quick question on Mass. proposed interstates

[agentsteel53]

Interstate 95 is nowadays the inner (9 mile) loop around Boston, and was originally numbered Mass state route 128.  (Which the locals still refer to it as, and a lot of the time it is cosigned, and on occasion the 128 is the only designation for the road.)

My question is - before the through-Boston I-95 was abandoned, and the number reassigned to the loop, was this loop road considered for an interstate designation?  I had heard it was to be made I-295, but cannot offhand find any evidence to substantiate that.  (Also, I-295 is used elsewhere in the state.)

[ATLRedSoxFan]

I've always wondered, especially after the Big-Dig, why they didn't just switch out I-95 and I-93. If I-93 had followed MA 128 and I-95 followed the Big-Dig, it would have been grid correct and the exit numbering could have been re-assigned during construction. I think MA 128 was supposed to be I-895, but when I-95 got killed, so did I-695 and I-895 IIRC. Just my two cents...

[froggie]

I-895 was the proposed number for a loop around the east side of Providence, RI.

I have a couple Boston-area planning maps at home.  I'd have to double-check them, but I'm pretty sure Route 128 was simply to remain that...Route 128.

[TheStranger]

I've always wondered, especially after the Big-Dig, why they didn't just switch out I-95 and I-93.

Judging from this Wikipedia article, part of it has to do with I-93 ultimately being extended down Route 24:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Route_24

According to MassHighway, it will be an extension of I-93. The portion south of I-195 will remain MA-24 and then RI-24. There is no word on the designation of I-93/US-1 between exits 1 and 4.[2]

[ATLRedSoxFan]

I've always wondered, especially after the Big-Dig, why they didn't just switch out I-95 and I-93.

Judging from this Wikipedia article, part of it has to do with I-93 ultimately being extended down Route 24:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_Route_24

According to MassHighway, it will be an extension of I-93. The portion south of I-195 will remain MA-24 and then RI-24. There is no word on the designation of I-93/US-1 between exits 1 and 4.[2]

Thanks for the link!
Also, according to Wikipedia, there evidentally was never any intention of MA 128 being included in the Interstate system and I-695 was part of the killed Inter-Belt. And MA 128 would have been a perfect candidate for a 3-di or so you would think. I'll have to look at my atlas when I get home and re-think my bright idea. lol!

[shadyjay]

First I've heard of a possible future extension of I-93 down MA 24... don't always trust everything you read on the Wiki!

What makes more sense and what I've seen more evidence of is I-93 being extended on MA 3 down to the Cape Cod Canal.  If I was in charge, that'd be my #2 idea (#1 being I-95 up to Boston, then on the NE Expy, with I-93 starting at the Zakim). 

[mightyace]

I've always wondered, especially after the Big-Dig, why they didn't just switch out I-95 and I-93.

My educated guess would more likely be that the intersection of I-95 and I-93 north of the city would be a double switch with your proposal.

[agentsteel53]

First I've heard of a possible future extension of I-93 down MA 24... don't always trust everything you read on the Wiki!

What makes more sense and what I've seen more evidence of is I-93 being extended on MA 3 down to the Cape Cod Canal.  If I was in charge, that'd be my #2 idea (#1 being I-95 up to Boston, then on the NE Expy, with I-93 starting at the Zakim). 

I wonder why either 24 or 3 isn't signed as 93.  They're both perfectly cromulent freeways. 

[shadyjay]

I remember reading (perhaps at bostonroads.com) that both MA 3 and 24 are not up to interstate standards.  I believe it has to do with such items as bridge clearances and shoulder widths.  But then again, there are dozens of interstates , especially in major cities, which don't meet those characteristics - those are probably "grandfathered" in. 

The one road that is probably up to interstate standards is US 3 from 128 up to 93.  This would make a good I-89, give the Everett a consistent number up through NH, and tie into existing 89 in the Concord area. 

[agentsteel53]

The one road that is probably up to interstate standards is US 3 from 128 up to 93.  This would make a good I-89, give the Everett a consistent number up through NH, and tie into existing 89 in the Concord area. 

does this mean you'd have an 89/93 multiplex for a bit?

[shadyjay]

does this mean you'd have an 89/93 multiplex for a bit?

Yes, but only for a short section from the present "northern 93/293 split" to the 89/93 interchange in Bow.  Lots of pros to my idea:  a single set of exit numbers and route number for the Everett, I-293 would be eliminated - east/west section would remain as NH 101, still fits in the grid in Mass (89-93-95), a perfect opportunity to renumber the exits so that they don't start with #25 in Mass, and if the Nashua beltway is ever built, then it could be numbered I-489.  Not sure if the Everett north of Nashua is up to interstate standards, though.  And the 89/93 interchange in Bow would need some tweaking - something that really needs to be done anyway.  US 3 would go onto surface roads, MA 3A, etc.

[Ian]

does this mean you'd have an 89/93 multiplex for a bit?

Yes, but only for a short section from the present "northern 93/293 split" to the 89/93 interchange in Bow.  Lots of pros to my idea:  a single set of exit numbers and route number for the Everett, I-293 would be eliminated - east/west section would remain as NH 101, still fits in the grid in Mass (89-93-95), a perfect opportunity to renumber the exits so that they don't start with #25 in Mass, and if the Nashua beltway is ever built, then it could be numbered I-489.  Not sure if the Everett north of Nashua is up to interstate standards, though.  And the 89/93 interchange in Bow would need some tweaking - something that really needs to be done anyway.  US 3 would go onto surface roads, MA 3A, etc.

I never imagined it that way. I always thought that US 3 from I-95/MA 128 to Nashua and the Everett Turnpike from their to I-293 could have become its own interstate. May be an I-595? The only thing that would kill it is the tolls on the Everett.

[mightyace]

The only thing that would kill it is the tolls on the Everett.

Maybe.  Witness, I-476 (your avatar) and I-376 in our home state.

[Ian]

The only thing that would kill it is the tolls on the Everett.

Maybe.  Witness, I-476 (your avatar) and I-376 in our home state.

Ok, got me there

[Alps]

It seems that existing toll highways can find their way into the Interstate system (PA 60 being the most recent example) but new ones can't (VA 895, PA 576)?

[Brandon]

It seems that existing toll highways can find their way into the Interstate system (PA 60 being the most recent example) but new ones can't (VA 895, PA 576)?

They most certainly can.  I-355 in Illinois is the primary example here.  Built in 1989 and always intended to be both a tollway and an interstate.  I guess it is up to the state in question.

[Stephane Dumas]

does this mean you'd have an 89/93 multiplex for a bit?

Yes, but only for a short section from the present "northern 93/293 split" to the 89/93 interchange in Bow.  Lots of pros to my idea:  a single set of exit numbers and route number for the Everett, I-293 would be eliminated - east/west section would remain as NH 101, still fits in the grid in Mass (89-93-95), a perfect opportunity to renumber the exits so that they don't start with #25 in Mass, and if the Nashua beltway is ever built, then it could be numbered I-489.  Not sure if the Everett north of Nashua is up to interstate standards, though.  And the 89/93 interchange in Bow would need some tweaking - something that really needs to be done anyway.  US 3 would go onto surface roads, MA 3A, etc.

Add one more pro: the MTQ, finally, extend the stretch of A-35 from St-Jean to the border where I-89 ends, so we'll have a 100% Montreal-Boston freeway path.

[ATLRedSoxFan]

Add one more pro: the MTQ, finally, extend the stretch of A-35 from St-Jean to the border where I-89 ends, so we'll have a 100% Montreal-Boston freeway path.

I thought that was already in the works..or has it been postponed...AGAIN? I mean QC 133 is not bad, but you would think there would be a complete Expressway path from Montreal to I-89

[2Co5_14]

Not sure if the Everett north of Nashua is up to interstate standards, though.

Judging from this view and my memory of driving it years ago, it doesn't appear to be Interstate standard (narrow shoulders, tight bridge clearance)

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Hingham,+MA&sll=34.052261,-84.613292&sspn=0.009654,0.021136&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Hingham,+Plymouth,+Massachusetts&ll=42.221232,-70.926468&spn=0.002157,0.005284&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=42.221323,-70.926475&panoid=iQd7_oGviiuyAQ9WEy9HNg&cbp=12,192.18,,0,6.51

As far as other interstate renumbering proposals go, the current configuration of I-93/I-95 makes sense - I-93 serves as the direct connection to downtown Boston from the north and south off of I-95.  Otherwise, giving directions from Boston to Providence would read I-93 to MA-128 (or I-x95) to I-95, which is too cumbersome for a direct highway link.

[SidS1045]

Interstate 95 is nowadays the inner (9 mile) loop around Boston, and was originally numbered Mass state route 128.  (Which the locals still refer to it as, and a lot of the time it is cosigned, and on occasion the 128 is the only designation for the road.)

The ONLY people who call it I-95 are roadgeeks (and presumably some people at the Massachusetts Department of Highways, who make the signs).  The locals, including every radio and TV traffic reporter, still call it 128, including the stretch which is no longer marked as 128, between the I-95/I-93 junction in Canton and the "Braintree Split" junction of I-93, US-1 and MA-3.

[Stephane Dumas]

I thought that was already in the works..or has it been postponed...AGAIN? I mean QC 133 is not bad, but you would think there would be a complete Expressway path from Montreal to I-89

It's finally in the works from what I saw at http://www.infrastructures.gouv.qc.ca/grands-projets/projet.asp?id=31
pics taken by a fan http://richard3.wordpress.com/2009/03/23/a-35-les-premieres-images/

[ATLRedSoxFan]

I thought that was already in the works..or has it been postponed...AGAIN? I mean QC 133 is not bad, but you would think there would be a complete Expressway path from Montreal to I-89

It's finally in the works from what I saw at http://www.infrastructures.gouv.qc.ca/grands-projets/projet.asp?id=31
pics taken by a fan http://richard3.wordpress.com/2009/03/23/a-35-les-premieres-images/

Well, Quebec has a history of building roads at a very quick pace, so it'll be interesting to see how long it takes to complete the A35. For me, it would be great, I could drive from the border to basically my uncle's front door in Chambly. (If I were driving from Boston)

[2Co5_14]

My question is - before the through-Boston I-95 was abandoned, and the number reassigned to the loop, was this loop road considered for an interstate designation?  I had heard it was to be made I-295, but cannot offhand find any evidence to substantiate that.  (Also, I-295 is used elsewhere in the state.)

Going back to your original question, I imagine that since the planning for and much of the construction of MA-128 occurred before the interstate highway act in 1956, the state didn't need more funding to complete it, and instead focused on getting interstate highway funding for the many other routes it had proposed.  Unlike us roadgeeks, most state highway departments don't want to make every highway an interstate.

[agentsteel53]

Unlike us roadgeeks, most state highway departments don't want to make every highway an interstate.

except for the state of California!

[PAHighways]

Unlike us roadgeeks, most state highway departments don't want to make every highway an interstate.

except for the state of California!

And North Carolina.