News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered at https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33904.0
Corrected several already and appreciate your patience as we work through the rest.

Main Menu

Massachusetts

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

Previous topic - Next topic

RobbieL2415

Quote from: 1 on June 05, 2016, 12:27:02 PM
Quote from: J Route Z on June 05, 2016, 01:42:18 AM
Why are the speed limits on various MA state very inconsistent and have unnecessary speed limit changes? It'll be 50 mph for 100 yards then up to 55 for 50 yards then back to 50, then down to 40, when there aren't even any houses or buildings within the area.

Where are you seeing 55 on a surface road in Massachusetts?

MA 9, US 6, MA 49 and MA 88 (to name a few) also have 55mph zones for all or part of their surface routes.


mariethefoxy

they have something like that on the north end of I-290, its 65 and then suddenly it drops to 45mph before the interchange with I-495, granted the curve is tight but its only an advisory speed of 25 not a speed limit of 25 on that ramp.

kefkafloyd

Don't forget the 60MPH section of MA 8 in Sandisfield.

Beeper1

That section of MA-8 from the CT line to just south of MA-57 is now posted at 55 MPH.

Mergingtraffic

#579
Quote from: upstatenyroads on June 05, 2016, 09:25:47 AM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on May 31, 2016, 11:55:35 AM
I never seen that full button copy type of signs elsewhere in the state (except the mass pike which at the time was a different agency)

The signs installed at the I-190/I-290 interchange in Worcester were all button copy when the interchange opened.

The date on those signs were 1985 and they weren't reflective.
they were replaced within the past 6 months.




I only take pics of good looking signs. Long live non-reflective button copy!
MergingTraffic https://www.flickr.com/photos/98731835@N05/

RobbieL2415

#580
Quote from: kefkafloyd on June 07, 2016, 09:30:39 PM
Don't forget the 60MPH section of MA 8 in Sandisfield.
I think you mean 55 as Beeper1 said.  The max statutory speed limit for surface highways in MA is 55 (it is in CT too but no surface highway to date has been given one).

Edit: specified sfc highways, not including limited access.

jp the roadgeek

I have never seen a (post NMSL) 60 MPH speed limit anywhere north and east of Maryland and West Virginia.
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)

Ian

#582
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 08, 2016, 12:57:40 AM
I have never seen a (post NMSL) 60 MPH speed limit anywhere north and east of Maryland and West Virginia.

Maine has a few. The Falmouth Spur (hidden I-495), I-95 through Bangor, and I-395 between I-95 and exit 5 are all posted at 60.
UMaine graduate, former PennDOT employee, new SoCal resident.
Youtube l Flickr

SectorZ

Quote from: Ian on June 08, 2016, 01:54:55 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 08, 2016, 12:57:40 AM
I have never seen a (post NMSL) 60 MPH speed limit anywhere north and east of Maryland and West Virginia.

Maine has a few. The Falmouth Spur (hidden I-495), I-95 through Bangor, and I-395 between I-95 and exit 5 are all posted at 60.

MA 3 southeast of Weymouth as well is 60 MPH.

yakra

Quote from: Ian on June 08, 2016, 01:54:55 AM
Maine has a few. The Falmouth Spur (hidden I-495), I-95 through Bangor, and I-395 between I-95 and exit 5 are all posted at 60.
US-1 freeway in Brunswick & West Bath; Scarborough Connector freeway
"Officer, I'm always careful to drive the speed limit no matter where I am and that's what I was doin'." Said "No, you weren't," she said, "Yes, I was." He said, "Madam, I just clocked you at 22 MPH," and she said "That's the speed limit," he said "No ma'am, that's the route numbah!"  - Gary Crocker

kefkafloyd

Quote from: Beeper1 on June 07, 2016, 10:19:37 PM
That section of MA-8 from the CT line to just south of MA-57 is now posted at 55 MPH.

My mistake, thanks for the correction.

bob7374

I have posted a few more photos of the new 'Go Time' travel distance and time signs being put up by MassDOT. This one on US 3 South in Burlington has gotten the most comments since it lacks the 'Via I-95 South/North' texts seen on other signs:


All the new photos are in the I-95 and US 3 sections of Part B at:
http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/miscsigns.html

Also here's the latest photo of the future on-ramp from Kendrick Street to I-95/128 North in Needham:


More new I-95 Add-A-Lane Project photos are at:
http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i95photos.html#addalane
(as well as a few misc. ones at the top of the page).

bob7374

Quote from: roadman on April 13, 2016, 11:30:17 AM
Quote from: yakra on April 13, 2016, 12:24:49 AM
Quote from: roadman on April 12, 2016, 04:02:59 PM
Bids were opened on the I-495 Raynham to Bolton sign replacement project earlier today.  RoadSafe Traffic Systems of Avon, MA is the apparent low responsible bidder.
Sorry if you've already covered this upthread -- is this going to include exit renumbering?
The project was designed to use milepost-based exit numbers, but that may change.  From the project addenda # 1:

QuoteITEM 828.1 OVERHEAD GUIDE SIGN - SQUARE FOOT
ALUMINUM PANEL (TYPE B)
The work under this item shall conform to the relevant provisions of Section 828 of the Standard
Specifications and the following:
Legend, border, and background of signs shall be High Intensity Prismatic (HIP) retrotreflective
sheeting conforming to ASTM D4956-11a Type VIII or better, except that the banners
indicating TOLL ROAD" , "EXIT ONLY" , etc. shall be fabricated with black opaque legend on
yellow retro-reflective sheeting conforming to ASTM D4956-11a Type VIII or better. .
The project plans and details for these sign panels presume that the existing exit numbers within
the project limits will be converted from the present sequential numbers to a referenced-based
(milepost) numbering system. However, the Contractor is advised that this conversion may now
be deferred until a later date. Accordingly, while the new exit number plates (tabs), gore, and
other signs shall be fabricated of sufficient width to accommodate the future exit numbers, the
Contractor may be directed to provide the current sequential exit numbers on new signs for now.
MassDOT shall inform the Contractor of which numbering scheme to use on new signs prior to
submission of the sign face drawings for review and approval.
(language added in Addenda # 1 - emphasis added)
METHOD OF MEASUREMENT
Item 828.1 will be measured for payment buy the square foot, complete in place,
BASIS OF PAYMENT
Item 828.1 will be paid for at the Contract unit price per square foot, which price shall include
furnishing and installing all materials, labor, equipment tools, appurtenances, and incidentals
necessary to satisfactorily complete the item of work, complete, in place and accepted.

A little birdie (no, not Twitter) told me this language was added as a result of the backlash from the US 6 preliminary design plans.
A follow-up, MassDOT gave the notice to proceed for the I-495 sign replacement contract on Monday (6/13). Guess it may be a few months before it is known what exit numbers will be used for the new signs.

Meanwhile, how close is MassDOT to the decision about I-90?

mariethefoxy

speaking of sign replacements, all but one or two signs on MA Route 2 are new from  I-495 to the end of the freeway, including the akward older style ones. I drove it from 495 to Greenfield earlier today.

PHLBOS

Quote from: mariethefoxy on June 19, 2016, 12:17:29 AM
speaking of sign replacements, all but one or two signs on MA Route 2 are new from  I-495 to the end of the freeway, including the akward older style ones.
What do you mean by awkward?
GPS does NOT equal GOD

mariethefoxy



these ones, with the exit number printed way too low on the sign and it looks like they slapped it on wierdly

Alps

Quote from: mariethefoxy on June 20, 2016, 12:19:25 PM


these ones, with the exit number printed way too low on the sign and it looks like they slapped it on wierdly
Because they did, because the exit panel was an afterthought.

cl94

Yeah, I noticed MassDOT had a bunch of new stuff up when I was through yesterday. A lot of new-looking assemblies on I-91 SB between the Vermont border and the Mohawk Trail. Button copy I-91 shields do remain.
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

Mergingtraffic

Has work started on the MA-6 bridge by Wellington Station yet over the tracks?  there's some glorious button copy around there.
I only take pics of good looking signs. Long live non-reflective button copy!
MergingTraffic https://www.flickr.com/photos/98731835@N05/

Alps

Quote from: Mergingtraffic on June 24, 2016, 08:59:41 PM
Has work started on the MA-6 bridge by Wellington Station yet over the tracks?  there's some glorious button copy around there.
(16)

bob7374

Got a chance to drive along the southern stretch of I-495 between Milford and Wareham this weekend. Was able to take photos of some of the new MassDOT 'Go Time' travel time signs, such as this southbound approaching I-95 in Foxboro:


Other photos can be found here:
http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/miscsigns.html#i495signs

I also have new photos of some of the signs installed along US 3 and MA 128.

bob7374

MassDOT has released its Draft 2017-2021 State TIP for public comment (available at: http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Portals/17/docs/STIP/StipDraft17_21.pdf)

As for new sign replacement projects listed, FY 2020 includes:
MA 146 Uxbridge to Worcester
I-391 between Chicopee and Holyoke (all of it), and
Sections of I-495 and I-195 between Dartmouth and Raynham.
For 2021 the only project listed is replacing the signs on US 3 from Burlington to Tyngsboro.
Previously listed projects for 2017-2019 are still there: MA 24, from Randolph to I-195 (2017), I-95 from Attleboro to Norwood (2018), and Reading to Lynnfield (2019), I-290 Auburn to Worcester (2018), US 1 Chelsea to Danvers (2019), I-495 Haverhill to Merrimac (2019), and, perhaps new, MA 28 Bourne to Falmouth (2019).

There is no mention of the US 6 sign replacement contract or the milepost conversion project, the latter was listed as a statewide project for 2016 in the previous STIP. If this has been postponed, and is not included in the final document, then it appears any changes will now not take place until after 2021.

AMLNet49

If they don't just bite the bullet and do the conversion, it will never happen. Public opinion is not going to change on this issue any time soon, so either they do it and everyone just has to adapt to the changes or they don't do it and anger the feds but keep everyone happy. They can't just play this game of cat and mouse and wait for public opinion to change because they will never have public support on the milepost conversion issue.

mass_citizen

#598
If public opinion will never change then shouldn't they listen to it? Sometimes traffic engineers forget their duty is to the public and that includes listening to public feedback even if it goes against their academic theory. Someone needs to do an intrinsic cost benefit analysis and if resident concerns regarding rural character, nostalgia, business advertising change costs, etc. are more important than some person without GPS wondering how many miles it is to their next exit then maybe they should just bite the bullet and give in to the public demand. To be honest the whole benefit of this exit number change thing is really diminished nowadays which is why the average person out there just doesn't get it. Either you are familiar with the area and you really don't need the exit-mileage information or you don't live around there and you have gps. I would liken it to food and gas service signs which are similarly becoming obsolete.


AMLNet49

Quote from: mass_citizen on July 13, 2016, 01:00:57 AM
If public opinion will never change then shouldn't they listen to it? Sometimes traffic engineers forget their duty is to the public and that includes listening to public feedback even if it goes against their academic theory. Someone needs to do an intrinsic cost benefit analysis and if resident concerns regarding rural character, nostalgia, business advertising change costs, etc. are more important than some person without GPS wondering how many miles it is to their next exit then maybe they should just bite the bullet and give in to the public demand. To be honest the whole benefit of this exit number change thing is really diminished nowadays which is why the average person out there just doesn't get it. Either you are familiar with the area and you really don't need the exit-mileage information or you don't live around there and you have gps. I would liken it to food and gas service signs which are similarly becoming obsolete.
Some might say that. I'm just saying MassDOT should make up their minds on it, decide to or decide not to. Personally, I would like it to happen but I wouldn't have a huge problem with them keeping the current numbers. I do hope that they would continue with the plan to add numbers to MA-28 and MA-57, but it seems unlikely unless they decide to go for mileage-based.



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.