Massachusetts

[yankee.peddler]

Text heights are going from 6" uppercase to 8"/6" mixed case.

I assume this covers just the destinations?  I imagine the directional prompts, such as "NEXT RIGHT", will remain 6" uppercase.

[mass_citizen]

Text heights are going from 6" uppercase to 8"/6" mixed case.

And that's enough to change the whole spec.?

sounds like a case of "if it ain't broke don't fix it"

[spooky]

sounds like a case of "if we want to keep using federal funds for signs we have to use Title Case legends like the MUTCD says"

[roadman]

I assume this covers just the destinations?  I imagine the directional prompts, such as "NEXT RIGHT", will remain 6" uppercase.

Correct.

[Zeffy]

I assume this covers just the destinations?  I imagine the directional prompts, such as "NEXT RIGHT", will remain 6" uppercase.

Correct.

Are they going to continue using Series D or switch to E (maybe E(HM) for more legibility)?

[SidS1045]

I've never been to the Vineyard, but on Nantucket it seems like most people just drive off the ferry and park the car for the duration of the trip.  They don't need it because they already have a few cars they keep there for on-island use.

They park their cars probably because gridlock on the island (only 14 miles long and 3.5 miles wide) during the summer is legendary.  It's almost always faster to bike or walk to get around Nantucket.

[roadman]

@PHLBOS - MassDOT's current D6/D8 specifications are based on the concept of using one of a number of standard sized sheet aluminum sign blanks, and formatting the legend of any particular sign to fit on a particular blank.  Changing to mixed case legend creates problems with this practice, especially for the top-mounted signs.

As such, going from sheet aluminum signs to extruded panels appears to be a logical move.  Even if MassDOT were to stick to sheet aluminum panels, it will be necessary to ditch the tubular posts and top-mounting of signs in favor of "traditional" steel beam (S or W beam) posts due to the increased loading of the larger signs.

BTW, the reason MassDOT is going to a 8/6 mixed case, in lieu of a 6/4.5 mixed case, for these signs is to maintain adequate legibilty.  They have determined that, at the distances drivers are normally expected to read a D6/D8 sign assembly, that going to 6/4.5. will result in texts that are less legible than with the current 6 inch uppercase.

Do not have a photo, but a good example of a mixed-case D6/D8 assembly was recently installed on Route 113 east at I-95 in Newburyport.  It replaced a larger extruded sign assembly, which was objected to by abutters due to the "excessive size" of the panels.

@Zeffy - MassDOT's current spec for D6/D8 legends calls for Series C font.  The sign I mentioned above was made with Series D font, which will likely become the new standard for D6/D8 signs.

[spooky]

@Zeffy - MassDOT's current spec for D6/D8 legends calls for Series C font.  The sign I mentioned above was made with Series D font, which will likely become the new standard for D6/D8 signs.

MassDOT's current spec allows for Series B for longer place names. (PROVIDENCE RI is one I recall running into.) I assume the use of extruded panels will mean Series D is used on all signs unless there is a horizontal clearance issue?

[Pete from Boston]

I've never been to the Vineyard, but on Nantucket it seems like most people just drive off the ferry and park the car for the duration of the trip.  They don't need it because they already have a few cars they keep there for on-island use.

They park their cars probably because gridlock on the island (only 14 miles long and 3.5 miles wide) during the summer is legendary.  It's almost always faster to bike or walk to get around Nantucket.

Actually, I was (half) kidding.  Most of them pack up a large, ostentatious vehicle and drive everywhere (hence the gridlock, though the army of trucks waging all-out total war on unkempt landscaping also contributes there). 

Biking on Nantucket is great, actually, because of the fact that the main cross-island roads have dedicated, fence-separated bike paths along them, and because most people drive. 

[PHLBOS]

Do not have a photo, but a good example of a mixed-case D6/D8 assembly was recently installed on Route 113 east at I-95 in Newburyport.  It replaced a larger extruded sign assembly, which was objected to by abutters due to the "excessive size" of the panels.

The new D6/D8 assembly that you speak of along MA 113 Eastbound prior to the I-95 interchange.  Remnants (post foundations) of the larger BGS assembly can be seen directly behind it.  The complaint about the larger BGS was due to it being placed in a residential area.

So this is the sign (no pun intended) of things to come in the Bay State?

[The Nature Boy]

I've never been to the Vineyard, but on Nantucket it seems like most people just drive off the ferry and park the car for the duration of the trip.  They don't need it because they already have a few cars they keep there for on-island use.

They park their cars probably because gridlock on the island (only 14 miles long and 3.5 miles wide) during the summer is legendary.  It's almost always faster to bike or walk to get around Nantucket.

The quickest way in is to take Sandpiper Air right? Not a big fan of Aeromass, I hear their owner is a bit of a jerk.

[Pete from Boston]

I've never been to the Vineyard, but on Nantucket it seems like most people just drive off the ferry and park the car for the duration of the trip.  They don't need it because they already have a few cars they keep there for on-island use.

They park their cars probably because gridlock on the island (only 14 miles long and 3.5 miles wide) during the summer is legendary.  It's almost always faster to bike or walk to get around Nantucket.

The quickest way in is to take Sandpiper Air right? Not a big fan of Aeromass, I hear their owner is a bit of a jerk.

And deal with a schedule?  If you vacation on Nantucket, surely your own plane will be faster.

[The Nature Boy]

I've never been to the Vineyard, but on Nantucket it seems like most people just drive off the ferry and park the car for the duration of the trip.  They don't need it because they already have a few cars they keep there for on-island use.

They park their cars probably because gridlock on the island (only 14 miles long and 3.5 miles wide) during the summer is legendary.  It's almost always faster to bike or walk to get around Nantucket.

The quickest way in is to take Sandpiper Air right? Not a big fan of Aeromass, I hear their owner is a bit of a jerk.

And deal with a schedule?  If you vacation on Nantucket, surely your own plane will be faster.

Sandpiper DOES only have one plane so you would have to plan carefully.

(Any other Wings fans on here?)

[mass_citizen]

sounds like a case of "if we want to keep using federal funds for signs we have to use Title Case legends like the MUTCD says"

Actually I was referring to the change in sign support, not the change in lettering.

Do not have a photo, but a good example of a mixed-case D6/D8 assembly was recently installed on Route 113 east at I-95 in Newburyport.  It replaced a larger extruded sign assembly, which was objected to by abutters due to the "excessive size" of the panels.

It looks like these panels are the same size. Will this also be the case in the future? I know you said it will be extruded panels, will it be one panel with a horizontal dividing line?

[roadman]

@mass citizen  The reason MassDOT is considering a change in the sign support design is threefold.  First, the top mounted (D6) signs currently require that the legend be designed so there is a vertical space of at least 6 inches on the bottom of the panel - this is so that the bracket used to mount the sign does not obscure any of the legend.  With the taller legend, and if the legend contains 'g's, 'y's, and the like, it is very difficult to maintain this spacing.  Unlike top-mounted signs on tubular posts, signs mounted to steel beam posts don't require a minimum bottom vertical spacing.

Second, with the new mixed case standard, many of the bottom bracket-mounted (D8) signs will have to be larger than the current standard sizes (PHLBOS's photo of the assembly on 113 in Newburyport is a good example and, yes, both panels are the same size).  This creates the potential for loading issues with the larger panels - traditional MassDPW/MassHighway/MassDOT tubular post design considers one large sign and one small one, not two large signs.

Lastly, as I mentioned in a previous post, MassDOT may opt to go to extruded aluminum panels for these signs - at least for signs with longer legends (such as approaching Interstate and freeway entrances).  Mounting extruded panels to tubular posts, apart from potential loading issues, would require custom mountings - such mountings will make sign installation more difficult.

Note that MassDOT has recently been transitioning to steel beam posts for larger regulatory, warning, and route marker assemblies used on Interstates and freeways.  Extending this practice to D6 and D8 guide signs seems to be a logical extension of this practice.

[roadman]

(Any other Wings fans on here?)

Enjoyed the show when it was in first run (my brother, his wife, and I used to watch it when I'd visit them for dinner).  However, I haven't seen an episode in years.

[mass_citizen]

Sounds like its the end of the paddle sign as we know it. 

Note that MassDOT has recently been transitioning to steel beam posts for larger regulatory, warning, and route marker assemblies used on Interstates and freeways.  Extending this practice to D6 and D8 guide signs seems to be a logical extension of this practice.

Has this been incorporated into a new standard? I can't find anything on the MassDOT website. Or is it just an unwritten trial so far?

[roadman]

Has this been incorporated into a new standard? I can't find anything on the MassDOT website. Or is it just an unwritten trial so far?

MassDOT is in the process of completely updating their Traffic Standard Details, which will again be issued as a separate document from the Construction Standards.  As part of this, the current Guide Sign Policy for Secondary State Highways will be expanded to include MassDOT-specific standards for all guide signing - including the use of steel beam posts for larger warning, regulatory, and route marker signs on Interstates and freeways.

The revised document is expected to be completed by late Spring of 2015.  At that time, it will be posted on MassDOT's public web site.

[spooky]

sounds like a case of "if we want to keep using federal funds for signs we have to use Title Case legends like the MUTCD says"

Actually I was referring to the change in sign support, not the change in lettering.

I was suggesting that the change in lettering would result in an increase in size, which in turn would require a change in support. I also knew that the D6 sign requires a 6" space at the bottom for the mounting bracket. The Route 113 example does look to be the same size as a current D6 sign, but it only has one line of legend. Current standards have two lines of legend and a directional legend (NEXT RIGHT, SECOND LEFT, etc.) or an arrow.

[mass_citizen]

sounds like a case of "if we want to keep using federal funds for signs we have to use Title Case legends like the MUTCD says"

Actually I was referring to the change in sign support, not the change in lettering.

I was suggesting that the change in lettering would result in an increase in size, which in turn would require a change in support. I also knew that the D6 sign requires a 6" space at the bottom for the mounting bracket. The Route 113 example does look to be the same size as a current D6 sign, but it only has one line of legend. Current standards have two lines of legend and a directional legend (NEXT RIGHT, SECOND LEFT, etc.) or an arrow.

I understand your and roadman's points but I am wondering has a structural analysis been done or is it based on simply engineering judgement? With the additional costs required not just for labor but for steel beam, extruded panels, and increased foundation size (current D6 foundations are unreinforced whereas steel beams will require steel reinforcement) I would hope there would be some kind of analysis to determine that, yes the additional lines of legend do require a different structure, or no we can keep the current system. I do understand roadmans other reasons he mentioned for the change but I also am wondering if the benefits to motorists are worth the additional costs, which will add up significantly on a statewide basis.

My point also applies to the warning/route signs which will go from a hollow steel tubular post (P5 post in the standards) driven into the ground to a steel beam post with concrete foundation. Let's keep in mind the increased maintenance cost to fix/replace one of these warning signs/foundations in instances of vehicle or plow collision.

[roadman]

MassDOT has had previous experience with steel beam posts for D6/D8 assemblies (special circumstances where "standard' sized D8 panels could not be used - the newer signs at MA2/MA2A Concord Rotary are a good example), as well as with small extruded panels on single steel beam posts (Interstate/freeway town line signs are a good example of this).

Recent bit prices have shown that the cost differential between tubular posts and single steel beam posts, and .25 inch thick sheet aluminum panels versus extruded aluminum panels are not significant, especially when you consider the full cost of various MassDOT sign replacement and sign maintenance projects.  Also consider that, for larger regulatory, warning, and route marker signs on Interstates and freeways, the increase in cost for steel beam posts (as opposed to the current telescopic posts) is offset by the increased durability of the signs - which means fewer knockdowns due to things like wind and snow removal activities.

[PHLBOS]

The Route 113 example does look to be the same size as a current D6 sign, but it only has one line of legend. Current standards have two lines of legend and a directional legend (NEXT RIGHT, SECOND LEFT, etc.) or an arrow

That's because the larger BGS' the new structure replaced only had one listed destination for each direction.  At the other side of the interchange, along 113 Westbound, the large BGS' remain.  Such gives a sense what the original BGS' along the 113 Eastbound looked like (granted the order of the I-95 directions are opposite, but one gets the general idea).

The smaller replacement was a match-in-kind with regards to the info.

[Pete from Boston]

Two questions and a comment regarding the roadside portable VMS signs now part of our permanent landscape here:

Q1:  is the VMS on 95 South two miles prior to the Mass. border owned and operated by Massachusetts?  It follows the Mass. conventions and today indicated time and distance to Mass. 113.

Q2:  Is there a timetable for statewide permanent signs as now exist on the Cape?

Comment:  A pitfall of the "helpful hint" messages that clutter our VMSes came up the other day entering the Sumner Tunnel.  While the BGSes clearly indicate "93–left lane only" and "Storrow Drive–right lane only," the adjacent VMS uselessly and confusingly says "Left lane travel for passing only."   

$&@%#!!

[AMLNet49]

I suspect the idea of a bridge from Falmouth to either Vineyard Haven or Oaks Bluff would run into even more political resistance from the rich and entitled locals who live on the islands than the wind turbines have.

I've been a Vineyard-goer my whole life and this drives me crazy. It's "Oak Bluffs" not "Oaks Bluff". Why is it that everyone makes this mistake?

[Pete from Boston]

I suspect the idea of a bridge from Falmouth to either Vineyard Haven or Oaks Bluff would run into even more political resistance from the rich and entitled locals who live on the islands than the wind turbines have.

I've been a Vineyard-goer my whole life and this drives me crazy. It's "Oak Bluffs" not "Oaks Bluff". Why is it that everyone makes this mistake?

I don't know. You should go down to Boston Commons or the Public Gardens and protest.