Maine

[KEVIN_224]

The US Route 1 Bypass bridge nearby was also replaced recently. Work starts soon to fix issues with the Piscataqua River Bridge on I-95.

[roadman65]

I see the new US 1 Bypass bridge has only one deck lift span as when a train crosses the span lowers to let the train cross. So basically cars and trains cannot use the lift span simultaneously and traffic on US 1 Bypass has to stop not only for boats but for rail traffic beneath it as well.

The new US 1 Bypass bridge is more modern in design and lacks a counterweight to help raise it up. GSV has not yet been able to capture the bridge itself from the road view.  So I am guessing that the train tracks are like the trolley tracks are in urban cities that still use that type of rail.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Mildred_Long_Bridge#/media/File:Sarah_Mildred_Long_Bridge_(2018)_1.jpg
You can see that the bridge is lowered to meet the rail deck below it, so in essence its raised for boats and lowered for rail traffic.

[Ben114]

Looks like Maine is installing distance signs like Massachusetts:

[DRMan]

Any idea what will be displayed on the signs with larger displays (such as the Saco sign in the last photo)?

[DRMan]

I see the new US 1 Bypass bridge has only one deck lift span as when a train crosses the span lowers to let the train cross. So basically cars and trains cannot use the lift span simultaneously and traffic on US 1 Bypass has to stop not only for boats but for rail traffic beneath it as well.

The new US 1 Bypass bridge is more modern in design and lacks a counterweight to help raise it up. GSV has not yet been able to capture the bridge itself from the road view.  So I am guessing that the train tracks are like the trolley tracks are in urban cities that still use that type of rail.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Mildred_Long_Bridge#/media/File:Sarah_Mildred_Long_Bridge_(2018)_1.jpg
You can see that the bridge is lowered to meet the rail deck below it, so in essence its raised for boats and lowered for rail traffic.

Here's a video that shows how rail traffic gets across the bridge. I've driven over several times, but I never noticed that the rails are embedded in the road surface. The bridge handles only a handful of trains per year, so doing it this way isn't terribly disruptive to road users.

https://youtu.be/quzC_9N6IDE

[SectorZ]

Looks like Maine is installing distance signs like Massachusetts:

Watch for hogs?

[roadman]

Looks like Maine is installing distance signs like Massachusetts:

Watch for hogs?

Could the message have something to do with this:  https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/HAB1904.pdf

[shadyjay]

Any idea what will be displayed on the signs with larger displays (such as the Saco sign in the last photo)?

Perhaps a "BEST ROUTE" notice during times of congestion on one route, with "-- MI -- MIN" displayed the rest of the time.

[KEVIN_224]

https://www.facebook.com/MaineTurnpikeAuthority/posts/1949036901868310?__xts__

The Maine Turnpike posted these pictures from when they started their TransPass program back in 1997.

[sturmde]

The larger message that I've seen so far is "NO DELAYS".
.
Most times, 295 is the shorter path, but the Maine Turnpike collects more tolls if you stay on 95.  Frankly, it's worth the couple more dollars to stay on 95.  Traffic on 295 from the southern end to Exit 31 in Topsham is an annoying 31 miles of many bad drivers, bottlenecks, left lane hogs, etc.  95 has its share too, and the widening from exit 44 to 53 is going to be messy... but it's open road from Exit 53 up to 103 when 295 rejoins.  Posted 70, should be posted 75, traffic moves mostly about 80-85.

[Jordanes]

Does anyone know why I-95 in Maine follows the path it does north of Bangor? That is a very remote area. Was it built that way to connect the Aroostook communities with the rest of the state (and the country)? Is there any official paperwork floating out there on how this decision process was made?

[Alps]

Does anyone know why I-95 in Maine follows the path it does north of Bangor? That is a very remote area. Was it built that way to connect the Aroostook communities with the rest of the state (and the country)? Is there any official paperwork floating out there on how this decision process was made?

They chose to follow US 2 to Houlton instead of ME 9 to Calais. I think the 2 corridor is overall less remote than 9.

[froggie]

Early Interstate system proposal maps going as far back as the "Toll Roads and Free Roads" report from 1939 show a route along the US 2 corridor to Houlton.  That said, the initial recommendation from the 1944 "Interregional Highways" report to Congress included a spur from Bangor to Calais via ALT 1 and US 1 (instead of ME 9).  However, this spur was gone by the time the initial system was approved in 1947.

[Jordanes]

Early Interstate system proposal maps going as far back as the "Toll Roads and Free Roads" report from 1939 show a route along the US 2 corridor to Houlton.

Do you know where these maps are? I'd love to look at them.

[froggie]

You'd have to do a deep web search for the report itself, though I believe http://roadfan.com/ still exists and has some of the maps posted.  What's not there may be on my Yellow Book page.

[sturmde]

Early Interstate system proposal maps going as far back as the "Toll Roads and Free Roads" report from 1939 show a route along the US 2 corridor to Houlton.  That said, the initial recommendation from the 1944 "Interregional Highways" report to Congress included a spur from Bangor to Calais via ALT 1 and US 1 (instead of ME 9).  However, this spur was gone by the time the initial system was approved in 1947.

Some folks around Maine DOT think that the original system map that didn't include BANGOR written out, but showed two termini, the northern one at HOULTON and the southern one at CALAIS is the source of the loss.
.
When BANGOR was included on the next map, it seemed to have been written over the branch line to CALAIS thus making it appear eliminated.
.
It's an interesting theory.  To the original question though, the closest approach to the TCH is by crossing at Houlton and running the five or so miles east to Woodstock NB and thus, the northern route to Houlton achieved both connectivity with Canada's TCH predecessor route; and it provided linkages to Aroostook County.
.
Frankly, what I've seen at the Maine State Library of old Maine DOT books was some initial terrain analysis for an intermediate route tending to be north of a "midline" between the Airline, ME 9, and Coastal US 1.  Traffic counts on ME 9 aren't insignificant, and it has been improved almost completely from Brewer to Woodland where it meets US 1 west of Calais.  The "missing link" is some sort of route that will connect the eastern terminus of I-395 to ME 9 somewhere around its intersection with ME 46.  Maybe by the year 2047.

[sturmde]

Yes, Froggie does have the map that has BANGOR written right where the branch to CALAIS should have been:
http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/yellowbook/conus-1947.jpg

The CALAIS branch is definitely there in 1943!
http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/yellowbook/conus-1943.jpg

[Alps]

Yes, Froggie does have the map that has BANGOR written right where the branch to CALAIS should have been:
http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/yellowbook/conus-1947.jpg

The CALAIS branch is definitely there in 1943!
http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/yellowbook/conus-1943.jpg

It's incredible how much of the system was already determined by 1943. I never knew.

[SectorZ]

Yes, Froggie does have the map that has BANGOR written right where the branch to CALAIS should have been:
http://www.ajfroggie.com/roads/yellowbook/conus-1947.jpg

Someone inevitably was paid to make this map and someone was paid to approve it. Egads.

[froggie]

^^ Steve, disregard my 1943 date.  That map comes from the 1944 Congressional report "Interregional Highways" which represents the initial Congressional and governmental approval for the Interstate system.  Further approvals and refinements occurred in 1947 and 1955.  The 1956 Federal Highway Act that Eisenhower championed was merely the funding mechanism that allowed construction to begin en masse, though it also did add 1,000 miles to what had been approved in 1955.  That additional mileage is what enabled I-12, I-29 between Sioux Falls and Fargo, I-70 west of Denver, and I-82 WA/OR.

[Alps]

^^ Steve, disregard my 1943 date.  That map comes from the 1944 Congressional report "Interregional Highways" which represents the initial Congressional and governmental approval for the Interstate system.  Further approvals and refinements occurred in 1947 and 1955.  The 1956 Federal Highway Act that Eisenhower championed was merely the funding mechanism that allowed construction to begin en masse, though it also did add 1,000 miles to what had been approved in 1955.  That additional mileage is what enabled I-12, I-29 between Sioux Falls and Fargo, I-70 west of Denver, and I-82 WA/OR.

You say disregard 1943, but most of the framework was even there in 1939.

[froggie]

The initial framework was there in the 1939 report but that was largely FDR-driven and was in no small part determining whether a national system should be tolled or free (a question later taken up by the Clay Committee in 1955).  The concept wasn't seriously taken up by Congress until the 1944 report.

When I said "disregard 1943", I was referring to the date I had appended to that map.  The map actually came from the 1944 report.

[Pete from Boston]

Question about 95 in Houlton–

Does anyone have a source of aerial photos or at least a detailed map of the border crossing at Houlton from before I-95 went to four lanes? I was there the other day, and I'm always surprised to see the old forlorn white wooden customs house still standing. I'm curious if I-95 traffic used this station, since NB-95 wasn't built until 1976 or so, when I-95 was expanded to four lanes.

Historicaerials.com doesn't have old enough coverage of this area to answer this question.

[Pete from Boston]

Question about 95 in Houlton–

Does anyone have a source of aerial photos or at least a detailed map of the border crossing at Houlton from before I-95 went to four lanes? I was there the other day, and I'm always surprised to see the old forlorn white wooden customs house still standing. I'm curious if I-95 traffic used this station, since NB-95 wasn't built until 1976 or so, when I-95 was expanded to four lanes.

Historicaerials.com doesn't have old enough coverage of this area to answer this question.

Never mind, answered my own question. Historicaerials.com has a miscategorized pre-1977 aerial photo that comes up when you click on the 1980 topo map link. Looks like 95 merged slightly south into US 2 (the northbound lane being where the current offramp to US 2 is) and made the crossing at that old custom house. It looks like from there, old NB-5 followed some now-disused pavement northeast to the NB-95 ROW, then curved south to current NB-555.

[Alps]

Question about 95 in Houlton–

Does anyone have a source of aerial photos or at least a detailed map of the border crossing at Houlton from before I-95 went to four lanes? I was there the other day, and I'm always surprised to see the old forlorn white wooden customs house still standing. I'm curious if I-95 traffic used this station, since NB-95 wasn't built until 1976 or so, when I-95 was expanded to four lanes.

Historicaerials.com doesn't have old enough coverage of this area to answer this question.

Never mind, answered my own question. Historicaerials.com has a miscategorized pre-1977 aerial photo that comes up when you click on the 1980 topo map link. Looks like 95 merged slightly south into US 2 (the northbound lane being where the current offramp to US 2 is) and made the crossing at that old custom house. It looks like from there, old NB-5 followed some now-disused pavement northeast to the NB-95 ROW, then curved south to current NB-555.

Yes, I've walked that disused pavement. 3 alignments next to each other there.