BCEC expansion | Seaport

How much do highway sings cost? Those things last 30+ years.

I dont think they cost $55,000
 
How about we wait to see photographs of the signs before judging how great or how bad a long-term deal $55k per sign really was.

I have to laugh at the suggestion that BCEC decided to make a long-term investment in quality signs over cheaper signs based on history. Long-term investment in materials hasn't been the M.O. of the BCEC since day one, and I'd bet Raphael Vinoly would back me up on that. When BCEC was approached to consider a completely solar installation on the roof the idea was shot down because it would take a decade to pay off and the BCEC didn't want to finance a front-loaded investment. Solar would have paid for itself by now.

Anyhow, here's the company that made the signs:

http://www.crccoinc.com/
 
Apparently these signs were put out for bid, and a minority-owned-business contractor from Quincy was low bidder. I suspect the contract was put out to bid by Massport, because they put up the most money.

That's the private sector for you.
 
Wasn't there a time when road-signage was manufactured in the correctional system, along with license plates and simple office furniture?
 
Beton Brut said:
Wasn't there a time when road-signage was manufactured in the correctional system, along with license plates and simple office furniture?
Click to expand...
Yes.

The city of Boston apparently still makes many of its own signs.

In this instance, I think, based on a picture of the sign, that the cost includes the sign pole(s), pediment base, and who knows what else. That's why a construction company bid on the contract, not a sign company. Also there were apparently two big overhead signs for one of the interstate sections of the Big Dig.

So while many would like to point fingers at the city, or the BCEC, I'll still put my money that the contract, the sign design and specs, etc., was done by MAssport.
 
datadyne007 said:
If they bought cheap signs and had to replace them in 5 years, you and the others would be the first to complain about the need to replace them again.

Make one investment now that is quality and will last or make a bunch of smaller investments that will require repeated investments and wasted time?
Click to expand...

Sicilian said:
How about we wait to see photographs of the signs before judging how great or how bad a long-term deal $55k per sign really was.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm the one who is losing my mind. Perhaps I do not know what a sign is. We're talking about the metal plates with some words on them, no? Or perhaps we're talking about some currency other than U.S. dollars? We're talking about fifty-five thousand dollars for a sign? One tenth of that would be extravagant. How are Boston's public schools doing by the way? Personally I'd prefer to pay a teacher's salary for a year than put up an overpriced metal sheet.
 
stellarfun said:
In this instance, I think, based on a picture of the sign, that the cost includes the sign pole(s), pediment base, and who knows what else. That's why a construction company bid on the contract, not a sign company.
Click to expand...

Good point on why the business would have been sourced to a construction company. If the sign fabrication was subcontracted out, I wonder if that bid was overseen by some State procurement official...
 
There are some pictures that accompanied the Herald article. It's funny because one of the quotes is something along the lines of, it's an area that hasn't had signage. When the pictures clearly show the existing (albeit) small signs right below the new behemoth's.

Now to be clear. The article compares this price tag, not to a car, but to a fully loaded Chevy Tahoe. Which is overpriced at 50k+. A car or truck, which by the way has moving parts, an internal combustion engine, on board computers, safety equipment etc. A sign has no moving parts. It is galvanized sheet steel, reflective paint, clear coat, etc.

The materials per sign are less than a grand each. The cost is in the setup fee for each. The programming of the sign, the typesetting, the pressing, etc. Still another couple grand, and some of these should be redundant or similar enough to get a better fee.

Some one above mentions the other costs, such as poles, concrete bases, etc. There is probably some civil engineering involved, traffic studies, view obstruction or best placement. Perhaps some lighting is involved, I'm not sure.

After all that, I'd say the cost per each should probably still be about half of what it was.

These however, are very important signs. Without them, how would you find the BCEC or the WTC? You can't unless you read them, because those very buildings are hidden by these gigantic new signs. The justify their own existance by blocking out what had previously been very easy to find landmarks.

Smart city would have put these on the Seaport Square developers, who when they build will actually block some of these easy to find locations. Yes you can build that new building, but we want a sign right here. Match this template to look like all others. Voila, you have signs.

The cruise terminal signs I agree with, because unless you've been there, you have no idea. But, that's what GPS are for. You don't typically walk to your cruise....
 
Pull over and ask for directions. What Boston resident, taxi driver, MBTA personnel etc doesn't know where the BCEC or World Trade Center is?
 
Found it.

438b4f_042511signsce08.jpg

http://bostonherald.com/news/politics/view.bg?articleid=1333555

They are quite nice, but that steep pricetag isn't very justified. To put things in perspective, Obama's Recovery Act signs on the highway only cost $10,000 each.

Also:
"In addition to the 19 signs, the project also included the replacement of two large highway signs over Interstate 90, officials said."
Click to expand...
 
Sealed General Bids for MPA Contract No. D161-C1, SOUTH BOSTON WAYFINDING
SIGN PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION, SOUTH BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS, will be
received by the Massachusetts Port Authority at the Capital Programs Department Office, Suite 209S, Logan Office Center, One Harborside Drive, East Boston, Massachusetts 02128, until 11:00 A.M. local time on WEDNESDAY, MAY 26, 2010 immediately after which, in a designated room, the bids will be opened and read publicly.

NOTE: PRE-BID CONFERENCE WILL BE HELD AT THE CAPITAL PROGRAMS
DEPARTMENT (ABOVE ADDRESS) AT 10:00AM LOCAL TIME ON
FRIDAY, MAY 7, 2010.

The work includes THE FURNISHING AND INSTALLATION OF WAYFINDING GUIDE SIGNS AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN SOUTH BOSTON. THE WORK INCLUDES ALL ASSOCIATED SITE WORK, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO PARTIAL DEMOLITION AND RESTORATION OF CONCRETE AND UNIT PAVER SIDEWALKS, REMOVAL AND DISPOSAL OF TREES AND TREE GRATES, EXCAVATION AND BACKFILL, AND RELATED MAINTENANCE AND PROTECTION OF VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC.
_____________________________________________
Only three construction companies took out plans.

Winning contractor was under the Massport cost estimate.


Recovery Act Highway signs typically cost a lot less than $10,000
http://www.ajc.com/news/gdot-to-pay-for-145846.html
 
The city can PUMP the Seaport District all they want. If Menino had a brain he would realize they need the T-service to expand maybe the Orange, Red, or Blue lines in that area to really get the area pumping. Accessible transit is key for growing that part of the city. I'm not talking about the silver line, I'm talking jumping on the train and jumping right off in minutes.
 
I don't know what the rights of way are in this area, nor am I even advocating pissing away what will inevitably amount to at least half a billion dollars, but a spur off of the Red Line perhaps at Broadway or somehow linking directly to South Station would be a bit more logical than the Blue or Orange Lines.
 
kmp1284 said:
I don't know what the rights of way are in this area, nor am I even advocating pissing away what will inevitably amount to at least half a billion dollars, but a spur off of the Red Line perhaps at Broadway or somehow linking directly to South Station would be a bit more logical than the Blue or Orange Lines.
Click to expand...

While the SBW does need real rapid transit, there's such a mess of spaghetti infrastructure underneath that entire area that would make heavy rail implementation extremely difficult and thus costly.
 
kmp1284 said:
I don't know what the rights of way are in this area, nor am I even advocating pissing away what will inevitably amount to at least half a billion dollars, but a spur off of the Red Line perhaps at Broadway or somehow linking directly to South Station would be a bit more logical than the Blue or Orange Lines.
Click to expand...

I'm far from an engineer. The city & state should have been working on the infrastructure a long-time ago. Forget worrying about who is building what and how tall is the strucuture let the FAA & the Private developers handle that. The city should have been working to build a strong infrastructure for the city a long time ago. The key to great city is making commuting very accessible and easy.
The T actually needs a massive upgrade because those trains have to be 50 years old. Red, Blue & Orange.

The Seaport would have already been booming if we had a better transit system underground.
 
datadyne007 said:
They are quite nice, but that steep pricetag isn't very justified. To put things in perspective, Obama's Recovery Act signs on the highway only cost $10,000 each.

Also:
Click to expand...

Thank you. I wondered how much those idiotic pat ourselves on the back signs cost. Probably installed 5,000 of them across the country at the recovery jobsites.... That $50m in, jerk ourselves off, we're saving the economy signs could have funded.... well a few more constrcution jobs. Awesome!!
 
SeamusMcFly said:
Thank you. I wondered how much those idiotic pat ourselves on the back signs cost. Probably installed 5,000 of them across the country at the recovery jobsites.... That $50m in, jerk ourselves off, we're saving the economy signs could have funded.... well a few more constrcution jobs. Awesome!!
Click to expand...

Apparently only a select number of them cost $10,000. I must have been reading a very biased news source. It was something I browsed by on Google a little while back. Stellarfun posted a link saying they were around $1500-$2500 each.
 
SeamusMcFly said:
Thank you. I wondered how much those idiotic pat ourselves on the back signs cost. Probably installed 5,000 of them across the country at the recovery jobsites.... That $50m in, jerk ourselves off, we're saving the economy signs could have funded.... well a few more constrcution jobs. Awesome!!
Click to expand...

How about some GREENWAY SIGNS!!!!!
 
datadyne007 said:
Apparently only a select number of them cost $10,000. I must have been reading a very biased news source. It was something I browsed by on Google a little while back. Stellarfun posted a link saying they were around $1500-$2500 each.
Click to expand...
There was a $10,000 sign put up by Dulles Airport outside of Washington.
But that was apparently the very expensive exception.

And one of the 'difficulties' is that you don't know how much a contractor is billing for a sign, in contrast to how much the sign actually cost. Like hospitals that charge $10 or $20 for a single aspirin; a price far in excess of what the hospital bought the aspirin for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top