Massachusetts

[roadman65]

Interesting to see I-190 isn't proposed on here either.

I-190 wasn't built until 1983 due to environmental concerns. Interesting to note also that it was once part of MA 52 as was I-395.

Now I remember for the longest time it was only completed through Worcester and incomplete on maps for a long time.   

[roadman65]

Isn't Marlboro supposed to be Marlborough?

As I recall, the full-length spelling was officialized relatively recently. Before then, it was considered always acceptable to abbreviate "-borough" to "-boro". (See also Pittsburg, PA.)

The "-boro" abbreviation has long been used on highway signs in Massachusetts, with I-90/MassPike being the last holdout prior to the sign replacements of 2018-2019.  It makes sense that a road atlas would also use those abbreviations on their maps.

However, if the municipality wants the name then it's official. In NJ we have a Marlboro, but it's not spelled Marlborough https://www.marlboro-nj.gov/ but B-O-R-O in the official name. So road signs aren't abbreviating it like they do ( or did with) Triborough Bridge in NYC with Triboro.  BTW spell check wouldn't let me use Boro and corrected it to Borough. They are spelling it that way cause it's spelled that way.


Bottom line the incorporation name and spelling as in Massachusetts it's Marlborough https://www.marlborough-ma.gov not spelled in official capacity.  It be like leaving off the double d "˜s in Jane Addams Tollway for Jane Adams.  Her name is Addams not Adams.

[yakra]

WRT the municipalities in general, doesn't NJ have Boros while PA has Boroughs?

[empirestate]

WRT the municipalities in general, doesn't NJ have Boros while PA has Boroughs?

No, they both have "boroughs", although NJ may be more likely to abbreviate the word since they are closer to the New England linguistic practice.

[kramie13]

Every "borough" in Massachusetts is abbreviated to "boro" on highway signs.  Except for Attleboro, which never had the "ugh" in its name.

[empirestate]

Every "borough" in Massachusetts is abbreviated to "boro" on highway signs.  Except for Attleboro, which never had the "ugh" in its name.

But are there any that, at least "officially", are not to be abbreviated? (And does the cartographer have any particular duty to honor that?)

[Ted$8roadFan]

I wonder if someone inside MassDOT has figured out how much the Commonwealth saves by not adding the "ugh"  to its signs.

[MATraveler128]

The only sign in Massachusetts I know of with “ugh” besides the bookleaf town line signs is westbound on the Pike at the Westborough Service Plaza. Unless there’s one somewhere else that I’m missing. Even the paddle signs abbreviate the town names.

[roadman]

I wonder if someone inside MassDOT has figured out how much the Commonwealth saves by not adding the "ugh"  to its signs.

For BGS signs on freeways, deleting the 'ugh' reduces the sign width by 2 feet on average (source:  personal experience overseeing sign design).  Using a hypothetical example, a sign that would otherwise be 15 feet by 10 feet (150 square feet) is now 13 feet by 10 feet (130 square feet).  20 square feet times $18.00/square foot (typical bid price for extruded BGS panels) = $360 savings per panel.  Now times that by 6 BGS panels per interchange = $2,160 savings per interchange.  As you see, it adds up pretty quickly.  Although difficult to quantify, there is also a cost savings associated with the support structures - smaller panels equals less loading (dead, wind, ice, and dead-wind-ice combined), which means a simpler design can be used.   Lastly, to my knowledge, there has been no evidence that omitting the 'ugh' on highway signs has resulted in navigational issues for drivers.

[empirestate]

Lastly, to my knowledge, there has been no evidence that omitting the 'ugh' on highway signs has resulted in navigational issues for drivers.

Ah, so it ranks up there in importance with which way a state's exits are numbered? <ducks>

[roadman]

Lastly, to my knowledge, there has been no evidence that omitting the 'ugh' on highway signs has resulted in navigational issues for drivers.

Ah, so it ranks up there in importance with which way a state's exits are numbered? <ducks>

   Note that 'Marlboro' and 'Marlborough' are pronounced the same.

[Pete from Boston]

Lastly, to my knowledge, there has been no evidence that omitting the 'ugh' on highway signs has resulted in navigational issues for drivers.

Ah, so it ranks up there in importance with which way a state's exits are numbered? <ducks>

   Note that 'Marlboro' and 'Marlborough' are pronounced the same.

"Mah-bro."  The last three letters aren't the only disregarded ones!

[empirestate]

   Note that 'Marlboro' and 'Marlborough' are pronounced the same.

Would the same be true of Loughborough and Loboro?

[bob7374]

Advertised this morning by MassDOT, upcoming sign replacement project on I-84, winning bid to be announced May 3:
Location: DISTRICT3
Description: Guide and Traffic Sign Replacement along a Section of Interstate 84
District: 3 Ad Date: 3/19/2022 Section Response: Const Project Value: $687,691.00
CDs, Plans & Specs Available: No
Federal Aid No.: HSI-0843(001)X Project Number: 609056 Project Type: Signing - Structural
No. of Addendums: 0 Date of Last Addendum: N/A

[jp the roadgeek]

Advertised this morning by MassDOT, upcoming sign replacement project on I-84, winning bid to be announced May 3:
Location: DISTRICT3
Description: Guide and Traffic Sign Replacement along a Section of Interstate 84
District: 3 Ad Date: 3/19/2022 Section Response: Const Project Value: $687,691.00
CDs, Plans & Specs Available: No
Federal Aid No.: HSI-0843(001)X Project Number: 609056 Project Type: Signing - Structural
No. of Addendums: 0 Date of Last Addendum: N/A

If they're smart (and consistent), they'll add exit numbers to the Mass Pike ramps.

[MATraveler128]

Advertised this morning by MassDOT, upcoming sign replacement project on I-84, winning bid to be announced May 3:
Location: DISTRICT3
Description: Guide and Traffic Sign Replacement along a Section of Interstate 84
District: 3 Ad Date: 3/19/2022 Section Response: Const Project Value: $687,691.00
CDs, Plans & Specs Available: No
Federal Aid No.: HSI-0843(001)X Project Number: 609056 Project Type: Signing - Structural
No. of Addendums: 0 Date of Last Addendum: N/A

If they’re smart (and consistent), they’ll add exit numbers to the Mass Pike ramps.

The signs at I-84’s eastern terminus have already been replaced when the Mass Pike went through its sign replacement project. They likely won’t get exit numbers, but they really should.

[MoMaRoadDweeb]

Advertised this morning by MassDOT, upcoming sign replacement project on I-84, winning bid to be announced May 3:
Location: DISTRICT3
Description: Guide and Traffic Sign Replacement along a Section of Interstate 84
District: 3 Ad Date: 3/19/2022 Section Response: Const Project Value: $687,691.00
CDs, Plans & Specs Available: No
Federal Aid No.: HSI-0843(001)X Project Number: 609056 Project Type: Signing - Structural
No. of Addendums: 0 Date of Last Addendum: N/A

Thought they had already replaced the signs?

[shadyjay]

Yes, the signs on I-84 are essentially the current standard (with the full-height exit tabs) and I see nothing wrong with them.  They were among the first signs in the state installed with the current standards, but appear to be in fine shape.  The existing signs feature "pull-throughs", which are becoming more rare as time goes on (except on I-90).... no idea if they will hold strong.  The parking area at the CT/MA state line is signed as a "Picnic Area", which is another relic from the past, as is the "Mass Pike" wording, vs the logo. 

Still, I think the signs could last another 10+ years without issue, but if MassDOT wants to replace them, that's up to them!

[roadman]

Yes, the signs on I-84 are essentially the current standard (with the full-height exit tabs) and I see nothing wrong with them.  They were among the first signs in the state installed with the current standards, but appear to be in fine shape.  The existing signs feature "pull-throughs", which are becoming more rare as time goes on (except on I-90).... no idea if they will hold strong.  The parking area at the CT/MA state line is signed as a "Picnic Area", which is another relic from the past, as is the "Mass Pike" wording, vs the logo. 

Still, I think the signs could last another 10+ years without issue, but if MassDOT wants to replace them, that's up to them!

The signs on I-84 were last updated in 2003-2004.  Current MassDOT policy is to replace sign panels about every 18 to 20 years, and replace sign structures about every 36 to 40 years.  Note that the project just advertised for bids is, with a handful of exceptions, for the replacement of panels only.  The existing overhead sign structures and most other ground-mounted posts are being retained.  And, good news for all you "paddle sign" fans.  The new design extruded MA-D1-7 "combined" guide signs with twin steel posts are not being specified for this project.  Rather, new sheet aluminum MA-D1-6/MA-D1-5 assemblies are being mounted to the existing single tubular posts, in the traditional "paddle sign" arrangement.

[PurdueBill]

The signs on I-84 were last updated in 2003-2004.  Current MassDOT policy is to replace sign panels about every 18 to 20 years, and replace sign structures about every 36 to 40 years.  Note that the project just advertised for bids is, with a handful of exceptions, for the replacement of panels only.  The existing overhead sign structures and most other ground-mounted posts are being retained.  And, good news for all you "paddle sign" fans.  The new design extruded MA-D1-7 "combined" guide signs with twin steel posts are not being specified for this project.  Rather, new sheet aluminum MA-D1-6/MA-D1-5 assemblies are being mounted to the existing single tubular posts, in the traditional "paddle sign" arrangement.

Hooray!!  I have thought ever since they were introduced that the extruded, larger signs commonly used as paddle sign replacements were too large and kinda unsightly on 2-lane roads and other locations where the paddle signs had served well for so long. 

If only they were consistent with the 20 year thing; there are certainly signs that are much older than that hanging around unreplaced that could use it.  (The one BGS for Lowell Street traffic at US 1, for example--installed in 1993 and still there, and still laid out wrong.  The sign it replaced was about 20 years old when it was replaced by the current sign, but it was laid out correctly.  How come the screwy signs manage to last longer?

[SectorZ]

Yes, the signs on I-84 are essentially the current standard (with the full-height exit tabs) and I see nothing wrong with them.  They were among the first signs in the state installed with the current standards, but appear to be in fine shape.  The existing signs feature "pull-throughs", which are becoming more rare as time goes on (except on I-90).... no idea if they will hold strong.  The parking area at the CT/MA state line is signed as a "Picnic Area", which is another relic from the past, as is the "Mass Pike" wording, vs the logo. 

Still, I think the signs could last another 10+ years without issue, but if MassDOT wants to replace them, that's up to them!

The signs on I-84 were last updated in 2003-2004.  Current MassDOT policy is to replace sign panels about every 18 to 20 years, and replace sign structures about every 36 to 40 years.  Note that the project just advertised for bids is, with a handful of exceptions, for the replacement of panels only.  The existing overhead sign structures and most other ground-mounted posts are being retained.  And, good news for all you "paddle sign" fans.  The new design extruded MA-D1-7 "combined" guide signs with twin steel posts are not being specified for this project.  Rather, new sheet aluminum MA-D1-6/MA-D1-5 assemblies are being mounted to the existing single tubular posts, in the traditional "paddle sign" arrangement.

I wonder if the state is already giving up on the new guide signs. Such a shame if so, they're a vast improvement given the stupidity of having one sign have to convey less information for no reason other than apparent tradition.

[MATraveler128]

I think there are too many overheads on I-84 in Mass. I know that MassDOT has a policy for this, but they should have the Brimfield sign and the eastbound Old Sturbridge Village sign ground mounted. Are there any plans to ground mount some of the guide signs like what they did on I-495?

[roadman]

I think there are too many overheads on I-84 in Mass. I know that MassDOT has a policy for this, but they should have the Brimfield sign and the eastbound Old Sturbridge Village sign ground mounted. Are there any plans to ground mount some of the guide signs like what they did on I-495?

Under the pending I-84 project, the existing overhead Brimfield and Old Sturbridge Village signs will be replaced with new ground-mounted signs.  I personally have never understood why these signs were overhead mounted int he first place.

[kramie13]

I think there are too many overheads on I-84 in Mass.

There are too many overheads in Massachusetts.  Not sure why the state is obsessed with them.

In my opinion, if the highway is only 2 lanes in each direction, all signs should be ground-mounted.  This used to be the case on Rte. 2 west of Fitchburg, the Mass Pike west of I-84, and even I-495 between Rte. 24 and I-195.  The overheads in these sections of highways ruins the "scenic-ness" of these roads.

[Rothman]

I think there are too many overheads on I-84 in Mass.

There are too many overheads in Massachusetts.  Not sure why the state is obsessed with them.

In my opinion, if the highway is only 2 lanes in each direction, all signs should be ground-mounted.  This used to be the case on Rte. 2 west of Fitchburg, the Mass Pike west of I-84, and even I-495 between Rte. 24 and I-195.  The overheads in these sections of highways ruins the "scenic-ness" of these roads.

From MA 9 north to MA 2, I-91 was ground mounted signs.