Massachusetts

[Ted$8roadFan]

Then again, this is the state that still hasn't done anything about the one lane loop ramp from I-95 NB to Rt 128 NB.

Who in the right mind decided that I-95, one of the major north-south corridors of the United States East Coast, would be reduced to a single lane (and a 270 degree loop) in Canton?  Even more odd, those exiting 95 onto 93 north get a 2-lane exit!  As a result, every time I drive through this area, there's a traffic jam.  Even on weekends!

Also, aren't I-95 and MA 128 one and the same between Canton and Peabody?  When you say "one lane loop ramp from 95 NB to 128 NB", you're making it sound like I-95 "ends" in Canton, when it clearly does not!

It's like this due to the cancellation of the Southwest Expressway into Boston, so it likely would've been built as a cloverleaf. I thought MassDOT originally looked into replacing it with a flyover. Are there still plans to do that? NIMBYism shouldn't be too big a problem since there aren't numerous houses in the way.

Yes, I-95 was intended to go straight through Boston.....long story short, it didn't happen. Thus, the intended on-ramp from I-95 North to what was MA-128 N now serves as a continuation of I-95 N, a critical link in the Greater Boston highway network, and an overburdened one at that. I had seen plans for a flyover in the past, but MassDOT spent so much money on improving I-93/95 themselves (such as adding a fourth lane and other improvements to the exit) that they may be a little gun shy or short of money. There may also be environmental issues, since a flyover may impact both the Neponset River and the Blue Hills Reservation.

[kramie13]

I am aware that I-95 was supposed to go through Boston.  But...

It's been 50 years since this project was cancelled.  FIFTY YEARS.

The fact that the state's Department of Transportation can't restructure mainline I-95 north traffic to be at least 2 lanes at a major junction with another Interstate is just baffling!

[Ted$8roadFan]

I am aware that I-95 was supposed to go through Boston.  But...

It's been 50 years since this project was cancelled.  FIFTY YEARS.

The fact that the state's Department of Transportation can't restructure mainline I-95 north traffic to be at least 2 lanes at a major junction with another Interstate is just baffling!

I agree wholeheartedly. Both I-93/95 interchanges need serious work. But it's not really a shock that it hasn't happened.  There are a few reasons:

1. The Big Dig sapped the public's will and wallet for big projects, even necessary ones.  The cost overruns and scandals were particularly harmful.

2. Not enough political will/bureaucratic inertia. For example, adding the extra lane from MA-9 to MA-24 took the better part of a decade by itself.

3. The cost of materials and labor in MA (never cheap, only going up).

4. Community opposition (it will happen) and the need for expensive mitigation over the potential for massive traffic disruptions. Traffic is already bad in that area, esp. from 95 North to 95/128 North, but worsening traffic often makes people forget about why improvements are needed. Some opposition will be genuine, some will be well-meaning, some will be self-serving, and some will oppose it just because.

5. Environmental concerns (esp. for the Blue Hills Reservation/Neponset River). Even if there aren't actual problems, the state will need to go out of its way to placate the green lobby.

6. The inevitable controversies over transit/green alternatives, etc.

[pderocco]

It's not that hard to build some ramps that go over a river without disturbing it.

I could see opposing building something that would take fifty acres of wetlands, if it was something like a housing development. After all, once one is built, why not another? Then another? But you can only justify one set of ramps in an interchange. Conceivably, express lane ramps might be desired decades from now, but building one interchange doesn't imply an open-ended ability to build more and more and more.

[roadman65]

Someone posted the Highest Point on I-90 east of South Dakota on Freeway Jim on FB.  Is that somewhere in the 30 mile exit less stretch east of Lee where the brown informative guide is located?

[Ted$8roadFan]

Someone posted the Highest Point on I-90 east of South Dakota on Freeway Jim on FB.  Is that somewhere in the 30 mile exit less stretch east of Lee where the brown informative guide is located?

There was one near the point where the Pike crosses the Appalachian Trail in the Town of Becket. I couldn't find it on GSV.

[Pete from Boston]

Someone posted the Highest Point on I-90 east of South Dakota on Freeway Jim on FB.  Is that somewhere in the 30 mile exit less stretch east of Lee where the brown informative guide is located?

There was one near the point where the Pike crosses the Appalachian Trail in the Town of Becket. I couldn't find it on GSV.

Someone has created it as a place in Google maps.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/iry2ZAUc3YTCBXZq5?g_st=ic

[Rothman]

The old sign was better for the highest point east of Oacoma.

[Pete from Boston]

Does Oacoma have a "Highest point east of Becket, Massachusetts"  sign?

[pderocco]

No, because it's not.

[Pete from Boston]

No, because it's not.

Yes, west.

[SidS1045]

...There are a few reasons:

1. The Big Dig sapped the public's will and wallet for big projects, even necessary ones.  The cost overruns and scandals were particularly devastating.

2. Not enough political will/bureaucratic inertia. For example, adding the extra lane from MA-9 to MA-24 took the better part of a decade by itself.

3. The cost of materials and labor in MA. 

4. Community opposition and the need for expensive mitigation over the potential for massive traffic disruptions (it will happen). Some will be genuine, some will be well-meaning, and some will oppose it just because.

5. Environmental concerns (esp. for the Blue Hills Reservation/Neponset River).

6. The inevitable controversies over transit/green alternatives, etc.

And, in the case of the northern interchange, let's not forget...

7.  The cost of condemning at least several properties in the way of the proposed solutions.  Average home prices in those towns are well over $1 million now.

[Pete from Boston]

And, in the case of the northern interchange, let's not forget...

7.  The cost of condemning at least several properties in the way of the proposed solutions.  Average home prices in those towns are well over $1 million now.

Not to sound cavalier with the public coffers, but $1 million is a drop in the bucket on a project this size. The big Interstate to Interstate interchange project in Massachusetts right now is 495 and the Mass Pike, and that is budgeted at close to half a billion dollars.

[shadyjay]

Then again, this is the state that still hasn't done anything about the one lane loop ramp from I-95 NB to Rt 128 NB.

Who in the right mind decided that I-95, one of the major north-south corridors of the United States East Coast, would be reduced to a single lane (and a 270 degree loop) in Canton?  Even more odd, those exiting 95 onto 93 north get a 2-lane exit!  As a result, every time I drive through this area, there's a traffic jam.  Even on weekends!

Also, aren't I-95 and MA 128 one and the same between Canton and Peabody?  When you say "one lane loop ramp from 95 NB to 128 NB", you're making it sound like I-95 "ends" in Canton, when it clearly does not!

It's like this due to the cancellation of the Southwest Expressway into Boston, so it likely would've been built as a cloverleaf. I thought MassDOT originally looked into replacing it with a flyover. Are there still plans to do that? NIMBYism shouldn't be too big a problem since there aren't numerous houses in the way.

Yes, I-95 was intended to go straight through Boston.....long story short, it didn't happen. Thus, the intended on-ramp from I-95 North to what was MA-128 N now serves as a continuation of I-95 N, a critical link in the Greater Boston highway network, and an overburdened one at that. I had seen plans for a flyover in the past, but MassDOT spent so much money on improving I-93/95 themselves (such as adding a fourth lane and other improvements to the exit) that they may be a little gun shy or short of money. There may also be environmental issues, since a flyover may impact both the Neponset River and the Blue Hills Reservation.

First off, I am well aware I-95 doesn't end in Canton/Dedham.  The way I look at I-95 in Mass, I see "south of 128", "128", and "north of 128".  We here all know that I-95 is continuous, but there are still those Boston area traffic reporters that think there's a gap in I-95 between Canton and Peabody. 

Anyways,
If there's anything the I-91 Exit 29 NB project in Hartford CT taught us, its that 2-lane flyovers can be built in a tight area (and can yield some pretty substantial traffic-relieving results).  Really the only major ramp here to be constructed is the I-95NB->128/95NB ramp.  So using https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2074995,-71.1440087,999m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu as a template...
I would create a 2-lane ramp from existing I-95 NB near Green Lodge St, then starting its left curve towards 128, to enter 128 on the left.  You would lose at least the two existing left most lanes of 128 coming into I-95 NB so build those off to the right (north side), again widening the bridge over Amtrak/MBTA adjacent to the Rt 128 station.  Traffic entering Rt 128 NB from this new I-95 NB ramp would not need to access University Ave/RR station, having already used the presently-under construction ramp to Dedham St.  So then you'd have 4 lanes of 128 and 2 lanes of I-95 merging in to 128.  The far rightmost lane can end at the Rt 128 exit, then you've got 3 "128" lanes and the 2 I-95 lanes.  All of this can reduce back to its existing footprint before you get too close to the development off East St/Canton St.
With the existing 95NB->128NB loop ramp removed, you can realign the existing 93SB->95SB ramp to lessen the curve. 

With the northern I-93/I-95 interchange in Reading/Woburn, you're looking at a much larger project with more flyovers or some alternative. 
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.50299,-71.1208524,941m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu
A cheaper solution may be to C/D road it, at least on I-95/128.  You may be able to keep 3 lanes of thru traffic with that alternative.  Not ideal, but a stopgap solution that doesn't raise a neighborhood.

[The Ghostbuster]

How much right-of-way might be necessary if the northern Interstate 93/Interstate 95 interchange were reconstructed in its existing configuration, and all ramps were expanded from one lane to two?

[SectorZ]

How much right-of-way might be necessary if the northern Interstate 93/Interstate 95 interchange were reconstructed in its existing configuration, and all ramps were expanded from one lane to two?

Lots. You have large business on the southwest side, and lots of homes on the other three sides, all right up to 93 and 95. The ones on the southeast side were even built long after the interchange was built.

[hotdogPi]

Wouldn't removing the lane drop on I-95 north  just past the I-93 interchange by increasing it from 3 to 4 lanes fix a lot of the issues at this interchange?

[SidS1045]

Wouldn't removing the lane drop on I-95 north  just past the I-93 interchange by increasing it from 3 to 4 lanes fix a lot of the issues at this interchange?

That might alleviate some of the issues, but not all of them.  One of the biggest problems is the conflict between traffic from I-93 north merging onto 95/128 north, and the traffic exiting 95/128 north onto MA-28 south.  The weave area is only about 1/4 mile.

Also, remember that the lane drop on 95/128 north extends all the way to Peabody, where the two routes separate.  Adding one lane beyond the I-93 interchange just "kicks the can" down the road.  Some of the overpasses on that stretch of 95/128 were built with capacity for an extra lane, but not all of them.  Look how long it took to add an extra lane on 95/128 between MA-9 and MA-24.

[Ted$8roadFan]

Wouldn't removing the lane drop on I-95 north  just past the I-93 interchange by increasing it from 3 to 4 lanes fix a lot of the issues at this interchange?

That might alleviate some of the issues, but not all of them.  One of the biggest problems is the conflict between traffic from I-93 north merging onto 95/128 north, and the traffic exiting 95/128 north onto MA-28 south.  The weave area is only about 1/4 mile.

Also, remember that the lane drop on 95/128 north extends all the way to Peabody, where the two routes separate.  Adding one lane beyond the I-93 interchange just "kicks the can" down the road.  Some of the overpasses on that stretch of 95/128 were built with capacity for an extra lane, but not all of them.  Look how long it took to add an extra lane on 95/128 between MA-9 and MA-24.

It would fix some issues, but still doesn't solve the main problems of the loop ramps in particular.

[pderocco]

Also, remember that the lane drop on 95/128 north extends all the way to Peabody, where the two routes separate.  Adding one lane beyond the I-93 interchange just "kicks the can" down the road.  Some of the overpasses on that stretch of 95/128 were built with capacity for an extra lane, but not all of them.  Look how long it took to add an extra lane on 95/128 between MA-9 and MA-24.

Look how long it took to add extra lanes on I-405 in California between CA-73 and CA-22. What was it, two years, during which they replaced or widened about 15 interchanges and grade separations? Massachusetts has a toy road department.

That said, traffic obviously drops the further north you go on 95/128, so extending the eight lanes up to the I-95 split would help, but only up to that point. It will make it all the more obvious that the ancient 128 beyond that needs more lanes, at least through Beverly. But it looks like there's actually room to do that without tearing down more than a few houses.

[bob7374]

Got to capture some of Exit 4 at the 1.6 km (1.0 mile), 800 m (0.5 mile) and at the exit with no exit tabs on I-93 SB on Friday 7 July, here they are. It looks like the EXIT 4 tab is new, however I can't confirm this as I couldn't read the date stamp at all.





The LEFT tab on the 800 m (0.5 mile) sign to I-93 South Exit 1 A-B remains as of last Friday.

Traffic prevented me from checking out whether this is also true on I-93 South at the 'Braintree Split.'

Also want to say that the signs at least at the exit were removed but can't confirm. Route 3 North at Exit 43 A-B: I-93 / Braintree Split may have also had their tabs removed as well. However, Google Maps suggests that this is true at I-93 South Exit 7:
1.6 km (1.0 mile)
800 m (0.5 mile)
At the exit

Got photos of some of the MA 3 exit signs showing tabs removed as well, First along I-93 South:


Then along along MA 3 North:

The Left Exit sign removal continues, this time further south along MA 3 in Plymouth with signage at the Plimoth Patuxet (formerly Plimoth Plantation) Highway exit, two examples:

[fwydriver405]

The Left Exit sign removal continues, this time further south along MA 3 in Plymouth with signage at the Plimoth Patuxet (formerly Plimoth Plantation) Highway exit, two examples:

(images clipped)

The tabs have also dissappeared along I-195, MA Route 24 and 140 as well near Fall River:

I-195 to MA Route 24 North:
400 m / 0.25 mi
At exit

MA Route 24 at I-195:
1.6 km / 1.0 mi
800 m / 0.5 mi
At exit

MA Route 140 at Exit 6: MA Route 18 / Ashley Boul.
1.6 km / 1.0 mi
400 m /  0.25 mi
240 m / 800 ft
At exit

[kramie13]

The Left Exit sign removal continues, this time further south along MA 3 in Plymouth with signage at the Plimoth Patuxet (formerly Plimoth Plantation) Highway exit, two examples:

Those overlays really stick out like a sore thumb.  Do you really need a large directional sign at the 1-mile warning for what is basically a parkway?

[sturmde]

I am aware that I-95 was supposed to go through Boston.  But...

It's been 50 years since this project was cancelled.  FIFTY YEARS.

The fact that the state's Department of Transportation can't restructure mainline I-95 north traffic to be at least 2 lanes at a major junction with another Interstate is just baffling!

No one is coming from the Middle Atlantic states or New York City along that segment of 95, anyway.  The bulk of traffic to Boston from points other than Rhode Island is coming up 91 from New Haven, over 84 from Hartford and then in on the Mass Pike/90 to Boston.  Traffic headed to Maine heads up 495.  95 south of Boston is only carrying Providence-Boston traffic.

[shadyjay]

... but that's still a fair amount of traffic, enough to warrant a 2-lane ramp. 

Have there been any proposals to expand "I-95 South" to 4 lanes, from 128 down to (at least) I-295)?  Looks like most of it could be done relatively easy, in the median, and the opportunity taken to fix the I-295NB to I-95NB ramp or to add c/d lanes at the I-95/I-495 cloverleaf.