Rhode Island News

[Ted$8roadFan]

I noticed a terrible error on RI 4 over Thanksgiving.  They recently replaced the advance BGS signage for Exit 9 as part of the Division St. Bridge Replacement project.  One problem...they posted the sign for Exit 9B (RI 4 NB) on the SB side, and vice versa.  As it stands, drivers on RI 4 NB won't know to take Exit 9B for I-95 South since that sign is now on the wrong side of the road.     Hopefully RIDOT fixes this soon!

I think most RI drivers know to take Exit 9B (RI-401 west) to access I-95 south.......but you're right, out-of-state drivers may not. RIDOT should fix this soon.

[shadyjay]

I drove RI 4 for the first time ever earlier this week.  The last time I was on this road was at some point I think in the 80s and it ended at the RI 2 exit. 
Anyway, this is the SB "exit now" for Exit 9...

DSC03187 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

I did look in my "rear view" and saw an I-95 South shield on the NB signage, which I believe was the 1/4 mile advance (at Exit 9-A).  Come to think of it, yes, the sign I posted above should be NB, since it has isolated "RI 401 West", when the SB direction provides access to both RI 401 East and West. 

Maybe someone should drop a line to RIDOT about this.  I did for ConnDOT a few months ago and the error was corrected quite quickly. 

Regardless, having I-95 displayed here isn't a terrible idea.  With the RI 4 exit being a left hand exit (with multiple lanes) from I-95 South, I bet its seen its fair share of motorists who have gotten in the wrong lane and have to get back.  I-95 South in Salisbury, MA has similar "return to I-495" shields posted one exit later, giving motorists a second chance. 

And the design of that pull-through... really?  No control city?  Something like "Narragansett/Newport" would work (and should be posted on I-95 instead of "North Kingstown").  Or ideally, "Shore Points" would be nice too, but we all know the MUTCD doesn't like that.

[jp the roadgeek]

That reminds me: I wish RIDOT would use Newport as a control at the NB exit for RI 138.  SB using Richmond/South Kingstown is fine, but Newport should replace one of them NB, since traffic coming from CT and points south are often exiting there with Newport as a destination.

Speaking of redundant signage for 95 South on 4 south: I noticed an example of something like that today in CT.  On the SB CT 9 Christian Lane exit (current 23/future 33), I noticed a new trailblazer sign for...CT 9 North(!).  Must be for those who pull a U-turn to access the SR 571 connector. 

[shadyjay]

That reminds me: I wish RIDOT would use Newport as a control at the NB exit for RI 138.  SB using Richmond/South Kingstown is fine, but Newport should replace one of them NB, since traffic coming from CT and points south are often exiting there with Newport as a destination.

In the 1980s and 1990s, the NB exit for RI 138 (back then, Exit 3-A) was actually signed "Kingston/Newport".  That was replaced with temporary signage, then the present "South Kingstown" for 138 East.  I'm not sure how RI does towns, but it seems south of the Providence area, there's only two towns in RI, as far as I-95 is concerned... "(North/South) Kingstown" and "(East/West) Greenwich".  RI 138 exit does gets a small "Newport Pell Bridge" trailblazer in both directions, and I believe "Newport" is on secondary signage. 

Still would be nice to see a freeway connecting I-95 directly with the RI 138 expressway (the cloverleaf interchange on US 1 is already there).  That RI 138 between I-95 and US 1 is a slow crawl.

[vdeane]

Google actually suggests RI 102 to RI 4 for I-95/New London to RI 138/Newport.  RI 138 was an alternate when I looked earlier, but now that one is suggesting Woodville and RI 2 to RI 138.  The other alternate is CT 2, CT/RI 78, and US 1, which is the longest time-wise (distance too), but looks to be the least aggravating.

[Ted$8roadFan]

That reminds me: I wish RIDOT would use Newport as a control at the NB exit for RI 138.  SB using Richmond/South Kingstown is fine, but Newport should replace one of them NB, since traffic coming from CT and points south are often exiting there with Newport as a destination.

In the 1980s and 1990s, the NB exit for RI 138 (back then, Exit 3-A) was actually signed "Kingston/Newport".  That was replaced with temporary signage, then the present "South Kingstown" for 138 East.  I'm not sure how RI does towns, but it seems south of the Providence area, there's only two towns in RI, as far as I-95 is concerned... "(North/South) Kingstown" and "(East/West) Greenwich".  RI 138 exit does gets a small "Newport Pell Bridge" trailblazer in both directions, and I believe "Newport" is on secondary signage. 

Still would be nice to see a freeway connecting I-95 directly with the RI 138 expressway (the cloverleaf interchange on US 1 is already there).  That RI 138 between I-95 and US 1 is a slow crawl.

This being Rhode Island, I wonder if local politics was involved in removing Newport from the I-95/RI-138 exit. By that I mean if the residents who live near RI-138 wanted to discourage additional traffic heading to Newport by removing it directly as a control city, since it is already clogged, especially URI-based traffic.

Also, I wonder if the coastal communities wanted Newport-based traffic to follow the coastal route for commercial purposes. I don't actually know if any of this is true, but it wouldn't be surprising. In any event, the CT-2/CT/RI-78/US-1 route, while longer, can be much less aggravating than 138.

As for a freeway between I-95 and the RI-138 freeway.....that won't happen in our lifetimes.

[Ted$8roadFan]

Google actually suggests RI 102 to RI 4 for I-95/New London to RI 138/Newport.  RI 138 was an alternate when I looked earlier, but now that one is suggesting Woodville and RI 2 to RI 138.  The other alternate is CT 2, CT/RI 78, and US 1, which is the longest time-wise (distance too), but looks to be the least aggravating.

RI-102 to RI-4 is potentially quicker than RI-138, although less direct. Also, RI-4 often has severe beach traffic backups from RI-102 down to its origin at US-1 (as does US-1 at RI-138), at least during the tourist season.

[southshore720]

Maybe someone should drop a line to RIDOT about this.  I did for ConnDOT a few months ago and the error was corrected quite quickly. 

I emailed RIDOT with your photo (Thanks Jay) and they are going to pass it along to the engineer.  We'll see what happens!

[shadyjay]

Still would be nice to see a freeway connecting I-95 directly with the RI 138 expressway (the cloverleaf interchange on US 1 is already there).  That RI 138 between I-95 and US 1 is a slow crawl.

As for a freeway between I-95 and the RI-138 freeway.....that won't happen in our lifetimes.

Oh, well aware of that!  Just wishful thinking.

[jp the roadgeek]

 

Google actually suggests RI 102 to RI 4 for I-95/New London to RI 138/Newport.  RI 138 was an alternate when I looked earlier, but now that one is suggesting Woodville and RI 2 to RI 138.  The other alternate is CT 2, CT/RI 78, and US 1, which is the longest time-wise (distance too), but looks to be the least aggravating.

RI-102 to RI-4 is potentially quicker than RI-138, although less direct. Also, RI-4 often has severe beach traffic backups from RI-102 down to its origin at US-1 (as does US-1 at RI-138), at least during the tourist season.

Didn't even consider it, but Google maps has me going to Newport via CT 2 to I-395 North to CT 138 to CT/RI 165 to RI 3 to the route you mentioned coming from the Hartford/Waterbury area. I always took 9 to 95 to 138.  Get to stop at the Middle of Nowhere Diner on the way this way.

[spooky]

I drove RI 4 for the first time ever earlier this week.  The last time I was on this road was at some point I think in the 80s and it ended at the RI 2 exit. 
Anyway, this is the SB "exit now" for Exit 9...

It was around 1990. My street had a traffic light on RI 4 up until I was in high school in the late '80s, when they temporarily dead-ended our street to build a bridge to carry our road under RI 4 with no direct access.

DSC03187 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

I did look in my "rear view" and saw an I-95 South shield on the NB signage, which I believe was the 1/4 mile advance (at Exit 9-A).  Come to think of it, yes, the sign I posted above should be NB, since it has isolated "RI 401 West", when the SB direction provides access to both RI 401 East and West. 

Maybe someone should drop a line to RIDOT about this.  I did for ConnDOT a few months ago and the error was corrected quite quickly. 

Regardless, having I-95 displayed here isn't a terrible idea.  With the RI 4 exit being a left hand exit (with multiple lanes) from I-95 South, I bet its seen its fair share of motorists who have gotten in the wrong lane and have to get back.  I-95 South in Salisbury, MA has similar "return to I-495" shields posted one exit later, giving motorists a second chance. 

You're absolutely correct that this sign should be NB, not SB. The NB signage has always identified the connection to 95SB because of the truck traffic coming from Quonset. The SB signage has always shown RI 401 to RI 2.

I learned that RIDOT is pursuing a federal grant to promote the "missing move" from RI 4 NB to I-95 SB. While RI 4 SB to I-95 NB is also a missing move, it is a much lower demand move.
http://www.dot.ri.gov/projects/MissingMove2022/

And the design of that pull-through... really?  No control city?  Something like "Narragansett/Newport" would work (and should be posted on I-95 instead of "North Kingstown").  Or ideally, "Shore Points" would be nice too, but we all know the MUTCD doesn't like that.

Every highway in RI will lead you to "Shore Points". Narraganset/Newport is most logical.
There are terrible RIDOT-y signs in the median on I-95 letting you know that RI 4 leads to the beaches and the Block Island Ferry.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6741089,-71.4786509,3a,15y,179.16h,85.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stTvfXw48aO3ftGg5rWJgdg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[Ted$8roadFan]

I remember the old RI-4 to RI-2 ending well when I was a kid. Going that way meant having to go through the infamous Wickford rotary, which was like the rotaries that used to bedevil the Boston area. By the time I was old enough to drive in 1989-90, Route 4 had been completed. 

I-95 in that area is actually designed for most of the traffic southbound to get off at Route 4, which is certainly true in the warm months. The state has actually gotten better with signage and pacing to tell drivers which way they're going, and to stay right on I-95 to continue south. Besides the nasty lane drop just after the exit on I-95 that needs to be fixed.......well, that's another post.

The state actually uses North Kingstown as a control city, and used East Greenwich in the past. Narragansett is a control city on RI-4. Newport is a little tougher, as RI-4/US-1 don't really go near there, and the other towns in South County aren't really big enough to warrant control city status, certainly not on I-95.

As has already been mentioned, pretty much everyone heading south on I-95 knows that RI-4 is the best way to get to the beach and to Newport, warts and all (you can't forget it on many summer evenings). Many RIers even call it the road to the beach.

In fairness, I can't understand why RIDOT uses the signage it does, or uses such tiny fonts for some of their auxiliary signs. I suspect that a not insignificant number of South County residents are secretly happy that their towns aren't named more prominently on highway signs.

[southshore720]

Every highway in RI will lead you to "Shore Points". Narraganset/Newport is most logical.
There are terrible RIDOT-y signs in the median on I-95 letting you know that RI 4 leads to the beaches and the Block Island Ferry.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6741089,-71.4786509,3a,15y,179.16h,85.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stTvfXw48aO3ftGg5rWJgdg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

RIDOT loves a horrible one-off LGS.  Small, cramped, with horrible font choices.  RIDOT's problem is using these LGS "beauties" as permanent BGS replacements instead of temporary placeholders.  They notably do this on I-295.  Even though those signs are about a decade old now, there are a few that have gone missing and have been given the LGS treatment.

[spooky]

Every highway in RI will lead you to "Shore Points". Narraganset/Newport is most logical.
There are terrible RIDOT-y signs in the median on I-95 letting you know that RI 4 leads to the beaches and the Block Island Ferry.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6741089,-71.4786509,3a,15y,179.16h,85.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stTvfXw48aO3ftGg5rWJgdg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

RIDOT loves a horrible one-off LGS.  Small, cramped, with horrible font choices.  RIDOT's problem is using these LGS "beauties" as permanent BGS replacements instead of temporary placeholders.  They notably do this on I-295.  Even though those signs are about a decade old now, there are a few that have gone missing and have been given the LGS treatment.

I realized driving down to North Kingstown yesterday that there are 4 or 5 LGS supplementing the RI 4 BGS on I-95 SB. Some are better than others.

[kramie13]

I drove RI 4 for the first time ever earlier this week.  The last time I was on this road was at some point I think in the 80s and it ended at the RI 2 exit. 
Anyway, this is the SB "exit now" for Exit 9...

DSC03187 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

I see RIDOT has kept the yellow "old exit" signs on RI 4, but looking at Google Street View, they've been plucked from both I-295 and I-195.

[Ted$8roadFan]

Every highway in RI will lead you to "Shore Points". Narraganset/Newport is most logical.
There are terrible RIDOT-y signs in the median on I-95 letting you know that RI 4 leads to the beaches and the Block Island Ferry.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.6741089,-71.4786509,3a,15y,179.16h,85.55t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1stTvfXw48aO3ftGg5rWJgdg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

RIDOT loves a horrible one-off LGS.  Small, cramped, with horrible font choices.  RIDOT's problem is using these LGS "beauties" as permanent BGS replacements instead of temporary placeholders.  They notably do this on I-295.  Even though those signs are about a decade old now, there are a few that have gone missing and have been given the LGS treatment.

I wonder if RIDOT buys their sign metal by the pound given some of their diminutive sizes.

[Ted$8roadFan]

I drove RI 4 for the first time ever earlier this week.  The last time I was on this road was at some point I think in the 80s and it ended at the RI 2 exit. 
Anyway, this is the SB "exit now" for Exit 9...

DSC03187 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

I see RIDOT has kept the yellow "old exit" signs on RI 4, but looking at Google Street View, they've been plucked from both I-295 and I-195.

Technically, the sign is correct, although East Greenwich (the destination on RI-401 east) may have a legitimate beef.

[Ted$8roadFan]

New license plates ready to issue.

https://www.abc6.com/wave-goodbye-to-iconic-wave-new-year-new-rhode-island-license-plates/

[jp the roadgeek]

New license plates ready to issue.

https://www.abc6.com/wave-goodbye-to-iconic-wave-new-year-new-rhode-island-license-plates/

Going to be fun going to Misquamicut and trying to distinguish between RI and CT plates.  Can just see the Pam Beasley meme now.

[Ted$8roadFan]

New license plates ready to issue.

https://www.abc6.com/wave-goodbye-to-iconic-wave-new-year-new-rhode-island-license-plates/

Going to be fun going to Misquamicut and trying to distinguish between RI and CT plates.  Can just see the Pam Beasley meme now.

In my experience, there have always been more CT plates (NY, NJ, MA) than RI plates, at least anecdotally.

[Ted$8roadFan]

New "Ocean"  license plates being rolled out:

https://dmv.ri.gov/media/1946/download

[roadman65]

I see Rhode Island joined the rest in implementing cash less tolls.
https://goo.gl/maps/3kSZbYGcWsWVEqAj6

Also I see the Claiborne- Pell Bridge uses a zipper barrier instead of a Jersey Wall to divide traffic. I'm assuming that traffic counts are high at times to warrant three lanes in one direction at times.

[Ted$8roadFan]

I see Rhode Island joined the rest in implementing cash less tolls.
https://goo.gl/maps/3kSZbYGcWsWVEqAj6

Also I see the Claiborne- Pell Bridge uses a zipper barrier instead of a Jersey Wall to divide traffic. I'm assuming that traffic counts are high at times to warrant three lanes in one direction at times.

That zipper barrier is relatively new. The barrier-less bridge could be white knuckle at times. Traffic can indeed be quite high, especially eastbound in the summer months heading into Newport, so reversible lanes would be welcome then, but I don't recall having seen that happen in many years of crossing the bridge.

[pderocco]

New "Ocean"  license plates being rolled out:

https://dmv.ri.gov/media/1946/download

Another state's bit the dust, and is surrendered to the temptation of those cheesy looking printed plates. Ugh.

It's understandable why: printed plates are undoubtedly cheaper, and you can print arbitrary plates without having to spit out a sequence of 1000 consecutively numbered plates. But there's something satisfying about an embossed plate. They're a sort of sculpture. I hope California (where I live) sticks with the embossed plates, at least for the regular series.

By the way, I often see the new printed plates referred to as "screened" plates. I think it's highly unlikely that the numbers are screened onto them. I would bet they're ink-jet printed, and then either heat-treated or coated to protect them from the elements.

[storm2k]

New "Ocean"  license plates being rolled out:

https://dmv.ri.gov/media/1946/download

Another state's bit the dust, and is surrendered to the temptation of those cheesy looking printed plates. Ugh.

It's understandable why: printed plates are undoubtedly cheaper, and you can print arbitrary plates without having to spit out a sequence of 1000 consecutively numbered plates. But there's something satisfying about an embossed plate. They're a sort of sculpture. I hope California (where I live) sticks with the embossed plates, at least for the regular series.

By the way, I often see the new printed plates referred to as "screened" plates. I think it's highly unlikely that the numbers are screened onto them. I would bet they're ink-jet printed, and then either heat-treated or coated to protect them from the elements.

New York is the only state I know of that went to the digitally printed plates (with the old blue and white series in the early aughts) only to return to embossed plates (first with the orange and blue ones and now the newer Excelsior plates). NJ moved to the printed ones in 2016 or so but they're the same runny egg design that has existed since 1992.