AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Northeast => Topic started by: roadman on October 28, 2015, 05:28:52 PM

Title: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on October 28, 2015, 05:28:52 PM
Adoption of milepost-based exit numbers in Massachusetts has been discussed as a sidebar in other topics pertaining to Massachusetts.  Because MassDOT has recently let a contract for the conversion process out for bids, I feel that further discussion of this topic deserves a dedicated thread.  As such, I'll start by cross-posting a comment I left on the Massachusetts thread earlier:

Specifications and detail sheets for the MassDOT statewide milepost exit numbering conversion project have just been posted on the Commonwealth of Massachusetts bidding site (as of Tuesday, October 27th):

https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-16-1030-0H100-0H002-00000005477&external=true&parentUrl=bid

Bid opening is scheduled for Tuesday, November 17, 2015.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on October 28, 2015, 07:36:08 PM
Some interesting notes from reviewing the contract:

• Massachusetts treating US-3 and MA-3 as the same route will actually have a tangible effect now, as both the expressway on the south shore and the expressway near lowell follow the same exit numbering system, beginning at 1 in Plymouth and proceeding to 91 near the New Hampshire border.

• The newly numbered Exit 50 on MA-2 near Concord is not included in the exit renumbering contract. This could potentially be problematic if one exit is not on the same numbering system as the rest of the road.

• The previously unnumbered exits on the freeway portions of MA-28 and MA-57 will now be numbered. All freeways that are part of a larger route (including US-6) will be numbered according to the overall length of the route, not the freeway.

• Another US-6 note: the Orleans rotary, which was numbered as Exit 13 N/S until two rounds of replacements ago, will remain unnumbered in the new contract (would have been Exits 90 A/B), as will the interchanges in Truro and Provincetown.

• The MA-128 freeway (after breaking from I-95 in Peabody) will be numbered according to the distance from the southern terminus in Canton. However, since I-95 will be numbered according to distance from the Rhode Island state line, the exits will appear to randomly start at Exit 37 and count up. Also no exits beyond the present Exit 12 will be numbered. Currently Grant Circle is assigned as Exit 11, and the at-grade intersections with MA-127 and MA-127A are assigned Exits 10 and 9. However, none of these three exit numbers are posted in the field under the current signing contract.

• Massachusetts has chosen to not fudge numbers to avoid Exit 0, they will instead be liberally adopting Exit 0, which comes as a surprise to me given their history of assigning the end of a road as Exit 1 under the sequential system. There will be many Exit 0s under the new contract.

• I-290 will finally have its own set of exit numbers, beginning with Exit 0 at I-90/I-395, instead of just using I-395's number set.

• Massachusetts will not be keeping numbers where the mile is only 1 number off from the sequential number. They will be renumbering everything except when the mile and the sequential number are an exact match.

• For suffixed exits, Massachusetts will place a space between the number and letter (34 B instead of 34B). This is a practice that started in the last several years and was first used on MA-24 when Exit 8B (labeled as 8 B) opened. It will be expanded to all suffixed exits. However the "formerly Exit XX" signs will reference the old exit without a space if it did not previously have one.

• The Mass Turnpike from the Allston/Brighton tolls east will be renumbered under this project.

• For some reason, Interstate 93 from current Exit 6 to current Exit 12 and is not included under this contract. Perhaps these numbers will be changed under a sign replacement deal like the Mass Turnpike.

• All of the signs in the Tip O'Neill tunnel are not included under this contract, however signs outside the tunnel for exits contained within it are included.

• Exits along the freeway portions of US-44, US-1, MA-1A and MA-99 will not receive exit numbering under this contract.

• Exits along the super-2 portions of US-44 and MA-88 will not receive exit numbering under this contract.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on October 28, 2015, 07:36:36 PM
Having thumbed through the documents (and given a heads-up on a FB post); MA will indeed be using Exit 0, but it's not consistently applied.

I-93's current Exits 1 through 5 will be future 0 through 4; personally, I would've left such alone (and saved some money)... especially since there's no changes for subsequent Exits 6 through 12.  Not to mention the very recent exit tab changes (from Exit 1 to Exits 1B-A) for the I-95 interchange in Canton.

However, I-95 current Exit 1 (partial-interchange w/US 1) at the RI State line will not become Exit 0 but current Exit 2A-B (MA 1A cloverleaf) will become Exit 1A-B.  Isn't having Exit X along with XA, XB no longer kosher with MUTCD/FHWA?

Further north, the Exit 23-24-25 (Recreation Rd./MA 30/I-90) will become Exit 39A-B-C respectively; however, MassDOT is repeating the same mistake it did when it renumbered this stretch some 27-28 years ago.  That mistake being they seem to be still numbering with respect to the southbound order of the ramps rather than the order of the actual roadway crossings. 

With MM-based exit numbering; the exit/interchange number is generally based on where the connecting road crosses the mainline corridor (in this case, I-95) not necessarily the location of the exit ramp(s).  In short, I-90 crosses I-95 south of MA 30; and the northbound ramp order reflects such (the southbound exit ramps do not).  That said, I-90 (current Exit 25/old Exit 50) should be new Exit 39B and MA 30 (current Exit 24/old Exit 51) should be Exit 39C; not the other way around.

The Lowell Connector's numbers will indeed change as well.  No application of Exit 0 here but there will now be Exits 1A-B-C-D-E-F with current Exits 5A-B-C becoming Exits 2A-B-C.

Now the big question: will there be addendums and/or change orders? 

When PA converted its exit numbers, the original plan was to have I-476's Exit 31 (NE Extension Lansdale interchange) become Exit 30 and I-95's Exits 1 though 3 were planned to be renumbered 0 through 2; but those particular changes did not happen.

Quote from: AMLNet49 on October 28, 2015, 07:36:08 PM- For suffixed exits, Massachusetts will place a space between the number and letter (34 B instead of 34B). This is a practice that started in the last several years and was first used on MA-24 when Exit 8B (labeled as 8 B) opened.
That's actually the MUTCD standard that's been around for a while and that MassDOT started recently adopting (as you mentioned).  The spacing is to avoid Exit XB being mistaken for Exit X8 at a quick glance.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SidS1045 on October 28, 2015, 10:44:55 PM
One thing I didn't see in the project specs (might have missed it, of course):  How long does MassDOT expect the "FORMERLY EXIT XX" signs to be left standing?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 28, 2015, 11:47:04 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 28, 2015, 07:36:36 PM
Having thumbed through the documents (and given a heads-up on a FB post); MA will indeed be using Exit 0, but it's not consistently applied.

I-93's current Exits 1 through 5 will be future 0 through 4; personally, I would've left such alone (and saved some money)... especially since there's no changes for subsequent Exits 6 through 12.  Not to mention the very recent exit tab changes (from Exit 1 to Exits 1B-A) for the I-95 interchange in Canton.

However, I-95 current Exit 1 (partial-interchange w/US 1) at the RI State line will not become Exit 0 but current Exit 2A-B (MA 1A cloverleaf) will become Exit 1A-B.  Isn't having Exit X along with XA, XB no longer kosher with MUTCD/FHWA?

Further north, the Exit 23-24-25 (Recreation Rd./MA 30/I-90) will become Exit 39A-B-C respectively; however, MassDOT is repeating the same mistake it did when it renumbered this stretch some 27-28 years ago.  That mistake being they seem to be still numbering with respect to the southbound order of the ramps rather than the order of the actual roadway crossings. 

With MM-based exit numbering; the exit/interchange number is generally based on where the connecting road crosses the mainline corridor (in this case, I-95) not necessarily the location of the exit ramp(s).  In short, I-90 crosses I-95 south of MA 30; and the northbound ramp order reflects such (the southbound exit ramps do not).  That said, I-90 (current Exit 25/old Exit 50) should be new Exit 39B and MA 30 (current Exit 24/old Exit 51) should be Exit 39C; not the other way around.

The Lowell Connector's numbers will indeed change as well.  No application of Exit 0 here but there will now be Exits 1A-B-C-D-E-F with current Exits 5A-B-C becoming Exits 2A-B-C.

Now the big question: will there be addendums and/or change orders? 

When PA converted its exit numbers, the original plan was to have I-476's Exit 31 (NE Extension Lansdale interchange) become Exit 30 and I-95's Exits 1 though 3 were planned to be renumbered 0 through 2; but those particular changes did not happen.

Quote from: AMLNet49 on October 28, 2015, 07:36:08 PM- For suffixed exits, Massachusetts will place a space between the number and letter (34 B instead of 34B). This is a practice that started in the last several years and was first used on MA-24 when Exit 8B (labeled as 8 B) opened.
That's actually the MUTCD standard that's been around for a while and that MassDOT started recently adopting (as you mentioned).  The spacing is to avoid Exit XB being mistaken for Exit X8 at a quick glance.
I agree with much of what was said. Seems MassDOT is making things a little more complicated number-wise than need be. For example I-95 near I-93 in Reading. Heading northbound the current two exits before I-93 northbound are 35 and 36 with I-93 being 37A/B. They want to renumber these as 53, 55A and 55B/C. Wouldn't 53, 54, 55A/B be less confusing? At the top end of MA 3 the last three exits northbound are 17, 19 and 20A/B. Southbound there's a combined ramp for Exits 19/18, then 17. MassDOT wants the numbers NB to be 40, 42A and 42B/C, SB it lists the combined ramp as 42A/41 (why the suffix SB?). Wouldn't it be easier to combine 18 and 19 as 41B and 41A, making NB 41, then 42A/B?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on October 29, 2015, 10:23:48 AM
Quote from: SidS1045 on October 28, 2015, 10:44:55 PM
One thing I didn't see in the project specs (might have missed it, of course):  How long does MassDOT expect the "FORMERLY EXIT XX" signs to be left standing?
The "Formerly Exit XX" signs will remain in place for at least two years after the new numbers are posted.  Removal of these signs after that time is not included in this contract, but will be done by District maintenance forces.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on October 29, 2015, 11:31:03 AM
QuoteFor some reason, Interstate 93 from current Exit 6 to current Exit 12 and is not included under this contract. Perhaps these numbers will be changed under a sign replacement deal like the Mass Turnpike

As explained in the detail sheets, the current exit numbers from Exit 6 to Exit 12 are being retained because the present sequential numbers match the adjacent mileposts at these locations.
QuoteAll of the signs in the Tip O'Neill tunnel are not included under this contract, however signs outside the tunnel for exits contained within it are included.

Signs in the O'Neill and WIlliams Tunnels will have their numbers converted under the pending MHS Tunnels overhead sign repair contract.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on October 29, 2015, 03:40:24 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 28, 2015, 11:47:04 PMSeems MassDOT is making things a little more complicated number-wise than need be. For example I-95 near I-93 in Reading. Heading northbound the current two exits before I-93 northbound are 35 and 36 with I-93 being 37A/B. They want to renumber these as 53, 55A and 55B/C. Wouldn't 53, 54, 55A/B be less confusing?
I was thinking the exact same thing.

I-95/US 3 Burlington interchange: the proposed exit number for I-95 along US 3 is Exits 70A-B; yet, MM 71 is just prior to the interchange (along C-D lane) along the I-95/US 3 multiplex. (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4778646,-71.2160056,3a,75y,292.16h,71.35t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMg_Vls_jlVMMHy993dJ5ag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)  It should be Exit 71A-B.

I-95/MA 128 Peabody interchange: the proposed exit number is 64; yet, MM 65 is located within the interchange itself (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5290937,-70.9768237,3a,75y,327.04h,83.78t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sJ2MvS8IolEkau69n3XQCSQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  IMHO, it should be Exit 65.

I-95/Centre St. Danvers interchange should be 68 not 67C since MM 68 is located just north of the Centre St. overpass and within the interchange.  Also, since this is a southbound only exit/entrance interchange and the MA 114 interchange (future Exit 67A-B) has only northbound exit ramps (but entrance ramps for both directions); assigning it a suffixed exit number just isn't right.

I-95/MA 62 Danvers (current Exit 49) & I-95/US 1 Danvers/Topsfield (current Exit 50) are palnned to change to Exit 69A and 69B respectively.  Why not just use Exit 69 for MA 62 and Exit 70 for US 1.  MM 70 is located within the US 1 interchange (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5955496,-70.9631052,3a,75y,0.36h,82.14t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9GOVrynsmIenaqy-kDOX6g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  Also, MA 62 is a northbound exit/southbound entrance interchange only; I-95 southbounders will only see signs for Exit 69B (US 1) but no 69A (MA 62).

Roadman, I'm sorry, but the project documents IMHO need to be resubmitted prior to bidding; there's way too many issues and even flat-out mistakes on something that should've been straight forward.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 31, 2015, 11:18:15 AM
It appears that the large number of suffixed exits is due to the way the exit numbers were assigned. From revising my interstate and US Route future exit numbers based on MassDOT mileposts for each exit and using the new MassDOT exit numbers, it appears they are using a 'round down' system where the number is assigned to the whole number on the milepost. Thus an exit at mile 1.20 or 1.99 is given the number 1. This contrasts with normal rounding where anything past .5 would be rounded up to the next whole number. Thus if you have exits at mileposts 1.1, 1.9 and 3, MassDOT would number them 1A, 1B and 3, as opposed to 1, 2 and 3.

You can check out the revised exit list here: http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/intexits.html (http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/intexits.html)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on October 31, 2015, 11:33:18 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 31, 2015, 11:18:15 AM
It appears that the large number of suffixed exits is due to the way the exit numbers were assigned. From revising my interstate and US Route future exit numbers based on MassDOT mileposts for each exit and using the new MassDOT exit numbers, it appears they are using a 'round down' system where the number is assigned to the whole number on the milepost. Thus an exit at mile 1.20 or 1.99 is given the number 1. This contrasts with normal rounding where anything past .5 would be rounded up to the next whole number. Thus if you have exits at mileposts 1.1, 1.9 and 3, MassDOT would number them 1A, 1B and 3, as opposed to 1, 2 and 3.
That's probably the case, but there's still some inconsistencies (Exit 0 or no Exit 0) in the documents plus no consideration seemed to be taken when renumbering partial-movement interchanges (see my above-examples regarding I-95's interchanges with MA 114, Centre St., MA 62 & US 1 in Danvers) so that there aren't any orphaned suffixed exit numbers.

Looking through the documents again, I noticed that no provision was made to place an exit tab (with the new numbers) on this BGS (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5495159,-70.9366086,3a,75y,200.9h,81.99t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDzxp6VAFHic_S43sL7v2jg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) along MA 128 southbound.

I'm assumming that this BGS was a match-in-kind for the original 1977-vintage one (though I believe the original sign stated the more-correct plural EXITS) that was probably damaged in an accident or vandalized.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on November 18, 2015, 07:23:58 PM
Bids for the exit re-numbering contract were opened on Tuesday, November 17th.  Liddell Brothers of Halifax (MA) is the apparent low responsible bidder.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 19, 2015, 10:47:07 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 18, 2015, 07:23:58 PM
Bids for the exit re-numbering contract were opened on Tuesday, November 17th.  Liddell Brothers of Halifax (MA) is the apparent low responsible bidder.
Will MassDOT be issuing a press release about the awarding of this contract or will they wait to issue many statements to specific local media before a particular route is re-numbered? Has there been any determination as to which route will be switched first? IMO I would start with MA 57, since that route is short and has no existing exit numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: spooky on November 20, 2015, 01:59:54 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on November 19, 2015, 10:47:07 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 18, 2015, 07:23:58 PM
Bids for the exit re-numbering contract were opened on Tuesday, November 17th.  Liddell Brothers of Halifax (MA) is the apparent low responsible bidder.
Will MassDOT be issuing a press release about the awarding of this contract or will they wait to issue many statements to specific local media before a particular route is re-numbered? Has there been any determination as to which route will be switched first? IMO I would start with MA 57, since that route is short and has no existing exit numbers.

I would hope that there are specific sequencing details in the contract.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2015, 05:08:00 PM
Which state will make the switch to milepost next?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on November 20, 2015, 08:04:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on November 19, 2015, 10:47:07 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 18, 2015, 07:23:58 PM
Bids for the exit re-numbering contract were opened on Tuesday, November 17th.  Liddell Brothers of Halifax (MA) is the apparent low responsible bidder.
Will MassDOT be issuing a press release about the awarding of this contract or will they wait to issue many statements to specific local media before a particular route is re-numbered? Has there been any determination as to which route will be switched first? IMO I would start with MA 57, since that route is short and has no existing exit numbers.
Note that the contract has not yet been formally awarded to Liddell (which is why I stated "apparent low responsible bidder" in my previous post).  Therefore, I personally doubt that MassDOT will issue a formal press release about contract award until Liddell actually receives their notice to proceed.  As for how MassDOT's PR folks intend to handle public notification of this work as it progresses, I do not know how that will happen at this time and, thus, cannot speak to (or speculate on) that aspect of the project.

As far as scheduling of which routes will be done in what sequence, I strongly suspect that this will be based on location and length of routes.  Nevertheless, both the Contractor's overall schedule and sequence of installation (which is a subset of the overall schedule) will have to be reviewed and approved by MassDOT well before they send crews out to actually install overlays and signs - this will almost certainly be a topic of discussion at the pre-construction conference for the contract.

I could not find this specifically stated in the contract special provisions or detail sheets, however, it is my understanding that it will be a condition of approval of the Contractor's overall schedule and sequence of installation that any given individual route(s) will be re-numbered completely before work on any other route(s) can be started - this is obviously to minimize the amount of time when 'partial' numbers are in place on any given route.  When you compare the quantities in the contract traffic control bid items (850.xxx series items in the bid list) against the total contract duration, they appear to reflect the fact that the Contractor will need to have multiple crews working on one or more routes at the same time. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on November 20, 2015, 10:16:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2015, 05:08:00 PM
Which state will make the switch to milepost next?

Depends on if New York's State Assembly actually votes on the conversion bill that the senate has passed repeatedly. Even with that, I'd lean toward New York. I don't know what NYSDOT has planned, but the fact that they gave milepost exit numbers to a previously-unnumbered parkway may mean something.

Of the states that are still sequential and have not begun conversion, New York is really the only one to be putting in true distance-based numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on November 21, 2015, 01:15:13 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2015, 10:16:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2015, 05:08:00 PM
Which state will make the switch to milepost next?

Depends on if New York's State Assembly actually votes on the conversion bill that the senate has passed repeatedly. Even with that, I'd lean toward New York. I don't know what NYSDOT has planned, but the fact that they gave milepost exit numbers to a previously-unnumbered parkway may mean something.

Of the states that are still sequential and have not begun conversion, New York is really the only one to be putting in true distance-based numbers.
I thought NY began conversion on I-781, though the roadway may not have been open when they switched. But I know they began conversion on I-95 and I-278 - once, years ago.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on November 22, 2015, 12:18:36 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 21, 2015, 01:15:13 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2015, 10:16:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2015, 05:08:00 PM
Which state will make the switch to milepost next?

Depends on if New York's State Assembly actually votes on the conversion bill that the senate has passed repeatedly. Even with that, I'd lean toward New York. I don't know what NYSDOT has planned, but the fact that they gave milepost exit numbers to a previously-unnumbered parkway may mean something.

Of the states that are still sequential and have not begun conversion, New York is really the only one to be putting in true distance-based numbers.
I thought NY began conversion on I-781, though the roadway may not have been open when they switched. But I know they began conversion on I-95 and I-278 - once, years ago.

Quote from: Alps on November 21, 2015, 01:15:13 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2015, 10:16:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2015, 05:08:00 PM
Which state will make the switch to milepost next?

Depends on if New York's State Assembly actually votes on the conversion bill that the senate has passed repeatedly. Even with that, I'd lean toward New York. I don't know what NYSDOT has planned, but the fact that they gave milepost exit numbers to a previously-unnumbered parkway may mean something.

Of the states that are still sequential and have not begun conversion, New York is really the only one to be putting in true distance-based numbers.
I thought NY began conversion on I-781, though the roadway may not have been open when they switched. But I know they began conversion on I-95 and I-278 - once, years ago.

I'm thinking Hell will freeze over before we see real distance-based numbers on the Thruway, I-81, and the Northway, for example.  Then again, I'd love to be proven wrong.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: machias on November 22, 2015, 12:18:11 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 22, 2015, 12:18:36 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 21, 2015, 01:15:13 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2015, 10:16:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2015, 05:08:00 PM
Which state will make the switch to milepost next?

Depends on if New York's State Assembly actually votes on the conversion bill that the senate has passed repeatedly. Even with that, I'd lean toward New York. I don't know what NYSDOT has planned, but the fact that they gave milepost exit numbers to a previously-unnumbered parkway may mean something.

Of the states that are still sequential and have not begun conversion, New York is really the only one to be putting in true distance-based numbers.
I thought NY began conversion on I-781, though the roadway may not have been open when they switched. But I know they began conversion on I-95 and I-278 - once, years ago.

Quote from: Alps on November 21, 2015, 01:15:13 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2015, 10:16:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2015, 05:08:00 PM
Which state will make the switch to milepost next?

Depends on if New York's State Assembly actually votes on the conversion bill that the senate has passed repeatedly. Even with that, I'd lean toward New York. I don't know what NYSDOT has planned, but the fact that they gave milepost exit numbers to a previously-unnumbered parkway may mean something.

Of the states that are still sequential and have not begun conversion, New York is really the only one to be putting in true distance-based numbers.
I thought NY began conversion on I-781, though the roadway may not have been open when they switched. But I know they began conversion on I-95 and I-278 - once, years ago.

I'm thinking Hell will freeze over before we see real distance-based numbers on the Thruway, I-81, and the Northway, for example.  Then again, I'd love to be proven wrong.

I think you're going to see distance-based numbers on the NYSDOT maintained roadways sooner than the Thruway. If I-81 through Syracuse gets ripped down with I-81 rerouted around the city, I'd think that would be a good time to look at renumbering the area.

One thing that frustrates me is that Region 5 replaced every guide panel on NY Route 400 a year or two ago and they didn't take the opportunity to number the interchanges, when the 400 is almost twice as long as I-290 with more exits. It's that "replace in kind" mentality that keeps NYSDOT lagging behind the national standards.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on November 22, 2015, 01:21:24 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 22, 2015, 12:18:11 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 22, 2015, 12:18:36 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 21, 2015, 01:15:13 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2015, 10:16:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2015, 05:08:00 PM
Which state will make the switch to milepost next?

Depends on if New York's State Assembly actually votes on the conversion bill that the senate has passed repeatedly. Even with that, I'd lean toward New York. I don't know what NYSDOT has planned, but the fact that they gave milepost exit numbers to a previously-unnumbered parkway may mean something.

Of the states that are still sequential and have not begun conversion, New York is really the only one to be putting in true distance-based numbers.
I thought NY began conversion on I-781, though the roadway may not have been open when they switched. But I know they began conversion on I-95 and I-278 - once, years ago.

Quote from: Alps on November 21, 2015, 01:15:13 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2015, 10:16:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2015, 05:08:00 PM
Which state will make the switch to milepost next?

Depends on if New York's State Assembly actually votes on the conversion bill that the senate has passed repeatedly. Even with that, I'd lean toward New York. I don't know what NYSDOT has planned, but the fact that they gave milepost exit numbers to a previously-unnumbered parkway may mean something.

Of the states that are still sequential and have not begun conversion, New York is really the only one to be putting in true distance-based numbers.
I thought NY began conversion on I-781, though the roadway may not have been open when they switched. But I know they began conversion on I-95 and I-278 - once, years ago.

I'm thinking Hell will freeze over before we see real distance-based numbers on the Thruway, I-81, and the Northway, for example.  Then again, I'd love to be proven wrong.

I think you're going to see distance-based numbers on the NYSDOT maintained roadways sooner than the Thruway. If I-81 through Syracuse gets ripped down with I-81 rerouted around the city, I'd think that would be a good time to look at renumbering the area.

One thing that frustrates me is that Region 5 replaced every guide panel on NY Route 400 a year or two ago and they didn't take the opportunity to number the interchanges, when the 400 is almost twice as long as I-290 with more exits. It's that "replace in kind" mentality that keeps NYSDOT lagging behind the national standards.

They did the same for NY 33. Granted, Region 5 is always a few years behind everyone else.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman65 on November 22, 2015, 02:02:34 PM
Nobody is proactive anymore when it comes to roads.

Yesterday, I was talking about roads with non road geeks, and some remember how states used to keep up with roads and had no problem eliminating potholes and such.  In fact sections of roads used to be removed and it was not just the "fill" they do nowadays, the repaired what caused them instead of placing a band aid on it!

Even my dad remembered that PA used to be one of the best roads in the nation as they always were on top of them.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on November 22, 2015, 02:21:24 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on November 22, 2015, 02:02:34 PM
Even my dad remembered that PA used to be one of the best roads in the nation as they always were on top of them.

How long ago was that? The roads have sucked even during most of the lives of my parents.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on November 22, 2015, 02:24:09 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 21, 2015, 01:15:13 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2015, 10:16:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2015, 05:08:00 PM
Which state will make the switch to milepost next?

Depends on if New York's State Assembly actually votes on the conversion bill that the senate has passed repeatedly. Even with that, I'd lean toward New York. I don't know what NYSDOT has planned, but the fact that they gave milepost exit numbers to a previously-unnumbered parkway may mean something.

Of the states that are still sequential and have not begun conversion, New York is really the only one to be putting in true distance-based numbers.
I thought NY began conversion on I-781, though the roadway may not have been open when they switched. But I know they began conversion on I-95 and I-278 - once, years ago.
The plans for I-781 specified sequential but converted to mile-based before it opened.  Interestingly, the exit number for Fort Drum was dropped when this happened.

There were mile-based numbers on I-278?

Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2015, 10:16:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2015, 05:08:00 PM
Which state will make the switch to milepost next?

Depends on if New York's State Assembly actually votes on the conversion bill that the senate has passed repeatedly. Even with that, I'd lean toward New York. I don't know what NYSDOT has planned, but the fact that they gave milepost exit numbers to a previously-unnumbered parkway may mean something.

Of the states that are still sequential and have not begun conversion, New York is really the only one to be putting in true distance-based numbers.
It's died in Assembly committee every time.  I suspect the committee leader just likes sequential and doesn't want to see NY switch.

Quote from: upstatenyroads on November 22, 2015, 12:18:11 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 22, 2015, 12:18:36 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 21, 2015, 01:15:13 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2015, 10:16:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2015, 05:08:00 PM
Which state will make the switch to milepost next?

Depends on if New York's State Assembly actually votes on the conversion bill that the senate has passed repeatedly. Even with that, I'd lean toward New York. I don't know what NYSDOT has planned, but the fact that they gave milepost exit numbers to a previously-unnumbered parkway may mean something.

Of the states that are still sequential and have not begun conversion, New York is really the only one to be putting in true distance-based numbers.
I thought NY began conversion on I-781, though the roadway may not have been open when they switched. But I know they began conversion on I-95 and I-278 - once, years ago.

Quote from: Alps on November 21, 2015, 01:15:13 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 20, 2015, 10:16:35 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2015, 05:08:00 PM
Which state will make the switch to milepost next?

Depends on if New York's State Assembly actually votes on the conversion bill that the senate has passed repeatedly. Even with that, I'd lean toward New York. I don't know what NYSDOT has planned, but the fact that they gave milepost exit numbers to a previously-unnumbered parkway may mean something.

Of the states that are still sequential and have not begun conversion, New York is really the only one to be putting in true distance-based numbers.
I thought NY began conversion on I-781, though the roadway may not have been open when they switched. But I know they began conversion on I-95 and I-278 - once, years ago.

I'm thinking Hell will freeze over before we see real distance-based numbers on the Thruway, I-81, and the Northway, for example.  Then again, I'd love to be proven wrong.

I think you're going to see distance-based numbers on the NYSDOT maintained roadways sooner than the Thruway. If I-81 through Syracuse gets ripped down with I-81 rerouted around the city, I'd think that would be a good time to look at renumbering the area.
I would think it would be mandatory, since that would force a renumbering of I-81's mileage and exits north of Syracuse if it happened, regardless of whether sequential was still allowed or not.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman65 on November 22, 2015, 02:25:32 PM
 To answer you cl it was very long ago.  Like long before I was even born.  My dad used to say when we encountered potholes on I-81 north of Scranton "Oh what happened to Pennsylvania, as they were always great at taking care of their roads?"  This was when I was real young. 

Being my dad graduated in 1942, I would have to say circa 40's and 50's.  Maybe even 1960's, as when I was growing up it was in the 1970's and that, from memory, I can tell you how bad PA was in their roads especially with concrete roads with asphalt patches on them making it more bumpy to drive on them.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: noelbotevera on November 22, 2015, 03:41:39 PM
Why doesn't all of New England just adopt mile based exit numbering? 40+ states have done this, why are the other ten or so still behind?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on November 22, 2015, 04:01:20 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 22, 2015, 03:41:39 PM
Why doesn't all of New England just adopt mile based exit numbering? 40+ states have done this, why are the other ten or so still behind?

Most of those states started with distance-based numbering. Unlike the rest of the country, exit numbers in the northeast have existed for nearly 100 years (if not more), long before distance-based schemes existed. A changeover costs a lot of money that is typically better put toward improvements. FHWA is funding the current changeover effort, speeding the process along.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on November 22, 2015, 04:04:08 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 22, 2015, 04:01:20 PM
Unlike the rest of the country, exit numbers in the northeast have existed for nearly 100 years (if not more), long before distance-based schemes existed.

I had no idea that exit numbers existed before route numbers. Can you give me a link to more information about this?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: NE2 on November 22, 2015, 05:09:17 PM
The earliest known exit numbers were on the NYC parkways in 1938.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Pete from Boston on November 22, 2015, 05:27:04 PM

Quote from: noelbotevera on November 22, 2015, 03:41:39 PM
Why doesn't all of New England just adopt mile based exit numbering? 40+ states have done this, why are the other ten or so still behind?

Nobody here ever says "It's a shame we don't have mileage-based exit numbers."

I promise there will be a big "Why are we spending money on this?" reaction.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on November 22, 2015, 05:37:39 PM
People in New England (well southern New England — CT, RI, MA) do not generally measure trips in distance but rather in time. "How far is it from here?" "About 20 minutes". This is because knowing the mileage doesn't always tell you even close to how much time you have to your destination, so people just don't pay attention to it.

Now this shouldn't preclude the states from changing. There are significant uses for it in northern Connecticut, western Mass, and all of New Hampshire and Vermont.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Duke87 on November 22, 2015, 06:50:31 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 22, 2015, 03:41:39 PM
Why doesn't all of New England just adopt mile based exit numbering? 40+ states have done this, why are the other ten or so still behind?

What needs to be appreciated is that while it is true today that 40+ states use mile-based exit numbering, this didn't happen overnight. It has taken more than half a century for distance based exit numbers to go from being a new idea to being the predominant way of doing things. Indeed, your own state of Pennsylvania only switched in 2001, decades after many other states had.

Changing signs, even if you only install greenouts, costs money, and a state needs to justify the expense of doing this. It can't just be done willy-nilly because someone wishes it so.

Also bear in mind that while FHWA may have reached the conclusion that distance based numbering is the way to go, this viewpoint is hardly gospel. Many jurisdictions outside of the US use sequential numbering and have no intention of switching. And while us roadgeeks may generally love distance based numbers and want to see them everywhere, the rest of the general public is not necessarily going to see it the same way.

As for "what's taking the remaining states so long?", well, there are varying factors at play here. New England is somewhat geographically isolated from the rest of the US and has somewhat of its own culture where they do more things differently than just exit numbers. As has been pointed out, people in New England tend to measure the length of trips in time, not distance ("this is an hour north of that"). The apparent benefit of exit numbers matching miles drops when people aren't so much paying attention to the miles.
The geographic isolation of New England also breeds somewhat of an isolationist mindset, so you get a lot of sentiment along the lines of "what's wrong with our exit numbers? Why should we have to spend our money to change them because people in other parts of the country don't like them?"

New York, meanwhile, has an ego that prevents it from adopting things which were invented elsewhere. And generally has a culture of not being cooperative. This is the state that only begrudgingly accepted the US highway system and to this day doesn't really show it much respect.

And Delaware... well, Delaware's sequentially numbered freeways are short enough that no one really notices. The fact that I-95 has no exit 2 but multiple exit 5s even helps create an illusion that the numbers are distance based. Indeed, it's very nearly an exit every two miles - if you took every existing number and simply doubled it, you'd have a pretty good approximation of mile-based numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bzakharin on November 22, 2015, 07:13:48 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on November 22, 2015, 06:50:31 PM
And Delaware... well, Delaware's sequentially numbered freeways are short enough that no one really notices. The fact that I-95 has no exit 2 but multiple exit 5s even helps create an illusion that the numbers are distance based. Indeed, it's very nearly an exit every two miles - if you took every existing number and simply doubled it, you'd have a pretty good approximation of mile-based numbers.
Got stuck in a much longer traffic jam than I thought recently on I-95 when I thought those exits were mile-based.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on November 22, 2015, 08:35:04 PM
There are problems with the numbers they plan on, as mentioned above, including...

I-95 Exit 50 for US 1 becoming 69B while MA 62, northbound only, is 69A
I-93 Exits 37A-B becoming 55B-C because of 55A (formerly 36) just to the south
I-93 Exits 2-5 all decreasing by 1

These are all unnecessary....as noted above by others, 69-70; 54-55A-55B; 0-2-3-4-5 would be reasonable sequences in the places mentioned.  They could save a lot of trouble by tweaking.  I-93's northern interchange with I-95 being a B-C instead of an A-B is downright silly, especially when the existing numbers involve 37C to the north--the A-B-C sequence shifting south one notch could be very confusing and a system interchange like this should get preference in numbering and suffixing and get its own A-B suffixes, especially when 54 is available for the next exit south.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 23, 2015, 08:42:18 AM
After reviewing the I-95 exit numbers a tad closer; I would also recommend tweaking the I-95 exit numbers from MA 16 to MA 30 to cut down on the overload of suffixes (38A through D) and orphaned northbound suffix (since there's only one exit ramp for MA 16 off I-95 northbound, 38B is skipped). 

Change MA 16 (current 21B-A southbound/21 northbound) to Exit 37B-A southbound/37 northbound (the down adjustment by 1 mile is justified here since MA 9 (current Exits 20A-B) will become Exits 36A-B).

Change Grove St. (current Exit 22) to Exit 38A northbound/38 southbound.

Change the northbound-only Recreation Rd. (current Exit 23) to Exit 38B.

Change I-90/Mass Pike (current Exit 25) to Exit 39A*.

Change MA 30 (current Exit 24) to Exit 39B*.

*I-90 crosses I-95 south of MA 30.  The I-95/90/MA 30 ramp order scenario is very similar to CT's I-84/691/CT 322 ramp order scenario.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on November 23, 2015, 09:31:43 AM
Quote from: NE2 on November 22, 2015, 05:09:17 PM
The earliest known exit numbers were on the NYC parkways in 1938.

You sure it wasn't before then? I thought the Southern State had numbers when it opened in the 20s.

Quote from: Duke87 on November 22, 2015, 06:50:31 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 22, 2015, 03:41:39 PM
Why doesn't all of New England just adopt mile based exit numbering? 40+ states have done this, why are the other ten or so still behind?

What needs to be appreciated is that while it is true today that 40+ states use mile-based exit numbering, this didn't happen overnight. It has taken more than half a century for distance based exit numbers to go from being a new idea to being the predominant way of doing things. Indeed, your own state of Pennsylvania only switched in 2001, decades after many other states had.

Changing signs, even if you only install greenouts, costs money, and a state needs to justify the expense of doing this. It can't just be done willy-nilly because someone wishes it so.

Also bear in mind that while FHWA may have reached the conclusion that distance based numbering is the way to go, this viewpoint is hardly gospel. Many jurisdictions outside of the US use sequential numbering and have no intention of switching. And while us roadgeeks may generally love distance based numbers and want to see them everywhere, the rest of the general public is not necessarily going to see it the same way.

As for "what's taking the remaining states so long?", well, there are varying factors at play here. New England is somewhat geographically isolated from the rest of the US and has somewhat of its own culture where they do more things differently than just exit numbers. As has been pointed out, people in New England tend to measure the length of trips in time, not distance ("this is an hour north of that"). The apparent benefit of exit numbers matching miles drops when people aren't so much paying attention to the miles.
The geographic isolation of New England also breeds somewhat of an isolationist mindset, so you get a lot of sentiment along the lines of "what's wrong with our exit numbers? Why should we have to spend our money to change them because people in other parts of the country don't like them?"

New York, meanwhile, has an ego that prevents it from adopting things which were invented elsewhere. And generally has a culture of not being cooperative. This is the state that only begrudgingly accepted the US highway system and to this day doesn't really show it much respect.

New York has been using them off and on since the 70s. They switched to using them for everything a few years back. They just aren't converting things. And all it will take for them to start converting is for a bill to get to the assembly floor. If the feds offered money, New York would convert in a heartbeat.

I agree completely about the time thing. East of approximately Utica, everything is time. Distance really doesn't mean crap because you learn to expect traffic. Long Island might be 120 miles long, but you'd be hard-pressed to get from the Midtown Tunnel to Montauk Point in much under 4 hours regardless of what Google Maps tells you.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: NE2 on November 23, 2015, 11:06:11 AM
Quote from: cl94 on November 23, 2015, 09:31:43 AM
Quote from: NE2 on November 22, 2015, 05:09:17 PM
The earliest known exit numbers were on the NYC parkways in 1938.

You sure it wasn't before then? I thought the Southern State had numbers when it opened in the 20s.
No, I'm not sure. Do you have any evidence that it had them?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on November 23, 2015, 11:40:41 AM
QuoteIf the feds offered money, New York would convert in a heartbeat.

Both MA and NH are being allowed to use Federal HSIP money for their exit number conversions - perhaps somebody should tell this to NYSDOT and NYSTA (sure, they have to request the funds, but the money should be there).

Note that HSIP money was used for the signing conversion from 'Fast Lane' to E-ZPass on the MassPike/I-90 in 2010, so the prescedent for using HSIP money for work on a toll road has been established.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on November 23, 2015, 01:44:22 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 23, 2015, 11:40:41 AM
QuoteIf the feds offered money, New York would convert in a heartbeat.

Both MA and NH are being allowed to use Federal HSIP money for their exit number conversions - perhaps somebody should tell this to NYSDOT and NYSTA (sure, they have to request the funds, but the money should be there).


What's your source on this?  Our FHWA Division would never let this fly.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on November 23, 2015, 02:02:43 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 23, 2015, 11:40:41 AM
QuoteIf the feds offered money, New York would convert in a heartbeat.

Both MA and NH are being allowed to use Federal HSIP money for their exit number conversions - perhaps somebody should tell this to NYSDOT and NYSTA (sure, they have to request the funds, but the money should be there).

Note that HSIP money was used for the signing conversion from 'Fast Lane' to E-ZPass on the MassPike/I-90 in 2010, so the prescedent for using HSIP money for work on a toll road has been established.

Also keep in mind that the MassPike is under MassDOT whereas NYSTA is its own separate agency.  I also imagine NYSDOT would want to wait on a statewide conversion for the final alternative selection for the I-81 project in Syracuse.  No sense in changing the numbers twice if the boulevard is selected.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on November 23, 2015, 02:10:58 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 23, 2015, 01:44:22 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 23, 2015, 11:40:41 AM
QuoteIf the feds offered money, New York would convert in a heartbeat.

Both MA and NH are being allowed to use Federal HSIP money for their exit number conversions - perhaps somebody should tell this to NYSDOT and NYSTA (sure, they have to request the funds, but the money should be there).


What's your source on this?  Our FHWA Division would never let this fly.
I've seen the actual letter from FHWA Massachusetts Division to MassDOT approving use of HSIP money for the Massachusetts exit numbering conversion.  The contract which is in the process of being awarded reflects this, as the project has a Federal Aid Number - HSIP-002S(874)X.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on November 23, 2015, 02:11:56 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 23, 2015, 02:02:43 PM

Also keep in mind that the MassPike is under MassDOT whereas NYSTA is its own separate agency.  I also imagine NYSDOT would want to wait on a statewide conversion for the final alternative selection for the I-81 project in Syracuse.  No sense in changing the numbers twice if the boulevard is selected.

Both good points.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on November 23, 2015, 03:03:01 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 23, 2015, 02:10:58 PM
Quote from: Rothman on November 23, 2015, 01:44:22 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 23, 2015, 11:40:41 AM
QuoteIf the feds offered money, New York would convert in a heartbeat.

Both MA and NH are being allowed to use Federal HSIP money for their exit number conversions - perhaps somebody should tell this to NYSDOT and NYSTA (sure, they have to request the funds, but the money should be there).


What's your source on this?  Our FHWA Division would never let this fly.
I've seen the actual letter from FHWA Massachusetts Division to MassDOT approving use of HSIP money for the Massachusetts exit numbering conversion.  The contract which is in the process of being awarded reflects this, as the project has a Federal Aid Number - HSIP-002S(874)X.

Excellent.  I'll check FMIS.

ETA:  I've checked FMIS and see the authorization with HSIP.  This made my day. :>
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: spooky on November 25, 2015, 06:51:16 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 22, 2015, 03:41:39 PM
Why doesn't all of New England just adopt mile based exit numbering? 40+ states have done this, why are the other ten or so still behind?

There are six states in New England. two of them already have mile based exit numbering, while a third is the very topic of this thread.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on November 25, 2015, 08:20:38 AM
Only Maine currently is totally renumbered in New England. Massachusetts is changing at some indeterminate point in 2016, Connecticut began changing in 2015 though there is no timetable to renumber all of the roads, RI-NH-VT haven't decided to renumber. So there is only one state with all mile-based, and by early 2017 there should be two.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: southshore720 on November 25, 2015, 11:25:39 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 23, 2015, 08:42:18 AM
After reviewing the I-95 exit numbers a tad closer; I would also recommend tweaking the I-95 exit numbers from MA 16 to MA 30 to cut down on the overload of suffixes (38A through D) and orphaned northbound suffix (since there's only one exit ramp for MA 16 off I-95 northbound, 38B is skipped). 

Change MA 16 (current 21B-A southbound/21 northbound) to Exit 37B-A southbound/37 northbound (the down adjustment by 1 mile is justified here since MA 9 (current Exits 20A-B) will become Exits 36A-B).

Change Grove St. (current Exit 22) to Exit 38A northbound/38 southbound.

Change the northbound-only Recreation Rd. (current Exit 23) to Exit 38B.

Change I-90/Mass Pike (current Exit 25) to Exit 39A*.

Change MA 30 (current Exit 24) to Exit 39B*.

*I-90 crosses I-95 south of MA 30.  The I-95/90/MA 30 ramp order scenario is very similar to CT's I-84/691/CT 322 ramp order scenario.

Are the proposed exit numbers in the plans set in stone, or is there room for negotiation/correction based upon all of your suggestions?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on November 25, 2015, 11:47:32 AM
Quote from: southshore720 on November 25, 2015, 11:25:39 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 23, 2015, 08:42:18 AM
After reviewing the I-95 exit numbers a tad closer; I would also recommend tweaking the I-95 exit numbers from MA 16 to MA 30 to cut down on the overload of suffixes (38A through D) and orphaned northbound suffix (since there's only one exit ramp for MA 16 off I-95 northbound, 38B is skipped). 

Change MA 16 (current 21B-A southbound/21 northbound) to Exit 37B-A southbound/37 northbound (the down adjustment by 1 mile is justified here since MA 9 (current Exits 20A-B) will become Exits 36A-B).

Change Grove St. (current Exit 22) to Exit 38A northbound/38 southbound.

Change the northbound-only Recreation Rd. (current Exit 23) to Exit 38B.

Change I-90/Mass Pike (current Exit 25) to Exit 39A*.

Change MA 30 (current Exit 24) to Exit 39B*.

*I-90 crosses I-95 south of MA 30.  The I-95/90/MA 30 ramp order scenario is very similar to CT's I-84/691/CT 322 ramp order scenario.

Are the proposed exit numbers in the plans set in stone, or is there room for negotiation/correction based upon all of your suggestions?
The final numbers won't be set in stone until the overlays and/or new exit tabs are actually fabricated.  So there is room for correction here.

I understand that MassDOT is currently working on making revisions to some of the numbers (thanks to folks both within and outside of MassDOT - including the suggestions mentioned by AA Roads members), and this revised information will be provided to the Contractor at the pre-construction conference for this project.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 28, 2015, 01:04:09 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 25, 2015, 11:47:32 AM
Quote from: southshore720 on November 25, 2015, 11:25:39 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 23, 2015, 08:42:18 AM
After reviewing the I-95 exit numbers a tad closer; I would also recommend tweaking the I-95 exit numbers from MA 16 to MA 30 to cut down on the overload of suffixes (38A through D) and orphaned northbound suffix (since there's only one exit ramp for MA 16 off I-95 northbound, 38B is skipped). 

Change MA 16 (current 21B-A southbound/21 northbound) to Exit 37B-A southbound/37 northbound (the down adjustment by 1 mile is justified here since MA 9 (current Exits 20A-B) will become Exits 36A-B).

Change Grove St. (current Exit 22) to Exit 38A northbound/38 southbound.

Change the northbound-only Recreation Rd. (current Exit 23) to Exit 38B.

Change I-90/Mass Pike (current Exit 25) to Exit 39A*.

Change MA 30 (current Exit 24) to Exit 39B*.

*I-90 crosses I-95 south of MA 30.  The I-95/90/MA 30 ramp order scenario is very similar to CT's I-84/691/CT 322 ramp order scenario.

Are the proposed exit numbers in the plans set in stone, or is there room for negotiation/correction based upon all of your suggestions?
The final numbers won't be set in stone until the overlays and/or new exit tabs are actually fabricated.  So there is room for correction here.

I understand that MassDOT is currently working on making revisions to some of the numbers (thanks to folks both within and outside of MassDOT - including the suggestions mentioned by AA Roads members), and this revised information will be provided to the Contractor at the pre-construction conference for this project.
Good to hear that some revisions are possible. I have a couple more suggestions, not previously posted in this thread, but possibly brought up by others:
1. The eastern terminus of I-84 at the Mass Pike. The ramps have never had exit numbers, and are not given any proposed numbers is the sign summary list. Given the removal of the toll booths in the upcoming year, however, wouldn't it make sense to provide numbers to be consistent with other interstate termini in the state, such as with I-93?
2. The southern terminus of MA 3. In this case there are existing exit numbers for US 6, but there are no proposed numbers for this exit in the sign summary sheet document. While it may make some sense to not sign the US 6 West 'exit' since its simply a continuation of MA 3 as a ramp merging before the bridge, doesn't it make sense to number US 6 West, since the exit ramp is from MA 3 before it ends? To be consistent an Exit 0 tab could be used here.
3. Checking the sign summary and mounting summary lists for inconsistent information. In some cases there are differences in the proposed numbers for the same exits. For example, for MA 3. The summary sheet lists the exits as 42 B and C. The mounting summary has these exits as 42 A and B.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: KEVIN_224 on November 28, 2015, 10:37:42 PM
If the toll booths were removed in Sturbridge, how would the last ramps be signed?

Exit 8A - I-90 | Mass Pike EAST - Worcester/Boston
Exit 8B - I-90 | Mass Pike WEST - Springfield/Albany, NY

Of course they could also be signed as Exit 4A/4B without any mileage conversion!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Kacie Jane on November 29, 2015, 12:37:16 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 22, 2015, 03:41:39 PM
Why doesn't all of New England just adopt mile based exit numbering? 40+ states have done this, why are the other ten or so still behind?

Really it depends on your perspective and your definition of "behind".  Most of the 40+ states you're talking about (not all, but I'm pretty sure most) have had mileage based numbers from the beginning because they didn't number their exits (or have exits to number) until much later, after mileage based became the standard. Why were they so behind?

Personally, I do prefer mileage based numbers, but I also understand why the New England states are in no huge rush to change if sequential numbers have been working for them for 40-80 years.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 30, 2015, 12:54:37 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on November 28, 2015, 10:37:42 PM
If the toll booths were removed in Sturbridge, how would the last ramps be signed?

Exit 8A - I-90 | Mass Pike EAST - Worcester/Boston
Exit 8B - I-90 | Mass Pike WEST - Springfield/Albany, NY

Of course they could also be signed as Exit 4A/4B without any mileage conversion!
There's no MM 8 along I-84, (US 20, current Exits 3A-B are slated to become Exits 6A-B).  I-84's eastern terminus with I-90 would be assigned Exits 7A-B, probably after AET is adopted and the tollbooths are removed.

Quote from: roadman on November 25, 2015, 11:47:32 AMThe final numbers won't be set in stone until the overlays and/or new exit tabs are actually fabricated.  So there is room for correction here.

I understand that MassDOT is currently working on making revisions to some of the numbers (thanks to folks both within and outside of MassDOT - including the suggestions mentioned by AA Roads members), and this revised information will be provided to the Contractor at the pre-construction conference for this project.
Good to know.  IMHO, the biggest renumbering issue(s) here is to have Exit 0 or not have Exit 0 for the first interchange situated between MM 0 and MM 1; or should termini even have exit numbers at all? 

MassDOT should adopt one of the following approaches and consistently apply such for every highway that will have exit numbers (at present, there's some inconstencies in the listed documents):

1.  Assign Exit 1 to an interchange or terminus that's located between MM 0 and MM 1.

2.  Assign Exit 0 to an interchange or terminus that's located between MM 0 and MM 1.

Additionally, should MassDOT decide not to assign exit numbers for termini for this conversion; such an approach would be an modified version of approach #2.

The other-listed issue involved either unnecessary suffixing or creating orphaned suffixed exit numbers in areas where there are absolutely no plans (at least not in our lifetimes, anyway) to build additional interchanges between existing interchanges.  Examples: I-95 between MA 38 and I-93 in Woburn/Reading (the Washington St. interchange can become Exit 54 despite it being located at MM 55 so that the I-93 cloverleaf can maintain its current A-B directional suffixes (55A-B for the current 37A-B) and I-95 between MA 9 and MA 16 in Newton (MA 16 can be Exit 37/37B-A despite it being located at MM 38, such allows for a cleaner approach to the subsequent interchange numbering for Grove St., Recreation Rd and even I-90 & MA 30).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 16, 2015, 02:50:50 PM
The Worcester Telegram posted an article a couple days ago talking about the I-395 exit numbering changes in CT. It is also the first article that talks about MA starting to change exit numbers next year. The writer got this information from an FHWA spokesman and includes a sentence that their call to MassDOT for comment was never returned. Perhaps they don't know the right people to contact? The article:
http://www.telegram.com/article/20151212/NEWS/151219726 (http://www.telegram.com/article/20151212/NEWS/151219726)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Henry on December 17, 2015, 11:53:07 AM
I find it odd that CT is renumbering the exits on I-395, but none of its other Interstates! What gives?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on December 17, 2015, 11:55:10 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 16, 2015, 02:50:50 PM
The Worcester Telegram posted an article a couple days ago talking about the I-395 exit numbering changes in CT. It is also the first article that talks about MA starting to change exit numbers next year. The writer got this information from an FHWA spokesman and includes a sentence that their call to MassDOT for comment was never returned. Perhaps they don't know the right people to contact? The article:
http://www.telegram.com/article/20151212/NEWS/151219726 (http://www.telegram.com/article/20151212/NEWS/151219726)

QuoteMichael Verseckes, spokesman for the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, did not reply to several emails and phone calls requesting information.

Sounds like they had the right person.  But they need to lose the "Wahh wahh wahh - they didn't call us back before our arbitrary deadline" attitude - a pet peeve of mine with the media.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on December 17, 2015, 11:58:57 AM
Quote from: Henry on December 17, 2015, 11:53:07 AM
I find it odd that CT is renumbering the exits on I-395, but none of its other Interstates! What gives?
ConnDOT has apparently decided that they will wait until signs are due for renewal before changing out the numbers.  In practical terms, this means that the state might be fully converted in about 35 years.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on December 17, 2015, 01:08:37 PM
Quote from: roadman on December 17, 2015, 11:58:57 AM
Quote from: Henry on December 17, 2015, 11:53:07 AM
I find it odd that CT is renumbering the exits on I-395, but none of its other Interstates! What gives?
ConnDOT has apparently decided that they will wait until signs are due for renewal before changing out the numbers.  In practical terms, this means that the state might be fully converted in about 35 years.
I don't have a source to confirm this, but I have a gut feeling that Conn is waiting to see if Mass can really finish all the patches from early 2016—early 2018. I feel like if it is the summer of 2018, and Mass has all of the patches installed (and on-budget), that ConnDOT will consider patching, having seen it succeed in a neighboring state of similar size. Just a feeling.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on December 17, 2015, 01:38:15 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on December 17, 2015, 01:08:37 PM
Quote from: roadman on December 17, 2015, 11:58:57 AM
Quote from: Henry on December 17, 2015, 11:53:07 AM
I find it odd that CT is renumbering the exits on I-395, but none of its other Interstates! What gives?
ConnDOT has apparently decided that they will wait until signs are due for renewal before changing out the numbers.  In practical terms, this means that the state might be fully converted in about 35 years.
I don't have a source to confirm this, but I have a gut feeling that Conn is waiting to see if Mass can really finish all the patches from early 2016-—early 2018. I feel like if it is the spring of 2018, and Mass has all of the patches installed (and on-budget), that ConnDOT will consider patching, having seen it succeed in a neighboring state of similar size. Just a feeling.

The Massachusetts contract has a two year construction duration.  The contract was just awarded and NTP should be issued in early January 2016, which should put completion by no later than January 2018.  Corrected your comment to reflect this.

And your theory about ConnDOT waiting until signs in Massachusetts are converted before making a decision about issuing a similar blanket conversion contract in their state is interesting.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on December 17, 2015, 02:05:56 PM
Quote from: roadman on December 17, 2015, 01:38:15 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on December 17, 2015, 01:08:37 PM
Quote from: roadman on December 17, 2015, 11:58:57 AM
Quote from: Henry on December 17, 2015, 11:53:07 AM
I find it odd that CT is renumbering the exits on I-395, but none of its other Interstates! What gives?
ConnDOT has apparently decided that they will wait until signs are due for renewal before changing out the numbers.  In practical terms, this means that the state might be fully converted in about 35 years.
I don't have a source to confirm this, but I have a gut feeling that Conn is waiting to see if Mass can really finish all the patches from early 2016-—early 2018. I feel like if it is the spring of 2018, and Mass has all of the patches installed (and on-budget), that ConnDOT will consider patching, having seen it succeed in a neighboring state of similar size. Just a feeling.

The Massachusetts contract has a two year construction duration.  The contract was just awarded and NTP should be issued in early January 2016, which should put completion by no later than January 2018.  Corrected your comment to reflect this.

And your theory about ConnDOT waiting until signs in Massachusetts are converted before making a decision about issuing a similar blanket conversion contract in their state is interesting.

Oops, edited my comment, thank you for catching that.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 17, 2015, 05:38:04 PM
Quote from: roadman on December 17, 2015, 11:55:10 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 16, 2015, 02:50:50 PM
The Worcester Telegram posted an article a couple days ago talking about the I-395 exit numbering changes in CT. It is also the first article that talks about MA starting to change exit numbers next year. The writer got this information from an FHWA spokesman and includes a sentence that their call to MassDOT for comment was never returned. Perhaps they don't know the right people to contact? The article:
http://www.telegram.com/article/20151212/NEWS/151219726 (http://www.telegram.com/article/20151212/NEWS/151219726)

QuoteMichael Verseckes, spokesman for the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, did not reply to several emails and phone calls requesting information.

Sounds like they had the right person.  But they need to lose the "Wahh wahh wahh - they didn't call us back before our arbitrary deadline" attitude - a pet peeve of mine with the media.
Just in case she still hadn't heard from MassDOT by yesterday, I sent the writer an e-mail with links to some of my new exit number listings. She thanked me but wanted to know from where I had compiled the information, so I gave her some more links to look for at the MassDOT website. Of course, if she had done a simple web search prior to publishing the story she wouldn't have had to complain about the lack of getting any information from the spokesperson.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on December 18, 2015, 09:10:28 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 17, 2015, 05:38:04 PM
Just in case she still hadn't heard from MassDOT by yesterday, I sent the writer an e-mail with links to some of my new exit number listings. She thanked me but wanted to know from where I had compiled the information, so I gave her some more links to look for at the MassDOT website. Of course, if she had done a simple web search prior to publishing the story she wouldn't have had to complain about the lack of getting any information from the spokesperson.

But then she wouldn't have been able to bash the government for no good reason.  As I said, it's a tactic that's increasingly being used by the media when they don't get information (like the statement "Police would not release the victim's identity" instead of "The victim's idenity was not available").  Such antagnoistic statements add NO value to whatever is being reported, and are insulting to readers/viewers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on December 18, 2015, 05:17:54 PM
Quote from: roadman on December 18, 2015, 09:10:28 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 17, 2015, 05:38:04 PM
Just in case she still hadn't heard from MassDOT by yesterday, I sent the writer an e-mail with links to some of my new exit number listings. She thanked me but wanted to know from where I had compiled the information, so I gave her some more links to look for at the MassDOT website. Of course, if she had done a simple web search prior to publishing the story she wouldn't have had to complain about the lack of getting any information from the spokesperson.

But then she wouldn't have been able to bash the government for no good reason.  As I said, it's a tactic that's increasingly being used by the media when they don't get information (like the statement "Police would not release the victim's identity" instead of "The victim's idenity was not available").  Such antagnoistic statements add NO value to whatever is being reported, and are insulting to readers/viewers.

Your example statement is not how writers are taught to write a news story. If a writer submits to their editor "The victim's identity was not available", the editor will ask "why", as will many readers. A good news story is supposed to point out simple facts, it's not antagonistic in giving the precise reason something is as it seems.

Now, in this case, it appears some laziness on part of the writer is a bit to blame, and it got taken out in a passive/aggressive way on MassDOT by the writer. However, a spokesperson's job is to respond to media inquiries, that's what we are paying them to do. If they don't respond to "several" inquiries, well they are as lazy as the reporter who could've gotten the info without them.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on December 18, 2015, 06:52:15 PM
Your points are taken Sector Z, and I agree that my example statement may not have been proper (perhaps "Victim's identity has not yet been released due to X" would have been better).  However, I stand by my statement that the media is increasingly antagonistic in their reporting when they don't get information - even when that information is not available (like "Police would not release further details" when reporting crimes where they don't even have a suspect - excuse me - "person of interest").
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on December 18, 2015, 06:58:45 PM
Instead of "did not reply to several emails and phone calls", a neutral statement would be "has not yet responded to inquiries". Shoddy journalism indeed.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 04, 2016, 12:09:48 PM
Quote from: roadman on December 18, 2015, 09:10:28 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 17, 2015, 05:38:04 PM
Just in case she still hadn't heard from MassDOT by yesterday, I sent the writer an e-mail with links to some of my new exit number listings. She thanked me but wanted to know from where I had compiled the information, so I gave her some more links to look for at the MassDOT website. Of course, if she had done a simple web search prior to publishing the story she wouldn't have had to complain about the lack of getting any information from the spokesperson.

But then she wouldn't have been able to bash the government for no good reason.  As I said, it's a tactic that's increasingly being used by the media when they don't get information (like the statement "Police would not release the victim's identity" instead of "The victim's idenity was not available").  Such antagnoistic statements add NO value to whatever is being reported, and are insulting to readers/viewers.
A curious follow-up about the lack of MassDOT response about the exit number conversion project. MassDOT posted a blog entry last week about upcoming pubic meetings as part of its federally mandated Triennial Review to discuss the state of repair of the Western Mass. section of the Turnpike and other capital needs for this section of highway, necessary for keep toll collections going. I posted a comment that the meeting would also be a good time to let the public know about the upcoming sign replacement contracts and that these would come with changing exit numbers along I-90. When my comment was posted today though, only the part discussing the sign replacement was published, not the comments about the exit numbers. Given this and the lack of replies to reporters and others, is MassDOT going out of its way to keep the upcoming exit number changes from the general public for as long as possible?

Here's a link to the blog post: http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/western-massachusetts-turnpike-state-of-good-repair-public-meetings/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/western-massachusetts-turnpike-state-of-good-repair-public-meetings/)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on January 05, 2016, 12:48:00 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 04, 2016, 12:09:48 PM
Quote from: roadman on December 18, 2015, 09:10:28 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 17, 2015, 05:38:04 PM
Just in case she still hadn't heard from MassDOT by yesterday, I sent the writer an e-mail with links to some of my new exit number listings. She thanked me but wanted to know from where I had compiled the information, so I gave her some more links to look for at the MassDOT website. Of course, if she had done a simple web search prior to publishing the story she wouldn't have had to complain about the lack of getting any information from the spokesperson.

But then she wouldn't have been able to bash the government for no good reason.  As I said, it's a tactic that's increasingly being used by the media when they don't get information (like the statement "Police would not release the victim's identity" instead of "The victim's idenity was not available").  Such antagnoistic statements add NO value to whatever is being reported, and are insulting to readers/viewers.
A curious follow-up about the lack of MassDOT response about the exit number conversion project. MassDOT posted a blog entry last week about upcoming pubic meetings as part of its federally mandated Triennial Review to discuss the state of repair of the Western Mass. section of the Turnpike and other capital needs for this section of highway, necessary for keep toll collections going. I posted a comment that the meeting would also be a good time to let the public know about the upcoming sign replacement contracts and that these would come with changing exit numbers along I-90. When my comment was posted today though, only the part discussing the sign replacement was published, not the comments about the exit numbers. Given this and the lack of replies to reporters and others, is MassDOT going out of its way to keep the upcoming exit number changes from the general public for as long as possible?

Here's a link to the blog post: http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/western-massachusetts-turnpike-state-of-good-repair-public-meetings/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/western-massachusetts-turnpike-state-of-good-repair-public-meetings/)
It certainly appears that way. According to something in the "Massachusetts" thread, the project could start this month, and even if it doesn't, it'll start within the amount of time that you would want to spread public awareness around this time. I don't see the motive in covering it up unless how it is somehow politically based.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on January 05, 2016, 12:50:27 PM
Here's a little government secret: if a DOT (or other agency) isn't as much as expected about something, politics are guaranteed to be the motive.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman65 on January 07, 2016, 06:59:11 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 16, 2015, 02:50:50 PM
The Worcester Telegram posted an article a couple days ago talking about the I-395 exit numbering changes in CT. It is also the first article that talks about MA starting to change exit numbers next year. The writer got this information from an FHWA spokesman and includes a sentence that their call to MassDOT for comment was never returned. Perhaps they don't know the right people to contact? The article:
http://www.telegram.com/article/20151212/NEWS/151219726 (http://www.telegram.com/article/20151212/NEWS/151219726)
Whoever wrote the article hasn't a clue. He says six states are sequential when he failed to check it out as Delaware is among the states that still uses sequential numbering.  So in reality seven states use that system not six!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Pete from Boston on January 07, 2016, 07:48:49 AM

Quote from: roadman65 on January 07, 2016, 06:59:11 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 16, 2015, 02:50:50 PM
The Worcester Telegram posted an article a couple days ago talking about the I-395 exit numbering changes in CT. It is also the first article that talks about MA starting to change exit numbers next year. The writer got this information from an FHWA spokesman and includes a sentence that their call to MassDOT for comment was never returned. Perhaps they don't know the right people to contact? The article:
http://www.telegram.com/article/20151212/NEWS/151219726 (http://www.telegram.com/article/20151212/NEWS/151219726)
Whoever wrote the article hasn't a clue. He says six states are sequential when he failed to check it out as Delaware is among the states that still uses sequential numbering.  So in reality seven states use that system not six!

Calling Ms. Thompson clueless for being off by one on this is a little harsh, wouldn't you say?  Overall it was a concise and thorough article. 

I do see more of the same unfortunate trend here, probably because there are not enough reporters to be specialists these days, where reporters don't cultivate good enough contacts in their field of expertise to get anyone to call them back.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 18, 2016, 06:03:23 PM
Given the lull between the awarding of the contract (assuming this has happened) and the start of work, thought I'd respond to a question that was posted to FB here too. The question regarded whether the exit number conversion contract was replacing signs, and if so, why weren't new signs recently placed on I-290 given the new numbers? The reason is that the exit signs are not being replaced, just the numbers on the exit tabs. New overlay panels will be produced with the new numbers, as shown in this diagram from the project plans:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gribblenation.net%2Fmass21%2Fexittab1.jpg&hash=ebef1596c3b3766a35fbc9553c14c00e1fb75989)

Numbers on pre-2010 signs will be changed in a similar manner:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gribblenation.net%2Fmass21%2Fexittab2.jpg&hash=de2bd56ab4bc62abcddeb315786d3824b02b9983)

The only new signs will be the 'Formerly Exit X' tabs which will be added to the existing signs, and perhaps, if needed, gore signs for larger numbers. Here's the standard 'FE' sign:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gribblenation.net%2Fmass21%2Fformerlyexitsign0.jpg&hash=847d244be3a5356bd54134c37c0eb85d32df8f1f)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 19, 2016, 08:39:55 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 18, 2016, 06:03:23 PM(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gribblenation.net%2Fmass21%2Fexittab1.jpg&hash=ebef1596c3b3766a35fbc9553c14c00e1fb75989)
That particular BGS (assuming that it's showing the 114 exit off I-495) will likely need a wider exit tab (or Series D numerals & letter).  Current Exit 42A-B is slated to become Exit 100A-B.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on February 06, 2016, 12:39:48 PM
The contract (Project 607092) "Fabrication and Installation of Tunnel Overhead Guide Signs along Sections of Interstates 90, 93 and Route 1," which will presumably include new exit numbers on the signs in the Big Dig Tunnels, was advertised for bids today, 2/6/16. The winning bidder will be announced on March 15. I am presuming the US 1 reference is for the City Square Tunnel which will get new signs, but not new exit numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Duke87 on February 07, 2016, 12:56:38 PM
Quote from: roadman on December 18, 2015, 09:10:28 AM
But then she wouldn't have been able to bash the government for no good reason.  As I said, it's a tactic that's increasingly being used by the media when they don't get information (like the statement "Police would not release the victim's identity" instead of "The victim's idenity was not available").  Such antagnoistic statements add NO value to whatever is being reported, and are insulting to readers/viewers.

They're only insulting to readers attempting to read objectively, which most readers are not. Most readers love drama and this sort of antagonism appeals to them, it feeds their emotional need to constantly be outraged about something.

As for trying to keep the impending change of exit numbers under wraps, I imagine MassDOT is actively trying to minimize said drama that everyone loves. If they were to go too public too soon with this, they would run the risk of generating a torrent of backlash that might result in something drastic happening like the governor ordering the DOT to cancel the project in order to appease the outraged masses. Which, given that they're required by the feds to change the numbers, might bring negative consequences to the state in the form of withheld federal funding. By deliberately keeping most people from being aware of any exit number changes until the signs are already going up, they ensure that by the time people flip out it will be too late to change anything.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on February 07, 2016, 02:34:49 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on February 07, 2016, 12:56:38 PM
Quote from: roadman on December 18, 2015, 09:10:28 AM
But then she wouldn't have been able to bash the government for no good reason.  As I said, it's a tactic that's increasingly being used by the media when they don't get information (like the statement "Police would not release the victim's identity" instead of "The victim's idenity was not available").  Such antagnoistic statements add NO value to whatever is being reported, and are insulting to readers/viewers.

They're only insulting to readers attempting to read objectively, which most readers are not. Most readers love drama and this sort of antagonism appeals to them, it feeds their emotional need to constantly be outraged about something.

As for trying to keep the impending change of exit numbers under wraps, I imagine MassDOT is actively trying to minimize said drama that everyone loves. If they were to go too public too soon with this, they would run the risk of generating a torrent of backlash that might result in something drastic happening like the governor ordering the DOT to cancel the project in order to appease the outraged masses. Which, given that they're required by the feds to change the numbers, might bring negative consequences to the state in the form of withheld federal funding. By deliberately keeping most people from being aware of any exit number changes until the signs are already going up, they ensure that by the time people flip out it will be too late to change anything.

True, but I would think that later this year (whenever the numbers start going up, which seems to be a huge mystery right now), there will be a Maine or Pennsylvania-type publicity campaign about the changes.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on February 22, 2016, 10:55:27 AM
The first milepost exit number on a Massachusetts BGS has been put up. Though, its not for a Massachusetts exit. Based on the latest post on the Connecticut News thread, the number for the 1 Mile advance sign for the first South I-395 CT exit, which is located before you cross the border, has been changed from 100 to 53. Are the numbers on I-395 in MA soon to follow?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on February 22, 2016, 11:44:44 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on February 22, 2016, 10:55:27 AM
The first milepost exit number on a Massachusetts BGS has been put up. Though, its not for a Massachusetts exit. Based on the latest post on the Connecticut News thread, the number for the 1 Mile advance sign for the first South I-395 CT exit, which is located before you cross the border, has been changed from 100 to 53. Are the numbers on I-395 in MA soon to follow?
I would assume so, 395 is a prime candidate to be among the first. The only question is when, since this project keeps getting pushed back it seems. When it does start, hopefully this spring or summer, 395 will almost certainly be an early conversion.
Title: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Pete from Boston on February 22, 2016, 12:32:21 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on February 07, 2016, 02:34:49 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on February 07, 2016, 12:56:38 PM
Quote from: roadman on December 18, 2015, 09:10:28 AM
But then she wouldn't have been able to bash the government for no good reason.  As I said, it's a tactic that's increasingly being used by the media when they don't get information (like the statement "Police would not release the victim's identity" instead of "The victim's idenity was not available").  Such antagnoistic statements add NO value to whatever is being reported, and are insulting to readers/viewers.

They're only insulting to readers attempting to read objectively, which most readers are not. Most readers love drama and this sort of antagonism appeals to them, it feeds their emotional need to constantly be outraged about something.

As for trying to keep the impending change of exit numbers under wraps, I imagine MassDOT is actively trying to minimize said drama that everyone loves. If they were to go too public too soon with this, they would run the risk of generating a torrent of backlash that might result in something drastic happening like the governor ordering the DOT to cancel the project in order to appease the outraged masses. Which, given that they're required by the feds to change the numbers, might bring negative consequences to the state in the form of withheld federal funding. By deliberately keeping most people from being aware of any exit number changes until the signs are already going up, they ensure that by the time people flip out it will be too late to change anything.

True, but I would think that later this year (whenever the numbers start going up, which seems to be a huge mystery right now), there will be a Maine or Pennsylvania-type publicity campaign about the changes.

The backlash that happens here is "The government did something and my personal problem is not solved by it, so I am going to list what is wrong with the government," followed by arguments about Donald Trump and Tom Brady and college kids.

People go online and say things like "The MBTA is terrible and my street doesn't get plowed, but they're going to change the exit numbers we all know?"  And the local news, which mostly reports on whatever gets twittered the most, fans the flames further.

I'd keep my head down, too.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on February 22, 2016, 01:14:55 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on February 07, 2016, 12:56:38 PM
They're only insulting to readers attempting to read objectively, which most readers are not. Most readers love drama and this sort of antagonism appeals to them, it feeds their emotional need to constantly be outraged about something.

But the media is supposed to be reporting objectively, not encouraging false antagonism.  That's what's wrong with the whole approach.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on February 22, 2016, 07:13:17 PM
Technically, as corporate entities, the media is only "supposed" to make a profit.  When ratings and journalistic integrity conflict, ratings win every time (it's even legal to lie on the news in this country).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Pete from Boston on February 22, 2016, 11:33:40 PM
The commercial media is struggling to find relevance in a world where people get information everywhere.  They just want eyeballs on ads at this point. 

That said, I'm sure this same line could have been used fifty and a hundred years ago and still be widely accepted as true.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on February 27, 2016, 11:04:07 PM
Though not technically a part of the MassDOT contract, the first exit sign with a milepost-based number has appeared in Massachusetts, for a Connecticut exit. The 1-Mile Advance for Exit 53, Old Exit 100 on I-395 South is 2/10 of a mile north of the CT border. The exit sign now reads 53 with a patch made over the old number:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gribblenation.net%2Fmass21%2Fi395exit53ma216a.JPG&hash=cb0a35134c27500a59fdd24573c706ead0c3fb68)

The new Mass. numbers should be less obvious, since only the old number on the tab is being overlaid.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: mariethefoxy on February 29, 2016, 10:16:13 PM
kinda off topic but if they can do this here, why cant they have advanced warning for the out of state Exit 1 on US 3 North in Tyngsboro. Hoping when the north end of US 3 is due for new signs they fix that issue (they still have the older small tab signs north of Exit 31, which got replaced during some widening project they had) , since I've had a near miss or two since it comes up at you with no warning.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 18, 2016, 09:10:32 PM
I see that Liddell Brothers of Halifax was the only bidder for the contract to replace the exit signage in the I-93, I-90 and US 1 tunnels (the bid tabulation item list has totals for sign supports as well as the signs themselves). Are they going to be awarded the contract though since their bid total was nearly twice the MassDOT estimate for the project ($1.2 million vs. $550K)?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on March 19, 2016, 01:53:32 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 18, 2016, 09:10:32 PM
I see that Liddell Brothers of Halifax was the only bidder for the contract to replace the exit signage in the I-93, I-90 and US 1 tunnels (the bid tabulation item list has totals for sign supports as well as the signs themselves). Are they going to be awarded the contract though since their bid total was nearly twice the MassDOT estimate for the project ($1.2 million vs. $550K)?
I bet the MPT (maintenance and protection of traffic) costs are the difference.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on March 20, 2016, 03:41:01 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 18, 2016, 09:10:32 PM
I see that Liddell Brothers of Halifax was the only bidder for the contract to replace the exit signage in the I-93, I-90 and US 1 tunnels (the bid tabulation item list has totals for sign supports as well as the signs themselves). Are they going to be awarded the contract though since their bid total was nearly twice the MassDOT estimate for the project ($1.2 million vs. $550K)?
The contract is question is for on-call repair and replacement of overhead signs and supports in the MHS tunnel system.  The re-numbering of exits is considered incidental work.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 20, 2016, 09:36:56 PM
The Worcester Telegram is out with another article on the milepost exit conversion project. The article has a link to a list of the current and future exits for highways in the Worcester area: http://www.telegram.com/article/20160319/NEWS/160329942 (http://www.telegram.com/article/20160319/NEWS/160329942)

The article is quite critical of MassDOT's supposed secrecy about the project. The writer called me when putting together the article, since I provided her with most of the information she could not get from MassDOT, and I am quoted a couple times, not very accurately. I sent her an e-mail suggesting she put my quotes more in context and pointing out a few errors in the story, (in particular as it relates to Roadman's postings in the AARoads Forum) in the hope she would edit the online edition. So far, with little success.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hbelkins on March 21, 2016, 03:33:32 PM
I read the story after you posted the link on Facebook. I don't understand all this butthurt over no public notice about the exit number changes. I don't see why a great deal of public notice would be required anyway. I'm sure the signage contracts were advertised the way MassDOT normally advertises a project.

I would handle this by doing a press release when work gets underway, advising motorists to use caution in the areas where signs are being installed. Then I would explain the conversion from sequential to mileage-based exit signage and why it's beneficial, and include the notation that "Old Exit XX" signage will remain in place.

If people feel like they need to be spoonfed information about this or if various urban planning organizations need to have their hands held, then humanity is in worse shape than I thought.  :banghead:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on March 21, 2016, 04:06:27 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on March 21, 2016, 03:33:32 PM
I read the story after you posted the link on Facebook. I don't understand all this butthurt over no public notice about the exit number changes. I don't see why a great deal of public notice would be required anyway. I'm sure the signage contracts were advertised the way MassDOT normally advertises a project.

I would handle this by doing a press release when work gets underway, advising motorists to use caution in the areas where signs are being installed. Then I would explain the conversion from sequential to mileage-based exit signage and why it's beneficial, and include the notation that "Old Exit XX" signage will remain in place.

If people feel like they need to be spoonfed information about this or if various urban planning organizations need to have their hands held, then humanity is in worse shape than I thought.  :banghead:

When Maine and Pennsylvania switched they launched massive PR campaigns to alert people to the changes. But if they do that in Mass before the signs get installed, there is no way it will actually happen. The faster the new numbers start going up, the better, because there is a less chance of stuff like these articles occurring. Then when the project is already in full swing they can launch a PR campaign. But nobody seems to know when it will actually begin, so for now these newspapers and local organizations are going to continue taking their shots when they hear something about the project.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 21, 2016, 04:11:53 PM
Quote from: hbelkins on March 21, 2016, 03:33:32 PM
I read the story after you posted the link on Facebook. I don't understand all this butthurt over no public notice about the exit number changes. I don't see why a great deal of public notice would be required anyway. I'm sure the signage contracts were advertised the way MassDOT normally advertises a project.

I would handle this by doing a press release when work gets underway, advising motorists to use caution in the areas where signs are being installed. Then I would explain the conversion from sequential to mileage-based exit signage and why it's beneficial, and include the notation that "Old Exit XX" signage will remain in place.

If people feel like they need to be spoon fed information about this or if various urban planning organizations need to have their hands held, then humanity is in worse shape than I thought.  :banghead:
The quotes I made in the article were in the context of what seems to be a paranoid view held by some MassDOT officials that if they announced the plan far in advance the overwhelming opinion would be negative and cause a delay or postponement of the project. I would like to believe, like H.B., that if this project brings more benefits than costs, then a simple explanation by MassDOT about the project in a timely manner would help gain the support of a majority of the public. There's always going to be a few people who rant against anything new in the media or on blogs or websites. It seems MassDOT is concerned more about upsetting this vocal minority than starting a project that would provide a benefit to all the travelling public.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Beeper1 on March 21, 2016, 05:32:37 PM
This is Massachusetts we're talking about.  Where any change like this is gonna be like pulling teeth and could absolutely get side-tracked by people getting pissy and getting their local state rep involved.   Keep in mind they maintain a totally redundant MA-128 designation on a long stretch of highway just because people refuse to accept that that road has a different number from what it had 45 years ago.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 21, 2016, 05:42:30 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on March 21, 2016, 05:32:37 PM
This is Massachusetts we're talking about.  Where any change like this is gonna be like pulling teeth and could absolutely get side-tracked by people getting pissy and getting their local state rep involved.   Keep in mind they maintain a totally redundant MA-128 designation on a long stretch of highway just because people refuse to accept that that road has a different number from what it had 45 years ago.
And the reaction to the attempts by MassDOT and its predecessors to remove 128 along the I-95 section by the press and public could very well be the reason for the agency's silence regarding the changing exit numbers contract.  However, now that the 'secret' is out it would be in the best interest for MassDOT to start publicizing the upcoming work to respond to the arguments of those critical of the project and to get their side of the story out there.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on March 21, 2016, 06:00:46 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on March 21, 2016, 05:32:37 PM
This is Massachusetts we're talking about.  Where any change like this is gonna be like pulling teeth and could absolutely get side-tracked by people getting pissy and getting their local state rep involved.   Keep in mind they maintain a totally redundant MA-128 designation on a long stretch of highway just because people refuse to accept that that road has a different number from what it had 45 years ago.

The Legislature is already involved in the exit numbering - https://malegislature.gov/Bills/189/House/H3041
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: noelbotevera on March 21, 2016, 06:21:44 PM
Quote from: roadman on March 21, 2016, 06:00:46 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on March 21, 2016, 05:32:37 PM
This is Massachusetts we're talking about.  Where any change like this is gonna be like pulling teeth and could absolutely get side-tracked by people getting pissy and getting their local state rep involved.   Keep in mind they maintain a totally redundant MA-128 designation on a long stretch of highway just because people refuse to accept that that road has a different number from what it had 45 years ago.

The Legislature is already involved in the exit numbering - https://malegislature.gov/Bills/189/House/H3041
They won't drag their feet this time. This is supposed to be done by New Year 2017.

However they acted like PennDOT and pulled the minimize costs schtick.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: spooky on March 22, 2016, 08:19:47 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 21, 2016, 05:42:30 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on March 21, 2016, 05:32:37 PM
This is Massachusetts we're talking about.  Where any change like this is gonna be like pulling teeth and could absolutely get side-tracked by people getting pissy and getting their local state rep involved.   Keep in mind they maintain a totally redundant MA-128 designation on a long stretch of highway just because people refuse to accept that that road has a different number from what it had 45 years ago.
And the reaction to the attempts by MassDOT and its predecessors to remove 128 along the I-95 section by the press and public could very well be the reason for the agency's silence regarding the changing exit numbers contract.  However, now that the 'secret' is out it would be in the best interest for MassDOT to start publicizing the upcoming work to respond to the arguments of those critical of the project and to get their side of the story out there.

Comparisons to Route 128 are apt. Can we expect traffic reporters to continue to refer to the wrong exit numbers years after the new ones go up?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on March 22, 2016, 08:37:07 AM
Quote from: spooky on March 22, 2016, 08:19:47 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 21, 2016, 05:42:30 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on March 21, 2016, 05:32:37 PM
This is Massachusetts we're talking about.  Where any change like this is gonna be like pulling teeth and could absolutely get side-tracked by people getting pissy and getting their local state rep involved.   Keep in mind they maintain a totally redundant MA-128 designation on a long stretch of highway just because people refuse to accept that that road has a different number from what it had 45 years ago.
And the reaction to the attempts by MassDOT and its predecessors to remove 128 along the I-95 section by the press and public could very well be the reason for the agency's silence regarding the changing exit numbers contract.  However, now that the 'secret' is out it would be in the best interest for MassDOT to start publicizing the upcoming work to respond to the arguments of those critical of the project and to get their side of the story out there.

Comparisons to Route 128 are apt. Can we expect traffic reporters to continue to refer to the wrong exit numbers years after the new ones go up?

Moot point, traffic reporters don't even refer to the interchanges by their present/current numbers.  They simply refer to them by either their street or route number (whichever is applicable).  In a case where two routes interchange with each other more than once (example: I-95 & US 1); they'll mention the town location of that interchange.

On the subject of exit numbers & 128; it's worth noting that the present numbers along the Interstate portion of the Yankee Division Highway are from 1987-1988 with the Canton-Braintree (I-93) stretch changing first, the Canton-Peabody (I-95) stretch conversion coinciding with the completion of Peabody I-95/MA 128 interchange (Exit 45/29).  When such occurred, I don't recall any major announcement of such beyond a brief article and conversion guide in the newspaper; and such was only for I-93's exit number changes.  The only guide I saw for I-95's new numbers was on Arrow road maps & atlases.

Additionally, back in the early 70s; several major highways in eastern Massachusetts (except US 3) converted from the Exit 25 =128 motif to more standard numbering; so this is not the first time interchange numbers were changed.  Heck, even 128's numbers east of I-95 aren't the original numbers; the current 9 through 28 date back to 1959.

I've stated such before and I'll state it again; MA had a golden opportunity to convert to mile-marker-based exit numbering along I-93 following the Big Dig for the simple reason that the new O'Neill Tunnel has less interchanges than the old Central Artery (which explains the present number gaps).  Had such been done; maybe the locals would've seen that such doesn't mean the end of the world as they know it (apologies to R.E.M.)

OTOH, there is a business plaza (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8702864,-70.8889683,3a,75y,29.51h,86.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seE8Oj0yF11E51Ey3zPxqAw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) at the northern end of I-95 that's named after Exit 60; will they now rename their business plaza to Exit 90?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: spooky on March 22, 2016, 09:09:36 AM
I've asked friends and relatives what they think about exit renumbering. (I'm a blast at parties, BTW.) Most are indifferent but invariably ask why it's necessary. The consensus seems to be that there's better things that MassDOT could be doing with the money, coming from people who don't understand how and where the money comes from. (i.e. you can't fix the MBTA with the money you were going to spend on signs)

A PR release stating that this is being done to meet federal requirements, and mostly paid for with federal money would satisfy a lot of people.

Quote from: PHLBOS on March 22, 2016, 08:37:07 AM
Quote from: spooky on March 22, 2016, 08:19:47 AM

Comparisons to Route 128 are apt. Can we expect traffic reporters to continue to refer to the wrong exit numbers years after the new ones go up?

Moot point, traffic reporters don't even refer to the interchanges by their present/current numbers.  They simply refer to them by either their street or route number (whichever is applicable).  In a case where two routes interchange with each other more than once (example: I-95 & US 1); they'll mention the town location of that interchange.

Agreed.

Quote from: PHLBOS on March 22, 2016, 08:37:07 AM
OTOH, there is a business plaza (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.8702864,-70.8889683,3a,75y,29.51h,86.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seE8Oj0yF11E51Ey3zPxqAw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) at the northern end of I-95 that's named after Exit 60; will they now rename their business plaza to Exit 90?

Too bad the sign didn't have separate attached numerals - they could have just turned the 6 over.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: KEVIN_224 on March 22, 2016, 12:07:48 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 20, 2016, 09:36:56 PM
The Worcester Telegram is out with another article on the milepost exit conversion project. The article has a link to a list of the current and future exits for highways in the Worcester area: http://www.telegram.com/article/20160319/NEWS/160329942 (http://www.telegram.com/article/20160319/NEWS/160329942)

First error: The first picture says it's from I-290 East. Wouldn't it actually be from the northern end of I-395?
Second error: They said Maine converted their exits in 2001. I think that was actually done in 2004.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 24, 2016, 12:01:04 PM
Cartoon in today's Worcester Telegram in response to Sunday's article about MassDOT's silence about the exit number conversion project:
http://www.telegram.com/article/20160324/NEWS/160329706 (http://www.telegram.com/article/20160324/NEWS/160329706)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 28, 2016, 01:10:51 PM
The Worcester article got picked up by the AP and has been re-published on several news websites including that of Fox 25 in Boston and the Berkshire Eagle newspaper. Today's Attleboro Sun-Chronicle has a follow-up report:
http://www.thesunchronicle.com/news/local_news/mass-highway-signs-will-be-changing-but-little-being-said/article_7210bc05-d157-5a96-b599-165a8564e510.html (http://www.thesunchronicle.com/news/local_news/mass-highway-signs-will-be-changing-but-little-being-said/article_7210bc05-d157-5a96-b599-165a8564e510.html)

It also indicates the silence from MassDOT about changing exit numbers and that the local regional planning commission hadn't heard of the project. They did get a list of frequently asked questions and a memo from MassDOT saying a 'public outreach' campaign is planned before the start of the project, but no date was mentioned.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 07, 2016, 06:11:52 PM
A follow-up article was published yesterday by the (Attleboro) Sun Chronicle newspaper regarding upcoming changes to local exit numbers on I-95 and I-495. The writer reports still getting no response from MassDOT:
http://www.thesunchronicle.com/news/local_news/what-exit-are-you-changes-in-exit-numbers-for-attleboro/article_7670a1dc-fc2a-11e5-8b84-1f769118f978.html (http://www.thesunchronicle.com/news/local_news/what-exit-are-you-changes-in-exit-numbers-for-attleboro/article_7670a1dc-fc2a-11e5-8b84-1f769118f978.html)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 28, 2016, 12:13:37 AM
At an appearance at a public meeting to discuss the Capital Investment Plan in Hyannis last evening (4/27), State Highway Administrator Thomas Tinlin stated that US 6 exit numbers will not be changed and that he is still evaluating the statewide project:
http://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20160427/state-puts-brakes-on-plan-to-renumber-route-6-signs (http://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20160427/state-puts-brakes-on-plan-to-renumber-route-6-signs)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on April 28, 2016, 10:47:45 AM
Quote from: roadman on March 21, 2016, 06:00:46 PMThe Legislature is already involved in the exit numbering - https://malegislature.gov/Bills/189/House/H3041
It should be noted that the legislation as listed only mentions the (interchange) renumbering along Interstates.

If such is indeed the case, numbered interchanges along non-Interstates would not be impacted by this change (at least not yet).

Quote from: bob7374 on April 28, 2016, 12:13:37 AM
At an appearance at a public meeting to discuss the Capital Investment Plan in Hyannis on Tuesday evening (4/27), State Highway Administrator Thomas Tinlin stated that US 6 exit numbers will not be changed and that he is still evaluating the statewide project:
http://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20160427/state-puts-brakes-on-plan-to-renumber-route-6-signs (http://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20160427/state-puts-brakes-on-plan-to-renumber-route-6-signs)
I mentioned similar on Facebook (and IIRC on the Massachusetts thread) & I'll mention it here:

1.  Renumber the interchanges along the Interstates first, per the above-legislation.

2.  Renumber the interchanges for all non-Interstates (if required), except for US 6, next.

3.  Then, renumber the interchanges along the Mid-Cape Highway.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 28, 2016, 01:05:34 PM
I'd just keep the renumbering on US 6.  As far as I've read, the main complaint was with the overhead signs; the exit numbers were practically a footnote, at least until the media started blowing up this issue.  I don't want to see MA become another PA (with mile-based numbers on the interstates but retaining sequential everywhere else).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on April 28, 2016, 01:44:24 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 28, 2016, 01:05:34 PMAs far as I've read, the main complaint was with the overhead signs; the exit numbers were practically a footnote, at least until the media started blowing up this issue.
With regards to the signs; as a compromise, I would say maintain the ground-mounted signs along the undivided super-2 stretch but go with overheads along the divided stretch.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on April 28, 2016, 05:58:16 PM
In an ideal world exit number changes should be redone to anchor point 0 at MA 3. But that's not logistically possible given that the mile markers corresponding to Seekonk are already standing. Any mileage based exits would have to come from an anchor point in Seekonk, which makes the numbers very random. It'll be interesting to see how this exit number thing plays out, it looks more and more like some kind of process is going to play out.

The part of the project I think I like the most is the fact that the plan is to put exit numbers on several routes that don't have them currently. If non-Interstates do not end up getting their numbers changed, would numbers still be added? Most likely not I would think.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on April 28, 2016, 06:30:36 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on April 28, 2016, 05:58:16 PM
The part of the project I think I like the most is the fact that the plan is to put exit numbers on several routes that don't have them currently. If non-Interstates do not end up getting their numbers changed, would numbers still be added? Most likely not I would think.

I still can't believe US 1 isn't getting exit numbers, especially the stretch from Boston up to 128/95.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 28, 2016, 06:35:37 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 28, 2016, 01:44:24 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 28, 2016, 01:05:34 PMAs far as I've read, the main complaint was with the overhead signs; the exit numbers were practically a footnote, at least until the media started blowing up this issue.
With regards to the signs; as a compromise, I would say maintain the ground-mounted signs along the undivided super-2 stretch but go with overheads along the divided stretch.
Honestly, I do have to agree with the NIMBYs one one thing: the overhead signs ARE excessive.  It DOES destroy the rural character of the freeway (overhead signs mean urban/suburban).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on April 28, 2016, 06:46:44 PM
The number of overhead signs in Massachusetts is excessive. Plenty of cases where a ground-mounted sign would suffice. Granted, I think the NYSDOT/NYSTA approach (use overhead only if ROW is limited) is a bit extreme in the other direction.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on April 28, 2016, 11:09:33 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 28, 2016, 06:30:36 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on April 28, 2016, 05:58:16 PM
The part of the project I think I like the most is the fact that the plan is to put exit numbers on several routes that don't have them currently. If non-Interstates do not end up getting their numbers changed, would numbers still be added? Most likely not I would think.

I still can't believe US 1 isn't getting exit numbers, especially the stretch from Boston up to 128/95.
The only freeway-grade section of 1 goes to the MA 60 circle, though it's extremely substandard. I think it's less confusing to keep the signs as is for the several closely spaced exits there. Some states go to the extreme of posting every number that is an exit, even if the road isn't a freeway. To me, that's a misinterpretation of the MUTCD.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on April 29, 2016, 12:06:04 AM
Quote from: cl94 on April 28, 2016, 06:46:44 PM
The number of overhead signs in Massachusetts is excessive. Plenty of cases where a ground-mounted sign would suffice.

Yup, like all of I-90 west of 128, I-84, and I-395.  And the new overheads on I-91 from the VT line south to Northampton just look strange to me.  I understand it improves visibility of the sign and eliminates having to cut growth around the signs, but it seems like more to maintain (the structure itself).  CT is going the other way, moving signs to ground level, and not just in rural areas either. 


Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Duke87 on April 29, 2016, 12:13:14 AM
Quote from: vdeane on April 28, 2016, 06:35:37 PM
Honestly, I do have to agree with the NIMBYs one one thing: the overhead signs ARE excessive.  It DOES destroy the rural character of the freeway (overhead signs mean urban/suburban).

Or cloverleaf. The MUTCD requires overhead signage from a freeway at a cloverleaf, so current exit 9 HAS to have overhead signs installed or it is not compliant.

Of course it's also not compliant if the numbers are sequential. Let's see if that stops them from defying the standard.

Quote from: hbelkins on March 21, 2016, 03:33:32 PM
I don't understand all this butthurt over no public notice about the exit number changes. I don't see why a great deal of public notice would be required anyway. I'm sure the signage contracts were advertised the way MassDOT normally advertises a project.

Lack of public notice isn't the actual complaint, if there were public notice people would complain just as hard. The issue is that people in New England really really don't like change, and renumbering every exit in the state is the sort of thing that is going to cause people to flip out no matter how you break the news to them.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on April 29, 2016, 09:09:07 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 29, 2016, 12:06:04 AMCT is going the other way, moving signs to ground level, and not just in rural areas either.
Given the number of trucks that use many of those highways; the probability of ground-mounted signs being blocked by such traffic, especially if the highway in question has 3 or more lanes in one direction, is greater.  Ground-mounted signs on 4-laners, though not completely ideal, is one thing; ground-mounted signs (primary ones for exits) along 6+ lane highways, not a good idea from a visibility standpoint.

Quote from: Duke87 on April 29, 2016, 12:13:14 AMThe issue is that people in New England really really don't like change, and renumbering every exit in the state is the sort of thing that is going to cause people to flip out no matter how you break the news to them.
Having grown up in New England and remember the I-93 & 95 renumbering (which also included the Southeast Expressway, Central Artery & the Interstate-occupied portions of MA 128) that took place in the late 80s very well; I do not recall any ruckus from the Boston media (newspapers articles & TV reports) whatsoever regarding that change.  There was actually more ruckus over the 508 carving into the 617 area code (which coincidentally occurred around the same time) than the I-93/95 exit renumberings.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on April 29, 2016, 12:57:01 PM
Quote from: Alps on April 28, 2016, 11:09:33 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 28, 2016, 06:30:36 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on April 28, 2016, 05:58:16 PM
The part of the project I think I like the most is the fact that the plan is to put exit numbers on several routes that don't have them currently. If non-Interstates do not end up getting their numbers changed, would numbers still be added? Most likely not I would think.

I still can't believe US 1 isn't getting exit numbers, especially the stretch from Boston up to 128/95.
The only freeway-grade section of 1 goes to the MA 60 circle, though it's extremely substandard. I think it's less confusing to keep the signs as is for the several closely spaced exits there. Some states go to the extreme of posting every number that is an exit, even if the road isn't a freeway. To me, that's a misinterpretation of the MUTCD.
And it looks like mileage or sequential, US 1 isn't getting numbers anyway. The expressway parts of MA 28 and 57 are the candidates to have numbers added. Not sure what the future of the idea is though.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on April 29, 2016, 01:08:08 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on April 29, 2016, 12:57:01 PM
Quote from: Alps on April 28, 2016, 11:09:33 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 28, 2016, 06:30:36 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on April 28, 2016, 05:58:16 PM
The part of the project I think I like the most is the fact that the plan is to put exit numbers on several routes that don't have them currently. If non-Interstates do not end up getting their numbers changed, would numbers still be added? Most likely not I would think.

I still can't believe US 1 isn't getting exit numbers, especially the stretch from Boston up to 128/95.
The only freeway-grade section of 1 goes to the MA 60 circle, though it's extremely substandard. I think it's less confusing to keep the signs as is for the several closely spaced exits there. Some states go to the extreme of posting every number that is an exit, even if the road isn't a freeway. To me, that's a misinterpretation of the MUTCD.
And it looks like mileage or sequential, US 1 isn't getting numbers anyway. The expressway parts of MA 28 and 57 are the candidates to have numbers added. Not sure what the future of the idea is though.
Conversely, the numbered intersections along MA 128 in Gloucester will just have their numbers (Exits 9, 10 & 11) dropped completely (9 & 10 should have been never numbered in the first place IMHO) right when the rest of 128's interchanges are renumbered.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on April 29, 2016, 01:12:54 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on April 29, 2016, 12:13:14 AM
Or cloverleaf. The MUTCD requires overhead signage from a freeway at a cloverleaf, so current exit 9 HAS to have overhead signs installed or it is not compliant.

When current Exit 9 eastbound was changed from a single exit interchange to a double exit interchange several years back, MassHighway originally proposed overhead mounting for the signs at the first exit ramp.  As with the current Route 6 proposal, the Cape Cod Commission shot them down.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 29, 2016, 01:43:28 PM
Being opposed to having every sign be overhead in understandable (given MassDOT's stance... will we see overhead tenth mile markers soon? :-D).  Being opposed to overhead cloverleaf signs is excessive.

I think the reason I tend to associate them with urban/suburban areas is because the situations where NYSDOT installs them (exits with multiple ramps, major freeway/freeway junctions, exit only lanes, and closely spaced exits) tend not to happen in rural areas often, especially since we have the Thruway, even some of the major freeway/freeway junctions are only ground mounted (for double trumpets).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on April 29, 2016, 01:47:34 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 29, 2016, 01:08:08 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on April 29, 2016, 12:57:01 PM
Quote from: Alps on April 28, 2016, 11:09:33 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 28, 2016, 06:30:36 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on April 28, 2016, 05:58:16 PM
The part of the project I think I like the most is the fact that the plan is to put exit numbers on several routes that don't have them currently. If non-Interstates do not end up getting their numbers changed, would numbers still be added? Most likely not I would think.

I still can't believe US 1 isn't getting exit numbers, especially the stretch from Boston up to 128/95.
The only freeway-grade section of 1 goes to the MA 60 circle, though it's extremely substandard. I think it's less confusing to keep the signs as is for the several closely spaced exits there. Some states go to the extreme of posting every number that is an exit, even if the road isn't a freeway. To me, that's a misinterpretation of the MUTCD.
And it looks like mileage or sequential, US 1 isn't getting numbers anyway. The expressway parts of MA 28 and 57 are the candidates to have numbers added. Not sure what the future of the idea is though.
Conversely, the numbered intersections along MA 128 in Gloucester will just have their numbers (Exits 9, 10 & 11) dropped completely (9 & 10 should have been never numbered in the first place IMHO) right when the rest of 128's interchanges are renumbered.

Those numbers are on paper only anyway. All of them use paddle signs with no numbers. And I'm still not sure why it starts with 9.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on April 29, 2016, 02:35:28 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on April 29, 2016, 01:47:34 PMThose numbers are on paper only anyway. All of them use paddle signs with no numbers.
This BGS (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6041022,-70.7422978,3a,75y,50.94h,85.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s69W28qktSNcsMFhjKJ7pAA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) gives hint of those numbers (except 14, which is an actual interchange w/MA 133).  It's slated to be taken down once 128's exit numbers change.

Stand-alone LGS for Exit 11 (MA 127/Grant Circle) (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6223507,-70.6798486,3a,75y,150.43h,75.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sq7YGodeFVOaeRmdF42WyvQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)  To my knowledge, this sign is still there.

There was a similar LGS for "Exit 10" (MA 127/Eastern Ave.) intersection and a D6 Paddle LGS for Exit 9 that read: 128 EXIT 9 placed just prior to the MA 127A/Main St./Bass Ave. intersection; but those have since bit the dust.  Way back when (early 80s and earlier), there was a button-copy freeway grade (aluminum, extruded panel) sign that read EXIT 9 LAST EXIT.  It was about the size of a gore exit sign and was probably mid-to-late 60s vintage.

Quote from: AMLNet49 on April 29, 2016, 01:47:34 PMAnd I'm still not sure why it starts with 9.
Such dates back to an ill-fated (& ill-advised IMHO) proposal to extend 128 further east and into Rockport.  128's original exit numbers started with 1 being Grant Circle and increased in the southerly direction.  The numbers changed to their current ones circa 1961-1962 (according to official state maps), no doubt, with this extension in mind.  The current numbers, by and large, increased by 10 (cloverleaf interchanges further south used to have separate numbers for each direction prior to the change) which lead to the 127 & 127A intersections east of Grant Circle to be Exits 10 & 9 respectively; the unnumbered Blackburn Circle was added later on.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 29, 2016, 03:37:52 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 29, 2016, 02:35:28 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on April 29, 2016, 01:47:34 PMThose numbers are on paper only anyway. All of them use paddle signs with no numbers.
This BGS (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6041022,-70.7422978,3a,75y,50.94h,85.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s69W28qktSNcsMFhjKJ7pAA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) gives hint of those numbers (except 14, which is an actual interchange w/MA 133).  It's slated to be taken down once 128's exit numbers change.

Stand-alone LGS for Exit 11 (MA 128).
(https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6223507,-70.6798486,3a,75y,150.43h,75.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sq7YGodeFVOaeRmdF42WyvQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
They both were there on my trip up to Gloucester on Tuesday night (4/26).

I agree that it's okay if US 1/NE Expressway does not get new numbers, the expressway portion is less than 4 miles long. Though if length is a factor, why does the Lowell Connector have exit numbers? It's not even 3 miles in length.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on April 29, 2016, 04:36:46 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 29, 2016, 03:37:52 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 29, 2016, 02:35:28 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on April 29, 2016, 01:47:34 PMThose numbers are on paper only anyway. All of them use paddle signs with no numbers.
This BGS (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6041022,-70.7422978,3a,75y,50.94h,85.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s69W28qktSNcsMFhjKJ7pAA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) gives hint of those numbers (except 14, which is an actual interchange w/MA 133).  It's slated to be taken down once 128's exit numbers change.

Stand-alone LGS for Exit 11 (MA 128).
(https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6223507,-70.6798486,3a,75y,150.43h,75.41t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sq7YGodeFVOaeRmdF42WyvQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
They both were there on my trip up to Gloucester on Tuesday night (4/26).

I agree that it's okay if US 1/NE Expressway does not get new numbers, the expressway portion is less than 4 miles long. Though if length is a factor, why does the Lowell Connector have exit numbers? It's not even 3 miles in length.
Wow I've driven that road a few times and never noticed those and I was looking for indications of exit numbers too, but mainly on guide signage.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 16, 2016, 11:37:41 PM
I've summarized what's been happening (or, perhaps better described as what's not been happening) with MassDOT's Milepost Exit Conversion Project in the second half of this blog post:
http://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2016/05/new-massachusetts-exit-signage-and.html (http://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2016/05/new-massachusetts-exit-signage-and.html)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on May 17, 2016, 09:25:08 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 16, 2016, 11:37:41 PM
I've summarized what's been happening (or, perhaps better described as what's not been happening) with MassDOT's Milepost Exit Conversion Project in the second half of this blog post:
http://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2016/05/new-massachusetts-exit-signage-and.html (http://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2016/05/new-massachusetts-exit-signage-and.html)
Interesting.  However, the FHWA may have something to say regarding such (at least for the Interstates).

IMHO & as previously suggested; it would be best that MassDOT select one road to do the conversion, gauge the overall reaction and then change the rest accordingly but at a more gradual rate.  Given the backlash regarding the proposed exit numbers along the Mid-Cape Highway portion of US 6; I would save that road for last should FHWA pressure MassDOT to have mile-marker-based interchange numbers for all freeways w/numbered interchanges in the state and not just Interstates.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on May 17, 2016, 06:10:50 PM
Let the rest of us know when the first highways to receive new numbers get them.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: ctrabs74 on May 25, 2016, 07:34:49 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 28, 2015, 07:36:36 PM
When PA converted its exit numbers, the original plan was to have I-476's Exit 31 (NE Extension Lansdale interchange) become Exit 30 and I-95's Exits 1 though 3 were planned to be renumbered 0 through 2; but those particular changes did not happen.

Part of the rationale at the time the new exit numbers were proposed for the Pennsylvania Turnpike, as I recall, was because the Northeast Extension of the Turnpike was signed as PA 9; the I-476 signing ended at the Mainline Turnpike (I-276). Once the Northeast Extension was rebuilt to Interstate standards, the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission re-signed the highway to 476.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on May 25, 2016, 10:20:57 PM
Quote from: ctrabs74 on May 25, 2016, 07:34:49 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 28, 2015, 07:36:36 PM
When PA converted its exit numbers, the original plan was to have I-476's Exit 31 (NE Extension Lansdale interchange) become Exit 30 and I-95's Exits 1 though 3 were planned to be renumbered 0 through 2; but those particular changes did not happen.

Part of the rationale at the time the new exit numbers were proposed for the Pennsylvania Turnpike, as I recall, was because the Northeast Extension of the Turnpike was signed as PA 9; the I-476 signing ended at the Mainline Turnpike (I-276). Once the Northeast Extension was rebuilt to Interstate standards, the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission re-signed the highway to 476.
False. No rebuilding.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on May 26, 2016, 09:18:30 AM
Quote from: Alps on May 25, 2016, 10:20:57 PM
Quote from: ctrabs74 on May 25, 2016, 07:34:49 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 28, 2015, 07:36:36 PM
When PA converted its exit numbers, the original plan was to have I-476's Exit 31 (NE Extension Lansdale interchange) become Exit 30 and I-95's Exits 1 though 3 were planned to be renumbered 0 through 2; but those particular changes did not happen.

Part of the rationale at the time the new exit numbers were proposed for the Pennsylvania Turnpike, as I recall, was because the Northeast Extension of the Turnpike was signed as PA 9; the I-476 signing ended at the Mainline Turnpike (I-276). Once the Northeast Extension was rebuilt to Interstate standards, the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission re-signed the highway to 476.
False. No rebuilding.
He might be referring to the current and ongoing widening project between Mid-County (I-276) and Lansdale (PA 63).  At the time of the I-476 redesignation and/or the exit renumbering; this particular project, at best, only existed on paper, presentation boards and/or a CAD file.

Ctrabs74, PA's exit renumbering (not just along the Turnpike) occurred several years after the Northeast Extension was redesignated as an extension of I-476.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on June 13, 2016, 12:59:11 PM
Based on her comments yesterday on Channel 5 during the quiz portion of On the Record, it appears that MassDOT Secretary Pollock would prefer that the state have milepost-based exits:
http://www.wcvb.com/politics/on-the-record-stephanie-pollack-segment-2/39979180 (http://www.wcvb.com/politics/on-the-record-stephanie-pollack-segment-2/39979180)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on June 13, 2016, 03:13:31 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on June 13, 2016, 12:59:11 PM
Based on her comments yesterday on Channel 5 during the quiz portion of On the Record, it appears that MassDOT Secretary Pollock would prefer that the state have milepost-based exits:
As most of us here know; prefer and implement are two different things.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on July 05, 2016, 12:11:48 PM
MassDOT posted a blog entry regarding a public meeting to be held 7/18 regarding the new signage replacement project for the Mid-Cape Highway (US 6):
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/route-6-sign-replacement-public-meeting-scheduled/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/route-6-sign-replacement-public-meeting-scheduled/)

I posted it here because a Cape Cod newspaper previously reported that MassDOT backed down and will not be changing the exit numbers with this project, however, there's nothing about that listed in the blog post, just that the new exit signs will be placed where the existing signs are. So, will there now be no overhead signs placed along US 6?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on July 16, 2016, 12:50:05 PM
Don't know if this has any significance to whether MassDOT has made a decision regarding going forward with the milepost exit conversion project, but in the Detail Sheets for the Dedham Street/ I-95 Interchange Reconstruction project, bid winning announcement now postponed until 8/30/16, the exit number assigned for the three new signs to go up for the new Dedham Street off-ramp northbound is 11C, whereas a milepost number would probably be 25. This document was published in December, after the winning bid for the conversion contract was announced.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on July 18, 2016, 10:18:41 PM
I've posted a full report under the US 6 sign plans thread, but at a public meeting tonight (7/18) regarding the US 6 sign replacement contract, MassDOT officials insisted they are still undecided about adopting milepost based numbering. Though it was stated that any new signage on US 6 would use the existing numbers, exit tabs for them are being made long enough to accommodate milepost based numbers if numbers are changed in the future.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on September 12, 2016, 12:23:09 PM
Today, September 12, marks the one year anniversary of MassDOT posting an advertisement for bids on the contract to convert exit numbers to those based on mileposts. They announced a winning bid last November 17 (Liddell Bros.), but nothing has happened since. If MassDOT comments at all about the conversion, they say they are still evaluating it. How long do you think this will continue before a final decision is made?

Meanwhile, the final plans for the US 6/Mid-Cape Highway sign project with the existing exit numbers were approved last week, with what I assume will be an advertisement for bids appearing shortly.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on September 12, 2016, 12:58:22 PM
Can't imagine that there was a big gap between PE and the advertisement, either.  At least MassDOT is on a ten-year clock -- if the project completed PE, then the feds will yank the funding anyway if it doesn't go to construction in 10 years...unless MassDOT has a good reason other than, "We're complete fools when it comes to managing public relations."
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 12, 2016, 05:16:33 PM
Have patience. These things don't happen overnight.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kalvado on September 12, 2016, 05:44:40 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 12, 2016, 05:16:33 PM
Have patience. These things don't happen overnight.
Well... You didn't see the saga about tourism promotional signs in NY.  Things do happen overnight, believe it or not!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on September 12, 2016, 06:01:24 PM
Quote from: kalvado on September 12, 2016, 05:44:40 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 12, 2016, 05:16:33 PM
Have patience. These things don't happen overnight.
Well... You didn't see the saga about tourism promotional signs in NY.  Things do happen overnight, believe it or not!

Ditto that. Other than a couple at state lines, they went from nowhere to everywhere in the span of a month.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on September 12, 2016, 09:20:13 PM
Imagine if MA had done their exit number conversion like that.  Would be interesting at least.  I wonder how much worse the reaction from Cape Cod would have been if the new numbers had popped up on US 6 overnight with no warning whatsoever?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on September 13, 2016, 03:02:36 PM
I'm sure it will happen at some point. But they just bungled it by essentially saying they'd dive in head-first and deal with the backlash by pinning it on the Feds, then pulling out and not doing it the second a negative word was written about it. When it comes to stuff like this, sometimes throwing the blinders on and taking the plunge is best, but I'm sure MassDOT's full PR campaign will be good.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 13, 2016, 07:31:22 PM
How would I know what's happening in New York? I'm from Wisconsin.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kalvado on September 13, 2016, 07:39:24 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 13, 2016, 07:31:22 PM
How would I know what's happening in New York? I'm from Wisconsin.
I don't think there is a good enough published summary - and using strong enough words to give you an idea is a no-no for media anyway.
try reading past month worth of this thread:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1487.2100
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on September 13, 2016, 10:33:04 PM
Quote from: kalvado on September 13, 2016, 07:39:24 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 13, 2016, 07:31:22 PM
How would I know what's happening in New York? I'm from Wisconsin.
I don't think there is a good enough published summary - and using strong enough words to give you an idea is a no-no for media anyway.
try reading past month worth of this thread:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=1487.2100

And there has been quite the public outcry Downstate about them: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2016/07/13/l-i-east-end-tourism-signs/

As a quick primer, New York (which claims to be too broke to even do necessary bridge repairs in places) spend $25 million on signs advertising its tourism app. See why we might be a little mad about that?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: epzik8 on September 15, 2016, 09:58:17 AM
One of the earlier posters said the "former exit" numbers would be posted along Massachusetts highways for "at least two years" following the changeover. Hopefully it won't be any longer than two years. In Pennsylvania, it will be 16 years next month since their switch to mileage-based exit numbers, and there are still "OLD EXIT XX" notations along exit signs on the Schuylkill portion of I-76, along I-83, I think I-80 and even on the Turnpike, and probably other Interstates in Pennsylvania like I-476 and I-376.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on September 15, 2016, 10:01:12 AM
Quote from: epzik8 on September 15, 2016, 09:58:17 AM
One of the earlier posters said the "former exit" numbers would be posted along Massachusetts highways for "at least two years" following the changeover. Hopefully it won't be any longer than two years. In Pennsylvania, it will be 16 years next month since their switch to mileage-based exit numbers, and there are still "OLD EXIT XX" notations along exit signs on the Schuylkill portion of I-76, along I-83, I think I-80 and even on the Turnpike, and probably other Interstates in Pennsylvania like I-476 and I-376.
Portions of I-95 in PA still has those OLD EXIT XX squares as well; especially where the BGS' predate the exit number change.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: mariethefoxy on September 15, 2016, 01:27:42 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on September 15, 2016, 09:58:17 AM
One of the earlier posters said the "former exit" numbers would be posted along Massachusetts highways for "at least two years" following the changeover. Hopefully it won't be any longer than two years. In Pennsylvania, it will be 16 years next month since their switch to mileage-based exit numbers, and there are still "OLD EXIT XX" notations along exit signs on the Schuylkill portion of I-76, along I-83, I think I-80 and even on the Turnpike, and probably other Interstates in Pennsylvania like I-476 and I-376.

well for 376 id expect it more since it was extended so even the mileage numbers had to be totally redone.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: spooky on September 15, 2016, 01:40:24 PM
I suspect it will be just like PA - the "Old Exit XX" panels will remain until someone bothers to take them down, and there won't be any pressing reason to take them down.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on September 15, 2016, 07:54:42 PM
Quote from: spooky on September 15, 2016, 01:40:24 PM
I suspect it will be just like PA - the "Old Exit XX" panels will remain until someone bothers to take them down, and there won't be any pressing reason to take them down.
Some states are actually good with it. NJ did "FORMERLY EXIT XX" along I-287 when I-95 was cancelled, and most of those were gone in a few years. A handful did stick around longer.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on September 16, 2016, 10:05:01 AM
Quote from: spooky on September 15, 2016, 01:40:24 PM
I suspect it will be just like PA - the "Old Exit XX" panels will remain until someone bothers to take them down, and there won't be any pressing reason to take them down.
When MassDPW re-numbered I-95 and I-93 in the mid-1980s, they put up similar "Formerly Exit XX" signs.  After two years, the majority of them were taken down in a relatively short time frame.  Ideally, you would have removal of those signs be the responsibility of the contractor that did the renumbering.  However, that is not a practical option because it extends the time frame of the contract, which is not desirable for either the contractor or the agency because of payment and administrative reasons.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jwolfer on September 21, 2016, 11:20:45 PM
Quote from: roadman on September 16, 2016, 10:05:01 AM
Quote from: spooky on September 15, 2016, 01:40:24 PM
I suspect it will be just like PA - the "Old Exit XX" panels will remain until someone bothers to take them down, and there won't be any pressing reason to take them down.
When MassDPW re-numbered I-95 and I-93 in the mid-1980s, they put up similar "Formerly Exit XX" signs.  After two years, the majority of them were taken down in a relatively short time frame.  Ideally, you would have removal of those signs be the responsibility of the contractor that did the renumbering.  However, that is not a practical option because it extends the time frame of the contract, which is not desirable for either the contractor or the agency because of payment and administrative reasons.
When FL renumbered exits the press release detailed the contractor would remove after 2 years
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 22, 2016, 05:29:27 PM
So, none of the exits have been renumbered to mileage-based yet? Does anyone know when the first road will get new exit numbers?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Beeper1 on September 22, 2016, 08:53:32 PM
Probably not anytime in the foreseeable future.  MassDOT bungled the PR rollout (or lack thereof), compounded by first making it public regarding changing the numbers on US-6 on Cape Cod, where people freak out about any tiny change of anything.

As of now, they are publicly insisting they haven't made up their mind about the conversion, even though the contract for it was issued last year.    Supposedly we will now for sure later this fall when the contract for replacement of the MassPike signs moves forward.

I'd say the odds are 50/50 that Mass backs off the conversion plan entirely.   
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on September 23, 2016, 08:54:57 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on September 22, 2016, 08:53:32 PM
Probably not anytime in the foreseeable future.  MassDOT bungled the PR rollout (or lack thereof), compounded by first making it public regarding changing the numbers on US-6 on Cape Cod, where people freak out about any tiny change of anything.

As of now, they are publicly insisting they haven't made up their mind about the conversion, even though the contract for it was issued last year.    Supposedly we will now for sure later this fall when the contract for replacement of the MassPike signs moves forward.

I'd say the odds are 50/50 that Mass backs off the conversion plan entirely.
What MassDOT could do (IMHO, they should've done this from the get-go) is convert one highway first (I-93 would be a good candidate IMHO) and see how it goes and then convert others highways (recommend changing the Interstates first) as time goes on and Bay State drivers gets used to/familiar with the concept.

Unlike the Cape Cod area; many highways in the Greater Boston area have changed once or twice over the decades and I don't recall any loud cries nor protests when most of those occurred.  For the record, US 3 & the Mass Pike (I-90) are the only highways in the Greater Boston area that still have the same interchange numbers that they originally had when the roads were first built.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on September 23, 2016, 09:39:52 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on September 22, 2016, 08:53:32 PM
Probably not anytime in the foreseeable future.  MassDOT bungled the PR rollout (or lack thereof), compounded by first making it public regarding changing the numbers on US-6 on Cape Cod, where people freak out about any tiny change of anything.
 

<.<

>.>

Half wonder if the "bungling" was intentionally done to kill of a project where the willingness to follow through on it dissipated.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kalvado on September 23, 2016, 10:11:25 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 23, 2016, 09:39:52 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on September 22, 2016, 08:53:32 PM
Probably not anytime in the foreseeable future.  MassDOT bungled the PR rollout (or lack thereof), compounded by first making it public regarding changing the numbers on US-6 on Cape Cod, where people freak out about any tiny change of anything.
 

<.<

>.>

Half wonder if the "bungling" was intentionally done to kill of a project where the willingness to follow through on it dissipated.

(personal opinion emphasized)

Is it just me, or there is not that much pressure for renumbering anyway? I mean 10 year mandate assumes that priorities of administration may change, and things can slide from back burner into a dark closet...
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on September 23, 2016, 11:06:04 AM
Quote from: kalvado on September 23, 2016, 10:11:25 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 23, 2016, 09:39:52 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on September 22, 2016, 08:53:32 PM
Probably not anytime in the foreseeable future.  MassDOT bungled the PR rollout (or lack thereof), compounded by first making it public regarding changing the numbers on US-6 on Cape Cod, where people freak out about any tiny change of anything.
 

<.<

>.>

Half wonder if the "bungling" was intentionally done to kill of a project where the willingness to follow through on it dissipated.

(personal opinion emphasized)

Is it just me, or there is not that much pressure for renumbering anyway? I mean 10 year mandate assumes that priorities of administration may change, and things can slide from back burner into a dark closet...
IMO this is all about the change in  administrations and highway administrators. The exit number conversion project was initiated by the previous regime. It is obvious that the new leadership is not enthusiastic about the project. Whether they've intentionally gone out of there way to have it postponed, either temporarily or permanently, is a good question. The continuing lack of openness about the project however, under a Transportation Secretary that keeps touting transparency and customer service as the new mantras of MassDOT, is not helping the agency convince cynical taxpayers that the agency is working in their best interest with this or other proposed projects.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on September 23, 2016, 11:27:44 AM
Except that a simple expedient of changing highway signs shouldn't be treated the same as running a new six lane highway through virgin forest, which is what is happening with the exit re-numbering project.  Inform people you're making changes - good idea.  Require multiple public hearings and soliciting public input in the name of "transparency" and "customer service" before you make these changes - bad idea.  Pennsylvania and Maine did wholesale exit number conversion without such nonsense, and their businesses are still thriving after the fact.

Of course, the biggest failure in this whole thing is the fact that the Feds dropped the compliance date for converting the numbers from the Final Rule for the 2009 MUTCD.  Hard to argue you need to make changes to comply with Federal requirements when you can't point to a hard deadline.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on September 23, 2016, 11:38:41 AM
Quote from: roadman on September 23, 2016, 11:27:44 AMRequire multiple public hearings and soliciting public input in the name of "transparency" and "customer service" before you make these changes - bad idea.
If memory serves, the outcry that occurred in the Cape over US 6 wasn't just about interchange numbers, but it was also about overhead signs replacing ground-mounted ones.  The locals preferred replacing the older, worn-out (reflectivity-wise) ground-mounted signs with newer ground-mounted ones (i.e. match-in-kind).  Personally, I see their point that using overheads along the 2-lane stretch being overkill but I disagree with them about not using overheads along the 4-lane divided stretch.

IMHO, had either the interchange number conversion already taken place or done in a later meeting independent of the sign replacement contract; there still would've been shouting & protests at the sign replacement meetings.

Although, it's worth noting that the Mid-Cape Highway has gone through some sign style changes in the past (right-justified exit tabs, mix-case lettering, larger panel sizes & letter heights, paler, green backgrounds, and reflective sheeting).  Were there protests regarding such changes back then?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: mariethefoxy on September 23, 2016, 12:50:48 PM
I can agree with the concerns on the cape in regards to the overhead signs, MA put overheads on the super 2 section of Route 2 and they seemed really overkill for what amounted to a rural highway where neighboring states would have just ground mounted them.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on September 23, 2016, 01:02:43 PM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on September 23, 2016, 12:50:48 PM
I can agree with the concerns on the cape in regards to the overhead signs, MA put overheads on the super 2 section of Route 2 and they seemed really overkill for what amounted to a rural highway where neighboring states would have just ground mounted them.

Would you rather MassDOT install ground-mounted signs, and then have to go through an environmental review process in 6 or 7 years so they can clear away trees and brush that are preventing drivers from seeing those signs?  Or they could put up overhead signs and avoid that issue entirely in the future.  And, with respect, I don't buy the 'destroying the rural character' argument as a reason to not provide adequate signing.  The super 2 sections of US 6 and Route 2 are FREEWAYS, and not some back roads that only see 20 cars a day.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on September 23, 2016, 01:15:58 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on September 23, 2016, 11:38:41 AM
Although, it's worth noting that the Mid-Cape Highway has gone through some sign style changes in the past (right-justified exit tabs, mix-case lettering, larger panel sizes & letter heights, paler, green backgrounds, and reflective sheeting).  Were there protests regarding such changes back then?

All of the sign style changes you mention occurred with the 1995-1996 sign replacement projects on US 6 between Sandwich and Eastham.  As I recall, there may have been some token opposition to the changes, but there was no serious public backlash of the level shown for the original design of the current project.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on September 23, 2016, 02:26:53 PM
Quote from: roadman on September 23, 2016, 01:02:43 PM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on September 23, 2016, 12:50:48 PM
I can agree with the concerns on the cape in regards to the overhead signs, MA put overheads on the super 2 section of Route 2 and they seemed really overkill for what amounted to a rural highway where neighboring states would have just ground mounted them.

Would you rather MassDOT install ground-mounted signs, and then have to go through an environmental review process in 6 or 7 years so they can clear away trees and brush that are preventing drivers from seeing those signs?  Or they could put up overhead signs and avoid that issue entirely in the future.  And, with respect, I don't buy the 'destroying the rural character' argument as a reason to not provide adequate signing.  The super 2 sections of US 6 and Route 2 are FREEWAYS, and not some back roads that only see 20 cars a day.
MA must have some very strict environmental laws if there's anything onerous for a maintenance tree trimming.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on September 23, 2016, 02:52:53 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 23, 2016, 02:26:53 PM
Quote from: roadman on September 23, 2016, 01:02:43 PM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on September 23, 2016, 12:50:48 PM
I can agree with the concerns on the cape in regards to the overhead signs, MA put overheads on the super 2 section of Route 2 and they seemed really overkill for what amounted to a rural highway where neighboring states would have just ground mounted them.

Would you rather MassDOT install ground-mounted signs, and then have to go through an environmental review process in 6 or 7 years so they can clear away trees and brush that are preventing drivers from seeing those signs?  Or they could put up overhead signs and avoid that issue entirely in the future.  And, with respect, I don't buy the 'destroying the rural character' argument as a reason to not provide adequate signing.  The super 2 sections of US 6 and Route 2 are FREEWAYS, and not some back roads that only see 20 cars a day.
MA must have some very strict environmental laws if there's anything onerous for a maintenance tree trimming.
In Massachusetts, most tree trimming along state highways must be vetted through the local conservation commissions, who have final say on whether trees can be cut or not.  This is partially due to the fact that MassDOT contracts out nearly all maintenance activities, including tree trimming to improve visibility of ground-mounted signs.  The issue of tree trimming/removal is a particularly sensitive one, especially in areas like Cape Cod.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on September 23, 2016, 09:39:29 PM
Quote from: roadman on September 23, 2016, 02:52:53 PM
Quote from: vdeane on September 23, 2016, 02:26:53 PM
Quote from: roadman on September 23, 2016, 01:02:43 PM
Quote from: mariethefoxy on September 23, 2016, 12:50:48 PM
I can agree with the concerns on the cape in regards to the overhead signs, MA put overheads on the super 2 section of Route 2 and they seemed really overkill for what amounted to a rural highway where neighboring states would have just ground mounted them.

Would you rather MassDOT install ground-mounted signs, and then have to go through an environmental review process in 6 or 7 years so they can clear away trees and brush that are preventing drivers from seeing those signs?  Or they could put up overhead signs and avoid that issue entirely in the future.  And, with respect, I don't buy the 'destroying the rural character' argument as a reason to not provide adequate signing.  The super 2 sections of US 6 and Route 2 are FREEWAYS, and not some back roads that only see 20 cars a day.
MA must have some very strict environmental laws if there's anything onerous for a maintenance tree trimming.
In Massachusetts, most tree trimming along state highways must be vetted through the local conservation commissions, who have final say on whether trees can be cut or not.  This is partially due to the fact that MassDOT contracts out nearly all maintenance activities, including tree trimming to improve visibility of ground-mounted signs.  The issue of tree trimming/removal is a particularly sensitive one, especially in areas like Cape Cod.
And I think trees may have a lot to do with the reaction on Cape Cod to the sign project. There was a backlash after most of the trees in the median of US 6 were taken down a few years ago along the first few miles in Sandwich. Whether part of this project or just occurring at the same time was the replacement of signage for the MA 6A exit and US 6/MA 3 advance signs (WB) with overhead signage, apparently now to be the only place where you will find overheads on the Mid-Cape highway. Thus I think that in the back of some people's minds is now an association between overhead signs and massive tree cutting, and so these people were quick to oppose the initial plans for the project.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on September 26, 2016, 09:52:39 AM
The sign replacement project on US 6 had nothing to do with the prior tree removal project, and was an entirely separate design.  Traditionally, the Cape Cod Commission has always been adverse to overhead signs, as well as LOGO service signs, east of the Cape Cod Canal.  Not so much because of the tree removal, but because they believe placing proper freeway signing on a freeway will somehow destroy the "image" of the Cape to tourists.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on September 26, 2016, 01:06:52 PM
To be fair, MA's policy on overhead signs IS overkill.  Overhead signs are for major junctions, closely spaced exits/ramps (including cloverleafs), lack of ROW, etc.  Using them for every sign just makes an area look more urban/suburban than it otherwise would.

Lack of logo signs isn't just a Cape Cod thing... also see the Adirondacks and Vermont.  It really does have an effect on perception, too.

I don't understand the intense opposition to mile-based exit numbers, but given that they were already mad about overhead signs, they were probably more sensitive to change than they otherwise would have been.  IMO MassDOT should have done the project with mile-based numbers and NYSDOT's overhead signing policies.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 26, 2016, 04:20:02 PM
So is the plan to change the state's exits from sequential to mileage-based dead?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on September 26, 2016, 06:16:42 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 26, 2016, 04:20:02 PM
So is the plan to change the state's exits from sequential to mileage-based dead?
That's the million dollar question
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 03, 2016, 03:53:12 PM
The MassDOT project that was advertised last fall to replace signage in the Big Dig and surrounding US 1 and I-90 tunnels,  with signs having new milepost based exit numbers, apparently has been canceled. MassDOT readvertised the project this past Saturday (10/1) with the date to announce the new winner of the contract to be announced 2/22/17. Unknown whether these signs will have new numbers or not.

The bid page for the project:
https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-17-1030-0H100-0H002-10081&external=true&parentUrl=bid (https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-17-1030-0H100-0H002-10081&external=true&parentUrl=bid)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on October 03, 2016, 04:03:19 PM
Why do I have a feeling that cancelation cans the rest of the sequential-to-milepost conversion plan?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on October 04, 2016, 09:17:42 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 03, 2016, 03:53:12 PM
The MassDOT project that was advertised last fall to replace signage in the Big Dig and surrounding US 1 and I-90 tunnels,  with signs having new milepost based exit numbers, apparently has been canceled. MassDOT readvertised the project this past Saturday (10/1) with the date to announce the new winner of the contract to be announced 2/22/17. Unknown whether these signs will have new numbers or not.

The bid page for the project:
https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-17-1030-0H100-0H002-10081&external=true&parentUrl=bid (https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-17-1030-0H100-0H002-10081&external=true&parentUrl=bid)
The previous contract for the Big Dig tunnel overhead sign repairs was not awarded due to issues with the sole bid that was received for the work.  As of now, signs under the new contract will retain the sequential numbers.  Note that MassDOT's current SOP for sign replacement projects is to retain the existing sequential numbers on new signs, but design the exit tabs and gore signs to eventually accommodate the new milepost numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on October 04, 2016, 09:26:44 AM
Quote from: roadman on October 04, 2016, 09:17:42 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 03, 2016, 03:53:12 PM
The MassDOT project that was advertised last fall to replace signage in the Big Dig and surrounding US 1 and I-90 tunnels,  with signs having new milepost based exit numbers, apparently has been canceled. MassDOT readvertised the project this past Saturday (10/1) with the date to announce the new winner of the contract to be announced 2/22/17. Unknown whether these signs will have new numbers or not.

The bid page for the project:
https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-17-1030-0H100-0H002-10081&external=true&parentUrl=bid (https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-17-1030-0H100-0H002-10081&external=true&parentUrl=bid)
The previous contract for the Big Dig tunnel overhead sign repairs was not awarded due to issues with the sole bid that was received for the work.  As of now, signs under the new contract will retain the sequential numbers.  Note that MassDOT's current SOP for sign replacement projects is to retain the existing sequential numbers on new signs, but design the exit tabs and gore signs to eventually accommodate the new milepost numbers.
Such would make for wider exit sign/tabs for the I-90 signage; the milepost-based numbers are all triple-digits (not including suffixes) in that area.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on October 04, 2016, 09:33:10 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 04, 2016, 09:26:44 AM
Quote from: roadman on October 04, 2016, 09:17:42 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 03, 2016, 03:53:12 PM
The MassDOT project that was advertised last fall to replace signage in the Big Dig and surrounding US 1 and I-90 tunnels,  with signs having new milepost based exit numbers, apparently has been canceled. MassDOT readvertised the project this past Saturday (10/1) with the date to announce the new winner of the contract to be announced 2/22/17. Unknown whether these signs will have new numbers or not.

The bid page for the project:
https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-17-1030-0H100-0H002-10081&external=true&parentUrl=bid (https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-17-1030-0H100-0H002-10081&external=true&parentUrl=bid)
The previous contract for the Big Dig tunnel overhead sign repairs was not awarded due to issues with the sole bid that was received for the work.  As of now, signs under the new contract will retain the sequential numbers.  Note that MassDOT's current SOP for sign replacement projects is to retain the existing sequential numbers on new signs, but design the exit tabs and gore signs to eventually accommodate the new milepost numbers.
Such would make for wider exit sign/tabs for the I-90 signage; the milepost-based numbers are all triple-digits (not including suffixes) in that area.
The I-90 sign replacement projects were originally designed to accommodate the new milepost numbers, so this SOP doesn't affect these projects as much as others that are still under design.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 04, 2016, 11:13:39 PM
Quote from: roadman on October 04, 2016, 09:33:10 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 04, 2016, 09:26:44 AM
Quote from: roadman on October 04, 2016, 09:17:42 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 03, 2016, 03:53:12 PM
The MassDOT project that was advertised last fall to replace signage in the Big Dig and surrounding US 1 and I-90 tunnels,  with signs having new milepost based exit numbers, apparently has been canceled. MassDOT readvertised the project this past Saturday (10/1) with the date to announce the new winner of the contract to be announced 2/22/17. Unknown whether these signs will have new numbers or not.

The bid page for the project:
https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-17-1030-0H100-0H002-10081&external=true&parentUrl=bid (https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-17-1030-0H100-0H002-10081&external=true&parentUrl=bid)
The previous contract for the Big Dig tunnel overhead sign repairs was not awarded due to issues with the sole bid that was received for the work.  As of now, signs under the new contract will retain the sequential numbers.  Note that MassDOT's current SOP for sign replacement projects is to retain the existing sequential numbers on new signs, but design the exit tabs and gore signs to eventually accommodate the new milepost numbers.
Such would make for wider exit sign/tabs for the I-90 signage; the milepost-based numbers are all triple-digits (not including suffixes) in that area.
The I-90 sign replacement projects were originally designed to accommodate the new milepost numbers, so this SOP doesn't affect these projects as much as others that are still under design.
So, in other words, the exit number conversion project is postponed indefinitely. Hopefully, all the effort put into planning the project will not go for naught. Will MA now be the last state to convert?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: mass_citizen on October 04, 2016, 11:47:17 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 04, 2016, 11:13:39 PM

Will MA now be the last state to convert?

A tad bit presumptuous considering the other northeast states aren't exactly fast tracking any changes
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on October 05, 2016, 01:34:13 PM
Quote from: mass_citizen on October 04, 2016, 11:47:17 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 04, 2016, 11:13:39 PM

Will MA now be the last state to convert?

A tad bit presumptuous considering the other northeast states aren't exactly fast tracking any changes

Rhode Island was supposed to be, they announced it around the same time as the Mass plan was announced. Just like Mass, they were also planning on adding exit numbers to roads that did not already have them. However, RIDOT fell silent at around the same time MassDOT did about the project. Given this, it would not be a stretch to assume that the states are working together to try and get a waiver, extension, or avoid it all together. NH and VT are on their own, but it does seem like RI and MA are somewhat tied together with this.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on October 05, 2016, 02:02:30 PM
I suppose there's some consolation that NY at least got the Taconic's conversion underway.  What a mess, though, having different numbering schemes on various different highways.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on October 05, 2016, 02:04:04 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on October 05, 2016, 01:34:13 PM
Quote from: mass_citizen on October 04, 2016, 11:47:17 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 04, 2016, 11:13:39 PM

Will MA now be the last state to convert?

A tad bit presumptuous considering the other northeast states aren't exactly fast tracking any changes

Rhode Island was supposed to be, they announced it around the same time as the Mass plan was announced. Just like Mass, they were also planning on adding exit numbers to roads that did not already have them. However, RIDOT fell silent at around the same time MassDOT did about the project. Given this, it would not be a stretch to assume that the states are working together to try and get a waiver, extension, or avoid it all together. NH and VT are on their own, but it does seem like RI and MA are somewhat tied together with this.
Once the 2009 MUTCD Final Rule was adopted, most of the New England states (excepting Maine) and New York jointly petitioned FHWA for a waiver from the requirement to convert to milepost-based numbering.  The request was flatly denied by FHWA.  And, although the original 2008 Federal Register NPA for the 2009 MUTCD contained a compliance date (10 years from adoption of Final Rule) for converting to milepost-based numbering, this compliance date was not included in the final 2009 MUTCD.  Pretty difficult for FHWA to mandate something be changed by a certain date if there's no compliance date requiring the change to be made.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on October 05, 2016, 02:27:13 PM
Quote from: Rothman on October 05, 2016, 02:02:30 PM
I suppose there's some consolation that NY at least got the Taconic's conversion underway.  What a mess, though, having different numbering schemes on various different highways.

The Taconic "conversion" is more applying numbers to a route that lost them 20-30 years ago and only in the Interstate-quality section. I've been on the road for as long as I can remember and there were only a couple numbers left in the late 90s, all north of I-84, IINM.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Beeper1 on October 05, 2016, 08:10:55 PM
And CT isn't exactly in a hurry to change it on the rest of their highways.  I-395 was a rare case of CT replacing signs for the entire length of a longer highway and it seems like they will keep using the "we're only replacing signs in one area" excuse for not changing anything else.

My bet would be for VT to be the last to change over.  The other states seem to be at least making some attempts, but IIRC from older posts on the topic, VTrans attitude is to not do it until FHWA absolutely forces them to. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on October 05, 2016, 08:14:22 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on October 05, 2016, 08:10:55 PM
My bet would be for VT to be the last to change over.  The other states seem to be at least making some attempts, but IIRC from older posts on the topic, VTrans attitude is to not do it until FHWA absolutely forces them to.

Do you mean "start changing existing numbers" or "finish transition"? If you meant the latter, I'll place my bets on New York. Good luck getting NYSTA, NYCDOT or Westchester County to change the numbers they control.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 05, 2016, 08:24:40 PM
I'll put my $$ on CT being the last to convert.  We were the last to raise our speed limit above 55 after the national speed limit was abolished.  We were one of the last states to allow Sunday liquor sales.   We've been trying to get Route 11 built since 1972.  Any project has to go through 25 EIS's before even being considered.  It's taken over a year and lawsuits against the developer and insurance company to get a minor league ballpark built.   
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Beeper1 on October 05, 2016, 08:28:41 PM
I think VT will be the last to start, but will probably do everything all at once when they do.

Last to finish would be either CT or NY (the non-NYSDOT roads).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kalvado on October 05, 2016, 08:48:30 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on October 05, 2016, 08:28:41 PM
I think VT will be the last to start, but will probably do everything all at once when they do.

Last to finish would be either CT or NY (the non-NYSDOT roads).
My bet is that HUD displays capable of substituting the exit number would become common enough before NYS completes renumbering...
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on October 05, 2016, 11:44:17 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 05, 2016, 08:24:40 PM
I'll put my $$ on CT being the last to convert.  We were the last to raise our speed limit above 55 after the national speed limit was abolished.
Hawaii
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on October 06, 2016, 09:39:51 AM
New Hampshire was all set to begin conversion, but word on the street (pardon the pun) is that the Governor's Budget Commission (which apparently all DOT projects must go through for approval) refused to approve funding for the work.  So I would say that, unless things change, NH will be the last of the New England states to convert.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on October 06, 2016, 08:20:06 PM
I wasn't even aware NH even had plans to convert.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on October 07, 2016, 11:29:50 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on October 05, 2016, 08:10:55 PM
And CT isn't exactly in a hurry to change it on the rest of their highways.  I-395 was a rare case of CT replacing signs for the entire length of a longer highway and it seems like they will keep using the "we're only replacing signs in one area" excuse for not changing anything else.

My bet would be for VT to be the last to change over.  The other states seem to be at least making some attempts, but IIRC from older posts on the topic, VTrans attitude is to not do it until FHWA absolutely forces them to.

If Connecticut sticks to its self-imposed 20-year timeline to complete the conversion to mileage-based numbering, we'd see the full statewide conversion wrapped up in...2035.  But some progress is being made though.  Routes 349 and 184 will get mileage-based exit numbers when their signs are replaced next year, and Routes 8 and 25 are supposedly the next freeways in line to be converted to mile based exits in 2017-2019, with sign replacement contracts already awarded and the contractor for each at work.  My guess is Route 7 would be the last to be converted to mile based exit numbering since signs on the freeway sections were replaced fairly recently.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on October 07, 2016, 11:44:59 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 05, 2016, 08:24:40 PM
We've been trying to get Route 11 built since 1972.

I hereby coin the term "Connecticut Try" as in, "We gave it the old Connecticut Try," which means you really didn't try at all. :D
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on October 07, 2016, 01:09:41 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 05, 2016, 11:44:17 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 05, 2016, 08:24:40 PM
I'll put my $$ on CT being the last to convert.  We were the last to raise our speed limit above 55 after the national speed limit was abolished.
Hawaii

Hawaii already has mileage-based numbers.

Quote from: roadman on October 06, 2016, 09:39:51 AM
New Hampshire was all set to begin conversion, but word on the street (pardon the pun) is that the Governor's Budget Commission (which apparently all DOT projects must go through for approval) refused to approve funding for the work.  So I would say that, unless things change, NH will be the last of the New England states to convert.

Interesting given the ability with these projects to pass off the spending to the feds.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on October 07, 2016, 01:21:02 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on October 07, 2016, 01:09:41 PM
Quote from: roadman on October 06, 2016, 09:39:51 AM
New Hampshire was all set to begin conversion, but word on the street (pardon the pun) is that the Governor's Budget Commission (which apparently all DOT projects must go through for approval) refused to approve funding for the work.  So I would say that, unless things change, NH will be the last of the New England states to convert.

Interesting given the ability with these projects to pass off the spending to the feds.

Not really.  Every state has an obligation limitation from the feds and limited apportionment.  One of the big reactions to exit numbering conversions is, "Isn't there something better to spend that money on?"  You know, like those bridges in poor condition we keep hearing about in the news.  That's the argument that needs to be overcome.

I suppose MA's approach was a type of solution, despite the fact it looks like political will to carry through with their conversion has dissipated:  Using HSIP funds.  FHWA can be such a stickler when it comes to spending HSIP that MA could have just said, "Pfft, might as well use it on this. You make it such a pain to use it anywhere else."
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on October 07, 2016, 09:39:58 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on October 07, 2016, 01:09:41 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 05, 2016, 11:44:17 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 05, 2016, 08:24:40 PM
I'll put my $$ on CT being the last to convert.  We were the last to raise our speed limit above 55 after the national speed limit was abolished.
Hawaii

Hawaii already has mileage-based numbers.

Not the part I was quoting. Speed limits.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on October 08, 2016, 09:30:20 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 07, 2016, 01:21:02 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on October 07, 2016, 01:09:41 PM
Quote from: roadman on October 06, 2016, 09:39:51 AM
New Hampshire was all set to begin conversion, but word on the street (pardon the pun) is that the Governor's Budget Commission (which apparently all DOT projects must go through for approval) refused to approve funding for the work.  So I would say that, unless things change, NH will be the last of the New England states to convert.

Interesting given the ability with these projects to pass off the spending to the feds.

The real source of the opposition to converting to mile-based exit numbers in Massachusetts (and the other New England states for that matter) is because people don't want to deal with the inconvenience with a change of exit numbers.  For Connecticut at least, money really isn't the driving factor behind the opposition since the state is replacing signs that have already reached their end-of-life and need replacement, making it cost-effective to implement the exit number conversion at that time.  The greatest opposition to the exit number conversion in Massachusetts is on Cape Cod.  Not surprisingly in Massachusetts, the way Cape Cod goes, so does the remainder of that state.

Not really.  Every state has an obligation limitation from the feds and limited apportionment.  One of the big reactions to exit numbering conversions is, "Isn't there something better to spend that money on?"  You know, like those bridges in poor condition we keep hearing about in the news.  That's the argument that needs to be overcome.

I suppose MA's approach was a type of solution, despite the fact it looks like political will to carry through with their conversion has dissipated:  Using HSIP funds.  FHWA can be such a stickler when it comes to spending HSIP that MA could have just said, "Pfft, might as well use it on this. You make it such a pain to use it anywhere else."
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on October 10, 2016, 09:19:28 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 07, 2016, 01:21:02 PMThe real source of the opposition to converting to mile-based exit numbers in Massachusetts (and the other New England states for that matter) is because people don't want to deal with the inconvenience with a change of exit numbers.  For Connecticut at least, money really isn't the driving factor behind the opposition since the state is replacing signs that have already reached their end-of-life and need replacement, making it cost-effective to implement the exit number conversion at that time.  The greatest opposition to the exit number conversion in Massachusetts is on Cape Cod.  Not surprisingly in Massachusetts, the way Cape Cod goes, so does the remainder of that state.
It's worth noting that several highways in eastern Massachusetts have had their exit/interchange numbers change once or twice from 1962-1988.  Allow me to run down the list:

1.  Route 128/Yankee Division Highway - the entire Gloucester-to-Braintree stretch changed all its numbers circa 1962; the original numbers had Exit 1 starting at Grant Circle (Route 127 & current Exit 11).  The I-95 (Peabody-to-Canton) and I-93 (Canton-to-Braintree) portions had their numbers change (to the current ones) circa 1987-88.  The Peabody-to-Gloucester stretch of 128 still has its 1962-era numbers and wrong-way sequencing (numbers increase as one head southwest).

2. I-93 north of Boston - originally had the Exit 25 = Route 128 numbering sequence (the numbers increased as one headed further away from Boston).  It changed to having Exit 1 at the Tobin Bridge (then I-95, later US 1) interchange during the early 70s; this change included the experimental MILE XX-EXIT YY tabs.  The numbers changed again (to the current ones) circa 1987 to reflect I-93's extension further south (along existing highways) to Canton.

3.  I-95 south of Canton - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif.  Numbers were changed to the current sequential ones some time during the early-to-mid 70s.

4.  Route 24 - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif.  Numbers were changed to the current sequential ones some time during the early-to-mid 70s.

5.  Southeast Expressway - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif (numbers decreased as one approached Boston).  Numbers were changed to the current I-93 based sequential ones circa 1987.

6.  Route 3 south of Boston - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif (it continued the Southeast Expressway's original numbering).  Numbers were changed to the current sequential ones some time during the late 70s.

The Mass Pike (I-90) & US 3 are the only freeways in the Greater Boston area that are still using their original interchange/exit numbers.

The Central Artery, I-95 north of Peabody & the freeway portions of Route 2 originally did not have numbered interchanges/exits.

Long story short; interchange/exit numbers in Massachusetts aren't as sacred as those who live along the Cape would think.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 10, 2016, 11:43:30 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 10, 2016, 09:19:28 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 07, 2016, 01:21:02 PMThe real source of the opposition to converting to mile-based exit numbers in Massachusetts (and the other New England states for that matter) is because people don't want to deal with the inconvenience with a change of exit numbers.  For Connecticut at least, money really isn't the driving factor behind the opposition since the state is replacing signs that have already reached their end-of-life and need replacement, making it cost-effective to implement the exit number conversion at that time.  The greatest opposition to the exit number conversion in Massachusetts is on Cape Cod.  Not surprisingly in Massachusetts, the way Cape Cod goes, so does the remainder of that state.
It's worth noting that several highways in eastern Massachusetts have had their exit/interchange numbers change once or twice from 1962-1988.  Allow me to run down the list:

1.  Route 128/Yankee Division Highway - the entire Gloucester-to-Braintree stretch changed all its numbers circa 1962; the original numbers had Exit 1 starting at Grant Circle (Route 127 & current Exit 11).  The I-95 (Peabody-to-Canton) and I-93 (Canton-to-Braintree) portions had their numbers change (to the current ones) circa 1987-88.  The Peabody-to-Gloucester stretch of 128 still has its 1962-era numbers and wrong-way sequencing (numbers increase as one head southwest).

2. I-93 north of Boston - originally had the Exit 25 = Route 128 numbering sequence (the numbers increased as one headed further away from Boston).  It changed to having Exit 1 at the Tobin Bridge (then I-95, later US 1) interchange during the early 70s; this change included the experimental MILE XX-EXIT YY tabs.  The numbers changed again (to the current ones) circa 1987 to reflect I-93's extension further south (along existing highways) to Canton.

3.  I-95 south of Canton - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif.  Numbers were changed to the current sequential ones some time during the early-to-mid 70s.

4.  Route 24 - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif.  Numbers were changed to the current sequential ones some time during the early-to-mid 70s.

5.  Southeast Expressway - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif (numbers decreased as one approached Boston).  Numbers were changed to the current I-93 based sequential ones circa 1987.

6.  Route 3 south of Boston - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif (it continued the Southeast Expressway's original numbering).  Numbers were changed to the current sequential ones some time during the late 70s.

The Mass Pike (I-90) & US 3 are the only freeways in the Greater Boston area that are still using their original interchange/exit numbers.

The Central Artery, I-95 north of Peabody & the freeway portions of Route 2 originally did not have numbered interchanges/exits.

Long story short; interchange/exit numbers in Massachusetts aren't as sacred as those who live along the Cape would think.
Agreed. And during the conversion of MA 3, they switched the exit numbers along the section south of MA 14 first, and did not change the others until about two years later (apparently during this time MA 14 was signed as Exit 11 NB but as Exit 33 SB). Drivers apparently didn't have too much trouble adapting.

Interestingly, if the milepost exit project ever goes ahead, the Mass Ave exit on I-93 (18) would be restored to it's original number, 15 (heading south, it is proposed to be 15B northbound).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on October 10, 2016, 04:28:18 PM
I'm sure people will get used to the new numbers in time (if the conversion happens). Massachusetts is hardly the only state to change its exit sequences from sequential to milepost.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: southshore720 on October 11, 2016, 05:32:23 PM
As long as GPS/navigation apps quickly adjust to the new exit numbers, most people will be fine with the conversion.  It's amazing how many people exclusively rely on navigation tools to get around...even in their own cities/towns!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on October 12, 2016, 08:39:39 AM
Quote from: southshore720 on October 11, 2016, 05:32:23 PMIt's amazing how many people exclusively rely on navigation tools to get around...even in their own cities/towns!
It's actually kind of sad IMHO.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on October 12, 2016, 03:37:24 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 12, 2016, 08:39:39 AM
Quote from: southshore720 on October 11, 2016, 05:32:23 PMIt's amazing how many people exclusively rely on navigation tools to get around...even in their own cities/towns!
It's actually kind of sad IMHO.

Yep. Also making it harder to identify when people have dementia. Used to be able to tell if someone couldn't find their way home. Now, they just use a GPS.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on October 13, 2016, 10:53:33 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 10, 2016, 09:19:28 AM
Quote from: Rothman on October 07, 2016, 01:21:02 PMThe real source of the opposition to converting to mile-based exit numbers in Massachusetts (and the other New England states for that matter) is because people don't want to deal with the inconvenience with a change of exit numbers.  For Connecticut at least, money really isn't the driving factor behind the opposition since the state is replacing signs that have already reached their end-of-life and need replacement, making it cost-effective to implement the exit number conversion at that time.  The greatest opposition to the exit number conversion in Massachusetts is on Cape Cod.  Not surprisingly in Massachusetts, the way Cape Cod goes, so does the remainder of that state.
It's worth noting that several highways in eastern Massachusetts have had their exit/interchange numbers change once or twice from 1962-1988.  Allow me to run down the list:

1.  Route 128/Yankee Division Highway - the entire Gloucester-to-Braintree stretch changed all its numbers circa 1962; the original numbers had Exit 1 starting at Grant Circle (Route 127 & current Exit 11).  The I-95 (Peabody-to-Canton) and I-93 (Canton-to-Braintree) portions had their numbers change (to the current ones) circa 1987-88.  The Peabody-to-Gloucester stretch of 128 still has its 1962-era numbers and wrong-way sequencing (numbers increase as one head southwest).

2. I-93 north of Boston - originally had the Exit 25 = Route 128 numbering sequence (the numbers increased as one headed further away from Boston).  It changed to having Exit 1 at the Tobin Bridge (then I-95, later US 1) interchange during the early 70s; this change included the experimental MILE XX-EXIT YY tabs.  The numbers changed again (to the current ones) circa 1987 to reflect I-93's extension further south (along existing highways) to Canton.

3.  I-95 south of Canton - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif.  Numbers were changed to the current sequential ones some time during the early-to-mid 70s.

4.  Route 24 - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif.  Numbers were changed to the current sequential ones some time during the early-to-mid 70s.

5.  Southeast Expressway - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif (numbers decreased as one approached Boston).  Numbers were changed to the current I-93 based sequential ones circa 1987.

6.  Route 3 south of Boston - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif (it continued the Southeast Expressway's original numbering).  Numbers were changed to the current sequential ones some time during the late 70s.

The Mass Pike (I-90) & US 3 are the only freeways in the Greater Boston area that are still using their original interchange/exit numbers.

The Central Artery, I-95 north of Peabody & the freeway portions of Route 2 originally did not have numbered interchanges/exits.

Long story short; interchange/exit numbers in Massachusetts aren't as sacred as those who live along the Cape would think.

If you want to get technical, you can throw MA 25 up there, as it has shared exit 1 with I-495 since mid-2006.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on October 14, 2016, 08:56:32 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on October 13, 2016, 10:53:33 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 10, 2016, 09:19:28 AMIt's worth noting that several highways in eastern Massachusetts have had their exit/interchange numbers change once or twice from 1962-1988.  Allow me to run down the list:

1.  Route 128/Yankee Division Highway - the entire Gloucester-to-Braintree stretch changed all its numbers circa 1962; the original numbers had Exit 1 starting at Grant Circle (Route 127 & current Exit 11).  The I-95 (Peabody-to-Canton) and I-93 (Canton-to-Braintree) portions had their numbers change (to the current ones) circa 1987-88.  The Peabody-to-Gloucester stretch of 128 still has its 1962-era numbers and wrong-way sequencing (numbers increase as one head southwest).

2. I-93 north of Boston - originally had the Exit 25 = Route 128 numbering sequence (the numbers increased as one headed further away from Boston).  It changed to having Exit 1 at the Tobin Bridge (then I-95, later US 1) interchange during the early 70s; this change included the experimental MILE XX-EXIT YY tabs.  The numbers changed again (to the current ones) circa 1987 to reflect I-93's extension further south (along existing highways) to Canton.

3.  I-95 south of Canton - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif.  Numbers were changed to the current sequential ones some time during the early-to-mid 70s.

4.  Route 24 - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif.  Numbers were changed to the current sequential ones some time during the early-to-mid 70s.

5.  Southeast Expressway - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif (numbers decreased as one approached Boston).  Numbers were changed to the current I-93 based sequential ones circa 1987.

6.  Route 3 south of Boston - original numbers had the Exit 25 = Route 128 motif (it continued the Southeast Expressway's original numbering).  Numbers were changed to the current sequential ones some time during the late 70s.

The Mass Pike (I-90) & US 3 are the only freeways in the Greater Boston area that are still using their original interchange/exit numbers.

The Central Artery, I-95 north of Peabody & the freeway portions of Route 2 originally did not have numbered interchanges/exits.

Long story short; interchange/exit numbers in Massachusetts aren't as sacred as those who live along the Cape would think.

If you want to get technical, you can throw MA 25 up there, as it has shared exit 1 with I-495 since mid-2006.
I also could add I-495 as well.  The numbers changed during the early 80s to accommodate the southern extension (east of I-95 in Mansfield) as well as the then-MA 25 stretch between Raynham & Wareham.  I-495's original interchange numbers started at I-95 in Mansfield.

I have to confess; when I typed my previous post, I thinking more in terms of the Greater Boston area as opposed to Eastern Massachusetts (which was why I excluded I-495 & MA 25).

If I'm not mistaken, I believe that the interchange numbers along the short stretch of I-295 in Attleboro originally continued w/RI's sequential numbering.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 05, 2017, 04:23:54 PM
Does anyone have any updates on Massachusetts's milepost exit sequence conversion? Will it happen eventually, or is the proposal dead like New York's one-time proposal?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 06, 2017, 05:31:19 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 05, 2017, 04:23:54 PM
Does anyone have any updates on Massachusetts's milepost exit sequence conversion? Will it happen eventually, or is the proposal dead like New York's one-time proposal?
I have heard nothing. I don't suspect we'll hear anything unless MassDOT decides to go through with the project. The officials at the US 6 sign project public meeting last summer said if the project went forward it would be preceded by a 6-12 month public relations campaign to educate everyone as to the changes.

It would be useful IMHO, if they are to proceed, to do so as soon as possible given the number of sign replacement projects going on and those scheduled over the next few years. Besides the current projects going on, two on the Mass Pike, the western project is 11% complete, while the eastern is 6% based on the MassDOT project listings, and the recently started project on I-495 from Raynham to Bolton, 3% complete, there are 5 projects scheduled for 2017 and 10 more through 2021. Here's a list:

US 6 Mid-Cape Highway, Spring 2017
I-90/I-93 US 1 Tunnels, Spring 2017
MA 24, Fall River to Randolph, Summer 2017
MA 1A, Boston to Revere, Summer 2017
I-495, Haverhill to Amesbury, Fall 2017
I-495, Bolton to Lowell, Fall 2018
I-290, Auburn to Worcester, Fall 2018
I-95, Attleboro to Norwood, Fall 2018
I-95, Reading to Lynnfield, Winter 2019/20
US 1, Chelsea to Danvers, Winter 2019/20
MA 28, Bourne to Falmouth, Winter
2019/20
MA 146, Uxbridge to Worcester, Fall 2020
I-391, Chicopee to Holyoke, Winter 2020/21
Sections of I-495 and I-195, Winter  2020/21
US 3, Burlington to Tyngsborough, Summer 2021

If they wait until all these are completed, perhaps it will start around 2023.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 09, 2017, 09:18:18 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 06, 2017, 05:31:19 PMMA 1A, Boston to Revere, Summer 2017
...
US 1, Chelsea to Danvers, Winter 2019/20
MA 28, Bourne to Falmouth, Winter 2019/20
Granted, you simply copied the list from MassDOT's website & pasted such here but MA 1A, US 1 & MA 28* presently don't have numbered interchanges at all; and, hence, shouldn't/wouldn't be impacted by any conversion.

*I just found out that MA 28 in this section was planned to receive numbered interchanges post-conversion.

Given that the MA 28 Bourne to Falmouth stretch is situated in Cape Cod; one could assume that such will be met with some resistance, especially since the southernmost interchange would be at/around MM 51.  If such gets implemented without a hitch; those howling over the US 6 conversions could be called out as hypocrites.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on January 12, 2017, 09:39:02 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 09, 2017, 09:18:18 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 06, 2017, 05:31:19 PMMA 1A, Boston to Revere, Summer 2017
...
US 1, Chelsea to Danvers, Winter 2019/20
MA 28, Bourne to Falmouth, Winter 2019/20
Granted, you simply copied the list from MassDOT's website & pasted such here but MA 1A, US 1 & MA 28* presently don't have numbered interchanges at all; and, hence, shouldn't/wouldn't be impacted by any conversion.

*I just found out that MA 28 in this section was planned to receive numbered interchanges post-conversion.

Given that the MA 28 Bourne to Falmouth stretch is situated in Cape Cod; one could assume that such will be met with some resistance, especially since the southernmost interchange would be at/around MM 51.  If such gets implemented without a hitch; those howling over the US 6 conversions could be called out as hypocrites.
They would be complaining about nothing!  Exit numbers give motorists something to reference when giving/receiving directions.  Its in their best interest to have them.  How could that be a bad thing?  There's a gap in exit numbers on CT 15 between the end of the Wilbur Cross Parkway and the beginning of the Wilbur Cross Highway but no one complains that the last exit before I-84 is Exit 91.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 13, 2017, 08:31:35 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on January 12, 2017, 09:39:02 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 09, 2017, 09:18:18 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 06, 2017, 05:31:19 PMMA 1A, Boston to Revere, Summer 2017
...
US 1, Chelsea to Danvers, Winter 2019/20
MA 28, Bourne to Falmouth, Winter 2019/20
Granted, you simply copied the list from MassDOT's website & pasted such here but MA 1A, US 1 & MA 28* presently don't have numbered interchanges at all; and, hence, shouldn't/wouldn't be impacted by any conversion.

*I just found out that MA 28 in this section was planned to receive numbered interchanges post-conversion.

Given that the MA 28 Bourne to Falmouth stretch is situated in Cape Cod; one could assume that such will be met with some resistance, especially since the southernmost interchange would be at/around MM 51.  If such gets implemented without a hitch; those howling over the US 6 conversions could be called out as hypocrites.
They would be complaining about nothing!  Exit numbers give motorists something to reference when giving/receiving directions.  Its in their best interest to have them.  How could that be a bad thing?  There's a gap in exit numbers on CT 15 between the end of the Wilbur Cross Parkway and the beginning of the Wilbur Cross Highway but no one complains that the last exit before I-84 is Exit 91.
Dude, you're preaching to the choir on this one.  I was just pointing out the potentially blatant hypocrisy of Cape Cod residents complaining about US 6's new interchange numbers but either ignoring or completely looking the other way regarding MA 28's new numbers (note: the latter has not yet happened and is personal speculation only).

One reason why MassDOT hasn't yet implemented its interchange number conversions statewide was indeed due to the backlash they received regarding US 6 (Mid-Cape Highway) when they unveiled plans for such during public meetings for a sign-replacement contract.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on January 14, 2017, 12:51:49 AM
I would think the fact that MA 28 doesn't have exit numbers would be a factor.  The issue was that they were attached to the existing sequential numbers of US 6.  There would be no such attachment on MA 28.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Beeper1 on January 14, 2017, 12:45:06 PM
I'm not sure the MA-28 expressway really benefits much from adding exit numbers, regardless of which numbering system is used.  Its not a long highway, and only has 3 grade-separated interchanges.   
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on January 15, 2017, 08:56:37 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on January 14, 2017, 12:45:06 PM
I'm not sure the MA-28 expressway really benefits much from adding exit numbers, regardless of which numbering system is used.  Its not a long highway, and only has 3 grade-separated interchanges.   
Extend the numbering from MA 25! :-D
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 16, 2017, 11:37:25 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 15, 2017, 08:56:37 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on January 14, 2017, 12:45:06 PM
I'm not sure the MA-28 expressway really benefits much from adding exit numbers, regardless of which numbering system is used.  Its not a long highway, and only has 3 grade-separated interchanges.   
Extend the numbering from MA 25! :-D
If I were in charge of renumbering MA highways, MA 25 would take over the MA 28 routing between Bourne and Orleans where, for the most part, signing it as an east-west highway makes the most sense, than the north-south directions it has now. (Orleans is almost directly east of Wareham, map-wise).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 16, 2017, 11:57:54 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on January 14, 2017, 12:45:06 PM
I'm not sure the MA-28 expressway really benefits much from adding exit numbers, regardless of which numbering system is used.  Its not a long highway, and only has 3 grade-separated interchanges.
And yet, the Northeast Expressway portion of US 1 (which was once part of I-95, some 43+ years ago) is longer but will not receive exit/interchange numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on January 16, 2017, 07:20:04 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 16, 2017, 11:57:54 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on January 14, 2017, 12:45:06 PM
I'm not sure the MA-28 expressway really benefits much from adding exit numbers, regardless of which numbering system is used.  Its not a long highway, and only has 3 grade-separated interchanges.
And yet, the Northeast Expressway portion of US 1 (which was once part of I-95, some 43+ years ago) is longer but will not receive exit/interchange numbers.

Would only make sense to have exit numbers on US 1 from the northern end of the I-93 overlap to just before Copeland Circle in Revere.  There are mostly at-grade and RIRO intersections north of there.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 17, 2017, 08:44:38 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 16, 2017, 07:20:04 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 16, 2017, 11:57:54 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on January 14, 2017, 12:45:06 PM
I'm not sure the MA-28 expressway really benefits much from adding exit numbers, regardless of which numbering system is used.  Its not a long highway, and only has 3 grade-separated interchanges.
And yet, the Northeast Expressway portion of US 1 (which was once part of I-95, some 43+ years ago) is longer but will not receive exit/interchange numbers.

Would only make sense to have exit numbers on US 1 from the northern end of the I-93 overlap to just before Copeland Circle in Revere.
Which is the fore-mentioned Northeast Expressway.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on January 17, 2017, 11:01:35 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 16, 2017, 11:37:25 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 15, 2017, 08:56:37 PM
Quote from: Beeper1 on January 14, 2017, 12:45:06 PM
I'm not sure the MA-28 expressway really benefits much from adding exit numbers, regardless of which numbering system is used.  Its not a long highway, and only has 3 grade-separated interchanges.   
Extend the numbering from MA 25! :-D
If I were in charge of renumbering MA highways, MA 25 would take over the MA 28 routing between Bourne and Orleans where, for the most part, signing it as an east-west highway makes the most sense, than the north-south directions it has now. (Orleans is almost directly east of Wareham, map-wise).
Tongue-in-cheek, I say call it MA 6B instead.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: CapeCodder on January 17, 2017, 01:38:51 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 13, 2017, 08:31:35 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on January 12, 2017, 09:39:02 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 09, 2017, 09:18:18 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 06, 2017, 05:31:19 PMMA 1A, Boston to Revere, Summer 2017
...
US 1, Chelsea to Danvers, Winter 2019/20
MA 28, Bourne to Falmouth, Winter 2019/20
Granted, you simply copied the list from MassDOT's website & pasted such here but MA 1A, US 1 & MA 28* presently don't have numbered interchanges at all; and, hence, shouldn't/wouldn't be impacted by any conversion.

*I just found out that MA 28 in this section was planned to receive numbered interchanges post-conversion.

Given that the MA 28 Bourne to Falmouth stretch is situated in Cape Cod; one could assume that such will be met with some resistance, especially since the southernmost interchange would be at/around MM 51.  If such gets implemented without a hitch; those howling over the US 6 conversions could be called out as hypocrites.
They would be complaining about nothing!  Exit numbers give motorists something to reference when giving/receiving directions.  Its in their best interest to have them.  How could that be a bad thing?  There's a gap in exit numbers on CT 15 between the end of the Wilbur Cross Parkway and the beginning of the Wilbur Cross Highway but no one complains that the last exit before I-84 is Exit 91.
Dude, you're preaching to the choir on this one.  I was just pointing out the potentially blatant hypocrisy of Cape Cod residents complaining about US 6's new interchange numbers but either ignoring or completely looking the other way regarding MA 28's new numbers (note: the latter has not yet happened and is personal speculation only).

One reason why MassDOT hasn't yet implemented its interchange number conversions statewide was indeed due to the backlash they received regarding US 6 (Mid-Cape Highway) when they unveiled plans for such during public meetings for a sign-replacement contract.

I just want to know when they will fix the BGS's and reassurance markers. At night you can't tell what route is which, as the reflectant is coming off the signs.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on January 17, 2017, 04:26:21 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 17, 2017, 08:44:38 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 16, 2017, 07:20:04 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 16, 2017, 11:57:54 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on January 14, 2017, 12:45:06 PM
I'm not sure the MA-28 expressway really benefits much from adding exit numbers, regardless of which numbering system is used.  Its not a long highway, and only has 3 grade-separated interchanges.
And yet, the Northeast Expressway portion of US 1 (which was once part of I-95, some 43+ years ago) is longer but will not receive exit/interchange numbers.

Would only make sense to have exit numbers on US 1 from the northern end of the I-93 overlap to just before Copeland Circle in Revere.
Which is the fore-mentioned Northeast Expressway.

Previous post said Chelsea to Danvers. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 17, 2017, 04:50:49 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 17, 2017, 04:26:21 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 17, 2017, 08:44:38 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 16, 2017, 07:20:04 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 16, 2017, 11:57:54 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on January 14, 2017, 12:45:06 PM
I'm not sure the MA-28 expressway really benefits much from adding exit numbers, regardless of which numbering system is used.  Its not a long highway, and only has 3 grade-separated interchanges.
And yet, the Northeast Expressway portion of US 1 (which was once part of I-95, some 43+ years ago) is longer but will not receive exit/interchange numbers.

Would only make sense to have exit numbers on US 1 from the northern end of the I-93 overlap to just before Copeland Circle in Revere.
Which is the fore-mentioned Northeast Expressway.

Previous post said Chelsea to Danvers.
Such was for a sign replacement project.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on January 17, 2017, 08:33:01 PM
Quote from: CapeCodder on January 17, 2017, 01:38:51 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 13, 2017, 08:31:35 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on January 12, 2017, 09:39:02 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 09, 2017, 09:18:18 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 06, 2017, 05:31:19 PMMA 1A, Boston to Revere, Summer 2017
...
US 1, Chelsea to Danvers, Winter 2019/20
MA 28, Bourne to Falmouth, Winter 2019/20
Granted, you simply copied the list from MassDOT's website & pasted such here but MA 1A, US 1 & MA 28* presently don't have numbered interchanges at all; and, hence, shouldn't/wouldn't be impacted by any conversion.

*I just found out that MA 28 in this section was planned to receive numbered interchanges post-conversion.

Given that the MA 28 Bourne to Falmouth stretch is situated in Cape Cod; one could assume that such will be met with some resistance, especially since the southernmost interchange would be at/around MM 51.  If such gets implemented without a hitch; those howling over the US 6 conversions could be called out as hypocrites.
They would be complaining about nothing!  Exit numbers give motorists something to reference when giving/receiving directions.  Its in their best interest to have them.  How could that be a bad thing?  There's a gap in exit numbers on CT 15 between the end of the Wilbur Cross Parkway and the beginning of the Wilbur Cross Highway but no one complains that the last exit before I-84 is Exit 91.
Dude, you're preaching to the choir on this one.  I was just pointing out the potentially blatant hypocrisy of Cape Cod residents complaining about US 6's new interchange numbers but either ignoring or completely looking the other way regarding MA 28's new numbers (note: the latter has not yet happened and is personal speculation only).

One reason why MassDOT hasn't yet implemented its interchange number conversions statewide was indeed due to the backlash they received regarding US 6 (Mid-Cape Highway) when they unveiled plans for such during public meetings for a sign-replacement contract.

I just want to know when they will fix the BGS's and reassurance markers. At night you can't tell what route is which, as the reflectant is coming off the signs.
Bids are scheduled to be opened on the US 6 sign replacement on Tuesday, January 24th.  As it is only a panels replacement project (no support work), new BGSes and route markers should be in by the end of this year.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jwolfer on January 17, 2017, 11:14:39 PM
I just dont understand how Cape Cod folks have the notion thar overhead freeway exit signs detract from historic charm... It's not like they are a legacy from colonial days.. Its a mid 20th century road..

Why not have newer easier to read signs? It would help tourism I would think. Having older outdated signage detracts from an area in my mind... 

LGMS428
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 18, 2017, 11:37:22 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on January 17, 2017, 11:14:39 PM
I just dont understand how Cape Cod folks have the notion thar overhead freeway exit signs detract from historic charm... It's not like they are a legacy from colonial days.. Its a mid 20th century road..

Why not have newer easier to read signs? It would help tourism I would think. Having older outdated signage detracts from an area in my mind... 

LGMS428
I guess people on the Cape view tourists having a hard time navigating their roadways as part of the charm of the place. There will actually be fewer signs since MassDOT is combining texts for some of the auxiliary signs onto a single sign.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 18, 2017, 11:40:16 AM
Quote from: roadman on January 17, 2017, 08:33:01 PM
Quote from: CapeCodder on January 17, 2017, 01:38:51 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 13, 2017, 08:31:35 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on January 12, 2017, 09:39:02 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 09, 2017, 09:18:18 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 06, 2017, 05:31:19 PMMA 1A, Boston to Revere, Summer 2017
...
US 1, Chelsea to Danvers, Winter 2019/20
MA 28, Bourne to Falmouth, Winter 2019/20
Granted, you simply copied the list from MassDOT's website & pasted such here but MA 1A, US 1 & MA 28* presently don't have numbered interchanges at all; and, hence, shouldn't/wouldn't be impacted by any conversion.

*I just found out that MA 28 in this section was planned to receive numbered interchanges post-conversion.

Given that the MA 28 Bourne to Falmouth stretch is situated in Cape Cod; one could assume that such will be met with some resistance, especially since the southernmost interchange would be at/around MM 51.  If such gets implemented without a hitch; those howling over the US 6 conversions could be called out as hypocrites.
They would be complaining about nothing!  Exit numbers give motorists something to reference when giving/receiving directions.  Its in their best interest to have them.  How could that be a bad thing?  There's a gap in exit numbers on CT 15 between the end of the Wilbur Cross Parkway and the beginning of the Wilbur Cross Highway but no one complains that the last exit before I-84 is Exit 91.
Dude, you're preaching to the choir on this one.  I was just pointing out the potentially blatant hypocrisy of Cape Cod residents complaining about US 6's new interchange numbers but either ignoring or completely looking the other way regarding MA 28's new numbers (note: the latter has not yet happened and is personal speculation only).

One reason why MassDOT hasn't yet implemented its interchange number conversions statewide was indeed due to the backlash they received regarding US 6 (Mid-Cape Highway) when they unveiled plans for such during public meetings for a sign-replacement contract.

I just want to know when they will fix the BGS's and reassurance markers. At night you can't tell what route is which, as the reflectant is coming off the signs.
Bids are scheduled to be opened on the US 6 sign replacement on Tuesday, January 24th.  As it is only a panels replacement project (no support work), new BGSes and route markers should be in by the end of this year.
Is the contract to replace the signs in the Big Dig tunnels, due to have a winning bid announced in February, still on track? Will that be completed by the end of 2017?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on January 18, 2017, 03:43:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 18, 2017, 11:40:16 AM
Is the contract to replace the signs in the Big Dig tunnels, due to have a winning bid announced in February, still on track? Will that be completed by the end of 2017?
Bids on this project are scheduled to be opened on Tuesday, February 28th.  Note that this is not a complete sign replacement project, but an emergency repair project to change out only those signs that are damaged by vehicles hitting them.  This is the re-advertisement of an earlier project where the sole bid was ultimately rejected due to excessive price.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on January 18, 2017, 05:39:18 PM
Quote from: jwolfer on January 17, 2017, 11:14:39 PM
I just dont understand how Cape Cod folks have the notion thar overhead freeway exit signs detract from historic charm... It's not like they are a legacy from colonial days.. Its a mid 20th century road..

Why not have newer easier to read signs? It would help tourism I would think. Having older outdated signage detracts from an area in my mind... 

LGMS428

I would guess that it has something to do with the fact that MassDOT goes a little overboard and overheads EVERY sign, not just major junctions, interchanges with multiple ramps (such as cloverleafs), and close together interchanges like most other states.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on January 18, 2017, 06:10:54 PM
I see no problem with ground-mounted signs on a 2-lane-per-direction limited access highway. 

Every state is different, though.  Mass. is choosing to go with overheads to improve sign visibility, even if that means more inspections of supports.  Several signs on I-95 in New Hampshire are still ground-mounted, and that road is 4 lanes each way.  Connecticut is moving more and more of its signs to the ground, including some of those in urban areas such as Hartford.  Then again, some overhead supports in Connecticut date back some 40 years, and some of those signs are almost just as old. 

Was MassDOT originally planning on overheads even on the Super 2 section of the Mid Cape?  That'd be overkill for sure!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Beeper1 on January 18, 2017, 10:12:12 PM
They probably were.  They put overheads on the Super-2 section of MA-2 between Erving and Philipston. It does look like overkill on that stretch.   
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on January 20, 2017, 01:15:05 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on January 17, 2017, 11:14:39 PM
I just dont understand how Cape Cod folks have the notion thar overhead freeway exit signs detract from historic charm... It's not like they are a legacy from colonial days.. Its a mid 20th century road..

Why not have newer easier to read signs? It would help tourism I would think. Having older outdated signage detracts from an area in my mind... 

LGMS428
Tourists on the Cape act like they've forgotten how to drive.  Why can't the Cape Cod Commission invest in Cuomo signs?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on January 20, 2017, 09:31:56 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on January 20, 2017, 01:15:05 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on January 17, 2017, 11:14:39 PM
I just dont understand how Cape Cod folks have the notion thar overhead freeway exit signs detract from historic charm... It's not like they are a legacy from colonial days.. Its a mid 20th century road..

Why not have newer easier to read signs? It would help tourism I would think. Having older outdated signage detracts from an area in my mind... 

LGMS428
Tourists on the Cape act like they've forgotten how to drive.  Why can't the Cape Cod Commission invest in Cuomo signs?

MassDOT does not permit the installation of LOGO service signs on highways east of the Cape Cod Canal because of long standing objections from the Cape Cod Commission.  I could only imagine the reaction of the Commission (picture heads exploding) if they started installing Cuomo-type signs on US 6 and Route 24.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 20, 2017, 10:24:31 AM
Quote from: roadman on January 20, 2017, 09:31:56 AMMassDOT does not permit the installation of LOGO service signs on highways east of the Cape Cod Canal because of long standing objections from the Cape Cod Commission.  I could only imagine the reaction of the Commission (picture heads exploding) if they started installing Cuomo-type signs on US 6 and Route 24.
I think you meant Route 28.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on January 20, 2017, 11:21:22 AM
Quote from: roadman on January 20, 2017, 09:31:56 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on January 20, 2017, 01:15:05 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on January 17, 2017, 11:14:39 PM
I just dont understand how Cape Cod folks have the notion thar overhead freeway exit signs detract from historic charm... It's not like they are a legacy from colonial days.. Its a mid 20th century road..

Why not have newer easier to read signs? It would help tourism I would think. Having older outdated signage detracts from an area in my mind... 

LGMS428
Tourists on the Cape act like they've forgotten how to drive.  Why can't the Cape Cod Commission invest in Cuomo signs?

MassDOT does not permit the installation of LOGO service signs on highways east of the Cape Cod Canal because of long standing objections from the Cape Cod Commission.  I could only imagine the reaction of the Commission (picture heads exploding) if they started installing Cuomo-type signs on US 6 and Route 24.
I'm not saying the have to use actual logos of places, but rather general symbols for food, attractions etc.  At least some kind of wayfinder system.  It doesn't have to be overtly flashy like the Cuomo signs tend to be.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jwolfer on January 20, 2017, 12:18:35 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 20, 2017, 09:31:56 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on January 20, 2017, 01:15:05 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on January 17, 2017, 11:14:39 PM
I just dont understand how Cape Cod folks have the notion thar overhead freeway exit signs detract from historic charm... It's not like they are a legacy from colonial days.. Its a mid 20th century road..

Why not have newer easier to read signs? It would help tourism I would think. Having older outdated signage detracts from an area in my mind... 

LGMS428
Tourists on the Cape act like they've forgotten how to drive.  Why can't the Cape Cod Commission invest in Cuomo signs?

MassDOT does not permit the installation of LOGO service signs on highways east of the Cape Cod Canal because of long standing objections from the Cape Cod Commission.  I could only imagine the reaction of the Commission (picture heads exploding) if they started installing Cuomo-type signs on US 6 and Route 24.
My God its not like giant "South of the Border" Pedro style billboards!

Why not mandate carved wooden sign posts or at the most 1930s style signs

I can appreciate aesthetics. But there are plenty of high end and/or historic resort areas in this country that have modern traffic signs on the main highways.  And it does not detract from the natural beauty of a place, its a freeway.  Get over yourselves Cape Cod

LGMS428
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on January 31, 2017, 07:26:27 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on January 20, 2017, 12:18:35 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 20, 2017, 09:31:56 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on January 20, 2017, 01:15:05 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on January 17, 2017, 11:14:39 PM
I just dont understand how Cape Cod folks have the notion thar overhead freeway exit signs detract from historic charm... It's not like they are a legacy from colonial days.. Its a mid 20th century road..

Why not have newer easier to read signs? It would help tourism I would think. Having older outdated signage detracts from an area in my mind... 

LGMS428
Tourists on the Cape act like they've forgotten how to drive.  Why can't the Cape Cod Commission invest in Cuomo signs?

MassDOT does not permit the installation of LOGO service signs on highways east of the Cape Cod Canal because of long standing objections from the Cape Cod Commission.  I could only imagine the reaction of the Commission (picture heads exploding) if they started installing Cuomo-type signs on US 6 and Route 24.
My God its not like giant "South of the Border" Pedro style billboards!

Why not mandate carved wooden sign posts or at the most 1930s style signs

I can appreciate aesthetics. But there are plenty of high end and/or historic resort areas in this country that have modern traffic signs on the main highways.  And it does not detract from the natural beauty of a place, its a freeway.  Get over yourselves Cape Cod

LGMS428

I can sum up in two words how resistance to exit renumbering on Cape Cod can halt the project statewide:  The Kennedys.  As I recall, Cape Cod and the Islands is home turf for the Kennedys, and as far as I know, they still run the show in the Commonwealth. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 31, 2017, 08:41:58 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on January 31, 2017, 07:26:27 AMI can sum up in two words how resistance to exit renumbering on Cape Cod can halt the project statewide:  The Kennedys.  As I recall, Cape Cod and the Islands is home turf for the Kennedys, and as far as I know, they still run the show in the Commonwealth.
At present, there's only one Kennedy serving government in Massachusetts and that's U.S. Rep. Joseph Kennedy III and his district is the 4th Congressional District (see below-graphic):
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1e/Massachusetts_US_Congressional_District_4_(since_2013).tif/lossless-page1-400px-Massachusetts_US_Congressional_District_4_(since_2013).tif.png)

As one can see, his district does not include Cape Cod.  While it's true that the Cape has been the summer home for many a Kennedy; the current generation of Kennedys today may not have as much clout as the previous generations (Jack, Bobby & Teddy) did.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on January 31, 2017, 04:03:02 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on January 31, 2017, 07:26:27 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on January 20, 2017, 12:18:35 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 20, 2017, 09:31:56 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on January 20, 2017, 01:15:05 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on January 17, 2017, 11:14:39 PM
I just dont understand how Cape Cod folks have the notion thar overhead freeway exit signs detract from historic charm... It's not like they are a legacy from colonial days.. Its a mid 20th century road..

Why not have newer easier to read signs? It would help tourism I would think. Having older outdated signage detracts from an area in my mind... 

LGMS428
Tourists on the Cape act like they've forgotten how to drive.  Why can't the Cape Cod Commission invest in Cuomo signs?

MassDOT does not permit the installation of LOGO service signs on highways east of the Cape Cod Canal because of long standing objections from the Cape Cod Commission.  I could only imagine the reaction of the Commission (picture heads exploding) if they started installing Cuomo-type signs on US 6 and Route 24.
My God its not like giant "South of the Border" Pedro style billboards!

Why not mandate carved wooden sign posts or at the most 1930s style signs

I can appreciate aesthetics. But there are plenty of high end and/or historic resort areas in this country that have modern traffic signs on the main highways.  And it does not detract from the natural beauty of a place, its a freeway.  Get over yourselves Cape Cod

LGMS428

I can sum up in two words how resistance to exit renumbering on Cape Cod can halt the project statewide:  The Kennedys.  As I recall, Cape Cod and the Islands is home turf for the Kennedys, and as far as I know, they still run the show in the Commonwealth.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/local_coverage/2017/01/cops_3_used_shriver_home_on_cape_cod_to_sell_fentanyl

Still running something on the Cape at least.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jwolfer on January 31, 2017, 04:22:09 PM
No longer rum running

LGMS428

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on January 31, 2017, 11:28:48 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on January 31, 2017, 04:03:02 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on January 31, 2017, 07:26:27 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on January 20, 2017, 12:18:35 PM
Quote from: roadman on January 20, 2017, 09:31:56 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on January 20, 2017, 01:15:05 AM
Quote from: jwolfer on January 17, 2017, 11:14:39 PM
I just dont understand how Cape Cod folks have the notion thar overhead freeway exit signs detract from historic charm... It's not like they are a legacy from colonial days.. Its a mid 20th century road..

Why not have newer easier to read signs? It would help tourism I would think. Having older outdated signage detracts from an area in my mind... 

LGMS428
Tourists on the Cape act like they've forgotten how to drive.  Why can't the Cape Cod Commission invest in Cuomo signs?

MassDOT does not permit the installation of LOGO service signs on highways east of the Cape Cod Canal because of long standing objections from the Cape Cod Commission.  I could only imagine the reaction of the Commission (picture heads exploding) if they started installing Cuomo-type signs on US 6 and Route 24.
My God its not like giant "South of the Border" Pedro style billboards!

Why not mandate carved wooden sign posts or at the most 1930s style signs

I can appreciate aesthetics. But there are plenty of high end and/or historic resort areas in this country that have modern traffic signs on the main highways.  And it does not detract from the natural beauty of a place, its a freeway.  Get over yourselves Cape Cod

LGMS428

I can sum up in two words how resistance to exit renumbering on Cape Cod can halt the project statewide:  The Kennedys.  As I recall, Cape Cod and the Islands is home turf for the Kennedys, and as far as I know, they still run the show in the Commonwealth.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/local_coverage/2017/01/cops_3_used_shriver_home_on_cape_cod_to_sell_fentanyl

Still running something on the Cape at least.

I rest my case...
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: spooky on February 01, 2017, 09:44:58 AM
Yes, because drug dealers are running fentanyl out of the Shriver home, the Kennedys keep signs ground mounted and sequential on the Cape. Logic seems sound!

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 01, 2017, 03:13:13 PM
Now that Massachusetts' exit renumbering plan is suspended indefinitely, it appears the next sequential-to-milepost state will be Rhode Island.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on February 01, 2017, 10:13:53 PM
Last I heard, at this point nobody's even sure if RI's project is still on.  It was supposed to have started already.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on February 01, 2017, 10:30:46 PM
Quote from: spooky on February 01, 2017, 09:44:58 AM
Yes, because drug dealers are running fentanyl out of the Shriver home, the Kennedys keep signs ground mounted and sequential on the Cape. Logic seems sound!
Barnstable County really does have a heroin problem, though.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on February 01, 2017, 10:37:37 PM
Quote from: vdeane on February 01, 2017, 10:13:53 PM
Last I heard, at this point nobody's even sure if RI's project is still on.  It was supposed to have started already.

They're too busy putting up the gantries for truck tolls.  If it were CT, it would need 10 more EIS's before hitting the planning stage.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 04, 2017, 11:33:31 AM
Quote from: roadman on January 18, 2017, 03:43:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 18, 2017, 11:40:16 AM
Is the contract to replace the signs in the Big Dig tunnels, due to have a winning bid announced in February, still on track? Will that be completed by the end of 2017?
Bids on this project are scheduled to be opened on Tuesday, February 28th.  Note that this is not a complete sign replacement project, but an emergency repair project to change out only those signs that are damaged by vehicles hitting them.  This is the re-advertisement of an earlier project where the sole bid was ultimately rejected due to excessive price.
Looks like the lowest bidder was Liddell Bros. again. Their bid ($796,566) though is still much higher than the MassDOT estimate ($594,108). Will MassDOT accept this and move on, or put the contract out for bids again?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on March 04, 2017, 12:37:30 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 04, 2017, 11:33:31 AM
Quote from: roadman on January 18, 2017, 03:43:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 18, 2017, 11:40:16 AM
Is the contract to replace the signs in the Big Dig tunnels, due to have a winning bid announced in February, still on track? Will that be completed by the end of 2017?
Bids on this project are scheduled to be opened on Tuesday, February 28th.  Note that this is not a complete sign replacement project, but an emergency repair project to change out only those signs that are damaged by vehicles hitting them.  This is the re-advertisement of an earlier project where the sole bid was ultimately rejected due to excessive price.
Looks like the lowest bidder was Liddell Bros. again. Their bid ($796,566) though is still much higher than the MassDOT estimate ($594,108). Will MassDOT accept this and move on, or put the contract out for bids again?
I wonder if MassDOT or contractor, whoever prepared the estimate, understands that all special equipment needs to be located and rented for this work given the limited overhead space and lack of shoulders for staging.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on March 04, 2017, 01:31:50 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 04, 2017, 11:33:31 AM
Quote from: roadman on January 18, 2017, 03:43:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 18, 2017, 11:40:16 AM
Is the contract to replace the signs in the Big Dig tunnels, due to have a winning bid announced in February, still on track? Will that be completed by the end of 2017?
Bids on this project are scheduled to be opened on Tuesday, February 28th.  Note that this is not a complete sign replacement project, but an emergency repair project to change out only those signs that are damaged by vehicles hitting them.  This is the re-advertisement of an earlier project where the sole bid was ultimately rejected due to excessive price.
Looks like the lowest bidder was Liddell Bros. again. Their bid ($796,566) though is still much higher than the MassDOT estimate ($594,108). Will MassDOT accept this and move on, or put the contract out for bids again?

That would still be in the acceptable range in NY, I believe.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on March 07, 2017, 10:26:44 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 04, 2017, 11:33:31 AM
Quote from: roadman on January 18, 2017, 03:43:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 18, 2017, 11:40:16 AM
Is the contract to replace the signs in the Big Dig tunnels, due to have a winning bid announced in February, still on track? Will that be completed by the end of 2017?
Bids on this project are scheduled to be opened on Tuesday, February 28th.  Note that this is not a complete sign replacement project, but an emergency repair project to change out only those signs that are damaged by vehicles hitting them.  This is the re-advertisement of an earlier project where the sole bid was ultimately rejected due to excessive price.
Looks like the lowest bidder was Liddell Bros. again. Their bid ($796,566) though is still much higher than the MassDOT estimate ($594,108). Will MassDOT accept this and move on, or put the contract out for bids again?

Although Liddell's bid was about 38% higher than the office estimate, it's my understanding that the bid will be accepted, pending a review to verify the accuracy of the bid quantities.  For whatever reason, District 6 seems to have a habit of low-balling estimates for NFA contracts within the Artery/Tunnel complex (old Metropolitan Highway System).

QuoteI wonder if MassDOT or contractor, whoever prepared the estimate, understands that all special equipment needs to be located and rented for this work given the limited overhead space and lack of shoulders for staging.

Between March and November, MassDOT routinely has full overnight I-93 tunnel shutdowns for various maintenance and repair activities.  With the exception of emergency sign removal due to vehicle strike, most of these overhead sign replacements are scheduled to happen during these full shutdowns.  As such, the unique requirements under this contract are not so much for special staging equipment, but for special supports and attachment hardware - note that the sign supports are suspended from the tunnel ceiling, and as such are a custom design.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on March 13, 2017, 12:31:59 PM
The Massachusetts Legislature is getting into the act again - they've refiled a bill mandating milepost exit numbers on all Interstate highways within Massachusetts.

https://malegislature.gov/Bills/190/H1863
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kalvado on March 13, 2017, 12:37:30 PM
Quote from: roadman on March 13, 2017, 12:31:59 PM
The Massachusetts Legislature is getting into the act again - they've refiled a bill mandating milepost exit numbers on all Interstate highways within Massachusetts.

https://malegislature.gov/Bills/190/H1863
Did they bother to edit the previous text before submission?
Quote(e) The mileage-based exit numbering system shall be completed on or before January 1, 2017
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on March 13, 2017, 01:09:16 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 13, 2017, 12:37:30 PM
Quote from: roadman on March 13, 2017, 12:31:59 PM
The Massachusetts Legislature is getting into the act again - they've refiled a bill mandating milepost exit numbers on all Interstate highways within Massachusetts.

https://malegislature.gov/Bills/190/H1863
Did they bother to edit the previous text before submission?
Quote(e) The mileage-based exit numbering system shall be completed on or before January 1, 2017
Somebody did an Oops.  :sombrero:

Do note that this new bill (as written) only involves Interstates.  Should this bill pass & the governor signs it; non-Interstates would not undergo the change.  Maybe such was drafted to appease those who live near/along the Mid-Cape Highway (US 6).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kalvado on March 13, 2017, 01:22:24 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 13, 2017, 01:09:16 PM

Do note that this new bill (as written) only involves Interstates.  Should this bill pass & the governor signs it; non-Interstates would not undergo the change.  Maybe such was drafted to appease those who live near/along the Mid-Cape Highway (US 6).
Foot in the door?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on March 13, 2017, 02:57:27 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 13, 2017, 01:09:16 PM
Do note that this new bill (as written) only involves Interstates.  Should this bill pass & the governor signs it; non-Interstates would not undergo the change.  Maybe such was drafted to appease those who live near/along the Mid-Cape Highway (US 6).

The original bill, which predated the Mid-Cape Highway controversy, also restricted the re-numbering to Interstate highways only.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on March 13, 2017, 05:31:04 PM
Quote from: roadman on March 13, 2017, 02:57:27 PMThe original bill, which predated the Mid-Cape Highway controversy, also restricted the re-numbering to Interstate highways only.
Either way, the re-introduction of the bill sounds like a case of if at first you don't succeed; try, try again.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 13, 2017, 05:56:31 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 13, 2017, 05:31:04 PM
Quote from: roadman on March 13, 2017, 02:57:27 PMThe original bill, which predated the Mid-Cape Highway controversy, also restricted the re-numbering to Interstate highways only.
Either way, the re-introduction of the bill sounds like a case of if at first you don't succeed; try, try again.
The last bill died in committee. I don't see this getting any further, unless more legislators sign on.

IMHO if the main reason to adopt milepost base numbering is to make it easier for drivers, especially unfamiliar ones, to judge distances when navigating a state's highways, then just changing numbers on interstates it seems would only lead to more confusion lessening any benefit the conversion might have. If the Cape people really want to keep their numbers, then have the legislation exempt US 6, but allow all other routes to be changed.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Duke87 on March 13, 2017, 06:47:47 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 13, 2017, 05:56:31 PM
IMHO if the main reason to adopt milepost base numbering is to make it easier for drivers, especially unfamiliar ones, to judge distances when navigating a state's highways

The main reason is to comply with a federal mandate. If not for said mandate this wouldn't even be under consideration.

The real question is, is FHWA going to start playing hardball about this at any point? I'm guessing they certainly won't under the current administration. Indeed it seems as of right now the immediate future holds the MUTCD being left to languish unenforced and unupdated.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Mergingtraffic on March 13, 2017, 07:23:19 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 13, 2017, 05:56:31 PM

IMHO if the main reason to adopt milepost base numbering is to make it easier for drivers, especially unfamiliar ones, to judge distances when navigating a state's highways, then just changing numbers on interstates it seems would only lead to more confusion lessening any benefit the conversion might have. If the Cape people really want to keep their numbers, then have the legislation exempt US 6, but allow all other routes to be changed.

I recently drove up I-395 in CT the recently changed exit numbers and because I was unfamiliar with the mileage distance to my exit....it wasn't really that useful to me.  I knew the old exit number but not the exact mileage of my exit.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: machias on March 14, 2017, 12:39:44 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on March 13, 2017, 07:23:19 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 13, 2017, 05:56:31 PM

IMHO if the main reason to adopt milepost base numbering is to make it easier for drivers, especially unfamiliar ones, to judge distances when navigating a state's highways, then just changing numbers on interstates it seems would only lead to more confusion lessening any benefit the conversion might have. If the Cape people really want to keep their numbers, then have the legislation exempt US 6, but allow all other routes to be changed.

I recently drove up I-395 in CT the recently changed exit numbers and because I was unfamiliar with the mileage distance to my exit....it wasn't really that useful to me.  I knew the old exit number but not the exact mileage of my exit.

Looking at the closest milepost, knowing the exit number, do a little subtraction and voila! you know how far it is to the exit you're looking for.  Knowing you need to go "3 exits" or whatever could be 2 miles, 10 miles or 50 miles. Check your gas.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Brandon on March 14, 2017, 04:15:42 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 14, 2017, 12:39:44 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on March 13, 2017, 07:23:19 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 13, 2017, 05:56:31 PM

IMHO if the main reason to adopt milepost base numbering is to make it easier for drivers, especially unfamiliar ones, to judge distances when navigating a state's highways, then just changing numbers on interstates it seems would only lead to more confusion lessening any benefit the conversion might have. If the Cape people really want to keep their numbers, then have the legislation exempt US 6, but allow all other routes to be changed.

I recently drove up I-395 in CT the recently changed exit numbers and because I was unfamiliar with the mileage distance to my exit....it wasn't really that useful to me.  I knew the old exit number but not the exact mileage of my exit.

Looking at the closest milepost, knowing the exit number, do a little subtraction and voila! you know how far it is to the exit you're looking for.  Knowing you need to go "3 exits" or whatever could be 2 miles, 10 miles or 50 miles. Check your gas.

Distance-based exit numbering is very superior to sequential exit numbering.  If you want to know how far to your exit, look at the milepost on the side of the road and do the quick math.  If you're at MP30, and your exit is Exit 55, you have 25 miles to go.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 15, 2017, 05:09:40 PM
I also think mileage-based exits are better than sequential-based exit numbers. In states that are/were sequential at one time, changing to mileage-based exits would take some getting used to, but I'm sure people ultimately have no problems with the numbering. On that note, I hope this issue is resolved soon.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on March 15, 2017, 05:16:56 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 15, 2017, 05:09:40 PMIn states that are/were sequential at one time, changing to mileage-based exits would take some getting used to, but I'm sure people ultimately have no problems with the numbering.
As previously stated in this thread a few pages back; many of the highways in Massachusetts w/sequential-numbered interchanges have changed at least once since the 1960s.  People got used to the changes then; they'll get used to the mile-marker-based conversions as well (should such happen).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on March 15, 2017, 10:18:56 PM
Now here's an idea: what if MADOT just un-signs US 6 from Bourne to Orleans and instead signs it "Mid-Cape Highway"?  Could they possibly skirt the federal mandate of mile-based exits that way?  They could reroute US 6 to its pre-limited access alignment and adjust the mile markers accordingly.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on March 16, 2017, 12:53:46 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on March 15, 2017, 10:18:56 PM
Now here's an idea: what if MADOT just un-signs US 6 from Bourne to Orleans and instead signs it "Mid-Cape Highway"?  Could they possibly skirt the federal mandate of mile-based exits that way?  They could reroute US 6 to its pre-limited access alignment and adjust the mile markers accordingly.
You're asking for another 128 right there
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on March 16, 2017, 08:30:39 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on March 15, 2017, 10:18:56 PM
Now here's an idea: what if MADOT just un-signs US 6 from Bourne to Orleans and instead signs it "Mid-Cape Highway"?  Could they possibly skirt the federal mandate of mile-based exits that way?  They could reroute US 6 to its pre-limited access alignment and adjust the mile markers accordingly.

It's definitely not mandated just because of the shield.  It is mandated because of the eligibility and use of federal funds on the facility. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: noelbotevera on March 16, 2017, 11:25:58 PM
Weren't there experiments with dual mile based and sequential exit numbers back in the 80's? Why not make those, so that when the sequential exit numbers come down, locals can associate the old sequential numbers with the mile based numbers, and eventually they adjust to them, and they know which exit is which.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on March 17, 2017, 08:51:07 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on March 16, 2017, 11:25:58 PM
Weren't there experiments with dual mile based and sequential exit numbers back in the 80's? Why not make those, so that when the sequential exit numbers come down, locals can associate the old sequential numbers with the mile based numbers, and eventually they adjust to them, and they know which exit is which.
Such was done during the early 70s and only on three New England highways (I-93 in MA, I-295 in RI &, I believe, I-95 in ME south of the Maine Turnpike) that I'm aware of.  IIRC, it was done on an experimental basis but was shortly phased out.  The dual-tabbed signs lingered on until the 1980s when such were replaced with conventional single-tab signs. 

When I-93 changed its exit numbers to the current ones (that reflected the mid-70s southern extension to Canton via the Southeast Expressway & then-MA 128) circa 1987, the larger tabs remained but just had the exit number legends changed.  Such made for some large blank-green space and some ghosted lettering & numerals on the older, larger tabs.  These signs were all replaced during the early-to-mid 1990s.

Back to the present, should MA adopt mile-marker-based interchange numbers; they will, like other states that have done such, mount a side tab showing the old number for a short-term period (unlike PennDOT's/PTC's OLD EXIT XX signs).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on March 17, 2017, 09:17:10 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 17, 2017, 08:51:07 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on March 16, 2017, 11:25:58 PM
Weren't there experiments with dual mile based and sequential exit numbers back in the 80's? Why not make those, so that when the sequential exit numbers come down, locals can associate the old sequential numbers with the mile based numbers, and eventually they adjust to them, and they know which exit is which.
Such was done during the early 70s and only on three New England highways (I-93 in MA, I-295 in RI &, I believe, I-95 in ME south of the Maine Turnpike) that I'm aware of.  IIRC, it was done on an experimental basis but was shortly phased out.  The dual-tabbed signs lingered on until the 1980s when such were replaced with conventional single-tab signs. 

When I-93 changed its exit numbers to the current ones (that reflected the mid-70s southern extension to Canton via the Southeast Expressway & then-MA 128) circa 1987, the larger tabs remained but just had the exit number legends changed.  Such made for some large blank-green space and some ghosted lettering & numerals on the older, larger tabs.  These signs were all replaced during the early-to-mid 1990s.

Back to the present, should MA adopt mile-marker-based interchange numbers; they will, like other states that have done such, mount a side tab showing the old number for a short-term period (unlike PennDOT's/PTC's OLD EXIT XX signs).
MassDOT's plan for this notification is to install separate signs indicating "Formerly Exit XX".  These signs are to be installed next to the first advance sign for the exit, and beneath the exit gore signs.  These signs will remain in place for a minimum of two years after the new exit numbers are posted.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 17, 2017, 11:48:28 AM
Quote from: roadman on March 17, 2017, 09:17:10 AM
MassDOT's plan for this notification is to install separate signs indicating "Formerly Exit XX".  These signs are to be installed next to the first advance sign for the exit, and beneath the exit gore signs.  These signs will remain in place for a minimum of two years after the new exit numbers are posted.
From the Project 608024 sign plans:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.malmeroads.net%2Fmass21c%2Fformerlyexitsign0.jpg&hash=22e7a0011b6e296a6927309517e13bd8d87424d9)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: machias on March 17, 2017, 12:05:29 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 17, 2017, 11:48:28 AM
Quote from: roadman on March 17, 2017, 09:17:10 AM
MassDOT's plan for this notification is to install separate signs indicating "Formerly Exit XX".  These signs are to be installed next to the first advance sign for the exit, and beneath the exit gore signs.  These signs will remain in place for a minimum of two years after the new exit numbers are posted.
From the Project 608024 sign plans:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.malmeroads.net%2Fmass21c%2Fformerlyexitsign0.jpg&hash=22e7a0011b6e296a6927309517e13bd8d87424d9)

I remember similar "Formerly Exit XX" (black on white) being posted only on the exit gore signs along MA 128 around 1988-1989.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on July 22, 2017, 10:52:03 AM
A poster to the FB BostonRoads Forum who works for a Boston TV station says that in conversations he has had with MassDOT officials there is a general agreement that conversion to milepost based numbering is years away, though they won't go on the record with that statement. IMO it was a mistake for MassDOT not to at least convert the MassPike during their current signs replacement contracts. They could have said it was part of the change to the AET system, that it wasn't costing any additional money, and that it was an experiment to see if drivers liked the new system. Later when people saw that the sky didn't fall and got used to it they could have rolled it out to the rest of the state after a well thought out public relations campaign. Now when the state eventually does adopt the milepost system, it will probably cost more money and create more backlash than if they had just gone ahead as originally planned.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Beeper1 on July 23, 2017, 12:23:37 AM
So then what was the story behind the contract from two years ago that went all the way to being awarded and then was cancelled?  If they had no plans to do this in the foreseeable future, why spend the money and effort to do all the design work, and go through the contracting process work (not to mention waste the time and effort of all the firms that bid on the job)?

Did some department at MassDOT get ahead of themselves and get that far in the project process without authorization to carry it out?  That would seem hard to believe.  But the alternative is that they flushed a lot of work, time, and funds down the toilet because some year-rounders on Cape Cod got pissy.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on July 23, 2017, 10:51:29 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on July 23, 2017, 12:23:37 AM
So then what was the story behind the contract from two years ago that went all the way to being awarded and then was cancelled?  If they had no plans to do this in the foreseeable future, why spend the money and effort to do all the design work, and go through the contracting process work (not to mention waste the time and effort of all the firms that bid on the job)?
Did some department at MassDOT get ahead of themselves and get that far in the project process without authorization to carry it out?  That would seem hard to believe.  But the alternative is that they flushed a lot of work, time, and funds down the toilet because some year-rounders on Cape Cod got pissy.

I think someone more familiar with the project, such as Roadman, may be able to better answer those questions. Part of the issue was the change in administrations. The exit numbering project was developed and approved under the previous governor's appointments. The new governor's appointees (and according to a MassDOT official at a public hearing about the US 6 sign project in 2016, the Lt. Gov) obviously weren't very enthusiastic about, or opposed, the project and when there was push back from the Cape it gave them an excuse to postpone it indefinitely. I think the money spent before the contract was pulled, and arrangements made in getting federal money for it, has led MassDOT to continually say that the project is under further study, and not officially canceled.

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kalvado on July 23, 2017, 11:45:42 AM
Quote from: Brandon on March 14, 2017, 04:15:42 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 14, 2017, 12:39:44 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on March 13, 2017, 07:23:19 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 13, 2017, 05:56:31 PM

IMHO if the main reason to adopt milepost base numbering is to make it easier for drivers, especially unfamiliar ones, to judge distances when navigating a state's highways, then just changing numbers on interstates it seems would only lead to more confusion lessening any benefit the conversion might have. If the Cape people really want to keep their numbers, then have the legislation exempt US 6, but allow all other routes to be changed.

I recently drove up I-395 in CT the recently changed exit numbers and because I was unfamiliar with the mileage distance to my exit....it wasn't really that useful to me.  I knew the old exit number but not the exact mileage of my exit.

Looking at the closest milepost, knowing the exit number, do a little subtraction and voila! you know how far it is to the exit you're looking for.  Knowing you need to go "3 exits" or whatever could be 2 miles, 10 miles or 50 miles. Check your gas.

Distance-based exit numbering is very superior to sequential exit numbering.  If you want to know how far to your exit, look at the milepost on the side of the road and do the quick math.  If you're at MP30, and your exit is Exit 55, you have 25 miles to go.

And if you're at MP 137 going to exit 79... Would you need a piece of paper or a calculator?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on July 23, 2017, 11:59:29 AM
Quote from: kalvado on July 23, 2017, 11:45:42 AM
Quote from: Brandon on March 14, 2017, 04:15:42 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 14, 2017, 12:39:44 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on March 13, 2017, 07:23:19 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 13, 2017, 05:56:31 PM

IMHO if the main reason to adopt milepost base numbering is to make it easier for drivers, especially unfamiliar ones, to judge distances when navigating a state's highways, then just changing numbers on interstates it seems would only lead to more confusion lessening any benefit the conversion might have. If the Cape people really want to keep their numbers, then have the legislation exempt US 6, but allow all other routes to be changed.

I recently drove up I-395 in CT the recently changed exit numbers and because I was unfamiliar with the mileage distance to my exit....it wasn't really that useful to me.  I knew the old exit number but not the exact mileage of my exit.

Looking at the closest milepost, knowing the exit number, do a little subtraction and voila! you know how far it is to the exit you're looking for.  Knowing you need to go "3 exits" or whatever could be 2 miles, 10 miles or 50 miles. Check your gas.

Distance-based exit numbering is very superior to sequential exit numbering.  If you want to know how far to your exit, look at the milepost on the side of the road and do the quick math.  If you're at MP30, and your exit is Exit 55, you have 25 miles to go.

And if you're at MP 137 going to exit 79... Would you need a piece of paper or a calculator?

My immediate thought, without calculating, was "about 60". Even if I picked 50 or 70 as my number, I still know that it's not coming up moderately soon, and it won't take several hours.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on August 06, 2017, 10:38:38 PM
Found this from last week's news. Another Mass. legislator has introduced a bill to have MassDOT renumber its exits to those based on mileposts:
http://nepr.net/post/proposal-would-re-number-mass-highway-exits#stream/0 (http://nepr.net/post/proposal-would-re-number-mass-highway-exits#stream/0)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on August 07, 2017, 11:17:10 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on August 06, 2017, 10:38:38 PM
Found this from last week's news. Another Mass. legislator has introduced a bill to have MassDOT renumber its exits to those based on mileposts:
http://nepr.net/post/proposal-would-re-number-mass-highway-exits#stream/0 (http://nepr.net/post/proposal-would-re-number-mass-highway-exits#stream/0)
The bill in question was actually introduced in January of 2017, and the hearing on it was held almost two weeks ago. https://malegislature.gov/Bills/190/H1863
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on August 07, 2017, 04:32:45 PM
Yes, the hearing by the Joint Committee on Transportation was held on July 25. No information about the outcome of the hearing however. This is the same legislator that has introduced two previous bills regarding milepost based numbering that died in committee. The bill text was apparently copied from a previous version and not edited since it asks that MassDOT complete the work by Jan. 1, 2017 (the bill was formally submitted on Jan. 13, 2017). Therefore, not getting the feeling that the fate of this bill will be any different.

The text of the bill can be found here: https://malegislature.gov/Bills/190/H1863 (https://malegislature.gov/Bills/190/H1863)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Brandon on August 08, 2017, 09:25:31 AM
Quote from: kalvado on July 23, 2017, 11:45:42 AM
Quote from: Brandon on March 14, 2017, 04:15:42 PM
Quote from: upstatenyroads on March 14, 2017, 12:39:44 PM
Quote from: Mergingtraffic on March 13, 2017, 07:23:19 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 13, 2017, 05:56:31 PM

IMHO if the main reason to adopt milepost base numbering is to make it easier for drivers, especially unfamiliar ones, to judge distances when navigating a state's highways, then just changing numbers on interstates it seems would only lead to more confusion lessening any benefit the conversion might have. If the Cape people really want to keep their numbers, then have the legislation exempt US 6, but allow all other routes to be changed.

I recently drove up I-395 in CT the recently changed exit numbers and because I was unfamiliar with the mileage distance to my exit....it wasn't really that useful to me.  I knew the old exit number but not the exact mileage of my exit.

Looking at the closest milepost, knowing the exit number, do a little subtraction and voila! you know how far it is to the exit you're looking for.  Knowing you need to go "3 exits" or whatever could be 2 miles, 10 miles or 50 miles. Check your gas.

Distance-based exit numbering is very superior to sequential exit numbering.  If you want to know how far to your exit, look at the milepost on the side of the road and do the quick math.  If you're at MP30, and your exit is Exit 55, you have 25 miles to go.

And if you're at MP 137 going to exit 79... Would you need a piece of paper or a calculator?

Neither.  You estimate mp80 to mp140, or a little shy of 60 miles.  Should take about 50 minutes at typical freeway speeds.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on August 15, 2017, 11:40:24 AM
Don't know whether this means anything or not, but MassDOT has finally removed the exit numbering conversion project from its Under Design list under Structural Signing on its projects listing website. The last update to the page was nearly 2 years ago when it was noted the contract had been advertised for bids. The project bid page was still up, at last check, but I took the liberty of downloading all the sign plan, contract revision, and contractor bid information files, just in case.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on August 24, 2017, 12:30:22 AM
Basically it the Patrick holdovers tried to force the project down MassDOT's throat with no PR campaign or advance planning, before Baker's people could come in, knowing they were more old school and cautious. And hey they came pretty close, it would have been a PR nightmare but in a state like Mass sometimes the only way to make progress is to rip the bandaid off. People tend to not see the merits of things until theyre in practice, and even then many people stay in denial
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on August 25, 2017, 03:26:25 PM
With the removal of the exit numbering conversion project from the MassDOT website, does that mean that the entire sequential-to-milepost exit conversion plan is dead?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on August 25, 2017, 06:02:38 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 25, 2017, 03:26:25 PM
With the removal of the exit numbering conversion project from the MassDOT website, does that mean that the entire sequential-to-milepost exit conversion plan is dead?

AFAIK, the proposal to convert exit numbers is not entirely dead.  However, a little bird has hinted that the project is undergoing some re-tweaking of the final numbering scheme, as well as establishing an actual timeline for public outreach.  These revisions are subject to approval by both FHWA and senior MassDOT and other Massachusetts officials before any actual work on revising or implementing the project can go forward.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on August 28, 2017, 09:18:25 AM
Quote from: roadman on August 25, 2017, 06:02:38 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 25, 2017, 03:26:25 PM
With the removal of the exit numbering conversion project from the MassDOT website, does that mean that the entire sequential-to-milepost exit conversion plan is dead?

AFAIK, the proposal to convert exit numbers is not entirely dead.  However, a little bird has hinted that the project is undergoing some re-tweaking of the final numbering scheme, as well as establishing an actual timeline for public outreach.  These revisions are subject to approval by both FHWA and senior MassDOT and other Massachusetts officials before any actual work on revising or implementing the project can go forward.
If memory serves, the original documents showing the proposed numbers were both inconsistent w/each other (some roads used Exit 0 whereas other roads used Exit 1 for exits between MM0 & MM1) and, in some instances, illogical (needless (over)use of suffixed exits where non-suffixed exits would suffice & be more appropriate).  Hopefully the fore-mentioned tweaks/revisions will address both of these issues.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 04, 2018, 04:21:42 PM
Are they any closer to a resolution on this subject?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Beeper1 on April 04, 2018, 05:19:33 PM
Yes.    The plan is dead.    Mass will remain with sequential exit numbers for the foreseeable future.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on April 12, 2018, 08:04:55 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on April 04, 2018, 05:19:33 PM
Yes.    The plan is dead.    Mass will remain with sequential exit numbers for the foreseeable future.

Or at least until they're refused a waiver from the feds... they wouldn't be the first state to request a waiver and be refused.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kalvado on April 12, 2018, 08:16:51 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on April 12, 2018, 08:04:55 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on April 04, 2018, 05:19:33 PM
Yes.    The plan is dead.    Mass will remain with sequential exit numbers for the foreseeable future.

Or at least until they're refused a waiver from the feds... they wouldn't be the first state to request a waiver and be refused.
1. request a wavier
2. get refusal letter
3. shrug your shoulders, mumble "Oh, ok, whatever"
4. do what you want to do anyway
5. lobby for including your approach in next must-pass federal spending bill
6. show FHWA middle finger
7. enjoy.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on April 12, 2018, 10:29:55 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on April 12, 2018, 08:04:55 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on April 04, 2018, 05:19:33 PM
Yes.    The plan is dead.    Mass will remain with sequential exit numbers for the foreseeable future.

Or at least until they're refused a waiver from the feds... they wouldn't be the first state to request a waiver and be refused.

That ship has sailed.  Immediately after the 2009 MUTCD was adopted, Massachusetts, New York, and most of the other remaining sequential-number states jointly sent a letter to FHWA requesting a formal waiver from the requirement to convert to milepost-based exit numbers.  This request was flatly denied, but FHWA did indicate states could use Federal funds (HSIP) to pay for 'blanket-wide' conversion projects.  Both Massachusetts and New Hampshire were ready to do this.  Massachusetts' program got derailed when people who are more concerned about incorrect perception rather than realistic action stuck their hands in the cookie jar, and New Hampshire's program got derailed because the governor's bean-counters didn't want to pony up their share of the money to do it.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 15, 2018, 10:45:22 AM
Quote from: roadman on April 12, 2018, 10:29:55 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on April 12, 2018, 08:04:55 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on April 04, 2018, 05:19:33 PM
Yes.    The plan is dead.    Mass will remain with sequential exit numbers for the foreseeable future.

Or at least until they're refused a waiver from the feds... they wouldn't be the first state to request a waiver and be refused.

That ship has sailed.  Immediately after the 2009 MUTCD was adopted, Massachusetts, New York, and most of the other remaining sequential-number states jointly sent a letter to FHWA requesting a formal waiver from the requirement to convert to milepost-based exit numbers.  This request was flatly denied, but FHWA did indicate states could use Federal funds (HSIP) to pay for 'blanket-wide' conversion projects.  Both Massachusetts and New Hampshire were ready to do this.  Massachusetts' program got derailed when people who are more concerned about incorrect perception rather than realistic action stuck their hands in the cookie jar, and New Hampshire's program got derailed because the governor's bean-counters didn't want to pony up their share of the money to do it.
Well, that will probably make MA and NH the last New England states with sequential numbering now that Vermont is changing its numbers in 2020. (Information from the Vermont thread, for those who have not seen it:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=218.msg2318486#msg2318486 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=218.msg2318486#msg2318486) )
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 15, 2018, 06:57:33 PM
Depends on whether the political winds shift and how long it takes CT to convert everything.  Since CT is doing it when major sign rehabs are done, I'm not holding my breath and it could take a couple decades.

And I doubt Maine is renumbering the sequential section of I-295 any time soon.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Beeper1 on April 15, 2018, 08:43:37 PM
I don't think CT is even serious about converting anything else major.  We'll see when the second Route 8 contract goes through, but they blew their chance to change over the northern half of it last year.

Maine I-295 (and I-395) were left alone because the existing sequential exits were deemed "close enough" to the mileposts that no changes were really needed.

Anyone know when RI plans to do the next round of changes?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on April 15, 2018, 09:51:23 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 15, 2018, 06:57:33 PM
Depends on whether the political winds shift and how long it takes CT to convert everything.  Since CT is doing it when major sign rehabs are done, I'm not holding my breath and it could take a couple decades.

And I doubt Maine is renumbering the sequential section of I-295 any time soon.
295 in Maine is mileage-based, isn't it?  There are the exits at the southern end that are somewhat fudged by 1 or 2, but the alternative is excessive lettering, which the original proposed Mass exit numbers exhibited (I-95's exits for 93 at the northern crossing being B-C suffixed because Washington St. was the A; there is no reason for that--fudge by 1 if necessary so that the system interchange is an A-B!!) and once there are larger gaps between exits on 295, it's back to being right on the milepost number.  I think the 295 exit numbers are examples of pretty good practical application of the rules in a way that isn't confusing, as the alternative to current 1-11 (all used) would be 1, 2A, 2B, 3, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A, 6B, 6C (maybe 7), 10, 11.  Why bother with all those letters? The exits average out to one per mile for the first 11 miles.  At exit 15, they go perfectly by milepost for the exit number.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 16, 2018, 06:23:11 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on April 15, 2018, 09:51:23 PM
295 in Maine is mileage-based, isn't it?  There are the exits at the southern end that are somewhat fudged by 1 or 2, but the alternative is excessive lettering, which the original proposed Mass exit numbers exhibited (I-95's exits for 93 at the northern crossing being B-C suffixed because Washington St. was the A; there is no reason for that--fudge by 1 if necessary so that the system interchange is an A-B!!) and once there are larger gaps between exits on 295, it's back to being right on the milepost number.  I think the 295 exit numbers are examples of pretty good practical application of the rules in a way that isn't confusing, as the alternative to current 1-11 (all used) would be 1, 2A, 2B, 3, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A, 6B, 6C (maybe 7), 10, 11.  Why bother with all those letters? The exits average out to one per mile for the first 11 miles.  At exit 15, they go perfectly by milepost for the exit number.
Only north of exit 11.  South of there is sequential.  IMO if it has to be fudged by more than 1 then it shouldn't be fudged.

Did not know about I-395.  Maine's exit numbers just get less elegant the more I learn about them.  IMO if you're going to do something, you should do it right, and if you do it right, you shouldn't be able to tell it wasn't always that way.

Quote from: Beeper1 on April 15, 2018, 08:43:37 PM
I don't think CT is even serious about converting anything else major.  We'll see when the second Route 8 contract goes through, but they blew their chance to change over the northern half of it last year.

Maine I-295 (and I-395) were left alone because the existing sequential exits were deemed "close enough" to the mileposts that no changes were really needed.

Anyone know when RI plans to do the next round of changes?
I've read that CT 8 will convert once all the sign contracts are done.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on April 16, 2018, 08:07:05 PM
Honestly just convert the numbers and say "fuck you, get over it" to the road users.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on April 16, 2018, 09:08:57 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on April 16, 2018, 08:07:05 PM
Honestly just convert the numbers and say "fuck you, get over it" to the road users.

It's funny how they don't mind saying that to all of us for thousands of things, but this is where they take pause of their actions.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on April 17, 2018, 07:39:52 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 16, 2018, 06:23:11 PM
Only north of exit 11.  South of there is sequential.  IMO if it has to be fudged by more than 1 then it shouldn't be fudged.

Going from numbers to a soup of suffixed exits just for the sake of accuracy when renumbering isn't worth it, though.  People are going to estimate it's 53 miles from Exit 11 to Exit 64 or something, but within the Portland section of 295, it's less likely to go by that, especially when the change would result in tons of numbers becoming new numbers that are near the old numbers.  Just not worth it. 
From the quantity of non-roadgeek friends who have absolutely no idea about the mileage being reflected by exit numbers, and these are people who you would think would know or care.  Doing something where 2 becomes 2A, 3 becomes 2B, 4 becomes 3, 5 becomes 4, and so on would serve no purpose other than to confuse people.  The beginning of I-93 is another example where the mileages happen to line up closely with one exit about every mile and thus from Canton up to near South Boston, the numbers might as well stay instead of tweaking by one here and there and adding letters. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 17, 2018, 07:55:50 PM
And what happens if they ever need to add an exit between 9 and 10?  The entire scheme will be thrown out of whack!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kalvado on April 17, 2018, 08:19:25 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 17, 2018, 07:55:50 PM
And what happens if they ever need to add an exit between 9 and 10?  The entire scheme will be thrown out of whack!
We desperately need FHWA approval for fractional exit numbers..
(https://d3egew7zjohdb1.cloudfront.net/ponIltIpIv-1478523581/incoming/56itxl-harry-potter.jpg/alternates/LANDSCAPE_640/harry%20potter.jpg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on April 18, 2018, 09:13:36 AM
Quote from: vdeane on April 17, 2018, 07:55:50 PM
And what happens if they ever need to add an exit between 9 and 10?  The entire scheme will be thrown out of whack!
Not necessarily.  Depending on where the additional exit falls between your Exit 9 and 10 example; only one of of those two existing exits would have its number tweaked.  One would ultimately have either a 9A (former 9), 9B, 10 or a 9, 10A, 10B (former 10) arrangement.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on April 24, 2018, 07:04:09 PM
The Mass Pike (I-90) should have been converted to mileage based numbering when all that AET was being installed. Could have attempted the other roads later.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on April 25, 2018, 09:16:56 AM
Quote from: Roadwarriors79 on April 24, 2018, 07:04:09 PM
The Mass Pike (I-90) should have been converted to mileage based numbering when all that AET was being installed. Could have attempted the other roads later.
Conversion of exit numbers on the Pike was proposed to be done as part of the ongoing sign upgrades, even after the opposition to letting DOT do their job mileage-based exit numbers mounted as the result of US 6 on the Cape.  It was flatly rejected.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: froggie on July 20, 2018, 10:59:30 AM
Quote from: bob7374Well, that will probably make MA and NH the last New England states with sequential numbering now that Vermont is changing its numbers in 2020.

They are...? (https://vtdigger.org/2018/07/19/new-interstate-numbering-system-vermont-scott-hopes-not/)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on July 20, 2018, 12:01:19 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 20, 2018, 10:59:30 AM
Quote from: bob7374Well, that will probably make MA and NH the last New England states with sequential numbering now that Vermont is changing its numbers in 2020.

They are...? (https://vtdigger.org/2018/07/19/new-interstate-numbering-system-vermont-scott-hopes-not/)

Is this an election year? (Did Doug Kerr give permission for them to use his photo?)

Hopefully, at least, the governor's criticism will be based on more facts after the meeting with the FHWA and VTrans. In particular, he seems to think that it will require all signs (in particular the new signs just put up) will have to be replaced. Nor does he know that the new exit tab signage, on I-91 anyway, includes space for the new exit numbers, reducing the cost of transition. Maybe he needs to see the planned information campaign that VTrans has in its budget for this fiscal year first before he makes up his mind.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on July 20, 2018, 05:51:14 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 20, 2018, 12:01:19 PM
Quote from: froggie on July 20, 2018, 10:59:30 AM
Quote from: bob7374Well, that will probably make MA and NH the last New England states with sequential numbering now that Vermont is changing its numbers in 2020.

They are...? (https://vtdigger.org/2018/07/19/new-interstate-numbering-system-vermont-scott-hopes-not/)

Is this an election year? (Did Doug Kerr give permission for them to use his photo?)

Yes. Vermont has elections for governor and both parts of the legislature every 2 years (even-numbered as usual), unlike almost every other state.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman65 on July 24, 2018, 11:20:49 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 16, 2018, 06:23:11 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on April 15, 2018, 09:51:23 PM
295 in Maine is mileage-based, isn't it?  There are the exits at the southern end that are somewhat fudged by 1 or 2, but the alternative is excessive lettering, which the original proposed Mass exit numbers exhibited (I-95's exits for 93 at the northern crossing being B-C suffixed because Washington St. was the A; there is no reason for that--fudge by 1 if necessary so that the system interchange is an A-B!!) and once there are larger gaps between exits on 295, it's back to being right on the milepost number.  I think the 295 exit numbers are examples of pretty good practical application of the rules in a way that isn't confusing, as the alternative to current 1-11 (all used) would be 1, 2A, 2B, 3, 4, 5A, 5B, 5C, 6A, 6B, 6C (maybe 7), 10, 11.  Why bother with all those letters? The exits average out to one per mile for the first 11 miles.  At exit 15, they go perfectly by milepost for the exit number.
Only north of exit 11.  South of there is sequential.  IMO if it has to be fudged by more than 1 then it shouldn't be fudged.

Did not know about I-395.  Maine's exit numbers just get less elegant the more I learn about them.  IMO if you're going to do something, you should do it right, and if you do it right, you shouldn't be able to tell it wasn't always that way.

Quote from: Beeper1 on April 15, 2018, 08:43:37 PM
I don't think CT is even serious about converting anything else major.  We'll see when the second Route 8 contract goes through, but they blew their chance to change over the northern half of it last year.

Maine I-295 (and I-395) were left alone because the existing sequential exits were deemed "close enough" to the mileposts that no changes were really needed.

Anyone know when RI plans to do the next round of changes?
I've read that CT 8 will convert once all the sign contracts are done.
I-395 is not alone.  You have both I-664 and I-395 in VA that use sequential still despite the changes in that state.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on July 25, 2018, 12:56:13 PM
I-395 VA was basically perfectly mile-based by coincidence anyways (with the exception of exit 2, which is a classic off-by-1 situation that is common even on roads that were never sequential to avoid letters).  I-664 really should convert; the six mile gap between exits 7 and 8 is flat-out unacceptable.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on July 25, 2018, 07:24:54 PM
The Interstate 695 Baltimore Beltway is still sequential. So is Interstate 581 in Roanoke, Virginia. Likewise US 54 and US 75 (north of Interstate 635) in Texas. Most of the country already is using mileage-based exits anyway, so I think the lone stragglers should bite the bullet, and accept mile-based exit numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on July 26, 2018, 09:24:59 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 25, 2018, 07:24:54 PMThe Interstate 695 Baltimore Beltway is still sequential.
In that particular case, many if the interchanges (there are some exceptions) are close enough to their respective mile markers to justify not changing them... even with a fudge-factor taken into account.

In Massachusetts (& I probably mentioned this several pages back on this thread), the only highway IMHO that should not change its interchange numbers to mile-marker based would be the Lowell Connector.  A conversion there would convert just about every numbered interchange/ramp into alphabet soup.  Personally, I would recommend dropping the numbers for the Lowell Connector should sequential numbered-interchanges become illegal.  Maybe the use of the word illegal is extreme but I believe many will get the drift so to speak.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on July 26, 2018, 09:35:25 AM
It'll remain to be seen what happens to I-95 west of New Haven CT.  Many of those exits are "close enough".  I-95 east of New Haven (well, east of Branford), however, should get the new numbers.  Branford to Madison is the largest stretch of button copy left on the interstate.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on July 26, 2018, 10:48:11 AM
There's a little bit of a difference on I-95 west of New Haven.  It's pretty close from the state line to Norwalk, but there's one exit in Fairfield (21) that's off by 4 miles (MP 25).  CT 8/25 is off by 2 miles (MP 29).  Things catch up again through Milford (Milford Connector and US 1 by the mall wouldn't change), diverge again through Orange and West Haven (42 is at MP 44), then are in unison at I-91 (47/48 would become 48 A/B).  The major divergence happens east of Exit 56.

I-84 in Danbury is also pretty straightforward up to Exit 8.  Only change would be Exit 2 (A/B WB) becoming Exit 1B EB and B/C WB.  The biggest Alphabet Cities in CT would be on CT 2 WB at I-84 (could go as high as 1F) and I-91 in New Haven (could go as high as 1E SB if the ramp to I-95 NB were to be numbered).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on July 26, 2018, 01:36:02 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on July 26, 2018, 10:48:11 AM
There’s a little bit of a difference on I-95 west of New Haven.  It’s pretty close from the state line to Norwalk, but there’s one exit in Fairfield (21) that’s off by 4 miles (MP 25).  CT 8/25 is off by 2 miles (MP 29).  Things catch up again through Milford (Milford Connector and US 1 by the mall wouldn’t change), diverge again through Orange and West Haven (42 is at MP 44), then are in unison at I-91 (47/48 would become 48 A/B).  The major divergence happens east of Exit 56.

I-84 in Danbury is also pretty straightforward up to Exit 8.  Only change would be Exit 2 (A/B WB) becoming Exit 1B EB and B/C WB.  The biggest Alphabet Cities in CT would be on CT 2 WB at I-84 (could go as high as 1F) and I-91 in New Haven (could go as high as 1E SB if the ramp to I-95 NB were to be numbered).
And they would likely skip E due to the East connotation, so 1G! Unless they decide G looks too much like 6.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on July 26, 2018, 02:27:10 PM
Quote from: Alps on July 26, 2018, 01:36:02 PM

And they would likely skip E due to the East connotation, so 1G! Unless they decide G looks too much like 6.

It doesn't help that the MUTCD, despite mandating milepost exit numbering, is totally silent on implementation issues such as these.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on July 26, 2018, 06:00:23 PM
Quote from: Alps on July 26, 2018, 01:36:02 PMAnd they would likely skip E due to the East connotation, so 1G! Unless they decide G looks too much like 6.
If memory serves, one reason why MUTCD specifies that there should be a gap between the exit number and letter-suffix was to avoid such confusion (B suffixes could be mistaken for 8).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Duke87 on July 26, 2018, 09:09:21 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on July 26, 2018, 10:48:11 AM
The biggest Alphabet Cities in CT would be on CT 2 WB at I-84 (could go as high as 1F) and I-91 in New Haven (could go as high as 1E SB if the ramp to I-95 NB were to be numbered).

This is why you use exit 0. I-91 would have 0A-B and 1A-C in that case... though CT 2 would still have 0 and 1A-E.

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on July 29, 2018, 09:18:07 PM
My guess is the simplest highways to renumber will get it first, so probably MA 24 and I-195. Then as follows:

I-84
I-91
I-395
I-290
I-190
MA 146
I-291
I-391
I-495
MA 140
I-93
MA-3
US 3
I-95
Free MA 128
Turnpike
MA 2

Routes that won't receive new numbers, IMO
MA 57
MA 88
US 5
US 1
MA 25
MA 28
US 6 (DUH)
US 44
I-295
Memorial Drive
Storrow Drive
Lowell Conn.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on July 29, 2018, 11:24:22 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on July 29, 2018, 09:18:07 PM
My guess is the simplest highways to renumber will get it first, so probably MA 24 and I-195. Then as follows:

I-84
I-91
I-395
I-290
I-190
MA 146
I-291
I-391
I-495
MA 140
I-93
MA-3
US 3
I-95
Free MA 128
Turnpike
MA 2

Routes that won't receive new numbers, IMO
MA 57
MA 88
US 5
US 1
MA 25
MA 28
US 6 (DUH)
US 44
I-295
Memorial Drive
Storrow Drive
Lowell Conn.
Under the 2016 plan MA 28 and MA 57 would have received numbers. The Lowell Connector, MA 25, I-295, and of course US 6, would have gotten new numbers, the rest would have stayed numberless. I don't expect, except for maybe US 6, this will change if and when the renumbering project is revived.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on August 01, 2018, 07:57:47 PM
What's the likelihood that the switch to mileage-based exits will be revived? I thought those along the US 6 freeway killed the renumbering project for good?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Beeper1 on August 02, 2018, 12:04:07 AM
Slim to none, unless the FHWA ever ends up forcing them to.  MassDOT doesn't seem to have much of a desire to push the issue any further. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on August 13, 2018, 08:36:06 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on July 29, 2018, 09:18:07 PM
My guess is the simplest highways to renumber will get it first, so probably MA 24 and I-195.
Personally, I would think that shorter Interstate routes would get renumbered first (examples: I-84, I-291, I-295, I-391).  Both I-195 & MA 24 are considerably longer.

Quote from: RobbieL2415 on July 29, 2018, 09:18:07 PMFree MA 128
Not to break your stones but Free implies that the Yankee Division Highway (what was once all-128 decades ago) once had tolls.  Either MA 128 or non-Interstate portion of MA 128 would've sufficed in your listing.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on March 21, 2019, 03:00:53 AM
Necro'ing this thread because there was some discussion about it (in "Connecticut" of all places) and wondering if MA should pull an IA (i.e., numbering interchanges on non-freeway portions of highways, the first example being the US 6 exits in Truro (Pamet/Highland, which would be exits 106/109 in a mile-based scheme))

Would it make things easier...or more difficult?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on March 21, 2019, 09:17:29 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on March 21, 2019, 03:00:53 AM
Necro'ing this thread because there was some discussion about it (in "Connecticut" of all places) and wondering if MA should pull an IA (i.e., numbering interchanges on non-freeway portions of highways, the first example being the US 6 exits in Truro (Pamet/Highland, which would be exits 106/109 in a mile-based scheme))

Would it make things easier...or more difficult?
Unnecessary IMHO & non-compliant w/current MUTCD standards.  If additional intersections are added due to a new subdivision, business park or whatever being built; such would cause multiple re-numberings (adding of suffixes or changing existing suffixes).

Yes, numbered intersections exist/existed along MA 128 in Gloucester/Cape Ann since 1962 but such was likely done under the presumption that the highway would be extended further east (it wasn't).  Exits 11 (MA 127/Grand Circle), 10 (MA 127 signalized intersection) & 9 (MA 127A signalized intersection) have long since been downplayed in terms of signage within the last 15-20 years.  Exits 10 & 9 are only mentioned on advance signage (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6040412,-70.7423877,3a,75y,74.95h,79.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sR85iaKYPbUZroZmMAdmcuw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) south/west of MA 133/Exit 14 and the only other Exit 11 sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6223566,-70.6799075,3a,75y,165.74h,64.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUNn72T9dsxgHljsAD1JH1A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) is a small stand-alone one prior to MA 127/Grant Circle along 128 northbound.

The current mile-marker conversion plan from a few years ago called for these intersections to lose their numbering and all remaining signage (the two that are still present) indicating such to be taken down.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on March 21, 2019, 12:18:31 PM
Was there actually a time when exits 9, 10 and 11 were signed as actual exits with gore signs and such at the actual rotary/intersection? Grew up in Gloucester in the 90s and never remember such being the case. Just curious what the signage would've been like. I was always baffled as a kid by that sign on 128 north mentioning exit 14 as well as 11, 10 & 9 when they weren't signed that way at the actual location...

SM-G900P

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on March 21, 2019, 12:39:22 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on March 21, 2019, 12:18:31 PM
Back in the 80s/early 90s, other than the examples I posted (though older versions/variants) the only other signs I remember seeing was a NEXT EXIT 10 sign for the MA 127/Eastern Ave. intersection (such was similar to the fore-mentioned one for Exit 11) and approaching MA 127A/E. Main St./Bass Ave. an old button-copy (late 60s/early 70s vintage) ground-mounted BGS that read:

EXIT
  9
LAST
EXIT


Later on, that BGS was later replaced with an early 90s vintage (had the MA 128 shield rather than just numerals) D6 Paddle sign that read:

128 ENDS
   EXIT 9


I'm guessing that particular sign was removed/knocked over/vandalized sometime during the late 90s.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on April 09, 2019, 05:12:39 AM
Quote from: 5foot14 on March 21, 2019, 12:18:31 PM
Was there actually a time when exits 9, 10 and 11 were signed as actual exits with gore signs and such at the actual rotary/intersection?

There was also a time when the Orleans Rotary was signed as Exits 13N/S.  I still remember the "Exit 13S" sign that used to hang below the sign for [6A][28].
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on April 15, 2019, 06:08:38 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on April 09, 2019, 05:12:39 AM
Quote from: 5foot14 on March 21, 2019, 12:18:31 PM
Was there actually a time when exits 9, 10 and 11 were signed as actual exits with gore signs and such at the actual rotary/intersection?

There was also a time when the Orleans Rotary was signed as Exits 13N/S.  I still remember the "Exit 13S" sign that used to hang below the sign for [6A][28].

And ironically the new LGS layouts are based on BGS layouts, meaning any new signage posted at the rotary would look much more like legit "exit" signage than the old "exit 13" plaques hanging below paddle signs
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on April 15, 2019, 10:24:14 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on April 09, 2019, 05:12:39 AM
Quote from: 5foot14 on March 21, 2019, 12:18:31 PM
Was there actually a time when exits 9, 10 and 11 were signed as actual exits with gore signs and such at the actual rotary/intersection?

There was also a time when the Orleans Rotary was signed as Exits 13N/S.  I still remember the "Exit 13S" sign that used to hang below the sign for [6A][28].
I believe it is still internally listed as such.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 16, 2019, 05:05:06 PM
I doubt conversion to mileage-based exits in Massachusetts will be revived anytime soon. I think will probably be, at the minimum, a few decades before any such consideration reoccurs. That is, if such a reconsideration happens at all.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on April 16, 2019, 05:19:49 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 16, 2019, 05:05:06 PMI doubt conversion to mileage-based exits in Massachusetts will be revived anytime soon. I think will probably be, at the minimum, a few decades before any such consideration reoccurs. That is, if such a reconsideration happens at all.
Out of curiousity; what is the basis for your reasoning?  At present, neighboring RI & even CT (though slowly) are converting.  Such wasn't in play when MA originally proposed the conversion.

As I stated multiple times in this thread, MA (eastern MA in particular) has changed its exit numbers on many of its highways several times since the early 1960s.  In the Greater Boston area, only the Mass Pike (I-90) & US 3 still have their originally-assigned exit numbers.  Yes, those along the Cape went bonkers when word got out that the Mid-Cape Highway portion of US 6 was slated to receive higher numbers for its interchanges due to the mile-marker conversions; but such shouldn't interfere with MA, at a minimum, converting its Interstates towards such numbering.  Time will tell.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 17, 2019, 10:55:29 AM
The basis of my reasoning is that it only took a few Cape Cod officials complaining to bring the whole conversion to a screeching halt. I am aware that MA 128's and MA 3's exits have been renumbered since the roads were first constructed. If a few powerful politicians can bring projects in-state to a halt, then to me, Massachusetts's exit renumbering scheme is dead-in-the-water.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on April 17, 2019, 01:07:57 PM
It probably didn't help that there was essentially zero public outreach for the conversion. I bet if they actually ran a public outreach program, highlighting the benefits and giving a clear timetable, more people would be receptive to it.

SM-G900P

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Brandon on April 17, 2019, 01:13:15 PM
Quote from: Alps on July 26, 2018, 01:36:02 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on July 26, 2018, 10:48:11 AM
There’s a little bit of a difference on I-95 west of New Haven.  It’s pretty close from the state line to Norwalk, but there’s one exit in Fairfield (21) that’s off by 4 miles (MP 25).  CT 8/25 is off by 2 miles (MP 29).  Things catch up again through Milford (Milford Connector and US 1 by the mall wouldn’t change), diverge again through Orange and West Haven (42 is at MP 44), then are in unison at I-91 (47/48 would become 48 A/B).  The major divergence happens east of Exit 56.

I-84 in Danbury is also pretty straightforward up to Exit 8.  Only change would be Exit 2 (A/B WB) becoming Exit 1B EB and B/C WB.  The biggest Alphabet Cities in CT would be on CT 2 WB at I-84 (could go as high as 1F) and I-91 in New Haven (could go as high as 1E SB if the ramp to I-95 NB were to be numbered).
And they would likely skip E due to the East connotation, so 1G! Unless they decide G looks too much like 6.

Why? https://goo.gl/maps/3NwwMkGyqCaSzUyXA
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 17, 2019, 01:14:47 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on April 17, 2019, 01:07:57 PM
It probably didn't help that there was essentially zero public outreach for the conversion. I bet if they actually ran a public outreach program, highlighting the benefits and giving a clear timetable, more people would be receptive to it.
If it wasn't for their "all guide signs must be overhead, no exceptions" mandate, it probably would have flown under the radar.  That's what drew everyone's attention to US 6... and once attention was drawn, the exit number changes were noticed too.  Given that this is New England, the more chances someone has to object, the more likely something like this is to be doomed.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 17, 2019, 01:18:10 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on April 17, 2019, 01:07:57 PM
It probably didn't help that there was essentially zero public outreach for the conversion. I bet if they actually ran a public outreach program, highlighting the benefits and giving a clear timetable, more people would be receptive to it.

SM-G900P
As I, and others, have commented before, IMO it was a mistake for MassDOT to not at least go ahead with the renumbering along the Mass Pike as part of the currently still ongoing sign replacement contracts. They could have promoted it to the public as a pilot project and allowed drivers to get used to the new system before rolling it out statewide.

As for when MassDOT finally concedes to exit renumbering, when the next MUTCD comes out if, as currently, MA along with NH and VT are the only states not to at least start converting some of their highways to mileage based numbers, it may come with a deadline (which was taken out of the current document) to force the remaining states to adopt the practice, whether they like it or not.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 17, 2019, 01:27:54 PM
To a much smaller degree, Delaware is another state that doesn't have plans for a sequential-to-mileage-based exit renumbering. Sure the new US 301 toll road has mileage-based exits, and DE 1 has kilometer-based exit numbers, but Interstates 95 and 495 are still sequential, and 295's exits aren't numbered.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on April 17, 2019, 01:38:46 PM


Quote from: vdeane on April 17, 2019, 01:14:47 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on April 17, 2019, 01:07:57 PM
It probably didn't help that there was essentially zero public outreach for the conversion. I bet if they actually ran a public outreach program, highlighting the benefits and giving a clear timetable, more people would be receptive to it.
If it wasn't for their "all guide signs must be overhead, no exceptions" mandate, it probably would have flown under the radar.  That's what drew everyone's attention to US 6... and once attention was drawn, the exit number changes were noticed too.  Given that this is New England, the more chances someone has to object, the more likely something like this is to be doomed.

True, and in reality, the only exit that would really be required to have overhead signs that didn't already is the exit 9 cloverleaf.

Quote from: bob7374 on April 17, 2019, 01:18:10 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on April 17, 2019, 01:07:57 PM
It probably didn't help that there was essentially zero public outreach for the conversion. I bet if they actually ran a public outreach program, highlighting the benefits and giving a clear timetable, more people would be receptive to it.

SM-G900P
As I, and others, have commented before, IMO it was a mistake for MassDOT to not at least go ahead with the renumbering along the Mass Pike as part of the currently still ongoing sign replacement contracts. They could have promoted it to the public as a pilot project and allowed drivers to get used to the new system before rolling it out statewide.

As for when MassDOT finally concedes to exit renumbering, when the next MUTCD comes out if, as currently, MA along with NH and VT are the only states not to at least start converting some of their highways to mileage based numbers, it may come with a deadline (which was taken out of the current document) to force the remaining states to adopt the practice, whether they like it or not.

Converting the pike would've been a no brainer. At least then everyone could see it in practice. It would've made the most sense since it's a long haul route. Given how stubborn and resistant to change many are in Massachusetts, it wouldn't surprise me at all if it came down to the feds twisting the states arm until they concede.

SM-G900P

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on April 17, 2019, 01:49:23 PM
I stated this several pages back but is worth repeating.  MA missed a golden opportunity IMHO to convert I-93 to mile-marker-based interchanges during the Big Dig project.  The reason being the O'Neill Tunnel has less interchanges than the old Central Artery/South Station Tunnel did.  As a result of the change not being done then, there are several noticeable gaps in the sequential exit numbering along I-93 through Boston that did not exist pre-Big Dig.

Anyway, had such been done; it would've exposed Bay State motorists to the concept.  Once motorists got accustomed to it; other roads would've underwent a similar conversion.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on April 17, 2019, 04:57:46 PM
There is new signage up at the current exits 12 and 11 collector-distributor road on I-495, however it appears that there are patches with the numbers 12 and 11 and that an "A/B" exit number is underneath.

This could either be a renumbering to exits 12 A/B or 11 A/B or it could be covering up mileage based numbers 29 A/B or 30 A/B
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on April 17, 2019, 06:32:32 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on April 17, 2019, 04:57:46 PM
There is new signage up at the current exits 12 and 11 collector-distributor road on I-495, however it appears that there are patches with the numbers 12 and 11 and that an "A/B" exit number is underneath.

This could either be a renumbering to exits 12 A/B or 11 A/B or it could be covering up mileage based numbers 29 A/B or 30 A/B
I think it'll be exits 30A-B, and these are the only covered ones I've seen along this replacement project.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 17, 2019, 09:11:03 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 17, 2019, 01:27:54 PM
To a much smaller degree, Delaware is another state that doesn't have plans for a sequential-to-mileage-based exit renumbering. Sure the new US 301 toll road has mileage-based exits, and DE 1 has kilometer-based exit numbers, but Interstates 95 and 495 are still sequential, and 295's exits aren't numbered.
DC as well.  I-695 is mile-based.  The portion of DC 295 that has numbers might be as well.  I-295 and I-395 are both sequential.  Interestingly, it looks like they might have begun converting (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8849343,-77.0126884,3a,24.4y,169.46h,95.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMSkMQEn25796fwQz2IK5uA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) I-395 and then aborted it (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8850328,-77.0126901,3a,23.1y,168.54h,93.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shV_Hr-jVb73UCF_cdJkuKA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on April 18, 2019, 10:38:32 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on April 17, 2019, 06:32:32 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on April 17, 2019, 04:57:46 PM
There is new signage up at the current exits 12 and 11 collector-distributor road on I-495, however it appears that there are patches with the numbers 12 and 11 and that an "A/B" exit number is underneath.

This could either be a renumbering to exits 12 A/B or 11 A/B or it could be covering up mileage based numbers 29 A/B or 30 A/B
I think it'll be exits 30A-B, and these are the only covered ones I've seen along this replacement project.

I agree.  The 30 MP falls just north of the 140 South overpass, but is within the footprint of the ramps for 140 South, so I'd be ok with rounding up to 30 in this case.  The northbound overpass is near MP 30.8, so 30 A-B makes sense.

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 17, 2019, 01:27:54 PM
To a much smaller degree, Delaware is another state that doesn't have plans for a sequential-to-mileage-based exit renumbering. Sure the new US 301 toll road has mileage-based exits, and DE 1 has kilometer-based exit numbers, but Interstates 95 and 495 are still sequential, and 295's exits aren't numbered.

DE 141 is also sequential.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 18, 2019, 01:08:53 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 18, 2019, 10:38:32 AM
DE 141 is also sequential.
The only difference between its numbers is that 2/3A/3B/4B should technically be 3A/3B/3C/3D, but close enough as far as I'm concerned.  Some states that have otherwise converted have done far worse (see: I-295 ME, I-664 VA, non-interstates in PA).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJDBVT on April 18, 2019, 09:13:38 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 17, 2019, 01:18:10 PM
As for when MassDOT finally concedes to exit renumbering, when the next MUTCD comes out if, as currently, MA along with NH and VT are the only states not to at least start converting some of their highways to mileage based numbers, it may come with a deadline (which was taken out of the current document) to force the remaining states to adopt the practice, whether they like it or not.

VT 289 has had mileage-based exit numbers since the first segment opened in the early '90s. All other exits in the state are numbered sequentially or are unnumbered.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DrSmith on April 19, 2019, 01:16:16 PM
I think getting into more mile-based exit conversion ignores the current and future state of travel. With smart phones and GPS so prolific now, it's that device telling everyone how much further (and how much longer). Exit numbers are support for pointing to a particular exit. If self-driving cars are really that close as well, that changes the needs significantly. Furthermore, as transportation funds are typically less than needed and tight, such conversions don't take into account other more important needs.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: NE2 on April 19, 2019, 07:00:20 PM
Quote from: DrSmith on April 19, 2019, 01:16:16 PM
I think getting into more mile-based exit conversion ignores the current and future state of travel. With smart phones and GPS so prolific now, it's that device telling everyone how much further (and how much longer).
"In 20 miles bear left to stay on the freeway." Soooooo useful.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on April 19, 2019, 08:22:49 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 18, 2019, 01:08:53 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 18, 2019, 10:38:32 AM
DE 141 is also sequential.
The only difference between its numbers is that 2/3A/3B/4B should technically be 3A/3B/3C/3D, but close enough as far as I'm concerned.  Some states that have otherwise converted have done far worse (see: I-295 ME, I-664 VA, non-interstates in PA).

After the US 13/40 Exits (which I have as 1A and 1B for mileage based), I have:

Exit 2: I-295 North (SB ONLY)
Exit 3A: I-95/US 202/I-495 NORTH
Exit 3B: I-95 SOUTH
Exit 3C: South James St/Old Airport Rd (SB ONLY)
Exit 4A: DE 4
Exit 4B: DE 62
Exit 5A: DE 2 EAST
Exit 5B: DE 2 WEST TO DE 41 (NB); TO DE 2 WEST/DE 41 (SB)

If you wanted to number the DE 52 exits on the middle section, they would be 8 A-B NB and 8 SB.  US/DE 202 (Concord Pike) would be Exit 11
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Scott5114 on April 20, 2019, 12:32:28 PM
I have to say, I'm rather amused by the pearl-clutching about the potential of high letter suffixes, which just comes off as parochial. I have never seen anyone have a problem with I-235 exits 1F and 1G in Oklahoma City, nor have I heard about anyone having a problem with exit 51I in Chicago (at least not for the exit number). Hell, I've even driven around Kansas City and nobody even talks about exit 2Y, which you'd think they would if high exit numbers somehow caused a problem.

Exit numbers are as essentially arbitrary as house numbers are, and the exit and its number will function exactly the same whether it's numbered as '10' or '2406K'.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on April 20, 2019, 01:19:46 PM
Massachusetts should get to doing this soon. Everyone on the Cape is whining about the higher numbers coming. All the drivers in Massachusetts are used to the sequential numbers, and more and more states are switching to mileage based numbers, there will be less places for Massachusetts drivers to have sequential numbers, and chances are, exits could be missed, and drivers fed up.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: J N Winkler on April 20, 2019, 01:47:45 PM
Why has this discussion revived in the last week or so?  Has MassDOT in the recent past advertised a contract or issued other publicity in connection with exit numbering?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 20, 2019, 09:40:55 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 19, 2019, 08:22:49 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 18, 2019, 01:08:53 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 18, 2019, 10:38:32 AM
DE 141 is also sequential.
The only difference between its numbers is that 2/3A/3B/4B should technically be 3A/3B/3C/3D, but close enough as far as I'm concerned.  Some states that have otherwise converted have done far worse (see: I-295 ME, I-664 VA, non-interstates in PA).

After the US 13/40 Exits (which I have as 1A and 1B for mileage based), I have:

Exit 2: I-295 South (SB ONLY)
Exit 3A: I-95/US 202/I-495 NORTH
Exit 3B: I-95 SOUTH
Exit 3C: South James St/Old Airport Rd (SB ONLY)
Exit 4A: DE 4
Exit 4B: DE 62
Exit 5A: DE 2 EAST
Exit 5B: DE 2 WEST TO DE 41 (NB); TO DE 2 WEST/DE 41 (SB)

If you wanted to number the DE 52 exits on the middle section, they would be 8 A-B NB and 8 SB.  US/DE 202 (Concord Pike) would be Exit 11

Hmm... looking at street view, it appears Google's routing of DE 9 is inaccurate, resulting in DE 141 being 0.45 miles shorter than I thought it was.  In any case, the numbers are only off by 1, so not really worth changing (and many would still match if a normal rounding system was used rather than the MUTCD-recommended "always round down" system; why the MUTCD recommends the system that maximizes the amount of alphabet soup, I don't know).

Quote from: Scott5114 on April 20, 2019, 12:32:28 PM
I have to say, I'm rather amused by the pearl-clutching about the potential of high letter suffixes, which just comes off as parochial. I have never seen anyone have a problem with I-235 exits 1F and 1G in Oklahoma City, nor have I heard about anyone having a problem with exit 51I in Chicago (at least not for the exit number). Hell, I've even driven around Kansas City and nobody even talks about exit 2Y, which you'd think they would if high exit numbers somehow caused a problem.

Exit numbers are as essentially arbitrary as house numbers are, and the exit and its number will function exactly the same whether it's numbered as '10' or '2406K'.
It's probably because suffixes in sequential states usually mean "separate ramps in the same interchange".  Even when a suffix is used because an exit was added, they're still obviously separate interchanges.  NY even has double suffixed exit numbers... the Southern State Parkway goes 28S, 28N, 28AS, 28AN, 29.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on April 20, 2019, 11:32:37 PM
Speaking of Long Island parkways, renumbering the north-south ones to mileage based exits could get a little interesting if you keep the prefix letters for the exits.  First of all, the numbers would have to be reversed to go south-north so that MP 0 would be at Jones Beach or in Robert Moses State Park.  For example, the Meadowbrook exits for Hempstead Turnpike (NY 24), which are now M3 and M4, would be M9A and M9B.  Would be even more fun with the Robert Moses, and Sunken Meadow with the two-letter prefixes.  The Sunrise Highway exits off of the Robert Moses would be Exits RM7A and RM7B.

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 21, 2019, 07:41:20 PM
Personially I wouldn't keep the prefixes.  They date back to a time when all the parkways were considered to be part of the Northern and Southern State Parkways (similar to how the Berkshire Spur is part of the Thruway but not the mainline).  I'd even merge the Sagtikos and Sunken Meadow into one numbering system.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on April 21, 2019, 08:59:51 PM
Nah.  Keep the prefixes.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 22, 2019, 09:27:25 PM
Quote from: Rothman on April 21, 2019, 08:59:51 PM
Nah.  Keep the prefixes.
Honestly, the two letter ones overwhelm the exit number, and the Sagtikos/Sunken Meadow having separate sets of exit numbers doesn't really make sense beyond the "all roads are part of the Northern/Southern Parkways" thing (which really, really doesn't make sense to me); heck, they don't even have separate reference route numbers!  Speaking of the Sunken Meadow, its prefix is kinda interesting, if you know what I mean.  :whip: Would you say that sticks and stones may break your bones but prefixes excite you?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on June 06, 2019, 02:38:57 PM
Apparently, there are people in Massachusetts who think mile-based exits are stupid:
https://www.reddit.com/r/massachusetts/comments/bwo5v7/what_is_the_holdup_with_massachusetts_renumbering/

Seriously though, the state should at least convert the Mass. Pike and I-93.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on June 06, 2019, 02:58:07 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 06, 2019, 02:38:57 PM
Apparently, there are people in Massachusetts who think mile-based exits are stupid:
https://www.reddit.com/r/massachusetts/comments/bwo5v7/what_is_the_holdup_with_massachusetts_renumbering/

Seriously though, the state should at least convert the Mass. Pike and I-93.

I-495 seems like a higher priority than I-93. On I-93, the exits are somewhat close to a mile apart, at least on average. This is not the case on most of I-495.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on June 06, 2019, 03:48:48 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 06, 2019, 02:38:57 PM
Apparently, there are people in Massachusetts who think mile-based exits are stupid:
https://www.reddit.com/r/massachusetts/comments/bwo5v7/what_is_the_holdup_with_massachusetts_renumbering/

Seriously though, the state should at least convert the Mass. Pike and I-93.

That thread, in a nutshell, confirms Reddit is just a second cousin of 4chan.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on June 07, 2019, 08:57:44 AM
Quote from: 1 on June 06, 2019, 02:58:07 PMI-495 seems like a higher priority than I-93. On I-93, the exits are somewhat close to a mile apart, at least on average. This is not the case on most of I-495.
IMHO and as previously stated, I-93 should be one of the first highways in MA to get the change.  Such a conversion will sort out the sequential interchange numbering gaps along the Big Dig/O'Neill Tunnel area. 

From Canton to about Neponset, I-93's interchanges are indeed close to/roughly a mile apart; I don't see much of a change once a conversion takes place ...especially if Exit 0 is not used for the I-95/Canton interchange (i.e. it retains the current Exits 1A-B). 

However, between Neponset and Somerville (including the O'Neill Tunnel), the interchanges are closer together enough to warrant suffixed interchange numbers along the way.  As a result, I-93's mile-marker-based interchange numbers north of Neponset would numerically decrease from their current sequential ones.  Examples: the current Exits 37A-B (I-95/MA 128) interchange in Reading/Woburn would likely become Exits 28A-B.  The northernmost interchange in MA, Exit 48 (MA 213) would likely become Exit 46.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on June 07, 2019, 02:53:03 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 07, 2019, 08:57:44 AM
Quote from: 1 on June 06, 2019, 02:58:07 PMI-495 seems like a higher priority than I-93. On I-93, the exits are somewhat close to a mile apart, at least on average. This is not the case on most of I-495.
IMHO and as previously stated, I-93 should be one of the first highways in MA to get the change.  Such a conversion will sort out the sequential interchange numbering gaps along the Big Dig/O'Neill Tunnel area. 

From Canton to about Neponset, I-93's interchanges are indeed close to/roughly a mile apart; I don't see much of a change once a conversion takes place ...especially if Exit 0 is not used for the I-95/Canton interchange (i.e. it retains the current Exits 1A-B). 

However, between Neponset and Somerville (including the O'Neill Tunnel), the interchanges are closer together enough to warrant suffixed interchange numbers along the way.  As a result, I-93's mile-marker-based interchange numbers north of Neponset would numerically decrease from their current sequential ones.  Examples: the current Exits 37A-B (I-95/MA 128) interchange in Reading/Woburn would likely become Exits 28A-B.  The northernmost interchange in MA, Exit 48 (MA 213) would likely become Exit 46.

The I-95 interchange is an example where Exit 0 makes sense, since the MA 138 interchanges fall within the 1 MP.  Otherwise, you'll have an alphabet city, plus there would be no interchanges to 95 on the northbound route.  If MA 138 were not a cloverleaf, you could get away with it, with 138 being 1C SB and 1 NB, and the I-95's being 1A and 1B. 

Through the tunnel, you'd have NB:

16A: I-90 East
16B-C: I-90 West/South Station
17: Government Center
18: MA 3/28 Leverett Circle/Cambridge
19: US 1 NORTH Tobin Bridge/Charlestown

And SB:
18C: MA 3/28 Leverett Circle/Cambridge
18B: MA 1A North TO Logan Airport Callahan Tunnel/East Boston
18A: Government Center
17: Purchase St
16B: I-90 West//Albany St
16A: South Station
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on June 07, 2019, 02:55:56 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 07, 2019, 08:57:44 AM
However, between Neponset and Somerville (including the O'Neill Tunnel), the interchanges are closer together enough to warrant suffixed interchange numbers along the way.  As a result, I-93's mile-marker-based interchange numbers north of Neponset would numerically decrease from their current sequential ones.  Examples: the current Exits 37A-B (I-95/MA 128) interchange in Reading/Woburn would likely become Exits 28A-B.  The northernmost interchange in MA, Exit 48 (MA 213) would likely become Exit 46.

The fact that I-93 in Massachusetts has "more" exit numbers than miles makes absolutely no sense!  And why did MassDOT assign "Exit 1B" for traffic going from Canton to Dedham?  Yes, they're going from 93 south to 95/128 north, but they don't exit the highway, they just travel in a straight line!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on June 07, 2019, 03:08:33 PM
They do the same thing at the south end of I-391 in Chicopee where I-91 North (clearly a ramp) is signed as Exit 1B, and I-91 South (which is the thru route) is signed as Exit 1A.  They may change to 0A and 0B in mileage based.  You might see a similar treatment in the future for Exit 24 on the Thruway if the Thruway gives mileage based numbers based on the individual highways, since you generally don't number the TOTSO's.  Exit 156 NB would be the connection from I-87 North to I-90 West and Exit 347 would be the connection to I-87 South from I-90 East, even though you're staying on the Thruway (the thru route)  Same with Exit B1 westbound on I-90; staying on the Berkshire Spur would be Exit 368 while the I-90 TOTSO is unnumbered.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on June 07, 2019, 04:57:56 PM
I am deeply skeptical that Massachusetts will revive the milepost exit numbering conversion plan. When those Cape Cod officals complained, the Massachusetts DOT probably figured everyone in the state opposed mileage-based exit numbers. Massachusetts will probably keep the existing sequential exit numbers for many decades to come, even if every road in the surrounding states had mileage-based exit numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on June 10, 2019, 01:43:21 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 07, 2019, 04:57:56 PM
I am deeply skeptical that Massachusetts will revive the milepost exit numbering conversion plan. When those Cape Cod officals complained, the Massachusetts DOT probably figured everyone in the state opposed mileage-based exit numbers. Massachusetts will probably keep the existing sequential exit numbers for many decades to come, even if every road in the surrounding states had mileage-based exit numbers.

Eventually the FHWA will ensure compliance....
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on June 10, 2019, 08:24:13 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on June 10, 2019, 01:43:21 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 07, 2019, 04:57:56 PM
I am deeply skeptical that Massachusetts will revive the milepost exit numbering conversion plan. When those Cape Cod officals complained, the Massachusetts DOT probably figured everyone in the state opposed mileage-based exit numbers. Massachusetts will probably keep the existing sequential exit numbers for many decades to come, even if every road in the surrounding states had mileage-based exit numbers.

Eventually the FHWA will ensure compliance....
What gives you that idea?  FHWA is big on writing manuals, not so big on enforcement outside of a few key areas.  At the Division level, FHWA enforcement can be outright laughable, with it being horrifically inconsistent as their staff rotates through their musical chair programs.

Not concerning engineering, but in regards to fiscal constraint (e.g., STIP), FHWA even relies on State DOTs querying FMIS to generate reports to prove fiscal constraint.  That's right, FHWA does not know their own fiscal management system well enough to run their own reports reliably and instead has told DOTs to run their own reports out of it and then have meetings where they review the reports.

Why State DOTs don't just make up numbers to make all their balances show zero is beyond me, given the situation.  Good thing certain State DOT staff still think they should do their job "properly," I suppose.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on June 10, 2019, 09:32:36 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 07, 2019, 02:55:56 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 07, 2019, 08:57:44 AM
However, between Neponset and Somerville (including the O'Neill Tunnel), the interchanges are closer together enough to warrant suffixed interchange numbers along the way.  As a result, I-93's mile-marker-based interchange numbers north of Neponset would numerically decrease from their current sequential ones.  Examples: the current Exits 37A-B (I-95/MA 128) interchange in Reading/Woburn would likely become Exits 28A-B.  The northernmost interchange in MA, Exit 48 (MA 213) would likely become Exit 46.

The fact that I-93 in Massachusetts has "more" exit numbers than miles makes absolutely no sense!
One needs to remember that those sequential numbers were set back when the Central Artery was still around & fully operational (circa 1987).  Here's what the numbers were pre-Big-Dig between Mass Ave. (Exit 18) to US 1 North (Exit 27):

Exit 19: Albany St.- southbound exit only (leaves I-93 southbound mainline with Exit 20 ramp)
Exit 20: I-90 West/Mass Pike (access to South Station/Kneeland St. from northbound exit ramp)
Exit 21: Kneeland St./Chinatown - southbound exit only
Exit 22: Atlantic Ave./Northern Ave. (northbound)/South Station (southbound)
Exit 23: High St./Congress St. - southbound exit only
Exit 24: MA 1A North/Callahan Tunnel/Logan Airport
Exit 25: Causeway St./North End (northbound)/Haymarket Square (southbound)
Exit 26: MA 3 North to MA 28/North Station/Storrow Drive

Another thing to keep in mind that when the Central Artery/South Station Tunnel originally opened; there were additional ramps present (& open) as well.  Most of them were closed off/removed during the 1970s.

Since MA traditionally only uses suffixed numbers for either multiple ramps at one interchange or for a new interchange built between two existing ones; the sequential exit numbers can increase very quickly when several interchanges are located close together.

Quote from: kramie13 on June 07, 2019, 02:55:56 PM
And why did MassDOT assign "Exit 1B" for traffic going from Canton to Dedham?  Yes, they're going from 93 south to 95/128 north, but they don't exit the highway, they just travel in a straight line!
Those EXIT 1B tabs were recent add-ons.  The signs were up for just over a year(?) prior to such being added.  MassDOT's rationale, despite this particular interchange's history (such was once through-128), for adding such was indeed due to the change in primary (Interstate) route number at this location. 

Had 128 been fully truncated to the I-95/MA 128 interchange in Peabody; a similar left exit tabs would've been placed on the through 95 SOUTH Waltham signs.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on June 10, 2019, 08:49:30 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 10, 2019, 08:24:13 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on June 10, 2019, 01:43:21 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 07, 2019, 04:57:56 PM
I am deeply skeptical that Massachusetts will revive the milepost exit numbering conversion plan. When those Cape Cod officals complained, the Massachusetts DOT probably figured everyone in the state opposed mileage-based exit numbers. Massachusetts will probably keep the existing sequential exit numbers for many decades to come, even if every road in the surrounding states had mileage-based exit numbers.

Eventually the FHWA will ensure compliance....
What gives you that idea?  FHWA is big on writing manuals, not so big on enforcement outside of a few key areas.  At the Division level, FHWA enforcement can be outright laughable, with it being horrifically inconsistent as their staff rotates through their musical chair programs.

Not concerning engineering, but in regards to fiscal constraint (e.g., STIP), FHWA even relies on State DOTs querying FMIS to generate reports to prove fiscal constraint.  That's right, FHWA does not know their own fiscal management system well enough to run their own reports reliably and instead has told DOTs to run their own reports out of it and then have meetings where they review the reports.

Why State DOTs don't just make up numbers to make all their balances show zero is beyond me, given the situation.  Good thing certain State DOT staff still think they should do their job "properly," I suppose.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Reminds me of all the issues the railroad grade crossing projects have right now because the FHWA would rather have a clean spreadsheet that includes them alongside highway projects that follow completely different processes rather than realizing that rail projects get done when the railroads want them to get done, not when the state DOT schedules it, and the railroads would rather give up federal money than control over how they schedule work crews.

(personal opinion)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on June 10, 2019, 08:53:20 PM
So, so true.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: J N Winkler on June 11, 2019, 11:55:18 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on June 10, 2019, 01:43:21 AMEventually the FHWA will ensure compliance....

A while ago we had a practitioner pass on inside information that mileage-based exit numbering and exit numbering for non-Interstates are not currently enforcement priorities for FHWA.  So, yes, those requirements are in the MUTCD, but their enforcement is an open question.  Kansas certainly shows no signs of any preparation for exit numbering on its (fairly substantial) mileage of non-Interstate freeway.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 11, 2019, 12:34:36 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 06, 2019, 02:38:57 PM
Apparently, there are people in Massachusetts who think mile-based exits are stupid:
https://www.reddit.com/r/massachusetts/comments/bwo5v7/what_is_the_holdup_with_massachusetts_renumbering/

Seriously though, the state should at least convert the Mass. Pike and I-93.
They wont think their stupid when they get docked FHWA funding for noncompliance.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on June 11, 2019, 12:45:15 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 11, 2019, 12:34:36 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 06, 2019, 02:38:57 PM
Apparently, there are people in Massachusetts who think mile-based exits are stupid:
https://www.reddit.com/r/massachusetts/comments/bwo5v7/what_is_the_holdup_with_massachusetts_renumbering/

Seriously though, the state should at least convert the Mass. Pike and I-93.
They wont think their stupid when they get docked FHWA funding for noncompliance.
I am really beginning to wonder what fantasyland some of you live in when you think FHWA will actually withhold funding of some sort because of refusal to convert to mileage-based exit numbering.

Outside of roadgeeks, the conversion is a very unpopular idea.  For FHWA and by extension the President to draw that line in the sand would be politically stupid and therefore a waste of everyone's time.

Sure, I want the conversion to happen, but thinking FHWA will do something about it is downright idiotic if you know how FHWA operates (i.e., think about why FHWA went after NY about the Cuomo signs rather than mileage-based exits...).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on June 11, 2019, 02:04:08 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 11, 2019, 12:45:15 PMSure, I want the conversion to happen, but thinking FHWA will do something about it is downright idiotic if you know how FHWA operates (i.e., think about why FHWA went after NY about the Cuomo signs rather than mileage-based exits...).
Actually, NY now is slowly phasing in mile-marker-based interchange numbering.  New signs being erected along I-84 show such a conversion at least for that road.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on June 11, 2019, 02:12:43 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 11, 2019, 02:04:08 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 11, 2019, 12:45:15 PMSure, I want the conversion to happen, but thinking FHWA will do something about it is downright idiotic if you know how FHWA operates (i.e., think about why FHWA went after NY about the Cuomo signs rather than mileage-based exits...).
Actually, NY now is slowly phasing in mile-marker-based interchange numbering.  New signs being erected along I-84 show such a conversion at least for that road.
Yes, NYSDOT is slowly doing so on a couple of roads, but not out of fear of FHWA.  The fear of FHWA is to what I was referring.

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on June 11, 2019, 02:17:32 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 11, 2019, 02:12:43 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 11, 2019, 02:04:08 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 11, 2019, 12:45:15 PMSure, I want the conversion to happen, but thinking FHWA will do something about it is downright idiotic if you know how FHWA operates (i.e., think about why FHWA went after NY about the Cuomo signs rather than mileage-based exits...).
Actually, NY now is slowly phasing in mile-marker-based interchange numbering.  New signs being erected along I-84 show such a conversion at least for that road.
Yes, NYSDOT is slowly doing so on a couple of roads, but not out of fear of FHWA.  The fear of FHWA is to what I was referring.
I don't know about fear per se; but what would be their (NY) reasoning for even starting such?  It's possible (guess on my part) that NY's moving towards mile-marker-based numbering, however slowly, may have been indirectly induced by the threat of federal funds being revoked over the Cuomo sings.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on June 11, 2019, 02:21:13 PM
You have the timing wrong. FHWA never threatened NYSDOT with penalities over the slow (almost dead) adoption of mileage-based exits, whereas they did so just last year regarding the Cuomo signs.  Keep in mind how long mileage-based exits have been included in the MUTCD and compare it to how quickly FHWA came down on the Cuomo signs.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on June 11, 2019, 04:34:59 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 11, 2019, 02:21:13 PMYou have the timing wrong. FHWA never threatened NYSDOT with penalities over the slow (almost dead) adoption of mileage-based exits, whereas they did so just last year regarding the Cuomo signs.  Keep in mind how long mileage-based exits have been included in the MUTCD and compare it to how quickly FHWA came down on the Cuomo signs.
Respectfully, you may want to reread my earlier post.  Nowhere did I state that the FWHA threatened NY funding-wise with regards to mile-marker-based interchange numbering.  Yes, such has been in the MUTCD for years but no official deadline to fully implement such was ever listed.  With no written official deadline for implementation; how would such be enforceable?  NY's recent gradual phase-in of such may be in anticipation of a coming future deadline.

The reason why the FWHA clamped down on the multiple Cuomo signs comparatively quickly was because such, in their eyes, were considered to be distracting to motorists.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on June 11, 2019, 05:37:13 PM
You may want to revisit the context of the conversation, where Robbie claimed that DOTs would fear FHWA's fiscal wrath for noncompliance.  That is what we were talking about.

There is no impending deadline for the conversion.  I suspect mileage conversion is actually occurring out of voluntary compliance as signage is in need of replacing.  Don't know if changing I-81 or I-88 over is even thought of yet, let alone programmed (I'll check when I have the chance).

And, despite the stated objection to readability, I believe there was a healthy political motivation to go after a blue state by this red federal administration -- it was an easy pot shot to take against NY.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on June 11, 2019, 07:56:59 PM
Will also note that sometimes, the guy in charge of signs at an agency is partial to the MUTCD.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on June 11, 2019, 08:55:19 PM
Everything I'm aware of with respect to converting I-81 is in reference to tearing down the viaduct in Syracuse.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on June 12, 2019, 09:02:42 AM
Quote from: Rothman on June 11, 2019, 05:37:13 PMYou may want to revisit the context of the conversation, where Robbie claimed that DOTs would fear FHWA's fiscal wrath for noncompliance.
And further down in the thread, I stated that I didn't know (in the context of agree) of fear of such per se.  Whether the recent start of conversions is due to lessons learned following the funding threat due to the Cuomo signs or simple voluntary compliance (your words) via sign replacement projects on NYSDOT's part is anybody's guess.

Quote from: Rothman on June 11, 2019, 05:37:13 PMAnd, despite the stated objection to readability, I believe there was a healthy political motivation to go after a blue state by this red federal administration -- it was an easy pot shot to take against NY.
Actually, the Cuomo sign debacle started during the final year of the prior federal administration.  So, the initial reasoning wasn't completely political per se.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on June 12, 2019, 09:18:59 AM
I know that the conversion was discussed at NYSDOT multiple times over at least the last decade.  Most times (earlier on), the opposition would just say there would be the usual issues with it to backburner the effort.  However, a few years ago, the conversion actually made it into a planning document -- long before the Cuomo sign nonsense.  Wish I could remember which one; it wasn't the master plan.  I dismissed it as a paper tiger at the time -- NYSDOT waxes quixotic in such documents all the time to appease anyone's desires (anyone remember the plan to time all the signals on Central Ave/State St between Albany and Schenectady?  So much for that... :D).  And, given how such documents are created, I wouldn't be surprised if it ended up in there accidentally! :D

In any matter, opposition to the conversion has definitely not been monolithic at NYSDOT, so I'm basing my "guess" that it has little to do with the Cuomo signs on my own experience and observations.  I do have to say that I was surprised when the conversion was announced for the Taconic Parkway given the discussions I witnessed prior to that, but the decision has been brewing for quite a while, rather than being pushed by allegedly readability issues regarding I Love NY signage (which was definitely pushed directly out of the Governor's office itself in the first place).

(personal opinion emphasized)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on June 12, 2019, 11:40:58 AM
Quote from: Rothman on June 11, 2019, 12:45:15 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 11, 2019, 12:34:36 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 06, 2019, 02:38:57 PM
Apparently, there are people in Massachusetts who think mile-based exits are stupid:
https://www.reddit.com/r/massachusetts/comments/bwo5v7/what_is_the_holdup_with_massachusetts_renumbering/

Seriously though, the state should at least convert the Mass. Pike and I-93.
They wont think their stupid when they get docked FHWA funding for noncompliance.
I am really beginning to wonder what fantasyland some of you live in when you think FHWA will actually withhold funding of some sort because of refusal to convert to mileage-based exit numbering.

Outside of roadgeeks, the conversion is a very unpopular idea.  For FHWA and by extension the President to draw that line in the sand would be politically stupid and therefore a waste of everyone's time.

Sure, I want the conversion to happen, but thinking FHWA will do something about it is downright idiotic if you know how FHWA operates (i.e., think about why FHWA went after NY about the Cuomo signs rather than mileage-based exits...).
They would (by 10%) if a state lowered their drinking age.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on June 12, 2019, 11:48:10 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 12, 2019, 11:40:58 AM
Quote from: Rothman on June 11, 2019, 12:45:15 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on June 11, 2019, 12:34:36 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 06, 2019, 02:38:57 PM
Apparently, there are people in Massachusetts who think mile-based exits are stupid:
https://www.reddit.com/r/massachusetts/comments/bwo5v7/what_is_the_holdup_with_massachusetts_renumbering/

Seriously though, the state should at least convert the Mass. Pike and I-93.
They wont think their stupid when they get docked FHWA funding for noncompliance.
I am really beginning to wonder what fantasyland some of you live in when you think FHWA will actually withhold funding of some sort because of refusal to convert to mileage-based exit numbering.

Outside of roadgeeks, the conversion is a very unpopular idea.  For FHWA and by extension the President to draw that line in the sand would be politically stupid and therefore a waste of everyone's time.

Sure, I want the conversion to happen, but thinking FHWA will do something about it is downright idiotic if you know how FHWA operates (i.e., think about why FHWA went after NY about the Cuomo signs rather than mileage-based exits...).
They would (by 10%) if a state lowered their drinking age.
That is very different, since that calculation happens specifically by federal law right when FHWA calculates apportionments for each state rather than some fiscal penalty on the fly at their regulatory whim due to noncompliance with the MUTCD.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: J N Winkler on June 12, 2019, 02:00:04 PM
I wonder to what extent FHWA's ability to set enforcement priorities is constrained by the "arbitrary and capricious" test.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on June 12, 2019, 04:20:44 PM
Has anyone ever seen this page?: Massachusetts Highways for the 21st Century: A Guide to Current Roadways and Proposals For Their Future: http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/index.html

I've checked it periodically to see if Massachusetts will ever change their mind about converting to mileage-based exits (which I doubt).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on June 12, 2019, 04:44:11 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 12, 2019, 04:20:44 PM
Has anyone ever seen this page?: Massachusetts Highways for the 21st Century: A Guide to Current Roadways and Proposals For Their Future: http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/index.html

I've checked it periodically to see if Massachusetts will ever change their mind about converting to mileage-based exits (which I doubt).
I think Bob7374 has seen it a few times. :D
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on June 12, 2019, 11:52:58 PM
 :nod:
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 12, 2019, 04:44:11 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 12, 2019, 04:20:44 PM
Has anyone ever seen this page?: Massachusetts Highways for the 21st Century: A Guide to Current Roadways and Proposals For Their Future: http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/index.html

I've checked it periodically to see if Massachusetts will ever change their mind about converting to mileage-based exits (which I doubt).
I think Bob7374 has seen it a few times. :D
May have.  Just posted some new I-90 sign photos there.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on June 13, 2019, 09:03:31 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on June 12, 2019, 11:52:58 PM
:nod:
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 12, 2019, 04:44:11 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 12, 2019, 04:20:44 PM
Has anyone ever seen this page?: Massachusetts Highways for the 21st Century: A Guide to Current Roadways and Proposals For Their Future: http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/index.html

I've checked it periodically to see if Massachusetts will ever change their mind about converting to mileage-based exits (which I doubt).
I think Bob7374 has seen it a few times. :D
May have.  Just posted some new I-90 sign photos there.
No offense but if there are indeed any updates/movements regarding MA converting their interchange numbers; such will likely get posted on this thread first.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadwarriors79 on November 18, 2019, 03:22:20 PM
I saw this on Twitter earlier. Will exit numbers finally get updated?

https://twitter.com/struffwbz/status/1196518506092793858?s=12&fbclid=IwAR1tS_8946PEXjVFdSo2gPUOPKRLYhwviU8fN8Uiv3ZRw-8WhfuqTf48pHQ
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 18, 2019, 03:28:44 PM
I hope they really mean it this time. The sequiential to mileage-based exit renumbering project should not have been held up, especially by the rich and powerful in Cape Cod. Personally, I expected it would be at least 20-30 years before the Massachusetts DOT revived the project (if at all).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on November 18, 2019, 04:23:47 PM
Let's hope with the west-to-east approach that the Cape can see the results and get on board.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 18, 2019, 04:34:12 PM
Guess I'm glad now I've kept my future MA exit number sites up. Will update the text. For those who haven't seen it, the interstate list is at:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/intexits.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/intexits.html)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 18, 2019, 05:02:43 PM
Massachusetts House Bill H.3078 (https://malegislature.gov/Bills/191/H3078/House/Bill/Text)

Bold emphasis added to the below:
Quote from: H.3078 ExcerptThe exit numbers along all interstate highways within Massachusetts shall be converted to a mileage-based system. The plan will include the following provisions:

(a) As closely as practicable, follow the Federal Highway Administration mileage-based exit numbering system

(b) Follow the convention that the numbering shall start at the southernmost or westernmost terminus of the interstate highway

Based on the above, the conversion (for now) will only be applied to Interstates.  Doing so will keep such a conversion out of Cape Cod.  Maybe doing the Interstates first then other highways later should've been the approach in the first place IMHO.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: southshore720 on November 18, 2019, 05:03:50 PM
Per WBZ (Channel 4), "Routes that don't have exit numbers already, like Route 28, won't get new numbers. And numbers will not be changed on the Lowell Connector, Route 213, Interstate 291 and Interstate 391 due to spacing reasons."   :-o

https://boston.cbslocal.com/2019/11/18/massachusetts-exits-new-numbers-mileage-signs/?fbclid=IwAR0hV_zMsBYiz_F8xyR233aGz2Rnte7KcxWn7DgB-ndHpOTqkx7gwPX4-vY
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on November 18, 2019, 05:56:57 PM
84, The Mass Pike and I-91 (except through Springfield) shouldn't be too confusing.  93 should be fun between the I-95/MA 128 junctions.  95 outside of 128 won't be too tough.  190, 295, and 395 should be a breeze.  290 might be on that list with 291 and 391 with all the tightly packed exits in Worcester. This is going to make CTDOT look foolish now that the entire length of I-84 outside of CT will be mileage based exits (and the fact it may take till 2030 or later to complete the state).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: KEVIN_224 on November 18, 2019, 06:06:16 PM
I'm sure I-84 could be done in a day! Exits 1, 2 and 3 A/B become Exits 3, 5 and 7 A/B. The challenge in western Massachusetts will be in greater Springfield.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on November 18, 2019, 06:15:28 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 18, 2019, 05:02:43 PM
Massachusetts House Bill H.3078 (https://malegislature.gov/Bills/191/H3078/House/Bill/Text)

Bold emphasis added to the below:
Quote from: H.3078 ExcerptThe exit numbers along all interstate highways within Massachusetts shall be converted to a mileage-based system. The plan will include the following provisions:

(a) As closely as practicable, follow the Federal Highway Administration mileage-based exit numbering system

(b) Follow the convention that the numbering shall start at the southernmost or westernmost terminus of the interstate highway

Based on the above, the conversion (for now) will only be applied to Interstates.  Doing so will keep such a conversion out of Cape Cod.  Maybe doing the Interstates first then other highways later should've been the approach in the first place IMHO.

. The current MassDOT plan is for most freeways, not just Interstates.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on November 18, 2019, 07:25:04 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 18, 2019, 05:56:57 PM
84, The Mass Pike and I-91 (except through Springfield) shouldn't be too confusing.  93 should be fun between the I-95/MA 128 junctions.  95 outside of 128 won't be too tough.  190, 295, and 395 should be a breeze.  290 might be on that list with 291 and 391 with all the tightly packed exits in Worcester. This is going to make CTDOT look foolish now that the entire length of I-84 outside of CT will be mileage based exits (and the fact it may take till 2030 or later to complete the state).
I'm not sure what the plan is for I-290 - will it extend I-395's exit numbers, or will it start over at 1? Will I-395 continue CT's exit numbers, or will it start over at 1?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: NE2 on November 18, 2019, 08:34:36 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 18, 2019, 05:02:43 PM
Massachusetts House Bill H.3078 (https://malegislature.gov/Bills/191/H3078/House/Bill/Text)

Bold emphasis added to the below:
Quote from: H.3078 ExcerptThe exit numbers along all interstate highways within Massachusetts shall be converted to a mileage-based system. The plan will include the following provisions:

(a) As closely as practicable, follow the Federal Highway Administration mileage-based exit numbering system

(b) Follow the convention that the numbering shall start at the southernmost or westernmost terminus of the interstate highway

Based on the above, the conversion (for now) will only be applied to Interstates.  Doing so will keep such a conversion out of Cape Cod.  Maybe doing the Interstates first then other highways later should've been the approach in the first place IMHO.


US 6 is an interstate highway, but not an Interstate Highway.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 18, 2019, 11:15:19 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 18, 2019, 07:25:04 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 18, 2019, 05:56:57 PM
84, The Mass Pike and I-91 (except through Springfield) shouldn't be too confusing.  93 should be fun between the I-95/MA 128 junctions.  95 outside of 128 won't be too tough.  190, 295, and 395 should be a breeze.  290 might be on that list with 291 and 391 with all the tightly packed exits in Worcester. This is going to make CTDOT look foolish now that the entire length of I-84 outside of CT will be mileage based exits (and the fact it may take till 2030 or later to complete the state).
I'm not sure what the plan is for I-290 - will it extend I-395's exit numbers, or will it start over at 1? Will I-395 continue CT's exit numbers, or will it start over at 1?
The 2016 project plans had I-395 numbers start over at the border and then start over again at the Mass Pike for the change of route to I-290. I-395 exit numbers run from 1-7 and I-290's from 0 to 20.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on November 19, 2019, 12:34:41 AM
Quote from: NE2 on November 18, 2019, 08:34:36 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 18, 2019, 05:02:43 PM
Massachusetts House Bill H.3078 (https://malegislature.gov/Bills/191/H3078/House/Bill/Text)

Bold emphasis added to the below:
Quote from: H.3078 ExcerptThe exit numbers along all interstate highways within Massachusetts shall be converted to a mileage-based system. The plan will include the following provisions:

(a) As closely as practicable, follow the Federal Highway Administration mileage-based exit numbering system

(b) Follow the convention that the numbering shall start at the southernmost or westernmost terminus of the interstate highway

Based on the above, the conversion (for now) will only be applied to Interstates.  Doing so will keep such a conversion out of Cape Cod.  Maybe doing the Interstates first then other highways later should've been the approach in the first place IMHO.


US 6 is an interstate highway, but not an Interstate Highway.
So is NY-MA 2, and it clearly has numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on November 19, 2019, 08:23:48 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 19, 2019, 12:34:41 AM
Quote from: NE2 on November 18, 2019, 08:34:36 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 18, 2019, 05:02:43 PM
Massachusetts House Bill H.3078 (https://malegislature.gov/Bills/191/H3078/House/Bill/Text)

Bold emphasis added to the below:
Quote from: H.3078 ExcerptThe exit numbers along all interstate highways within Massachusetts shall be converted to a mileage-based system. The plan will include the following provisions:

(a) As closely as practicable, follow the Federal Highway Administration mileage-based exit numbering system

(b) Follow the convention that the numbering shall start at the southernmost or westernmost terminus of the interstate highway

Based on the above, the conversion (for now) will only be applied to Interstates.  Doing so will keep such a conversion out of Cape Cod.  Maybe doing the Interstates first then other highways later should've been the approach in the first place IMHO.


US 6 is an interstate highway, but not an Interstate Highway.
So is NY-MA 2, and it clearly has numbers.

Add MA/US 3 too.  It has numbers, MA treats it as one route, and it runs into NH.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: KEVIN_224 on November 19, 2019, 12:40:19 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 18, 2019, 07:25:04 PM
I'm not sure what the plan is for I-290 - will it extend I-395's exit numbers, or will it start over at 1? Will I-395 continue CT's exit numbers, or will it start over at 1?

Why should Massachusetts make the Connecticut mistake with their Route 15 (Merritt Parkway) numbering? Reset to zero at the state line.  :clap:

OR...

Are you saying for them to continue CT's numbering up to the change to I-290 in Auburn?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on November 19, 2019, 12:52:59 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on November 18, 2019, 11:15:19 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 18, 2019, 07:25:04 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 18, 2019, 05:56:57 PM
84, The Mass Pike and I-91 (except through Springfield) shouldn't be too confusing.  93 should be fun between the I-95/MA 128 junctions.  95 outside of 128 won't be too tough.  190, 295, and 395 should be a breeze.  290 might be on that list with 291 and 391 with all the tightly packed exits in Worcester. This is going to make CTDOT look foolish now that the entire length of I-84 outside of CT will be mileage based exits (and the fact it may take till 2030 or later to complete the state).
I'm not sure what the plan is for I-290 - will it extend I-395's exit numbers, or will it start over at 1? Will I-395 continue CT's exit numbers, or will it start over at 1?
The 2016 project plans had I-395 numbers start over at the border and then start over again at the Mass Pike for the change of route to I-290. I-395 exit numbers run from 1-7 and I-290's from 0 to 20.
I would hope not for I-395 - the road is longer and that would mean the numbers wouldn't be changing!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on November 19, 2019, 01:42:12 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on November 19, 2019, 12:40:19 PM

Are you saying for them to continue CT's numbering up to the change to I-290 in Auburn?

Per Section 2E.31 of the 2009 MUTCD, that's actually what's supposed to happen with Interstate loops and spurs

Standard:

(paragraphs 01 to 14 clipped for brevity)

15  If a circumferential, loop, or spur route crosses State boundaries, the numbering
sequence shall be coordinated by the States to provide continuous interchange numbering.

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on November 19, 2019, 01:49:50 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 19, 2019, 01:42:12 PM
15  If a circumferential, loop, or spur route crosses State boundaries, the numbering
sequence shall be coordinated by the States to provide continuous interchange numbering.


I-395 is none of those. It's a medium-distance connector similar to I-155 in Illinois and I-135 in Kansas.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on November 19, 2019, 02:10:02 PM
Quote from: 1 on November 19, 2019, 01:49:50 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 19, 2019, 01:42:12 PM
15  If a circumferential, loop, or spur route crosses State boundaries, the numbering
sequence shall be coordinated by the States to provide continuous interchange numbering.


I-395 is none of those. It's a medium-distance connector similar to I-155 in Illinois and I-135 in Kansas.

It's still a spur of I-95 though.  However, despite the current MUTCD standard, the mileposts should reset to zero at the MA border.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 19, 2019, 04:24:30 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 18, 2019, 06:15:28 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 18, 2019, 05:02:43 PM
Massachusetts House Bill H.3078 (https://malegislature.gov/Bills/191/H3078/House/Bill/Text)

Bold emphasis added to the below:
Quote from: H.3078 ExcerptThe exit numbers along all interstate highways within Massachusetts shall be converted to a mileage-based system. The plan will include the following provisions:

(a) As closely as practicable, follow the Federal Highway Administration mileage-based exit numbering system

(b) Follow the convention that the numbering shall start at the southernmost or westernmost terminus of the interstate highway

Based on the above, the conversion (for now) will only be applied to Interstates.  Doing so will keep such a conversion out of Cape Cod.  Maybe doing the Interstates first then other highways later should've been the approach in the first place IMHO.

. The current MassDOT plan is for most freeways, not just Interstates.
Prior to seeing the above-H.3078 text; I would've thought such as well. 

Quote from: NE2 on November 18, 2019, 08:34:36 PM
Granted, capitalization does make a difference here (and, yes I didn't initially catch it); but would state highways that don't cross state lines that have numbered interchanges (like MA 128 for example from Peabody to Gloucester) undergo the change?

That said, the H.3078 text, as written, can be subject to misinterpretation.

Given the backlash over US 6's interchange number changes along the Mid-Cape Highway several years ago; maybe that H.3078 text should've used Interstate rather than interstate.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: J N Winkler on November 19, 2019, 04:35:42 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 19, 2019, 04:24:30 PMGranted, capitalization does make a difference here (and, yes I didn't initially catch it); but would state highways that don't cross state lines that have numbered interchanges (like MA 128 for example from Peabody to Gloucester) undergo the change?

That said, the H.3078 text, as written, can be subject to misinterpretation.

Given the backlash over US 6's interchange number changes along the Mid-Cape Highway several years ago; maybe that H.3078 text should've used Interstate rather than interstate.

I haven't dived into the bill language, but I think there is definitely some ambiguity here since I strongly suspect Interstate Highway has been decapitalized in accordance with bill drafting convention (for example, in Kansas the head of KDOT is described in statute as "the secretary of the department of transportation").  I wonder if interpretation would hinge on something else in statute that specifies that the term interstate highway (no caps) is confined to facilities comprising part of the Interstate highway system.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on November 19, 2019, 04:37:48 PM
Fingers crossed that the state finally kills off 128 from Canton to Peabody so we don't have exits starting in the 30's in Peabody.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on November 19, 2019, 05:15:37 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on November 19, 2019, 04:37:48 PM
Fingers crossed that the state finally kills off 128 from Canton to Peabody so we don't have exits starting in the 30's in Peabody.

I could see them keeping the signs up but officially killing the route south of Peabody. Far too many traffic reporters and locals still call the thing 128 for it to not be signed. Don't want to confuse non-locals.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 19, 2019, 05:28:56 PM
Quote from: cl94 on November 19, 2019, 05:15:37 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on November 19, 2019, 04:37:48 PM
Fingers crossed that the state finally kills off 128 from Canton to Peabody so we don't have exits starting in the 30's in Peabody.

I could see them keeping the signs up but officially killing the route south of Peabody. Far too many traffic reporters and locals still call the thing 128 for it to not be signed. Don't want to confuse non-locals.
It's worth noting that there are still some surviving mid-1980s vintage overpass/underpass mile markers (to the 3rd decimal place) along 128 that were based on Mile Marker 0 being at the US 1 interchange (Exit 44).

MM 3.71 along MA 128 at the MA 114 interchange in Peabody (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5397821,-70.9382024,3a,75y,44.92h,80.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sleI5L9mVUHzkS3cWabityg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Current MA 128-specific mile markers start at MM 37.2 at the Peabody I-95 interchange.  If such were to be rest to MM 0 at I-95; one would need to subtract 37.2 from the current mile markers to get the 128-only mileage & exit numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 19, 2019, 05:35:01 PM
When it comes to Highway 128, it is very unlikely the number will be decomissioned along Interstate 95. Maybe 128 could be de-signed along 95. What is the likelihood of that?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 19, 2019, 06:00:32 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 19, 2019, 05:35:01 PMWhen it comes to Highway 128, it is very unlikely the number will be decomissioned along Interstate 95. Maybe 128 could be de-signed along 95. What is the likelihood of that?
At present, and such has been mentioned many times in other threads & probably including this one, MassDOT's current policy only allows MA 128 shields on supplemental trailblazer & reassurance marker signage along the section where it's concurrent w/I-95.  All BGS' and enhanced mile markers do not include MA 128 shields.  IMHO, as long as the Amtrak/MBTA rail station at Exit 13 in Westwood is still officially called/named the Route 128 station; the concurrency's not going anywhere.

One possible compromise would be replacing the MA 128 shields along the I-95 concurrency with Brown Historic 128 shields.  Such would clear the way to reset the mile markers for MA 128 east of I-95 to MM 0 in Peabody rather than Canton.

The below is copied from an old post I made in the Fictional Exit Numbers thread.

Had MA 128's interchange numbers been reset to not include the I-95 (Canton to Peabody) portion; such would be (Exit 0 is not used): 

Current / New Mile-Marker* / (Route or street(s))
* subtract 37 (36 for I-95 jct.) from current 128 mile markers

29 / 1A-B (I-95; 1A for I-95 North, 1B for I-95 South (current through-128 South))

28 / 2A (Forest St.)

26 / 2B (Lowell St.)

25A-B / 3A-B (MA 114)

24 / 3C (Endicott St.)

23 / 4A (MA 35)

22 / 4B (MA 62)

21 / 5 (Trask Ln./Conant St.)

20B-A / 6A-B (MA 1A)

19 / 7 (Sohier Rd./Brimbal Ave.)

18 / 8 (MA 22)

17 / 10 (Grapevine Ave.)

16 / 12 (Pine St.)

15 / 13 (School St.)

14 / 16 (MA 133)

13 / 17 (Concord St.)

12 / 18 (Crafts Rd.)

Current exit designations (11, 10** & 9**) for at-grade intersections would be deleted.

**No known exit number signage near/at these intersections are present.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on November 19, 2019, 07:06:45 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 19, 2019, 05:35:01 PM
When it comes to Highway 128, it is very unlikely the number will be decomissioned along Interstate 95. Maybe 128 could be de-signed along 95. What is the likelihood of that?

They're not going to remove signage for 128 along the I-95 concurrency. MassDPW tried that and it failed, which is part of why the current compromise policy of only having supplemental shields exists. Public opposition to that would be even stronger than what we saw regarding the exit numbers when MA pulled a mulligan a few years ago.

Quote from: PHLBOS on November 19, 2019, 06:00:32 PM
IMHO, as long as the Amtrak/MBTA rail station at Exit 13 in Westwood is still officially called/named the Route 128 station; the concurrency's not going anywhere.

One possible compromise would be replacing the MA 128 shields along the I-95 concurrency with Brown Historic 128 shields.  Such would clear the way to reset the mile markers for MA 128 east of I-95 to MM 0 in Peabody rather than Canton.

This times a million. As long as you have public facilities named "Route 128", the name will remain down there. And good luck getting that changed.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on November 19, 2019, 08:00:39 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 19, 2019, 02:10:02 PM
Quote from: 1 on November 19, 2019, 01:49:50 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 19, 2019, 01:42:12 PM
15  If a circumferential, loop, or spur route crosses State boundaries, the numbering
sequence shall be coordinated by the States to provide continuous interchange numbering.


I-395 is none of those. It's a medium-distance connector similar to I-155 in Illinois and I-135 in Kansas.

It's still a spur of I-95 though.  However, despite the current MUTCD standard, the mileposts should reset to zero at the MA border.
In this case, I disagree, but only because you would be resetting numbers twice in a short distance along the continuous 395-290 freeway. I think it would be more intuitive to motorists to have exit numbers only reset once in that stretch.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on November 19, 2019, 09:41:37 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 19, 2019, 06:00:32 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 19, 2019, 05:35:01 PMWhen it comes to Highway 128, it is very unlikely the number will be decomissioned along Interstate 95. Maybe 128 could be de-signed along 95. What is the likelihood of that?
At present, and such has been mentioned many times in other threads & probably including this one, MassDOT's current policy only allows MA 128 shields on supplemental trailblazer & reassurance marker signage along the section where it's concurrent w/I-95.  All BGS' and enhanced mile markers do not include MA 128 shields.  IMHO, as long as the Amtrak/MBTA rail station at Exit 13 in Westwood is still officially called/named the Route 128 station; the concurrency's not going anywhere.

One possible compromise would be replacing the MA 128 shields along the I-95 concurrency with Brown Historic 128 shields.  Such would clear the way to reset the mile markers for MA 128 east of I-95 to MM 0 in Peabody rather than Canton.

Well, one thing that needs to end is the dual exit numbers on 128.  Listen/watch traffic reports and they'll refer to, for example, an accident at  Route 128 Exit 20.  They're not referring to Exit 20 in Beverly, but instead Exit 20 down in Newton, for Route 9.  How do I know this?  The footage being shown is clearly the I-95 Exit 20, since Route 128 out in Beverly is not an 8 lane highway. 

Option 1:
So, lets say Route 128 takes its mileage assuming Mile 0.0 is down at I-95/I-93 in Canton.  That would put the first exit on solo 128 as roughly Exit 38.  And that would still result in duplicate Route 128 exit numbers, or at least a duplicate "range"... whether the precise exit numbers would be duplicated is math I don't feel like calculating at this hour.  If you still end up with this "two-sets-of-exit-numbers-for-one-road" complex, then you still have confusion.

Option 2:
Have Route 128 MM 0 be at I-95 in Peabody and your first exit on 128 be 1.  Reset the mile markers on "solo 128" to reflect this.  Your highest exit number would be (roughly) 20 under this approach, maybe a little less.  And since the southern point of 128 is at I-95 MM 26 in Canton, you wouldn't risk the duplicate exit number scenario.  Take the suggestion from above to put up "Historic 128" signs, replacing existing 128 shields.

Option 3:
Have Route 128 continue I-95's exit numbers, based on mileage 0.0 being at the RI/MA border.  The first exit on 128 in Peabody would then become 65 (or 66).  Now you have the issue of the mile markers/exit numbers not truly reflecting the southern terminus of the route.  Unless you extend 128 signage onto I-95 south of Canton to RI. 


What actually will happen remains to be seen, until MassDOT puts out the map showing the new numbers.   Such a case is similar, but not identical by any means, of what will happen in New York when the Thruway goes mile-based.  I-87 has 3 sets of exit numbers on 3 significantly different roadways and in 3 jurisdictions.  I'm sure it will make somewhat sense in the end... can't be any worse than the old addage of "Exit 25 is Route 128" that was used in an exit numbering sequence long ago (and still existant for US 3).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on November 19, 2019, 10:02:07 PM
Here is some signage I created for what MA 128 would look like, assuming MP 0 is in Canton

(https://live.staticflickr.com/4309/35862864870_37d5d90ddf_c.jpg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 19, 2019, 11:52:23 PM
Some good ideas for solving the 128 exit problem. For the I-95 exits, I just hope some of the proposed numbers are changed. For example, the numbers proposed in 2015 for the I-93 exit in Reading were 55B/C, with the Washington St exit 55A. Since there is no proposed Exit 54, why not fudge a little and give that to Washington St and I-93 simply be 55A/B?

Other questions I have thought of regarding the renumbering:
1. The MA 24 sign replacement project is almost to the point where new support posts and signs could be installed. Is the project going to be delayed until later in 2020 and have signs go up with new numbers or will the signs go up with the current numbers and the exit tabs/gore signs be changed later?
2. Both the I-95 RI border to Westwood and I-495 Harvard to Lowell projects have started with plans using the current numbers. Is it safe to assume the plans will be updated with the new numbers? (By the way, the winning bid for the US 1 sign replacement contract from Chelsea to Danvers was supposed to be announced today, fortunately, no exit number issues.)
3. When will the exit renumbering contract be advertised/let? (Will Liddell Bros. bid again after 'winning' the contract last time?)
4. What route will be the last to be renumbered? (The Boston Globe reported today (11/19) that I-91 will be the first.)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 20, 2019, 08:37:47 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 19, 2019, 10:02:07 PM
Interesting graphics.  Minor nitpick: the exit for MA 128 off I-95 in Peabody should be Exit 65 not 64.  The reason being that I-95's MM 65 falls within the interchange (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5290681,-70.976758,3a,75y,305.27h,92.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRj5NXDQFaHQLBTr-1DF39w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

Quote from: bob7374 on November 19, 2019, 11:52:23 PMFor the I-95 exits, I just hope some of the proposed numbers are changed.
Agreed and hopefully such & other suggestions will be taken into consideration... *hint-hint* Roadman.  Another issue, not just w/I-95, is should Exit 0 be used at all?  The previous plans were inconsistent regarding such.  My suggestion would be not to use Exit 0; mainly due to the path-of-least-resistance... i.e. less number changes would need to be made.

Quote from: bob7374 on November 19, 2019, 11:52:23 PMWhat route will be the last to be renumbered? (The Boston Globe reported today (11/19) that I-91 will be the first.)
If I were a betting man and given the recent history regarding how all this went over the last time; I would say that US 6 along the Mid-Cape Highway would be the last route to have its interchanges renumbered.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on November 20, 2019, 09:18:07 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 20, 2019, 08:37:47 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on November 19, 2019, 11:52:23 PMFor the I-95 exits, I just hope some of the proposed numbers are changed.
Agreed and hopefully such & other suggestions will be taken into consideration... *hint-hint* Roadman.  Another issue, not just w/I-95, is should Exit 0 be used at all?  The previous plans were inconsistent regarding such.  My suggestion would be not not to use Exit 0; mainly due to the path-of-least-resistance... i.e. less number changes would need to be made.

Exit 0 will not be used at any location.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Henry on November 20, 2019, 10:12:26 AM
According to the WBZ story:

QuoteThe move is part of a federal mandate; New Hampshire and Delaware are the only other states who have yet to implement the change. The Bay State risks losing federal funds if it doesn't comply.

AFAIK, I haven't seen any news from CT or VT making any changes yet. NY has done it, but only on I-84, so I guess that is on a route-by-route basis, as will happen in MA.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 20, 2019, 10:16:02 AM
Quote from: Henry on November 20, 2019, 10:12:26 AM
According to the WBZ story:

QuoteThe move is part of a federal mandate; New Hampshire and Delaware are the only other states who have yet to implement the change. The Bay State risks losing federal funds if it doesn't comply.

AFAIK, I haven't seen any news from CT or VT making any changes yet. NY has done it, but only on I-84, so I guess that is on a route-by-route basis, as will happen in MA.
CT has already started.  At the time of this posting; I-395 in CT has already been converted.  See the Connecticut News thread regarding such.  CT indeed has a plan to ultimately convert all its highways to mile-marker-based numbering; but such will be done over a decade (not a typo) long period.

Can't speak/answer for VT.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on November 20, 2019, 10:21:54 AM
CT is also doing it on a route by route basis.  I-395 and CT 2A were done first.  CT 349 was next.  CT 184 had a number added.  CT 72 will convert next year as part of a project that replaces signage on it and CT 9 north of Middletown (the exit on the Willow Brook Connector will also get a number).  There was a list in the CT thread with a provisional schedule; some may take till 2030 to convert.  CT has a way of dragging its feet with things.  They were the last state in the Northeast to raise the speed limit to 65. 

NY has done I-84, plus I-99, I-781, and the Taconic.  I-95 in NYC is sort of done. I hear The Hutch may be next, while I-684 and I-88 seem like easy choices.

VT has no plans either.  Only VT 289 is compliant. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on November 20, 2019, 10:58:03 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 20, 2019, 10:16:02 AM
Quote from: Henry on November 20, 2019, 10:12:26 AM
According to the WBZ story:

QuoteThe move is part of a federal mandate; New Hampshire and Delaware are the only other states who have yet to implement the change. The Bay State risks losing federal funds if it doesn’t comply.

AFAIK, I haven't seen any news from CT or VT making any changes yet. NY has done it, but only on I-84, so I guess that is on a route-by-route basis, as will happen in MA.
CT has already started.  At the time of this posting; I-395 in CT has already been converted.  See the Connecticut News thread regarding such.  CT indeed has a plan to ultimately convert all its highways to mile-marker-based numbering; but such will be done over a decade (not a typo) long period.

Can't speak/answer for VT.

VT apparently has a plan for conversion, but I haven't seen any details on it.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 20, 2019, 11:23:07 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 19, 2019, 08:00:39 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 19, 2019, 02:10:02 PM
Quote from: 1 on November 19, 2019, 01:49:50 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 19, 2019, 01:42:12 PM
15  If a circumferential, loop, or spur route crosses State boundaries, the numbering
sequence shall be coordinated by the States to provide continuous interchange numbering.


I-395 is none of those. It's a medium-distance connector similar to I-155 in Illinois and I-135 in Kansas.

It's still a spur of I-95 though.  However, despite the current MUTCD standard, the mileposts should reset to zero at the MA border.
In this case, I disagree, but only because you would be resetting numbers twice in a short distance along the continuous 395-290 freeway. I think it would be more intuitive to motorists to have exit numbers only reset once in that stretch.
The existing mile markers along I-395/290 in CT/MA already reset twice.  The highest I-395 mile marker in MA is MM 11.6 (within the US 20 interchange in Auburn) before I-290's mile markers start.  That said, the one location where such should change is indeed at the I-290/395 handoff location in Auburn.  While it could be argued about whether having another reset at the state line is necessary; I-395 in MA is long enough where such a change wouldn't cause too much confusion.  If anything, its the current sequential numbers in MA that can be confusing to one unfamiliar with the area.  IMHO, I-290's sequential numbers should've been reset in Auburn when or even before MA 52 (later I-395) was completed circa 1977.

Personally, the only MA highway that could ditch the mile-marker reset at the state line is I-295; given its short length in the Bay State (highest mile marker is 3.8).  IIRC, when that road was first built in the late 1960s; its original exit numbers in MA were a continuation of RI's then-sequential numbers.  The likely reasoning for not resetting at the state line then was due to the fact that the long-since-aborted extension east of I-95 was to be a different route (I-895).  I-295's interchange numbers in MA were changed to the current ones sometime during the 1970s.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on November 20, 2019, 01:14:40 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on November 19, 2019, 09:41:37 PM
Now you have the issue of the mile markers/exit numbers not truly reflecting the southern terminus of the route.  Unless you extend 128 signage onto I-95 south of Canton to RI. 
While it's good practice, it's not required.  See: I-276, I-17
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2019, 01:37:19 PM
Wikipedia hasn't been updated to reflect that Massachusetts's milepost exit numbering conversion is back in business. I suppose it will take some time before it is updated.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 20, 2019, 01:39:45 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2019, 01:37:19 PMWikipedia hasn't been updated to reflect that Massachusetts's milepost exit numbering conversion is back in business. I suppose it will take some time before it is updated.
Personally, you're more likely to get more current information on this subject on this thread rather than Wiki.  :sombrero:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 20, 2019, 01:47:41 PM
I know Wikipedia can be unreliable, but it was via Wikipedia that I discovered Bob7374's (whom I assume's real name is Robert H. Malme) website about Massachusetts's mileage-based exit renumbering plan.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 20, 2019, 04:09:04 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on November 18, 2019, 06:06:16 PM
I'm sure I-84 could be done in a day! Exits 1, 2 and 3 A/B become Exits 3, 5 and 7 6 A/B. The challenge in western Massachusetts will be in greater Springfield.
FTFY.  Reason being that the I-90/Mass Pike termini ramps may finally get assigned numbers 7 A/B.  Since I-84 has no MM 8 & the fact that MM 6.5 is roughly midway inside the I-84/US 20 interchange; assigning its terminus w/I-90 Exit 7 A/B is the most logical choice.  Why blank exit tabs weren't placed on top of those 1-to-2-year-old I-90 APLs along I-84 eastbound is unknown.

While such has been mentioned on Facebook, I don't believe that such has been mentioned here as of yet; but several short-distance highways that have several interchanges clumped together will not have their interchange numbers changed: MA 213, I-291, I-391 & the Lowell Connector.  Converting those would've created some serious alphabet soup (suffixed) exit numbers; especially since the practice of using Exit 0 for termini and/or at state lines won't be happening at all.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 20, 2019, 04:41:50 PM
For those who may not have seen the Boston Globe article, and because it's behind a paywall, here's the text:

By 2022, highways, routes across Massachusetts will have new exit numbers, MassDOT says:
Your hometown exit number will likely change in the coming years.

By Christopher Gavin 11/19/19 10:32 AM

Over the next two years, exit numbers along Massachusetts' highways and routes will change under a federal mandate, MassDOT officials said Monday.

Exits, which currently use sequential numbering, will shift to mileage-based numbering, according to Neil Boudreau, the department's assistant administrator for traffic and safety.

The switch comes as the commonwealth adopts federal policies that spell out required uniform traffic features, he said. So far, all but three states have begun to put those changes in place: Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Delaware, Boudreau said at a MassDOT board meeting.

The state could lose federal funding if it does not comply.

State officials are focusing on getting the word out through next spring to give residents and business owners notice before construction begins by late summer 2020, according to Boudreau.

Crews are planning on starting with Interstate 91 and working on a route-by-route basis, he said.

"We don't want to confuse the public when we're out there,"  he said. "We intend to move from west to east."

MassDOT anticipates traffic impacts from the project will be minimal.

To ensure the public adapts to the shift, Boudreau said MassDOT will leave signs up indicating each exit's old number for at least two years.

The department won't be in a rush to take them down, either.

"We are not planning to go out and remove them at two years and one day,"  he said. "The thought process was as we have a new project in that area, we would take them down."

Route 213, Interstate 291, Interstate 391, and the Lowell Connector will be exempt from the shift, however, due to their length and the spacing of the exits, Boudreau said.

"There are some routes that because they are such a short nature in length that it didn't make sense to change them ... because you weren't going to see much of a difference,"  he said.

Routes 28, 57, and 79 do not currently have exit numbers and therefore will not receive new ones, he said.

While officials acknowledged that the new numbers will be an adjustment for motorists, Boudreau said the signs will ultimately help drivers determine mileage and distance more easily and quickly, and can also help improve reporting of emergency incidents on roadways.

Other pros include the uniformity the signs will have with systems in other states as well as the future, potential cost savings, since sign numbers will no longer need to change if new interchanges are added on a highway, according to Boudreau.

The department says it will inform the public about new exit numbers through electronic billboards, social media, and an interactive, online map.

MassDOT hopes to have all the changes completed by late spring 2021, Boudreau said.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on November 20, 2019, 06:08:02 PM
That answers another question I had: no numbers for currently-unnumbered routes.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on November 20, 2019, 06:49:22 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on November 20, 2019, 04:41:50 PM
MassDOT hopes to have all the changes completed by late spring 2021, Boudreau said.
They are not going to get all that done in ~6 months.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SidS1045 on November 20, 2019, 07:16:48 PM
The web site is up:  http://newmassexits.com
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Mergingtraffic on November 20, 2019, 07:18:07 PM
I really don't think the exit numbers on the i-95/MA-128 multiplex will favor 128. I mean cmon really. I-95 is the main route. After 128 splits off then it'll have its own numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on November 20, 2019, 08:01:20 PM
Looked at the new website for the project. Updates about what has been debated.

I-290 and I-395 will not have a reset in Auburn. Mile 0 will be at the CT border.

Route 128 will have mile 0 in Canton.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on November 20, 2019, 08:05:07 PM
Is there something wrong with the interactive map?  It isn't loading for me.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on November 20, 2019, 09:46:18 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on November 20, 2019, 08:01:20 PM
I-290 and I-395 will not have a reset in Auburn. Mile 0 will be at the CT border.
I find this most interesting.  So that will probably mean new mile markers on the I-290 portion north of Auburn, as mile markers reset there currently, but exits do not.  Enhanced mile markers would then show (approx.) I-290 MILE 12 where currently I-290 MILE 0 exits.  The previous marker will be I-395 MILE 11.  Kind of strange.


QuoteRoute 128 will have mile 0 in Canton.

So this will still lead to a duplication of exits on Route 128.  Sure. 


Also, US 3 north of "128" will feature exit numbers which combine the mileage of MA 3 and US 3.  It assumes MP 0 is down at the Cape Cod Canal at the southern terminus of MA 3, vs somewhere near the BU Bridge (where US 3 technically begins). 

Still I'm unsure why exits on US 1 will remain unnumbered.  Those on the Northeast Expressway are legitimate interchanges and in my opinion deserve to be numbered.

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Magical Trevor on November 20, 2019, 10:07:40 PM
The logo for the public awareness campaign: once you see it...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newmassexits.com%2Fimages%2FBranding%2FExRenumbering_Logo.jpg&hash=c2ee256b4cc86563e9c3c7d1f224447112296b02)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on November 20, 2019, 10:38:00 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 20, 2019, 11:23:07 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 19, 2019, 08:00:39 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 19, 2019, 02:10:02 PM
Quote from: 1 on November 19, 2019, 01:49:50 PM
Quote from: roadman on November 19, 2019, 01:42:12 PM
15  If a circumferential, loop, or spur route crosses State boundaries, the numbering
sequence shall be coordinated by the States to provide continuous interchange numbering.


I-395 is none of those. It's a medium-distance connector similar to I-155 in Illinois and I-135 in Kansas.

It's still a spur of I-95 though.  However, despite the current MUTCD standard, the mileposts should reset to zero at the MA border.
In this case, I disagree, but only because you would be resetting numbers twice in a short distance along the continuous 395-290 freeway. I think it would be more intuitive to motorists to have exit numbers only reset once in that stretch.
The existing mile markers along I-395/290 in CT/MA already reset twice.  The highest I-395 mile marker in MA is MM 11.6 (within the US 20 interchange in Auburn) before I-290's mile markers start.  That said, the one location where such should change is indeed at the I-290/395 handoff location in Auburn.  While it could be argued about whether having another reset at the state line is necessary; I-395 in MA is long enough where such a change wouldn't cause too much confusion.  If anything, its the current sequential numbers in MA that can be confusing to one unfamiliar with the area.  IMHO, I-290's sequential numbers should've been reset in Auburn when or even before MA 52 (later I-395) was completed circa 1977.

Personally, the only MA highway that could ditch the mile-marker reset at the state line is I-295; given its short length in the Bay State (highest mile marker is 3.8).  IIRC, when that road was first built in the late 1960s; its original exit numbers in MA were a continuation of RI's then-sequential numbers.  The likely reasoning for not resetting at the state line then was due to the fact that the long-since-aborted extension east of I-95 was to be a different route (I-895).  I-295's interchange numbers in MA were changed to the current ones sometime during the 1970s.
I would continue numbers on I-295, I-195, and I-395. These are all spur/loop routes where that's allowable, and I think both 295 and 395 make cases for why. (It's rare for a through freeway to reset numbers at all, let alone 11 miles from a state line.) I-195 is also relatively short in RI.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on November 20, 2019, 10:38:40 PM
Quote from: Magical Trevor on November 20, 2019, 10:07:40 PM
The logo for the public awareness campaign: once you see it...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newmassexits.com%2Fimages%2FBranding%2FExRenumbering_Logo.jpg&hash=c2ee256b4cc86563e9c3c7d1f224447112296b02)
Sesame Street, or are we talking about the centered tab?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on November 20, 2019, 10:46:27 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 20, 2019, 10:38:40 PM
Quote from: Magical Trevor on November 20, 2019, 10:07:40 PM
The logo for the public awareness campaign: once you see it...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newmassexits.com%2Fimages%2FBranding%2FExRenumbering_Logo.jpg&hash=c2ee256b4cc86563e9c3c7d1f224447112296b02)
Sesame Street, or are we talking about the centered tab?
Or is it the circle and how the project is coming back to life?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Magical Trevor on November 20, 2019, 10:48:40 PM
Quote from: Alps on November 20, 2019, 10:38:40 PM
Quote from: Magical Trevor on November 20, 2019, 10:07:40 PM
The logo for the public awareness campaign: once you see it...
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newmassexits.com%2Fimages%2FBranding%2FExRenumbering_Logo.jpg&hash=c2ee256b4cc86563e9c3c7d1f224447112296b02)
Sesame Street, or are we talking about the centered tab?
The latter - but hey, it could be accurate for CT to use whenever they renumber!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on November 20, 2019, 11:33:59 PM
Looks like MA will use the round to the nearest mile provision in exit numbers.  The overpass for MA 10/US 202 is between MP 40.6 and 40.8, but will have Exit 41.  MA 32 is at MP 62.6, but will be Exit 63.  OTOH, CTDOT plans on using Exit 37 on CT 9 for CT 175 even though the overpass of CT 175 is at MP 37.98.  Maryland always rounds up; Exit 77 on I-95 (MD 24), is at about MP 76.2

Some serious fudging is being done on I-91 in the Springfield area, especially in the area of Forest Park.  The US 5 exits are 1 SB and 2 NB, although you're in the 3-4 MP range. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on November 21, 2019, 08:08:57 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 20, 2019, 11:33:59 PM
Some serious fudging is being done on I-91 in the Springfield area, especially in the area of Forest Park.  The US 5 exits are 1 SB and 2 NB, although you're in the 3-4 MP range.
Similar fudging is happening in Worcester on I-290. The MA 122 exit is 18, with MLK Blvd being 20 (despite these exits being half a mile apart).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 21, 2019, 08:49:40 AM
My take, based on MassDOT's current listings.

I-95:

Current Exit 23/Recreation Rd. is missing from the list.  Will such be Exit 37 C?

Current Exit 45/MA 128 North should be Exit 65 not 64 due to MM 65 is located within the interchange footprint (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5290221,-70.97665,3a,75y,298.06h,86.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFd4u4VKUuv57AMM9gGxVWw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

Current Exit 36/Washington St. is obviously fudged to Exit 54 to reduce suffixing.  The other option/original plan would've been to have it designated as Exit 55 A and the I-93 interchange ramps designated as Exits 55 B/C.

MA 30 should be Exit 39 B not 39 A due to the corridor being located north of I-90; which should be Exit 39 A not 39 B.  The proposed numbering still erroneously holds the southbound sequence; a repeat error from the 1987 I-95 sequential renumbering.  See I-84/691/CT 322 interchanges in CT for the proper approach to number two adjacent interchanges with the ramps in the same order for both directions.

I-93:

Typo for current Exit 27/new Exit 19.  Listing should be for US 1, not Rte. 9.

Northbound, there's an Exit 15 A (Southampton St.) as well as an Exit 15 (Frontage Rd.).  I believe such isn't MUTCD-kosher for mile-marker interchange numbering.  Maybe Exit 15 for northbound I-93 should be Exit 15 B.

MA 128:

Definitely some fudging was done to reduce suffixing; some a tad too extreme IMHO.  In a few instances, the interchange number is 2 higher than the actual mile markers. 

Endicott St./current Exit 24 should've been Exit 40 C, not Exit 41

MA 35/current Exit 23 should be Exit 41 (not Exit 42, MM 41.2 is located just beyond the MA 35 underpass)

MA 62/current Exit 22 should be Exit 42, not Exit 43

Current Exit 21/Conant St./Trask Ln. should be Exit 43 A or Exit 43, not Exit 44

MA 1A/current Exit 20 A/B should be Exit 43 B/C or Exit 44 A/B, not Exit 45 A/B

Current Exit 19 (Sohier Rd./Brimbal Ave.) is located at MM 44.2; such should be Exit 44 or Exit 44 C, not Exit 46.

MA 22/current Exit 18 should be Exit 46, not Exit 47

Current Exit 17/Grapevine Ave. is located at MM 47.4; such should be Exit 47, not Exit 48

128's proposed numbering definitely needs some recalibrating IMHO.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on November 21, 2019, 09:14:30 AM
I would imagine Recreation Rd would become 38B and Riverside would become 38A northbound.  Seems to be the easiest solution.  Absolutely agree the Pike should be 39A and MA 30 39B.  Funny thing is you get that same I-691/ CT 322 situation on I-91 in Hartford with the Airport Rd and CT 15 south exits, and it's also Exits 27 and 28.  Future numbers would be 40 A/B for I-84 and 36 A/B for I-91.

My 128 numbers were also off from 39-48.  Definite fudging there.  The south end of 93 was also fudged a bit to avoid the alphabet city within MP 1 by raising everything by 1.   Same with 95 in Attleboro and keeping the MA 1A exits as is.  My 91 numbers were spot on from the Pike north, but many were off a bit through Springfield (except the 291 exit is spot on).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 21, 2019, 09:40:57 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on November 20, 2019, 08:01:20 PM
I-290 and I-395 will not have a reset in Auburn. Mile 0 will be at the CT border.
I know such was discussed on this thread just yesterday, but my opinion on this has not changed.  Unless MassDOT is planning on having I-395 take over I-290 in the process; not resetting the mile markers in Auburn where the two routes meet is a bad idea.  Just because it was done with sequential numbering in the past is not an excuse to do such with mile-marker based interchange numbering.

If the reason for doing this is because of the state-line reset 11 miles to the south along I-395; then a better solution is obvious... continue CT's mileage along I-395 into MA.  Now that CT already converted I-395's numbers, which resulted in lower numbers than the old CT-Turnpike-based sequentials, such a change will not mean that 3-digit-non-suffixed exit numbers would be appearing along I-395 in MA.

Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 21, 2019, 09:14:30 AMI would imagine Recreation Rd would become 38B and Riverside would become 38A northbound.  Seems to be the easiest solution.
Agree with you on that one. 

Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 21, 2019, 09:14:30 AMThe south end of 93 was also fudged a bit to avoid the alphabet city within MP 1 by raising everything by 1.   Same with 95 in Attleboro and keeping the MA 1A exits as is.
I stated such before.  Not using Exit 0 for both I-93 & 95 allows more interchange numbers to not undergo a change; i.e. path-of-least-resistance.  A slight fudge with respect to the mile markers, yes; but not as ridiculous as the fudged ones for MA 128 from Danvers to Wenham.

When it comes time CT to renumber the interchanges along I-84; they should take a cue from MassDOT and not use Exit 0 as well.  Such would allow I-84's westernmost interchanges through Exit 8 to remain as is with minimal fudging.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Henry on November 21, 2019, 09:47:05 AM
I was hoping that I-395's exit numbers would carry over from CT; they will not, but I-290 will continue to pick up where it left off, so there's that. Personally, I feel that I-395 should count up from CT, and I-290 start over from Mile 0, but alas, it is not to be.

I-295's exits will basically be doubled, with Exit 1 becoming Exit 2 and the current Exit 2 becoming Exit 4.

I-195 will also reset from RI, which I don't mind, but if you ask me, I-295 should've had its exit numbers continue from there, as it loops around the north and west sides of Providence. All in all, I applaud MA for finally moving forward with its plans.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on November 21, 2019, 09:54:20 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 21, 2019, 09:40:57 AM
When it comes time CT to renumber the interchanges along I-84; they should take a cue from MassDOT and not use Exit 0 as well.  Such would allow I-84's westernmost interchanges through Exit 8 to remain as is with minimal fudging.

I agree there.  If CT were to be totally exact, the only difference in Danbury would be making Exit 1 1A and Exit 2 1B eastbound / 1 B-C westbound.  Only places where Exit 0's might make sense are at the south end of I-91 (0A for the exit formerly known as CT 34 and 0B for I-95 North; where there is no northbound counterpart), and at the I-691/CT 66 handoff in Meriden (too many Exit 1's, with the 2 CT 66 exits being Exit 1, and the exits on 691 back to Downtown Meriden all being an alphabet city of Exit 1's, since I-691 is actually mileposted east-west in the CT Highway Log despite sequential numbers that go from west to east.)

Couple other MA related things:  I'm assuming the newish US 44 expressway will also remain numberless?  And why does I-93 North get a number on Route 3 north when the 93 North connection is actually mainline MA 3?  Same question for why I-95/MA 128 North gets a number when its mainline US 3.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Magical Trevor on November 21, 2019, 10:33:43 AM
Apologies if an answer has been made available elsewhere but I've always wondered, why not have I-290 start at the state line? (I know this would change the whole route mileage but while a ton of signage would be getting done anyway...) Steve Anderson's site (http://www.bostonroads.com/roads/I-395_MA/) implies it was the FHWA's decision.

Also, apparently Massachusetts is getting a new interstate in the form of "I-140" (http://newmassexits.com/MassDOT_Documents/I-295_Route%20140.pdf).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on November 21, 2019, 11:49:00 AM
Quote from: Magical Trevor on November 21, 2019, 10:33:43 AM
Apologies if an answer has been made available elsewhere but I've always wondered, why not have I-290 start at the state line? (I know this would change the whole route mileage but while a ton of signage would be getting done anyway...) Steve Anderson's site (http://www.bostonroads.com/roads/I-395_MA/) implies it was the FHWA's decision.

Also, apparently Massachusetts is getting a new interstate in the form of "I-140" (http://newmassexits.com/MassDOT_Documents/I-295_Route%20140.pdf).

Actually, the smarter thing would have been to make the transition in CT, where I-395 would have bent east on the SR 695 CT Turnpike stub and I-290 took over the route to Worcester. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 21, 2019, 12:33:06 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 21, 2019, 09:54:20 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 21, 2019, 09:40:57 AM
When it comes time CT to renumber the interchanges along I-84; they should take a cue from MassDOT and not use Exit 0 as well.  Such would allow I-84's westernmost interchanges through Exit 8 to remain as is with minimal fudging.
Couple other MA related things:  I'm assuming the newish US 44 expressway will also remain numberless?  And why does I-93 North get a number on Route 3 north when the 93 North connection is actually mainline MA 3?  Same question for why I-95/MA 128 North gets a number when its mainline US 3.
Roadman would probably be the best to explain. IIRC the reason both exits get numbers in the instances you mention was to provide a signal to the motorist that the particular highways (Pilgrims Highway, US 3) are ending. My biggest issue with the I-93 exit signs on Route 3 North is that they still do not have any US 1 shields, either on the signs or ground-mounted, associated with them, unlike those on I-93.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 21, 2019, 12:35:41 PM
I'm disappointed that highways that currently without exit numbers won't get them. In previous sequential-to-milepost conversions, some routes that didn't have exit numbers pre-conversion got them post-conversion. Maybe at some point in the future, those routes will get numbers. Also, I didn't see anything about State Highway 2 getting new exit numbers. Does that mean Highway 2's exit numbers won't change?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on November 21, 2019, 12:50:29 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 21, 2019, 12:35:41 PM
I'm disappointed that highways that currently without exit numbers won't get them. In previous sequential-to-milepost conversions, some routes that didn't have exit numbers pre-conversion got them post-conversion. Maybe at some point in the future, those routes will get numbers. Also, I didn't see anything about State Highway 2 getting new exit numbers. Does that mean Highway 2's exit numbers won't change?

I think they forgot to put 2 on there. I mean, so much is incorrect on it why not mess that up as well.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on November 21, 2019, 12:54:27 PM
I sent them a comment about 128, bringing up the continued media confusion that can occur due to 95 and 128 sharing the same exit number in totally different places and this system perpetuating that problem. If they start 128 at zero, it ends before 20, whereas 95 is beyond 25 once it hits Canton. So if the media starts confusing 128 on 95 again, there is no chance of them saying an exit number that is the same as real 128.

Also sad that the media can't figure this out. With the 93 stretch not having had 128 on it for 30 years now, the media still calling it that can be confusion for a whole generation of people now.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on November 21, 2019, 01:08:20 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on November 21, 2019, 12:50:29 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 21, 2019, 12:35:41 PM
I'm disappointed that highways that currently without exit numbers won't get them. In previous sequential-to-milepost conversions, some routes that didn't have exit numbers pre-conversion got them post-conversion. Maybe at some point in the future, those routes will get numbers. Also, I didn't see anything about State Highway 2 getting new exit numbers. Does that mean Highway 2's exit numbers won't change?

I think they forgot to put 2 on there. I mean, so much is incorrect on it why not mess that up as well.
It was on the interactive map when I looked at it last night on Firefox (it won't load in Chrome for some reason).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 21, 2019, 01:25:26 PM
I just submitted my comments to MassDOT's website.  Let's see what happens.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on November 21, 2019, 01:47:45 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on November 21, 2019, 12:54:27 PM

Also sad that the media can't figure this out. With the 93 stretch not having had 128 on it for 30 years now, the media still calling it that can be confusion for a whole generation of people now.

When questioned about this in the past, the media's response has usually been something to the effect of "Well, the locals still call it 128, so as reporters we're obligated to use the reference most people are familiar with."
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on November 21, 2019, 02:04:50 PM
Quote from: vdeane on November 21, 2019, 01:08:20 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on November 21, 2019, 12:50:29 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 21, 2019, 12:35:41 PM
I'm disappointed that highways that currently without exit numbers won't get them. In previous sequential-to-milepost conversions, some routes that didn't have exit numbers pre-conversion got them post-conversion. Maybe at some point in the future, those routes will get numbers. Also, I didn't see anything about State Highway 2 getting new exit numbers. Does that mean Highway 2's exit numbers won't change?

I think they forgot to put 2 on there. I mean, so much is incorrect on it why not mess that up as well.
It was on the interactive map when I looked at it last night on Firefox (it won't load in Chrome for some reason).

They just didn't put up the PDF list like they did for the other highways.  Still don't know why the southern terminus of MA 140 at US 6 gets an exit number for an at-grade intersection.  Seems ridiculous. Same with the turn off ramps to MA 24 at the northern terminus of the freeway section.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on November 21, 2019, 03:03:19 PM
FYI, the first public information meetings have been scheduled for the Exit Renumbering Project.  They are:

-   Northampton- Monday, December 9, 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., Highway District 2 headquarters, 811 North King Street

-   Lenox- Wednesday, December 11, 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., Highway District 1 headquarters, 270 Main Street

-   Worcester- Monday, December 16, 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m., Blackstone Heritage Corridor Visitor Center, 3 Paul Clancy Way.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 21, 2019, 05:10:42 PM
Discovered another boo-boo in the planned US 3 number changes:  Current Exits 25 A/B (I-95/MA 128) should be Exits 71 A/B not the listed Exits 70 A/B.  The reason being that the I-95/US 3/MA 128 interchange is located between US 3's MM 71 and 72.  As a matter of fact, US 3's MM 71 is located along the I-95/MA 128 collector-distributor road between that interchange & the one with the Middlesex Turnpike (current Exit 32 B/future Exit 50 B). (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4774557,-71.2157049,3a,75y,93.06h,87.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1dDz7_T58VU8WouxMkC8Rw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

For those that may ask; yes, I submitted the above-comment to MassDOT's website.

It's starting to be adamantly clear that several of these lists weren't necessarily ready for prime-time release IMHO.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 21, 2019, 05:40:00 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 21, 2019, 09:54:20 AMAnd why does I-93 North get a number on Route 3 north when the 93 North connection is actually mainline MA 3?
Such is indeed odd.  If the MA 3 concurrency is to remain (though it's more silent than in previous years), the only ramp that should be exit-tabbed at MA 3 side of the interchange is the ramp to I-93 southbound. 

Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 21, 2019, 09:54:20 AMSame question for why I-95/MA 128 North gets a number when its mainline US 3.
Unless there's a plan to revive extending the Northwest Expressway portion of US 3 south of that interchange; I agree, such should not have an exit tab on it.  Since exit number hasn't changed since the highway's inception, aside from a change in suffix (N to A); nobody ever gave thought of removing it for that through-US 3 South movement when the highway's planned extension was killed off during the early 70s.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 22, 2019, 12:16:16 AM
Discovered a couple other exit number fudging problems. One is with I-195 through New Bedford. There are several exits clustered around mile 25. MassDOT decided not to use any suffixed exits, so for what under the 2016 proposal were Exits 25A-C are now 25 to 28. The exits for Washburn St (EB) and Coggeshall St (WB), which are at milepost 25.4 and 25.6 respectively, and were both labeled Exit 25C in 2016 are now Exits 27 and 28, probably because there are different numbers (16 and 17) under the current system.

The I-93 exit list just north of Boston is problematic in that it lists the same information for several exits that signs with different information depending on direction. For Future Exit 20 they only list MA 99 which is the NB exit, not Sullivan Square which will have that number SB. The Storrow Drive exits in each direction get the same number despite one being near mile 18 and the other at mile 20, probably because they have the same exit number currently, 26. Therefore Exit 18 SB will be farther north than Exit 20 NB, major fudging here.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 22, 2019, 08:22:25 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on November 22, 2019, 12:16:16 AMThe I-93 exit list just north of Boston is problematic in that it lists the same information for several exits that signs with different information depending on direction. For Future Exit 20 they only list MA 99 which is the NB exit, not Sullivan Square which will have that number SB. The Storrow Drive exits in each direction get the same number despite one being near mile 18 and the other at mile 20, probably because they have the same exit number currently, 26. Therefore Exit 18 SB will be farther north than Exit 20 NB, major fudging here.
If memory serves, the exit number assignments aren't/shouldn't necessarily be based on where the (first) ramp of the interchange exits the mainline highway but rather where the two theoretical centerlines cross/intersect (for most interchanges, it's at the main over/underpass).  In the case of a three-way interchange, the exit number should be based on the mile marker within the interchange's right-of-way/footprint.

The above I-93 faux pas numbering tells me that whoever did such has still using the sequential mindset.

If you didn't already done so, you might want to post your comments to MassDOT's website.  If they get enough of these comments prior to the December Public Hearing dates; some of our recommended revisions/corrects might get implemented.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: southshore720 on November 22, 2019, 11:04:48 AM
Keeping my fingers crossed that this was rushed due to pressure to publish it and that they will make the appropriate modifications based on all of your suggestions!  This group has been known to have some pull in the past!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on November 22, 2019, 02:15:23 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 22, 2019, 08:22:25 AM
The above I-93 faux pas numbering tells me that whoever did such has still using the sequential mindset.
Might be the same person doing I-290.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: sturmde on November 22, 2019, 02:32:20 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on November 22, 2019, 12:16:16 AM
Discovered a couple other exit number fudging problems. One is with I-195 through New Bedford. There are several exits clustered around mile 25. MassDOT decided not to use any suffixed exits, so for what under the 2016 proposal were Exits 25A-C are now 25 to 28. The exits for Washburn St (EB) and Coggeshall St (WB), which are at milepost 25.4 and 25.6 respectively, and were both labeled Exit 25C in 2016 are now Exits 27 and 28, probably because there are different numbers (16 and 17) under the current system.

The I-93 exit list just north of Boston is problematic in that it lists the same information for several exits that signs with different information depending on direction. For Future Exit 20 they only list MA 99 which is the NB exit, not Sullivan Square which will have that number SB. The Storrow Drive exits in each direction get the same number despite one being near mile 18 and the other at mile 20, probably because they have the same exit number currently, 26. Therefore Exit 18 SB will be farther north than Exit 20 NB, major fudging here.
.
Bob, this is comparable to MaineDOT when renumbering exits in 2004 looking at I-295 through Portland and just shrugging and saying "looks good enough" and not adjusting the exit numbers for the reasons of "clarity" by avoiding multiple suffixes.
.
These people have obviously never visited Kansas City.  We've got 26 letters to work with, folks. :)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: CapeCodder on November 22, 2019, 08:38:48 PM
It appears that state reps from Cape Cod are trying to get an exemption.

The link explains it better:

https://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20191121/state-again-presses-for-renaming-of-route-6-exits (https://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20191121/state-again-presses-for-renaming-of-route-6-exits)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 23, 2019, 11:04:28 AM
Quote from: CapeCodder on November 22, 2019, 08:38:48 PM
It appears that state reps from Cape Cod are trying to get an exemption.

The link explains it better:

https://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20191121/state-again-presses-for-renaming-of-route-6-exits (https://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20191121/state-again-presses-for-renaming-of-route-6-exits)
As I've suggested before, maybe a compromise would be to put up mileage based numbers based on the length of the Mid-Cape Highway, either with a new route concurrency or not. This way MassDOT complies with the MUTCD and drivers get the benefit of a mileage based system that would be useful (stuck in summer traffic or not) to figure out how far they are to, or from, the Sagamore Bridge. The Cape would get its own unique number system, not as critics have complained as an arbitrary set of numbers. Exit 1 for MA 6A wouldn't have to change and the numbers would go up to 35 at the end of the Highway at the Orleans Rotary.

Looks like they are making an effort to correct some of the errors on the Route 'fliers.' The entry on the I-95 page that had the same number for the Neponset St exit has been corrected to show the correct future numbers, 23A/B. Still no change on the I-93 page with MA 9 being routed on the Tobin Bridge.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on November 25, 2019, 01:50:14 AM
Finally had a chance to really examine the list of exits vs what they should be.  Here is what I came up with (MP's refer to the center of the junction):

I-84, I-90, I-190 (fine with fudging Mountain St SB to 3 despite being at MP 3.54), MA 25, and MA 146: all fine as proposed.

I-91: Everything is fine from the Mass Pike north.  Here is how south of there should look (my changes in Bold

Current/Proposed Exit 1 (US 5 South; SB ONLY):  Exit is at MP 3.8.  Fudge down to Exit 3 to avoid Exit 4 logjam
Current/Proposed Exit 2 (MA 83 SOUTH; NB ONLY): Exit 4A
Current/Proposed Exit 3 (US 5 NORTH): Exit 4B
Current/Proposed Exit 4 (MA 83 SOUTH; SB ONLY): Make Exit 4A to match NB exit for 83 South
Current Exit 5/Proposed Exit 4 (Broad St; NB ONLY): Exit 5A
Current Exit 6/Proposed Exit 5 (MGM Way NB; Union St SB): Exit 5B NB; Exit 5 SB
The proposals for current Exits 7-9 are fine as is
Current Exit 10/Proposed Exit 8 (MA 116 NORTH; NB ONLY): Exit 7C. Exit is at MP 7.48
Current Exit 11/Proposed Exit 8 (Main St/US 20 WEST; SB): Make Exit 7 C-B to match NB.
Current Exit 12/Proposed Exit 9 (I-391): Exit 8
Current Exit 13 A-B/Proposed Exit 10 A-B (US 5): Exit 9 A-B

I-93
Everything is fine between MA 37 and the Mass Pike and from the Zakim Bridge north. The southern terminus is fine

Current/Proposed Exit 2 A-B (MA 138): Exit 1 C-D.  Exit is at MP 1.41
Current/Proposed Exit 3 (Houghtons Pond): Exit 2.  At MP 2.61, but fudged down for simplicity
Current/Proposed Exit 4 (MA 24 SOUTH): Exit 3
Current/Proposed Exit 5 A-B (MA 28): Exit 4 A-B.  Exit is at MP 4.23
Current Exit 20/Proposed Exit 16 NB/16A SB (I-90):NB Exit should be 16 A-B for each direction; SB Exit 16B
Current Exit 20A/Proposed to be merged with Exit 16 NB/16B SB (South Station): Exit 16C both directions
Current NB Exit 23/Proposed Exit 17: Fine as proposed
Current SB Exit 23/Proposed Exit 16B: Exit 17A.  Exit is at MP 17.48
Current Exit 24A/Proposed Exit 17A (Government Center; SB): Exit 17B.  At MP 17.81; fudged down to match GC NB
Current SB Exit 24B/Proposed Exit 17B (MA 1A; SB ONLY): Exit 18A.  At MP 17.81
Current Exit 26/Proposed Exit 18 (Storrow Dr): Exit 18 (NB)/18B (SB).  Fine with SB being an 18 to match NB exit

I-95
Spot changes north and south of the 128 portion, significant adjustments near the Pike and between US 3 and the 128 split.  I'm also fine with fudging the I-93 Canton exit to 26 (at MP 26.74) and the East St/Canton St exit to 28 (at MP 28.63) to avoid logjams at Exits 27 and 29, respectively.

Current/Proposed Exit 1 (US 1; SB ONLY): Exit 1A
Current/Proposed Exit 2 A-B (MA 1A): Exit 1 B-C. Exit is at MP 1.2
Current Exit 20 A-B/Proposed Exit 36 A-B (MA 9): Exit 37 A-B.  Exit is at MP 36.8
Current Exit 21 A-B/Proposed Exit 37 A-B (MA 16): Exit 38 A-B.  Exit is at MP 38.17
Current Exit 22/Proposed Exit 38 (Grove St): Exit 38C.  Exit is at MP 38.51; fudged down to avoid logjam at Pike exits
Current Exit 23/Omitted from proposal (Recreation Rd; NB ONLY): Exit 39A
Current Exit 24/Proposed Exit 39A (MA 30): Exit 39C.  Exit is north of I-90.  This corrects the error
Current Exit 25/Proposed Exit 39B (I-90): Fine  as proposed

To save space, I'll sum up the US 3/MA 3A to the 128 split portion: All proposed exits need to be adjusted up by 1, except for the US 1/MA 129 Exits (Current 44/Proposed 63). Central St (Current 55/Proposed 81) should be Exit 82, as it is at MP 81.54

I-195
Most changes are in the Fall River and New Bedford areas

Current Exit 5/Proposed Exit 11 (MA 79/138): Exit 12A.  MP 12 is on overpass
Current Exit 6/Proposed Exit 12 (Hartwell St EB; Pleasant St WB): Exit 12B
Current Exit 14/Proposed Exit 25 (Penniman St; EB ONLY): Exit 25A
Current Exit 15/Proposed Exit 26 (MA 18 SOUTH): Exit 25B (EB); Exit 25 (WB).  MP 25 is on overpass
Current Exit 16/Proposed Exit 27 (Washburn St; EB ONLY): Exit 26
Current Exit 17/Proposed Exit 28 (Coggeshall St; WB ONLY): Exit 26. Why 2 numbers for 2 exits at the same MP?
Current Exit 18/Proposed Exit 29 (MA 240 SOUTH): Exit 27.  Exit is near MP 27.3

I-290
This is an absolute mess, especially through Worcester.  Don't like the added 395 mileage either, so my proposals also include standalone numbers.

Current Exit 7/Proposed Exit 12 (EB) 12B (WB): Fine as proposed.  Standalone Exit 1A both directions
Current Exit 8/Proposed Exit 13 (WB ONLY): Fine as proposed. Standalone Exit 1B
Current Exit 9/Proposed Exit 13 (Swanson Rd EB): Fine as proposed.  Standalone Exit 1B
Current Exit 9/Proposed Exit 13 (Auburn St WB): Exit 14.  At MP 13.61.  Standalone Exit 2
Current Exit 10/Proposed Exit 14 (MA 12 NORTH; WB ONLY):Exit 15A.  At MP 15.26.  Standalone Exit 3
Current Exit 11/Proposed Exit 15 (College/Federal/Southbridge): Exit 15 EB, Exit 15B WB.  Standalone Exit 4
Current Exit 12/Proposed Exit 16 (MA 146 SOUTH; WB ONLY): Fine as proposed. At MP 16.52 but fudged to avoid logjam at 17.  Standalone Exit 5A
Current Exit 13/Proposed Exit 17 (MA 122A): Fine as proposed.  Standalone Exit 5 EB, Exit 5B WB
Current Exit 14/Proposed Exit 18 (MA 122): Exit 18A.  Standalone Exit 6A
Current Exit 15/Proposed Exit 19 (Shrewsbury St; EB ONLY): Exit 18B.  Standalone Exit 6B
Current Exit 16/Proposed Exit 20 (MLK Jr Blvd): Exit 18C.  Standalone Exit 6C
Current Exit 17/Proposed Exit 21 (MA 9; EB ONLY): Exit 19A.  At MP 18.49, but fudged up to match WB exit.  Standalone Exit 7A
Current Exit 18/Proposed Exit 21 (MA 9/70; WB ONLY): Exit 19A.  Standalone Exit 7A
Current Exit 19/Proposed Exit 22 (I-190/MA 12 NORTH): Exit 19B.  Standalone Exit 7B
Current Exit 20/Proposed Exit 23 (MA 70): Exit 20.  EB exit combined with 190 exit, but fudged up to match. Standalone Exit 8 (EB similarly fudged)
Current Exit 21/Proposed Exit 24 (Plantation St): Exit 21.  At MP 21.55, but fudged down for simplicity. Standalone Exit 9 (similarly fudged down)
Current Exit 22/Proposed Exit 25 (Main St): Leave it alone.  Standalone Exit 10
Current Exit 23 A-B/Proposed Exit 26 A-B (MA 140): Exit 25 A-B.  Standalone Exit 13 A-B

The last 3 exits to I-495 are fine as proposed.  Standalone numbers would be 15, 18 A-B, and 20 A-B

I-495
Only changes are in the Lawrence area.  I'm fine with fudging the MA 97 Exit to 108 for simplicity despite being at MP 107.4

Current Exit 43/Proposed Exit 101 (Mass Ave/Loring St): Exit 101A
Current Exit 44/Proposed Exit 102 (Merrimack St): Exit 101B. Closer to MP 101
Current Exit 45A/Proposed Exit 103A (Comm Dr NB, Marston St NORTH SB): Exit 102A.  Comm Dr is at MP 102.1
Current Exit 45B/Proposed Exit 103B (Marston St; SOUTH SB): Exit 102B
Current Exit 46/Proposed Exit 104 (MA 110): Exit 103
Current Exit 47/Proposed Exit 105 (MA 213): Exit 104.  Exit is at MP 104.1

MA 2
Spot changes in the Fitchburg area, as well as near 495.  I would add numbers to the Greenfield exits: 50 for I-91 North (WB ONLY) and 51 for US 5/MA 10.  Biggest mess is inside 128 (however, Exit 135 for Alewife is fine)

Current Exit 26/Proposed Exit 93 (Willard Rd/Village Inn Rd; EB ONLY): Exit 93A
Current Exit 27/Proposed Exit 94 (Narrows Rd/Depot Rd): Exit 93A EB; Exit 93 WB.  Exit is at MP 93.48
Current Exit 28/Proposed Exit 95 (MA 31): Exit 94. Exit is at MP 94.49
Current Exit 39/Proposed Exit 112 (Taylor Rd): Exit 113A.  Exit is at MP 113.05
Current Exit 40 A-B/Proposed Exit 113 A-B (I-495): Exit 113 B-C
Current Exit 42/Proposed Exit 117 (MA 27): Exit 118 EB; Exit 118 A WB.  Exit is at MP 117.61
Current Exit 43/Proposed Exit 118 (MA 111; WB ONLY): Exit 118B
Current Exit 52 A-B/Proposed Exit 127 A-B (I-95/MA 128): Exit 128 A-B.  Exit is at MP 128.53, but fudged down to avoid a logjam at 129.  Also makes for a fun "Exit 128 is 128" mnemonic
Current Exit 53/Proposed Exit 128 (Spring St; EB ONLY): Exit 129
Current Exit 54 A-B/Proposed Exit 129 A-B (Waltham St; WB ONLY): Exit 130 A-B.  Exit is at MP 130
Current Exit 55/Proposed Exit 130 (Pleasant St; EB ONLY): Exit 131A.  Exit is at MP 130.89
Current Exit 56/Proposed Exit 131 (Winter St EB, MA 4/225 WB): Exit 131B EB; Exit 131 WB
Current Exit 57/Proposed Exit 132A EB/132 WB (Dow Ave): Exit 132 both directions
Current Exit 58/Proposed Exit 132B EB/133 WB (Park Ave): Exit 133 both directions
Current Exit 59/Proposed Exit 133 EB/134 WB (MA 60): Exit 134A both directions
Current Exit 60/Proposed Exit 134 EB/135 WB (Lake St): Exit 134B both directions

MA/US 3
A mess from Braintree north to the NH line. Spot changes elsewhere.  Also, I would give the exit from 6 West to 3 North a US 6 exit number (54A), since it is technically a US 6 exit where US 6 itself leaves for a surface road

Current Exit 11/Proposed Exit 22 (MA 14): Exit 23.  Exit is near MP 22.6
Current Exit 17/Proposed Exit 40 (Union St): Exit 41.  Exit is at MP 40.8
Current Exit 18/Proposed Exit 41 (Washington St; SB ONLY): Exit 42. Exit is just before MP 42
Current Exit 19/Proposed Exit 42 (Burgin Pkwy/Quincy Adams T): Exit 42 NB; Exit 42B SB
Current Exit 20 A-B/Proposed Exit 43 A-B (I-93): Exit 43 for 93 SOUTH ONLY. 93 NORTH ramp is part of MA 3 mainline.
Current Exit 25 A-B/Proposed Exit 70 A-B (I-95/MA 128): Exit 72 for 95/128 SOUTH ONLY.  95/128 NORTH ramp is part of US 3 mainline. Exit is at 71.6 MP
Current Exit 30B/Proposed Exit 80 (Lowell Connector): Exit 82A.  Exit is at MP 81.6
Current Exit 30 A-C/Proposed Exit 81 A-B (I-495): Exit 82 B-C

I omitted the rest of the US 3 exits here, because it can be summed up by one action: raising each proposed exit number by 1.

US 6
Only a couple of spot changes, and a minor adjustment at the MA 3 junction

Current/Proposed Exit 1B (MA 3 NORTH; WB ONLY): Exit 54A
Current/Proposed Exit 1A (Scusset Beach Rd; WB ONLY): Exit 54B
Current Exit 4/Proposed Exit 62 (Chase Rd): Exit 63.  Exit is after MP 63
Current Exit 11/Proposed Exit 85 (MA 137): Exit 84.  Exit is at MP 84.4

MA 24
Some changes in the Fall River area.  A couple of spot changes elsewhere

Current/Proposed Exit 2 (Brayton Ave/Eastern Ave): Exit 2A NB; Exit 2 SB
Current/Proposed Exit 3 (I-195 WEST; NB ONLY): Exit 2B. MP 2 is on ramp to 195 EAST
Current/Proposed Exit 4 (I-195 EAST; SB ONLY): Exit 3.  MP 3.2 is on ramp to 195 WEST
Current/Proposed Exit 6 (Highland Ave; SB ONLY): Exit 7.  Exit is at MP 7.6, but fudged down for simplicity
Current/Proposed Exit 7 (MA 79 SOUTH): Exit 8
Current Exit 8A/Proposed Exit 8 (Commerce Dr): Exit 9.  Exit is at MP 8.4, but fudged up for simplicity
Current Exit 14 A-B/Proposed Exit 22 A-B (I-495): Exit 23 A-B.  Exit is at MP 22.9
Current Exit 19/Proposed Exit 35 (Harrison Blvd): Exit 36.  Exit is at MP 35.7

MA 128
A mess in the Danvers/Beverly area.  Fine near I-95 and east of Grapevine Rd

Current Exit 24/Proposed Exit 41 (Endicott St): Exit 40C.  Exit is at MP 40.45
Current Exit 23/Proposed Exit 42 (MA 35): Exit 41.  Exit is at MP 41.2
Current Exit 22/Proposed Exit 43 (MA 62): Exit 42.  Exit is at MP 41.8
Current Exit 21/Proposed Exit 44 (Folly Lane/Conant St): Exit 43.  RIRO's are at MP 42.5 and rounded up for simplicity.
Current Exit 20 A-B/Proposed Exit 45 A-B (MA 1A): Exit 44 A-B. Exit at MP 43.5 and rounded up for simplicity.
Current Exit 19/Proposed Exit 46 (Sohler Rd/Brimbal Ave): Exit 44C.  Exit at MP 44.2
Current Exit 18/Proposed Exit 47 (MA 22): Exit 45.  Exit is at MP 45.4
Current Exit 17/Proposed Exit 48 (Grapevine Rd): Exit 47.  Exit is as MP 47.4

MA 140
For starters, remove the number for the at-grade intersection at its southern terminus at US 6, and remove the numbers for the signalized interchange at MA 24. A couple of other changes:

Current/Proposed Exit 2 A-B (I-195): Exit 1 A-B
Current/Proposed Exit 3 (Hathaway Rd): Exit 2.  Exit is at MP 1.5 and rounded up for simplicity



Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 25, 2019, 09:18:41 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 25, 2019, 01:50:14 AMI-93
Everything is fine between MA 37 and the Mass Pike and from the Zakim Bridge north. The southern terminus is fine

Current/Proposed Exit 2 A-B (MA 138): Exit 1 C-D.  Exit is at MP 1.41
Current/Proposed Exit 3 (Houghtons Pond): Exit 2.  At MP 2.61, but fudged down for simplicity
Current/Proposed Exit 4 (MA 24 SOUTH): Exit 3
Current/Proposed Exit 5 A-B (MA 28): Exit 4 A-B.  Exit is at MP 4.23
Disagree on your recommendations for the following reasons:
1.  Only I-93 southbounders see Exits 1 A/B.  The first exit I-93 northbounders would see is Exit 1 C.  More awkward IMHO than seeing Exit 2 A.
2.  No real reason to change Exit 3 especially since such falls within tolerance levels; keep MA 24 at Exit 4.
3.  While MA 28 falls slightly below MM 4.5; its within reasonable tolerance to fudge a tad and round up to keep the current numbers.
Bottom line: justifiable fudging for the above is allowed to reduce the number of changes... i.e. the path of least resistance.

Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 25, 2019, 01:50:14 AMI-95
Current/Proposed Exit 1 (US 1; SB ONLY): Exit 1A
Current/Proposed Exit 2 A-B (MA 1A): Exit 1 B-C. Exit is at MP 1.2
No for the same reasons I mentioned regarding I-93's interchanges w/I-95 & MA 138.  The current Exit 1 (1 A in your plan) is only seen be southbound traffic.  The first exit northbound traffic would see is 1 B.  While there's certainly a fudge-factor in keeping the MA 1A interchange's numbers as they are; keeping such, along with the southbound Exit 1 (for US 1 South), as they are keeps things simple & reduces the level of awkwardness.

Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 25, 2019, 01:50:14 AM
Current Exit 20 A-B/Proposed Exit 36 A-B (MA 9): Exit 37 A-B.  Exit is at MP 36.8
Current Exit 21 A-B/Proposed Exit 37 A-B (MA 16): Exit 38 A-B.  Exit is at MP 38.17
Current Exit 22/Proposed Exit 38 (Grove St): Exit 38C.  Exit is at MP 38.51; fudged down to avoid logjam at Pike exits
Current Exit 23/Omitted from proposal (Recreation Rd; NB ONLY): Exit 39A
Current Exit 24/Proposed Exit 39A (MA 30): Exit 39C.  Exit is north of I-90.  This corrects the error
Current Exit 25/Proposed Exit 39B (I-90): Fine  as proposed
Given that Recreation Rd. is only a partial interchange (northbound exit & entrance); I would recommend using Exit 38 D, thereby keeping such separate from the I-90 & MA 30 interchanges. 

I disagree regarding the A/B assignments for Exit 39.  I-90 crosses over I-95 south of where MA 30 crosses it; so the suffix assignments should be the opposite of what's being proposed.  The current sequential numbers for those two interchanges were erroneous IMHO since their 1987 inception due to such was holding the southbound order of the exit ramps as a guide.  As I stated earlier, see I-84 in CT at I-691 & CT 322 interchanges (current Exit 27-28, Future Exits 40 A/B) for the proper way to assign exit numbers in a situation where the ramp order is the same for both directions.

Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 25, 2019, 01:50:14 AM
To save space, I'll sum up the US 3/MA 3A to the 128 split portion: All proposed exits need to be adjusted up by 1, except for the US 1/MA 129 Exits (Current 44/Proposed 63).
I'm not seeing any issue with what's being proposed.  Your proposed changes for this segment IMHO is unnecessary.  The only debate for that leg might be how to renumber the Washington St. (current Exit 36) and I-93 (current Exit 37 A/B) interchanges.  If one goes strictly be the mile markers, Exit 36 would become Exit 55 A and Exits 37 A/B would become Exits 55 B/C; such was the original plan.  Since there's no chance of a new interchange being built between Washington St. & MA 38 (current Exit 35, Proposed Exit 53); assigning Washington St. Exit 54 and I-93 Exits 55 A/B per the current plan is somewhat justified in that it reduces a suffixed exit & keeps the I-93 ramps as A/B... despite that the Washington St. overpass crosses I-95 at roughly MM 55.3-55.4.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Magical Trevor on November 25, 2019, 10:05:59 AM
Can I just say that, if we used kilometers, there wouldn't have to be so much fudging?   :biggrin:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on November 25, 2019, 10:11:56 AM
My proposal for the I-90 interchange on 95 does indeed correct the error.  It has the Pike as 39B and Route 30 as 39C, so you would have 39B followed by 39C southbound.  It's the same thing I did with the MA 83 interchanges on I-91 in Springfield. 

As for the 93 and 95 south ends, an Exit 0 in these situations would've made things so much easier. 

My renumbering of 95 between Burlington and Peabody takes care of the situation at the 93 interchange.  I have Washington St at MP 55.31 and I-93 at MP 55.71, so you'd have 55 for Washington and 56 A/B for 93.   
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 25, 2019, 02:34:15 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 25, 2019, 09:18:41 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 25, 2019, 01:50:14 AMI-93
Everything is fine between MA 37 and the Mass Pike and from the Zakim Bridge north. The southern terminus is fine

Current/Proposed Exit 2 A-B (MA 138): Exit 1 C-D.  Exit is at MP 1.41
Current/Proposed Exit 3 (Houghtons Pond): Exit 2.  At MP 2.61, but fudged down for simplicity
Current/Proposed Exit 4 (MA 24 SOUTH): Exit 3
Current/Proposed Exit 5 A-B (MA 28): Exit 4 A-B.  Exit is at MP 4.23
Disagree on your recommendations for the following reasons:
1.  Only I-93 southbounders see Exits 1 A/B.  The first exit I-93 northbounders would see is Exit 1 C.  More awkward IMHO than seeing Exit 2 A.
2.  No real reason to change Exit 3 especially since such falls within tolerance levels; keep MA 24 at Exit 4.
3.  While MA 28 falls slightly below MM 4.5; its within reasonable tolerance to fudge a tad and round up to keep the current numbers.
Bottom line: justifiable fudging for the above is allowed to reduce the number of changes... i.e. the path of least resistance.

Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 25, 2019, 01:50:14 AMI-95
Current/Proposed Exit 1 (US 1; SB ONLY): Exit 1A
Current/Proposed Exit 2 A-B (MA 1A): Exit 1 B-C. Exit is at MP 1.2
No for the same reasons I mentioned regarding I-93's interchanges w/I-95 & MA 138.  The current Exit 1 (1 A in your plan) is only seen be southbound traffic.  The first exit northbound traffic would see is 1 B.  While there's certainly a fudge-factor in keeping the MA 1A interchange's numbers as they are; keeping such, along with the southbound Exit 1 (for US 1 South), as they are keeps things simple & reduces the level of awkwardness.

Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 25, 2019, 01:50:14 AM
Current Exit 20 A-B/Proposed Exit 36 A-B (MA 9): Exit 37 A-B.  Exit is at MP 36.8
Current Exit 21 A-B/Proposed Exit 37 A-B (MA 16): Exit 38 A-B.  Exit is at MP 38.17
Current Exit 22/Proposed Exit 38 (Grove St): Exit 38C.  Exit is at MP 38.51; fudged down to avoid logjam at Pike exits
Current Exit 23/Omitted from proposal (Recreation Rd; NB ONLY): Exit 39A
Current Exit 24/Proposed Exit 39A (MA 30): Exit 39C.  Exit is north of I-90.  This corrects the error
Current Exit 25/Proposed Exit 39B (I-90): Fine  as proposed
Given that Recreation Rd. is only a partial interchange (northbound exit & entrance); I would recommend using Exit 38 D, thereby keeping such separate from the I-90 & MA 30 interchanges. 

I disagree regarding the A/B assignments for Exit 39.  I-90 crosses over I-95 south of where MA 30 crosses it; so the suffix assignments should be the opposite of what's being proposed.  The current sequential numbers for those two interchanges were erroneous IMHO since their 1987 inception due to such was holding the southbound order of the exit ramps as a guide.  As I stated earlier, see I-84 in CT at I-691 & CT 322 interchanges (current Exit 27-28, Future Exits 40 A/B) for the proper way to assign exit numbers in a situation where the ramp order is the same for both directions.

Quote from: jp the roadgeek on November 25, 2019, 01:50:14 AM
To save space, I'll sum up the US 3/MA 3A to the 128 split portion: All proposed exits need to be adjusted up by 1, except for the US 1/MA 129 Exits (Current 44/Proposed 63).
I'm not seeing any issue with what's being proposed.  Your proposed changes for this segment IMHO is unnecessary.  The only debate for that leg might be how to renumber the Washington St. (current Exit 36) and I-93 (current Exit 37 A/B) interchanges.  If one goes strictly be the mile markers, Exit 36 would become Exit 55 A and Exits 37 A/B would become Exits 55 B/C; such was the original plan.  Since there's no chance of a new interchange being built between Washington St. & MA 38 (current Exit 35, Proposed Exit 53); assigning Washington St. Exit 54 and I-93 Exits 55 A/B per the current plan is somewhat justified in that it reduces a suffixed exit & keeps the I-93 ramps as A/B... despite that the Washington St. overpass crosses I-95 at roughly MM 55.3-55.4.
Are any of these recommendations to be forwarded to MassDOT? For what it's worth, they've now posted the MA 2 flier on the new exit number website: https://www.newmassexits.com/MassDOT_Documents/Route_2.pdf (https://www.newmassexits.com/MassDOT_Documents/Route_2.pdf).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on November 25, 2019, 02:49:51 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on November 25, 2019, 02:34:15 PMAre any of these recommendations to be forwarded to MassDOT?
I can't speak for jp the roadgeek but I already sent in my earlier comments to their website.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: sturmde on November 25, 2019, 02:51:08 PM
Quote from: Magical Trevor on November 25, 2019, 10:05:59 AM
Can I just say that, if we used kilometers, there wouldn't have to be so much fudging?   :biggrin:

Hello Ohio, Arizona, Delaware, and Alabama... who among others each tried some variation of switching something to kilometers.  How's that working? :)
.
Alabama's kilometer post experiment... what a mess that was!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on November 26, 2019, 02:55:17 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on November 23, 2019, 11:04:28 AM
Quote from: CapeCodder on November 22, 2019, 08:38:48 PM
It appears that state reps from Cape Cod are trying to get an exemption.

The link explains it better:

https://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20191121/state-again-presses-for-renaming-of-route-6-exits (https://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20191121/state-again-presses-for-renaming-of-route-6-exits)
As I've suggested before, maybe a compromise would be to put up mileage based numbers based on the length of the Mid-Cape Highway, either with a new route concurrency or not. This way MassDOT complies with the MUTCD and drivers get the benefit of a mileage based system that would be useful (stuck in summer traffic or not) to figure out how far they are to, or from, the Sagamore Bridge. The Cape would get its own unique number system, not as critics have complained as an arbitrary set of numbers. Exit 1 for MA 6A wouldn't have to change and the numbers would go up to 35 at the end of the Highway at the Orleans Rotary.
Dear merciful Zapfish, the Cape Cod crybabies are at it again!  :banghead:

As a former Cape Codder, I can tell you, that compromise won't work.  Stubborn Codders don't want anything to change ever ever ever because they're of the mistaken idea that the Cape is still "rural" and that the slightest change will ruin the Cape forevermore.  They are the reason the last 12.5 miles of the freeway are Super-2.  They are the reason the freeway wasn't extended to North Eastham (and trust me, it NEEDS to be).  They are the reason the original renumbering project was shelved in 2016.  If they had a say, they'd kill the bridge replacement program too.

They seriously don't consider the Mid-Cape a freeway because "a freeway is a city thing".  They want exceptions for everything they don't like.  They are a breeding ground for the Karens of r/entitledpeople!

Sorry about the rant, but I REALLY hate it when the Cape (and the Cape Cod Commission) tries to wall off progress.  😔
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: CapeCodder on November 26, 2019, 06:26:06 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on November 26, 2019, 02:55:17 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on November 23, 2019, 11:04:28 AM
Quote from: CapeCodder on November 22, 2019, 08:38:48 PM
It appears that state reps from Cape Cod are trying to get an exemption.

The link explains it better:

https://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20191121/state-again-presses-for-renaming-of-route-6-exits (https://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20191121/state-again-presses-for-renaming-of-route-6-exits)
As I've suggested before, maybe a compromise would be to put up mileage based numbers based on the length of the Mid-Cape Highway, either with a new route concurrency or not. This way MassDOT complies with the MUTCD and drivers get the benefit of a mileage based system that would be useful (stuck in summer traffic or not) to figure out how far they are to, or from, the Sagamore Bridge. The Cape would get its own unique number system, not as critics have complained as an arbitrary set of numbers. Exit 1 for MA 6A wouldn't have to change and the numbers would go up to 35 at the end of the Highway at the Orleans Rotary.
Dear merciful Zapfish, the Cape Cod crybabies are at it again!  :banghead:

As a former Cape Codder, I can tell you, that compromise won't work.  Stubborn Codders don't want anything to change ever ever ever because they're of the mistaken idea that the Cape is still "rural" and that the slightest change will ruin the Cape forevermore.  They are the reason the last 12.5 miles of the freeway are Super-2.  They are the reason the freeway wasn't extended to North Eastham (and trust me, it NEEDS to be).  They are the reason the original renumbering project was shelved in 2016.  If they had a say, they'd kill the bridge replacement program too.

They seriously don't consider the Mid-Cape a freeway because "a freeway is a city thing".  They want exceptions for everything they don't like.  They are a breeding ground for the Karens of r/entitledpeople!

Sorry about the rant, but I REALLY hate it when the Cape (and the Cape Cod Commission) tries to wall off progress.  😔

As a former Nantucketer, St. Louisan and current Cape Codder, I agree with you. Mileage based exits are the national standard. We are not and should not be exempt from it. The Mid-Cape Highway is a travesty (specifically Suicide Alley.)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on November 26, 2019, 01:31:49 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on November 25, 2019, 02:34:15 PMAre any of these recommendations to be forwarded to MassDOT? For what it's worth, they've now posted the MA 2 flier on the new exit number website: https://www.newmassexits.com/MassDOT_Documents/Route_2.pdf (https://www.newmassexits.com/MassDOT_Documents/Route_2.pdf).
Right out of the gate there's 2 errors with the route 2 flyer. Old Exits 25 and 30 list the new exit numbers as... Wait for it... 25 and 30... Is anyone even checking these before they go up?

SM-G900P
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 26, 2019, 03:15:48 PM
Not that anyone cares, but Wikipedia has updated its pages about highways in Massachusetts about the restart of Massachusetts's sequential to mileage-based exit renumbering project.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 02, 2019, 05:28:25 AM
Something else I noticed...

Cape Codders:
"They have exceptions for I-291, I-391, MA-213, and the Lowell, why not for us [US-6]?"

Because they are very short freeways (none longer than 6 miles) in highly urban areas with exits spaced very close together.  The Mid-Cape Highway fits NONE of those criteria!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Henry on December 02, 2019, 09:35:37 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 26, 2019, 03:15:48 PM
Not that anyone cares, but Wikipedia has updated its pages about highways in Massachusetts about the restart of Massachusetts's sequential to mileage-based exit renumbering project.
So they have...


I can't wait to see the new exits next year!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 02, 2019, 05:12:22 PM
Just received several emails from MassDOT in response to my comments:

Regarding the US 3 interchange w/I-95/MA 128 being Exit 71 A/B instead of Exit 70 A/B.  They partially-agreed and will change/correct such to Exit 72 A/B.  The likely reasoning being that MM 72.0 is located just north of the I-95/MA 128 interchange (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4816287,-71.2236374,3a,75y,177.69h,81.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scQ8Jofav4j3Qez6I0BCorA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

MM 71.6 is located just north of the I-95/MA 128 underpass (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4777335,-71.2210158,3a,75y,159.53h,85.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slQG6znABXyG99Gb0K-QJmg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Fair enough.  This interchange could be either Exit 71 A/B or 72 A/B; but their original plan to designate this one as Exit 70 A/B was just wrong.

Regarding the I-290/395 renumbering using only I-395's mileage:
Quote from: MassDOThank you for your comment. To minimize potential driver confusion, we are continuing the I-395 numbering along I-290 to replicate the present exit numbering, which is continuous from Webster to Marlborough.   As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with "˜dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290.  MassDOT may consider re-designating I-290 as an extension of I-395 at a later date based on driver response to the new exit numbering and the "˜dual' mile markers.

MassDOT has considered this option for I-395.  Resetting the exit numbers at the Massachusetts border, as occurs now, provides travelers an additional cue that they've crossed over into a different state.  It is our judgement that this will aid driver navigation better than continuing the Connecticut exit number sequence into Massachusetts will.
So MassDOT's not ruling out a possible redesignation for I-290?

Regarding the omission of including the Recreation Rd. exit off I-95/MA 128 northbound:
Quote from: MassDOTThe Recreation Road exit from I-95 north is planned to be closed within the next three years as part of a proposed development project.  As Recreation Road does not appear on any of the overhead signs for I-90 and MA 30, and as Recreation Road is a relatively low volume exit, the current exit number will be removed but not replaced with a new milepost-based one.  The existing "˜Recreation Road Exit 23' sign on I-95 northbound will be modified to read "˜Recreation Road Next Exit', and the existing overhead sign for Recreation Road on the exit ramp will be removed and replaced with a smaller ground-mounted sign.
That's one way around numbering an oddball setup.

Regarding that current I-95's Exit 45 being Exit 65 instead of Exit 64:
Quote from: MassDOTFor single exit interchanges such as the I-95 north/Route 128 Peabody split, the proposed exit number is based on proximity of the exit gore to the mile marker, and not the midpoint of the interchange.  Mile marker 64 is approximately 280 feet south of the exit gore for 128 north.
I personally don't agree with their decision.

My comment regarding the proposed exit numbers suffixes for I-90 & MA 30 being switched (39 A to 39 B & vice-versa):
Quote from: MassDOTNoted.  We will revise the new exit numbers accordingly.

My comment regarding the listing of Exit 15 & 15 A for I-93 northbound:
Quote from: MassDOTThe northbound exit to Frontage Road will be designated Exit 15B.  As there is no southbound exit for Southampton Street, the southbound exit for Frontage Road will be designated Exit 15.
MassDOT obviously agreed that there was a typo in the listing.

My comments regarding MA 128's proposed interchange numbers being way out-of-synch with respect to the mile markers:
Quote from: MassDOTThe proposed exit numbering on all highways under this project will use the A/B/C scheme only to denote exits that either serve both directions of a route or street from separate ramps on the highway (such as I-95(128) at I-93 in Woburn); to denote multiple exits accessed by a collector-distributor road off the highway (such as the northbound exit from I-95 to I-90 and Route 30, and the southbound exit from I-95 to Highland Avenue and Kendrick Street); or to denote separate exits that are so closely spaced apart that assigning separate numbers is impractical (such as Southampton Street and Frontage Road on I-93 northbound in Boston).

To consistently apply this standard statewide, it is necessary on some routes, such as MA 128 north of Peabody and I-91 through Springfield, to adjust the proposed numbers in certain areas from the normal rounding conventions.  These deviations have been minimized so that the overall numbering will "catch up"  to the mile markers in a short distance.
As suspected, such was done to minimize suffixing except for multiple ramps at the same interchange.  Nonetheless, such isn't an excuse to do such.  Maybe I need to inform them that the NJTA recently revised some of their interchange numbers along the Garden State Parkway to be more in-synch with the mile markers even if such meant more suffixing.

Long story short: Our comments are indeed being heard.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 02, 2019, 06:16:44 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 02, 2019, 05:12:22 PM
Just received several emails from MassDOT in response to my comments:

Regarding the US 3 interchange w/I-95/MA 128 being Exit 71 A/B instead of Exit 70 A/B.  They partially-agreed and will change/correct such to Exit 72 A/B.  The likely reasoning being that MM 72.0 is located just north of the I-95/MA 128 interchange (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4816287,-71.2236374,3a,75y,177.69h,81.52t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scQ8Jofav4j3Qez6I0BCorA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

MM 71.6 is located just north of the I-95/MA 128 underpass (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4777335,-71.2210158,3a,75y,159.53h,85.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slQG6znABXyG99Gb0K-QJmg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

Fair enough.  This interchange could be either Exit 71 A/B or 72 A/B; but their original plan to designate this one as Exit 70 A/B was just wrong.

Regarding the I-290/395 renumbering using only I-395's mileage:
Quote from: MassDOThank you for your comment. To minimize potential driver confusion, we are continuing the I-395 numbering along I-290 to replicate the present exit numbering, which is continuous from Webster to Marlborough.   As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with "˜dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290.  MassDOT may consider re-designating I-290 as an extension of I-395 at a later date based on driver response to the new exit numbering and the "˜dual' mile markers.

MassDOT has considered this option for I-395.  Resetting the exit numbers at the Massachusetts border, as occurs now, provides travelers an additional cue that they've crossed over into a different state.  It is our judgement that this will aid driver navigation better than continuing the Connecticut exit number sequence into Massachusetts will.
So MassDOT's not ruling out a possible redesignation for I-290?

Regarding the omission of including the Recreation Rd. exit off I-95/MA 128 northbound:
Quote from: MassDOTThe Recreation Road exit from I-95 north is planned to be closed within the next three years as part of a proposed development project.  As Recreation Road does not appear on any of the overhead signs for I-90 and MA 30, and as Recreation Road is a relatively low volume exit, the current exit number will be removed but not replaced with a new milepost-based one.  The existing "˜Recreation Road Exit 23' sign on I-95 northbound will be modified to read "˜Recreation Road Next Exit', and the existing overhead sign for Recreation Road on the exit ramp will be removed and replaced with a smaller ground-mounted sign.
That's one way around numbering an oddball setup.

Regarding that current I-95's Exit 45 being Exit 65 instead of Exit 64:
Quote from: MassDOTFor single exit interchanges such as the I-95 north/Route 128 Peabody split, the proposed exit number is based on proximity of the exit gore to the mile marker, and not the midpoint of the interchange.  Mile marker 64 is approximately 280 feet south of the exit gore for 128 north.
I personally don't agree with their decision.

My comment regarding the proposed exit numbers suffixes for I-90 & MA 30 being switched (39 A to 39 B & vice-versa):
Quote from: MassDOTNoted.  We will revise the new exit numbers accordingly.

My comment regarding the listing of Exit 15 & 15 A for I-93 northbound:
Quote from: MassDOTThe northbound exit to Frontage Road will be designated Exit 15B.  As there is no southbound exit for Southampton Street, the southbound exit for Frontage Road will be designated Exit 15.
MassDOT obviously agreed that there was a typo in the listing.

My comments regarding MA 128's proposed interchange numbers being way out-of-synch with respect to the mile markers:
Quote from: MassDOTThe proposed exit numbering on all highways under this project will use the A/B/C scheme only to denote exits that either serve both directions of a route or street from separate ramps on the highway (such as I-95(128) at I-93 in Woburn); to denote multiple exits accessed by a collector-distributor road off the highway (such as the northbound exit from I-95 to I-90 and Route 30, and the southbound exit from I-95 to Highland Avenue and Kendrick Street); or to denote separate exits that are so closely spaced apart that assigning separate numbers is impractical (such as Southampton Street and Frontage Road on I-93 northbound in Boston).

To consistently apply this standard statewide, it is necessary on some routes, such as MA 128 north of Peabody and I-91 through Springfield, to adjust the proposed numbers in certain areas from the normal rounding conventions.  These deviations have been minimized so that the overall numbering will "catch up"  to the mile markers in a short distance.
As suspected, such was done to minimize suffixing except for multiple ramps at the same interchange.  Nonetheless, such isn't an excuse to do such.  Maybe I need to inform them that the NJTA recently revised some of their interchange numbers along the Garden State Parkway to be more in-synch with the mile markers even if such meant more suffixing.

Long story short: Our comments are indeed being heard.
That's good news. I haven't gotten a response to my comments yet, but since several (I-290/I-395, the US 3/I-95 exit, numbers on MA 128) repeated yours, I know what the answers will be, if they ever get back to me. Wonder what will become of I-190 if I-290 becomes an extended I-395. Does it become an I-x95? Do they extend I-190 to I-90 over what is now I-290? Was amused by comment that they are not changing exit numbers to reduce driver confusion, but putting up dual mile markers, as there won't be any confusion with those? As I suggested Exit 72 on my US 3 exit number listing for I-95, glad they are going with that. Wonder if/when the exit number listings on the MassDOT site will be updated?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Duke87 on December 02, 2019, 06:42:53 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 02, 2019, 06:16:44 PM
Wonder what will become of I-190 if I-290 becomes an extended I-395. Does it become an I-x95? Do they extend I-190 to I-90 over what is now I-290?

My guess is that in this scenario, nothing happens with I-190. It stays as is and just ends up orphaned. And while technically in violation of numbering convention, no one who isn't a roadgeek will notice or care. Especially since there will be absolutely no negative safety or navigational implications to this.

QuoteWas amused by comment that they are not changing exit numbers to reduce driver confusion, but putting up dual mile markers, as there won't be any confusion with those?

Yeah that's a really goofy way of handling this. Just change the mile markers so that 395 and 290 have one continuous set and be done with it.
I'm otherwise fine with I-290 continuing I-395's exit numbers - the two are physically one continuous road, so this makes sense.

What I find most aggravating though, is this:

Quote from: MassDOT
The proposed exit numbering on all highways under this project will use the A/B/C scheme only to denote exits that either serve both directions of a route or street from separate ramps on the highway (such as I-95(128) at I-93 in Woburn); to denote multiple exits accessed by a collector-distributor road off the highway (such as the northbound exit from I-95 to I-90 and Route 30, and the southbound exit from I-95 to Highland Avenue and Kendrick Street); or to denote separate exits that are so closely spaced apart that assigning separate numbers is impractical (such as Southampton Street and Frontage Road on I-93 northbound in Boston).

So, okay, that also explains the mess where exit 1 on I-91 will be nearly 4 miles from the state line. MassDOT, it seems, really really really wants to avoid alphabet soup and will fudge numbers to all hell in order to do so.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on December 02, 2019, 06:54:25 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 02, 2019, 05:12:22 PM
Just received several emails from MassDOT in response to my comments:

Regarding the I-290/395 renumbering using only I-395's mileage:
Quote from: MassDOThank you for your comment. To minimize potential driver confusion, we are continuing the I-395 numbering along I-290 to replicate the present exit numbering, which is continuous from Webster to Marlborough.   As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with "˜dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290.  MassDOT may consider re-designating I-290 as an extension of I-395 at a later date based on driver response to the new exit numbering and the "˜dual' mile markers.

MassDOT has considered this option for I-395.  Resetting the exit numbers at the Massachusetts border, as occurs now, provides travelers an additional cue that they've crossed over into a different state.  It is our judgement that this will aid driver navigation better than continuing the Connecticut exit number sequence into Massachusetts will.
So MassDOT's not ruling out a possible redesignation for I-290?

My comments regarding MA 128's proposed interchange numbers being way out-of-synch with respect to the mile markers:
Quote from: MassDOTThe proposed exit numbering on all highways under this project will use the A/B/C scheme only to denote exits that either serve both directions of a route or street from separate ramps on the highway (such as I-95(128) at I-93 in Woburn); to denote multiple exits accessed by a collector-distributor road off the highway (such as the northbound exit from I-95 to I-90 and Route 30, and the southbound exit from I-95 to Highland Avenue and Kendrick Street); or to denote separate exits that are so closely spaced apart that assigning separate numbers is impractical (such as Southampton Street and Frontage Road on I-93 northbound in Boston).

To consistently apply this standard statewide, it is necessary on some routes, such as MA 128 north of Peabody and I-91 through Springfield, to adjust the proposed numbers in certain areas from the normal rounding conventions.  These deviations have been minimized so that the overall numbering will "catch up"  to the mile markers in a short distance.
As suspected, such was done to minimize suffixing except for multiple ramps at the same interchange.  Nonetheless, such isn't an excuse to do such.  Maybe I need to inform them that the NJTA recently revised some of their interchange numbers along the Garden State Parkway to be more in-synch with the mile markers even if such meant more suffixing.

Long story short: Our comments are indeed being heard.

2 replies to you.
1) Good! They recognize that multiple resets of numbering in a short distance hurts the unfamiliar traveler. I personally would not change I-290 to I-395, though I don't know what FHWA's take on this would be. 290 is a loop route through Worcester, 395 is a spur route from CT. You could consider I-290 as beginning at I-90, going through the toll plaza, and merging into the freeway mainline that is I-395. But I don't think they do. I am going to be most curious as to what the dual mile markers will look like. Is there going to be a de facto 290/395 multiplex?
2) Your last sentence is not quite right. The GSP did not renumber exits to be in synch "even if such meant more suffixing." The GSP, in fact, specifically only changed an exit number if that would reduce the suffixing and ease the transition. For example: 131, 131B, 131A became 132, 131B, 131A instead of adding a 131C. 117A became 118 to avoid having a 117A-B setup.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Duke87 on December 02, 2019, 08:02:17 PM
So I ended up submitting my own comment to MassDOT on another... inconsistency in their plans:

QuoteI am curious as to why exits 1A and 1B on Route 6 are not proposed to be changed. Based on route 6 mileage, shouldn't these be renumbered to 54B and 54A? Otherwise there is an awkward jump from 55 to 1 in only a mile.

Let's see if they have an answer for that!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on December 02, 2019, 09:00:56 PM
If they really want to avoid alphabet soup, perhaps they should advocate that the US go metric.  You never hear about alphabet soup problems in Canada.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 03, 2019, 01:42:29 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on December 02, 2019, 08:02:17 PM
I am curious as to why exits 1A and 1B on Route 6 are not proposed to be changed. Based on route 6 mileage, shouldn't these be renumbered to 54B and 54A? Otherwise there is an awkward jump from 55 to 1 in only a mile.

My guess is they're considering it MA-3 Exit 1A/B.  Since the Scusset Beach/3A exit is being considered Exit 3 in the new renumbering (despite Mile 3 being almost half a mile north of the exit presently), maybe they're pushing the Zero Point of MA-3 a bit further south over the bridge for a small US-6 concurrency?

Hey, I didn't say it was a *good* idea, but it would explain why northbound the exits are 1 A/B instead of 54 A/B.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 03, 2019, 08:41:24 AM
Quote from: Alps on December 02, 2019, 06:54:25 PM
1) Good! They recognize that multiple resets of numbering in a short distance hurts the unfamiliar traveler. I personally would not change I-290 to I-395, though I don't know what FHWA's take on this would be. 290 is a loop route through Worcester, 395 is a spur route from CT. You could consider I-290 as beginning at I-90, going through the toll plaza, and merging into the freeway mainline that is I-395. But I don't think they do. I am going to be most curious as to what the dual mile markers will look like. Is there going to be a de facto 290/395 multiplex?
Given that Auburn interchange with I-90 was originally just a connector to MA 12 and that I-290 & I-395 (then MA 52) corridors & connections were built later & at different times; I would say that I-290's terminus was never at the toll plaza even though it conceivably could be.  Such may also be due to the fact that the toll plaza and the related feeder ramps to/from I-290/395 (former MA 52) were built & maintained by the then-Mass Turnpike Authority & not the then-MassDPW; Roadman can verify/confirm such.  The ramp overpass structures appear to be Turnpike Authority-spec'd/design.  Now that the toll plaza is gone plus the fact that the Turnpike Authority & MassDOT (formerly MassHighway) are now one entity; moving I-290's mile marker 0 to where the former toll plaza was could logistically be a possibility, although there would be some alphabet soup for the currently unnumbered MA 12 & I-395 southbound ramps.

With regards to the proposed exit renumbering along I-290 to reflect I-395's mileage; MassDOT's basically doing similar to what the PTC did with I-276 along the PA Turnpike's continuing I-76's mileage.  The two differences being the (East-West) PA Turnpike is a tolled facility w/toll gantries/plazas at every interchange; and, from a roadgeek perspective or even MUTCD perspective, the I-290/395 handoff is not a child interstate branching off its parent interstate in a TOTSO scenario.  As Duke87 mentioned earlier, such doesn't really matter to the general motoring public.

Quote from: Alps on December 02, 2019, 06:54:25 PM
2) Your last sentence is not quite right. The GSP did not renumber exits to be in synch "even if such meant more suffixing." The GSP, in fact, specifically only changed an exit number if that would reduce the suffixing and ease the transition. For example: 131, 131B, 131A became 132, 131B, 131A instead of adding a 131C. 117A became 118 to avoid having a 117A-B setup.
Fair enough.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on December 03, 2019, 12:27:17 PM
I, like many of you, posted comments regarding the exit renumbering and finally got a reply.

My comments were generally about the exit numbering of 128 north of Peabody, and the resulting overlap in some of the exit numbers.

QuoteThank you for your comment. Your concerns are noted.  We point out that duplicate exit numbers (12 to 29) have existed on both I-95/Route 128 between Canton and Peabody and Route 128 between Peabody and Gloucester for over 32 years.  In that time, we have had no known instances of police, fire, or other emergency services failing to respond to an accident or other incident due to drivers inaccurately informing them of their location.  The new exit renumbering has been reviewed with emergency responders and all are comfortable with the changes.

We agree that removing the Route 128 designation south of Peabody would allow the "˜zero' milepost for Route 128 to be at I-95 in Peabody.  However, such a change would require a significant outreach effort that is well beyond the scope of the current exit renumbering project.

MassDOT recognizes the significance of the Route 128 designation to the region.  However, "˜Historic Route"  designations are normally applied to ex-US numbered routes that are rural and scenic in nature,  and not to multi-lane Interstate highways in urban areas.

They make fair points and it's good to see that our concerns are being heard

SM-G900P

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 03, 2019, 12:57:18 PM
I submitted an additional comment to MassDOT regarding I-84's terminus with I-90 having exit numbers (7 A & 7 B).  Now that the tollbooths are long gone and both highways are under the same state agency (MassDOT) control; assigning exit numbers for the ramps from I-84 eastbound to both directions of I-90 would be consistent with how MassDOT designates & signs other highway-to-highway termini.

Let's see what MassDOT's reply to the above will be.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on December 03, 2019, 01:04:02 PM
I'm a bit confused about the I-91 numbering in Springfield. Like, why are they keeping Exit 1 at Mile 4? I get trying to avoid alphabet soup, but they could make it 3 and 4AB (or even 2-3-4), as 1 and 2 are both partial exits and could be combined.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on December 03, 2019, 01:06:48 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 03, 2019, 08:41:24 AM
With regards to the proposed exit renumbering along I-290 to reflect I-395's mileage; MassDOT's basically doing similar to what the PTC did with I-276 along the PA Turnpike's continuing I-76's mileage.  The two differences being the (East-West) PA Turnpike is a tolled facility w/toll gantries/plazas at every interchange; and, from a roadgeek perspective or even MUTCD perspective, the I-290/395 handoff is not a child interstate branching off its parent interstate in a TOTSO scenario.  As Duke87 mentioned earlier, such doesn't really matter to the general motoring public.
And, of course, I-276 only has the PA Turnpike mileage - they don't post an additional set starting at 0.  I don't see why MassDOT couldn't just change I-290's mileage to continue from I-395 and leave it at that.  Seems like that would be less confusing.  I wouldn't change the designation - I don't want to see I-190 orphaned.

Quote from: cl94 on December 03, 2019, 01:04:02 PM
I'm a bit confused about the I-91 numbering in Springfield. Like, why are they keeping Exit 1 at Mile 4? I get trying to avoid alphabet soup, but they could make it 3 and 4AB (or even 2-3-4), as 1 and 2 are both partial exits and could be combined.
Same reason why I-195 in New Bedford has two numbers for one interchange - MassDOT is doing this with a sequential mindset and isn't using the opportunity to fix existing mistakes in their exit numbers, instead choosing to perpetuate them.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on December 03, 2019, 01:07:34 PM
I would actually prefer that I-84 continue its exit numbers from Connecticut, but this would require Connecticut to renumber before Massachusetts.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on December 03, 2019, 01:48:31 PM
Quote from: 1 on December 03, 2019, 01:07:34 PM
I would actually prefer that I-84 continue its exit numbers from Connecticut, but this would require Connecticut to renumber before Massachusetts.
which apparently won't happen before 2028 :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 03, 2019, 01:50:20 PM
Quote from: cl94 on December 03, 2019, 01:04:02 PM
I'm a bit confused about the I-91 numbering in Springfield. Like, why are they keeping Exit 1 at Mile 4? I get trying to avoid alphabet soup, but they could make it 3 and 4AB (or even 2-3-4), as 1 and 2 are both partial exits and could be combined.
Maybe you can submit that suggestion to MassDOT if you haven't already done so.

Quote from: 1 on December 03, 2019, 01:07:34 PMI would actually prefer that I-84 continue its exit numbers from Connecticut, but this would require Connecticut to renumber before Massachusetts.
I definitely don't see that happening.  It wasn't until the mid-to-late 80s that ConnDOT renumbered the interchanges along I-84, east of CT 15 to their present sequential numbers.  Originally, this stretch (CT only) continued with CT 15's numbers.

Besides, I-84's interchanges in MA are far enough apart that converting such to mile marker based ones won't be as problematic as, say, those along the Lowell Connector.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on December 03, 2019, 02:57:08 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 03, 2019, 01:50:20 PM
Maybe you can submit that suggestion to MassDOT if you haven't already done so.

Submitted immediately after I made the post here. I'm curious what their response will be.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 03, 2019, 05:26:08 PM
Late this afternoon, I also received a response from MassDOT to my comments on exit renumbering. I won't repeat all the responses to the same comments I made as PHLBOS since my responses were the same. This includes that on the I-395 exit numbers, my comments also asking whether the potential of numbering I-195 and I-295 as continuations of RI exit numbers was considered. The response was the same:
QuoteResetting the exit numbers at the Massachusetts border, as occurs now, provides travelers with an additional cue that they've crossed over into a different state.  It is our judgement that this will aid driver navigation better than continuing the adjacent state's exit number sequences into Massachusetts will.

One of my comments involved solutions to the criticism by Cape Cod officials of the US 6 numbers, apparently they are thinking of these options:
Has anyone thought of a compromise of assigning milepost based numbers, but using the Mid-Cape Highway miles instead of US 6? If the assigning of mileposts to a named highway would be difficult, perhaps you could create a new route to run concurrently with US 6 from Route 3 in Bourne to Route 28 in Orleans and use that highway's mileage for the exit numbers.
Quote
MassDOT is considering these possible alternatives to using the US 6 mile marker numbers for the Mid-Cape Highway exits.  If either alternative were considered acceptable to Cape Cod officials, AASHTO and/or FHWA approval would be required before any changes could be made.  We also note that, if the Mid-Cape Highway were designated as a different route from US 6, it would likely begin at the Sagamore Bridge, and not run concurrently with the section of US 6 Scenic Highway between Route 25 and the bridge.
I also made a comment about US 3/MA3 sharing mileage and wouldn't it be simpler to have the entire route US 3, either on the current route, or reroute it north of Boston, or just have 2 separate routes on the freeway portions:
Quote
The MA Route 3 designation cannot be changed to US 3 because Route 3 between the Mass. Ave Bridge and I-93 at Leverett Circle does not meet current AASHTO design standards, particularly regarding minimum vertical bridge clearances, to be given a US Route designation.  Rerouting US 3 between Burlington and Boston via I-95 (128) and I-93, which would require AASHTO review and approval before implementation, is not considered a practical option at this time.  This is due to capacity constraints at the I-95/I-93 interchange in Woburn, and would also require an outreach effort and highway sign changes that are beyond the scope of this project.

As you note, media traffic reporters, the general public, and others generally consider Route 3 to be two separate roads, one from Braintree south and the other from Burlington north.  Also, the freeway segments of US 3 and MA 3 already have distinct sets of exit numbers that do not duplicate — this will still be the case after milepost numbering is implemented.  For these reasons, and given the additional outreach effort and changes to highway signs required — both of which are outside the scope of this project, MassDOT sees little tangible benefit to the public to justify removing the Route 3 designation between Braintree and Burlington entirely.

I also asked that it was somewhat confusing under a mile-based system to have the Storrow Drive exit marked 18 in both directions, but have the southbound Exit 18 be north of mile 20:
Quote
For ease of navigation and for consistency in directing people to businesses, exits in different directions that serve the same route, street, or area of a city or town, are being given the same exit number even when they are physically located at different locations along the highway.  As the signs on I-93 south for the Sullivan Square and Leverett Connector/Storrow Drive exits overlap, this "out of order"  numbering should not create undue confusion for drivers.

The rest of my comments involved errors with the exit lists. The response was that the I-93 exit list needed to be updated regarding the inclusion of Sullivan Square as an exit southbound and also removing the reference to MA 28 in that direction also, but no timeline given for the corrections.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 03, 2019, 05:59:02 PM
Regarding US 6/Mid Cape Highway, barring the Cape seceding the Commonwealth or even the Union (the latter would be outside of AASHTO's/FHWA's jurisdiction); one compromise, though I'm a tad hesitant to submit this one to MassDOT, would be to feature dual MILE XX - EXIT YY tabs akin to those that I-93 north of Boston & I-295 in RI had from the 1970s through mid-1980s.  Granted such is from the outdated 1971(?) MUTCD but it might be the best way to display the classic (and I use the term very loosely) sequential exit numbers of the Mid-Cape Highway along with US 6's overall mileage on the same tab.

Problem solved(?)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 04, 2019, 01:35:43 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 03, 2019, 05:59:02 PM
Regarding US 6/Mid Cape Highway, barring the Cape seceding the Commonwealth or even the Union (the latter would be outside of AASHTO's/FHWA's jurisdiction); one compromise, though I'm a tad hesitant to submit this one to MassDOT, would be to feature dual MILE XX - EXIT YY tabs akin to those that I-93 north of Boston & I-295 in RI had from the 1970s through mid-1980s.  Granted such is from the outdated 1971(?) MUTCD but it might be the best way to display the classic (and I use the term very loosely) sequential exit numbers of the Mid-Cape Highway along with US 6's overall mileage on the same tab.

Problem solved(?)
Or alternately, keep the "OLD EXIT xx" signs up until no one cares anymore.   :-D

Otherwise, the only solution Codders will go for is "no change ever".  Trust me.  Once the change is done, over time the residents will get used to it, but unless that clock is allowed to start, it will NEVER happen.

If MA-DPW caved to Codders' demands back in the 1950s, there wouldn't even BE a Mid-Cape Highway.

Codders need to be told "the Mid-Cape is getting the new numbers, and it's not up for debate!"
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 04, 2019, 08:50:19 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 04, 2019, 01:35:43 AM
Or alternately, keep the "OLD EXIT xx" signs up until no one cares anymore.   :-D
PA's tried and true model.  :sombrero:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on December 04, 2019, 08:50:50 AM
They got back to me about the 128 exit numbers...

"Thank you for your comment. While I-95 is the primary designation for the highway between Canton and Peabody, Route 128 continues to be carried as a secondary designation on this road.  This is why the mileposts for Route 128 begin in Canton and not Peabody.  Although removing the Route 128 designation south of Peabody would allow the "˜zero' milepost for 128 to be at I-95 in Peabody, such a change would require an outreach effort and changes to highway signs that is beyond the scope of the current exit renumbering project."

:rolleyes:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on December 04, 2019, 08:53:21 AM
As bob7374 pointed out above, the state responded by not wanting duplicated exit numbers for each route 3, then on another hand telling me the same for 128 is A-OK...
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on December 04, 2019, 08:55:59 AM
Can someone contact them about the possibility of continuing Rhode Island's exit numbers for I-295? An additional advantage is that I-95's exit numbers and I-295's exit numbers won't be confused.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 04, 2019, 09:08:24 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on December 04, 2019, 08:50:50 AM
"...Although removing the Route 128 designation south of Peabody would allow the "˜zero' milepost for 128 to be at I-95 in Peabody, such a change would require an outreach effort and changes to highway signs that is beyond the scope of the current exit renumbering project."

:rolleyes:
If you haven't already done so, you should reply back stating that 128 signs along that stretch only appear on stand-alone trailblazer & reassurance markers.  The main highway signs (independent contractor ones in Wakefield aside) don't have any MA 128 shields per federal mandate.

The biggest stumbling block to remove any 128 references along the I-95 stretch IMHO is the fore-mentioned Amtrak/MBTA Route 128 Station in Westwood.  If such were officially renamed; then it might be a tad easier to remove the old designation... at least in that vicinity.  Although history & culture, both locally as well as nationally, has made such a challenge.  That's why I mentioned, though MassDOT pooh-poohed such when someone else suggested such, replacing the MA 128 shields on the existing trailblazer/reassurance markers with brown rectangular HISTORIC 128 shields.  While such has only been done for US routes; the history & lore of 128 might be enough to warrant such for a state route.

Quote from: 1 on December 04, 2019, 08:55:59 AMCan someone contact them about the possibility of continuing Rhode Island's exit numbers for I-295? An additional advantage is that I-95's exit numbers and I-295's exit numbers won't be confused.
While I agree with you in principle regarding the continuation of RI's mileage along the short, 4-mile stretch of I-295 in MA, I'm not seeing where there would be any confusion with 295's exit numbers vs. those along I-95.  Such are two different roads regardless of exit numbering convention.  I-295's currently has an Exit 1 & 2 (terminus w/I-95) just as I-95 has an Exit 1 & 2.

Update: I decided to pull the trigger and submit my suggested dual MILE/EXIT tab idea for US 6/Mid-Cape Highway to MassDOT.  It'll probably get shot down; but it's worth a shot to submit a compromise.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on December 04, 2019, 12:58:37 PM
Regarding 128s exit numbers, how about this...

Sever the existing 128 into 2 "routes". Both routes would still be 128, however they would logged separately and have separate mileage. Canton to Peabody could be logged internally as 128L and Peabody to Gloucester could be logged as 128U (Lower and Upper). Signs in the field would however only use "128" for both routes. That way exit numbers in Peabody can start at 1 and 128 can still exist down to Canton. There's even somewhat of a precedent for this with the two different route 8As in Western MA logged as 8AU and 8AL.

SM-G900P

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on December 04, 2019, 01:08:30 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on December 04, 2019, 12:58:37 PM
Regarding 128s exit numbers, how about this...

Sever the existing 128 into 2 "routes". Both routes would still be 128, however they would logged separately and have separate mileage. Canton to Peabody could be logged internally as 128L and Peabody to Gloucester could be logged as 128U (Lower and Upper). Signs in the field would however only use "128" for both routes. That way exit numbers in Peabody can start at 1 and 128 can still exist down to Canton. There's even somewhat of a precedent for this with the two different route 8As in Western MA logged as 8AU and 8AL.

SM-G900P


Exactly.  They can do the same for US 6 to get the mile markers on the Mid-Cape Highway to start at Sagamore rather than RI.  I'm not really a fan of the "exit X mile Y" exit tab idea or of moving route numbers around.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 04, 2019, 01:36:50 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on December 04, 2019, 12:58:37 PM
Regarding 128s exit numbers, how about this...

Sever the existing 128 into 2 "routes". Both routes would still be 128, however they would logged separately and have separate mileage. Canton to Peabody could be logged internally as 128L and Peabody to Gloucester could be logged as 128U (Lower and Upper). Signs in the field would however only use "128" for both routes. That way exit numbers in Peabody can start at 1 and 128 can still exist down to Canton. There's even somewhat of a precedent for this with the two different route 8As in Western MA logged as 8AU and 8AL.
If you haven't already done so, submit the above-comment to MassDOT and await their response.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on December 04, 2019, 01:42:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 04, 2019, 01:08:30 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on December 04, 2019, 12:58:37 PM
Regarding 128s exit numbers, how about this...

Sever the existing 128 into 2 "routes". Both routes would still be 128, however they would logged separately and have separate mileage. Canton to Peabody could be logged internally as 128L and Peabody to Gloucester could be logged as 128U (Lower and Upper). Signs in the field would however only use "128" for both routes. That way exit numbers in Peabody can start at 1 and 128 can still exist down to Canton. There's even somewhat of a precedent for this with the two different route 8As in Western MA logged as 8AU and 8AL.

SM-G900P

Exactly.  They can do the same for US 6 to get the mile markers on the Mid-Cape Highway to start at Sagamore rather than RI.  I'm not really a fan of the "exit X mile Y" exit tab idea or of moving route numbers around.

Would that fly with the AASHTO being that it's a US Route? Or do they not care about state highway logs as much? This seems like a easy compromise to keep most people happy (especially Cape Codders) if the feds and MassDOT would agree to it.

I submitted my idea to MassDOT for Route 128 and vdeane's regarding US 6. When I get a reply I'll report back
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on December 04, 2019, 02:01:44 PM
I would think they wouldn't car too much about internal documentation, just what the actual US route is.  NYSDOT inventories its portion of US 2 as "2U" to avoid duplication with NY 2 (similarly, the interstates have I suffixes for that reason - I-87 is route 87I).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on December 04, 2019, 11:01:29 PM
I don't think they'll accept a "6W / 6E" type argument. However, there is nothing that mandates a route start at mile 0, only that mileposts generally increase from the south or west. So just have US 6 enter Massachusetts at MILE -54.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 05, 2019, 01:05:23 AM
Quote from: 5foot14 on December 04, 2019, 01:42:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 04, 2019, 01:08:30 PM
Exactly.  They can do the same for US 6 to get the mile markers on the Mid-Cape Highway to start at Sagamore rather than RI.  I'm not really a fan of the "exit X mile Y" exit tab idea or of moving route numbers around.

Would that fly with the AASHTO being that it's a US Route? Or do they not care about state highway logs as much? This seems like a easy compromise to keep most people happy (especially Cape Codders) if the feds and MassDOT would agree to it.
It would still involve renumbering exits (except 1C), therefore it wouldn't fly with Cape Codders.

You don't know the level of disconnect they have.  they don't even consider the Mid-Cape a freeway because (and someone actually told me this) "a freeway is a city thing".

They're the reason that freeway is the unsafe mess it currently is.  The Super-2 portion is nicknamed "Suicide Alley" (by LOCALS!) because of all the head-on collisions, the forest it cuts through in many areas often blocks ground-level signage, about 80% of it doesn't have adequate shoulders...  any proposed project that could fix any of those has been shot down time and time again by these ultra-NIMBYs because they're afraid it would ruin the ENTIRE Cape experience.  NO ONE COMES TO THE CAPE TO SEE THE PRETTY FREEWAY!!!  🤬
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on December 05, 2019, 12:57:44 PM
Quote from: Alps on December 04, 2019, 11:01:29 PM
I don't think they'll accept a "6W / 6E" type argument. However, there is nothing that mandates a route start at mile 0, only that mileposts generally increase from the south or west. So just have US 6 enter Massachusetts at MILE -54.
They wouldn't accept it even if they were just internal designations used by MassDOT? Seems like it shouldn't matter as long as both segments are signed in the field as US 6. It would just give them a way to start the Mid Cape Highway at exit 1

SM-G900P

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on December 05, 2019, 01:00:09 PM
MA has very few differences between internal designations and signed designations compared to other states. US 6 should not be split into two routes.

However, the exit numbers can start at 1 at the canal, even if they don't match the mile markers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on December 05, 2019, 01:41:01 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 05, 2019, 01:05:23 AM
Quote from: 5foot14 on December 04, 2019, 01:42:26 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 04, 2019, 01:08:30 PM
Exactly.  They can do the same for US 6 to get the mile markers on the Mid-Cape Highway to start at Sagamore rather than RI.  I'm not really a fan of the "exit X mile Y" exit tab idea or of moving route numbers around.

Would that fly with the AASHTO being that it's a US Route? Or do they not care about state highway logs as much? This seems like a easy compromise to keep most people happy (especially Cape Codders) if the feds and MassDOT would agree to it.
It would still involve renumbering exits (except 1C), therefore it wouldn't fly with Cape Codders.

You don't know the level of disconnect they have.  they don't even consider the Mid-Cape a freeway because (and someone actually told me this) "a freeway is a city thing".

They're the reason that freeway is the unsafe mess it currently is.  The Super-2 portion is nicknamed "Suicide Alley" (by LOCALS!) because of all the head-on collisions, the forest it cuts through in many areas often blocks ground-level signage, about 80% of it doesn't have adequate shoulders...  any proposed project that could fix any of those has been shot down time and time again by these ultra-NIMBYs because they're afraid it would ruin the ENTIRE Cape experience.  NO ONE COMES TO THE CAPE TO SEE THE PRETTY FREEWAY!!!  🤬
I think I get the impression of how obstinate they are.  I just don't care.  I'm willing to make REASONABLE compromise but not bend to their delusions.  If one of their complaints is that having the numbering start at RI isn't distinct enough for the Cape, fine, start it at Sagamore.  But don't keep it sequential or have something like "exit X mile Y" just because people on Cape Cod are entirely divorced from reality.  At some point someone needs to tell them what the actual definition of a freeway is and tell them that they're delusional if they continue to insist otherwise.

I actually agree with them that MassDOT's original plans to make every sign on the Mid-Cape overhead was way overkill and not becoming of the character of the area, though I think the ones at exit 9 at least should have become overhead because of the cloverleaf.  No other state makes every single guide sign overhead, and there's a reason for that.

Quote from: 1 on December 05, 2019, 01:00:09 PM
MA has very few differences between internal designations and signed designations compared to other states. US 6 should not be split into two routes.

However, the exit numbers can start at 1 at the canal, even if they don't match the mile markers.
But they don't have none, and what's one more if it eases this situation?  I actually despise roads with distance-based exit numbers that don't match the miles (DE 1 is a case in point for numbers I loath).  The point of distance-based numbers is that you don't have to do a ton of calculations to figure out where the exit will be.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 05, 2019, 11:20:58 PM
I posted these images on Twitter...Codders still don't care.

And as you can see...there's a reason why the Mid-Cape needs overhead signage.  Along most of it, the trees are too thick.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ELCVZDfWsAEb8N1?format=jpg&name=orig)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ELCVZDeXUAACb65?format=jpg&name=orig)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: sturmde on December 06, 2019, 12:40:11 AM
Quote from: 1 on December 05, 2019, 01:00:09 PM
MA has very few differences between internal designations and signed designations compared to other states. US 6 should not be split into two routes.

However, the exit numbers can start at 1 at the canal, even if they don't match the mile markers.

How about having an unsigned MA 206 duplexed from the canal.  The exit numbers could follow *its* mileage.  After all, Massachusetts is known for having subordinate numbers more important than Interstates and US routes.  (Cough, cough, 128.)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on December 06, 2019, 12:51:59 AM
This whole US 6 discussion just reminded me of something else on US 6.  In PA, the Carbondale Bypass section of US 6 leading east from the I-81/I-84/I-380 junction is signed sequentially, even though it starts at MP 336.  PennDOT has a habit of not numbering exits on US and state routes, so it's strange that this stretch received numbers, and sequential to boot.  So here is a precedent the Codders could use to stop the change.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 06, 2019, 02:03:46 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 06, 2019, 12:51:59 AM
This whole US 6 discussion just reminded me of something else on US 6.  In PA, the Carbondale Bypass section of US 6 leading east from the I-81/I-84/I-380 junction is signed sequentially, even though it starts at MP 336.  PennDOT has a habit of not numbering exits on US and state routes, so it's strange that this stretch received numbers, and sequential to boot.  So here is a precedent the Codders could use to stop the change.

How long is that stretch, and how close are the exits?  Remember that 4 freeways in MA got exceptions due to being short urban freeways with very close exit congestion.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadsguy on December 06, 2019, 07:32:46 AM
It's 15 miles, but the vast majority of US 6 isn't an expressway; the other expressway sections are short, disconnected town bypasses in the middle of nowhere or the concurrency with I-81 north of Scranton. It does have mile markers along its entire length, though–unique for a non-expressway in PA–because of the poorly-named PA Route 6 Alliance (https://paroute6.com/). This means mileage-based exits along the Casey/Lackawanna Valley Industrial Highway wouldn't be too jarring, but the existing exit numbers are clearly meant to be for just the expressway, not US 6 as a whole.

Or just make it I-781 (PA 181, 381, and of course 581 are taken) and put US 6 back through Carbondale and it's a moot point. :P

Similarly, the North and South Cross Valley Expressways (PA 29 and 309, respectively) near Wilkes-Barre have sequential exit numbers starting from I-81. (In PA 29's case, it's the start of the northern half of the route.)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on December 06, 2019, 09:10:55 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 05, 2019, 11:20:58 PM
I posted these images on Twitter...Codders still don't care.

And as you can see...there's a reason why the Mid-Cape needs overhead signage.  Along most of it, the trees are too thick.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ELCVZDfWsAEb8N1?format=jpg&name=orig)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ELCVZDeXUAACb65?format=jpg&name=orig)

The foliage obscuring signs was one of the arguments MassDOT made for going to overhead signs along the Mid-Cape Highway.  They pointed out that, with overhead signs, foliage would not need to be periodically cleared and thinned to maintain sign visibility, which is an environmental benefit.  Fell on totally deaf ears.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 06, 2019, 10:55:22 AM
Quote from: roadman on December 06, 2019, 09:10:55 AM
The foliage obscuring signs was one of the arguments MassDOT made for going to overhead signs along the Mid-Cape Highway.  They pointed out that, with overhead signs, foliage would not need to be periodically cleared and thinned to maintain sign visibility, which is an environmental benefit.  Fell on totally deaf ears.

Seriously, MassDoT should just come in, say "Route 6 is unsafe as it is, so we're making these changes, and you don't get a say".

And the kicker is...eventually, the residents will get used to it if it's forced on them.  They'll complain for a few years, but they'll adjust.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on December 06, 2019, 01:05:31 PM
Most states would rather clear the vegetation than make the sign overhead.  Overhead signs cost more and take longer to install, plus they need to be inspected and may have to be taken down suddenly if they fail inspection.  Plus, since most states don't use them pervasively like MA does, they do have a connotation of being in a more developed area or a freeway/freeway junction.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on December 06, 2019, 02:10:14 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 06, 2019, 01:05:31 PM
Most states would rather clear the vegetation than make the sign overhead.  Overhead signs cost more and take longer to install, plus they need to be inspected and may have to be taken down suddenly if they fail inspection.  Plus, since most states don't use them pervasively like MA does, they do have a connotation of being in a more developed area or a freeway/freeway junction.

In the past 35 years, Massachusetts has had less than a dozen overhead sign support failures that were not the result of vehicle impact (like an overheight trailer or a raised dump body).  All of the failures were the result of severe weather events (blizzard or tornado).  Likewise, the number of supports that were removed owing to problems found during inspection has been about six.  In that time, many more ground-mounted signs have been damaged or destroyed by errant vehicles.

Also consider that clearing and grubbing of vegetation blocking signs, by its nature (pardon the pun), is a frequently recurring activity.  Unless there is a failure, an overhead sign structure can last 40 to 50 years without major maintenance.  And, I don't know about New York, but in Massachusetts, nearly all vegetation work on highways requires a review and sign-off by the conservation commission in the communities the work is being done in beforehand - just one more thing to delay the work.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on December 06, 2019, 10:27:19 PM
Meanwhile in New York, a few have failed in the past decade and it can take months/years for replacement to happen, assuming it's not replaced with ground-mounted signage permanently (the Utica area in particular is moving away from overhead signs in many locations).  I want to say that we've had at least six fail inspection in the last decade alone.

New York also doesn't do corridor sign replacements of the type that are often seen in MA and CT all that often these days (outside of Regions 3 and 8, at least).  Most of our signage either dates to the 90s or the economic stimulus in the recession unless it's a newer spot replacement or done as part of a larger project.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on December 06, 2019, 10:47:16 PM
Look at how long CT is taking to replace signage.  CT won't be fully converted to mileage based exits until at least 2030.  There is still a ton of 1980's button copy signage that looks like 1960's highway signage that has totally lost its reflectivity and the buttons are so worn out you don't even know what route the exit is for.  And CT won't convert a highway until all signage on it has been replaced.  And by the time it's all replaced, much of the signage on longer highways will already be 20 years old and halfway through its useful life.  What is the big deal with putting overlays over existing signage and slapping a little OLD EXIT XX sign?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on December 06, 2019, 10:54:13 PM
Let's just say that overlays can be very noticeable (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5316843,-73.8397971,3a,22.2y,93.99h,89.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sm7gJqnkpcT3tRksW_tEjEA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) when placed on old signs.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 06, 2019, 11:36:08 PM
MassDOT has started making changes to its future exit lists based on comments submitted by members of this forum (if not others). They've changed the US 3 exit number for I-95 from 70 A/B to 72 A/B and revised the MA 2 list so that Exits 25 and 30 future numbers are now 92 and 98. No changes to other lists yet.  Link to the revised US 3 exit list:
https://www.newmassexits.com/MassDOT_Documents/Project_Documents/US_3.pdf (https://www.newmassexits.com/MassDOT_Documents/Project_Documents/US_3.pdf)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on December 07, 2019, 11:19:02 AM
vdeane:  Are you saying we have had OSS total failures detected through the inspection cycle (things changed a couple of years ago when the funding was centralized in the MO and the need for Regional PINs was greatly reduced)? OSSes get red flags all the time through inspections, but I wasn't aware of any that had to be taken down and totally replaced due to an inspection (which isn't saying much since I was only half out of the loop until more recently)  -- I'm thinking they were because of incidents?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: machias on December 07, 2019, 06:20:45 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 07, 2019, 11:19:02 AM
vdeane:  Are you saying we have had OSS total failures detected through the inspection cycle (things changed a couple of years ago when the funding was centralized in the MO and the need for Regional PINs was greatly reduced)? OSSes get red flags all the time through inspections, but I wasn't aware of any that had to be taken down and totally replaced due to an inspection (which isn't saying much since I was only half out of the loop until more recently)  -- I'm thinking they were because of incidents?

A few years ago I-790 and NY 5 in the Utica area were shut down overnight because overhead signs had to come down within 48 hours of an inspection. There were four or five installations that came down from that inspection alone.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on December 07, 2019, 10:42:21 PM
Quote from: machias on December 07, 2019, 06:20:45 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 07, 2019, 11:19:02 AM
vdeane:  Are you saying we have had OSS total failures detected through the inspection cycle (things changed a couple of years ago when the funding was centralized in the MO and the need for Regional PINs was greatly reduced)? OSSes get red flags all the time through inspections, but I wasn't aware of any that had to be taken down and totally replaced due to an inspection (which isn't saying much since I was only half out of the loop until more recently)  -- I'm thinking they were because of incidents?

A few years ago I-790 and NY 5 in the Utica area were shut down overnight because overhead signs had to come down within 48 hours of an inspection. There were four or five installations that came down from that inspection alone.
There was another case on I-390 in Henrietta.  I wouldn't be surprised if the same reason is why a couple of signs on I-590 were replaced with tiny ground-mounted signs filling in for a few months, the gantries on I-88 near Binghamton that were out for several years, or the one that just went missing on I-787 in Albany.  I think this was also the case with NY 590 near Blossom Road.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: storm2k on December 08, 2019, 01:50:06 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 07, 2019, 10:42:21 PM
Quote from: machias on December 07, 2019, 06:20:45 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 07, 2019, 11:19:02 AM
vdeane:  Are you saying we have had OSS total failures detected through the inspection cycle (things changed a couple of years ago when the funding was centralized in the MO and the need for Regional PINs was greatly reduced)? OSSes get red flags all the time through inspections, but I wasn't aware of any that had to be taken down and totally replaced due to an inspection (which isn't saying much since I was only half out of the loop until more recently)  -- I'm thinking they were because of incidents?

A few years ago I-790 and NY 5 in the Utica area were shut down overnight because overhead signs had to come down within 48 hours of an inspection. There were four or five installations that came down from that inspection alone.
There was another case on I-390 in Henrietta.  I wouldn't be surprised if the same reason is why a couple of signs on I-590 were replaced with tiny ground-mounted signs filling in for a few months, the gantries on I-88 near Binghamton that were out for several years, or the one that just went missing on I-787 in Albany.  I think this was also the case with NY 590 near Blossom Road.

Or you can just be NJDOT and take down an overhead gantry and just never replace it with any signage. Like this (https://goo.gl/maps/qLdjsh2edG9QkxZE7), for example (here's the original gantry from 2008 GSV (https://goo.gl/maps/HUk3Vsn1sBEkw1jY9)). Eventually, I'm assuming that NJDOT will replace the gantry or do what they also like to do, and put up poorly assembled ground mount signs (they did this in various places on 295, which had similarly aged gantries that needed to come down)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Duke87 on December 08, 2019, 07:13:35 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 06, 2019, 10:55:22 AM
Seriously, MassDoT should just come in, say "Route 6 is unsafe as it is, so we're making these changes, and you don't get a say".

Except... we don't live in a dictatorship and that's not how things work.

The law requires community input on projects. Were MassDOT to attempt to bypass this requirement, they'd be stopped in court. Were MassDOT to solicit community input and then summarily ignore it, people would start complaining to their elected officials and the folks in charge at MassDOT would be told to listen to the community input or lose their jobs.

I'm sure some folks at the DOT would love in numerous instances to just push improvements through without having to care about or deal with what the locals think... if it were possible to just ignore the complaints and tell the locals tough shit, it would happen. There's a reason it doesn't.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on December 08, 2019, 09:08:32 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on December 08, 2019, 07:13:35 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 06, 2019, 10:55:22 AM
Seriously, MassDoT should just come in, say "Route 6 is unsafe as it is, so we're making these changes, and you don't get a say".

Except... we don't live in a dictatorship and that's not how things work.

The law requires community input on projects. Were MassDOT to attempt to bypass this requirement, they'd be stopped in court. Were MassDOT to solicit community input and then summarily ignore it, people would start complaining to their elected officials and the folks in charge at MassDOT would be told to listen to the community input or lose their jobs.

I'm sure some folks at the DOT would love in numerous instances to just push improvements through without having to care about or deal with what the locals think... if it were possible to just ignore the complaints and tell the locals tough shit, it would happen. There's a reason it doesn't.

Safety should never be diminished due to public whining.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 09, 2019, 01:35:07 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on December 08, 2019, 07:13:35 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 06, 2019, 10:55:22 AM
Seriously, MassDoT should just come in, say "Route 6 is unsafe as it is, so we're making these changes, and you don't get a say".

Except... we don't live in a dictatorship and that's not how things work.

The law requires community input on projects. Were MassDOT to attempt to bypass this requirement, they'd be stopped in court. Were MassDOT to solicit community input and then summarily ignore it, people would start complaining to their elected officials and the folks in charge at MassDOT would be told to listen to the community input or lose their jobs.

I'm sure some folks at the DOT would love in numerous instances to just push improvements through without having to care about or deal with what the locals think... if it were possible to just ignore the complaints and tell the locals tough shit, it would happen. There's a reason it doesn't.

Except...it's effectively what the USACE is telling locals about the bridge rebuilding, so there is precedent.

Also, as stated above, public safety should never take a back seat to locals whining about aesthetics.  "Suicide Alley", for example, is notorious for head-on collisions and has been since it was finished (to its current state) in 1958.  The restructuring of the stretch in 1989 (and subsequent widening in 1992) alleviated the issue somewhat, but there are still far too many head-ons there, and it's all because locals won't approve expanding it to a proper freeway.

How much more blood needs to be on Codders' hands before they finally give up?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Duke87 on December 09, 2019, 02:07:44 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 09, 2019, 01:35:07 AM
Except...it's effectively what the USACE is telling locals about the bridge rebuilding, so there is precedent.

USACE has the benefit of being a military entity and under the purview of the federal, rather than state, government. This insulates them from local interference to a much greater degree.

If the locals don't like what MassDOT wants to do, they can start calling up their state reps/state senators who may have the clout to move legislation to stop MassDOT, and failing that the folks on Cape Cod can make enough of a stink that the governor might step in because it's important to keep their votes.

If the locals don't like what USACE wants to do, well they can call their reps or senators in Washington but they've probably got bigger fish to fry than this and, if nothing else, would have a tough time getting enough support to pass legislation stopping USACE considering that most of the support would have to come from people representing other states who aren't impacted by this. And the president isn't going to step in because this is not a sufficiently significant matter to be worth his concern.

QuoteAlso, as stated above, public safety should never take a back seat to locals whining about aesthetics.

I don't disagree, but the locals whining about aesthetics are entitled to their say. And it's an oversimplification to paint this as a simple matter of aesthetics vs. safety - there are numerous other issues at play: cost, environmental impacts, impact on traffic on other roadways, etc.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 09, 2019, 04:13:36 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on December 09, 2019, 02:07:44 AM
QuoteAlso, as stated above, public safety should never take a back seat to locals whining about aesthetics.

I don't disagree, but the locals whining about aesthetics are entitled to their say. And it's an oversimplification to paint this as a simple matter of aesthetics vs. safety - there are numerous other issues at play: cost, environmental impacts, impact on traffic on other roadways, etc.

And if those were the reasons they were giving, that would mean something.  As it stands, the only time one of those reasons were given was in the debate on whether to improve up to Exit 85 or 89, and it's because of wetlands in between those 2 exits.  Fine.  But otherwise, all their arguments tend to be "the Cape's character will be forever ruined!"

Sorry if I'm so emotional about this, but I almost lost a great-uncle to a Suicide Alley head-on back in the 1980s, so forgive me if I find it a bit personal.  😔
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on December 09, 2019, 09:31:06 AM
Quote from: machias on December 07, 2019, 06:20:45 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 07, 2019, 11:19:02 AM
vdeane:  Are you saying we have had OSS total failures detected through the inspection cycle (things changed a couple of years ago when the funding was centralized in the MO and the need for Regional PINs was greatly reduced)? OSSes get red flags all the time through inspections, but I wasn't aware of any that had to be taken down and totally replaced due to an inspection (which isn't saying much since I was only half out of the loop until more recently)  -- I'm thinking they were because of incidents?

A few years ago I-790 and NY 5 in the Utica area were shut down overnight because overhead signs had to come down within 48 hours of an inspection. There were four or five installations that came down from that inspection alone.

Question.  How old were those structures?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: machias on December 09, 2019, 06:48:08 PM
Quote from: roadman on December 09, 2019, 09:31:06 AM
Quote from: machias on December 07, 2019, 06:20:45 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 07, 2019, 11:19:02 AM
vdeane:  Are you saying we have had OSS total failures detected through the inspection cycle (things changed a couple of years ago when the funding was centralized in the MO and the need for Regional PINs was greatly reduced)? OSSes get red flags all the time through inspections, but I wasn't aware of any that had to be taken down and totally replaced due to an inspection (which isn't saying much since I was only half out of the loop until more recently)  -- I'm thinking they were because of incidents?

A few years ago I-790 and NY 5 in the Utica area were shut down overnight because overhead signs had to come down within 48 hours of an inspection. There were four or five installations that came down from that inspection alone.

Question.  How old were those structures?

All installed in 1989.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on December 10, 2019, 10:04:34 AM
Quote from: machias on December 09, 2019, 06:48:08 PM
Quote from: roadman on December 09, 2019, 09:31:06 AM
Quote from: machias on December 07, 2019, 06:20:45 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 07, 2019, 11:19:02 AM
vdeane:  Are you saying we have had OSS total failures detected through the inspection cycle (things changed a couple of years ago when the funding was centralized in the MO and the need for Regional PINs was greatly reduced)? OSSes get red flags all the time through inspections, but I wasn't aware of any that had to be taken down and totally replaced due to an inspection (which isn't saying much since I was only half out of the loop until more recently)  -- I'm thinking they were because of incidents?

A few years ago I-790 and NY 5 in the Utica area were shut down overnight because overhead signs had to come down within 48 hours of an inspection. There were four or five installations that came down from that inspection alone.

Question.  How old were those structures?

All installed in 1989.

Less than 30 years old, and all in the same area.  Assuming all the structures were fabricated and installed under the same project, methinks there may have been a flaw in the fabricator's original design that went unnoticed during review and didn't fully manifest itself until years later.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 10, 2019, 12:08:48 PM
Media report related to last night's first MassDOT public meeting about exit renumbering in Springfield. Notice the completion date mentioned is 2022, not 2021 (Notice also that they say I-91 will change first, but use the map of I-90 exit numbers):
https://www.wwlp.com/news/local-news/hampden-county/i-91-highway-exit-numbers-to-be-the-first-to-change-in-2020-project/ (https://www.wwlp.com/news/local-news/hampden-county/i-91-highway-exit-numbers-to-be-the-first-to-change-in-2020-project/)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on December 12, 2019, 09:21:11 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 07, 2019, 02:55:56 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 07, 2019, 08:57:44 AM
However, between Neponset and Somerville (including the O'Neill Tunnel), the interchanges are closer together enough to warrant suffixed interchange numbers along the way.  As a result, I-93's mile-marker-based interchange numbers north of Neponset would numerically decrease from their current sequential ones.  Examples: the current Exits 37A-B (I-95/MA 128) interchange in Reading/Woburn would likely become Exits 28A-B.  The northernmost interchange in MA, Exit 48 (MA 213) would likely become Exit 46.

The fact that I-93 in Massachusetts has "more" exit numbers than miles makes absolutely no sense!  And why did MassDOT assign "Exit 1B" for traffic going from Canton to Dedham?  Yes, they're going from 93 south to 95/128 north, but they don't exit the highway, they just travel in a straight line!

Sorry to bump this but it is an exit because it is technically a ramp while the 95 loop is the mainline. It’s simply a very wide and straight ramp. I gave massdot a standing ovation when they numbered that, I am a huge advocate of this practice. Mainlines should never be labeled as exits, and any change of road number where there is a choice present (hell even if the split off to the right was to a local road instead of 95 south) should have each choice, including the “mainline” be labeled as an exit.

Massdot got it right in a similar fashion at US6/3 in Bourne where the “mainline” is labeled an exit for 3 north and a loop ramp for 6 is labeled as the mainline.

However they still have yet to apply this to MA 25 North or I-495 South where they converge with I-195, and if it was up to me it would apply at 290/395, where not only should the numbers reset at the MassPike, but for example on 290 south, both 90 and the “mainline” continuation of 395 should be given exit numbers

Signing of exits/routes should be strictly de jure

If you couldn’t tell I’m not a big fan of unsigned interstates, although the one fudging I do like are “faux” interstates where the state can’t get funding for full interstate conversion but slap an interstat number on anyway, I like that because it promotes continuity of the network, and I’d be down to see more like Rhode Island used to do with their fake white “RI”-195 shields way back when, but other than that it should be strictly de jure
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: MikeTheActuary on December 12, 2019, 10:04:10 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 22, 2015, 03:41:39 PM
Why doesn't all of New England just adopt mile based exit numbering? 40+ states have done this, why are the other ten or so still behind?

1.  Do you want to pay for the change (both signage and business advertising)?
2.  In portions of New England, sequentially-numbered exits are already almost 1 mile apart.  My exit off of I-91 is exit 40; I don't know that changing it to Exit 48 conveys materially useful new information.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 12, 2019, 10:07:07 AM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on December 12, 2019, 09:21:11 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 07, 2019, 02:55:56 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 07, 2019, 08:57:44 AM
However, between Neponset and Somerville (including the O'Neill Tunnel), the interchanges are closer together enough to warrant suffixed interchange numbers along the way.  As a result, I-93's mile-marker-based interchange numbers north of Neponset would numerically decrease from their current sequential ones.  Examples: the current Exits 37A-B (I-95/MA 128) interchange in Reading/Woburn would likely become Exits 28A-B.  The northernmost interchange in MA, Exit 48 (MA 213) would likely become Exit 46.

The fact that I-93 in Massachusetts has "more" exit numbers than miles makes absolutely no sense!  And why did MassDOT assign "Exit 1B" for traffic going from Canton to Dedham?  Yes, they're going from 93 south to 95/128 north, but they don't exit the highway, they just travel in a straight line!

Sorry to bump this but it is an exit because it is technically a ramp while the 95 loop is the mainline. It's simply a very wide and straight ramp. I gave massdot a standing ovation when they numbered that, I am a huge advocate of this practice. Mainlines should never be labeled as exits, and any change of road number where there is a choice present (hell even if the split off to the right was to a local road instead of 95 south) should have each choice, including the "mainline"  be labeled as an exit. Massdot got it right in a similar fashion at US6/3 in Bourne where the "mainline"  is labeled an exit for 3 north and a loop ramp for 6 is labeled as the mainline. However they still have yet to apply this to MA 25 North or I-495 South where they converge with I-195
I hate to bust your bubble here but had you scrolled down a tad when your found that old post; you would found my detailed, 2-part reply to kramie13's post some 3 days later that mentioned MassDOT's reasoning for adding that left EXIT tab (reposted below, note the 2nd-to-last paragraph, bold emphasis added):

Quote from: PHLBOS on June 10, 2019, 09:32:36 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 07, 2019, 02:55:56 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 07, 2019, 08:57:44 AM
However, between Neponset and Somerville (including the O'Neill Tunnel), the interchanges are closer together enough to warrant suffixed interchange numbers along the way.  As a result, I-93's mile-marker-based interchange numbers north of Neponset would numerically decrease from their current sequential ones.  Examples: the current Exits 37A-B (I-95/MA 128) interchange in Reading/Woburn would likely become Exits 28A-B.  The northernmost interchange in MA, Exit 48 (MA 213) would likely become Exit 46.

The fact that I-93 in Massachusetts has "more" exit numbers than miles makes absolutely no sense!
One needs to remember that those sequential numbers were set back when the Central Artery was still around & fully operational (circa 1987).  Here's what the numbers were pre-Big-Dig between Mass Ave. (Exit 18) to US 1 North (Exit 27):

Exit 19: Albany St.- southbound exit only (leaves I-93 southbound mainline with Exit 20 ramp)
Exit 20: I-90 West/Mass Pike (access to South Station/Kneeland St. from northbound exit ramp)
Exit 21: Kneeland St./Chinatown - southbound exit only
Exit 22: Atlantic Ave./Northern Ave. (northbound)/South Station (southbound)
Exit 23: High St./Congress St. - southbound exit only
Exit 24: MA 1A North/Callahan Tunnel/Logan Airport
Exit 25: Causeway St./North End (northbound)/Haymarket Square (southbound)
Exit 26: MA 3 North to MA 28/North Station/Storrow Drive

Another thing to keep in mind that when the Central Artery/South Station Tunnel originally opened; there were additional ramps present (& open) as well.  Most of them were closed off/removed during the 1970s.

Since MA traditionally only uses suffixed numbers for either multiple ramps at one interchange or for a new interchange built between two existing ones; the sequential exit numbers can increase very quickly when several interchanges are located close together.

Quote from: kramie13 on June 07, 2019, 02:55:56 PM
And why did MassDOT assign "Exit 1B" for traffic going from Canton to Dedham?  Yes, they're going from 93 south to 95/128 north, but they don't exit the highway, they just travel in a straight line!
Those EXIT 1B tabs were recent add-ons.  The signs were up for just over a year(?) prior to such being added.  MassDOT's rationale, despite this particular interchange's history (such was once through-128), for adding such was indeed due to the change in primary (Interstate) route number at this location. 

Had 128 been fully truncated to the I-95/MA 128 interchange in Peabody; a similar left exit tabs would've been placed on the through 95 SOUTH Waltham signs.

Suggestion & from personal experience: when replying to an older, months-old in this case, post; it's good practice to scroll further down to see whether or not someone else already answered/addressed such.  When I see an older post that nobody recently answered/commented on; I typically scroll down to see if such was indeed already answered/addressed earlier.  If I have nothing to further add or expand upon; I'll just not bother replying.

Quote from: MikeTheActuary on December 12, 2019, 10:04:10 AM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 22, 2015, 03:41:39 PM
Why doesn't all of New England just adopt mile based exit numbering? 40+ states have done this, why are the other ten or so still behind?

1.  Do you want to pay for the change (both signage and business advertising)?
2.  In portions of New England, sequentially-numbered exits are already almost 1 mile apart.  My exit off of I-91 is exit 40; I don't know that changing it to Exit 48 conveys materially useful new information.
No offense but are you aware that you're replying to a 4+ year-old post?  See the above-suggestion.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on December 12, 2019, 06:49:39 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on December 12, 2019, 09:21:11 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 07, 2019, 02:55:56 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 07, 2019, 08:57:44 AM
However, between Neponset and Somerville (including the O'Neill Tunnel), the interchanges are closer together enough to warrant suffixed interchange numbers along the way.  As a result, I-93's mile-marker-based interchange numbers north of Neponset would numerically decrease from their current sequential ones.  Examples: the current Exits 37A-B (I-95/MA 128) interchange in Reading/Woburn would likely become Exits 28A-B.  The northernmost interchange in MA, Exit 48 (MA 213) would likely become Exit 46.

The fact that I-93 in Massachusetts has "more" exit numbers than miles makes absolutely no sense!  And why did MassDOT assign "Exit 1B" for traffic going from Canton to Dedham?  Yes, they're going from 93 south to 95/128 north, but they don't exit the highway, they just travel in a straight line!

Sorry to bump this but it is an exit because it is technically a ramp while the 95 loop is the mainline. It's simply a very wide and straight ramp. I gave massdot a standing ovation when they numbered that, I am a huge advocate of this practice. Mainlines should never be labeled as exits, and any change of road number where there is a choice present (hell even if the split off to the right was to a local road instead of 95 south) should have each choice, including the "mainline"  be labeled as an exit.

Massdot got it right in a similar fashion at US6/3 in Bourne where the "mainline"  is labeled an exit for 3 north and a loop ramp for 6 is labeled as the mainline.

However they still have yet to apply this to MA 25 North or I-495 South where they converge with I-195, and if it was up to me it would apply at 290/395, where not only should the numbers reset at the MassPike, but for example on 290 south, both 90 and the "mainline"  continuation of 395 should be given exit numbers

Signing of exits/routes should be strictly de jure

If you couldn't tell I'm not a big fan of unsigned interstates, although the one fudging I do like are "faux"  interstates where the state can't get funding for full interstate conversion but slap an interstat number on anyway, I like that because it promotes continuity of the network, and I'd be down to see more like Rhode Island used to do with their fake white "RI" -195 shields way back when, but other than that it should be strictly de jure

Technically, the 95/93 Canton exits are at the end of the mainline, and MassDOT is pretty inconsistent as to whether or not the end of mainline ramps are numbered.  I-190 is a strange example where the north end ramps to MA 2 are numbered, but the south end ramps to I-290 are not.  The ramps at the south ends of I-291 and I-391, the east ends of I-195 and I-290, and the north end of I-295 are numbered, but the ramps to the Mass Pike from I-84 are not.  The ones that really drive me crazy to no end that should not be numbered are the MA 3 ramp to 93 North and the US 3 ramp to I-95/MA 128 North, as each carries mainline Route 3.  CTDOT seems to be moving away from numbering endpoints where they are numbered (most are not); the north end of CT 9 at I-84 will no longer be numbered in a signing project next year. RIDOT typically does not number endpoint ramps.  The I-195 ramps to I-95 are not numbered (the NB ramp carries mainline US 6), nor is the west end of RI 403 at RI 4 or the west end of the TF Green Connector at I-95.  However, the east end of RI 37 at US 1 is. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 13, 2019, 02:50:54 AM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on December 12, 2019, 09:21:11 AM
Massdot got it right in a similar fashion at US6/3 in Bourne where the "mainline"  is labeled an exit for 3 north and a loop ramp for 6 is labeled as the mainline.

Not anymore.  According to mile markers, MA-3 now starts just barely south of that interchange, making MA-3 the mainline at that exit.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7792915,-70.5430228,3a,50.7y,10.15h,89.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb72YR7Idk3-4dK81YcG3rg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: MikeTheActuary on December 13, 2019, 07:27:26 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 12, 2019, 10:07:07 AM
No offense but are you aware that you're replying to a 4+ year-old post?  See the above-suggestion.

Actually, I missed that.   The challenge of the "new posts" function in a forum where very-long running threads are bumped up from time to time....

Mea culpa.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 13, 2019, 08:55:56 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 12, 2019, 06:49:39 PMTechnically, the 95/93 Canton exits are at the end of the mainline.
Even though the Add-A-Lane project is completed; those stretches of I-95 & I-93 that were widened don't have any mile markers (re)erected yet... at least as of 2018 through Westwood/Canton/Randolph.  Nonetheless, it's a reasonable assumption that I-93's southern terminus (aka MM 0.0) is located where I-95 southbound leaves the Yankee Division Highway corridor in this vicinity (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2092486,-71.1432797,3a,75y,119.14h,70.33t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sgoMNa45eFfqJ7OO9BAQVDQ!2e0!5s20170601T000000!7i13312!8i6656), which is probably MA 128's official southern terminus is as well.

At present, the only mile marker that's out there is along I-95 northbound (MM 26.0) (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2033913,-71.1423864,3a,75y,13.99h,81.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXzZVNFFawcJoYhjCVgy7eQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) just past the I-93 northbound exit.

Observation while looking at this area via GSV: I-95 shield on this northbound pull-through sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2024822,-71.1427669,3a,75y,16.22h,77.96t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0jb1GSZoLZ9F-AhPtso7MQ!2e0!5s20181001T000000!7i13312!8i6656) was replaced sometime in 2018 but its neighboring I-93 shield on the neighboring sign was not even though it's completely faded/washed out.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: southshore720 on December 13, 2019, 09:24:25 AM
The faded I-93 button copy shield has finally been replaced at Exit 12.  They've even started replacing the faded button-copy shields on the diagrammatic advance BGS's, but did not complete the job.  There is one BGS that has a new I-95 and an old I-93 button copy...I want to say at the 1 mile sign.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 13, 2019, 10:42:23 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 13, 2019, 08:55:56 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 12, 2019, 06:49:39 PMTechnically, the 95/93 Canton exits are at the end of the mainline.
Even though the Add-A-Lane project is completed; those stretches of I-95 & I-93 that were widened don't have any mile markers (re)erected yet... at least as of 2018 through Westwood/Canton/Randolph.  Nonetheless, it's a reasonable assumption that I-93's southern terminus (aka MM 0.0) is located where I-95 southbound leaves the Yankee Division Highway corridor in this vicinity (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2092486,-71.1432797,3a,75y,119.14h,70.33t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sgoMNa45eFfqJ7OO9BAQVDQ!2e0!5s20170601T000000!7i13312!8i6656), which is probably MA 128's official southern terminus is as well.

At present, the only mile marker that's out there is along I-95 northbound (MM 26.0) (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2033913,-71.1423864,3a,75y,13.99h,81.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sXzZVNFFawcJoYhjCVgy7eQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) just past the I-93 northbound exit.

Observation while looking at this area via GSV: I-95 shield on this northbound pull-through sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2024822,-71.1427669,3a,75y,16.22h,77.96t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s0jb1GSZoLZ9F-AhPtso7MQ!2e0!5s20181001T000000!7i13312!8i6656) was replaced sometime in 2018 but its neighboring I-93 shield on the neighboring sign was not even though it's completely faded/washed out.
There are still no mile markers between Randolph and Westwood as of last month. Perhaps the exit renumbering project will encourage those to be put up finally. They did put ones up in the Needham area when the last part of the Add-A-Lane project was completed. I'll plan to checkout the new shields in the Canton area the next time through.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 16, 2019, 04:08:30 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 13, 2019, 08:55:56 AM
Nonetheless, it's a reasonable assumption that I-93's southern terminus (aka MM 0.0) is located where I-95 southbound leaves the Yankee Division Highway corridor in this vicinity (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2092486,-71.1432797,3a,75y,119.14h,70.33t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sgoMNa45eFfqJ7OO9BAQVDQ!2e0!5s20170601T000000!7i13312!8i6656), which is probably MA 128's official southern terminus is as well.

The "END [128]" sign is here (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2099112,-71.1444948,3a,49.9y,141.8h,86.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGhr1sdaMGdyZ57ciZ49eFQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  Dunno how much it means though...
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 16, 2019, 08:55:18 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 16, 2019, 04:08:30 AMThe "END [128]" sign is here (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2099112,-71.1444948,3a,49.9y,141.8h,86.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sGhr1sdaMGdyZ57ciZ49eFQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  Dunno how much it means though...
In general, END XXX signs aren't always placed at the actual route's terminus; so, no that sign is [/I]not[/I] at 128's official end point... which would probably be at the gore just beyond.

Many states tend to be fast-and-loose on this... especially at non-highway termini.  Here's a more blatant example (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9328618,-75.3493909,3a,75y,293.09h,83.12t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s_ZfDJeM67R4JqnUHiN-RCg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) not too far from where I reside vs. PA 420's actual terminus (https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9338245,-75.3520693,3a,75y,302.44h,82.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szecYIDq9T6amoyzAXdXGug!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) at PA 320 some roughly 800 feet beyond the END 420 sign.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 16, 2019, 10:54:36 AM
I received some feedback from MassDOT regarding whether the ramps from I-84 eastbound to I-90 will be signed as Exits 7 A/B; here's the reply.
Quote from: MassDOTThank you for your comment. Your suggestion is noted. When the projects to convert the Massachusetts Turnpike/I-90 to all electronic tolling and demolish the existing toll plazas were in design, it was decided at that time to not add exit numbers for the entrance ramps from I-84 to the Turnpike. At this point, adding exit number panels to the current signs, which were recently replaced with new panels on new support structures, may not be feasible if the structures cannot safely accommodate the additional loading that would result from new exit panels.

Here is my follow-up reply:
Quote from: My MassDOT replyThank you for getting back to me on this matter.  While I certainly can understand not assigning exit numbers to the I-84 ramps to I-90 per se prior to the exit number conversion when the signs were first erected; however, the "new sign structures not being able to support the exit tabs" argument falls flat IMHO because there are plenty of other sign gantries throughout the Bay State that feature large panels (although signs are diagrammatic vs. arrow-per-lane (APL)) as well as accompanying exit tabs.  If the particular APL gantries along I-84 indeed weren't designed to have a couple of comparatively small (with respect to the overall main sign panel size) exit tabs; than those gantries weren't properly designed to begin with.  It's also worth noting that the sign panels above the split-gore itself are still the older 90s vintage ones.  Will such be replaced in the foreseeable future?
A basically polite way of saying that the sign gantry structure design being the reason for not adding exit tabs is a lame excuse.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 16, 2019, 12:15:24 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 16, 2019, 10:54:36 AM
I received some feedback from MassDOT regarding whether the ramps from I-84 eastbound to I-90 will be signed as Exits 7 A/B; here's the reply.
Quote from: MassDOTThank you for your comment. Your suggestion is noted. When the projects to convert the Massachusetts Turnpike/I-90 to all electronic tolling and demolish the existing toll plazas were in design, it was decided at that time to not add exit numbers for the entrance ramps from I-84 to the Turnpike. At this point, adding exit number panels to the current signs, which were recently replaced with new panels on new support structures, may not be feasible if the structures cannot safely accommodate the additional loading that would result from new exit panels.

Here is my follow-up reply:
Quote from: My MassDOT replyThank you for getting back to me on this matter.  While I certainly can understand not assigning exit numbers to the I-84 ramps to I-90 per se prior to the exit number conversion when the signs were first erected; however, the "new sign structures not being able to support the exit tabs" argument falls flat IMHO because there are plenty of other sign gantries throughout the Bay State that feature large panels (although signs are diagrammatic vs. arrow-per-lane (APL)) as well as accompanying exit tabs.  If the particular APL gantries along I-84 indeed weren't designed to have a couple of comparatively small (with respect to the overall main sign panel size) exit tabs; than those gantries weren't properly designed to begin with.  It's also worth noting that the sign panels above the split-gore itself are still the older 90s vintage ones.  Will such be replaced in the foreseeable future?
A basically polite way of saying that the sign gantry structure design being the reason for not adding exit tabs is a lame excuse.
Agree that the excuse is quite flimsy. If the sign structure would truly not tolerate adding an exit tab on top, you could put it on the support posts, you could still make new gore signs with the number, and, as you indicated, the last sign structure prior to the ramp split still has not been replaced under the I-90 sign replacement project, so those signs could be installed with exit tabs. Meanwhile, they have not updated the I-95 exit list with the reversal they said they would do with the I-90 and MA 30 exit letters but did correct the I-93 one so that its now US 1 that is Exit 27. They still refer to the Mass Ave. exit as Frontage Road, though.

The last of their December public meetings is set for tonight in Worcester. The next one is Jan. 23 in Lowell, hopefully they will have one in or to the south of Boston too in Feb or later.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on December 16, 2019, 02:17:23 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 16, 2019, 10:54:36 AM
I received some feedback from MassDOT regarding whether the ramps from I-84 eastbound to I-90 will be signed as Exits 7 A/B; here's the reply.
Quote from: MassDOTThank you for your comment. Your suggestion is noted. When the projects to convert the Massachusetts Turnpike/I-90 to all electronic tolling and demolish the existing toll plazas were in design, it was decided at that time to not add exit numbers for the entrance ramps from I-84 to the Turnpike. At this point, adding exit number panels to the current signs, which were recently replaced with new panels on new support structures, may not be feasible if the structures cannot safely accommodate the additional loading that would result from new exit panels.

Here is my follow-up reply:
Quote from: My MassDOT replyThank you for getting back to me on this matter.  While I certainly can understand not assigning exit numbers to the I-84 ramps to I-90 per se prior to the exit number conversion when the signs were first erected; however, the "new sign structures not being able to support the exit tabs" argument falls flat IMHO because there are plenty of other sign gantries throughout the Bay State that feature large panels (although signs are diagrammatic vs. arrow-per-lane (APL)) as well as accompanying exit tabs.  If the particular APL gantries along I-84 indeed weren't designed to have a couple of comparatively small (with respect to the overall main sign panel size) exit tabs; than those gantries weren't properly designed to begin with.  It's also worth noting that the sign panels above the split-gore itself are still the older 90s vintage ones.  Will such be replaced in the foreseeable future?
A basically polite way of saying that the sign gantry structure design being the reason for not adding exit tabs is a lame excuse.

I feel that every response on rather simple fixes/requests has been met with rather strange excuses. I imagine they're just sick of any questions about it because of what the Cape residents are like.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Duke87 on December 16, 2019, 07:16:08 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on December 02, 2019, 08:02:17 PM
So I ended up submitting my own comment to MassDOT on another... inconsistency in their plans:

QuoteI am curious as to why exits 1A and 1B on Route 6 are not proposed to be changed. Based on route 6 mileage, shouldn't these be renumbered to 54B and 54A? Otherwise there is an awkward jump from 55 to 1 in only a mile.

Let's see if they have an answer for that!

Got an answer and it's... predictable:
Quote from: MassDOTThank you for your comment. At the Sagamore Bridge, New Exits 1A and 1B are based on the Route 3 mileposts. Because MassDOT is not adopting the Exit 0 designation for exits, these exit numbers will stay the same as present. New Exits 55 is based on the Route 6 mileposts, which begin at the Rhode Island border in Seekonk and ascend from west to east to the end of Route 6 in Provincetown.

This is dumb since both exits 1A and 1B in the westbound direction are exits from Route 6 - not from route 3. But I'm not going to be a pest about it.

Quote from: PHLBOS on December 16, 2019, 10:54:36 AM
I received some feedback from MassDOT regarding whether the ramps from I-84 eastbound to I-90 will be signed as Exits 7 A/B; here's the reply.
Quote from: MassDOTThank you for your comment. Your suggestion is noted. When the projects to convert the Massachusetts Turnpike/I-90 to all electronic tolling and demolish the existing toll plazas were in design, it was decided at that time to not add exit numbers for the entrance ramps from I-84 to the Turnpike. At this point, adding exit number panels to the current signs, which were recently replaced with new panels on new support structures, may not be feasible if the structures cannot safely accommodate the additional loading that would result from new exit panels.

The bit about loading is a bit excusey - this just means no one has or wants to do the work to look into whether the gantry could support the extra weight.

On the other hand I agree in principle with not having exit numbers here - terminal interchanges do not need exit numbers for the terminating route.




Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on December 16, 2019, 08:16:23 PM
I asked about the fudging on I-290 through Worcester (especially with proposed exits 18, 19, and 20 all being within one mile).
Quote from: my question to MassDOT
On the topic of I-290, why are proposed exits 18 and 20 (currently 14 and 16) not going to be exits 18A and 18C, respectively, with Shrewsbury Street (currently exit 15) being exit 18B, since all three exits are within one mile?
They got back to me.
Quote from: their response
To minimize possible driver confusion, the proposed exit numbering on all highways under this project will use the A/B/C scheme only to denote exits that serve both directions of a route or street from separate ramps on the highway (such as I-495 at Route 9 in Marlborough); to denote multiple exits accessed by a collector-distributor road off the highway (such as the exit from I-495 to US 3 and the Lowell Connector in Chelmsford; or to denote separate exits that are so closely spaced apart that assigning separate numbers is impractical (such as Southampton Street and Frontage Road on I-93 northbound in Boston).

To consistently apply this standard statewide, it is necessary on some routes, such as I-290 through Worcester, to adjust the proposed numbers in certain areas from the normal rounding conventions. These deviations have been minimized so that the overall numbering will "catch up"  to the mile markers in a short distance.
Any thoughts? Looks to me that they want to try to get out of the true mile-based system with these sequential segments.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on December 16, 2019, 08:50:00 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on December 16, 2019, 07:16:08 PM
The bit about loading is a bit excusey - this just means no one has or wants to do the work to look into whether the gantry could support the extra weight.

On the other hand I agree in principle with not having exit numbers here - terminal interchanges do not need exit numbers for the terminating route.
I'm not exactly surprised, though - given how many numbering mistakes and oddities are being perpetuated into the mile-based scheme instead of corrected (honestly, we can probably count it as a minor miracle that Allston-Brighton will have one exit number instead of two), they probably didn't think of the potential for adding exit numbers during the Turnpike AET project.  Also, the wind loading excuse is the exact same one used by CalTrans to justify their in-sign exit "tabs".

Re: numbering terminal exits, I agree, though I can see logic for numbering the ending interchange as one likely doesn't have the length of the freeway memorized.  That said, starting interchanges IMO should never be numbered unless the mileage starts at something other than 0 - one can assume the freeway starts at 0 and be right most of the time, and numbering it just creates needless alphabet soup.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 17, 2019, 01:04:47 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on December 16, 2019, 07:16:08 PM
This is dumb since both exits 1A and 1B in the westbound direction are exits from Route 6 - not from route 3. But I'm not going to be a pest about it.

As I posted earlier, the Mile 0 post for MA-3 was re-calibrated to be just after the north end of the Sagamore Bridge, between exits 1B and 1C (55), so there is now a small concurrency (about 1/10th mile or so) of US-6 and MA-3

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7792915,-70.5430228,3a,50.7y,10.15h,89.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb72YR7Idk3-4dK81YcG3rg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 17, 2019, 08:29:39 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on December 16, 2019, 07:16:08 PMOn the other hand I agree in principle with not having exit numbers here - terminal interchanges do not need exit numbers for the terminating route.
The issue here is consistencyAll Most other highway termini in the Bay State w/numbered exits include numbering at their respective termini (I-190 being the only other known exception).  Had those tollbooths hypothetically never existed at that interchange; those I-90 ramps from I-84 would've likely had exit tabs, though sequential, from day one.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on December 17, 2019, 08:44:45 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 17, 2019, 08:29:39 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on December 16, 2019, 07:16:08 PMOn the other hand I agree in principle with not having exit numbers here - terminal interchanges do not need exit numbers for the terminating route.
The issue here is consistency.  All other highway termini in the Bay State w/numbered exits include numbering at their respective termini.  Had those tollbooths hypothetically never existed at that interchange; those I-90 ramps from I-84 would've likely had exit tabs, though sequential, from day one.

The southern end of I-190 does not have numbered ramps for I-290.  That would be the only other exception.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 17, 2019, 08:52:25 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 17, 2019, 08:44:45 AMThe southern end of I-190 does not have numbered ramps for I-290.  That would be the only other exception.
Forgot about I-190 and the new plans don't call for the I-290 ramps to receive such either during the renumbering.  Given the proximity of the MA 12 interchange (Exit 1); this could've been one case for using Exit 0 for the termini.

I've since corrected my earlier post; edits in blue.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: cl94 on December 17, 2019, 09:33:49 AM
I got nearly identical responses for my points about I-91, Routes 3/6, and the end of I-84, so I'm not going to post them here.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on December 17, 2019, 09:46:59 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on December 16, 2019, 08:16:23 PM
I asked about the fudging on I-290 through Worcester (especially with proposed exits 18, 19, and 20 all being within one mile).
Quote from: my question to MassDOT
On the topic of I-290, why are proposed exits 18 and 20 (currently 14 and 16) not going to be exits 18A and 18C, respectively, with Shrewsbury Street (currently exit 15) being exit 18B, since all three exits are within one mile?
They got back to me.
Quote from: their response
To minimize possible driver confusion, the proposed exit numbering on all highways under this project will use the A/B/C scheme only to denote exits that serve both directions of a route or street from separate ramps on the highway (such as I-495 at Route 9 in Marlborough); to denote multiple exits accessed by a collector-distributor road off the highway (such as the exit from I-495 to US 3 and the Lowell Connector in Chelmsford; or to denote separate exits that are so closely spaced apart that assigning separate numbers is impractical (such as Southampton Street and Frontage Road on I-93 northbound in Boston).

To consistently apply this standard statewide, it is necessary on some routes, such as I-290 through Worcester, to adjust the proposed numbers in certain areas from the normal rounding conventions. These deviations have been minimized so that the overall numbering will "catch up"  to the mile markers in a short distance.
Any thoughts? Looks to me that they want to try to get out of the true mile-based system with these sequential segments.

Do they think 495 and 9 junction in Marlboro?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on December 17, 2019, 10:51:10 AM
I'm actually fine with the sequential segments.

Note that they did fix the typos when we pointed them out.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on December 17, 2019, 12:45:55 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 17, 2019, 01:04:47 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on December 16, 2019, 07:16:08 PM
This is dumb since both exits 1A and 1B in the westbound direction are exits from Route 6 - not from route 3. But I'm not going to be a pest about it.

As I posted earlier, the Mile 0 post for MA-3 was re-calibrated to be just after the north end of the Sagamore Bridge, between exits 1B and 1C (55), so there is now a small concurrency (about 1/10th mile or so) of US-6 and MA-3

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7792915,-70.5430228,3a,50.7y,10.15h,89.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb72YR7Idk3-4dK81YcG3rg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Which begs the question - why did they do that?  MA 3 should end at US 6, not some random point just south of that interchange.  The only thing I can see is if that's where the rotary was and they just kept it there rather than truncate.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on December 17, 2019, 03:44:50 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on December 17, 2019, 09:46:59 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on December 16, 2019, 08:16:23 PM
I asked about the fudging on I-290 through Worcester (especially with proposed exits 18, 19, and 20 all being within one mile).
Quote from: my question to MassDOT
On the topic of I-290, why are proposed exits 18 and 20 (currently 14 and 16) not going to be exits 18A and 18C, respectively, with Shrewsbury Street (currently exit 15) being exit 18B, since all three exits are within one mile?
They got back to me.
Quote from: their response
To minimize possible driver confusion, the proposed exit numbering on all highways under this project will use the A/B/C scheme only to denote exits that serve both directions of a route or street from separate ramps on the highway (such as I-495 at Route 9 in Marlborough); to denote multiple exits accessed by a collector-distributor road off the highway (such as the exit from I-495 to US 3 and the Lowell Connector in Chelmsford; or to denote separate exits that are so closely spaced apart that assigning separate numbers is impractical (such as Southampton Street and Frontage Road on I-93 northbound in Boston).

To consistently apply this standard statewide, it is necessary on some routes, such as I-290 through Worcester, to adjust the proposed numbers in certain areas from the normal rounding conventions. These deviations have been minimized so that the overall numbering will "catch up"  to the mile markers in a short distance.
Any thoughts? Looks to me that they want to try to get out of the true mile-based system with these sequential segments.

Do they think 495 and 9 junction in Marlboro?

I did not see that one, should've read it more carefully.

Also:
Quote from: MassDOT reply
or to denote separate exits that are so closely spaced apart that assigning separate numbers is impractical
Isn't that the situation I brought up? Something seems odd......
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on December 17, 2019, 04:08:26 PM
Just submitted my question about why the ramps from 3 North to 93 North and from 3 South to 95/128 north are numbered despite carrying mainline Route 3.  We'll see if I get a response.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Duke87 on December 17, 2019, 08:38:23 PM
Quote from: vdeane on December 17, 2019, 12:45:55 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 17, 2019, 01:04:47 AM
As I posted earlier, the Mile 0 post for MA-3 was re-calibrated to be just after the north end of the Sagamore Bridge, between exits 1B and 1C (55), so there is now a small concurrency (about 1/10th mile or so) of US-6 and MA-3
Which begs the question - why did they do that?  MA 3 should end at US 6, not some random point just south of that interchange.  The only thing I can see is if that's where the rotary was and they just kept it there rather than truncate.

The center of the rotary was pretty much where the two roadways now cross. It looks like that mile 0 marker is located right about where the southern limit of the project to construct the interchange would have been, so its placement probably stems from that.

I wouldn't read this as there being a 3/6 concurrency though - just as an inventorying quirk. It's worth noting that eastbound, US 6 enters the freeway right near where that mile 0 marker is, i.e. right near where the logical southbound end of MA 3 is if we hyperanalyze interchange geometry. But in the other direction, traffic following US 6 westbound crosses the overpass and takes a loop ramp... resultingly, the logical northbound beginning of MA 3 is nearly 1/4 mile north of where the logical southbound end is. Since mile 0 for both directions needs to be in the same place, they had to pick a place to put it and they picked the southernmost logical spot.

Nonetheless, the traveling public doesn't care what a finite element of pavement is inventoried as. They care that when they are following a route things make consistent sense. Someone following US 6 westbound should see nothing but US 6 exit numbers. Someone going from US 6 westbound to MA 3 northbound should not see MA 3 exit numbers until they have passed the point where they have "exited" US 6.

Currently, MassDOT has (correctly!) signed the through movement onto 3 north as an exit (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7830506,-70.5430429,3a,75y,351.84h,99.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-C6W6_0_lYLjEq3Su6whdw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) while leaving the offramp which is the mainline path for US 6 unnumbered. This, I'd say, is the most damning argument against "well we're leaving 1A and 1B based on route 3 mileage". According to this logic, exit 1B from MA 3 north is for MA 3 north!
For MassDOT's position to be internally consistent they'd need to move the exit 1B tab over to the sign for US 6 west.




Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 18, 2019, 03:27:26 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on December 17, 2019, 08:38:23 PM
For MassDOT's position to be internally consistent they'd need to move the exit 1B tab over to the sign for US 6 west.
According to the renumbering map, apparently that's exactly what's going to happen.  The graphic for the "Exit 1B" sign has the arrow pointing to the right.

And, the Mile 0 point being where it is actually makes sense when you figure that mileposts are always measured in northbound and eastbound directions, so that would make US-6's junction with MA-3 officially at about that post, since US-6 is measured via eastbound.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on December 18, 2019, 06:57:17 PM
Good on MassDOT for considering dropping I-290 and signing it as I-395.  Been clamoring for that for years.

Quote from: DJ Particle on December 05, 2019, 11:20:58 PM
I posted these images on Twitter...Codders still don't care.

And as you can see...there's a reason why the Mid-Cape needs overhead signage.  Along most of it, the trees are too thick.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ELCVZDfWsAEb8N1?format=jpg&name=orig)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ELCVZDeXUAACb65?format=jpg&name=orig)
IIRC the lanes are 12' from Exit 6 to Exit 9B, with full shoulders.  That section is newer than from Exit 1C to Edit 6.

I agree that a 30' clear-zone should be added, but residents will probably complain about it because trees will die.

I think an upgrade of Exits 1C to 6 should be considered.  12' lanes, full shoulder, and ramp extensions and over/underpass replacement.  I would also move the service plaza at exit 6 to the center median area to the east for better entrance access.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on December 18, 2019, 08:31:16 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 18, 2019, 06:57:17 PM
Good on MassDOT for considering dropping I-290 and signing it as I-395.  Been clamoring for that for years.
Meanwhile, I'm dead set against that because it would orphan I-190.  If they decide to pursue that, I can only hope that Worcester proves to be as resistant to change as Boston.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on December 19, 2019, 12:23:55 AM
Quote from: vdeane on December 18, 2019, 08:31:16 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 18, 2019, 06:57:17 PM
Good on MassDOT for considering dropping I-290 and signing it as I-395.  Been clamoring for that for years.
Meanwhile, I'm dead set against that because it would orphan I-190.  If they decide to pursue that, I can only hope that Worcester proves to be as resistant to change as Boston.
I-995?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 19, 2019, 01:34:48 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 18, 2019, 06:57:17 PM
IIRC the lanes are 12' from Exit 6 to Exit 9B, with full shoulders.  That section is newer than from Exit 1C to Edit 6.

Only eastbound Exits 6 (68) - 9 (78) and about half a mile westbound near Exit 8 (75) are up to modern standards.  Those are the parts that were built in the late 1960s. The reason why that short westbound stretch was done was to remove an at-grade railway crossing.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on December 19, 2019, 02:11:47 AM
Quote from: vdeane on December 18, 2019, 08:31:16 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 18, 2019, 06:57:17 PM
Good on MassDOT for considering dropping I-290 and signing it as I-395.  Been clamoring for that for years.
Meanwhile, I'm dead set against that because it would orphan I-190.  If they decide to pursue that, I can only hope that Worcester proves to be as resistant to change as Boston.

I still say the best solution would be for CT to get involved and route I-395 onto SR 695 and have I-290 begin at the 395/695 split.  Granted you'd have an I-287 in NJ situation where the parent never enters the state, but when CT/MA 52 was upgraded, the I-290 designation was considered.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 19, 2019, 08:54:32 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 18, 2019, 06:57:17 PMGood on MassDOT for considering dropping I-290 and signing it as I-395.  Been clamoring for that for years.
The key word in your post is considering.  I don't believe that such is fully a done deal as of yet.  While the I-290 mile markers will change during the interchange numbering conversion; the route number may stay as is since the current sequential numbers were already a continuation of I-395's (originally MA 52) numbers.  IMHO, the time to redesignate I-290 as an extension of I-395 would've been when I-395 replaced MA/CT 52 circa 1983.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on December 19, 2019, 09:02:20 AM
Quote from: Alps on December 19, 2019, 12:23:55 AM
Quote from: vdeane on December 18, 2019, 08:31:16 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 18, 2019, 06:57:17 PM
Good on MassDOT for considering dropping I-290 and signing it as I-395.  Been clamoring for that for years.
Meanwhile, I'm dead set against that because it would orphan I-190.  If they decide to pursue that, I can only hope that Worcester proves to be as resistant to change as Boston.
I-995?
Let's do I-502.

*ducks and runs*
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on December 19, 2019, 11:17:47 AM
Quote from: vdeane on December 18, 2019, 08:31:16 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 18, 2019, 06:57:17 PM
Good on MassDOT for considering dropping I-290 and signing it as I-395.  Been clamoring for that for years.
Meanwhile, I'm dead set against that because it would orphan I-190.  If they decide to pursue that, I can only hope that Worcester proves to be as resistant to change as Boston.

Maybe extend 190 south to 146 and down to 90 via 146?

Also, where did I miss in the thread that this was being considered?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 19, 2019, 01:17:33 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on December 19, 2019, 11:17:47 AM
Quote from: vdeane on December 18, 2019, 08:31:16 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 18, 2019, 06:57:17 PM
Good on MassDOT for considering dropping I-290 and signing it as I-395.  Been clamoring for that for years.
Meanwhile, I'm dead set against that because it would orphan I-190.  If they decide to pursue that, I can only hope that Worcester proves to be as resistant to change as Boston.

Maybe extend 190 south to 146 and down to 90 via 146?
Wouldn't such cause a similar change in exit numbers in a short distance as I-395/290 would?  Assuming that RI has plans to number its SR 146 interchanges (do they?, I know, OT); such would conceivably change at the state line then change again at I-90 to I-190's mileage.  I won't even go into the I-190/395 concurrency and I-395 (current I-290) segment east of Worcester.

Quote from: SectorZ on December 19, 2019, 11:17:47 AMAlso, where did I miss in the thread that this was being considered?
See Reply #474 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16734.450).  Such was an actual MassDOT consideration down the road (no pun intended).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: southshore720 on December 19, 2019, 04:46:05 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 19, 2019, 01:17:33 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on December 19, 2019, 11:17:47 AM
Quote from: vdeane on December 18, 2019, 08:31:16 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on December 18, 2019, 06:57:17 PM
Good on MassDOT for considering dropping I-290 and signing it as I-395.  Been clamoring for that for years.
Meanwhile, I'm dead set against that because it would orphan I-190.  If they decide to pursue that, I can only hope that Worcester proves to be as resistant to change as Boston.

Maybe extend 190 south to 146 and down to 90 via 146?
Wouldn't such cause a similar change in exit numbers in a short distance as I-395/290 would?  Assuming that RI has plans to number its SR 146 interchanges (do they?, I know, OT); such would conceivably change at the state line then change again at I-90 to I-190's mileage.  I won't even go into the I-190/395 concurrency and I-395 (current I-290) segment east of Worcester.

Quote from: SectorZ on December 19, 2019, 11:17:47 AMAlso, where did I miss in the thread that this was being considered?
See Reply #474 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16734.450).  Such was an actual MassDOT consideration down the road (no pun intended).

RI 146 is currently undergoing sign-replacement with assignment of mile-based exit numbers.  The last exit (RI 146A to RI 5/102) is Exit 14.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on December 20, 2019, 12:08:59 PM
May email MassDOT regarding Route 2 exit 29, a former RIRO, however the offramps are now actual ramps and traffic no longer has to stop; only the on-ramps are a hard right turn. Since this intersections was rebuilt into this quasi-interchange, the advance signage has resembled that of any other exit, and most travelers who aren't paying attention would likely not understand why the signage is unnumbered. It's de facto exit 29 as it sits between 28 and 30, with other at-grade turnoffs in that stretch not having offramps and being signed with LGSs, as opposed to the normal exit signage for exit (29).

It should be designated exit 98.

Note that exit 50/future 125 is also amidst a field of at-grade turnoffs and traffic lights but is numbered
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DRMan on December 20, 2019, 01:06:08 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on December 20, 2019, 12:08:59 PM
May email MassDOT regarding Route 2 exit 29, a former RIRO, however the offramps are now actual ramps and traffic no longer has to stop; only the on-ramps are a hard right turn. Since this intersections was rebuilt into this quasi-interchange, the advance signage has resembled that of any other exit, and most travelers who aren't paying attention would likely not understand why the signage is unnumbered. It's de facto exit 29 as it sits between 28 and 30, with other at-grade turnoffs in that stretch not having offramps and being signed with LGSs, as opposed to the normal exit signage for exit (29).

It should be designated exit 98.

Note that exit 50/future 125 is also amidst a field of at-grade turnoffs and traffic lights but is numbered
There is still a traffic signal here (Mt. Elam Road) for eastbound MA 2 traffic -- for that reason, I would leave it unnumbered.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: AMLNet49 on December 20, 2019, 04:03:11 PM
Quote from: DRMan on December 20, 2019, 01:06:08 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on December 20, 2019, 12:08:59 PM
May email MassDOT regarding Route 2 exit 29, a former RIRO, however the offramps are now actual ramps and traffic no longer has to stop; only the on-ramps are a hard right turn. Since this intersections was rebuilt into this quasi-interchange, the advance signage has resembled that of any other exit, and most travelers who aren’t paying attention would likely not understand why the signage is unnumbered. It’s de facto exit 29 as it sits between 28 and 30, with other at-grade turnoffs in that stretch not having offramps and being signed with LGSs, as opposed to the normal exit signage for exit (29).

It should be designated exit 98.

Note that exit 50/future 125 is also amidst a field of at-grade turnoffs and traffic lights but is numbered
There is still a traffic signal here (Mt. Elam Road) for eastbound MA 2 traffic -- for that reason, I would leave it unnumbered.

There is a full offramp eastbound as well. I’m not sure that light ever changes color as the onramp is a RIRO just like the westbound side
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: NE2 on December 20, 2019, 05:39:07 PM
For comparison, http://www.google.com/maps/@33.9346182,-117.0363326,17z was assigned a number.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on December 21, 2019, 10:49:10 AM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on December 20, 2019, 04:03:11 PM
Quote from: DRMan on December 20, 2019, 01:06:08 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on December 20, 2019, 12:08:59 PM
May email MassDOT regarding Route 2 exit 29, a former RIRO, however the offramps are now actual ramps and traffic no longer has to stop; only the on-ramps are a hard right turn. Since this intersections was rebuilt into this quasi-interchange, the advance signage has resembled that of any other exit, and most travelers who aren't paying attention would likely not understand why the signage is unnumbered. It's de facto exit 29 as it sits between 28 and 30, with other at-grade turnoffs in that stretch not having offramps and being signed with LGSs, as opposed to the normal exit signage for exit (29).

It should be designated exit 98.

Note that exit 50/future 125 is also amidst a field of at-grade turnoffs and traffic lights but is numbered
There is still a traffic signal here (Mt. Elam Road) for eastbound MA 2 traffic -- for that reason, I would leave it unnumbered.

There is a full offramp eastbound as well. I'm not sure that light ever changes color as the onramp is a RIRO just like the westbound side

Westbound side never changes, eastbound side does. Mt. Elam Rd south of 2 is a dead end road, so given the residents have no option but to exit onto route 2, the light is operational. When I lived in Fitchburg I was curious what it looked like down there and drove down. Getting back to 2 I got a green as soon it could switch to red on 2.

I am also on board with it getting an exit number. There are much less deserving interchanges that have exit numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 23, 2019, 02:32:08 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on December 21, 2019, 10:49:10 AM
I am also on board with it getting an exit number. There are much less deserving interchanges that have exit numbers.

Also see:  MA-140 Exit 12 (20)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on December 23, 2019, 03:20:01 PM
Got a reply from MassDOT as to why the ramps from Route 3 are numbered:

Although the ramp from US 3 south to I-95/MA 128 North in Burlington is also the continuation of US 3 south, it is signed as an exit because I-95/MA 128 north is the principal destination for the ramp, and because US 3 south continues as a two-lane road instead of a freeway south of I-95/MA 128.  This has been the case since exit numbers were originally posted on this section of US 3 in the late 1950s.

The ramp from MA 3 north to I-93 north in Braintree, although a continuation of the MA 3 mainline, was given an exit number in the early 2000s for similar reasons.

It has been our experience that these current exit designations have not caused any undue problems for travelers.  Likewise, emergency responders have indicated to use that they have no issues with the current exit signing at either of
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 23, 2019, 06:23:03 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on December 23, 2019, 03:20:01 PM
Got a reply from MassDOT as to why the ramps from Route 3 are numbered:

Although the ramp from US 3 south to I-95/MA 128 North in Burlington is also the continuation of US 3 south, it is signed as an exit because I-95/MA 128 north is the principal destination for the ramp, and because US 3 south continues as a two-lane road instead of a freeway south of I-95/MA 128.  This has been the case since exit numbers were originally posted on this section of US 3 in the late 1950s.

The ramp from MA 3 north to I-93 north in Braintree, although a continuation of the MA 3 mainline, was given an exit number in the early 2000s for similar reasons.

It has been our experience that these current exit designations have not caused any undue problems for travelers.  Likewise, emergency responders have indicated to use that they have no issues with the current exit signing at either of
IMO it would be helpful to travelers to at least have MA 3, along with US 1 on the overhead signs on Route 3 North in Braintree, or at least as trailblazers on sign supports, like the other signs for I-93/US 1 North and South. They should also remove the 1 remaining MA 128 trailblazer on the ramp from Washington Street/Burgin Parkway ramp to I-93. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 24, 2019, 03:44:21 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 23, 2019, 06:23:03 PM
They should also remove the 1 remaining MA 128 trailblazer on the ramp from Washington Street/Burgin Parkway ramp to I-93.

Or at least add a "TO"
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 24, 2019, 11:42:29 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on December 24, 2019, 03:44:21 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 23, 2019, 06:23:03 PM
They should also remove the 1 remaining MA 128 trailblazer on the ramp from Washington Street/Burgin Parkway ramp to I-93.
Or at least add a "TO"
Perhaps. Link to the Google Maps Street View image of the trailblazer, still there as of 12/15/19:
https://goo.gl/maps/1AkYhKgKk3XF38iA6 (https://goo.gl/maps/1AkYhKgKk3XF38iA6)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on December 25, 2019, 12:53:16 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on December 17, 2019, 03:44:50 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on December 17, 2019, 09:46:59 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on December 16, 2019, 08:16:23 PM
I asked about the fudging on I-290 through Worcester (especially with proposed exits 18, 19, and 20 all being within one mile).
Quote from: my question to MassDOT
On the topic of I-290, why are proposed exits 18 and 20 (currently 14 and 16) not going to be exits 18A and 18C, respectively, with Shrewsbury Street (currently exit 15) being exit 18B, since all three exits are within one mile?
They got back to me.
Quote from: their response
To minimize possible driver confusion, the proposed exit numbering on all highways under this project will use the A/B/C scheme only to denote exits that serve both directions of a route or street from separate ramps on the highway (such as I-495 at Route 9 in Marlborough); to denote multiple exits accessed by a collector-distributor road off the highway (such as the exit from I-495 to US 3 and the Lowell Connector in Chelmsford; or to denote separate exits that are so closely spaced apart that assigning separate numbers is impractical (such as Southampton Street and Frontage Road on I-93 northbound in Boston).

To consistently apply this standard statewide, it is necessary on some routes, such as I-290 through Worcester, to adjust the proposed numbers in certain areas from the normal rounding conventions. These deviations have been minimized so that the overall numbering will "catch up"  to the mile markers in a short distance.
Any thoughts? Looks to me that they want to try to get out of the true mile-based system with these sequential segments.

Do they think 495 and 9 junction in Marlboro?

I did not see that one, should've read it more carefully.

Also:
Quote from: MassDOT reply
or to denote separate exits that are so closely spaced apart that assigning separate numbers is impractical
Isn't that the situation I brought up? Something seems odd......

I got another response from MassDOT about this spacing on I-290:
Quote from: MassDOT reply
To clarify our previous response to you, A/B/C designations will be used to denote closely spaced separate exits where the adjacent exits are spaced approximately 1/8th mile apart or less. The majority of exits on I-290 have greater spacing than that, which is why we are using separate numbers for each of these exits.
1/8th mile for letters!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 13, 2020, 12:28:28 PM
In addition to the upcoming public meeting in Lowell on January 23, MassDOT has added 3 more about their Exit Renumbering Project: Boston, February 11, New Bedford, March 10, and Springfield March 24. As of now I plan to attend the meeting in Boston.

They have also added a short explanatory video to their website. A direct link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gG9-Pl-fUA&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gG9-Pl-fUA&feature=youtu.be)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 18, 2020, 12:22:40 PM
MassDOT has updated its Exit Renumbering Project page with a few more questions and answers. Sound familiar? (my comments in [ ] ):

WHY ARE THE EXIT NUMBERS CONTINUING FROM I-395 THROUGH I-290?
MassDOT is continuing the I-395 numbering along I-290 to replicate the present exit numbering, which is continuous from Webster to Marlborough. As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with "˜dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290. [Nothing about the possibility of redesignating I-290 as I-395.]

WHY DO ROUTE 128 MILE MARKERS NOT BEGIN AT ZERO IN PEABODY?
While I-95 is the primary designation for the highway between Canton and Peabody, Route 128 continues to be carried as a secondary designation on this road. This is why the mileposts for Route 128 begin in Canton and not Peabody. Although removing the Route 128 designation south of Peabody would allow the "˜zero' milepost for 128 to be at I-95 in Peabody, such a change would require an outreach effort and changes to highway signs that is beyond the scope of the current exit renumbering project. [Don't like the last sentence. It seems to me that the exit renumbering project would be a great time/excuse to make other changes to improve the current system such as by eliminating redundant routes and creating or extending new ones.]

WHY ARE ROUTE 6'S NEW EXITS GOING FROM 1A, 1B TO 55?
At the Sagamore Bridge, New Exits 1A and 1B are based on the Route 3 mileposts. Because MassDOT is not adopting the Exit 0 designation for exits, these exit numbers will stay the same. New Exits 55 and 82 are based on the Route 6 mileposts, which begin at the Rhode Island border in Seekonk and ascend from west to east to the end of Route 6 in Provincetown. [Shouldn't it say that 'New Exits 1A and 1B WILL BE based on the Route 3 Numbers'? The current numbers are based on US 6 numbering since Route 3 North is Exit 1A and the US 6 exit has no number. Looks like MassDOT is going forward with the proposed US 6 numbers despite Cape Cod opposition.]
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on January 20, 2020, 02:17:07 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 18, 2020, 12:22:40 PM
[Looks like MassDOT is going forward with the proposed US 6 numbers despite Cape Cod opposition.]

Good....
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on January 21, 2020, 12:20:12 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 18, 2020, 12:22:40 PM
MassDOT has updated its Exit Renumbering Project page with a few more questions and answers. Sound familiar? (my comments in [ ] ):

WHY ARE THE EXIT NUMBERS CONTINUING FROM I-395 THROUGH I-290?
MassDOT is continuing the I-395 numbering along I-290 to replicate the present exit numbering, which is continuous from Webster to Marlborough. As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with "˜dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290. [Nothing about the possibility of redesignating I-290 as I-395.]

WHY DO ROUTE 128 MILE MARKERS NOT BEGIN AT ZERO IN PEABODY?
While I-95 is the primary designation for the highway between Canton and Peabody, Route 128 continues to be carried as a secondary designation on this road. This is why the mileposts for Route 128 begin in Canton and not Peabody. Although removing the Route 128 designation south of Peabody would allow the "˜zero' milepost for 128 to be at I-95 in Peabody, such a change would require an outreach effort and changes to highway signs that is beyond the scope of the current exit renumbering project. [Don't like the last sentence. It seems to me that the exit renumbering project would be a great time/excuse to make other changes to improve the current system such as by eliminating redundant routes and creating or extending new ones.]

WHY ARE ROUTE 6'S NEW EXITS GOING FROM 1A, 1B TO 55?
At the Sagamore Bridge, New Exits 1A and 1B are based on the Route 3 mileposts. Because MassDOT is not adopting the Exit 0 designation for exits, these exit numbers will stay the same. New Exits 55 and 82 are based on the Route 6 mileposts, which begin at the Rhode Island border in Seekonk and ascend from west to east to the end of Route 6 in Provincetown. [Shouldn't it say that 'New Exits 1A and 1B WILL BE based on the Route 3 Numbers'? The current numbers are based on US 6 numbering since Route 3 North is Exit 1A and the US 6 exit has no number. Looks like MassDOT is going forward with the proposed US 6 numbers despite Cape Cod opposition.]
US 6 and MA 3 are multiplexed for a few hundred feet going east and a few thousand feet going west. That's why you get the sudden change in numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on January 21, 2020, 01:00:09 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on January 21, 2020, 12:20:12 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 18, 2020, 12:22:40 PM
MassDOT has updated its Exit Renumbering Project page with a few more questions and answers. Sound familiar? (my comments in [ ] ):

WHY ARE THE EXIT NUMBERS CONTINUING FROM I-395 THROUGH I-290?
MassDOT is continuing the I-395 numbering along I-290 to replicate the present exit numbering, which is continuous from Webster to Marlborough. As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with "˜dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290. [Nothing about the possibility of redesignating I-290 as I-395.]

WHY DO ROUTE 128 MILE MARKERS NOT BEGIN AT ZERO IN PEABODY?
While I-95 is the primary designation for the highway between Canton and Peabody, Route 128 continues to be carried as a secondary designation on this road. This is why the mileposts for Route 128 begin in Canton and not Peabody. Although removing the Route 128 designation south of Peabody would allow the "˜zero' milepost for 128 to be at I-95 in Peabody, such a change would require an outreach effort and changes to highway signs that is beyond the scope of the current exit renumbering project. [Don't like the last sentence. It seems to me that the exit renumbering project would be a great time/excuse to make other changes to improve the current system such as by eliminating redundant routes and creating or extending new ones.]

WHY ARE ROUTE 6'S NEW EXITS GOING FROM 1A, 1B TO 55?
At the Sagamore Bridge, New Exits 1A and 1B are based on the Route 3 mileposts. Because MassDOT is not adopting the Exit 0 designation for exits, these exit numbers will stay the same. New Exits 55 and 82 are based on the Route 6 mileposts, which begin at the Rhode Island border in Seekonk and ascend from west to east to the end of Route 6 in Provincetown. [Shouldn't it say that 'New Exits 1A and 1B WILL BE based on the Route 3 Numbers'? The current numbers are based on US 6 numbering since Route 3 North is Exit 1A and the US 6 exit has no number. Looks like MassDOT is going forward with the proposed US 6 numbers despite Cape Cod opposition.]
US 6 and MA 3 are multiplexed for a few hundred feet going east and a few thousand feet going west. That's why you get the sudden change in numbers.

I just wish they were also numbering Exits 106 and 109 in Truro
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 21, 2020, 01:46:57 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on January 21, 2020, 01:00:09 AMI just wish they were also numbering Exits 106 and 109 in Truro
US 6 through Truro is not a limited-access highway.  Interchange numbers in MA, both past/current sequential and new/future mile-marker-based ones, are only assigned for interchanges along limited-access highways.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on January 21, 2020, 01:47:42 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 21, 2020, 01:46:57 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on January 21, 2020, 01:00:09 AMI just wish they were also numbering Exits 106 and 109 in Truro
US 6 through Truro is not a limited-access highway.  Interchange numbers in MA, both past/current sequential and new/future mile-marker-based ones, are only assigned for interchanges along limited-access highways.

Except 50 on MA 2.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 21, 2020, 01:59:07 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 21, 2020, 01:47:42 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 21, 2020, 01:46:57 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on January 21, 2020, 01:00:09 AMI just wish they were also numbering Exits 106 and 109 in Truro
US 6 through Truro is not a limited-access highway.  Interchange numbers in MA, both past/current sequential and new/future mile-marker-based ones, are only assigned for interchanges along limited-access highways.

Except 50 on MA 2.
That one's a fairly new created when that whole intersection was upgraded to an interchange a few years ago.  MassDOT's likely rationale for that one is due to that section of MA 2 from just east of the MA 126 intersection to just west of the Bedford Rd. intersection, the new Exit 50 interchange is located along said-stretch, was indeed upgraded to a limited-access highway.  Those openings along the shoulders have a sliding gate and are not intended for general public use.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 21, 2020, 05:10:02 PM
I wonder if new maps, such as the upcoming 2021 Rand McNally Road Atlas, will feature Massachusetts' exit numbers with the new mileage-based numbers?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on January 22, 2020, 12:37:17 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 21, 2020, 01:59:07 PM
Quote from: 1 on January 21, 2020, 01:47:42 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 21, 2020, 01:46:57 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on January 21, 2020, 01:00:09 AMI just wish they were also numbering Exits 106 and 109 in Truro
US 6 through Truro is not a limited-access highway.  Interchange numbers in MA, both past/current sequential and new/future mile-marker-based ones, are only assigned for interchanges along limited-access highways.

Except 50 on MA 2.
That one's a fairly new created when that whole intersection was upgraded to an interchange a few years ago.  MassDOT's likely rationale for that one is due to that section of MA 2 from just east of the MA 126 intersection to just west of the Bedford Rd. intersection, the new Exit 50 interchange is located along said-stretch, was indeed upgraded to a limited-access highway.  Those openings along the shoulders have a sliding gate and are not intended for general public use.
I also feel like 2's a special case in general because of how much of it (east of US 202) is a freeway already, such that the few bits that aren't can still harbor some strange occurrences. At one pont I thought a regular intersection had an exit number? 2A being 50 tells me that in the future there will be one more interchange to the east (likely at Bedford - heck, Wiki already lists it as such).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on January 22, 2020, 01:53:02 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on January 21, 2020, 01:46:57 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on January 21, 2020, 01:00:09 AMI just wish they were also numbering Exits 106 and 109 in Truro
US 6 through Truro is not a limited-access highway.  Interchange numbers in MA, both past/current sequential and new/future mile-marker-based ones, are only assigned for interchanges along limited-access highways.
yeah, I know....but even as a kid, I hoped I'd see exit numbers on them someday  *heh*
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 22, 2020, 09:05:35 AM
Quote from: Alps on January 22, 2020, 12:37:17 AM2A being 50 tells me that in the future there will be one more interchange to the east (likely at Bedford - heck, Wiki already lists it as such).
For those that haven't checked MassDOT's latest list yet; the newly-built Exit 50 for MA 2 will be renumbered as Exit 125. 

That Wiki listing for Exit 51, at-grade intersection w/Bedford Rd., does not appear to have a future renumbering (tabulation only shows a dash).  Having rechecked GSV in that area; there is absolutely no signage indicating that such is Exit 51.  I have to wonder if that Wiki listing was based (erroneously(?)) on a proposed plan to convert that intersection into an interchange that never came to fruition.  That said & as many here know, this is one of those times where one needs to take some Wiki listings with a grain of salt.

Speaking of MA 2; the exit renumbering with respect to the mile markers along the expressway portion from I-95/MA 128 (current Exit 52 A/B) to the Lake St. interchange (current Exit 60) deviate a bit due to MassDOT's insistence not to assign suffixes for different interchanges.  As a result, the anticipation of the I-95 being renumbered as Exit 128 A/B (coincidental to the Yankee Division Highway's original route number) will instead be renumbered as Exit 127 A/B despite MA 2's MM 128.0 is located well west of the interchange at the Lexington/Concord line (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4323181,-71.2672432,3a,75y,111.5h,89.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7X478qM2VQVFGZgl-oO2gA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  I've sent a comment to MassDOT via their website but I'll probably receive a similar reply I got when I commented regarding MA 128's renumbering from Peabody through Beverly.  To be fair, MA 2's renumbering deviation isn't as blatant/severe as those further north/east along MA 128.

Here's how I would've done the MA 2 renumbering along that stretch; since I submitted the below to MassDOT, such is not necessarily fictional. 

Current / Proposed / Suggested revision (Route number(s) or Street name)

52 A-B / 127A-B / 128 A-B (I-95/MA 128)

53 / 128 / 129 (Spring St.)

54 / 129 / 130 (Waltham St.)

55 / 130 / 131 (Pleasant St.)

56 / 131 / 132 A (MA 4/225/Winter St.)

57 / 132 / 132 B (Dow Ave.)

58 / 133 / No revision (Park Ave.)

59 / 134 / 134 A (MA 60)

60 / 135 / 134 B (Lake St.)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on January 23, 2020, 05:58:56 PM
I'm here at the meeting in Lowell.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on January 31, 2020, 01:38:49 PM
I was just looking at the new exit number list - while Mass. DOT plans to continue the mile-based exits from I-395 along I-290, they plan to "reset" the mile-based exits along I-295.  Wouldn't it make more sense to renumber the exits on I-295 to 25 (US-1) and 27 (I-95) instead of 2 and 4?  I believe I-205 around Portland, Oregon continues the mile-based exits from Oregon after crossing the state line into Washington.

It also does NOT make sense to have "dual mile-posts" along I-290.  Those exit numbers should reset at the Mass. Pike (I-90).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on January 31, 2020, 01:39:51 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on January 31, 2020, 01:38:49 PM
I was just looking at the new exit number list - while Mass. DOT plans to continue the mile-based exits from I-395 along I-290, they plan to "reset" the mile-based exits along I-295.  Wouldn't it make more sense to renumber the exits on I-295 to 25 (US-1) and 27 (I-95) instead of 2 and 4?

I asked this exact question in person. She said that it was so that it's clear that you're crossing a state line.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on January 31, 2020, 10:04:42 PM
I don't mind I-290 continuing I-395's numbers, but they really should just have I-290 continue I-395's mileage rather than their "dual milepost" idea.  Seems like they're going for the worst of both worlds with their plan.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on February 01, 2020, 12:23:01 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 31, 2020, 01:39:51 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on January 31, 2020, 01:38:49 PM
I was just looking at the new exit number list - while Mass. DOT plans to continue the mile-based exits from I-395 along I-290, they plan to "reset" the mile-based exits along I-295.  Wouldn't it make more sense to renumber the exits on I-295 to 25 (US-1) and 27 (I-95) instead of 2 and 4?

I asked this exact question in person. She said that it was so that it's clear that you're crossing a state line.
But that apparently doesn't matter with I-395? M'eh.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: KEVIN_224 on February 01, 2020, 09:02:23 PM
Imagine if the road just switched from I-395 to I-290 at the Connecticut/Massachusetts state line?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on February 02, 2020, 12:01:08 AM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on February 01, 2020, 09:02:23 PM
Imagine if the road just switched from I-395 to I-290 at the Connecticut/Massachusetts state line?

I say just redirect I-395 onto SR 695 and have I-290 assume the rest of 395 north of there. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on February 02, 2020, 12:05:15 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 02, 2020, 12:01:08 AM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on February 01, 2020, 09:02:23 PM
Imagine if the road just switched from I-395 to I-290 at the Connecticut/Massachusetts state line?

I say just redirect I-395 onto SR 695 and have I-290 assume the rest of 395 north of there. 
Since this isn't Fictional, that won't work because CT and RI have no interest in traffic using 695 as a through link. If you're on 95, they want you on 95 to Providence. If you're on 395, you can make any number of ways to Providence, but that might overload 6 or drag people off the freeway who weren't expecting it to end. I've always considered I-290 to begin at the toll plaza and then "join" the I-395 freeway. That's not the technical definition, I don't think, but it at least provides a cleaner resolution.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Magical Trevor on February 03, 2020, 01:32:59 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 02, 2020, 12:05:15 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 02, 2020, 12:01:08 AM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on February 01, 2020, 09:02:23 PM
Imagine if the road just switched from I-395 to I-290 at the Connecticut/Massachusetts state line?

I say just redirect I-395 onto SR 695 and have I-290 assume the rest of 395 north of there. 
Since this isn't Fictional, that won't work because CT and RI have no interest in traffic using 695 as a through link. If you're on 95, they want you on 95 to Providence. If you're on 395, you can make any number of ways to Providence, but that might overload 6 or drag people off the freeway who weren't expecting it to end. I've always considered I-290 to begin at the toll plaza and then "join" the I-395 freeway. That's not the technical definition, I don't think, but it at least provides a cleaner resolution.

I get what you're saying, but of course now the plaza is no more and that "first half mile of 290" is just a mess of ramps, rough bridges, and poorly-laid-out lane markings (the amount of people coming off of the Pike and slowly meandering out of the right lane prematurely because they think it is an "exit only" to 12 South is astounding - and yeah, maintaining a breakdown area is nice but the second lane exiting from Eastbound 90 is certainly missed).

A few pages ago I suggested the same as Kevin just did.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on February 03, 2020, 02:57:18 AM
Quote from: vdeane on January 31, 2020, 10:04:42 PM
I don't mind I-290 continuing I-395's numbers, but they really should just have I-290 continue I-395's mileage rather than their "dual milepost" idea.  Seems like they're going for the worst of both worlds with their plan.

My guess is they're considering numbering the whole thing I-395, but haven't come to a final decision yet.  Though, if they were to give the whole route one number, at that point, wouldn't an even-numbered 3di be more appropriate, since it would then start at I-95 and end at I-495?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on February 03, 2020, 01:12:05 PM
There have been statements to that effect, but I don't see how that drives a need for dual mileposts.  There's no need for "dual" mileposts even if it stays I-290 (which I would prefer to avoid orphaning I-190), because continuing mileage from another route is allowed (see: I-276).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 03, 2020, 04:26:56 PM
Does anyone know for sure if Interstate 290 is planned to be renumbered to Interstate 395, or is this just speculation because the 290 exits will be a continuation of 395's?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on February 03, 2020, 04:37:50 PM
If CT and RI don't want SSR 695/US 6 to be used as a through route, then why do they sign it as a thru route?  From I-395, the destination is "PROVIDENCE", and this actually is referred to on the I-395 North control point if coming from CT 2 East in Norwich.  Heck, way back in the greater Hartford area, I-384 East has a control point of PROVIDENCE even though the limited-access highway only extends out for about 8 miles before becoming "Suicide Six".  And in RI, US 6 West exit from I-95 gets a control point of HARTFORD.  Sounds like a thru route to me.  Sure, maybe more would follow it if it was signed "I-395 NORTH - PROVIDENCE" and I-395 north of Exit 35 became I-290.  I'm all for that renumbering.  Maybe on the thru signage, leave out "I-395 NORTH" and just have the signs say "TO 6 EAST/PROVIDENCE" as they do now. 

As far as I-395 replacing I-290, that seems to make sense to me as well.  Yes, it does orphan I-190, perhaps make it part of an extended MA 146, with a brief co-signing?  Or renumber all of I-395/I-290 to I-695. 

As for I-295 having its numbers reset at the RI/MA state line, that makes sense to me.  In my opinion, a route should reset numbers at the state line.  Heck, it still erks me why the Merritt Parkway didn't get its exits renumbered when signs were changed.  The contiguous exit numbering with NY's Hutch seemed cool, until the 90s when NY renumbered its exits, so NY/CT Exit 27 became NY Exit 30S/CT Exit 27. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on February 03, 2020, 05:45:21 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 03, 2020, 04:26:56 PM
Does anyone know for sure if Interstate 290 is planned to be renumbered to Interstate 395, or is this just speculation because the 290 exits will be a continuation of 395's?
MassDOT is considering it. See comment #474 of this thread: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16734.450 (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16734.450)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on February 03, 2020, 05:45:36 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 31, 2020, 10:04:42 PM
I don't mind I-290 continuing I-395's numbers, but they really should just have I-290 continue I-395's mileage rather than their "dual milepost" idea.  Seems like they're going for the worst of both worlds with their plan.
For the billionth time, this could be avoided if I-395 became I-290.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on February 03, 2020, 08:12:54 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on February 03, 2020, 05:45:36 PM
Quote from: vdeane on January 31, 2020, 10:04:42 PM
I don't mind I-290 continuing I-395's numbers, but they really should just have I-290 continue I-395's mileage rather than their "dual milepost" idea.  Seems like they're going for the worst of both worlds with their plan.
For the billionth time, this could be avoided if I-395 became I-290.
It could also be avoided if MA would see the light and do the mileage the same way PA does I-276.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on February 07, 2020, 12:17:29 PM
Was going through the MassDOT structural signing project listings this morning and noticed that the entry for the exit renumbering project had changed in the Design category. Instead of a statewide contract, the entry now is for one covering Districts 1-3 only. I assume another contract covering Districts 4-6 will be listed soon. Districts 1 to 3 cover the western and central parts of the state. The contract would thus cover the conversion of I-91, I-84, I-395, I-190 and MA 146. Other routes that are partially in District 3 include I-290 and US 3 (parts of which are in District 4).

I am assuming any route where the project's start (at the northern and eastern end) is not in Districts 1-3 will not be included in this contract (this would be I-290, along with I-90 and MA 2). Will the US 3 renumbering be started under this contract, or wait until the next one? The new exit renumbering project listing still lists Summer 2020 as a start date.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on February 07, 2020, 12:43:29 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on February 07, 2020, 12:17:29 PM
Was going through the MassDOT structural signing project listings this morning and noticed that the entry for the exit renumbering project had changed in the Design category. Instead of a statewide contract, the entry now is for one covering Districts 1-3 only. I assume another contract covering Districts 4-6 will be listed soon. Districts 1 to 3 cover the western and central parts of the state. The contract would thus cover the conversion of I-91, I-84, I-395, I-190 and MA 146. Other routes that are partially in District 3 include I-290 and US 3 (parts of which are in District 4).

I am assuming any route where the project's start (at the northern and eastern end) is not in Districts 1-3 will not be included in this contract (this would be I-290, along with I-90 and MA 2). Will the US 3 renumbering be started under this contract, or wait until the next one? The new exit renumbering project listing still lists Summer 2020 as a start date.

That is correct Bob.  The original contract has been changed to now cover Districts 1, 2, and 3 only.  A second contract will cover Districts 4, 5, and 6, and a third contract will cover the full length of the Mass Pike/I-90.  Routes such as I-495 and MA 3 that span multiple contracts will be completed end to end under one of the contracts, and not split up by District.  Construction on all the contracts, which are to be advertised for bids in April and May, is still scheduled to begin in mid-Summer of this year.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 07, 2020, 05:04:04 PM
On the signs that have already been replaced (e.g. Interstate 90/Mass. Turnpike, US 6), will the new numbers be stapled onto the existing numbers? On Highway 30 here in Madison, the previously unnumbered exit signs had numbered signs stapled over them, as can be seen here: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1068176,-89.328986,3a,75y,264.75h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6kmaJfzc-uNVrcS_gh5Org!2e0!7i13312!8i6656.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on February 07, 2020, 10:27:16 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 07, 2020, 05:04:04 PM
On the signs that have already been replaced (e.g. Interstate 90/Mass. Turnpike, US 6), will the new numbers be stapled onto the existing numbers? On Highway 30 here in Madison, the previously unnumbered exit signs had numbered signs stapled over them, as can be seen here: https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1068176,-89.328986,3a,75y,264.75h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6kmaJfzc-uNVrcS_gh5Org!2e0!7i13312!8i6656.

Yes. The replaced signs on I-495 north of Exit 41 have empty space that is made to hold three digits.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on February 12, 2020, 11:48:50 AM
Quote from: roadman on February 07, 2020, 12:43:29 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on February 07, 2020, 12:17:29 PM
Was going through the MassDOT structural signing project listings this morning and noticed that the entry for the exit renumbering project had changed in the Design category. Instead of a statewide contract, the entry now is for one covering Districts 1-3 only. I assume another contract covering Districts 4-6 will be listed soon. Districts 1 to 3 cover the western and central parts of the state. The contract would thus cover the conversion of I-91, I-84, I-395, I-190 and MA 146. Other routes that are partially in District 3 include I-290 and US 3 (parts of which are in District 4).

I am assuming any route where the project's start (at the northern and eastern end) is not in Districts 1-3 will not be included in this contract (this would be I-290, along with I-90 and MA 2). Will the US 3 renumbering be started under this contract, or wait until the next one? The new exit renumbering project listing still lists Summer 2020 as a start date.

That is correct Bob.  The original contract has been changed to now cover Districts 1, 2, and 3 only.  A second contract will cover Districts 4, 5, and 6, and a third contract will cover the full length of the Mass Pike/I-90.  Routes such as I-495 and MA 3 that span multiple contracts will be completed end to end under one of the contracts, and not split up by District.  Construction on all the contracts, which are to be advertised for bids in April and May, is still scheduled to begin in mid-Summer of this year.
The other 2 contracts have been posted on the MassDOT project listings for Structural Signing. Therefore, the 3 exit renumbering contracts are:  610646-Districts 1-3, 610699-Districts 4-6, and 610700-I-90/Mass Pike.

I went to the public meeting on the renumbering project in Boston held last night. I was the only non-MassDOT person in the room along with 2 presenters, 3 other members of the project team, and an interested sign engineer. I asked about the Cape Cod US 6 numbering, they insist that the numbers listed will not change, but that US 6 will be the last highway renumbered. Meanwhile, the next public meeting will be in Hyannis on Feb. 25. I assume more people will show up for that meeting, will MassDOT hold firm after that? I also asked if they knew which highway in the Boston area would be the first to be converted, they would not commit saying that it depends on which highway corridor is chosen by the contractor. Since there will be multiple contracts, there could be more than one route having their exit numbers changed at the same time. The completion date is still stated to be in the spring of 2021. They had cards with the new exit numbers for each route available as handouts. The information is the same as those on the website, meaning if there are still errors or typos online, they are also on the cards. The I-95 card, for example, lists the exits for Kenrdick St in Needham.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on February 27, 2020, 04:27:10 PM
A slightly larger crowd that in Boston apparently appeared at Tuesday night's MassDOT exit renumbering meeting in Hyannis. All but 1, should we be surprised, were against the proposed renumbering of US 6. Here's the Cape Cod Times take on the meeting: https://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20200226/plan-to-renumber-route-6-exits-gets-little-support (https://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20200226/plan-to-renumber-route-6-exits-gets-little-support)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 27, 2020, 04:48:46 PM
Sometimes people get too comfortable with the status quo, and fiercely resist any changes to it. I think MassDOT should just renumber the exits and be done with it.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on February 27, 2020, 07:27:09 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on February 27, 2020, 04:27:10 PM
A slightly larger crowd that in Boston apparently appeared at Tuesday night's MassDOT exit renumbering meeting in Hyannis. All but 1, should we be surprised, were against the proposed renumbering of US 6. Here's the Cape Cod Times take on the meeting: https://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20200226/plan-to-renumber-route-6-exits-gets-little-support (https://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20200226/plan-to-renumber-route-6-exits-gets-little-support)

If the residents of Cape Cod are so concerned about exits on the Mid Cape Highway being renumbered to reflect US-6 mileage from the Rhode Island border, vice the Bourne Bridge, here's a novel idea:  overlay a new state highway designation along the Mid Cape Highway from the Bourne Bridge to the Orleans rotary, and in-so doing the Mid Cape Highway would be co-signed as US-6/MA-XX (XX being whatever route number MassDOT assigns to the road). Then re-number exits according to MA-XX mileage from the Bourne Bridge. Problem solved.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on February 27, 2020, 08:28:13 PM
Of course, they'd have to redo the mileposts to do that, since currently they measure from where US 6 crosses into MA from RI.  Anyone want to bet that even THAT would trigger uproar on the Cape?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on February 28, 2020, 01:35:11 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on February 27, 2020, 07:27:09 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on February 27, 2020, 04:27:10 PM
A slightly larger crowd that in Boston apparently appeared at Tuesday night's MassDOT exit renumbering meeting in Hyannis. All but 1, should we be surprised, were against the proposed renumbering of US 6. Here's the Cape Cod Times take on the meeting: https://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20200226/plan-to-renumber-route-6-exits-gets-little-support (https://www.capecodtimes.com/news/20200226/plan-to-renumber-route-6-exits-gets-little-support)

If the residents of Cape Cod are so concerned about exits on the Mid Cape Highway being renumbered to reflect US-6 mileage from the Rhode Island border, vice the Bourne Bridge, here's a novel idea:  overlay a new state highway designation along the Mid Cape Highway from the Bourne Bridge to the Orleans rotary, and in-so doing the Mid Cape Highway would be co-signed as US-6/MA-XX (XX being whatever route number MassDOT assigns to the road). Then re-number exits according to MA-XX mileage from the Bourne Bridge. Problem solved.

Nope....they want their 1-12.

Remember...Cape Codders fear change.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on February 28, 2020, 01:51:05 AM
QuoteRep. Sarah Peake, D-Provincetown. “We think this will be more confusing, it detracts from the character of Cape Cod and we would really like to see an exemption for Cape Cod.”

I knew it...the famous "it'll ruin the Cape's character" argument that means absolutely nothing.

NO ONE (except maybe us roadgeeks) GOES TO THE CAPE TO SEE THE FREEWAY!!!   :banghead:  It's not like Route 6 is any kind of tourist attraction in and of itself!

QuoteState Rep. William Crocker, R-Barnstable, agreed, saying it was an example of fixing something that wasn’t broken.

The exits are not numbered by mileposts...  ergo, it's broken.  Fix it! 

Quoteand few people care how far they are from Rhode Island.

It's not about that.  It's about the motorist who sees "Exit 55" and won't have to guess anymore how far it is to Exit 89.

I grew up on Cape Cod.  I know how stubborn they can get, and how entitled they will act.  It's one of the reasons my parents got the hell out of there as soon as they sold Days' Cottages.

Someone needs to take all these entitled Codders and verbally smack them all with the reality stick. "The world doesn't revolve around YOU!"
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on February 28, 2020, 08:55:47 AM
Maybe the Cape needs to secede from either the Commonwealth (become a 51st state) or the nation if they're that adamant about those sequential Mid-Cape Highway interchange numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on February 29, 2020, 07:36:26 PM
MassDOT needs an ultimatum.  Like, if they don't get the renumbered exits then they'll decommission US 6 east of Bourne.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on March 01, 2020, 12:14:48 AM
That's not a threat.  That would only make them look at you if you had two heads.

Maybe turn US 6 over to the locals...
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Verlanka on March 01, 2020, 06:03:49 AM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on February 29, 2020, 07:36:26 PM
MassDOT needs an ultimatum.  Like, if they don't get the renumbered exits then they'll decommission US 6 east of Bourne.
Or worse, they decommission ALL of US 6 in the state.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 01, 2020, 10:51:37 PM
According to MassDOT's project listings, all 3 renumbering contracts are now at the 75% Design stage. I assume 100% will happen soon after the last public meeting later in March.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Magical Trevor on March 08, 2020, 10:18:37 PM
Took this photo (https://photos.app.goo.gl/4KE72zrwQfNV4Rip6) the other day behind the McDonald's off of the Mass Pike Palmer exit - are there any other "former" lots (obviously this one still sees some use anyway) like this one? I suppose we could remind through the website comment form that this would need an update with the renumbering...
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on March 11, 2020, 07:54:21 PM
Quote from: Rothman on March 01, 2020, 12:14:48 AM
That's not a threat.  That would only make them look at you if you had two heads.

Maybe turn US 6 over to the locals...
Do that, but delete the number from the log books. 
No sense in signing a road if they want it their own way.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Beeper1 on March 12, 2020, 10:54:24 PM
Quote from: Magical Trevor on March 08, 2020, 10:18:37 PM
Took this photo (https://photos.app.goo.gl/4KE72zrwQfNV4Rip6) the other day behind the McDonald's off of the Mass Pike Palmer exit - are there any other "former" lots (obviously this one still sees some use anyway) like this one? I suppose we could remind through the website comment form that this would need an update with the renumbering...

That sign has been long forgotten about by anyone official, I'm sure.   Technically that lot was "closed" way back in 2005 when the McDonald's decided not to renew their agreement with the Turnpike Authority.   Some people still park there, not sure if the McD's particularly cares or not.

   

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 27, 2020, 12:05:25 PM
According to the MassDOT Project Information site, the design for the first exit renumbering contract for Districts 1-3 was sent for final review and approval on March 19. How soon will the project be advertised? (The other contracts are still at the 75% design level).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on March 27, 2020, 10:04:45 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 27, 2020, 12:05:25 PM
According to the MassDOT Project Information site, the final design for the first exit renumbering contract for Districts 1-3 was approved on March 19. How soon will the project be advertised? (The other contracts are still at the 75% design level).

One clarification Bob.  The 3/19 date is when the PS&E submission was received from the designer for final review and approval by MassDOT.  For most projects, advertising normally occurs within 4 to 6 weeks after the PS&E is received, and is always on a Saturday.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 10, 2020, 12:09:59 PM
Update on the renumbering contracts process. The District 1-3 contract final design has been sent to FAPRO (Federal Aid Programming and Reimbursement Office) for FHWA authorization. The final designs for the other 2 contracts have been submitted for MassDOT approval, Districts 4-6 on April 6 and for the Mass Pike on April 9. Should we expect to see advertisements posted for all the contracts by the end of May?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bluecountry on April 20, 2020, 06:21:57 PM
When is this expected to start/finish?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on April 21, 2020, 12:57:34 AM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 20, 2020, 06:21:57 PM
When is this expected to start/finish?
I think it's meant to start mid-summer 2020 and go for about 1.5-2 years, with the Mid-Cape Highway being the last freeway to get its exits renumbered.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 09, 2020, 11:27:17 AM
The first exit renumbering contract (610646), for Districts 1-3, has been advertised at a cost of $908,675. The winning bidder to be announced on July 7. The actual contract bid page has not been put up yet. I will post a link when it is.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on May 09, 2020, 05:01:44 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 09, 2020, 11:27:17 AM
The first exit renumbering contract (610646), for Districts 1-3, has been advertised at a cost of $908,675. The winning bidder to be announced on July 7. The actual contract bid page has not been put up yet. I will post a link when it is.

Just to note.  610646 also includes all of Route 2 and I-495.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 11, 2020, 12:44:23 PM
Quote from: roadman on May 09, 2020, 05:01:44 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 09, 2020, 11:27:17 AM
The first exit renumbering contract (610646), for Districts 1-3, has been advertised at a cost of $908,675. The winning bidder to be announced on July 7. The actual contract bid page has not been put up yet. I will post a link when it is.
Just to note.  620646 also includes all of Route 2 and I-495.
Thanks. So based on my understanding of district boundaries and the additions, this would mean the first contract will cover I-84, I-91, I-190, I-290, I-395, I-495, MA 2 and MA 146?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on May 11, 2020, 09:43:10 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 11, 2020, 12:44:23 PM
Quote from: roadman on May 09, 2020, 05:01:44 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 09, 2020, 11:27:17 AM
The first exit renumbering contract (610646), for Districts 1-3, has been advertised at a cost of $908,675. The winning bidder to be announced on July 7. The actual contract bid page has not been put up yet. I will post a link when it is.
Just to note.  620646 also includes all of Route 2 and I-495.
Thanks. So based on my understanding of district boundaries and the additions, this would mean the first contract will cover I-84, I-91, I-190, I-290, I-395, I-495, MA 2 and MA 146?

You are correct sir.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2020, 10:50:31 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 11, 2020, 12:44:23 PM
Quote from: roadman on May 09, 2020, 05:01:44 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 09, 2020, 11:27:17 AM
The first exit renumbering contract (610646), for Districts 1-3, has been advertised at a cost of $908,675. The winning bidder to be announced on July 7. The actual contract bid page has not been put up yet. I will post a link when it is.
Just to note.  620646 also includes all of Route 2 and I-495.
Thanks. So based on my understanding of district boundaries and the additions, this would mean the first contract will cover I-84, I-91, I-190, I-290, I-395, I-495, MA 2 and MA 146?
So all the highways except Eastern MA (and I-291 and I-391)? I guess exits are spaced closer together here.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 14, 2020, 05:38:58 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 11, 2020, 10:50:31 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 11, 2020, 12:44:23 PM
Quote from: roadman on May 09, 2020, 05:01:44 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 09, 2020, 11:27:17 AM
The first exit renumbering contract (610646), for Districts 1-3, has been advertised at a cost of $908,675. The winning bidder to be announced on July 7. The actual contract bid page has not been put up yet. I will post a link when it is.
Just to note.  620646 also includes all of Route 2 and I-495.
Thanks. So based on my understanding of district boundaries and the additions, this would mean the first contract will cover I-84, I-91, I-190, I-290, I-395, I-495, MA 2 and MA 146?
So all the highways except Eastern MA (and I-291 and I-391)? I guess exits are spaced closer together here.
That is correct. The bid page is now up, but with only a short Notice to Contractor's:
https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-20-1030-0H100-0H002-51627&external=true&parentUrl=bid (https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-20-1030-0H100-0H002-51627&external=true&parentUrl=bid)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 16, 2020, 12:56:42 PM
MassDOT has now advertised the second exit renumbering contract (610699). The estimated cost is higher than the first contract at $1,046,735. This contract will cover all remaining routes not included in the first such as I-93, I-95, I-195, MA 3, MA 24, MA 128, US 3 and US 6 (the last route to be renumbered). The winning bid is to be announced on June 23, 2 weeks before the second contract. The bid page has not been put up yet. According to the MassDOT project listing, the last contract covering the Mass. Pike has not yet been sent to the FHWA for approval.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on May 16, 2020, 10:24:47 PM
If the contract including US 6 is already advertised and the contract for I-90 hasn't even gotten FHWA approval yet, wouldn't I-90 be the last road instead of US 6?  Or is contract 2 expected to take a lot longer than contract 3?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on May 16, 2020, 11:34:25 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 16, 2020, 10:24:47 PM
If the contract including US 6 is already advertised and the contract for I-90 hasn't even gotten FHWA approval yet, wouldn't I-90 be the last road instead of US 6?  Or is contract 2 expected to take a lot longer than contract 3?

If Contract 3 is only going to convert the Mass Pike, then I can see Contract 3 finishing before Contract 2, seeing as how Contract 2 will cover more signs requiring replacement.    There are only 25 or so exits on I-90 in Contract 3, while I-95 alone has 60 exits.  That's a lot more signs.

Then again, depending on the contractor, you could see Contract 3 finishing before Contract 1.  Let's not forget there are still signs on the Mass Pike in Springfield that have not yet been replaced (the CT style at Exit 6, WB.... has it been done yet?  Anyone???) while the rest of the 'pike has been converted, under later contracts.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on May 16, 2020, 11:37:50 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 16, 2020, 10:24:47 PM
If the contract including US 6 is already advertised and the contract for I-90 hasn't even gotten FHWA approval yet, wouldn't I-90 be the last road instead of US 6?  Or is contract 2 expected to take a lot longer than contract 3?

Contract # 2 (610699) is more complex than Contract # 3 (610700) is, so US 6 will most likely be the last highway converted under the full program.  610699 is also more complex than 610646 (Contract 1, advertised on 5-9) is, which may explain why the 610699 bid opening is two weeks prior to the one for 610646.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: KEVIN_224 on May 17, 2020, 06:20:33 PM
Exit 6 is in Chicopee (I-291/US 20). The Turnpike passes north of Springfield. (Sorry to nitpick!)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on May 17, 2020, 08:39:47 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on May 17, 2020, 06:20:33 PM
Exit 6 is in Chicopee (I-291/US 20). The Turnpike passes north of Springfield. (Sorry to nitpick!)

Meant to say either the "exit for Springfield" or the "Springfield area".  At last check several months back, the supports were up, that's it.  This is the last guide sign to be replaced on the Mass Pike, I believe.

If its not replaced by the time Contract 3 gets going, wonder if we'll see the new exit numbers on the old signs!   The signs on the pike eastbound for Exit 22/Prudential Center are still button copy and not replaced either so wonder if we'll see new numbers there as well.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on May 18, 2020, 12:59:54 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on May 17, 2020, 08:39:47 PM
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on May 17, 2020, 06:20:33 PM
Exit 6 is in Chicopee (I-291/US 20). The Turnpike passes north of Springfield. (Sorry to nitpick!)

Meant to say either the "exit for Springfield" or the "Springfield area".  At last check several months back, the supports were up, that's it.  This is the last guide sign to be replaced on the Mass Pike, I believe.

If its not replaced by the time Contract 3 gets going, wonder if we'll see the new exit numbers on the old signs!   The signs on the pike eastbound for Exit 22/Prudential Center are still button copy and not replaced either so wonder if we'll see new numbers there as well.

It would be fabulous if they could put button copy numerals on for the new exit number at the Pru if the signs are still up when the time comes.  (Ain't gonna happen, but one can dream.)  I live near an Exit 133 and would have tried to get the exit tabs from the old button copy signs when they came down a few years back if I had known, to help out.  :P  ODOT (Ohio) or its contractor actually did scrounge up button copy capital Bs when Exit 209 on I-71 became an A-B and they needed to add the B to the blue logo service signs; a couple with reflective copy got reflective Bs and the older button copy signs got button copy Bs.  It is amazing.

I wish they could have just put the new exit numbers on the Mid-Cape Highway in the middle of the night or something.  All that drama!  Sigh.  (I know they have to give people notice to change brochures/web sites etc., but again, one can dream.)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 30, 2020, 11:58:05 AM
Two breaking news items regarding exit renumbering:
1. The final renumbering contract for I-90/Mass Pike has been advertised. The estimated value is $378,000 and the winning bidder is to be announced July 21. This means all the contract winners will be provided over a 4 week period starting on June 23.
2. The bid page for the 2nd contract (610699) has added new documents including Drawings and Sketches which provide details of the signage along with a new list of old and new exit numbers for all the routes covered by the contract. It confirms that MassDOT has changed its original intention of numbering the I-90 and MA 30 exits on I-95/128 in northbound order which would have been backward, to a more logical Exit 24 is now 39A and Exit 25 will be 39B. I am still going through the plans to spot any other changes. It also shows no changes to the US 6 numbers, sorry Cape residents. Feel free to check it the document yourself at:
https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-20-1030-0H100-0H002-51737&external=true&parentUrl=bid (https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-20-1030-0H100-0H002-51737&external=true&parentUrl=bid)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on June 13, 2020, 12:17:13 PM
MassDOT has released the plans for the western and central exit renumbering contract and posted additional files on the contract bid page including, like the second contract, a drawings and sketches file listing the old and new exit numbers, and a special provisions document which, in this case, details the dual mile markers on I-290, quoting:
"Work under this item involves the installation of enhanced reference location signs (MA-D10-4a)
and intermediate reference location signs (MA-D10-2b) along I-290 to continue the I-395 mile-markers. The mile-markers along I-290 will have dual references, including the existing reference markers along side the proposed I-395 reference markers." The document then lists of the numbers for the markers, needless to say, they did not decide to change the numbers so that I-290  exits used that route's mileage, this is on page 41/48.

A preliminary look at the other exit lists shows no changes from the previously posted lists, but I will look at them more closely and post any changes seen on my exit list pages. The winning bidder is still to be announced on July 7.  Here's the bid page:
https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-20-1030-0H100-0H002-51627&external=true&parentUrl=bid (https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-20-1030-0H100-0H002-51627&external=true&parentUrl=bid)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on June 23, 2020, 04:25:56 PM
Bids for the District 4-District 5-District 6 exit renumbering contract (Project 610699/Contract 111369) were opened earlier today.  RoadSafe Traffic systems is the apparent low bidder at $998,880.  Northeast Traffic Control was second lowest bidder at $1,285,291.60, and Liddell Brothers had the highest bid at $1,407,080.00.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on June 23, 2020, 09:58:55 PM
Quote from: roadman on June 23, 2020, 04:25:56 PM
Bids for the District 4-District 5-District 6 exit renumbering contract (Project 610699/Contract 111369) were opened earlier today.  RoadSafe Traffic systems is the apparent low bidder at $998,880.  Northeast Traffic Control was second lowest bidder at $1,285,291.60, and Liddell Brothers had the highest bid at $1,407,080.00.
I would assume RoadSafe will get the contract unless something changes, especially since they had the only bid that was below the MassDOT estimate of $1,046,735. Would it be best if 1 firm won all 3 contracts, or would having at least 2 firms with winning bids help in getting the entire project finished as fast as possible?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on June 24, 2020, 01:21:53 AM
Found a few recent changes to the exit numbers.

- I-90 exit 107 (old 11A) now 106
- I-90 exit 128 (old 17) now 127
- MA 25 exit 1 (was un-numbered in detail sheets) has regained the number

The exit lists on the project website (http://www.newmassexits.com) have changed from being PDF files to being webpages.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on June 24, 2020, 12:13:45 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on June 24, 2020, 01:21:53 AM
Found a few recent changes to the exit numbers.

- I-90 exit 107 (old 11A) now 106
- I-90 exit 128 (old 17) now 127
- MA 25 exit 1 (was un-numbered in detail sheets) has regained the number

The exit lists on the project website (http://www.newmassexits.com) have changed from being PDF files to being webpages.

Was I-90 Exit 41 (old 3) a change?  I had it as 40.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on June 24, 2020, 12:55:08 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 24, 2020, 12:13:45 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on June 24, 2020, 01:21:53 AM
Found a few recent changes to the exit numbers.

- I-90 exit 107 (old 11A) now 106
- I-90 exit 128 (old 17) now 127
- MA 25 exit 1 (was un-numbered in detail sheets) has regained the number

The exit lists on the project website (http://www.newmassexits.com) have changed from being PDF files to being webpages.

Was I-90 Exit 41 (old 3) a change?  I had it as 40.
The proposed number for the US 202/MA 10 exit AFAIK has always been 41, though it probably should be 40 since it is at MM 40.4. Never new why they had changed the I-495 exit to 107 since it is at MM 106.2. The Newton/Watertown exit is at MM 127.6, did they round it down to avoid any confusion with the I-95 (128) exit? I'll update my exit lists with the new information and look through the new website lists to see if there are any other changes I can spot.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on June 24, 2020, 01:09:46 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on June 24, 2020, 12:55:08 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 24, 2020, 12:13:45 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on June 24, 2020, 01:21:53 AM
Found a few recent changes to the exit numbers.

- I-90 exit 107 (old 11A) now 106
- I-90 exit 128 (old 17) now 127
- MA 25 exit 1 (was un-numbered in detail sheets) has regained the number

The exit lists on the project website (http://www.newmassexits.com) have changed from being PDF files to being webpages.

Was I-90 Exit 41 (old 3) a change?  I had it as 40.
The proposed number for the US 202/MA 10 exit AFAIK has always been 41, though it probably should be 40 since it is at MM 40.4. Never new why they had changed the I-495 exit to 107 since it is at MM 106.2. The Newton/Watertown exit is at MM 127.6, did they round it down to avoid any confusion with the I-95 (128) exit? I'll update my exit lists with the new information and look through the new website lists to see if there are any other changes I can spot.
Took a look at Street View, and found the following:

Newton / Watertown EB exit ramp is closest to MP 127.4, WB ramp is a bit west of MP 128.

US 202 / MA 10 EB exit ramp is closest to MP 40.4, WB closest to MP 40.6. This is a case where the interchange is equidistant from both mileposts. It should be 40 only because of the "next exit 30 miles" sign WB (and EB in Lee).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on June 25, 2020, 02:55:11 AM
Funny thing I noticed....  the MA-14 exit for MA-3...

Under the original numbering system, it was Exit 33
In the 1976 renumbering, it was Exit 11
In the 2020 renumbering, it will be Exit 22

That exit can't help but be a multiple of 11!   :-D
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on June 26, 2020, 02:31:16 PM
Plans and detail documents for the third exit renumbering contract covering I-90/Massachusetts Turnpike have been posted to the CommBuys site.  They can be found at https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-20-1030-0H100-0H002-52079&external=true&parentUrl=bid
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on June 29, 2020, 12:08:52 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 30, 2020, 11:58:05 AM
It confirms that MassDOT has changed its original intention of numbering the I-90 and MA 30 exits on I-95/128 in northbound order which would have been backward, to a more logical Exit 24 is now 39A and Exit 25 will be 39B.
Unless the latest listing was an oversight/typo, I submitted another comment to MassDOT regarding such; and, this time, recited that the I-90 & MA 30 ramp set-up along I-95 is similar to what exists along I-84 in CT for the I-691 & CT 322 interchanges.  ConnDOT's approach to I-84's Exits 27 & 28 (Future (?) Exits 40A & 40B) was/is the right call.

As previously stated, the current/original plan is basically carrying over the same error that was made nearly 33 years ago when I-95 received its current sequential numbers (the southbound ramp order was held rather than the northbound ramp order).  Such only made sense when the interchange numbers increased southbound as it did with the old/former 128 numbers.

A supplemental sign in the southbound direction reading
NEXT EXIT 39A
SECOND EXIT 39B

would alleviate the one-time oddity.  I submitted that suggestion in my comment to MassDOT as well.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on July 08, 2020, 12:55:19 PM
Bids were opened on Tuesday for the Districts 1, 2, and 3 - plus all of MA 2 and I-495, exit renumbering contract (Project 610646).  Liddell Brothers was the apparent low bidder at $986,313.00.  Northeast Traffic Control was the second lowest bidder at $1,007,891.38, and RoadSafe Traffic Systems had the highest bid at $1,204,155.00.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: ProfBrad on July 20, 2020, 05:58:02 AM
Is late summer (August?) still the target date for sign replacements to begin?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on July 21, 2020, 11:44:36 AM
Quote from: ProfBrad on July 20, 2020, 05:58:02 AM
Is late summer (August?) still the target date for sign replacements to begin?
The winning bidder for the last renumbering contract for the Mass Pike is to be announced today. Assuming things are still on schedule, I guess when the project will start depends on the definition of 'late summer.' MassDOT's calendar considers June-August as summer, so late summer could mean late August. However, since the term late summer has been used in public notices, it could be what the public considers to be late summer, September, perhaps after Labor Day. The other two contracts have not received their notices to proceed as of today, July 21.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on July 23, 2020, 10:11:00 AM
Liddell Bros. appears to be the lowest bidder for the last renumbering contract for the Mass Pike (610700).

DISTRICT 1 - DISTRICT 2 - DISTRICT 3 - DISTRICT 6 - 610700 - 111439 - Conversion of
Interstate and Freeway Exit Signs to Milepost-Based Numbering on the
Massachusetts Turnpike (I-90) - 6% MWBE
OFFICE ESTIMATE: $378,000.00

Liddell Brothers Inc 600 Industrial Drive, Halifax, MA 02338 $150,588.80
Roadsafe Traffic Systems Inc 55 Bodwell Street, Avon, MA, 02322 $316,100.00
Northeast Traffic Control 8 Scobee Circle, Plymouth, MA 02362 $362,620.80
K5 Corporation 9 Rockview Way, Rockland, MA 02370 $727,400.00

How can Liddell under bid everyone else by more than 150K?
Here are the bid tabulations, I've bolded the items where there are large differences between the MassDOT and Liddell estimates, it appears Liddell says they can save a lot of money using their temporary traffic management devices:
                                                                                            Office Estimate                       Liddell Bros. Inc.
Item     # Quantity  Units        Description                                Unit Price         Amount           Unit Price          Amount
748.     1.000         LS            MOBILIZATION                          $11,000.00     $11,000.00      $8,000.00        $8,000.00
832.12 1,540.000   F        REFLECTIVE SIGN OVERLAY         $5.00             $7,700.00         $44.00           $67,760.00
832.4   810.000    SF       OLD EXIT X SIGN - ALUM PANEL (TYPE A)$12.00 $9,720.00      $45.00            $36,450.00
848.1   10.000       EA            SIGN SUP (N/GUIDE)+RTE MKR   $250.00       $2,500.00          $300.00          $3,000.00
848.2   90.000       EA            BRACKETS FOR SIGN MOUNTING $80.00         $7,200.00          $150.00          $13,500.00
852.     800.000      SF           SIGNING FOR TRAFFIC MGMT      $20.00         $16,000.00         $0.01             $8.00
853.403 1,080.0 DAY       TRUCK MOUNTED ATTENUATOR   $125.00      $135,000.00        $1.00             $1,080.00
853.8    540.000     DAY        TEMP ILLUM FOR WORK ZONE   $25.00       $13,500.00         $1.00             $540.00
856.     1,080.000   DAY        ARROW BOARD                         $10.00       $10,800.00         $1.00             $1,080.00
856.12 6,120.000   DAY        PORT. CHANGEABLE MSG SIGN $20.00        $122,400.00       $1.00             $6,120.00

874.2   20.000       EA            TRAF SIGN REMOVED + RESET   $110.00        $2,200.00           $125.00         $2,500.00
899.1   1.000         LS            MASSDOT SIGN INVENT UPDATE $20,000.00   $20,000.00         $10,000.00     $10,000.00
                                                                                                  Total :    $378,000.00                   Total : $150,588.80
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on July 23, 2020, 03:51:09 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 23, 2020, 10:11:00 AM
Liddell Bros. appears to be the lowest bidder for the last renumbering contract for the Mass Pike (610700).

DISTRICT 1 - DISTRICT 2 - DISTRICT 3 - DISTRICT 6 - 610700 - 111439 - Conversion of
Interstate and Freeway Exit Signs to Milepost-Based Numbering on the
Massachusetts Turnpike (I-90) - 6% MWBE
OFFICE ESTIMATE: $378,000.00

Liddell Brothers Inc 600 Industrial Drive, Halifax, MA 02338 $150,588.80
Roadsafe Traffic Systems Inc 55 Bodwell Street, Avon, MA, 02322 $316,100.00
Northeast Traffic Control 8 Scobee Circle, Plymouth, MA 02362 $362,620.80
K5 Corporation 9 Rockview Way, Rockland, MA 02370 $727,400.00

How can Liddell under bid everyone else by more than 150K?
Here are the bid tabulations, I've bolded the items where there are large differences between the MassDOT and Liddell estimates, it appears Liddell says they can save a lot of money using their temporary traffic management devices:
                                                                                            Office Estimate                       Liddell Bros. Inc.
Item     # Quantity  Units        Description                                Unit Price         Amount           Unit Price          Amount
748.     1.000         LS            MOBILIZATION                          $11,000.00     $11,000.00      $8,000.00        $8,000.00
832.12 1,540.000   F        REFLECTIVE SIGN OVERLAY         $5.00             $7,700.00         $44.00           $67,760.00
832.4   810.000    SF       OLD EXIT X SIGN - ALUM PANEL (TYPE A)$12.00 $9,720.00      $45.00            $36,450.00
848.1   10.000       EA            SIGN SUP (N/GUIDE)+RTE MKR   $250.00       $2,500.00          $300.00          $3,000.00
848.2   90.000       EA            BRACKETS FOR SIGN MOUNTING $80.00         $7,200.00          $150.00          $13,500.00
852.     800.000      SF           SIGNING FOR TRAFFIC MGMT      $20.00         $16,000.00         $0.01             $8.00
853.403 1,080.0 DAY       TRUCK MOUNTED ATTENUATOR   $125.00      $135,000.00        $1.00             $1,080.00
853.8    540.000     DAY        TEMP ILLUM FOR WORK ZONE   $25.00       $13,500.00         $1.00             $540.00
856.     1,080.000   DAY        ARROW BOARD                         $10.00       $10,800.00         $1.00             $1,080.00
856.12 6,120.000   DAY        PORT. CHANGEABLE MSG SIGN $20.00        $122,400.00       $1.00             $6,120.00

874.2   20.000       EA            TRAF SIGN REMOVED + RESET   $110.00        $2,200.00           $125.00         $2,500.00
899.1   1.000         LS            MASSDOT SIGN INVENT UPDATE $20,000.00   $20,000.00         $10,000.00     $10,000.00
                                                                                                  Total :    $378,000.00                   Total : $150,588.80

The crazy thing is a truck-mounted attenuator 15 years ago cost $10,000. Don't know why the state thinks $135,000 is a legit price. Maybe assuming 10 cost $135,000 now, but it's not like everyone of these companies doesn't have a crap load in their possession already. They only need to be replaced after impacts, and hence why I know their value from years of auto claim adjusting. The huge drop in their bid doesn't surprise me one bit.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on July 23, 2020, 03:53:55 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on July 23, 2020, 03:51:09 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 23, 2020, 10:11:00 AM
Liddell Bros. appears to be the lowest bidder for the last renumbering contract for the Mass Pike (610700).

DISTRICT 1 - DISTRICT 2 - DISTRICT 3 - DISTRICT 6 - 610700 - 111439 - Conversion of
Interstate and Freeway Exit Signs to Milepost-Based Numbering on the
Massachusetts Turnpike (I-90) - 6% MWBE
OFFICE ESTIMATE: $378,000.00

Liddell Brothers Inc 600 Industrial Drive, Halifax, MA 02338 $150,588.80
Roadsafe Traffic Systems Inc 55 Bodwell Street, Avon, MA, 02322 $316,100.00
Northeast Traffic Control 8 Scobee Circle, Plymouth, MA 02362 $362,620.80
K5 Corporation 9 Rockview Way, Rockland, MA 02370 $727,400.00

How can Liddell under bid everyone else by more than 150K?
Here are the bid tabulations, I've bolded the items where there are large differences between the MassDOT and Liddell estimates, it appears Liddell says they can save a lot of money using their temporary traffic management devices:
                                                                                            Office Estimate                       Liddell Bros. Inc.
Item     # Quantity  Units        Description                                Unit Price         Amount           Unit Price          Amount
748.     1.000         LS            MOBILIZATION                          $11,000.00     $11,000.00      $8,000.00        $8,000.00
832.12 1,540.000   F        REFLECTIVE SIGN OVERLAY         $5.00             $7,700.00         $44.00           $67,760.00
832.4   810.000    SF       OLD EXIT X SIGN - ALUM PANEL (TYPE A)$12.00 $9,720.00      $45.00            $36,450.00
848.1   10.000       EA            SIGN SUP (N/GUIDE)+RTE MKR   $250.00       $2,500.00          $300.00          $3,000.00
848.2   90.000       EA            BRACKETS FOR SIGN MOUNTING $80.00         $7,200.00          $150.00          $13,500.00
852.     800.000      SF           SIGNING FOR TRAFFIC MGMT      $20.00         $16,000.00         $0.01             $8.00
853.403 1,080.0 DAY       TRUCK MOUNTED ATTENUATOR   $125.00      $135,000.00        $1.00             $1,080.00
853.8    540.000     DAY        TEMP ILLUM FOR WORK ZONE   $25.00       $13,500.00         $1.00             $540.00
856.     1,080.000   DAY        ARROW BOARD                         $10.00       $10,800.00         $1.00             $1,080.00
856.12 6,120.000   DAY        PORT. CHANGEABLE MSG SIGN $20.00        $122,400.00       $1.00             $6,120.00

874.2   20.000       EA            TRAF SIGN REMOVED + RESET   $110.00        $2,200.00           $125.00         $2,500.00
899.1   1.000         LS            MASSDOT SIGN INVENT UPDATE $20,000.00   $20,000.00         $10,000.00     $10,000.00
                                                                                                  Total :    $378,000.00                   Total : $150,588.80

The crazy thing is a truck-mounted attenuator 15 years ago cost $10,000. Don't know why the state thinks $135,000 is a legit price. Maybe assuming 10 cost $135,000 now, but it's not like everyone of these companies doesn't have a crap load in their possession already. They only need to be replaced after impacts, and hence why I know their value from years of auto claim adjusting. The huge drop in their bid doesn't surprise me one bit.
Maybe they're buying the truck with it.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on July 23, 2020, 11:12:52 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on July 23, 2020, 03:51:09 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 23, 2020, 10:11:00 AM
Liddell Bros. appears to be the lowest bidder for the last renumbering contract for the Mass Pike (610700).

DISTRICT 1 - DISTRICT 2 - DISTRICT 3 - DISTRICT 6 - 610700 - 111439 - Conversion of
Interstate and Freeway Exit Signs to Milepost-Based Numbering on the
Massachusetts Turnpike (I-90) - 6% MWBE
OFFICE ESTIMATE: $378,000.00

Liddell Brothers Inc 600 Industrial Drive, Halifax, MA 02338 $150,588.80
Roadsafe Traffic Systems Inc 55 Bodwell Street, Avon, MA, 02322 $316,100.00
Northeast Traffic Control 8 Scobee Circle, Plymouth, MA 02362 $362,620.80
K5 Corporation 9 Rockview Way, Rockland, MA 02370 $727,400.00

How can Liddell under bid everyone else by more than 150K?
Here are the bid tabulations, I've bolded the items where there are large differences between the MassDOT and Liddell estimates, it appears Liddell says they can save a lot of money using their temporary traffic management devices:
                                                                                            Office Estimate                       Liddell Bros. Inc.
Item     # Quantity  Units        Description                                Unit Price         Amount           Unit Price          Amount
748.     1.000         LS            MOBILIZATION                          $11,000.00     $11,000.00      $8,000.00        $8,000.00
832.12 1,540.000   F        REFLECTIVE SIGN OVERLAY         $5.00             $7,700.00         $44.00           $67,760.00
832.4   810.000    SF       OLD EXIT X SIGN - ALUM PANEL (TYPE A)$12.00 $9,720.00      $45.00            $36,450.00
848.1   10.000       EA            SIGN SUP (N/GUIDE)+RTE MKR   $250.00       $2,500.00          $300.00          $3,000.00
848.2   90.000       EA            BRACKETS FOR SIGN MOUNTING $80.00         $7,200.00          $150.00          $13,500.00
852.     800.000      SF           SIGNING FOR TRAFFIC MGMT      $20.00         $16,000.00         $0.01             $8.00
853.403 1,080.0 DAY       TRUCK MOUNTED ATTENUATOR   $125.00      $135,000.00        $1.00             $1,080.00
853.8    540.000     DAY        TEMP ILLUM FOR WORK ZONE   $25.00       $13,500.00         $1.00             $540.00
856.     1,080.000   DAY        ARROW BOARD                         $10.00       $10,800.00         $1.00             $1,080.00
856.12 6,120.000   DAY        PORT. CHANGEABLE MSG SIGN $20.00        $122,400.00       $1.00             $6,120.00

874.2   20.000       EA            TRAF SIGN REMOVED + RESET   $110.00        $2,200.00           $125.00         $2,500.00
899.1   1.000         LS            MASSDOT SIGN INVENT UPDATE $20,000.00   $20,000.00         $10,000.00     $10,000.00
                                                                                                  Total :    $378,000.00                   Total : $150,588.80

The crazy thing is a truck-mounted attenuator 15 years ago cost $10,000. Don't know why the state thinks $135,000 is a legit price. Maybe assuming 10 cost $135,000 now, but it's not like everyone of these companies doesn't have a crap load in their possession already. They only need to be replaced after impacts, and hence why I know their value from years of auto claim adjusting. The huge drop in their bid doesn't surprise me one bit.

One clarification.  The $135,000 amount in the office estimate is for the full duration of the contract, not per day (the per day estimate is $125).  And the payment is per DAY, regardless of the amount of attenuators that are needed during each day.  Some work setups may need only one attenuator, others may need three.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on July 23, 2020, 11:20:11 PM
Quote from: roadman on July 23, 2020, 11:12:52 PM
One clarification.  The $135,000 amount in the office estimate is for the full duration of the contract, not per day (the per day estimate is $125).  And the payment is per DAY, regardless of the amount of attenuators that are needed during each day.  Some work setups may need only one attenuator, others may need three.

That clarifies things. I was wondering why it said 6,120 portable VMSes. Nobody has a use for that many.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on July 25, 2020, 10:26:19 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on July 23, 2020, 11:20:11 PM
Quote from: roadman on July 23, 2020, 11:12:52 PM
One clarification.  The $135,000 amount in the office estimate is for the full duration of the contract, not per day (the per day estimate is $125).  And the payment is per DAY, regardless of the amount of attenuators that are needed during each day.  Some work setups may need only one attenuator, others may need three.

That clarifies things. I was wondering why it said 6,120 portable VMSes. Nobody has a use for that many.

One other thing.  As noted in the project specifications, the quantities for the traffic control items are based on the assumption that the Contractor will have three crews working at the same time.  This is why the quantities are higher than the contract duration.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on August 08, 2020, 07:40:57 PM
I noticed today a sign replacement on I-495 north in Norton.  A green "NEXT EXIT 12"  sign has been replaced with a yellow "NO EXIT 11"  sign.  It seems rather wasteful considering the exit numbers will be changing soon.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on August 09, 2020, 05:52:34 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on August 08, 2020, 07:40:57 PM
I noticed today a sign replacement on I-495 north in Norton.  A green "NEXT EXIT 12"  sign has been replaced with a yellow "NO EXIT 11"  sign.  It seems rather wasteful considering the exit numbers will be changing soon.

Knowing the state when they change the numbers someone will handwrite "^ FORMER" into the "NO EXIT 11" sign.

Or they could move it to a freeway with no exit 11 after the change just to screw with people.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on August 13, 2020, 09:29:20 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on August 08, 2020, 07:40:57 PM
I noticed today a sign replacement on I-495 north in Norton.  A green "NEXT EXIT 12"  sign has been replaced with a yellow "NO EXIT 11"  sign.  It seems rather wasteful considering the exit numbers will be changing soon.

Well this is interesting.  Today, I noticed that an identical "NO EXIT 11" sign also exists in the exact same spot on I-495 in the southbound direction.  But there IS an exit 11 going south, and it's 1.5 miles after said exit number.

What a waste of our tax dollars!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on August 13, 2020, 11:06:42 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on August 09, 2020, 05:52:34 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on August 08, 2020, 07:40:57 PM
I noticed today a sign replacement on I-495 north in Norton.  A green "NEXT EXIT 12"  sign has been replaced with a yellow "NO EXIT 11"  sign.  It seems rather wasteful considering the exit numbers will be changing soon.

Knowing the state when they change the numbers someone will handwrite "^ FORMER" into the "NO EXIT 11" sign.

Or they could move it to a freeway with no exit 11 after the change just to screw with people.

Could donate it to CTDOT for I-91 South, since they're dragging their a$$es on converting highways.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on August 17, 2020, 04:17:17 PM
I-91 is supposed to be the first highway to be converted to mile-based exit numbers starting this summer. Has there been any announcement as to when that conversion will be starting, or has anyone been up I-91 recently to confirm whether or not MassDOT has started the exit conversion?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on August 18, 2020, 09:23:50 PM
None of the renumbering contracts have gotten their Notice to Proceed as of yet. The MassDOT exit renumbering website still says the project will start in late summer though it looks now like the project won't start until at least some time later in September. You will probably see reports in the media before the project does start.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: ProfBrad on September 09, 2020, 07:50:10 AM
So now that we are past Labor Day hopefully work will commence in the next couple weeks.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 09, 2020, 03:44:31 PM
The sooner the renumbering begins, the better. I think it should have happened on its original 2016-2018 timeline, but Mass DOT caved to the Cape Coders. Is it possible the renumbering might be postponed again, despite what they said last November that it will go forward?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on September 09, 2020, 04:29:48 PM
Drove I-91 in its entirety over the weekend and didn't notice any work... and didn't expect to yet... to early in the contract.

I am curious as to where the exit number will go on those railroad station signs for Northampton and Greenfield.... up top, or below Amtrak?  See image below:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3011295,-72.6286814,3a,15y,28.41h,91.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdtxpQPpCYPqj4JN3lzTGhg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: ProfBrad on September 09, 2020, 05:10:49 PM
Maybe the newmassexits site should change the wording to a Fall 2020 project start...it is fall in less than 2 weeks.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on September 10, 2020, 06:15:31 PM
Just got an e-mail from MassDOT regarding the exit renumbering project. First, they're going to hold a virtual public meeting about the project on Sept. 24. Second, the project is not starting now until mid-October, and third the project will now be completed sometime next summer. A link to register for the meeting is now in the MassDOT Exit Renumbering Site:
https://www.newmassexits.com/ (https://www.newmassexits.com/)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on September 15, 2020, 10:44:09 AM
The MassDOT structural signing projects under construction list was updated to include the exit renumbering contract for the Mass Pike, the Notice to Proceed was given on August 25. Still not listing for the first contract covering Districts 1-3 (and I-495 and MA 2).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on September 22, 2020, 11:07:58 AM
According to this article,  conversion is set to start October 18th and continue until next summer. Apparently they are starting with MA 140 and then proceeding with the other routes in contract 2 (Eastern MA, excluding MA 2 and I-495). Wonder when they are starting the 1st contract for Western MA?

https://boston.cbslocal.com/2020/09/21/massachusetts-new-exit-numbers-mileage-construction/amp/

SM-A515U
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 22, 2020, 05:41:10 PM
Why start with MA 140? I would have started with Interstates 91, 84 and 395/290.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on September 22, 2020, 05:43:45 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 22, 2020, 05:41:10 PM
Why start with MA 140? I would have started with Interstates 91, 84 and 395/290.

My guess: it would reduce confusion between MA 24's exit numbers and MA 140's exit numbers. It's also lightly traveled compared to parts of 91 and 290, which is more ideal for a test run.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on September 22, 2020, 07:27:31 PM
Quote from: 1 on September 22, 2020, 05:43:45 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 22, 2020, 05:41:10 PM
Why start with MA 140? I would have started with Interstates 91, 84 and 395/290.

My guess: it would reduce confusion between MA 24's exit numbers and MA 140's exit numbers. It's also lightly traveled compared to parts of 91 and 290, which is more ideal for a test run.
Personally, I would have chosen I-84 to be the first road to make the change.  That highway's only 7 miles long with only 3 interchanges southwest of I-90.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on September 22, 2020, 09:27:07 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on September 22, 2020, 07:27:31 PM
Quote from: 1 on September 22, 2020, 05:43:45 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 22, 2020, 05:41:10 PM
Why start with MA 140? I would have started with Interstates 91, 84 and 395/290.

My guess: it would reduce confusion between MA 24's exit numbers and MA 140's exit numbers. It's also lightly traveled compared to parts of 91 and 290, which is more ideal for a test run.
Personally, I would have chosen I-84 to be the first road to make the change.  That highway's only 7 miles long with only 3 interchanges southwest of I-90.

Just a reminder:  The exit renuimbering project has been divided into three separate contracts.  Not sure why, but the eastern contract was awarded before the western and I-90 contracts were.   I-84 is in the western contract, not the eastern one.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on September 24, 2020, 09:44:52 PM
I participated with about 50 other people (including AARoads Forum's own Roadman) earlier this evening in MassDOT's virtual public meeting about the upcoming Exit Renumbering Project. Highlights: The schedule for the first 3 routes in the District 4-6 contract were announced, MA 140 on October 18, then I-195 to follow probably around the end of October, then MA 25 sometime in mid-November. How well the contractor meets these dates will determine the schedule for the remainder of the routes. The other 2 contracts have also been awarded but will start later. Public meetings at a yet unannounced date will proceed the start of work on the Districts 1-3 (and MA 2 and I-495) and Mass Pike. The project is still to be completed by next summer.

Unsurprisingly, US 6 exit renumbering was the focus of many of the questions afterwards, mostly from Cape Cod officials and citizens. Apparently in  response to complaints about how the proposed old exit number signs would look on their scenic highway, MassDOT will put up green and white old exit number signs along US 6 instead of the yellow and black ones going up everywhere else. Positively, one official said that they know that since many visitors to the Cape come from places with mileage based exits, the exit number change would be a benefit to them. Another though thought mileage for US 6 should start at Provincetown so that exit numbers would retain some meaning for Cape drivers, he was reminded that mileposts have to start at the western border with RI. Another thought the Cape Cod Commission should pay MassDOT to keep the old exit numbers signs up indefinitely. An official from Gloucester wanted to know why the new exit numbers for Route 128 end at current Exit 12 and not with the now former Exits 11-9. He was told that those numbers are no longer used. He shared examples of signs that still have those numbers and MassDOT said it will remove any remaining signs for those 'exits' as part of the renumbering project. Another person had put together a spreadsheet showing that 60% of the new mileage based numbers do not actually correspond to MUTCD specifications in assigning numbers. MassDOT's response is they want to limit as far as possible the number of suffixed exits so not to be too confusing to drivers, this includes not following MUTCD specs regarding continuation of numbers across borders for 3-digit interstate routes. There was even a question about why Massachusetts signs don't use Clearview.

I will continue to monitor the progress of exit renumbering and will plan road trips to cover routes as they are converted to the new system.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: southshore720 on September 25, 2020, 03:27:13 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2020, 09:44:52 PM
I participated with about 50 other people (including AARoads Forum's own Roadman) earlier this evening in MassDOT's virtual public meeting about the upcoming Exit Renumbering Project. Highlights: The schedule for the first 3 routes in the District 4-6 contract were announced, MA 140 on October 18, then I-195 to follow probably around the end of October, then MA 25 sometime in mid-November. How well the contractor meets these dates will determine the schedule for the remainder of the routes. The other 2 contracts have also been awarded but will start later. Public meetings at a yet unannounced date will proceed the start of work on the Districts 1-3 (and MA 2 and I-495) and Mass Pike. The project is still to be completed by next summer.

Unsurprisingly, US 6 exit renumbering was the focus of many of the questions afterwards, mostly from Cape Cod officials and citizens. Apparently in  response to complaints about how the proposed old exit number signs would look on their scenic highway, MassDOT will put up green and white old exit number signs along US 6 instead of the yellow and black ones going up everywhere else. Positively, one official said that they know that since many visitors to the Cape come from places with mileage based exits, the exit number change would be a benefit to them. Another though thought mileage for US 6 should start at Provincetown so that exit numbers would retain some meaning for Cape drivers, he was reminded that mileposts have to start at the western border with RI. Another thought the Cape Cod Commission should pay MassDOT to keep the old exit numbers signs up indefinitely. An official from Gloucester wanted to know why the new exit numbers for Route 128 end at current Exit 12 and not with the now former Exits 11-9. He was told that those numbers are no longer used. He shared examples of signs that still have those numbers and MassDOT said it will remove any remaining signs for those 'exits' as part of the renumbering project. Another person had put together a spreadsheet showing that 60% of the new mileage based numbers do not actually correspond to MUTCD specifications in assigning numbers. MassDOT's response is they want to limit as far as possible the number of suffixed exits so not to be too confusing to drivers, this includes not following MUTCD specs regarding continuation of numbers across borders for 3-digit interstate routes. There was even a question about why Massachusetts signs don't use Clearview.

I will continue to monitor the progress of exit renumbering and will plan road trips to cover routes as they are converted to the new system.

Wow, I was expecting a nuclear meltdown from the US 6 contingency!  Maybe they will save that in a more localized public meeting.  I can't believe that they balked over the yellow & black "Old Exit XX" signage...actually, yes I can believe it.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on September 25, 2020, 05:17:59 PM
At least the US 6 exit numbers will be changed along with the rest of the state. I'm sure Cape Coders will eventually get used to the new numbers, although that cannot be guaranteed.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on September 25, 2020, 06:54:15 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2020, 09:44:52 PM
Unsurprisingly, US 6 exit renumbering was the focus of many of the questions afterwards, mostly from Cape Cod officials and citizens.
No surprise. 2015 / 2016 repeats itself.

QuoteApparently in response to complaints about how the proposed old exit number signs would look on their scenic highway, MassDOT will put up green and white old exit number signs along US 6 instead of the yellow and black ones going up everywhere else.
Fairly interesting that there's a concern here. If MA is using the same yellow as RI, I don't see much of an issue. Depending on the design of the "old exit" tab, it could blend in too much with the new exit number, unless using the same design as CT.

QuotePositively, one official said that they know that since many visitors to the Cape come from places with mileage based exits, the exit number change would be a benefit to them.
As New England and other Northeast states progress with conversions, it will help that everything is the same standard.

QuoteAnother though thought mileage for US 6 should start at Provincetown so that exit numbers would retain some meaning for Cape drivers
That would have exit numbers starting around 30 or 40 in Orleans, and increase as one travels west, until exit 70-something in Bourne. That's even weirder and more confusing than the current plan.

Quotemileposts have to start at the western border with RI.
Arizona hides.

QuoteAnother thought the Cape Cod Commission should pay MassDOT to keep the old exit numbers signs up indefinitely.
Nice try, but no, bribing won't work with the government.

QuoteAn official from Gloucester wanted to know why the new exit numbers for Route 128 end at current Exit 12 and not with the now former Exits 11-9.
This is a new one. Exit 12, for as long I have known, is the last interchange on 128.

QuoteAnother person had put together a spreadsheet showing that 60% of the new mileage based numbers do not actually correspond to MUTCD specifications in assigning numbers.
Yes, but 60% being different is too much for MassDOT to call this a renumbering based on mileposts.

QuoteMassDOT's response is they want to limit as far as possible the number of suffixed exits so not to be too confusing to drivers
Does anyone know why MassDOT removed the suffixes from the 2016 plan? Seems like they are trying to keep seqential numbers around.

QuoteThere was even a question about why Massachusetts signs don't use Clearview.
We just don't.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on September 26, 2020, 12:45:53 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on September 25, 2020, 06:54:15 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2020, 09:44:52 PM
An official from Gloucester wanted to know why the new exit numbers for Route 128 end at current Exit 12 and not with the now former Exits 11-9.
This is a new one. Exit 12, for as long I have known, is the last interchange on 128.

QuoteAnother person had put together a spreadsheet showing that 60% of the new mileage based numbers do not actually correspond to MUTCD specifications in assigning numbers.
Yes, but 60% being different is too much for MassDOT to call this a renumbering based on mileposts.

QuoteMassDOT's response is they want to limit as far as possible the number of suffixed exits so not to be too confusing to drivers
Does anyone know why MassDOT removed the suffixes from the 2016 plan? Seems like they are trying to keep seqential numbers around.

QuoteThere was even a question about why Massachusetts signs don't use Clearview.
We just don't.

I can remember long ago signs (smaller ones) with "Next Exit 11" and such up on 128 in Gloucester, but they are gone now.  There were once BGS type signs for the exit numbers.

The original proposed new exit numbers had a lot of unnecessary suffixing--things like on I-95, Washington St. in Woburn becoming A and I-93 becoming B and C all of the same number.  A system interchange changing from A-B to B-C to accommodate a service interchange nearby being squeezed in as the A was silly; it makes way more sense to keep Washington St. as its own number and I-93 staying an A-B.  That is one example of where some limitation of suffixes makes a lot of sense.

Aren't there some different schemes used by different states for assigning exit numbers by milepost?  Some use the idea that mile 0-1.5 is Exit 1, 1.5-2.5 is Exit 2, etc.; some use Exit 0 so anything up to 0.99 gets that and 1.00-1.99 gets Exit 1, and so on; and probably in between (0.0-0.5 gets 0, 0.5-1.5 gets 1, etc.) but as long as there is a system that is roughly consistent, it works out.  Someone figuring the 60% may be using one criterion while MassDOT is using another but MassDOT is probably being consistent and using engineering judgement to avoid too many suffixes. 

What is best to avoid is something like this where it looks to make no sense; Exit 12 one way is at Mile 13 and the other way at 12.6.  Why not Exit 13?  Route 8 crosses 303 at about mile 12.8.  It looks especially crazy seeing the Exit 12 gore and Mile 13 marker next to each other when trying to explain to people that the exits are supposed to be numbered by mile marker.
https://goo.gl/maps/CbTXvkUKA2aGvcuE7
https://goo.gl/maps/cEyrHyp6FxYZGyJx7

Was the person who asked about Clearview a plant from Meeker?  :P
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bjcolby50 on September 26, 2020, 09:48:52 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 22, 2020, 05:41:10 PM
Why start with MA 140? I would have started with Interstates 91, 84 and 395/290.

MA 24 and MA 140 share an exit 12 in Taunton, so to eliminate that confusion, MA 140 will have their numbers changed first (MA 140's Exit 12 will be Exit 20, whereas MA 24's Exit 12 will become Exit 17).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on September 26, 2020, 11:58:28 AM
Quote from: bjcolby50 on September 26, 2020, 09:48:52 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 22, 2020, 05:41:10 PM
Why start with MA 140? I would have started with Interstates 91, 84 and 395/290.

MA 24 and MA 140 share an exit 12 in Taunton, so to eliminate that confusion, MA 140 will have their numbers changed first (MA 140's Exit 12 will be Exit 20, whereas MA 24's Exit 12 will become Exit 17).
On a related note, MassDOT advertised a couple weeks ago a project that will replace the MA 24 bridge over MA 140. The description of the project includes traffic signal improvements, so apparently the project will not upgrade the current MA 140 'exits' to MA 24.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bjcolby50 on September 27, 2020, 07:15:57 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 26, 2020, 11:58:28 AM
Quote from: bjcolby50 on September 26, 2020, 09:48:52 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 22, 2020, 05:41:10 PM
Why start with MA 140? I would have started with Interstates 91, 84 and 395/290.

MA 24 and MA 140 share an exit 12 in Taunton, so to eliminate that confusion, MA 140 will have their numbers changed first (MA 140's Exit 12 will be Exit 20, whereas MA 24's Exit 12 will become Exit 17).
On a related note, MassDOT advertised a couple weeks ago a project that will replace the MA 24 bridge over MA 140. The description of the project includes traffic signal improvements, so apparently the project will not upgrade the current MA 140 'exits' to MA 24.

Ah...thanks for letting me know.  I haven't been down MA 140 since I graduated from UMass Dartmouth over 25 years ago.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on September 27, 2020, 09:47:21 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 26, 2020, 11:58:28 AM

On a related note, MassDOT advertised a couple weeks ago a project that will replace the MA 24 bridge over MA 140. The description of the project includes traffic signal improvements, so apparently the project will not upgrade the current MA 140 'exits' to MA 24.

The project includes adding a new exit ramp from MA 24 south to MA 140 north, adding a new ramp from MA 140 south to Stevens Street, and rebuilding the Stevens Street bridge over MA 140.  But you are correct, the current "exits" from MA 140 onto MA 24 will not change.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on September 28, 2020, 10:37:21 PM
MassDOT's posted the presentation slides from last week's public meeting:
https://newmassexits.com/images/MassDOT_Documents/Project_Documents/Exit_Renumbering_VPM_2020-9-24-20.pdf (https://newmassexits.com/images/MassDOT_Documents/Project_Documents/Exit_Renumbering_VPM_2020-9-24-20.pdf)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on October 05, 2020, 02:52:46 PM
Quote from: bjcolby50 on September 26, 2020, 09:48:52 AM
MA 24 and MA 140 share an exit 12 in Taunton, so to eliminate that confusion, MA 140 will have their numbers changed first (MA 140's Exit 12 will be Exit 20, whereas MA 24's Exit 12 will become Exit 17).

Yet I-95 and I-93 share an exit 37 in Reading but those numbers won't be changed until who knows...
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on October 05, 2020, 08:28:17 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on September 26, 2020, 12:45:53 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on September 25, 2020, 06:54:15 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2020, 09:44:52 PM
An official from Gloucester wanted to know why the new exit numbers for Route 128 end at current Exit 12 and not with the now former Exits 11-9.
This is a new one. Exit 12, for as long I have known, is the last interchange on 128.
I can remember long ago signs (smaller ones) with "Next Exit 11" and such up on 128 in Gloucester, but they are gone now.  There were once BGS type signs for the exit numbers.

While Exit 12 (Crafts Rd./Rust Island) is indeed the northeasternmost interchange along 128; Grant Circle (MA 127), the Eastern Ave. (MA 127) intersection & the Bass Ave. (MA 127A) intersection were designated Exits 11, 10 & 9 respectively since 1962.  Prior to such; Grant Circle was originally Exit 1 & Crafts Rd. was originally Exit 2.  The change was due to a proposed but ultimately abandoned proposal to extend the Freeway further into Cape Ann.  No, there wouldn't have been 11 more interchanges built with the extension because such would be too short   Adding 10 to the existing interchange numbers up to the MA 1A cloverleaf was viewed by the MassDPW as an easier adjustment/conversion.

As far as I know, there are still two signs out in the field the list Exits 11 through 9.

Circa Nov. 2019, last remaining BGS (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6040363,-70.7424276,3a,75y,60.62h,84.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUxR7h0Ep2y9j2Tlh43U9nQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

The fore-mentioned NEXT EXIT 11 sign circa Nov. 2019 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6223491,-70.6798691,3a,75y,122.64h,75.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spX41WaPJYYHqh8ZkNNpOVw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 05, 2020, 10:42:23 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on October 05, 2020, 08:28:17 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on September 26, 2020, 12:45:53 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on September 25, 2020, 06:54:15 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2020, 09:44:52 PM
An official from Gloucester wanted to know why the new exit numbers for Route 128 end at current Exit 12 and not with the now former Exits 11-9.
This is a new one. Exit 12, for as long I have known, is the last interchange on 128.
I can remember long ago signs (smaller ones) with "Next Exit 11" and such up on 128 in Gloucester, but they are gone now.  There were once BGS type signs for the exit numbers.

While Exit 12 (Crafts Rd./Rust Island) is indeed the northeasternmost interchange along 128; Grant Circle (MA 127), the Eastern Ave. (MA 127) intersection & the Bass Ave. (MA 127A) intersection were designated Exits 11, 10 & 9 respectively since 1962.  Prior to such; Grant Circle was originally Exit 1 & Crafts Rd. was originally Exit 2.  The change was due to a proposed but ultimately abandoned proposal to extend the Freeway further into Cape Ann.  No, there wouldn't have been 11 more interchanges built with the extension because such would be too short   Adding 10 to the existing interchange numbers up to the MA 1A cloverleaf was viewed by the MassDPW as an easier adjustment/conversion.

As far as I know, there are still two signs out in the field the list Exits 11 through 9.

Circa Nov. 2019, last remaining BGS (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6040363,-70.7424276,3a,75y,60.62h,84.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUxR7h0Ep2y9j2Tlh43U9nQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

The fore-mentioned NEXT EXIT 11 sign circa Nov. 2019 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6223491,-70.6798691,3a,75y,122.64h,75.17t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1spX41WaPJYYHqh8ZkNNpOVw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)
Both are apparently still up. It was the BGS one that was the major issue with the Gloucester official. He wondered if the last exit is 12 now, why is that sign still up listing exits 11-9. He hoped the removal of that sign and any others would be a part of the renumbering project.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 10, 2020, 10:50:23 AM
Got an email from MassDOT saying a recording of the September 24 public hearing is now available at:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7K5e6SbuuE&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7K5e6SbuuE&feature=youtu.be)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 12, 2020, 12:45:13 PM
Received an email from MassDOT this morning with this information:
"Please be advised that MassDOT will begin converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Work will take place on each corridor in the west to east or north to south direction. Work will typically be completed during the overnight hours and the contractors are required to complete the full interchange before moving along to the next exit.

The following corridor will begin conversion in approximately two weeks [1 week by my calendar]:
Corridor: Route 140
Approximate start and completion dates: Oct. 18 - Oct. 23
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM"
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on October 12, 2020, 04:30:20 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 12, 2020, 12:45:13 PM
Received an email from MassDOT this morning with this information:
"Please be advised that MassDOT will begin converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Work will take place on each corridor in the west to east or north to south direction. Work will typically be completed during the overnight hours and the contractors are required to complete the full interchange before moving along to the next exit.

The following corridor will begin conversion in approximately two weeks [1 week by my calendar]:
Corridor: Route 140
Approximate start and completion dates: Oct. 18 - Oct. 23
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM"
I would hope they meant east to west direction.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: odditude on October 12, 2020, 06:01:45 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 12, 2020, 04:30:20 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 12, 2020, 12:45:13 PM
Received an email from MassDOT this morning with this information:
"Please be advised that MassDOT will begin converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Work will take place on each corridor in the west to east or north to south direction. Work will typically be completed during the overnight hours and the contractors are required to complete the full interchange before moving along to the next exit.

The following corridor will begin conversion in approximately two weeks [1 week by my calendar]:
Corridor: Route 140
Approximate start and completion dates: Oct. 18 - Oct. 23
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM"
I would hope they meant east to west direction.

i think they're talking about the work itself, not the direction in which the numbers will increase. working in the same direction as the numbering goes could result in temporary duplicate exit numbering.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 12, 2020, 10:39:48 PM
Quote from: odditude on October 12, 2020, 06:01:45 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 12, 2020, 04:30:20 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 12, 2020, 12:45:13 PM
Received an email from MassDOT this morning with this information:
"Please be advised that MassDOT will begin converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Work will take place on each corridor in the west to east or north to south direction. Work will typically be completed during the overnight hours and the contractors are required to complete the full interchange before moving along to the next exit.

The following corridor will begin conversion in approximately two weeks [1 week by my calendar]:
Corridor: Route 140
Approximate start and completion dates: Oct. 18 - Oct. 23
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM"
I would hope they meant east to west direction.

i think they're talking about the work itself, not the direction in which the numbers will increase. working in the same direction as the numbering goes could result in temporary duplicate exit numbering.
They meant east to west, its how they describe how the work will proceed on their website. Someone didn't proofread before sending the email out. However, renumbering north to south could be a problem for I-93 where the new exit numbers are all lower than the current ones. This could lead to some temporary duplicate exit numbers. For example, if the numbers in the O'Neill Tunnel are changed before those to the south, a driver on I-93 North would see numbers progress up to 15, 16, 18, 20 then go back to 17 then a duplicate 18 then 20. Perhaps they should start I-93 at the southern end and work north.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on October 12, 2020, 11:42:09 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 12, 2020, 10:39:48 PM
Quote from: odditude on October 12, 2020, 06:01:45 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 12, 2020, 04:30:20 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 12, 2020, 12:45:13 PM
Received an email from MassDOT this morning with this information:
"Please be advised that MassDOT will begin converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Work will take place on each corridor in the west to east or north to south direction. Work will typically be completed during the overnight hours and the contractors are required to complete the full interchange before moving along to the next exit.

The following corridor will begin conversion in approximately two weeks [1 week by my calendar]:
Corridor: Route 140
Approximate start and completion dates: Oct. 18 - Oct. 23
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM"
I would hope they meant east to west direction.

i think they're talking about the work itself, not the direction in which the numbers will increase. working in the same direction as the numbering goes could result in temporary duplicate exit numbering.
They meant east to west, its how they describe how the work will proceed on their website. Someone didn't proofread before sending the email out. However, renumbering north to south could be a problem for I-93 where the new exit numbers are all lower than the current ones. This could lead to some temporary duplicate exit numbers. For example, if the numbers in the O'Neill Tunnel are changed before those to the south, a driver on I-93 North would see numbers progress up to 15, 16, 18, 20 then go back to 17 then a duplicate 18 then 20. Perhaps they should start I-93 at the southern end and work north.
I hope they have thought this through and only do work in chunks that make sense. But... not holding my breath.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on October 14, 2020, 09:46:52 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 12, 2020, 10:39:48 PM
Quote from: odditude on October 12, 2020, 06:01:45 PM
i think they're talking about the work itself, not the direction in which the numbers will increase. working in the same direction as the numbering goes could result in temporary duplicate exit numbering.
They meant east to west, its how they describe how the work will proceed on their website. Someone didn't proofread before sending the email out. However, renumbering north to south could be a problem for I-93 where the new exit numbers are all lower than the current ones. This could lead to some temporary duplicate exit numbers. For example, if the numbers in the O'Neill Tunnel are changed before those to the south, a driver on I-93 North would see numbers progress up to 15, 16, 18, 20 then go back to 17 then a duplicate 18 then 20. Perhaps they should start I-93 at the southern end and work north.
According to the Contractor Documents and Special Provisions pdf that I found on the Bidx site, I93 will be converted south to north for that reason.
Excerpt from the document:



IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
The contractor shall implement the new exit numbers beginning from the northern-most end of
the corridor working their way south or from the eastern-most end of the corridor working their
way west. Implementation of I-93 will be the exception where construction shall begin in the
southern-most end and work north. This is due to the fact that all new exit numbers proposed on
I-93 will be lower than the existing number.

US Route 6 shall be the last corridor to be implemented.

Once the contractor has begun construction and implementation of the new exit numbers on a
corridor, they must complete that corridor before moving on to the next. In order to avoid
confusion from the public, any disruptions in the middle of a corridor of more than 3 days must
be coordinated and approved by the Engineer prior to the interruption in implementation.




Full document is available below (FYI its a download link), text was taken from page 266 of the pdf.

https://www.bidx.com/ma/attachment?filekey=634eabb0-a1c5-11ea-b814-e2690017612b/files/99892962-ace0-11ea-97d1-c045abd10e4d.pdf&drive=1 (https://www.bidx.com/ma/attachment?filekey=634eabb0-a1c5-11ea-b814-e2690017612b/files/99892962-ace0-11ea-97d1-c045abd10e4d.pdf&drive=1)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on October 14, 2020, 10:19:53 AM
Quote from: Alps on October 12, 2020, 11:42:09 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 12, 2020, 10:39:48 PM
Quote from: odditude on October 12, 2020, 06:01:45 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 12, 2020, 04:30:20 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 12, 2020, 12:45:13 PM
Received an email from MassDOT this morning with this information:
"Please be advised that MassDOT will begin converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Work will take place on each corridor in the west to east or north to south direction. Work will typically be completed during the overnight hours and the contractors are required to complete the full interchange before moving along to the next exit.

The following corridor will begin conversion in approximately two weeks [1 week by my calendar]:
Corridor: Route 140
Approximate start and completion dates: Oct. 18 - Oct. 23
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM"
I would hope they meant east to west direction.

i think they're talking about the work itself, not the direction in which the numbers will increase. working in the same direction as the numbering goes could result in temporary duplicate exit numbering.
They meant east to west, its how they describe how the work will proceed on their website. Someone didn't proofread before sending the email out. However, renumbering north to south could be a problem for I-93 where the new exit numbers are all lower than the current ones. This could lead to some temporary duplicate exit numbers. For example, if the numbers in the O'Neill Tunnel are changed before those to the south, a driver on I-93 North would see numbers progress up to 15, 16, 18, 20 then go back to 17 then a duplicate 18 then 20. Perhaps they should start I-93 at the southern end and work north.
I hope they have thought this through and only do work in chunks that make sense. But... not holding my breath.

I-93 is planned to be renumbered from south to north, largely for the reasons you have indicated.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on October 14, 2020, 02:55:11 PM
The first 12 or so exits on Interstate 93 will not get new numbers, so it is likely that the first exit that will get a new number is Exit 14: Morrissey Blvd. which will be changed to 13B (technically, Exit 13: Victory Rd. will become 13A). I also find it interesting that every exit north of Morrissey Blvd. will get a number that is lower than the existing sequential number. Even the last exit before entering New Hampshire, Exit 48 will become Exit 46.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 16, 2020, 12:08:45 AM
MassDOT Blog post about the upcoming exit renumbering on MA 140 starting Sunday night. The text states the renumbering will be from Taunton to New Bedford, when actually it will be just from Taunton to East Freetown:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/uncategorized/federally-required-exit-renumbering-beginning-on-rt-140-the-week-of-oct-18/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/uncategorized/federally-required-exit-renumbering-beginning-on-rt-140-the-week-of-oct-18/)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 16, 2020, 09:56:24 PM
Some MA 140 businesses don't like next week's exit number changes:
https://www.wcvb.com/article/massachusetts-exit-numbers-changing-october-route-140-first/34388436 (https://www.wcvb.com/article/massachusetts-exit-numbers-changing-october-route-140-first/34388436)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 18, 2020, 10:09:58 PM
Short report on NBC 10 regarding the start of exit renumbering tonight on MA 140. The interesting thing is they use video of signs along I-93 in Quincy where the exit numbers aren't changing:
https://www.nbcboston.com/on-air/as-seen-on/exit-renumbering-begins-tonight-on-route-140/2214052/ (https://www.nbcboston.com/on-air/as-seen-on/exit-renumbering-begins-tonight-on-route-140/2214052/)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on October 19, 2020, 10:30:06 AM
WCVB had a story on the news this morning about the new exit numbers.  You can see actual video footage of the first mile-based numbers going up:
https://www.wcvb.com/article/massachusetts-exit-numbers-change-begins-route-140-first/34413239
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on October 19, 2020, 03:56:34 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on October 19, 2020, 10:30:06 AM
WCVB had a story on the news this morning about the new exit numbers.  You can see actual video footage of the first mile-based numbers going up:
https://www.wcvb.com/article/massachusetts-exit-numbers-change-begins-route-140-first/34413239

The day we have all been waiting for.....has come.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: epzik8 on October 19, 2020, 04:36:57 PM
Didn't Massachusetts request an exemption from mileage-based exits but got denied?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on October 19, 2020, 05:16:59 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 19, 2020, 04:36:57 PM
Didn't Massachusetts request an exemption from mileage-based exits but got denied?

Yes, and Rhode Island did try to do that as well, but they got denied as well.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 19, 2020, 09:32:21 PM
From my quick trip to check out the new exit numbers on MA 140. Only the MA 24 exit signs were changed. The new number sign photos (and a couple not yet renumbered) for MA 140 are at:
http://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (http://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

It appears the contractor will only be doing 1 exit per night. The 5 exits on MA 140 will take up this week. Work on I-195 is to start next Sunday night and renumbering its 22 exits are scheduled to take 4 weeks.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on October 19, 2020, 09:51:20 PM
Quote from: epzik8 on October 19, 2020, 04:36:57 PM
Didn't Massachusetts request an exemption from mileage-based exits but got denied?

Yes.   Shortly after the 2009 MUTCD was enacted,  Massachusetts and the other sequential states jointly wrote FHWA and requested an exemption from the requirement to convert to milepost based numbering.   The request was denied shortly thereafter.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on October 19, 2020, 11:05:10 PM
I have received an email about the next corridor for renumbering, I-195.

Quote
Please be advised that MassDOT will begin converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Work will take place on each corridor in the east to west or north to south direction. Work will typically be completed during the overnight hours and the contractors are required to complete the full interchange before moving along to the next exit.

The following corridor will begin conversion in approximately two weeks:   

  • Corridor: Interstate 195
  • Location: Beginning in Wareham and ending in Seekonk
  • Approximate start and completion dates: Oct. 25 - Nov. 20
  • Hours of operation:  8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

For more information on the project please visit the project's website. If needed, a GIS shapefile with the specific numbering information is available on Massachusetts' GeoDOT site.

If this pace continues, we should see MA 25 complete around Thanksgiving, and the next routes announced by the end of November or early December.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 26, 2020, 09:49:08 PM
I've uploaded photos taken over the past week of the newly renumbered signs along MA 140 between Taunton and Freetown. They are available in the photo gallery of my New England Exit Renumbering Central website:
http://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (http://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on October 29, 2020, 11:59:15 AM
For the MA 140 renumbering, I don't understand why they didn't renumber exits 2-4.  They're closer to mileposts 1-3!

I've also noticed that in Massachusetts, if you go north/east I-95, I-93, or the Mass. Pike (I-90), you started with Exit 2, not 1.  Thankfully mile-based exits will make this a moot point.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on October 29, 2020, 12:25:28 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on October 29, 2020, 11:59:15 AM
For the MA 140 renumbering, I don't understand why they didn't renumber exits 2-4.  They're closer to mileposts 1-3!

I've also noticed that in Massachusetts, if you go north/east I-95, I-93, or the Mass. Pike (I-90), you started with Exit 2, not 1.  Thankfully mile-based exits will make this a moot point.

According to the plans,  both I-95 and I-93 will retain their existing southbound only Exit 1's since Massachusetts is not going to be utilizing Exit 0.  I-90 Exit 1, which is westbound only,  will change to Exit 3.

SM-A515U
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 30, 2020, 12:48:32 PM
Photo gallery showing the in progress exit number changes on I-195 from Fall River to Wareham:
https://www.southcoasttoday.com/photogallery/NB/20201002/NEWS/100109998/PH/1 (https://www.southcoasttoday.com/photogallery/NB/20201002/NEWS/100109998/PH/1)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 30, 2020, 09:46:17 PM
Looks like progress on renumbering I-195 has been faster than MassDOT expected, therefore they sent the following email out this afternoon:
Statewide Exit Renumbering Project

The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) is announcing construction updates on the Statewide Exit Renumbering Project. MassDOT is converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Construction began in the Fall of 2020 and is anticipated to end in Summer 2021. Work on Route 25 and Route 3 will begin in 'mid-November' on the following approximate dates:
Route 25: November 8, 2020
Route 3: November 15, 2020
Please note that all work is weather dependent and start dates may be adjusted accordingly.

Work will take place on each corridor in the east to west or north to south direction. Work will typically be completed during the overnight hours. Construction schedule updates are posted regularly to the project website. For more information on the project, to submit a comment or question, or to sign up for construction updates, please visit the project website: newmassexits.com

MA Route 25 wasn't suppose to start until later in November. I was somewhat surprised that US 6 was not the next route chosen after 25, at the public hearing people on the Cape said if it was going to happen anyway then they should do it as soon as possible so everyone could update their information before the next vacation season.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on October 30, 2020, 11:22:04 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 30, 2020, 09:46:17 PM
I was somewhat surprised that US 6 was not the next route chosen after 25, at the public hearing people on the Cape said if it was going to happen anyway then they should do it as soon as possible so everyone could update their information before the next vacation season.

US 6 is supposed to be the last road converted. (emphasis added)

Quote from: 5foot14 on October 14, 2020, 09:46:52 AM
According to the Contractor Documents and Special Provisions pdf that I found on the Bidx site, I-93 will be converted south to north for that reason.
Excerpt from the document:



IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
The contractor shall implement the new exit numbers beginning from the northern-most end of
the corridor working their way south or from the eastern-most end of the corridor working their
way west. Implementation of I-93 will be the exception where construction shall begin in the
southern-most end and work north. This is due to the fact that all new exit numbers proposed on
I-93 will be lower than the existing number.

US Route 6 shall be the last corridor to be implemented.

Once the contractor has begun construction and implementation of the new exit numbers on a
corridor, they must complete that corridor before moving on to the next. In order to avoid
confusion from the public, any disruptions in the middle of a corridor of more than 3 days must
be coordinated and approved by the Engineer prior to the interruption in implementation.




Full document is available below (FYI its a download link), text was taken from page 266 of the pdf.

https://www.bidx.com/ma/attachment?filekey=634eabb0-a1c5-11ea-b814-e2690017612b/files/99892962-ace0-11ea-97d1-c045abd10e4d.pdf&drive=1 (https://www.bidx.com/ma/attachment?filekey=634eabb0-a1c5-11ea-b814-e2690017612b/files/99892962-ace0-11ea-97d1-c045abd10e4d.pdf&drive=1)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 07, 2020, 05:41:05 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on October 30, 2020, 11:22:04 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 30, 2020, 09:46:17 PM
I was somewhat surprised that US 6 was not the next route chosen after 25, at the public hearing people on the Cape said if it was going to happen anyway then they should do it as soon as possible so everyone could update their information before the next vacation season.

US 6 is supposed to be the last road converted. (emphasis added)

Quote from: 5foot14 on October 14, 2020, 09:46:52 AM
According to the Contractor Documents and Special Provisions pdf that I found on the Bidx site, I-93 will be converted south to north for that reason.
Excerpt from the document:



IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
The contractor shall implement the new exit numbers beginning from the northern-most end of
the corridor working their way south or from the eastern-most end of the corridor working their
way west. Implementation of I-93 will be the exception where construction shall begin in the
southern-most end and work north. This is due to the fact that all new exit numbers proposed on
I-93 will be lower than the existing number.

US Route 6 shall be the last corridor to be implemented.

Once the contractor has begun construction and implementation of the new exit numbers on a
corridor, they must complete that corridor before moving on to the next. In order to avoid
confusion from the public, any disruptions in the middle of a corridor of more than 3 days must
be coordinated and approved by the Engineer prior to the interruption in implementation.




Full document is available below (FYI its a download link), text was taken from page 266 of the pdf.

https://www.bidx.com/ma/attachment?filekey=634eabb0-a1c5-11ea-b814-e2690017612b/files/99892962-ace0-11ea-97d1-c045abd10e4d.pdf&drive=1 (https://www.bidx.com/ma/attachment?filekey=634eabb0-a1c5-11ea-b814-e2690017612b/files/99892962-ace0-11ea-97d1-c045abd10e4d.pdf&drive=1)
Based on this entry from the MassDOT project listing, it appears they are trying to complete all the routes in District 5 by the end of the year, and notice one of the places exits will be changed:
"Work began on this Contract on Sunday, October 18. It is expected that the sign replacements along the contracted corridors will continue into late Spring 2021. Through the rest of 2020, work will be focused in the South Coast and Cape Cod (MassDOT District 5). Work on the remaining corridors will follow through the end of May 2021. (as of 11/04/2020)."
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 07, 2020, 05:53:27 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 26, 2020, 11:58:28 AM
Quote from: bjcolby50 on September 26, 2020, 09:48:52 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 22, 2020, 05:41:10 PM
Why start with MA 140? I would have started with Interstates 91, 84 and 395/290.

MA 24 and MA 140 share an exit 12 in Taunton, so to eliminate that confusion, MA 140 will have their numbers changed first (MA 140's Exit 12 will be Exit 20, whereas MA 24's Exit 12 will become Exit 17).
On a related note, MassDOT advertised a couple weeks ago a project that will replace the MA 24 bridge over MA 140. The description of the project includes traffic signal improvements, so apparently the project will not upgrade the current MA 140 'exits' to MA 24.
The scope of work of the project from Addenda 2 of the contract documents:
"Improvements proposed as part of the Project include:
- New Route 24 Southbound Ramp to Route 140 Northbound/Industrial Drive (Exit 12B);
- Widening of Route 24 to three travel lanes in each travel direction, plus acceleration and
deceleration lanes at interchange ramps;
- Reconstruction of interchange ramps between Routes 24 and 140, including two lane
entrance ramps from Route 140;
- Replacement of three bridges: T-01-045 (Rt 24 over MBTA / Keolis Commuter Rail), T01-046 (Rt 24 over Rt 140) and T-01-047 (Rt 24 over Railroad) and the extension of the
Cotley River Culvert (T-01-054).
- New bypass lane on Route 140 southbound, between the Route 24 northbound and
southbound ramps;
- Widening of Route 140 to accommodate additional turning lanes and the bypass lane.

Notice the scope of project list, the project name, nor the sign plans recognize the upcoming changes in MA 24 exit numbers:
"Federal Aid Project Nos. HIP(BR)-003S(398), HIP(NI)-003S(398),
HPP-003S(398), HPP1-003S(398) & NHP(BR-ON)-003S(398)
3 Bridge Replacements and Related Work (Including Signals & Wall Structures) along a
Section of Route 24 Br. Nos. T-01-045 & T-01-047 (Steel) and Br. No. T-01-046 (Steel) at
Interchange 12, over Route 140"

The project documents can be found at: https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-21-1030-0H100-0H002-53893&external=true&parentUrl=bid (https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-21-1030-0H100-0H002-53893&external=true&parentUrl=bid)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 10, 2020, 10:37:44 PM
I drove part of I-195 East and all on I-195 West to document the new exit numbers on Sunday. All the numbers had been changed except those at the eastern end for I-495/MA 25 in Wareham.

The photos from the trip are at:
http://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (http://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

It appears the work to renumber MA 25 is complete as of last night. Not surprising since there's only 2 exits to change (and perhaps the work to complete I-195).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 13, 2020, 12:06:56 PM
MassDOT's Exit renumbering page has been revised with new dates for the next two scheduled routes:
MA 25 November 15
MA 3 November 17

and their Twitter account has new information about the next route to be scheduled in December:
"ADVISORY: Sign installations scheduled to begin Sunday, Dec. 6 on Route 6 on Cape Cod for the Statewide Exit Renumbering Project. The construction duration is approximately two weeks, ending in mid-December."

Based on comments to the post it appears some people on the Cape still hadn't heard about the US exit renumbering.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on November 13, 2020, 05:07:58 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on November 13, 2020, 12:06:56 PM
MassDOT's Exit renumbering page has been revised with new dates for the next two scheduled routes:
MA 25 November 15
MA 3 November 17

and their Twitter account has new information about the next route to be scheduled in December:
"ADVISORY: Sign installations scheduled to begin Sunday, Dec. 6 on Route 6 on Cape Cod for the Statewide Exit Renumbering Project. The construction duration is approximately two weeks, ending in mid-December."

Based on comments to the post it appears some people on the Cape still hadn't heard about the US exit renumbering.

Will US-3's exit number's be a continuation of MA-3's numbering, given that US-3 mileage is a continuation of MA-3 mileage?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on November 13, 2020, 05:10:52 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on November 13, 2020, 05:07:58 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on November 13, 2020, 12:06:56 PM
MassDOT's Exit renumbering page has been revised with new dates for the next two scheduled routes:
MA 25 November 15
MA 3 November 17

and their Twitter account has new information about the next route to be scheduled in December:
"ADVISORY: Sign installations scheduled to begin Sunday, Dec. 6 on Route 6 on Cape Cod for the Statewide Exit Renumbering Project. The construction duration is approximately two weeks, ending in mid-December."

Based on comments to the post it appears some people on the Cape still hadn't heard about the US exit renumbering.

Will US-3's exit number's be a continuation of MA-3's numbering, given that US-3 mileage is a continuation of MA-3 mileage?

It will be the same as the mile markers, so the numbers won't reset, but they will also skip some numbers to represent the section between Braintree and Burlington.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 17, 2020, 05:00:07 PM
MassDOT is holding another virtual public meeting about the Exit Renumbering Project, this one covering the western contract and the Mass Pike:
The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) is announcing an upcoming virtual Public Information Meeting for MassDOT's Statewide Exit Renumbering Project on Tuesday, December 1 from 6:30 p.m., to 7:30 p.m. This project is converting all existing exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements.

The public meeting will cover information about the project and the upcoming construction schedule. Members of the project team will be available to answer questions. The meeting link is available through registration at this site.

Construction began on this project in mid-October of this year and is anticipated to end in the Summer of 2021. This is a statewide project; however, this public meeting will be focused on the scope and schedule of the following corridor:
Interstate 90
As well as:
Route 2
Route 146
Interstate 84
Interstate 91
Interstate 190
Interstate 290
Interstate 395
Interstate 495

Meanwhile the eastern project contractors are supposed to start renumbering exits along MA 3 tonight, if they have completed work on MA 25, which was to start Sunday but it was stormy that night, so it may have been postponed.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: yakra on November 18, 2020, 01:08:35 AM
Eastbound, can we confirm the new exits 15, 25 & 27 are signed?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 23, 2020, 12:14:08 PM
Received an email from MassDOT this morning, apparently renumbering of MA 3 exits is now to begin next week:
"The following corridor will begin conversion in approximately a week:   
Corridor: Route 3
Approximate start date: Nov. 30
Approximate construction duration: 3 weeks
Location: Braintree to Bourne
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM"

It appears, based on Waze reports, that the last exit on I-195 East at I-495/MA 25 was renumbered last night. (Reports indicated alternative left and right lane closures on I-195 East, necessary since tabs on both sides of the diagrammatic signs needed to be changed) starting before the MA 28 exit and moving east. I am presuming then that work on MA 25, to be completed before MA 3, will be done over the next 2 nights before Thanksgiving. No word yet on a new date for US 6 which was supposed to start on Dec. 6. Perhaps they will wait until after the start of 2021.

Update:The MassDOT New Exits site was updated after I originally posted this. It now says I-195 is complete, and as I thought, the MA 25 work is to start (and maybe conclude, since there are only 2 exits) tonight. Word came out later about the rescheduling of US 6. See the next post.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on November 23, 2020, 04:19:04 PM
I got this email about Route 6 just now:

QuoteExit numbering conversion will begin on Route 6 on December 13, 2020. The construction duration is approximately two weeks. Work will typically be completed during the overnight hours. Construction details are as follows:
Corridor: Route 6
Location:
Eastbound construction: Beginning in Bourne and ending in Orleans
Westbound construction: Beginning in Orleans and ending in Bourne
Start date: Dec. 13
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 25, 2020, 01:42:22 PM
They're doing US 6 now? I thought US 6 was planned to be converted last since Cape Coders bitched about the new numbers, both when they were first proposed, and when the renumbering hiatus ended. I actually fully support not renumbering US 6 last, not as a way to "own" the Cape Coders, but to show them that converting the exits from 1-12 to 55-89 will not bring on the apocalypse.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on November 26, 2020, 12:31:08 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 25, 2020, 01:42:22 PM
I actually fully support not renumbering US 6 last, not as a way to "own" the Cape Codders, but to show them that converting the exits from 1-12 to 55-89 will not bring on the apocalypse.

I, however, fully support doing it to "own" the Codders!   :-D
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on November 26, 2020, 07:39:09 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 25, 2020, 01:42:22 PM
They're doing US 6 now? I thought US 6 was planned to be converted last since Cape Coders bitched about the new numbers, both when they were first proposed, and when the renumbering hiatus ended. I actually fully support not renumbering US 6 last, not as a way to "own" the Cape Coders, but to show them that converting the exits from 1-12 to 55-89 will not bring on the apocalypse.

I think they realized it would be smarter to do it not during tourist season.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 28, 2020, 10:54:03 AM
Took a road trip yesterday to check out the completed exit renumbering at the east end of I-195 and along MA 25:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i195signs1120yy.jpg)

And the last newly numbered exit sign on MA 25 East:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma25signs1120p.jpg)

For those who can't see the images, and for the rest of the photos from yesterday, they are available at:
http://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 01, 2020, 07:15:09 PM
Just attended MassDOT's virtual public meeting about the upcoming work on exit renumbering contracts 1 (Western MA) and 3 (Mass Pike). The renumbering of the Mass Pike is to start Dec. 13, the same day as renumbering is to begin on US 6. Work is to start in Boston and move west and they are allowing for it to take 4 weeks to complete. Work on the first contract is to start last, after the Pike is completed. They would not provide any information as to the first route to be renumbered or date, only that that the contractor (Liddell Bros.) is working hard to produce the overlays needed to begin renumbering. They will look at how hard a winter it is to decide whether work should start in January or later in the winter, not wanting to complete only a part of a route then be shut down for a long time. Work is still scheduled to be completed next summer. Work on MA 3 under the second contract was supposed to start last night but was postponed due to the weather, the contractors are prepared to start work at 8PM tonight (and I will check out any renumbering that has taken place tomorrow).

Not too many questions. One was asked about why weren't exit numbers added to the ends of several routes such as I-84 in Sturbridge, I-190 at I-290, and I-90 in East Boston. The MassDOT response was they decided not to add numbers where there historically have not been any. Adding exit numbers for the Mass Pike on I-84 was complicated by the additional wind load caused by the new exit tabs on the large arrow-per-lane signs that would exceed design specs, though IMO you could post the exit numbers elsewhere if that was truly a problem. Not having consistent signing practices at the end of Interstates within a state can be problematic too. Another person asked whether the FHWA could reverse their policy against sequential numbering and the need for the state to continue with exit renumbering, officials did not see this happening.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 02, 2020, 05:11:58 PM
The contractors started renumbering MA 3 last night. The first 3 exits in Braintree were renumbered southbound starting with the signs along I-93/US 1 North approaching the MA 3 exit:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmalmeroads.net%2Fmass21c%2Fma3signs1220f.jpg&hash=f866f320fb3029e005ab0e0c3e6182b709768c58)

I had assumed the MA project would be like RI's in that the exit renumbering would happen exit by exit on both directions of the route east to west or north to south, but it appears, both from the observations of MA 3 and news articles I've seen about renumbering of US 6 ("Exit numbering conversion will begin on the eastbound side of the highway in Bourne and proceed to Orleans before work shifts to the westbound side.") and I-90 ("Work is scheduled to begin in Boston on Dec. 13 and proceed westbound for about two weeks before the crews turn around and replace the eastbound signs.") it seems that only exits on one direction will be changed before moving to the next. Is this way going to be more or less confusing to drivers of the route undergoing renumbering?

The remaining photos from MA 3 are at:
http://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (http://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on December 03, 2020, 04:57:49 PM
It's nice to see the exit renumbering come closer to Boston now, but I have some questions:

-Why are old exits 19-18 now exits 42-41 instead of exits 42B-A?  The exits in question share a common off ramp from Rte. 3 south, so they don't need different whole numbers.
-As a result of this, old exit 17 is exit 40 when it should be exit 41.  Nobody's perfect, but, come on!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on December 03, 2020, 05:49:38 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on December 03, 2020, 04:57:49 PM
Why are old exits 19-18 now exits 42-41 instead of exits 42B-A?  The exits in question share a common off ramp from Rte. 3 south, so they don't need different whole numbers.
As far as I know, MassDOT did not want to add extra suffixes to previously unsuffixed exits, so its 42 and 41 now because it was 19 and 18 before.

QuoteAs a result of this, old exit 17 is exit 40 when it should be exit 41.  Nobody's perfect, but, come on!
41 was already taken by (old) exit 18, so 40 was the most logical choice. If MassDOT chose to renumber 19-18 and 42B-A, 17 would probably be 41.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 03, 2020, 10:59:04 PM
Former exits 16 to 14 were renumbered last night, so far 13 and 12 tonight. If they get to 11 they will be halfway done on the southbound side. Here's one of the photos I got today:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma3signs1220k.jpg)

The rest are at: http://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: spooky on December 04, 2020, 11:17:13 AM
Just navigated through 100+ comments on my town's Facebook forum about why Exit 12 is now Exit 27, as you might guess the average doofus isn't in favor.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on December 04, 2020, 02:58:34 PM
Quote from: spooky on December 04, 2020, 11:17:13 AM
Just navigated through 100+ comments on my town's Facebook forum about why Exit 12 is now Exit 27, as you might guess the average doofus isn't in favor.

Not surprising, given that New Englanders are naturally very resistant to change.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on December 04, 2020, 09:15:33 PM
Could you post a link to those Facebook forum comments, spooky? I would be interested to see what they say.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 04, 2020, 10:13:41 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 04, 2020, 02:58:34 PM
Quote from: spooky on December 04, 2020, 11:17:13 AM
Just navigated through 100+ comments on my town's Facebook forum about why Exit 12 is now Exit 27, as you might guess the average doofus isn't in favor.
Not surprising, given that New Englanders are naturally very resistant to change.
Here's one of the signs for the newly renumbered, former Exit 12:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmalmeroads.net%2Fmass21c%2Fma3signs1220ee.jpg&hash=0bf7d93ef35caacd0948252b79cbb6d2eb40eb29)

Others on my exit renumbering site photo section:
http://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (http://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: yakra on December 05, 2020, 12:50:51 PM
Has the 20A/B (NB) -> 43A/B (NB) renumbering taken place?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 05, 2020, 05:12:08 PM
Quote from: yakra on December 05, 2020, 12:50:51 PM
Has the 20A/B (NB) -> 43A/B (NB) renumbering taken place?
That will presumably be the last exit renumbered when the contractor completes the MA 3 exits heading north next week.
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/federally-required-statewide-exit-renumbering-starting-on-route-3-nb-from-bourne-to-braintree (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/federally-required-statewide-exit-renumbering-starting-on-route-3-nb-from-bourne-to-braintree)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: yakra on December 05, 2020, 08:05:33 PM
Oh yes. They're just doing SB now. Doy!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 06, 2020, 10:08:41 PM
The work crews have resumed MA 3 South renumbering at Smith Lane in Kingston tonight. This photo is now probably outdated taken earlier this afternoon (I've encrypted my MalmeRoads.net site, so all can see the images):
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma3signs1220tt.jpg)

I also took a photo of the hometown exit sign missed earlier this week:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma3signs1220hh.jpg)

The rest of the new photos taken today (showing still more problems with gore sign numbers) are at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

The last overnight of exit renumbering saw 5 exits done. If this happens again tonight, they still will need to do a couple more exits before starting the northbound side which is scheduled for tomorrow night. Will they do anything at Exit 1/US 6? The northbound signs are now arranged so the MA 3 is Exit 1A from US 6, the new numbering is making US 6 an exit from MA 3. Will they simply switch the exit tabs and add a new gore sign at the US 6 exit?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on December 07, 2020, 01:24:49 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 06, 2020, 10:08:41 PM
I've encrypted my MalmeRoads.net site, so all can see the images
Well, who knew that was the issue! Interesting. I encrypted mine 2-3 years ago because it was quick and free. I guess it's all the rage now.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on December 08, 2020, 09:23:57 AM
It just occurred to me that if Massachusetts did the following:

1. Re-designate MA 25 as I-195
2. Re-milepost I-195 so that it continues Rhode Island's mile markers (measuring distance from the I-95/I-195 interchange in Providence)
3. Re-number I-195's (and former MA 25's) exit numbers to reflect the "new" mile markers

This would result in the exit for US 6 before the Bourne Bridge becoming Exit 53.  Exit 1 on US 6 after the Sagamore bridge is being renumbered to Exit 55.  This would then provide some sort of (albeit unofficial) "exit number continuity", and could have helped alleviate the confusion and uproar about renumbering US 6 along the Cape.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on December 08, 2020, 01:56:06 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 06, 2020, 10:08:41 PM
I've encrypted my MalmeRoads.net site, so all can see the images

Thanks for that. Great job on the pix as usual.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on December 08, 2020, 04:02:53 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on December 08, 2020, 09:23:57 AM
same post as other thread
same response as other thread
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: yakra on December 09, 2020, 02:11:46 PM
Quote from: Alps on December 08, 2020, 04:02:53 PM
no link to other thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10638.msg2552851#msg2552851)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on December 11, 2020, 08:46:32 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 01, 2020, 07:15:09 PM
Not too many questions. One was asked about why weren't exit numbers added to the ends of several routes such as I-84 in Sturbridge, I-190 at I-290, and I-90 in East Boston. The MassDOT response was they decided not to add numbers where there historically have not been any. Adding exit numbers for the Mass Pike on I-84 was complicated by the additional wind load caused by the new exit tabs on the large arrow-per-lane signs that would exceed design specs, though IMO you could post the exit numbers elsewhere if that was truly a problem. Not having consistent signing practices at the end of Interstates within a state can be problematic too. Another person asked whether the FHWA could reverse their policy against sequential numbering and the need for the state to continue with exit renumbering, officials did not see this happening.
I stated similar on the FB thread & I'll restate it here.  I don't completely buy the wind-load spec reason/excuse for exit tabs can't be placed on those I-84 APLs. 

Why?

1.  When those APLs & support gantries were designed as part of the I-90/Mass Pike AET conversion project; it was already internally well known that MA was eventually going to be converting its interchange numbering.  As a result, designing such to support the additional exit tabs should've been automatic.  The only reason why the ramps to I-90 from I-84 didn't have exit numbers from the get-go was due to the two highways, when originally build, were owed/operated by two state different agencies... the then-MassDPW (I-84) and the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority (I-90).

2.  While not APLs, there are plenty of large if not larger diagrammatic sign panels in the Bay State that have exit tab(s) mounted on top of them.  The ones along I-93 southbound in Canton approaching I-95 had LEFT EXIT 1 B tabs retrofitted on them a few years after such were erected.

3.  The supposed reason for not placing an exit tab on this 1987-era BGS along I-95 northbound in Peabody (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5449074,-70.982856,3a,75y,23.8h,72.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sdVWgWx7Q-r6yUYt0nDkELw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) was wind-load related.  However, its 2015 replacement using the same late-80s gantry (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5448716,-70.9828836,3a,75y,4.65h,74.98t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sz1GMIYQPFzkhVoPD_3b9SQ!2e0!5s20150701T000000!7i13312!8i6656) now feature it... such also has the control cities in their proper order as well with respect to the exit ramps.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 11, 2020, 06:06:52 PM
It appears exit renumbering work on MA 3 North will not be completed until Sunday night, so the beginning of the US 6 exit renumbering will now start this Monday, Dec. 14. Work on the Mass Pike is still scheduled to start Monday night.

I took a quick trip along MA 3 NB between Hanover and Braintree. The last 2 exits in Braintree, which include I-93, still need to be renumbered. I took some photos of some of the renumbered exit signs, including at the former Exit 15:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma3signs1220fff.jpg)

The rest of today's photos have been added to the New England Exit Renumbering Central Photo Gallery:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: dkblake on December 14, 2020, 09:14:14 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 11, 2020, 06:06:52 PM
It appears exit renumbering work on MA 3 North will not be completed until Sunday night, so the beginning of the US 6 exit renumbering will now start this Monday, Dec. 14. Work on the Mass Pike is still scheduled to start Monday night.

I took a quick trip along MA 3 NB between Hanover and Braintree. The last 2 exits in Braintree, which include I-93, still need to be renumbered. I took some photos of some of the renumbered exit signs, including at the former Exit 15:

The rest of today's photos have been added to the New England Exit Renumbering Central Photo Gallery:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

For some reason, MA 3 is the one that makes me happiest to see the mileage-based numbers. The spacing of the exits and traffic patterns was just really frustrating for sequential ordering.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 14, 2020, 10:05:30 PM
The rest of the MA 3 North exits were renumbered last night/this morning. I went out in the rain to capture some images, better photos will be available soon at https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

Here's the soggy pic of the 1-Mile advance for the I-93 (US 1) exit:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma3signs1220aaaaa.jpg)

Meanwhile, work has started on the US 6/Mid-Cape Highway exit renumbering, on MA 3 South. There are references to the 6A exit across the bridge as Exit 1C that have to be changed.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on December 15, 2020, 12:58:55 PM
I wonder if protestors will tie themselves to US 6's exit signs, so that the numbers can't be changed? I seriously doubt this will happen, but anything is possible.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on December 15, 2020, 01:09:16 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 15, 2020, 12:58:55 PM
I wonder if protestors will tie themselves to US 6's exit signs, so that the numbers can't be changed? I seriously doubt this will happen, but anything is possible.
Given what people did to prevent I-84 to Providence, I wouldn't put it past them.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Pete from Boston on December 15, 2020, 02:11:21 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 15, 2020, 01:09:16 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 15, 2020, 12:58:55 PM
I wonder if protestors will tie themselves to US 6's exit signs, so that the numbers can't be changed? I seriously doubt this will happen, but anything is possible.
Given what people did to prevent I-84 to Providence, I wouldn't put it past them.

What extreme measures did people undertake to stop 84?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on December 16, 2020, 08:44:57 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 15, 2020, 01:09:16 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 15, 2020, 12:58:55 PM
I wonder if protestors will tie themselves to US 6's exit signs, so that the numbers can't be changed? I seriously doubt this will happen, but anything is possible.
Given what people did to prevent I-84 to Providence, I wouldn't put it past them.
There was a story (not sure if was true or just an urban legend) that at least one landowner drove ConnDOT engineers off their property with a shotgun as they attempted to survey the alignment for I-84 between Manchester and Willimantic.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on December 16, 2020, 09:01:36 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 16, 2020, 08:44:57 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 15, 2020, 01:09:16 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 15, 2020, 12:58:55 PM
I wonder if protestors will tie themselves to US 6's exit signs, so that the numbers can't be changed? I seriously doubt this will happen, but anything is possible.
Given what people did to prevent I-84 to Providence, I wouldn't put it past them.
There was a story (not sure if was true or just an urban legend) that at least one landowner drove ConnDOT engineers off their property with a shotgun as they attempted to survey the alignment for I-84 between Manchester and Willimantic.
I saw interviews with people that simply pulled up the survey stakes over and over.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: rushfan01760 on December 20, 2020, 10:56:34 AM
Drove on I-90 (Mass Pike) yesterday between Rte. 9 in Framingham and I-91 in West Springfield.  Westbound all the exits through Rte. 32 in Palmer were renumbered.

It appears that Waze has renumbered all of the exits on I-90 whether or not MassDOT has gotten to them yet.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on December 20, 2020, 11:27:15 AM
Quote from: rushfan01760 on December 20, 2020, 10:56:34 AM
Drove on I-90 (Mass Pike) yesterday between Rte. 9 in Framingham and I-91 in West Springfield.  Westbound all the exits through Rte. 32 in Palmer were renumbered.

It appears that Waze has renumbered all of the exits on I-90 whether or not MassDOT has gotten to them yet.

They must have gotten to renumbering that stretch within the weekend.  When our basketball team left for a trip to Hartford CT on the night of Friday, December 18th, Exits 9 (new 78) (I-84) and 10 (new 90) (I-290/I-395) in the westbound direction were not renumbered.

We plan on going to Boston College tomorrow from Hartford. Will have to see if MassDOT renumbered the eastbound exits... will be travelling from exit 9 (new 78) to exit 14 (new 123) in the eastbound direction...

And yes, Waze did update the exit numbers to the new ones as of Friday December 18th.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 20, 2020, 06:10:08 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on December 20, 2020, 11:27:15 AM
Quote from: rushfan01760 on December 20, 2020, 10:56:34 AM
Drove on I-90 (Mass Pike) yesterday between Rte. 9 in Framingham and I-91 in West Springfield.  Westbound all the exits through Rte. 32 in Palmer were renumbered.

It appears that Waze has renumbered all of the exits on I-90 whether or not MassDOT has gotten to them yet.

They must have gotten to renumbering that stretch within the weekend.  When our basketball team left for a trip to Hartford CT on the night of Friday, December 18th, Exits 9 (new 78) (I-84) and 10 (new 90) (I-290/I-395) in the westbound direction were not renumbered.

We plan on going to Boston College tomorrow from Hartford. Will have to see if MassDOT renumbered the eastbound exits… will be travelling from exit 9 (new 78) to exit 14 (new 123) in the eastbound direction…

And yes, Waze did update the exit numbers to the new ones as of Friday December 18th.
I traveled between Logan Airport and I-495 on the Pike westbound this morning. They have not renumbered the exits east of I-95, perhaps they're afraid somebody dropping off passengers for Christmas travels at Logan Airport will get lost on the way back with the new numbers. I took photos of some of the renumbered signs between I-95 and I-495, here's one of the I-95 signs in Weston:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs1220d.jpg)

The rest I took today are on my New England Exit Renumbering Central website:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

The contractor will not start renumbering eastbound until the westbound exits are done. That probably won't happen until at least next week. Meanwhile, on US 6 it appears exit renumbering is happening in the Yarmouth area tonight.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on December 21, 2020, 10:34:16 AM
Just travelled through I-90/Mass Pike eastbound and managed to take a few photos of the new WB signs from I-84 to I-95/MA 128 on our way to Boston College. Eastbound exits remain untouched as of now.

https://www.icloud.com/sharedalbum/#B0QGfnH8tlq2zW
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 21, 2020, 12:36:11 PM
Based on traffic camera images, it looks like the renumbering has made it out to at least the I-291 interchange as of last night. Waze reports early this morning had the exit renumbering taking place on US 6 East at least to Harwich.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on December 21, 2020, 02:11:02 PM
Will the renumbering of the Massachusetts Turnpike's remaining exits resume this week? I'm sure the incomplete project is already causing confusion. Hopefully, the other exits on Interstate 90 will soon be renumbered as well.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on December 21, 2020, 03:22:11 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 21, 2020, 02:11:02 PM
Will the renumbering of the Massachusetts Turnpike's remaining exits resume this week? I'm sure the incomplete project is already causing confusion. Hopefully, the other exits on Interstate 90 will soon be renumbered as well.

If you look at the post from Bob directly above yours, you can see he has traffic camera confirmation that exits are now done out to I-291/former Exit 6.  Seems like they're moving right along, and the plan as stated earlier is to do all westbound, then come back east.  No idea on the Boston extension. 

Wasn't expecting to see much progress right after a winter storm, but out they are! 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 23, 2020, 05:08:27 PM
A political science professor is not happy with the new exit numbers on US 6:
http://www.masspoliticsprofs.org/2020/12/20/professoru-is-not-happy-with-changes-to-route-6-on-cape-cod/ (http://www.masspoliticsprofs.org/2020/12/20/professoru-is-not-happy-with-changes-to-route-6-on-cape-cod/)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on December 23, 2020, 06:21:07 PM
BOO-HOO-HOO! WHINE! WHINE! WHINE! US 6's exit numbers are changing, end of discussion! Suck it up, Cape Cod! By the way, does anyone have any cheese? It would go well with the Cape Coders' wineing (whining).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on December 24, 2020, 07:05:53 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 23, 2020, 05:08:27 PM
A political science professor is not happy with the new exit numbers on US 6:
http://www.masspoliticsprofs.org/2020/12/20/professoru-is-not-happy-with-changes-to-route-6-on-cape-cod/ (http://www.masspoliticsprofs.org/2020/12/20/professoru-is-not-happy-with-changes-to-route-6-on-cape-cod/)

Again proving that political science is the most imaginary of the sciences.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 74/171FAN on December 24, 2020, 11:27:34 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on December 24, 2020, 07:05:53 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 23, 2020, 05:08:27 PM
A political science professor is not happy with the new exit numbers on US 6:
http://www.masspoliticsprofs.org/2020/12/20/professoru-is-not-happy-with-changes-to-route-6-on-cape-cod/ (http://www.masspoliticsprofs.org/2020/12/20/professoru-is-not-happy-with-changes-to-route-6-on-cape-cod/)

Again proving that political science is the most imaginary of the sciences.

The worst part is that he assumes that no one has traveled the length of US 6 in MA.  Of course, Travel Mapping shows that at least 12 people have (https://travelmapping.net/hb/showroute.php?u=null&units=miles&r=ma.us006).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 24, 2020, 11:31:07 AM
Based on Waze reporting work crews on US 6 west approaching the Sagamore Bridge last night, it appears work on renumbering US 6 exits on the Cape has been completed. Meanwhile, MassDOT issued a new blog post about renumbering that clarified the work on the Mass Pike and when the exits east of I-95/MA 128 will be renumbered:

"New exit sign installations began along I-90 westbound on Sunday, December 13. Crews began in Weston and are working westbound to the border with New York. Then crews will [then] work on I-90 eastbound from the New York border to Boston.  The remaining exit conversion on I-90 westbound between Boston/Logan Airport and Weston will be completed after the eastbound side of I-90. Exit conversion will take approximately 2 weeks to complete in each direction. Work is scheduled to take place during overnight hours, beginning at 8:00 p.m. through 5:00 a.m. the next morning."
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on December 24, 2020, 07:08:14 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 24, 2020, 11:31:07 AM
Based on Waze reporting work crews on US 6 west approaching the Sagamore Bridge last night, it appears work on renumbering US 6 exits on the Cape has been completed. Meanwhile, MassDOT issued a new blog post about renumbering that clarified the work on the Mass Pike and when the exits east of I-95/MA 128 will be renumbered:

"New exit sign installations began along I-90 westbound on Sunday, December 13. Crews began in Weston and are working westbound to the border with New York. Then crews will [then] work on I-90 eastbound from the New York border to Boston.  The remaining exit conversion on I-90 westbound between Boston/Logan Airport and Weston will be completed after the eastbound side of I-90. Exit conversion will take approximately 2 weeks to complete in each direction. Work is scheduled to take place during overnight hours, beginning at 8:00 p.m. through 5:00 a.m. the next morning."

Why did they decide to start renumbering exits on the Mass Pike at Weston and work toward New York, then do the easternmost part of the Pike last? That seems to be a caddiwhompus way of completing the exit conversion because--for a period of time that could range from weeks to months--exits on the easternmost section of the Pike will be the old sequential exits. Then they will jump to mile-based exits once you get west of the 128 beltway. Talk about confusion, there you go.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 25, 2020, 04:26:16 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 24, 2020, 07:08:14 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 24, 2020, 11:31:07 AM
Based on Waze reporting work crews on US 6 west approaching the Sagamore Bridge last night, it appears work on renumbering US 6 exits on the Cape has been completed. Meanwhile, MassDOT issued a new blog post about renumbering that clarified the work on the Mass Pike and when the exits east of I-95/MA 128 will be renumbered:

"New exit sign installations began along I-90 westbound on Sunday, December 13. Crews began in Weston and are working westbound to the border with New York. Then crews will [then] work on I-90 eastbound from the New York border to Boston.  The remaining exit conversion on I-90 westbound between Boston/Logan Airport and Weston will be completed after the eastbound side of I-90. Exit conversion will take approximately 2 weeks to complete in each direction. Work is scheduled to take place during overnight hours, beginning at 8:00 p.m. through 5:00 a.m. the next morning."

Why did they decide to start renumbering exits on the Mass Pike at Weston and work toward New York, then do the easternmost part of the Pike last? That seems to be a caddiwhompus way of completing the exit conversion because--for a period of time that could range from weeks to months--exits on the easternmost section of the Pike will be the old sequential exits. Then they will jump to mile-based exits once you get west of the 128 beltway. Talk about confusion, there you go.
My guess is that some of the exit renumbering heading west from Logan Airport might require shutting down ramps for the I-93 exits, and even with overnight work, they may not have wanted to do that during the holidays due to higher traffic volume to and from the airport. Though, they could have started at Allston-Brighton if that were the case instead of I-95. There will be a short-term duplication when the eastbound exits are renumbered because the Lee exit will become 10 and for a few days, no more hopefully, the Auburn exit will be 10 too.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: rushfan01760 on December 26, 2020, 06:22:59 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 24, 2020, 11:31:07 AM
Based on Waze reporting work crews on US 6 west approaching the Sagamore Bridge last night, it appears work on renumbering US 6 exits on the Cape has been completed. Meanwhile, MassDOT issued a new blog post about renumbering that clarified the work on the Mass Pike and when the exits east of I-95/MA 128 will be renumbered:

"New exit sign installations began along I-90 westbound on Sunday, December 13. Crews began in Weston and are working westbound to the border with New York. Then crews will [then] work on I-90 eastbound from the New York border to Boston.  The remaining exit conversion on I-90 westbound between Boston/Logan Airport and Weston will be completed after the eastbound side of I-90. Exit conversion will take approximately 2 weeks to complete in each direction. Work is scheduled to take place during overnight hours, beginning at 8:00 p.m. through 5:00 a.m. the next morning."

I was on US 6 today and can confirm that all of the exit numbers have been updated on that road.  The only thing I don't like is Rte. 3 North's designation of Exit 1B.  If this is supposed to be based off Rte. 3's mileage, then Rte. 3 North should not have a number because it would be exiting itself.  The 1B Exit number should have been transferred to the US 6 West (Scenic Highway) Exit.

[I also was on the Plimoth Plantation Highway westbound (toward Rte. 3 North) and noticed that the two advance signs for Exit 13 on Rte. 3 (just before the end) still have the exit number as 5.]
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 27, 2020, 12:47:02 PM
Quote from: rushfan01760 on December 26, 2020, 06:22:59 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on December 24, 2020, 11:31:07 AM
Based on Waze reporting work crews on US 6 west approaching the Sagamore Bridge last night, it appears work on renumbering US 6 exits on the Cape has been completed. Meanwhile, MassDOT issued a new blog post about renumbering that clarified the work on the Mass Pike and when the exits east of I-95/MA 128 will be renumbered:

I was on US 6 today and can confirm that all of the exit numbers have been updated on that road.  The only thing I don't like is Rte. 3 North's designation of Exit 1B.  If this is supposed to be based off Rte. 3's mileage, then Rte. 3 North should not have a number because it would be exiting itself.  The 1B Exit number should have been transferred to the US 6 West (Scenic Highway) Exit.
Here's one of the signs referred to above.
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/us6signs1220ww.jpg)

I agree that if the exits on the north side of the bridge are Route 3's, then the tab over the Route 3 North sign should be removed and the right sign have a tab stating Exits 1A-B. It made sense under a sequential system to differentiate between Exits 1 on Routes 3 and 6 by using letters, however, under a milepost system, and if the exit tabs are to stay where they are, then what's wrong with having them all as US 6 exits and having an Exit 55 C-B-A system as was previously proposed under the postponed 2016 contract?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on December 27, 2020, 02:50:11 PM
It doesn't really make sense to keep it as exit 1 with the new system. They should have kept the proposal from 2016 with exits 55 A-B-C because of the Sagamore Bridge. I'm not fully sure where MassDOT has mile 0 on Route 3, but it is primarily Route 6 going over the bridge. Exit 1C, located on the south side of the bridge, would be a Route 3 exit past the end of Route 3 itself.

If this were to switch to 55, it would make far more sense with Route 6 going over the bridge. The only issue would be Route 3 ending with exit 55, or an exit with multiple numbers (1 and 55).


Edit: I just realized that 1C is actually switching to 55. Still doesn't make sense that 1A and 1B carry over from Route 3, especially when a) these are signed from Route 6 before Route 3 begins, and b) Route 6's ramp doesn't have an exit number, implying that Route 6 is the through route (however, the layout of the interchange doesn't agree with this)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on December 27, 2020, 03:55:01 PM
They don't make any sense there.  55 for 1C EB and WB is OK.  The screwiness arises from 1A being basically off of 6 WB (at the very beginning of 3 NB too) but off of 3 SB, and with the sequential numbers, they could cover that up with the 1A number.  Now, US 6 WB is still not signed as an "exit" north of the bridge, once they break actual Exit 1A out from the thru signage for 6, with 1A being Scusset Beach and 1B being route 3.  Southbound Exit 1B for 6 EB carries signage over to the south side of the bridge after route 3 has ended and it is seen by US 6 traffic that shouldn't see it, as it is a route 3 exit number on the wrong side of the canal.
It seems that they feel forced to use the same exit number for Scusset Beach both directions, which is mucking everything up.  It could be 54B on 6 WB right at the start of 3 NB, with 3 being exit 54A.  Southbound on 3, the exit 1A is actually for both 6 WB and Scusset, so that could stay 1A off of 3.  Would the people giving directions to stuff around Scusset State Beach hate being exit 1A one way and 54B the other?  Sure, but the insanity of 55-1A-1B on US 6 with the A and B of exit 1 even being in the wrong order (eastbound, B should come before A especially as there used to be a C) has to be fixed.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 27, 2020, 09:59:52 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on December 27, 2020, 03:55:01 PM
They don't make any sense there.  55 for 1C EB and WB is OK.  The screwiness arises from 1A being basically off of 6 WB (at the very beginning of 3 NB too) but off of 3 SB, and with the sequential numbers, they could cover that up with the 1A number.  Now, US 6 WB is still not signed as an "exit" north of the bridge, once they break actual Exit 1A out from the thru signage for 6, with 1A being Scusset Beach and 1B being route 3.  Southbound Exit 1B for 6 EB carries signage over to the south side of the bridge after route 3 has ended and it is seen by US 6 traffic that shouldn't see it, as it is a route 3 exit number on the wrong side of the canal.
It seems that they feel forced to use the same exit number for Scusset Beach both directions, which is mucking everything up.  It could be 54B on 6 WB right at the start of 3 NB, with 3 being exit 54A.  Southbound on 3, the exit 1A is actually for both 6 WB and Scusset, so that could stay 1A off of 3.  Would the people giving directions to stuff around Scusset State Beach hate being exit 1A one way and 54B the other?  Sure, but the insanity of 55-1A-1B on US 6 with the A and B of exit 1 even being in the wrong order (eastbound, B should come before A especially as there used to be a C) has to be fixed.
I agree. At least they removed the exit number for US 6 East at the Route 6A exit (sorry for the late afternoon glare):
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/us6signs1220d.jpg)

I've posted all the photos I took yesterday, including of the Chase Road exit:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/us6signs1220m.jpg)

on my New England Exit Renumbering Central page photo section:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: CapeCodder on December 27, 2020, 10:19:52 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 23, 2020, 06:21:07 PM
BOO-HOO-HOO! WHINE! WHINE! WHINE! US 6's exit numbers are changing, end of discussion! Suck it up, Cape Cod! By the way, does anyone have any cheese? It would go well with the Cape Coders' wineing (whining).

I'm glad that they're changing. The sequential numbers don't really make sense anymore.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on December 28, 2020, 04:22:39 PM
See, Cape Cod! The exits on US 6 were renumbered without the Rapture or the Apocalypse happening. Now if they could just find a way to expand the two-lane section east of Exit 78 to four lanes, and convert the Sagamore Bridge from a four-lane undivided bridge into a four or six-lane divided bridge.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on December 28, 2020, 07:46:24 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 28, 2020, 04:22:39 PM
convert the Sagamore Bridge from a four-lane undivided bridge into a four or six-lane divided bridge.

Supposedly that's coming before this decade ends....  yes, seriously.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on December 28, 2020, 09:05:16 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on December 28, 2020, 04:22:39 PM
See, Cape Cod! The exits on US 6 were renumbered without the Rapture or the Apocalypse happening.
It's 2020.  Those things could be happening right now or yet to come.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Beeper1 on December 28, 2020, 09:58:21 PM
Mass Pike westbound exits are all renumbered all the way to the NY border as of today (12/28), not counting the Boston Extension.

Eastbound, so far the Lee, Westfield, and I-91 exits have been changed.   
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on December 29, 2020, 10:11:48 AM
The next batch of highways to be renumbered has been announced.

I-295: 1/3 and 1/4
MA 24: 3 weeks starting 1/5 (1/5 to 1/26)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Beeper1 on December 29, 2020, 11:49:23 PM
As of 12/29, Mass Pike eastbound renumbering has made it as far as Auburn.  At this rate, they should be complete by middle of next wee.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on December 30, 2020, 10:38:49 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on December 29, 2020, 10:11:48 AM
The next batch of highways to be renumbered has been announced.

I-295: 1/3 and 1/4
MA 24: 3 weeks starting 1/5 (1/5 to 1/26)
Here's the official MassDOT blog post announcement:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/federally-required-statewide-exit-renumbering-to-begin-on-i-295-rt-24/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/federally-required-statewide-exit-renumbering-to-begin-on-i-295-rt-24/)

It appears MassDOT estimates the contractor to do 2 exits in one direction per night. Therefore I-295's 3 exits (2 NB, 1 SB) will take 2 nights. MA 24's 27 exits (14 NB, 13 SB) would take 14 nights, and since the contractor works 5 days a week, with work over 3 weeks. So far, work has typically proceeded faster than this estimate, especially on US 6 where most of the signs were ground mounted and 4-5 exits were done per night. Work on MA 3 seemed to average around 3-4 exits per night. Liddell, the Mass Pike contractor, seems to be doing about 3 exits per night. Work was complete eastbound to I-91 (old Exit 4) at the start of the week and has proceeded over 2 days to Auburn (Old Exit 10). If this holds tonight, all the Worcester area exits and I-495 should be complete before breaking for the New Year's holiday. This leaves everything east of I-495 eastbound and east of I-95 westbound to be completed by Thursday of next week, agreeing with Beeper1's prediction.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: rushfan01760 on January 03, 2021, 08:21:43 PM
Was on the Mass Pike between Natick and Allston this weekend.  Most of the signs eastbound in this area have been updated; however, two advance signs for the old Exit 14 (I-95) exit eastbound (the 2-mile advance and a hazmat warning sign) had the exit number changed to 117 when the number should have been 123. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 03, 2021, 11:05:17 PM
Quote from: rushfan01760 on January 03, 2021, 08:21:43 PM
Was on the Mass Pike between Natick and Allston this weekend.  Most of the signs eastbound in this area have been updated; however, two advance signs for the old Exit 14 (I-95) exit eastbound (the 2-mile advance and a hazmat warning sign) had the exit number changed to 117 when the number should have been 123. 
That's a major error. Were there any Exit 123 signs for the MA 30/Natick exit? Did the renumbering continue beyond I-95?Because of the bad weather tonight, it does not appear the contractor has started renumbering I-295. Fortunately, they can do it in 1 night and are not due to start MA 24 until Tuesday.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: rushfan01760 on January 04, 2021, 08:46:46 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 03, 2021, 11:05:17 PM
Quote from: rushfan01760 on January 03, 2021, 08:21:43 PM
Was on the Mass Pike between Natick and Allston this weekend.  Most of the signs eastbound in this area have been updated; however, two advance signs for the old Exit 14 (I-95) exit eastbound (the 2-mile advance and a hazmat warning sign) had the exit number changed to 117 when the number should have been 123. 
That's a major error. Were there any Exit 123 signs for the MA 30/Natick exit? Did the renumbering continue beyond I-95?Because of the bad weather tonight, it does not appear the contractor has started renumbering I-295. Fortunately, they can do it in 1 night and are not due to start MA 24 until Tuesday.

I didn't see any 123 signs for the Rte. 30 exit but then again I didn't drive on the Mass Pike east between Rte. 9 and Rte. 30 so I can't tell what the numbers are there.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 04, 2021, 11:06:42 PM
Work has commenced, and will hopefully wrap up, on exit renumbering on I-295 tonight. Meanwhile, it appears exit renumbering eastbound has made it to the I-93 exit. Here's a photo MassDOT posted on its Twitter account this afternoon that was taken last night:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90exitnumberchangeati931421mdt.jpg)

The tweet said the contractor will be changing exit numbers in the Ted Williams tunnel this week, hopefully continuing on to get the rest of the westbound exits out to MA 16 in Newton as well.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 08, 2021, 10:08:43 PM
Work started on renumbering the exits on MA 24 South on Wednesday night. I took a quick drive out to see what progress had been made, the first 4 exits are renumbered. Here's the 1 mile advance for the third exit, MA 27:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma24signs121j.jpg)

The remainder of today's photos are at the usual place:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

Work has apparently been completed for the Mass Pike/I-90. I hope to confirm that sometime over the weekend.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 10, 2021, 11:07:42 PM
I took a drive along the Pike from Boston out to Auburn and back. The exit renumbering is not quite done. There are several auxiliary signs eastbound starting at Framingham that still have the old exit numbers. The overhead signs for the exits beyond Allston-Brighton need to be renumbered with the exception of I-93. The reportedly wrong numbered 2-miles advance sign EB for the I-95/MA 128 exit has been fixed:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs121gg.jpg)

All other photos taken over my past 2 trips along the Pike can be found at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i90exits (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i90exits)

The contractor changing exit numbers on MA 24 South appears to be at the I-495 exit late this evening, according to Waze.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on January 12, 2021, 03:35:52 PM
I was running an errand in Brockton this morning and crossed Route 24 at the Route 123 interchange.  When going over the highway (along MA 123), looking south I noticed the exit for 123 East has been renumbered to exit 31A.  But looking north, the exit for 123 West is still exit 17B.

Why is the contractor renumbering only the southbound side of Route 24?  Wouldn't this create confusion for a round trip driver?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on January 12, 2021, 06:08:04 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on January 12, 2021, 03:35:52 PM
I was running an errand in Brockton this morning and crossed Route 24 at the Route 123 interchange.  When going over the highway (along MA 123), looking south I noticed the exit for 123 East has been renumbered to exit 31A.  But looking north, the exit for 123 West is still exit 17B.

Why is the contractor renumbering only the southbound side of Route 24?  Wouldn't this create confusion for a round trip driver?

Because they are renumbering the exits on the southbound side first, then working their way back north.  SOP for the renumberings is to start at the north/easternmost point and work south/westbound, then work back north/eastbound.  It's only temporary. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on January 13, 2021, 09:15:57 AM
Email just got sent out that US 3 will be next up, with renumbering starting on 1/20 and go for 2 weeks.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on January 13, 2021, 10:34:23 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 12, 2021, 06:08:04 PM
Because they are renumbering the exits on the southbound side first, then working their way back north.  SOP for the renumberings is to start at the north/easternmost point and work south/westbound, then work back north/eastbound.  It's only temporary.

I thought MassDOT required the contractors to entirely complete work on an interchange before moving to the next one.  That would mean for MA 24, renumbering the I-93 interchange first, then MA 139 in both directions, then the Harrison Blvd/Central St exit in both directions, etc.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 13, 2021, 12:14:29 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on January 13, 2021, 10:34:23 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 12, 2021, 06:08:04 PM
Because they are renumbering the exits on the southbound side first, then working their way back north.  SOP for the renumberings is to start at the north/easternmost point and work south/westbound, then work back north/eastbound.  It's only temporary.

I thought MassDOT required the contractors to entirely complete work on an interchange before moving to the next one.  That would mean for MA 24, renumbering the I-93 interchange first, then MA 139 in both directions, then the Harrison Blvd/Central St exit in both directions, etc.
This is how RI and CT have done it. Apparently, not in MA. I thought the point of starting at the northern and eastern ends were to prevent confusion by changing exits in both directions at once. By only doing one direction at a time you do prevent duplicate exits in that direction, but you have a problem when returning in the opposition direction. Case in point, the work on MA 24 has been completed southbound and Waze reported they were returning in the northern direction last night. If they renumbered only the first two exits last night, then 8A became 8 and 8B became 10. Drivers today would see Exits 8, 10, 9, 10 heading north from Fall River. Yes, this is only a short term problem (to be replaced by a different one tomorrow), but could have been avoided entirely if MassDOT did what was done in its neighboring states.

With the announcement of US 3 being the next route renumbered under the Districts 4-6 contract, I predict the order of the remaining routes under the contract will be MA 128, I-93 and I-95.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 13, 2021, 05:13:36 PM
One thing I have found interesting during highways having their exits converted from sequential to mileage-based is that sometimes the exit sequence reverses direction following the renumbering. Whereas the sequential numbers may have risen from say, north-to-south or east-to-west, when they become mileage-based, the exits rise in the opposite direction. The only highway in Massachusetts that will have its exit sequence reverse direction is MA 128, the portion that didn't become part of Interstates 93 and 95 in the 1970's. Excluding the traffic circle and two intersections that had numbers, the exit sequence started at 12, rising as one goes west, and continued to 29 (and historically continued to 69 when MA 128's terminus was at the freeway junction between Interstate 93 and MA 3). Now the exits will start at 37, rise as one goes east, and continue to 55.


Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on January 13, 2021, 06:04:56 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on January 13, 2021, 12:14:29 PM
If they renumbered only the first two exits last night, then 8A became 8 and 8B became 10. Drivers today would see Exits 8, 10, 9, 10 heading north from Fall River. Yes, this is only a short term problem (to be replaced by a different one tomorrow), but could have been avoided entirely if MassDOT did what was done in its neighboring states.

Fun fact: the exit for Airport Rd was Exit 8 until 2012, when it got renumbered to 8A with the opening of the Innovation Way exit, now with the mile-based system it's back to being exit 8.  I'm not sure why Mass DOT didn't assign exit number 8A to Innovation Way in the first place - it cost them more money to renumber an existing exit in addition to adding a new exit at the time.  Thankfully, this is something mile-based exits "fixes".
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on January 13, 2021, 06:19:51 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 13, 2021, 05:13:36 PM
One thing I have found interesting during highways having their exits converted from sequential to mileage-based is that sometimes the exit sequence reverses direction following the renumbering. Whereas the sequential numbers may have risen from say, north-to-south or east-to-west, when they become mileage-based, the exits rise in the opposite direction. The only highway in Massachusetts that will have its exit sequence reverse direction is MA 128, the portion that didn't become part of Interstates 93 and 95 in the 1970's. Excluding the traffic circle and two intersections that had numbers, the exit sequence started at 12, rising as one goes west, and continued to 29 (and historically continued to 69 when MA 128's terminus was at the freeway junction between Interstate 93 and MA 3). Now the exits will start at 37, rise as one goes east, and continue to 55.



That confirms that 128 begins at 95/93 and no longer exists out to 3. Interesting that they had another opportunity to de-designate it by starting at "1" at the northern 95 junction and chose not to.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on January 13, 2021, 06:31:23 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 13, 2021, 06:19:51 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 13, 2021, 05:13:36 PM
One thing I have found interesting during highways having their exits converted from sequential to mileage-based is that sometimes the exit sequence reverses direction following the renumbering. Whereas the sequential numbers may have risen from say, north-to-south or east-to-west, when they become mileage-based, the exits rise in the opposite direction. The only highway in Massachusetts that will have its exit sequence reverse direction is MA 128, the portion that didn't become part of Interstates 93 and 95 in the 1970's. Excluding the traffic circle and two intersections that had numbers, the exit sequence started at 12, rising as one goes west, and continued to 29 (and historically continued to 69 when MA 128's terminus was at the freeway junction between Interstate 93 and MA 3). Now the exits will start at 37, rise as one goes east, and continue to 55.
That confirms that 128 begins at 95/93 and no longer exists out to 3. Interesting that they had another opportunity to de-designate it by starting at "1" at the northern 95 junction and chose not to.
According to MassDOT when the project was announced at the end of 2019, re-designating 128 "would require an outreach effort and changes to highway signs that is beyond the scope of the current exit renumbering project".
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 13, 2021, 11:53:36 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on January 13, 2021, 06:31:23 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 13, 2021, 06:19:51 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 13, 2021, 05:13:36 PM
One thing I have found interesting during highways having their exits converted from sequential to mileage-based is that sometimes the exit sequence reverses direction following the renumbering. Whereas the sequential numbers may have risen from say, north-to-south or east-to-west, when they become mileage-based, the exits rise in the opposite direction. The only highway in Massachusetts that will have its exit sequence reverse direction is MA 128, the portion that didn't become part of Interstates 93 and 95 in the 1970's. Excluding the traffic circle and two intersections that had numbers, the exit sequence started at 12, rising as one goes west, and continued to 29 (and historically continued to 69 when MA 128's terminus was at the freeway junction between Interstate 93 and MA 3). Now the exits will start at 37, rise as one goes east, and continue to 55.
That confirms that 128 begins at 95/93 and no longer exists out to 3. Interesting that they had another opportunity to de-designate it by starting at "1" at the northern 95 junction and chose not to.
According to MassDOT when the project was announced at the end of 2019, re-designating 128 "would require an outreach effort and changes to highway signs that is beyond the scope of the current exit renumbering project".
It's worth noting that MassDOT and its predecessors have tried to completely phase out the Rte. 128 designations from the I-95 portion for about 25 to 30 years.  For the most part*, the only 128 signs that appear along the I-95 stretch are trailblazer & reassurance route markers; the latter being either underneath or alongside the I-95 shields.

*Private guidance sign installs in Wakefield feature dual I-95/MA 128 shields on them.

If 128 were to be officially truncated at I-95/Peabody; the major sign alterations, aside from removing said-128 signs along the I-95 stretch, would be to change the direction cardinals to east-west along the Peabody-Gloucester stretch as well as resetting the mile markers to MM 0.0 at I-95 in Peabody.  However, given the past resistance to such; I don't see such happening. 

OTOH, MassDOT might be able to get away with truncating 128 from Canton to the US 1/MA 1A interchange in Dedham/Westwood if the Amtrak/MBTA Route 128 train station was officially renamed to something else.  Such would make 128's mile marker at I-95/Peabody at 34 rather than 37.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on January 14, 2021, 12:34:26 PM
Quote from: Alps on January 13, 2021, 06:19:51 PM
That confirms that 128 begins at 95/93 and no longer exists out to 3. Interesting that they had another opportunity to de-designate it by starting at "1" at the northern 95 junction and chose not to.

Quote from: PHLBOS on January 13, 2021, 11:53:36 PM
If 128 were to be officially truncated at I-95/Peabody; the major sign alterations, aside from removing said-128 signs along the I-95 stretch, would be to change the direction cardinals to east-west along the Peabody-Gloucester stretch as well as resetting the mile markers to MM 0.0 at I-95 in Peabody.  However, given the past resistance to such; I don't see such happening. 

The mile markers on "standalone" Route 128 started at 0 in Peabody in the past - this Google Street View from 2008 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5752643,-70.8810405,3a,75y,316.71h,91.25t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sz2GvNfgwLk_9OX0aOp7egg!2e0!5s20081001T000000!7i3328!8i1664) confirms it.  When the "enhanced" mile markers were rolled out across Massachusetts (I believe this started in 2009), the mile markers for standalone MA 128 started at 37, which indicated at the time that Mass DOT "officially recognizes MA 128 as concurrent with I-95 between Peabody and Canton".
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on January 14, 2021, 02:20:41 PM
It's been a long time since they placed the three decimal place mile markers at various points but one prominent one is still on "128" just past where I-95 used to exit (https://goo.gl/maps/YsjEQHpoJQRnoDWj6) up to 1988; mile 0 on independent 128 would have been at the US 1 NB/MA 129 exit where 95 also exited, and this overpass was at mile 0.314 in that scheme.  Evidence of the many times over the years they have half-heartedly tried to get rid of 128 where it lives with 95.  Nowadays, mile 0 would be a little further north.  And they probably will never do that.  :P
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 14, 2021, 08:57:52 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on January 14, 2021, 12:34:26 PM
The mile markers on "standalone" Route 128 started at 0 in Peabody in the past - this Google Street View from 2008 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5752643,-70.8810405,3a,75y,316.71h,91.25t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sz2GvNfgwLk_9OX0aOp7egg!2e0!5s20081001T000000!7i3328!8i1664) confirms it.
Those old mile markers predate the existence of the I-95/MA 128 interchange that was built & fully opened in 1988.  Back then, Mile Marker 0 was at the US 1/MA 129 interchange (then Exit 30, presently Exit 44).  The mile markers from the mid-70s were based on MM 0.0 being at the Braintree Split.

Quote from: PurdueBill on January 14, 2021, 02:20:41 PM
It's been a long time since they placed the three decimal place mile markers at various points but one prominent one is still on "128" just past where I-95 used to exit (https://goo.gl/maps/YsjEQHpoJQRnoDWj6) up to 1988; mile 0 on independent 128 would have been at the US 1 NB/MA 129 exit where 95 also exited, and this overpass was at mile 0.314 in that scheme.  Evidence of the many times over the years they have half-heartedly tried to get rid of 128 where it lives with 95.  Nowadays, mile 0 would be a little further north.  And they probably will never do that.  :P
Here's another one of those 3-decimal placed mile markers at the MA 114 overpass along MA 128 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5397644,-70.9382324,3a,75y,60.6h,71.63t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sytyxJjKogc5QE2nuU55hxg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).  3.71 miles from the US 1/MA 129 interchange.  Such were erected around the mid-80s.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: echo on January 16, 2021, 05:44:49 PM
If Massdot was serious about the 128 thing, they should start in Quincy
https://earth.google.com/web/@42.22822927,-71.01516288,36.24130249a,0d,60y,-108.2558h,85.4028t,0r/data=IhoKFjBkdkhkSFRHRFEwTXlSUnRpYWd6S3cQAg?utm_source=earth7&utm_campaign=vine&hl=en
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 18, 2021, 11:54:20 PM
Took a trip along I-90 in Boston this weekend and it appears the exit renumbering (with the exception of a couple small auxiliary signs) is complete, including the renumbering of the Logan Airport exit, which will now be the highest numbered exit in the state:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs121ppp.jpg)

The remainder of the new I-90 photos are at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i90exits (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i90exits)

I also checked on the progress of the exit renumbering of MA 24. It is completed southbound and was completed up past I-495 northbound as of Sunday, through MA 123 as of last night and the remainder of the exits are being renumbered through tomorrow night. Photos of the MA 24 signs are at the top of the photo section, or at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: yakra on January 19, 2021, 01:37:02 AM
I see that south of Exit 28, MA24 got 295ed.

295 as a transitive verb means to forgo renumbering exits spaced on average about 1 mile apart at the beginning of a highway when the exit numbers don't fully match the mileposts. Named after the 295 upta lopstah country theyah.

Speaking of 295, any word on the one in Mass?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on January 19, 2021, 11:37:07 AM
Quote from: yakra on January 19, 2021, 01:37:02 AM
I see that south of Exit 28, MA24 got 295ed.

295 as a transitive verb means to forgo renumbering exits spaced on average about 1 mile apart at the beginning of a highway when the exit numbers don't fully match the mileposts. Named after the 295 upta lopstah country theyah.

91 will be 295 on steroids when it is renumbered.  But then you could always get "290'd" , which is similar to being 295'd; the only difference is you've inherited the mileage of a previous highway.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 19, 2021, 12:03:02 PM
Quote from: yakra on January 19, 2021, 01:37:02 AM
I see that south of Exit 28, MA24 got 295ed.

295 as a transitive verb means to forgo renumbering exits spaced on average about 1 mile apart at the beginning of a highway when the exit numbers don't fully match the mileposts. Named after the 295 upta lopstah country theyah.

Speaking of 295, any word on the one in Mass?
I-295 was the first highway renumbered in 2021, here's a photo of the US 1 exit. I hope to make a trip down there soon to get the I-95 exit:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i295signspjw121c.jpg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on January 20, 2021, 09:21:49 PM
Exit renumbering has begun, with workers on the southbound side of the highway in Tyngsborough transforming Exit 35 into Exit 90.
(https://scontent-atl3-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/141271804_1855834214570813_948762427122137219_o.png)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on January 22, 2021, 07:40:33 AM
Drove north on 128 today.  There is now a VMS just after exit 28 stating that exit numbers change soon. Looks like 128 is next up after US 3 though i don't believe they've made an official announcement yet

SM-A515U
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 22, 2021, 08:13:12 PM
Quote from: echo on January 16, 2021, 05:44:49 PM
If Massdot was serious about the 128 thing, they should start in Quincy
https://earth.google.com/web/@42.22822927,-71.01516288,36.24130249a,0d,60y,-108.2558h,85.4028t,0r/data=IhoKFjBkdkhkSFRHRFEwTXlSUnRpYWd6S3cQAg?utm_source=earth7&utm_campaign=vine&hl=en
Such is actually in Braintree just south of the Quincy border.

That 128 trailblazer assembly has been there for well over 30 years and predated the official truncation to the I-95 interchange in Canton.  Such occurred at the same time that US 1 was rerouted onto I-93 south of Storrow Drive & onto I-95 between the the I-93 Canton interchange and the US 1/MA 1A interchange in Dedham/Westwood.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 23, 2021, 12:11:11 PM
Got to capture the remaining MA 24 signs that renumbered this past week on a drive yesterday, they include those for the I-93 exit:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma24signs121www.jpg)

Also have posted photos of the first few US 3 exits renumbered, courtesy of Paul Schlichtman, which includes the Drum Hill rotary, MA 4 exit: (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/us3signsps121k.jpg)

All the photos are at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 24, 2021, 11:26:32 PM
Took a trip almost to RI today to check out I-295's renumbered Mass. exits, here's the last one northbound:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i295signs121n.jpg)

The rest are at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i295exits (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i295exits)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: ran4sh on January 25, 2021, 02:04:46 AM
Quote from: yakra on January 19, 2021, 01:37:02 AM
I see that south of Exit 28, MA24 got 295ed.

295 as a transitive verb means to forgo renumbering exits spaced on average about 1 mile apart at the beginning of a highway when the exit numbers don't fully match the mileposts. Named after the 295 upta lopstah country theyah.

Speaking of 295, any word on the one in Mass?

The proposed new MUTCD does say that exit numbers can be 1 off if it's done to avoid letter-suffix exits. Including a figure illustrating that idea. But it also says that suffixes may be necessary to avoid numbers being 2 miles off, or if there are more than 2 or 3 exits in a mile.

So it makes sense that the states that are converting now are avoiding letter suffixes.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on January 25, 2021, 09:21:12 AM
Route 2 should be next. Their exit numbering scheme is a crime to humanity.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on January 25, 2021, 09:31:42 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 25, 2021, 09:21:12 AM
Route 2 should be next. Their exit numbering scheme is a crime to humanity.
What's wrong with Route 2's exit numbering scheme? (I haven't seen what the new exit numbers will be)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on January 25, 2021, 09:33:12 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on January 25, 2021, 09:31:42 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 25, 2021, 09:21:12 AM
Route 2 should be next. Their exit numbering scheme is a crime to humanity.
What's wrong with Route 2's exit numbering scheme? (I haven't seen what the new exit numbers will be)
It randomly starts with exit 14 on the west end of the expressway section, goes to 42 I think, there is an exit 50 just randomly in the middle, resumes at 52 and goes to 60.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on January 25, 2021, 09:36:22 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 25, 2021, 09:33:12 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on January 25, 2021, 09:31:42 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 25, 2021, 09:21:12 AM
Route 2 should be next. Their exit numbering scheme is a crime to humanity.
What's wrong with Route 2's exit numbering scheme? (I haven't seen what the new exit numbers will be)
It randomly starts with exit 14 on the west end of the expressway section, goes to 42 I think, there is an exit 50 just randomly in the middle, resumes at 52 and goes to 60.

The new numbering won't fix that. It still won't start at zero, and there will be a gap with a single exit in the middle, only with different numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on January 25, 2021, 09:37:07 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 25, 2021, 09:36:22 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 25, 2021, 09:33:12 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on January 25, 2021, 09:31:42 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 25, 2021, 09:21:12 AM
Route 2 should be next. Their exit numbering scheme is a crime to humanity.
What's wrong with Route 2's exit numbering scheme? (I haven't seen what the new exit numbers will be)
It randomly starts with exit 14 on the west end of the expressway section, goes to 42 I think, there is an exit 50 just randomly in the middle, resumes at 52 and goes to 60.

The new numbering won't fix that. It still won't start at zero, and there will be a gap with a single exit in the middle, only with different numbers.
Yeah, but at least the exit numbers will make sense.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on January 25, 2021, 09:46:48 AM
Quote from: 1 on January 25, 2021, 09:36:22 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 25, 2021, 09:33:12 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on January 25, 2021, 09:31:42 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on January 25, 2021, 09:21:12 AM
Route 2 should be next. Their exit numbering scheme is a crime to humanity.
What's wrong with Route 2's exit numbering scheme? (I haven't seen what the new exit numbers will be)
It randomly starts with exit 14 on the west end of the expressway section, goes to 42 I think, there is an exit 50 just randomly in the middle, resumes at 52 and goes to 60.

The new numbering won't fix that. It still won't start at zero, and there will be a gap with a single exit in the middle, only with different numbers.

Yeah but at least following mile markers it will make sense. The exit 14 start had no rational basis whatsoever. It will still look weird, but it will be logical.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Jim on January 25, 2021, 09:48:14 AM
My assumption on MA 2 numbers was that they were based on a sequential numbering of where hypothetical interchanges would be placed if the road was ever completed as a full freeway end-to-end, or at least as far west as it could make any sense to do so.  The mileage-based numbers will definitely make more sense and convey something much more meaningful.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on January 25, 2021, 09:48:24 AM
So looking at wikipedia for mileage and seeing the new exit numbers on US 3 S/B thus far, it appears the posted mile markers are about 1/2 mile too high along the stretch from I-95. I was wondering how old exit 34 (Westford Rd), now exit 88, was 88 when the bridge crossing over the road is between MM 89.0 and 89.2. Well, it appears the exit is really at MM 88.6, and all the marker signs are off.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on January 25, 2021, 12:59:23 PM
Quote from: ran4sh on January 25, 2021, 02:04:46 AM
Quote from: yakra on January 19, 2021, 01:37:02 AM
I see that south of Exit 28, MA24 got 295ed.

295 as a transitive verb means to forgo renumbering exits spaced on average about 1 mile apart at the beginning of a highway when the exit numbers don't fully match the mileposts. Named after the 295 upta lopstah country theyah.

Speaking of 295, any word on the one in Mass?

The proposed new MUTCD does say that exit numbers can be 1 off if it's done to avoid letter-suffix exits. Including a figure illustrating that idea. But it also says that suffixes may be necessary to avoid numbers being 2 miles off, or if there are more than 2 or 3 exits in a mile.

So it makes sense that the states that are converting now are avoiding letter suffixes.
Interesting.  If that makes it to the final MUTCD, I can think of a couple interstates in NY that would de facto convert immediately upon adoption.  MA's sections that retain sequential wouldn't all meet that standard, though.  I-291 and I-391 both have numbers that are at least two off, and I bet I-91 does as well.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 27, 2021, 12:01:56 AM
Exit renumbering along US 3 South got to the MA 62 exit in Burlington as of last night. Tonight's work has been postponed by weather, meaning this number combination will be up for at least another day, showing a nearly 50 number difference between exits, courtesy of Paul Schlichtman:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/us3signsps121y.jpg)

When the new number is placed for the I-95 exit, the signs will still look odd because there will be a 2 miles distance between exits 73 and 72. Other photos of the changes to the I-495 exit in Chelmsford are at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on January 27, 2021, 09:55:53 AM
Got news via e-mail on a new route soon to get its new exit numbers

The following corridor will begin conversion in approximately a week:   

    Corridor: Route 128
    Approximate start date: Feb. 3
    Approximate construction duration: 2 weeks
    Location: Gloucester to Peabody
    Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on January 27, 2021, 12:23:03 PM
Got the email from MassDOT this morning announcing Route 128 as next up for renumbering. Anticipated start date is February 3rd and is expected to take 2 weeks. 

SM-A515U

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on January 27, 2021, 02:00:51 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on January 27, 2021, 12:23:03 PM
Got the email from MassDOT this morning announcing Route 128 as next up for renumbering. Anticipated start date is February 3rd and is expected to take 2 weeks. 

SM-A515U

Am I on your ignore list or something?  :-D
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on January 27, 2021, 02:43:37 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on January 27, 2021, 02:00:51 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on January 27, 2021, 12:23:03 PM
Got the email from MassDOT this morning announcing Route 128 as next up for renumbering. Anticipated start date is February 3rd and is expected to take 2 weeks. 

SM-A515U

Am I on your ignore list or something?  :-D
My bad, I thought i scrolled to the bottom... guess I didn't. 

SM-A515U

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on January 27, 2021, 07:08:49 PM
I've been noticing some of the news stations in the Boston area are a bit slow to adapt to the new exit numbering... a few examples:

https://whdh.com/news/multiple-crashes-reported-after-snow-creates-slick-spots-in-parts-of-bay-state/

Quote from: Multiple crashes reported after snow creates slick spots in parts of Bay State, WHDHTroopers responding to a reported crash on Interstate 90 westbound just before exit 13 across from the Natick Service Plaza Wednesday morning found a car with significant damage and a tractor-trailer that had gone off the road.


Even the State Police is using the old numbers:

https://twitter.com/MassStatePolice/status/1354418422508040192


As well as this part of the mass.gov website as well.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on January 27, 2021, 07:52:51 PM
Hopefully they will adjust to the new numbers in time. I'm sure other portions of the country that underwent sequential-to-mileage-based exit renumberings had similar problems initially.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on January 28, 2021, 07:08:34 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 27, 2021, 07:52:51 PM
Hopefully they will adjust to the new numbers in time. I'm sure other portions of the country that underwent sequential-to-mileage-based exit renumberings had similar problems initially.

Yeah but our media still calls a stretch of I-93 "128" despite it being removed from the roadway 32 years ago. Boston media can be a tad resistant to basic changes.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: yakra on January 28, 2021, 11:54:58 AM
Quote from: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos
When the I-95 exit number is changed there will be 2 miles listed between Exits 73 and 74, the reason below.
...
The milepost seen behind it is for Mile 74, why was that number not chosen?
More to come...
Don't leave us hanging! What is the reason?




https://newmassexits.com/us-3-corridor doesn't list a new number for the other Jct. I-95 & RTE 128.
Looks like it doesn't already have a number, and MassDOT isn't adding numbers to exits that don't already have them, correct?
Significant that it's an exit from the non-freeway portion of the route.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on January 28, 2021, 12:06:20 PM
Quote from: yakra on January 28, 2021, 11:54:58 AM
Quote from: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos
When the I-95 exit number is changed there will be 2 miles listed between Exits 73 and 74, the reason below.
...
The milepost seen behind it is for Mile 74, why was that number not chosen?
More to come...
Don't leave us hanging! What is the reason?

See my reply #829 above. The mile marker signs are apparently not reality.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: yakra on January 28, 2021, 01:19:43 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on January 25, 2021, 09:48:24 AM
So looking at wikipedia for mileage and seeing the new exit numbers on US 3 S/B thus far, it appears the posted mile markers are about 1/2 mile too high along the stretch from I-95. I was wondering how old exit 34 (Westford Rd), now exit 88, was 88 when the bridge crossing over the road is between MM 89.0 and 89.2. Well, it appears the exit is really at MM 88.6, and all the marker signs are off.
Just to muddy the waters even more, some data from RoadInv2017/Road_Inventory shapefiles (downloaded here (https://docs.digital.mass.gov/dataset/massgis-data-massachusetts-department-transportation-massdot-roads) iirc, dated 2017-07-11):

MM      Exit
70.2    I-95
72.4    MA62
87.8    Westford Rd
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on January 28, 2021, 01:32:19 PM
Quote from: yakra on January 28, 2021, 01:19:43 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on January 25, 2021, 09:48:24 AM
So looking at wikipedia for mileage and seeing the new exit numbers on US 3 S/B thus far, it appears the posted mile markers are about 1/2 mile too high along the stretch from I-95. I was wondering how old exit 34 (Westford Rd), now exit 88, was 88 when the bridge crossing over the road is between MM 89.0 and 89.2. Well, it appears the exit is really at MM 88.6, and all the marker signs are off.
Just to muddy the waters even more, some data from RoadInv2017/Road_Inventory shapefiles (downloaded here (https://docs.digital.mass.gov/dataset/massgis-data-massachusetts-department-transportation-massdot-roads) iirc, dated 2017-07-11):

MM      Exit
70.2    I-95
72.4    MA62
87.8    Westford Rd


So 62 and Westford Road are pretty much OK as far as the new exit numbers (Route 62 could have been 73, but at 72.4 it could go either way).  Could someone have read the mileage at 128/95 aloud as "seventy, two" and someone else wrote it down as 72 and that's how the new exit number got to be what it is?  :P  It is seriously off to have the numbers differ by 1 with more than 2 miles between the exits and no need for fudging to avoid extra letters or anything.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 28, 2021, 03:43:02 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on January 28, 2021, 01:32:19 PM
Quote from: yakra on January 28, 2021, 01:19:43 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on January 25, 2021, 09:48:24 AM
So looking at wikipedia for mileage and seeing the new exit numbers on US 3 S/B thus far, it appears the posted mile markers are about 1/2 mile too high along the stretch from I-95. I was wondering how old exit 34 (Westford Rd), now exit 88, was 88 when the bridge crossing over the road is between MM 89.0 and 89.2. Well, it appears the exit is really at MM 88.6, and all the marker signs are off.
Just to muddy the waters even more, some data from RoadInv2017/Road_Inventory shapefiles (downloaded here (https://docs.digital.mass.gov/dataset/massgis-data-massachusetts-department-transportation-massdot-roads) iirc, dated 2017-07-11):

MM      Exit
70.2    I-95
72.4    MA62
87.8    Westford Rd


So 62 and Westford Road are pretty much OK as far as the new exit numbers (Route 62 could have been 73, but at 72.4 it could go either way).  Could someone have read the mileage at 128/95 aloud as "seventy, two" and someone else wrote it down as 72 and that's how the new exit number got to be what it is?  :P  It is seriously off to have the numbers differ by 1 with more than 2 miles between the exits and no need for fudging to avoid extra letters or anything.
US 3 MM 73.6 just south of the MA 62 underpass (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5010265,-71.2419228,3a,75y,313.26h,82.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUdClWYu6o5bwhRTXv4S9ig!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) 
That said, assigning this interchange Exit 74 instead of Exit 73 would've made more logical sense.

For the I-95 (MA 128)/US 3 interchange further south:

US 3 southbound MM 71.6 just north of the I-95 underpass (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4776486,-71.2209775,3a,75y,176.72h,89.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMpjmYaV0e18BnwbFVlkzyw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Further down US 3 southbound along the cloverleaf ramp at MM 71.4 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4747737,-71.2194872,3a,75y,215.31h,80.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sE2ltMIlBex1httxbI6od1g!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

MM 71.2 along US 3 northbound from I-95 southbound prior to merging with the mainline US 3 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4786131,-71.2197019,3a,75y,318.11h,85.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5BcmP1E-49mWQnYPlpCsLA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

A pair of MM 71 markers along I-95 southbound/US 3 northbound (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4779601,-71.2157477,3a,75y,278.24h,81.69t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfrmWPKBW2DO5rb-hCBWFGw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

MM 71's opposite companions along I-95 northbound/US 3 southbound (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4774699,-71.2157504,3a,75y,90.81h,82.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sJ9SZ70xiOkD2jEC1jeO9rA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DJ9SZ70xiOkD2jEC1jeO9rA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D160.53088%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192)

This one's more of a toughy given the interchange geometry & route concurrency.  If one were to hold US 3 northbound, the I-95 interchange would be Exits 71 B-A*.  However, since US 3 southbound comprises more of the mainline US 3 corridor as well as longer mileage (the mainline I-95 underpass is roughly at US 3 southbound's MM 71.5); one could justify assigning it Exits 72 B-A*.  It's also worth noting & for obvious reasons that the I-95 exits are only along US 3 southbound; therefore, Exits 72 B-A* gets the nod.
*Given that Exit 72 A (old 25 A) is thru-US 3 southbound (to I-95 northbound); I would've ditched the exit tab for that movement altogether and signed the I-95 southbound exit ramp simply as Exit 72.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 31, 2021, 12:27:07 PM
Exit renumbering on US 3 North has gotten as far as the MA 129 exit in Chelmsford. Here's the latest number gap to appear on the route, with the I-495 exit not yet renumbered, courtesy of Paul Schlichtman:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/us3signsps121xx.jpg)

Photos documenting the complete exit renumbering of US 3 South, can be found at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DrSmith on January 31, 2021, 02:12:12 PM
Signs were put along 91 indicating that exit numbers are changing soon
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on February 01, 2021, 11:27:00 PM
They completed renumbering the I-495 and MA 110 exits on US 3 North before the storm hit, but they got this one wrong, this is now Exits 80/81A:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/us3signsps221c.jpg)

The rest have the correct numbers, but they are backwards, though they are in the same order as the Old Exit numbers (and someone forgot an S):
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/us3signsps221e.jpg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on February 05, 2021, 10:08:11 AM
Drove up Route 128 this morning, so far no progress has been made on the exit renumbering. I'm assuming this is due to delays on US3 due to the nor'easter we had this week.

SM-A515U

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on February 05, 2021, 10:23:33 AM
This is a correct assumption. The contractor needs to finish US 3 before proceeding to 128.

Quote from: 5foot14 on February 05, 2021, 10:08:11 AM
Drove up Route 128 this morning, so far no progress has been made on the exit renumbering. I'm assuming this is due to delays on US3 due to the nor'easter we had this week.

SM-A515U
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on February 05, 2021, 10:26:29 AM
Quote from: 5foot14 on February 05, 2021, 10:08:11 AM
Drove up Route 128 this morning, so far no progress has been made on the exit renumbering. I'm assuming this is due to delays on US3 due to the nor'easter we had this week.

SM-A515U

Looks like work is slowing down now that winter has finally hit New England.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kefkafloyd on February 05, 2021, 05:11:38 PM
Got a chuckle yesterday when exiting US 3 northbound on exit "76" when the mile marker is right on the ramp saying 77.

Still, it's progress. I'll take it.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Brandon on February 07, 2021, 07:46:35 AM
Quote from: kefkafloyd on February 05, 2021, 05:11:38 PM
Got a chuckle yesterday when exiting US 3 northbound on exit "76" when the mile marker is right on the ramp saying 77.

Still, it's progress. I'll take it.

If the exit is between MM76 and MM77, there's no reason why it cannot, nor should not be Exit 76.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: ran4sh on February 07, 2021, 05:57:23 PM
What matters is the location of the crossing road, which, if a mile marker 77 was next to a northbound exit ramp, it would mean that the road is between markers 77 and 78. (but very close to 77)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 08, 2021, 02:47:43 PM
If Massachusetts did not consider US 3 and MA 3 one route, the Northwest Expressway's exit sequence (by mileage-based numbering) would probably have been numbered from 15 (Interstate 95) to 36 (Middlesex Road). Ironically, the last exit number would be the same as the former sequential exit number.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on February 08, 2021, 09:44:45 PM
Quote from: ran4sh on February 07, 2021, 05:57:23 PM
What matters is the location of the crossing road, which, if a mile marker 77 was next to a northbound exit ramp, it would mean that the road is between markers 77 and 78. (but very close to 77)

It also depends on how a state determines the location where the exit number is determined. It looks like Massachusetts is numbering its exits based on where the southern/western-most offramp leaves the highway (gore point), which might explain why the exit number is 76 even though the 77 mile marker is adjacent to the northbound exit ramp.

Most other states base the exit number from the milepoint where the intersecting road crosses over or under the freeway. Point in fact, out here in New Mexico, the interchange for NM-14 on I-40 in Tijeras is Exit 175, even though the (very long) eastbound Exit 175 exit ramp leaves I-40 before the 174 milepoint (around milepoint 173.90) while the westbound exit ramp departs I-40 around milepoint 177.40, but NM-14 crosses under I-40 between milepoints 175 and 176. So based on where NM-14 crosses I-40, it ends up being Exit 175.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kefkafloyd on February 08, 2021, 10:14:49 PM
Quote from: Brandon on February 07, 2021, 07:46:35 AM

If the exit is between MM76 and MM77, there's no reason why it cannot, nor should not be Exit 76.

Nine-tenths of the interchange lies past MM77 which is posted right where the deceleration lane on US 3 north becomes the ramp and splits to form the gore. After passing the mile marker on the right, you then see the "EXIT 76" sign on the left. That's the chuckleworthy bit.

IMO, it should be exit 77, but as I said, I'll take the good over the perfect overall.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: ran4sh on February 08, 2021, 10:17:25 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on February 08, 2021, 09:44:45 PM

It also depends on how a state determines the location where the exit number is determined. It looks like Massachusetts is numbering its exits based on where the southern/western-most offramp leaves the highway (gore point), which might explain why the exit number is 76 even though the 77 mile marker is adjacent to the northbound exit ramp.

Most other states base the exit number from the milepoint where the intersecting road crosses over or under the freeway. Point in fact, out here in New Mexico, the interchange for NM-14 on I-40 in Tijeras is Exit 175, even though the (very long) eastbound Exit 175 exit ramp leaves I-40 before the 174 milepoint (around milepoint 173.90) while the westbound exit ramp departs I-40 around milepoint 177.40, but NM-14 crosses under I-40 between milepoints 175 and 176. So based on where NM-14 crosses I-40, it ends up being Exit 175.


But only one of those methods is compliant under the MUTCD.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on February 08, 2021, 10:32:29 PM
In NY, it would be Exit 76, even if the midpoint of the over/underpass is at MP 76.99; they always round down.   CT was going to do this on CT 9 for the CT 175 exit and make it 37, although MP 38 is at the north end of the overpass and 2 of the 4 ramps for the interchange are between MP 38 and MP 39.  Fortunately, revised plans corrected it to 38.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on February 08, 2021, 11:54:36 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 08, 2021, 10:32:29 PM
In NY, it would be Exit 76, even if the midpoint of the over/underpass is at MP 76.99; they always round down.   CT was going to do this on CT 9 for the CT 175 exit and make it 37, although MP 38 is at the north end of the overpass and 2 of the 4 ramps for the interchange are between MP 38 and MP 39.  Fortunately, revised plans corrected it to 38.
If MP 38 is at the north side of the overpass, it should be 37, but either way is okay ultimately. I'm not that concerned with off by 1 errors - the idea is you know the distance to your next exit, and there are enough signs that you'll know when it's there.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on February 09, 2021, 01:26:15 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 08, 2021, 11:54:36 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 08, 2021, 10:32:29 PM
In NY, it would be Exit 76, even if the midpoint of the over/underpass is at MP 76.99; they always round down.   CT was going to do this on CT 9 for the CT 175 exit and make it 37, although MP 38 is at the north end of the overpass and 2 of the 4 ramps for the interchange are between MP 38 and MP 39.  Fortunately, revised plans corrected it to 38.
If MP 38 is at the north side of the overpass, it should be 37, but either way is okay ultimately. I'm not that concerned with off by 1 errors - the idea is you know the distance to your next exit, and there are enough signs that you'll know when it's there.

Seems CT, like MA, has gone to the "round to the nearest milepost"  convention (as evidenced in the latest CTDOT plans) rather than round down within the mile.  But my thought is if a milepost is within the extent of the interchange (before the northern/easternmost extent of the ramps, it's  a viable and/or the most viable option.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on February 09, 2021, 09:41:28 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 08, 2021, 10:32:29 PM
In NY, it would be Exit 76, even if the midpoint of the over/underpass is at MP 76.99; they always round down.   CT was going to do this on CT 9 for the CT 175 exit and make it 37, although MP 38 is at the north end of the overpass and 2 of the 4 ramps for the interchange are between MP 38 and MP 39.  Fortunately, revised plans corrected it to 38.

They probably did a re-survey of the overpass before adjusting the exit number from 37 to 38.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on February 09, 2021, 11:15:58 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 09, 2021, 01:26:15 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 08, 2021, 11:54:36 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 08, 2021, 10:32:29 PM
In NY, it would be Exit 76, even if the midpoint of the over/underpass is at MP 76.99; they always round down.   CT was going to do this on CT 9 for the CT 175 exit and make it 37, although MP 38 is at the north end of the overpass and 2 of the 4 ramps for the interchange are between MP 38 and MP 39.  Fortunately, revised plans corrected it to 38.
If MP 38 is at the north side of the overpass, it should be 37, but either way is okay ultimately. I'm not that concerned with off by 1 errors - the idea is you know the distance to your next exit, and there are enough signs that you'll know when it's there.

Seems CT, like MA, has gone to the "round to the nearest milepost"  convention (as evidenced in the latest CTDOT plans) rather than round down within the mile.  But my thought is if a milepost is within the extent of the interchange (before the northern/easternmost extent of the ramps, it's  a viable and/or the most viable option.

In general, Massachusetts bases the new exit number on the milepost where the two roadways cross, and uses the commonly accepted rounding convention (i.e., 0.4 mile or less, round down; 0.5 mile or greater, round up) in determing the new exit numbers.  Note that, at present, there is no requirement in the MUTCD to always round the number down to match the lower of the two mileposts.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on February 09, 2021, 11:24:09 AM
Quote from: roadman on February 09, 2021, 11:15:58 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 09, 2021, 01:26:15 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 08, 2021, 11:54:36 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 08, 2021, 10:32:29 PM
In NY, it would be Exit 76, even if the midpoint of the over/underpass is at MP 76.99; they always round down.   CT was going to do this on CT 9 for the CT 175 exit and make it 37, although MP 38 is at the north end of the overpass and 2 of the 4 ramps for the interchange are between MP 38 and MP 39.  Fortunately, revised plans corrected it to 38.
If MP 38 is at the north side of the overpass, it should be 37, but either way is okay ultimately. I'm not that concerned with off by 1 errors - the idea is you know the distance to your next exit, and there are enough signs that you'll know when it's there.

Seems CT, like MA, has gone to the "round to the nearest milepost"  convention (as evidenced in the latest CTDOT plans) rather than round down within the mile.  But my thought is if a milepost is within the extent of the interchange (before the northern/easternmost extent of the ramps, it's  a viable and/or the most viable option.

In general, Massachusetts bases the new exit number on the milepost where the two roadways cross, and uses the commonly accepted rounding convention (i.e., 0.4 mile or less, round down; 0.5 mile or greater, round up) in determing the new exit numbers.  Note that, at present, there is no requirement in the MUTCD to always round the number down to match the lower of the two mileposts.

That leaves only two logical conclusions as to why the numbered the interchange 76, even though milepost 77 is adjacent to the northbound exit ramp (which implies the intersecting road crosses US-3 between MPs 77 and 78): either 1) they screwed up and they **might** go back and fix it later, or 2) they're planning to re-survey the highway's mileage (to account for recent construction, realignments, etc.), which might lead to adjustments to where each milepost is located.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on February 09, 2021, 11:52:33 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on February 09, 2021, 11:24:09 AM
Quote from: roadman on February 09, 2021, 11:15:58 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 09, 2021, 01:26:15 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 08, 2021, 11:54:36 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 08, 2021, 10:32:29 PM
In NY, it would be Exit 76, even if the midpoint of the over/underpass is at MP 76.99; they always round down.   CT was going to do this on CT 9 for the CT 175 exit and make it 37, although MP 38 is at the north end of the overpass and 2 of the 4 ramps for the interchange are between MP 38 and MP 39.  Fortunately, revised plans corrected it to 38.
If MP 38 is at the north side of the overpass, it should be 37, but either way is okay ultimately. I'm not that concerned with off by 1 errors - the idea is you know the distance to your next exit, and there are enough signs that you'll know when it's there.

Seems CT, like MA, has gone to the "round to the nearest milepost"  convention (as evidenced in the latest CTDOT plans) rather than round down within the mile.  But my thought is if a milepost is within the extent of the interchange (before the northern/easternmost extent of the ramps, it's  a viable and/or the most viable option.

In general, Massachusetts bases the new exit number on the milepost where the two roadways cross, and uses the commonly accepted rounding convention (i.e., 0.4 mile or less, round down; 0.5 mile or greater, round up) in determing the new exit numbers.  Note that, at present, there is no requirement in the MUTCD to always round the number down to match the lower of the two mileposts.

That leaves only two logical conclusions as to why the numbered the interchange 76, even though milepost 77 is adjacent to the northbound exit ramp (which implies the intersecting road crosses US-3 between MPs 77 and 78): either 1) they screwed up and they **might** go back and fix it later, or 2) they're planning to re-survey the highway's mileage (to account for recent construction, realignments, etc.), which might lead to adjustments to where each milepost is located.

See some of the prior posts, the mile markers posted are not correct, almost a mile above what they should be.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on February 09, 2021, 09:35:39 PM
Update from MassDOT:

The Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT) is in the process of converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Construction began in the Fall of 2020 and is anticipated to be complete by Summer 2021. Exit renumbering conversion is compete on the following corridors:
Route 140 - between Taunton and New Bedford
Interstate 195 - between Wareham and Seekonk
State Route 25 - between Wareham and Bourne
State Route 3 - between Braintree and Bourne
US Route 6 - between Orleans and Bourne
Interstate 90 - between Boston and West Stockbridge
Interstate 295 - between North Attleboro and Attleboro
State Route 24 - between Randolph and Fall River
US Route 3 - between Tyngsborough and Burlington

The remaining corridors, with the known anticipated start dates and locations, are as follows:   

State Route 128 
Start date: Feb 10
Location: Gloucester to Peabody 

Interstate 95 
Start date: Feb 21
I-95 will be broken up into four segments 
Between the NH Border and Route 128
Between the Route 1 Interchange and Route 20
Between the I-90 Interchange and Westwood/Canton
Between Neponset Street and and the RI Border

Interstate 84 
Start date: Feb 28
Location: I-90 interchange in Sturbridge to the Connecticut border 

Interstate 93 
Location: Based on their locations along the existing mile markers, existing Exits 1 (Canton) through 12 (Boston/Neponset) will not be renumbered. Exit renumbering will begin at existing Exit 13 (Boston/Dorchester) and continue to existing Exit 48 (Methuen).

Interstate 91 
State Route 146 
Interstate 190 
State Route 2 
Interstate 495
Interstate 395 
Interstate 295   

Please be advised I-495 (between Harvard and Lowell) and I-290 (between Auburn and Shrewsbury) currently have on-going sign replacement contracts being completed. Due to funding, scheduling and constructability reasons, it was not practical for MassDOT to fully complete these projects before the exit renumbering project was started. However, be aware that the new signs on both projects have been designed to accommodate the updated exit numbers, so only overlay panels will be required to update the exit numbers on these panels.

Construction start dates and locations on the remaining corridors listed above will be announced as they are finalized. Work takes place on each corridor in the east to west or north to south direction. Work typically is completed during the overnight hours and the contractors are required to complete the full interchange before moving along to the next exit. Please note that all work is weather dependent and construction dates may be adjusted accordingly.   

To learn more about the project, sign up for project updates, and submit project inquiries, please visit the project website: newmassexits.com.   
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on February 09, 2021, 09:48:05 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on February 09, 2021, 09:35:39 PM
Exit renumbering conversion is compete [sic] on the following corridors:

Is that their typo or yours?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on February 09, 2021, 10:48:42 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 09, 2021, 09:48:05 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on February 09, 2021, 09:35:39 PM
Exit renumbering conversion is compete [sic] on the following corridors:

Is that their typo or yours?
It's their typo, along with listing I-295 in the to-do exit renumbering list instead of I-290 and Route 120 instead of 128 in the section describing the I-95 work. Do they not have editors?

I was somewhat surprised that I-93 instead of I-95 was chosen as the last route to be renumbered under the eastern contract, but I guess it is, the southern part anyway, the most eastern interstate route. Also surprised I-495 was not the last chosen for the other contract (I assume they'll break that up in sections like I-95, my guess: I-95 to US 3, US 3 to I-90, I-90 to I-95, I-95  to I-195/MA 25). Guess I-395 and I-290 were chosen because that work is more complicated by the need to install the new dual mile markers, that somewhat makes the point of wouldn't providing separate exit numbers for each route based on their mileage have been easier? They also jumped the gun saying US 3 is complete. It was to be completed tonight, but, so far, no work crews have appeared to renumber the northernmost exits according to Waze. This also means a delay in the start of Route 128, or is that 120.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on February 10, 2021, 12:15:03 PM
The same information (I mean the same, with typos and all) has now been posted on the MassDOT blog:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/exit-renumbering-operations-have-been-completed-on-nine-statewide-corridors/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/exit-renumbering-operations-have-been-completed-on-nine-statewide-corridors/)

Noticed this wording about I-84: "Interstate 84 renumbering operations will begin on Sunday, February 28, and will take place from the I-90 interchange in Sturbridge to the Connecticut border." Does this mean they are giving a number to the I-90 exit, or should they have said US 20 in Sturbridge to the Connecticut border?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on February 10, 2021, 12:24:19 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on February 10, 2021, 12:15:03 PM
The same information (I mean the same, with typos and all) has now been posted on the MassDOT blog:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/exit-renumbering-operations-have-been-completed-on-nine-statewide-corridors/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/exit-renumbering-operations-have-been-completed-on-nine-statewide-corridors/)

Noticed this wording about I-84: "Interstate 84 renumbering operations will begin on Sunday, February 28, and will take place from the I-90 interchange in Sturbridge to the Connecticut border." Does this mean they are giving a number to the I-90 exit, or should they have said US 20 in Sturbridge to the Connecticut border?

They might be referring to the advance signs for US 20 east of US 20.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on February 10, 2021, 12:30:08 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on February 10, 2021, 12:15:03 PM
The same information (I mean the same, with typos and all) has now been posted on the MassDOT blog:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/exit-renumbering-operations-have-been-completed-on-nine-statewide-corridors/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/exit-renumbering-operations-have-been-completed-on-nine-statewide-corridors/)

Noticed this wording about I-84: "Interstate 84 renumbering operations will begin on Sunday, February 28, and will take place from the I-90 interchange in Sturbridge to the Connecticut border." Does this mean they are giving a number to the I-90 exit, or should they have said US 20 in Sturbridge to the Connecticut border?
Maybe MassDOT is doing a random act of consistency & decided to add Exit 7 A/B tabs for the I-90 interchange signs along I-84 eastbound.  :hmm:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on February 10, 2021, 02:05:43 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 10, 2021, 12:30:08 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on February 10, 2021, 12:15:03 PM
The same information (I mean the same, with typos and all) has now been posted on the MassDOT blog:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/exit-renumbering-operations-have-been-completed-on-nine-statewide-corridors/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/exit-renumbering-operations-have-been-completed-on-nine-statewide-corridors/)

Noticed this wording about I-84: "Interstate 84 renumbering operations will begin on Sunday, February 28, and will take place from the I-90 interchange in Sturbridge to the Connecticut border." Does this mean they are giving a number to the I-90 exit, or should they have said US 20 in Sturbridge to the Connecticut border?
Maybe MassDOT is doing a random act of consistency & decided to add Exit 7 A/B tabs for the I-90 interchange signs along I-84 eastbound.  :hmm:

For a state whose unofficial motto is that quote by Emerson, that would be nice for a change.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Dougtone on February 10, 2021, 07:31:27 PM
I've decided to throw my hat into the ring on the exit numbering conversion in Massachusetts on my latest podcast episode on the Gribblenation Roadcast. It's more of a general overview of the project from information I've culled. I'm from Upstate New York, so I'm not sure if I pronounced every town name correctly. I tried my best.

https://anchor.fm/gribblenation/episodes/Fresh-Drives---Massachusetts-Exit-Renumbering-eq83pm (https://anchor.fm/gribblenation/episodes/Fresh-Drives---Massachusetts-Exit-Renumbering-eq83pm)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on February 10, 2021, 09:42:19 PM
Quote from: ran4sh on February 08, 2021, 10:17:25 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on February 08, 2021, 09:44:45 PM

It also depends on how a state determines the location where the exit number is determined. It looks like Massachusetts is numbering its exits based on where the southern/western-most offramp leaves the highway (gore point), which might explain why the exit number is 76 even though the 77 mile marker is adjacent to the northbound exit ramp.

Most other states base the exit number from the milepoint where the intersecting road crosses over or under the freeway. Point in fact, out here in New Mexico, the interchange for NM-14 on I-40 in Tijeras is Exit 175, even though the (very long) eastbound Exit 175 exit ramp leaves I-40 before the 174 milepoint (around milepoint 173.90) while the westbound exit ramp departs I-40 around milepoint 177.40, but NM-14 crosses under I-40 between milepoints 175 and 176. So based on where NM-14 crosses I-40, it ends up being Exit 175.


But only one of those methods is compliant under the MUTCD.

No.  There are currently no statements in the MUTCD that either mandate or recommend that the lower of the two mileposts be used for the exit number.  While this is implied in some of the figures, they are only examples and not a "shall" or "should" condition.

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: ran4sh on February 10, 2021, 09:45:10 PM
Quote from: roadman on February 10, 2021, 09:42:19 PM
Quote from: ran4sh on February 08, 2021, 10:17:25 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on February 08, 2021, 09:44:45 PM

It also depends on how a state determines the location where the exit number is determined. It looks like Massachusetts is numbering its exits based on where the southern/western-most offramp leaves the highway (gore point), which might explain why the exit number is 76 even though the 77 mile marker is adjacent to the northbound exit ramp.

Most other states base the exit number from the milepoint where the intersecting road crosses over or under the freeway. Point in fact, out here in New Mexico, the interchange for NM-14 on I-40 in Tijeras is Exit 175, even though the (very long) eastbound Exit 175 exit ramp leaves I-40 before the 174 milepoint (around milepoint 173.90) while the westbound exit ramp departs I-40 around milepoint 177.40, but NM-14 crosses under I-40 between milepoints 175 and 176. So based on where NM-14 crosses I-40, it ends up being Exit 175.


But only one of those methods is compliant under the MUTCD.

No.  There is currently nothing in the MUTCD that mandates that the lower of the two milepoints be used for the exit number.  While this is implied in some of the figures, they are only examples.


I am referring to using a ramp location versus using the crossroad location. Nothing in the MUTCD endorses the practice of using the ramp, of either direction, as the location that determines the exit number.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on February 11, 2021, 12:11:29 AM
Quote from: ran4sh on February 10, 2021, 09:45:10 PM
Quote from: roadman on February 10, 2021, 09:42:19 PM
Quote from: ran4sh on February 08, 2021, 10:17:25 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on February 08, 2021, 09:44:45 PM

It also depends on how a state determines the location where the exit number is determined. It looks like Massachusetts is numbering its exits based on where the southern/western-most offramp leaves the highway (gore point), which might explain why the exit number is 76 even though the 77 mile marker is adjacent to the northbound exit ramp.

Most other states base the exit number from the milepoint where the intersecting road crosses over or under the freeway. Point in fact, out here in New Mexico, the interchange for NM-14 on I-40 in Tijeras is Exit 175, even though the (very long) eastbound Exit 175 exit ramp leaves I-40 before the 174 milepoint (around milepoint 173.90) while the westbound exit ramp departs I-40 around milepoint 177.40, but NM-14 crosses under I-40 between milepoints 175 and 176. So based on where NM-14 crosses I-40, it ends up being Exit 175.


But only one of those methods is compliant under the MUTCD.

No.  There is currently nothing in the MUTCD that mandates that the lower of the two milepoints be used for the exit number.  While this is implied in some of the figures, they are only examples.


I am referring to using a ramp location versus using the crossroad location. Nothing in the MUTCD endorses the practice of using the ramp, of either direction, as the location that determines the exit number.
You are correct. The MUTCD provides for the milepost of the cross street at the interchange. Of course, most old freeways have a few strange interchanges where you can't pick out a cross milepost.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on February 11, 2021, 12:12:07 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 10, 2021, 12:30:08 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on February 10, 2021, 12:15:03 PM
The same information (I mean the same, with typos and all) has now been posted on the MassDOT blog:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/exit-renumbering-operations-have-been-completed-on-nine-statewide-corridors/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/exit-renumbering-operations-have-been-completed-on-nine-statewide-corridors/)

Noticed this wording about I-84: "Interstate 84 renumbering operations will begin on Sunday, February 28, and will take place from the I-90 interchange in Sturbridge to the Connecticut border." Does this mean they are giving a number to the I-90 exit, or should they have said US 20 in Sturbridge to the Connecticut border?
Maybe MassDOT is doing a random act of consistency & decided to add Exit 7 A/B tabs for the I-90 interchange signs along I-84 eastbound.  :hmm:
Once you go to AET, you lose the toll plaza being a "breakpoint" that lets the driver "reset" and find their way, so there really ought to be exit numbers there.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on February 11, 2021, 08:44:18 AM
Quote from: Alps on February 11, 2021, 12:12:07 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 10, 2021, 12:30:08 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on February 10, 2021, 12:15:03 PM
The same information (I mean the same, with typos and all) has now been posted on the MassDOT blog:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/exit-renumbering-operations-have-been-completed-on-nine-statewide-corridors/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/exit-renumbering-operations-have-been-completed-on-nine-statewide-corridors/)

Noticed this wording about I-84: "Interstate 84 renumbering operations will begin on Sunday, February 28, and will take place from the I-90 interchange in Sturbridge to the Connecticut border." Does this mean they are giving a number to the I-90 exit, or should they have said US 20 in Sturbridge to the Connecticut border?
Maybe MassDOT is doing a random act of consistency & decided to add Exit 7 A/B tabs for the I-90 interchange signs along I-84 eastbound.  :hmm:
Once you go to AET, you lose the toll plaza being a "breakpoint" that lets the driver "reset" and find their way, so there really ought to be exit numbers there.
Agree 100%.  I even sent in a comment to the MassDOT site & the response I received was kind of a brush-off.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: deathtopumpkins on February 11, 2021, 09:04:18 AM
I would expect MassDOT to have finished US 3 northbound last night. When I drove through around 2 am a crew was working on the service signs for (old) Exit 36 - the last one.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: ProfBrad on February 11, 2021, 08:36:28 PM
I was driving southbound today on 495 in Littleton and noticed a number of  new exit signs stacked up by the 2A exit.  One of the signs said exit 88 so I am assuming these are going to be used on 495?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on February 12, 2021, 11:38:26 AM
Quote from: roadman on February 09, 2021, 11:15:58 AMIn general, Massachusetts bases the new exit number on the milepost where the two roadways cross, and uses the commonly accepted rounding convention (i.e., 0.4 mile or less, round down; 0.5 mile or greater, round up) in determining the new exit numbers.  Note that, at present, there is no requirement in the MUTCD to always round the number down to match the lower of the two mileposts.
Not to throw stones here, but MassDOT has/is taken some liberties on some of its interchange renumbering: the planned interchange renumberings for the eastern stretch of MA 2 and MA 128 from Danvers through Wenham come to mind.  Yes, I'm aware such was done do reduce suffixing/alphabet soup; but the deviations from the actual mile markers, particularly along the 128 stretch, go way too far IMHO... and I stated such on the website.

Also, I still do not agree with I-95's Exit 45 (MA 128 North) becoming Exit 64 when it IMHO should be Exit 65 due to Mile Marker 65 being located within the interchange footprint (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5290956,-70.9768105,3a,75y,301.47h,72.66t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRj5NXDQFaHQLBTr-1DF39w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).  Note: the mile marker has been missing since the Sept. GSV was taken.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on February 12, 2021, 11:46:28 AM
Work started on MA 128 last night in Gloucester, from monitoring Waze reports they got at least to MA 133 (New Exit 53). Here's an article that appeared in yesterday's online Gloucester Times:
https://www.gloucestertimes.com/news/local_news/route-128-exits-to-be-renumbered-thursday-night/article_d4d6036f-2b93-5f00-aca1-fb0d8c315c86.html (https://www.gloucestertimes.com/news/local_news/route-128-exits-to-be-renumbered-thursday-night/article_d4d6036f-2b93-5f00-aca1-fb0d8c315c86.html)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 12, 2021, 03:05:56 PM
I'm glad Highway 128 is getting rid of its goofy exit sequence, where the exit sequence started at 9 instead of 1. One oddity I have noticed along the route is the eastbound at-grade intersection at Wayside Dr. between Exits 43 and 44 (old 22 and 21). I don't suppose there are any plans to eliminate that at-grade intersection, but I do wonder why it exists, given that the Trask Ln. jug-handle interchange is just east of it.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on February 12, 2021, 03:30:35 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on February 12, 2021, 11:46:28 AM
Work started on MA 128 last night in Gloucester, from monitoring Waze reports they got at least to MA 133 (New Exit 53). Here's an article that appeared in yesterday's online Gloucester Times:
https://www.gloucestertimes.com/news/local_news/route-128-exits-to-be-renumbered-thursday-night/article_d4d6036f-2b93-5f00-aca1-fb0d8c315c86.html (https://www.gloucestertimes.com/news/local_news/route-128-exits-to-be-renumbered-thursday-night/article_d4d6036f-2b93-5f00-aca1-fb0d8c315c86.html)

Curious, since it will be handled near the end, is this sign just coming down given 3/4 of it is make-believe anyways...

https://goo.gl/maps/c6YrUsM1DV5379Tq7

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on February 12, 2021, 05:18:07 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 12, 2021, 03:05:56 PM
I'm glad Highway 128 is getting rid of its goofy exit sequence, where the exit sequence started at 9 instead of 1. One oddity I have noticed along the route is the eastbound at-grade intersection at Wayside Dr. between Exits 43 and 44 (old 22 and 21). I don't suppose there are any plans to eliminate that at-grade intersection, but I do wonder why it exists, given that the Trask Ln. jug-handle interchange is just east of it.
To my knowledge, there's no plans to eliminate any at-grade intersections along 128.

Quote from: SectorZ on February 12, 2021, 03:30:35 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on February 12, 2021, 11:46:28 AM
Work started on MA 128 last night in Gloucester, from monitoring Waze reports they got at least to MA 133 (New Exit 53). Here's an article that appeared in yesterday's online Gloucester Times:
https://www.gloucestertimes.com/news/local_news/route-128-exits-to-be-renumbered-thursday-night/article_d4d6036f-2b93-5f00-aca1-fb0d8c315c86.html (https://www.gloucestertimes.com/news/local_news/route-128-exits-to-be-renumbered-thursday-night/article_d4d6036f-2b93-5f00-aca1-fb0d8c315c86.html)

Curious, since it will be handled near the end, is this sign just coming down given 3/4 of it is make-believe anyways...

https://goo.gl/maps/c6YrUsM1DV5379Tq7
It is my understanding that particular sign is ultimately slated to be removed.  Whether such will occur during the conversion of 128's numbers or sometime later is not known.  Such is the last remaining sign that gives hint of the intersection Exits 10 (MA 127) & 9 (MA 127A).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on February 12, 2021, 10:33:52 PM
I can't remember many center-tab exit signs in Mass anymore except almost all for Endicott St. and one for 114 on 128; with the new exit number overlays, it will be weird having the new exit numbers on center-tab signs.  (How they have escaped for so long is really something.)  Are there others I can't think of?  It seems like 90s-early 2000s sign replacements would have caught them all, but the ones at these exits on 128 have managed to survive.

They can't help but have the driveway for the cemetery just before the Danvers line on the northbound side.  The side street at Folly Hill is one way off of 128 now and while it probably could be closed off, it doesn't present a weave with the RIRO at Exit 21 and probably isn't that worth it to do much with--it does provide a second access to the neighborhood in the event that Exit 21 is blocked.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 14, 2021, 12:33:12 PM
On the February 9th email that was issued... I noticed another typo on the I-95 portion of the email:

QuoteInterstate 95 
Start date: Feb 21
I-95 will be broken up into four segments 
Between the NH Border and Route 120

I think they meant Route 128... initially re-reading the email I was thinking "I don't remember there being a "Route 120" on that stretch of I-95".
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on February 14, 2021, 02:02:29 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 12, 2021, 05:18:07 PM
Curious, since it will be handled near the end, is this sign just coming down given 3/4 of it is make-believe anyways...
https://goo.gl/maps/c6YrUsM1DV5379Tq7
It is my understanding that particular sign is ultimately slated to be removed.  Whether such will occur during the conversion of 128's numbers or sometime later is not known.  Such is the last remaining sign that gives hint of the intersection Exits 10 (MA 127) & 9 (MA 127A).
[/quote]

This sign will be removed as part of the exit renumbering.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on February 15, 2021, 07:18:18 AM
So exit renumbering has made it as far south as exit 20 on 128 this morning.  Seems like they're moving at breakneck speed on 128.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210215/94a6bc30132d9bf2e39a481201142957.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210215/1a2bf736914d0a2b65ee1a8600e61f33.jpg)

SM-A515U

Title: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Pete from Boston on February 15, 2021, 12:21:54 PM
Are there plans to replace exit gore signs where the contractor seems to have had to use substandard exit number sizes to fit new, longer exit numbers? I've seen this in a couple of locations so far, off the top of my head at 117 on the Mass Pike.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on February 15, 2021, 01:06:50 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on February 15, 2021, 07:18:18 AM
So exit renumbering has made it as far south as exit 20 on 128 this morning.  Seems like they're moving at breakneck speed on 128.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210215/94a6bc30132d9bf2e39a481201142957.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210215/1a2bf736914d0a2b65ee1a8600e61f33.jpg)

SM-A515U
The schedule (planning to start I-95 next Sunday, 2/21) implies that they would need to do 4-5 exits a night. In two nights (there was no reported work last night according to Waze), they have completed 9 exits heading south, so they are on pace. Unless there is a significant weather delay, at that rate they should complete the work by this Friday.

P.S. Could I post your photos on my Exit Renumbering site, with proper credit?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on February 15, 2021, 01:34:30 PM
I've been thinking about this and it's really not surprising the speed they are moving at. This stretch of 128 has few supplemental signs, and no services signs that i can think of that would need conversion. At exit 24 southbound for instance, there is only an 'exit now' and a gore sign that needs changing.

SM-A515U

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on February 15, 2021, 05:51:28 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on February 12, 2021, 10:33:52 PM
I can't remember many center-tab exit signs in Mass anymore except almost all for Endicott St. and one for 114 on 128; with the new exit number overlays, it will be weird having the new exit numbers on center-tab signs.  (How they have escaped for so long is really something.)  Are there others I can't think of?  It seems like 90s-early 2000s sign replacements would have caught them all, but the ones at these exits on 128 have managed to survive.
Truth be told, those two signs are newer than one would believe.  Such were separate match-in-kind replacements for the original mid-70s vintage signs that were damaged and/or vandalized.  Ironically, both were erected when center-tab exit signs were long since phased out of MassDPW/Highway/DOT specs. 

Personally, I'm more surprised that a replacement southbound advance sign for Endicott St. was never erected.  One would've thought a further advance sign for the exit would've been provided when the MA 35 interchange was reconfigured several years ago.  IMHO, there should also be a better advance sign for the MA 114 interchange is warranted as well.

Quote from: 5foot14 on February 15, 2021, 07:18:18 AM
So exit renumbering has made it as far south as exit 20 on 128 this morning.  Seems like they're moving at breakneck speed on 128.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210215/94a6bc30132d9bf2e39a481201142957.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210215/1a2bf736914d0a2b65ee1a8600e61f33.jpg)
If MassDOT was following true MUTCD criteria for mile-marker-based interchange numbering; such would be Exit 43 A.  The stretch from Danvers (Endicott St.) to Wenham (Grapevine Rd.) veers off the reservation, so to speak, all in the name of avoiding alphabet soup assignments for separate interchanges.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 15, 2021, 09:37:10 PM
Maybe when Interstate 95 in Massachusetts gets new exit numbers, they can also renumber the exits along 95 in Rhode Island as well. IMO, 95 in Rhode Island's exits should have been converted to mileage-based as well by now.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on February 16, 2021, 08:56:22 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on February 15, 2021, 07:18:18 AM
So exit renumbering has made it as far south as exit 20 on 128 this morning.  Seems like they're moving at breakneck speed on 128.

The contractors probably worked their butts off on Sunday night because they almost certainly didn't work on Monday night due to inclement weather.  And with more snow in the forecast Thursday night, it's not realistic that standalone 128 will be fully converted by February 21.  Perhaps the southbound direction will be complete by then.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on February 16, 2021, 09:32:46 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 15, 2021, 09:37:10 PM
Maybe when Interstate 95 in Massachusetts gets new exit numbers, they can also renumber the exits along 95 in Rhode Island as well. IMO, 95 in Rhode Island's exits should have been converted to mileage-based as well by now.

RI's conversion of I-95 went out to bid recently, I believe.  Haven't been able to find any more updated info on the RIDOT site.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on February 16, 2021, 10:51:19 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on February 16, 2021, 08:56:22 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on February 15, 2021, 07:18:18 AM
So exit renumbering has made it as far south as exit 20 on 128 this morning.  Seems like they're moving at breakneck speed on 128.
The contractors probably worked their butts off on Sunday night because they almost certainly didn't work on Monday night due to inclement weather.  And with more snow in the forecast Thursday night, it's not realistic that standalone 128 will be fully converted by February 21.  Perhaps the southbound direction will be complete by then.
The contractors didn't work Sunday or Monday nights. They are back tonight working in the Danvers area. Given the forecast for snow Thursday night, they should complete the southbound work, but may not even start work northbound, yet alone complete it to allow for the I-95 work to begin on schedule next Sunday night.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on February 16, 2021, 11:59:12 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 15, 2021, 05:51:28 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on February 12, 2021, 10:33:52 PM
I can't remember many center-tab exit signs in Mass anymore except almost all for Endicott St. and one for 114 on 128; with the new exit number overlays, it will be weird having the new exit numbers on center-tab signs.  (How they have escaped for so long is really something.)  Are there others I can't think of?  It seems like 90s-early 2000s sign replacements would have caught them all, but the ones at these exits on 128 have managed to survive.
Truth be told, those two signs are newer than one would believe.  Such were separate match-in-kind replacements for the original mid-70s vintage signs that were damaged and/or vandalized.  Ironically, both were erected when center-tab exit signs were long since phased out of MassDPW/Highway/DOT specs. 

Personally, I'm more surprised that a replacement southbound advance sign for Endicott St. was never erected.  One would've thought a further advance sign for the exit would've been provided when the MA 35 interchange was reconfigured several years ago.  IMHO, there should also be a better advance sign for the MA 114 interchange is warranted as well.


I could have sworn as much but then thought no, there is no way that they did that--but I should have known better.  The first sign for 114 southbound is still the old-fashioned type without exit number and could have been made with exit number but was made as a complete carbon copy as well; I should have realized it.  It is totally Mass to do something like that.

I remember maybe around 1990 a couple signs on Route 1 northbound approaching 114 just into Danvers that completely faithful carbon copy signs were made replacing pretty old ones from the 70s for the 114 exits with small rectangular shields but they only lasted a little while before being replaced with the current overhead signs.  The carbon copies, near the Hardcover restaurant, were one above the other for eastbound and westbound 114.  It seems that one-off carbon-copy replacements give wacky replacements.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on February 17, 2021, 10:24:55 AM
Quote from: PurdueBill on February 16, 2021, 11:59:12 PM
The first sign for 114 southbound is still the old-fashioned type without exit number and could have been made with exit number but was made as a complete carbon copy as well; I should have realized it.  It is totally Mass to do something like that.
Such was indeed a match-in-kind replacement for the original 70s vintage version that was likely damaged in an accident sometime during the 90s or early 2000s(?).

Personally, I'm surprised a WEST legend wasn't added to this sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5453381,-70.9363964,3a,75y,183.93h,75.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBNzytGURjGtWQLKskgfG1A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) or its predecessor sign when the exit number changed from Exit 25W to Exit 25B.  Personally, I would reposition that 114 shield to the left and apply the direction cardinal to the right of the shield.  There's plenty of room on the panel for such a mod.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on February 17, 2021, 11:17:32 AM


Quote from: PHLBOS on February 17, 2021, 10:24:55 AM

Personally, I'm surprised a WEST legend wasn't added to this sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5453381,-70.9363964,3a,75y,183.93h,75.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBNzytGURjGtWQLKskgfG1A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) or its predecessor sign when the exit number changed from Exit 25W to Exit 25B.  Personally, I would reposition that 114 shield to the left and apply the direction cardinal to the right of the shield.  There's plenty of room on the panel for such a mod.

I'm surprised they didn't either, however it's moot now since this signs days are numbered. With the ongoing bridge replacement project over the Waters River and the addition of sound barriers on both sides of 128, there won't be room for this sign to exist much longer. As of right now it's temporarily mounted to wooden supports and they deliberately left a gap in the sound wall since it's too wide. I think replacement with a modern overhead is pretty much guaranteed.

SM-A515U

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on February 17, 2021, 05:09:13 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on February 17, 2021, 11:17:32 AM


Quote from: PHLBOS on February 17, 2021, 10:24:55 AM

Personally, I'm surprised a WEST legend wasn't added to this sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5453381,-70.9363964,3a,75y,183.93h,75.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBNzytGURjGtWQLKskgfG1A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) or its predecessor sign when the exit number changed from Exit 25W to Exit 25B.  Personally, I would reposition that 114 shield to the left and apply the direction cardinal to the right of the shield.  There's plenty of room on the panel for such a mod.

I'm surprised they didn't either, however it's moot now since this signs days are numbered. With the ongoing bridge replacement project over the Waters River and the addition of sound barriers on both sides of 128, there won't be room for this sign to exist much longer. As of right now it's temporarily mounted to wooden supports and they deliberately left a gap in the sound wall since it's too wide. I think replacement with a modern overhead is pretty much guaranteed.

SM-A515U



What mystified me at the time that they changed 114 to A-B was that the A and B were in the wrong order (it went 24, 25B, 25A, 26) but hopefully they will leave the A and B where they are when they renumber!  At route 1A, A became B and B became A because of the numbers now decreasing instead of increasing going south, but hopefully the A and B aren't just blindly swapped at 114 because they were swapped at 1A.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 18, 2021, 03:17:51 PM
This email was just sent out at 14:52 today:

Quote from: MassDOT Statewide Exit Renumbering Project TeamThe following corridor will begin conversion in approximately one week:
Corridor: Interstate 95
Approximate start date: Feb. 23
Approximate construction duration: 10 weeks
Location: Construction will be broken up into four segments
- Between the NH Border and Route 120
- Between the Route 1 Interchange and Route 20
- Between the I-90 Interchange and Westwood/Canton
- Between Neponset Street and and the RI Border
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on February 18, 2021, 03:42:40 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 18, 2021, 03:17:51 PM
This email was just sent out at 14:52 today:

Quote from: MassDOT Statewide Exit Renumbering Project TeamThe following corridor will begin conversion in approximately one week:
Corridor: Interstate 95
Approximate start date: Feb. 23
Approximate construction duration: 10 weeks
Location: Construction will be broken up into four segments
- Between the NH Border and Route 120
- Between the Route 1 Interchange and Route 20
- Between the I-90 Interchange and Westwood/Canton
- Between Neponset Street and and the RI Border
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

I see that they kept the "Route 120" typo in there. Ten weeks puts the finishing estimate at May 4.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on February 18, 2021, 05:13:23 PM
Perhaps these segments of I-95 make more sense:

Northern I-95, from NH State Line to Peabody
I-95/128 - North end, from Peabody to Weston
I-95/128 - South end, from Weston to Canton
Southern I-95, from Canton to the RI State Line

By the split into four segments, I'm guessing this means they'll start SB with the NH to Peabody section, then work back north.  Then when that section is done, they'll work from Peabody to Weston, then back north, continuing with all 4 segments until its done.

I really have to hand it to them to continue work on this project through the winter we're having... compared to the past couple winters! 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on February 18, 2021, 05:16:14 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on February 18, 2021, 05:13:23 PM
I really have to hand it to them to continue work on this project through the winter we're having... compared to the past couple winters!

This is actually a normal year in Massachusetts. Last year was unusually unsnowy.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on February 19, 2021, 09:29:01 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on February 18, 2021, 03:42:40 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 18, 2021, 03:17:51 PM
This email was just sent out at 14:52 today:

Quote from: MassDOT Statewide Exit Renumbering Project TeamThe following corridor will begin conversion in approximately one week:
Corridor: Interstate 95
Approximate start date: Feb. 23
Approximate construction duration: 10 weeks
Location: Construction will be broken up into four segments
- Between the NH Border and Route 120
- Between the Route 1 Interchange and Route 20
- Between the I-90 Interchange and Westwood/Canton
- Between Neponset Street and and the RI Border
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

I see that they kept the "Route 120" typo in there. Ten weeks puts the finishing estimate at May 4.
FWIW & based on this 1958-1959 Official State Map, an MA 120 did once exist in Peabody/W. Peabody through the late 50s.

The current MA 120 exists in N. Attleboro & is an extension of RI 120.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on February 19, 2021, 10:30:53 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 19, 2021, 09:29:01 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on February 18, 2021, 03:42:40 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 18, 2021, 03:17:51 PM
This email was just sent out at 14:52 today:

Quote from: MassDOT Statewide Exit Renumbering Project TeamThe following corridor will begin conversion in approximately one week:
Corridor: Interstate 95
Approximate start date: Feb. 23
Approximate construction duration: 10 weeks
Location: Construction will be broken up into four segments
- Between the NH Border and Route 120
- Between the Route 1 Interchange and Route 20
- Between the I-90 Interchange and Westwood/Canton
- Between Neponset Street and and the RI Border
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

I see that they kept the "Route 120" typo in there. Ten weeks puts the finishing estimate at May 4.
FWIW & based on this 1958-1959 Official State Map, an MA 120 did once exist in Peabody/W. Peabody through the late 50s.

The current MA 120 exists in N. Attleboro & is an extension of RI 120.

In case anyone has an issue with PHLBOS' link (I did) the map is on this page, https://massdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MinimalGallery/index.html?appid=643a9eb188d0439088646866bf5e9844
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on February 19, 2021, 10:38:35 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 19, 2021, 09:29:01 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on February 18, 2021, 03:42:40 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 18, 2021, 03:17:51 PM
This email was just sent out at 14:52 today:

Quote from: MassDOT Statewide Exit Renumbering Project TeamThe following corridor will begin conversion in approximately one week:
Corridor: Interstate 95
Approximate start date: Feb. 23
Approximate construction duration: 10 weeks
Location: Construction will be broken up into four segments
- Between the NH Border and Route 120
- Between the Route 1 Interchange and Route 20
- Between the I-90 Interchange and Westwood/Canton
- Between Neponset Street and and the RI Border
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

I see that they kept the "Route 120" typo in there. Ten weeks puts the finishing estimate at May 4.
FWIW & based on this 1958-1959 Official State Map, an MA 120 did once exist in Peabody/W. Peabody through the late 50s.https://scontent-ort2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/152443814_10115223643109108_7367100488803313067_o.jpg?_nc_cat=103&ccb=3&_nc_sid=0debeb&_nc_ohc=sKFK1cTcFvQAX8r4_0s&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-2.xx&oh=2db1b1cd5bbc2f077dd8f95c15f9b8dd&oe=60542BB1

The current MA 120 exists in N. Attleboro & is an extension of RI 120.

I can't believe the Route 120 thing above didn't hit me before (although it may have come up in a thread in the past).  When we lived in Peabody, we lived right near the former route 120, which even then hadn't been around for a long time but my dad remembered it.  We figured that its onetime presence had to be why Lake Street, part of Lowell Street, and Birch Street were a slightly thicker line on the classic AAA "Boston and Vicinity" map that they don't make anymore (but what a classic it was!); those streets were the route of the old Route 120.



For decades now, Birch Street has been one-way northbound (mainly due to the Burke School, but it's awful narrow anyway).  Signage on Birch Street would probably be better if the state did it.  Peabody is known for making its own wacky signs and shows no signs of ever stopping.

Thinking about Route 1, did they give any rationale why not to number exits even on stretches like the Northeast Expressway section from Charlestown to Revere?  Did they take the Caltrans wind-loading excuse, or was it just that un-numbered was good enough?  It seems like exit numbers could be helpful, or at least wouldn't hurt anyone.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on February 19, 2021, 11:57:10 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on February 19, 2021, 10:30:53 AMIn case anyone has an issue with PHLBOS' link (I did) the map is on this page, https://massdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MinimalGallery/index.html?appid=643a9eb188d0439088646866bf5e9844
Were you doing such on a phone or a computer/laptop?  The link should've directed one to the map pdf file.  I rechecked the link on my laptop prior to posting & it went through fine.

Quote from: PurdueBill on February 19, 2021, 10:38:35 AMThinking about Route 1, did they give any rationale why not to number exits even on stretches like the Northeast Expressway section from Charlestown to Revere?  Did they take the Caltrans wind-loading excuse, or was it just that un-numbered was good enough?
My guess would be the latter; since it was never numbered; leave it alone. 

Quote from: PurdueBill on February 19, 2021, 10:38:35 AMIt seems like exit numbers could be helpful, or at least wouldn't hurt anyone.
Had it still been part of I-95 as it once was; it certainly would've received numbers for those interchanges decades ago.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on February 19, 2021, 12:01:10 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 19, 2021, 11:57:10 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on February 19, 2021, 10:30:53 AMIn case anyone has an issue with PHLBOS' link (I did) the map is on this page, https://massdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MinimalGallery/index.html?appid=643a9eb188d0439088646866bf5e9844
Were you doing such on a phone or a computer/laptop?  The link should've directed one to the map pdf file.  I rechecked the link on my laptop prior to posting & it went through fine.

The first link doesn't work by clicking it on a laptop, but it does work through the second link.

It appears to have a signature that's different for everyone.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on February 19, 2021, 12:07:02 PM


Quote from: PurdueBill on February 19, 2021, 10:38:35 AM

I can't believe the Route 120 thing above didn't hit me before (although it may have come up in a thread in the past).  When we lived in Peabody, we lived right near the former route 120, which even then hadn't been around for a long time but my dad remembered it.  We figured that its onetime presence had to be why Lake Street, part of Lowell Street, and Birch Street were a slightly thicker line on the classic AAA "Boston and Vicinity" map that they don't make anymore (but what a classic it was!); those streets were the route of the old Route 120.

Just out of curiosity, is this the reason the jughandle exists on Route 1 north, to provide access to what was once route 120 from route 1 north?


Quote from: PurdueBill on February 19, 2021, 10:38:35 AM

Thinking about Route 1, did they give any rationale why not to number exits even on stretches like the Northeast Expressway section from Charlestown to Revere?  Did they take the Caltrans wind-loading excuse, or was it just that un-numbered was good enough?  It seems like exit numbers could be helpful, or at least wouldn't hurt anyone.

The more I think about this the more I would like to see exit numbers on route 1. That would create actual reference points that could be used on route 1, instead of having to use local landmarks to reference where something is. Would be easier for businesses to utilize for advertising as well.

SM-A515U

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on February 19, 2021, 01:04:45 PM
Just for ha-ha's, here is what I have for exit numbers if Route 1 were to add them:

Exit 47 (SB ONLY): Rutherford Ave//TO I-93 NORTH
Exit 49 (NB ONLY): Beacon St
Exit 50: Fourth St (NB) / Carter Ave (SB)
Exit 51A (NB ONLY): Webster Ave
Exit 51B (51 SB): MA 16
Exit 52 (NB ONLY): Sargent St
Exit 53: MA 60
Exit 54 A/B: Lynn St

End of controlled access section

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on February 19, 2021, 01:10:53 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 19, 2021, 01:04:45 PM
Just for ha-ha’s, here is what I have for exit numbers if Route 1 were to add them:

Exit 47 (SB ONLY): Rutherford Ave//TO I-93 NORTH
Exit 49 (NB ONLY): Beacon St
Exit 50: Fourth St (NB) / Carter Ave (SB)
Exit 51A (NB ONLY): Webster Ave
Exit 51B (51 SB): MA 16
Exit 52 (NB ONLY): Sargent St
Exit 53: MA 60
Exit 54 A/B: Lynn St

End of controlled access section



I wouldn't mind them being numbered all the way up through Danvers.  I know it's not limited access, but there are interchanges that could be identified with numbers.  If Route 2 can have separate sections with exit numbering and especially if Route 6 on the Cape can have exit numbers for its limited-access section, even the Super-2, why not Route 1?  Maybe on the next sign replacement.

Separately, I still don't get why the interior of the Walnut Street interchange gets used for staging the big green signs for signing projects in Revere/Saugus/Lynnfield on Route 1, but the Walnut Street interchange itself never gets any big green signs.  You'd think with a numbered route coming in there even, maybe they could put signs at that one like they do at all the other like interchanges in Saugus.  Hinky.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on February 19, 2021, 01:26:33 PM
Quote from: 1 on February 19, 2021, 12:01:10 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 19, 2021, 11:57:10 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on February 19, 2021, 10:30:53 AMIn case anyone has an issue with PHLBOS' link (I did) the map is on this page, https://massdot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/MinimalGallery/index.html?appid=643a9eb188d0439088646866bf5e9844
Were you doing such on a phone or a computer/laptop?  The link should've directed one to the map pdf file.  I rechecked the link on my laptop prior to posting & it went through fine.

The first link doesn't work by clicking it on a laptop, but it does work through the second link.

It appears to have a signature that's different for everyone.

I was on my desktop. I knew where the link came from so posted that URL as a courtesy in case others had the same issue.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on February 19, 2021, 10:11:40 PM
I found a copy of the classic AAA Boston and Vicinity map and there it is, old Route 120 still in a thicker line.  It was like this until that version of the map was succeeded by a bigger sheet, digitally produced one that lacks the charm of this one.
(https://scontent-ort2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/152627364_10115226769703388_6532186699277197755_o.jpg?_nc_cat=105&ccb=3&_nc_sid=0debeb&_nc_ohc=amqrn0i0cCEAX_1p0xK&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-2.xx&oh=afb7be512f719c6904d5e6a882cc64b2&oe=6057986C)

Old-fashioned legend (https://scontent-ort2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/r90/152292733_10115226770586618_4149491345655137289_o.jpg?_nc_cat=110&ccb=3&_nc_sid=0debeb&_nc_ohc=4IqnqzwF8I8AX--gdBx&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-2.xx&_nc_tp=31&oh=6eb35019c267758e824c6db75cf6a586&oe=60555238)

map cover, which changed annually; somewhere around we have some from longer ago than this 1990 one (https://scontent-ort2-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/152035188_10115226771375038_6273676585849496144_o.jpg?_nc_cat=102&ccb=3&_nc_sid=0debeb&_nc_ohc=AM1c9BsXbVUAX-jdWZ9&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-2.xx&oh=2378bb6eaccf7657a4127f7fecc70ddd&oe=605522EE).  This was one of the first to have the then-new exit numbers for I-95 and the completed interchange in Peabody shown.  Older ones showed the incomplete stuff and, of course, older exit numbers.  Living in Peabody, it was kinda exciting (to me) to live near such a big deal and that Peabody got the outline while not every city or town did.
The West St. that is shown in W. Peabody is mythical; never was sure where that one came from.  No street runs on that path all the way from Winona to Pine; Johnson St. does exist on part of what appears to be West St.  Also, Good Dale is really Goodale, just like in Columbus, Ohio.  Oh well, at least old Route 120 is on there with a thicker line.  :P

They didn't bother to show Exit 29 on 128, which is too bad--guess it would have been too confusing with it being 45 on 128. 

On a new exit number note, is someone going to be in charge of renumbering tab in the famous meme?  It has to become Exit 26 soon.  Will it get an OLD EXIT sign too?
(https://images-wixmp-ed30a86b8c4ca887773594c2.wixmp.com/f/8922e955-f8c9-431b-9689-1b8e55435fb6/dcrv14l-d54f76db-a0bb-4f38-a606-0dcc1bb71354.jpg/v1/fill/w_1024,h_1025,q_75,strp/memes_are_better__left_exit_12_meme__by_narwhalsareawsome_dcrv14l-fullview.jpg?token=eyJ0eXAiOiJKV1QiLCJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiJ9.eyJzdWIiOiJ1cm46YXBwOiIsImlzcyI6InVybjphcHA6Iiwib2JqIjpbW3siaGVpZ2h0IjoiPD0xMDI1IiwicGF0aCI6IlwvZlwvODkyMmU5NTUtZjhjOS00MzFiLTk2ODktMWI4ZTU1NDM1ZmI2XC9kY3J2MTRsLWQ1NGY3NmRiLWEwYmItNGYzOC1hNjA2LTBkY2MxYmI3MTM1NC5qcGciLCJ3aWR0aCI6Ijw9MTAyNCJ9XV0sImF1ZCI6WyJ1cm46c2VydmljZTppbWFnZS5vcGVyYXRpb25zIl19.nz_wrakVAA4lnZCAaj2WNiPyUo8WGFTEn5cIKpEThXc)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on February 22, 2021, 10:50:10 AM
Some pics I took of the renumbering on route 128. As of this morning they have completed up to Route 35 heading northbound. I was kind of hoping they would add an exit tab to the northbound route 35 advance sign but they did not. Because of that the old exit plaque was added to the exit now sign. The same goes for the southbound route 114 advance sign. The old exit plaque for the southbound Endicott st exit sign was placed on its own supports, but was placed in such a way that it obscures the exit sign behind it. Also, curiously, there is a small sign approaching route 114 northbound for the Essex Coastal Scenic Byway that they slapped a giant 40A on to, covering up the word Exit entirely. I apologize for some pics being blurry, my camera is not great at high speed.  (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210222/852532c1f9f75a59834ff82dfce87e97.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210222/699de8722ce6b3ab2d6c3df78a68c7f5.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210222/ad29ab4e46d795d3bd1742a33fb2afff.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210222/8c6f519be2b7a6a191419448bd9c68c6.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210222/7d75c386dc308c6dce52d5a42f19acd8.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210222/2729d35545effa45202d316e5c83ff83.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210222/3f8832608143b5e39228e759630c13cf.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210222/73c221e16921881da2c89bcbe9adb16f.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210222/dd33f2b30ac83351546afcc018274380.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210222/23d21e0b9ed5a7bec5b877a405f101a9.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210222/7841c8c010e8293acafcc2e7ad4c9c4f.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210222/ad8ff86571ed5347ed236339a73a2525.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210222/50e8a5abc87eb41b35048b3ce13854bb.jpg)

SM-A515U
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on February 22, 2021, 03:49:58 PM
Got an e-mail today about the next highway getting new exit numbers:

The following corridor will begin conversion in approximately one week:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on February 22, 2021, 04:03:03 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 19, 2021, 01:04:45 PM
Just for ha-ha's, here is what I have for exit numbers if Route 1 were to add them:

Exit 47 (SB ONLY): Rutherford Ave//TO I-93 NORTH
Exit 49 (NB ONLY): Beacon St
Exit 50: Fourth St (NB) / Carter Ave St. (SB)
Exit 51A (NB ONLY): Webster Ave
Exit 51B (51 SB): MA 16
Exit 52 (NB ONLY): Sargent St
Exit 53: MA 60
Exit 54 A/B: Lynn St

End of controlled access section
FTFY.  The MA 60 interchange is where I-95 would've continued northward.  The Northeast Expressway listing on Google Maps for US 1 between MA 60 & Lynn St. is erroneous.

Quote from: bob7374 on February 22, 2021, 12:51:39 PM
See they weren't totally honest with the old exits signs for the MA 114 exits, they were incorrectly reversed under the sequential numbering system so Exit 40A should say Old Exit 25B and 40B, Old Exit 25A.
:confused: The sequentially erroneous A-B assignments (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5376275,-70.9421957,3a,75y,55.8h,92.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sffOxmqTjDEDDwOhH494_3w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) for the 114 interchange have been the same since the old E-W suffixes were dropped.  It was the MA 1A interchange where Exit 45 A was the old Exit 20 B and Exit 45 B was the old Exit 20 A.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on February 22, 2021, 10:12:55 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 22, 2021, 04:03:03 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on February 19, 2021, 01:04:45 PM
Just for ha-ha’s, here is what I have for exit numbers if Route 1 were to add them:

Exit 47 (SB ONLY): Rutherford Ave//TO I-93 NORTH
Exit 49 (NB ONLY): Beacon St
Exit 50: Fourth St (NB) / Carter Ave St. (SB)
Exit 51A (NB ONLY): Webster Ave
Exit 51B (51 SB): MA 16
Exit 52 (NB ONLY): Sargent St
Exit 53: MA 60
Exit 54 A/B: Lynn St

End of controlled access section
FTFY.  The MA 60 interchange is where I-95 would've continued northward.  The Northeast Expressway listing on Google Maps for US 1 between MA 60 & Lynn St. is erroneous.

Quote from: bob7374 on February 22, 2021, 12:51:39 PM
See they weren't totally honest with the old exits signs for the MA 114 exits, they were incorrectly reversed under the sequential numbering system so Exit 40A should say Old Exit 25B and 40B, Old Exit 25A.
:confused: The sequentially erroneous A-B assignments (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.5376275,-70.9421957,3a,75y,55.8h,92.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sffOxmqTjDEDDwOhH494_3w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) for the 114 interchange have been the same since the old E-W suffixes were dropped.  It was the MA 1A interchange where Exit 45 A was the old Exit 20 B and Exit 45 B was the old Exit 20 A.

I think the idea of the ha-has exit numbers though was for the limited-access section which begins in Charlestown and makes it to north of Lynn Street even though that is beyond the Northeast Expressway section which would have went with 95 through the marsh.  If they did add exit numbers, it would only make sense to number Lynn Street too even though it is a pretty tight, substandard interchange.  (If they can number intersections on Route 140 and equally tight interchanges on 128, then why not this one.)  North of that, it could be argued against numbering although I think they should.)

It is a relief that they didn't accidentally swap the As and Bs at Route 114 thinking that they needed to do so based on Route 1A or something.  At least this time someone looked at all the exits carefully, unlike when 25E became 25A!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on February 23, 2021, 02:14:45 PM
As to giving US 1 exit numbers, I would give all exits along US 1 in Massachusetts numbers, not just the ones on the Northeast Expressway.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on February 24, 2021, 12:28:00 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 23, 2021, 02:14:45 PM
As to giving US 1 exit numbers, I would give all exits along US 1 in Massachusetts numbers, not just the ones on the Northeast Expressway.

MA-9 also has quite a few interchanges on it, with the furthest-east one being Mass. Ave.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on February 25, 2021, 06:13:55 PM
MassDOT posted a blog post this afternoon indicating the I-95 exit renumbering is to start tonight (2/25), and they actually list the route in Peabody as 128, not 120:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/uncategorized/massdot-advisory-federally-required-statewide-exit-renumbering-work/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/uncategorized/massdot-advisory-federally-required-statewide-exit-renumbering-work/)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on March 01, 2021, 02:38:56 PM
Dang, they are working quickly to renumber all the exits! Next up is Interstate 91 starting TOMORROW!

The following corridor will begin conversion tomorrow: 
Corridor: Interstate 91
Approximate start date: Mar. 2
Approximate construction duration: 2 weeks
Location: Vermont border to the Connecticut border
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 02, 2021, 11:30:18 AM
Took a trip this weekend to capture the exit renumbering completed on MA 128 and the start of work on I-95. Here's a couple renumbered signs for the first two I-95 exits which are actually in NH. Hope their governor doesn't hear about this: (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signs221a.jpg)

The remainder of the I-95 photos and what I've posted so far for MA 128 are at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: yakra on March 02, 2021, 04:42:52 PM
QuoteHope their governor doesn't hear about this
<NotSerious>
Since that exit leaves within NH, it could be renumbered as Exit 0. Fits nicely with the current sequential sequence, matches mileposts too, and everybody's happy!
</NotSerious>
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on March 02, 2021, 05:48:04 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on March 01, 2021, 02:38:56 PM
Dang, they are working quickly to renumber all the exits! Next up is Interstate 91 starting TOMORROW!

The following corridor will begin conversion tomorrow: 
Corridor: Interstate 91
Approximate start date: Mar. 2
Approximate construction duration: 2 weeks
Location: Vermont border to the Connecticut border
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Meanwhile in CT....
started conversion 2015
finish conversion 2035

If they really wanted to, they could do the Mass approach.  But I guess they really don't want to do it that fast.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on March 03, 2021, 01:29:54 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on March 02, 2021, 05:48:04 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on March 01, 2021, 02:38:56 PM
Dang, they are working quickly to renumber all the exits! Next up is Interstate 91 starting TOMORROW!

The following corridor will begin conversion tomorrow: 
Corridor: Interstate 91
Approximate start date: Mar. 2
Approximate construction duration: 2 weeks
Location: Vermont border to the Connecticut border
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Meanwhile in CT....
started conversion 2015
finish conversion 2035

If they really wanted to, they could do the Mass approach.  But I guess they really don't want to do it that fast.

As of the end of the week, CT will be the last state left on the entire I-84 corridor with sequential exits now that MA is renumbering theirs.  Seems CT is last to the party in everything except raising taxes when it comes to moving out of the Stone Age.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on March 03, 2021, 08:22:55 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on March 03, 2021, 01:29:54 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on March 02, 2021, 05:48:04 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on March 01, 2021, 02:38:56 PM
Dang, they are working quickly to renumber all the exits! Next up is Interstate 91 starting TOMORROW!

The following corridor will begin conversion tomorrow: 
Corridor: Interstate 91
Approximate start date: Mar. 2
Approximate construction duration: 2 weeks
Location: Vermont border to the Connecticut border
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Meanwhile in CT....
started conversion 2015
finish conversion 2035

If they really wanted to, they could do the Mass approach.  But I guess they really don't want to do it that fast.

As of the end of the week, CT will be the last state left on the entire I-84 corridor with sequential exits now that MA is renumbering theirs.  Seems CT is last to the party in everything except raising taxes when it comes to moving out of the Stone Age.
I'd say NY is the same, but we now have a couple of facilities with mileage-based exit numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on March 03, 2021, 08:24:44 AM
Quote from: Rothman on March 03, 2021, 08:22:55 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on March 03, 2021, 01:29:54 AM
As of the end of the week, CT will be the last state left on the entire I-84 corridor with sequential exits now that MA is renumbering theirs.  Seems CT is last to the party in everything except raising taxes when it comes to moving out of the Stone Age.
I'd say NY is the same, but we now have a couple of facilities with mileage-based exit numbers.

Connecticut's I-395 is mileage-based.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on March 03, 2021, 11:20:33 AM
Quote from: 1 on March 03, 2021, 08:24:44 AM
Quote from: Rothman on March 03, 2021, 08:22:55 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on March 03, 2021, 01:29:54 AM
As of the end of the week, CT will be the last state left on the entire I-84 corridor with sequential exits now that MA is renumbering theirs.  Seems CT is last to the party in everything except raising taxes when it comes to moving out of the Stone Age.
I'd say NY is the same, but we now have a couple of facilities with mileage-based exit numbers.

Connecticut's I-395 is mileage-based.

Which includes I-84
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 03, 2021, 12:50:20 PM
MassDOT Blog Post regarding the start of Exit Renumbering on I-91 tonight (3/3):
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/massdot-advisory-statewide-exit-renumbering-project/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/massdot-advisory-statewide-exit-renumbering-project/)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on March 04, 2021, 07:49:39 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on March 03, 2021, 01:29:54 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on March 02, 2021, 05:48:04 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on March 01, 2021, 02:38:56 PM
Dang, they are working quickly to renumber all the exits! Next up is Interstate 91 starting TOMORROW!

The following corridor will begin conversion tomorrow: 
Corridor: Interstate 91
Approximate start date: Mar. 2
Approximate construction duration: 2 weeks
Location: Vermont border to the Connecticut border
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Meanwhile in CT....
started conversion 2015
finish conversion 2035

If they really wanted to, they could do the Mass approach.  But I guess they really don't want to do it that fast.

As of the end of the week, CT will be the last state left on the entire I-84 corridor with sequential exits now that MA is renumbering theirs.  Seems CT is last to the party in everything except raising taxes when it comes to moving out of the Stone Age.

To your point, Connecticut was the last state in the CONUS to raise its maximum speed limit above 55 mph. They tried for years in the '90s to get it raised to 65, and they finally succeeded in October 1998. But it was a big fight to get that through the state legislature, as there were a lot of special interest groups lobbying lawmakers to keep the limit at 55.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: sturmde on March 04, 2021, 03:26:11 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 04, 2021, 07:49:39 AM
:
To your point, Connecticut was the last state in the CONUS to raise its maximum speed limit above 55 mph. They tried for years in the '90s to get it raised to 65, and they finally succeeded in October 1998. But it was a big fight to get that through the state legislature, as there were a lot of special interest groups lobbying lawmakers to keep the limit at 55.

This is why for many years, the combination of 55 mph and Connecticut traffic... we'd go from Maine to parts south by staying on the Mass Pike all the way to the Berkshire NYT spur, then travel down I-87 to 84 or 287 depending on going west or south... or even down the Taconic to 84.  This "Connecticut Bypass" was a great relief route when making longer trips. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on March 09, 2021, 02:35:19 PM
Exit renumbering status:

I-84 is done, both directions.  As expected, no number given to the Mass Pike exit.
I-95 is done from the NH State Line down to 128 in Peabody, in both directions.


Southbound, Former Exit 59:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51020474111_2b477d9c90_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kJvgqK)DSC02591 (https://flic.kr/p/2kJvgqK) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr


Southbound, former Exit 54:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51019746698_713868cd3c_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kJrxc9)DSC02597 (https://flic.kr/p/2kJrxc9) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr

Southbound, former Exit 50:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51019746623_e0b834297b_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kJrxaR)DSC02604 (https://flic.kr/p/2kJrxaR) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr


Southbound, former Exit 46:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51020474601_13592bdc1d_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kJvgzc)DSC02608 (https://flic.kr/p/2kJvgzc) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr


Southbound, former Exit 45:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51019746063_15a003bed5_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kJrx1c)DSC02610 (https://flic.kr/p/2kJrx1c) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr


No new numbers yet on Rt 128 portion:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51020575082_989e2cd83f_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kJvMrC)DSC02611 (https://flic.kr/p/2kJvMrC) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr


Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on March 09, 2021, 03:46:52 PM
On I-84 Westbound...


Former Exit 3...
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51020574837_b2c28f7b06_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kJvMnp)DSC02627 (https://flic.kr/p/2kJvMnp) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr

Former Exit 2...
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51019746188_b9390c8bfb_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kJrx3m)DSC02630 (https://flic.kr/p/2kJrx3m) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr

Former Exit 1...
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51019745943_39259ca992_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2kJrwY8)DSC02632 (https://flic.kr/p/2kJrwY8) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr


There's more on my FLICKR page... see the sig for the link. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 12, 2021, 12:01:58 PM
Exit renumbering has made its way onto the '128' portion of I-95 South as far as the US 3 North exit in Burlington. Here's a photo of a couple of the renumbered exits, courtesy of Paul Schlichtman:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signsps321h.jpg)

Other images of his are at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 12, 2021, 12:15:31 PM
Breaking News. MassDOT has just revealed the dates for the next two exit renumbering projects:
"Route 146
Approximate start date: Mar. 17
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: Uxbridge to Worcester
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Interstate 190
Approximate start date: Mar. 21
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: West Boylston to Leominster
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

There are only 4 exits to change on I-190 (Exits 1-4 will not change), but 12 on MA 146, is 2 days feasible for that route?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 12:51:00 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 12, 2021, 12:15:31 PM
Breaking News. MassDOT has just revealed the dates for the next two exit renumbering projects:
"Route 146
Approximate start date: Mar. 17
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: Uxbridge to Worcester
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Interstate 190
Approximate start date: Mar. 21
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: West Boylston to Leominster
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

There are only 4 exits to change on I-190 Exits 1-4 will not change), but 12 on MA 146, is 2 days feasible for that route?

So then that would leave just I-495, Route 2 and I-290 left to be converted. Are there any other routes I'm missing that haven't yet been converted?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on March 12, 2021, 12:56:54 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 12, 2021, 12:15:31 PM
Breaking News. MassDOT has just revealed the dates for the next two exit renumbering projects:
"Route 146
Approximate start date: Mar. 17
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: Uxbridge to Worcester
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Interstate 190
Approximate start date: Mar. 21
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: West Boylston to Leominster
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

There are only 4 exits to change on I-190 Exits 1-4 will not change), but 12 on MA 146, is 2 days feasible for that route?

146 could possibly be done in 2 days, but they'll need to work fast. Each exit on 146 only has one advance BGS, instead of the 2 on most other roads, and exits 11 and 13 are northbound only. There aren't many auxiliary signs, and all but one (one for exit 12) has "next right" or "next exit" instead of an exit number. Same goes for the blue service signs.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on March 12, 2021, 04:48:54 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 12:51:00 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 12, 2021, 12:15:31 PM
Breaking News. MassDOT has just revealed the dates for the next two exit renumbering projects:
"Route 146
Approximate start date: Mar. 17
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: Uxbridge to Worcester
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Interstate 190
Approximate start date: Mar. 21
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: West Boylston to Leominster
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

There are only 4 exits to change on I-190 Exits 1-4 will not change), but 12 on MA 146, is 2 days feasible for that route?

So then that would leave just I-495, Route 2 and I-290 left to be converted. Are there any other routes I'm missing that haven't yet been converted?

I-93 as well. It was referenced in an e-mail in February but hasn't been put on the schedule.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 04:52:07 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on March 12, 2021, 04:48:54 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 12:51:00 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 12, 2021, 12:15:31 PM
Breaking News. MassDOT has just revealed the dates for the next two exit renumbering projects:
"Route 146
Approximate start date: Mar. 17
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: Uxbridge to Worcester
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Interstate 190
Approximate start date: Mar. 21
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: West Boylston to Leominster
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

There are only 4 exits to change on I-190 Exits 1-4 will not change), but 12 on MA 146, is 2 days feasible for that route?

So then that would leave just I-495, Route 2 and I-290 left to be converted. Are there any other routes I'm missing that haven't yet been converted?

I-93 as well. It was referenced in an e-mail in February but hasn't been put on the schedule.

I thought I-93 was finished already.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on March 12, 2021, 04:52:59 PM
Haven't gotten pix of them, but along I-495 around Lowell and Chelmsford (exits 34-35C) they have replaced the exit gore signs. Since the numbers haven't been changed over, the new signs, I presume, have the "new" number on it with the old one placed over it for the time being. Pretty smart thinking on their part where they can do the sign project at its own pace and just rip off the old number when converting.

I think the sign pile with those new exit signs are what was sitting off 495 in Littleton for about a month.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on March 12, 2021, 04:53:46 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 04:52:07 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on March 12, 2021, 04:48:54 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 12:51:00 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 12, 2021, 12:15:31 PM
Breaking News. MassDOT has just revealed the dates for the next two exit renumbering projects:
"Route 146
Approximate start date: Mar. 17
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: Uxbridge to Worcester
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Interstate 190
Approximate start date: Mar. 21
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: West Boylston to Leominster
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

There are only 4 exits to change on I-190 Exits 1-4 will not change), but 12 on MA 146, is 2 days feasible for that route?

So then that would leave just I-495, Route 2 and I-290 left to be converted. Are there any other routes I'm missing that haven't yet been converted?

I-93 as well. It was referenced in an e-mail in February but hasn't been put on the schedule.

I thought I-93 was finished already.

Not even started yet, and I just drove on it today from Braintree to Andover.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 04:59:06 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on March 12, 2021, 04:53:46 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 04:52:07 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on March 12, 2021, 04:48:54 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 12:51:00 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 12, 2021, 12:15:31 PM
Breaking News. MassDOT has just revealed the dates for the next two exit renumbering projects:
"Route 146
Approximate start date: Mar. 17
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: Uxbridge to Worcester
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Interstate 190
Approximate start date: Mar. 21
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: West Boylston to Leominster
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

There are only 4 exits to change on I-190 Exits 1-4 will not change), but 12 on MA 146, is 2 days feasible for that route?

So then that would leave just I-495, Route 2 and I-290 left to be converted. Are there any other routes I'm missing that haven't yet been converted?

I-93 as well. It was referenced in an e-mail in February but hasn't been put on the schedule.

I thought I-93 was finished already.

Not even started yet, and I just drove on it today from Braintree to Andover.

Okay...it was Route 3 that was converted. Got that mixed up with I-93.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 12, 2021, 06:21:32 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 04:59:06 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on March 12, 2021, 04:53:46 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 04:52:07 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on March 12, 2021, 04:48:54 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 12, 2021, 12:51:00 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on March 12, 2021, 12:15:31 PM
Breaking News. MassDOT has just revealed the dates for the next two exit renumbering projects:
"Route 146
Approximate start date: Mar. 17
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: Uxbridge to Worcester
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Interstate 190
Approximate start date: Mar. 21
Approximate construction duration: 2 days
Location: West Boylston to Leominster
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

There are only 4 exits to change on I-190 Exits 1-4 will not change), but 12 on MA 146, is 2 days feasible for that route?

So then that would leave just I-495, Route 2 and I-290 left to be converted. Are there any other routes I'm missing that haven't yet been converted?

I-93 as well. It was referenced in an e-mail in February but hasn't been put on the schedule.

I thought I-93 was finished already.

Not even started yet, and I just drove on it today from Braintree to Andover.

Okay...it was Route 3 that was converted. Got that mixed up with I-93.
The remaining routes are for Contract 1 (after completing I-91, MA 146 and I-190)-MA 2, I-495, I-395 and I-290 and for Contract 2 (after completing I-95)-I-93.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on March 12, 2021, 07:24:57 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on March 09, 2021, 02:35:19 PM
Southbound, former Exit 46:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51020474601_13592bdc1d_b.jpg)
(https://flic.kr/p/2kJvgzc)DSC02608 (https://flic.kr/p/2kJvgzc) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr
I guess sign repair was not in scope.  That particular BGS is not even 2 years old.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on March 16, 2021, 11:43:02 AM
Please be advised that MassDOT is in the process of converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Work takes place on each corridor in the east to west or north to south direction. Work typically is completed during the overnight hours.

The following corridor will begin conversion in a week: 
Corridor: Route 2
Approximate start date: Mar. 23
Approximate construction duration: 4 weeks
Location: Arlington to West Orange
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 74/171FAN on March 16, 2021, 12:01:21 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on March 16, 2021, 11:43:02 AM
Please be advised that MassDOT is in the process of converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Work takes place on each corridor in the east to west or north to south direction. Work typically is completed during the overnight hours.

The following corridor will begin conversion in a week: 
Corridor: Route 2
Approximate start date: Mar. 23
Approximate construction duration: 4 weeks
Location: Arlington to West Orange
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Is this a direct quote from MassDOT?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on March 16, 2021, 01:38:21 PM
Quote from: 74/171FAN on March 16, 2021, 12:01:21 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on March 16, 2021, 11:43:02 AM
Please be advised that MassDOT is in the process of converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Work takes place on each corridor in the east to west or north to south direction. Work typically is completed during the overnight hours.

The following corridor will begin conversion in a week: 
Corridor: Route 2
Approximate start date: Mar. 23
Approximate construction duration: 4 weeks
Location: Arlington to West Orange
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Is this a direct quote from MassDOT?

Yes - they send out email to exit change subscribers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on March 16, 2021, 02:54:37 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on March 16, 2021, 11:43:02 AM
Please be advised that MassDOT is in the process of converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Work takes place on each corridor in the east to west or north to south direction. Work typically is completed during the overnight hours.

The following corridor will begin conversion in a week: 
Corridor: Route 2
Approximate start date: Mar. 23
Approximate construction duration: 4 weeks
Location: Arlington to West Orange
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

That leaves with I-495, I-290/395, and I-93 to get new exit numbers. Which highway left will be the next one to get new exit numbers?  :hmmm:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on March 16, 2021, 06:25:44 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on March 03, 2021, 01:29:54 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on March 02, 2021, 05:48:04 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on March 01, 2021, 02:38:56 PM
Dang, they are working quickly to renumber all the exits! Next up is Interstate 91 starting TOMORROW!

The following corridor will begin conversion tomorrow: 
Corridor: Interstate 91
Approximate start date: Mar. 2
Approximate construction duration: 2 weeks
Location: Vermont border to the Connecticut border
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

Meanwhile in CT....
started conversion 2015
finish conversion 2035

If they really wanted to, they could do the Mass approach.  But I guess they really don't want to do it that fast.

As of the end of the week, CT will be the last state left on the entire I-84 corridor with sequential exits now that MA is renumbering theirs.  Seems CT is last to the party in everything except raising taxes when it comes to moving out of the Stone Age.
Honestly they may wait until the next sign replacement contract is awarded. Exits 59-71 really need them. 60-65 are especially faded and some had to have new shields tacked on.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on March 16, 2021, 09:21:18 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on March 16, 2021, 02:54:37 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on March 16, 2021, 11:43:02 AM
Please be advised that MassDOT is in the process of converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. Work takes place on each corridor in the east to west or north to south direction. Work typically is completed during the overnight hours.

The following corridor will begin conversion in a week: 
Corridor: Route 2
Approximate start date: Mar. 23
Approximate construction duration: 4 weeks
Location: Arlington to West Orange
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

That leaves with I-495, I-290/395, and I-93 to get new exit numbers. Which highway left will be the next one to get new exit numbers?  :hmmm:
Probably I-93, since it's on the other contract, which is currently in the middle of converting I-95.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on March 16, 2021, 10:09:08 PM
That, and I-495 and I-290 are both in the middle of sign replacement projects.  Not that the new signs will be up by the time those roads come up for conversion... no new gantries were observed on I-495 or I-290 so they're still a little ways out from being close to finished.  Or, they push converting those roads back til later in the spring/early summer. 

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 17, 2021, 12:20:09 PM
I've posted photos, taken during a weekend road trip, of the new I-95 exit numbers, starting with MA 110 at the Merrimack River:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signs321ss.jpg)

and heading south to US 3 in Burlington:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signs321aaaaa.jpg)

I have also posted photos taken by Paul Schlichtman covering exits between US 1 to I-93 and from US 3 to Waltham. All photos can be found at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 17, 2021, 05:03:01 PM
Massachusetts is changing the exit numbers on their portion of Interstate 95, but Rhode Island can't be bothered to change the exit numbers on their segment of Interstate 95. What gives?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on March 17, 2021, 07:00:51 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 17, 2021, 05:03:01 PM
Massachusetts is changing the exit numbers on their portion of Interstate 95, but Rhode Island can't be bothered to change the exit numbers on their segment of Interstate 95. What gives?

Allegedly was to happen in late 2020 but hasn't happened yet.

http://www.dot.ri.gov/projects/ExitNumbers/index.php
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on March 18, 2021, 12:06:12 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on March 17, 2021, 07:00:51 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 17, 2021, 05:03:01 PM
Massachusetts is changing the exit numbers on their portion of Interstate 95, but Rhode Island can't be bothered to change the exit numbers on their segment of Interstate 95. What gives?

Allegedly was to happen in late 2020 but hasn't happened yet.

http://www.dot.ri.gov/projects/ExitNumbers/index.php
And CT probably won't until at least 2030 :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on March 18, 2021, 02:09:36 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 22, 2015, 03:41:39 PM
Why doesn't all of New England just adopt mile based exit numbering? 40+ states have done this, why are the other ten or so still behind?
Maine went to milepost numbering in 2004.
Massachusetts in the process of an aggressive conversion, with two contracts running simultaneously.
Rhode Island began the process, but is slow in implementation.
Vermont posted Milepost Exit numbers beneath their signs.
The governor of New Hampshire has an emotional attachment to his exit number on I-93, so he is blocking the whole project.
Connecticut will replace numbers when they get around to replacing signs. They are moving at the pace of New York, where the conversion schedule is about as fast as traffic on the Cross Bronx Expressway. They have lots of work to do, as I-87 has THREE different sets of exit numbers (Bronx, NY Thruway, Northway). New Jersey also has some work to do with the Turnpike and I-95.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on March 18, 2021, 02:37:58 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on March 18, 2021, 12:06:12 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on March 17, 2021, 07:00:51 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 17, 2021, 05:03:01 PM
Massachusetts is changing the exit numbers on their portion of Interstate 95, but Rhode Island can't be bothered to change the exit numbers on their segment of Interstate 95. What gives?

Allegedly was to happen in late 2020 but hasn't happened yet.

http://www.dot.ri.gov/projects/ExitNumbers/index.php
And CT probably won't until at least 2030 :rolleyes:

From an e-mail response I received from RIDOT this morning, the I-95 exit renumbering has been placed on-hold until they secure additional funding for the contract.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on March 18, 2021, 02:55:21 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 18, 2021, 02:37:58 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on March 18, 2021, 12:06:12 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on March 17, 2021, 07:00:51 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 17, 2021, 05:03:01 PM
Massachusetts is changing the exit numbers on their portion of Interstate 95, but Rhode Island can't be bothered to change the exit numbers on their segment of Interstate 95. What gives?

Allegedly was to happen in late 2020 but hasn't happened yet.

http://www.dot.ri.gov/projects/ExitNumbers/index.php
And CT probably won't until at least 2030 :rolleyes:

From an e-mail response I received from RIDOT this morning, the I-95 exit renumbering has been placed on-hold until they secure additional funding for the contract.

I can't believe they use that excuse. Massachusetts has to pay $280K out of pocket, and that's for about 250 exits changing numbers. 95 itself for Rhode Island has 30 exits, so it could be assumed that's less than $50K cost to them. Amazing.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on March 19, 2021, 08:21:15 PM
I-95 renumbering update:
Southbound renumbered from the New Hampshire line to Exit 41 (former exit 26) US 20
Northbound renumbered from Exit 43 (former exit 27) Totten Pond Road to Exit 46 (former Exit 30) MA 2A, and from Exit 67 (former Exit 47) MA 114 to the New Hampshire line. Northbound crews will resume their work Sunday night at future Exit 50 (US 3) Sunday night.

(https://www.schlichtman.org/exit45.jpeg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: rushfan01760 on March 20, 2021, 08:00:52 PM
Drove on Rte. 79 northbound in Fall River today.  Just before the merge with Rte. 24 northbound is this advance sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7434758,-71.1233745,3a,75y,63.51h,91.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s05p1N-I90_LF5iJbDbo5Xw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) which still refers to the Innovation Way exit as 8B rather than 10 (Rte. 24's exit numbers have been updated).  Looks like the advanced signage on intersecting roads is being missed (the advance sign for Rte. 3's Exit 13 at the western end of the Plimoth Plantation Highway was still Exit 5 when I was on that road back at the end of December after the Rte. 3 exit numbers were updated).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on March 21, 2021, 10:12:46 AM
Quote from: rushfan01760 on March 20, 2021, 08:00:52 PM
Drove on Rte. 79 northbound in Fall River today.  Just before the merge with Rte. 24 northbound is this advance sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7434758,-71.1233745,3a,75y,63.51h,91.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s05p1N-I90_LF5iJbDbo5Xw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) which still refers to the Innovation Way exit as 8B rather than 10 (Rte. 24's exit numbers have been updated).  Looks like the advanced signage on intersecting roads is being missed (the advance sign for Rte. 3's Exit 13 at the western end of the Plimoth Plantation Highway was still Exit 5 when I was on that road back at the end of December after the Rte. 3 exit numbers were updated).

I just sent MassDOT an e-mail about this. I guess that's just an oversight that no one caught when planning up the project.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 22, 2021, 12:39:42 PM
MassDOT's Exit Renumbering website has been updated with new start dates for the next routes to be worked on:
March 21, 2021 - Route 146
March 23, 2021 - Interstate 190
March 25, 2021 - Route 2

I-91 (at first not present on the revised list) is now listed as completed.  The new dates are at:
https://newmassexits.com/#it-schedule (https://newmassexits.com/#it-schedule)

Also, I finally got a photo of the new signs at the end of MA 24 North that had been hidden by the old gantry since December until early March when it was taken down:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma24signs321d.jpg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on March 27, 2021, 06:07:59 PM
I drove along I-95/Rte. 128 today between Canton and Lexington, getting off at Rte. 2.  Google Maps has apparently gotten the memo, as it instructed me to take exit 45A for Rte. 2 east!

However, I've noticed that the Rte. 20 exit now reads Exit 41 going south, but still Exit 26 going north.  Why wasn't the Rte. 20 exit changed going north yet?  Seeing how I-95 is being converted in 4 seconds, this could create a multi-week discrepancy.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on March 27, 2021, 06:15:53 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on March 27, 2021, 06:07:59 PM
However, I've noticed that the Rte. 20 exit now reads Exit 41 going south, but still Exit 26 going north.  Why wasn't the Rte. 20 exit changed going north yet?  Seeing how I-95 is being converted in 4 seconds, this could create a multi-week discrepancy.

This is likely due to how I-95 is being split into sections. The current section is between old exits 26 and 45, where the southern end is at exit 26 itself (draw an imaginary line straight through exit 26, and they likely can't go south of this line). A similar thing happened with exit 45 a few weeks ago, and has now been converted to exit 64.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: connroadgeek on March 27, 2021, 07:41:33 PM
I like that left exit crown. I'd put the TO between the 93 and 95 shields though.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 27, 2021, 10:02:24 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on March 27, 2021, 06:15:53 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on March 27, 2021, 06:07:59 PM
However, I've noticed that the Rte. 20 exit now reads Exit 41 going south, but still Exit 26 going north.  Why wasn't the Rte. 20 exit changed going north yet?  Seeing how I-95 is being converted in 4 seconds, this could create a multi-week discrepancy.
This is likely due to how I-95 is being split into sections. The current section is between old exits 26 and 45, where the southern end is at exit 26 itself (draw an imaginary line straight through exit 26, and they likely can't go south of this line). A similar thing happened with exit 45 a few weeks ago, and has now been converted to exit 64.
Ideally, they would have completed each section by having the line going through south of the exits listed for that section. Thus the first section, which was listed from the NH border to Route 128, they would have completed the MA 128 exit renumbering in both directions, and US 20 for the second section.

Here, thanks to Paul Schlichtman, is the last renumbered MA 128 exit sign heading north:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signsps321wwww.jpg)

Along with the renumbered last exit of the second section heading south, US 20:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signsps321z.jpg)

The entire set of photos from I-95 between the NH line and US 20 can be found at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on March 29, 2021, 09:59:22 PM
Crews are currently converting exit numbers on Route 2 westbound in Arlington.
(https://alewifeinstitute.org//Exit135.jpeg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on March 29, 2021, 10:14:31 PM
One of the three highways (the others being the Interstate 90 Massachusetts Turnpike and Interstate 495) in Massachusetts that will have exit numbers in the 100s. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on March 29, 2021, 10:59:11 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 29, 2021, 10:14:31 PM
One of the three highways (the others being the Interstate 90 Massachusetts Turnpike and Interstate 495) in Massachusetts that will have exit numbers in the 100s. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Massachusetts is a small but mighty state.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on March 29, 2021, 11:01:11 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on March 29, 2021, 09:59:22 PM
Crews are currently converting exit numbers on Route 2 westbound in Arlington.
(https://alewifeinstitute.org//Exit135.jpeg)
So trippy to see an exit 134 and 135 so close to Boston.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on March 29, 2021, 11:51:57 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 29, 2021, 10:14:31 PM
One of the three highways (the others being the Interstate 90 Massachusetts Turnpike and Interstate 495) in Massachusetts that will have exit numbers in the 100s. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

US-6 would have been a fourth if they had decided to number the exits in Truro....  ;)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on March 30, 2021, 12:35:18 PM
Anyone have pics of the new exit numbers on I-91?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on March 30, 2021, 01:51:12 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on March 29, 2021, 11:51:57 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 29, 2021, 10:14:31 PM
One of the three highways (the others being the Interstate 90 Massachusetts Turnpike and Interstate 495) in Massachusetts that will have exit numbers in the 100s. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

US-6 would have been a third fourth if they had decided to number the exits in Truro....  ;)
FTFY. 
The Ghostbuster was referring to & included MA 2 in his above-One of the three highways... quote.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on March 30, 2021, 11:47:59 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on March 30, 2021, 01:51:12 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on March 29, 2021, 11:51:57 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 29, 2021, 10:14:31 PM
One of the three highways (the others being the Interstate 90 Massachusetts Turnpike and Interstate 495) in Massachusetts that will have exit numbers in the 100s. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

US-6 would have been a third fourth if they had decided to number the exits in Truro....  ;)
FTFY. 
The Ghostbuster was referring to & included MA 2 in his above-One of the three highways... quote.
fixed
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 31, 2021, 11:52:19 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on March 30, 2021, 12:35:18 PM
Anyone have pics of the new exit numbers on I-91?
Here's the one photo I have on my site courtesy of Doug Kerr:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i91exitsdk321a.jpg)

Meanwhile, I have posted photos taken by Paul Schlichtman of the exit renumbering on MA 2 West, which includes exits for I-95:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma2signsps321r.jpg)

The rest at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 02, 2021, 12:42:12 PM
Exit renumbering along I-95 South has made it as far as MA 9. Here's a photo of the newly renumbered MA 30 and I-90/Mass Pike exits, courtesy of Paul Schlichtman:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signsps421b.jpg)

and the still wrong exit tab, with a new number, for MA 9:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signsps421k.jpg)

Other of his photos are at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs2 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs2)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kernals12 on April 03, 2021, 01:50:56 PM
Exit 22 on 128, which is the one I use, is now Exit 37. But someone screwed up with the signs on Quinobequin, with the "7" being made of what looks like Tape.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on April 06, 2021, 12:04:21 PM
Don't understand why MassDOT still uses Attleboro as a control in Lexington for I-95.  Seems so random considering there's other options that would have been better (Waltham, Canton, Providence).  Too bad they couldn't have used Exit 128 for the number for the "128 is 128" effect.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on April 06, 2021, 01:25:14 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 06, 2021, 12:04:21 PM
Don't understand why MassDOT still uses Attleboro as a control in Lexington for I-95.  Seems so random considering there's other options that would have been better (Waltham, Canton, Providence).  Too bad they couldn't have used Exit 128 for the number for the "128 is 128" effect.
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma2signsps321t.jpg)
Absolutely absurd to use Attleboro as a control city in Lexington. Waltham is a half mile away, so it wouldn't be a good control city for I-95 south. Canton would be better, but Providence is most frequently used as the control city on this stretch of I-95. Here's a list of control cities for onramps, listed by exit number.
https://alewifeinstitute.org/I-95entrance.html

And yes, it would have been much better if MassDOT made this Exit 128.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bluecountry on April 07, 2021, 09:45:22 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on March 18, 2021, 02:09:36 PM
Quote from: noelbotevera on November 22, 2015, 03:41:39 PM
Why doesn't all of New England just adopt mile based exit numbering? 40+ states have done this, why are the other ten or so still behind?
Maine went to milepost numbering in 2004.
Massachusetts in the process of an aggressive conversion, with two contracts running simultaneously.
Rhode Island began the process, but is slow in implementation.
Vermont posted Milepost Exit numbers beneath their signs.
The governor of New Hampshire has an emotional attachment to his exit number on I-93, so he is blocking the whole project.
Connecticut will replace numbers when they get around to replacing signs. They are moving at the pace of New York, where the conversion schedule is about as fast as traffic on the Cross Bronx Expressway. They have lots of work to do, as I-87 has THREE different sets of exit numbers (Bronx, NY Thruway, Northway). New Jersey also has some work to do with the Turnpike and I-95.

1.  When is the MassPike changing?
2.  When is NY changing?
3.  When is NJ?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on April 07, 2021, 09:58:18 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 07, 2021, 09:45:22 PM

1.  When is the MassPike changing?
2.  When is NY changing?
3.  When is NJ?

MassPike changed several weeks ago.
NY is changing, one highway every decade or so.
NJ had one of the first milepost-based exits on the Garden State Parkway. Most of the state is numbered based on mileage, the only exception is the NJ Turnpike.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bluecountry on April 07, 2021, 10:00:47 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on April 07, 2021, 09:58:18 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 07, 2021, 09:45:22 PM

1.  When is the MassPike changing?
2.  When is NY changing?
3.  When is NJ?

MassPike changed several weeks ago.
NY is changing, one highway every decade or so.
NJ had one of the first milepost-based exits on the Garden State Parkway. Most of the state is numbered based on mileage, the only exception is the NJ Turnpike.
Any pics of I-90?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 07, 2021, 11:48:21 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 07, 2021, 10:00:47 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on April 07, 2021, 09:58:18 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 07, 2021, 09:45:22 PM

1.  When is the MassPike changing?
2.  When is NY changing?
3.  When is NJ?

MassPike changed several weeks ago.
NY is changing, one highway every decade or so.
NJ had one of the first milepost-based exits on the Garden State Parkway. Most of the state is numbered based on mileage, the only exception is the NJ Turnpike.
Any pics of I-90?
Go to https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i90signs2 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i90signs2)
Scroll up for exits east of Auburn, down for I-84.

I have also posted photos taken this last weekend along I-84, direct link: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i84signs (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i84signs)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: RobbieL2415 on April 08, 2021, 09:18:49 AM
Quote from: paul02474 on March 29, 2021, 10:59:11 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 29, 2021, 10:14:31 PM
One of the three highways (the others being the Interstate 90 Massachusetts Turnpike and Interstate 495) in Massachusetts that will have exit numbers in the 100s. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Massachusetts is a small but mighty state.
It's actually larger than NJ.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on April 08, 2021, 11:18:32 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 07, 2021, 11:48:21 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 07, 2021, 10:00:47 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on April 07, 2021, 09:58:18 PM
Quote from: bluecountry on April 07, 2021, 09:45:22 PM

1.  When is the MassPike changing?
2.  When is NY changing?
3.  When is NJ?

MassPike changed several weeks ago.
NY is changing, one highway every decade or so.
NJ had one of the first milepost-based exits on the Garden State Parkway. Most of the state is numbered based on mileage, the only exception is the NJ Turnpike.
Any pics of I-90?
Go to https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i90signs2 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i90signs2)
Scroll up for exits east of Auburn, down for I-84.

I have also posted photos taken this last weekend along I-84, direct link: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i84signs (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i84signs)

They'll never change exit numbers on the New Jersey Turnpike, nor do they have to since the Turnpike is funded by toll collections, and no money from the feds.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 08, 2021, 05:22:03 PM
Why is it that Massachusetts was able to renumber its exits to mileage-based so quickly, but the other states (Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island) have moved at such a snail's pace renumbering their exits to mileage-based? I'd also like to see how prompt Vermont and New Hampshire move when/if they also convert their exits to mileage-based. I'm excluding Vermont's new "milepoint" signs as those don't count as a conversion in my eyes.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on April 08, 2021, 05:39:15 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 08, 2021, 05:22:03 PM
Why is it that Massachusetts was able to renumber its exits to mileage-based so quickly, but the other states (Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island) have moved at such a snail's pace renumbering their exits to mileage-based? I'd also like to see how prompt Vermont and New Hampshire move when/if they also convert their exits to mileage-based. I'm excluding Vermont's new "milepoint" signs as those don't count as a conversion in my eyes.

Will. Mass wanted to get it done all at once and quickly. They've exceeded my expectations on the speed of getting it done.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on April 08, 2021, 05:59:03 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 08, 2021, 05:39:15 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 08, 2021, 05:22:03 PM
Why is it that Massachusetts was able to renumber its exits to mileage-based so quickly, but the other states (Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island) have moved at such a snail's pace renumbering their exits to mileage-based? I'd also like to see how prompt Vermont and New Hampshire move when/if they also convert their exits to mileage-based. I'm excluding Vermont's new "milepoint" signs as those don't count as a conversion in my eyes.

Will. Mass wanted to get it done all at once and quickly. They've exceeded my expectations on the speed of getting it done.
Mass Pike was also consolidated under Mass DOT.  NYSDOT and NYSTA are separate entities.  NY also has vocal opposition to the idea statewide.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on April 09, 2021, 10:07:22 AM
Quote from: Rothman on April 08, 2021, 05:59:03 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 08, 2021, 05:39:15 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 08, 2021, 05:22:03 PM
Why is it that Massachusetts was able to renumber its exits to mileage-based so quickly, but the other states (Connecticut, New York, Rhode Island) have moved at such a snail's pace renumbering their exits to mileage-based? I'd also like to see how prompt Vermont and New Hampshire move when/if they also convert their exits to mileage-based. I'm excluding Vermont's new "milepoint" signs as those don't count as a conversion in my eyes.

Will. Mass wanted to get it done all at once and quickly. They've exceeded my expectations on the speed of getting it done.
Mass Pike was also consolidated under Mass DOT.  NYSDOT and NYSTA are separate entities.  NY also has vocal opposition to the idea statewide.

Same is the case in Connecticut. There's a lot of local opposition to renumbering exits, so both New York and Connecticut are taking advantage of the fact that the FHWA is mandating the conversion to mile-based exits when all signs along a given route are due for replacement. I think such is the case for Vermont also.

So for Connecticut, it'll be no earlier than 2030 that the state is fully converted to mile-based exit numbers. In New York, it'll probably be a lot longer with all of the highways it has. I would suspect the Thruway would be exempt from adopting mile-based exit numbering since it's construction and upkeep was not federally funded, and the FHWA's exit numbering mandate only applies to routes that receive federal funds for construction and upkeep.

In New Hampshire, the governor has pretty much told the feds they're not going to convert to mile-based exit numbering. I'm looking forward to seeing how that fight will go down.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on April 09, 2021, 10:45:15 AM
NY tried fighting FHWA on mileage-based exit numbering and its I Love NY signage.  In both cases NY technically lost, but was still able to negotiate some leniency.  The I Love NY signs were altered and the conversion of exit numbering is now going to be long and drawn out.

I'd expect a similar evolution in NH.  They're taking a strong stance now, but will have to retract to a similar arrangement as there has been in other states.

That said, I am sympathetic to the idea that the conversion is an unfunded mandate.  FHWA/Congress could have easily set up a separate program code for this purpose -- even carving it out of NHPP or HSIP apportionments.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 09, 2021, 12:06:16 PM
I've posted photos taken of exit renumbering along MA 146 this past weekend
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma146signs421ff.jpg)

at my New England Exit Renumbering Central page: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#ma146signs (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#ma146signs)

As well of exit renumbering along I-190:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i190signs421i.JPG)

Located at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i190exits (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i190exits)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on April 09, 2021, 02:38:46 PM
I would expect NH to go the VT route when required.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on April 10, 2021, 07:39:56 PM
I-95 renumbering update:

Going south, exits are renumbered through the I-93 split in Canton.

Going north, new exit numbers start with University Ave and continue through Highland Ave.  But from Rte. 9 up to Rte. 20 the sequential numbers still remain.  We've had at least 2 weeks now with the Rte. 20 exit being exit 41 SB but exit 26 NB.

I expect I-95 will be completed in the next 2 weeks, with I-93 work starting no later than April 25.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on April 10, 2021, 08:21:34 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on April 10, 2021, 07:39:56 PM
I-95 renumbering update:

Going south, exits are renumbered through the I-93 split in Canton.

Going north, new exit numbers start with University Ave and continue through Highland Ave.  But from Rte. 9 up to Rte. 20 the sequential numbers still remain.  We've had at least 2 weeks now with the Rte. 20 exit being exit 41 SB but exit 26 NB.

I expect I-95 will be completed in the next 2 weeks, with I-93 work starting no later than April 25.

So after I-93 is finished, that would leave just I-495. Correct?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on April 10, 2021, 09:01:39 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 10, 2021, 08:21:34 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on April 10, 2021, 07:39:56 PM
I-95 renumbering update:

Going south, exits are renumbered through the I-93 split in Canton.

Going north, new exit numbers start with University Ave and continue through Highland Ave.  But from Rte. 9 up to Rte. 20 the sequential numbers still remain.  We've had at least 2 weeks now with the Rte. 20 exit being exit 41 SB but exit 26 NB.

I expect I-95 will be completed in the next 2 weeks, with I-93 work starting no later than April 25.

So after I-93 is finished, that would leave just I-495. Correct?

Within that contract? Yes, but there's I-290/395 in the other contract.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on April 10, 2021, 09:07:56 PM
Contract 2 remaining (after I-95 is finished):  I-93

Contract 1 remaining (after MA 2 is finished):  I-290/I-395, I-495
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: BridgesToIdealism on April 12, 2021, 07:42:53 PM
I noticed the other day while riding the Framingham/Worcester MBTA Commuter Rail line (which parallels the Mass Pike) that in some cases, it seems that MassDOT didn't bother to actually replace the gore point exit signs when converting a two digit exit number to a three digit exit number. Unfortunately didn't get any photos (train windows are always so dirty); however the result of not actually replacing the signs means that the new 3-digit exit numbers seems crammed onto the original signs that were designed only for 2-digits. I have no idea if this is temporary or permanent, but if this is intended to be permanent, it would seem that someone or something fell short somewhere.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 12, 2021, 10:21:38 PM
Quote from: BridgesToIdealism on April 12, 2021, 07:42:53 PM
I noticed the other day while riding the Framingham/Worcester MBTA Commuter Rail line (which parallels the Mass Pike) that in some cases, it seems that MassDOT didn't bother to actually replace the gore point exit signs when converting a two digit exit number to a three digit exit number. Unfortunately didn't get any photos (train windows are always so dirty); however the result of not actually replacing the signs means that the new 3-digit exit numbers seems crammed onto the original signs that were designed only for 2-digits. I have no idea if this is temporary or permanent, but if this is intended to be permanent, it would seem that someone or something fell short somewhere.
Such as this?
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs121e.jpg)

They've put up numbers like this on some of the wider gore signs too:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs1220n.jpg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 13, 2021, 12:05:22 PM
I took photos over the weekend of recent exit renumbering along I-95/MA 128 between Needham and I-93 in Canton, here's one SB at the US 1 interchange in Dedham:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signs421ww.jpg)

The rest are at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs2 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs2)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: BridgesToIdealism on April 13, 2021, 01:43:16 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 12, 2021, 10:21:38 PM
Quote from: BridgesToIdealism on April 12, 2021, 07:42:53 PM
I noticed the other day while riding the Framingham/Worcester MBTA Commuter Rail line (which parallels the Mass Pike) that in some cases, it seems that MassDOT didn't bother to actually replace the gore point exit signs when converting a two digit exit number to a three digit exit number. Unfortunately didn't get any photos (train windows are always so dirty); however the result of not actually replacing the signs means that the new 3-digit exit numbers seems crammed onto the original signs that were designed only for 2-digits. I have no idea if this is temporary or permanent, but if this is intended to be permanent, it would seem that someone or something fell short somewhere.
Such as this?
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs121e.jpg)

They've put up numbers like this on some of the wider gore signs too:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs1220n.jpg)

Yep, that's exactly what I was talking about.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on April 14, 2021, 09:01:22 AM
Weren't the Mass. Pike signs replaced a few years ago?  I find it very odd that east of I-495, some of the new gore signs were wide enough to accommodate 3-digit exit numbers, but some were not.  Looking at Google Street View, the I-95/Rte. 128 exit EB, the Rte. 16 exit WB, and the Newton/Watertown exit WB were not future-proofed.

The Rte. 146 exit now has gore signs wide enough for 3 digits but now have a 2-digit exit number - they could be swapped with 2 of the signs east of I-495.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on April 14, 2021, 05:28:34 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on April 14, 2021, 09:01:22 AM
The Rte. 146 exit now has gore signs wide enough for 3 digits but now have a 2-digit exit number - they could be swapped with 2 of the signs east of I-495.

The exit 94 (Route 146) signs were originally designed to fit "Exit 10 A" on them, as 10 A was the old exit number.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on April 15, 2021, 03:05:57 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on April 14, 2021, 05:28:34 PM
The exit 94 (Route 146) signs were originally designed to fit "Exit 10 A" on them, as 10 A was the old exit number.

I know.  I think this is the only instance where a new exit number has *fewer* digits.  So Massachusetts could swap the gore signs at this exit with one that has a 3-digit exit number so you don't have awkward-looking exit signs.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 15, 2021, 10:47:27 PM
I've posted photos taken along the completed MA 2 exit renumbering project heading east between Lincoln and Cambridge taken by Paul Schlichtman:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma2signsps421e.jpg)

and between Gardner and Orange by Greg Goldman:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma2signsgg421p.jpg)

on my Exit Renumbering page:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kernals12 on April 16, 2021, 07:06:32 AM
When will they get around to 93?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: akotchi on April 16, 2021, 12:18:16 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 15, 2021, 10:47:27 PM
I've posted photos taken along the completed MA 2 exit renumbering project heading east between Lincoln and Cambridge taken by Paul Schlichtman:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma2signsps421e.jpg)

and between Gardner and Orange by Greg Goldman:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma2signsgg421p.jpg)

on my Exit Renumbering page:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Interesting that the warning sign assembly is embedded in a green background.  Other similar panels elsewhere are completely yellow with the smaller sign shapes outlined in black within the field.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on April 16, 2021, 01:13:02 PM
WHOA!  Did Rte. 2 between Orange and Alewife get finished in just 2 weeks' time?  It's taken that long just to do I-95/Rte. 128 between Weston and Canton!

:confused:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 16, 2021, 01:33:57 PM
Meanwhile, on I-95 / Rte 128 north, one of the exit number patches is already starting to come apart as of 2021/04/14... near Exit 63 B

(https://i.ibb.co/wdLVQXc/Screenshot-2021-04-16-at-13-30-07.png) (https://ibb.co/zm5p2Y6)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on April 16, 2021, 04:44:20 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 16, 2021, 07:06:32 AM
When will they get around to 93?

Most likely when I-95 is done, as I-93 is the last road left in that particular contract set.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 16, 2021, 06:25:42 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 16, 2021, 04:44:20 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 16, 2021, 07:06:32 AM
When will they get around to 93?
Most likely when I-95 is done, as I-93 is the last road left in that particular contract set.
That will probably be some time next week. They've renumbered I-95 South at least as far as I-495 in Mansfield, that leaves 3 more SB and 9 NB to go. I have updated my website with photos taken by Paul Schlichtman of the exit renumbering along I-95 North between Needham and Weston, of which I-90 / MA 30 is the most significant:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signsps421dd.jpg)

The rest are on my exit renumbering website: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs2 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs2)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on April 17, 2021, 01:15:46 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 16, 2021, 06:25:42 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 16, 2021, 04:44:20 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 16, 2021, 07:06:32 AM
When will they get around to 93?
Most likely when I-95 is done, as I-93 is the last road left in that particular contract set.
That will probably be some time next week. They've renumbered I-95 South at least as far as I-495 in Mansfield, that leaves 3 more SB and 9 NB to go. I have updated my website with photos taken by Paul Schlichtman of the exit renumbering along I-95 North between Needham and Weston, of which I-90 / MA 30 is the most significant:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signsps421dd.jpg)

The rest are on my exit renumbering website: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs2 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs2)
Recreation Road managed to lose an exit number?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on April 17, 2021, 10:12:54 AM
Quote from: Alps on April 17, 2021, 01:15:46 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 16, 2021, 06:25:42 PM
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signsps421dd.jpg)
Recreation Road managed to lose an exit number?
The ramp to Recreation Road is to be closed permanently within the next two years once the new Riverside development in Newton is completed.  As such, MassDOT decided to remove the exit number rather than update it.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on April 17, 2021, 01:30:51 PM
I wasn't aware the Recreation Rd. interchange ramps were going to be removed. Now I know why they didn't give it a new number. Will Recreation Rd. itself still pass over Interstate 95 to terminate in Riverside Park?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on April 17, 2021, 08:41:35 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on March 21, 2021, 10:12:46 AM
Quote from: rushfan01760 on March 20, 2021, 08:00:52 PM
Drove on Rte. 79 northbound in Fall River today.  Just before the merge with Rte. 24 northbound is this advance sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7434758,-71.1233745,3a,75y,63.51h,91.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s05p1N-I90_LF5iJbDbo5Xw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) which still refers to the Innovation Way exit as 8B rather than 10 (Rte. 24's exit numbers have been updated).  Looks like the advanced signage on intersecting roads is being missed (the advance sign for Rte. 3's Exit 13 at the western end of the Plimoth Plantation Highway was still Exit 5 when I was on that road back at the end of December after the Rte. 3 exit numbers were updated).

I just sent MassDOT an e-mail about this. I guess that's just an oversight that no one caught when planning up the project.

Quoting myself as a follow-up here, got an e-mail from a MassDOT rep telling me that the two signs referenced here have been updated.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 20, 2021, 11:48:00 AM
I have posted more photos of exit renumbering along I-95 South from south of I-93/MA 128:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signs421qqq.jpg)

They wrapped up renumbering in that direction last night and should complete the remaining exits heading back north this week, weather permitting. All the new photos are at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs3 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs3)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on April 20, 2021, 12:27:47 PM
Quote from: roadman on April 17, 2021, 10:12:54 AM
Quote from: Alps on April 17, 2021, 01:15:46 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 16, 2021, 06:25:42 PM
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signsps421dd.jpg)
Recreation Road managed to lose an exit number?
The ramp to Recreation Road is to be closed permanently within the next two years once the new Riverside development in Newton is completed.  As such, MassDOT decided to remove the exit number rather than update it.
Okay, that would explain the nonconforming oddity here; and it clearly is nonconforming.

Out of curiosity, what are the current traffic counts for that ramp?  I could imagine some northbounders using this entrance/exit for either the golf course or the Weston Ski Track (once reopened) are not going to be too pleased with being forced to use the surrounding 2-lanes roads once the ramp does close.

That said & related to the above-photo; I still believe that the 39 A-B assignments for MA 30 & I-90 should be the opposite.  Collector-distributor or no collector distributor road; I-90 crosses I-95 south of where MA 30 crosses it.  A similar scenario, sans the collector-distributor road, exists along I-84 at I-691 & CT 322.

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 17, 2021, 01:30:51 PM
I wasn't aware the Recreation Rd. interchange ramps were going to be removed. Now I know why they didn't give it a new number.
Truth be told, I wasn't aware of much either.  Had such were to be retained, I would've assigned the northbound Grove St. ramp as Exit 38 A and Recreation Road as Exit 38 B.  Southbound, since Grove St. (Exit 38) shares the same ramp as MA 16 westbound (Exit 37 B); I would've simply signed the mainline exit ramp as simply Exit 37 B & ditched the separate exit tabs for the ramp split signs.  Such practice has been done elsewhere.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on April 20, 2021, 01:17:56 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 20, 2021, 11:48:00 AM
I have posted more photos of exit renumbering along I-95 South from south of I-93/MA 128:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signs421qqq.jpg)

They wrapped up renumbering in that direction last night and should complete the remaining exits heading back north this week, weather permitting. All the new photos are at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs3 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs3)
Observation: several of those hyphens on those updated number tabs along that stretch of I-95 look so small; one wouldn't even notice them until up close.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kernals12 on April 20, 2021, 10:05:19 PM
So I drove on 2 today from Lunenburg to Lexington and it was jarring to see triple digit exit numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on April 21, 2021, 04:31:29 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 20, 2021, 01:17:56 PM
Observation: several of those hyphens on those updated number tabs along that stretch of I-95 look so small; one wouldn't even notice them until up close.

That stretch of I-95, for some reason, has atrocious exit signs when compared to all other highways in the state.  Thankfully there is a sign replacement project in the works.  These new signs won't have the mile-based exits "slapped on" either - they'll look just right.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on April 21, 2021, 04:53:48 PM
I'm never going to get used to my exit being exit 35.
Title: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Pete from Boston on April 22, 2021, 11:21:10 AM
Numbering was moving steadily up 95 the last couple of days. Went past two Exit 7s Tuesday, but only one on Wednesday. Old Exit 9 was still intact yesterday evening.

I guess there's plenty of wiggle room because milepost 1 actually occurs within the footprint of Exit 2.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on April 22, 2021, 11:35:17 AM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on April 22, 2021, 11:21:10 AM
Old Exit 9 was still intact yesterday evening.

It was renumbered last night, along with old exits 11 and 12.  The schedule page at newmassexits.com now lists Interstate 95 as "complete".  Route 2 is not listed as "complete", even though earlier posts on this thread indicate it is.

The schedule now also indicates that I-93 renumbering will begin on May 2, with I-495, I-395, and I-290 each listed as TBD.  Not sure why the "eastern" contract is taking a week off.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on April 22, 2021, 12:17:39 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 21, 2021, 04:53:48 PM
I'm never going to get used to my exit being exit 35.

Hey my exit 38/route 38 in Tewksbury off 495 is on borrowed time for me.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kernals12 on April 22, 2021, 12:42:59 PM
My life will fall apart when Connecticut switches to mile based exits.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on April 22, 2021, 02:39:21 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 22, 2021, 12:42:59 PM
My life will fall apart when Connecticut switches to mile based exits.

So are you in a partial state of collapse right now?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: spooky on April 22, 2021, 03:33:45 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 21, 2021, 04:53:48 PM
I'm never going to get used to my exit being exit 35.

I don't remember what my exit number is. I still find it every time.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on April 22, 2021, 03:47:54 PM
Exiting I-91 on Exit 25 instead of Exit 19 was more jarring than I expected, but, in the end, it felt like a very good change.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 22, 2021, 11:00:31 PM
Does anyone know if this sign, on I-95 SB in NH on the Exit 1 bridge, is an NHDOT or MassDOT install? The previous sign pre-2013 (https://www.aaroads.com/ma/095/i-095_sb_exit_060_01.jpg) looked like an NHDOT install based on the sign design and dual units for the distance. If the old sign was still there it would have been the only dual unit sign for a newly renumbered MA exit.

(https://i.ibb.co/ZS6LjW2/IMG-0030.jpg) (https://ibb.co/pQv07Jh)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on April 23, 2021, 08:04:06 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 22, 2021, 11:00:31 PM
Does anyone know if this sign, on I-95 SB in NH on the Exit 1 bridge, is an NHDOT or MassDOT install? The previous sign pre-2013 (https://www.aaroads.com/ma/095/i-095_sb_exit_060_01.jpg) looked like an NHDOT install based on the sign design and dual units for the distance. If the old sign was still there it would have been the only dual unit sign for a newly renumbered MA exit.

(https://i.ibb.co/ZS6LjW2/IMG-0030.jpg) (https://ibb.co/pQv07Jh)

What's weird is that I would guess that the old was NHDOT, the new MassDOT.

Yet, the old sign had "Salisbury", the new "Salisbury MA".
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kernals12 on April 23, 2021, 09:47:49 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 22, 2021, 02:39:21 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 22, 2021, 12:42:59 PM
My life will fall apart when Connecticut switches to mile based exits.

So are you in a partial state of collapse right now?

It will once they get to I-84 in Danbury. My exit was exit 3 throughout my childhood, my mother taught me that. Exit 2 was Trader Joe's, Exit 4 was for Stew Leonard's, Costco, Loew's, and Lowe's, and Exit 8 was Target. Now they're taking it away :-(
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on April 23, 2021, 10:00:19 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 23, 2021, 09:47:49 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 22, 2021, 02:39:21 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 22, 2021, 12:42:59 PM
My life will fall apart when Connecticut switches to mile based exits.

So are you in a partial state of collapse right now?

It will once they get to I-84 in Danbury. My exit was exit 3 throughout my childhood, my mother taught me that. Exit 2 was Trader Joe's, Exit 4 was for Stew Leonard's, Costco, Loew's, and Lowe's, and Exit 8 was Target. Now they're taking it away :-(

The exits through Danbury probably won't change much, since the existing exits are pretty close to their respective mileposts from the NY state line to Exit 8. Exits 1 and 2 would probably change to Exits 1A and 1B/C. I would suspect Exits 3 through 8 would remain the same, and Exit 9 would become probably 11 or 12, and 10 would become 15, and so on...

But...I-84 would be probably be one of the last highways in Connecticut to be renumbered to mile-based exits, along with I-91 and I-95 since highway signs along the entire length would have to be replaced before the conversion becomes required.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kernals12 on April 23, 2021, 10:56:09 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 23, 2021, 10:00:19 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 23, 2021, 09:47:49 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 22, 2021, 02:39:21 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 22, 2021, 12:42:59 PM
My life will fall apart when Connecticut switches to mile based exits.

So are you in a partial state of collapse right now?

It will once they get to I-84 in Danbury. My exit was exit 3 throughout my childhood, my mother taught me that. Exit 2 was Trader Joe's, Exit 4 was for Stew Leonard's, Costco, Loew's, and Lowe's, and Exit 8 was Target. Now they're taking it away :-(

The exits through Danbury probably won't change much, since the existing exits are pretty close to their respective mileposts from the NY state line to Exit 8. Exits 1 and 2 would probably change to Exits 1A and 1B/C. I would suspect Exits 3 through 8 would remain the same, and Exit 9 would become probably 11 or 12, and 10 would become 15, and so on...

But...I-84 would be probably be one of the last highways in Connecticut to be renumbered to mile-based exits, along with I-91 and I-95 since highway signs along the entire length would have to be replaced before the conversion becomes required.
Okay good. Existential crisis averted
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on April 23, 2021, 12:23:44 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 23, 2021, 10:56:09 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 23, 2021, 10:00:19 AM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 23, 2021, 09:47:49 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 22, 2021, 02:39:21 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 22, 2021, 12:42:59 PM
My life will fall apart when Connecticut switches to mile based exits.

So are you in a partial state of collapse right now?

It will once they get to I-84 in Danbury. My exit was exit 3 throughout my childhood, my mother taught me that. Exit 2 was Trader Joe's, Exit 4 was for Stew Leonard's, Costco, Loew's, and Lowe's, and Exit 8 was Target. Now they're taking it away :-(

The exits through Danbury probably won't change much, since the existing exits are pretty close to their respective mileposts from the NY state line to Exit 8. Exits 1 and 2 would probably change to Exits 1A and 1B/C. I would suspect Exits 3 through 8 would remain the same, and Exit 9 would become probably 11 or 12, and 10 would become 15, and so on...

But...I-84 would be probably be one of the last highways in Connecticut to be renumbered to mile-based exits, along with I-91 and I-95 since highway signs along the entire length would have to be replaced before the conversion becomes required.
Okay good. Existential crisis averted

I'm already practicing that my exits (30-32) will be 42, 44, and 46. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 23, 2021, 01:36:41 PM
MassDOT just announced the details of I-93 exit renumbering, they will be doing it in 2 segments:

The following corridor will begin conversion in a week: 
Corridor: Interstate 93
Approximate start date: May 2
Approximate construction duration: 4 weeks
Sunday, May 2 to Wednesday, May 5: Old Exits 13 to 27 (Southeast Expressway from Dorchester through the Tip O'Neill Tunnel)
Thursday, May 6 to Thursday, May 27: Old Exit 28 through 48 (from Boston/Somerville through Methuen)
Location: Boston to Methuen

Exit numbers 1 through 12 will remain the same exit numbers as they are already consistent with the existing mile markers. Work will take place starting in the south and working north.
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kphoger on April 23, 2021, 01:57:55 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 23, 2021, 10:56:09 AM
Okay good. Existential crisis averted

Were you not going to be able to find the store otherwise?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kernals12 on April 23, 2021, 04:53:55 PM
Quote from: kphoger on April 23, 2021, 01:57:55 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 23, 2021, 10:56:09 AM
Okay good. Existential crisis averted

Were you not going to be able to find the store otherwise?

I don't live there anymore.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kernals12 on April 23, 2021, 04:56:05 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 23, 2021, 01:36:41 PM
MassDOT just announced the details of I-93 exit renumbering, they will be doing it in 2 segments:

The following corridor will begin conversion in a week: 
Corridor: Interstate 93
Approximate start date: May 2
Approximate construction duration: 4 weeks
Sunday, May 2 to Wednesday, May 5: Old Exits 13 to 27 (Southeast Expressway from Dorchester through the Tip O'Neill Tunnel)
Thursday, May 6 to Thursday, May 27: Old Exit 28 through 48 (from Boston/Somerville through Methuen)
Location: Boston to Methuen

Exit numbers 1 through 12 will remain the same exit numbers as they are already consistent with the existing mile markers. Work will take place starting in the south and working north.
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM

I get off on old exit 43 when going to work, so that will take some getting used to, but on the other hand I won't be stuck in the right lane behind some truck for miles after exit 42.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on April 23, 2021, 09:22:25 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 23, 2021, 09:47:49 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 22, 2021, 02:39:21 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 22, 2021, 12:42:59 PM
My life will fall apart when Connecticut switches to mile based exits.

So are you in a partial state of collapse right now?

It will once they get to I-84 in Danbury. My exit was exit 3 throughout my childhood, my mother taught me that. Exit 2 was Trader Joe's, Exit 4 was for Stew Leonard's, Costco, Loew's, and Lowe's, and Exit 8 was Target. Now they're taking it away :-(

I would be more confused at an exit having a Loew's and a Lowe's then that exit changing numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 10:06:42 PM
Question: Why did they not replace the Mass Pike exit numbers when they replaced the signs, instead choosing to replace the signs with the old exits and put stickers over the numbers?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on April 23, 2021, 11:09:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 10:06:42 PM
Question: Why did they not replace the Mass Pike exit numbers when they replaced the signs, instead choosing to replace the signs with the old exits and put stickers over the numbers?

The Pike sign replacement was planned during the initial renumbering effort from 2015-16, and when the renumbering was postponed, the sign replacement continued with existing exit numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 11:10:03 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on April 23, 2021, 11:09:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 10:06:42 PM
Question: Why did they not replace the Mass Pike exit numbers when they replaced the signs, instead choosing to replace the signs with the old exits and put stickers over the numbers?

The Pike sign replacement was planned during the initial renumbering effort from 2015-16, and when the renumbering was postponed, the sign replacement continued with existing exit numbers.
Ok... but why did they postpone the exit renumbering? It's just stickers!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 23, 2021, 11:47:33 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 11:10:03 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on April 23, 2021, 11:09:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 10:06:42 PM
Question: Why did they not replace the Mass Pike exit numbers when they replaced the signs, instead choosing to replace the signs with the old exits and put stickers over the numbers?

The Pike sign replacement was planned during the initial renumbering effort from 2015-16, and when the renumbering was postponed, the sign replacement continued with existing exit numbers.
Ok... but why did they postpone the exit renumbering? It's just stickers!
You can blame Cape Cod for that.  The US 6 sign replacement was happening around the same time, and while they were in a process of throwing a hissy fit over the overhead signs, someone noticed the new numbers, and they threw a hissy fit over those too.  In response, MassDOT cancelled the renumbering statewide, only to bring it back a few years later, I presume due to FHWA pressure.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 23, 2021, 11:47:33 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 11:10:03 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on April 23, 2021, 11:09:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 10:06:42 PM
Question: Why did they not replace the Mass Pike exit numbers when they replaced the signs, instead choosing to replace the signs with the old exits and put stickers over the numbers?

The Pike sign replacement was planned during the initial renumbering effort from 2015-16, and when the renumbering was postponed, the sign replacement continued with existing exit numbers.
Ok... but why did they postpone the exit renumbering? It's just stickers!
You can blame Cape Cod for that.  The US 6 sign replacement was happening around the same time, and while they were in a process of throwing a hissy fit over the overhead signs, someone noticed the new numbers, and they threw a hissy fit over those too.  In response, MassDOT cancelled the renumbering statewide, only to bring it back a few years later, I presume due to FHWA pressure.
Why would Cape Cod care about exit numbers? Nobody in Needham has said a word about the exits in town changing from 18 and 19 to 33 and 35.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kernals12 on April 24, 2021, 12:15:53 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 23, 2021, 09:22:25 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 23, 2021, 09:47:49 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 22, 2021, 02:39:21 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 22, 2021, 12:42:59 PM
My life will fall apart when Connecticut switches to mile based exits.

So are you in a partial state of collapse right now?

It will once they get to I-84 in Danbury. My exit was exit 3 throughout my childhood, my mother taught me that. Exit 2 was Trader Joe's, Exit 4 was for Stew Leonard's, Costco, Loew's, and Lowe's, and Exit 8 was Target. Now they're taking it away :-(

I would be more confused at an exit having a Loew's and a Lowe's then that exit changing numbers.

Even better, they're on the same lot although the Loew's is now AMC branded
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4175113,-73.4164524,17.48z


I'm very sure that was intentional.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 24, 2021, 12:24:52 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 23, 2021, 11:47:33 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 11:10:03 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on April 23, 2021, 11:09:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 10:06:42 PM
Question: Why did they not replace the Mass Pike exit numbers when they replaced the signs, instead choosing to replace the signs with the old exits and put stickers over the numbers?

The Pike sign replacement was planned during the initial renumbering effort from 2015-16, and when the renumbering was postponed, the sign replacement continued with existing exit numbers.
Ok... but why did they postpone the exit renumbering? It's just stickers!
You can blame Cape Cod for that.  The US 6 sign replacement was happening around the same time, and while they were in a process of throwing a hissy fit over the overhead signs, someone noticed the new numbers, and they threw a hissy fit over those too.  In response, MassDOT cancelled the renumbering statewide, only to bring it back a few years later, I presume due to FHWA pressure.
Why would Cape Cod care about exit numbers? Nobody in Needham has said a word about the exits in town changing from 18 and 19 to 33 and 35.
They have a pathological resistance to change.  Also, they hated that the Mid-Cape Highway starts at 55 instead of 1.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on April 24, 2021, 12:36:02 AM
Quote from: vdeane on April 24, 2021, 12:24:52 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 11:54:09 PM
Quote from: vdeane on April 23, 2021, 11:47:33 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 11:10:03 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on April 23, 2021, 11:09:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 10:06:42 PM
Question: Why did they not replace the Mass Pike exit numbers when they replaced the signs, instead choosing to replace the signs with the old exits and put stickers over the numbers?

The Pike sign replacement was planned during the initial renumbering effort from 2015-16, and when the renumbering was postponed, the sign replacement continued with existing exit numbers.
Ok... but why did they postpone the exit renumbering? It's just stickers!
You can blame Cape Cod for that.  The US 6 sign replacement was happening around the same time, and while they were in a process of throwing a hissy fit over the overhead signs, someone noticed the new numbers, and they threw a hissy fit over those too.  In response, MassDOT cancelled the renumbering statewide, only to bring it back a few years later, I presume due to FHWA pressure.
Why would Cape Cod care about exit numbers? Nobody in Needham has said a word about the exits in town changing from 18 and 19 to 33 and 35.
They have a pathological resistance to change.  Also, they hated that the Mid-Cape Highway starts at 55 instead of 1.
Lol they can lose the US 6 number and get MA 389 or something like that if they want exits to start at 1. Fortunately, the state stood its ground and renumbered the exits.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: akotchi on April 24, 2021, 09:57:14 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on April 23, 2021, 11:09:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 10:06:42 PM
Question: Why did they not replace the Mass Pike exit numbers when they replaced the signs, instead choosing to replace the signs with the old exits and put stickers over the numbers?
The Pike sign replacement was planned during the initial renumbering effort from 2015-16, and when the renumbering was postponed, the sign replacement continued with existing exit numbers.
Curious that they did not go the other way and install the signs with the new exit numbers, but overlay with the old numbers until the renumbering became official.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on April 24, 2021, 12:30:48 PM
Quote from: akotchi on April 24, 2021, 09:57:14 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on April 23, 2021, 11:09:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 10:06:42 PM
Question: Why did they not replace the Mass Pike exit numbers when they replaced the signs, instead choosing to replace the signs with the old exits and put stickers over the numbers?
The Pike sign replacement was planned during the initial renumbering effort from 2015-16, and when the renumbering was postponed, the sign replacement continued with existing exit numbers.
Curious that they did not go the other way and install the signs with the new exit numbers, but overlay with the old numbers until the renumbering became official.
If they knew they were going to have to renumber the exits eventually might as well get it out of the way.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on April 24, 2021, 12:34:17 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 24, 2021, 12:15:53 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 23, 2021, 09:22:25 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 23, 2021, 09:47:49 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 22, 2021, 02:39:21 PM
Quote from: kernals12 on April 22, 2021, 12:42:59 PM
My life will fall apart when Connecticut switches to mile based exits.

So are you in a partial state of collapse right now?

It will once they get to I-84 in Danbury. My exit was exit 3 throughout my childhood, my mother taught me that. Exit 2 was Trader Joe's, Exit 4 was for Stew Leonard's, Costco, Loew's, and Lowe's, and Exit 8 was Target. Now they're taking it away :-(

I would be more confused at an exit having a Loew's and a Lowe's then that exit changing numbers.

Even better, they're on the same lot although the Loew's is now AMC branded
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4175113,-73.4164524,17.48z


I'm very sure that was intentional.

Of course it was.  Same thing in Plainville (this is from 2015) https://goo.gl/maps/WLPneGNwJR3Tabfe7
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on April 24, 2021, 10:25:56 PM
Quote from: akotchi on April 24, 2021, 09:57:14 AM
Quote from: Ben114 on April 23, 2021, 11:09:25 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 23, 2021, 10:06:42 PM
Question: Why did they not replace the Mass Pike exit numbers when they replaced the signs, instead choosing to replace the signs with the old exits and put stickers over the numbers?
The Pike sign replacement was planned during the initial renumbering effort from 2015-16, and when the renumbering was postponed, the sign replacement continued with existing exit numbers.
Curious that they did not go the other way and install the signs with the new exit numbers, but overlay with the old numbers until the renumbering became official.

I suspect that they hoped they could just quietly bury the project and never have it come up again.  As we all know, that didn't happen.  Still, this is the same MassDOT that didn't give exit numbers to I-84 at I-90 when the Turnpike went AET, despite the booths being the only reason there weren't numbers there before.  Such behavior is not atypical, sadly.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on April 25, 2021, 08:26:12 AM
Google Maps has already pre-deceased the sequential exit numbers on 495. It's funny because Apple Maps takes a few months to get them updated.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on April 25, 2021, 08:37:03 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 25, 2021, 08:26:12 AM
Google Maps has already pre-deceased the sequential exit numbers on 495. It's funny because Apple Maps takes a few months to get them updated.

As well as some (but only some!) of I-93. Sometimes it's even labeled sequential in one direction and mileage-based in the other direction for the same exit. Look at sequential exits 43 and 47 in particular.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on April 25, 2021, 10:18:39 AM
Quote from: 1 on April 25, 2021, 08:37:03 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 25, 2021, 08:26:12 AM
Google Maps has already pre-deceased the sequential exit numbers on 495. It's funny because Apple Maps takes a few months to get them updated.

As well as some (but only some!) of I-93. Sometimes it's even labeled sequential in one direction and mileage-based in the other direction for the same exit. Look at sequential exits 43 and 47 in particular.

They can jump the gun here but I can't get them to remove fictitious roads within a six-month time period. Go figure.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 25, 2021, 01:22:55 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 25, 2021, 10:18:39 AM
Quote from: 1 on April 25, 2021, 08:37:03 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 25, 2021, 08:26:12 AM
Google Maps has already pre-deceased the sequential exit numbers on 495. It's funny because Apple Maps takes a few months to get them updated.

As well as some (but only some!) of I-93. Sometimes it's even labeled sequential in one direction and mileage-based in the other direction for the same exit. Look at sequential exits 43 and 47 in particular.

They can jump the gun here but I can't get them to remove fictitious roads within a six-month time period. Go figure.

As of the writing of this reply, Waze has not yet changed any numbers on I-495 and I-93 yet.

However, on Google Maps:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on April 25, 2021, 05:56:46 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 25, 2021, 01:22:55 PM

However, on Google Maps:

  • I noticed that the former HOV left exit NB (https://www.mass.gov/service-details/about-the-bypass-road-and-loganroute-1a-express-lane-pilot-project) to the airport and South Station after new exit 16 (old exit 20) is labelled as "exit 17 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3359891,-71.064698,18.12z)". The last time I checked, there was no mention of that exit ever receiving a number at all.
  • 20 B SB is still listed even though most of the tunnel exits are already renumbered.

The left HOV/South Station exit on I-93 north has never had an exit number, nor will it receive one under this project.  Google is in error here.

None of the I-93 O'Neill Tunnel exits have been renumbered yet.  That work hasn't started yet.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 25, 2021, 06:07:00 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 25, 2021, 10:18:39 AM
Quote from: 1 on April 25, 2021, 08:37:03 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 25, 2021, 08:26:12 AM
Google Maps has already pre-deceased the sequential exit numbers on 495. It's funny because Apple Maps takes a few months to get them updated.

As well as some (but only some!) of I-93. Sometimes it's even labeled sequential in one direction and mileage-based in the other direction for the same exit. Look at sequential exits 43 and 47 in particular.

They can jump the gun here but I can't get them to remove fictitious roads within a six-month time period. Go figure.
MassDOT has joined the jump the gun party of I-495, here's a recent tweet about one of the sign replacement projects, though it may be correct by the end of the lane closures in late May:

"In #Tewksbury I-495 SB overhead sign work; most lanes closed exit 94 to exit 92 starting 8pm, Thursday, 4/29, thru 5am, Friday, 5/30. For 15 min period, 4/30, 495 SB all lanes closed, starting 12:01am"
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: astralentity on April 25, 2021, 06:55:45 PM
Going to Springfield/Chicopee yesterday, it was pretty cool seeing the new exit numbers for the first time.

Is I-391 up next at some point?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on April 25, 2021, 06:57:14 PM
Quote from: astralentity on April 25, 2021, 06:55:45 PM
Going to Springfield/Chicopee yesterday, it was pretty cool seeing the new exit numbers for the first time.

Is I-391 up next at some point?
I-391 is really short, so maybe sequential works there. Mileage-based would lead to a lot of alphabet soup.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: astralentity on April 25, 2021, 06:58:51 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 25, 2021, 06:57:14 PM
Quote from: astralentity on April 25, 2021, 06:55:45 PM
Going to Springfield/Chicopee yesterday, it was pretty cool seeing the new exit numbers for the first time.

Is I-391 up next at some point?
I-391 is really short, so maybe sequential works there. Mileage-based would lead to a lot of alphabet soup.

Figured I'd ask.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on April 25, 2021, 07:19:40 PM
Quote from: astralentity on April 25, 2021, 06:58:51 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 25, 2021, 06:57:14 PM
Quote from: astralentity on April 25, 2021, 06:55:45 PM
Going to Springfield/Chicopee yesterday, it was pretty cool seeing the new exit numbers for the first time.

Is I-391 up next at some point?
I-391 is really short, so maybe sequential works there. Mileage-based would lead to a lot of alphabet soup.

Figured I'd ask.

I-291, I-391, MA 213, and the Lowell Connector are all remaining status quo due to their short length and somewhat close-already exit numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on April 25, 2021, 08:37:25 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 25, 2021, 07:19:40 PM
Quote from: astralentity on April 25, 2021, 06:58:51 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 25, 2021, 06:57:14 PM
Quote from: astralentity on April 25, 2021, 06:55:45 PM
Going to Springfield/Chicopee yesterday, it was pretty cool seeing the new exit numbers for the first time.

Is I-391 up next at some point?
I-391 is really short, so maybe sequential works there. Mileage-based would lead to a lot of alphabet soup.

Figured I'd ask.

I-291, I-391, MA 213, and the Lowell Connector are all remaining status quo due to their short length and somewhat close-already exit numbers.
Has the state confirmed that?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on April 25, 2021, 09:22:55 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 25, 2021, 08:37:25 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 25, 2021, 07:19:40 PM
I-291, I-391, MA 213, and the Lowell Connector are all remaining status quo due to their short length and somewhat close-already exit numbers.
Has the state confirmed that?

Yes.... see the FAQ section of the newmassexits.com site:

QuoteWHY ARE ROUTE 213, I-291, I-391 AND THE LOWELL CONNECTOR BEING EXCLUDED FROM THIS PROJECT?
Route 213, I-291, and I-391 exit numbers will not be changing as those corridors are short and have exits that are generally spaced in 1-mile increments.  The Lowell Connector exit numbers will not be changing as there are no mile markers currently posted along the corridor.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on April 26, 2021, 11:36:44 AM
Quote from: akotchi on April 24, 2021, 09:57:14 AM
Curious that they did not go the other way and install the signs with the new exit numbers, but overlay with the old numbers until the renumbering became official.

This sign on I-495 South in Mansfield suggests that it was fabricated with its mile-based exit number, then the sequential number was plastered on top of it:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0026139,-71.2184469,3a,15y,137.95h,100.55t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1siRzH2_6YPqyMliNNS7fE4Q!2e0!5s20190901T000000!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:38:01 AM
Will roads with unnumbered exits like US 1 and US 44 get exit numbers?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on April 26, 2021, 11:39:38 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on April 25, 2021, 08:26:12 AM
Google Maps has already pre-deceased the sequential exit numbers on 495. It's funny because Apple Maps takes a few months to get them updated.

I've noticed this twice in the past month.  Google Maps told me to take exit 19B for Rte. 24 North from I-495 South (its new number will actually be 19A), and to take exit 33A for I-95 North (which will be correct).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on April 26, 2021, 11:42:18 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:38:01 AM
Will roads with unnumbered exits like US 1 and US 44 get exit numbers?

No, they will not.

Side note - once upon a time, MA 146 did NOT have exit numbers.  Why did Mass DOT add exit numbers to this route?  I recall them being added around the time US 44 was moved onto its current alignment, which doesn't have exit numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:43:59 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on April 26, 2021, 11:42:18 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:38:01 AM
Will roads with unnumbered exits like US 1 and US 44 get exit numbers?

No, they will not.

Side note - once upon a time, MA 146 did NOT have exit numbers.  Why did Mass DOT add exit numbers to this route?  I recall them being added around the time US 44 was moved onto its current alignment, which doesn't have exit numbers.
US 1 should have numbers. It's a substantial freeway and a former interstate.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on April 26, 2021, 12:10:52 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:43:59 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on April 26, 2021, 11:42:18 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:38:01 AM
Will roads with unnumbered exits like US 1 and US 44 get exit numbers?

No, they will not.

Side note - once upon a time, MA 146 did NOT have exit numbers.  Why did Mass DOT add exit numbers to this route?  I recall them being added around the time US 44 was moved onto its current alignment, which doesn't have exit numbers.
US 1 should have numbers. It's a substantial freeway and a former interstate.

As should MA 57 and MA 1A.  MA 57 connects to US 5 and in spirit to I-91 at the other end of the South End Bridge.  MA 1A connects to I-93.  Also wouldn't hurt to add them to US 5 through West Springfield.  And why not number the MA 2 exits in Greenfield?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 12:11:50 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 26, 2021, 12:10:52 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:43:59 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on April 26, 2021, 11:42:18 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:38:01 AM
Will roads with unnumbered exits like US 1 and US 44 get exit numbers?

No, they will not.

Side note - once upon a time, MA 146 did NOT have exit numbers.  Why did Mass DOT add exit numbers to this route?  I recall them being added around the time US 44 was moved onto its current alignment, which doesn't have exit numbers.
US 1 should have numbers. It's a substantial freeway and a former interstate.

As should MA 57 and MA 1A.  MA 57 connects to US 5 and in spirit to I-91 at the other end of the South End Bridge.  MA 1A connects to I-93.  Also wouldn't hurt to add them to US 5 through West Springfield.  And why not number the MA 2 exits in Greenfield?
All exits should be numbered unless it's just one interchange on a non freeway.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 26, 2021, 06:17:30 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 12:11:50 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 26, 2021, 12:10:52 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:43:59 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on April 26, 2021, 11:42:18 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:38:01 AM
Will roads with unnumbered exits like US 1 and US 44 get exit numbers?

No, they will not.

Side note - once upon a time, MA 146 did NOT have exit numbers.  Why did Mass DOT add exit numbers to this route?  I recall them being added around the time US 44 was moved onto its current alignment, which doesn't have exit numbers.
US 1 should have numbers. It's a substantial freeway and a former interstate.

As should MA 57 and MA 1A.  MA 57 connects to US 5 and in spirit to I-91 at the other end of the South End Bridge.  MA 1A connects to I-93.  Also wouldn't hurt to add them to US 5 through West Springfield.  And why not number the MA 2 exits in Greenfield?
All exits should be numbered unless it's just one interchange on a non freeway.
When word got out that the MUTCD was being revised it was suggested that it would require states to number all their exits. Did language to the effect get into the draft document that was posted a few months back?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 06:19:27 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 26, 2021, 06:17:30 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 12:11:50 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 26, 2021, 12:10:52 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:43:59 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on April 26, 2021, 11:42:18 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:38:01 AM
Will roads with unnumbered exits like US 1 and US 44 get exit numbers?

No, they will not.

Side note - once upon a time, MA 146 did NOT have exit numbers.  Why did Mass DOT add exit numbers to this route?  I recall them being added around the time US 44 was moved onto its current alignment, which doesn't have exit numbers.
US 1 should have numbers. It's a substantial freeway and a former interstate.

As should MA 57 and MA 1A.  MA 57 connects to US 5 and in spirit to I-91 at the other end of the South End Bridge.  MA 1A connects to I-93.  Also wouldn't hurt to add them to US 5 through West Springfield.  And why not number the MA 2 exits in Greenfield?
All exits should be numbered unless it's just one interchange on a non freeway.
When word got out that the MUTCD was being revised it was suggested that it would require states to number all their exits. Did language to the effect get into the draft document that was posted a few months back?
States would have to number all exits? Even interchanges on non freeways like MA 9?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on April 27, 2021, 11:39:20 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 06:19:27 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 26, 2021, 06:17:30 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 12:11:50 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 26, 2021, 12:10:52 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:43:59 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on April 26, 2021, 11:42:18 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:38:01 AM
Will roads with unnumbered exits like US 1 and US 44 get exit numbers?

No, they will not.

Side note - once upon a time, MA 146 did NOT have exit numbers.  Why did Mass DOT add exit numbers to this route?  I recall them being added around the time US 44 was moved onto its current alignment, which doesn't have exit numbers.
US 1 should have numbers. It's a substantial freeway and a former interstate.

As should MA 57 and MA 1A.  MA 57 connects to US 5 and in spirit to I-91 at the other end of the South End Bridge.  MA 1A connects to I-93.  Also wouldn't hurt to add them to US 5 through West Springfield.  And why not number the MA 2 exits in Greenfield?
All exits should be numbered unless it's just one interchange on a non freeway.
When word got out that the MUTCD was being revised it was suggested that it would require states to number all their exits. Did language to the effect get into the draft document that was posted a few months back?
States would have to number all exits? Even interchanges on non freeways like MA 9?
If the requirement to number all interchanges were to be imposed, DOTs would get into a huge frenzy on splitting hairs on what types of junctions are considered "interchanges" versus "intersections." New Jersey, for example, has a lot of intersections with "jug-handle" ramps to eliminate left turn movements at the intersection. Would those ramps be required to have exit numbers under such a requirement? On US-1 in Southport, Connecticut (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.1395155,-73.2790365,148m/data=!3m1!1e3), there's a ramp from US-1 SB that leads to Pequot Avenue and Mill Hill Road (Peqout Avenue passes under US-1 a few hundred yards west of this ramp). Would that be considered an interchange and require an exit number?  Then there are New York's parkways, where exit numbers are assigned to both at-grade and grade-separated junctions.

The requirement to number every "interchange" on non-freeways can get very unwieldy based on how each state defines what constitutes an "interchange."
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on April 27, 2021, 12:08:12 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 27, 2021, 11:39:20 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 06:19:27 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on April 26, 2021, 06:17:30 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 12:11:50 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 26, 2021, 12:10:52 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:43:59 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on April 26, 2021, 11:42:18 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:38:01 AM
Will roads with unnumbered exits like US 1 and US 44 get exit numbers?

No, they will not.

Side note - once upon a time, MA 146 did NOT have exit numbers.  Why did Mass DOT add exit numbers to this route?  I recall them being added around the time US 44 was moved onto its current alignment, which doesn't have exit numbers.
US 1 should have numbers. It's a substantial freeway and a former interstate.

As should MA 57 and MA 1A.  MA 57 connects to US 5 and in spirit to I-91 at the other end of the South End Bridge.  MA 1A connects to I-93.  Also wouldn't hurt to add them to US 5 through West Springfield.  And why not number the MA 2 exits in Greenfield?
All exits should be numbered unless it's just one interchange on a non freeway.
When word got out that the MUTCD was being revised it was suggested that it would require states to number all their exits. Did language to the effect get into the draft document that was posted a few months back?
States would have to number all exits? Even interchanges on non freeways like MA 9?
If the requirement to number all interchanges were to be imposed, DOTs would get into a huge frenzy on splitting hairs on what types of junctions are considered "interchanges" versus "intersections." New Jersey, for example, has a lot of intersections with "jug-handle" ramps to eliminate left turn movements at the intersection. Would those ramps be required to have exit numbers under such a requirement? On US-1 in Southport, Connecticut (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.1395155,-73.2790365,148m/data=!3m1!1e3), there's a ramp from US-1 SB that leads to Pequot Avenue and Mill Hill Road (Peqout Avenue passes under US-1 a few hundred yards west of this ramp). Would that be considered an interchange and require an exit number?  Then there are New York's parkways, where exit numbers are assigned to both at-grade and grade-separated junctions.

The requirement to number every "interchange" on non-freeways can get very unwieldy based on how each state defines what constitutes an "interchange."
Maybe we should only require it on freeways.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on April 29, 2021, 04:54:15 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 21, 2021, 04:53:48 PM
I'm never going to get used to my exit being exit 35.
Such was originally Exits 53-54.  It became Exits 56 (E-W) circa 1962 & Exits 19 A-B* circa 1987-88. 
*19 B-C when the Kendrick St. ramps opened a few years ago.

Quote from: kramie13 on April 26, 2021, 11:42:18 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:38:01 AM
Will roads with unnumbered exits like US 1 and US 44 get exit numbers?

No, they will not.

Side note - once upon a time, MA 146 did NOT have exit numbers.  Why did Mass DOT add exit numbers to this route?  I recall them being added around the time US 44 was moved onto its current alignment, which doesn't have exit numbers.
The expressway/freeway segments of MA 2 didn't have exit numbers at all either until sometime during the 1990s.

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on April 26, 2021, 11:43:59 AMUS 1 should have numbers. It's a substantial freeway and a former interstate.
Only the Tobin Bridge & the Northeast Expressway portions of US 1 were a former Interstate (I-95).  The rest of it, where it's not concurrent w/I-93 or I-95, is predominantly not controlled-access. 

One could argue whether the short, limited-access highway segments of US 1, or any US or state route for that matter should receive exit numbers for their interchanges; but such, IMHO, is another topic for another thread.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on April 30, 2021, 12:00:11 AM
I've posted more photos of exit renumbering along the current route of I-95. Here NB approaching I-93 (MA 128) in Canton:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signs421xxxx.jpg)

The rest of the new photos taken NB between MA 140 and I-93 yesterday are at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs3 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs3)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on April 30, 2021, 12:12:53 AM
Is the lack of separation between the exit tab and the main panel in some of the pics intentional?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on April 30, 2021, 07:13:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 30, 2021, 12:12:53 AM
Is the lack of separation between the exit tab and the main panel in some of the pics intentional?


Yup, that was MassHighway standard practice on signs in the 1990s. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on April 30, 2021, 09:20:41 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 30, 2021, 07:13:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 30, 2021, 12:12:53 AM
Is the lack of separation between the exit tab and the main panel in some of the pics intentional?


Yup, that was MassHighway standard practice on signs in the 1990s.

I believe MaineDOT (https://www.aaroads.com/me/295/i-295_sb_exit_049_02.jpg) and RIDOT (https://www.aaroads.com/ri/095/i-095_nb_exit_021_04.jpg) also used this design with their older signs. Is there a name for this kind of style? I wonder why the three states chose to use this exit tab design at one point.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: storm2k on April 30, 2021, 11:22:11 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 30, 2021, 09:20:41 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 30, 2021, 07:13:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 30, 2021, 12:12:53 AM
Is the lack of separation between the exit tab and the main panel in some of the pics intentional?


Yup, that was MassHighway standard practice on signs in the 1990s.

I believe MaineDOT (https://www.aaroads.com/me/295/i-295_sb_exit_049_02.jpg) and RIDOT (https://www.aaroads.com/ri/095/i-095_nb_exit_021_04.jpg) also used this design with their older signs. Is there a name for this kind of style? I wonder why the three states chose to use this exit tab design at one point.

Don't think it has an official name. PA used to do that in older signing from the 70s. You can see where there's a break in the outline of this old picture from PA Highways where the old center tab where there isn't a bottom border:

(https://www.pahighways.com/graphics/pictures/I80west2.jpg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on April 30, 2021, 11:27:53 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 30, 2021, 09:20:41 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 30, 2021, 07:13:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 30, 2021, 12:12:53 AM
Is the lack of separation between the exit tab and the main panel in some of the pics intentional?


Yup, that was MassHighway standard practice on signs in the 1990s.

I believe MaineDOT (https://www.aaroads.com/me/295/i-295_sb_exit_049_02.jpg) and RIDOT (https://www.aaroads.com/ri/095/i-095_nb_exit_021_04.jpg) also used this design with their older signs. Is there a name for this kind of style? I wonder why the three states chose to use this exit tab design at one point.
I just call it the exit tab without a bottom border. I don't really like that style, but it seems like Massachusetts now go with a similar style as Wisconsin and Michigan for exit tabs, which is my second preferred. Even the left exit tabs that I thought were exclusive to Michigan, with the left banner stretching the whole length above the tab, is used in Massachusetts.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on April 30, 2021, 12:12:51 PM
This old thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7901.msg180279#msg180279) had some discussion of the Massachusetts "integral" tabs; many other states beside those mentioned already had at least some signs like them.  Ohio, for example, had a few scattered around (pics on Steve's site); Steve's site also has I-70 Colorado pics from Michael Summa from long ago with some of the same type--note that in both of those states, not all signs had that design; it seemed to depend on the contractor or designer.  Mass hung on to the style well after everyone else had stopped using it. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: machias on April 30, 2021, 12:59:32 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on April 30, 2021, 12:12:51 PM
This old thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7901.msg180279#msg180279) had some discussion of the Massachusetts "integral" tabs; many other states beside those mentioned already had at least some signs like them.  Ohio, for example, had a few scattered around (pics on Steve's site); Steve's site also has I-70 Colorado pics from Michael Summa from long ago with some of the same type--note that in both of those states, not all signs had that design; it seemed to depend on the contractor or designer.  Mass hung on to the style well after everyone else had stopped using it. 

I always liked the design on Massachusetts integrated exit tabs, especially when they were centered on the sign. They must have started that in the 70s, as older signs seemed to have a separate tab mounted slightly above the main panel.

Pennsylvania and South Carolina had the centered integral tabs as well, in fact, I remember driving through SC in the late 90s and seeing the integral tabs on I-85 relocated to the right side of the panel, but with the border not matching anymore.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on May 03, 2021, 11:01:06 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 30, 2021, 07:13:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 30, 2021, 12:12:53 AM
Is the lack of separation between the exit tab and the main panel in some of the pics intentional?



Yup, that was MassHighway standard practice on signs in the 1990s. 

Use of this 'integral tab' design actually started in the late 1970s in response to the MUTCD change in exit tab height from 18 inches to 24 inches.  Citing potential issues with mounting the larger exit tabs onto existing support structures, MassDPW came up with their 'integral tab' design, which received the blessing of the FHWA regional office.  By omitting a portion of the top sign border and overlapping the exit numeral onto the main sign panel, they were able to keep the tab height at 18 inches, while allowing for a 15 inch numeral.  This design was in use until 2004, when the MUTCD exit tab height was increased to 30 inches.  Besides not meeting current height requirements, the 'integral tab' design was more complex to fabricate and install due to the 'missing' top border, and took time to correct if a sign were fabricated improperly (i.e. tab for left-hand exit placed on the right side of the sign, which happened at at least three locations I am personally aware of).  Starting in 2004, MassHighway formally changed their BGS design standards to require a fully separate exit tab of 30 inches high by variable width.  The only difference between the MassHighway/MassDOT full exit tab and the MUTCD is that the MassDOT design omits the bottom border on the exit tab, and squares off the upper right corner of the border on the main sign, instead of using a full border on the exit tab.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on May 03, 2021, 11:02:54 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 30, 2021, 11:27:53 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on April 30, 2021, 09:20:41 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 30, 2021, 07:13:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on April 30, 2021, 12:12:53 AM
Is the lack of separation between the exit tab and the main panel in some of the pics intentional?


Yup, that was MassHighway standard practice on signs in the 1990s.

I believe MaineDOT (https://www.aaroads.com/me/295/i-295_sb_exit_049_02.jpg) and RIDOT (https://www.aaroads.com/ri/095/i-095_nb_exit_021_04.jpg) also used this design with their older signs. Is there a name for this kind of style? I wonder why the three states chose to use this exit tab design at one point.
I just call it the exit tab without a bottom border. I don't really like that style, but it seems like Massachusetts now go with a similar style as Wisconsin and Michigan for exit tabs, which is my second preferred. Even the left exit tabs that I thought were exclusive to Michigan, with the left banner stretching the whole length above the tab, is used in Massachusetts.

MassHighway originally developed the 'full width' separate LEFT tab option, which Michigan later copied.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 06, 2021, 10:19:59 PM
Update from MassDOT on I-93 exit renumbering:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/statewide-exit-renumbering-work-update/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/statewide-exit-renumbering-work-update/)

To summarize: Work was completed NB between former Exits 13 and 27 (now 13A to 19) on Tuesday night. Work was completed in the O'Neill Tunnel SB last night, and the remaining SB work to Exit 15, Columbia Road (soon to be 14) is to be completed tonight. Work north of Boston will start next Monday night. I hope to get some photos tomorrow. In the meantime, here's a traffic camera photo of the renumbered I-90/Mass Pike exit sign heading north:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i93nbnewexit16mtc5621.jpg)

A couple others at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on May 07, 2021, 12:40:54 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 06, 2021, 10:19:59 PM
Update from MassDOT on I-93 exit renumbering:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/statewide-exit-renumbering-work-update/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/statewide-exit-renumbering-work-update/)

To summarize: Work was completed NB between former Exits 13 and 27 (now 13A to 19) on Tuesday night. Work was completed in the O'Neill Tunnel SB last night, and the remaining SB work to Exit 15, Columbia Road (soon to be 14) is to be completed tonight. Work north of Boston will start next Monday night. I hope to get some photos tomorrow. In the meantime, here's a traffic camera photo of the renumbered I-90/Mass Pike exit sign heading north:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i93nbnewexit16mtc5621.jpg)

A couple others at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
college me is jumping for joy that exits don't go from 16 to 26 in half a mile anymore
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 07, 2021, 01:11:46 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 06, 2021, 10:19:59 PM
Update from MassDOT on I-93 exit renumbering:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/statewide-exit-renumbering-work-update/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/statewide-exit-renumbering-work-update/)

To summarize: Work was completed NB between former Exits 13 and 27 (now 13A to 19) on Tuesday night. Work was completed in the O'Neill Tunnel SB last night, and the remaining SB work to Exit 15, Columbia Road (soon to be 14) is to be completed tonight. Work north of Boston will start next Monday night. I hope to get some photos tomorrow. In the meantime, here's a traffic camera photo of the renumbered I-90/Mass Pike exit sign heading north:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i93nbnewexit16mtc5621.jpg)

A couple others at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

On I-93 NB, will the "NO EXIT 19 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3287492,-71.0597076,3a,15y,349.57h,89.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss8GMLz2yY0ka8AxnnF_svg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) / 17 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3242341,-71.0555169,3a,15y,351.04h,89.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sL5dTX8SIlk1DLdL3vPL9gg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)" signs be removed, unlike some of the Next Exit signs that remained even after the remumbering?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on May 07, 2021, 05:50:08 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 07, 2021, 01:11:46 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 06, 2021, 10:19:59 PM
Update from MassDOT on I-93 exit renumbering:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/statewide-exit-renumbering-work-update/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/statewide-exit-renumbering-work-update/)

To summarize: Work was completed NB between former Exits 13 and 27 (now 13A to 19) on Tuesday night. Work was completed in the O'Neill Tunnel SB last night, and the remaining SB work to Exit 15, Columbia Road (soon to be 14) is to be completed tonight. Work north of Boston will start next Monday night. I hope to get some photos tomorrow. In the meantime, here's a traffic camera photo of the renumbered I-90/Mass Pike exit sign heading north:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i93nbnewexit16mtc5621.jpg)

A couple others at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

On I-93 NB, will the "NO EXIT 19 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3287492,-71.0597076,3a,15y,349.57h,89.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss8GMLz2yY0ka8AxnnF_svg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) / 17 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3242341,-71.0555169,3a,15y,351.04h,89.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sL5dTX8SIlk1DLdL3vPL9gg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)" signs be removed, unlike some of the Next Exit signs that remained even after the remumbering?

I fear they will. In the midst of the I-495 sign project around Lowell, they actually put up brand new signs a few weeks ago between exits 35 and 37, with the old number plastered over the new number underneath.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on May 07, 2021, 10:15:48 AM
I just got an email from MassDOT.  I-495 renumbering will begin on May 16.

Like I-95, the renumbering will occur in 4 segments, but for some reason, the renumbering will move from south to north on this highway.

1st segment: Old exit 3 (Rte. 28) in Middleboro to old exit 13 (I-95) in Mansfield.
2nd segment: Old exit 14 (US. 1) in Plainville to old exit 22 (I-90/Mass. Pike) in Hopkinton.
3rd segment: Old exit 23 (Rte. 9) in Westborough to old exits 35A-B-C (Rte. 3/Lowell Connector) in Chelmsford
4th segment: Old exit 37 (Woburn St) in Lowell to old exit 55 (Rte. 110) in Amesbury

This will certainly create confusion for long-stretch drivers in both directions, as you'll have two exit 19s in both directions for a time, and even two exit 50s!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 07, 2021, 11:50:56 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on May 07, 2021, 10:15:48 AM
I just got an email from MassDOT.  I-495 renumbering will begin on May 16.

Like I-95, the renumbering will occur in 4 segments, but for some reason, the renumbering will move from south to north on this highway.

1st segment: Old exit 3 (Rte. 28) in Middleboro to old exit 13 (I-95) in Mansfield.
2nd segment: Old exit 14 (US. 1) in Plainville to old exit 22 (I-90/Mass. Pike) in Hopkinton.
3rd segment: Old exit 23 (Rte. 9) in Westborough to old exits 35A-B-C (Rte. 3/Lowell Connector) in Chelmsford
4th segment: Old exit 37 (Woburn St) in Lowell to old exit 55 (Rte. 110) in Amesbury

This will certainly create confusion for long-stretch drivers in both directions, as you'll have two exit 19s in both directions for a time, and even two exit 50s!
They should cover up the numbers and reveal it all at once.
Title: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2021, 04:02:37 PM
Now, I realize that 90% of the people that care about this at all are probably reading this thread, but still, how hard is it for a contractor to put the same typeface on adjoining exit tabs? This hack work is all over the re-numbered highways.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210507/a5193de0bef73d075b5a8bd90039a653.jpg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on May 07, 2021, 05:22:38 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2021, 04:02:37 PM
Now, I realize that 90% of the people that care about this at all are probably reading this thread, but still, how hard is it for a contractor to put the same typeface on adjoining exit tabs? This hack work is all over the re-numbered highways.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210507/a5193de0bef73d075b5a8bd90039a653.jpg)

I'm surprised they don't have the letters falling off the edge of the tab so people don't pull the "uh-oh what's exit 138" thing that they think is a problem.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on May 07, 2021, 05:40:04 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 07, 2021, 11:50:56 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on May 07, 2021, 10:15:48 AM
I just got an email from MassDOT.  I-495 renumbering will begin on May 16.

Like I-95, the renumbering will occur in 4 segments, but for some reason, the renumbering will move from south to north on this highway.

1st segment: Old exit 3 (Rte. 28) in Middleboro to old exit 13 (I-95) in Mansfield.
2nd segment: Old exit 14 (US. 1) in Plainville to old exit 22 (I-90/Mass. Pike) in Hopkinton.
3rd segment: Old exit 23 (Rte. 9) in Westborough to old exits 35A-B-C (Rte. 3/Lowell Connector) in Chelmsford
4th segment: Old exit 37 (Woburn St) in Lowell to old exit 55 (Rte. 110) in Amesbury

This will certainly create confusion for long-stretch drivers in both directions, as you'll have two exit 19s in both directions for a time, and even two exit 50s!
They should cover up the numbers and reveal it all at once.
That... what? You're going to put up two overlays and come back with more lane closures, vehicles, and personnel to remove one? Go ahead and pay for that out of pocket.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 07, 2021, 05:44:09 PM
Quote from: Alps on May 07, 2021, 05:40:04 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 07, 2021, 11:50:56 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on May 07, 2021, 10:15:48 AM
I just got an email from MassDOT.  I-495 renumbering will begin on May 16.

Like I-95, the renumbering will occur in 4 segments, but for some reason, the renumbering will move from south to north on this highway.

1st segment: Old exit 3 (Rte. 28) in Middleboro to old exit 13 (I-95) in Mansfield.
2nd segment: Old exit 14 (US. 1) in Plainville to old exit 22 (I-90/Mass. Pike) in Hopkinton.
3rd segment: Old exit 23 (Rte. 9) in Westborough to old exits 35A-B-C (Rte. 3/Lowell Connector) in Chelmsford
4th segment: Old exit 37 (Woburn St) in Lowell to old exit 55 (Rte. 110) in Amesbury

This will certainly create confusion for long-stretch drivers in both directions, as you'll have two exit 19s in both directions for a time, and even two exit 50s!
They should cover up the numbers and reveal it all at once.
That... what? You're going to put up two overlays and come back with more lane closures, vehicles, and personnel to remove one? Go ahead and pay for that out of pocket.
Mixing sequential and mileage-based exits is a recipe for mass confusion.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on May 07, 2021, 05:55:52 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 07, 2021, 01:11:46 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 06, 2021, 10:19:59 PM
Update from MassDOT on I-93 exit renumbering:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/statewide-exit-renumbering-work-update/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/statewide-exit-renumbering-work-update/)

To summarize: Work was completed NB between former Exits 13 and 27 (now 13A to 19) on Tuesday night. Work was completed in the O'Neill Tunnel SB last night, and the remaining SB work to Exit 15, Columbia Road (soon to be 14) is to be completed tonight. Work north of Boston will start next Monday night. I hope to get some photos tomorrow. In the meantime, here's a traffic camera photo of the renumbered I-90/Mass Pike exit sign heading north:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i93nbnewexit16mtc5621.jpg)

A couple others at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

On I-93 NB, will the "NO EXIT 19 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3287492,-71.0597076,3a,15y,349.57h,89.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss8GMLz2yY0ka8AxnnF_svg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) / 17 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3242341,-71.0555169,3a,15y,351.04h,89.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sL5dTX8SIlk1DLdL3vPL9gg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)" signs be removed, unlike some of the Next Exit signs that remained even after the remumbering?

The NO EXIT signs will be removed.  The NEXT EXIT signs are supposed to be removed as well.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on May 07, 2021, 07:25:04 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2021, 04:02:37 PM
Now, I realize that 90% of the people that care about this at all are probably reading this thread, but still, how hard is it for a contractor to put the same typeface on adjoining exit tabs? This hack work is all over the re-numbered highways.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210507/a5193de0bef73d075b5a8bd90039a653.jpg)
It seems like the signs were replaced not that long ago. Why did the sign replacement not get scheduled to coincide with the exit renumbering?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on May 07, 2021, 10:13:22 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 07, 2021, 05:44:09 PM
Quote from: Alps on May 07, 2021, 05:40:04 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 07, 2021, 11:50:56 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on May 07, 2021, 10:15:48 AM
I just got an email from MassDOT.  I-495 renumbering will begin on May 16.

Like I-95, the renumbering will occur in 4 segments, but for some reason, the renumbering will move from south to north on this highway.

1st segment: Old exit 3 (Rte. 28) in Middleboro to old exit 13 (I-95) in Mansfield.
2nd segment: Old exit 14 (US. 1) in Plainville to old exit 22 (I-90/Mass. Pike) in Hopkinton.
3rd segment: Old exit 23 (Rte. 9) in Westborough to old exits 35A-B-C (Rte. 3/Lowell Connector) in Chelmsford
4th segment: Old exit 37 (Woburn St) in Lowell to old exit 55 (Rte. 110) in Amesbury

This will certainly create confusion for long-stretch drivers in both directions, as you'll have two exit 19s in both directions for a time, and even two exit 50s!
They should cover up the numbers and reveal it all at once.
That... what? You're going to put up two overlays and come back with more lane closures, vehicles, and personnel to remove one? Go ahead and pay for that out of pocket.
Mixing sequential and mileage-based exits is a recipe for mass confusion.

Hasn't been an issue during the renumbering project so far.  For one thing, in the rare instances where the 'overlap' results in duplicate numbers along the highway, the exits are very far apart.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 07, 2021, 11:45:19 PM
Quote from: roadman on May 07, 2021, 05:55:52 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 07, 2021, 01:11:46 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 06, 2021, 10:19:59 PM
Update from MassDOT on I-93 exit renumbering:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/statewide-exit-renumbering-work-update/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/statewide-exit-renumbering-work-update/)

To summarize: Work was completed NB between former Exits 13 and 27 (now 13A to 19) on Tuesday night. Work was completed in the O'Neill Tunnel SB last night, and the remaining SB work to Exit 15, Columbia Road (soon to be 14) is to be completed tonight. Work north of Boston will start next Monday night. I hope to get some photos tomorrow. In the meantime, here's a traffic camera photo of the renumbered I-90/Mass Pike exit sign heading north:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i93nbnewexit16mtc5621.jpg)

A couple others at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

On I-93 NB, will the "NO EXIT 19 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3287492,-71.0597076,3a,15y,349.57h,89.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1ss8GMLz2yY0ka8AxnnF_svg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) / 17 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3242341,-71.0555169,3a,15y,351.04h,89.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sL5dTX8SIlk1DLdL3vPL9gg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)" signs be removed, unlike some of the Next Exit signs that remained even after the remumbering?

The NO EXIT signs will be removed.  The NEXT EXIT signs are supposed to be removed as well.
Drove on I-93 North today (photos will be posted soon). The No Exit signs have been removed in that direction. I did not have a chance to check whether the Next Exit 12 on I-93 South was removed as well.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on May 08, 2021, 12:56:38 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 07, 2021, 07:25:04 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2021, 04:02:37 PM
Now, I realize that 90% of the people that care about this at all are probably reading this thread, but still, how hard is it for a contractor to put the same typeface on adjoining exit tabs? This hack work is all over the re-numbered highways.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210507/a5193de0bef73d075b5a8bd90039a653.jpg)
It seems like the signs were replaced not that long ago. Why did the sign replacement not get scheduled to coincide with the exit renumbering?
because they weren't ready for exit renumbering then
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 08, 2021, 01:13:32 AM
Quote from: Alps on May 08, 2021, 12:56:38 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 07, 2021, 07:25:04 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2021, 04:02:37 PM
Now, I realize that 90% of the people that care about this at all are probably reading this thread, but still, how hard is it for a contractor to put the same typeface on adjoining exit tabs? This hack work is all over the re-numbered highways.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210507/a5193de0bef73d075b5a8bd90039a653.jpg)
It seems like the signs were replaced not that long ago. Why did the sign replacement not get scheduled to coincide with the exit renumbering?
because they weren't ready for exit renumbering then
We were ready for exit renumbering my whole life, we just didn't want to do it.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 08, 2021, 01:48:06 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 07, 2021, 07:25:04 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2021, 04:02:37 PM
Now, I realize that 90% of the people that care about this at all are probably reading this thread, but still, how hard is it for a contractor to put the same typeface on adjoining exit tabs? This hack work is all over the re-numbered highways.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210507/a5193de0bef73d075b5a8bd90039a653.jpg)
It seems like the signs were replaced not that long ago. Why did the sign replacement not get scheduled to coincide with the exit renumbering?

These signs were replaced in 2014 (date stamp of signs suggests 5/14 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2926364,-71.0443234,3a,15y,1.61h,128.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSO9sqOH8eR9oVFPAW-msKQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) well before the exit renumbering even started.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 08, 2021, 02:01:41 AM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 08, 2021, 01:48:06 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 07, 2021, 07:25:04 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2021, 04:02:37 PM
Now, I realize that 90% of the people that care about this at all are probably reading this thread, but still, how hard is it for a contractor to put the same typeface on adjoining exit tabs? This hack work is all over the re-numbered highways.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210507/a5193de0bef73d075b5a8bd90039a653.jpg)
It seems like the signs were replaced not that long ago. Why did the sign replacement not get scheduled to coincide with the exit renumbering?

These signs were replaced in 2014 (date stamp of signs suggests 5/14 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2926364,-71.0443234,3a,15y,1.61h,128.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSO9sqOH8eR9oVFPAW-msKQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)) well before the exit renumbering even started.
We should have renumbered out exits years ago.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: CtrlAltDel on May 08, 2021, 02:06:15 AM
Out of idle curiosity, what do this text mean?


14.0 X 8.0 5/14 F10 M5 A
Freeport St
Dorchester St

8.5 X 2.5 5/10 F10 M5 A
Exit 13
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Pete from Boston on May 08, 2021, 09:11:20 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 08, 2021, 01:13:32 AM
Quote from: Alps on May 08, 2021, 12:56:38 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 07, 2021, 07:25:04 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2021, 04:02:37 PM
Now, I realize that 90% of the people that care about this at all are probably reading this thread, but still, how hard is it for a contractor to put the same typeface on adjoining exit tabs? This hack work is all over the re-numbered highways.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210507/a5193de0bef73d075b5a8bd90039a653.jpg)
It seems like the signs were replaced not that long ago. Why did the sign replacement not get scheduled to coincide with the exit renumbering?
because they weren't ready for exit renumbering then
We were ready for exit renumbering my whole life, we just didn't want to do it.

Best answer yet.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on May 08, 2021, 09:33:12 AM
Oh there's a date stamp on the bottom left of both BGS. That's new to me.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: storm2k on May 08, 2021, 11:08:57 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 08, 2021, 09:33:12 AM
Oh there's a date stamp on the bottom left of both BGS. That's new to me.

I feel like that's becoming a more common practice at various state agencies. NJDOT, for example, has been adding a date stamp and the size of the panel (https://goo.gl/maps/MUjUpHwJP4Wehg7n8) to more of its signage since the late aughts. Don't know if it's universal or depends on the contract and the contractor, but definitely and increasingly common site in many places.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Pete from Boston on May 08, 2021, 01:21:39 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 08, 2021, 09:33:12 AM
Oh there's a date stamp on the bottom left of both BGS. That's new to me.

It's been the practice in Mass. for at least a couple of decades, maybe longer.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 08, 2021, 04:44:08 PM
I was just on route 2 east of 128 and saw the new exits. It was bizarre seeing huge numbers in Lexington and Arlington.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 08, 2021, 09:31:07 PM
I've posted photos taken Friday of the exit renumbering along I-93 North from Freeport Street and Morrissey Blvd:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i93signs521b.jpg)

to I-90 and South Station:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i93signs521o.jpg)

on my New England Exit Renumbering Central page:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: southshore720 on May 08, 2021, 10:25:53 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2021, 04:02:37 PM
Now, I realize that 90% of the people that care about this at all are probably reading this thread, but still, how hard is it for a contractor to put the same typeface on adjoining exit tabs? This hack work is all over the re-numbered highways.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210507/a5193de0bef73d075b5a8bd90039a653.jpg)

RIDOT got it right when they decided to replace the tab instead of use an ugly overlay.  And yes, I can't believe I started a sentence with "RIDOT got it right..."   :-D
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on May 09, 2021, 02:05:26 PM
Quote from: southshore720 on May 08, 2021, 10:25:53 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2021, 04:02:37 PM
Now, I realize that 90% of the people that care about this at all are probably reading this thread, but still, how hard is it for a contractor to put the same typeface on adjoining exit tabs? This hack work is all over the re-numbered highways.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210507/a5193de0bef73d075b5a8bd90039a653.jpg)

RIDOT got it right when they decided to replace the tab instead of use an ugly overlay.  And yes, I can't believe I started a sentence with "RIDOT got it right..."   :-D
RIDOT got it right when they left old bridges up so that roadgeeks could walk on them...
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: ran4sh on May 09, 2021, 03:28:29 PM
Quote from: Alps on May 07, 2021, 05:40:04 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 07, 2021, 11:50:56 AM
Quote from: kramie13 on May 07, 2021, 10:15:48 AM
I just got an email from MassDOT.  I-495 renumbering will begin on May 16.

Like I-95, the renumbering will occur in 4 segments, but for some reason, the renumbering will move from south to north on this highway.

1st segment: Old exit 3 (Rte. 28) in Middleboro to old exit 13 (I-95) in Mansfield.
2nd segment: Old exit 14 (US. 1) in Plainville to old exit 22 (I-90/Mass. Pike) in Hopkinton.
3rd segment: Old exit 23 (Rte. 9) in Westborough to old exits 35A-B-C (Rte. 3/Lowell Connector) in Chelmsford
4th segment: Old exit 37 (Woburn St) in Lowell to old exit 55 (Rte. 110) in Amesbury

This will certainly create confusion for long-stretch drivers in both directions, as you'll have two exit 19s in both directions for a time, and even two exit 50s!
They should cover up the numbers and reveal it all at once.
That... what? You're going to put up two overlays and come back with more lane closures, vehicles, and personnel to remove one? Go ahead and pay for that out of pocket.

Georgia did its exit renumbering that way in 1999/2000 (and then again on the Athens bypass in 2004). Signs that were being replaced were replaced with signs that had the new number covered with an overlay of the old number. Then on the scheduled date to change the numbers, those overlays were removed (with overlays being applied to remaining signs that still had the old number). I think it was done this way so that the exit numbers all over the state would be changed within a few days or weeks instead of waiting months or more for all signs to be replaced.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on May 09, 2021, 09:44:09 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on May 08, 2021, 02:06:15 AM
Out of idle curiosity, what do this text mean?


14.0 X 8.0 5/14 F10 M5 A
Freeport St


Dorchester St

8.5 X 2.5 5/10 F10 M5 A
Exit 13


Panel dimensions, date of fabrication, fabricator, sheeting maker, sheeting type.  MassDPW first introduced these codes in 1988.  The appear on the lower front corner of overhead signs, and on the lower rear corner on ground mounted signs.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Pete from Boston on May 10, 2021, 02:42:17 PM
Quote from: roadman on May 09, 2021, 09:44:09 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on May 08, 2021, 02:06:15 AM
Out of idle curiosity, what do this text mean?


14.0 X 8.0 5/14 F10 M5 A
Freeport St


Dorchester St

8.5 X 2.5 5/10 F10 M5 A
Exit 13


Panel dimensions, date of fabrication, fabricator, sheeting maker, sheeting type.  MassDPW first introduced these codes in 1988.  The appear on the lower front corner of overhead signs, and on the lower rear corner on ground mounted signs.

Heh, just came here to ask what the extraneous letters after dimension and date mean. Thank you.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: CtrlAltDel on May 10, 2021, 06:39:12 PM
Quote from: roadman on May 09, 2021, 09:44:09 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on May 08, 2021, 02:06:15 AM
Out of idle curiosity, what do this text mean?


14.0 X 8.0 5/14 F10 M5 A
Freeport St


Dorchester St

8.5 X 2.5 5/10 F10 M5 A
Exit 13


Panel dimensions, date of fabrication, fabricator, sheeting maker, sheeting type.  MassDPW first introduced these codes in 1988.  The appear on the lower front corner of overhead signs, and on the lower rear corner on ground mounted signs.

That exit tab is eight and a half feet wide? Wow. Even though I know how big those signs are, I'm still amazed by how big those signs are.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 10, 2021, 11:00:50 PM
Exit renumbering along I-93 North has advanced into Medford as of last night. I have posted revised and additional photos of signage north of I-90, such as:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i93signs521ee.jpg)

to the New England Exit Renumbering Central page:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on May 10, 2021, 11:45:48 PM
I just thought of something...I believe the Mass Ave exit actually got its OLD old exit number back.  IIRC, it was "Exit 15" in the old "25 is 128" system.  :-D
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on May 11, 2021, 09:35:18 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on May 10, 2021, 11:45:48 PM
I just thought of something...I believe the Mass Ave exit actually got its OLD old exit number back.  IIRC, it was "Exit 15" in the old "25 is 128" system.  :-D
Correct, it was.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 11, 2021, 11:05:07 PM
I've added new photos taken of I-95 exit renumbering between I-495 and MA 123, including the I-295 interchange:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signs521h.jpg)

on my New England Exit Renumbering Central page: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs4 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs4)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: MVHighways on May 13, 2021, 02:02:37 PM
Haven't posted here in nearly 5 years (though have lurked at various points). Drove into Boston this morning and then up to Salem NH and back to Dracut via Methuen, so I was able to see the renumbering progress north of the Zakim Bridge on I-93.

Northbound on 93 is done, except for sequential exits 47 (Pelham St.) and 48 (Route 213) in Methuen. Mileage exit 27/sequential exit 36 has a new gore sign northbound with the new number.

Southbound on 93, sequential exits 27 through 47 have not been changed. As others have noted, the new numbers are in place SB starting with mileage exit 18/sequential exit 26 and continuing southward. For some reason, mileage exit 46/sequential exit 48 has been changed southbound (except the sign at Rt. 213 exit 1A, which appears to still read exit 48, but I didn't go on that ramp and only caught a glance at it from the mainline). This situation results in an exit sequence SB coming from NH that goes 46, then 47, and then 46 again (Routes 110/113), all in a span of less than three miles. Didn't get any pictures as I was driving by myself. I'm hoping my elderly great-grandmother, who lives in Methuen and still drives despite her memory issues, doesn't get confused by this. We've tried our best to alert her to the upcoming changes.

In other recent travels: on US 3 north Sunday morning, I think I saw a new gore sign for exits 81A/80 that does not have the "old exit" sign below it. And on 95/128 north, the very large 63B overlay for the Essex County Scenic Byway (there's a photo of it on Bob Malme's site) had fallen nearly entirely off as of Saturday, with only one corner of the overlay sign still attached and thus distinctly revealing the former exit number.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 13, 2021, 11:59:18 PM
Quote from: MVHighways on May 13, 2021, 02:02:37 PM
Haven't posted here in nearly 5 years (though have lurked at various points). Drove into Boston this morning and then up to Salem NH and back to Dracut via Methuen, so I was able to see the renumbering progress north of the Zakim Bridge on I-93.

Northbound on 93 is done, except for sequential exits 47 (Pelham St.) and 48 (Route 213) in Methuen. Mileage exit 27/sequential exit 36 has a new gore sign northbound with the new number.

Southbound on 93, sequential exits 27 through 47 have not been changed. As others have noted, the new numbers are in place SB starting with mileage exit 18/sequential exit 26 and continuing southward. For some reason, mileage exit 46/sequential exit 48 has been changed southbound (except the sign at Rt. 213 exit 1A, which appears to still read exit 48, but I didn't go on that ramp and only caught a glance at it from the mainline). This situation results in an exit sequence SB coming from NH that goes 46, then 47, and then 46 again (Routes 110/113), all in a span of less than three miles. Didn't get any pictures as I was driving by myself. I'm hoping my elderly great-grandmother, who lives in Methuen and still drives despite her memory issues, doesn't get confused by this. We've tried our best to alert her to the upcoming changes.

In other recent travels: on US 3 north Sunday morning, I think I saw a new gore sign for exits 81A/80 that does not have the "old exit" sign below it. And on 95/128 north, the very large 63B overlay for the Essex County Scenic Byway (there's a photo of it on Bob Malme's site) had fallen nearly entirely off as of Saturday, with only one corner of the overlay sign still attached and thus distinctly revealing the former exit number.
I've posted photos of I-93 North exit renumbering taken by Paul Schlichtman up to Route 125 in Andover, including that of the I-95 (MA 128) interchange:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i93signsps521q.jpg)

All the photos at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on May 14, 2021, 09:34:23 AM
R.I.P. "double exit 37" at the I-95/MA-128/I-93 interchange in Woburn/Reading.

My work office is near the River Rd. exit off of I-93.  I haven't been there since March 2020, and it'll be weird seeing a different exit number when I do eventually have to drive there again.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 14, 2021, 11:02:12 AM
A bit off-topic, but this statement in the New England Exit Renumbering Central webpage regarding the first 12 exits on I-93 not receiving new exit numbers...

Quote
EXITS 1 to 12 - No Renumbering

MassDOT has explained not renumbering these exits due to their matching existing mileposts. This is not completely correct. While Exits 6 to 12 match up, Exits 1-5 do not. While not changing exits 1 and 2 is a practical solution despite being within 1 mile of I-95, Exits 3 to 5 could have been changed to better reflect the closest mile marker.

...kind of reminds me about when Maine changed its exit numbers back in 2004, the first 10 exits on I-295  (https://www.maine.gov/mdot/pdf/redesignation_brochure.pdf) through Portland and South Portland were not changed at all, and the new mile-based numbers (along with the post-2004 routing of I-295) actually started at exit 11 (Falmouth Spur).

Quote from: yakra on March 02, 2020, 03:44:16 AM
3. Call them sequential. These sections were not renumbered in the switch to milepost based in 2004. 195 & 395 are probably "close enough", though I don't know how the actual mileposts shake out & can't be arsed to look ATM. On "classic" I-295 thru Portland, exit numbers are off by about 1. Milepost 6 is in the gore of Exit 7. (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6678692,-70.2595979,3a,28.2y,229.63h,85.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slcgBYZTVowi6qWob6OvHhQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 14, 2021, 12:03:47 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on May 14, 2021, 09:34:23 AM
R.I.P. "double exit 37" at the I-95/MA-128/I-93 interchange in Woburn/Reading.

My work office is near the River Rd. exit off of I-93.  I haven't been there since March 2020, and it'll be weird seeing a different exit number when I do eventually have to drive there again.
You will always be remembered  :-(
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on May 14, 2021, 03:45:12 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 14, 2021, 11:02:12 AM
A bit off-topic, but this statement in the New England Exit Renumbering Central webpage regarding the first 12 exits on I-93 not receiving new exit numbers...

Quote
EXITS 1 to 12 - No Renumbering

MassDOT has explained not renumbering these exits due to their matching existing mileposts. This is not completely correct. While Exits 6 to 12 match up, Exits 1-5 do not. While not changing exits 1 and 2 is a practical solution despite being within 1 mile of I-95, Exits 3 to 5 could have been changed to better reflect the closest mile marker.

...kind of reminds me about when Maine changed its exit numbers back in 2004, the first 10 exits on I-295  (https://www.maine.gov/mdot/pdf/redesignation_brochure.pdf) through Portland and South Portland were not changed at all, and the new mile-based numbers (along with the post-2004 routing of I-295) actually started at exit 11 (Falmouth Spur).

Quote from: yakra on March 02, 2020, 03:44:16 AM
3. Call them sequential. These sections were not renumbered in the switch to milepost based in 2004. 195 & 395 are probably "close enough", though I don't know how the actual mileposts shake out & can't be arsed to look ATM. On "classic" I-295 thru Portland, exit numbers are off by about 1. Milepost 6 is in the gore of Exit 7. (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.6678692,-70.2595979,3a,28.2y,229.63h,85.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slcgBYZTVowi6qWob6OvHhQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)

In Maine the exits that didn't get new numbers still got "Formerly" exit signs (ostensibly so motorists knew that the number was current and not missed by crews/not one that was yet to be changed) and you got gems like this...
(https://i.imgur.com/0tPilBq.jpg)(https://robertstevenson.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/24344258_8459aae327.jpg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: MVHighways on May 14, 2021, 06:51:46 PM
update: I-93 NB is fully renumbered. Old exits 48/47 are renumbered SB now, further exacerbating the situation referenced below because the new numbers are 46/45 for those two exits. As a result, there are now two exits 46 and two exits 45 in the southbound direction, all in a span of less than four miles. I guess MassDOT isn't planning on going south-to-north with the renumbering on 93 SB after all, unless there was a miscommunication with the contractor or some other error happened with the contractor.

Quote from: MVHighways on May 13, 2021, 02:02:37 PM
Haven't posted here in nearly 5 years (though have lurked at various points). Drove into Boston this morning and then up to Salem NH and back to Dracut via Methuen, so I was able to see the renumbering progress north of the Zakim Bridge on I-93.

Northbound on 93 is done, except for sequential exits 47 (Pelham St.) and 48 (Route 213) in Methuen. Mileage exit 27/sequential exit 36 has a new gore sign northbound with the new number.

Southbound on 93, sequential exits 27 through 47 have not been changed. As others have noted, the new numbers are in place SB starting with mileage exit 18/sequential exit 26 and continuing southward. For some reason, mileage exit 46/sequential exit 48 has been changed southbound (except the sign at Rt. 213 exit 1A, which appears to still read exit 48, but I didn't go on that ramp and only caught a glance at it from the mainline). This situation results in an exit sequence SB coming from NH that goes 46, then 47, and then 46 again (Routes 110/113), all in a span of less than three miles. Didn't get any pictures as I was driving by myself. I'm hoping my elderly great-grandmother, who lives in Methuen and still drives despite her memory issues, doesn't get confused by this. We've tried our best to alert her to the upcoming changes.

In other recent travels: on US 3 north Sunday morning, I think I saw a new gore sign for exits 81A/80 that does not have the "old exit" sign below it. And on 95/128 north, the very large 63B overlay for the Essex County Scenic Byway (there's a photo of it on Bob Malme's site) had fallen nearly entirely off as of Saturday, with only one corner of the overlay sign still attached and thus distinctly revealing the former exit number.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on May 14, 2021, 10:18:48 PM
MassDOT has been doing that kind of stuff this whole renumbering project.  I'm not sure why, though I suspect it seems to be that the way they're doing this is basically "just drive the road from one end to the other, changing numbers along the way" (albeit in sections for I-93 and I-95).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 14, 2021, 11:41:52 PM
I've begun adding photos taken of exit renumbering along MA 2 between Fitchburg and Acton taken last week. I've uploaded those from Leominster east, including one that hit the century mark:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma2signs521pp.jpg)

on my New England Exit Renumbering Central page: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#ma2signsmay (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#ma2signsmay)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on May 16, 2021, 03:57:17 PM
Quote from: MVHighways on May 14, 2021, 06:51:46 PM
update: I-93 NB is fully renumbered. Old exits 48/47 are renumbered SB now, further exacerbating the situation referenced below because the new numbers are 46/45 for those two exits. As a result, there are now two exits 46 and two exits 45 in the southbound direction, all in a span of less than four miles. I guess MassDOT isn't planning on going south-to-north with the renumbering on 93 SB after all, unless there was a miscommunication with the contractor or some other error happened with the contractor.

Quote from: MVHighways on May 13, 2021, 02:02:37 PM

Southbound on 93, sequential exits 27 through 47 have not been changed. As others have noted, the new numbers are in place SB starting with mileage exit 18/sequential exit 26 and continuing southward. For some reason, mileage exit 46/sequential exit 48 has been changed southbound (except the sign at Rt. 213 exit 1A, which appears to still read exit 48, but I didn't go on that ramp and only caught a glance at it from the mainline). This situation results in an exit sequence SB coming from NH that goes 46, then 47, and then 46 again (Routes 110/113), all in a span of less than three miles. Didn't get any pictures as I was driving by myself. I'm hoping my elderly great-grandmother, who lives in Methuen and still drives despite her memory issues, doesn't get confused by this. We've tried our best to alert her to the upcoming changes.

I would view this as a significant problem if MassDOT was renumbering as part of a sign replacement project. Given the pace of the project, the entire I-93 southbound renumbering will be complete by the end of the week.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 16, 2021, 06:12:08 PM
Quote from: MVHighways on May 13, 2021, 02:02:37 PM
Southbound on 93, sequential exits 27 through 47 have not been changed. As others have noted, the new numbers are in place SB starting with mileage exit 18/sequential exit 26 and continuing southward. For some reason, mileage exit 46/sequential exit 48 has been changed southbound (except the sign at Rt. 213 exit 1A, which appears to still read exit 48, but I didn't go on that ramp and only caught a glance at it from the mainline). This situation results in an exit sequence SB coming from NH that goes 46, then 47, and then 46 again (Routes 110/113), all in a span of less than three miles.

As of yesterday, 2021-05-15, old exit 48 SB still stands on the Route 213 Exit 1A ramp:
(https://i.ibb.co/rcNW14m/Screenshot-2021-05-16-at-18-00-08.png) (https://ibb.co/5nw7fB6)
(https://i.ibb.co/B4WmrBY/Screenshot-2021-05-16-at-18-00-17.png) (https://ibb.co/hXQkZVT)

Old exit 47 SB has been renumbered to its new number, 45:
(https://i.ibb.co/59qTFJz/Screenshot-2021-05-16-at-18-00-31.png) (https://ibb.co/mBQJ8PY)

Old exit 46 still stands, as well as old exit 45:
(https://i.ibb.co/1b24VTn/Screenshot-2021-05-16-at-18-00-43.png) (https://ibb.co/PtCVpgY)
(https://i.ibb.co/r3VbWyZ/Screenshot-2021-05-16-at-18-01-21.png) (https://ibb.co/G9qshPV)
(https://i.ibb.co/K29Ptht/Screenshot-2021-05-16-at-18-08-40.png) (https://ibb.co/pf37HwH)

The new exit numbers SB as of 2021-05-15 don't start until the MA 28 / 3 (Leverett Cir / Cambridge / Storrow Dr) interchange, which was old exit 26.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: MVHighways on May 16, 2021, 06:27:05 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 16, 2021, 06:12:08 PM
Quote from: MVHighways on May 13, 2021, 02:02:37 PM
Southbound on 93, sequential exits 27 through 47 have not been changed. As others have noted, the new numbers are in place SB starting with mileage exit 18/sequential exit 26 and continuing southward. For some reason, mileage exit 46/sequential exit 48 has been changed southbound (except the sign at Rt. 213 exit 1A, which appears to still read exit 48, but I didn't go on that ramp and only caught a glance at it from the mainline). This situation results in an exit sequence SB coming from NH that goes 46, then 47, and then 46 again (Routes 110/113), all in a span of less than three miles.

As of yesterday, 2021-05-15, old exit 48 SB still stands on the Route 213 Exit 1A ramp:
(https://i.ibb.co/rcNW14m/Screenshot-2021-05-16-at-18-00-08.png) (https://ibb.co/5nw7fB6)
(https://i.ibb.co/B4WmrBY/Screenshot-2021-05-16-at-18-00-17.png) (https://ibb.co/hXQkZVT)

Old exit 47 SB has been renumbered to its new number, 45:
(https://i.ibb.co/59qTFJz/Screenshot-2021-05-16-at-18-00-31.png) (https://ibb.co/mBQJ8PY)

Old exit 46 still stands, as well as old exit 45:
(https://i.ibb.co/1b24VTn/Screenshot-2021-05-16-at-18-00-43.png) (https://ibb.co/PtCVpgY)
(https://i.ibb.co/r3VbWyZ/Screenshot-2021-05-16-at-18-01-21.png) (https://ibb.co/G9qshPV)
(https://i.ibb.co/K29Ptht/Screenshot-2021-05-16-at-18-08-40.png) (https://ibb.co/pf37HwH)

The new exit numbers SB as of 2021-05-15 don't start until the MA 28 / 3 (Leverett Cir / Cambridge / Storrow Dr) interchange, which was old exit 26.
I'm sure they'll change those last two exit 48 signs SB (at the weave with 213) when they get back to Methuen to hit exit 46 SB. Not a major issue since it shouldn't take them that long, but I'm still puzzled as to why they changed those first two exits SB early, and that combined with the sign at exit 1A not being touched (for now) may confuse at least a few folks.

The order in which they changed the exits in Methuen is bizarre. They did new 43/old 46 NB first, as expected. Then they changed new 46/old 48 SB, except for the signs at 213 exit 1A (as shown in your pictures). Then they did new 45/46 NB and 45 SB on Thursday night. [Fun tidbit: The 1-mile SB advance sign for new 46 is in New Hampshire, making it one of a handful mileage-based exit signs to physically be in NH (with a sign for exit 89 and two for exit 90 SB on I-95 in Seabrook).] I guess we'll find out tonight if they resume the exit numbering SB in Somerville (like they planned) or Methuen.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 17, 2021, 12:50:15 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on May 07, 2021, 05:50:08 AM
I fear they will. In the midst of the I-495 sign project around Lowell, they actually put up brand new signs a few weeks ago between exits 35 and 37, with the old number plastered over the new number underneath.

Well, that explains why I saw patches with the old exit number on some of the exit gore signs on my way back from Cape Cod earlier today via I-495 Northbound... They started somewhere after I-290 / MA 85 interchange and ended somewhere around I-93 or Lawrence, but I'm not sure 100 % about the exact start and end of those new signs. I'm not sure if the exit signs themself or any auxiliary signs got that treatment as well, as I saw a new sign for "Manchester-Boston Regional Airport via US-3 North" with a patched exit sign.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on May 17, 2021, 02:33:29 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 17, 2021, 12:50:15 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on May 07, 2021, 05:50:08 AM
I fear they will. In the midst of the I-495 sign project around Lowell, they actually put up brand new signs a few weeks ago between exits 35 and 37, with the old number plastered over the new number underneath.


Well, that explains why I saw patches with the old exit number on some of the exit gore signs on my way back from Cape Cod earlier today via I-495 Northbound... They started somewhere after I-290 / MA 85 interchange and ended somewhere around I-93 or Lawrence, but I'm not sure 100 % about the exact start and end of those new signs. I'm not sure if the exit signs themself or any auxiliary signs got that treatment as well, as I saw a new sign for "Manchester-Boston Regional Airport via US-3 North" with a patched exit sign.
The current I-495 sign project with the old exit number 'patches' starts just south of Route 111 in Harvard and ends just north of Woburn Street in Lowell.

fixed quoting - A
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on May 17, 2021, 06:00:34 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 17, 2021, 12:50:15 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on May 07, 2021, 05:50:08 AM
I fear they will. In the midst of the I-495 sign project around Lowell, they actually put up brand new signs a few weeks ago between exits 35 and 37, with the old number plastered over the new number underneath.

Well, that explains why I saw patches with the old exit number on some of the exit gore signs on my way back from Cape Cod earlier today via I-495 Northbound... They started somewhere after I-290 / MA 85 interchange and ended somewhere around I-93 or Lawrence, but I'm not sure 100 % about the exact start and end of those new signs. I'm not sure if the exit signs themself or any auxiliary signs got that treatment as well, as I saw a new sign for "Manchester-Boston Regional Airport via US-3 North" with a patched exit sign.

It's a good idea in general for the regular signs, but putting up a brand new "next exit XX" sign is just pissing money away.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on May 19, 2021, 04:04:24 PM
Exit renumbering on I-495 has made it to the I-95 interchange going north.

The "No Exit 11" sign is still standing between old exits 10 and 12 going north, even though they've been renumbered to 27 and 30.

Also, the exit for MA 140 should be Exit 30 going north when it's signed Exit 31 - the gore sign is almost immediately after milepost 30!  And going south, old exits 12 and 11 should be 30B and 30A instead of 31 and 30.  The reason being is that it's the same route number, but different directions.  The exit tabs for these signs were made wide enough to accommodate this.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 19, 2021, 05:16:36 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on May 19, 2021, 04:04:24 PM
Exit renumbering on I-495 has made it to the I-95 interchange going north.

The "No Exit 11" sign is still standing between old exits 10 and 12 going north, even though they've been renumbered to 27 and 30.

Also, the exit for MA 140 should be Exit 30 going north when it's signed Exit 31 - the gore sign is almost immediately after milepost 30!  And going south, old exits 12 and 11 should be 30B and 30A instead of 31 and 30.  The reason being is that it's the same route number, but different directions.  The exit tabs for these signs were made wide enough to accommodate this.
Why did Exit 11 not exist in the first place?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 19, 2021, 06:26:16 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 19, 2021, 05:16:36 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on May 19, 2021, 04:04:24 PM
Exit renumbering on I-495 has made it to the I-95 interchange going north.

The "No Exit 11" sign is still standing between old exits 10 and 12 going north, even though they've been renumbered to 27 and 30.

Also, the exit for MA 140 should be Exit 30 going north when it's signed Exit 31 - the gore sign is almost immediately after milepost 30!  And going south, old exits 12 and 11 should be 30B and 30A instead of 31 and 30.  The reason being is that it's the same route number, but different directions.  The exit tabs for these signs were made wide enough to accommodate this.
Why did Exit 11 not exist in the first place?
Exit 11 exists heading south as the exit number for MA 140 South while Exit 12 is for MA 140 North (for a few more days, anyway). Heading north it's just Exit 12 for MA 140, therefore the No Exit 11 sign in that direction. Guess they didn't want to give a single NB ramp two exit numbers, so they chose 12.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on May 19, 2021, 07:25:51 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 19, 2021, 06:26:16 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on May 19, 2021, 05:16:36 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on May 19, 2021, 04:04:24 PM
Exit renumbering on I-495 has made it to the I-95 interchange going north.

The "No Exit 11" sign is still standing between old exits 10 and 12 going north, even though they've been renumbered to 27 and 30.

Also, the exit for MA 140 should be Exit 30 going north when it's signed Exit 31 - the gore sign is almost immediately after milepost 30!  And going south, old exits 12 and 11 should be 30B and 30A instead of 31 and 30.  The reason being is that it's the same route number, but different directions.  The exit tabs for these signs were made wide enough to accommodate this.
Why did Exit 11 not exist in the first place?
Exit 11 exists heading south as the exit number for MA 140 South while Exit 12 is for MA 140 North (for a few more days, anyway). Heading north it's just Exit 12 for MA 140, therefore the No Exit 11 sign in that direction. Guess they didn't want to give a single NB ramp two exit numbers, so they chose 12.
Oh ok I forgot about that.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 21, 2021, 12:26:40 PM
Work was completed last night on I-93, and therefore on the 'second' renumbering contract. The MassDOT site has been updated.  Here are the new renumbered signs at the I-95/MA 128 South exit, courtesy of Paul Schlichtman:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i93signsps521pp.jpg)

The rest of his photos can be found at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

Work continues on the 'first' contract on I-495, no dates have been set for start of work on I-395 and I-290. I hope to get photos of renumbered exits along I-495 over the weekend.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 24, 2021, 11:24:18 PM
I've uploaded photos of exit renumbering along I-495 taken this past weekend from I-95 in Mansfield and south (work has proceeded NB as far as I-90). Here's one of the MA 140 exit ramp signs:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i495signs521e.jpg)

The whole set at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

I've also completed posting exit renumbering photos taken along MA 2 a couple weeks ago out to MA 140:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma2signs521bb.jpg)

A shortcut to those photos at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#ma2signsmay (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#ma2signsmay)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 25, 2021, 02:52:49 AM
I don't know if this has been answered in the past, but does anyone know why there is no exit number tab on any of these westbound signs for Exit 131 (old exit 20 18)?

EDIT, the old exit number for this exit in this direction is 20, 18 is eastbound.

(https://i.ibb.co/2jff2sJ/IMG-3093.jpg) (https://ibb.co/xMRRvfZ)
(https://i.ibb.co/0FPLH7y/IMG-3099.jpg) (https://ibb.co/xfVbxkq)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on May 25, 2021, 04:26:35 PM
There's one (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3557768,-71.1185564,3a,22.2y,323.86h,85.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szd-mTKiqJkwyw68uJik0gA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), but it is perplexing.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on May 25, 2021, 07:40:22 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 25, 2021, 02:52:49 AM
I don't know if this has been answered in the past, but does anyone know why there is no exit number tab on any of these westbound signs for Exit 131 (old exit 20 18)?

EDIT, the old exit number for this exit in this direction is 20, 18 is eastbound.

(https://i.ibb.co/2jff2sJ/IMG-3093.jpg) (https://ibb.co/xMRRvfZ)
(https://i.ibb.co/0FPLH7y/IMG-3099.jpg) (https://ibb.co/xfVbxkq)
I wonder if in the quest to make the sign the proper size, they maxed out the height/area.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: storm2k on May 25, 2021, 09:14:48 PM
Don't know why they can't put that "U-Turn to Boston" on an aux sign. Seems straightforward and easier to read the other sign.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 25, 2021, 10:32:03 PM
Quote from: vdeane on May 25, 2021, 04:26:35 PM
There's one (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3557768,-71.1185564,3a,22.2y,323.86h,85.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szd-mTKiqJkwyw68uJik0gA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192), but it is perplexing.
Here's what that sign looks like after exit renumbering, not enough room for even all the text for an Old Exit sign:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs121b.jpg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on May 26, 2021, 08:20:52 AM
Update on I-495 exit renumbering:

-The "No Exit 11" sign going north, which was just installed last summer, has been removed.
-A blue gas sign for new exit 30/old exit 11 still reads "Gas - Exit 11".  The sign for the Xfinity center going south also still reads exit 11.
-Going north, the first sign for Gillette Stadium (before the I-95 exits) now reads "Exit 36A", but another Gillette Stadium sign closer to the US 1 exits still reads "Exit 14A".
-The US 1 interchange has been renumbered in both directions.  So it's possible the contractors are now renumbering an interchange in each direction before moving onto the next one.  But it still doesn't explain why they're going south-to-north on I-495 instead of north-to-south.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on May 26, 2021, 09:29:28 AM
Quote from: storm2k on May 25, 2021, 09:14:48 PM
Don't know why they can't put that "U-Turn to Boston" on an aux sign. Seems straightforward and easier to read the other sign.

I don't know if this counts, but there's this (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.348897,-71.1059927,3a,47.6y,289.63h,95.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMRsNpaf4EqAbEp17v4SneQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) sign between the two photos I posted:

(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs121a.jpg)

Source: New England Exit Renumbering Central (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i84signs)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on May 26, 2021, 11:35:48 AM
I'm questioning how useful the "U-turn to Boston sign" even is. At that point very close to Boston, almost all vehicles probably passed through Boston already, unless there's someone out there that didn't pay attention to anything on their surroundings at all until the U-turn sign and is like "oh no, I missed Boston's skyline".
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 26, 2021, 12:24:23 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 26, 2021, 11:35:48 AM
I'm questioning how useful the "U-turn to Boston sign" even is. At that point very close to Boston, almost all vehicles probably passed through Boston already, unless there's someone out there that didn't pay attention to anything on their surroundings at all until the U-turn sign and is like "oh no, I missed Boston's skyline".
The primary reason MassDOT cited for creating the U-Turn was to help buses, taxis and ride sharing vehicles from Logan Airport access the Copley Square/Prudential exit instead of taking local streets to get there. The alternative was to build a new interchange westbound which to them cost prohibitive.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on May 26, 2021, 12:55:41 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 26, 2021, 12:24:23 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 26, 2021, 11:35:48 AM
I'm questioning how useful the "U-turn to Boston sign" even is. At that point very close to Boston, almost all vehicles probably passed through Boston already, unless there's someone out there that didn't pay attention to anything on their surroundings at all until the U-turn sign and is like "oh no, I missed Boston's skyline".
The primary reason MassDOT cited for creating the U-Turn was to help buses, taxis and ride sharing vehicles from Logan Airport access the Copley Square/Prudential exit instead of taking local streets to get there. The alternative was to build a new interchange westbound which to them cost prohibitive.
For that purpose, I would've expected a sign stating Copley/Prudential, or Exit 133 as the U-turn destination, instead of just Boston, but I guess Boston works fine.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: deathtopumpkins on May 27, 2021, 09:41:10 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 26, 2021, 12:55:41 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 26, 2021, 12:24:23 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on May 26, 2021, 11:35:48 AM
I'm questioning how useful the "U-turn to Boston sign" even is. At that point very close to Boston, almost all vehicles probably passed through Boston already, unless there's someone out there that didn't pay attention to anything on their surroundings at all until the U-turn sign and is like "oh no, I missed Boston's skyline".
The primary reason MassDOT cited for creating the U-Turn was to help buses, taxis and ride sharing vehicles from Logan Airport access the Copley Square/Prudential exit instead of taking local streets to get there. The alternative was to build a new interchange westbound which to them cost prohibitive.
For that purpose, I would've expected a sign stating Copley/Prudential, or Exit 133 as the U-turn destination, instead of just Boston, but I guess Boston works fine.

Since there are no westbound exits or eastbound entrances between Allston/Brighton and 93, the idea was to provide the U-turn both for westbound traffic to exit at Copley/Prudential, and for eastbound traffic to enter via one of the westbound-only onramps. There are plenty of times when the fastest way from Copley to I-93 or the Ted Williams Tunnel, for example, involves using this U-turn ramp. Even right now Google says from Copley to the Zakim Bridge is 2 minutes faster this way vs via Boylston and Essex. I did this kind of thing somewhat regularly in my Uber/Lyft driving days.

I think signing it exclusively for Copley/Prudential would not cover the whole intended use of that ramp, and just "Boston" is a bit vague, but it conveys the message sufficiently well since U-turning does take you back to downtown Boston.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on May 28, 2021, 09:43:33 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on May 17, 2021, 06:00:34 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on May 17, 2021, 12:50:15 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on May 07, 2021, 05:50:08 AM
I fear they will. In the midst of the I-495 sign project around Lowell, they actually put up brand new signs a few weeks ago between exits 35 and 37, with the old number plastered over the new number underneath.

Well, that explains why I saw patches with the old exit number on some of the exit gore signs on my way back from Cape Cod earlier today via I-495 Northbound... They started somewhere after I-290 / MA 85 interchange and ended somewhere around I-93 or Lawrence, but I'm not sure 100 % about the exact start and end of those new signs. I'm not sure if the exit signs themself or any auxiliary signs got that treatment as well, as I saw a new sign for "Manchester-Boston Regional Airport via US-3 North" with a patched exit sign.

It's a good idea in general for the regular signs, but putting up a brand new "next exit XX" sign is just pissing money away.

At the time the I-495 Harvard to Lowell project was under design, it was still uncertain when the exit renumbering work would begin, which is why the plans called for replacing the Next Exit XX' signs.  However, given the subsequent overlap of the two projects, I agree with you that it probably should have been caught and the signs not fabricated.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on May 31, 2021, 11:45:12 AM
Taking 'advantage' of the cold and damp Memorial Day weekend weather, I've added photos taken by Vinh Lam of I-93 exit renumbering from the Boston area to the New Hampshire border, including new photos along the Zakim/Bunker Hill Bridge:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i93signsvl521ng.jpg)

To my New England Exit Renumbering Central website:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i93signs (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i93signs)

I-495 exit renumbering has made it northbound to US 3. Will post more of that route soon.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 01, 2021, 11:19:35 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on May 31, 2021, 11:45:12 AM
I-495 exit renumbering has made it northbound to US 3. Will post more of that route soon.

Managed to capture the Exit 89 photos northbound from Nashua from US 3 to 495 NB. Southbound is still old exit 35 as of 2021-05-29.

(https://i.ibb.co/cbsdj2Y/IMG-3539.jpg) (https://ibb.co/RhJWqQj)
(https://i.ibb.co/yyzffDS/IMG-3541.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mqnDDm8)

Quote from: roadman on May 28, 2021, 09:43:33 AM
At the time the I-495 Harvard to Lowell project was under design, it was still uncertain when the exit renumbering work would begin, which is why the plans called for replacing the Next Exit XX' signs.  However, given the subsequent overlay of the two projects, I agree with you that it probably should have been caught and the signs not fabricated.

One of the actual new "Next Exit" signs:
SB before Old Exit 35:
(https://i.ibb.co/F3FRsgC/IMG-3453.jpg) (https://ibb.co/g9xkvzh)

NB after Old exit 35, now 89:
(https://i.ibb.co/HY48fFJ/IMG-3542.jpg) (https://ibb.co/tcKrTmd)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: ran4sh on June 01, 2021, 11:31:22 PM
Do they not realize that there's no point to a "next exit ##" sign with mile-based exit numbers?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on June 01, 2021, 11:56:05 PM
Have posted exit renumbering photos from the Chelmsford area taken by Paul Schlichtman, it appears not all the work is complete NB to US 3, for example, they forgot to change the exit number at MA 4:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i495signsps521g.jpg)

Also, there do not appear to be any Old Exit signs related to the US 3/Lowell Connector interchange, as noted above, and in the other photos I've posted at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i495photos2 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i495photos2)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on June 02, 2021, 09:56:36 PM
Quote from: ran4sh on June 01, 2021, 11:31:22 PM
Do they not realize that there's no point to a "next exit ##" sign with mile-based exit numbers?

See my response #1152 above.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on June 04, 2021, 01:25:27 PM
Drove on I-495 between exits 89 and 91 (old 35 and 37) today and both "next exit XX" signs were just outright taken down.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 04, 2021, 01:45:46 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on June 04, 2021, 01:25:27 PM
Drove on I-495 between exits 89 and 91 (old 35 and 37) today and both "next exit XX" signs were just outright taken down.

So much for those two signs... wonder if the ones on MA 3 and I-195 still exist to this day or have also outright taken down:

Quote from: fwydriver405 on March 01, 2021, 02:23:52 PM
Actually, some of those "Next Exit XX" signs were reused as part of MA's exit renumbering scheme.

Route 3: 1 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma3signs1220yyyyy.jpg), 2 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ma3signs1220yyy.jpg)

This blank "Next Exit" sign on 195 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i195signs1120p.jpg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on June 04, 2021, 04:00:36 PM
"NEXT EXIT ##" signs didn't really seem to make sense to me, even in a sequential system where a number is skipped.  Where they would have been useful would have been for significant exit jumps... like when I-95 used to use Route 128's numbering sequence, in Maine where the exits jumped all over the place before mile-based and renumbering, and today on I-95 North where it leaves the turnpike in East Lyme, CT and exits jump from 76 to 81. 

But in a typical mileage-based exit world, there's no need for them. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 74/171FAN on June 04, 2021, 04:08:27 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on June 04, 2021, 04:00:36 PM
"NEXT EXIT ##" signs didn't really seem to make sense to me, even in a sequential system where a number is skipped.  Where they would have been useful would have been for significant exit jumps... like when I-95 used to use Route 128's numbering sequence, in Maine where the exits jumped all over the place before mile-based and renumbering, and today on I-95 North where it leaves the turnpike in East Lyme, CT and exits jump from 76 to 81. 

But in a typical mileage-based exit world, there's no need for them. 

I have even seen these on I-80 in northern PA (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0002559,-76.6285458,3a,75y,302.86h,90.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srvqezKBX4-UsEkQaYXOLCA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) though it tends to have more distance between exits than other PA interstates west of I-380.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on June 04, 2021, 04:55:31 PM
Those i have no problem with and are very useful.  Mass reduced theirs back to 10 miles.  Most exits in VT have them posted.  Portions of the Connecticut Tuenpike had them until 1992 but they were laughable.  Next Exit 2 Miles!  Ha!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on June 04, 2021, 09:09:04 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on June 04, 2021, 04:55:31 PM
Those i have no problem with and are very useful.  Mass reduced theirs back to 10 miles.  Most exits in VT have them posted.  Portions of the Connecticut Tuenpike had them until 1992 but they were laughable.  Next Exit 2 Miles!  Ha!

There aren't too many places on Connecticut's highways where the exits are space more than 2 miles. I think that's part of the reason why Connecticut's highways have so much congestion. Too many exits spaced too close together, especially in Fairfield and New Haven Counties.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DrSmith on June 04, 2021, 09:56:38 PM
The old "Next Exit 1" survives on 91 south, although the southbound changes stopped with old exit 6 and after that the numbers remained the same.

Back when you had to use maps, the next exit would have some use even in mileage based systems with the partial-interchanges. It might not be visible that your side of the highway was an entrance only or such with a map displaying an interchange and not indicating it as partial. It's less an issue with GPS directions now
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on June 12, 2021, 04:29:45 AM
I just read that the I-290/I-395 exit numbers will be converted to mile-based sometime in August 2021, per this link:

https://www.wwlp.com/news/massachusetts/massdot-to-continue-exit-renumbering-work-on-i-495/

I find this quote interesting in the article: "Note that the overhead guide signs and sign structures currently being installed on I-290 are a part of a separate MassDOT project. As this project was designed and begun well before the start of the Statewide Exit Renumbering Project, these signs have been fabricated with the current sequential exit numbers. Once the sign replacement work is complete, all of the exit numbers will then be overlaid with the new milepost-based numbers."
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: ProfBrad on June 12, 2021, 05:59:55 AM
For the renumbering on Route 2, why is I-95 (128) Exit 127?  Mile marker 128 is just before the exit if you are Rt 2 heading east.  Mile 127 is further west in Lincoln and it does not line up with the exit.  Any reason why such a glaring discrepancy?  I would think that Exit 128 lining up with route 128 would be a neat thing.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 12, 2021, 02:52:40 PM
Quote from: ProfBrad on June 12, 2021, 05:59:55 AM
For the renumbering on Route 2, why is I-95 (128) Exit 127?  Mile marker 128 is just before the exit if you are Rt 2 heading east.  Mile 127 is further west in Lincoln and it does not line up with the exit.  Any reason why such a glaring discrepancy?  I would think that Exit 128 lining up with route 128 would be a neat thing.
Maybe they think that the exit number will confuse people.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on June 12, 2021, 06:56:29 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 12, 2021, 02:52:40 PM
Quote from: ProfBrad on June 12, 2021, 05:59:55 AM
For the renumbering on Route 2, why is I-95 (128) Exit 127?  Mile marker 128 is just before the exit if you are Rt 2 heading east.  Mile 127 is further west in Lincoln and it does not line up with the exit.  Any reason why such a glaring discrepancy?  I would think that Exit 128 lining up with route 128 would be a neat thing.
Maybe they think that the exit number will confuse people.
The number was set at 127, despite the nearby mile 128 marker, so that the exits through the Lexington stretch would not have to be given letters, particularly old Exits 55 and 56 which would have to be 131A and 131B. That, according to MassDOT, would be more confusing, since they think drivers would expect that separate exits have different numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on June 14, 2021, 11:42:20 PM
I have started posting photos taken of I-495 North exit renumbering from a trip last Friday to my New England Exit Renumbering Central website. I have put up some additional photos of signage from MA 24 to I-95, such as this:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i495signs621g.jpg)

along with new signage photos from US 1 to MA 9, including:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i495signs621vv.jpg)

The rest of the photos are at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

I'll plan to post the remaining photos over the next couple days. MassDOT indicated that the I-495 work should be completed on June 12, but their exit renumbering site has not been updated to reflect this as of yet.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on June 16, 2021, 02:00:07 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on June 04, 2021, 04:55:31 PM
Those i have no problem with and are very useful.  Mass reduced theirs back to 10 miles.  Most exits in VT have them posted.  Portions of the Connecticut Tuenpike had them until 1992 but they were laughable.  Next Exit 2 Miles!  Ha!

Section 2E.34 Next Exit Plaques
Option:
Where the distance to the next interchange is unusually long, a Next Exit plaque (see Figure 2E-23) may be
installed to inform road users of the distance to the next interchange.
Guidance:
The Next Exit plaque should not be used unless the distance between successive interchanges is more
than 5 miles

Massachusetts standardized on ten miles as the minimum distance to post these signs back in the 1980s.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on June 16, 2021, 02:39:44 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on June 12, 2021, 06:56:29 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 12, 2021, 02:52:40 PM
Quote from: ProfBrad on June 12, 2021, 05:59:55 AM
For the renumbering on Route 2, why is I-95 (128) Exit 127?  Mile marker 128 is just before the exit if you are Rt 2 heading east.  Mile 127 is further west in Lincoln and it does not line up with the exit.  Any reason why such a glaring discrepancy?  I would think that Exit 128 lining up with route 128 would be a neat thing.
Maybe they think that the exit number will confuse people.
The number was set at 127, despite the nearby mile 128 marker, so that the exits through the Lexington stretch would not have to be given letters, particularly old Exits 55 and 56 which would have to be 131A and 131B. That, according to MassDOT, would be more confusing, since they think drivers would expect that separate exits have different numbers.
This bothers me every time I pass by this exit, which is often. The eastbound new Exit 128 is essentially the same as the westbound Exit 129, so they could have shared 129 with no confusion.
For many years, Exit 60 was one exit east of Route 60, which was always a source of confusion. Placing Exit 128 one exit east of Route 128 would seem to present the same problem, and should have been avoided. Besides, how cool would it be if Exit 128 put you on the circumferential highway.

(Note for historians - before the highway was built, MA 128 ran along Waltham Street in Lexington.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on June 16, 2021, 06:55:37 PM
Does anyone agree with Mass DOT that Interstate 290's new exit numbers should be a continuation of Interstate 395's exit numbers (like they are at present), instead of both highways having their own exit sequences?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on June 16, 2021, 06:59:55 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 16, 2021, 06:55:37 PM
Does anyone agree with Mass DOT that Interstate 290's new exit numbers should be a continuation of Interstate 395's exit numbers (like they are at present), instead of both highways having their own exit sequences?
I do. It's a single highway in practicality (not numbers), and as they're both short in the state, and using a single set would reduce confusion. I read somewhere that there's a plan to renumber I-290 as an extension of I-395 after the mileage based exit number renumbering, does someone have more details on that?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on June 16, 2021, 09:56:03 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 16, 2021, 06:59:55 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 16, 2021, 06:55:37 PM
Does anyone agree with Mass DOT that Interstate 290's new exit numbers should be a continuation of Interstate 395's exit numbers (like they are at present), instead of both highways having their own exit sequences?
I do. It's a single highway in practicality (not numbers), and as they're both short in the state, and using a single set would reduce confusion. I read somewhere that there's a plan to renumber I-290 as an extension of I-395 after the mileage based exit number renumbering, does someone have more details on that?
That's the only way I'd agree with it. It'll create the unique circumstance of a 3di's only connection to the Interstate system being the 3di child of a different parent.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on June 16, 2021, 10:00:09 PM
I agree with continuing the numbering rather than starting with 0, but honestly, I'd just make I-290's mileposts be a continuation of I-395's, rather than the "dual milepost" plan that MassDOT has.  And I'm definitely not a fan of just getting rid of I-290 in favor of I-395 like they seem to be considering, especially as such would orphan I-190.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 10:33:33 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 16, 2021, 10:00:09 PM
I agree with continuing the numbering rather than starting with 0, but honestly, I'd just make I-290's mileposts be a continuation of I-395's, rather than the "dual milepost" plan that MassDOT has.  And I'm definitely not a fan of just getting rid of I-290 in favor of I-395 like they seem to be considering, especially as such would orphan I-190.
What would they renumber I-190? I-595?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on June 16, 2021, 11:39:50 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 10:33:33 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 16, 2021, 10:00:09 PM
I agree with continuing the numbering rather than starting with 0, but honestly, I'd just make I-290's mileposts be a continuation of I-395's, rather than the "dual milepost" plan that MassDOT has.  And I'm definitely not a fan of just getting rid of I-290 in favor of I-395 like they seem to be considering, especially as such would orphan I-190.
What would they renumber I-190? I-595?
I-102
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 11:41:48 PM
Quote from: Alps on June 16, 2021, 11:39:50 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 10:33:33 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 16, 2021, 10:00:09 PM
I agree with continuing the numbering rather than starting with 0, but honestly, I'd just make I-290's mileposts be a continuation of I-395's, rather than the "dual milepost" plan that MassDOT has.  And I'm definitely not a fan of just getting rid of I-290 in favor of I-395 like they seem to be considering, especially as such would orphan I-190.
What would they renumber I-190? I-595?
I-102
I-2 is in Texas
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on June 16, 2021, 11:50:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 11:41:48 PM
Quote from: Alps on June 16, 2021, 11:39:50 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 10:33:33 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 16, 2021, 10:00:09 PM
I agree with continuing the numbering rather than starting with 0, but honestly, I'd just make I-290's mileposts be a continuation of I-395's, rather than the "dual milepost" plan that MassDOT has.  And I'm definitely not a fan of just getting rid of I-290 in favor of I-395 like they seem to be considering, especially as such would orphan I-190.
What would they renumber I-190? I-595?
I-102
I-2 is in Texas
I-38 doesn't exist
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 17, 2021, 12:28:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 16, 2021, 11:50:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 11:41:48 PM
Quote from: Alps on June 16, 2021, 11:39:50 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 10:33:33 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 16, 2021, 10:00:09 PM
I agree with continuing the numbering rather than starting with 0, but honestly, I'd just make I-290's mileposts be a continuation of I-395's, rather than the "dual milepost" plan that MassDOT has.  And I'm definitely not a fan of just getting rid of I-290 in favor of I-395 like they seem to be considering, especially as such would orphan I-190.
What would they renumber I-190? I-595?
I-102
I-2 is in Texas
I-38 doesn't exist
Renumbering I-190 to I-102 would make no sense.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on June 17, 2021, 12:33:33 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 17, 2021, 12:28:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 16, 2021, 11:50:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 11:41:48 PM
Quote from: Alps on June 16, 2021, 11:39:50 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 10:33:33 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 16, 2021, 10:00:09 PM
I agree with continuing the numbering rather than starting with 0, but honestly, I'd just make I-290's mileposts be a continuation of I-395's, rather than the "dual milepost" plan that MassDOT has.  And I'm definitely not a fan of just getting rid of I-290 in favor of I-395 like they seem to be considering, especially as such would orphan I-190.
What would they renumber I-190? I-595?
I-102
I-2 is in Texas
I-38 doesn't exist
Renumbering I-190 to I-102 would make no sense.
Why not just demote I-190 and extend MA 146 via a duplex with the extended I-395?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 17, 2021, 12:58:26 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 17, 2021, 12:33:33 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 17, 2021, 12:28:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 16, 2021, 11:50:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 11:41:48 PM
Quote from: Alps on June 16, 2021, 11:39:50 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 10:33:33 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 16, 2021, 10:00:09 PM
I agree with continuing the numbering rather than starting with 0, but honestly, I'd just make I-290's mileposts be a continuation of I-395's, rather than the "dual milepost" plan that MassDOT has.  And I'm definitely not a fan of just getting rid of I-290 in favor of I-395 like they seem to be considering, especially as such would orphan I-190.
What would they renumber I-190? I-595?
I-102
I-2 is in Texas
I-38 doesn't exist
Renumbering I-190 to I-102 would make no sense.
Why not just demote I-190 and extend MA 146 via a duplex with the extended I-395?
I guess you could but I-595 would make more sense.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on June 17, 2021, 10:25:32 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 17, 2021, 12:33:33 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 17, 2021, 12:28:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 16, 2021, 11:50:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 11:41:48 PM
Quote from: Alps on June 16, 2021, 11:39:50 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 10:33:33 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 16, 2021, 10:00:09 PM
I agree with continuing the numbering rather than starting with 0, but honestly, I'd just make I-290's mileposts be a continuation of I-395's, rather than the "dual milepost" plan that MassDOT has.  And I'm definitely not a fan of just getting rid of I-290 in favor of I-395 like they seem to be considering, especially as such would orphan I-190.
What would they renumber I-190? I-595?
I-102
I-2 is in Texas
I-38 doesn't exist
Renumbering I-190 to I-102 would make no sense.
Why not just demote I-190 and extend MA 146 via a duplex with the extended I-395?
Or you could do the reverse, extend I-190 south along current I-290 to MA 146, then down 146 to I-90. Yes, there would probably have to be substantial improvements to the MA 146 roadway for it to be Interstate standard.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on June 17, 2021, 12:37:27 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on June 17, 2021, 10:25:32 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 17, 2021, 12:33:33 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 17, 2021, 12:28:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 16, 2021, 11:50:41 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 11:41:48 PM
Quote from: Alps on June 16, 2021, 11:39:50 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 16, 2021, 10:33:33 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 16, 2021, 10:00:09 PM
I agree with continuing the numbering rather than starting with 0, but honestly, I'd just make I-290's mileposts be a continuation of I-395's, rather than the "dual milepost" plan that MassDOT has.  And I'm definitely not a fan of just getting rid of I-290 in favor of I-395 like they seem to be considering, especially as such would orphan I-190.
What would they renumber I-190? I-595?
I-102
I-2 is in Texas
I-38 doesn't exist
Renumbering I-190 to I-102 would make no sense.
Why not just demote I-190 and extend MA 146 via a duplex with the extended I-395?
Or you could do the reverse, extend I-190 south along current I-290 to MA 146, then down 146 to I-90. Yes, there would probably have to be substantial improvements to the MA 146 roadway for it to be Interstate standard.

Does MA 146 need much for improvements between I-90 and I-290? Then going south of the Pike I-190 could just revert to MA 146 from there, where a freeway conversion is probably very unlikely to happen, probably ever.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 17, 2021, 01:30:10 PM
Or you could renumber I-395 to I-290. But that wouldn't make much sense.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on June 17, 2021, 01:37:54 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on June 17, 2021, 12:37:27 PM

Does MA 146 need much for improvements between I-90 and I-290? Then going south of the Pike I-190 could just revert to MA 146 from there, where a freeway conversion is probably very unlikely to happen, probably ever.
This is just moving the problem from one highway to another. Instead of a 395/290 split you end up with a 146/190 split. If they're going to renumber highways, keep it simple, extend 395 over 290, change 190 to 595. No need to renumber exits again on old 190. If keeping 190 is a must, duplex it over 395 to 90, but that will require exit numbers to be changed again.

SM-A515U
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on June 17, 2021, 02:12:42 PM
I don't think MassDOT has plans to renumber I-190 if I-290 became part of I-395.  It would just be orphaned.

IMO no need to renumber I-290 for its exits to be an extension of I-395's.  The situation isn't that different from the I-76/I-276 situation on the PTC.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 17, 2021, 02:28:18 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 17, 2021, 02:12:42 PM
I don't think MassDOT has plans to renumber I-190 if I-290 became part of I-395.  It would just be orphaned.

IMO no need to renumber I-290 for its exits to be an extension of I-395's.  The situation isn't that different from the I-76/I-276 situation on the PTC.
Why wouldn't they renumber it?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on June 17, 2021, 04:09:59 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 17, 2021, 01:30:10 PM
Or you could renumber I-395 to I-290. But that wouldn't make much sense.

If you're going to do that, renumber I-395 in CT down to Exit 35 in Plainfield as I-290, so that I-395 continues the 5 miles east on the Conn Tpke spur to the state line.  South of Exit 35, I-395 remains as-is.  And maybe that would give CT inspiration to convert that desolate section of highway to 65 MPH.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: MikeTheActuary on June 17, 2021, 04:41:56 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 17, 2021, 02:28:18 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 17, 2021, 02:12:42 PM
I don't think MassDOT has plans to renumber I-190 if I-290 became part of I-395.  It would just be orphaned.

IMO no need to renumber I-290 for its exits to be an extension of I-395's.  The situation isn't that different from the I-76/I-276 situation on the PTC.
Why wouldn't they renumber it?
Confusion/inertia.   Don't people still to this day refer to I-95 around Boston as "128"?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 17, 2021, 04:44:42 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on June 17, 2021, 04:41:56 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 17, 2021, 02:28:18 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 17, 2021, 02:12:42 PM
I don't think MassDOT has plans to renumber I-190 if I-290 became part of I-395.  It would just be orphaned.

IMO no need to renumber I-290 for its exits to be an extension of I-395's.  The situation isn't that different from the I-76/I-276 situation on the PTC.
Why wouldn't they renumber it?
Confusion/inertia.   Don't people still to this day refer to I-95 around Boston as "128"?
I would rather just keep I-290.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on June 17, 2021, 04:49:08 PM
MassHighway renumbered this highway already -- From MA/CT 52.  Once was enough.

We are getting into fictional territory away from the topic of the thread.  I would rather keep this thread to the actual status of renumbering.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: yakra on June 18, 2021, 10:48:54 AM
Also: M-2: I-795?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 18, 2021, 11:38:28 AM
Quote from: yakra on June 18, 2021, 10:48:54 AM
Also: M-2: I-795?
What about I-795
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on June 18, 2021, 03:53:21 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 18, 2021, 11:38:28 AM
Quote from: yakra on June 18, 2021, 10:48:54 AM
Also: M-2: I-795?
What about I-795
I-795: M-2.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on June 18, 2021, 04:00:24 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 17, 2021, 02:12:42 PM
IMO no need to renumber I-290 for its exits to be an extension of I-395's.  The situation isn't that different from the I-76/I-276 situation on the PTC.
Au contraire: the I-76/276 Valley Forge scenario is very different in that:

1. I-76 actually leaves one road (the PA Turnpike) and continues along another, the Schuylkill Expressway; i.e. a genuine TOTSO scenario.

2. One of the roadways is a toll road that, until very recently, featured a ticketed toll-system.  Such was why the exit numbering, both the original sequential numbering & the current milepost numbering, continued along the eastern, I-276 portion of the PA Turnpike.  Side bar: even with the PA Turnpike going fully AET, I don't see I-276's interchange numbers changing again anytime soon.  The only reason why the easternmost portion of the PA Turnpike received I-95's mileage markers & related-interchange numbers nearly 3 years ago was due to that stretch was no longer a fully, tolled stretch when the mainline toll gantry (eastern end of the old ticketed system) was moved west of the I-95/295 interchange.

Neither of the above-situations exists along I-290/395 in Auburn; i.e. I-395 does not veer off onto a separate highway corridor in Auburn and neither I-290 & I-395 are closed system tolled facilities. 

Yes, I-90/Mass Pike crosses the area and is roughly where the 290/395 routes change hands; but I-90 isn't the route that's leaving the tolled facility and continuing along as a free highway. 

It's also worth noting that I-290 was built first; I-395, originally MA 52, came along years later.  Prior to MA 52 being built, the upper (mostly I-290) portion of the highway simply dead-ended at the US 20 interchange (old Exit 6/current Exit 12 off I-395).

Long story short: either assign I-290 & I-395 separate mile markers (as they currently are) and interchange numbers or have I-395 fully take over I-290 as others have mentioned.

IMHO, I-290 & I-395 should have their own separate exit numbers despite utilizing the same overall corridor.  Personally, I thought this interchange conversion program would finally address the present sequential interchange numbering oddity; I was obviously proven wrong when I read MassDOT's latest plans.
_____________________________________________________________

Yes, the below is a fictional idea but could be a workable solution IMHO:

Now that the Turnpike toll booths are gone and the Pike & all other highways are under the jurisdiction of one agency (MassDOT); one option would be to reestablish I-290's mile marker 0 at the I-90/Auburn interchange connector where the toll booths once were. 

Exit 1 A along I-290 westbound would be for MA 12 South (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1885605,-71.854783,3a,75y,190.13h,71.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHvJVT-PPd7k-pX0fQGFCxw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Exit 1 B along I-290 westbound would be for MA 12 North (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1860789,-71.8545498,3a,75y,145.46h,72.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scUIdWqXlCu8UtdU8OIDNow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Exit 1 C along I-290 westbound would be for I-395 South (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1860869,-71.8506373,3a,75y,50.41h,80.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLVbJnFwv2UOC9nK--pyiwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Exit 2 along I-290 westbound would be for I-90/MA 12 North (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1933027,-71.8458349,3a,75y,16.62h,99.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soyLhuHVF1gzcmDgLMN7jOQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

For I-290 eastbound approaching I-395:

Exit 2 along I-290 eastbound would be for MA 12 South (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1913704,-71.847039,3a,75y,202.04h,70.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbE5l3PPldJLmUgCjCXMqZg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) 
For the adjacent US 20 BGS', I would use wider EXIT 12 x OFF 395* for such.
*small I-395 shield, similar to what was erected along I-295/former I-95 near Trenton, NJ per the yellow tabs (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2859454,-74.8184184,3a,75y,41.8h,82.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sseU0IHgscXu622BH8LfcBA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).

Left Exit 1 B along I-290 eastbound would be I-395 South (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1893831,-71.8476142,3a,75y,213.65h,75.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stRX_e_fyfm65GHy7E8gaeA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Exit 1 A along I-290 eastbound would be for MA 12 North (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1867553,-71.8498502,3a,75y,232.51h,84.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqiJ4uf50XuXqXULeRTh4Uw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Note: if one wants to assign exit numbers for the I-90 ramps (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1903405,-71.8539473,3a,75y,10.99h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sftgbc7GeBw9O6NVAkkC4GQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) (along eastbound I-290); such could be Exits 1 B-A.

Using that scenario, numbering the I-90 ramps; the fore-mentioned Exits 1 B-A off eastbound I-290 would be Exits 2 B-A.  The fore-mentioned Exits 1 A-B-C & 2 along westbound I-290 would be Exits 2 A-B-C-D respectively.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on June 18, 2021, 09:08:09 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 18, 2021, 04:00:24 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 17, 2021, 02:12:42 PM
IMO no need to renumber I-290 for its exits to be an extension of I-395's.  The situation isn't that different from the I-76/I-276 situation on the PTC.
Au contraire: the I-76/276 Valley Forge scenario is very different in that:

1. I-76 actually leaves one road (the PA Turnpike) and continues along another, the Schuylkill Expressway; i.e. a genuine TOTSO scenario.

2. One of the roadways is a toll road that, until very recently, featured a ticketed toll-system.  Such was why the exit numbering, both the original sequential numbering & the current milepost numbering, continued along the eastern, I-276 portion of the PA Turnpike.  Side bar: even with the PA Turnpike going fully AET, I don't see I-276's interchange numbers changing again anytime soon.  The only reason why the easternmost portion of the PA Turnpike received I-95's mileage markers & related-interchange numbers nearly 3 years ago was due to that stretch was no longer a fully, tolled stretch when the mainline toll gantry (eastern end of the old ticketed system) was moved west of the I-95/295 interchange.

Neither of the above-situations exists along I-290/395 in Auburn; i.e. I-395 does not veer off onto a separate highway corridor in Auburn and neither I-290 & I-395 are closed system tolled facilities. 

Yes, I-90/Mass Pike crosses the area and is roughly where the 290/395 routes change hands; but I-90 isn't the route that's leaving the tolled facility and continuing along as a free highway. 

It's also worth noting that I-290 was built first; I-395, originally MA 52, came along years later.  Prior to MA 52 being built, the upper (mostly I-290) portion of the highway simply dead-ended at the US 20 interchange (old Exit 6/current Exit 12 off I-395).

Long story short: either assign I-290 & I-395 separate mile markers (as they currently are) and interchange numbers or have I-395 fully take over I-290 as others have mentioned.

IMHO, I-290 & I-395 should have their own separate exit numbers despite utilizing the same overall corridor.  Personally, I thought this interchange conversion program would finally address the present sequential interchange numbering oddity; I was obviously proven wrong when I read MassDOT's latest plans.
_____________________________________________________________
The postponed 2016 project would have done that, with exits running from 0 A/B at I-90 to 20 A/B at I-495. With the exception of using Exit 0, they should have kept the original proposal. Will be interesting if drivers using the continuous sequential exit system are suddenly confused by a continued milepost one.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on June 18, 2021, 09:27:59 PM
What's wrong with exit 0?

Quote from: PHLBOS on June 18, 2021, 04:00:24 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 17, 2021, 02:12:42 PM
IMO no need to renumber I-290 for its exits to be an extension of I-395's.  The situation isn't that different from the I-76/I-276 situation on the PTC.
Au contraire: the I-76/276 Valley Forge scenario is very different in that:

1. I-76 actually leaves one road (the PA Turnpike) and continues along another, the Schuylkill Expressway; i.e. a genuine TOTSO scenario.

2. One of the roadways is a toll road that, until very recently, featured a ticketed toll-system.  Such was why the exit numbering, both the original sequential numbering & the current milepost numbering, continued along the eastern, I-276 portion of the PA Turnpike.  Side bar: even with the PA Turnpike going fully AET, I don't see I-276's interchange numbers changing again anytime soon.  The only reason why the easternmost portion of the PA Turnpike received I-95's mileage markers & related-interchange numbers nearly 3 years ago was due to that stretch was no longer a fully, tolled stretch when the mainline toll gantry (eastern end of the old ticketed system) was moved west of the I-95/295 interchange.

Neither of the above-situations exists along I-290/395 in Auburn; i.e. I-395 does not veer off onto a separate highway corridor in Auburn and neither I-290 & I-395 are closed system tolled facilities. 

Yes, I-90/Mass Pike crosses the area and is roughly where the 290/395 routes change hands; but I-90 isn't the route that's leaving the tolled facility and continuing along as a free highway. 

It's also worth noting that I-290 was built first; I-395, originally MA 52, came along years later.  Prior to MA 52 being built, the upper (mostly I-290) portion of the highway simply dead-ended at the US 20 interchange (old Exit 6/current Exit 12 off I-395).

Long story short: either assign I-290 & I-395 separate mile markers (as they currently are) and interchange numbers or have I-395 fully take over I-290 as others have mentioned.

IMHO, I-290 & I-395 should have their own separate exit numbers despite utilizing the same overall corridor.  Personally, I thought this interchange conversion program would finally address the present sequential interchange numbering oddity; I was obviously proven wrong when I read MassDOT's latest plans.
_____________________________________________________________

Yes, the below is a fictional idea but could be a workable solution IMHO:

Now that the Turnpike toll booths are gone and the Pike & all other highways are under the jurisdiction of one agency (MassDOT); one option would be to reestablish I-290's mile marker 0 at the I-90/Auburn interchange connector where the toll booths once were. 

Exit 1 A along I-290 westbound would be for MA 12 South (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1885605,-71.854783,3a,75y,190.13h,71.47t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHvJVT-PPd7k-pX0fQGFCxw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Exit 1 B along I-290 westbound would be for MA 12 North (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1860789,-71.8545498,3a,75y,145.46h,72.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1scUIdWqXlCu8UtdU8OIDNow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Exit 1 C along I-290 westbound would be for I-395 South (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1860869,-71.8506373,3a,75y,50.41h,80.9t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sLVbJnFwv2UOC9nK--pyiwQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Exit 2 along I-290 westbound would be for I-90/MA 12 North (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1933027,-71.8458349,3a,75y,16.62h,99.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soyLhuHVF1gzcmDgLMN7jOQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

For I-290 eastbound approaching I-395:

Exit 2 along I-290 eastbound would be for MA 12 South (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1913704,-71.847039,3a,75y,202.04h,70.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sbE5l3PPldJLmUgCjCXMqZg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) 
For the adjacent US 20 BGS', I would use wider EXIT 12 x OFF 395* for such.
*small I-395 shield, similar to what was erected along I-295/former I-95 near Trenton, NJ per the yellow tabs (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.2859454,-74.8184184,3a,75y,41.8h,82.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sseU0IHgscXu622BH8LfcBA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).

Left Exit 1 B along I-290 eastbound would be I-395 South (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1893831,-71.8476142,3a,75y,213.65h,75.5t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stRX_e_fyfm65GHy7E8gaeA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Exit 1 A along I-290 eastbound would be for MA 12 North (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1867553,-71.8498502,3a,75y,232.51h,84.25t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqiJ4uf50XuXqXULeRTh4Uw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

Note: if one wants to assign exit numbers for the I-90 ramps (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1903405,-71.8539473,3a,75y,10.99h,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sftgbc7GeBw9O6NVAkkC4GQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) (along eastbound I-290); such could be Exits 1 B-A.

Using that scenario, numbering the I-90 ramps; the fore-mentioned Exits 1 B-A off eastbound I-290 would be Exits 2 B-A.  The fore-mentioned Exits 1 A-B-C & 2 along westbound I-290 would be Exits 2 A-B-C-D respectively.
I'll give you that this isn't in the middle of a ticket-system toll road and never was, but IMO the fact that I-76 continues past the PTC isn't relevant to the issue.  When driving down I-395 and I-290, the transition is just as seamless as I-76 to I-276, if not more so.  If you miss these signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1881857,-71.8471435,3a,75y,1.94h,93.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sknBd2ZplysY8xNhgfrQnBg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), you have no way of knowing you're on a road with a different number.  I-76, meanwhile, has multiple signs showing it exits itself before the road becomes I-276.

I do find the idea of extending I-290 to I-90 properly over the ramps and ending I-395 at I-290 interesting, though it does run into the issue that the interchange would need upgrading for those ramps to meet interstate standards.  And FHWA would likely want them to build the missing movement.

Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 17, 2021, 02:28:18 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 17, 2021, 02:12:42 PM
I don't think MassDOT has plans to renumber I-190 if I-290 became part of I-395.  It would just be orphaned.

IMO no need to renumber I-290 for its exits to be an extension of I-395's.  The situation isn't that different from the I-76/I-276 situation on the PTC.
Why wouldn't they renumber it?
Why would they?  Nobody cares about the intricacies of the interstate numbering system as roadgeeks do (not even AASHTO or FHWA) and most DOT employees are not roadgeeks.  Just leaving I-190 as-is is the path of least resistance, so that is what will happen unless there is some kind of push otherwise, regardless of what happens with I-290.

This situation unfortunately is not unprecedented.  See: I-585 and all I-x78 numbers
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on June 18, 2021, 09:36:36 PM
Fictional crud needs to be separated out of here.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 18, 2021, 10:55:15 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 18, 2021, 09:36:36 PM
Fictional crud needs to be separated out of here.
Calm down
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: machias on June 19, 2021, 03:10:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 18, 2021, 09:36:36 PM
Fictional crud needs to be separated out of here.

Agreed
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 19, 2021, 03:32:45 PM
Quote from: machias on June 19, 2021, 03:10:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 18, 2021, 09:36:36 PM
Fictional crud needs to be separated out of here.

Agreed
Someone should start a fictional thread about this.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on June 19, 2021, 03:39:56 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 19, 2021, 03:32:45 PM
Quote from: machias on June 19, 2021, 03:10:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 18, 2021, 09:36:36 PM
Fictional crud needs to be separated out of here.

Agreed
Someone should start a fictional thread about this.
It already exists, called "Single ideas that are not enough for their own thread" .
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 19, 2021, 04:11:34 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 19, 2021, 03:39:56 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 19, 2021, 03:32:45 PM
Quote from: machias on June 19, 2021, 03:10:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 18, 2021, 09:36:36 PM
Fictional crud needs to be separated out of here.

Agreed
Someone should start a fictional thread about this.
It already exists, called "Single ideas that are not enough for their own thread" .
Someone can post this stuff there then.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 19, 2021, 04:32:24 PM
I wonder if anyone can confirm this but on 2021-06-13, I drove I-495 South from I-95 Exit 89 to I-93 and they had the exit numbers changed up to old exit 54 (now 118). However, not all of the auxiliary signs or some of the exit gore signs (old exit 46 comes to mind) have their new numbers yet. Wonder if the signs that were missed my last run were corrected this week...
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on June 19, 2021, 04:33:07 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on June 19, 2021, 04:32:24 PM
I wonder if anyone can confirm this but on 2021-06-13, I drove I-495 South from I-95 Exit 89 to I-93 and they had the exit numbers changed up to old exit 54 (now 118). However, not all of the auxiliary signs or some of the exit gore signs (old exit 46 comes to mind) have their new numbers yet. Wonder if the signs that were missed my last run were corrected this week...

46 was definitely corrected.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 19, 2021, 04:38:41 PM
Should also mention that even though they built wide exit gore signs from the last sign replacement in anticipation for this project... the font they used is very small and skinny (looks like Series B or C they used?). Not sure what was going on when the patches were fabricated.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on June 19, 2021, 06:17:26 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on June 19, 2021, 04:38:41 PM
Should also mention that even though they built wide exit gore signs from the last sign replacement in anticipation for this project... the font they used is very small and skinny (looks like Series B or C they used?). Not sure what was going on when the patches were fabricated.
An example:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i495signs621ssssss.jpg)

Some other gore signs are better, such as:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i495signs621hhhhhh.jpg)

I've now posted all the photos taken a week ago on my Exit Renumbering Central website:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i495photos2 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i495photos2)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on June 19, 2021, 08:44:58 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 19, 2021, 03:39:56 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 19, 2021, 03:32:45 PM
Quote from: machias on June 19, 2021, 03:10:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 18, 2021, 09:36:36 PM
Fictional crud needs to be separated out of here.

Agreed
Someone should start a fictional thread about this.
It already exists, called "Single ideas that are not enough for their own thread" .
It's worth noting that the idea of renumbering I-290 as an extension of I-395 is an actual MassDOT proposal that I could have sworn was mentioned earlier in this thread (along with the dual mileposts), but search hasn't turned anything up.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on June 19, 2021, 08:45:53 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 19, 2021, 08:44:58 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 19, 2021, 03:39:56 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 19, 2021, 03:32:45 PM
Quote from: machias on June 19, 2021, 03:10:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 18, 2021, 09:36:36 PM
Fictional crud needs to be separated out of here.

Agreed
Someone should start a fictional thread about this.
It already exists, called "Single ideas that are not enough for their own thread" .
It's worth noting that the idea of renumbering I-290 as an extension of I-395 is an actual MassDOT proposal that I could have sworn was mentioned earlier in this thread (along with the dual mileposts), but search hasn't turned anything up.
I mentioned it just before the fictional renumbering conversation began.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on June 19, 2021, 09:52:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 19, 2021, 08:44:58 PM
It's worth noting that the idea of renumbering I-290 as an extension of I-395 is an actual MassDOT proposal that I could have sworn was mentioned earlier in this thread (along with the dual mileposts), but search hasn't turned anything up.

Is there a reference to this actual proposal?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on June 19, 2021, 09:52:43 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 19, 2021, 08:45:53 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 19, 2021, 08:44:58 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 19, 2021, 03:39:56 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 19, 2021, 03:32:45 PM
Quote from: machias on June 19, 2021, 03:10:18 PM
Quote from: Rothman on June 18, 2021, 09:36:36 PM
Fictional crud needs to be separated out of here.

Agreed
Someone should start a fictional thread about this.
It already exists, called "Single ideas that are not enough for their own thread" .
It's worth noting that the idea of renumbering I-290 as an extension of I-395 is an actual MassDOT proposal that I could have sworn was mentioned earlier in this thread (along with the dual mileposts), but search hasn't turned anything up.
I mentioned it just before the fictional renumbering conversation began.
I was thinking of an earlier, more comprehensive mention.  If I remember right, there were quotes from a news article and/or emails from MassDOT.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on June 19, 2021, 10:41:26 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on June 19, 2021, 09:52:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 19, 2021, 08:44:58 PM
It's worth noting that the idea of renumbering I-290 as an extension of I-395 is an actual MassDOT proposal that I could have sworn was mentioned earlier in this thread (along with the dual mileposts), but search hasn't turned anything up.

Is there a reference to this actual proposal?
I received an email from MassDOT in response to a comment I made to them regarding the continuation of I-395's numbers on  I-290, this is posted on my I-290 exit list page:
"To minimize potential driver confusion, we are continuing the I-395 numbering along I-290 to replicate the present exit numbering, which is continuous from Webster to Marlborough.   As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with "˜dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290.

MassDOT may consider re-designating I-290 as an extension of I-395 at a later date based on driver response to the new exit numbering and the "˜dual' mile markers.  However, any such re-designation would have to be reviewed by AASHTO and approved by FHWA before it could actually be implemented."
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 19, 2021, 11:43:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on June 19, 2021, 10:41:26 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on June 19, 2021, 09:52:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 19, 2021, 08:44:58 PM
It's worth noting that the idea of renumbering I-290 as an extension of I-395 is an actual MassDOT proposal that I could have sworn was mentioned earlier in this thread (along with the dual mileposts), but search hasn't turned anything up.

Is there a reference to this actual proposal?
I received an email from MassDOT in response to a comment I made to them regarding the continuation of I-395's numbers on  I-290, this is posted on my I-290 exit list page:
"To minimize potential driver confusion, we are continuing the I-395 numbering along I-290 to replicate the present exit numbering, which is continuous from Webster to Marlborough.   As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with "˜dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290.

MassDOT may consider re-designating I-290 as an extension of I-395 at a later date based on driver response to the new exit numbering and the "˜dual' mile markers.  However, any such re-designation would have to be reviewed by AASHTO and approved by FHWA before it could actually be implemented."
Why would it be confusing to number the highways differently?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on June 20, 2021, 07:34:56 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 19, 2021, 11:43:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on June 19, 2021, 10:41:26 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on June 19, 2021, 09:52:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 19, 2021, 08:44:58 PM
It's worth noting that the idea of renumbering I-290 as an extension of I-395 is an actual MassDOT proposal that I could have sworn was mentioned earlier in this thread (along with the dual mileposts), but search hasn't turned anything up.

Is there a reference to this actual proposal?
I received an email from MassDOT in response to a comment I made to them regarding the continuation of I-395's numbers on  I-290, this is posted on my I-290 exit list page:
"To minimize potential driver confusion, we are continuing the I-395 numbering along I-290 to replicate the present exit numbering, which is continuous from Webster to Marlborough.   As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with "˜dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290.

MassDOT may consider re-designating I-290 as an extension of I-395 at a later date based on driver response to the new exit numbering and the "˜dual' mile markers.  However, any such re-designation would have to be reviewed by AASHTO and approved by FHWA before it could actually be implemented."
Why would it be confusing to number the highways differently?

It's not, it's just a lame excuse to continue the incorrect system already in place.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 20, 2021, 12:08:40 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on June 20, 2021, 07:34:56 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 19, 2021, 11:43:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on June 19, 2021, 10:41:26 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on June 19, 2021, 09:52:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 19, 2021, 08:44:58 PM
It's worth noting that the idea of renumbering I-290 as an extension of I-395 is an actual MassDOT proposal that I could have sworn was mentioned earlier in this thread (along with the dual mileposts), but search hasn't turned anything up.

Is there a reference to this actual proposal?
I received an email from MassDOT in response to a comment I made to them regarding the continuation of I-395's numbers on  I-290, this is posted on my I-290 exit list page:
"To minimize potential driver confusion, we are continuing the I-395 numbering along I-290 to replicate the present exit numbering, which is continuous from Webster to Marlborough.   As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with "˜dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290.

MassDOT may consider re-designating I-290 as an extension of I-395 at a later date based on driver response to the new exit numbering and the "˜dual' mile markers.  However, any such re-designation would have to be reviewed by AASHTO and approved by FHWA before it could actually be implemented."
Why would it be confusing to number the highways differently?

It's not, it's just a lame excuse to continue the incorrect system already in place.
If they want to renumber it go ahead, just they better not orphan I-190 or I'm going to cry.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on June 20, 2021, 12:35:13 PM
Orphaning 3di isn't a new thing. See: x78s.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 20, 2021, 12:38:28 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 20, 2021, 12:35:13 PM
Orphaning 3di isn't a new thing. See: x78s.
Connecting the x78s would require new construction. I-190 can just be renumbered I-595 without much trouble.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on June 20, 2021, 01:42:11 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 20, 2021, 12:38:28 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 20, 2021, 12:35:13 PM
Orphaning 3di isn't a new thing. See: x78s.
Connecting the x78s would require new construction. I-190 can just be renumbered I-595 without much trouble.

Except this orphan would be about 72 miles from a connection via a 3di to its parent (yes, it would be only 27 or on MA 2)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 20, 2021, 01:51:18 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 20, 2021, 01:42:11 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 20, 2021, 12:38:28 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on June 20, 2021, 12:35:13 PM
Orphaning 3di isn't a new thing. See: x78s.
Connecting the x78s would require new construction. I-190 can just be renumbered I-595 without much trouble.

Except this orphan would be about 72 miles from a connection via a 3di to its parent (yes, it would be only 27 or on MA 2)
It still follows numbering rules. 3dis connected to their parent via another interstate follow rules. Keeping it at I-190 would violate the rules.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on June 20, 2021, 03:12:49 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 20, 2021, 12:08:40 PM
If they want to renumber it go ahead, just they better not orphan I-190 or I'm going to cry.
Put away your Kleenex. They could run I-190 concurrently through Worcester to the Mass Pike.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 20, 2021, 03:15:17 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on June 20, 2021, 03:12:49 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 20, 2021, 12:08:40 PM
If they want to renumber it go ahead, just they better not orphan I-190 or I'm going to cry.
Put away your Kleenex. They could run I-190 concurrently through Worcester to the Mass Pike.
They could I guess but I'm wouldn't be a big fan of that either. Better than orphaning it.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on June 20, 2021, 10:49:52 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on June 20, 2021, 07:34:56 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 19, 2021, 11:43:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on June 19, 2021, 10:41:26 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on June 19, 2021, 09:52:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 19, 2021, 08:44:58 PM
It's worth noting that the idea of renumbering I-290 as an extension of I-395 is an actual MassDOT proposal that I could have sworn was mentioned earlier in this thread (along with the dual mileposts), but search hasn't turned anything up.

Is there a reference to this actual proposal?
I received an email from MassDOT in response to a comment I made to them regarding the continuation of I-395's numbers on  I-290, this is posted on my I-290 exit list page:
"To minimize potential driver confusion, we are continuing the I-395 numbering along I-290 to replicate the present exit numbering, which is continuous from Webster to Marlborough.   As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with "˜dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290.

MassDOT may consider re-designating I-290 as an extension of I-395 at a later date based on driver response to the new exit numbering and the "˜dual' mile markers.  However, any such re-designation would have to be reviewed by AASHTO and approved by FHWA before it could actually be implemented."
Why would it be confusing to number the highways differently?

It's not, it's just a lame excuse to continue the incorrect system already in place.

I can see how it could be seen as confusing.  While us roadgeeks are more number oriented than most and would think of I-395 and I-290 as separate roads, the traveling public probably sees it as one road that happens to change numbers for unknown (to them) reasons.

Heck, around here there are people that refer to the at-grade divided highway NY 787 as "interstate 787" because it extends I-787 to the south (and that's good by the standards of upstate NY; around Rochester, people don't even know what interstates even are, everything is "route X", and I-590 and NY 590 are considered the same road).  Never underestimate how much something that's obvious to use is not obvious to Joe Public who couldn't care less about the history of the roads or that CT didn't want a x90 route back when I-395 was designated.

Quote from: paul02474 on June 20, 2021, 03:12:49 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 20, 2021, 12:08:40 PM
If they want to renumber it go ahead, just they better not orphan I-190 or I'm going to cry.
Put away your Kleenex. They could run I-190 concurrently through Worcester to the Mass Pike.
Ending a route on an overlap is really inelegant, though.  Plus then they'd have to renumber the exits again.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on June 20, 2021, 11:09:03 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 20, 2021, 10:49:52 PM
...who couldn't care less about the history of the roads or that CT didn't want a x90 route back when I-395 was designated.
I thought it was AASHTO that rejected it, or at least that's what the "Connecticut Turnpike" Wikipedia article states. Yes, the AASHTO we all know with their double standards.
QuoteInitially, Connecticut and Massachusetts requested that the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) extend the I-290 designation southward along free Route 52 and the Connecticut Turnpike to I-95 in Waterford. AASHTO rejected the I-290 request and instead approved the I-395 designation in 1983.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 20, 2021, 11:09:46 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 20, 2021, 10:49:52 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on June 20, 2021, 07:34:56 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 19, 2021, 11:43:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on June 19, 2021, 10:41:26 PM
Quote from: paul02474 on June 19, 2021, 09:52:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 19, 2021, 08:44:58 PM
It's worth noting that the idea of renumbering I-290 as an extension of I-395 is an actual MassDOT proposal that I could have sworn was mentioned earlier in this thread (along with the dual mileposts), but search hasn't turned anything up.

Is there a reference to this actual proposal?
I received an email from MassDOT in response to a comment I made to them regarding the continuation of I-395's numbers on  I-290, this is posted on my I-290 exit list page:
"To minimize potential driver confusion, we are continuing the I-395 numbering along I-290 to replicate the present exit numbering, which is continuous from Webster to Marlborough.   As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with "˜dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290.

MassDOT may consider re-designating I-290 as an extension of I-395 at a later date based on driver response to the new exit numbering and the "˜dual' mile markers.  However, any such re-designation would have to be reviewed by AASHTO and approved by FHWA before it could actually be implemented."
Why would it be confusing to number the highways differently?

It's not, it's just a lame excuse to continue the incorrect system already in place.

I can see how it could be seen as confusing.  While us roadgeeks are more number oriented than most and would think of I-395 and I-290 as separate roads, the traveling public probably sees it as one road that happens to change numbers for unknown (to them) reasons.

Heck, around here there are people that refer to the at-grade divided highway NY 787 as "interstate 787" because it extends I-787 to the south (and that's good by the standards of upstate NY; around Rochester, people don't even know what interstates even are, everything is "route X", and I-590 and NY 590 are considered the same road).  Never underestimate how much something that's obvious to use is not obvious to Joe Public who couldn't care less about the history of the roads or that CT didn't want a x90 route back when I-395 was designated.

Quote from: paul02474 on June 20, 2021, 03:12:49 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 20, 2021, 12:08:40 PM
If they want to renumber it go ahead, just they better not orphan I-190 or I'm going to cry.
Put away your Kleenex. They could run I-190 concurrently through Worcester to the Mass Pike.
Ending a route on an overlap is really inelegant, though.  Plus then they'd have to renumber the exits again.
That's why I would prefer just renumbering it I-595. No need to renumber the exits then.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on June 24, 2021, 12:46:17 PM
Interstates 290 and 395 should not have their numbers changed. The way I see it, it is completely unnecessary.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 24, 2021, 12:50:47 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on June 24, 2021, 12:46:17 PM
Interstates 290 and 395 should not have their numbers changed. The way I see it, it is completely unnecessary.
I agree
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on June 24, 2021, 02:41:56 PM
I-495 still has some weird errors after conversion

MA 2 at I-495 N/B has the old exit number at the gore, along with "Old exit 27 A-B" underneath.

Exit 102-103 (the double decker bridge) in Lawrence N/B has "Old exit 44-54" underneath (instead of 44-45). How they messed that one up is beyond me.

Also lots of improper font sizes. Lots of series B where there is tons of room and lots of series D (or maybe E) that is so big the new exit number is sticking off the edge of the sign. Most of the series B was used on rather new exit signs that were made to accommodate the three digit numbers from Lawrence northward.

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on June 27, 2021, 07:32:13 PM
I got some photos of I-91 south of I-90 on a daytrip last weekend.  They're on my site now: https://nysroads.com/photos.php?route=i91&state=MA
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 27, 2021, 07:33:54 PM
What is still left to convert?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on June 27, 2021, 07:45:00 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 27, 2021, 07:33:54 PM
What is still left to convert?
I-290 and I-395.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 27, 2021, 07:46:26 PM
Quote from: Ben114 on June 27, 2021, 07:45:00 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 27, 2021, 07:33:54 PM
What is still left to convert?
I-290 and I-395.
Oh boy
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on June 27, 2021, 09:35:35 PM
Drove thru 495 this Saturday to Lowell. Some of the exit signs still have the old exit numbers along with "OLD EXIT XX" on them... a la Maine back in 2004-ish where a few of the (https://i.imgur.com/0tPilBq.jpg) exits (https://robertstevenson.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/24344258_8459aae327.jpg) for a short time on the Maine Turnpike were posted with the old number along with "FORMERLY EXIT XX" plaques below them:

(https://i.ibb.co/7rjk9MH/IMG-3866.jpg) (https://ibb.co/tYQLdjS)
(https://i.ibb.co/CWT0sn7/IMG-3903.jpg) (https://ibb.co/hCt81KW)
(https://i.ibb.co/KjKMvsf/IMG-3918.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gM45KWf)
(https://i.ibb.co/CPWzVt0/IMG-3927.jpg) (https://ibb.co/qJxdmn1)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman65 on June 30, 2021, 02:06:23 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/Wxh3PKufZGYzcRUM7

Is the new Exit 3 part of the milepost conversion?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on June 30, 2021, 03:38:14 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 30, 2021, 02:06:23 AM
https://goo.gl/maps/Wxh3PKufZGYzcRUM7

Is the new Exit 3 part of the milepost conversion?

No, and that was part of an older scheme that renumbered the exits on MA Route 25 back in 2007. Prior to that, the I-495 exit was numbered 1 and MA 25 exits were numbered 1 and 2 respectively (now exits 3 and 10 respectively). Basically, they were "bumped" up a number to avoid confusion with I-495 and MA 25's exits 1s.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on June 30, 2021, 02:12:37 PM
I just got an email from MassDOT, indicating that the I-495 exit number conversion is complete, and that work on I-395 and I-290 will begin in August.

It also mentions that new signs are being installed on I-290, yet they're being fabricated with the sequential numbers then overlaid with the mileage numbers.

That's so wasteful!  This also happened on Route 24!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 30, 2021, 02:33:01 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 30, 2021, 02:12:37 PM
I just got an email from MassDOT, indicating that the I-495 exit number conversion is complete, and that work on I-395 and I-290 will begin in August.

It also mentions that new signs are being installed on I-290, yet they're being fabricated with the sequential numbers then overlaid with the mileage numbers.

That's so wasteful!  This also happened on Route 24!
MassDot wasting money once again lol what else is new
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: mvak36 on June 30, 2021, 02:55:58 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 30, 2021, 02:12:37 PM
I just got an email from MassDOT, indicating that the I-495 exit number conversion is complete, and that work on I-395 and I-290 will begin in August.

It also mentions that new signs are being installed on I-290, yet they're being fabricated with the sequential numbers then overlaid with the mileage numbers.

That's so wasteful!  This also happened on Route 24!

This is what I saw in the email. In my opinion, I don't think it's wasteful. Probably just bad luck with the timing of the I-290 sign replacement project.
QuoteThe remaining two corridors, Interstate 290 and Interstate 395, will be converted to milepost-based exit numbering in August 2021. Note that the overhead guide signs and sign structures currently being installed on I-290 are a part of a separate MassDOT project. As this project was designed and begun well before the start of the Statewide Exit Renumbering Project, these signs have been fabricated with the current sequential exit numbers. Once the sign replacement work is complete, all of the exit numbers will then be overlaid with the new milepost-based numbers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 30, 2021, 02:57:49 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on June 30, 2021, 02:55:58 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 30, 2021, 02:12:37 PM
I just got an email from MassDOT, indicating that the I-495 exit number conversion is complete, and that work on I-395 and I-290 will begin in August.

It also mentions that new signs are being installed on I-290, yet they're being fabricated with the sequential numbers then overlaid with the mileage numbers.

That's so wasteful!  This also happened on Route 24!

This is what I saw in the email. In my opinion, I don't think it's wasteful. Probably just bad luck with the timing of the I-290 sign replacement project.
QuoteThe remaining two corridors, Interstate 290 and Interstate 395, will be converted to milepost-based exit numbering in August 2021. Note that the overhead guide signs and sign structures currently being installed on I-290 are a part of a separate MassDOT project. As this project was designed and begun well before the start of the Statewide Exit Renumbering Project, these signs have been fabricated with the current sequential exit numbers. Once the sign replacement work is complete, all of the exit numbers will then be overlaid with the new milepost-based numbers.
Yeah just unfortunate. The signs may have already been made.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on June 30, 2021, 03:09:42 PM
MassDOT is spending almost nothing on exit number conversion; I seem to remember 2.4 million for the entire state. A new set of signs costs much more than replacing the exit number only; not much extra is spent by doing them separately.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on June 30, 2021, 09:36:42 PM
Quote from: mvak36 on June 30, 2021, 02:55:58 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on June 30, 2021, 02:12:37 PM
I just got an email from MassDOT, indicating that the I-495 exit number conversion is complete, and that work on I-395 and I-290 will begin in August.

It also mentions that new signs are being installed on I-290, yet they're being fabricated with the sequential numbers then overlaid with the mileage numbers.

That's so wasteful!  This also happened on Route 24!

This is what I saw in the email. In my opinion, I don't think it's wasteful. Probably just bad luck with the timing of the I-290 sign replacement project.
QuoteThe remaining two corridors, Interstate 290 and Interstate 395, will be converted to milepost-based exit numbering in August 2021. Note that the overhead guide signs and sign structures currently being installed on I-290 are a part of a separate MassDOT project. As this project was designed and begun well before the start of the Statewide Exit Renumbering Project, these signs have been fabricated with the current sequential exit numbers. Once the sign replacement work is complete, all of the exit numbers will then be overlaid with the new milepost-based numbers.
I'm sure they could have put a change order in.  Or had more foresight.

In any case... in the contractor taking the month of July off or something?  What's the point of waiting for August when the rest of the state is done?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 30, 2021, 10:23:30 PM
Quote from: 1 on June 30, 2021, 03:09:42 PM
MassDOT is spending almost nothing on exit number conversion; I seem to remember 2.4 million for the entire state. A new set of signs costs much more than replacing the exit number only; not much extra is spent by doing them separately.
It just looks tacky having them taped on.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on July 06, 2021, 05:50:07 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 18, 2021, 09:27:59 PM
What's wrong with exit 0?
For reasons unknown; many states, not just Massachusetts, have an aversion/reluctance to using Exit 0.

Had MassDOT allowed the use of Exit 0; I-291, I-391 & the Lowell Connector might have been included in the statewide exit renumbering project.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on July 06, 2021, 05:52:34 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on July 06, 2021, 05:50:07 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 18, 2021, 09:27:59 PM
What's wrong with exit 0?
For reasons unknown; many states, not just Massachusetts, have an aversion/reluctance to using Exit 0.

Had MassDOT allowed the use of Exit 0; I-291, I-391 & the Lowell Connector might have been included in the statewide exit renumbering project.

Don't forget the lame excuse that the Lowell Connector wasn't changed because it doesn't have posted mile markers.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on July 06, 2021, 05:58:54 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on July 06, 2021, 05:52:34 PM
Don't forget the lame excuse that the Lowell Connector wasn't changed because it doesn't have posted mile markers.

The Lowell Connector shouldn't be changed anyway. It would result in alphabet soup.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on July 06, 2021, 07:50:41 PM
Quote from: 1 on July 06, 2021, 05:58:54 PM
Quote from: SectorZ on July 06, 2021, 05:52:34 PM
Don't forget the lame excuse that the Lowell Connector wasn't changed because it doesn't have posted mile markers.

The Lowell Connector shouldn't be changed anyway. It would result in alphabet soup.

I agree, and that should have been the reason for it (like their reason for MA 213, I-291, and I-391).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on July 08, 2021, 11:21:33 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on June 30, 2021, 10:23:30 PM
Quote from: 1 on June 30, 2021, 03:09:42 PM
MassDOT is spending almost nothing on exit number conversion; I seem to remember 2.4 million for the entire state. A new set of signs costs much more than replacing the exit number only; not much extra is spent by doing them separately.
It just looks tacky having them taped on.

It seems that the tacky, sloppy looking exit renumbering took place in locations where there is an active sign replacement project. The worst of it seems to be the stretch of I-95 between I-93 in Reading and the 128 split in Peabody, and on I-495 north of the Mass Pike.
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signsps321qqqq.jpg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on July 08, 2021, 11:27:24 PM
I've added photos taken along I-495 South between Amesbury and Andover of the exit renumbering project courtesy of Vinh Lam, both of the successful:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i495signsvl621t.jpg)

and the not so successful efforts:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i495signsvl621vv.jpg)

Photos between I-93 and US 3 are now posted, all can be reached at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i495signs3 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i495signs3)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Pete from Boston on July 13, 2021, 05:22:26 PM
So how are the exit numbers determined relative to the milepost? Because on Route 2, exit 129 is pretty much at mile 130, exit 128 is within mile 129, and missing a great opportunity, exit 127 is within mile 128 (and at Route 128).

Is there a logic that I am missing, or did some bitter MassDOT engineers refuse to give 128 any encouragement?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on July 13, 2021, 05:59:01 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 13, 2021, 05:22:26 PM
So how are the exit numbers determined relative to the milepost? Because on Route 2, exit 129 is pretty much at mile 130, exit 128 is within mile 129, and missing a great opportunity, exit 127 is within mile 128 (and at Route 128).

Is there a logic that I am missing, or did some bitter MassDOT engineers refuse to give 128 any encouragement?
Do they always round down?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on July 13, 2021, 09:27:55 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 13, 2021, 05:59:01 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 13, 2021, 05:22:26 PM
So how are the exit numbers determined relative to the milepost? Because on Route 2, exit 129 is pretty much at mile 130, exit 128 is within mile 129, and missing a great opportunity, exit 127 is within mile 128 (and at Route 128).

Is there a logic that I am missing, or did some bitter MassDOT engineers refuse to give 128 any encouragement?
Do they always round down?
They round down (avoiding an Exit 0). They also fudge the numbers when exits are close together in order to avoid suffixes on exit numbers, even in Suffolk County.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on July 13, 2021, 09:28:59 PM
Didn't someone on this forum tell MassDot not to have Exit 128 be Route 128 (as it was in the initial plan) because of confusion?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on July 13, 2021, 09:30:49 PM
I'm not sure what the general way to round exit numbers is (Ohio also rounds down like MA), though my preferred option is to round up on 0.5 and above, round down on 0.4 and below.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: paul02474 on July 14, 2021, 12:11:12 AM
Quote from: 1 on July 13, 2021, 09:28:59 PM
Didn't someone on this forum tell MassDot not to have Exit 128 be Route 128 (as it was in the initial plan) because of confusion?

That's silly. The old exit numbers had Route 60 at Exit 59; Lake Street (Exit 60) is less than a mile away, and there was confusion with folks looking for Route 60 ending up on Lake Street. Using Exit 128 for I-95 (which corresponds to the adjacent mile marker) would have created less confusion.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Pete from Boston on July 14, 2021, 12:58:23 PM
Quote from: 1 on July 13, 2021, 09:28:59 PM
Didn't someone on this forum tell MassDot not to have Exit 128 be Route 128 (as it was in the initial plan) because of confusion?

People have an unusual idea of what constitutes confusion.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on July 14, 2021, 01:00:24 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 14, 2021, 12:58:23 PM
Quote from: 1 on July 13, 2021, 09:28:59 PM
Didn't someone on this forum tell MassDot not to have Exit 128 be Route 128 (as it was in the initial plan) because of confusion?

People have an unusual idea of what constitutes confusion.
"Not having a perfect US highways grid confuses drivers ability to navigate"
- A very special forum member here
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on July 14, 2021, 01:32:55 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on July 14, 2021, 01:00:24 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on July 14, 2021, 12:58:23 PM
Quote from: 1 on July 13, 2021, 09:28:59 PM
Didn't someone on this forum tell MassDot not to have Exit 128 be Route 128 (as it was in the initial plan) because of confusion?

People have an unusual idea of what constitutes confusion.
"Not having a perfect US highways grid confuses drivers ability to navigate"
- A very special forum member here
He's been real quiet lately.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on July 14, 2021, 03:51:41 PM
Quote from: 1 on July 13, 2021, 09:28:59 PM
Didn't someone on this forum tell MassDot not to have Exit 128 be Route 128 (as it was in the initial plan) because of confusion?
That's illogical. I can name plenty of interchanges around the country where the exit number just happens to the same as the route number of the road the freeway intersects. The most notable example I can think of being on the northeast side of Indianapolis, Exit 37 on I-465 also being for I-69/SR-37 North.

And there's also in Connecticut: I-84 Exit 7 serves US-7 North and US-202 East.

So why would someone find it confusing to have an interchange with Route 128 be numbered Exit 128?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: machias on July 14, 2021, 05:28:35 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on July 14, 2021, 03:51:41 PM
Quote from: 1 on July 13, 2021, 09:28:59 PM
Didn't someone on this forum tell MassDot not to have Exit 128 be Route 128 (as it was in the initial plan) because of confusion?
That's illogical. I can name plenty of interchanges around the country where the exit number just happens to the same as the route number of the road the freeway intersects. The most notable example I can think of being on the northeast side of Indianapolis, Exit 37 on I-465 also being for I-69/SR-37 North.

And there's also in Connecticut: I-84 Exit 7 serves US-7 North and US-202 East.

So why would someone find it confusing to have an interchange with Route 128 be numbered Exit 128?

I find this baffling as well. Having Route 128 numbered as Exit 128 if probably as logical as one can get with interchange/route number combinations. To add another to the list: on I-86/NY 17 Exit 79 is for NY Route 79.  It's a shame this will go away when NYSDOT (eventually) moved to distance based numbers on the rest of the interstates.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on July 14, 2021, 08:33:41 PM
Isn't this location a spot where the numbers are fudged to avoid a suffix?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on July 15, 2021, 05:37:30 AM
Quote from: vdeane on July 14, 2021, 08:33:41 PM
Isn't this location a spot where the numbers are fudged to avoid a suffix?

It is. Exits 127-135 are between MMs 128.5-134.1
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on July 15, 2021, 04:31:28 PM
Are they serious with this? I hope they fix these mistakes...

I-495 NB, Exit 100A(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210715/eca9757aa551b46d9b4d350efe42a1f3.jpg)

SM-A515U

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kefkafloyd on July 19, 2021, 11:23:08 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on July 14, 2021, 03:51:41 PM
Quote from: 1 on July 13, 2021, 09:28:59 PM
Didn't someone on this forum tell MassDot not to have Exit 128 be Route 128 (as it was in the initial plan) because of confusion?
That's illogical. I can name plenty of interchanges around the country where the exit number just happens to the same as the route number of the road the freeway intersects. The most notable example I can think of being on the northeast side of Indianapolis, Exit 37 on I-465 also being for I-69/SR-37 North.

And there's also in Connecticut: I-84 Exit 7 serves US-7 North and US-202 East.

So why would someone find it confusing to have an interchange with Route 128 be numbered Exit 128?

Until very recently, exit 38 on I-495 was for MA 38! :)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on July 19, 2021, 01:12:25 PM
Now that is one goofy-looking exit sign! Hopefully the next sign replacement will include an exit sign wide enough to include all three digits.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on July 19, 2021, 10:51:16 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on July 15, 2021, 04:31:28 PM
Are they serious with this? I hope they fix these mistakes...

I-495 NB, Exit 100A(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210715/eca9757aa551b46d9b4d350efe42a1f3.jpg)

SM-A515U



That is so baffling considering how many narrow digit greenouts they made for signs that were already made wide enough for the new numbers (e.g., "111" in series B (!) with very tight kerning so as to be basically illegible when wider font and normal kerning would have had plenty of room, even on a regular-width gore sign, never mind the wide one that was waiting.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on July 20, 2021, 05:33:23 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on July 15, 2021, 04:31:28 PM
Are they serious with this? I hope they fix these mistakes...

I-495 NB, Exit 100A(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210715/eca9757aa551b46d9b4d350efe42a1f3.jpg)

SM-A515U


I have it on reliable authority that this is being fixed.


Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: southshore720 on July 20, 2021, 07:57:59 PM
The gore signs are usually a snow plow or wayward driver's favorite target, so hopefully many of these wonky paste-overs will be replaced with proper gore signage in years to come!
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on July 20, 2021, 08:15:06 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on July 15, 2021, 04:31:28 PM
Are they serious with this? I hope they fix these mistakes...

I-495 NB, Exit 100A(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210715/eca9757aa551b46d9b4d350efe42a1f3.jpg)

SM-A515U
I was more expecting that from O(klahoma)DOT, not MASSDOT.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on July 20, 2021, 11:03:52 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on July 20, 2021, 08:15:06 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on July 15, 2021, 04:31:28 PM
Are they serious with this? I hope they fix these mistakes...

I-495 NB, Exit 100A(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210715/eca9757aa551b46d9b4d350efe42a1f3.jpg)

SM-A515U
I was more expecting that from O(klahoma)DOT, not MASSDOT.
That would be something I would expect to see out here in New Mexico.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on July 23, 2021, 12:11:28 AM
I finally had a chance to check out exit renumbering along the Mass Pike west of Sturbridge on my (roundabout) way to the Wilmington Road Meet. I've posted the new photos, such as for the I-91 exit
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs721u.jpg)

on my New England Exit Renumbering Central site:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i90signs3 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i90signs3)

I also checked out I-91 South from the Mass Pike to the CT border, here's two approaching I-291:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i91signs721j.jpg)

The rest can be found at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i91signs1 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i91signs1)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on July 26, 2021, 11:04:11 AM
They have to be getting near the end of the conversion to mile-based exit numbering in Massachusetts. How much do they have left to do?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on July 26, 2021, 12:35:19 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on July 26, 2021, 11:04:11 AM
They have to be getting near the end of the conversion to mile-based exit numbering in Massachusetts. How much do they have left to do?

I-290/I-395 and that's pretty much it.

One other note on an older post: Exit 7 for US 7/202 would remain the same when I-84 in CT joins the other 3 states it passes through and is converted.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on July 26, 2021, 06:43:01 PM
Last week, I travelled I-395/I-290, I-190, as well as I-495 from Marlboro up to the NH state line.  For photos of the new exit numbers, you can hit here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/collections/72157659357861836/

Next to nothing as far as sign replacement on the Bolton-to-Lowell project.  Progress being made on I-290 from Auburn to Worcester, mostly north and south of the city center. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on July 28, 2021, 12:10:17 PM
Breaking news! I-395/290 conversion starts this Sunday.

Text from the email:
Quote
Statewide Exit Renumbering Project Notification


Please be advised that MassDOT is in the process of converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. The final two corridors, Interstate 290 and Interstate 395, will begin conversion this Sunday:

Corridors: Interstate 290 and Interstate 395

Approximate start date: Sunday, August 1, 2021

Approximate construction duration: 2 weeks

Location: Marlborough to Webster

Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM


MassDOT has completed the conversion of the exit numbers to a milepost-based numbering system on the following corridors:


SM-A515U
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on July 28, 2021, 01:22:50 PM
Will the I-290 numbers be a continuation of the I-395 numbers?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Great Lakes Roads on July 28, 2021, 03:17:17 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 28, 2021, 01:22:50 PM
Will the I-290 numbers be a continuation of the I-395 numbers?

Yes.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on July 28, 2021, 05:06:12 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on July 28, 2021, 03:17:17 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 28, 2021, 01:22:50 PM
Will the I-290 numbers be a continuation of the I-395 numbers?

Yes.
Not a surprise.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on July 29, 2021, 11:09:10 PM
Guess the tentative start of August 1 in yesterday's email was really that. They released a new email tonight and moved the start of I-395 exit renumbering to August 8, and added a sentence about the dual mile marker installation, which will take place after the exits numbers are changed:
"Please be advised that MassDOT is in the process of converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. The final two corridors, Interstate 290 and Interstate 395, will begin in approximately one week:
Corridors: Interstate 290 and Interstate 395
Approximate start date: Sunday, August 8, 2021
Approximate construction duration: 2 weeks
Location: Marlborough to Webster
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM
As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with 'dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290. This work will be done following the completion of the exit renumbering conversion."
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on July 29, 2021, 11:10:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 29, 2021, 11:09:10 PM
Guess the tentative start of August 1 in yesterday's email was really that. They released a new email tonight and moved the start of I-395 exit renumbering to August 8, and added a paragraph about the dual mile marker installation, which will take place after the exits numbers are changed:
"Please be advised that MassDOT is in the process of converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. The final two corridors, Interstate 290 and Interstate 395, will begin in approximately one week:
Corridors: Interstate 290 and Interstate 395
Approximate start date: Sunday, August 8, 2021
Approximate construction duration: 2 weeks
Location: Marlborough to Webster
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM
As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with 'dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290. This work will be done following the completion of the exit renumbering conversion."
Dual mile markers huh. Is this used anywhere else?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on July 29, 2021, 11:37:21 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 29, 2021, 11:09:10 PM
As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with 'dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290. This work will be done following the completion of the exit renumbering conversion."

Does this officially make I-395 a "semi-silent" multiplex with I-290?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on July 30, 2021, 12:18:36 AM
Quote from: DJ Particle on July 29, 2021, 11:37:21 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 29, 2021, 11:09:10 PM
As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with 'dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290. This work will be done following the completion of the exit renumbering conversion."

Does this officially make I-395 a "semi-silent" multiplex with I-290?
I-395 won't be signed on I-290?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on July 30, 2021, 12:34:00 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 29, 2021, 11:10:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 29, 2021, 11:09:10 PM
Guess the tentative start of August 1 in yesterday's email was really that. They released a new email tonight and moved the start of I-395 exit renumbering to August 8, and added a paragraph about the dual mile marker installation, which will take place after the exits numbers are changed:
"Please be advised that MassDOT is in the process of converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. The final two corridors, Interstate 290 and Interstate 395, will begin in approximately one week:
Corridors: Interstate 290 and Interstate 395
Approximate start date: Sunday, August 8, 2021
Approximate construction duration: 2 weeks
Location: Marlborough to Webster
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM
As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with 'dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290. This work will be done following the completion of the exit renumbering conversion."
Dual mile markers huh. Is this used anywhere else?

I believe the US 22/322 concurrency in PA uses dual markers
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on July 30, 2021, 02:32:37 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on July 30, 2021, 12:34:00 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on July 29, 2021, 11:10:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 29, 2021, 11:09:10 PM
Guess the tentative start of August 1 in yesterday's email was really that. They released a new email tonight and moved the start of I-395 exit renumbering to August 8, and added a paragraph about the dual mile marker installation, which will take place after the exits numbers are changed:
"Please be advised that MassDOT is in the process of converting all exit numbers on freeways to a milepost-based numbering system, per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requirements. The final two corridors, Interstate 290 and Interstate 395, will begin in approximately one week:
Corridors: Interstate 290 and Interstate 395
Approximate start date: Sunday, August 8, 2021
Approximate construction duration: 2 weeks
Location: Marlborough to Webster
Hours of operation: 8:00 PM - 5:00 AM
As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with 'dual' mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290. This work will be done following the completion of the exit renumbering conversion."
Dual mile markers huh. Is this used anywhere else?

I believe the US 22/322 concurrency in PA uses dual markers
That's a bit different since there is an actual concurrency here.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on July 30, 2021, 08:04:38 AM
I don't get the need for the dual mile marker thing for 290. Just keep the regular mile markers up and have the exit numbers be the continuation of 395. A better idea would have been to not continue them from 395 but as we learned the "feedback" the state wanted from us was for show.

It's like their excuse of not changing the Lowell Connector's exit numbers because it doesn't have mile markers. Notwithstanding that the Lowell Connector shouldn't change, that is the lamest of reasons out there to say it shouldn't. You still know what the distances are between exits.

It's just weird how I've spent 40 years watching this state strive, with road-related stuff, to be ultra-specific and on-point only to in practice screw up simple things like the difference between a US route and a state route in signage.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on July 30, 2021, 11:59:28 AM
I also agree that "dual mile markers" along I-290 are stupid.  Just re-number I-290 and I-395 based on the existing mile markers.  If they're going to spend money to re-mile post highways, they should have re-posted I-295 and I-195, continuing the mile markers that started in Rhode Island.

You have exits 1-alphabet soup, 2-alphabet soup, then back to 1 along I-195 going east, and you have exit numbers that go 2-22-20-18 along I-295 going south.

Also, wouldn't it make more sense to sign I-295 as east-west in Massachusetts?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on July 30, 2021, 12:06:56 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on July 30, 2021, 11:59:28 AM
Also, wouldn't it make more sense to sign I-295 as east-west in Massachusetts?

Only if it's east-west east of RI 146. The state line means nothing.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on July 30, 2021, 12:20:46 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on July 30, 2021, 11:59:28 AM
I also agree that "dual mile markers" along I-290 are stupid.  Just re-number I-290 and I-395 based on the existing mile markers.  If they're going to spend money to re-mile post highways, they should have re-posted I-295 and I-195, continuing the mile markers that started in Rhode Island.

You have exits 1-alphabet soup, 2-alphabet soup, then back to 1 along I-195 going east, and you have exit numbers that go 2-22-20-18 along I-295 going south.

Also, wouldn't it make more sense to sign I-295 as east-west in Massachusetts?
MassDOT's response to comments regarding both the decision in keeping the continuous exit numbers for I-395/I-290 and for not continuing the RI exit numbering into MA was that would be too confusing for drivers. Here's the text of MassDOT's answer to my comment about I-290's proposed exit numbers:
"To minimize potential driver confusion, we are continuing the I-395 numbering along I-290 to replicate the present exit numbering, which is continuous from Webster to Marlborough.   As part of this project, the existing mileposts on I-290 will be replaced with ‘dual’ mile markers showing mileage for both I-395 and I-290.

MassDOT may consider re-designating I-290 as an extension of I-395 at a later date based on driver response to the new exit numbering and the ‘dual’ mile markers.  However, any such re-designation would have to be reviewed by AASHTO and approved by FHWA before it could actually be implemented."

and their response to whether the continuation of RI's exit numbers was considered for I-295:
"MassDOT has considered this option for these routes.  Resetting the exit numbers at the Massachusetts border, as occurs now, provides travelers with an additional cue that they’ve crossed over into a different state.  It is our judgement [sic] that this will aid driver navigation better than continuing the adjacent state’s exit number sequences into Massachusetts will."

As others have pointed out, it would have been simpler just use separate exit number systems for I-395 and I-290, this was the proposal in the postponed 2016 exit renumbering project.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on July 30, 2021, 12:58:26 PM
Between the MA exit renumbering differences between 2016 and now, and the evolution of I-81 in Syracuase, why does it seem to be a trend that projects evolve in ways that become more annoying to roadgeeks?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: The Ghostbuster on July 30, 2021, 01:17:24 PM
Maybe because they want to "own us roadgeeks" by making idiotic proposals that annoy us.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DrSmith on July 30, 2021, 03:26:57 PM
Maybe it's much more work than I realize, couldn't the mileposts on 290 be changed so that the start is a continuation of 395, similar to how I-17 works. Not perfect and still seems easier than two sets.

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on July 30, 2021, 03:34:45 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 30, 2021, 01:17:24 PM
Maybe because they want to "own us roadgeeks" by making idiotic proposals that annoy us.
I doubt they care
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on July 30, 2021, 08:58:33 PM
Quote from: DrSmith on July 30, 2021, 03:26:57 PM
Maybe it's much more work than I realize, couldn't the mileposts on 290 be changed so that the start is a continuation of 395, similar to how I-17 works. Not perfect and still seems easier than two sets.


That would be the logical thing to do.  Sometimes it feels like government entities can be allergic to the logical option, though.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DJ Particle on August 01, 2021, 10:24:45 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 30, 2021, 12:20:46 PM
MassDOT may consider re-designating I-290 as an extension of I-395 at a later date based on driver response to the new exit numbering and the "˜dual' mile markers.  However, any such re-designation would have to be reviewed by AASHTO and approved by FHWA before it could actually be implemented."

At that point, wouldn't it be more appropriate for it to be named I-695 or I-895 since it basically becomes a Providence bypass of I-95?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on August 01, 2021, 10:50:42 PM
Quote from: DJ Particle on August 01, 2021, 10:24:45 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on July 30, 2021, 12:20:46 PM
MassDOT may consider re-designating I-290 as an extension of I-395 at a later date based on driver response to the new exit numbering and the "˜dual' mile markers.  However, any such re-designation would have to be reviewed by AASHTO and approved by FHWA before it could actually be implemented."

At that point, wouldn't it be more appropriate for it to be named I-695 or I-895 since it basically becomes a Providence bypass of I-95?
It would, but the government doesn't like renumbering. I hope that they at least renumber I-190.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on August 02, 2021, 06:01:54 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 01, 2021, 10:50:42 PM
It would, but the government doesn't like renumbering. I hope that they at least renumber I-190.

What do you want I-190 renumbered to? If your problem is that it doesn't touch I-90, there's no number that will fix it.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on August 02, 2021, 06:57:09 AM
Getting into fictional territory when you're discussing changes not being officially proposed.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on August 02, 2021, 12:58:52 PM
Quote from: 1 on August 02, 2021, 06:01:54 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 01, 2021, 10:50:42 PM
It would, but the government doesn't like renumbering. I hope that they at least renumber I-190.

What do you want I-190 renumbered to? If your problem is that it doesn't touch I-90, there's no number that will fix it.
Basically, if I-290 gets renumbered to I-395 (something MassDOT is actually considering), he'd like I-190 renumbered (no official proposal) because it would be orphaned if I-290 gets renumbered.

I'm pretty sure there's already been a long discussion on this thread speculating on potential fictional renumberings of I-190.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 02:32:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 02, 2021, 12:58:52 PM
Quote from: 1 on August 02, 2021, 06:01:54 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 01, 2021, 10:50:42 PM
It would, but the government doesn't like renumbering. I hope that they at least renumber I-190.

What do you want I-190 renumbered to? If your problem is that it doesn't touch I-90, there's no number that will fix it.
Basically, if I-290 gets renumbered to I-395 (something MassDOT is actually considering), he'd like I-190 renumbered (no official proposal) because it would be orphaned if I-290 gets renumbered.

I'm pretty sure there's already been a long discussion on this thread speculating on potential fictional renumberings of I-190.
Yes, true. I doubt they would because normal people don't care about the rules, but they should.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on August 02, 2021, 02:35:37 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 02:32:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 02, 2021, 12:58:52 PM
Quote from: 1 on August 02, 2021, 06:01:54 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 01, 2021, 10:50:42 PM
It would, but the government doesn't like renumbering. I hope that they at least renumber I-190.

What do you want I-190 renumbered to? If your problem is that it doesn't touch I-90, there's no number that will fix it.
Basically, if I-290 gets renumbered to I-395 (something MassDOT is actually considering), he'd like I-190 renumbered (no official proposal) because it would be orphaned if I-290 gets renumbered.

I'm pretty sure there's already been a long discussion on this thread speculating on potential fictional renumberings of I-190.
Yes, true. I doubt they would because normal people don't care about the rules, but they should.
If that were the case, I would have I-395 take over I-190, and re-designate the east-west section of I-290 between I-190 and I-495 as an I-x95. I think 695 and 895 are available for assignment.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 02:39:14 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on August 02, 2021, 02:35:37 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 02:32:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 02, 2021, 12:58:52 PM
Quote from: 1 on August 02, 2021, 06:01:54 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 01, 2021, 10:50:42 PM
It would, but the government doesn't like renumbering. I hope that they at least renumber I-190.

What do you want I-190 renumbered to? If your problem is that it doesn't touch I-90, there's no number that will fix it.
Basically, if I-290 gets renumbered to I-395 (something MassDOT is actually considering), he'd like I-190 renumbered (no official proposal) because it would be orphaned if I-290 gets renumbered.

I'm pretty sure there's already been a long discussion on this thread speculating on potential fictional renumberings of I-190.
Yes, true. I doubt they would because normal people don't care about the rules, but they should.
If that were the case, I would have I-395 take over I-190, and re-designate the east-west section of I-290 between I-190 and I-495 as an I-x95. I think 695 and 895 are available for assignment.
I like the current system. I-395 is the spur from I-95 to Worcester, I-290 is a loop through Worcester and also a bypass for I-90E to I-495N traffic and vice versa, and I-190 is a spur from Worcester to Fitchburg.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on August 02, 2021, 05:39:44 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on August 02, 2021, 02:35:37 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 02:32:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 02, 2021, 12:58:52 PM
Quote from: 1 on August 02, 2021, 06:01:54 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 01, 2021, 10:50:42 PM
It would, but the government doesn't like renumbering. I hope that they at least renumber I-190.

What do you want I-190 renumbered to? If your problem is that it doesn't touch I-90, there's no number that will fix it.
Basically, if I-290 gets renumbered to I-395 (something MassDOT is actually considering), he'd like I-190 renumbered (no official proposal) because it would be orphaned if I-290 gets renumbered.

I'm pretty sure there's already been a long discussion on this thread speculating on potential fictional renumberings of I-190.
Yes, true. I doubt they would because normal people don't care about the rules, but they should.
If that were the case, I would have I-395 take over I-190, and re-designate the east-west section of I-290 between I-190 and I-495 as an I-x95. I think 695 and 895 are available for assignment.
Or keep I-290 as is and the beginning is concurrent with I-395.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 06:50:46 PM
Quote from: Alps on August 02, 2021, 05:39:44 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on August 02, 2021, 02:35:37 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 02:32:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 02, 2021, 12:58:52 PM
Quote from: 1 on August 02, 2021, 06:01:54 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 01, 2021, 10:50:42 PM
It would, but the government doesn't like renumbering. I hope that they at least renumber I-190.

What do you want I-190 renumbered to? If your problem is that it doesn't touch I-90, there's no number that will fix it.
Basically, if I-290 gets renumbered to I-395 (something MassDOT is actually considering), he'd like I-190 renumbered (no official proposal) because it would be orphaned if I-290 gets renumbered.

I'm pretty sure there's already been a long discussion on this thread speculating on potential fictional renumberings of I-190.
Yes, true. I doubt they would because normal people don't care about the rules, but they should.
If that were the case, I would have I-395 take over I-190, and re-designate the east-west section of I-290 between I-190 and I-495 as an I-x95. I think 695 and 895 are available for assignment.
Or keep I-290 as is and the beginning is concurrent with I-395.
I dislike it when roads start with multiplexes so I would rather not.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on August 02, 2021, 08:22:00 PM
I still say having 395 bend east on the CT Turnpike leg (SR 695) and having 290 start at the split in Danielson is the easiest for MassDOT.  Yes, CT would need to re-renumber the stretch north of there, but you eliminate the Mass confusion. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 09:14:37 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on August 02, 2021, 08:22:00 PM
I still say having 395 bend east on the CT Turnpike leg (SR 695) and having 290 start at the split in Danielson is the easiest for MassDOT.  Yes, CT would need to re-renumber the stretch north of there, but you eliminate the Mass confusion.
Connecticut won't do that.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on August 02, 2021, 11:18:24 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 09:14:37 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on August 02, 2021, 08:22:00 PM
I still say having 395 bend east on the CT Turnpike leg (SR 695) and having 290 start at the split in Danielson is the easiest for MassDOT.  Yes, CT would need to re-renumber the stretch north of there, but you eliminate the Mass confusion.
Connecticut won't do that.

"Be a lot cooler if they did!"   
:D :D :D

(I like that idea too)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 11:49:30 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on August 02, 2021, 11:18:24 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 09:14:37 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on August 02, 2021, 08:22:00 PM
I still say having 395 bend east on the CT Turnpike leg (SR 695) and having 290 start at the split in Danielson is the easiest for MassDOT.  Yes, CT would need to re-renumber the stretch north of there, but you eliminate the Mass confusion.
Connecticut won't do that.

"Be a lot cooler if they did!"   
:D :D :D

(I like that idea too)
What's in this for them?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on August 03, 2021, 12:39:16 AM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 11:49:30 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on August 02, 2021, 11:18:24 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 09:14:37 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on August 02, 2021, 08:22:00 PM
I still say having 395 bend east on the CT Turnpike leg (SR 695) and having 290 start at the split in Danielson is the easiest for MassDOT.  Yes, CT would need to re-renumber the stretch north of there, but you eliminate the Mass confusion.
Connecticut won't do that.

"Be a lot cooler if they did!"   
:D :D :D

(I like that idea too)
What's in this for them?
They just mile-based I-395. Too late.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on August 04, 2021, 02:57:35 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 09:14:37 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on August 02, 2021, 08:22:00 PM
I still say having 395 bend east on the CT Turnpike leg (SR 695) and having 290 start at the split in Danielson is the easiest for MassDOT.  Yes, CT would need to re-renumber the stretch north of there, but you eliminate the Mass confusion.
Connecticut won't do that.
Back in the '80s Connecticut and Massachusetts originally requested the I-290 designation be extended from the Mass Pike to Waterford along what is now I-395 (formerly Route 52). That request was rejected by AASHTO, and I-395 was approved instead. I don't know what the rationale was behind AASHTO rejecting the I-290 designation request. Maybe someone more familiar with the history of the I-395 designation could chime in.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on August 04, 2021, 03:04:27 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on August 04, 2021, 02:57:35 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 09:14:37 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on August 02, 2021, 08:22:00 PM
I still say having 395 bend east on the CT Turnpike leg (SR 695) and having 290 start at the split in Danielson is the easiest for MassDOT.  Yes, CT would need to re-renumber the stretch north of there, but you eliminate the Mass confusion.
Connecticut won't do that.
Back in the '80s Connecticut and Massachusetts originally requested the I-290 designation be extended from the Mass Pike to Waterford along what is now I-395 (formerly Route 52). That request was rejected by AASHTO, and I-395 was approved instead. I don't know what the rationale was behind AASHTO rejecting the I-290 designation request. Maybe someone more familiar with the history of the I-395 designation could chime in.
Maybe it was rejected because it didn't end at its parent?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bjcolby50 on August 06, 2021, 05:07:03 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on August 04, 2021, 02:57:35 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 09:14:37 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on August 02, 2021, 08:22:00 PM
I still say having 395 bend east on the CT Turnpike leg (SR 695) and having 290 start at the split in Danielson is the easiest for MassDOT.  Yes, CT would need to re-renumber the stretch north of there, but you eliminate the Mass confusion.
Connecticut won't do that.
Back in the '80s Connecticut and Massachusetts originally requested the I-290 designation be extended from the Mass Pike to Waterford along what is now I-395 (formerly Route 52). That request was rejected by AASHTO, and I-395 was approved instead. I don't know what the rationale was behind AASHTO rejecting the I-290 designation request. Maybe someone more familiar with the history of the I-395 designation could chime in.

I'll go with roadgeekteen here - I-90 doesn't reach Connecticut , so I-290 would have been an anomaly.  A more logical replacement would have been I-93, but I-93 got split off from I-91 in Vermont; also, I-97 would have been a good replacement, but there's already a CT 97 and MA/NH 97, so those routes would have had to been changed.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Roadgeekteen on August 06, 2021, 05:11:09 PM
Quote from: bjcolby50 on August 06, 2021, 05:07:03 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on August 04, 2021, 02:57:35 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 09:14:37 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on August 02, 2021, 08:22:00 PM
I still say having 395 bend east on the CT Turnpike leg (SR 695) and having 290 start at the split in Danielson is the easiest for MassDOT.  Yes, CT would need to re-renumber the stretch north of there, but you eliminate the Mass confusion.
Connecticut won't do that.
Back in the '80s Connecticut and Massachusetts originally requested the I-290 designation be extended from the Mass Pike to Waterford along what is now I-395 (formerly Route 52). That request was rejected by AASHTO, and I-395 was approved instead. I don't know what the rationale was behind AASHTO rejecting the I-290 designation request. Maybe someone more familiar with the history of the I-395 designation could chime in.

I'll go with roadgeekteen here - I-90 doesn't reach Connecticut , so I-290 would have been an anomaly.  A more logical replacement would have been I-93, but I-93 got split off from I-91 in Vermont; also, I-97 would have been a good replacement, but there's already a CT 97 and MA/NH 97, so those routes would have had to been changed.
I-97? That breaks the grid, but at least it's longer than the Maryland.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on August 06, 2021, 06:02:33 PM
MassDOT posted to Twitter reminding everyone of the upcoming exit renumbering on I-395 and I-290:
"Upcoming statewide exit renumbering work on I-290 and I-395, between #Marlborough and #Webster. Sign installation begins 8/8 and will take place nightly from 8pm until 5am, for  approx. 2 weeks. This will be final corridor to be completed. https://newmassexits.com/#it-schedule"

If you click on the website link it will take you to the list of Interstates to be renumbered that has not been updated for weeks with no completion date for I-495 and I-395 and I-290 listed as TBD. If you're going to post the link, at least update the information on the other end.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bjcolby50 on August 07, 2021, 03:30:27 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 06, 2021, 05:11:09 PM
Quote from: bjcolby50 on August 06, 2021, 05:07:03 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on August 04, 2021, 02:57:35 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on August 02, 2021, 09:14:37 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on August 02, 2021, 08:22:00 PM
I still say having 395 bend east on the CT Turnpike leg (SR 695) and having 290 start at the split in Danielson is the easiest for MassDOT.  Yes, CT would need to re-renumber the stretch north of there, but you eliminate the Mass confusion.
Connecticut won't do that.
Back in the '80s Connecticut and Massachusetts originally requested the I-290 designation be extended from the Mass Pike to Waterford along what is now I-395 (formerly Route 52). That request was rejected by AASHTO, and I-395 was approved instead. I don't know what the rationale was behind AASHTO rejecting the I-290 designation request. Maybe someone more familiar with the history of the I-395 designation could chime in.

I'll go with roadgeekteen here - I-90 doesn't reach Connecticut , so I-290 would have been an anomaly.  A more logical replacement would have been I-93, but I-93 got split off from I-91 in Vermont; also, I-97 would have been a good replacement, but there's already a CT 97 and MA/NH 97, so those routes would have had to been changed.
I-97? That breaks the grid, but at least it's longer than the Maryland.

True.  In order to be "in the grid," I-97 would have to be east of I-95.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on August 09, 2021, 07:05:25 PM
I-495 exit renumbering update:  the abomination exit gore signs in the Andover/Lawrence area have been modified with smaller letters to properly fit 3-digit numbers, or 4-digit numbers (3 + the A or B).  They look much better.  Didn't get any pics as I was traveling through at night.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: JWF1959 on August 29, 2021, 02:12:22 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed, but it looks like 395N is now concurrent with I-290 all the way from it's old end point (at I-290 and the Mass Pike) to I-495.

The mile markers now show the mileage points for both I-290 and I-395.

However, the signage still shows "End 395, Begin 290" at 290/MA Pike interchange.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on August 29, 2021, 03:41:35 PM
Quote from: JWF1959 on August 29, 2021, 02:12:22 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed, but it looks like 395N is now concurrent with I-290 all the way from it's old end point (at I-290 and the Mass Pike) to I-495.

The mile markers now show the mileage points for both I-290 and I-395.

However, the signage still shows "End 395, Begin 290" at 290/MA Pike interchange.
That's MA's dual milemarker plan.  They're not actually extending I-395 at this time.  It would have been simpler to just have I-290 itself continue I-395's milemarkers directly, but that option seems to have required too much imagination for MassDOT's bureaucrats.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on August 29, 2021, 09:40:07 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 29, 2021, 03:41:35 PM
Quote from: JWF1959 on August 29, 2021, 02:12:22 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed, but it looks like 395N is now concurrent with I-290 all the way from it's old end point (at I-290 and the Mass Pike) to I-495.

The mile markers now show the mileage points for both I-290 and I-395.

However, the signage still shows "End 395, Begin 290" at 290/MA Pike interchange.
That's MA's dual milemarker plan.  They're not actually extending I-395 at this time.  It would have been simpler to just have I-290 itself continue I-395's milemarkers directly, but that option seems to have required too much imagination for MassDOT's bureaucrats.
Agreed. Given they wanted dual milemarkers, couldn't they have put up the new ones without the I-395 shields? Seems like they're going out of the way to confuse people, or they are seriously considering dropping I-290 for I-395 north of the Pike, which they said they would consider if it caused too much confusion (a self-fulfilling prophecy?). Why not simply post 'Exit Mile' or 'Total Mile' markers instead?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on August 31, 2021, 11:44:29 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on August 29, 2021, 09:40:07 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 29, 2021, 03:41:35 PM
Quote from: JWF1959 on August 29, 2021, 02:12:22 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed, but it looks like 395N is now concurrent with I-290 all the way from it's old end point (at I-290 and the Mass Pike) to I-495.

The mile markers now show the mileage points for both I-290 and I-395.

However, the signage still shows "End 395, Begin 290" at 290/MA Pike interchange.
That's MA's dual milemarker plan.  They're not actually extending I-395 at this time.  It would have been simpler to just have I-290 itself continue I-395's milemarkers directly, but that option seems to have required too much imagination for MassDOT's bureaucrats.
Agreed. Given they wanted dual milemarkers, couldn't they have put up the new ones without the I-395 shields? Seems like they're going out of the way to confuse people, or they are seriously considering dropping I-290 for I-395 north of the Pike, which they said they would consider if it caused too much confusion (a self-fulfilling prophecy?). Why not simply post 'Exit Mile' or 'Total Mile' markers instead?
Here's the first set of dual mile markers heading east on I-290:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs821f.jpg)

In a few cases they put new I-395 mile markers up where the I-290 marker was not present, that isn't confusing, is it? Here's an example in Shrewsbury:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs821pp.jpg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on August 31, 2021, 09:08:20 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on August 31, 2021, 11:44:29 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on August 29, 2021, 09:40:07 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 29, 2021, 03:41:35 PM
Quote from: JWF1959 on August 29, 2021, 02:12:22 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed, but it looks like 395N is now concurrent with I-290 all the way from it's old end point (at I-290 and the Mass Pike) to I-495.

The mile markers now show the mileage points for both I-290 and I-395.

However, the signage still shows "End 395, Begin 290" at 290/MA Pike interchange.
That's MA's dual milemarker plan.  They're not actually extending I-395 at this time.  It would have been simpler to just have I-290 itself continue I-395's milemarkers directly, but that option seems to have required too much imagination for MassDOT's bureaucrats.
Agreed. Given they wanted dual milemarkers, couldn't they have put up the new ones without the I-395 shields? Seems like they're going out of the way to confuse people, or they are seriously considering dropping I-290 for I-395 north of the Pike, which they said they would consider if it caused too much confusion (a self-fulfilling prophecy?). Why not simply post 'Exit Mile' or 'Total Mile' markers instead?
Here's the first set of dual mile markers heading east on I-290:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs821f.jpg)

In a few cases they put new I-395 mile markers up where the I-290 marker was not present, that isn't confusing, is it? Here's an example in Shrewsbury:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs821pp.jpg)
What's weird is I was just through there at the beginning of August, looked for these, and didn't see any.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on September 03, 2021, 11:48:40 AM
An example of exit renumbering along I-395 North:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i395signs821dd.jpg)

I've posted photos taken of exit renumbering along I-395 last Monday at New England Exit Renumbering Central:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos)

MassDOT's Exit Renumbering site now indicates work on all routes is complete.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 74/171FAN on September 03, 2021, 03:18:23 PM
Bob, did you quote yourself??

(Whatever I saw earlier seems to have been fixed.)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Ben114 on September 03, 2021, 11:22:02 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on August 31, 2021, 11:44:29 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on August 29, 2021, 09:40:07 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 29, 2021, 03:41:35 PM
Quote from: JWF1959 on August 29, 2021, 02:12:22 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed, but it looks like 395N is now concurrent with I-290 all the way from it's old end point (at I-290 and the Mass Pike) to I-495.

The mile markers now show the mileage points for both I-290 and I-395.

However, the signage still shows "End 395, Begin 290" at 290/MA Pike interchange.
That's MA's dual milemarker plan.  They're not actually extending I-395 at this time.  It would have been simpler to just have I-290 itself continue I-395's milemarkers directly, but that option seems to have required too much imagination for MassDOT's bureaucrats.
Agreed. Given they wanted dual milemarkers, couldn't they have put up the new ones without the I-395 shields? Seems like they're going out of the way to confuse people, or they are seriously considering dropping I-290 for I-395 north of the Pike, which they said they would consider if it caused too much confusion (a self-fulfilling prophecy?). Why not simply post 'Exit Mile' or 'Total Mile' markers instead?
Here's the first set of dual mile markers heading east on I-290:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs821f.jpg)

In a few cases they put new I-395 mile markers up where the I-290 marker was not present, that isn't confusing, is it? Here's an example in Shrewsbury:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs821pp.jpg)

That might bring some confusion. If they wanted to have the I-395 mileage continue, they should have just did what happened on I-17 in AZ where the I-17 mile markers start at 100-something.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on September 04, 2021, 12:02:39 AM
^ The dual I-290/I-395 mile markers reminds me of this example of redundancy in my home state...
(https://i.imgur.com/6c0BWRo.png?1)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: rushfan01760 on September 04, 2021, 08:26:53 AM
Quote from: Alps on August 31, 2021, 09:08:20 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on August 31, 2021, 11:44:29 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on August 29, 2021, 09:40:07 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 29, 2021, 03:41:35 PM
Quote from: JWF1959 on August 29, 2021, 02:12:22 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed, but it looks like 395N is now concurrent with I-290 all the way from it's old end point (at I-290 and the Mass Pike) to I-495.

The mile markers now show the mileage points for both I-290 and I-395.

However, the signage still shows "End 395, Begin 290" at 290/MA Pike interchange.
That's MA's dual milemarker plan.  They're not actually extending I-395 at this time.  It would have been simpler to just have I-290 itself continue I-395's milemarkers directly, but that option seems to have required too much imagination for MassDOT's bureaucrats.
Agreed. Given they wanted dual milemarkers, couldn't they have put up the new ones without the I-395 shields? Seems like they're going out of the way to confuse people, or they are seriously considering dropping I-290 for I-395 north of the Pike, which they said they would consider if it caused too much confusion (a self-fulfilling prophecy?). Why not simply post 'Exit Mile' or 'Total Mile' markers instead?
Here's the first set of dual mile markers heading east on I-290:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs821f.jpg)

In a few cases they put new I-395 mile markers up where the I-290 marker was not present, that isn't confusing, is it? Here's an example in Shrewsbury:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs821pp.jpg)
What's weird is I was just through there at the beginning of August, looked for these, and didn't see any.

On top of this, there appears to be a gap at Exit 11B on I-395 North (at least as of this past Sunday).  The mile marker at the exit gore is for mile 11.6.  However, at the onramp merge immediately following (where I-290 mile marker 0 is) the next I-395 mile marker is for mile 12.  What happened to mile 11.8?  :hmmm:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on September 04, 2021, 10:25:14 PM
Quote from: rushfan01760 on September 04, 2021, 08:26:53 AM
Quote from: Alps on August 31, 2021, 09:08:20 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on August 31, 2021, 11:44:29 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on August 29, 2021, 09:40:07 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 29, 2021, 03:41:35 PM
Quote from: JWF1959 on August 29, 2021, 02:12:22 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed, but it looks like 395N is now concurrent with I-290 all the way from it's old end point (at I-290 and the Mass Pike) to I-495.

The mile markers now show the mileage points for both I-290 and I-395.

However, the signage still shows "End 395, Begin 290" at 290/MA Pike interchange.
That's MA's dual milemarker plan.  They're not actually extending I-395 at this time.  It would have been simpler to just have I-290 itself continue I-395's milemarkers directly, but that option seems to have required too much imagination for MassDOT's bureaucrats.
Agreed. Given they wanted dual milemarkers, couldn't they have put up the new ones without the I-395 shields? Seems like they're going out of the way to confuse people, or they are seriously considering dropping I-290 for I-395 north of the Pike, which they said they would consider if it caused too much confusion (a self-fulfilling prophecy?). Why not simply post 'Exit Mile' or 'Total Mile' markers instead?
Here's the first set of dual mile markers heading east on I-290:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs821f.jpg)

In a few cases they put new I-395 mile markers up where the I-290 marker was not present, that isn't confusing, is it? Here's an example in Shrewsbury:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs821pp.jpg)
What's weird is I was just through there at the beginning of August, looked for these, and didn't see any.

On top of this, there appears to be a gap at Exit 11B on I-395 North (at least as of this past Sunday).  The mile marker at the exit gore is for mile 11.6.  However, at the onramp merge immediately following (where I-290 mile marker 0 is) the next I-395 mile marker is for mile 12.  What happened to mile 11.8?  :hmmm:
I'm guessing they skipped 11.8 in order to sync the miles up.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Old Dominionite on September 05, 2021, 11:08:29 AM
During all my years in New England (including 4 years of college in Worcester), I never thought twice about I-395 and I-290, and I never heard anyone else voice confusion or concern about the numbering change at the Mass. Pike. To me I-395 and I-290 have always functioned as separate routes. For example, coming westbound on I-290, the majority of traffic exits either at the Pike or US 20.

I don't see any value in placing dual mileposts on I-290. And I certainly don't see any value to renumbering I-290 as an extension of I-395 in the future. I think that move would cause significant confusion within and around Worcester -- to say nothing about the costs to businesses having to remarket themselves and educate customer bases.

And what happens to I-190? Does it keep the same number and serve as a disconnected orphan route (now confusingly) several miles from its parent route, or does it have to renumbered as well?

I think the current numbering convention works. I-395 is a spur from I-95 through eastern Connecticut up into central Massachusetts. I-290 is a loop through Worcester that parallels its parent route to the north. And I-190 is a spur off I-290 to the Fitchburg area.

MassDOT's ideas of placing dual mileposts and potentially renumbering I-290 appear to be "solutions" in search of a problem.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on September 05, 2021, 11:22:47 AM
Quote from: Old Dominionite on September 05, 2021, 11:08:29 AM
During all my years in New England (including 4 years of college in Worcester), I never thought twice about I-395 and I-290, and I never heard anyone else voice confusion or concern about the numbering change at the Mass. Pike. To me I-395 and I-290 have always functioned as separate routes. For example, coming westbound on I-290, the majority of traffic exits either at the Pike or US 20.
For some history, I-290 came first, and it was initially the number proposed for the Worcester-New London interstate, as it's pretty much a continuation south. Not sure why it was changed to I-395 later down the line in the drawing board, but I guess that it has something to do with AASHTO getting picky with the numbering.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: JWF1959 on September 05, 2021, 03:19:39 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 05, 2021, 11:22:47 AM
Quote from: Old Dominionite on September 05, 2021, 11:08:29 AM
During all my years in New England (including 4 years of college in Worcester), I never thought twice about I-395 and I-290, and I never heard anyone else voice confusion or concern about the numbering change at the Mass. Pike. To me I-395 and I-290 have always functioned as separate routes. For example, coming westbound on I-290, the majority of traffic exits either at the Pike or US 20.
For some history, I-290 came first, and it was initially the number proposed for the Worcester-New London interstate, as it's pretty much a continuation south. Not sure why it was changed to I-395 later down the line in the drawing board, but I guess that it has something to do with AASHTO getting picky with the numbering.

Wasn't I-395 originally numbered Route 52 for awhile?  I seem to remember where I-290 ended, the road became Route 52 for a period of time.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: snowc on September 05, 2021, 03:34:07 PM
So that means bye bye to Left Exit 12?  :wow:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: hotdogPi on September 05, 2021, 03:34:27 PM
Quote from: snowc on September 05, 2021, 03:34:07 PM
So that means bye bye to Left Exit 12?  :wow:

It's already gone.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: snowc on September 05, 2021, 03:34:52 PM
Quote from: 1 on September 05, 2021, 03:34:27 PM
Quote from: snowc on September 05, 2021, 03:34:07 PM
So that means bye bye to Left Exit 12?  :wow:

It's already gone.
That's so sad!  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on September 06, 2021, 12:28:24 AM
It's left exit 26 now.

Btw, any images of the "left exit 12" sign with the new 26 exit number? I checked this thread , and didn't find any here.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on September 06, 2021, 02:34:26 AM
Quote from: JWF1959 on September 05, 2021, 03:19:39 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 05, 2021, 11:22:47 AM
Quote from: Old Dominionite on September 05, 2021, 11:08:29 AM
During all my years in New England (including 4 years of college in Worcester), I never thought twice about I-395 and I-290, and I never heard anyone else voice confusion or concern about the numbering change at the Mass. Pike. To me I-395 and I-290 have always functioned as separate routes. For example, coming westbound on I-290, the majority of traffic exits either at the Pike or US 20.
For some history, I-290 came first, and it was initially the number proposed for the Worcester-New London interstate, as it's pretty much a continuation south. Not sure why it was changed to I-395 later down the line in the drawing board, but I guess that it has something to do with AASHTO getting picky with the numbering.

Wasn't I-395 originally numbered Route 52 for awhile?  I seem to remember where I-290 ended, the road became Route 52 for a period of time.

That would've been the case prior to 1983.  I-395 was CT/MA 52.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: snowc on September 06, 2021, 07:15:35 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 06, 2021, 12:28:24 AM
It's left exit 26 now.

Btw, any images of the "left exit 12" sign with the new 26 exit number? I checked this thread , and didn't find any here.
Only one I can find is a meme that I made.
(https://i.imgur.com/54Gnh0p.png)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: yakra on September 06, 2021, 09:49:36 AM
1009x636 JPEG (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95signs421xx.jpg)

Go to https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i95signs4 and search for the string Old EXIT 12
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on September 08, 2021, 12:14:34 AM
I've completed posting photos taken of exit renumbering along I-290 East, including some which include examples of the dual mile markers:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs821ddd.jpg)

All can be found here: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i290signs (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i290signs)

I hope to get photos of along I-290 West soon.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on September 08, 2021, 12:24:52 PM
According to this article, MassDOT announced yesterday that the Exit Renumbering Project is complete:
https://www.masslive.com/news/2021/09/massachusetts-highway-exit-renumbering-complete.html (https://www.masslive.com/news/2021/09/massachusetts-highway-exit-renumbering-complete.html)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on September 08, 2021, 04:09:20 PM
I received an email from MassDOT today, indicating that the exit renumbering project is complete.

You have to give the contractors a lot of credit, completing this in under a year during a global pandemic.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on September 08, 2021, 10:41:06 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on September 08, 2021, 04:09:20 PM
I received an email from MassDOT today, indicating that the exit renumbering project is complete.

You have to give the contractors a lot of credit, completing this in under a year during a global pandemic.
Here's the official MassDOT blog post that echoes the email:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/statewide-exit-renumbering-work-complete/ (http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/statewide-exit-renumbering-work-complete/)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on September 09, 2021, 06:23:49 PM
I do have to hand it to them (MassDOT, and the contractor) for getting it done so quickly and efficiently.  After the first attempt a couple years ago, we weren't sure when/if the state was going to convert, but then they went for it, and got it done. 

A lot of states could learn from this... (cough...CT...cough).  A project will be released next year to renumber CT 8's exits.  For some reason, CT is changing out perfectly good exit tabs (some tabs on signs that haven't even been installed yet) instead of using overlays.  Seems like an incredible waste of time and money.  No wonder the project to renumber CT exits will take 10 years. 
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on September 13, 2021, 04:27:11 PM
Some of the new exit numbers (and old exit number signs) can now be viewed on Google Maps Street View!

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9929188,-71.179675,3a,25.6y,115.02h,88.99t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-VHC2Hvr-fmCet8BeWLzxA!2e0!5s20210701T000000!7i16384!8i8192
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on September 23, 2021, 11:28:52 PM
I've posted the photos taken during a trip along I-290 East last Sunday, these include many new overhead signs with non-centered numbers on their exit tabs:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs921gg.jpg)

and the placing of a wrong exit number for the MA 122A exit, should be 17 (MA 122 is 18), the distance is wrong to, it is 1 1/2 miles to the MA 122A ramp from the sign location:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs921aa.jpg)

All the photos are at New England Exit Renumbering Central:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i290signs (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i290signs)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on September 24, 2021, 11:52:32 PM
With the Exit Renumbering Project completed, I've summarized my views on both the good and the not so good aspects of the project on the Gribblenation Blog Site:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on September 25, 2021, 01:43:12 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2021, 11:52:32 PM
With the Exit Renumbering Project completed, I've summarized my views on both the good and the not so good aspects of the project on the Gribblenation Blog Site:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html)
I thought Gribblenation is mainly focused on roads in the Southwestern US (California mostly) from the compilation thread (and all the threads in the Southwest board) for the site. Nice to see it expanding to other parts of the country.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on September 25, 2021, 02:00:15 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 25, 2021, 01:43:12 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2021, 11:52:32 PM
With the Exit Renumbering Project completed, I've summarized my views on both the good and the not so good aspects of the project on the Gribblenation Blog Site:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html)
I thought Gribblenation is mainly focused on roads in the Southwestern US (California mostly) from the compilation thread (and all the threads in the Southwest board) for the site. Nice to see it expanding to other parts of the country.
Um, Gribblenation is a northeastern-based website... it just happens to have a quite active SW contributor.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on September 25, 2021, 02:08:47 AM
Quote from: Alps on September 25, 2021, 02:00:15 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 25, 2021, 01:43:12 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2021, 11:52:32 PM
With the Exit Renumbering Project completed, I've summarized my views on both the good and the not so good aspects of the project on the Gribblenation Blog Site:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html)
I thought Gribblenation is mainly focused on roads in the Southwestern US (California mostly) from the compilation thread (and all the threads in the Southwest board) for the site. Nice to see it expanding to other parts of the country.
Um, Gribblenation is a northeastern-based website... it just happens to have a quite active SW contributor.
Oh... I didn't know that.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: CanesFan27 on September 25, 2021, 09:52:39 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 25, 2021, 01:43:12 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2021, 11:52:32 PM
With the Exit Renumbering Project completed, I've summarized my views on both the good and the not so good aspects of the project on the Gribblenation Blog Site:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html)
I thought Gribblenation is mainly focused on roads in the Southwestern US (California mostly) from the compilation thread (and all the threads in the Southwest board) for the site. Nice to see it expanding to other parts of the country.

You don't know us that well, do you?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Rothman on September 25, 2021, 11:06:42 AM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on September 25, 2021, 09:52:39 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 25, 2021, 01:43:12 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2021, 11:52:32 PM
With the Exit Renumbering Project completed, I've summarized my views on both the good and the not so good aspects of the project on the Gribblenation Blog Site:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html)
I thought Gribblenation is mainly focused on roads in the Southwestern US (California mostly) from the compilation thread (and all the threads in the Southwest board) for the site. Nice to see it expanding to other parts of the country.

You don't know us that well, do you?
Hey now, give the overly assertive newbie a little slack.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on September 25, 2021, 12:39:30 PM
Quote from: Rothman on September 25, 2021, 11:06:42 AM
Quote from: CanesFan27 on September 25, 2021, 09:52:39 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on September 25, 2021, 01:43:12 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2021, 11:52:32 PM
With the Exit Renumbering Project completed, I've summarized my views on both the good and the not so good aspects of the project on the Gribblenation Blog Site:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html)
I thought Gribblenation is mainly focused on roads in the Southwestern US (California mostly) from the compilation thread (and all the threads in the Southwest board) for the site. Nice to see it expanding to other parts of the country.

You don't know us that well, do you?
Hey now, give the overly assertive newbie a little slack.
sure why not now
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: CtrlAltDel on September 25, 2021, 12:56:45 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2021, 11:52:32 PM
With the Exit Renumbering Project completed, I've summarized my views on both the good and the not so good aspects of the project on the Gribblenation Blog Site:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html)
They really half-assed that conversion, didn't they?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SkyPesos on September 25, 2021, 01:06:45 PM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on September 25, 2021, 12:56:45 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2021, 11:52:32 PM
With the Exit Renumbering Project completed, I've summarized my views on both the good and the not so good aspects of the project on the Gribblenation Blog Site:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html)
They really half-assed that conversion, didn't they?
I think the tiny ass numbers are a bigger issue than the oversized ones, despite both not being aesthetically pleasing. Like even zooming into this image (from the linked blog post), I still can't make out what number it is:
(https://i.imgur.com/DfM12JZ.png)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: machias on September 26, 2021, 12:13:34 AM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on September 25, 2021, 12:56:45 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2021, 11:52:32 PM
With the Exit Renumbering Project completed, I've summarized my views on both the good and the not so good aspects of the project on the Gribblenation Blog Site:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html)


They really half-assed that conversion, didn't they?

From what I've seen in photos on forums and the like, 98 to 99% of the signs were converted to new exit numbers without an issue. There's some outliers here and there, and yes, these could have been addressed from the onset, but getting 98 to 99% of the project completed without an issue is not "half-assed".  The vast majority of the signs are legible without an issue, even if differences in numeral style or something makes it obvious it was an overlay. It works, and that's what's important.

Now, that other 1% of signs, like the attractions sign show above? Not only is the contractor off base on the installation, but did the inspector sign off on it?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: CtrlAltDel on September 26, 2021, 12:51:00 AM
Quote from: machias on September 26, 2021, 12:13:34 AM
The vast majority of the signs are legible without an issue, even if differences in numeral style or something makes it obvious it was an overlay.

Fair enough, but that's pretty much what I mean by half-assed: it could be worse, but it could be better, too.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on September 26, 2021, 10:03:09 PM
Quote from: machias on September 26, 2021, 12:13:34 AM
Quote from: CtrlAltDel on September 25, 2021, 12:56:45 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2021, 11:52:32 PM
With the Exit Renumbering Project completed, I've summarized my views on both the good and the not so good aspects of the project on the Gribblenation Blog Site:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html)


They really half-assed that conversion, didn't they?

From what I've seen in photos on forums and the like, 98 to 99% of the signs were converted to new exit numbers without an issue. There's some outliers here and there, and yes, these could have been addressed from the onset, but getting 98 to 99% of the project completed without an issue is not "half-assed".  The vast majority of the signs are legible without an issue, even if differences in numeral style or something makes it obvious it was an overlay. It works, and that's what's important.

Now, that other 1% of signs, like the attractions sign show above? Not only is the contractor off base on the installation, but did the inspector sign off on it?
If the difference in numerals makes it obvious that it's an overlay, I'd call that half-assed, even if it works.  I can understand where using regular numerals would have required a sign replacement, but there are plenty of examples where the sign was specifically designed to accommodate a larger exit number in preparation for the conversion but narrow numerals were used anyways.  This is particularly prevalent on gore signs for the MassPike.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on September 27, 2021, 10:20:04 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on September 24, 2021, 11:52:32 PM
With the Exit Renumbering Project completed, I've summarized my views on both the good and the not so good aspects of the project on the Gribblenation Blog Site:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html (https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/massachusetts-exit-renumbering-good-bad.html)

I agree with some of the comments in this blog post.  Most notably, the I-95/MA 128 exit off Rte. 2 not being Exits 128 A-B, some of the exit numbers on "standalone" 128 in Beverly being off by 2 in some cases, the exit number font/sizes being inconsistent, and the dual-mileposts along I-290.

However, the "old exit" signs are temporary, so they don't need to be critiqued.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: mrsman on October 19, 2021, 11:57:44 AM
Quote from: Alps on August 31, 2021, 09:08:20 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on August 31, 2021, 11:44:29 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on August 29, 2021, 09:40:07 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 29, 2021, 03:41:35 PM
Quote from: JWF1959 on August 29, 2021, 02:12:22 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed, but it looks like 395N is now concurrent with I-290 all the way from it's old end point (at I-290 and the Mass Pike) to I-495.

The mile markers now show the mileage points for both I-290 and I-395.

However, the signage still shows "End 395, Begin 290" at 290/MA Pike interchange.
That's MA's dual milemarker plan.  They're not actually extending I-395 at this time.  It would have been simpler to just have I-290 itself continue I-395's milemarkers directly, but that option seems to have required too much imagination for MassDOT's bureaucrats.
Agreed. Given they wanted dual milemarkers, couldn't they have put up the new ones without the I-395 shields? Seems like they're going out of the way to confuse people, or they are seriously considering dropping I-290 for I-395 north of the Pike, which they said they would consider if it caused too much confusion (a self-fulfilling prophecy?). Why not simply post 'Exit Mile' or 'Total Mile' markers instead?
Here's the first set of dual mile markers heading east on I-290:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs821f.jpg)

In a few cases they put new I-395 mile markers up where the I-290 marker was not present, that isn't confusing, is it? Here's an example in Shrewsbury:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i290signs821pp.jpg)
What's weird is I was just through there at the beginning of August, looked for these, and didn't see any.

I wonder if this was done because of a (mis)interpretation of the FHWA regulations regarding mileage based exit numbers.

- The old system had sequential numbers where the numbering of 395 continued seamlessly onto the numbering of 290.
- The state wants to continue that pattern in the mileage based system, 395's numbering continuing onto 290
- The state also (at least for the present time) wants to keep 395 and 290 as two separate highways, as opposed to renumbering 290 as part of 395 or vice versa
- An interpreation of the FHWA regs would require exit numbers to start at zero at its southernmost or westernmost point within a state
- An interpretation of the FHWA regs would also require that the exit numbers match the milepost numbers that are posted along the shoulder
-The above means that where 395 ends and 290 begins, the exit numbering must restart
- This could lead to some level of confusion, particularly in the US 20/MA-12/I-90 area where it all comes together.
- To avoid that, continue 395's exit numbering onto 290 and also continue 395's mileposts onto 290
- But 290 needs its own milepost numbers, hence the double milepost system that is now in place
- Whether there is now a (secret) multiplex of 395 onto 290 is an unresolved question


In my mind, the result is needlessly complicated.  It would have been far better for the driving public to have one set of mileposts and one set of exit numbers. Period. If it means that 290 starts at milepost 12, instead of milepost 0, so be it.

There are examples of interstates where the mileposts and/or exit numbers don't start at zero.  Most often, because of planned extensions to the west or south that never ended up being built.  Also, this tends to happen where the Interstate is concurrent with a longer state or US highway and the road follows the mileposts and exit numbers of the underlying state or US highway.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on October 19, 2021, 09:57:52 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 19, 2021, 11:57:44 AM
- An interpretation of the FHWA regs would also require that the exit numbers match the milepost numbers that are posted along the shoulder
Such interpretation is incorrect.  Strongly prefers, yes, requires, no.  See the actual text of Section 2H.05:

Quote
Guidance:
13 Zero distance should begin at the south and west State lines, or at the south and west terminus points where routes begin within a State.

Should, not shall.  I would say that this area is a reasonable exception.  As such, the situation strikes me as similar to NCDOT assuming that the even/odd rule holds for 3dis and posting I-587 as north-south.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: yakra on October 21, 2021, 03:35:23 PM
Sounds like a case of south state line to me.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 21, 2021, 03:57:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 19, 2021, 09:57:52 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 19, 2021, 11:57:44 AM
- An interpretation of the FHWA regs would also require that the exit numbers match the milepost numbers that are posted along the shoulder
Such interpretation is incorrect.  Strongly prefers, yes, requires, no.  See the actual text of Section 2H.05:

Quote
Guidance:
13 Zero distance should begin at the south and west State lines, or at the south and west terminus points where routes begin within a State.

Should, not shall.  I would say that this area is a reasonable exception.  As such, the situation strikes me as similar to NCDOT assuming that the even/odd rule holds for 3dis and posting I-587 as north-south.
For those who believe MassDOT was wrong in posting the dual mileposts because of a violation of federal guidance, remember that the FHWA signed off on MassDOT's plans so that they could get 90% federal funding for the project. They therefore did not apparently have a problem with the continuous exit numbering along I-395/I-290 or saw it as a violation of the MUTCD.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on October 21, 2021, 08:20:34 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 21, 2021, 03:57:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 19, 2021, 09:57:52 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 19, 2021, 11:57:44 AM
- An interpretation of the FHWA regs would also require that the exit numbers match the milepost numbers that are posted along the shoulder
Such interpretation is incorrect.  Strongly prefers, yes, requires, no.  See the actual text of Section 2H.05:

Quote
Guidance:
13 Zero distance should begin at the south and west State lines, or at the south and west terminus points where routes begin within a State.

Should, not shall.  I would say that this area is a reasonable exception.  As such, the situation strikes me as similar to NCDOT assuming that the even/odd rule holds for 3dis and posting I-587 as north-south.
Remember that the FHWA signed off on MassDOT's plans so that they could get 90% federal funding for the project. They therefore did not apparently have a problem with the continuous exit numbering along I-395/I-290 or saw it as a violation of the MUTCD.
I did not say the MUTCD has a problem with I-290 continuing I-395's numbering.  Quite the opposite, in fact.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: mrsman on October 22, 2021, 05:13:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 21, 2021, 08:20:34 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 21, 2021, 03:57:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 19, 2021, 09:57:52 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 19, 2021, 11:57:44 AM
- An interpretation of the FHWA regs would also require that the exit numbers match the milepost numbers that are posted along the shoulder
Such interpretation is incorrect.  Strongly prefers, yes, requires, no.  See the actual text of Section 2H.05:

Quote
Guidance:
13 Zero distance should begin at the south and west State lines, or at the south and west terminus points where routes begin within a State.

Should, not shall.  I would say that this area is a reasonable exception.  As such, the situation strikes me as similar to NCDOT assuming that the even/odd rule holds for 3dis and posting I-587 as north-south.
Remember that the FHWA signed off on MassDOT's plans so that they could get 90% federal funding for the project. They therefore did not apparently have a problem with the continuous exit numbering along I-395/I-290 or saw it as a violation of the MUTCD.
I did not say the MUTCD has a problem with I-290 continuing I-395's numbering.  Quite the opposite, in fact.

Correct.  The MUTCD recommends (with the word should) but does not require that the zero distance point start at the west terminus of I-290.  MassDOT misinterpreted this as a requirement, hence their perceived need to keep signing the I-395 mileposts north of Mass Pike.

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on October 23, 2021, 12:08:12 AM
Quote from: mrsman on October 22, 2021, 05:13:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 21, 2021, 08:20:34 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 21, 2021, 03:57:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 19, 2021, 09:57:52 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 19, 2021, 11:57:44 AM
- An interpretation of the FHWA regs would also require that the exit numbers match the milepost numbers that are posted along the shoulder
Such interpretation is incorrect.  Strongly prefers, yes, requires, no.  See the actual text of Section 2H.05:

Quote
Guidance:
13 Zero distance should begin at the south and west State lines, or at the south and west terminus points where routes begin within a State.

Should, not shall.  I would say that this area is a reasonable exception.  As such, the situation strikes me as similar to NCDOT assuming that the even/odd rule holds for 3dis and posting I-587 as north-south.
Remember that the FHWA signed off on MassDOT's plans so that they could get 90% federal funding for the project. They therefore did not apparently have a problem with the continuous exit numbering along I-395/I-290 or saw it as a violation of the MUTCD.
I did not say the MUTCD has a problem with I-290 continuing I-395's numbering.  Quite the opposite, in fact.

Correct.  The MUTCD recommends (with the word should) but does not require that the zero distance point start at the west terminus of I-290.  MassDOT misinterpreted this as a requirement, hence their perceived need to keep signing the I-395 mileposts north of Mass Pike.


NJDOT misinterpreted that they couldn't sign I-295 east-west north of Trenton because the exit numbers would be going backwards. We should have a "DOT misinterpretations of MUTCD" thread and see what else pops in.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: mrsman on October 23, 2021, 09:13:45 PM
Quote from: Alps on October 23, 2021, 12:08:12 AM
Quote from: mrsman on October 22, 2021, 05:13:21 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 21, 2021, 08:20:34 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 21, 2021, 03:57:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 19, 2021, 09:57:52 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 19, 2021, 11:57:44 AM
- An interpretation of the FHWA regs would also require that the exit numbers match the milepost numbers that are posted along the shoulder
Such interpretation is incorrect.  Strongly prefers, yes, requires, no.  See the actual text of Section 2H.05:

Quote
Guidance:
13 Zero distance should begin at the south and west State lines, or at the south and west terminus points where routes begin within a State.

Should, not shall.  I would say that this area is a reasonable exception.  As such, the situation strikes me as similar to NCDOT assuming that the even/odd rule holds for 3dis and posting I-587 as north-south.
Remember that the FHWA signed off on MassDOT's plans so that they could get 90% federal funding for the project. They therefore did not apparently have a problem with the continuous exit numbering along I-395/I-290 or saw it as a violation of the MUTCD.
I did not say the MUTCD has a problem with I-290 continuing I-395's numbering.  Quite the opposite, in fact.

Correct.  The MUTCD recommends (with the word should) but does not require that the zero distance point start at the west terminus of I-290.  MassDOT misinterpreted this as a requirement, hence their perceived need to keep signing the I-395 mileposts north of Mass Pike.


NJDOT misinterpreted that they couldn't sign I-295 east-west north of Trenton because the exit numbers would be going backwards. We should have a "DOT misinterpretations of MUTCD" thread and see what else pops in.

I am still upset that this was numbered as I-295 at all.  The roadway between Langhorne, PA and Lawrence Township, NJ was once I-95, a separate designation from I-295 and worked fine as a north-south.  I understand (and applaud) the move of I-95 onto the Penn Turnpike once the I-95/Penn Turnpike interchage was completed, but the old roadway should have maintained a new number* altogether to not be confused with I-295.  The roadway as a whole is pointed north-south and it is weird that the north-south roadway in Pennsylvania is signed as east-west and the east-west roadway in NJ is signed as south-north.

You are left with confusion like signs that say I-295 north to I-95 south to Philadelphia.  Thank god for control cities, otherwise we would all get lost!



* My preference would have been I-695 which is unused in PA and NJ and is only a very small insignificant road in the NY area.  In my mind the situation at US 1 - I-295 - I-695 north of Trenton is very similar to US 101- I-280 - I-680 in San Jose.  I-280 and I-680 are both north-south freeways on different sides of the SF Bay that happen to be coterminous at US 101.  The main roadway from I-280 SB flows into I-680 NB (and vice versa).  Given that it makes a bit of a hair-pinned curve at this point, it is appropriate that both roadways are north-south.  I see the situation in the Trenton area to be very similar and regret that any part of this roadway is east-west.

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on October 24, 2021, 03:12:42 PM
Maybe they could extend 290 down to the state line along 395 and have them both mileposted starting at 0 there!  (Not gonna happen, but it's not any less silly than I-74 multiplexing with 77 in NC to end at the VA line, or how 69 disappears while running with 55, although that is "temporary".)  Then 395 could end where-ever they like leaving 290 to carry the numbers alone to its end.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 25, 2021, 12:24:51 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on October 24, 2021, 03:12:42 PM
Maybe they could extend 290 down to the state line along 395 and have them both mileposted starting at 0 there!  (Not gonna happen, but it's not any less silly than I-74 multiplexing with 77 in NC to end at the VA line, or how 69 disappears while running with 55, although that is "temporary".)  Then 395 could end where-ever they like leaving 290 to carry the numbers alone to its end.
Agree that that is unlikely. As for the other examples you bring up, VA has authorization to sign I-74 along I-77 to I-81, but has no incentive to do so. Perhaps when I-74 is signed along US 52 and around Winston-Salem groups seeking to encourage drivers to use the route to get between VA and SC could pressure VADOT to do so.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: mrsman on October 25, 2021, 08:30:07 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 25, 2021, 12:24:51 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on October 24, 2021, 03:12:42 PM
Maybe they could extend 290 down to the state line along 395 and have them both mileposted starting at 0 there!  (Not gonna happen, but it's not any less silly than I-74 multiplexing with 77 in NC to end at the VA line, or how 69 disappears while running with 55, although that is "temporary".)  Then 395 could end where-ever they like leaving 290 to carry the numbers alone to its end.
Agree that that is unlikely. As for the other examples you bring up, VA has authorization to sign I-74 along I-77 to I-81, but has no incentive to do so. Perhaps when I-74 is signed along US 52 and around Winston-Salem groups seeking to encourage drivers to use the route to get between VA and SC could pressure VADOT to do so.

PurdueBill's suggestion is not a bad one, and would seem to be better than what MASSDOT actually did.  I-290 and I-395 would both start at the state line, and both would have a zero milepost.  The roads continue north, and then I-395 terminates at I-90, while I-290 continues.  It is true that in both cases (this hypothetical and what MASSDOT did) we have a useless multiplex, but at least this hypothetical provides some simplicity since both roadways will have the same milepost numbers that will also match the exit numbers of the highway.

So looking at what MASSDOT actually did definitely fuels the speculation that they intend for I-395 to take over I-290.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on October 26, 2021, 11:57:28 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 25, 2021, 08:30:07 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 25, 2021, 12:24:51 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on October 24, 2021, 03:12:42 PM
Maybe they could extend 290 down to the state line along 395 and have them both mileposted starting at 0 there!  (Not gonna happen, but it's not any less silly than I-74 multiplexing with 77 in NC to end at the VA line, or how 69 disappears while running with 55, although that is "temporary".)  Then 395 could end where-ever they like leaving 290 to carry the numbers alone to its end.
Agree that that is unlikely. As for the other examples you bring up, VA has authorization to sign I-74 along I-77 to I-81, but has no incentive to do so. Perhaps when I-74 is signed along US 52 and around Winston-Salem groups seeking to encourage drivers to use the route to get between VA and SC could pressure VADOT to do so.

PurdueBill's suggestion is not a bad one, and would seem to be better than what MASSDOT actually did.  I-290 and I-395 would both start at the state line, and both would have a zero milepost.  The roads continue north, and then I-395 terminates at I-90, while I-290 continues.  It is true that in both cases (this hypothetical and what MASSDOT did) we have a useless multiplex, but at least this hypothetical provides some simplicity since both roadways will have the same milepost numbers that will also match the exit numbers of the highway.

So looking at what MASSDOT actually did definitely fuels the speculation that they intend for I-395 to take over I-290.

I also hate the idea of 190 being orphaned if 290 disappeared, with it becoming a branch off 395.  If they wanted it to remain a legit x90 while eliminating 290, they could have extended it down to 90 (silently for now, then sign it when 290 goes away, with its 0 milepoint at 90, but numbers not showing independently until it leaves 395).  Useless multiplex? Yep. Violating principle of lower-numbered route having priority in mileage/numbering? Yep. But it would technically make it a legit x90 still.  Probably simpler to just orphan it (still hate that) or renumber to an x95 (needless confusion, first renumbering exits on 190, then changing 190's number--a double whammy).  Why didn't they just leave 395 and 290 as they were?  Would have avoided all this.

I remember driving on 52 before 74 was a thing all the way down from Mt. Airy to Winston-Salem, and it was clearly the best way according to maps, triptiks, etc. and would still be with GPS and stuff regardless of the number.  If VA isn't going to sign it, 74 might as well end at 77.  It isn't like it is ever going to get all the way to Cincinnati anyway.  (I actually have done mostly 52 for Albemarle, NC to Lafayette, IN before, using Interstates where sensible but it was amazing how much 52 was involved, including all along the Ohio River in Ohio.)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 27, 2021, 02:30:47 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 25, 2021, 08:30:07 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 25, 2021, 12:24:51 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on October 24, 2021, 03:12:42 PM
Maybe they could extend 290 down to the state line along 395 and have them both mileposted starting at 0 there!  (Not gonna happen, but it's not any less silly than I-74 multiplexing with 77 in NC to end at the VA line, or how 69 disappears while running with 55, although that is "temporary".)  Then 395 could end where-ever they like leaving 290 to carry the numbers alone to its end.
Agree that that is unlikely. As for the other examples you bring up, VA has authorization to sign I-74 along I-77 to I-81, but has no incentive to do so. Perhaps when I-74 is signed along US 52 and around Winston-Salem groups seeking to encourage drivers to use the route to get between VA and SC could pressure VADOT to do so.

PurdueBill's suggestion is not a bad one, and would seem to be better than what MASSDOT actually did.  I-290 and I-395 would both start at the state line, and both would have a zero milepost.  The roads continue north, and then I-395 terminates at I-90, while I-290 continues.  It is true that in both cases (this hypothetical and what MASSDOT did) we have a useless multiplex, but at least this hypothetical provides some simplicity since both roadways will have the same milepost numbers that will also match the exit numbers of the highway.

So looking at what MASSDOT actually did definitely fuels the speculation that they intend for I-395 to take over I-290.

<cough> Extend I-290 to Plainfield, CT and have I-395 take over SR 695 <cough>
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on October 29, 2021, 10:30:50 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 27, 2021, 02:30:47 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 25, 2021, 08:30:07 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 25, 2021, 12:24:51 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on October 24, 2021, 03:12:42 PM
Maybe they could extend 290 down to the state line along 395 and have them both mileposted starting at 0 there!  (Not gonna happen, but it's not any less silly than I-74 multiplexing with 77 in NC to end at the VA line, or how 69 disappears while running with 55, although that is "temporary".)  Then 395 could end where-ever they like leaving 290 to carry the numbers alone to its end.
Agree that that is unlikely. As for the other examples you bring up, VA has authorization to sign I-74 along I-77 to I-81, but has no incentive to do so. Perhaps when I-74 is signed along US 52 and around Winston-Salem groups seeking to encourage drivers to use the route to get between VA and SC could pressure VADOT to do so.

PurdueBill's suggestion is not a bad one, and would seem to be better than what MASSDOT actually did.  I-290 and I-395 would both start at the state line, and both would have a zero milepost.  The roads continue north, and then I-395 terminates at I-90, while I-290 continues.  It is true that in both cases (this hypothetical and what MASSDOT did) we have a useless multiplex, but at least this hypothetical provides some simplicity since both roadways will have the same milepost numbers that will also match the exit numbers of the highway.

So looking at what MASSDOT actually did definitely fuels the speculation that they intend for I-395 to take over I-290.

<cough> Extend I-290 to Plainfield, CT and have I-395 take over SR 695 <cough>
I would just go back to CT and MA's original idea and extend 290 over 395 all the way down to I-95 at Waterford. Why AASHTO rejected that proposal in the first place defies logic, as it makes sense in my mind.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on October 30, 2021, 12:25:23 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on October 29, 2021, 10:30:50 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 27, 2021, 02:30:47 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 25, 2021, 08:30:07 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 25, 2021, 12:24:51 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on October 24, 2021, 03:12:42 PM
Maybe they could extend 290 down to the state line along 395 and have them both mileposted starting at 0 there!  (Not gonna happen, but it's not any less silly than I-74 multiplexing with 77 in NC to end at the VA line, or how 69 disappears while running with 55, although that is "temporary".)  Then 395 could end where-ever they like leaving 290 to carry the numbers alone to its end.
Agree that that is unlikely. As for the other examples you bring up, VA has authorization to sign I-74 along I-77 to I-81, but has no incentive to do so. Perhaps when I-74 is signed along US 52 and around Winston-Salem groups seeking to encourage drivers to use the route to get between VA and SC could pressure VADOT to do so.

PurdueBill's suggestion is not a bad one, and would seem to be better than what MASSDOT actually did.  I-290 and I-395 would both start at the state line, and both would have a zero milepost.  The roads continue north, and then I-395 terminates at I-90, while I-290 continues.  It is true that in both cases (this hypothetical and what MASSDOT did) we have a useless multiplex, but at least this hypothetical provides some simplicity since both roadways will have the same milepost numbers that will also match the exit numbers of the highway.

So looking at what MASSDOT actually did definitely fuels the speculation that they intend for I-395 to take over I-290.

<cough> Extend I-290 to Plainfield, CT and have I-395 take over SR 695 <cough>
I would just go back to CT and MA's original idea and extend 290 over 395 all the way down to I-95 at Waterford. Why AASHTO rejected that proposal in the first place defies logic, as it makes sense in my mind.
According to this letter sent to AASHTO by the Director of the Conn. Dept. of Transportation I found in the AASHTO online database (searching under CT) with the application for the I-395 designation dated May 5, 1983 it was Massachusetts who objected to the I-290 designation since they felt the even digit would be misleading to drivers since it only connected to I-90 once, unlike the state's other even 3dis. Massachusetts would have accepted a 2-digit interstate designation, the FHWA didn't like that idea, but the only one they would make available, I-99(!), was rejected by Conn. since they already has a Route 99 'of considerable length.' (Would roadgeeks have objected to a MA/CT I-99 as much as the PA one?). Mass. reluctantly accepted I-395 as being the best option available, though they didn't like an odd spur number for a route connecting 2 interstates. It would be interesting if almost 40 years later they end up changing all of I-290 to a number they originally didn't like:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i395cdotletter551983.jpg)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 31, 2021, 02:14:50 AM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 30, 2021, 12:25:23 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on October 29, 2021, 10:30:50 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 27, 2021, 02:30:47 PM
Quote from: mrsman on October 25, 2021, 08:30:07 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on October 25, 2021, 12:24:51 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on October 24, 2021, 03:12:42 PM
Maybe they could extend 290 down to the state line along 395 and have them both mileposted starting at 0 there!  (Not gonna happen, but it's not any less silly than I-74 multiplexing with 77 in NC to end at the VA line, or how 69 disappears while running with 55, although that is "temporary".)  Then 395 could end where-ever they like leaving 290 to carry the numbers alone to its end.
Agree that that is unlikely. As for the other examples you bring up, VA has authorization to sign I-74 along I-77 to I-81, but has no incentive to do so. Perhaps when I-74 is signed along US 52 and around Winston-Salem groups seeking to encourage drivers to use the route to get between VA and SC could pressure VADOT to do so.

PurdueBill's suggestion is not a bad one, and would seem to be better than what MASSDOT actually did.  I-290 and I-395 would both start at the state line, and both would have a zero milepost.  The roads continue north, and then I-395 terminates at I-90, while I-290 continues.  It is true that in both cases (this hypothetical and what MASSDOT did) we have a useless multiplex, but at least this hypothetical provides some simplicity since both roadways will have the same milepost numbers that will also match the exit numbers of the highway.

So looking at what MASSDOT actually did definitely fuels the speculation that they intend for I-395 to take over I-290.

<cough> Extend I-290 to Plainfield, CT and have I-395 take over SR 695 <cough>
I would just go back to CT and MA's original idea and extend 290 over 395 all the way down to I-95 at Waterford. Why AASHTO rejected that proposal in the first place defies logic, as it makes sense in my mind.
According to this letter sent to AASHTO by the Director of the Conn. Dept. of Transportation I found in the AASHTO online database (searching under CT) with the application for the I-395 designation dated May 5, 1983 it was Massachusetts who objected to the I-290 designation since they felt the even digit would be misleading to drivers since it only connected to I-90 once, unlike the state's other even 3dis. Massachusetts would have accepted a 2-digit interstate designation, the FHWA didn't like that idea, but the only one they would make available, I-99(!), was rejected by Conn. since they already has a Route 99 'of considerable length.' (Would roadgeeks have objected to a MA/CT I-99 as much as the PA one?). Mass. reluctantly accepted I-395 as being the best option available, though they didn't like an odd spur number for a route connecting 2 interstates. It would be interesting if almost 40 years later they end up changing all of I-290 to a number they originally didn't like:

CT 99 only traverses 3 towns, not 6: Cromwell, Rocky Hill, and Wethersfield.  It terminates at the Hartford city line, and does not quite reach the Middletown city line at the south end.  Plus it was only about 14 years old at the time, as it was an old routing of CT 9 prior to the expressway being completed to I-91 (and much later,  I-84)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on November 19, 2021, 03:16:30 PM
It just occurred to me that if Mass DOT can dual-milepost I-290, they could have dual-mileposted I-95 between Canton and Peabody with MA-128 mileposts.  That way, drivers going onto the "standalone" portion of Rte. 128 aren't startled to see the exit numbers begin at 38.

Also, I-95 between Canton (where 128 begins) and Needham currently doesn't have mile markers.  Similarly, there are no mile-markers on I-93 between I-95 in Canton and MA 24.  I'm not sure how Mass DOT is getting away with this...
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on November 19, 2021, 09:27:07 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on November 19, 2021, 03:16:30 PM
It just occurred to me that if Mass DOT can dual-milepost I-290, they could have dual-mileposted I-95 between Canton and Peabody with MA-128 mileposts.  That way, drivers going onto the "standalone" portion of Rte. 128 aren't startled to see the exit numbers begin at 38.

Also, I-95 between Canton (where 128 begins) and Needham currently doesn't have mile markers.  Similarly, there are no mile-markers on I-93 between I-95 in Canton and MA 24.  I'm not sure how Mass DOT is getting away with this...
Apparently putting in mile markers at the completion of widening was only included in the last contract for the I-95 Add-A-Lane project, did they forget the rest? Don't know why they couldn't have included that as part of the exit renumbering of I-93 and I-95, since it was included in the I-290 work.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on January 10, 2022, 08:54:27 PM
Quote from: Old Dominionite on September 05, 2021, 11:08:29 AM
During all my years in New England (including 4 years of college in Worcester), I never thought twice about I-395 and I-290, and I never heard anyone else voice confusion or concern about the numbering change at the Mass. Pike. To me I-395 and I-290 have always functioned as separate routes. For example, coming westbound on I-290, the majority of traffic exits either at the Pike or US 20.

I don't see any value in placing dual mileposts on I-290. And I certainly don't see any value to renumbering I-290 as an extension of I-395 in the future. I think that move would cause significant confusion within and around Worcester -- to say nothing about the costs to businesses having to remarket themselves and educate customer bases.

And what happens to I-190? Does it keep the same number and serve as a disconnected orphan route (now confusingly) several miles from its parent route, or does it have to renumbered as well?

I think the current numbering convention works. I-395 is a spur from I-95 through eastern Connecticut up into central Massachusetts. I-290 is a loop through Worcester that parallels its parent route to the north. And I-190 is a spur off I-290 to the Fitchburg area.

MassDOT's ideas of placing dual mileposts and potentially renumbering I-290 appear to be "solutions" in search of a problem.
It's been a while since I chimed on this site & thread.

As far as I-290 sporting I-395 mile markers alongside eachother is concerned: Both my brother & his wife, who reside in central MA & use I-290 on many occasions, believe that such is indeed causing more confusion; the complete opposite of MassDOT's reasoning for continuing I-395's mile markers along I-290.

That's the boots on the ground report.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on January 12, 2022, 11:56:32 PM
Google Maps Street View has updated their imagery along I-91 North in MA to November 2021, capturing the exit renumbering between I-90 and the VT border. I have taken some screen grabs of these images, such as the 1 mile advance sign for the MA 9 exit:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i91signsgsv1121exit25noma.jpg)

I have posted images from I-90 to MA 2/2A in Greenfield so far, and these are available at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i91signs2 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i91signs2)

The rest will be posted in the next couple of days.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PHLBOS on February 23, 2022, 09:06:29 PM
It's been a little while since I chimed in on here & such has been stated before; MassDOT dropped the ball the most with the interchange renumbering along I-290... particularly with those enhanced I-395 mile-markers.  Such have both confused my brother & his wife (Sturbridge residents who utilize this road a lot) when they first encountered such.

IMHO (granted, I still believe that MassDOT should've used the I-290 mileage for the interchange numbers but such is water under the bridge now), it would've been better for MassDOT just to do with I-290 what PTC did with the enhanced mile-markers along the I-276 stretch of the PA Turnpike (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0935612,-75.3968195,3a,75y,101.85h,75.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0QBu6D4xXVRTgMr-DtC--w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192); just have erect the enhanced mile markers that simply show the I-290 shields but listing the longer I-395 mileage.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: abqtraveler on February 24, 2022, 09:27:41 AM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 23, 2022, 09:06:29 PM
It's been a little while since I chimed in on here & such has been stated before; MassDOT dropped the ball the most with the interchange renumbering along I-290... particularly with those enhanced I-395 mile-markers.  Such have both confused my brother & his wife (Sturbridge residents who utilize this road a lot) when they first encountered such.

IMHO (granted, I still believe that MassDOT should've used the I-290 mileage for the interchange numbers but such is water under the bridge now), it would've been better for MassDOT just to do with I-290 what PTC did with the enhanced mile-markers along the I-276 stretch of the PA Turnpike (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0935612,-75.3968195,3a,75y,101.85h,75.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0QBu6D4xXVRTgMr-DtC--w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192); just have erect the enhanced mile markers that simply show the I-290 shields but listing the longer I-395 mileage.
The problem would be easier solved if MassDOT reset the mileage to zero where I-395 ends and I-290 begins.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: yakra on February 24, 2022, 11:28:34 AM
or just started I-290 @ mile > 0
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: PurdueBill on February 25, 2022, 04:58:49 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on February 23, 2022, 09:06:29 PM
It's been a little while since I chimed in on here & such has been stated before; MassDOT dropped the ball the most with the interchange renumbering along I-290... particularly with those enhanced I-395 mile-markers.  Such have both confused my brother & his wife (Sturbridge residents who utilize this road a lot) when they first encountered such.

IMHO (granted, I still believe that MassDOT should've used the I-290 mileage for the interchange numbers but such is water under the bridge now), it would've been better for MassDOT just to do with I-290 what PTC did with the enhanced mile-markers along the I-276 stretch of the PA Turnpike (https://www.google.com/maps/@40.0935612,-75.3968195,3a,75y,101.85h,75.06t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0QBu6D4xXVRTgMr-DtC--w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192); just have erect the enhanced mile markers that simply show the I-290 shields but listing the longer I-395 mileage.

Such is the same as the eastern end of the Ohio Turnpike where I-76's enhanced mile markers show the Turnpike mileage, not 76's mileage (which would repeat numbers from out near Toledo).  I still don't get why Mass didn't have 290 pick up with 395's mile markers.  If need be, they could have "officially" moved the start of 290 to the state line (although I bet that would never have made it past AASHTO) to make mile 0 of 290 be at 395's mile 0.  The dual mileposting on 290 is the worst thing they could have chosen (worse too than restarting with mile 0 where 290 meets 90), unless their game is to turn 290 into 395 eventually.  Which would orphan 190 from another x90 unless it changed too.  Sigh.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: ran4sh on February 25, 2022, 11:31:30 PM
If the Ohio Turnpike mileage is used for the I-76 section, then in my opinion an Ohio Turnpike marker should be used in the enhanced milepost sign instead of the I-76 marker, so that it is clear that the mileage refers to the turnpike and not the interstate.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on March 24, 2022, 04:17:17 PM
I was on Rte. 6 along the Cape recently and noticed that the "old exit xx" signs are green instead of yellow.  Was this a compromise because Cape politicians resisted the changing of the numbers so hard?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: MATraveler128 on March 24, 2022, 04:40:54 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on March 24, 2022, 04:17:17 PM
I was on Rte. 6 along the Cape recently and noticed that the "old exit xx" signs are green instead of yellow.  Was this a compromise because Cape politicians resisted the changing of the numbers so hard?

I'm not sure about that. I know the ground mount signage was a compromise (IMO it looks way better) but don't remember why the Cape uses green.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on March 24, 2022, 11:16:06 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on March 24, 2022, 04:40:54 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on March 24, 2022, 04:17:17 PM
I was on Rte. 6 along the Cape recently and noticed that the "old exit xx" signs are green instead of yellow.  Was this a compromise because Cape politicians resisted the changing of the numbers so hard?
I'm not sure about that. I know the ground mount signage was a compromise (IMO it looks way better) but don't remember why the Cape uses green.
Yes, this was a compromise with Cape Cod officials who thought that yellow signs were 'out of character' for the Mid-Cape Highway. Guess MassDOT was willing to give them something since they weren't blocking the project this time, unlike in 2016.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on June 14, 2022, 03:15:47 PM
I drove up I-93 North from Montvale Ave (exit 27) in Stoneham up to River Rd (exit 42) in Andover this morning.  I've noticed a lot of exit gore signs have been replaced, but there are some weird oddities:


:confused: :confused: :confused:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: 5foot14 on June 15, 2022, 08:54:41 AM
Those exit gore signs being replaced on 93 north is all the result of the signs being knocked down or one of the posts being clipped and damaging the sign. They weren't all replaced at the same time. (42 was replaced first last year, not long after the exit number was changed; 39 and 38 were replaced together earlier this year) As for the yellow old exit signs? Maybe they figure it's close enough to 2 years, or maybe they just don't care. Honestly I'm over the old numbers, take down the yellow signs and be done with it.

But yeah, Mass drivers are terrible...

SM-A515U

Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on June 15, 2022, 12:27:26 PM
Quote from: 5foot14 on June 15, 2022, 08:54:41 AM
As for the yellow old exit signs? Maybe they figure it's close enough to 2 years, or maybe they just don't care. Honestly I'm over the old numbers, take down the yellow signs and be done with it.
SM-A515U

The I-93 exit numbers were changed in May 2021.  MassDOT promised the "old exit XX" signs would stay up for "at least 2 years" so for this stretch of highway it wouldn't be until June 2023 at the earliest that these signs would go down "as promised".

But I never regularly drove on this stretch of road until a few months ago, so the old I-93 exit numbers don't come to mind for me when I pass one of these exits.  However, if I'm driving on I-495, I-95, or MA-24, I still associate interchanges with their old exit numbers, most likely because I grew up in that area.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DrSmith on June 15, 2022, 01:23:30 PM
On the Pike eastbound at 495, someone took out most of the exit sign. So now there is a thin slice of the old sign that shows Exit 11A. Some of the top and bottom pieces of the extruded aluminum panels are gone and I guess they figured it was close enough to tack up instead of putting in a temporary sign while a new one is fabricated.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: bob7374 on July 27, 2022, 12:02:42 PM
Google Maps has updated their Street View coverage of the Mass Pike, at least west of Lee, to June 2022 finally showing the exit renumbering that took place in early 2021. I've added Street View images to my Exit Renumbering website which includes this of the 1/2 mile advance for the US 20 exit, notice something wrong?
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signsgsv622kgoof.jpg)

This sign may have not been put up until after the exit renumbering occurred, but you would think someone would have noticed by now. The rest of the signs for Old Exits 1 and 2 have had their exit numbers changed, and photos are available at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i90signs3 (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i90signs3)
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on July 27, 2022, 08:40:49 PM
^ It looks like that sign structure was taken down and only recently put back up.  The sign shows up in the August 2018 GSV and is on the ground in the October 2018 GSV.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman on July 27, 2022, 10:07:22 PM
Quote from: vdeane on July 27, 2022, 08:40:49 PM
^ It looks like that sign structure was taken down and only recently put back up.  The sign shows up in the August 2018 GSV and is on the ground in the October 2018 GSV.

That is exactly correct vdeane.  Massachusetts has had a long standing pratice whereby when a sign is knocked down or other roadside hardware (like guardrail or lighting poles) is damaged or destroyed, and the driver of the involved vehicle can be identified, the repair/replacement is handled by a group called Accident Recovery.  The flaw in the system is that the price for repairs must be negotiated between the driver's insurance company and the state before any repairs can be effected.  This often results in a noticeable delay in getting the repairs or replacement completed.  In most cases for guide signs, MassDOT will usually install smaller temporary guide signs until a sign structure is replaced.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: JWF1959 on October 10, 2022, 10:22:24 AM
Quote from: JWF1959 on August 29, 2021, 02:12:22 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed, but it looks like 395N is now concurrent with I-290 all the way from it's old end point (at I-290 and the Mass Pike) to I-495.

The mile markers now show the mileage points for both I-290 and I-395.

However, the signage still shows "End 395, Begin 290" at 290/MA Pike interchange.

didn't see any recent messages related to this topic, so sorry if i missed them.

Just recently (10/8/22) traveled up 395 to 290 in Worcester, and noticed that those dual 290/395 mile markers have now been taken down.  Seems like a waste of money.  Anyway, the markers now say "290" but the mileage itself seems to include the 395 portion as well.  Noticed that as I passed by Holy Cross, the mileage marker said 290/15.0 miles (or something close to that), when in reality, Holy Cross is probably no more than 5 miles from the start of 290.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: MATraveler128 on October 10, 2022, 10:51:10 AM
Quote from: JWF1959 on October 10, 2022, 10:22:24 AM
Quote from: JWF1959 on August 29, 2021, 02:12:22 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed, but it looks like 395N is now concurrent with I-290 all the way from it's old end point (at I-290 and the Mass Pike) to I-495.

The mile markers now show the mileage points for both I-290 and I-395.

However, the signage still shows "End 395, Begin 290" at 290/MA Pike interchange.

didn't see any recent messages related to this topic, so sorry if i missed them.

Just recently (10/8/22) traveled up 395 to 290 in Worcester, and noticed that those dual 290/395 mile markers have now been taken down.  Seems like a waste of money.  Anyway, the markers now say "290" but the mileage itself seems to include the 395 portion as well.  Noticed that as I passed by Holy Cross, the mileage marker said 290/15.0 miles (or something close to that), when in reality, Holy Cross is probably no more than 5 miles from the start of 290.

They took down the dual mile markers? What a waste of time that was installing those, but weren’t those supposed to be temporary until the public got used to the new numbers? I’ve also noticed some of the yellow “Old Exit XX” signs come down in the past few months. Also, the Exit 106 sign that was knocked over still hasn’t been replaced when I drove by it last night and still reads Exit 11A.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: Alps on October 10, 2022, 09:57:48 PM
Quote from: JWF1959 on October 10, 2022, 10:22:24 AM
Quote from: JWF1959 on August 29, 2021, 02:12:22 PM
Not sure if this has been discussed, but it looks like 395N is now concurrent with I-290 all the way from it's old end point (at I-290 and the Mass Pike) to I-495.

The mile markers now show the mileage points for both I-290 and I-395.

However, the signage still shows "End 395, Begin 290" at 290/MA Pike interchange.

didn't see any recent messages related to this topic, so sorry if i missed them.

Just recently (10/8/22) traveled up 395 to 290 in Worcester, and noticed that those dual 290/395 mile markers have now been taken down.  Seems like a waste of money.  Anyway, the markers now say "290" but the mileage itself seems to include the 395 portion as well.  Noticed that as I passed by Holy Cross, the mileage marker said 290/15.0 miles (or something close to that), when in reality, Holy Cross is probably no more than 5 miles from the start of 290.
this is great news. I'm guessing they are doing this to keep exit numbers continuous
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on October 11, 2022, 10:15:37 AM
Not only are the exit numbers on I-290 including mileage along I-395 from the CT border, but many of the exits in Worcester don't match the "new" mile markers at all!  From Rte. 9 in Worcester to Rte. 140 in Shrewsbury, the exit numbers are all off by at least 1 mile!  In some cases, they're off by 3!

You also have this sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2695452,-71.7935115,3a,43y,14.85h,92.23t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sE5g7JgYM1ZvPnYxHWNDboA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) that includes "old exit 19" and "old exit 20" signs right before old exit 17!  I'm sure some drivers will be confused here...

And worst of all, the exits for I-190, MA 70, Plantation St (EB only) and Main St (Shrewsbury) ALL could have retained their old (sequential) numbers, as they already closely matched the "I-395" mile markers!  WTF, MassDOT??????????   :confused:  :confused:  :confused:
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 11, 2022, 10:57:06 AM
The numbers on I-290 and I-91 are fudged a bit to use what would be unused numbers just to avoid an alphabet city.  CTDOT is following suit on CT 9 renumbering, such as numbering the I-91 ramps as 29-30 rather than 29 A-B because the next exit is at MP 31.  It's also the reason why I-291 and I-391 were skipped altogether.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on October 11, 2022, 12:33:54 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 11, 2022, 10:57:06 AM
The numbers on I-290 and I-91 are fudged a bit to use what would be unused numbers just to avoid an alphabet city.

Why does MassDOT hate alphabet soup?  Going east on 290, the exits could have easily been 17A-17B-17C (Shrewsbury St, EB only), 18A-18B (Rte 9 exit).  Going west, they would have gone 18B-18A-17B-17A.

On I-91, they really screwed up keeping exits 1 (SB only) and 2 (NB only) "as is" when they're both between miles 3 and 4.  Yet on the Mass Pike and I-84, they properly renumbered sequential exit 1 to exit 3.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on October 11, 2022, 12:46:26 PM
I don't understand why CT 9 is using 29 and 30 for I-91.  It's one interchange.  Using the same number with letter suffixes is standard for such situations even in sequential.

I'm in agreement about exit 1 on I-91.  It really should have been a southbound exit 2.  That would have still let MassDOT avoid alphabet soup (a common complaint of mile-based numbers in this part of the country) while only being off by 1 rather than 2.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 11, 2022, 03:46:49 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 11, 2022, 12:46:26 PM
I don't understand why CT 9 is using 29 and 30 for I-91.  It's one interchange.  Using the same number with letter suffixes is standard for such situations even in sequential.

From CTDOT:

Q: How are the new exit numbers determined?

A: Exit numbers will be determined based on the mileage contained in the CTDOT Linear Referencing System. Mileage typically runs from south to north and west to east.
- No Exit 0
- Mileage 0.00 — 1.49 = Exit 1
- Mileage 1.50 — 2.99 = Exit 2
- Mileage 3.00 — 3.99 and beyond.
+ Round down to the nearest whole mile
- In some cases, the CTDOT may round up or down to the next nearest whole mile to reduce suffix letters or utilize the existing exit number.
- Splits on off-ramps will not be designated as separate numbers/suffix letters.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: shadyjay on October 11, 2022, 05:08:07 PM
I drove I-290 West today from I-190 down to Auburn and noticed the new whole-mile markers... they are a slightly darker shade of green than all the others.  Granted, they couldn't use the previously-installed (and much hated, apparently) dual markers since they would have had to be modified (change the route marker and direction).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on October 11, 2022, 06:11:04 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 11, 2022, 12:46:26 PM
I don't understand why CT 9 is using 29 and 30 for I-91.  It's one interchange.  Using the same number with letter suffixes is standard for such situations even in sequential.

Merritt Pkwy says hello.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: vdeane on October 11, 2022, 09:40:53 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 11, 2022, 03:46:49 PM
Quote from: vdeane on October 11, 2022, 12:46:26 PM
I don't understand why CT 9 is using 29 and 30 for I-91.  It's one interchange.  Using the same number with letter suffixes is standard for such situations even in sequential.

From CTDOT:

Q: How are the new exit numbers determined?

A: Exit numbers will be determined based on the mileage contained in the CTDOT Linear Referencing System. Mileage typically runs from south to north and west to east.
- No Exit 0
- Mileage 0.00 — 1.49 = Exit 1
- Mileage 1.50 — 2.99 = Exit 2
- Mileage 3.00 — 3.99 and beyond.
+ Round down to the nearest whole mile
- In some cases, the CTDOT may round up or down to the next nearest whole mile to reduce suffix letters or utilize the existing exit number.
- Splits on off-ramps will not be designated as separate numbers/suffix letters.
But as I said, it's one interchange.  Not two.  It would be like if I-395 had exits 13A/B numbered 12 and 13.  One would think that this conversion would be a chance to make the numbers more consistent, not less.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on November 03, 2022, 12:45:16 PM
1.5 years after the exit numbers were changed along I-495, Google Maps is still reporting the "old" exit number for US 1 South in Plainville.  The map is correct but the voiceover is not.

Here is a video describing what I experienced: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ly3q1B5kG8

How do I report this to Google?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: dantheman on February 05, 2023, 01:33:15 PM
I noticed recently that a weird hold-over from the old exit numbers has finally been fixed. On the ramp from I-291 to I-91 SB, there is an overhead sign for the Basketball Hall of Fame. For quite a while after I-91's exits were renumbered, this still said "Exit 6." Sometime in the last couple of months, it's finally been updated to "Exit 5A." I can't recall if it's a 100% new sign or just a patch over the old number... I'll have to look closer the next time I'm through there.

Street View shot of the old sign, from last August: https://goo.gl/maps/rn3K2Ed6EPRFkb4u7 (https://goo.gl/maps/rn3K2Ed6EPRFkb4u7)

(For a while, the "No Crossing To Exit 7" signs on that same ramp also were missing the new exit number. The state evidently opted to get rid of the signs completely, rather than update them.)

Last I saw (within the last couple of weeks), both the "Exit 2" on the 1/2 mile EB advance sign for the Lee exit on I-90 (now Exit 10) and "Exit 11A" on the I-90 EB gore sign (now Exit 106), both mentioned previously in this thread, were still showing. Are there any other goofs/damaged signs/etc. left that still have the old numbers peeking through?
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: DrSmith on February 05, 2023, 03:17:34 PM
Quote from: dantheman on February 05, 2023, 01:33:15 PM
I noticed recently that a weird hold-over from the old exit numbers has finally been fixed. On the ramp from I-291 to I-91 SB, there is an overhead sign for the Basketball Hall of Fame. For quite a while after I-91's exits were renumbered, this still said "Exit 6." Sometime in the last couple of months, it's finally been updated to "Exit 5A." I can't recall if it's a 100% new sign or just a patch over the old number... I'll have to look closer the next time I'm through there.

Street View shot of the old sign, from last August: https://goo.gl/maps/rn3K2Ed6EPRFkb4u7 (https://goo.gl/maps/rn3K2Ed6EPRFkb4u7)

(For a while, the "No Crossing To Exit 7" signs on that same ramp also were missing the new exit number. The state evidently opted to get rid of the signs completely, rather than update them.)

The "No Crossing to Exit 7" or 5B now are no longer necessary now. When I-91 viaduct was reconstructed a few years back they added a Jersey barrier so that the on-ramp from 291 could not cross to exit over the relatively short distance between the on-ramp from 291 and the Columbus Blvd exit. Prior to the barrier there were a lot of people that would make that lane change. You can see the lack of barrier and short distance there in the link below.

https://goo.gl/maps/Nh5ZX2QURgSchq9s8

There were a couple of errors in signs on I-190 heading into Worcester that referenced old exit numbers on I-290. Those were updated I believe.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: dantheman on February 20, 2023, 02:54:15 PM
Another one bites the dust... the new number has fallen off of the EB gore sign at Exit 96 (old 11). Unless 11A has been fixed since the last time I went through, there's now two exits in a row EB where the gore sign shows the old number. If I'm not mistaken, this is new since the last time I went through the area in mid-January. The funny thing about this one is that the yellow "Old Exit 11" sign is still there, so it now reads "Exit 11/Old Exit 11."

(On the "No Crossing To Exit 7" signs... while I agree that they're no longer necessary, I have seen at least one driver try to make that crossing since the new concrete barrier was added. They were almost perpendicular to the main lanes of SB I-91 trying to get from the 291 onramp to the now-Exit 5B offramp. They were lucky that it was about 5 PM on a weekday and traffic was doing its usual rush hour crawl... otherwise it could've easily been a nasty T-bone accident. Only in Massachusetts.  :rolleyes: )
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: fwydriver405 on February 23, 2023, 02:41:36 PM
I noticed a strange quirk in Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 90, Section 17A (https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXIV/Chapter90/Section17A). Apperently this section on speed limits in Massachusetts still references old exit 21 (new exit 27) in Northampton on Interstate 91 and old exits 50 (new exit 70) in Danvers and 56 (new exit 83) in Newbury on Interstate 95. Did somebody forget to update this section when the exit renumbering was completed?

Quote from: Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 90, Section 17ASection 17A. Unless otherwise prohibited by federal law, the maximum speed for motor vehicles traveling on interstate highway route 90, the Massachusetts Turnpike, between the New York state border and the Westfield interchange, and from the Ludlow interchange to the Auburn interchange, interstate highway route 91 from the Vermont border to Northampton, exit 21, and interstate 95 from the Newbury interchange 56 to the Danvers interchange 50, shall be sixty-five miles per hour.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: SectorZ on February 23, 2023, 04:54:43 PM
Quote from: fwydriver405 on February 23, 2023, 02:41:36 PM
I noticed a strange quirk in Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 90, Section 17A (https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXIV/Chapter90/Section17A). Apperently this section on speed limits in Massachusetts still references old exit 21 (new exit 27) in Northampton on Interstate 91 and old exits 50 (new exit 70) in Danvers and 56 (new exit 83) in Newbury on Interstate 95. Did somebody forget to update this section when the exit renumbering was completed?

Quote from: Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 90, Section 17ASection 17A. Unless otherwise prohibited by federal law, the maximum speed for motor vehicles traveling on interstate highway route 90, the Massachusetts Turnpike, between the New York state border and the Westfield interchange, and from the Ludlow interchange to the Auburn interchange, interstate highway route 91 from the Vermont border to Northampton, exit 21, and interstate 95 from the Newbury interchange 56 to the Danvers interchange 50, shall be sixty-five miles per hour.

That law predates the full repeal of the 55 MPH NMSL in 1995, so it technically needs full repeal and not update.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kefkafloyd on March 02, 2023, 06:49:11 PM
Quote from: dantheman on February 05, 2023, 01:33:15 PM
I noticed recently that a weird hold-over from the old exit numbers has finally been fixed. On the ramp from I-291 to I-91 SB, there is an overhead sign for the Basketball Hall of Fame. For quite a while after I-91's exits were renumbered, this still said "Exit 6." Sometime in the last couple of months, it's finally been updated to "Exit 5A." I can't recall if it's a 100% new sign or just a patch over the old number... I'll have to look closer the next time I'm through there.

It's a replacement number patch (although not like the other signs). Note that it looks like just the numeral was replaced; you can see the un-faded area from where the 5 used to be. This sign is a real oldie and I'm surprised it didn't get the axe when the latest round of sign replacements happened. It's about to have its fortieth birthday (Sept 1984 vintage).
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on July 17, 2023, 02:22:14 PM
Quote from: dantheman on February 20, 2023, 02:54:15 PM
Another one bites the dust... the new number has fallen off of the EB gore sign at Exit 96 (old 11). Unless 11A has been fixed since the last time I went through, there's now two exits in a row EB where the gore sign shows the old number. If I'm not mistaken, this is new since the last time I went through the area in mid-January. The funny thing about this one is that the yellow "Old Exit 11" sign is still there, so it now reads "Exit 11/Old Exit 11."

I was just on the Mass Pike this past weekend.  Going east, the gore sign at the MA 122 exit now correctly displays "Exit 96".  The "96" is fabricated onto the sign and not "plated over".  The yellow "old exit 11" sign still exists beneath the new gore sign.

Meanwhile, at the I-495 exit, the damaged gore sign that still displayed "exit 11A" has been removed while a temporary exit ramp has been created.  This is due to the I-90/I-495 interchange being reconstructed.  A red (road work colored) "exit 106" gore sign is now displayed at this exit going east.
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: roadman65 on July 17, 2023, 07:44:26 PM
Quote from: kramie13 on July 17, 2023, 02:22:14 PM
Quote from: dantheman on February 20, 2023, 02:54:15 PM
Another one bites the dust... the new number has fallen off of the EB gore sign at Exit 96 (old 11). Unless 11A has been fixed since the last time I went through, there's now two exits in a row EB where the gore sign shows the old number. If I'm not mistaken, this is new since the last time I went through the area in mid-January. The funny thing about this one is that the yellow "Old Exit 11" sign is still there, so it now reads "Exit 11/Old Exit 11."



Meanwhile, at the I-495 exit, the damaged gore sign that still displayed "exit 11A" has been removed while a temporary exit ramp has been created.  This is due to the I-90/I-495 interchange being reconstructed.  A red (road work colored) "exit 106" gore sign is now displayed at this exit going east.

This I take what you mean?
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2632781,-71.5718849,3a,75y,61.83h,89.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1saadva6Or7LcQiSPqZGE-Sw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Daadva6Or7LcQiSPqZGE-Sw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D215.09534%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

https://goo.gl/maps/XxxCqZV2uQw8Y5vd7
Title: Re: Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract
Post by: kramie13 on July 18, 2023, 10:03:03 AM
Quote from: roadman65 on July 17, 2023, 07:44:26 PM
This I take what you mean?
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2632781,-71.5718849,3a,75y,61.83h,89.23t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1saadva6Or7LcQiSPqZGE-Sw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3Daadva6Or7LcQiSPqZGE-Sw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D215.09534%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

https://goo.gl/maps/XxxCqZV2uQw8Y5vd7

Correct.  This (gore) sign is no longer present.