Massachusetts

[Rothman]

I find the idea of doing a major interchange reconstruction of a cramped cloverleaf like I-95/I-93 without needing ROW to be absolutely laughable.

The sacrifice here is that it requires a relatively low design speed on the ramps.

Pfft.  A temporary fix at best.  It's still a cloverleaf with slightly longer weaves.  May not even solve the issues.

[yakra]

^ clearly did not look at the diagram

[Rothman]

^ clearly did not look at the diagram

...or looked at the diagram on his phone.

Still seems like a partial solution to me.

[yakra]

What seems partial about it?

[hotdogPi]

What seems partial about it?

Two of the four quadrants are changing, and two of the four are remaining the same.

Another way to help solve the problem: have it four lanes northbound between MA 28 and the 95/128 split; the lane drop at MA 28 causes congestion from merging.

[Alps]

What seems partial about it?

Two of the four quadrants are changing, and two of the four are remaining the same.

Another way to help solve the problem: have it four lanes northbound between MA 28 and the 95/128 split; the lane drop at MA 28 causes congestion from merging.

Those two quadrants changing eliminates the weave so it's not small potatoes.

[Rothman]

What seems partial about it?

Two of the four quadrants are changing, and two of the four are remaining the same.

Another way to help solve the problem: have it four lanes northbound between MA 28 and the 95/128 split; the lane drop at MA 28 causes congestion from merging.

Those two quadrants changing eliminates the weave so it's not small potatoes.

Reminds me of what was done at I-495/Georgia Ave in DC, albeit trying to retain all movements.  Proof would be in post-construction traffic conditions.

[roadman]

What seems partial about it?

Two of the four quadrants are changing, and two of the four are remaining the same.

Another way to help solve the problem: have it four lanes northbound between MA 28 and the 95/128 split; the lane drop at MA 28 causes congestion from merging.

Widening to four lanes northbound all the way to the I-95/128 split would be a major project from both a cost and construction perspective.  However, extending the fourth lane to just north of the on-ramp from Route 28 north would do much to improve the merge.

[vdeane]

^ clearly did not look at the diagram

...or looked at the diagram on his phone.

Still seems like a partial solution to me.

I was confused by the diagram for a while too, despite looking at it on a desktop.  It would help if the color used for ramps that would be removed were consistent - the loops use dark gray but the outer ramps use white.

[fwydriver405]

Don't know if this fits on a "Google Maps" thread or here, but have a question about how Google Maps shows toll roads. Why is the Massachusetts Turnpike between Exits 45 and 54, as well as between Exits 90 and 96 listed as a "toll road" by Google Maps, even though there are no tolls between those two interchanges (for all users)?

EDIT: And also why doesn't MassDOT put "Last Exit Before Toll" signs at the last exits before the tolls restart as well on the Mass Pike on the un-tolled segments listed above?

An example of Google Maps listing the tolled and untolled sections of a toll road is the Garden State Parkway, particularly between the Driscoll Bridge and the NJ/NY border, where there are a few untolled segments (between exit 129 and US 22 (NB) or I-78 (SB) is an example) as well as places to get off the freeway before encountering a mainline or ramp toll.

[hotdogPi]

Is I-87 → I-88 and the reverse commute still free after AET? Before AET, you would receive a ticket and pay $0.00 as you exited. Google Maps always showed that segment as a toll road, too, and it's not a recent change unlike the Mass Pike. That said, if they never changed the details on the Mass Pike from when Google Maps was created, the segment west of Exit 51 would still be listed as free for passenger cars, and it isn't.

[fwydriver405]

Is I-87 → I-88 and the reverse commute still free after AET? Before AET, you would receive a ticket and pay $0.00 as you exited. Google Maps always showed that segment as a toll road, too, and it's not a recent change unlike the Mass Pike. That said, if they never changed the details on the Mass Pike from when Google Maps was created, the segment west of Exit 51 would still be listed as free for passenger cars, and it isn't.

If you are talking about the NY Thruway, yes, it is still $0.00 for all users, but that's only if you entered at Interchanges 24, 25, and 26 and exited at 25 A, or entered at 25 A and exit to 24, 25 or 26.

Source: Took a trip to Binghamton NY from Orono ME from last Thu-Sat that involved that route, and also here.

[Rothman]

Don't know if this fits on a "Google Maps" thread or here, but have a question about how Google Maps shows toll roads. Why is the Massachusetts Turnpike between Exits 45 and 54, as well as between Exits 90 and 96 listed as a "toll road" by Google Maps, even though there are no tolls between those two interchanges (for all users)?

EDIT: And also why doesn't MassDOT put "Last Exit Before Toll" signs at the last exits before the tolls restart as well on the Mass Pike on the un-tolled segments listed above?

An example of Google Maps listing the tolled and untolled sections of a toll road is the Garden State Parkway, particularly between the Driscoll Bridge and the NJ/NY border, where there are a few untolled segments (between exit 129 and US 22 (NB) or I-78 (SB) is an example) as well as places to get off the freeway before encountering a mainline or ramp toll.

I miss the old days when Rand McNally carved up the Garden State color-wise to show where the toll-free stretches were.

[mass_citizen]

I drove to Tyngsboro from CT yesterday.
Why are there two sets of mile markers on I-290? Is it multiplexed?


I noticed quite a few extruded aluminum signs seem to "bleach"  white from my headlights for a second just before I drive under them. I could see how the white and green would blend together for certain drivers.  I don't notice that w CT ones. They stay clear and vibrant color wise as I drive towards them.

I remember some NY signs did that on I-287/87 heading east towards the TPZ Bridge. Those were really bad, you'd think it was a white sign for a few seconds.

I-290 isn't multiplexed. The second set of mile markers is from the exit renumbering in August 2021. There are dual mile markers for I-395, which ends at the Mass Pike. MassDOT has considered extending I-395 over the existing I-290 to Marlborough if the general public is used to it. It's a little confusing at first.

So is the plan to remove the 290 designation? Why number the exits based off 395?

Agreed it is confusing...as are most ideas traffic engineers come up with 

[5foot14]

Don't know if this fits on a "Google Maps" thread or here, but have a question about how Google Maps shows toll roads. Why is the Massachusetts Turnpike between Exits 45 and 54, as well as between Exits 90 and 96 listed as a "toll road" by Google Maps, even though there are no tolls between those two interchanges (for all users)?

Because technically it still is a toll road, the toll between these points is just $0. They did a similar thing years ago between the NY border and Springfield. Folks in western mass were upset paying tolls that wound up going to Boston and the big dig so the Masspike set the toll to $0 for Exits 1-6. By not eliminating its status as a toll road, they preserve their ability to add them back later (which they did). If they relinquish the toll road status and I-90 becomes a free interstate, it would be very difficult to add tolls back again.

SM-A515U

[SidS1045]

That'll make a mess out of Cedar St. by turning it into an arterial road. It's currently an industrial park alley with lots of driveways. Imagine a line of cars and trucks on Cedar St headed for I-93, and trying to make a left turn into it from Cummings Park. In a tractor trailer.

It will also add exponentially to the traffic load on Washington Street, which south of the Cedar Street intersection is not nearly wide enough to handle tractor-trailer traffic.  As it stands now, rush-hour traffic routinely backs up through the Cedar Street intersection from the traffic lights at Salem Street.

I understand they're looking for a quick fix, after almost two decades of not deciding how to fix the problem permanently.  But turning Cedar Street into an on-ramp to I-93S doesn't really fix anything.

[SidS1045]

Pfft.  A temporary fix at best.  It's still a cloverleaf with slightly longer weaves.  May not even solve the issues.

Not to mention that it does nothing about the conflicting entrance and exit ramps on 93.

[Alps]

Don't know if this fits on a "Google Maps" thread or here, but have a question about how Google Maps shows toll roads. Why is the Massachusetts Turnpike between Exits 45 and 54, as well as between Exits 90 and 96 listed as a "toll road" by Google Maps, even though there are no tolls between those two interchanges (for all users)?

Because technically it still is a toll road, the toll between these points is just $0. They did a similar thing years ago between the NY border and Springfield. Folks in western mass were upset paying tolls that wound up going to Boston and the big dig so the Masspike set the toll to $0 for Exits 1-6. By not eliminating its status as a toll road, they preserve their ability to add them back later (which they did). If they relinquish the toll road status and I-90 becomes a free interstate, it would be very difficult to add tolls back again.

Yeah but Google's decision to show it as toll vs. free doesn't change whether they can charge tolls later (:

[kramie13]

What mandates a "2-mile" advance warning sign on highways?  I've noticed that when driving on highways in Massachusetts, usually an exit as a 1 mile and a 1/2 mile warning sign.  But some exits have 2 mile warning signs as well.  Usually it's for an interstate highway interchange, but I've noticed that the US 1 exit on I-495 in Plainville now has 2 mile warning signs, and recently a "2 1/4 miles" warning sign was put up for the US 3/Lowell Connector interchange.  WHY?  It seems so unnecessary!

And speaking of unnecessary, why are there duplicate signs for Exits 33 A-B on I-495 in Mansfield, as seen here?
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0063859,-71.2238196,3a,75y,315.43h,99.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5jBkPhUjbLmdMrLcdi8eeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

[MATraveler128]

What mandates a "2-mile" advance warning sign on highways?  I've noticed that when driving on highways in Massachusetts, usually an exit as a 1 mile and a 1/2 mile warning sign.  But some exits have 2 mile warning signs as well.  Usually it's for an interstate highway interchange, but I've noticed that the US 1 exit on I-495 in Plainville now has 2 mile warning signs, and recently a "2 1/4 miles" warning sign was put up for the US 3/Lowell Connector interchange.  WHY?  It seems so unnecessary!

And speaking of unnecessary, why are there duplicate signs for Exits 33 A-B on I-495 in Mansfield, as seen here?
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0063859,-71.2238196,3a,75y,315.43h,99.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5jBkPhUjbLmdMrLcdi8eeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

They are very common across the state. There's even a 5 1/2 mile sign for the Mass Pike at Exit 6 for I-291 in Springfield. The duplicate signs in Mansfield are placed on the entrance ramp from Exit 31. Not sure why they did it like this, but who knows.

[shadyjay]

Median may not be wide enough to accommodate a single pole sign, as such:

https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2075075,-71.1393763,3a,75y,308.66h,88.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOGq_a5U4UXpNnTPw2PhpfQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The Springfield I-90 advance on I-91 is to show that the best route to I-90 West is to stay on I-91 North for another 5 1/2 miles.  The last sign iteration for I-291 had no directions for I-90... it just said "EAST 291/TO 90/Mass Pike", when the best route to travel west is to stay on I-91.  Maybe the change of heart because the section of I-90 between the I-91 exit and the I-291 exit is now toll-free, so there's no incentive to send westbound traffic via I-291, since there's no extra revenue to grab.

[roadman]

And speaking of unnecessary, why are there duplicate signs for Exits 33 A-B on I-495 in Mansfield, as seen here?
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0063859,-71.2238196,3a,75y,315.43h,99.46t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5jBkPhUjbLmdMrLcdi8eeg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

The left one is over the I-495 mainline, the right one is over the collector road from Route 140.

[Alps]

What mandates a "2-mile" advance warning sign on highways?  I've noticed that when driving on highways in Massachusetts, usually an exit as a 1 mile and a 1/2 mile warning sign.  But some exits have 2 mile warning signs as well.  Usually it's for an interstate highway interchange, but I've noticed that the US 1 exit on I-495 in Plainville now has 2 mile warning signs, and recently a "2 1/4 miles" warning sign was put up for the US 3/Lowell Connector interchange.  WHY?  It seems so unnecessary!

It's supposed to be warranted for major interchanges, which US 3 would certainly qualify as. I guess there was an issue locating the sign 2 miles away so they went with 2 1/4. Not so sure US 1 really warrants "major" status or not - up to the agency to determine.

[jp the roadgeek]

What mandates a "2-mile" advance warning sign on highways?  I've noticed that when driving on highways in Massachusetts, usually an exit as a 1 mile and a 1/2 mile warning sign.  But some exits have 2 mile warning signs as well.  Usually it's for an interstate highway interchange, but I've noticed that the US 1 exit on I-495 in Plainville now has 2 mile warning signs, and recently a "2 1/4 miles" warning sign was put up for the US 3/Lowell Connector interchange.  WHY?  It seems so unnecessary!

It's supposed to be warranted for major interchanges, which US 3 would certainly qualify as. I guess there was an issue locating the sign 2 miles away so they went with 2 1/4. Not so sure US 1 really warrants "major" status or not - up to the agency to determine.

US 1 does warrant it a few weekends a year.  It's the exit many take to get to Gillette Stadium. 

[roadman65]

Was looking at GSV to see how the tolls were collected at the I-90 and I-95 connection. I see that going EB from I-95 you paid cash on the ramp at a separate plaza  adjacent to the mainline east ticket terminus plaza.  However, I see that that the current Exits 123 A and 123B lie west of of the former eastern ticket plaza, so I assume sure that WB I-90 to I-95 had you obtain a ticket, then exit to surrender it similar to the Delaware Valley Interchange on the PA Turnpike from New Jersey where you got your ticket at the eastern plaza and then proceeded right to Exit 359 to pay your toll.

Unfortunately GSV from 2007 is no help there, but interesting enough I see some old grading near Park Road from Satellite imagery, so it suggests that the original WB ramp might of been elsewhere.