AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Northeast => Topic started by: bob7374 on August 14, 2015, 06:53:07 PM

Title: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on August 14, 2015, 06:53:07 PM
MassDOT plans to let a contract this upcoming Tuesday (8/18) to replace signage along the Mass Pike / I-90 from Auburn westward. New milepost based numbers will accompany the new signage. Though sign plans are not available online (I may try to get a hold of them through MassDOT after the contract is awarded), addenda to bid documents posted online do provide sample plans for two exits, with the new numbers. Here's what the new signage for current Exit 10 will look like:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90exit90sign.jpg)

There was also a sign plan for the I-91/US 5 Springfield exit, currently Exit 4, which will become Exit 45. I have posted an image of that plan on my Mass. Misc. Sign Photos page: http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/miscsigns.html (http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/miscsigns.html) where I will post future new exit number related material during the next year.

I have also updated my I-90 Exit list: http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90exits.html (http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90exits.html). The plan numbers did not quite match mine, seems the I-91 exit was rounded up, while the I-290/I-390 was rounded down from the given MassDOT milepost listings. Hopefully, this trend won't continue with the rest of the list.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on August 14, 2015, 07:17:55 PM
Beat me to the punch Bob.  For those who are interested, the specs, bid item list, and plan holders list for the West Stockbridge to Auburn project can be viewed at  https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-15-1030-0H100-0H002-00000003478&external=true&parentUrl=bid

Addenda # 2 was issued to address sign design issues related to roadway changes identified by the project team for the pending Legacy Toll Plaza demolition project, which is planned to commence shortly after AET goes "live" on the Turnpike - this is currently scheduled for late 2016.  Advertising for the Auburn to Boston project has been pushed back to October 31st to address similar changes to the re-signing design in that contract, which will be more extensive on the eastern end of I-90.

I will post an update for West Stockbridge to Boston next week once the bids are opened and the winning contractor has been identified.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: KEVIN_224 on August 14, 2015, 10:39:23 PM
Thanks for the update! The signs on the present gantry for Exit 10 eastbound in Auburn are in very bad shape, especially the bigger pull-through sign for the Turnpike east.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: AMLNet49 on August 14, 2015, 11:34:05 PM
Hard to tell from the image, but will the new MassPike signage use the shorter MassPike-only exit tabs, or the taller tabs used in the rest of the state?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Alps on August 15, 2015, 01:33:28 AM
Hard to tell from the image, but will the new MassPike signage use the shorter MassPike-only exit tabs, or the taller tabs used in the rest of the state?
Those look like MUTCD-standard tabs.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: vdeane on August 15, 2015, 04:37:57 PM
Plus everything is now MassDOT anyways, so I'd doubt there will be any difference between new MassPike signage and new signage everywhere else except possibly the pilgrim hat.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: lowerdeck on August 17, 2015, 02:23:23 PM
It seems odd they use New London as a reference city, considering nearly every other one (in both states) for 395 uses Norwich
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on August 17, 2015, 05:55:58 PM
Quote
Hard to tell from the image, but will the new MassPike signage use the shorter MassPike-only exit tabs, or the taller tabs used in the rest of the state?
All new signing on the Turnpike - both the West Stockbridge to Auburn and Auburn to Boston sections - will be using the 30 inch tall exit tabs.  For tab width, MassDOT standard is to use a somewhat wider panel than required by the numerals.

Quote
It seems odd they use New London as a reference city, considering nearly every other one (in both states) for 395 uses Norwich
As signing on I-290 west for 395 south is replaced later this decade, MassDOT will be phasing out Norwich in favor of New London as the principal control city where only one destination is provided on applicable signs.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on August 17, 2015, 07:08:34 PM
As signing on I-290 west for 395 south is replaced later this decade, MassDOT will be phasing out Norwich in favor of New London as the principal control city where only one destination is provided on applicable signs.

Too bad ConnDOT didn't feel the same way.  The signs currently being replaced will retain "NORWICH" as a control city, so we won't be looking at any "NEW LONDON" signage on I-395 until sometime around 2050 when the signs now installed will be up for replacement.

What we can only hope for is that when signage on I-95 is upgraded for I-395 (installed 2000) is that "WORCESTER" replace the god-aweful "PLAINFIELD".   I-95 NB Exit 76 is the only place which has PLAINFIELD as a control point, but really, why not WORCESTER?  No secondary signage even mentions Worcester.

Getting back onto Mass Pike...

Wonder if any control points will be changing for I-84/present Exit 9?  Will HARTFORD/NEW YORK CITY be retained WB?  I always thought replacing HOLYOKE with HARTFORD for EB Exit 4 signage made more sense, thus moving Holyoke onto a secondary sign. 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on August 17, 2015, 07:26:38 PM

Getting back onto Mass Pike...

Wonder if any control points will be changing for I-84/present Exit 9?  Will HARTFORD/NEW YORK CITY be retained WB?  I always thought replacing HOLYOKE with HARTFORD for EB Exit 4 signage made more sense, thus moving Holyoke onto a secondary sign. 


The new principal BGSes for I-84 will read Hartford CT   NY City both westbound and eastbound.  US 20 will be downgraded from the principal signs to new supplemental signs with Sturbridge on them.

The new principal BGSes for I-91/US 5 will read Springfield  Holyoke both eastbound and westbound.  The reason for this is to satisfy MUTCD requirements regarding control destinations on signs for routes that go in two directions.

The new principal BGSes for I-291 will read  Springfield  Hartford CT.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on August 18, 2015, 11:33:39 AM
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90exit90sign.jpg)
I commented on this on FB and will state similar here.  Given that the ramps to both directions to MA 12 occur right after the toll booths and are within the interchange (such is not the case for the I-84/US 20 interchange below the Pike's Sturbridge interchange); I would've still placed MA 12 shields on the main signs (to the right of the I-290/395 shields).  A dual-legend treatment similar to what was done for the westbound BGS' for the I-95/MA 30 interchange; IMHO, would be overkill.   

I'm assuming that the future signing for MA 12 and Auburn will be ground-mounted supplemental signs.  I agree with such for Auburn; disagree regarding MA 12. 

As one who's used the MA 12 ramps at the Auburn interchange many times over during the last 25 years; I can attest that many use still use that interchange to get on MA 12 (especially 12 southbound) and not I-290/395.

Personal preference; the numerals for the I-shields should be Series C.  Note: I'm well aware that current MassDOT standards state Series D numerals for all routes (including 3-digit routes); but that hasn't stopped fabrication of Series C and (ugh) Series B (I-495 signage at I-90 Eastbound) for 3di-shields in the past.  IMHO, the only 3di-shields using Series D numerals in MA should be ones containing a 1 in them (I-190, 195, 291 and 391).

The new principal BGSes for I-84 will read Hartford CT   NY City both westbound and eastbound.  US 20 will be downgraded from the principal signs to new supplemental signs with Sturbridge on them.
Agree for the westbound signs (the current signs reflect such); disagree for the eastbound signs (the current ones list Sturbridge and Hartford).  Nobody, repeat nobody heading eastbound along I-90 in that area is going to use that exit to head towards NY (be it NYC or NY State).  They'll likely head south on local roads and/or west to I-291 (to I-91).  While one can make a similar argument for Hartford (again, for those exiting the eastbound Pike); such is the only logical I-84 westbound destination beyond Sturbridge.

This is one case where the keeping the same legends on interchange signage in both directions approach is flawed.  The current legends on the eastbound signs work; let's try not to fix what's not broken.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on August 18, 2015, 01:32:46 PM
Thanks for the update! The signs on the present gantry for Exit 10 eastbound in Auburn are in very bad shape, especially the bigger pull-through sign for the Turnpike east.
Given that those signs and gantry were retained under the 1996 sign update, it's no wonder they are now in bad shape.  MassDOT District 3 crews were going to replace the shields on these signs as a stop-gap measure until the panels (and support) are replaced as part of the West Stockbridge to Auburn sign update, but I'm not sure if that's been done yet.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on August 18, 2015, 04:34:59 PM
Bids for 606619 were opened earlier today.  The apparent low bidder is RoadSafe Traffic Systems of Avon, MA.  They are also the contractor for the just-completed I-95 (128) Wellesley to Lexington sign project, and the ongoing I-91 West Springfield to Bernardston sign project.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: lowerdeck on August 18, 2015, 06:39:23 PM
The new principal BGSes for I-84 will read Hartford CT   NY City both westbound and eastbound.  US 20 will be downgraded from the principal signs to new supplemental signs with Sturbridge on them.
Agree for the westbound signs (the current signs reflect such); disagree for the eastbound signs (the current ones list Sturbridge and Hartford).  Nobody, repeat nobody heading eastbound along I-90 in that area is going to use that exit to head towards NY (be it NYC or NY State).  They'll likely head south on local roads and/or west to I-291 (to I-91).  While one can make a similar argument for Hartford (again, for those exiting the eastbound Pike); such is the only logical I-84 westbound destination beyond Sturbridge.

This is one case where the keeping the same legends on interchange signage in both directions approach is flawed.  The current legends on the eastbound signs work; let's try not to fix what's not broken.

If they were to add a second town on the EB signs, it should be Southbridge (131) or Charlton (20)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: TravelingBethelite on August 18, 2015, 06:48:46 PM
The new principal BGSes for I-84 will read Hartford CT   NY City both westbound and eastbound.  US 20 will be downgraded from the principal signs to new supplemental signs with Sturbridge on them.
Agree for the westbound signs (the current signs reflect such); disagree for the eastbound signs (the current ones list Sturbridge and Hartford).  Nobody, repeat nobody heading eastbound along I-90 in that area is going to use that exit to head towards NY (be it NYC or NY State).  They'll likely head south on local roads and/or west to I-291 (to I-91).  While one can make a similar argument for Hartford (again, for those exiting the eastbound Pike); such is the only logical I-84 westbound destination beyond Sturbridge.

This is one case where the keeping the same legends on interchange signage in both directions approach is flawed.  The current legends on the eastbound signs work; let's try not to fix what's not broken.

If they were to add a second town on the EB signs, it should be Southbridge (131) or Charlton (20)
They feel too short a distance to be control cites. On that topic, what do you guys think is too short or long a distance to be considered a control city?  :hmm:  :hmmm:
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on August 18, 2015, 07:39:40 PM
The new principal BGSes for I-84 will read Hartford CT   NY City both westbound and eastbound.  US 20 will be downgraded from the principal signs to new supplemental signs with Sturbridge on them.
Agree for the westbound signs (the current signs reflect such); disagree for the eastbound signs (the current ones list Sturbridge and Hartford).  Nobody, repeat nobody heading eastbound along I-90 in that area is going to use that exit to head towards NY (be it NYC or NY State).  They'll likely head south on local roads and/or west to I-291 (to I-91).  While one can make a similar argument for Hartford (again, for those exiting the eastbound Pike); such is the only logical I-84 westbound destination beyond Sturbridge.

This is one case where the keeping the same legends on interchange signage in both directions approach is flawed.  The current legends on the eastbound signs work; let's try not to fix what's not broken.

If they were to add a second town on the EB signs, it should be Southbridge (131) or Charlton (20)
Why? Sturbridge is right there (131 actually heads towards the center of town before it reaches Southbridge) and the historic Old Sturbridge Village is located right along 20.  Sturbridge, in addition to being a pass-through area (in terms of Interstates), does draw in tourists.  Moreso than Charlton or Southbridge.

IMHO, keeping Sturbridge on the eastbound exit signs (along w/Hartford as the current signs do) isn't going to cause harm or confuse motorists one iota.  Removing it and replacing such with a more distant city that nobody along I-90 East would use (remember that I-90 eastbound traffic is coming from NY State and had better more logical options to get to NYC beforehand) is ludicrous and MassDOT will likely get some backlash for such should they erect the new signs as planned/designed.  Again, I'm only referring to the eastbound exit signage not the westbound ones.
 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Rothman on August 20, 2015, 03:23:40 PM
Sturbridge also is a destination for school field trips from all around Massachusetts.  It's a pretty significant draw.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: lowerdeck on August 20, 2015, 08:20:04 PM
The new principal BGSes for I-84 will read Hartford CT   NY City both westbound and eastbound.  US 20 will be downgraded from the principal signs to new supplemental signs with Sturbridge on them.
Agree for the westbound signs (the current signs reflect such); disagree for the eastbound signs (the current ones list Sturbridge and Hartford).  Nobody, repeat nobody heading eastbound along I-90 in that area is going to use that exit to head towards NY (be it NYC or NY State).  They'll likely head south on local roads and/or west to I-291 (to I-91).  While one can make a similar argument for Hartford (again, for those exiting the eastbound Pike); such is the only logical I-84 westbound destination beyond Sturbridge.

This is one case where the keeping the same legends on interchange signage in both directions approach is flawed.  The current legends on the eastbound signs work; let's try not to fix what's not broken.

If they were to add a second town on the EB signs, it should be Southbridge (131) or Charlton (20)
Why? Sturbridge is right there (131 actually heads towards the center of town before it reaches Southbridge) and the historic Old Sturbridge Village is located right along 20.  Sturbridge, in addition to being a pass-through area (in terms of Interstates), does draw in tourists.  Moreso than Charlton or Southbridge.

IMHO, keeping Sturbridge on the eastbound exit signs (along w/Hartford as the current signs do) isn't going to cause harm or confuse motorists one iota.  Removing it and replacing such with a more distant city that nobody along I-90 East would use (remember that I-90 eastbound traffic is coming from NY State and had better more logical options to get to NYC beforehand) is ludicrous and MassDOT will likely get some backlash for such should they erect the new signs as planned/designed.  Again, I'm only referring to the eastbound exit signage not the westbound ones.


I never suggested taking Sturbridge off the EB signs in favor of something else.  I was saying, instead of Hartford underneath Sturbridge it should be either Southbridge or Charlton.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on August 21, 2015, 08:56:15 AM
I never suggested taking Sturbridge off the EB signs in favor of something else.  I was saying, instead of Hartford underneath Sturbridge it should be either Southbridge or Charlton.
Charlton doesn't work because it's located several miles east of I-84, which heads in a southwesterly direction from Sturbridge.  Southbridge is also located east of I-84 as well. 

Plus I-84 in MA is only just over 7 miles long vs. 97 miles in CT.  Using a CT destination (Hartford in this case) makes the most sense despite the fact that one heading eastbound on I-90 had more direct options beforehand (I-91 & 291).  Those heading to Hartford from Palmer (Exit 8 off I-90) or Ludlow (Exit 7 off I-90) would more likely head west on either I-90 or US 20 to I-291 rather than head east to pick up I-84.

If there were a small (Danbury-sized for example) or more noteworthy city located between Hartford & Sturbridge; only then could such a destination be used en lieu of Hartford for those eastbound exit signs.

Another option (for the I-84 interchange signage along I-90 eastbound) not mentioned yet would be just to list one destination on the primary exit signs (Hartford).  Such has been done previously for the current eastbound signage for the MA 9 interchange (Framingham (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2925132,-71.4849041,3a,75y,53h,82.53t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNDTcDARB1Fp19YRyZUinzg!2e0!7i3328!8i1664!6m1!1e1) for the eastbound signs vs. Framingham/Marlborough (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2973564,-71.4780287,3a,75y,239.24h,84.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1su6B5ErS4QELzzRnnnLh7TA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!6m1!1e1) for the westbound exit signs) as well as the US 20 signage its I-84 West exit ramp (eastbound direction shown) (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sturbridge,+MA/@42.1124936,-72.0853255,3a,75y,74.74h,89.2t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sp0UZzIACWPRq1t6vyayvBQ!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3Dp0UZzIACWPRq1t6vyayvBQ%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D100%26h%3D80%26yaw%3D266.53671%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m2!3m1!1s0x89e6a24d2dc6b9c7:0xcedbfdbb3b3eb8a7!6m1!1e1).
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: southshore720 on August 23, 2015, 01:38:37 PM
I'm not as picky with the 90 EB signage for I-84.  It is a major interstate and should have major cities listed as destinations.  Don't forget...not everyone are Road Geeks like us.  Many people get lost, do not have GPS, or just have no sense of direction whatsoever.  Maybe broadening the scope on 90 EB will help that population of people.  Admittedly, I'm playing a little bit of devil's advocate, here.  I don't disagree with what anyone has said from a Road Geek perspective, but just trying to rationalize it for the rest of the folks out there.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: southshore720 on August 23, 2015, 01:42:47 PM
I also approve of I-395's new control of New London instead of Norwich.  Technically, I-395 only leads to you CT 32 to get to New London directly as they have yet to move on the 95/395/CT 11 interchange that would provide direct access from the end of I-395 to I-95 North.  (Wishful thinking for completion of this interchange?)  But at least it addresses the terminus location as opposed to midway through I-395.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on August 24, 2015, 08:46:37 AM
My earlier critiques on the proposed I-90 east bound sign changes for the I-84 interchange have nothing to do with road geeking as much it has to do with simple logic and common sense. 

Plus the fact that the current Sturbridge/Hartford legend works for the eastbound signage.  Any changes to the destination listings these particular signs is (IMHO) essentially fixing something that isn't broken.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on September 29, 2015, 09:26:04 AM
Thread bump:

Regarding the new interchange signage for Auburn:

Per Roadman's suggestion, I submitted a comment regarding the absence of MA 12 shields on the proposed main interchange signs.  My argument for keeping the MA 12 shields was because the ramps to MA 12 are not only part of the overall interchange but are the first ramps one encounters after exiting off the Pike (and after clearing the toll booths).

I have since received a reply e-mail from the MassDOT District Three Feedback.  Bold emphais added:

Quote from: Note: Actual names are intentionally not shown
Thank you for your recent e-mail to MassDOT Feedback regarding your concerns about the proposed replacement signs on Interstate 90 (MassPike) for the Interstate 295/395/MA Route 12 interchange in Auburn.

It was not practical to include destinations on Route 12 on the new overhead signs for I-295/I-395 while conforming to Federal signing guidelines.  Therefore, a decision was made early in the project design process to relegate the Route 12 information to ground-mounted supplemental signs instead, and to not provide Route 12 shields on the overhead signs.

However, upon further review of this location, and in consideration of the unique nature of this interchange, we now agree that placing Route 12 shields on these new signs will benefit drivers using I-90.  Accordingly, we will instruct our sign fabricator for the I-90 West Stockbridge to Auburn sign replacement project to add the Route 12 shields to the new overhead signs on the I-90 mainline at this location.

Again, thank you for contacting us with your concerns.  We appreciate your interest in MassDOT’s ongoing freeway sign replacement program, and in the Massachusetts state highway system.

Sincerely,

MassDOT District Three Highway Feedback

Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Mergingtraffic on September 30, 2015, 12:07:41 PM
Thread bump:

Regarding the new interchange signage for Auburn:

Per Roadman's suggestion, I submitted a comment regarding the absence of MA 12 shields on the proposed main interchange signs.  My argument for keeping the MA 12 shields was because the ramps to MA 12 are not only part of the overall interchange but are the first ramps one encounters after exiting off the Pike (and after clearing the toll booths).

I have since received a reply e-mail from the MassDOT District Three Feedback.  Bold emphais added:

Quote from: Note: Actual names are intentionally not shown
Thank you for your recent e-mail to MassDOT Feedback regarding your concerns about the proposed replacement signs on Interstate 90 (MassPike) for the Interstate 295/395/MA Route 12 interchange in Auburn.

It was not practical to include destinations on Route 12 on the new overhead signs for I-295/I-395 while conforming to Federal signing guidelines.  Therefore, a decision was made early in the project design process to relegate the Route 12 information to ground-mounted supplemental signs instead, and to not provide Route 12 shields on the overhead signs.

However, upon further review of this location, and in consideration of the unique nature of this interchange, we now agree that placing Route 12 shields on these new signs will benefit drivers using I-90.  Accordingly, we will instruct our sign fabricator for the I-90 West Stockbridge to Auburn sign replacement project to add the Route 12 shields to the new overhead signs on the I-90 mainline at this location.

Again, thank you for contacting us with your concerns.  We appreciate your interest in MassDOT’s ongoing freeway sign replacement program, and in the Massachusetts state highway system.

Sincerely,

MassDOT District Three Highway Feedback



WOW some good feedback and you got them to change!
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on October 07, 2015, 06:33:34 PM
I have been able to get the sign plans for the first I-90 re-signing project. The new numbers, except for 1, match those I have listed on my Future I-90 Exit page. Here's the plan for the 1/2 mile advance sign westbound:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90exit78wbhalfmile.jpg)

I have posted plans for all the new 1 mile advance signs, and a few others on my Misc. Sign Photos Page:
http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/miscsigns.html (http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/miscsigns.html)

I plan to post more in the coming days.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on October 07, 2015, 08:56:49 PM
Thanks Bob for posting this information on your site.  One minor clarification, the West Stockbridge to Auburn project ends east of the I-290/I-395 interchange.  So the advance signs for the current Exit 10 - new Exit 90 interchange in both directions will be replaced under this project.

The Auburn to Boston project, which is scheduled to be let for bids on October 31st, will replace all the signs from the Route 146 interchange in Millbury to the eastbound signing at the Allston/Brighton interchange in Boston.  Note that the westbound signing for Allston/Brighton was replaced a few years back as part of the project to change the Citizen's Bank FastLane signing to E-ZPass, and that all most other signing east of Allston/Brighton was installed/updated as part of the Big Dig.

thanks to southshore720 for the clarification re:  the Pru Tunnel exit signs
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: southshore720 on October 07, 2015, 10:12:03 PM
Will that mean that there will be orphaned button copy for Exit 22: Prudential Ctr./Copley Square?  You can hardly see the signage at the exit in the Pru tunnel...it's so dark and unlit that I can't tell what kind of signage is there.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on October 08, 2015, 09:29:28 AM
Will that mean that there will be orphaned button copy for Exit 22: Prudential Ctr./Copley Square?  You can hardly see the signage at the exit in the Pru tunnel...it's so dark and unlit that I can't tell what kind of signage is there.
There is a contract pending for overhead sign repairs for the Downtown Boston tunnel system - I suspect those panels will be replaced under that contract.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on October 08, 2015, 10:08:13 AM
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90exit78wbhalfmile.jpg)
It's interesting that MassDOT went with a diagrammatic BGS for this interchange despite not having a shared-lane.  I was under the impression that such was now an MUTCD no-no (for the record, I do not agree with MUTCD's current take on this subject).

If the reasoning for doing such was due to traffic volume (based on personal experience with this interchange); why wasn't similar done for the Briantree Split and/or the MA 24 interchange alont  I-93?

Corrected due to brain-freeze.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on October 08, 2015, 11:41:16 AM
Diagrammatic signage is best kept to option lanes per MUTCD. In this case, however, I'd make an exception. People unfamiliar with the area might be expecting such a major departure to be on the left. Traffic here does split pretty evenly. I don't know why it wasn't done elsewhere, but it is certainly a good location for distinctive signage.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on October 08, 2015, 12:00:31 PM
Diagrammatic signage is best kept to option lanes per MUTCD. In this case, however, I'd make an exception. People unfamiliar with the area might be expecting such a major departure to be on the left. Traffic here does split pretty evenly. I don't know why it wasn't done elsewhere, but it is certainly a good location for distinctive signage.
I absolutely agree & I shared such on Facebook.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on October 08, 2015, 12:30:58 PM
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90exit78wbhalfmile.jpg)
It's interesting that MassDOT went with a diagrammatic BGS for this interchange despite not having a shared-lane.  I was under the impression that such was now an MUTCD no-no (for the record, I do not agree with MUTCD's current take on this subject).

If the reasoning for doing such was due to traffic volume (based on personal experience with this interchange); why wasn't similar done for the Briantree Split and/or the MA 24 interchange alont I-93?

I-93 at MA 24 has diagrammatic signs in both directions.  I-93 south at MA 3 - Braintree Split also has diagrammatic signs.  I-93 north at MA 3 - Braintree Split has conventional signs instead of diagrammatics.  IIRC, it ws decided not to go with diagrammatics on that approach due to the proximinty of MA 3 Exits 19-18 (Burgin Parkway/Washington Street) to the split.

For now, the local FHWA office has remained receptive to MassDOT using diagrammatic signs for other than 'option-lane' situations, such as the signs for Sturbridge.  However, as the West Stockbridge to Auburn re-signing is being done entirely with state funds, it was not subject to FHWA review.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on October 08, 2015, 01:07:13 PM
Roadman, I had a bit of a brain-freeze regarding those I-93/MA 3 & I-93/MA 24 diagammatic BGS' and since corrected my last post.

For now, the local FHWA office has remained receptive to MassDOT using diagrammatic signs for other than 'option-lane' situations, such as the signs for Sturbridge.  However, as the West Stockbridge to Auburn re-signing is being done entirely with state funds, it was not subject to FHWA review.
Interesting.  Good to know.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman65 on October 09, 2015, 02:34:50 AM
So Mass Pike gets milebased numbers now, and the other highways, for an indefinite period still keep the seqential numbering.  That is interesting.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on October 09, 2015, 09:21:16 AM
So Mass Pike gets milebased numbers now, and the other highways, for an indefinite period still keep the seqential numbering.  That is interesting.

Mass Pike also has widely-spaced exits. It's quite useful for travelers west of Springfield to know the relative location of the next exit when they're 30 miles apart.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 09, 2015, 09:27:44 AM
So Mass Pike gets milebased numbers now, and the other highways, for an indefinite period still keep the seqential numbering.  That is interesting.

It's the exact opposite in Jersey, and no plans to change that
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: spooky on October 09, 2015, 09:41:39 AM
So Mass Pike gets milebased numbers now, and the other highways, for an indefinite period still keep the seqential numbering.  That is interesting.

The project to convert the rest of the state is not far behind the Mass Pike signing project - it is scheduled for bid opening in November.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: kurumi on October 09, 2015, 12:00:10 PM
I also approve of I-395's new control of New London instead of Norwich.  Technically, I-395 only leads to you CT 32 to get to New London directly as they have yet to move on the 95/395/CT 11 interchange that would provide direct access from the end of I-395 to I-95 North.  (Wishful thinking for completion of this interchange?)  But at least it addresses the terminus location as opposed to midway through I-395.

The proposed 95/395/11 interchange does not include movements from 395 SB to 95 NB and 95 SB to 395 NB -- CT 32 will still be used for the 395/New London connection. Diagram of the interchange plan (from circa 2002) is on the CT 11 page: http://www.kurumi.com/roads/ct/ct11.html

(I, too, would still like to see this built!)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: ARMOURERERIC on October 09, 2015, 12:20:31 PM
If PA has to put "New England on a 80EB BGS at 81, I think it's only fair that they put Scranton on the WB Mass Pike sign :)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman65 on October 09, 2015, 01:39:14 PM
That should be interesting for I-495 as it would be the first (second actually as the Mass Pike is over 100 miles long)to have three digit exit numbering for the road that held the title for longest 3 digit interstate until I-476 in PA took the title away from it.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on October 09, 2015, 04:52:35 PM
That should be interesting for I-495 as it would be the first (second actually as the Mass Pike is over 100 miles long)to have three digit exit numbering for the road that held the title for longest 3 digit interstate until I-476 in PA took the title away from it.
The expressway portion of MA 2 between Lexington (I-95/MA 128) Lexington and the Alewife station (US 3/MA 16) will have 3-digit exit numbers as well.  Interestingly, the new exit number for the I-95 interchange (current Exit 52A-B) will be Exit 128A-B).

IMHO, the next MA highway candidate for an exit number conversion will probably be I-84; that highway's just over 7 miles and only has 3 interchanges (4 if one counts the connection with I-90/Mass Pike).
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on October 09, 2015, 05:38:32 PM
If PA has to put "New England on a 80EB BGS at 81, I think it's only fair that they put Scranton on the WB Mass Pike sign :)
If PA chooses to put "New England" on a BGS on I-80, or on signs at the I-84 EB/I-380 split, that's PennDOT's decision.  MassDOT is under no obligation to place "Scranton" on any of their signs.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 09, 2015, 06:49:05 PM
If PA has to put "New England on a 80EB BGS at 81, I think it's only fair that they put Scranton on the WB Mass Pike sign :)
If PA chooses to put "New England" on a BGS on I-80, or on signs at the I-84 EB/I-384 split, that's PennDOT's decision.  MassDOT is under no obligation to place "Scranton" on any of their signs.

I assume you mean the I-84/I-380 split.  You're already well into New England at 84/384
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman65 on October 10, 2015, 12:44:56 PM
The reason for PennDOT doing that was because of a truck ban on US 209 between Bushkill and Shawnee.  Those at Scranton on I-81 were follow up signs for ones on I-81 at I-78 several miles earlier directing truck traffic via I-81 and I-84 so the truckers do not take I-78 E Bound to PA 33 to US 209.

For years that part of US 209 was a connection between I-80 and I-84 until lawmakers decided to put a truck ban on that part of US 209 for whatever reason they chose.  I believe it might of been because of the Delaware Water Gap Recreation Area and trying to make Route 209 to be like a parkway, but I am not totally sure.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman65 on October 10, 2015, 12:53:58 PM
That should be interesting for I-495 as it would be the first (second actually as the Mass Pike is over 100 miles long)to have three digit exit numbering for the road that held the title for longest 3 digit interstate until I-476 in PA took the title away from it.
The expressway portion of MA 2 between Lexington (I-95/MA 128) Lexington and the Alewife station (US 3/MA 16) will have 3-digit exit numbers as well.  Interestingly, the new exit number for the I-95 interchange (current Exit 52A-B) will be Exit 128A-B).

IMHO, the next MA highway candidate for an exit number conversion will probably be I-84; that highway's just over 7 miles and only has 3 interchanges (4 if one counts the connection with I-90/Mass Pike).
Wow, they are doing non interstate highways too!  That is incredible as many just do the interstates with some like VA still keeping sequential numbering on I-395 and I-664, in which both are still interstates even though not primary ones. 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SidS1045 on October 10, 2015, 11:20:39 PM
Wow, they are doing non interstate highways too!  That is incredible as many just do the interstates with some like VA still keeping sequential numbering on I-395 and I-664, in which both are still interstates even though not primary ones.

From the 2009 Massachusetts supplement to the MUTCD:

Section 2E.31 Interchange Exit Numbering

Massachusetts will be changing all its interchange exit signs statewide to the reference location numbering system, with the entire state highway system to be converted to the new numbers within the next five to ten years. The Department will be updating the exit numbers to the reference-based system on a route-by-route basis, after existing signs within a given highway corridor have been updated during normal replacement.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: mrsman on October 11, 2015, 09:15:47 AM
Diagrammatic signage is best kept to option lanes per MUTCD. In this case, however, I'd make an exception. People unfamiliar with the area might be expecting such a major departure to be on the left. Traffic here does split pretty evenly. I don't know why it wasn't done elsewhere, but it is certainly a good location for distinctive signage.

True, but wouldn't the same thing be accomplished with an APL?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: AMLNet49 on October 11, 2015, 11:02:18 AM
Currently at the I-84 interchange they simply list a two-lane exit only. I don't see what is confusing about that, and why that needs to be improved upon in this situation.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on October 12, 2015, 05:19:41 PM
Diagrammatic signage is best kept to option lanes per MUTCD. In this case, however, I'd make an exception. People unfamiliar with the area might be expecting such a major departure to be on the left. Traffic here does split pretty evenly. I don't know why it wasn't done elsewhere, but it is certainly a good location for distinctive signage.

True, but wouldn't the same thing be accomplished with an APL?
I don't believe that MassDOT has adopted APL as of yet.  Additionally, while one can let diagrammatics for non-shared lanes slide; I don't believe the same can be said for APLs.

Currently at the I-84 interchange they simply list a two-lane exit only. I don't see what is confusing about that, and why that needs to be improved upon in this situation.
Keep in mind, what's been posted thus far is only handful of signs.  I'm assuming that there will be a further-advance diagrammatic BGS' for this interchange along I-90 westbound.  As far as improvement is concerned; given the fact that this stretch backs up for miles; the diagrammatics gives one unfamiliar with the area an advance visual.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on October 12, 2015, 05:22:37 PM
Wow, they are doing non interstate highways too!  That is incredible as many just do the interstates with some like VA still keeping sequential numbering on I-395 and I-664, in which both are still interstates even though not primary ones.

From the 2009 Massachusetts supplement to the MUTCD:

Section 2E.31 Interchange Exit Numbering

Massachusetts will be changing all its interchange exit signs statewide to the reference location numbering system, with the entire state highway system to be converted to the new numbers within the next five to ten years. The Department will be updating the exit numbers to the reference-based system on a route-by-route basis, after existing signs within a given highway corridor have been updated during normal replacement.
The information contained in the Massachusetts Amendements about implementation of milepost-based exit numbers is now somewhat out of date.  Under the contract that has just been let for bids (MassDOT Project # 608024), most Interstates and freeways will be converted within a two year time frame once notice to proceed is issued to the Contractor.  The two exceptions are I-90/MassPike between West Stockbridge and the Allston-Brighton tolls in Boston, which will be converted as part of the sign replacement projects, and the I-93 and I-90 tunnel system in Boston, which will be converted as part of the pending MHS overhead sign maintenance/repair contract.

The reason for the change in the time frame for implementation is because MassDOT was able to secure Federal funding (Highway Safety Improvement Program - HSIP) for the work.

Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on October 12, 2015, 05:52:55 PM
Diagrammatic signage is best kept to option lanes per MUTCD. In this case, however, I'd make an exception. People unfamiliar with the area might be expecting such a major departure to be on the left. Traffic here does split pretty evenly. I don't know why it wasn't done elsewhere, but it is certainly a good location for distinctive signage.

True, but wouldn't the same thing be accomplished with an APL?
I don't believe that MassDOT has adopted APL as of yet.  Additionally, while one can let diagrammatics for non-shared lanes slide; I don't believe the same can be said for APLs.

Currently at the I-84 interchange they simply list a two-lane exit only. I don't see what is confusing about that, and why that needs to be improved upon in this situation.
Keep in mind, what's been posted thus far is only handful of signs.  I'm assuming that there will be a further-advance diagrammatic BGS' for this interchange along I-90 westbound.  As far as improvement is concerned; given the fact that this stretch backs up for miles; the diagrammatics gives one unfamiliar with the area an advance visual.

I agree. There is a specific prohibition against using APLs without option lanes. At one point, using diagrammatics without option lanes was accepted. If anything has a chance at helping the atrocious traffic here, it is worth a try.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: vdeane on October 12, 2015, 07:31:14 PM
Converting the MassPike to AET will probably do more to alleviate the backups than anything else.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: The Nature Boy on October 12, 2015, 11:44:41 PM
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90exit78wbhalfmile.jpg)
It's interesting that MassDOT went with a diagrammatic BGS for this interchange despite not having a shared-lane.  I was under the impression that such was now an MUTCD no-no (for the record, I do not agree with MUTCD's current take on this subject).

If the reasoning for doing such was due to traffic volume (based on personal experience with this interchange); why wasn't similar done for the Briantree Split and/or the MA 24 interchange alont  I-93?

Corrected due to brain-freeze.

I find it interesting that "NY City" is used there but "New York" is used here:

(http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/8c342b3923cc40479cdea382375eaaef/highway-sign-for-mass-pike-i-90-to-new-york-in-the-back-bay-section-ab03kb.jpg)

Could this be the State of New York as a control city? If so, it's weird that they wouldn't just sign Albany NY here unless they just didn't feel like choosing between Albany and NYC as potential control cities and just said "screw it, we'll use the state."
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Rothman on October 13, 2015, 12:24:36 PM
Converting the MassPike to AET will probably do more to alleviate the backups than anything else.

Oh, gosh, this.  The configuration of the I-84 plaza is horrible and causes a lot of the backups on its own.  The last time I was through there, there was neither rhyme nor reason to where the E-ZPass lanes were.

Pike has other plaza issues, as well, such as with I-91, where the plaza is far too close to the end of the ramps leading to it.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Jim on October 13, 2015, 05:25:37 PM
Pike has other plaza issues, as well, such as with I-91, where the plaza is far too close to the end of the ramps leading to it.

As someone who had that interchange as part of my commute for a few years, I can say the ramps are too narrow and tight, leading to a toll plaza that has far too few lanes in an inconvenient location.  Seems to me that mess could be improved a lot with a few key direct E-ZPass-only I-90/I-91 ramps.  They also badly need a climbing lane for WB trucks entering the Mass Pike from Exit 4.  It takes them forever to get up to speed up that grade.  I am sure all of this is complicated by the crazy set of ramps already in place and development near the I-90/I-91 crossing point.  And money obviously.
Title: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Pete from Boston on October 13, 2015, 05:39:29 PM
Converting the MassPike to AET will probably do more to alleviate the backups than anything else.

This is true, because E-ZPass alone only went so far.  Rothman's point above about lane arrangement is a major factor, in part because the Mass Pike was late to the game the Thruway worked out 20 years ago with advance toll lane instructions (only attempting it after Gov. Patrick was legendarily inconvenienced) and never quite got it right.

E-ZPass has helped—the truly miserable holiday stoppages at Exit 9 are now more prosaic slowdowns, but they can still reach back to Exit 10.  Were AET not coming, an interchange redesign might be in order, but let's see how it goes.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on October 13, 2015, 05:40:11 PM
I find it interesting that "NY City" is used there but "New York" is used here:

(http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/8c342b3923cc40479cdea382375eaaef/highway-sign-for-mass-pike-i-90-to-new-york-in-the-back-bay-section-ab03kb.jpg)
A couple things regarding that particular BGS:

1.  It dates back to when the Pike was under control of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority which had their own standards; today, the entity is part of MassDOT.

2.  The MUTCD prohibition for using state names as destinations was either in its infancy stage in terms of implementation at the time or did not take full effect just yet.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Rothman on October 14, 2015, 09:18:54 AM
Pike has other plaza issues, as well, such as with I-91, where the plaza is far too close to the end of the ramps leading to it.

As someone who had that interchange as part of my commute for a few years, I can say the ramps are too narrow and tight, leading to a toll plaza that has far too few lanes in an inconvenient location.  Seems to me that mess could be improved a lot with a few key direct E-ZPass-only I-90/I-91 ramps.  They also badly need a climbing lane for WB trucks entering the Mass Pike from Exit 4.  It takes them forever to get up to speed up that grade.  I am sure all of this is complicated by the crazy set of ramps already in place and development near the I-90/I-91 crossing point.  And money obviously.

Sing it, brother.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: southshore720 on October 14, 2015, 04:00:25 PM
A couple things regarding that particular BGS:

1.  It dates back to when the Pike was under control of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority which had their own standards; today, the entity is part of MassDOT.

2.  The MUTCD prohibition for using state names as destinations was either in its infancy stage in terms of implementation at the time or did not take full effect just yet.

Yet Rhode Island continues to use "New York" as a control city on all of its new signage!
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: The Nature Boy on October 14, 2015, 04:04:19 PM
And NHDOT and MassDOT continue to use "Maine" or "Maine Points."
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 14, 2015, 04:48:16 PM
CONNDot only uses state references on the last exits in the state (and on I-84 and I-91 use "Mass" instead of MA, with the 84 sign being relatively new Phase IV).  Control cities eliminate the state, even if it's 60 miles away.  For New York City,  they often use the USPS noncompliant N.Y. City (periods in NY).  But I think we can all agree that in most cases, when New York is used as a control by a state DOT or turnpike/thruway authority (oftentimes too liberally), it's assumed the city.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: lordsutch on October 14, 2015, 05:13:50 PM
"New York" is also a city name; "New York City" is just a disambiguation thereof. So it should be fine per MUTCD.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on October 14, 2015, 05:45:30 PM
"New York" is also a city name; "New York City" is just a disambiguation thereof. So it should be fine per MUTCD.
Exactly.

And NHDOT and MassDOT continue to use "Maine" or "Maine Points."
MassDOT (or its predecessor, MassHighway) hasn't used Maine on its signage (as part of the old-school NH-Maine listing) for years.  There are a handful of I-95 northbound ramp signage that use Kittery, ME or Portland, ME and that's about it in terms of listing Maine destinations while in MA.

The remaining NH-Maine listings on interchange signage along I-90 (for I-495 & I-95) will be dropped when the current 90s-vintage BGS' are replaced.

As far as NHDOT is concerned; I believe most BGS use the All Maine Points moniker for norhtbound I-95 signage.  There is at least one ramp sign that lists both Maine and Massachusetts for both directions of I-95.

Given that I-95 in NH is a toll road (part of the NH Turnpike system) and is more independently funded; such signs may have not been reviewed by FHWA.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Pete from Boston on October 14, 2015, 08:40:32 PM

And NHDOT and MassDOT continue to use "Maine" or "Maine Points."

Perhaps this is a sign that some within MassDOT feel the Missouri Compromise was forced, and do not recognize the secession of Maine from its Mother Commonwealth, making its use on the sign free from the MUTCD proscription. 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on October 14, 2015, 09:32:13 PM
It'll be strange to see "NH-Maine" gone from MassPike signage for I-495 (and for I-95/128, EB).  But life will go on... just like when "NH-Maine" become "Portsmouth NH" on I-95.  What will replace NH-Maine on the I-495 signage?  Lowell?  And I'm assuming the I-95 exit will become Waltham/Providence RI like its WB replaced counterpart? 

NHDOT still uses "Maine" and "Vermont" for two recent (within the past 5 years) overheads, on I-95 in Portsmouth and I-89 in Lebanon, respectively.  A slightly newer sign also uses "HAMPTON NH/MASSACHUSETTS" that once said "HAMPTON/BOSTON" in Portsmouth, but that is the Exit 5 onramp on I-95, in turnpike jurisdiction.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Alps on October 15, 2015, 06:39:18 PM
I think it's silly that state names are now proscribed. If you're going anywhere in Maine from Boston, you use I-95 at least until NH 16. If you're on I-95 SB in New York City, you use the GWB to New Jersey. If you're in NJ, you use the Turnpike south to Delaware.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 15, 2015, 10:46:30 PM
It'll be strange to see "NH-Maine" gone from MassPike signage for I-495 (and for I-95/128, EB).  But life will go on... just like when "NH-Maine" become "Portsmouth NH" on I-95.  What will replace NH-Maine on the I-495 signage?  Lowell?

Losing the NH/Maine signage eastbound isn't that big a deal, since many drivers use Exit 10 anyway.  The control cities on the BGS's for I-495 should be Lowell NB and Foxborough SB (since a lot of people use it to get to Gillette anyway).  An LGS EB could list Portsmouth NH and Cape Cod.

On I-95 north of I-495, there should only be 4 control cities used: Portsmouth, Portland, Bangor, and Houlton.  Going south of Portland, there should only be Portsmouth and Boston.   
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: The Nature Boy on October 15, 2015, 11:03:44 PM

And NHDOT and MassDOT continue to use "Maine" or "Maine Points."

Perhaps this is a sign that some within MassDOT feel the Missouri Compromise was forced, and do not recognize the secession of Maine from its Mother Commonwealth, making its use on the sign free from the MUTCD proscription.

Given our current state government, I (and many people I know) would welcome rejoining Massachusetts.  I'd like to keep my Maine license plate though, the chickadee design is more aesthetically pleasing than the "Spirit of America" plate.

It'll be strange to see "NH-Maine" gone from MassPike signage for I-495 (and for I-95/128, EB).  But life will go on... just like when "NH-Maine" become "Portsmouth NH" on I-95.  What will replace NH-Maine on the I-495 signage?  Lowell?

Losing the NH/Maine signage eastbound isn't that big a deal, since many drivers use Exit 10 anyway.  The control cities on the BGS's for I-495 should be Lowell NB and Foxborough SB (since a lot of people use it to get to Gillette anyway).  An LGS EB could list Portsmouth NH and Cape Cod.

On I-95 north of I-495, there should only be 4 control cities used: Portsmouth, Portland, Bangor, and Houlton.  Going south of Portland, there should only be Portsmouth and Boston.   

I can agree with this. Kittery, ME is a pretty useless control city and where it is used in Maine, it should just be replaced with Portsmouth, NH.

I almost disagree with Houlton but I can't think of anything to sign north of Bangor other than Houlton.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on October 16, 2015, 05:52:08 PM
It'll be strange to see "NH-Maine" gone from MassPike signage for I-495 (and for I-95/128, EB).  But life will go on... just like when "NH-Maine" become "Portsmouth NH" on I-95.  What will replace NH-Maine on the I-495 signage?  Lowell?

Losing the NH/Maine signage eastbound isn't that big a deal, since many drivers use Exit 10 anyway.  The control cities on the BGS's for I-495 should be Lowell NB and Foxborough SB (since a lot of people use it to get to Gillette anyway).  An LGS EB could list Portsmouth NH and Cape Cod.
It should be noted that the original I-495 interchange signage off the Pike listed Marlborough/Milford for control cities.  In the 80s (after I-495 was extended southeast of I-95), the eastbound interchange signage was changed to the current NH-Maine/Cape Cod destination listings for both Pike directions.  The current signage, erected in the 90s, carried over the latter listings.  The split-ramp signage list Marlborough/NH-Maine for I-495 North and Milford/Cape Cod for I-495 South.

I could easily see MassDOT using Portsmouth, NH to replace NH-Maine (like it did for I-95 signage) and, if FWHA/MUTCD gets too anal over the use of Cape Cod as a listing, use either Wareham or Bourne en lieu of the Cape.

Kittery, ME is a pretty useless control city and where it is used in Maine, it should just be replaced with Portsmouth, NH.
MassDOT only recently started placing Kittery, ME on distance signage and I-95 North on-ramp signage in (Salisbury) MA.  The reasoning for that is due to Maine Outlet traffic.

In Maine itself, the use of Kittery on I-95 southbound signage pre-Outlet was probably due to it being the last town prior to the NH border.  Similar to why Salisbury and Attleboro are used on several I-95 ramp signage in MA.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: noelbotevera on October 16, 2015, 07:57:13 PM
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on October 16, 2015, 09:06:30 PM
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 hope that's meant as a joke. Toronto is a good 12 hours from Houlton. If anything, have Fredericton as the control.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: The Nature Boy on October 16, 2015, 11:25:43 PM
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 hope that's meant as a joke. Toronto is a good 12 hours from Houlton. If anything, have Fredericton as the control.

North of Bangor, Fredericton makes sense. It's only a 3 hour drive from Bangor so it's not terribly far away.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on October 16, 2015, 11:53:10 PM
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 hope that's meant as a joke. Toronto is a good 12 hours from Houlton. If anything, have Fredericton as the control.

North of Bangor, Fredericton makes sense. It's only a 3 hour drive from Bangor so it's not terribly far away.

Given the AADTs, I wouldn't be shocked if that's where half of the people are going. Really no different from NYSDOT using Montreal as a control.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: JakeFromNewEngland on October 17, 2015, 12:19:03 AM
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: The Nature Boy on October 17, 2015, 12:32:47 AM
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 17, 2015, 09:28:47 AM
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
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: The Nature Boy on October 17, 2015, 09:36:54 AM
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Pete from Boston on October 17, 2015, 09:59:24 AM

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.   
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on October 31, 2015, 11:12:47 AM
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on November 28, 2015, 12:42:30 PM
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 (https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-16-1030-0H100-0H002-00000006345&external=true&parentUrl=bid)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on November 30, 2015, 10:05:02 AM
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: AMLNet49 on November 30, 2015, 12:54:54 PM
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Alps on November 30, 2015, 09:37:54 PM
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on November 30, 2015, 10:29:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Jim on November 30, 2015, 10:58:01 PM
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?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on December 01, 2015, 08:37:24 AM
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on December 01, 2015, 09:23:23 AM
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on January 21, 2016, 10:15:49 PM
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 (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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: vdeane on January 23, 2016, 03:21:30 PM
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).
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on January 27, 2016, 04:36:13 PM
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 (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?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on January 27, 2016, 07:34:46 PM
Quote
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).
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on February 17, 2016, 10:36:21 AM
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 (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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on February 22, 2016, 10:42:45 AM
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 (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:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90mmplans.jpg)

Hopefully, the contract winner will be announced tomorrow.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on February 22, 2016, 11:20:17 AM
Addenda 3 (available at the link above) also had specifications for the mile/reference markers to be installed:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90mmplans.jpg)
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: KEVIN_224 on February 23, 2016, 12:21:03 PM
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on February 23, 2016, 01:19:13 PM
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Jim on February 23, 2016, 01:23:49 PM
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.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Rothman on February 23, 2016, 01:43:24 PM
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. :D
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on February 23, 2016, 02:13:52 PM
MassDOT opened bids on the Auburn to Boston sign replacement earlier today.  Liddell Brothers of Halifax (MA) is tha apparent low bidder.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on March 01, 2016, 12:13:35 PM
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?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on March 01, 2016, 03:06:04 PM
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?
Based on similar contracts, NTP should be late March or early April.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: canav08 on March 02, 2016, 02:13:24 PM
Interesting that, from looking at the links, the new mile markers are going to be on the left side of the road. As we know, this is the current situation on the MA Pike but the rest of the state switched mile markers from the left to the right side of divided highways when they did the replacement in 09-ish. Wonder why the pike is bucking the trend and going left side? The only thing I can think of is there are a lot more places on the pike with no median whatsoever and money can be saved using the same pole and mounting 2 signs back to back. I still do t agree with this, just keep it uniform. It would not be MA if they did not do something odd.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: AMLNet49 on March 02, 2016, 02:51:30 PM
The only thing I can think of is there are a lot more places on the pike with no median whatsoever and money can be saved using the same pole and mounting 2 signs back to back.

This seems likely, given that the Mass Pike (like the Pennsylvania Turnpike) has long stretches with only a jersey barrier as the median. So to mount them back to back would make sense. The only problem with it is that stranded motorists in the breakdown lane would not be able to find the mile marker. However, a state police cruiser would probably find them relatively quickly given how many of them drive on that road.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on March 02, 2016, 02:57:18 PM
They wouldn't be the only state that uses median placement. Ohio places all of the enhanced markers in the median regardless of median width. In a few places, it looks quite ridiculous.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on March 02, 2016, 03:10:29 PM
Interesting that, from looking at the links, the new mile markers are going to be on the left side of the road. As we know, this is the current situation on the MA Pike but the rest of the state switched mile markers from the left to the right side of divided highways when they did the replacement in 09-ish. Wonder why the pike is bucking the trend and going left side? The only thing I can think of is there are a lot more places on the pike with no median whatsoever and money can be saved using the same pole and mounting 2 signs back to back. I still don't agree with this, just keep it uniform. It would not be MA if they did not do something odd.
Yes, all the signs will be in the median mounted back-to-back with the exception of 4 places where they will be put on individual signs, a cost-saving design. According to the documents, most are indicated to be 'mount on barrier' with the next popular option 'mount on post', with two to be mounted on bridges (MM 98.6 and 106.8)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: KEVIN_224 on March 02, 2016, 11:23:43 PM
I guess Mile Marker 100 under that given bridge in Grafton will stay put then! :)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Alps on March 03, 2016, 01:09:30 AM
Downside of median mounted signs is that they are much more likely to be struck, being much closer to the travel lane. All sorts of crazy things happen along the median.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on April 12, 2016, 12:11:25 PM
I was able to get a hold of the plans for the second sign replacement contract from Auburn to Boston this morning. Here's what the new eastbound 1-Mile advance sign will look like for what will be just the I-95 exit in Weston:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90ebexit1231mile.jpg)

This is the sign for what will be the same numbered exit heading west:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90wbexit1231mile.jpg)

I've loaded, for now, images of all the 1-Mile advance signs for the project area on my I-90 Photo Gallery Site:
http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90photos.html (http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on April 12, 2016, 12:40:25 PM
I was able to get a hold of the plans for the second sign replacement contract from Auburn to Boston this morning. Here's what the new eastbound 1-Mile advance sign will look like for what will be just the I-95 exit in Weston:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90ebexit1231mile.jpg)

This is the sign for what will be the same numbered exit heading west:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90wbexit1231mile.jpg)

I've loaded, for now, images of all the 1-Mile advance signs for the project area on my I-90 Photo Gallery Site:
http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90photos.html (http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90photos.html)

No APL? Wow.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on April 12, 2016, 12:50:45 PM
For situations where the lane configuration at the advance signs is not the same at at the exit direction sign (like with the new I-90 eastbound diagrammatics in Weston), MassDOT prefers to stick with traditional diagrammatic signs instead of APLs.

The westbound signs are designed to accommodate the pending reconfiguration of the westbound I-95/Route 30 exit.  As part of the legacy toll plaza demolition projects to be advertised later this spring, the westbound interchange will be re-configured into two separate exits, one for I-95 and one for MA 30.  Spacing constraints on the Extension preculded installing separate sign sequences for the new dual exits.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on April 12, 2016, 01:24:55 PM
So such will become Exits 123 B-A when all is said and done?

This is the sign for what will be the same numbered exit heading west:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90wbexit1231mile.jpg)
I still think that Dedham should be used for the I-95 southbound destination from I-90 westbound instead of Providence, RI for the simple reason that most people heading to Providence east of this interchange (especially from Boston) are more likely to use I-93 South to get to I-95 South.

Such would've also made for a narrower sign panel.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on April 12, 2016, 05:00:51 PM
Surprised that Lowell isn't the control city for I-495 north.   
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: KEVIN_224 on April 12, 2016, 05:13:01 PM
Why does the westbound Massachusetts Turnpike sign for I-95 say Waltham/Providence instead of Portsmouth/Providence? 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: mariethefoxy on April 12, 2016, 06:41:33 PM
because they want you to take 495 to 95 for Portsmouth since it bypasses a lot of the closer in Boston traffic, same reason the exit for 128 has Waltham they want you to use 128 for more closer destinations.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: AMLNet49 on April 12, 2016, 07:20:32 PM
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90ebexit1251mile.jpg)

Caltrans layout?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Rothman on April 13, 2016, 08:59:57 AM
Heh.  Signage for that half-interchange has always been different (may have to do with the clearance of the bridge?).  When I was a kid, the sign was even more scrunched with a tiny MA 16 shield.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on April 13, 2016, 09:02:10 AM
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90ebexit1251mile.jpg)
Caltrans layout?
Just mimicking the current BGS (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3513134,-71.2066625,3a,75y,251.71h,72.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6KUOxjoQ-IvXJNlmbDAQuQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) layouts.

Signage for that half-interchange has always been different (may have to do with the clearance of the bridge?).
All the MA 16 BGS' along I-90 westbound are like that, regardless of any bridge clearances.  IIRC, the new replacement BGS' will be all gantry-mounted.

When I was a kid, the sign was even more scrunched with a tiny MA 16 shield.
... and more rectangular (shield) as well.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on April 13, 2016, 11:34:50 AM
Surprised that Lowell isn't the control city for I-495 north.   
It will be mentioned, along with Cape Cod, on a ground mounted auxiliary sign:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90aux495cc.jpg)

Meanwhile, MA 30, but not MA 128, will be on an auxiliary sign before the I-95 exit eastbound:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90auxma30123.jpg)

I have placed additional auxiliary sign plans on my I-90 photo gallery as well:
http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90photos.html (http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on April 13, 2016, 12:51:32 PM
Why does the westbound Massachusetts Turnpike sign for I-95 say Waltham/Providence instead of Portsmouth/Providence? 
because they want you to take 495 to 95 for Portsmouth since it bypasses a lot of the closer in Boston traffic, same reason the exit for 128 has Waltham they want you to use 128 for more closer destinations.
It should be noted that the original Exit 11A signage had Marlborough and Milford listed as I-495 destinations.  Sometime during the mid-80s, after I-495 was extended east of I-95; the destinations for the eastbound Pike BGS' were changed to NH-Maine and Cape Cod.  The current BGS', most of which were erected during the 90s had NH-Maine and Cape Cod listed on both eastbound and westbound ramp signs.

While the change from MH-Maine to Portsmouth, NH was expected (and consistent); the use of Taunton came as a bit of surprise... especially since new signage for both MA 3 and the Southeast Expressway (I-93) that were erected within the last 2 years still used Cape Cod for a control destination.  IMHO, either Wareham (where I-495 actually ends) or Bourne (for the Bourne Bridge) should have been used on the Pike exit signs instead.

Historical tid-bit: when I-495 was extended east of I-95 in Mansfield during the early 80s, the Exit 6A BGS' for I-495 South listed Taunton on the major signs.  Such was changed to Cape Cod when the current BGS' were erected in the 90s.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on April 13, 2016, 10:32:29 PM
Does this mean they're going to finally get rid of the Route 128 signage south/west of Peabody?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on April 14, 2016, 10:25:33 AM
Does this mean they're going to finally get rid of the Route 128 signage south/west of Peabody?
Current MassDOT specs/regs prohibit any display of 128 shields on the major signs along the I-95 stretch of the Yankee Division Highway (YDH).  However, supplemental 128 trailblazer & reassurance signs erected near/alongside the main signs are permitted.

The current mile-markers and subsequent mile-marker-based interchange renumbering for 128 east of I-95/Peabody has the first 128-only mile marker at 37.2 rather than 0 (128's Exit 29 is slated to become Exit 37).  So far and for the time being; MassDOT is still acknowledging the Canton I-95/93 interchange (I-95's Exit 12) as 128's southern terminus.

Regarding the Pike interchange, something tells me that supplemental 128 trailblazers will be erected at key points later on.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on April 25, 2016, 11:49:53 AM
Though not sign related, for those interested in seeing the detail plans of the contract that will demolish and remove the toll booths and related structures for current Exits 3 to 8 on the Mass Pike/I-90 after electronic tolls are instituted this fall (winning bid to announced a week from Tuesday (5/3)), links are available at:
https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-16-1030-0H100-0H002-00000007759&external=true&parentUrl=bid (https://www.commbuys.com/bso/external/bidDetail.sdo?docId=BD-16-1030-0H100-0H002-00000007759&external=true&parentUrl=bid)
The estimated cost is almost $14 million.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on May 06, 2016, 02:20:59 PM
Question for Roadman. It's now been over 6 months since the notice to proceed was given to the first I-90 re-signing project, and a couple months since the winner for the second project was announced. Based on information from the MassDOT project listings, it appears work has not started on the first contract nor a notice to proceed issued for the second. Is this due to the renewed debate within in the agency about switching to milepost based numbers, issues with the contractor, or something else?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Pete from Boston on May 06, 2016, 06:36:32 PM
because they want you to take 495 to 95 for Portsmouth since it bypasses a lot of the closer in Boston traffic, same reason the exit for 128 has Waltham they want you to use 128 for more closer destinations.


Westbound to Lowell via 495 from Weston?  I doubt it.  That's a seriously long detour over 128 to 3.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: mariethefoxy on May 06, 2016, 11:05:56 PM
if I was heading to Maine or Portsmouth coming from the pike I would take 495 up to 95 rather than stay on the pike to 95/128.

When I went to Kittery from Nashua las year I went down to 495 to 95 then up 95 to Maine.
Title: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Pete from Boston on May 07, 2016, 07:01:31 AM
if I was heading to Maine or Portsmouth coming from the pike I would take 495 up to 95 rather than stay on the pike to 95/128.

When I went to Kittery from Nashua las year I went down to 495 to 95 then up 95 to Maine.
 
Yes, but we are talking about heading westbound from basically Boston, before the exit for 95/128.  It would make as much sense to use 495 to get to Providence from there as it would to get to Portsmouth—i.e.., not a lot.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: RobbieL2415 on May 07, 2016, 12:17:25 PM
if I was heading to Maine or Portsmouth coming from the pike I would take 495 up to 95 rather than stay on the pike to 95/128.

When I went to Kittery from Nashua las year I went down to 495 to 95 then up 95 to Maine.
If you're in a toll pinch you could do I-190 - > I-290 - > I-495.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: mariethefoxy on May 08, 2016, 03:58:39 AM
if I was heading to Maine or Portsmouth coming from the pike I would take 495 up to 95 rather than stay on the pike to 95/128.

When I went to Kittery from Nashua las year I went down to 495 to 95 then up 95 to Maine.
 
Yes, but we are talking about heading westbound from basically Boston, before the exit for 95/128.  It would make as much sense to use 495 to get to Providence from there as it would to get to Portsmouth—i.e.., not a lot.

oh that direction it doesnt make sense. Shoulda went with Lowell and Taunton in that direction since a lot of the signage from other exits on 495 use Lowell as a northbound control city, at least from what I remember from getting off the highway in Hopkinton and Acton.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on May 09, 2016, 09:30:54 AM
IMHO, the I-95 & I-495 BGS legends for westbound I-90 should list more local cities (Waltham/Dedham for I-95, Lowell/Taunton for I-495) and the legends for eastbound I-90 would list the more distant cities (Portsmouth, NH/Providence, RI for I-95 & Portsmouth, NH/Bourne for I-495).
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on May 10, 2016, 10:48:17 AM
Question for Roadman. It's now been over 6 months since the notice to proceed was given to the first I-90 re-signing project, and a couple months since the winner for the second project was announced. Based on information from the MassDOT project listings, it appears work has not started on the first contract nor a notice to proceed issued for the second. Is this due to the renewed debate within in the agency about switching to milepost based numbers, issues with the contractor, or something else?
Update. The Notice to Proceed was issued today (5/10) for the second I-90 contract. No Resident Engineer is listed for the project yet, however, nor completion date.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on May 10, 2016, 12:25:49 PM
Question for Roadman. It's now been over 6 months since the notice to proceed was given to the first I-90 re-signing project, and a couple months since the winner for the second project was announced. Based on information from the MassDOT project listings, it appears work has not started on the first contract nor a notice to proceed issued for the second. Is this due to the renewed debate within in the agency about switching to milepost based numbers, issues with the contractor, or something else?

No.  The renewed debate about exit re-numbering is not delaying work on either of the I-90 signing contracts.

Final survey work and soil borings for new OH structures have begun on the West Stockbridge to Auburn project.  Once the survey and soil borings are completed, the fabricator will prepare design drawings and calculations for review and approval by MassDOT.

As far as the exit numbers go, the new signs will be fabricated with sufficient width to accept the mileage-based numbers.  The contractor will be informed of which numbers to use (sequential or mile-based) prior to submission of the sign face drawings for approval.  This is similar to the new requirement that was included in the Addendum for the I-495 Raynham to Bolton project.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: AMLNet49 on May 10, 2016, 06:13:41 PM
The part I don't get is that the Feds seem to be backing off this. I was under the impression that the reason the mileage based project was moving so quickly was because of federal pressure, and the offer for federal funding to pay for the conversion. In that case, wouldn't federal funding superceed local opposition? I would think that if the state made the public aware of the fact that the Feds are paying for this, they would be more likely to accept the idea with a shrug and say "oh okay whatever the state doesn't have to pay for it".
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: vdeane on May 10, 2016, 06:30:35 PM
This is what I was afraid of... I wouldn't be surprised if it's another decade before mile-based numbers show up in MA.  It's getting to the point where the federal government is going to have to call in the military to force the remaining sequentially numbered roads changed at gunpoint.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on May 10, 2016, 06:40:57 PM
FWIW & I'm not 100% sure when the below-Wiki Write-Up on the matter was posted; but see below:

Quote from: Wiki Write-Up Regarding Exit Numbers in the US
Massachusetts and New Hampshire are among the states still using sequential numbering that initially requested a waiver from the Federal Highway Administration to retain sequential exit numbering system indefinitely. This request was denied by FHWA.

Link for Above-Quote (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exit_numbers_in_the_United_States)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on May 10, 2016, 10:28:12 PM
Question for Roadman. It's now been over 6 months since the notice to proceed was given to the first I-90 re-signing project, and a couple months since the winner for the second project was announced. Based on information from the MassDOT project listings, it appears work has not started on the first contract nor a notice to proceed issued for the second. Is this due to the renewed debate within in the agency about switching to milepost based numbers, issues with the contractor, or something else?

No.  The renewed debate about exit re-numbering is not delaying work on either of the I-90 signing contracts.

Final survey work and soil borings for new OH structures have begun on the West Stockbridge to Auburn project.  Once the survey and soil borings are completed, the fabricator will prepare design drawings and calculations for review and approval by MassDOT.

As far as the exit numbers go, the new signs will be fabricated with sufficient width to accept the mileage-based numbers.  The contractor will be informed of which numbers to use (sequential or mile-based) prior to submission of the sign face drawings for approval.  This is similar to the new requirement that was included in the Addendum for the I-495 Raynham to Bolton project.
Any estimate as to how long it will be before the contractors are notified as to which numbers to use?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on May 13, 2016, 10:57:00 AM
Question for Roadman. It's now been over 6 months since the notice to proceed was given to the first I-90 re-signing project, and a couple months since the winner for the second project was announced. Based on information from the MassDOT project listings, it appears work has not started on the first contract nor a notice to proceed issued for the second. Is this due to the renewed debate within in the agency about switching to milepost based numbers, issues with the contractor, or something else?
Update. The Notice to Proceed was issued today (5/10) for the second I-90 contract. No Resident Engineer is listed for the project yet, however, nor completion date.
Further update (5/13), the second I-90 project page has been updated with a completion date of Spring 2018. Meanwhile, the W. Stockbridge to Auburn page has finally been updated with a completion date of Autumn 2017 and 3% of the work completed.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on September 26, 2016, 12:13:42 PM
Since I had to travel the Mass Pike from Weston to the NY border to attend the Capital District Road Meet in Albany on Saturday, I took notes along the way on any progress seen on the I-90 sign replacement contracts. From the 7% complete listing for the western project and nothing for the eastern, I wasn't expecting to see much, but there were some things to note.

On the eastern section, the only evidence for the project were orange tags placed by the contractor, Liddell Bros., to mark future sign locations, such as here for the 1-Mile Advance for MA 9 in Framingham:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90signs916a.JPG)

These tags, however, only were placed between I-95 and I-495.

In the western project area there were no indications of any sign project at all. The only contract related work that could be seen were the placement of the new 2/10 mile reference posts, and these were only seen starting at Mile 40 westward. Here's one of the few right-hand markers, the rest were in the center median, where there is an older cement median just east of the Westfield River:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90signs916i.JPG)

These markers are not of the design depicted in the project plans, the same as on all other MA interstates, but have larger vertical numbering.

The only new signs seen on the Pike were the new MassDOT 'Go Time' travel time signs, and not all of them have been placed yet. Here's the sign approaching I-495 westbound:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90signs916b.JPG)

Photos of other new travel time signs on the Pike and I-95/128 taken on Saturday 9/24 can be found in Section B of the Misc. Massachusetts Sign page:
http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/miscsigns.html (http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/miscsigns.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: southshore720 on September 30, 2016, 04:59:56 PM
Did they finally replace the signage inside the Prudential Tunnel for Exit 22?  I seemed to notice that they were brighter and more reflective, but were "in-kind" replacements...
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on October 15, 2016, 01:01:35 PM
On my trip along the Pike out to Ludlow and back yesterday, I saw little progress in starting the sign replacement contracts over what I saw 2 weeks ago. I did spot additional orange tags put up by Liddell Bros. to mark future sign post locations. They are now as far west as Exit 11 in Millbury.

While no new signage, I did get a photo of the new shields on the existing Exit 10 signage in Auburn:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90signs1016c.JPG)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: KEVIN_224 on October 16, 2016, 08:26:41 AM
Has the big pullthrough sign been fixed at Exit 10 itself in Auburn? The shields on that sign eastbound are (were?) horribly faded!
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: AMLNet49 on October 16, 2016, 10:08:46 AM
Has the big pullthrough sign been fixed at Exit 10 itself in Auburn? The shields on that sign eastbound are (were?) horribly faded!
Yes the shields on that sign have been replaced. So grab a picture of the old MassPike shield with nice shields while they last.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on October 16, 2016, 10:05:06 PM
Has the big pullthrough sign been fixed at Exit 10 itself in Auburn? The shields on that sign eastbound are (were?) horribly faded!
Yes the shields on that sign have been replaced. So grab a picture of the old MassPike shield with nice shields while they last.
Here's a photo of that sign:
(http://www.gribblenation.net/mass21/i90signs1016d.JPG)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on October 16, 2016, 10:59:34 PM
It's still there? Wow. I was shocked to see it when I went through there in August. Is it the last one in the wild?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: KEVIN_224 on October 19, 2016, 09:04:40 PM
"Memories"...back on September 22, 2015:
(http://i.imgur.com/VcL26aj.jpg)

Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on May 22, 2017, 10:24:13 PM
From scanning the MassDOT project listings, the I-90 W. Stockbridge to Auburn signing project is now listed as 30% complete. Looks like they'll need to push to finish the project by the listed Fall 2017 completion date. The Auburn to Boston project has been listed at 8% complete for at least a couple months. I hope to get a chance to drive the Pike soon, at least east of Worcester, to see what progress has been made there.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on May 22, 2017, 10:33:50 PM
When I travelled the 'Pike last month from the NY line to Exit 6, the only new signs were mile markers... that was it.  Didn't see any new foundations or markers for new overheads.  So 30% complete seems like a stretch IMHO. 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: AMLNet49 on May 24, 2017, 09:15:40 PM
They have replaced all the auxiliary signs at most interchanges west of 495 (both on the ramps and on the mainline). They have also replaced speed limit signs. All the new signs (except the BGS directionals at intersections) use the new single breakaway post design that MassDOT has shifted toward. They all in all look quite good, but none of the BGS signage has even remotely begun installation.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on May 24, 2017, 09:18:42 PM
Foundations for the BGS supports have begun to be installed in western MA.  There are a number of locations between Lee and Sturbridge where footings have been poured or the excavations for them have been dug.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on May 26, 2017, 11:12:05 AM
Just to remind those here commenting on the progress of MassPike sign work.  The I-90 sign replacements are being done in two separate contracts:  NY line to I-290/I-395 in Auburn, and Route 146 in Millbury to Allston-Brighton interchange in Boston.  There are also two different contractors - RoadSafe Traffic Systems of Avon, MA is doing the western contract, and Liddell Brothers of Halifax, MA is doing the eastern contract.  Also note that, at some locations, some BGS work is either being done under the legacy toll plaza demo contracts, or has been deferred until full completion of the demo contracts.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jpdailey14 on May 28, 2017, 09:48:58 AM
I noticed yesterday that the gore signs at the Charlton Rest Area were replaced.  Interestingly, they are now in mixed case.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on May 30, 2017, 08:39:38 AM
I noticed yesterday that the gore signs at the Charlton Rest Area were replaced.  Interestingly, they are now in mixed case.
When I was up there this past weekend; I also noticed some of the new/replacement signs being erected along I-90 westbound.  One of them being the supplemental BGS for US 20 & Sturbridge (the shape of the shield looks slightly off) and one for MA 12 & Auburn. 

It looks like my request/suggestion for MassDOT to continue having the MA 12 shields on the yet-to-be-erected main signs was either was or the supplemental signage wasn't coordinated with the change (which would have just had Auburn listed).  The reasoning for the request/suggestion (such was posted several pages back) is due to the location of the ramps to/from MA 12 being within the interchange.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on May 30, 2017, 09:07:20 AM
I noticed yesterday that the gore signs at the Charlton Rest Area were replaced.  Interestingly, they are now in mixed case.
When I was up there this past weekend; I also noticed some of the new/replacement signs being erected along I-90 westbound.  One of them being the supplemental BGS for US 20 & Sturbridge (the shape of the shield looks slightly off) and one for MA 12 & Auburn. 

It looks like my request/suggestion for MassDOT to continue having the MA 12 shields on the yet-to-be-erected main signs was either was or the supplemental signage wasn't coordinated with the change (which would have just had Auburn listed).  The reasoning for the request/suggestion (such was posted several pages back) is due to the location of the ramps to/from MA 12 being within the interchange.
The sign fabricator for the project has been directed to include the MA 12 shields on the overhead BGS panels for the I-295/I-395 interchange.  As it was not practical to add "Auburn" to the BGS signs, the supplemental signs were installed per the original design.  This reinforces that 12 goes to Auburn.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on May 30, 2017, 09:58:35 AM
The sign fabricator for the project has been directed to include the MA 12 shields on the overhead BGS panels for the I-295/I-395 interchange.  As it was not practical to add "Auburn" to the BGS signs, the supplemental signs were installed per the original design.  This reinforces that 12 goes to Auburn.
I understand the reasoning behind not adding Auburn to the main BGS'.  The point I was trying to make was that since MA 12 shields will now be on the main BGS', having it on the supplemental BGS' for Auburn is redundant.  IMHO, the supplemental BGS' should just list Auburn with no MA 12 shield.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: AMLNet49 on May 30, 2017, 06:19:15 PM
The sign fabricator for the project has been directed to include the MA 12 shields on the overhead BGS panels for the I-295/I-395 interchange.  As it was not practical to add "Auburn" to the BGS signs, the supplemental signs were installed per the original design.  This reinforces that 12 goes to Auburn.
I understand the reasoning behind not adding Auburn to the main BGS'.  The point I was trying to make was that since MA 12 shields will now be on the main BGS', having it on the supplemental BGS' for Auburn is redundant.  IMHO, the supplemental BGS' should just list Auburn with no MA 12 shield.
I think the reasoning is to inform drivers that to go to Auburn, one should use MA 12 as opposed to the interstates
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on May 30, 2017, 11:26:08 PM
The sign fabricator for the project has been directed to include the MA 12 shields on the overhead BGS panels for the I-295/I-395 interchange.  As it was not practical to add "Auburn" to the BGS signs, the supplemental signs were installed per the original design.  This reinforces that 12 goes to Auburn.
I understand the reasoning behind not adding Auburn to the main BGS'.  The point I was trying to make was that since MA 12 shields will now be on the main BGS', having it on the supplemental BGS' for Auburn is redundant.  IMHO, the supplemental BGS' should just list Auburn with no MA 12 shield.
I assume this is what the Auburn sign looks like, based on this sign plan, except that the exit number is 10:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90exit90ma12aux.jpg)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on May 31, 2017, 09:08:04 AM
I assume this is what the Auburn sign looks like, based on this sign plan, except that the exit number is 10:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90exit90ma12aux.jpg)

Correct.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on June 13, 2017, 11:20:30 AM
I assume this is what the Auburn sign looks like, based on this sign plan, except that the exit number is 10:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90exit90ma12aux.jpg)
Here's the actual sign:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs617h.JPG)

Another photo of the US 20 auxuliary sign for the I-84 exit:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs617b.JPG)

Here's one of the new destination mileages signs with shields instead of text:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs617f.JPG)

All of the photos of new signage taken along the Mass Pike on June 4 are available at:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Roadgeekteen on June 13, 2017, 02:06:56 PM
I assume this is what the Auburn sign looks like, based on this sign plan, except that the exit number is 10:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90exit90ma12aux.jpg)
Here's the actual sign:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs617h.JPG)

Another photo of the US 20 auxuliary sign for the I-84 exit:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs617b.JPG)

Here's one of the new destination mileages signs with shields instead of text:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs617f.JPG)

All of the photos of new signage taken along the Mass Pike on June 4 are available at:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Is there a reason they stopped using text? Any problem with it?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: 1 on June 13, 2017, 02:16:53 PM
Is there a reason they stopped using text? Any problem with it?

Previously it said:


Worcester 17
I-495     26
Boston    56


exactly as shown (except the font wasn't monospaced). Since almost all other mentions of I-495 (and other Interstates) use shields, using the literal text "I-495" isn't as obvious what it refers to, which means it takes slightly longer to process.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on June 13, 2017, 03:18:57 PM
Is there a reason they stopped using text?
The previous signage was fabricated back when the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority was its own separate entity (from then-MassHighway) and, hence, had their own standards & specifications.  In contrast, MassHighway typically used route shields in its mileage signs.

Circa 2009, the Turnpike Authority was merged into MassHighway and the parent agency was renamed to the current MassDOT.  As a result of that merger, future sign specifications/fabrications along the Pike started to mirror those along other Massachusetts highways; including the use of route shields on mileage signs.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on June 13, 2017, 04:51:43 PM
Is there a reason they stopped using text?
The previous signage was fabricated back when the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority was its own separate entity (from then-MassHighway) and, hence, had their own standards & specifications.  In contrast, MassHighway typically used route shields in its mileage signs.

Circa 2009, the Turnpike Authority was merged into MassHighway and the parent agency was renamed to the current MassDOT.  As a result of that merger, future sign specifications/fabrications along the Pike started to mirror those along other Massachusetts highways; including the use of route shields on mileage signs.

Also, the MUTCD preference for distance signs is to use shields instead of text when a route is provided as a destination.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Magical Trevor on June 15, 2017, 12:51:53 AM
I was curious why, a couple months ago when the faded shields on the EB signs for Exit 10 (including the one-mile advance) were replaced, the two-mile advance sign was left out. Well, an hour ago while traveling WB I just saw that a new overhead "pipe" mount had been erected just a bit before the old roadside sign, with a crane lifting the new one into place.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on June 16, 2017, 03:43:12 PM
I was curious why, a couple months ago when the faded shields on the EB signs for Exit 10 (including the one-mile advance) were replaced, the two-mile advance sign was left out. Well, an hour ago while traveling WB I just saw that a new overhead "pipe" mount had been erected just a bit before the old roadside sign, with a crane lifting the new one into place.
Thanks for the update, according to the MassDOT Project Listing, the western project (Exits 1-10) is now 36% complete, while the project to the east is 13% done.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Pete from Boston on June 17, 2017, 04:47:26 PM
I was curious why, a couple months ago when the faded shields on the EB signs for Exit 10 (including the one-mile advance) were replaced, the two-mile advance sign was left out. Well, an hour ago while traveling WB I just saw that a new overhead "pipe" mount had been erected just a bit before the old roadside sign, with a crane lifting the new one into place.
Thanks for the update, according to the MassDOT Project Listing, the western project (Exits 1-10) is now 36% complete, while the project to the east is 13% done.

Was the "Highest point on I-90 east of South Dakota" sign replaced in kind, or did som MUTCD hyper-adherence ruin the fun?  I didn't see it last time, but it was night and I was focused on the fairly heavy traffic.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: kefkafloyd on June 17, 2017, 06:11:43 PM
I was curious why, a couple months ago when the faded shields on the EB signs for Exit 10 (including the one-mile advance) were replaced, the two-mile advance sign was left out. Well, an hour ago while traveling WB I just saw that a new overhead "pipe" mount had been erected just a bit before the old roadside sign, with a crane lifting the new one into place.
Thanks for the update, according to the MassDOT Project Listing, the western project (Exits 1-10) is now 36% complete, while the project to the east is 13% done.

Was the "Highest point on I-90 east of South Dakota" sign replaced in kind, or did som MUTCD hyper-adherence ruin the fun?  I didn't see it last time, but it was night and I was focused on the fairly heavy traffic.

According to bob7374's website with copies of the sign plans (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html), it's intended to be replaced in-kind, though with new wording. Not sure if it has been replaced yet in the field.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: AMLNet49 on June 24, 2017, 12:58:20 PM
I was curious why, a couple months ago when the faded shields on the EB signs for Exit 10 (including the one-mile advance) were replaced, the two-mile advance sign was left out. Well, an hour ago while traveling WB I just saw that a new overhead "pipe" mount had been erected just a bit before the old roadside sign, with a crane lifting the new one into place.
Thanks for the update, according to the MassDOT Project Listing, the western project (Exits 1-10) is now 36% complete, while the project to the east is 13% done.

Was the "Highest point on I-90 east of South Dakota" sign replaced in kind, or did som MUTCD hyper-adherence ruin the fun?  I didn't see it last time, but it was night and I was focused on the fairly heavy traffic.

According to bob7374's website with copies of the sign plans (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html), it's intended to be replaced in-kind, though with new wording. Not sure if it has been replaced yet in the field.
I'm pretty sure if the wording is changed then it's not "in kind". I always though "in kind" was carbon-copy plus modern additions like exit tabs where needed.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Pete from Boston on June 24, 2017, 01:40:37 PM
I was curious why, a couple months ago when the faded shields on the EB signs for Exit 10 (including the one-mile advance) were replaced, the two-mile advance sign was left out. Well, an hour ago while traveling WB I just saw that a new overhead "pipe" mount had been erected just a bit before the old roadside sign, with a crane lifting the new one into place.
Thanks for the update, according to the MassDOT Project Listing, the western project (Exits 1-10) is now 36% complete, while the project to the east is 13% done.

Was the "Highest point on I-90 east of South Dakota" sign replaced in kind, or did som MUTCD hyper-adherence ruin the fun?  I didn't see it last time, but it was night and I was focused on the fairly heavy traffic.

According to bob7374's website with copies of the sign plans (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html), it's intended to be replaced in-kind, though with new wording. Not sure if it has been replaced yet in the field.
I'm pretty sure if the wording is changed then it's not "in kind". I always though "in kind" was carbon-copy plus modern additions like exit tabs where needed.

For the purpose of my question, it's a replacement in kind.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: kefkafloyd on June 26, 2017, 10:28:04 PM
Surprised at the lack of discussion of the new overpass street name signs being installed on bridges crossing the pike. I saw a lot of them out on the western end last weekend.

A change would be noticeable because the previous turnpike authority white-on-black signs didn't match the rest of the state, but the new ones are brand new style that is yet again different from the rest of the state. They're much larger, larger than the concrete parts of the bridges they're mounted to, and the text is in mixed case. They don't fit the bridge design at all. Is this going to be the new standard state-wide? I did not see anything like this on recently re-signed roads like 95 or 290.

Also, RIP the Big Red Sign in Lee, rendered obsolete by AET and interchange redesign work. It's been taken down since the last time I drove west in May. One less oddity on the pike.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on June 27, 2017, 12:27:11 PM
Photos of the new overheads put up last week for the I-290/I-395/MA 12 exit on the Mass Pike East, courtesy of Shaun Ganley.
The 2-Mile advance sign:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs617sg1w.jpg)

and the 1/2 mile advance sign:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs617sg2w.jpg)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on June 27, 2017, 12:59:15 PM
Photos of the new overheads put up last week for the I-290/I-395/MA 12 exit on the Mass Pike East, courtesy of Shaun Ganley.
The 2-Mile advance sign:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs617sg1w.jpg)

and the 1/2 mile advance sign:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs617sg2w.jpg)
Nice looking signs.  However, is it me or do the MA 12 shields appear off-centered?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: davewiecking on June 27, 2017, 06:39:40 PM
I think it's centered between "EAST" and "SOUTH", but not between the I-'s...
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on June 27, 2017, 06:58:00 PM
IMHO, it (the MA 12 shield) should be centered with respect to the sign panel.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Alps on June 27, 2017, 08:50:13 PM
I think it's centered between "EAST" and "SOUTH", but not between the I-'s...
The perils of relying on GuidSign.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SidS1045 on June 28, 2017, 11:20:19 AM
This past weekend the old ramp from the Turnpike westbound to I-95/MA 128 and MA 30 (exit 15) was closed.  The new ramp to 95/128 (now exit 15A) opened about a quarter-mile further west and has eliminated the dangerously short-distanced weave between the now-closed ramp from the Pike and the ramps to 95/128.  As of last night the new ramp from the Pike westbound to MA 30 (now exit 15B) was not open (between the old exit 15 and the new exit 15A), but a detour was posted for drivers to access 30 by using the ramp to 95/128 northbound and taking exit 24 from the C/D road.  The MassDOT blog indicated that the 15B ramp to Park Road, the access road to MA 30, should be open in about a week.

I did not see any auxiliary route shields for 128, on either BGS's or ground-mounts, at or before exit 15A, except on older signs that haven't been replaced.  Maybe MassDOT is finally getting the hint, or are they still in the works?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on June 28, 2017, 12:10:14 PM
This past weekend the old ramp from the Turnpike westbound to I-95/MA 128 and MA 30 (exit 15) was closed.  The new ramp to 95/128 (now exit 15A) opened about a quarter-mile further west and has eliminated the dangerously short-distanced weave between the now-closed ramp from the Pike and the ramps to 95/128.  As of last night the new ramp from the Pike westbound to MA 30 (now exit 15B) was not open (between the old exit 15 and the new exit 15A), but a detour was posted for drivers to access 30 by using the ramp to 95/128 northbound and taking exit 24 from the C/D road.  The MassDOT blog indicated that the 15B ramp to Park Road, the access road to MA 30, should be open in about a week.

I did not see any auxiliary route shields for 128, on either BGS's or ground-mounts, at or before exit 15A, except on older signs that haven't been replaced.  Maybe MassDOT is finally getting the hint, or are they still in the works?
Did the exit tabs look like they could hold a future milepost based number (123 to be exact)?

Good question about the lack of 128 shields. According to the sign replacement project plans there are only to be auxiliary signs for MA 30 at the Weston exit. Looking through the list of shields to be put up, there is no reference to 128 at all while it does list auxiliary trailblazers for MA 146, MA 122, and US 20. For comparison, 26 new shields for I-90 will be going up between Auburn and Boston, 15 paired with Mass Pike logo signs.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on June 28, 2017, 01:26:46 PM
I did not see any auxiliary route shields for 128, on either BGS's or ground-mounts, at or before exit 15A, except on older signs that haven't been replaced.  Maybe MassDOT is finally getting the hint, or are they still in the works?
Did the exit tabs look like they could hold a future milepost based number (123 to be exact)?

Good question about the lack of 128 shields. According to the sign replacement project plans there are only to be auxiliary signs for MA 30 at the Weston exit. Looking through the list of shields to be put up, there is no reference to 128 at all while it does list auxiliary trailblazers for MA 146, MA 122, and US 20. For comparison, 26 new shields for I-90 will be going up between Auburn and Boston, 15 paired with Mass Pike logo signs.
Is it possible that the supplemental 128 signs might be added later; as either an addendum/change notice or as a separate package?

Wouldn't be the first time.  IIRC, a supplemental NORTH 128 trailblazer sign was added at the northbound c-d ramp signage at MA 30 (Exit 24). Scroll down to see before & after pics. (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SidS1045 on June 28, 2017, 01:34:37 PM
Did the exit tabs look like they could hold a future milepost based number (123 to be exact)?
Using the current numbering scheme, EXIT 15A or EXIT 15B and EXIT 123 have the same number of characters and should, in theory anyhow, take up the same amount of space.  But the new exits, rendered as mileage-based, could end up as EXIT 123A or EXIT 123B, and I don't believe they left enough room for that on the new tabs.  I'll have to take another look to be sure.

The exit tabs on the 1-mile-to-exit and 1/2-mile-to-exit BGS's have been replaced (the green sheeting on the tabs is definitely a different shade of green from the rest of the BGS).  The new ones read EXIT 15B-A.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on June 28, 2017, 05:29:42 PM
Using the current numbering scheme, EXIT 15A or EXIT 15B and EXIT 123 have the same number of characters and should, in theory anyhow, take up the same amount of space.  But the new exits, rendered as mileage-based, could end up as EXIT 123A or EXIT 123B, and I don't believe they left enough room for that on the new tabs.  I'll have to take another look to be sure.
It's worth noting that the current MUTCD standards (MassDOT doesn't always follow this) call for a space between the exit numeral(s) and the lettered suffix(es).  So Exits 15A & 15B would actually be signed as EXIT 15 A & EXIT 15 B; and Exits 123A & 123 B would actually be signed as EXIT 123 A & EXIT 123 B respectively.

The supposed reason for the space is to reduce/eliminate a motorist confusing EXIT XB (signed EXIT X B) for EXIT X8.

That said, there may not be room for the longer mile-marker based numerals if spaced per MUTCD standards.  I'd have to see the actual exit tabs to be sure.

The exit tabs on the 1-mile-to-exit and 1/2-mile-to-exit BGS's have been replaced (the green sheeting on the tabs is definitely a different shade of green from the rest of the BGS).  The new ones read EXIT 15B-A.
Are those signs still the older ones from the 1990s(?) or the newer ones (last year or two)?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on June 28, 2017, 05:53:03 PM
They went with Exits 15A and 15B?  The new ramp to 95/128 should have been numbered Exit 14, to match the eastbound exit, since they go to the same place and no longer have to deal with different numbered toll plazas. 

The remaining ramp to Park Road/Route 30 could have stayed as just Exit 15.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on June 28, 2017, 07:51:46 PM
Using the current numbering scheme, EXIT 15A or EXIT 15B and EXIT 123 have the same number of characters and should, in theory anyhow, take up the same amount of space.  But the new exits, rendered as mileage-based, could end up as EXIT 123A or EXIT 123B, and I don't believe they left enough room for that on the new tabs.  I'll have to take another look to be sure.
It's worth noting that the current MUTCD standards (MassDOT doesn't always follow this) call for a space between the exit numeral(s) and the lettered suffix(es).  So Exits 15A & 15B would actually be signed as EXIT 15 A & EXIT 15 B; and Exits 123A & 123 B would actually be signed as EXIT 123 A & EXIT 123 B respectively.

The supposed reason for the space is to reduce/eliminate a motorist confusing EXIT XB (signed EXIT X B) for EXIT X8

That is precisely the reason for the space.  It's also a detail that I note many designers and fabricators ignore.

Quote

That said, there may not be room for the longer mile-marker based numerals if spaced per MUTCD standards.  I'd have to see the actual exit tabs to be sure.

Excellent observation.  When I get a chance, I'll have to check that out myself.

Quote
The exit tabs on the 1-mile-to-exit and 1/2-mile-to-exit BGS's have been replaced (the green sheeting on the tabs is definitely a different shade of green from the rest of the BGS).  The new ones read EXIT 15B-A.
Are those signs still the older ones from the 1990s(?) or the newer ones (last year or two)?

Yes, new exit tabs have been placed on the existing westbound advance signs for I-95 and MA 30 for now.  These signs and structures will be replaced as part of the I-90 Auburn to Boston sign replacement project presently under construction.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Benlonghighway on July 01, 2017, 04:50:26 PM
I really don't like that they're doing this. I mean, is it really necessary?

1. I-495 control cities should remain "NH-Maine and Cape Cod." Makes more sense, since most people exiting the Pike are probably headed to these areas.
2. The MA-128 designation should stay, as this is what's unique to the Pike; currently, it is the only highway to have the MA-128 designation remaining.
3. Why the overhead signs, and not the ground signs? I thought ground signs would be better for this highway, especially the two lane stretch between Sturbridge and West Stockbridge.
4. The guide signs for the maintenance centers just say "not an exit." This doesn't specifically state that only authorized vehicles are allowed to use these ramps, and people may just use these ramps as turnarounds.

What do you guys think?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: 1 on July 01, 2017, 05:00:59 PM
I really don't like that they're doing this. I mean, is it really necessary?

1. I-495 control cities should remain "NH-Maine and Cape Cod." Makes more sense, since most people exiting the Pike are probably headed to these areas.
2. The MA-128 designation should stay, as this is what's unique to the Pike; currently, it is the only highway to have the MA-128 designation remaining.
3. Why the overhead signs, and not the ground signs? I thought ground signs would be better for this highway, especially the two lane stretch between Sturbridge and West Stockbridge.
4. The guide signs for the maintenance centers just say "not an exit." This doesn't specifically state that only authorized vehicles are allowed to use these ramps, and people may just use these ramps as turnarounds.

What do you guys think?

1. The MUTCD (which is nationwide, unlike my answers to questions 2 and 3) says that state names cannot be used as destinations. (Not that everyone follows the MUTCD; on this very subject, Chicago uses "Indiana" and "Wisconsin" as control cities.)

2. MassDOT has been phasing out MA 128 signage. With a few exceptions, MA 128 and I-95 cannot appear together on the same sign, even when referring to the same road.

3. MassDOT likes overhead signs more than most other states.

4. Is there any way to abuse a turnaround? I don't think there's any way to avoid a toll by turning around.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: kefkafloyd on July 03, 2017, 08:05:56 AM
-

4. Is there any way to abuse a turnaround? I don't think there's any way to avoid a toll by turning around.

Blandford westbound, the off-ramp for the maintenance area (which requires you to go around on Old Chester Rd) would let you duck out, if the gate's open. The toll gantry is right after that ramp. This of course would only help you if you wanted to exit the pike there. The ramp does not enable someone on the mainline to dodge the toll.

Kind of a risky move since you can't guarantee the gate would be open (I've never seen it closed, personally) and if a Statie saw you, I'm sure they'd give you a ticket.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SectorZ on July 03, 2017, 10:45:47 AM
-

4. Is there any way to abuse a turnaround? I don't think there's any way to avoid a toll by turning around.

Blandford westbound, the off-ramp for the maintenance area (which requires you to go around on Old Chester Rd) would let you duck out, if the gate's open. The toll gantry is right after that ramp. This of course would only help you if you wanted to exit the pike there. The ramp does not enable someone on the mainline to dodge the toll.

Kind of a risky move since you can't guarantee the gate would be open (I've never seen it closed, personally) and if a Statie saw you, I'm sure they'd give you a ticket.

A statie could technically arrest one for trespassing if they really wanted to push the issue. Is there a ticket for toll evasion? I imagine you could get ticketed for driving on an unauthorized roadway.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on July 03, 2017, 11:19:54 AM
Quote
2. MassDOT has been phasing out MA 128 signage. With a few exceptions, MA 128 and I-95 cannot appear together on the same sign, even when referring to the same road.

Those 'exceptions' you note are either LGS signs that were installed as part of private developer projects, or a handful of older signs that haven't been updated yet.  MassDOT does not place 95 and 128 shields together on BGS or LGS signs as the result of an FHWA directive that was first issued in the early 1990s.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: kefkafloyd on July 04, 2017, 09:57:34 AM
-

4. Is there any way to abuse a turnaround? I don't think there's any way to avoid a toll by turning around.

Blandford westbound, the off-ramp for the maintenance area (which requires you to go around on Old Chester Rd) would let you duck out, if the gate's open. The toll gantry is right after that ramp. This of course would only help you if you wanted to exit the pike there. The ramp does not enable someone on the mainline to dodge the toll.

Kind of a risky move since you can't guarantee the gate would be open (I've never seen it closed, personally) and if a Statie saw you, I'm sure they'd give you a ticket.

A statie could technically arrest one for trespassing if they really wanted to push the issue. Is there a ticket for toll evasion? I imagine you could get ticketed for driving on an unauthorized roadway.

Now that the ticket system is abolished, the odds are that you have paid some amount of toll if you were heading westbound, unless you got on at Exit 3. Blandford's gantry is the first one westbound past exit 3. It would probably be some kind of unauthorized use fine. The ramp westbound dumps you out on Chester road, which is just a local street, so it's not like you're crossing through the maintenance area itself.

On a related subject, I hope AET gives MassDOT the idea to add an interchange in the 30 mile gap between Westfield and Lee, but I'm not getting my hopes up.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: 1 on July 04, 2017, 10:07:53 AM
On a related subject, I hope AET gives MassDOT the idea to add an interchange in the 30 mile gap between Westfield and Lee, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

US 20/MA 8 and MA 23 (Blandford center, not where MA 23 actually crosses) should both have exits.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on July 04, 2017, 12:21:03 PM
On a related subject, I hope AET gives MassDOT the idea to add an interchange in the 30 mile gap between Westfield and Lee, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

US 20/MA 8 and MA 23 (Blandford center, not where MA 23 actually crosses) should both have exits.

Should also be one at US 7 between West Stockbridge and Lee, and at MA 19 or MA 67 between Palmer and Sturbridge
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: kefkafloyd on July 04, 2017, 08:29:41 PM
Another oddity dead: the Appalachian Trail's new overpass sign is now standard green and matches the rest of the new (ugly, IMO) overpass signs. Previously, it was brown (versus black of the old overpass signs).
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on July 04, 2017, 10:21:26 PM
-

4. Is there any way to abuse a turnaround? I don't think there's any way to avoid a toll by turning around.

Blandford westbound, the off-ramp for the maintenance area (which requires you to go around on Old Chester Rd) would let you duck out, if the gate's open. The toll gantry is right after that ramp. This of course would only help you if you wanted to exit the pike there. The ramp does not enable someone on the mainline to dodge the toll.

Kind of a risky move since you can't guarantee the gate would be open (I've never seen it closed, personally) and if a Statie saw you, I'm sure they'd give you a ticket.

A statie could technically arrest one for trespassing if they really wanted to push the issue. Is there a ticket for toll evasion? I imagine you could get ticketed for driving on an unauthorized roadway.

Now that the ticket system is abolished, the odds are that you have paid some amount of toll if you were heading westbound, unless you got on at Exit 3. Blandford's gantry is the first one westbound past exit 3. It would probably be some kind of unauthorized use fine. The ramp westbound dumps you out on Chester road, which is just a local street, so it's not like you're crossing through the maintenance area itself.

On a related subject, I hope AET gives MassDOT the idea to add an interchange in the 30 mile gap between Westfield and Lee, but I'm not getting my hopes up.

The recently passed state budget includes funds and a directive for MassDOT to study building an interchange somewhere on the 30-mile stretch.  As someone who lives in that part of the Berkshires, I can say that an interchange there is long overdue.  This comes after years of asking by both the town of Blandford and the city of Westfield.

I can think of two possible places that would work:

1)  Algerie Road in Otis.  Provides connections to US-20/MA-8 near Becket Center, to MA-23 in East Otis near the reservoir, and to Blandford via North Blandford Rd.

2) Some variation on a Blandford center exit, likely at North Street or at Russell Stage Road.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on July 10, 2017, 01:22:50 PM
Using the current numbering scheme, EXIT 15A or EXIT 15B and EXIT 123 have the same number of characters and should, in theory anyhow, take up the same amount of space.  But the new exits, rendered as mileage-based, could end up as EXIT 123A or EXIT 123B, and I don't believe they left enough room for that on the new tabs.  I'll have to take another look to be sure.
It's worth noting that the current MUTCD standards (MassDOT doesn't always follow this) call for a space between the exit numeral(s) and the lettered suffix(es).  So Exits 15A & 15B would actually be signed as EXIT 15 A & EXIT 15 B; and Exits 123A & 123 B would actually be signed as EXIT 123 A & EXIT 123 B respectively.

The supposed reason for the space is to reduce/eliminate a motorist confusing EXIT XB (signed EXIT X B) for EXIT X8

That is precisely the reason for the space.  It's also a detail that I note many designers and fabricators ignore.

Quote

That said, there may not be room for the longer mile-marker based numerals if spaced per MUTCD standards.  I'd have to see the actual exit tabs to be sure.

Excellent observation.  When I get a chance, I'll have to check that out myself.

Quote
The exit tabs on the 1-mile-to-exit and 1/2-mile-to-exit BGS's have been replaced (the green sheeting on the tabs is definitely a different shade of green from the rest of the BGS).  The new ones read EXIT 15B-A.
Are those signs still the older ones from the 1990s(?) or the newer ones (last year or two)?

Yes, new exit tabs have been placed on the existing westbound advance signs for I-95 and MA 30 for now.  These signs and structures will be replaced as part of the I-90 Auburn to Boston sign replacement project presently under construction.
I got around to checking out the new Weston ramps signage late yesterday afternoon. The exit tabs are long enough to accommodate a 3-digit number: Here's the signage at the (To) MA 30 ramp:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95westonsigns717c.JPG)

While here's the signage at the new I-95 (128) ramp:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95westonsigns717e.JPG)

The gore signs look like they could be adapted for a 3-digit (and 1 letter) number:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95westonsigns717d.JPG)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on July 10, 2017, 01:24:46 PM
I've posted image of new overhead signs up on the Mass Pike as of this past weekend, including 1 eastbound for I-84:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs717p.JPG)

on my I-90 in Mass. photo gallery:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on July 10, 2017, 02:31:04 PM
Why would MassDOT use NY City (150 miles almost in the opposite direction) as a control city for the I-84 exit traveling eastbound on the Pike?  Most NY bound traffic would have gotten off over a hundred miles ago in the Albany area, or even in Springfield.  Drives me nuts like putting Hartford as a control city for Exit 6 when most people use Exit 4 because they know I-91 goes to Hartford.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on July 10, 2017, 04:16:28 PM
Any reason why the new I-95 exit westbound is Exit 15-A while the eastbound exit is Exit 14?  Wouldn't logic have both directions for the same exit be the same number?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on July 10, 2017, 06:19:05 PM
Any reason why the new I-95 exit westbound is Exit 15-A while the eastbound exit is Exit 14?  Wouldn't logic have both directions for the same exit be the same number?
Agreed. The plan was to have the exits on both sides be numbered 123 with the arrival of milepost base numbering (123 A/B WB), however with this postponed guess they stuck with the established numbers. Some suggested why not two separate numbers, 15 for the Route 30 exit and 14 for I-95, which would have made the I-95 number consistent both ways, but possibly deemed too confusing by MassDOT.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: KEVIN_224 on July 10, 2017, 08:48:26 PM
So I see the new eastbound sign for I-84 also omits the reference for US Route 20. Is it the same reason MA Route 128 doesn't appear on the new I-95 signs in Weston?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: DrSmith on July 10, 2017, 09:34:56 PM
In the previous system with tickets and barriers, the switch occurred in Weston at Route 128. Outside of Route 128 on the pike was the ticket system, and inside the barriers. Heading east, the ticket system ended at Exit 14. Heading west, you weren't yet on the ticket system, and there was Exit 15 as a barrier toll for Route 128 or you entered the ticket system if remaining on the pike. Additionally, hopefully the new ramps will help as the old ramp westbound ramp had a quick weave as it had to be after the toll plaza from the eastbound direction, but now that ramp is moved further back providing a little more room.

As note that different numbers are for Allston-Brighton as well; Exit 18 eastbound and Exit 20 westbound with Exit 19 being the old tolls. Consider they also consider the Mass Ave onramp as Exit 21 even though it is a single entrance ramp only.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: mariethefoxy on July 11, 2017, 01:36:08 AM
I really don't like that they're doing this. I mean, is it really necessary?

1. I-495 control cities should remain "NH-Maine and Cape Cod." Makes more sense, since most people exiting the Pike are probably headed to these areas.
2. The MA-128 designation should stay, as this is what's unique to the Pike; currently, it is the only highway to have the MA-128 designation remaining.
3. Why the overhead signs, and not the ground signs? I thought ground signs would be better for this highway, especially the two lane stretch between Sturbridge and West Stockbridge.
4. The guide signs for the maintenance centers just say "not an exit." This doesn't specifically state that only authorized vehicles are allowed to use these ramps, and people may just use these ramps as turnarounds.

What do you guys think?

1. The MUTCD (which is nationwide, unlike my answers to questions 2 and 3) says that state names cannot be used as destinations. (Not that everyone follows the MUTCD; on this very subject, Chicago uses "Indiana" and "Wisconsin" as control cities.)

2. MassDOT has been phasing out MA 128 signage. With a few exceptions, MA 128 and I-95 cannot appear together on the same sign, even when referring to the same road.

3. MassDOT likes overhead signs more than most other states.

4. Is there any way to abuse a turnaround? I don't think there's any way to avoid a toll by turning around.


1) I agree, Cape Cod is a much more recognizable location for out of towners than Taunton. Some of the control cities on the other onramps to 495 use Lowell or Lawrence as the control city. From the Pike Portsmouth NH pretty much shows you that you're heading up that way.

2) At the very least the ground mounted 128 signs should stay

3) it appears to be a DOT policy, even rural highways like Route 2 have all overhead signage on the super 2 segment.

Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on July 11, 2017, 08:40:45 AM
I got around to checking out the new Weston ramps signage late yesterday afternoon. The exit tabs are long enough to accommodate a 3-digit number: Here's the signage at the (To) MA 30 ramp:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95westonsigns717c.JPG)

While here's the signage at the new I-95 (128) ramp:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i95westonsigns717e.JPG)

These photos (nice ones BTW) of these signs IMHO are proof that the use of smaller size numerals and the paler shade of blue for the I-shields makes for some harder-to-read route makers (I made a similar comment on the 3d-I-shield Font thread).

The earlier-erected signage at this interchange (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3401358,-71.2626665,3a,75y,231.06h,83.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4Klyd6Af0jNVTT1UkXNoYA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) feature much more readable (at a distance) numerals & the darker shade of blue.

Note: I still think that either Dedham or Canton should've been used for the southbound I-95 legend for the westbound I-90 signage but that's another topic for another thread.

Why would MassDOT use NY City (150 miles almost in the opposite direction) as a control city for the I-84 exit traveling eastbound on the Pike?  Most NY bound traffic would have gotten off over a hundred miles ago in the Albany area, or even in Springfield.  Drives me nuts like putting Hartford as a control city for Exit 6 when most people use Exit 4 because they know I-91 goes to Hartford.
I mentioned similar earlier in this thread and I'll reiterate again.  This is a poster-child case where blindly following MUTCD policy of using the same exact control city legend combo on interchange signage for both directions doesn't work or defies simple logic.  IMHO, either the previous Sturbridge/Hartford (CT) combo should've been maintained for the eastbound signage or the eastbound signage should just list Hartford CT similar to the nearby ramp signage for I-84 West from US 20 East.

So I see the new eastbound sign for I-84 also omits the reference for US Route 20. Is it the same reason MA Route 128 doesn't appear on the new I-95 signs in Weston?
No.  Such is likely due to the I-84/US 20 junction being a separate, independent interchange.  Note: there will be supplemental signage for US 20 erected for Exit 9 (if not already).
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: vdeane on July 11, 2017, 12:55:23 PM
In the previous system with tickets and barriers, the switch occurred in Weston at Route 128. Outside of Route 128 on the pike was the ticket system, and inside the barriers. Heading east, the ticket system ended at Exit 14. Heading west, you weren't yet on the ticket system, and there was Exit 15 as a barrier toll for Route 128 or you entered the ticket system if remaining on the pike. Additionally, hopefully the new ramps will help as the old ramp westbound ramp had a quick weave as it had to be after the toll plaza from the eastbound direction, but now that ramp is moved further back providing a little more room.

As note that different numbers are for Allston-Brighton as well; Exit 18 eastbound and Exit 20 westbound with Exit 19 being the old tolls. Consider they also consider the Mass Ave onramp as Exit 21 even though it is a single entrance ramp only.
And this is why exit numbers should be for exits, not toll barriers.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on July 11, 2017, 02:45:57 PM



Quote
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on July 10, 2017, 08:48:26 PM

So I see the new eastbound sign for I-84 also omits the reference for US Route 20. Is it the same reason MA Route 128 doesn't appear on the new I-95 signs in Weston?


No.  Such is likely due to the I-84/US 20 junction being a separate, independent interchange.  Note: there will be supplemental signage for US 20 erected for Exit 9 (if not already).

Remember that US 20 was not originally part of the Exit 9 designation.  Back in the I-86 days, the signing for Exit 9 had I-86 and Route 15 shields, with Hartford and New York City.  As part of the route change from I-86 back to I-84 in the mid-1980s, the Route 15 designation was discontinued on I-84 east of Hartford.  At the time, Pike forces simply replaced the Route 15 shields with US 20 ones, even though US 20 doesn't serve either of the destinations on the signs.  In the mid-1990s, this error was carried through to the signs now being replaced.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on July 11, 2017, 02:59:40 PM



Quote
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on July 10, 2017, 08:48:26 PM

So I see the new eastbound sign for I-84 also omits the reference for US Route 20. Is it the same reason MA Route 128 doesn't appear on the new I-95 signs in Weston?


No.  Such is likely due to the I-84/US 20 junction being a separate, independent interchange.  Note: there will be supplemental signage for US 20 erected for Exit 9 (if not already).

Remember that US 20 was not originally part of the Exit 9 designation.  Back in the I-86 days, the signing for Exit 9 had I-86 and Route 15 shields, with Hartford and New York City.  As part of the route change from I-86 back to I-84 in the mid-1980s, the Route 15 designation was discontinued on I-84 east of Hartford.  At the time, Pike forces simply replaced the Route 15 shields with US 20 ones, even though US 20 doesn't serve either of the destinations on the signs.  In the mid-1990s, this error was carried through to the signs now being replaced.

Looks like a similar correction was made in Palmer at Exit 8, as the US 20 reference was also removed from that signage and it only lists MA 32.  In that case, MA 20 is almost a mile south of the interchange. 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on July 11, 2017, 03:14:07 PM



Quote
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on July 10, 2017, 08:48:26 PM

So I see the new eastbound sign for I-84 also omits the reference for US Route 20. Is it the same reason MA Route 128 doesn't appear on the new I-95 signs in Weston?


No.  Such is likely due to the I-84/US 20 junction being a separate, independent interchange.  Note: there will be supplemental signage for US 20 erected for Exit 9 (if not already).

Remember that US 20 was not originally part of the Exit 9 designation.  Back in the I-86 days, the signing for Exit 9 had I-86 and Route 15 shields, with Hartford and New York City.  As part of the route change from I-86 back to I-84 in the mid-1980s, the Route 15 designation was discontinued on I-84 east of Hartford.  At the time, Pike forces simply replaced the Route 15 shields with US 20 ones, even though US 20 doesn't serve either of the destinations on the signs.  In the mid-1990s, this error was carried through to the signs now being replaced.

Looks like a similar correction was made in Palmer at Exit 8, as the US 20 reference was also removed from that signage and it only lists MA 32.  In that case, MA 20 is almost a mile south of the interchange. 

'TO 20' was added to the Exit 8 signs when they were replaced as part of the 1995 signing project.  Prior to that time, as with the recently-installed signs, Exit 8 only referenced MA 32.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: KEVIN_224 on July 13, 2017, 09:49:25 PM
The signs looked mostly the same at Exit 9 in Sturbridge...except for a big yellow sign warning about a traffic merge. It's on the westbound mainline, immediately after the Exit 9 off ramp.

I finally got to see the new versions of the Exit 10 signs in Auburn. Why New London and not Norwich? Huh?
(http://i.imgur.com/FWVZf6h.jpg)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: RobbieL2415 on July 13, 2017, 11:04:17 PM
The signs looked mostly the same at Exit 9 in Sturbridge...except for a big yellow sign warning about a traffic merge. It's on the westbound mainline, immediately after the Exit 9 off ramp.

I finally got to see the new versions of the Exit 10 signs in Auburn. Why New London and not Norwich? Huh?
(http://i.imgur.com/FWVZf6h.jpg)
Well, New London is the county seat, after all :-D
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman65 on July 13, 2017, 11:09:03 PM
New London, CT is the city near where I-395 ends at its parent route.  Even though not the city limits itself, it is close to it.  With this said there is, however, no connection to NB I-95 that goes to its center it has exits before its terminus that lead to the large city.

Also, I thought CT has no county seats?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: RobbieL2415 on July 13, 2017, 11:10:34 PM
New London, CT is the city near where I-395 ends at its parent route.  Even though not the city limits itself, it is close to it.  Though no connection to NB I-95 it has exits before its terminus that lead to the large city.

Also, I thought CT has no county seats?
It hasn't since 1960.  Sheriffs were eliminated in 2000.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Alps on July 13, 2017, 11:20:14 PM
The signs looked mostly the same at Exit 9 in Sturbridge...except for a big yellow sign warning about a traffic merge. It's on the westbound mainline, immediately after the Exit 9 off ramp.

I finally got to see the new versions of the Exit 10 signs in Auburn. Why New London and not Norwich? Huh?

I would have failed the question as to which has higher population.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: JJBers on July 14, 2017, 12:41:51 AM
The signs looked mostly the same at Exit 9 in Sturbridge...except for a big yellow sign warning about a traffic merge. It's on the westbound mainline, immediately after the Exit 9 off ramp.

I finally got to see the new versions of the Exit 10 signs in Auburn. Why New London and not Norwich? Huh?

I would have failed the question as to which has higher population.
Norwich, but that also may be the fact that Norwich is much larger than New London in population and land area, plus I-395 actually does run through Norwich, while it strays to the east of New London. A even better case for proximity would be Putnam, but that's only 9,000 people.
But the reason New London is used is becuase the fact that it is a major stop on I-95 and the for eastern coastline of Connecticut. Also Norwich is kinda is a tossover on I-395.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: KEVIN_224 on July 14, 2017, 09:22:24 AM
I-395 ends to the west of New London, in Waterford. Anyways, this is reminding me of the small "To (Mass Pike logo)" sign you used to see on I-95 North, just before the I-395 Exit.

Getting back to I-90/Massachusetts Turnpike...the bridge overpass street signs (blades?) are now a bit big. They also look identical to ones I saw along the Everett Turnpike (portions US Route 3) in New Hampshire on Wednesday.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman65 on July 14, 2017, 11:02:12 AM
New London is far strange to control cities being signed in the nationwide system.  You have Benson now in NC, which is only used on I-95 and I-40 cause the two routes meet there.    Even though eb on I-40 Wilmington should mainly be used from Raliegh eastward, and Fayetteville SB on I-95 from Rocky Mount southward that are much bigger places.  Then now Corning has come to fame in NYS due to I-99 and I-86 meeting there which removes Elmira from signs along NY 17 in Binghamton, NY especially along I-81. 

This new interstate junction thing is going to be the norm despite the population of the area around the interchanges.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: kefkafloyd on August 30, 2017, 09:34:18 AM
A new Big Yellow Sign went up right before the Blandford service plaza, warning all truckers about the steep grade and to test brakes. This is pretty new as I don't recall seeing it a month ago the last time I went eastbound on the turnpike.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on August 30, 2017, 09:50:01 AM
Traveling the eastern section of the Pike between I-95/Route 128 and I-495 this past weekend, not much to report except for a few more orange contractor tags placed where the new overhead signs will go. I noticed one westbound just after the merge in Weston, this will be for exit and pull-through signs eastbound at the I-95 exit, the concrete barrier in the median apparently not able to support the sign support. There is also one eastbound indicating the 2-Mile advance sign for Exit 14 I-95 will be 1/4 mile after the current bridge-mounted sign in Weston. Some of the photos taken of these and other tags are available at:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)

From perusing the MassDOT traffic cameras, the contractors completed putting up a foundation for one of the overhead signs for Exit 9 westbound near MA 49 a couple weeks ago, have been checking back frequently waiting to see when the sign supports go up. From an e-mail I got recently, apparently new signs have been placed at least westbound for Exits 7, 6, 5 and 3. The last confirmed through traffic cameras in Westfield.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on August 30, 2017, 06:47:34 PM
At least some new signs are in place for all exits on the western part of the pike, except for Exit 1 (presumably waiting for the toll plaza removal project to wrap up).  At exit 2 the WB signs are in place, though the EB ones are still the old ones.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: DrSmith on August 30, 2017, 08:35:04 PM
It seems like most of the new overhead signs are up along the western Pike that use a single post. Roadway spanning overhead structures are still the older ones. A lot of the ground mounted signs are not up yet either (except for some of the ones near I-84 and I-290/395). A lot of the regulatory/warning signs have also been replaced using new I-beam posts for everything
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on August 31, 2017, 08:24:41 AM
It seems like most of the new overhead signs are up along the western Pike that use a single post. Roadway spanning overhead structures are still the older ones. A lot of the ground mounted signs are not up yet either (except for some of the ones near I-84 and I-290/395). A lot of the regulatory/warning signs have also been replaced using new I-beam posts for everything
Personal take (& I noticed such too when I was up there last week): it appears the full-width sign bridge gantries are scheduled to be replaced later on in the project.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on September 07, 2017, 09:01:06 PM
I was on the Pike west of Lee this evening. Only new signs are the bridge signs: black street names are gone and replaced with the green MassDOT style street name/town signs.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on September 08, 2017, 06:28:30 AM
Personal take (& I noticed such too when I was up there last week): it appears the full-width sign bridge gantries are scheduled to be replaced later on in the project.

Yes, that is normally the case for larger sign and support replacement projects of this type - fabrication schedule is normally cantilevers first, then the longer full span structures.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: kefkafloyd on September 08, 2017, 03:20:17 PM
I was on the Pike west of Lee this evening. Only new signs are the bridge signs: black street names are gone and replaced with the green MassDOT style street name/town signs.

They're not quite the same, the new pike overpass signs are a completely different style than previous green bridge signs seen around the state. They're very similar to ones I've seen in New Hampshire (size of sign, style of FHWA font with mixed case). Still unclear if new signing projects will use these, as the other recently completed signing projects in the past year were still using the shorter sign style with all-caps.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on September 08, 2017, 03:32:34 PM
I was on the Pike west of Lee this evening. Only new signs are the bridge signs: black street names are gone and replaced with the green MassDOT style street name/town signs.

They're not quite the same, the new pike overpass signs are a completely different style than previous green bridge signs seen around the states. They're very similar to ones I've seen in New Hampshire (size of sign, style of FHWA font with mixed case). Still unclear if new signing projects will use these, as the other recently completed signing projects in the past year were still using the shorter sign style with all-caps.

MassDOT, at least in the western part of the state, has gone mixed-case with everything in the past couple months. I've seen a few mixed-case paddles out there, notably US 20/MA 8 south of Becket village (which shocked me quite a bit when I saw it yesterday). I wouldn't be shocked in the least bit if mixed-case everything is the new standard.

*Edit: wrote all-caps instead of mixed-case
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on September 08, 2017, 05:43:32 PM
I wouldn't be shocked in the least bit if all-caps everything is the new standard.
You have that backwards.  All-caps was the old standard.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on September 08, 2017, 05:51:25 PM
I wouldn't be shocked in the least bit if all-caps everything is the new standard.
You have that backwards.  All-caps was the old standard.

Yes, I do have that backwards. I meant mixed-case. Corrected. Thanks.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on September 15, 2017, 11:54:14 PM
Looks like there will be plenty of new signage going up along the Pike and its interchanges the next couple of weeks as part of the toll plaza demolition project, information taken from the MassDOT project Contruction Updates page:
http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/highway/HighlightedProjects/TollPlazaDemolitionProject/ConstructionUpdates.aspx (http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/highway/HighlightedProjects/TollPlazaDemolitionProject/ConstructionUpdates.aspx)

At Exit 2 (US 20), permanent signage is to go up over the nights of Sept. 18-20 as well as Sept. 25.
At Exit 9 (I-84), overhead sign structures (which Roadman said would be Mass. first APLs) go up overnight Sept. 17 + 18.
At Exit 10 (I-290/I-395), the overhead sign structures will go up overnight on Sept. 19.
At Exit 10A (MA 146), the overheads signs will go up overnight on Sept. 20.
At Exit 11A (I-495), the overhead signs will be installed during night work on Sept. 21, 24 and 25.
At Exit 14 (I-95/MA 128), overhead signage for the ramp from I-90 West to I-95 North and South will be installed overnight Sept. 20.
At Exit 20 (Allston-Brighton WB), overhead signage for ramp to Cambridge St. will be put up overnight on Sept. 20 and 21, guide signage will be put up between Sept. 17 and 20.

I hope to get out to at least some of these locations by the end of the month to get some photos.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SidS1045 on September 18, 2017, 03:35:26 PM
Looks like there will be plenty of new signage going up along the Pike and its interchanges the next couple of weeks as part of the toll plaza demolition project, information taken from the MassDOT project Contruction Updates page:
http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/highway/HighlightedProjects/TollPlazaDemolitionProject/ConstructionUpdates.aspx (http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/highway/HighlightedProjects/TollPlazaDemolitionProject/ConstructionUpdates.aspx)

At Exit 2 (US 20), permanent signage is to go up over the nights of Sept. 18-20 as well as Sept. 25.
At Exit 9 (I-84), overhead sign structures (which Roadman said would be Mass. first APLs) go up overnight Sept. 17 + 18.
At Exit 10 (I-290/I-395), the overhead sign structures will go up overnight on Sept. 19.
At Exit 10A (MA 146), the overheads signs will go up overnight on Sept. 20.
At Exit 11A (I-495), the overhead signs will be installed during night work on Sept. 21, 24 and 25.
At Exit 14 (I-95/MA 128), overhead signage for the ramp from I-90 West to I-95 North and South will be installed overnight Sept. 20.
At Exit 20 (Allston-Brighton WB), overhead signage for ramp to Cambridge St. will be put up overnight on Sept. 20 and 21, guide signage will be put up between Sept. 17 and 20.

I hope to get out to at least some of these locations by the end of the month to get some photos.

I'd almost bet some of these installs will be postponed, with Tropical Storm José on its way and due to hit on Tuesday 9/19 into Wednesday 9/20.  Putting up BGS's on overheads during high winds might be a tad difficult...and dangerous.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: 1 on September 18, 2017, 05:03:33 PM
Looks like there will be plenty of new signage going up along the Pike and its interchanges the next couple of weeks as part of the toll plaza demolition project, information taken from the MassDOT project Contruction Updates page:
http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/highway/HighlightedProjects/TollPlazaDemolitionProject/ConstructionUpdates.aspx (http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/highway/HighlightedProjects/TollPlazaDemolitionProject/ConstructionUpdates.aspx)

At Exit 2 (US 20), permanent signage is to go up over the nights of Sept. 18-20 as well as Sept. 25.
At Exit 9 (I-84), overhead sign structures (which Roadman said would be Mass. first APLs) go up overnight Sept. 17 + 18.
At Exit 10 (I-290/I-395), the overhead sign structures will go up overnight on Sept. 19.
At Exit 10A (MA 146), the overheads signs will go up overnight on Sept. 20.
At Exit 11A (I-495), the overhead signs will be installed during night work on Sept. 21, 24 and 25.
At Exit 14 (I-95/MA 128), overhead signage for the ramp from I-90 West to I-95 North and South will be installed overnight Sept. 20.
At Exit 20 (Allston-Brighton WB), overhead signage for ramp to Cambridge St. will be put up overnight on Sept. 20 and 21, guide signage will be put up between Sept. 17 and 20.

I hope to get out to at least some of these locations by the end of the month to get some photos.

I'd almost bet some of these installs will be postponed, with Tropical Storm José on its way and due to hit on Tuesday 9/19 into Wednesday 9/20.  Putting up BGS's on overheads during high winds might be a tad difficult...and dangerous.

Winds are expected to get into the 15-20 range, with gusts around 35. Slightly less in western Massachusetts.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on October 20, 2017, 11:30:43 AM
I have posted photos of more new signage on the Mass Pike from a trip over this past weekend which include this cantilever double sign installation for the I-91/US 5 exit in West Springfield westbound:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs1017x.JPG)

and one of the two new APL signs at the end of I-84 East at the former Sturbridge toll plaza:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signsapl1017.JPG)

on my I-90/Mass Pike Photo Gallery: http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)

There is now a sharp contrast between progress by the two sign contractors. Most, if not all, one post cantilever signs have been installed on the western project, while only sign post foundations have appeared for the eastern one. Also new 2/10 mile markers are now present from Mile 92 westward, at least for the westbound lanes, while nothing in the east. The actual contract progress % is unknown since both project listings on the MassDOT site have not been updated since June.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on October 20, 2017, 11:37:33 AM
One clarification.  The new APLs on I-84 (as Bob notes on his web page, the first APLs in the state) were done as part of the legacy toll plaza demo contract for Interchange 9, and not under the West Stockbridge to Auburn project.  Signing for most of the toll plaza demo contracts, which MassDOT has on an accelerated schedule, is being done by Liddell Brothers, who also has the Auburn to Boston sign project.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: kefkafloyd on October 20, 2017, 11:05:32 PM
I have posted photos of more new signage on the Mass Pike from a trip over this past weekend which include this cantilever double sign installation for the I-91/US 5 exit in West Springfield westbound:

On your comments on the US 5 1 mile sign on eastbound (whehter it was new or old), it is an old sign that's been there for-ever. It's always been notable for having mismatching green panels. It should be replaced as part of the project.

Also wondering whether the button copy signs on the US 5 ramps to/from the turnpike will be replaced as part of this project as well as the turnpike entrance signs on US 5. They are real oldies.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 20, 2017, 11:32:44 PM
Noticed one inconsistency between the APL sign at Exit 9 and the reassurance sign at Exit 4:  The APL has just "Albany" as a control city, while the sign at Exit 4 has "Albany NY" as the control city.  Is MassDOT moving away from using the 2 letter abbreviation for out of state control cities other than NYC now that the MTA has been merged?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on October 23, 2017, 11:14:46 AM
Noticed one inconsistency between the APL sign at Exit 9 and the reassurance sign at Exit 4:  The APL has just "Albany" as a control city, while the sign at Exit 4 has "Albany NY" as the control city.  Is MassDOT moving away from using the 2 letter abbreviation for out of state control cities other than NYC now that the MTA has been merged?
Good catch.  Using state abbreviation for out of state destinations is still current MassDOT practice.  Not sure why NY was omitted from these APLs, but I'll check with my District contacts.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on October 23, 2017, 10:22:57 PM
One clarification.  The new APLs on I-84 (as Bob notes on his web page, the first APLs in the state) were done as part of the legacy toll plaza demo contract for Interchange 9, and not under the West Stockbridge to Auburn project.  Signing for most of the toll plaza demo contracts, which MassDOT has on an accelerated schedule, is being done by Liddell Brothers, who also has the Auburn to Boston sign project.
Here are new overheads in Auburn beyond the former toll plaza, assuming also placed under the toll demo contract:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90toll1017b.JPG)

Other AET project related images from a week ago are now up on the I-90/Mass Pike Gallery:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html#aet (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html#aet)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on October 24, 2017, 09:26:16 AM
Here are new overheads in Auburn beyond the former toll plaza, assuming also placed under the toll demo contract:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90toll1017b.JPG)
Given that the location of that overhead is prior to the ramp for MA 12 South (to US 20 West); there appears to be a (permanent) sign missing for that movement.  What gives?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on October 27, 2017, 12:06:50 AM
Have they been taking out the town line signs with the current sign project? I only saw 1 tonight when I drove the Pike WB west of Springfield, but it may have been due to how dark it was. Ironically, that one I saw was for West Stockbridge, which got a new sign with the toll booth removal after not having one for 10+ years.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on October 27, 2017, 10:44:20 AM
Have they been taking out the town line signs with the current sign project? I only saw 1 tonight when I drove the Pike WB west of Springfield, but it may have been due to how dark it was. Ironically, that one I saw was for West Stockbridge, which got a new sign with the toll booth removal after not having one for 10+ years.
Town line signs are being replaced under the current sign projects, not the toll plaza demo work.  Existing median signs being changed to new right side signs, but old signs should not be removed until new signs in place - this is MassDOT SOP.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on October 27, 2017, 11:41:36 AM
Have they been taking out the town line signs with the current sign project? I only saw 1 tonight when I drove the Pike WB west of Springfield, but it may have been due to how dark it was. Ironically, that one I saw was for West Stockbridge, which got a new sign with the toll booth removal after not having one for 10+ years.
Town line signs are being replaced under the current sign projects, not the toll plaza demo work.  Existing median signs being changed to new right side signs, but old signs should not be removed until new signs in place - this is MassDOT SOP.

That's what I figured,  but there are definitely a few town lines missing any type of sign. The new Stockbridge/W Stockbridge sign is the old Pike standard in the median.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on October 29, 2017, 08:18:04 PM
Drove the 'pike between Sturbridge and Auburn on Saturday.  The transition between I-84 and I-90 where the toll plaza was is nice and looked largely completed.  As stated above, there are APLs, 1 and 1/2 mile out, but the sign right at the split between I-90 East and West has not yet been replaced.  It still has the "NH-Maine/Boston" control points for I-90 East.  I'm assuming this will get replaced as part of the West Stockbridge to Auburn project, vs part of the toll demolition project.  I noticed all new advance signage for Exit 10 in the eastbound direction EXCEPT at Exit 10 itself.  In the westbound direction, no new guide signs for Exit 9.  All existing signs are in their original configuration, mix of ground and overhead.  It was dark so I didn't notice foundations, but saw no supporting structures for any new BGSs in the westbound direction between Exits 10 & 9. 

It was dark for most of the trip, so I only lensed a couple of the Exit 10 signs, all of which are similar to those previously posted here, but they're over on my FLICKR page anyway.  The sun hadn't come up yet for me to get the I-84 APLs. 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on October 30, 2017, 11:04:00 AM
and one of the two new APL signs at the end of I-84 East at the former Sturbridge toll plaza:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signsapl1017.JPG)
Personally, I'm surprised that there aren't Exit (4)A-B tabs placed on that APL.  Maybe such will come later should MassDOT adopt mile-marker-based interchange numbering; such would become Exits 7A-B.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 30, 2017, 03:01:51 PM
and one of the two new APL signs at the end of I-84 East at the former Sturbridge toll plaza:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signsapl1017.JPG)
Personally, I'm surprised that there aren't Exit (4)A-B tabs placed on that APL.  Maybe such will come later should MassDOT adopt mile-marker-based interchange numbering; such would become Exits 7A-B.

Different states have different standards about numbering the end of freeway interchanges, and some even have different standards for different highways, and some even have different standards for different ends of the same highway (I-291 in CT has exit numbers at its western terminus for I-91/CT 218, but no numbers for I-84/I-384).   I would agree that the numbers should be added; the only time I wouldn't number one of them is when the mainline of the freeway clearly joins in to one side of the connecting freeway, which is the case with I-91's southern end joining I-95 South (the I-95 North ramp should get a number), I-384 West joining I-84 West (I-84 East/I-291 West should be Exit 1A and Spencer St westbound becomes 1B), and I-691 West joining I-84 West (when renumbered, I-84 East should be Exit 1, and westbound no #).  Here, I-84 doesn't mainline into the Mass Pike, so Exit numbers would be appropriate.  More accurately under mileage based, they'd be 8 A-B because they're closer to 8 miles from the CT border; 7 A-B would be for US 20.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on October 30, 2017, 03:11:55 PM
Here, I-84 doesn't mainline into the Mass Pike, so Exit numbers would be appropriate.  More accurately under mileage based, they'd be 8 A-B because they're closer to 8 miles from the CT border; 7 A-B would be for US 20.
I-84 in MA has no Mile Marker 8 (Wiki lists it as only 7.7 miles long) & the US 20 interchange is spread out between MM 6.2 & 7; so 6 A-B would be more appropriate for US 20 & 7 A-B would be 84's terminus with I-90.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on October 30, 2017, 04:47:47 PM
If you're gonna number one ramp, while the other transitions right onto the other road (such as 91SB->95SB in CT), you might as well just number the both, for consistency. 

When signs on I-93 in Mass. were replaced, exit numbers were adjusted on the southern end of I-93 at I-95(128).  In the past, just the ramp from I-93 SB to I-95 SB was numbered Exit 1.  Now both the exit and the "thru route" to I-95/128 NB got numbers (Exits 1A and 1B for I-95 NB and SB). 

With the I-84 case, perhaps they're just waiting to see what's going to happen with mile-based exits before they go ahead and add a new exit number.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Alps on October 30, 2017, 07:35:10 PM
If you're gonna number one ramp, while the other transitions right onto the other road (such as 91SB->95SB in CT), you might as well just number the both, for consistency. 

When signs on I-93 in Mass. were replaced, exit numbers were adjusted on the southern end of I-93 at I-95(128).  In the past, just the ramp from I-93 SB to I-95 SB was numbered Exit 1.  Now both the exit and the "thru route" to I-95/128 NB got numbers (Exits 1A and 1B for I-95 NB and SB). 

With the I-84 case, perhaps they're just waiting to see what's going to happen with mile-based exits before they go ahead and add a new exit number.
See, I disagree on this philosophy. To me, there's no reason to number exits at the terminus of a highway as long as the split is roughly equal. If not, number the one that's less equal. I've seen things as dumb as a 3-lane through highway have an exit number because the route I'm on ends - this is not an exit! You're exiting nothing!
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on October 31, 2017, 02:04:16 AM
If you're gonna number one ramp, while the other transitions right onto the other road (such as 91SB->95SB in CT), you might as well just number the both, for consistency. 

When signs on I-93 in Mass. were replaced, exit numbers were adjusted on the southern end of I-93 at I-95(128).  In the past, just the ramp from I-93 SB to I-95 SB was numbered Exit 1.  Now both the exit and the "thru route" to I-95/128 NB got numbers (Exits 1A and 1B for I-95 NB and SB). 

With the I-84 case, perhaps they're just waiting to see what's going to happen with mile-based exits before they go ahead and add a new exit number.
See, I disagree on this philosophy. To me, there's no reason to number exits at the terminus of a highway as long as the split is roughly equal. If not, number the one that's less equal. I've seen things as dumb as a 3-lane through highway have an exit number because the route I'm on ends - this is not an exit! You're exiting nothing!

That's exactly what Exit 1B above, and the reverse, Exit 12 on I-95 SB, are: 3 lane mainline connections where I-95 exits to the southwest.  But I-86 West to I-390 north in Avoca, NY is similar, but does not have a number (yet I-86 East to I-390 North is numbered.)

Question is what do you do when a duplex of equal interstates splits up?  That's also a case-by-case basis.  For example, the upcoming I-81/I-86 duplex should have I-81 Exit numbers for where I-86 joins/leaves I-81.  The I-20/I-59 splits both use I-59 exit numbers for I-20 joining/leaving the duplex, and the I-65/I-70 duplex in Indy has I-65 exit numbers for where I-70 joins/leaves.  For state turnpikes, tie goes to the interstate that remains on the mainline the longest.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Alps on October 31, 2017, 05:53:52 PM
You do use exit numbers if your route continues. I'm only referring to a route that ends.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on November 06, 2017, 11:15:38 PM
I received an e-mail with a question about this destination mileage sign on I-90 West after the Palmer exit (Exit 8) which I thought I'd seek answers to here:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs1017d.JPG)

The e-mailer said the mileage to Ludlow has changed from 7 on the previous sign to 8. Checking out GSV to confirm, I also noticed the distance to Springfield had also changed, it previously read as 10 miles. From my list of proposed milepost exit numbers it appears the distance to Springfield was changed to that of the mileage to the I-291 exit (12 miles from Exit 8 at mile 63 to I-291 at mile 51) and the mileage of I-291 to its end at I-91 (5 miles). In the past Mass Pike mileages for destinations along the Pike have been based simply on the distance to the destination's exit. With the Pike now under the control of MassDOT, has there been a change to how distance numbers are calculated? What would account for the change in the Ludlow number, a different rounding method?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on November 07, 2017, 02:21:04 AM
I received an e-mail with a question about this destination mileage sign on I-90 West after the Palmer exit (Exit 8) which I thought I'd seek answers to here:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs1017d.JPG)

The e-mailer said the mileage to Ludlow has changed from 7 on the previous sign to 8. Checking out GSV to confirm, I also noticed the distance to Springfield had also changed, it previously read as 10 miles. From my list of proposed milepost exit numbers it appears the distance to Springfield was changed to that of the mileage to the I-291 exit (12 miles from Exit 8 at mile 63 to I-291 at mile 51) and the mileage of I-291 to its end at I-91 (5 miles). In the past Mass Pike mileages for destinations along the Pike have been based simply on the distance to the destination's exit. With the Pike now under the control of MassDOT, has there been a change to how distance numbers are calculated? What would account for the change in the Ludlow number, a different rounding method?

Probably that the center of Ludlow is about a mile south of the Pike on MA 21.  Seems they're using distances to the city/town center. So unless the exit empties directly into the town center, mileages will most likely be adjusted.  Worcester will have to be by about 6 miles eastbound (using I-290), and about 4 miles westbound (using MA 146)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on November 07, 2017, 05:23:36 PM
I received an e-mail with a question about this destination mileage sign on I-90 West after the Palmer exit (Exit 8) which I thought I'd seek answers to here:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs1017d.JPG)

The e-mailer said the mileage to Ludlow has changed from 7 on the previous sign to 8. Checking out GSV to confirm, I also noticed the distance to Springfield had also changed, it previously read as 10 miles. From my list of proposed milepost exit numbers it appears the distance to Springfield was changed to that of the mileage to the I-291 exit (12 miles from Exit 8 at mile 63 to I-291 at mile 51) and the mileage of I-291 to its end at I-91 (5 miles). In the past Mass Pike mileages for destinations along the Pike have been based simply on the distance to the destination's exit. With the Pike now under the control of MassDOT, has there been a change to how distance numbers are calculated? What would account for the change in the Ludlow number, a different rounding method?

Probably that the center of Ludlow is about a mile south of the Pike on MA 21.  Seems they're using distances to the city/town center. So unless the exit empties directly into the town center, mileages will most likely be adjusted.  Worcester will have to be by about 6 miles eastbound (using I-290), and about 4 miles westbound (using MA 146)

That is exactly correct.  Mass. Turnpike Authority policy for distance signs was to provide the distance to the interchange, and not the city/town center.  So, a sign indicating the distance to Palmer would show the distance to Exit 8, and not the town center.

Current MassDOT policy is to measure distances either to the city/town center, or to the city boundary for larger cities such as Springfield (as evidenced on the newer travel time signs). Hence the longer distances on the new Pike signs.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on November 07, 2017, 07:25:23 PM
The 95 to Albany would put you right at about the I-90/I-787 junction.  Seeing that it was originally 7 miles to the Ludlow exit (at MP 55), it's 62 miles to the NY border, then 18 miles west on the Berkshire Spur to B1 (Free 90).  Rounding off, the remaining distance on Free 90 would put you right about at that junction just across the Hudson and the city line.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: DrSmith on November 09, 2017, 08:16:12 PM
The some of new overhead signs are up eastbound for Rt 146 and Rt 122.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on November 10, 2017, 07:58:46 AM
The some of new overhead signs are up eastbound for Rt 146 and Rt 122.
I'll get a chance to see those during the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday/weekend.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on November 10, 2017, 11:13:29 AM
The some of new overhead signs are up eastbound for Rt 146 and Rt 122.
I'll get a chance to see those during the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday/weekend.
I may try to get a look at them the weekend before.
Looks like there will be a delay in getting the remaining signage up for Auburn and west. The contract completion date for that project has been moved from Fall 2017 to Spring 2018.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on November 10, 2017, 11:18:13 AM
The some of new overhead signs are up eastbound for Rt 146 and Rt 122.
I'll get a chance to see those during the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday/weekend.
I may try to get a look at them the weekend before.
Looks like there will be a delay in getting the remaining signage up for Auburn and west. The contract completion date for that project has been moved from Fall 2017 to Spring 2018.

Is the remaining signage west of Springfield part of that delay? Saw a ton of old and missing signs when driving WB yesterday. The Route 23 bridge still has its old street name signage.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on November 10, 2017, 11:53:44 AM
Probably the delay is the advance signage for Exit 1, which was held up while the toll plaza removal contract was wrapping up. 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on November 11, 2017, 06:33:57 PM
I received an e-mail with a question about this destination mileage sign on I-90 West after the Palmer exit (Exit 8) which I thought I'd seek answers to here:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs1017d.JPG)

The e-mailer said the mileage to Ludlow has changed from 7 on the previous sign to 8. Checking out GSV to confirm, I also noticed the distance to Springfield had also changed, it previously read as 10 miles. From my list of proposed milepost exit numbers it appears the distance to Springfield was changed to that of the mileage to the I-291 exit (12 miles from Exit 8 at mile 63 to I-291 at mile 51) and the mileage of I-291 to its end at I-91 (5 miles). In the past Mass Pike mileages for destinations along the Pike have been based simply on the distance to the destination's exit. With the Pike now under the control of MassDOT, has there been a change to how distance numbers are calculated? What would account for the change in the Ludlow number, a different rounding method?

Probably that the center of Ludlow is about a mile south of the Pike on MA 21.  Seems they're using distances to the city/town center. So unless the exit empties directly into the town center, mileages will most likely be adjusted.  Worcester will have to be by about 6 miles eastbound (using I-290), and about 4 miles westbound (using MA 146)

That is exactly correct.  Mass. Turnpike Authority policy for distance signs was to provide the distance to the interchange, and not the city/town center.  So, a sign indicating the distance to Palmer would show the distance to Exit 8, and not the town center.

Current MassDOT policy is to measure distances either to the city/town center, or to the city boundary for larger cities such as Springfield (as evidenced on the newer travel time signs). Hence the longer distances on the new Pike signs.
Went back through the I-90 sign plans to see what differences in mileages this change makes. It, naturally, depends on how close I-90 gets to the destination. The distances to Albany and Boston only increase by 1 mile, while the distances to Springfield increase 6 or 7 miles (heading west, 2-3 miles heading east) and to Worcester 7 or 8 miles. There are some interesting changes regarding interstates, which you would think the miles wouldn't change, however westbound after Exit 10 the distance to I-84 is 12 miles, but the older sign had 10. Heading east after the Westfield exit the new sign says it is 6 miles to I-91 while the old sign said 4 (the distance based on mileposts is 5). The new signs consistently have 3 destinations while the old signs varied between 2 and 3.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on November 11, 2017, 10:40:01 PM
The distance to I-91 likely changed because the actual entrance to I-91 from Exit 4 is at the end of a C/D roadway, which is approximately one mile from the exit ramps off the Turnpike.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on November 19, 2017, 11:06:23 AM
I took a road trip to view the new signage placed on the Mass Pike between the I-495 and I-290/I-395 exits yesterday. Progress to report. New signage has been put up for Exits 10A and 11 in both directions. Here's the 1/2 mile advance for the MA 146/US 20 exit:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs1117o.JPG)

Progress can also be reported to the east as to the placement of many new sign support foundations. A full set of photos and a description of the progress of the contract are on my I-90 in Mass. Photo Gallery:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on November 27, 2017, 10:28:19 AM
Observation from this past Thanksgiving weekend but no photos; the faded I-95 shields on the button-copy signage beyond the now-gone interchange toll plaza, have since been replaced.

Shown in its better days circa 2011; these shields were faded beyond recognition circa 2 months ago. (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3409482,-71.2664733,3a,75y,74.37h,88.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sS0RpIeKHqub0itg-AU-qPg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)  Replacements were match-in-kind

Also from 2011; these shields were practically all-white as of 2 months ago (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3411534,-71.2645017,3a,75y,58.13h,94.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swF38s79fVMnmWur_sn208g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)Replacements feature slightly smaller (& narrower stroked) numerals. 

I guess these BGS' aren't being destined to be completely replaced as of yet.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on January 04, 2018, 12:22:59 PM
New overheads have gone up over the past month between MA 9 and I-495 exits. Here's the 1/2 mile advance for I-495 on I-90 West with the new control cities (and next exit distance tab):
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signsbl118c.png)

This, and other new sign photos sent to me from Freeway Jim Facebook group member Benjamin Long are on my I-90 in Mass. Gallery page:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: 1 on January 04, 2018, 12:28:22 PM
New overheads have gone up over the past month between MA 9 and I-495 exits. Here's the 1/2 mile advance for I-495 on I-90 West with the new control cities (and next exit distance tab):
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signsbl118c.png)

This, and other new sign photos sent to me from Freeway Jim Facebook group member Benjamin Long are on my I-90 in Mass. Gallery page:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)

Skipping over Lowell for a city ⅕ the size?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on January 04, 2018, 01:16:33 PM
New overheads have gone up over the past month between MA 9 and I-495 exits. Here's the 1/2 mile advance for I-495 on I-90 West with the new control cities (and next exit distance tab):
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signsbl118c.png)

This, and other new sign photos sent to me from Freeway Jim Facebook group member Benjamin Long are on my I-90 in Mass. Gallery page:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)

Skipping over Lowell for a city ⅕ the size?
Past & previous signage at this interchange never listed Lowell for the off-ramp signage.  It originally listed Marlborough as a northbound 495 control city, then later NH-Maine

However, it is worth noting that at the eastbound gore has 2 BGS' on a cantilevered gantry that list two destinations for each direction of I-495: Lowell/Portsmouth, NH for 495 North & Taunton/cape Cod for I-495 South.  A photo of such is shown in the above-link (scroll down to see it).
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: mrsman on January 09, 2018, 11:10:36 AM
I like the new signs especially the tabs showing distance to the next exit.  This should be the model for other roads with sparse exits like NJTP.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on January 09, 2018, 12:02:39 PM
I like the new signs especially the tabs showing distance to the next exit.  This should be the model for other roads with sparse exits like NJTP.
Previous THRU TRAFFIC pull-through signage along the NJTP listed the distance to the next exit as well.

From this site:
(https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/new_jersey095/i-095_nb_exit_012_08.jpg)

Even the PA Turnpike does such.

Again, from this site:
(https://www.aaroads.com/northeast/pennsylvania075/i-076_wb_exit_312_01.jpg)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: RobbieL2415 on January 13, 2018, 09:48:10 PM
New overheads have gone up over the past month between MA 9 and I-495 exits. Here's the 1/2 mile advance for I-495 on I-90 West with the new control cities (and next exit distance tab):
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signsbl118c.png)

This, and other new sign photos sent to me from Freeway Jim Facebook group member Benjamin Long are on my I-90 in Mass. Gallery page:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Cape Cod no longer a control destination?  Did they install ground-mounted secondary destination signs between the half-mile signs?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on January 15, 2018, 09:07:37 AM
Cape Cod no longer a control destination?  Did they install ground-mounted secondary destination signs between the half-mile signs?
Not sure of the exact location, but there is now a supplemental sign listing Cape Cod for this exit mounted for at least the eastbound direction.  I'm assuming that one for the westbound direction will follow.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: 1 on January 15, 2018, 09:23:20 AM
Cape Cod no longer a control destination?  Did they install ground-mounted secondary destination signs between the half-mile signs?
Not sure of the exact location, but there is now a supplemental sign listing Cape Cod for this exit mounted for at least the eastbound direction.  I'm assuming that one for the westbound direction will follow.

It makes much more sense eastbound than westbound.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on January 15, 2018, 03:30:30 PM
Cape Cod no longer a control destination?  Did they install ground-mounted secondary destination signs between the half-mile signs?
Not sure of the exact location, but there is now a supplemental sign listing Cape Cod for this exit mounted for at least the eastbound direction.  I'm assuming that one for the westbound direction will follow.

It makes much more sense eastbound than westbound.
Drove from Weston to Millbury and back today. There are no new supplemental signs for I-495 westbound. It doesn't appear the contractor has put up most of the auxiliary, destination mileage or gore signs for the eastern project as of yet, as opposed to the western project contractor which put up most of the new ground-level signage before tackling the overheads. Here's a photo of the new 1/2 mile advance sign for I-495 headed east:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs118n.JPG)

The rest of the photos are on my I-90 in Mass. Photo Gallery:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: kefkafloyd on January 16, 2018, 09:30:37 AM
Just a correction, the town for exit 3 is Westfield, not Westford.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: DrSmith on March 20, 2018, 11:09:37 PM
Apparently, they decided to spell Westborough as Westboro on the new Pike signs (town line and service plaza sign)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Alps on March 20, 2018, 11:16:05 PM
Apparently, they decided to spell Westborough as Westboro on the new Pike signs (town line and service plaza sign)
In anticipation of the church moving in.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: spooky on March 21, 2018, 07:30:02 AM
Apparently, they decided to spell Westborough as Westboro on the new Pike signs (town line and service plaza sign)

I believe that MassDOT as a rule shortens the -ough towns to -o on highway signage.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SectorZ on March 21, 2018, 08:58:54 AM
Apparently, they decided to spell Westborough as Westboro on the new Pike signs (town line and service plaza sign)
In anticipation of the church moving in.

Oh my God that reminds me of a story...

I was working in Worcester in the mid-2000's, and worked with this kid (that lived in Spencer at the time) that was (rightfully) railing against that church, and was talking about driving to Westboro to picket it and confront the heads of it. Kid literally thought it was down the street in Westboro MA. I broke his poor heart when I told him they were about 1500 miles away in Kansas.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on March 21, 2018, 09:49:09 AM
Apparently, they decided to spell Westborough as Westboro on the new Pike signs (town line and service plaza sign)

I believe that MassDOT as a rule shortens the -ough towns to -o on highway signage.
That is correct.  The rule goes back to the late MassDPW days.  The existing Turnpike signs not yet replaced are among the last holdouts for full spelling.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: AMLNet49 on March 21, 2018, 03:20:43 PM
Apparently, they decided to spell Westborough as Westboro on the new Pike signs (town line and service plaza sign)

I believe that MassDOT as a rule shortens the -ough towns to -o on highway signage.
That is correct.  The rule goes back to the late MassDPW days.  The existing Turnpike signs not yet replaced are among the last holdouts for full spelling.
And those weren’t even part of the MassDPW rules right? Because before 2009 the Mass Pike had its own unique signing standards? Did MTA also change their standards when MassDPW did or was -ough the MTA standard all the way thru 2008?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on March 21, 2018, 06:48:46 PM
Apparently, they decided to spell Westborough as Westboro on the new Pike signs (town line and service plaza sign)
I believe that MassDOT as a rule shortens the -ough towns to -o on highway signage.
That is correct.  The rule goes back to the late MassDPW days.  The existing Turnpike signs not yet replaced are among the last holdouts for full spelling.
And those weren’t even part of the MassDPW rules right? Because before 2009 the Mass Pike had its own unique signing standards? Did MTA also change their standards when MassDPW did or was -ough the MTA standard all the way thru 2008?
Full spelling of the 'ough' towns was MTA standard up until the very end.  Also note that, with the exception of "spot" replacements, the last major BGS replacement/upgrade along the Turnpike prior to the current work was in the 1990s.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on March 28, 2018, 09:33:34 PM
Apparently, they decided to spell Westborough as Westboro on the new Pike signs (town line and service plaza sign)
I believe that MassDOT as a rule shortens the -ough towns to -o on highway signage.
That is correct.  The rule goes back to the late MassDPW days.  The existing Turnpike signs not yet replaced are among the last holdouts for full spelling.
And those weren’t even part of the MassDPW rules right? Because before 2009 the Mass Pike had its own unique signing standards? Did MTA also change their standards when MassDPW did or was -ough the MTA standard all the way thru 2008?
Full spelling of the 'ough' towns was MTA standard up until the very end.  Also note that, with the exception of "spot" replacements, the last major BGS replacement/upgrade along the Turnpike prior to the current work was in the 1990s.
Here's a photo westbound contrasting the new town spelling policy on the right with the old on the left:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs318b.JPG)

Here's the new Westboro Service Plaza sign without the -ugh:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs318a.JPG)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on April 24, 2018, 11:50:51 AM
I drove the Mass Pike westbound from Weston to the NY border last Friday. With the exception of maybe a few more town/city border signs, nothing new to report for the eastern contract since I last drove out to Sturbridge last month. What's more interesting is what has happened, or more accurately, not happened on the western contract from Exit 10 on. There has been no additional sign placements since I traveled through last July. No new signs at Exit 9, no new overhead gantries at Exits 6 and 5, no new signs for Exit 1 at all (except placed at the exit ramp under the toll plaza removal contract). Is there something going on with the contractor, Road Safe Systems? I can understand not working in the winter months, but more than 9 months without any additional work? Did notice that the mile markers put up in the vicinity of the Westfield River bridge, that were on the right instead of the left as everywhere else, due to the concrete center median, had been removed. Hopefully, work will be at least completed on the eastern section by the summer.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on April 24, 2018, 12:43:04 PM
So still no town line signs west of Springfield? Jeesh. I will admit, I was surprised to see no additional replacements when I went through EB on the 14th.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on April 26, 2018, 10:16:23 PM
I drove the Mass Pike westbound from Weston to the NY border last Friday. With the exception of maybe a few more town/city border signs, nothing new to report for the eastern contract since I last drove out to Sturbridge last month. What's more interesting is what has happened, or more accurately, not happened on the western contract from Exit 10 on. There has been no additional sign placements since I traveled through last July. No new signs at Exit 9, no new overhead gantries at Exits 6 and 5, no new signs for Exit 1 at all (except placed at the exit ramp under the toll plaza removal contract). Is there something going on with the contractor, Road Safe Systems? I can understand not working in the winter months, but more than 9 months without any additional work? Did notice that the mile markers put up in the vicinity of the Westfield River bridge, that were on the right instead of the left as everywhere else, due to the concrete center median, had been removed. Hopefully, work will be at least completed on the eastern section by the summer.
I did get photos of signs put up for the US 20 exit in Lee last fall. Here's the one-mile advance:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs418d.JPG)

Other new sign captures, if not new signs, are on the I-90/Mass Pike Photo Gallery:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)

Seems to be differences between the 2 contractors on the placement order of ground-mounted signs. For the west contract, all the bridge blade signs have been replaced, the enhanced mileposts put up (except for the area mentioned above), but no town/city line signs. In the east, all the town/city line signs are up, but no new bridge blades or mileposts.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on June 03, 2018, 10:57:47 AM
Some progress to report. New overheads have gone up for the MA 30/Natick exit on the Pike.
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs618d.JPG)

Also new foundations have been placed for the 2-Mile and ramp overheads for the I-95/128 West exit eastbound, but not, as it appears for the other signs. The mile markers and post-interchange distance signs have also not yet been replaced between Worcester and Boston. The rest of the new sign photos are in the Gallery:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on June 04, 2018, 07:31:38 AM
Is it me, or has this (at least the western) project been going on for way too long?  I drove the 'pike westbound between Exits 9 & 4 yesterday afternoon, and didn't expect to see this:

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1747/41822353844_b974f6a542.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/26HGuJh)DSC00192 (https://flic.kr/p/26HGuJh) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr

or this:
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1742/40736751450_54bd7501a8.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/254LuXC)DSC00209 (https://flic.kr/p/254LuXC) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr

or this:
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1722/41643273795_e1801c3693.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/26rSEte)DSC00219 (https://flic.kr/p/26rSEte) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr

In fact, all overheads that existed before the re-signing project began are still up between Exits 4 and 9 (as far as I could see, not including Exit 4-WB).  And there's still a fair amount of regulatory signage still to be replaced.  I did see a staging yard in the Springfield area, but it looked like it was holding mostly old signage.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on June 04, 2018, 12:34:29 PM
Is it me, or has this (at least the western) project been going on for way too long?  I drove the 'pike westbound between Exits 9 & 4 yesterday afternoon, and didn't expect to see this:

(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1747/41822353844_b974f6a542.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/26HGuJh)DSC00192 (https://flic.kr/p/26HGuJh) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr

or this:
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1742/40736751450_54bd7501a8.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/254LuXC)DSC00209 (https://flic.kr/p/254LuXC) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr

or this:
(https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1722/41643273795_e1801c3693.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/26rSEte)DSC00219 (https://flic.kr/p/26rSEte) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr

In fact, all overheads that existed before the re-signing project began are still up between Exits 4 and 9 (as far as I could see, not including Exit 4-WB).  And there's still a fair amount of regulatory signage still to be replaced.  I did see a staging yard in the Springfield area, but it looked like it was holding mostly old signage.
Its not you. The project was to wrap up last fall. In December the project listing was changed to finishing this spring. Based on your, and my observations traveling the length of the Pike in April, and reported above, no new work has been done, at least with overhead signs, by the western project contractor since last summer. Is the contractor, Road Safe Systems, having financial problems? It would seem not, since they've bid on, and won, other contracts this year. I know placing the bigger overhead signs is more complicated than the cantilever types, but needing nearly a year (or more) of preparation before putting them up seems a little too long a time.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on June 04, 2018, 04:11:27 PM
The remaining guide signs to be put up within the section I traveled were the final signs of Exits 6 (E & WB) and Exit 9 (EB), which were pre-existing overhead signs/gantries.  I believe the final sign for Exit 4 (EB) has also not yet been replaced (tough to see from I-91 SB).  It's gotta be an issue with the foundations for the new signs supporting more than one sign, whether they be a traditional over-the-roadway support or what they did for Exit 4-WB with a singe-sided support.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on June 04, 2018, 06:45:35 PM
The EB sign at exit 4 has not been changed, you're correct.

There has been some activity in the last couple weeks.  New supplementary BGSs have been put up near Exit 4, and many new town line signs have recently gone in in the Berkshires between Exits 2 and 3. 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on June 11, 2018, 11:00:28 PM
The EB sign at exit 4 has not been changed, you're correct.

There has been some activity in the last couple weeks.  New supplementary BGSs have been put up near Exit 4, and many new town line signs have recently gone in in the Berkshires between Exits 2 and 3. 
The MassDOT project listing now has the completion date for the eastern project as Fall 2018, changed from Spring 2018. The western project still has a Spring 2018 completion date, which is outdated since it is now Summer (which covers June-August), hopefully this means there will some effort to complete the work west of Auburn before the fall.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: KEVIN_224 on June 13, 2018, 09:26:14 PM
Was this already up? We were coming up to the former toll plaza from I-91 North at the West Springfield/Holyoke town line.

(https://i.imgur.com/BquUYVr.jpg)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on June 13, 2018, 10:18:08 PM
Yup... pretty sure those went up when I-91 signs were replaced from West Springfield up to the VT border.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: DrSmith on June 13, 2018, 11:59:53 PM
That was from a separate project that improved the connection between Routes 91 and 5 and the Pike that formally made it marked as two lanes. It is probably a couple years old now
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on June 21, 2018, 10:56:49 PM
The contractor has put up 2 of the 4 sign replacements for the I-95/MA Route 128 exit on the Mass Pike East in Weston. Here's the new 2-mile advance diagrammatic sign with new control cities (and no Route 128 shield):
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs618l.JPG)

The other advance signs still await foundations. The next signs put up were at the exit itself:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs618m.JPG)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on August 26, 2018, 10:42:12 PM
Sign replacement is proceeding along the eastern half of the Mass Pike, if not the west. New signs are up eastbound for the Newton/Watertown exit, and advance signs are up westbound for Newton/Watertown and I-95/MA 128 along with a ramp sign for MA 16. There are also new signs along the ramps at the Weston interchange. The most curious sign is below, a 1/2 mile advance with no distance listing and an exit only arrow not pointing to the exit only lane, could this be the ramp sign put in the wrong place?:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs818h.JPG)

The rest of the new sign images can be found on my I-90/Mass Pike Photo Gallery:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Alps on August 27, 2018, 12:08:37 AM
Sign replacement is proceeding along the eastern half of the Mass Pike, if not the west. New signs are up eastbound for the Newton/Watertown exit, and advance signs are up westbound for Newton/Watertown and I-95/MA 128 along with a ramp sign for MA 16. There are also new signs along the ramps at the Weston interchange. The most curious sign is below, a 1/2 mile advance with no distance listing and an exit only arrow not pointing to the exit only lane:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs818h.JPG)

The rest of the new sign images can be found on my I-90/Mass Pike Photo Gallery:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Clearly ready for mile based exit numbers, and clearly misinstalled.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on August 27, 2018, 04:37:39 PM
The gantry in that sign above looks like the older style cantilever, vs the present 4-chord cantilever standard.  Is it in fact new, or did they just tack a new sign on the old support?  That could be why its out of alignment with the lanes.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Alps on August 27, 2018, 06:55:21 PM
The gantry in that sign above looks like the older style cantilever, vs the present 4-chord cantilever standard.  Is it in fact new, or did they just tack a new sign on the old support?  That could be why its out of alignment with the lanes.
Reusing the gantry is fine as long as they mount the sign correctly. 12' to the right would reduce the wind load through torsion on the pole, so it could be done right now.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on August 27, 2018, 11:38:27 PM
The gantry in that sign above looks like the older style cantilever, vs the present 4-chord cantilever standard.  Is it in fact new, or did they just tack a new sign on the old support?  That could be why its out of alignment with the lanes.
Reusing the gantry is fine as long as they mount the sign correctly. 12' to the right would reduce the wind load through torsion on the pole, so it could be done right now.
From looking at the sign plans, the installed sign is is what was planned as the 1/2 mile advance sign (except for the mileage based exit number). The sign though is identical to the plan for the overhead exit sign at the ramp, including the down arrow:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signplanexit17halfmile.jpg)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on August 28, 2018, 10:52:37 AM
The gantry in that sign above looks like the older style cantilever, vs the present 4-chord cantilever standard.  Is it in fact new, or did they just tack a new sign on the old support?  That could be why its out of alignment with the lanes.
The cantilever support is new.  The style is commonly referred to as an 'F' type arm.  'F' type is suitable for arm length up to 30 feet.  The four chord truss is normally used for arms over 30 feet, although some fabricators use four chord trusses for all cantilevers regardless of arm length.

For clarification, MassDOT has begun making the distinction between the arm lengths for 'F' type and 4 chord truss arms in the project plans and specifications in recent sign projects, although only one of these projects (I-395/I-290 Auburn to Shrewsbury) has been advertised for bids.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: mass_citizen on September 06, 2018, 01:52:52 AM
The gantry in that sign above looks like the older style cantilever, vs the present 4-chord cantilever standard.  Is it in fact new, or did they just tack a new sign on the old support?  That could be why its out of alignment with the lanes.
Reusing the gantry is fine as long as they mount the sign correctly. 12' to the right would reduce the wind load through torsion on the pole, so it could be done right now.
From looking at the sign plans, the installed sign is is what was planned as the 1/2 mile advance sign (except for the mileage based exit number). The sign though is identical to the plan for the overhead exit sign at the ramp, including the down arrow:


Looking at the plan cross sections, it appears this was a design error as opposed to a contractor error. For some reason the plans show the arrow over the second lane.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: AMLNet49 on September 06, 2018, 09:32:12 AM
The gantry in that sign above looks like the older style cantilever, vs the present 4-chord cantilever standard.  Is it in fact new, or did they just tack a new sign on the old support?  That could be why its out of alignment with the lanes.
Reusing the gantry is fine as long as they mount the sign correctly. 12' to the right would reduce the wind load through torsion on the pole, so it could be done right now.
From looking at the sign plans, the installed sign is is what was planned as the 1/2 mile advance sign (except for the mileage based exit number). The sign though is identical to the plan for the overhead exit sign at the ramp, including the down arrow:


Looking at the plan cross sections, it appears this was a design error as opposed to a contractor error. For some reason the plans show the arrow over the second lane.

It could be dangerous and should be fixed, they just need to move it a few feet to the right. It should probably say 1/2 mile as well but placing it over the correct lane is more important
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on September 06, 2018, 11:00:26 AM
The gantry in that sign above looks like the older style cantilever, vs the present 4-chord cantilever standard.  Is it in fact new, or did they just tack a new sign on the old support?  That could be why its out of alignment with the lanes.
Reusing the gantry is fine as long as they mount the sign correctly. 12' to the right would reduce the wind load through torsion on the pole, so it could be done right now.
From looking at the sign plans, the installed sign is is what was planned as the 1/2 mile advance sign (except for the mileage based exit number). The sign though is identical to the plan for the overhead exit sign at the ramp, including the down arrow:


Looking at the plan cross sections, it appears this was a design error as opposed to a contractor error. For some reason the plans show the arrow over the second lane.

It could be dangerous and should be fixed, they just need to move it a few feet to the right. It should probably say 1/2 mile as well but placing it over the correct lane is more important
Per current MUTCD standards, distances are to be omitted from "EXIT ONLY" intermediate advance signs.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on September 19, 2018, 06:08:18 PM
Nothing new to report exit sign wise on the Pike in the Boston area. A trip from MA 30 to Newton only revealed perhaps 1 new sign foundation for the I-95/MA 128 exit. The contractor, though, has begun installing new signs on the bridge over the Pike indicating street and city or town, as here in Newton:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs918g.JPG)

Other examples of these signs and a new sign at the Newton on-ramp to I-90 West can be found in my Mass Pike gallery: http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: DrSmith on September 19, 2018, 10:20:46 PM
Noticed that the regulatory, warning, etc signing on the Pike uses i-beams for supports; however, similar signage on the ramps is now being installed using square sign posts.  It's interesting the difference in what they are using for posts between the highway and ramps.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on September 19, 2018, 10:35:03 PM
On the western project, a number of regulatory signs and ground-mounted supplementary signs have been replaced in the last few weeks, especially west of Springfield. 

One thing I've noticed:  the exit gore signs have been replaced so far at exits 2 -5.  The gore signs do NOT look wide enough to accommodate double-digit numbers should mile-based numbers come about.

Still no evidence of construction for the remaining 2-sign overheads at exits 4, 6, 9, or 10.   
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on September 19, 2018, 11:01:28 PM
Have they installed new town line signs west of Springfield yet? The old ones were removed a year ago and hadn't been replaced when I was last through there.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: abqtraveler on September 20, 2018, 07:56:08 AM
 

One thing I've noticed:  the exit gore signs have been replaced so far at exits 2 -5.  The gore signs do NOT look wide enough to accommodate double-digit numbers should mile-based numbers come about.


Looks like Massachusetts is going to tell the FHWA to "Piss off" with their mandate to convert to mile-based exit numbering. 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Jim on September 20, 2018, 08:30:09 AM
Have they installed new town line signs west of Springfield yet? The old ones were removed a year ago and hadn't been replaced when I was last through there.

I don't know if they're all up, but as of this past Saturday on my westbound trip I recall seeing the new style signs for Montgomery, Otis, and Becket, at least.  I figure the others were there but didn't grab my attention.

I also saw for the first time in person the new highest elevation sign but my efforts to grab a picture were thwarted by a bright setting sun in the background causing every little splattered bug and other flaw on my windshield to make a decent picture impossible.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on September 20, 2018, 10:24:49 AM
Noticed that the regulatory, warning, etc signing on the Pike uses i-beams for supports; however, similar signage on the ramps is now being installed using square sign posts.  It's interesting the difference in what they are using for posts between the highway and ramps.

MassDOT is transitioning from single I-beam posts to square tube posts for the newer MA-D1-XX LGS signs, also larger regulatory, warning, and route signs as well.  This was the result of an evaluation of some single I-beam post failures that happened on Cape Cod during some storms last February and March.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on September 20, 2018, 10:47:34 PM
and a quick correction to my post from yesterday.  One new 2-sign overhead assembly has been installed at Exit 4 eastbound in the last couple days.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: DrSmith on September 29, 2018, 01:04:13 PM
The eastbound signs for Route 290 are all replaced now too, including the one at the exit itself. And gone is the old green hat logo there as well
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on October 30, 2018, 11:04:56 PM
The contractor for the western sign replacement project (finally) put up new overhead signs for the I-84/Sturbridge exit last week. The large diagrammatic signs drop US 20 from the previous signs and has control cites of Hartford and NY City. here's the 1-Mile Advance:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs1018d.JPG)

Photos of the other new signs, and other new exit and regulatory signage spotted on the Pike can be found on my I-90/Mass Pike Photo Gallery:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: DrSmith on November 01, 2018, 02:32:02 PM
You can see the lack of communication between the sign project and the AET project at Exit 10. Eastbound was originally a 2 lane exit and then has been made a one lane exit during the toll plaza project. The new sign just installed at the exit itself shows 2 down arrows in the exit only tab.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: AMLNet49 on November 03, 2018, 08:15:32 PM
You can see the lack of communication between the sign project and the AET project at Exit 10. Eastbound was originally a 2 lane exit and then has been made a one lane exit during the toll plaza project. The new sign just installed at the exit itself shows 2 down arrows in the exit only tab.

Yup and the sad part is that exit already had one of those super ugly out of proportion signs with one of the down arrows covered, and now even after replacement it will look like that for years to come. The only difference is that the patch is now yellow instead of green.

There’s another one of these on I-93 south at the Braintree Split. The sign is way way too big and has a down arrow covered up; that one was a straight up design error there was no miscommunication except between the state and the designers. And the shame in that one is that it replaced a really well done sign that was a standard size, two down arrows, and a centered old school “exit only” patch which had a unique black border around it (haven’t seen this elsewhere in the state), making it more sharp looking than a standard yellow patch. So they bacislly replaced one of the state’s best looking signs with one of its absolute ugliest
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on November 05, 2018, 10:53:41 AM
There’s another one of these on I-93 south at the Braintree Split. The sign is way way too big and has a down arrow covered up; that one was a straight up design error there was no miscommunication except between the state and the designers. And the shame in that one is that it replaced a really well done sign that was a standard size, two down arrows, and a centered old school “exit only” patch which had a unique black border around it (haven’t seen this elsewhere in the state), making it more sharp looking than a standard yellow patch. So they bacislly replaced one of the state’s best looking signs with one of its absolute ugliest
I'm assuming that you're referring to this sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2314968,-71.0233801,3a,75y,186.62h,66.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svgJygkJ5AHvCoYE5f7uDPA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) vs. its predecessor sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2314472,-71.0234324,3a,75y,170.96h,72.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1silwbVE72dylTwBqU_Dw0Wg!2e0!5s20120701T000000!7i13312!8i6656).  What happened there (& I am not excusing/condoning the oversight) was that the exit lanes for MA 3 South was reduced from three to two during that time period but the replacement sign was still sized/configured for a three-lane exit.  Either MassDOT or the contractor opted for the "cheap" route for the sign correction and covered that far-left, angled down-arrow.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: AMLNet49 on November 05, 2018, 11:42:43 AM
There’s another one of these on I-93 south at the Braintree Split. The sign is way way too big and has a down arrow covered up; that one was a straight up design error there was no miscommunication except between the state and the designers. And the shame in that one is that it replaced a really well done sign that was a standard size, two down arrows, and a centered old school “exit only” patch which had a unique black border around it (haven’t seen this elsewhere in the state), making it more sharp looking than a standard yellow patch. So they bacislly replaced one of the state’s best looking signs with one of its absolute ugliest
I'm assuming that you're referring to this sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2314968,-71.0233801,3a,75y,186.62h,66.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svgJygkJ5AHvCoYE5f7uDPA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) vs. its predecessor sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2314472,-71.0234324,3a,75y,170.96h,72.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1silwbVE72dylTwBqU_Dw0Wg!2e0!5s20120701T000000!7i13312!8i6656).  What happened there (& I am not excusing/condoning the oversight) was that the exit lanes for MA 3 South was reduced from three to two during that time period but the replacement sign was still sized/configured for a three-lane exit.  Either MassDOT or the contractor opted for the "cheap" route for the sign correction and covered that far-left, angled down-arrow.
To tell you the truth, I actually forgot that it used to be three lanes there, which explains the error on the new one, so it was a wider sign at the split. I was actually thinking of the advance signage, which has been replaced by diagrammics, as the “beautiful” signage. I for some reason thought those regular width signs had been replaced with the new patched sign, but in reality it was actually just another three wide sign but with an exit only patch.

The change in lanes makes the I-90 one a more egregious error imo, because in this case they had already patched the previous sign
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on November 05, 2018, 11:48:48 AM
The sign discussed in the previous posts:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i93signs31214e.jpg)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on November 07, 2018, 09:47:50 AM
There’s another one of these on I-93 south at the Braintree Split. The sign is way way too big and has a down arrow covered up; that one was a straight up design error there was no miscommunication except between the state and the designers. And the shame in that one is that it replaced a really well done sign that was a standard size, two down arrows, and a centered old school “exit only” patch which had a unique black border around it (haven’t seen this elsewhere in the state), making it more sharp looking than a standard yellow patch. So they bacislly replaced one of the state’s best looking signs with one of its absolute ugliest
I'm assuming that you're referring to this sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2314968,-71.0233801,3a,75y,186.62h,66.36t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1svgJygkJ5AHvCoYE5f7uDPA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) vs. its predecessor sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2314472,-71.0234324,3a,75y,170.96h,72.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1silwbVE72dylTwBqU_Dw0Wg!2e0!5s20120701T000000!7i13312!8i6656).  What happened there (& I am not excusing/condoning the oversight) was that the exit lanes for MA 3 South was reduced from three to two during that time period but the replacement sign was still sized/configured for a three-lane exit.  Either MassDOT or the contractor opted for the "cheap" route for the sign correction and covered that far-left, angled down-arrow.

The "narrowing" of the Route 3 exit to two lanes took place after the new signs were fabricated.  As such, the expedient move was to change the arrow on the diagrammatic signs to reflect the revised configuration, and to revise the exit direction sign by covering the third arrow.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on December 11, 2018, 11:29:26 AM
Sign replacement is proceeding along the eastern half of the Mass Pike, if not the west. New signs are up eastbound for the Newton/Watertown exit, and advance signs are up westbound for Newton/Watertown and I-95/MA 128 along with a ramp sign for MA 16. There are also new signs along the ramps at the Weston interchange. The most curious sign is below, a 1/2 mile advance with no distance listing and an exit only arrow not pointing to the exit only lane, could this be the ramp sign put in the wrong place?:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs818h.JPG)

The rest of the new sign images can be found on my I-90/Mass Pike Photo Gallery:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
The above sign has been revised so that the exit only arrow now appears over the correct lane:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs1218a.JPG)

No new Pike signage to report east of I-95/MA 128. The contractor has been putting new mile posts up in the median though, as of Sunday they're present west of Mile 125 (MA 16 WB exit). Here's one prior to the Weston interchange (with to be replaced signage in the background:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs1218b.JPG)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on December 11, 2018, 08:59:26 PM
On the western contract, the only overhead signs that have not been changed are the 2-sign overheads at Exit 10 WB and Exit 6 WB.   (Yes, the button copy still lives at exit 6)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: DrSmith on March 09, 2019, 09:12:25 AM
Well the sign at Exit 6 is probably a short timer now. I noticed a new empty gantry was up behind the old one.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Mergingtraffic on March 10, 2019, 04:05:06 PM
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7865/40366973703_56fa134e09_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/24v6hVe)

I surprised this relic hasn't been replaced off of the Exit 4 connector.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SignBridge on March 10, 2019, 08:50:41 PM
Yeah really, that sign is very 1960's, but let's enjoy the button-copy while we still can.  :spin:
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on March 11, 2019, 08:21:20 AM
Yeah really, that sign is very 1960's, but let's enjoy the button-copy while we still can.  :spin:
I believe that particular BGS is from the early 70s.  And it looks to me that the I-90 shield is likely not original.  Tilting 9s didn't start coming into vogue in the Bay State until the 1980s.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on March 11, 2019, 12:35:08 PM
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7865/40366973703_56fa134e09_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/24v6hVe)

I surprised this relic hasn't been replaced off of the Exit 4 connector.
There is a project under design to redo the US 5 end of the connector roadway.  This is why the signs weren't included in the I-90 sign project.  At that time, this sign, and the signs at the I-90 ramps from the connector, will be replaced.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on March 26, 2019, 10:15:43 PM
Checked out the Pike westbound between Newton and Millbury on St. Patrick's Day to note any sign replacement progress (the MassDOT progress listing still has Fall 2018 as the completion date, the western contract now lists Fall 2019). Nothing overhead sign wise, still need advances for the Route 16 westbound and I-95 westbound and eastbound (still no foundations for the 1 and 1/2 mile advances eastbound which need warmer weather) along with both ramp signs at I-495. It appears more ground-mounted signage is going up in the near future as support posts have appeared behind most of the speed limit and other regulatory signage and reassurance markers, but not around the old distance signs. I've posted photos with examples of all the above, such as with this reassurance marker in Framingham:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs319g.JPG)

on my I-90/Mass Pike Photo Gallery: http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on June 12, 2019, 11:50:50 PM
The eastern project contractors have put up the overhead exit and pull through signs for the I-495 exit, here westbound:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs619u.JPG)

They have also put up many of the ground mounted signs in May that posts were placed for back in March, including signs at town borders, reassurance markers, and post-interchange distance signs where some text has been by interstate shields:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs619l.JPG)

The new reassurance markers for the eastern contract have the I-90 shield over the Mass Pike logo, same as the pull through signs, but opposite of the previous order and those of the new western contract markers.
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs619p.JPG)

Photos taken of much of the new signage between Newton and Auburn can be found at:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on June 13, 2019, 09:26:10 AM
The eastern project contractors have put up the overhead exit and pull through signs for the I-495 exit, here westbound:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs619u.JPG)
:thumbsup: Very nice.  This IMHO is how interchange signage should be.  The use of two control cities on the pull-through panel makes sense for this location & is completely logical. 

Minor nitpicks for the above-signs would be the use of a paler blue for the I-shields as well as the smaller numerals.  The combination of such makes the shields harder to read from a distance due to less of a contrast.  The smaller numerals also increases the possibility of such being not positioned properly (I've seen dozens of examples in several other states as well as MA); the numerals on the I-495 shield are properly positioned but the numerals on the I-90 shield are positioned too close to the top.

They have also put up many of the ground mounted signs in May that posts were placed for back in March, including signs at town borders, reassurance markers, and post-interchange distance signs where some text has been by interstate shields:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs619l.JPG)
Interestingly, the numerals on the I-495 shield are of the taller variety than the numerals on the I-84 shield.

The new reassurance markers for the eastern contract have the I-90 shield over the Mass Pike logo, same as the pull through signs, but opposite of the previous order and those of the new western contract markers.
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs619p.JPG)
As I commented on Facebook; the Turnpike shield on these reassurance markers are of a square variety rather then the normal rectangular (portrait orientation).  Such does make the MASS PIKE text above and below the Pilgrim hat look crowded.  Given that the shields on the new BGS' are still rectangular; I'm assuming that these square, stand-alone shields are a fabrication error(?).

Whoever fabricated those I-90 shields should IMHO take a look at the I-95 reassurance markers that were erected along the Peabody-to-Newburyport stretch a year or two ago.  Those had the numerals properly spaced & positioned.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on June 20, 2019, 01:14:56 PM
Update at the Weston (I-95/MA 128) interchange but no photos for such:

Even though the I-95 shields on these two bridge-mounted BGS' (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3409567,-71.2663749,3a,75y,82.45h,75.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOVzo89Ld9LVJdepmSFYFHw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) replaced faded ones just over a year ago; the BGS' themselves have since been replaced with new ones on an overhead gantry erected just prior to the overpass.

The legends are similar (but not 100% identical) to the BGS' that were erected at the ramp split beyond the overpass.  Going by memory here:

    95 NORTH
     Waltham
Portsmouth, NH

   \|/         \|/
and
   95 SOUTH
    Dedham
Providence, RI

       \|/ ONLY
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on June 20, 2019, 06:28:01 PM
Update at the Weston (I-95/MA 128) interchange but no photos for such:

Even though the I-95 shields on these two bridge-mounted BGS' (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3409567,-71.2663749,3a,75y,82.45h,75.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOVzo89Ld9LVJdepmSFYFHw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) replaced faded ones just over a year ago; the BGS' themselves have since been replaced with new ones on an overhead gantry erected just prior to the overpass.

The legends are similar (but not 100% identical) to the BGS' that were erected at the ramp split beyond the overpass.  Going by memory here:

    95 NORTH
     Waltham
Portsmouth, NH

   \|/         \|/
and
   95 SOUTH
    Dedham
Providence, RI

       \|/ ONLY
Good to know. The two signs in the Street View image has been taken down the last time through the Weston interchange in early June. Was wondering if they were going to be replaced.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Ben114 on June 20, 2019, 07:04:37 PM
Update at the Weston (I-95/MA 128) interchange but no photos for such:

Even though the I-95 shields on these two bridge-mounted BGS' (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3409567,-71.2663749,3a,75y,82.45h,75.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOVzo89Ld9LVJdepmSFYFHw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) replaced faded ones just over a year ago; the BGS' themselves have since been replaced with new ones on an overhead gantry erected just prior to the overpass.

The legends are similar (but not 100% identical) to the BGS' that were erected at the ramp split beyond the overpass.  Going by memory here:

    95 NORTH
     Waltham
Portsmouth, NH

   \|/         \|/
and
   95 SOUTH
    Dedham
Providence, RI

       \|/ ONLY
I was able to find a photo of said signs.
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs818k.JPG)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on June 21, 2019, 09:10:06 AM
Good to know. The two signs in the Street View image has been taken down the last time through the Weston interchange in early June. Was wondering if they were going to be replaced.
That would make sense.  Prior to last week, I was in the area during Memorial Day weekend and the old bridge-mounted signs were still there.  Although I'm a bit surprised that the new gantry & signs weren't already erected prior to the old signs being removed.  I guess the gantry's located too close to the overpass to allow for such.

Anyway, the old sign for I-95 (MA 128) southbound I believe were the last ones to list Cape Cod as a control destination/point for that route.

I was able to find a photo of said signs.
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs818k.JPG)
Those aren't the ones.  The ones I'm referring to are prior to one seeing those signs & have the route shield/direction cardinals, sans the TO 30 legend, arranged per my earlier description.  The BGS' I'm referring to are also taller; especially for the southbound panel.

Edited to add
A photo of the signs (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10211390110948873&set=pcb.10157070834045630&type=3&theater&ifg=1) I was describing has since made it onto Facebook's BostonRoads page from one of the users here but not yet on the malmeroads.net (http://malmeroads.net) site.  Hopefully, the above-link works for those who do not have a Facebook account.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on July 01, 2019, 09:57:57 PM
For those who can't access Facebook, here's the new overhead signs along the I-90/Mass Pike ramp to I-95:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs619eee.JPG)

That and photos of the new advance signs for the Weston exit eastbound are now up at:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SidS1045 on July 03, 2019, 02:34:11 PM
Last evening I saw a few new signs on the eastbound approach to the I-95 exit, regarding the ban on transport of hazardous materials on the Pike east of I-95.  Too dark to get some photos, however.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on July 10, 2019, 12:43:43 PM
I have posted new signage photos from the Mass Pike between Weston and Framingham, courtesy of Benjamin Long. They include new ramp signage, such at the split of the Pike off-ramp in Framingham:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signsbl719a.JPG)

and new ground mounted signage along the Pike such as this new version of the Trucker Advisory sign eastbound in Weston (notice there would be room for a future 123 exit number):
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signsbl719c.JPG)

The remaining new photos are on my I-90/Mass Pike Photo Gallery:http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SignBridge on July 10, 2019, 08:40:42 PM
Wow Bob, I'm surprised to see a brand new butterfly style sign gantry in the 21st Century! I didn't think anyone in the USA built those anymore. New York replaced all or most of theirs by the 1970's with full across the road gantries so errant drivers wouldn't be crashing into the pole.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on July 11, 2019, 10:41:52 AM
Wow Bob, I'm surprised to see a brand new butterfly style sign gantry in the 21st Century! I didn't think anyone in the USA built those anymore. New York replaced all or most of theirs by the 1970's with full across the road gantries so errant drivers wouldn't be crashing into the pole.

Original project plans called for a full span structure across the ramps at this location, which was later deemed impractical to construct due to utility conflicts and other constraints.  The location is protected by an impact attenuator, so it's MUTCD compliant.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SidS1045 on July 11, 2019, 03:27:51 PM
The 1/2-mile advance sign for exit 15 (westbound) has been replaced...with, if my eyes haven't deceived me, a mistake.  The EXIT ONLY arrow is pointing to the middle lane, not the right lane.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SignBridge on July 11, 2019, 08:51:43 PM
Thanks Roadman. That's interesting about the change in specs for the sign gantry. And yes, it is MUTCD compliant with the impact attenuator.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on July 11, 2019, 10:30:49 PM
The 1/2-mile advance sign for exit 15 (westbound) has been replaced...with, if my eyes haven't deceived me, a mistake.  The EXIT ONLY arrow is pointing to the middle lane, not the right lane.
If it's like the mistake they made with the 1/2 mile for the Newton/Watertown exit, they'll change the Exit (Arrow) Only tab to Exit Only (Arrow). From a live image on this evening's news, they may also have replaced the 1/2 mile advance heading east for Allston-Brighton, I may just have to check out the Boston to Weston section of the Pike this weekend.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Ben114 on July 14, 2019, 01:11:54 PM
Found this on my way home from Buffalo yesterday. (yes this is GSV, I didn't take a picture)

(https://i.imgur.com/s9oWcHMh.jpg)

This is approaching exit B3 on the Berkshire Connector, from the other side it looks just like a MassDOT sign.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on July 14, 2019, 07:12:16 PM
This afternoon, returning from a weekend in New York, I traveled the 'pike from the NY state line out to Exit 10 (Auburn).  Yup, I did notice the above-photographed sign and quickly grabbed a shot of it.  I also noticed one remaining old Exit 5 sign (33/Chicopee) remaining, along with numerous regulatory-style signs that have still not been replaced yet.... or maybe they have but the sheating has been torn (speed limit signs).  Still a lot of faded merge and "lane ends" signs, old town line signs, and even some brown overpass labels.  The Phase III button copy at Exit 6, westbound, continues to live on, but with a new monotube bridge gantry behind it, one can only guess for how much longer.  I can't believe this project is still not finished. 

Photos from my Mass Pike drive can be found here (starting from the third row on this page, down...)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/albums/72157667478371052/page2

I hope to get further east in the weeks ahead.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on July 14, 2019, 10:43:36 PM
The Phase III button copy at Exit 6, westbound, continues to live on, but with a new monotube bridge gantry behind it, one can only guess for how much longer.  I can't believe this project is still not finished. 


That empty monotube gantry has been there since last October/November.  No idea what has happened but the western contract seems to have totally stalled.    The WB overhead assembly at Exit 10 in Auburn is still there as well.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on July 15, 2019, 09:12:02 AM
Found this on my way home from Buffalo yesterday. (yes this is GSV, I didn't take a picture)

(https://i.imgur.com/s9oWcHMh.jpg)

This is approaching exit B3 on the Berkshire Connector, from the other side it looks just like a MassDOT sign.

That's because it is a MassDOT sign.  Was installed as part of the I-90 "Go Live" AET implementation contract.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on July 15, 2019, 09:14:21 AM
The Phase III button copy at Exit 6, westbound, continues to live on, but with a new monotube bridge gantry behind it, one can only guess for how much longer.  I can't believe this project is still not finished. 


That empty monotube single chord gantry has been there since last October/November.  No idea what has happened but the western contract seems to have totally stalled.    The WB overhead assembly at Exit 10 in Auburn is still there as well.

Corrected it for you.  In the sign support world, monotube refers to the large curved tubular gantries that are designed to look like a single piece.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on July 15, 2019, 12:05:10 PM
The 1/2-mile advance sign for exit 15 (westbound) has been replaced...with, if my eyes haven't deceived me, a mistake.  The EXIT ONLY arrow is pointing to the middle lane, not the right lane.
If it's like the mistake they made with the 1/2 mile for the Newton/Watertown exit, they'll change the Exit (Arrow) Only tab to Exit Only (Arrow). From a live image on this evening's news, they may also have replaced the 1/2 mile advance heading east for Allston-Brighton, I may just have to check out the Boston to Weston section of the Pike this weekend.
Here's a photo of the sign:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs719d.JPG)

The 1-mile advance isn't much better. Photos of that sign and the new remaining overheads put between Newton and Allston-Brighton are on my I-90/Mass Pike Photo Gallery: http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SignBridge on July 15, 2019, 09:17:29 PM
How the heck does something like that happen? And nobody catches it?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: 1 on July 15, 2019, 09:28:16 PM
If it pointed to the right lane, it would imply that Exit 15B is exit only, while it should apply to Exit 15A.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SidS1045 on July 16, 2019, 02:49:17 PM
If it pointed to the right lane, it would imply that Exit 15B is exit only, while it should apply to Exit 15A.

In that case, perhaps a small edit would be in order, as in "EXITS ONLY" or "EXITS 15B-A ONLY."  Not exactly MUTCD-compliant, but it would convey the correct message, with the arrow properly placed over the right lane.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: mrsman on July 17, 2019, 05:20:42 PM
If it pointed to the right lane, it would imply that Exit 15B is exit only, while it should apply to Exit 15A.

In that case, perhaps a small edit would be in order, as in "EXITS ONLY" or "EXITS 15B-A ONLY."  Not exactly MUTCD-compliant, but it would convey the correct message, with the arrow properly placed over the right lane.

One idea to fix it would be to only mention I-95 at this point.  A supplemental sign for exit 15B to convey that message separately.

Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on July 17, 2019, 05:23:36 PM
One idea to fix it would be to only mention I-95 at this point.  A supplemental sign for exit 15B to convey that message separately.

Good luck with that.  Getting a local to refer to that stretch as anything but 128 is harder than getting someone to call the new Thruway bridge between Tarrytown and Nyack anything but the Tappan Zee. 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SectorZ on July 17, 2019, 05:44:40 PM
One idea to fix it would be to only mention I-95 at this point.  A supplemental sign for exit 15B to convey that message separately.

Good luck with that.  Getting a local to refer to that stretch as anything but 128 is harder than getting someone to call the new Thruway bridge between Tarrytown and Nyack anything but the Tappan Zee.

The sign doesn't mention 128 in the first place, he meant removing the mention of 30 at exit 15B...
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on July 18, 2019, 09:10:34 AM
If it pointed to the right lane, it would imply that Exit 15B is exit only, while it should apply to Exit 15A.

In that case, perhaps a small edit would be in order, as in "EXITS ONLY" or "EXITS 15B-A ONLY."  Not exactly MUTCD-compliant, but it would convey the correct message, with the arrow properly placed over the right lane.

One idea to fix it would be to only mention I-95 at this point.  A supplemental sign for exit 15B to convey that message separately.
In this direction, Exit 15B is for MA 30 and comes before Exit 15A for I-95.  If one scans through the latest GSVs; one sees that this right lane splits at Exit 15B and veers off the I-90 westbound mainline at Exit 15A.  Hence the use of the yellow EXIT \|/ ONLY banners as well as mentioning the TO 30 Weston legends on all the main & applicable panels.

IMHO, it might've been better to use a more traditional layout where information for both exits are vertically stacked for most if not all of the advance notice signs (Roadman, was such even considered?). 

The current spilt legend motif which mimicked the previous signage layout worked when this exit was just one ramp that split after leaving mainline I-90 westbound later.  Repeating said-motif on the new signs and ramp reconfiguration is the reason why the arrow locations using traditional MUTCD standards has become awkward and clunky.

Using a 1-mile advance sign for examples:

  EXITS 15 B-A
    TO
    30    95
    Weston
   Waltham
Providence, RI
    1 MILE
EXIT
\|/ ONLY

or

  EXITS 15 B-A
    TO
    30    95
    Weston
   Waltham
   Dedham
    1 MILE
EXIT
\|/ ONLY

or

  EXITS 15 B-A
    TO
    30    95
    Weston
   Waltham
    1 MILE
EXIT
\|/ ONLY

All three of the above-examples (the latter was based on the previous sign's legends) would've reduced the overall sign width and allowed the sign to be accurately placed with respect to the lane.

Another signing layout option would be to what was done for the I-95/US 3 South/MA 3A North cloverleaf advance signage (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.4793074,-71.2099608,3a,75y,65.04h,87.38t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sR3V0IU4Itk4TIoz2-hI2mQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656).

For the above, such would look like:
  EXITS 15 B-A
    TO   30
    Weston     
       95
   Waltham
    1 MILE
EXIT
\|/ ONLY

or

  EXITS 15 B-A
    TO   30
    Weston     
       95
   Waltham
   Dedham
    1 MILE
EXIT
\|/ ONLY

or, as a means to reduce the overall sign height

     EXITS 15 B-A
       TO   30
       Weston         
          95
Waltham - Dedham
       1 MILE
  EXIT
\|/ ONLY
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: mrsman on July 19, 2019, 05:42:10 PM
I always support using more well-known bigger cities as controls.  So I'm glad that they replaced Dedham with Providence.  I feel that Waltham should have been replaced with Portsmouth NH.

AASHTO Control city list:

https://traffic.transportation.org/interstate-control-cities/
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: 1 on July 19, 2019, 05:49:14 PM
I always support using more well-known bigger cities as controls.  So I'm glad that they replaced Dedham with Providence.  I feel that Waltham should have been replaced with Portsmouth NH.

Waltham is almost three times as large as Portsmouth.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: mrsman on July 19, 2019, 06:03:37 PM
I always support using more well-known bigger cities as controls.  So I'm glad that they replaced Dedham with Providence.  I feel that Waltham should have been replaced with Portsmouth NH.

Waltham is almost three times as large as Portsmouth.

Nonetheless, Portsmouth is the long-distance control city on the AASHTO list and is also utilized at some junctions.

Here are signs from MA-9, where they do what is ideal, a local control and a long-distance control (when there is room):

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3165532,-71.2347802,3a,75y,75.63h,89.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siESuQYxcFsHLqKwCqVIOrg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Oddly, they preferred Peabody to Waltham as the local control.  Probably because that is where I-95 splits from MA-128.

Where you can put 2 control cities, have a local and a long distance control.  Where you can only put in one control city, especially on a 2di or a bypass route, the long-distance control is more important than a suburb, even if the suburb has more population.

The sign from I-90 has room for 2 cities, but only room for 1 city to the north and 1 city to the south.  IMO, Providence and Portsmouth should take priority over other choices like Canton, Dedham, Waltham, or Peabody.  Of course where there is room for 2 cities in each direction include local controls as well.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on July 19, 2019, 07:56:51 PM
At the exit in question, however, it doesn't make sense for Portsmouth NH to be signed.  Any entrances to the 'pike east of here would primarily be in Boston or its immediate suburbs.  So there'd be less long distance traffic heading west looking to head north to that part of New Hampshire.

Then there's the case of Exit 9 on I-90 East, which scrapped the local control city of "Sturbridge" in favor of "NY City".  IIRC, the reasoning behind having NYC posted on an eastbound sign was to keep the two directions in sync, with the same destinations East and West.  Sturbridge should've been kept.

So why wasn't the same logic applied to Exit 15-WB?  Perhaps because at the time, access to MA 30 and I-95 left I-90 WB at the same spot (with the ramp to I-95 being relocated later).  Perhaps they got away with it because its not the same exit # as eastbound (15 vs 14).  Or perhaps, shear logic intervened ("Why would someone heading west for Boston want to go back east to the coast?"  "Oh wait, we have that U-turn ramp for that"). 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: mrsman on July 21, 2019, 06:03:24 PM
At the exit in question, however, it doesn't make sense for Portsmouth NH to be signed.  Any entrances to the 'pike east of here would primarily be in Boston or its immediate suburbs.  So there'd be less long distance traffic heading west looking to head north to that part of New Hampshire.

Then there's the case of Exit 9 on I-90 East, which scrapped the local control city of "Sturbridge" in favor of "NY City".  IIRC, the reasoning behind having NYC posted on an eastbound sign was to keep the two directions in sync, with the same destinations East and West.  Sturbridge should've been kept.

So why wasn't the same logic applied to Exit 15-WB?  Perhaps because at the time, access to MA 30 and I-95 left I-90 WB at the same spot (with the ramp to I-95 being relocated later).  Perhaps they got away with it because its not the same exit # as eastbound (15 vs 14).  Or perhaps, shear logic intervened ("Why would someone heading west for Boston want to go back east to the coast?"  "Oh wait, we have that U-turn ramp for that").


I agree with your assessment of I-90/I-84.  There is no automatic need for the exact same controls to be used in both directions.  There is no good reason why I-90 eastbound traffic would need to see New York City.  Sturbridge should be the local control and Hartford the long distance control, the way the signs have always been.  Westbound would ordinarily also use Sturbridge (local) and Hartford (long distance).  Of course, as MassDot desires to direct BOS-NYC traffic away from the Coast by using 90-84, the NYC control will be used as a super-long-distance control.  (Akin to signs that once existed in Virginia to guide traffic at the 95-85 split toward Miami).  Since there is only room for two controls, Sturbridge loses.  [NYC is not 84's normal control, it is only used at key junctions to guide traffic to NYC.  Hartford is the normal control.]

As far as I-90/I-95, i still don't agree with your conclusion.  While it is true that the most direct way from Downtown Boston to get to Portsmouth and Maine is to take I-93 to US 1 (or I-93 to I-95), the fact remains that this is still an interchange of two nationally important routes.  And even if primarily local traffic take the I-90WB to I-95NB ramp, it is still helpful to the long distance motorists to sign for the nationally important control.  I can say that with regards to reaching Providence from Downtown Boston, most would probably take I-93 to I-95, and not take I-90 to I-95 - yet the control for the I-90 WB to I-95 SB ramp is Providence.

Also, we can't assume that everyone on the Pike is coming from Downtown Boston.  For traffic coming from the nearby suburbs like Newton, it's ceratainly possible that a Newton-Portsmouth trip would in fact be using the 90/95 interchange and not heading into Boston to then reach Portsmouth.

Obviously, the use of the national controls is largely due to having I-95 along the Route 128 ROW.   If I-95 were built through Boston, 128 would likely maintain local control cities, and I-95 would have the national controls Providence-Boston-Portsmouth.

In my area (DC) I-95 was similarly prevented from being built through the city center.  I-95 was thus routed along the eastern half of the Capital Beltway (495). Yet, at every interchange, even at freeways coming from the city center (like US 50), I-95's controls are Baltimore and Richmond, despite the fact that no one would take US 50 from DC to the Beltway in New Carrolton, MD to reach Richmond, when it is much shorter to take I-395 to I-95 to Richmond.  Yet, the national controls are used at the US 50 / I-95 interchange.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on July 22, 2019, 08:57:59 AM
Also, we can't assume that everyone on the Pike is coming from Downtown Boston.  For traffic coming from the nearby suburbs like Newton, it's certainly possible that a Newton-Portsmouth trip would in fact be using the 90/95 interchange and not heading into Boston to then reach Portsmouth.
Given that the road (I-90) is a tolled facility; barring an accident or construction-related blockage on the Pike, most Portsmouth/NH-bound traffic coming from Newton, per your listed example, wouldn't even get on the Pike just to go that short distance to exit off for I-95 northbound (they'll get on I-95 at one of the other more numerous interchanges).  It's a reasonable conclusion that most traffic entering I-90 westbound at either Exit 17 (Newton/Watertown) or Exit 16 (MA 16/W. Newton) are staying on I-90 beyond Weston.

That said, the use of more local control cities along I-95 (MA 128) like Waltham, Dedham & so forth makes more sense for the traffic heading out of the Downtown Boston area.  One needs to keep in mind that those destinations aren't exactly hick-towns per se.  Given the history of this particular I-95 corridor (many locals still refer to it as just Route 128 even after all these now-decades); maintaining the listing of the more local control cities on I-95 signage at key/certain locations or in areas where signboard width is restricted is a way of meeting the locals half-way as it were.

Several years ago, my mother (back when she was still alive & driving) missed the I-95 northbound entrance ramp at the US 20 interchange in Waltham because all she saw was 95 NORTH Portsmouth, NH (note: there was a supplemental NORTH 128 trailblazer sign next to the main sign gantry).  Had the sign used a Peabody listing in addition to or instead of Portsmouth; she would've likely not missed the ramp... she intended to ultimately exit off MA 128 at MA 114 adjacent to the North Shore Mall.

Obviously, the use of the national controls is largely due to having I-95 along the Route 128 ROW.   If I-95 were built through Boston, 128 would likely maintain local control cities, and I-95 would have the national controls Providence-Boston-Portsmouth.
Under current practices/standards, had the corridor still been just 128; Gloucester & Braintree would've been likely used as distant control cities.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: KEVIN_224 on July 22, 2019, 01:59:23 PM
While New York City gets mentioned on I-90/Massachusetts Turnpike...

Boston gets used as a control city on I-84/US 6 as soon as the Exit 45 (Flatbush Avenue) area in Hartford, near the West Hartford town line. Of course I-84 ends in Sturbridge, a good hour or so west of Boston. I wonder if Worcester would've been a better control city to use there? Otherwise, what would the eastbound pullthrough say? Manchester?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: 1 on July 22, 2019, 02:01:12 PM
While New York City gets mentioned on I-90/Massachusetts Turnpike...

Boston gets used as a control city on I-84/US 6 as soon as the Exit 45 (Flatbush Avenue) area in Hartford, near the West Hartford town line. Of course I-84 ends in Sturbridge, a good hour or so west of Boston. I wonder if Worcester would've been a better control city to use there? Otherwise, what would the eastbound pullthrough say? Manchester?

Boston is fine. Even though you're switching routes, you're taking almost a straight line from Hartford to Boston.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: KEVIN_224 on July 22, 2019, 02:12:51 PM
I wonder what it would say if a certain highway had been fully completed between Bolton, CT to Rhode Island? Maybe it would say "PROVIDENCE" instead?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on July 22, 2019, 02:20:27 PM
It makes sense for Boston to be used once you cross the Hartford city line because you are in Hartford.  The official farthest west use is the BGS at the entrance from Prospect Ave, which straddles the Hartford/West Hartford city line.  Park Rd and Trout Brook Dr entrances still use Hartford. 

84 also doesn't go to Worcester (unless you consider my fictional extension that would parallel MA 49 then bend around to meet the east-west portion of I-290).  Plus, you have to switch highways twice to get there (Mass Pike and I-290).  Most people's destination on 84 East isn't Sturbridge, unless they're going to Old Sturbridge Village or a meeting at Sturbridge Host.

The only places I've seen NYC as a control on I-90 in MA are the westbound entrance near Hynes Convention Center, and as a second control for Exit 9 (though it irritates me to no end by its use eastbound).  The next time you see it on I-84 is at Exit 57 (CT 15 TO I-91 SOUTH) in CT, then you don't see it again till I-684 (NY Exit 68) in Brewster.

Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on July 22, 2019, 03:48:44 PM
I wonder what it would say if a certain highway had been fully completed between Bolton, CT to Rhode Island? Maybe it would say "PROVIDENCE" instead?
IMHO, such would likely used a Boston/Providence combo until the (current I-84/384) split.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on July 22, 2019, 04:49:33 PM
The next time you see it on I-84 is at Exit 57 (CT 15 TO I-91 SOUTH) in CT, then you don't see it again till I-684 (NY Exit 68) in Brewster.

Well, things are going to get interesting in a couple years.  With sign replacements as part of the I-91 Exit 29/Charter Oak Bridge (CT) construction, some (but not all) signs are being replaced on CT 15, and the ones for the ramp from 15S->91S are losing "NY City" as a control point, switching to just "91 SOUTH/NEW HAVEN".  And one has to wonder, at some point, the signs through East Hartford (Exit 57) will be replaced (god willing) and they'll most likely say just "New Haven". 

So what's a NY City-bound motorist to do at that point (providing there are still any at that point who rely solely on signs and not GPS)...
Maybe ConnDOT will put up a sign saying "NY CITY - USE 15 SOUTH TO 91 SOUTH" to compensate for the loss of a control city. 

Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SignBridge on July 22, 2019, 08:20:39 PM
I've driven from Boston to Long Island many times using that Charter Oak Bridge route and I always thought New Haven would have been the correct control city to use for I-91 South in that area.

Similarly, on I-90 westbound at the I-84 interchange, I always thought Hartford should have been used as it's the state capital and the next control city on the route. Using New York City as a secondary destination at those points would have been okay too, but maybe it should not have been the only destination displayed.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: mrsman on July 22, 2019, 08:22:39 PM
I've driven from Boston to Long Island many times using that Charter Oak Bridge route and I always thought New Haven would have been the correct control city to use for I-91 South in that area.

Similarly, on I-90 westbound at the I-84 interchange, I always thought Hartford should have been used as it's the state capital and the next control city on the route. Using New York City as a secondary destination at those points would have been okay too, but maybe it should not have been the only destination displayed.

There are very good arguments to be made for having two control cities to be displayed as much as practical.  Unfortunately, sometimes the signs are too small and we have to pick one.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: RobbieL2415 on July 22, 2019, 10:24:39 PM
The control cities at Exit 9 should be Hartford, then Waterbury, with a supplemental sign, "New Haven, New York City follow I-84 to I-91"  I-90's control cities at that point are correct IMO.

At Hartford, past I-91, I-84 WB should be Waterbury, then Newburgh, eastbound should be Worcester, then Boston.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on July 23, 2019, 12:39:12 AM
Hartford is the primary control for Exit 9 on the Mass Pike.  NYC is listed second.  It should remain that way westbound.  I'd be fine with just Hartford or the older version with Hartford/Sturbridge eastbound.

Why no love for Danbury? Even NYSDOT uses Danbury from the Thruway eastward, except that NYTA shows more love for Scranton on Exit 17 signage and relegates Danbury to supplemental signage.  I've often thought NYSDOT should use Hartford as a secondary control exiting from the Taconic and especially I-684.     

I wish they would remove the Charter Oak Bridge reference for Exit 57 and just have it listed as:

SOUTH       SOUTH
   15    TO     91

     New Haven
   New York City

The bridge is not a true destination.  You would think it's a landmark as important as the GW or the Mario Cuomo Tappan Zee.

And Worcester will not get recognition on I-84, just as RIDOT will never show love for New London on I-95 South.  Where it should get recognition is in Providence on the I-95 North exit to RI 146.  It really should be Woonsocket/Worcester instead of Lincoln/Woonsocket, especially since MassDOT is replacing Worcester with Marlboro for I-495 North signage on I-95 in Mansfield.

Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on July 23, 2019, 09:25:21 AM
...on I-90 westbound at the I-84 interchange, I always thought Hartford should have been used as it's the state capital and the next control city on the route. Using New York City as a secondary destination at those points would have been okay too, but maybe it should not have been the only destination displayed.
At present, the only sign that still lists New York for I-90 westbound, be it the city or state, is this old 90s-vintage sign at MA 9 near Copley Square (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3491823,-71.0772173,3a,75y,219.07h,77.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPYHrEqTaIHA3a9Cd6zO_xA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192).  All other/newer signs for westbound I-90 invariably list Albany, NY as its most-distant control city.

Depending on location, Worcester and/or Springfield are used as well.

I wish they would remove the Charter Oak Bridge reference for Exit 57 and just have it listed as:

SOUTH       SOUTH
   15    TO     91

     New Haven
   New York City

The bridge is not a true destination.
Those signs are fairly old & will likely be replaced sometime down the road.  Given the stricter adherence to listing actual cities/municipalities on primary signs; your above-legend may very well be what's placed on successor signage with optional supplemental exit signage listing the Charter Oak Bridge.  Given that the bridge hasn't been a tolled facility for quite some time and there's nothing visually significant structure-wise that one sees while approaching & driving on it; does it really need advance/supplemental signage at all?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: RobbieL2415 on July 23, 2019, 10:22:25 AM
Hartford is the primary control for Exit 9 on the Mass Pike.  NYC is listed second.  It should remain that way westbound.  I'd be fine with just Hartford or the older version with Hartford/Sturbridge eastbound.

Why no love for Danbury? Even NYSDOT uses Danbury from the Thruway eastward, except that NYTA shows more love for Scranton on Exit 17 signage and relegates Danbury to supplemental signage.  I've often thought NYSDOT should use Hartford as a secondary control exiting from the Taconic and especially I-684.     

I wish they would remove the Charter Oak Bridge reference for Exit 57 and just have it listed as:

SOUTH       SOUTH
   15    TO     91

     New Haven
   New York City

The bridge is not a true destination.  You would think it's a landmark as important as the GW or the Mario Cuomo Tappan Zee.

And Worcester will not get recognition on I-84, just as RIDOT will never show love for New London on I-95 South.  Where it should get recognition is in Providence on the I-95 North exit to RI 146.  It really should be Woonsocket/Worcester instead of Lincoln/Woonsocket, especially since MassDOT is replacing Worcester with Marlboro for I-495 North signage on I-95 in Mansfield.
The Exit 57 sign, I'm gonna guess, dates from when the GHBA managed the Charter Oak Bridge and when it was still tolled.  People probably used it as a destination because it was an important crossing.  ConnDOT doesn't really prominate bridge names anymore.

The furthest New York should be a control city should be Sturbridge and Providence.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: southshore720 on July 24, 2019, 04:09:32 PM
And Worcester will not get recognition on I-84, just as RIDOT will never show love for New London on I-95 South.  Where it should get recognition is in Providence on the I-95 North exit to RI 146.  It really should be Woonsocket/Worcester instead of Lincoln/Woonsocket, especially since MassDOT is replacing Worcester with Marlboro for I-495 North signage on I-95 in Mansfield.
A large chunk of RI 146 is in Lincoln and the casino is in Lincoln, so I don't see Worcester being favored over Lincoln on I-95 NB.  That supplemental signage is also older and if replaced, it will probably go full MUTCD and only have "Woonsocket" as the control city.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: 1 on July 24, 2019, 04:49:43 PM
And Worcester will not get recognition on I-84, just as RIDOT will never show love for New London on I-95 South.  Where it should get recognition is in Providence on the I-95 North exit to RI 146.  It really should be Woonsocket/Worcester instead of Lincoln/Woonsocket, especially since MassDOT is replacing Worcester with Marlboro for I-495 North signage on I-95 in Mansfield.
A large chunk of RI 146 is in Lincoln and the casino is in Lincoln, so I don't see Worcester being favored over Lincoln on I-95 NB.  That supplemental signage is also older and if replaced, it will probably go full MUTCD and only have "Woonsocket" as the control city.

A casino is not a reason to favor one control city over another unless there are no good choices at all. It's like A00234826 wanting Gillette Stadium (or one of its various misspellings) on a whole bunch of signs.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on July 24, 2019, 04:54:22 PM
And Worcester will not get recognition on I-84, just as RIDOT will never show love for New London on I-95 South.  Where it should get recognition is in Providence on the I-95 North exit to RI 146.  It really should be Woonsocket/Worcester instead of Lincoln/Woonsocket, especially since MassDOT is replacing Worcester with Marlboro for I-495 North signage on I-95 in Mansfield.
A large chunk of RI 146 is in Lincoln and the casino is in Lincoln, so I don't see Worcester being favored over Lincoln on I-95 NB.  That supplemental signage is also older and if replaced, it will probably go full MUTCD and only have "Woonsocket" as the control city.

A casino is not a reason to favor one control city over another unless there are no good choices at all. It's like A00234826 wanting Gillette Stadium (or one of its various misspellings) on a whole bunch of signs.

Lincoln was used as a control city for 146 long before the casino opened.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on July 24, 2019, 06:39:00 PM
Just out of curiosity... does this sign still exist?  (on the ramp from MA 30 at Exit 13)...
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3108973,-71.3860026,3a,15y,25.37h,89.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slBa7cNtC3aNDz3LJCrvf-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on July 24, 2019, 11:45:50 PM
Just out of curiosity... does this sign still exist?  (on the ramp from MA 30 at Exit 13)...
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3108973,-71.3860026,3a,15y,25.37h,89.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slBa7cNtC3aNDz3LJCrvf-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
No, it was replaced as of June 2018:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs618k.JPG)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: SectorZ on July 25, 2019, 01:22:56 PM
Just out of curiosity... does this sign still exist?  (on the ramp from MA 30 at Exit 13)...
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.3108973,-71.3860026,3a,15y,25.37h,89.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slBa7cNtC3aNDz3LJCrvf-w!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
No, it was replaced as of June 2018:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs618k.JPG)

Never fail do they replace signs exactly as they were despite the lanes changing over time.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: DrSmith on July 26, 2019, 07:10:33 PM
That's not as bad as the sign for 290 that shows two exit only lanes when there is only one lane now (still exit only)-and still does for maybe a year now
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: southshore720 on July 31, 2019, 11:44:11 AM
And Worcester will not get recognition on I-84, just as RIDOT will never show love for New London on I-95 South.  Where it should get recognition is in Providence on the I-95 North exit to RI 146.  It really should be Woonsocket/Worcester instead of Lincoln/Woonsocket, especially since MassDOT is replacing Worcester with Marlboro for I-495 North signage on I-95 in Mansfield.
A large chunk of RI 146 is in Lincoln and the casino is in Lincoln, so I don't see Worcester being favored over Lincoln on I-95 NB.  That supplemental signage is also older and if replaced, it will probably go full MUTCD and only have "Woonsocket" as the control city.

A casino is not a reason to favor one control city over another unless there are no good choices at all. It's like A00234826 wanting Gillette Stadium (or one of its various misspellings) on a whole bunch of signs.
Thank you Roadman for your backup.  "1," it's not like that at all, so don't be fresh. I merely mentioned the casino as an added justification on top of the amount of mileage RI 146 has in Lincoln.  Lincoln is a control for RI 146 SB on I-295 as well.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: seicer on July 31, 2019, 12:33:16 PM
That's not as bad as the sign for 290 that shows two exit only lanes when there is only one lane now (still exit only)-and still does for maybe a year now

But the sign isn't incorrect. The center lane ends for westbound traffic as does the right lane for eastbound traffic.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on October 09, 2019, 10:55:49 PM
Drove the Pike through the Springfield area today.   The button copy assembly at Exit 6 WB is still there.  I really thought it would have been long gone by now.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on October 09, 2019, 11:35:27 PM
Drove the Pike through the Springfield area today.   The button copy assembly at Exit 6 WB is still there.  I really thought it would have been long gone by now.
You would think so since the replacement gantry support posts were put up about a year ago. The latest MassDOT listing says the project is to be complete this fall, so I guess they have a couple months more to finish the work (at last check they also needed to put up 1/2 mile advance overheads for Exit 1 WB and for Exit 2 EB).
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on October 21, 2019, 06:10:44 PM
Looks like the contractors are finally getting around to placing the last new overhead sign westbound at the I-290 interchange on Auburn. From MassDOT's Twitter account:
Traffic Alert: #Auburn- I-90 E/W at Interchange 10, overnight intermittent lane closures, rolling roadblocks thru Thurs, Oct 24, 11pm-5am. Overhead sign installation.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on October 22, 2019, 09:16:48 AM
Looks like the contractors are finally getting around to placing the last new overhead sign westbound at the I-290 interchange on Auburn. From MassDOT's Twitter account:
Traffic Alert: #Auburn- I-90 E/W at Interchange 10, overnight intermittent lane closures, rolling roadblocks thru Thurs, Oct 24, 11pm-5am. Overhead sign installation.
I may have to take a slight detour while heading home from this weekend's Newburyport meet to see it in the field.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on October 22, 2019, 10:40:47 AM
Now we just need the town line signs in the Berkshires and the overheads near Springfield to go in. I'll be able to check on those Friday.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on October 25, 2019, 11:03:47 AM
Exit 6 WB button copy remains. Still missing the town/county line signs at the Otis/Blandford line and a few assorted warning signs.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on December 03, 2019, 12:19:45 AM
Passing through western MA, numerous town line signs still not replaced (Blandford/Otis,  Warren/Brimfield,  Westfield/W. Springfield, eastbound Westfield River & Russell/Montgomery).    The button copy at Exit 6 WB is still in place.

Most of the progress of the last 6 moths seems to be on the BGSs on the on-ramp splits.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: DrSmith on December 04, 2019, 12:00:26 AM
On the Pike Westbound after the Allston-Brighton onramp there is a new Speed Limit 40 sign.  A short bit down the road (1/4 mile maybe?) there's a new 55 mph sign.  Not sure if the speed drop is from the old toll plaza and still marked as such through there, choosing the post a lower speed limit through the curves there (as opposed to advisory speeds) or something else.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Ben114 on December 04, 2019, 12:10:02 AM
On the Pike Westbound after the Allston-Brighton onramp there is a new Speed Limit 40 sign.  A short bit down the road (1/4 mile maybe?) there's a new 55 mph sign.  Not sure if the speed drop is from the old toll plaza and still marked as such through there, choosing the post a lower speed limit through the curves there (as opposed to advisory speeds) or something else.
Given the distance between the signs, it's most likely a speed limit from the tight curves in that area.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on December 04, 2019, 11:34:38 AM
On the Pike Westbound after the Allston-Brighton onramp there is a new Speed Limit 40 sign.  A short bit down the road (1/4 mile maybe?) there's a new 55 mph sign.  Not sure if the speed drop is from the old toll plaza and still marked as such through there, choosing the post a lower speed limit through the curves there (as opposed to advisory speeds) or something else.

It's Massachusetts. Advisory speeds generally do not exist outside of ramps. They likely lowered the limit for the curves as is typical on surface roads.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: RobbieL2415 on December 04, 2019, 11:52:55 AM
Now we just need the town line signs in the Berkshires and the overheads near Springfield to go in. I'll be able to check on those Friday.

There's already ones up for Becket and Lee.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: RobbieL2415 on December 04, 2019, 11:54:57 AM
On the Pike Westbound after the Allston-Brighton onramp there is a new Speed Limit 40 sign.  A short bit down the road (1/4 mile maybe?) there's a new 55 mph sign.  Not sure if the speed drop is from the old toll plaza and still marked as such through there, choosing the post a lower speed limit through the curves there (as opposed to advisory speeds) or something else.
Because MA likes to be able to enforce speed limits.  If you make it an advisory sign you can only be ticketed for a basic speed law violation.  If there's an actual limit posted then it has statutory protection and they can go after you for actual speeding.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: vdeane on December 04, 2019, 01:02:13 PM
On the Pike Westbound after the Allston-Brighton onramp there is a new Speed Limit 40 sign.  A short bit down the road (1/4 mile maybe?) there's a new 55 mph sign.  Not sure if the speed drop is from the old toll plaza and still marked as such through there, choosing the post a lower speed limit through the curves there (as opposed to advisory speeds) or something else.

It's Massachusetts. Advisory speeds generally do not exist outside of ramps. They likely lowered the limit for the curves as is typical on surface roads.
Many ramps use statutory limits as well.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Alps on December 04, 2019, 10:54:54 PM
On the Pike Westbound after the Allston-Brighton onramp there is a new Speed Limit 40 sign.  A short bit down the road (1/4 mile maybe?) there's a new 55 mph sign.  Not sure if the speed drop is from the old toll plaza and still marked as such through there, choosing the post a lower speed limit through the curves there (as opposed to advisory speeds) or something else.
Because MA likes to be able to enforce speed limits.  If you make it an advisory sign you can only be ticketed for a basic speed law violation.  If there's an actual limit posted then it has statutory protection and they can go after you for actual speeding.
Yeah, but every curve does not warrant a speed limit.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on January 16, 2020, 11:25:51 PM
This tweet was posted earlier today by MassDOT. Don't know if it's related to the long-standing I-90 sign replacement project or a separate contract with the US 5/I-90/I-91 connector roadway:
"Alert: West Springfield- Route 5 N/S ramps to I-90 closed overnight, Mon-Tues, Jan 20-21, 9pm-5:30am. Sign installation. Posted detour."
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: kefkafloyd on January 17, 2020, 08:54:59 PM
RIP those button copy signs on the ramp connector that have been around since who-knows-when.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on January 31, 2020, 11:41:15 AM
While the signing work on the eastern half of the Pike may be almost completed (still some needed town line signs and reassurance markers), the completion date for the western contract (NY line to Auburn) has been moved back in the MassDOT project listing to Summer 2020. Just in time for new exit numbers?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on January 31, 2020, 12:44:28 PM
With regards to the above: does such include replacing these left-over signs along I-84 eastbound (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1266026,-72.0659175,3a,75y,43.02h,76.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQfepv-Fq8qqij5Kgwh0Cfw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)?  At minimum, the I-90 shields should be replaced; the 9s on both shields lost their reflectivity years ago.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on January 31, 2020, 01:23:13 PM
With regards to the above: does such include replacing these left-over signs along I-84 eastbound (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1266026,-72.0659175,3a,75y,43.02h,76.08t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sQfepv-Fq8qqij5Kgwh0Cfw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)?  At minimum, the I-90 shields should be replaced; the 9s on both shields lost their reflectivity years ago.

It is my understanding that the new signs and support at this location have recently been installed, and that the existing signs and support are to be removed shortly.  The new signs are located closer to the ramp gore, and the lane arrows will reflect the current 3 to 2+2 configuration at the ramps.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: mariethefoxy on February 02, 2020, 10:51:34 AM
Theyre gone, I couldnt get a photo but the new signs have the Hat logo and teh NH-Maine control city was replaced with Worcester
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on February 02, 2020, 11:16:24 AM
Are they ever going to get around to the final sign for Exit 10 and Exit 6, westbound?  Why is it taking them so long to just install 2 gantries?
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: mariethefoxy on February 02, 2020, 01:49:53 PM
One thing I noticed with the new signs is theres an error on the one for Exit 10 Eastbound for 290/395/12 it has two arrows for the exit only but its only one lane, looks like it was two lanes but it was changed to one. That extra lane would be nice since I always seem to get stuck behind some 18 wheeler going wicked slow thru that whole interchange.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on February 02, 2020, 05:30:26 PM
The westbound Exit 10 assembly was replaced a couple months ago. 

The Exit 6 button copy has not and is still there.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on February 02, 2020, 09:48:52 PM
No further progress west of Exit 4 as of today. Berkshire/Hampden C/L signs are missing, as are a few overpass signs.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on February 04, 2020, 12:05:51 PM
One thing I noticed with the new signs is theres an error on the one for Exit 10 Eastbound for 290/395/12 it has two arrows for the exit only but its only one lane, looks like it was two lanes but it was changed to one. That extra lane would be nice since I always seem to get stuck behind some 18 wheeler going wicked slow thru that whole interchange.

This issue has been brought to MassDOT's attention, and will be corrected by removing the left arrow on the sign.  When the I-90 sign replacement project was in design, the exit ramp at this location was two lanes.  The ramp was changed to one lane late during the legacy toll demo project for I/C 10. 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on February 04, 2020, 11:28:15 PM
Took a quick road trip on Sunday to capture some of the new signs put up along the Mass Pike between Boston and Framingham over the past few months. Work is still not complete, with some reassurance markers and town line signs still in need of replacement. The new reassurance markers westbound between Allston/Brighton and Weston have the Mass Pike logo shield on top, opposite to the new ones put up between Weston and Auburn:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs220e.JPG)

and those I saw put up eastbound in Newton. The rest of the new, and still need to be replaced, signs are on my I-90/Mass Pike Photo Gallery:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: kramie13 on February 05, 2020, 11:37:35 AM
I have a bone to pick about this sign replacement project:

WHY are the new Mass. Pike signs OVERHEAD, particularly west of I-84 when the highway is only 2 lanes?  It ruins the view in some places!  This same blunder happened on Rte. 2 west of Fitchburg!  I liked the fact that the Pike had ground-mounted exit signs for 1 mile and 1/2 mile approaching the exit.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: 1 on February 05, 2020, 11:40:12 AM
MassDOT likes overhead signs, even when they're not needed.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: PHLBOS on February 05, 2020, 12:38:03 PM
I have a bone to pick about this sign replacement project:

WHY are the new Mass. Pike signs OVERHEAD, particularly west of I-84 when the highway is only 2 lanes?  It ruins the view in some places!  This same blunder happened on Rte. 2 west of Fitchburg!  I liked the fact that the Pike had ground-mounted exit signs for 1 mile and 1/2 mile approaching the exit.
MassDOT likes overhead signs, even when they're not needed.
IIRC, MassDOT's reasoning for using overhead signs on all divided highways was to eliminate tree/brush clearing maintenance often associated with ground-mounted signs.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on February 05, 2020, 12:56:44 PM
I have a bone to pick about this sign replacement project:

WHY are the new Mass. Pike signs OVERHEAD, particularly west of I-84 when the highway is only 2 lanes?  It ruins the view in some places!  This same blunder happened on Rte. 2 west of Fitchburg!  I liked the fact that the Pike had ground-mounted exit signs for 1 mile and 1/2 mile approaching the exit.
MassDOT likes overhead signs, even when they're not needed.
IIRC, MassDOT's reasoning for using overhead signs on all divided highways was to eliminate tree/brush clearing maintenance often associated with ground-mounted signs.

MassDOT's principal reasons for overhead mounting of guide signs on all divided highways are improved visibility, less overall wear than with ground-mounted signs, reduced possibility of damage as compared to overhead signs, and, as you noted, reduced maintenance costs due to no need for clearing and thinning.  Also, as I've noted in other posts, in Massachusetts, all but the most minimal clearing and thinning activities need a review by the local conservation commissions.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: shadyjay on February 05, 2020, 04:52:32 PM
Meanwhile, CT is taking the opposite approach, mounting more and more guide signs on ground supports, even on urban 3-lane highways, presumably to cut down on the number of supports which need regular inspection.  Some supports in CT are nearing 40 years of age, carrying signs which are 30 years old.  They're gradually being replaced, but its going to take a minute.

I agree.  It seems strange to seen an overhead sign especially in the 30 mile no exit zone in the Berkshires, or even on I-91 north of Northampton. 
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: cl94 on February 05, 2020, 06:12:55 PM
I agree.  It seems strange to seen an overhead sign especially in the 30 mile no exit zone in the Berkshires

The Berkshires ones I actually get more than some of the others. Signs on that stretch are lacking period and most of what exists is for grades, a runaway truck ramp, and a service plaza. The first 2 should be overheads anyway and the third set is ground-mounted. I would argue that the 30-mile gap is a reason TO make the signs for Exits 2 and 3 overheads as well. Miss those exits and you'll be spending an hour backtracking.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Mergingtraffic on February 05, 2020, 07:32:54 PM
Some supports in CT are nearing 40 years of age, carrying signs which are 30 years old. 

Not to get off topic but I am for this one post.  CT replaced signs in the 80's with reflective button copy and some of the signs that were replaced weren't even that old...not even 10 years in some spots.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on February 06, 2020, 09:43:34 AM
Meanwhile, CT is taking the opposite approach, mounting more and more guide signs on ground supports, even on urban 3-lane highways, presumably to cut down on the number of supports which need regular inspection.

IMO, that's a pretty poor reason to be eliminating overhead signs.  As the saying goes, penny wise and pound foolish.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: jp the roadgeek on February 06, 2020, 11:49:34 AM
Meanwhile, CT is taking the opposite approach, mounting more and more guide signs on ground supports, even on urban 3-lane highways, presumably to cut down on the number of supports which need regular inspection.

IMO, that's a pretty poor reason to be eliminating overhead signs.  As the saying goes, penny wise and pound foolish.

This state is bass ackwards.  How else do you explain the state going to reflective button copy with non-filled in state shields on its signage on sign projects in the 80's and 90's when states were moving away from it (VT had signs like that in the 1960's).  Also, while MA and RI are changing exit numbers over a 2 year span, CT will end up taking 16 years to do it if we consider that they started with I-395 and CT 2A in 2014 and won't do I-95 until 2030 or later.  I'll refrain from other local issues here, though.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: vdeane on February 06, 2020, 01:10:12 PM
Meanwhile, CT is taking the opposite approach, mounting more and more guide signs on ground supports, even on urban 3-lane highways, presumably to cut down on the number of supports which need regular inspection.

IMO, that's a pretty poor reason to be eliminating overhead signs.  As the saying goes, penny wise and pound foolish.
If they don't have the same tree trimming hurdles MA has (or has in-house maintenance that bothers to take care of it before it becomes an issue), they might not have the reason to take on the additional expense of installing, inspecting, and eventually replacing the gantry.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: storm2k on February 07, 2020, 01:38:15 PM
Meanwhile, CT is taking the opposite approach, mounting more and more guide signs on ground supports, even on urban 3-lane highways, presumably to cut down on the number of supports which need regular inspection.  Some supports in CT are nearing 40 years of age, carrying signs which are 30 years old.  They're gradually being replaced, but its going to take a minute.

I agree.  It seems strange to seen an overhead sign especially in the 30 mile no exit zone in the Berkshires, or even on I-91 north of Northampton. 

Or you can be NJDOT, have to take a gantry down because it's in bad shape, and just leave it there with nothing in its place for years. I'm looking at you I-280 westbound at Exit 5B. Or 295 in various places south of Trenton where they took down gantries and just put up ground mount signs on flimsy wooden posts for a long time.
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: roadman on February 07, 2020, 01:47:23 PM
Meanwhile, CT is taking the opposite approach, mounting more and more guide signs on ground supports, even on urban 3-lane highways, presumably to cut down on the number of supports which need regular inspection.  Some supports in CT are nearing 40 years of age, carrying signs which are 30 years old.  They're gradually being replaced, but its going to take a minute.

I agree.  It seems strange to seen an overhead sign especially in the 30 mile no exit zone in the Berkshires, or even on I-91 north of Northampton. 

Or you can be NJDOT, have to take a gantry down because it's in bad shape, and just leave it there with nothing in its place for years. I'm looking at you I-280 westbound at Exit 5B. Or 295 in various places south of Trenton where they took down gantries and just put up ground mount signs on flimsy wooden posts for a long time.

Or you can just take the damaged gantry and signs down, but never replace them.   https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=6336.msg139183#msg139183
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: bob7374 on March 22, 2020, 04:30:42 PM
Finally got around to capture two of the latest signs going up on, or just off the Mass. Pike. Here's the overhead BGSs westbound at the Auburn exit:
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs320a.JPG)

Here is the new signs and gantry at the end of I-84 in Sturbridge (capable of sustaining 130 MPH winds):
(http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90signs320b.JPG)

I have posted some additional new sign finds on my I-90/Mass Pike Gallery:
http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html (http://www.malmeroads.net/mass21c/i90photos.html)
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: fwydriver405 on March 22, 2020, 10:48:21 PM
Has this sign at exit 6 (future 51) been updated yet?  (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.1615999,-72.5383492,3a,15.1y,269.72h,92.59t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1staUDHRgYZqWBRjdG_qa06w!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DtaUDHRgYZqWBRjdG_qa06w%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dsearch.revgeo_and_fetch.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D96%26h%3D64%26yaw%3D89.155914%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192) Forgot to check on my way to Albany NY on 11 January and Stony Brook NY on 22 February... wonder what's taking them so long to put the new signs up especially since the surrounding signs were already updated...
Title: Re: I-90 / Mass Pike Signing Work
Post by: Beeper1 on March 23, 2020, 09:03:56 PM
As of last week, the button copy at Exit 6 is still there.  No sign of any replacement activity here in over a year.