Massachusetts

[RobbieL2415]

It was an old rest stop, replaced by the current one between exits 6 and 7.

The cars are there for fishing.

[roadman]

Spent the day with family down in Naragansett (RI).  On the way down and back, I noted that some of the MassDOT SES retrofit VMS boards are now active.  Personally, I'm not terribly impressed with the displays, which are a color that appears to be a cross between fluorescent yellow-green and chartreuse.  IMO, they are fairly weak compared to other boards.

[Pete from Boston]

It was an old rest stop, replaced by the current one between exits 6 and 7.

The cars are there for fishing.

Ah, ok. Thanks. I figured the people were there either to fish or for the rail trail.

[PHLBOS]

You know I just thought of this song:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_SVoOwW4Yc

Nice little montage.  Although there are some newer footage of the Central Artery (the cars & overhead signs being the dead give-aways) mixed in with the vintage ones; that include the Central Artery with the older signs.

[DrSmith]

Came across this yesterday by Wachusett Dam.
It looks like an old lantern hanging over the intersection.
Any idea what it might actually be?

https://goo.gl/maps/PcJW8nGKEaG3DGSp7

[shadyjay]

A very old intersection flashing light (yellow for thru traffic, red for intersecting traffic) or a 3-way flashing red light (stop) perhaps? 

Damn, it looks really old!

[RobbieL2415]

A very old intersection flashing light (yellow for thru traffic, red for intersecting traffic) or a 3-way flashing red light (stop) perhaps? 

Damn, it looks really old!

That's what it is. If you toggle Street View around you can get a shot of it illuminated.

[kramie13]

Can someone list every single change in the Massachusetts route system since ~1980? I don't think there are that many. The ones I know of:

• US 1 no longer goes through Boston city streets
• US 44 rerouted onto freeway
• The MA 62 change just mentioned
• MA 127 no longer ends at itself
• MA 140 in Gardner rerouted into bypass

A little late to the party, but I'll add MA 140 being rerouted in Mansfield in 1982 onto a "freeway with traffic lights" when I-495 opened in that area.

[Ben114]

Gotcha... thanks.  So that means the project (Raynham to Bolton) is still going on? 
I can see a sign or so getting missed in an entire project ("there's always one" in CT projects it seems), but the amount I saw not replaced was a little high.

I think it's still going on, just at a slow pace. If it is "done", I wonder what they'll do when adding the new exit numbers later this year.

I have an update on this project (I-495 Raynham to Bolton). I believe every sign is in, definitely 100% south of MA 9.

[kramie13]

I have an update on this project (I-495 Raynham to Bolton). I believe every sign is in, definitely 100% south of MA 9.

I was just on this stretch of I-495 recently.  In both directions, the only overheads that have not yet been replaced are those on the service roads for the exits 11/12 ramps, as well as Exit 24B northbound and Exit 24A southbound (the "loop ramp" exits to US 20).  Also, for some reason the "at-exit" overhead for Exit 23C going north hasn't been replaced yet, even though its southbound counterpart has.

It could be a matter of the sign being "missed".  I've noticed it with other highways in the state.  If you travel I-95/Rte 128 north through Dedham, the 1/4 mile sign for Exit 15B (US 1 South) and the 1 mile sign for Exits 16 A-B (MA 109) are still the old 1990s-era signs.  Perhaps they'll get replaced when the exit numbers get changed?

[PHLBOS]

I was just on this stretch of I-495 recently.  In both directions, the only overheads that have not yet been replaced are those on the service roads for the exits 11/12 ramps, as well as Exit 24B northbound and Exit 24A southbound (the "loop ramp" exits to US 20).  Also, for some reason the "at-exit" overhead for Exit 23C going north hasn't been replaced yet, even though its southbound counterpart has.

It could be a matter of the sign being "missed".  I've noticed it with other highways in the state.  If you travel I-95/Rte 128 north through Dedham, the 1/4 mile sign for Exit 15B (US 1 South) and the 1 mile sign for Exits 16 A-B (MA 109) are still the old 1990s-era signs.  Perhaps they'll get replaced when the exit numbers get changed?

Similar holds true for these overhead signs along I-95 northbound at the MA 110 interchange.  Such were still there as of last October during the Newburyport Meet.

[kernals12]

I don't think the new cape bridges are enough. The Army Corps of Engineers should fix the mistake it made 80 years ago and narrow the canal back to 100 feet. You could then build as many bridges as you wanted. Why should the state pay for the federal government's errors?

[DJ Particle]

I don't think the new cape bridges are enough. The Army Corps of Engineers should fix the mistake it made 80 years ago and narrow the canal back to 100 feet. You could then build as many bridges as you wanted. Why should the state pay for the federal government's errors?

The main problems with the existing setup are:

Sagamore:
1 - Lane drop at MA-3 South.
2 - No acceleration lane for traffic coming in from Exit 55 Westbound.
3 - Incredibly narrow lanes with no barrier separating directions of traffic, resulting in a speed limit drop to 40.

Bourne:
1 - Lane drop at the end of MA-25 East.
2 - No acceleration lane for traffic coming in from Exit 10 Eastbound.
3 - Rotary on MA-28 at south end of bridge (AFAIK this will remain even with the new bridges)
4 - Incredibly narrow lanes with no barrier separating directions of traffic, resulting in a speed limit drop to 40.

The new bridges will address all of these issues save for the rotary and the MA-25 lane drop.  That and the proposed direct ramp from US-6 West to MA-25 West should alleviate most traffic woes, or at least reduce them significantly.

[RobbieL2415]

I don't think the new cape bridges are enough. The Army Corps of Engineers should fix the mistake it made 80 years ago and narrow the canal back to 100 feet. You could then build as many bridges as you wanted. Why should the state pay for the federal government's errors?

The main problems with the existing setup are:

Sagamore:
1 - Lane drop at MA-3 South.
2 - No acceleration lane for traffic coming in from Exit 55 Westbound.
3 - Incredibly narrow lanes with no barrier separating directions of traffic, resulting in a speed limit drop to 40.

Bourne:
1 - Lane drop at the end of MA-25 East.
2 - No acceleration lane for traffic coming in from Exit 10 Eastbound.
3 - Rotary on MA-28 at south end of bridge (AFAIK this will remain even with the new bridges)
4 - Incredibly narrow lanes with no barrier separating directions of traffic, resulting in a speed limit drop to 40.

The new bridges will address all of these issues save for the rotary and the MA-25 lane drop.  That and the proposed direct ramp from US-6 West to MA-25 West should alleviate most traffic woes, or at least reduce them significantly.

5- Neither bridge is conducive to non-motorize traffic. The sidewalks are too narrow for bicycles to safely pass each other, there's a very high curb and there's no shoulder to buffer it from traffic.
I would definitely consider adding a multi-use path into the design.
Are they considering tolling the new bridges?

[DJStephens]

The existing bridges were designed for flivvers.  ('08 - '27 Model T)  That is the type of car, that was common on roads when those bridges were designed.   The dates of construction used to be visible on plaques on the truss superstructure, along with the state seal.  Early Depression 1931-33 timeframe. 

So yes, they do need to be replaced.   

[DJ Particle]

The existing bridges were designed for flivvers.  ('08 - '27 Model T)  That is the type of car, that was common on roads when those bridges were designed.   The dates of construction used to be visible on plaques on the truss superstructure, along with the state seal.  Early Depression 1931-33 timeframe. 

So yes, they do need to be replaced.

Originally the bridges were striped one lane each direction with shoulders.  That didn't last long as the Cape quickly became an even larger vacation destination soon after.  By the late 1940s, they were striped 4 lanes, their current configuration.

I've actually seen home video of people in the late 1940s actually being able to cross the street on the bridge in daylight, an unfathomable feat today.

Also, AFAIK, they are *considering* tolling the bridges, as after the new bridges are constructed, the Canal is being transferre to state ownership.

[Rothman]

Makes me wonder how they finagled the State getting ownership of the canal.  Quite a while ago -- over a decade -- I saw a presentation about the Corps and they were really asserting their jurisdiction over navigable waters.  Wonder what changed.

[RobbieL2415]

Makes me wonder how they finagled the State getting ownership of the canal.  Quite a while ago -- over a decade -- I saw a presentation about the Corps and they were really asserting their jurisdiction over navigable waters.  Wonder what changed.

They're getting just the bridges, not the canal AFIAK.

[SectorZ]

5- Neither bridge is conducive to non-motorize traffic. The sidewalks are too narrow for bicycles to safely pass each other, there's a very high curb and there's no shoulder to buffer it from traffic.
I would definitely consider adding a multi-use path into the design.
Are they considering tolling the new bridges?

I think the ridiculously high curb IS the buffer.

Each bridge is terrifying to ride a bicycle on. Done them each just once in a single ride. Thankfully I was the only one on them each time.

I believe an MUP is being engineered into each bridge, with a 10-foot wide one on one side of each bridge, with a barrier and 10-foot shoulder between it and auto traffic.

A few years ago, I watched what appeared to be a DWI cyclist* enter the Sagamore from the US 6 E/B ramp onto the west side of the bridge, up the right lane, doing about 5 MPH with a line of traffic behind him. Talk about a potential head-on collision waiting to happen...

*DWI cyclist refers to either a person riding a bicycle due to not having a license due to a DWI, or, an actively drunk cyclist

[Pete from Boston]

I don't think the new cape bridges are enough. The Army Corps of Engineers should fix the mistake it made 80 years ago and narrow the canal back to 100 feet. You could then build as many bridges as you wanted. Why should the state pay for the federal government's errors?

The main problems with the existing setup are:

Sagamore:
1 - Lane drop at MA-3 South.
2 - No acceleration lane for traffic coming in from Exit 55 Westbound.
3 - Incredibly narrow lanes with no barrier separating directions of traffic, resulting in a speed limit drop to 40.

Bourne:
1 - Lane drop at the end of MA-25 East.
2 - No acceleration lane for traffic coming in from Exit 10 Eastbound.
3 - Rotary on MA-28 at south end of bridge (AFAIK this will remain even with the new bridges)
4 - Incredibly narrow lanes with no barrier separating directions of traffic, resulting in a speed limit drop to 40.

The new bridges will address all of these issues save for the rotary and the MA-25 lane drop.  That and the proposed direct ramp from US-6 West to MA-25 West should alleviate most traffic woes, or at least reduce them significantly.

5- Neither bridge is conducive to non-motorize traffic. The sidewalks are too narrow for bicycles to safely pass each other, there's a very high curb and there's no shoulder to buffer it from traffic.
I would definitely consider adding a multi-use path into the design.
Are they considering tolling the new bridges?

Absolutely this. I know that people in road discussions aren't always that bicycle friendly, but these bridges tie into some pretty heavily used long-distance bike corridors that bring a lot of tourists. Plus, how cool would it be to just stand there and look off those bridges (while, you know, not risking one's life)?

[deathtopumpkins]

This week MassDOT received a $21 million BUILD grant toward the I-90/I-495 Interchange project [PDF].

The grant covers but a fraction of the estimated total project cost, but is a step forward. The project is currently at 25% design, with construction projected for 2022-2027.

For those unfamiliar with the project, it involves building direct ramps from I-90 westbound to I-495 northbound and from I-495 northbound to I-90 eastbound, eliminating weaving between the other movements at the old toll plaza location, and replacing the trumpets with 40-45 mph flyovers. Plans and renderings can be found in the presentation from the July design public hearing [PDF].

[pderocco]

Makes me wonder how they finagled the State getting ownership of the canal.  Quite a while ago -- over a decade -- I saw a presentation about the Corps and they were really asserting their jurisdiction over navigable waters.  Wonder what changed.

Makes me wonder, too. Such a deal. If you doubt there was major horsetrading over that, I have a couple of old bridges to sell you in Massachusetts.

As to the jurisdiction, perhaps they just deemed the canal not to be a navigable waterway. Meanwhile, the damp spot out back of my house is.

I still think they should do a third bridge in the middle. I'll bet a majority of Cape traffic comes from MA-25 and I-195, since it "drains" such a large area, and most of it goes down US-6, to the bulk of the Cape.

[Beeper1]

The canal itself is NOT being transferred to the state, it will still be owned and managed by the Feds.  Only the new bridges will be owned by MassDOT.

[DJStephens]

This week MassDOT received a $21 million BUILD grant toward the I-90/I-495 Interchange project [PDF].

The grant covers but a fraction of the estimated total project cost, but is a step forward. The project is currently at 25% design, with construction projected for 2022-2027.

For those unfamiliar with the project, it involves building direct ramps from I-90 westbound to I-495 northbound and from I-495 northbound to I-90 eastbound, eliminating weaving between the other movements at the old toll plaza location, and replacing the trumpets with 40-45 mph flyovers. Plans and renderings can be found in the presentation from the July design public hearing [PDF].

Vaguely remember the Turnpike and I-495 interchange as "11A" the A being used due to the fact the Turnpike is considerably older, and there had been no interchange number reserved for the later 495.   Yes the trumpets were likely outdated by the seventies.   

[dkblake]

I still think they should do a third bridge in the middle. I'll bet a majority of Cape traffic comes from MA-25 and I-195, since it "drains" such a large area, and most of it goes down US-6, to the bulk of the Cape.

Nah- plenty of US 6 <-> Boston traffic- the US 6 control city is Boston, after all. I grew up on Cape and knew a few people who made that commute. I know the "third bridge" comes up, but the two bridges as is are a whole 4 miles apart, and any bridge in the middle would connect, what, a fishing parking lot to another fishing parking lot? Just add another lane both ways on both bridges and make the lanes wide enough to accommodate cars built after 1940 and you're good.