Something interesting I noticed recently:
Two overhead signs in the Rochester, NY, area have completely disappeared, without a trace:
I-490 Westbound at Exit 16 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1479218,-77.6019746,3a,75y,327.05h,86.81t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snovhUm7k3YTLSk8ieM6p-Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
I-390 Southbound at Exit 14 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0899988,-77.6040173,3a,75y,192.24h,82.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMN_ys79YM_k5rSwhl4ARfQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
I'll try to get some photos to prove that these are MIA, but in the meantime, figured I'd see if anyone had any insight.
They've been gone for several weeks, so I'm not sure whether there will be replacements.
Judging by their looks, an inspection may have taken place which determined there was something unsafe about them and they had to be removed pronto.
Depending on the state, they can do some emergency work and get something designed and built quickly. Or, they can reinstall them, eventually, someday, sometime, some year.
That seems likely. Overheads can take a while when they need to be replaced. Given that they're expensive, I've seen ones that are out for years. Let's hope these don't take quite that long.
When I first saw Exit 53 for I-495 in Massachusetts, the final sign was a VMS. It's a standard overhead sign now. Maybe VMSes will be a temporary solution for the ones in New York.
Quote from: 1 on June 12, 2018, 01:20:09 PM
When I first saw Exit 53 for I-495 in Massachusetts, the final sign was a VMS. It's a standard overhead sign now. Maybe VMSes will be a temporary solution for the ones in New York.
Each NYSDOT region seems to be doing their own thing when they remove overhead signs due to safety issues. R9 made tiny little BGSs and ground mounted them near the appropriate location. R2 put up standard reassurance shields and arrows and have moved to decrease the number of standard overhead sign installations. R3 ground mounts the removed sign until it can be replaced, though I have seen VMSs filling the role.
R4 did the tiny BGS thing on I-590 when the exit 3 and 4 overheads were out.
Quote from: vdeane on June 12, 2018, 01:17:51 PM
That seems likely. Overheads can take a while when they need to be replaced. Given that they're expensive, I've seen ones that are out for years.
(New Jersey, cough cough)
Ones that have been hit by a truck and thus the state can be reimbursed may take under 2 years. Others that may have failed inspection could be 5 or more years. There was one on Rt. 42 in Deptford, NJ thought that was rebuilt in under 6 months, which is quite the exception to the general timespan.
Quote from: 1 on June 12, 2018, 01:20:09 PM
When I first saw Exit 53 for I-495 in Massachusetts, the final sign was a VMS. It's a standard overhead sign now. Maybe VMSes will be a temporary solution for the ones in New York.
The interesting thing is that neither of the missing overheads in the OP are
strictly necessary for navigational purposes.
The I-490 one has this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.1450255,-77.5997757,3a,75y,328.44h,93.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDtWhyB8kt1Zkl3KiurCmlQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656), and the I-390 one has this (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0932699,-77.6027913,3a,75y,195.3h,91.6t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sFvOA7UFxfVjgcNz4-qV7oA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) (as well as ample warning (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.0815074,-77.6145839,3a,75y,214.8h,88.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAI-7hfbpUQHSNderaGJEmA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) for the Hylan Drive exit further down the road). This adds to the likelihood of these signs being out for some time, even years. Or maybe they don't plan to replace them at all for that reason.
I have seen VMS's used to give temporary guidance, but only in construction zones.
WVDOH has had overheads where either the the truss or the support columns have been hit by trucks. The state generally waits for insurance to settle out before replacing. It can take months to sometimes year for them to come back in overhead form. DOH will sometimes install temporary ground-mounted signage until the overhead structure gets replaced.
Quote from: Bitmapped on June 14, 2018, 09:23:44 AM
WVDOH has had overheads where either the the truss or the support columns have been hit by trucks. The state generally waits for insurance to settle out before replacing. It can take months to sometimes year for them to come back in overhead form. DOH will sometimes install temporary ground-mounted signage until the overhead structure gets replaced.
MassDOT has a similar practice and a specific section (Accident Recovery) to deal with such issues. Like WV, they will typically provide portable VMS panels or install temporary signs until the signs and support are replaced. The only problem with this is, as Bitmapped noted for WV, the program is contingent on negotiating with the driver's or company's insurance company first - with can add a considerable time delay to replacing the overhead structure.
Then there's PennDOT who's slow as hell at replacing damaged signs. Take this one at I-95 and PA 420 that been going 5+ years with this temporary sign:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.868539,-75.3126159,3a,49.4y,101.29h,93.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSgA_KbcPPiAbqjEo7zm5pw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Quote from: Bitmapped on June 14, 2018, 09:23:44 AM
DOH will sometimes install temporary ground-mounted signage until the overhead structure gets replaced.
Maryland DOT/SHA has at least one overhead set of signs (might be two) on MD-100 westbound approaching MD-295 in Anne Arundel County that are gone for reasons not clear to me. The vertical structures that the assemblies rest on - maybe it was struck by an overheight truck? - are still there, and small temporary-looking green signs on both sides of the westbound lanes have been there for a while. The state sign shop can fabricate BGS panels when needed, but I am not sure that anyone except a private contractor can do the horizontal structural assemblies that the signs are mounted on.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on June 14, 2018, 11:02:48 AM
Quote from: Bitmapped on June 14, 2018, 09:23:44 AM
DOH will sometimes install temporary ground-mounted signage until the overhead structure gets replaced.
Maryland DOT/SHA has at least one overhead set of signs (might be two) on MD-100 westbound approaching MD-295 in Anne Arundel County that are gone for reasons not clear to me. The vertical structures that the assemblies rest on - maybe it was struck by an overheight truck? - are still there, and small temporary-looking green signs on both sides of the westbound lanes have been there for a while. The state sign shop can fabricate BGS panels when needed, but I am not sure that anyone except a private contractor can do the horizontal structural assemblies that the signs are mounted on.
I see what you mean in streetview. But also I see this as well:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1702343,-76.7302271,3a,33y,304.74h,100.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s34ywPPVjCYSFTBsiet3Zvw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
One the state seems to be going away from signs mounted on bridges so I would expect these to be replaced as well. But also I don't recall seeing side mounted lighting for signs before.
Quote from: ekt8750 on June 14, 2018, 10:58:10 AM
Then there's PennDOT who's slow as hell at replacing damaged signs. Take this one at I-95 and PA 420 that been going 5+ years with this temporary sign:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.868539,-75.3126159,3a,49.4y,101.29h,93.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSgA_KbcPPiAbqjEo7zm5pw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
5+ years. Hah! In Boston, we have signs that have been missing for 13+ years.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6336.msg139183#msg139183
Quote from: roadman on June 14, 2018, 12:13:45 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on June 14, 2018, 10:58:10 AM
Then there's PennDOT who's slow as hell at replacing damaged signs. Take this one at I-95 and PA 420 that been going 5+ years with this temporary sign:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.868539,-75.3126159,3a,49.4y,101.29h,93.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSgA_KbcPPiAbqjEo7zm5pw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
5+ years. Hah! In Boston, we have signs that have been missing for 13+ years.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6336.msg139183#msg139183
Wow I remember that sign bridge but I didn't even realize it was gone as it's been years since I went that way. What was under the greenout on the MassPike sign and the Exit 20 tab?
Quote from: AMLNet49 on June 14, 2018, 12:56:15 PM
Quote from: roadman on June 14, 2018, 12:13:45 PM
Quote from: ekt8750 on June 14, 2018, 10:58:10 AM
Then there's PennDOT who's slow as hell at replacing damaged signs. Take this one at I-95 and PA 420 that been going 5+ years with this temporary sign:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.868539,-75.3126159,3a,49.4y,101.29h,93.45t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sSgA_KbcPPiAbqjEo7zm5pw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
5+ years. Hah! In Boston, we have signs that have been missing for 13+ years.
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6336.msg139183#msg139183
Wow I remember that sign bridge but I didn’t even realize it was gone as it’s been years since I went that way. What was under the greenout on the MassPike sign and the Exit 20 tab?
South Station. The photo shows these signs as they were first installed, when the roadway was still an interim condition, with only access to I-90 west from Exit 20. Once the full build was completed, the Purchase Street sign was changed to omit South Station, the greenout on the I-90 sign was removed to reveal the additional legend, and the exit tab modified to read Exits 20B-A.
There have been a handful of signs missing on I-87 in northern Saratoga County for a while. Think they were taken down by the storms in early May, but all were still missing as of Tuesday.
The SB 3/4 mile advance for Exit 8A was gone for several months as well...only to be replaced recently by something I'd expect from Region 9.
Quote from: webny99 on June 12, 2018, 03:25:38 PM
I have seen VMS's used to give temporary guidance, but only in construction zones.
NJ Turnpike has at least one VMS that frequently displays travel times styled as a BGS, complete with the US 13 shield and Wilmington as control city.
BGSes are like traffic signals in Florida. If a mast arm assembly goes, it will be replaced by a span wire between two telephone poles. That assembly will stay like that usually for years as one on John Young Parkway at the Orlando Baptist Church Driveway had the NB JYP pole hit years ago (probably in 08) and still Orlando has not replaced the pole. The temporary span wire is still there with the other three mast arm assemblies.
Another one now is US 27 NB at I-4 West freeway ramp. The mast arm pole was removed (even the foundation since been chiseled out) within a few months ago, and probably will stay that way for 5 years or whenever Polk County decides to replace the whole intersection and most likely go all span wire as Polk County has been using all span wires at every intersection north and south of I-4, so to keep uniform it will replace them to look like the others when that time comes. Hey Osceola County replaced two intersections along SR 535 with span wires where previously both intersections had mast arms and one having a pole knocked out using a temporary span wire in one direction.
Hey if it were CA, IL, or NJ they would be required right away to get another mast arm in there pronto as the MUTCD forbids it there if its not a temporary installation!
Quote from: BrianP on June 14, 2018, 11:50:20 AM
I see what you mean in streetview. But also I see this as well:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1702343,-76.7302271,3a,33y,304.74h,100.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s34ywPPVjCYSFTBsiet3Zvw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
One the state seems to be going away from signs mounted on bridges so I would expect these to be replaced as well. But also I don't recall seeing side mounted lighting for signs before.[/quote]
The three agencies that own the freeways I drive the most on are MDOT/SHA, VDOT and MDTA. All of them seem to have been taking the sign panels off of bridges and mounting them on stand-alone structures. Seems to have been more common in relative terms IMO, on MDOT/SHA-maintained freeways.
Lighting on the side of sign panels was never very common in Maryland, but I have seen it in a few other places (cannot name them either - I think at least one location is in the West on I-68).
Does not the signs on bridges compromise the structural integrity of the structure? I heard that many states have determined that and want to move away from this practice.
Quote from: roadman65 on June 15, 2018, 10:58:44 AM
Does not the signs on bridges compromise the structural integrity of the structure? I heard that many states have determined that and want to move away from this practice.
The principal issue with BGSes on overpass structures is that the BGS normally extends well above the height of the bridge structure. Because of this, over time wind acting on the panel creates a torsional effect. This has two impacts: First, the upper anchors that are in the bridge parapets loosen over time and eventually become totally ineffective. Second, such mountings eventually create additional loading stresses where the sign support "cage" connects with the outer beams of the bridge, which are exacerbated once the parapet mountings fail.
In the case of Massachusetts, these potential issues came to light during the accelerated bridge inspections (for all types of spans) done following the I-35W collapse. While it had been recommended design practice to not mount new BGS panels on bridge structures prior to these inspections, these findings emphasized the need to avoid such installations unless there is no other practical alternative. Where bridge-mountings of BGS panels cannot be avoided, typically it is recommended that signs be replaced "in-kind" so that existing supports and mounting hardware can be either reused or replaced with identical supports and hardware.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dawnet.com%2FAAroads%2F50-301_NoBGS.jpg&hash=6575ffb99e66fb98477679d7379027034f6a9d98)
Several years ago, issues were found with the sign gantry at this location. A few weeks after an emergency removal of the overhead gantry and sign, these 2 signs appeared on the old gantry supports. (This was the third in a sequence of nearly identical diagramatic signs.) This past spring, a new gantry was installed and 3 new APL signs appeared in this stretch.
Not to mention Wilmington is now gone, after it was finally added after many years of US 301 not having any sort of control city. Now Salisbury is even gone for US 50. I guess the MDSHA does not have this assembly's replacement in the budget.
Quote from: roadman65 on June 19, 2018, 10:03:35 PM
Not to mention Wilmington is now gone, after it was finally added after many years of US 301 not having any sort of control city. Now Salisbury is even gone for US 50. I guess the MDSHA does not have this assembly's replacement in the budget.
They installed new APLs without any control cities?
Quote from: Roadsguy on June 19, 2018, 10:06:15 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on June 19, 2018, 10:03:35 PM
Not to mention Wilmington is now gone, after it was finally added after many years of US 301 not having any sort of control city. Now Salisbury is even gone for US 50. I guess the MDSHA does not have this assembly's replacement in the budget.
They installed new APLs without any control cities?
I was referring to the time these were on the road. I have no clue about the replacements.
Excuse me today, when you have issues with women your mind is not on things. I did not see that the APL was now added in the text. It is even more on your mind when you have issues with a female co worker.
Start here and go forward...
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4765/25986948808_ff59c6d2a0_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/FAnUvw)2017 Delaware trip Day 2 - 004 (https://flic.kr/p/FAnUvw) by H.B. Elkins (https://www.flickr.com/photos/hbelkins/), on Flickr
Quote from: davewiecking on June 19, 2018, 09:16:40 PM
[img snipped]
Several years ago, issues were found with the sign gantry at this location. A few weeks after an emergency removal of the overhead gantry and sign, these 2 signs appeared on the old gantry supports. (This was the third in a sequence of nearly identical diagramatic signs.) This past spring, a new gantry was installed and 3 new APL signs appeared in this stretch.
That's an interesting way to sign option lanes. I wonder if there's anywhere where it's been done like that permanently.
Quote from: webny99 on June 20, 2018, 12:15:33 PM
Quote from: davewiecking on June 19, 2018, 09:16:40 PM
[img snipped]
Several years ago, issues were found with the sign gantry at this location. A few weeks after an emergency removal of the overhead gantry and sign, these 2 signs appeared on the old gantry supports. (This was the third in a sequence of nearly identical diagramatic signs.) This past spring, a new gantry was installed and 3 new APL signs appeared in this stretch.
That's an interesting way to sign option lanes. I wonder if there's anywhere where it's been done like that permanently.
It's definitely way better than how NJDOT signed I-295 approaching 42/76...using 2 arrows for 3 lanes, leaving a driver unfamiliar with the area to guess if they *had* to be in the left or right lane, and if the center lane could be used for both, or only went towards one roadway. https://goo.gl/maps/yReEvhtDDBq
Quote from: hbelkins on June 20, 2018, 11:04:06 AM
Start here and go forward...
(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4765/25986948808_ff59c6d2a0_z.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/FAnUvw)
2017 Delaware trip Day 2 - 004 (https://flic.kr/p/FAnUvw) by H.B. Elkins (https://www.flickr.com/photos/hbelkins/), on Flickr
Good timing on this one; shows newly installed APL sign in front of an older diagrammatic. Looks like replacement work was done a bit earlier than "this past spring"!
I do admit that Ocean City is a better choice than Salisbury. More people go there. During the Summer its real popular among people from the DC area or Baltimore.