I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work

[jp the roadgeek]

South of Portland, the control city could be Boston rather than Kittery or Portsmouth. What's the point of Portsmouth anyways?

North of Bangor, my recommendation could be Toronto. Just go a couple miles west.

I doubt that anyone in Maine would actually be driving to Toronto or anywhere in Ontario for that matter via I-95 NB. Going all the way through Atlantic Canada to go back west again is a ridiculous idea.

Driving from Portland, ME to Toronto involves going SOUTH to the Mass Pike.

Driving from Bangor, ME to Toronto involves US 201 North.

The only way that I-95 ever factors into a drive from Maine to Toronto is if you drive south.

And going US 201 to get to Toronto, you would have to pass through Montreal anyway, and US 201 is more of a direct route to Quebec City (one could argue for Quebec City on a BGS for the exit from I-95 to US 201 north).  Houlton is the only logical NB control city north of Bangor because I-95 ends there.  If you really want to stretch it, you can always use Fredericton, although you'd have to take NB 95 to NB 2

[The Nature Boy]

South of Portland, the control city could be Boston rather than Kittery or Portsmouth. What's the point of Portsmouth anyways?

North of Bangor, my recommendation could be Toronto. Just go a couple miles west.

I doubt that anyone in Maine would actually be driving to Toronto or anywhere in Ontario for that matter via I-95 NB. Going all the way through Atlantic Canada to go back west again is a ridiculous idea.

Driving from Portland, ME to Toronto involves going SOUTH to the Mass Pike.

Driving from Bangor, ME to Toronto involves US 201 North.

The only way that I-95 ever factors into a drive from Maine to Toronto is if you drive south.

And going US 201 to get to Toronto, you would have to pass through Montreal anyway, and US 201 is more of a direct route to Quebec City (one could argue for Quebec City on a BGS for the exit from I-95 to US 201 north).  Houlton is the only logical NB control city north of Bangor because I-95 ends there.  If you really want to stretch it, you can always use Fredericton, although you'd have to take NB 95 to NB 2

Signing Fredericton is not much different than New York signing Montreal on I-87.

[Pete from Boston]

South of Portland, the control city could be Boston rather than Kittery or Portsmouth. What's the point of Portsmouth anyways?

It's a big tourist destination, for one, and probably the most built-up area along 95 between Portland and 128.   

[bob7374]

The West Stockbridge to Auburn project has now officially started with the contract having been moved from the Design to the Under Construction section of the MassDOT Project list with a notice to proceed issued on 10/22/15. No completion date was posted, however.

[bob7374]

MassDOT posted an ad on 11/28 for the bidding to commence on the I-90 signing project from Auburn to Boston. The official project bid page has been posted, only with a general note to contractors, for now. https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-16-1030-0H100-0H002-00000006345&external=true&parentUrl=bid

[roadman]

The West Stockbridge to Auburn project has now officially started with the contract having been moved from the Design to the Under Construction section of the MassDOT Project list with a notice to proceed issued on 10/22/15. No completion date was posted, however.

Project duration is 730 calendar days from notice to proceed (for future reference, the duration is stated on the first page of the bid proposal portion of the bid book).  Unlike most roadway construction work, MassDOT's sign replacement projects typically do not have winter exclusion periods.  Therefore, the completion date should be in November of 2017.

[AMLNet49]

The West Stockbridge to Auburn project has now officially started with the contract having been moved from the Design to the Under Construction section of the MassDOT Project list with a notice to proceed issued on 10/22/15. No completion date was posted, however.

Project duration is 730 calendar days from notice to proceed (for future reference, the duration is stated on the first page of the bid proposal portion of the bid book).  Unlike most roadway construction work, MassDOT's sign replacement projects typically do not have winter exclusion periods.  Therefore, the completion date should be in November of 2017.

Interesting, so it appears that the Mass Pike will be the last to finish converting its numbers even though it's starting first, because of the sign replacement. Most other roads will be converted by the end of 2016, and all will be by 2017. But the Mass Pike will only be 2/3  converted by then. (Exits 1-10 and 16-26). If the same schedule is pursued for the second half of the project, it would appear that it could take until 2019 for exits 11-15 to get converted.

[Alps]

The West Stockbridge to Auburn project has now officially started with the contract having been moved from the Design to the Under Construction section of the MassDOT Project list with a notice to proceed issued on 10/22/15. No completion date was posted, however.

Project duration is 730 calendar days from notice to proceed (for future reference, the duration is stated on the first page of the bid proposal portion of the bid book).  Unlike most roadway construction work, MassDOT's sign replacement projects typically do not have winter exclusion periods.  Therefore, the completion date should be in November of 2017.

Interesting, so it appears that the Mass Pike will be the last to finish converting its numbers even though it's starting first, because of the sign replacement. Most other roads will be converted by the end of 2016, and all will be by 2017. But the Mass Pike will only be 2/3  converted by then. (Exits 1-10 and 16-26). If the same schedule is pursued for the second half of the project, it would appear that it could take until 2019 for exits 11-15 to get converted.

Is it actually proposed to do 1-10 before 11-15? I feel like that just won't happen.

[bob7374]

The West Stockbridge to Auburn project has now officially started with the contract having been moved from the Design to the Under Construction section of the MassDOT Project list with a notice to proceed issued on 10/22/15. No completion date was posted, however.

Project duration is 730 calendar days from notice to proceed (for future reference, the duration is stated on the first page of the bid proposal portion of the bid book).  Unlike most roadway construction work, MassDOT's sign replacement projects typically do not have winter exclusion periods.  Therefore, the completion date should be in November of 2017.

Interesting, so it appears that the Mass Pike will be the last to finish converting its numbers even though it's starting first, because of the sign replacement. Most other roads will be converted by the end of 2016, and all will be by 2017. But the Mass Pike will only be 2/3  converted by then. (Exits 1-10 and 16-26). If the same schedule is pursued for the second half of the project, it would appear that it could take until 2019 for exits 11-15 to get converted.

Is it actually proposed to do 1-10 before 11-15? I feel like that just won't happen.

The second I-90 project actually covers Exits 10A to 20. 730 days is 2 years so if the second project starts by this spring, it could be completed by early 2018. (The project page for the first contract has been updated declaring it will be completed by the fall of 2017, consistent with what Roadman indicated.) I believe the conversion project (covering exits 22-26) completion date was indicated to be late 2017 or early 2018. Therefore, I don't believe there will be too much of difference between the completion date of the I-90 projects and the rest of the state.

What could be interesting though is that the contract that covers changing the exit numbers in the Big Dig tunnels is, according to that project's page, supposed to start in the spring of 2016. If the conversion project's contractors don't plan to get to the rest of I-93 until 2017, then there will be a significant amount of time where there will be two different sets of I-93 numbers.

[Jim]

I'm surprised to learn that there could be significant amounts of time (up to 2 years?!) with inconsistent exit numbers posted on routes in Massachusetts.  I believe I did some traveling in states like Florida and Pennsylvania right around their changeovers, and I don't recall any times when I noticed a mixture of consecutive and mileage based exit numbers posted at the same time (other than, of course, the "old exit" indicators).  Does anyone recall how long those conversions took?

[PHLBOS]

I believe I did some traveling in states like Florida and Pennsylvania right around their changeovers, and I don't recall any times when I noticed a mixture of consecutive and mileage based exit numbers posted at the same time (other than, of course, the "old exit" indicators).  Does anyone recall how long those conversions took?

In PA (at least the southeastern portion of it); the exit number conversions took roughly a year with the higher (north or east) numbers starting first. 

Sidebar: there are still a bunch of OLD EXIT XX squares erected despite being about 15 years old.

[roadman]

What could be interesting though is that the contract that covers changing the exit numbers in the Big Dig tunnels is, according to that project's page, supposed to start in the spring of 2016. If the conversion project's contractors don't plan to get to the rest of I-93 until 2017, then there will be a significant amount of time where there will be two different sets of I-93 numbers.

Like most District-wide sign replacement work, the MHS overhead sign repair contract will be an open-ended "on-call" contract, with no specific schedule for the work.  So it's likely that the exit number conversions in the O'Neill Tunnel will be scheduled to coincide with the I-93 portion of the statewide conversion contract.

[bob7374]

MassDOT posted an ad on 11/28 for the bidding to commence on the I-90 signing project from Auburn to Boston. The official project bid page has been posted, only with a general note to contractors, for now. https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-16-1030-0H100-0H002-00000006345&external=true&parentUrl=bid

The bid page now has more information, besides that the plans are now available to potential bidders.
Besides the Notice to Contractors, there are several other documents including a 4-part Attachment A that lists positions of the Enhance Reference Location (aka 2/10 mile marker) Signs. The markers will run from 92.4 in Auburn to 131.0 just west of the Allston-Brighton on-ramp on I-90 West (the project limits). With no addenda to the contract, there are no sign plans available, however. The winning bidder is still scheduled to be announced Feb. 2.

[vdeane]

Not the standard mile markers, like the ones already in use on the western part of the Turnpike?  So much for consistency.  Plus the standard markers look better than the enhanced ones anyways (IMO the enhanced markers are overkill).

[bob7374]

MassDOT posted an ad on 11/28 for the bidding to commence on the I-90 signing project from Auburn to Boston. The official project bid page has been posted, only with a general note to contractors, for now. https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-16-1030-0H100-0H002-00000006345&external=true&parentUrl=bid

The bid page now has more information, besides that the plans are now available to potential bidders.
Besides the Notice to Contractors, there are several other documents including a 4-part Attachment A that lists positions of the Enhance Reference Location (aka 2/10 mile marker) Signs. The markers will run from 92.4 in Auburn to 131.0 just west of the Allston-Brighton on-ramp on I-90 West (the project limits). With no addenda to the contract, there are no sign plans available, however. The winning bidder is still scheduled to be announced Feb. 2.

Apparently, from an addendum added to the project bid page today, the announcement of the winning bidder has been postponed for 2 weeks to 2/17. Perhaps due to the lateness of getting the CD of the plans available or that the number of firms that had asked for plans only totals 3 as of last week?

[roadman]

Perhaps due to the lateness of getting the CD of the plans available or that the number of firms that had asked for plans only totals 3 as of last week?

As a point of information, only two of those three plan holders requested official bid packages (O).  The third requested only an informational bid package (I).

Liddell Brothers is obviously pre-qualified to bid Signing-Structural work in Massachusetts.  However, to my knowledge, Mohawk Construction is not currently pre-qualified, as they are not a highway-signing specific contractor (note that MassDOT does not generally require pre-qualification as a condition of obtaining an official bid package).  And CIM (Construction Industries of Massachusetts) is not a contractor, but rather the lobbyist group for contractors in Massachusetts (which is why they requested only an informational bid package).

[bob7374]

MassDOT posted an ad on 11/28 for the bidding to commence on the I-90 signing project from Auburn to Boston. The official project bid page has been posted, only with a general note to contractors, for now. https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-16-1030-0H100-0H002-00000006345&external=true&parentUrl=bid

The bid page now has more information, besides that the plans are now available to potential bidders.
Besides the Notice to Contractors, there are several other documents including a 4-part Attachment A that lists positions of the Enhance Reference Location (aka 2/10 mile marker) Signs. The markers will run from 92.4 in Auburn to 131.0 just west of the Allston-Brighton on-ramp on I-90 West (the project limits). With no addenda to the contract, there are no sign plans available, however. The winning bidder is still scheduled to be announced Feb. 2.

Apparently, from an addendum added to the project bid page today, the announcement of the winning bidder has been postponed for 2 weeks to 2/17. Perhaps due to the lateness of getting the CD of the plans available or that the number of firms that had asked for plans only totals 3 as of last week?

It appears there's another delay. A check of the advertisement list indicates the announcement of the winning bid has been postponed until next Tuesday, 2/23. The project bid page itself has not been updated with this info yet.

[bob7374]

MassDOT posted an ad on 11/28 for the bidding to commence on the I-90 signing project from Auburn to Boston. The official project bid page has been posted, only with a general note to contractors, for now. https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-16-1030-0H100-0H002-00000006345&external=true&parentUrl=bid

The bid page now has more information, besides that the plans are now available to potential bidders.
Besides the Notice to Contractors, there are several other documents including a 4-part Attachment A that lists positions of the Enhance Reference Location (aka 2/10 mile marker) Signs. The markers will run from 92.4 in Auburn to 131.0 just west of the Allston-Brighton on-ramp on I-90 West (the project limits). With no addenda to the contract, there are no sign plans available, however. The winning bidder is still scheduled to be announced Feb. 2.

Apparently, from an addendum added to the project bid page today, the announcement of the winning bidder has been postponed for 2 weeks to 2/17. Perhaps due to the lateness of getting the CD of the plans available or that the number of firms that had asked for plans only totals 3 as of last week?

It appears there's another delay. A check of the advertisement list indicates the announcement of the winning bid has been postponed until next Tuesday, 2/23. The project bid page itself has not been updated with this info yet.

The new addenda has now been posted. It appears the delay is due to new specifications for the supports and electronics for the new VMS assemblies. Addenda 3 (available at the link above) also had specifications for the mile/reference markers to be installed:


Hopefully, the contract winner will be announced tomorrow.

[roadman]

Addenda 3 (available at the link above) also had specifications for the mile/reference markers to be installed:

Hopefully, the contract winner will be announced tomorrow.

The design of the new mile/reference markers is identical to those installed under the blanket mile/reference marker contracts MassHighway issued in 2008.

[KEVIN_224]

When do they change the signs on the Turnpike in Auburn? The extremely faded signs at Exit 10 eastbound are still there. You can't even see the numbers for I-290 and I-395 until you're like 500 feet in front of the sign.

[roadman]

When do they change the signs on the Turnpike in Auburn? The extremely faded signs at Exit 10 eastbound are still there. You can't even see the numbers for I-290 and I-395 until you're like 500 feet in front of the sign.

Those signs are to be replaced under the West Stockbridge to Auburn contract that construction has only begun on.  Allowing for shop drawing approval and fabrication of signs and gantries, the signs at the I-290/I-395 interchange will likely be replaced by mid to late summer of 2016.

I've been told that, as an interim measure until new signs are installed, the shields on the current signs were to be replaced with new ones (this is unrelated to the construction contract).  Haven't driven through that area in a while, so I've ben unable to confirm if this has happened.

Historical note - the eastbound signs and support at the I-290/I-395 off ramp were retained under the 1995 sign replacement contract, which is why they're now in such tough shape.

[Jim]

When do they change the signs on the Turnpike in Auburn? The extremely faded signs at Exit 10 eastbound are still there. You can't even see the numbers for I-290 and I-395 until you're like 500 feet in front of the sign.

I'll be sad to see the pilgrim hat go on that one.

[Rothman]

When do they change the signs on the Turnpike in Auburn? The extremely faded signs at Exit 10 eastbound are still there. You can't even see the numbers for I-290 and I-395 until you're like 500 feet in front of the sign.

I'll be sad to see the pilgrim hat go on that one.

Pfft.  It was sad to see MA 52 go.

[roadman]

MassDOT opened bids on the Auburn to Boston sign replacement earlier today.  Liddell Brothers of Halifax (MA) is tha apparent low bidder.

[bob7374]

MassDOT opened bids on the Auburn to Boston sign replacement earlier today.  Liddell Brothers of Halifax (MA) is tha apparent low bidder.

Apparently, based on the posted bid results, the lowest of only 2 bidders. The other bidder was RoadSafe Traffic Systems of Avon. Both bids were substantially lower than the estimated cost. Any estimated date for the Notice to Proceed?