannot be used as destinations. (Not that everyone follows the MUTCD; on this very subject, Chicago uses "Indiana" and "Wisconsin" as control cities.)

2. MassDOT has been phasing out MA 128 signage. With a few exceptions, MA 128 and I-95 cannot appear together on the same sign, even when referring to the same road.

3. MassDOT likes overhead signs more than most other states.

4. Is there any way to abuse a turnaround? I don't think there's any way to avoid a toll by turning around.
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.

kefkafloyd

Quote from: 1 on July 01, 2017, 05:00:59 PM-

4. Is there any way to abuse a turnaround? I don't think there's any way to avoid a toll by turning around.

Blandford westbound, the off-ramp for the maintenance area (which requires you to go around on Old Chester Rd) would let you duck out, if the gate's open. The toll gantry is right after that ramp. This of course would only help you if you wanted to exit the pike there. The ramp does not enable someone on the mainline to dodge the toll.

Kind of a risky move since you can't guarantee the gate would be open (I've never seen it closed, personally) and if a Statie saw you, I'm sure they'd give you a ticket.

SectorZ

Quote from: kefkafloyd on July 03, 2017, 08:05:56 AM
Quote from: 1 on July 01, 2017, 05:00:59 PM-

4. Is there any way to abuse a turnaround? I don't think there's any way to avoid a toll by turning around.

Blandford westbound, the off-ramp for the maintenance area (which requires you to go around on Old Chester Rd) would let you duck out, if the gate's open. The toll gantry is right after that ramp. This of course would only help you if you wanted to exit the pike there. The ramp does not enable someone on the mainline to dodge the toll.

Kind of a risky move since you can't guarantee the gate would be open (I've never seen it closed, personally) and if a Statie saw you, I'm sure they'd give you a ticket.

A statie could technically arrest one for trespassing if they really wanted to push the issue. Is there a ticket for toll evasion? I imagine you could get ticketed for driving on an unauthorized roadway.

roadman

#184
Quote2. MassDOT has been phasing out MA 128 signage. With a few exceptions, MA 128 and I-95 cannot appear together on the same sign, even when referring to the same road.

Those 'exceptions' you note are either LGS signs that were installed as part of private developer projects, or a handful of older signs that haven't been updated yet.  MassDOT does not place 95 and 128 shields together on BGS or LGS signs as the result of an FHWA directive that was first issued in the early 1990s.
"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)

kefkafloyd

Quote from: SectorZ on July 03, 2017, 10:45:47 AM
Quote from: kefkafloyd on July 03, 2017, 08:05:56 AM
Quote from: 1 on July 01, 2017, 05:00:59 PM-

4. Is there any way to abuse a turnaround? I don't think there's any way to avoid a toll by turning around.

Blandford westbound, the off-ramp for the maintenance area (which requires you to go around on Old Chester Rd) would let you duck out, if the gate's open. The toll gantry is right after that ramp. This of course would only help you if you wanted to exit the pike there. The ramp does not enable someone on the mainline to dodge the toll.

Kind of a risky move since you can't guarantee the gate would be open (I've never seen it closed, personally) and if a Statie saw you, I'm sure they'd give you a ticket.

A statie could technically arrest one for trespassing if they really wanted to push the issue. Is there a ticket for toll evasion? I imagine you could get ticketed for driving on an unauthorized roadway.

Now that the ticket system is abolished, the odds are that you have paid some amount of toll if you were heading westbound, unless you got on at Exit 3. Blandford's gantry is the first one westbound past exit 3. It would probably be some kind of unauthorized use fine. The ramp westbound dumps you out on Chester road, which is just a local street, so it's not like you're crossing through the maintenance area itself.

On a related subject, I hope AET gives MassDOT the idea to add an interchange in the 30 mile gap between Westfield and Lee, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

hotdogPi

Quote from: kefkafloyd on July 04, 2017, 09:57:34 AM
On a related subject, I hope AET gives MassDOT the idea to add an interchange in the 30 mile gap between Westfield and Lee, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

US 20/MA 8 and MA 23 (Blandford center, not where MA 23 actually crosses) should both have exits.
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.

jp the roadgeek

Quote from: 1 on July 04, 2017, 10:07:53 AM
Quote from: kefkafloyd on July 04, 2017, 09:57:34 AM
On a related subject, I hope AET gives MassDOT the idea to add an interchange in the 30 mile gap between Westfield and Lee, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

US 20/MA 8 and MA 23 (Blandford center, not where MA 23 actually crosses) should both have exits.

Should also be one at US 7 between West Stockbridge and Lee, and at MA 19 or MA 67 between Palmer and Sturbridge
Interstates I've clinched: 97, 290 (MA), 291 (CT), 291 (MA), 293, 295 (DE-NJ-PA), 295 (RI-MA), 384, 391, 395 (CT-MA), 395 (MD), 495 (DE), 610 (LA), 684, 691, 695 (MD), 695 (NY), 795 (MD)

kefkafloyd

Another oddity dead: the Appalachian Trail's new overpass sign is now standard green and matches the rest of the new (ugly, IMO) overpass signs. Previously, it was brown (versus black of the old overpass signs).

Beeper1

Quote from: kefkafloyd on July 04, 2017, 09:57:34 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on July 03, 2017, 10:45:47 AM
Quote from: kefkafloyd on July 03, 2017, 08:05:56 AM
Quote from: 1 on July 01, 2017, 05:00:59 PM-

4. Is there any way to abuse a turnaround? I don't think there's any way to avoid a toll by turning around.

Blandford westbound, the off-ramp for the maintenance area (which requires you to go around on Old Chester Rd) would let you duck out, if the gate's open. The toll gantry is right after that ramp. This of course would only help you if you wanted to exit the pike there. The ramp does not enable someone on the mainline to dodge the toll.

Kind of a risky move since you can't guarantee the gate would be open (I've never seen it closed, personally) and if a Statie saw you, I'm sure they'd give you a ticket.

A statie could technically arrest one for trespassing if they really wanted to push the issue. Is there a ticket for toll evasion? I imagine you could get ticketed for driving on an unauthorized roadway.

Now that the ticket system is abolished, the odds are that you have paid some amount of toll if you were heading westbound, unless you got on at Exit 3. Blandford's gantry is the first one westbound past exit 3. It would probably be some kind of unauthorized use fine. The ramp westbound dumps you out on Chester road, which is just a local street, so it's not like you're crossing through the maintenance area itself.

On a related subject, I hope AET gives MassDOT the idea to add an interchange in the 30 mile gap between Westfield and Lee, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

The recently passed state budget includes funds and a directive for MassDOT to study building an interchange somewhere on the 30-mile stretch.  As someone who lives in that part of the Berkshires, I can say that an interchange there is long overdue.  This comes after years of asking by both the town of Blandford and the city of Westfield.

I can think of two possible places that would work:

1)  Algerie Road in Otis.  Provides connections to US-20/MA-8 near Becket Center, to MA-23 in East Otis near the reservoir, and to Blandford via North Blandford Rd.

2) Some variation on a Blandford center exit, likely at North Street or at Russell Stage Road.

bob7374

Quote from: roadman on June 28, 2017, 07:51:46 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 28, 2017, 05:29:42 PM
Quote from: SidS1045 on June 28, 2017, 01:34:37 PMUsing the current numbering scheme, EXIT 15A or EXIT 15B and EXIT 123 have the same number of characters and should, in theory anyhow, take up the same amount of space.  But the new exits, rendered as mileage-based, could end up as EXIT 123A or EXIT 123B, and I don't believe they left enough room for that on the new tabs.  I'll have to take another look to be sure.
It's worth noting that the current MUTCD standards (MassDOT doesn't always follow this) call for a space between the exit numeral(s) and the lettered suffix(es).  So Exits 15A & 15B would actually be signed as EXIT 15 A & EXIT 15 B; and Exits 123A & 123 B would actually be signed as EXIT 123 A & EXIT 123 B respectively.

The supposed reason for the space is to reduce/eliminate a motorist confusing EXIT XB (signed EXIT X B) for EXIT X8

That is precisely the reason for the space.  It's also a detail that I note many designers and fabricators ignore.

Quote

That said, there may not be room for the longer mile-marker based numerals if spaced per MUTCD standards.  I'd have to see the actual exit tabs to be sure.

Excellent observation.  When I get a chance, I'll have to check that out myself.

QuoteThe exit tabs on the 1-mile-to-exit and 1/2-mile-to-exit BGS's have been replaced (the green sheeting on the tabs is definitely a different shade of green from the rest of the BGS).  The new ones read EXIT 15B-A.
Are those signs still the older ones from the 1990s(?) or the newer ones (last year or two)?

Yes, new exit tabs have been placed on the existing westbound advance signs for I-95 and MA 30 for now.  These signs and structures will be replaced as part of the I-90 Auburn to Boston sign replacement project presently under construction.
I got around to checking out the new Weston ramps signage late yesterday afternoon. The exit tabs are long enough to accommodate a 3-digit number: Here's the signage at the (To) MA 30 ramp:


While here's the signage at the new I-95 (128) ramp:


The gore signs look like they could be adapted for a 3-digit (and 1 letter) number:

bob7374

I've posted image of new overhead signs up on the Mass Pike as of this past weekend, including 1 eastbound for I-84:


on my I-90 in Mass. photo gallery:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html

jp the roadgeek

Why would MassDOT use NY City (150 miles almost in the opposite direction) as a control city for the I-84 exit traveling eastbound on the Pike?  Most NY bound traffic would have gotten off over a hundred miles ago in the Albany area, or even in Springfield.  Drives me nuts like putting Hartford as a control city for Exit 6 when most people use Exit 4 because they know I-91 goes to Hartford.
Interstates I've clinched: 97, 290 (MA), 291 (CT), 291 (MA), 293, 295 (DE-NJ-PA), 295 (RI-MA), 384, 391, 395 (CT-MA), 395 (MD), 495 (DE), 610 (LA), 684, 691, 695 (MD), 695 (NY), 795 (MD)

shadyjay

Any reason why the new I-95 exit westbound is Exit 15-A while the eastbound exit is Exit 14?  Wouldn't logic have both directions for the same exit be the same number?

bob7374

Quote from: shadyjay on July 10, 2017, 04:16:28 PM
Any reason why the new I-95 exit westbound is Exit 15-A while the eastbound exit is Exit 14?  Wouldn't logic have both directions for the same exit be the same number?
Agreed. The plan was to have the exits on both sides be numbered 123 with the arrival of milepost base numbering (123 A/B WB), however with this postponed guess they stuck with the established numbers. Some suggested why not two separate numbers, 15 for the Route 30 exit and 14 for I-95, which would have made the I-95 number consistent both ways, but possibly deemed too confusing by MassDOT.

KEVIN_224

So I see the new eastbound sign for I-84 also omits the reference for US Route 20. Is it the same reason MA Route 128 doesn't appear on the new I-95 signs in Weston?

DrSmith

In the previous system with tickets and barriers, the switch occurred in Weston at Route 128. Outside of Route 128 on the pike was the ticket system, and inside the barriers. Heading east, the ticket system ended at Exit 14. Heading west, you weren't yet on the ticket system, and there was Exit 15 as a barrier toll for Route 128 or you entered the ticket system if remaining on the pike. Additionally, hopefully the new ramps will help as the old ramp westbound ramp had a quick weave as it had to be after the toll plaza from the eastbound direction, but now that ramp is moved further back providing a little more room.

As note that different numbers are for Allston-Brighton as well; Exit 18 eastbound and Exit 20 westbound with Exit 19 being the old tolls. Consider they also consider the Mass Ave onramp as Exit 21 even though it is a single entrance ramp only.

mariethefoxy

Quote from: 1 on July 01, 2017, 05:00:59 PM
Quote from: Benlonghighway on July 01, 2017, 04:50:26 PM
I really don't like that they're doing this. I mean, is it really necessary?

1. I-495 control cities should remain "NH-Maine and Cape Cod." Makes more sense, since most people exiting the Pike are probably headed to these areas.
2. The MA-128 designation should stay, as this is what's unique to the Pike; currently, it is the only highway to have the MA-128 designation remaining.
3. Why the overhead signs, and not the ground signs? I thought ground signs would be better for this highway, especially the two lane stretch between Sturbridge and West Stockbridge.
4. The guide signs for the maintenance centers just say "not an exit." This doesn't specifically state that only authorized vehicles are allowed to use these ramps, and people may just use these ramps as turnarounds.

What do you guys think?

1. The MUTCD (which is nationwide, unlike my answers to questions 2 and 3) says that state names cannot be used as destinations. (Not that everyone follows the MUTCD; on this very subject, Chicago uses "Indiana" and "Wisconsin" as control cities.)

2. MassDOT has been phasing out MA 128 signage. With a few exceptions, MA 128 and I-95 cannot appear together on the same sign, even when referring to the same road.

3. MassDOT likes overhead signs more than most other states.

4. Is there any way to abuse a turnaround? I don't think there's any way to avoid a toll by turning around.


1) I agree, Cape Cod is a much more recognizable location for out of towners than Taunton. Some of the control cities on the other onramps to 495 use Lowell or Lawrence as the control city. From the Pike Portsmouth NH pretty much shows you that you're heading up that way.

2) At the very least the ground mounted 128 signs should stay

3) it appears to be a DOT policy, even rural highways like Route 2 have all overhead signage on the super 2 segment.


PHLBOS

#198
Quote from: bob7374 on July 10, 2017, 01:22:50 PMI got around to checking out the new Weston ramps signage late yesterday afternoon. The exit tabs are long enough to accommodate a 3-digit number: Here's the signage at the (To) MA 30 ramp:


While here's the signage at the new I-95 (128) ramp:


These photos (nice ones BTW) of these signs IMHO are proof that the use of smaller size numerals and the paler shade of blue for the I-shields makes for some harder-to-read route makers (I made a similar comment on the 3d-I-shield Font thread).

The earlier-erected signage at this interchange feature much more readable (at a distance) numerals & the darker shade of blue.

Note: I still think that either Dedham or Canton should've been used for the southbound I-95 legend for the westbound I-90 signage but that's another topic for another thread.

Quote from: jp the roadgeek on July 10, 2017, 02:31:04 PM
Why would MassDOT use NY City (150 miles almost in the opposite direction) as a control city for the I-84 exit traveling eastbound on the Pike?  Most NY bound traffic would have gotten off over a hundred miles ago in the Albany area, or even in Springfield.  Drives me nuts like putting Hartford as a control city for Exit 6 when most people use Exit 4 because they know I-91 goes to Hartford.
I mentioned similar earlier in this thread and I'll reiterate again.  This is a poster-child case where blindly following MUTCD policy of using the same exact control city legend combo on interchange signage for both directions doesn't work or defies simple logic.  IMHO, either the previous Sturbridge/Hartford (CT) combo should've been maintained for the eastbound signage or the eastbound signage should just list Hartford CT similar to the nearby ramp signage for I-84 West from US 20 East.

Quote from: KEVIN_224 on July 10, 2017, 08:48:26 PM
So I see the new eastbound sign for I-84 also omits the reference for US Route 20. Is it the same reason MA Route 128 doesn't appear on the new I-95 signs in Weston?
No.  Such is likely due to the I-84/US 20 junction being a separate, independent interchange.  Note: there will be supplemental signage for US 20 erected for Exit 9 (if not already).
GPS does NOT equal GOD

vdeane

Quote from: DrSmith on July 10, 2017, 09:34:56 PM
In the previous system with tickets and barriers, the switch occurred in Weston at Route 128. Outside of Route 128 on the pike was the ticket system, and inside the barriers. Heading east, the ticket system ended at Exit 14. Heading west, you weren't yet on the ticket system, and there was Exit 15 as a barrier toll for Route 128 or you entered the ticket system if remaining on the pike. Additionally, hopefully the new ramps will help as the old ramp westbound ramp had a quick weave as it had to be after the toll plaza from the eastbound direction, but now that ramp is moved further back providing a little more room.

As note that different numbers are for Allston-Brighton as well; Exit 18 eastbound and Exit 20 westbound with Exit 19 being the old tolls. Consider they also consider the Mass Ave onramp as Exit 21 even though it is a single entrance ramp only.
And this is why exit numbers should be for exits, not toll barriers.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.



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.