Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract

[The Ghostbuster]

To a much smaller degree, Delaware is another state that doesn't have plans for a sequential-to-mileage-based exit renumbering. Sure the new US 301 toll road has mileage-based exits, and DE 1 has kilometer-based exit numbers, but Interstates 95 and 495 are still sequential, and 295's exits aren't numbered.

[5foot14]

It probably didn't help that there was essentially zero public outreach for the conversion. I bet if they actually ran a public outreach program, highlighting the benefits and giving a clear timetable, more people would be receptive to it.

If it wasn't for their "all guide signs must be overhead, no exceptions" mandate, it probably would have flown under the radar.  That's what drew everyone's attention to US 6... and once attention was drawn, the exit number changes were noticed too.  Given that this is New England, the more chances someone has to object, the more likely something like this is to be doomed.

True, and in reality, the only exit that would really be required to have overhead signs that didn't already is the exit 9 cloverleaf.

It probably didn't help that there was essentially zero public outreach for the conversion. I bet if they actually ran a public outreach program, highlighting the benefits and giving a clear timetable, more people would be receptive to it.

SM-G900P

As I, and others, have commented before, IMO it was a mistake for MassDOT to not at least go ahead with the renumbering along the Mass Pike as part of the currently still ongoing sign replacement contracts. They could have promoted it to the public as a pilot project and allowed drivers to get used to the new system before rolling it out statewide.

As for when MassDOT finally concedes to exit renumbering, when the next MUTCD comes out if, as currently, MA along with NH and VT are the only states not to at least start converting some of their highways to mileage based numbers, it may come with a deadline (which was taken out of the current document) to force the remaining states to adopt the practice, whether they like it or not.

Converting the pike would've been a no brainer. At least then everyone could see it in practice. It would've made the most sense since it's a long haul route. Given how stubborn and resistant to change many are in Massachusetts, it wouldn't surprise me at all if it came down to the feds twisting the states arm until they concede.

SM-G900P

[PHLBOS]

I stated this several pages back but is worth repeating.  MA missed a golden opportunity IMHO to convert I-93 to mile-marker-based interchanges during the Big Dig project.  The reason being the O'Neill Tunnel has less interchanges than the old Central Artery/South Station Tunnel did.  As a result of the change not being done then, there are several noticeable gaps in the sequential exit numbering along I-93 through Boston that did not exist pre-Big Dig.

Anyway, had such been done; it would've exposed Bay State motorists to the concept.  Once motorists got accustomed to it; other roads would've underwent a similar conversion.

[AMLNet49]

There is new signage up at the current exits 12 and 11 collector-distributor road on I-495, however it appears that there are patches with the numbers 12 and 11 and that an "A/B" exit number is underneath.

This could either be a renumbering to exits 12 A/B or 11 A/B or it could be covering up mileage based numbers 29 A/B or 30 A/B

[Ben114]

There is new signage up at the current exits 12 and 11 collector-distributor road on I-495, however it appears that there are patches with the numbers 12 and 11 and that an "A/B" exit number is underneath.

This could either be a renumbering to exits 12 A/B or 11 A/B or it could be covering up mileage based numbers 29 A/B or 30 A/B

I think it'll be exits 30A-B, and these are the only covered ones I've seen along this replacement project.

[vdeane]

To a much smaller degree, Delaware is another state that doesn't have plans for a sequential-to-mileage-based exit renumbering. Sure the new US 301 toll road has mileage-based exits, and DE 1 has kilometer-based exit numbers, but Interstates 95 and 495 are still sequential, and 295's exits aren't numbered.

DC as well.  I-695 is mile-based.  The portion of DC 295 that has numbers might be as well.  I-295 and I-395 are both sequential.  Interestingly, it looks like they might have begun converting I-395 and then aborted it.

[jp the roadgeek]

There is new signage up at the current exits 12 and 11 collector-distributor road on I-495, however it appears that there are patches with the numbers 12 and 11 and that an "A/B" exit number is underneath.

This could either be a renumbering to exits 12 A/B or 11 A/B or it could be covering up mileage based numbers 29 A/B or 30 A/B

I think it'll be exits 30A-B, and these are the only covered ones I've seen along this replacement project.

I agree.  The 30 MP falls just north of the 140 South overpass, but is within the footprint of the ramps for 140 South, so I'd be ok with rounding up to 30 in this case.  The northbound overpass is near MP 30.8, so 30 A-B makes sense.

To a much smaller degree, Delaware is another state that doesn't have plans for a sequential-to-mileage-based exit renumbering. Sure the new US 301 toll road has mileage-based exits, and DE 1 has kilometer-based exit numbers, but Interstates 95 and 495 are still sequential, and 295's exits aren't numbered.

DE 141 is also sequential.

[vdeane]

DE 141 is also sequential.

The only difference between its numbers is that 2/3A/3B/4B should technically be 3A/3B/3C/3D, but close enough as far as I'm concerned.  Some states that have otherwise converted have done far worse (see: I-295 ME, I-664 VA, non-interstates in PA).

[DJDBVT]

As for when MassDOT finally concedes to exit renumbering, when the next MUTCD comes out if, as currently, MA along with NH and VT are the only states not to at least start converting some of their highways to mileage based numbers, it may come with a deadline (which was taken out of the current document) to force the remaining states to adopt the practice, whether they like it or not.

VT 289 has had mileage-based exit numbers since the first segment opened in the early '90s. All other exits in the state are numbered sequentially or are unnumbered.

[DrSmith]

I think getting into more mile-based exit conversion ignores the current and future state of travel. With smart phones and GPS so prolific now, it's that device telling everyone how much further (and how much longer). Exit numbers are support for pointing to a particular exit. If self-driving cars are really that close as well, that changes the needs significantly. Furthermore, as transportation funds are typically less than needed and tight, such conversions don't take into account other more important needs.

[NE2]

I think getting into more mile-based exit conversion ignores the current and future state of travel. With smart phones and GPS so prolific now, it's that device telling everyone how much further (and how much longer).

"In 20 miles bear left to stay on the freeway." Soooooo useful.

[jp the roadgeek]

DE 141 is also sequential.

The only difference between its numbers is that 2/3A/3B/4B should technically be 3A/3B/3C/3D, but close enough as far as I'm concerned.  Some states that have otherwise converted have done far worse (see: I-295 ME, I-664 VA, non-interstates in PA).

After the US 13/40 Exits (which I have as 1A and 1B for mileage based), I have:

Exit 2: I-295 North (SB ONLY)
Exit 3A: I-95/US 202/I-495 NORTH
Exit 3B: I-95 SOUTH
Exit 3C: South James St/Old Airport Rd (SB ONLY)
Exit 4A: DE 4
Exit 4B: DE 62
Exit 5A: DE 2 EAST
Exit 5B: DE 2 WEST TO DE 41 (NB); TO DE 2 WEST/DE 41 (SB)

If you wanted to number the DE 52 exits on the middle section, they would be 8 A-B NB and 8 SB.  US/DE 202 (Concord Pike) would be Exit 11

[Scott5114]

I have to say, I'm rather amused by the pearl-clutching about the potential of high letter suffixes, which just comes off as parochial. I have never seen anyone have a problem with I-235 exits 1F and 1G in Oklahoma City, nor have I heard about anyone having a problem with exit 51I in Chicago (at least not for the exit number). Hell, I've even driven around Kansas City and nobody even talks about exit 2Y, which you'd think they would if high exit numbers somehow caused a problem.

Exit numbers are as essentially arbitrary as house numbers are, and the exit and its number will function exactly the same whether it's numbered as '10' or '2406K'.

[Ben114]

Massachusetts should get to doing this soon. Everyone on the Cape is whining about the higher numbers coming. All the drivers in Massachusetts are used to the sequential numbers, and more and more states are switching to mileage based numbers, there will be less places for Massachusetts drivers to have sequential numbers, and chances are, exits could be missed, and drivers fed up.

[J N Winkler]

Why has this discussion revived in the last week or so?  Has MassDOT in the recent past advertised a contract or issued other publicity in connection with exit numbering?

[vdeane]

DE 141 is also sequential.

The only difference between its numbers is that 2/3A/3B/4B should technically be 3A/3B/3C/3D, but close enough as far as I'm concerned.  Some states that have otherwise converted have done far worse (see: I-295 ME, I-664 VA, non-interstates in PA).

After the US 13/40 Exits (which I have as 1A and 1B for mileage based), I have:

Exit 2: I-295 South (SB ONLY)
Exit 3A: I-95/US 202/I-495 NORTH
Exit 3B: I-95 SOUTH
Exit 3C: South James St/Old Airport Rd (SB ONLY)
Exit 4A: DE 4
Exit 4B: DE 62
Exit 5A: DE 2 EAST
Exit 5B: DE 2 WEST TO DE 41 (NB); TO DE 2 WEST/DE 41 (SB)

If you wanted to number the DE 52 exits on the middle section, they would be 8 A-B NB and 8 SB.  US/DE 202 (Concord Pike) would be Exit 11

Hmm... looking at street view, it appears Google's routing of DE 9 is inaccurate, resulting in DE 141 being 0.45 miles shorter than I thought it was.  In any case, the numbers are only off by 1, so not really worth changing (and many would still match if a normal rounding system was used rather than the MUTCD-recommended "always round down" system; why the MUTCD recommends the system that maximizes the amount of alphabet soup, I don't know).

I have to say, I'm rather amused by the pearl-clutching about the potential of high letter suffixes, which just comes off as parochial. I have never seen anyone have a problem with I-235 exits 1F and 1G in Oklahoma City, nor have I heard about anyone having a problem with exit 51I in Chicago (at least not for the exit number). Hell, I've even driven around Kansas City and nobody even talks about exit 2Y, which you'd think they would if high exit numbers somehow caused a problem.

Exit numbers are as essentially arbitrary as house numbers are, and the exit and its number will function exactly the same whether it's numbered as '10' or '2406K'.

It's probably because suffixes in sequential states usually mean "separate ramps in the same interchange".  Even when a suffix is used because an exit was added, they're still obviously separate interchanges.  NY even has double suffixed exit numbers... the Southern State Parkway goes 28S, 28N, 28AS, 28AN, 29.

[jp the roadgeek]

Speaking of Long Island parkways, renumbering the north-south ones to mileage based exits could get a little interesting if you keep the prefix letters for the exits.  First of all, the numbers would have to be reversed to go south-north so that MP 0 would be at Jones Beach or in Robert Moses State Park.  For example, the Meadowbrook exits for Hempstead Turnpike (NY 24), which are now M3 and M4, would be M9A and M9B.  Would be even more fun with the Robert Moses, and Sunken Meadow with the two-letter prefixes.  The Sunrise Highway exits off of the Robert Moses would be Exits RM7A and RM7B.

[vdeane]

Personially I wouldn't keep the prefixes.  They date back to a time when all the parkways were considered to be part of the Northern and Southern State Parkways (similar to how the Berkshire Spur is part of the Thruway but not the mainline).  I'd even merge the Sagtikos and Sunken Meadow into one numbering system.

[Rothman]

Nah.  Keep the prefixes.

[vdeane]

Nah.  Keep the prefixes.

Honestly, the two letter ones overwhelm the exit number, and the Sagtikos/Sunken Meadow having separate sets of exit numbers doesn't really make sense beyond the "all roads are part of the Northern/Southern Parkways" thing (which really, really doesn't make sense to me); heck, they don't even have separate reference route numbers!  Speaking of the Sunken Meadow, its prefix is kinda interesting, if you know what I mean.  Would you say that sticks and stones may break your bones but prefixes excite you?

[kramie13]

Apparently, there are people in Massachusetts who think mile-based exits are stupid:
https://www.reddit.com/r/massachusetts/comments/bwo5v7/what_is_the_holdup_with_massachusetts_renumbering/

Seriously though, the state should at least convert the Mass. Pike and I-93.

[hotdogPi]

Apparently, there are people in Massachusetts who think mile-based exits are stupid:
https://www.reddit.com/r/massachusetts/comments/bwo5v7/what_is_the_holdup_with_massachusetts_renumbering/

Seriously though, the state should at least convert the Mass. Pike and I-93.

I-495 seems like a higher priority than I-93. On I-93, the exits are somewhat close to a mile apart, at least on average. This is not the case on most of I-495.

[SectorZ]

Apparently, there are people in Massachusetts who think mile-based exits are stupid:
https://www.reddit.com/r/massachusetts/comments/bwo5v7/what_is_the_holdup_with_massachusetts_renumbering/

Seriously though, the state should at least convert the Mass. Pike and I-93.

That thread, in a nutshell, confirms Reddit is just a second cousin of 4chan.

[PHLBOS]

I-495 seems like a higher priority than I-93. On I-93, the exits are somewhat close to a mile apart, at least on average. This is not the case on most of I-495.

IMHO and as previously stated, I-93 should be one of the first highways in MA to get the change.  Such a conversion will sort out the sequential interchange numbering gaps along the Big Dig/O'Neill Tunnel area. 

From Canton to about Neponset, I-93's interchanges are indeed close to/roughly a mile apart; I don't see much of a change once a conversion takes place ...especially if Exit 0 is not used for the I-95/Canton interchange (i.e. it retains the current Exits 1A-B). 

However, between Neponset and Somerville (including the O'Neill Tunnel), the interchanges are closer together enough to warrant suffixed interchange numbers along the way.  As a result, I-93's mile-marker-based interchange numbers north of Neponset would numerically decrease from their current sequential ones.  Examples: the current Exits 37A-B (I-95/MA 128) interchange in Reading/Woburn would likely become Exits 28A-B.  The northernmost interchange in MA, Exit 48 (MA 213) would likely become Exit 46.

[jp the roadgeek]

I-495 seems like a higher priority than I-93. On I-93, the exits are somewhat close to a mile apart, at least on average. This is not the case on most of I-495.

IMHO and as previously stated, I-93 should be one of the first highways in MA to get the change.  Such a conversion will sort out the sequential interchange numbering gaps along the Big Dig/O'Neill Tunnel area. 

From Canton to about Neponset, I-93's interchanges are indeed close to/roughly a mile apart; I don't see much of a change once a conversion takes place ...especially if Exit 0 is not used for the I-95/Canton interchange (i.e. it retains the current Exits 1A-B). 

However, between Neponset and Somerville (including the O'Neill Tunnel), the interchanges are closer together enough to warrant suffixed interchange numbers along the way.  As a result, I-93's mile-marker-based interchange numbers north of Neponset would numerically decrease from their current sequential ones.  Examples: the current Exits 37A-B (I-95/MA 128) interchange in Reading/Woburn would likely become Exits 28A-B.  The northernmost interchange in MA, Exit 48 (MA 213) would likely become Exit 46.

The I-95 interchange is an example where Exit 0 makes sense, since the MA 138 interchanges fall within the 1 MP.  Otherwise, you'll have an alphabet city, plus there would be no interchanges to 95 on the northbound route.  If MA 138 were not a cloverleaf, you could get away with it, with 138 being 1C SB and 1 NB, and the I-95's being 1A and 1B. 

Through the tunnel, you'd have NB:

16A: I-90 East
16B-C: I-90 West/South Station
17: Government Center
18: MA 3/28 Leverett Circle/Cambridge
19: US 1 NORTH Tobin Bridge/Charlestown

And SB:
18C: MA 3/28 Leverett Circle/Cambridge
18B: MA 1A North TO Logan Airport Callahan Tunnel/East Boston
18A: Government Center
17: Purchase St
16B: I-90 West//Albany St
16A: South Station