New Hampshire

[SectorZ]

Will New Hampshire have to wait until a new governor is elected in order for the exits to finally be converted from sequential-to-mileage-based?

If the feds grow some fortitude he could be forced to.

[froggie]

Will New Hampshire have to wait until a new governor is elected in order for the exits to finally be converted from sequential-to-mileage-based?

Given Sununu's long-stated opposition to changing them, most likely yes...

[yakra]

18 years on next door, the world has not ended, happy to report.
NH needs to get their collective stick outta the mud, join the 21st century, number those unnumbered interchanges, get rid of their alphabet soup, and reap all the other benefits mileage-based exits have to offer.

...and while they're at it, swap I-93 & I-293 to get rid of those TOTSOs and keep I-93 on the main thru movement at either end.
*runs*

[froggie]

18 years on next door, the world has not ended, happy to report.
NH needs to get their collective stick outta the mud, join the 21st century, number those unnumbered interchanges, get rid of their alphabet soup, and reap all the other benefits mileage-based exits have to offer.

At this point, I would accept a compromise along the lines of what VTrans did here (but with more than just a single sign per exit).

...and while they're at it, swap I-93 & I-293 to get rid of those TOTSOs and keep I-93 on the main thru movement at either end.
*runs*

Trading one TOTSO for another? 🙃

[MATraveler128]

New Hampshire needs to get to doing this soon. Their reasons for stalling are no longer an excuse. No more of this "I grew up as an Exit 3 kid"  baloney. It still bugs me that there is no Exit 21 on I-93. At least the I-95 renumbering in Rhode Island has a legit reason. Again, as froggie mentioned, they could take the Vermont approach with better signage, but this has gone on long enough IMO. They did it on the Cape they can do it here.

[abqtraveler]

New Hampshire needs to get to doing this soon. Their reasons for stalling are no longer an excuse. No more of this "I grew up as an Exit 3 kid"  baloney. It still bugs me that there is no Exit 21 on I-93. At least the I-95 renumbering in Rhode Island as a legit reason. Again, as froggie mentioned, they could take the Vermont approach with better signage, but this has gone on long enough IMO. They did it on the Cape they can do it here.

They could also take the "slow roll" approach that Connecticut and New York are applying.  Renumber exits only when signs along a given highway are due for replacement. So renumbering will get done...albeit in about 20-30 years.

[fwydriver405]

Going a bit off topic about the exit numbering, but two things that caught my eye in the past few days:

1. The Exit 10 toll of the Everett Turnpike (source) has been removed as of 1 January 2022, making the Bedford and Hooksett (Mainline and I-93 Exit 11) plazas the only ones remaining on the Everett Turnpike.

2. I don't know if this belongs here or on the Maine thread, but I noticed that on the Piscataqua River Bridge, new lane markings have been applied for the future breakdown lane travel coming soon. I don't know if:
- on the New Hampshire side, it starts/ends in the middle of Exit 7 (MM 15.421) or after the Exit 7 NB on-ramp merges in.
- on the Maine side, if it starts at Exit 2 SB and ends at Exit 3 NB.

[Alps]

Going a bit off topic about the exit numbering, but two things that caught my eye in the past few days:

1. The Exit 10 toll of the Everett Turnpike (source) has been removed as of 1 January 2022, making the Bedford and Hooksett (Mainline and I-93 Exit 11) plazas the only ones remaining on the Everett Turnpike.

I would imagine Bedford will go soon. It's so trivial to avoid it.

[yakra]

2. I don't know if this belongs here or on the Maine thread, but I noticed that on the Piscataqua River Bridge, new lane markings have been applied for the future breakdown lane travel coming soon. I don't know if:
- on the New Hampshire side, it starts/ends in the middle of Exit 7 (MM 15.421) or after the Exit 7 NB on-ramp merges in.
- on the Maine side, if it starts at Exit 2 SB and ends at Exit 3 NB.

Oh crap. Oh no. Does the bridge ever get that #$*%in' congested? Dude, it's fine. This isn't Massachusetts, and we don't need that mumbo jumbo here. Let the shoulders be shoulders.
I don't think this Transportation System can be called Intelligent.

[deathtopumpkins]

2. I don't know if this belongs here or on the Maine thread, but I noticed that on the Piscataqua River Bridge, new lane markings have been applied for the future breakdown lane travel coming soon. I don't know if:
- on the New Hampshire side, it starts/ends in the middle of Exit 7 (MM 15.421) or after the Exit 7 NB on-ramp merges in.
- on the Maine side, if it starts at Exit 2 SB and ends at Exit 3 NB.

Looking at the plans, northbound will begin at the Exit 6 offramp, and ends at the Exit 3 offramp. Southbound will begin at the Exit 2 onramp (from the C/D road) and end at the Exit 5 offramp.

I would imagine Bedford will go soon. It's so trivial to avoid it.

I wouldn't be so sure, considering the Bedford plaza's AET conversion (NHDOT project 16100) is fully funded in the current draft 10-year plan for construction in 2023-2024. Then again, this project was initially designed as ORT instead... so who knows.

Oh crap. Oh no. Does the bridge ever get that #$*%in' congested? Dude, it's fine. This isn't Massachusetts, and we don't need that mumbo jumbo here. Let the shoulders be shoulders.
I don't think this Transportation System can be called Intelligent.

Are you kidding? This bridge is often congested on summer weekends, especially southbound!
The shoulder will only be in use during peak hours, which I imagine would only be summer weekends, though it sounds like the technology to open it on-demand as-needed will be in place.
The implementation will be far better than MA's as well, with overhead lane use arrow signals, and warning signs accompanied by flashing lights on onramps. Additionally both ramps at Exit 1 will close as needed to help with traffic flow.

[shadyjay]

...and while they're at it, swap I-93 & I-293 to get rid of those TOTSOs and keep I-93 on the main thru movement at either end.
*runs*

Not sure what you're referring to when you say "those TOTSOs".  There's only one I know of.... I-93 South just past the Hooksett tolls.  Northbound its not an issue as I-93 North seemlessly merges onto the Everett before the tolls.  I-293, however, you have to TOTSO at NH 101's western end of concurrency.  Signing the entire Everett I-89 right down to 128 would solve this.

[fwydriver405]

I would imagine Bedford will go soon. It's so trivial to avoid it.

I wouldn't be so sure, considering the Bedford plaza's AET conversion (NHDOT project 16100) is fully funded in the current draft 10-year plan for construction in 2023-2024. Then again, this project was initially designed as ORT instead... so who knows.

Last time I remembered, they were thinking about moving the Bedford tolls further south when Exit 13 opened a few years ago and they were considering converting to ORT, like you mentioned above. Might be a reality given NHDOT is going to be converting its toll facilities to AET in the next few years... but time will tell. Every time I go to Nashua from Maine via the Everett from Manchester, I always use Exit 13 to skip the Bedford tolls...

Are you kidding? This bridge is often congested on summer weekends, especially southbound!
The shoulder will only be in use during peak hours, which I imagine would only be summer weekends, though it sounds like the technology to open it on-demand as-needed will be in place.
The implementation will be far better than MA's as well, with overhead lane use arrow signals, and warning signs accompanied by flashing lights on onramps. Additionally both ramps at Exit 1 will close as needed to help with traffic flow.

Would this system be something similar to what NJTA did on Interstate 78 (Newark Bay-Hudson County Extension) when the Bayonne Bridge Pulaski Skyway was closed (info here), minus the onramp flashing signs? I didn't know that Exit 1's ramps would be closed when breakdown lane travel is in effect. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kfL2GG3rFk

[yakra]

Oh crap. Oh no. Does the bridge ever get that #$*%in' congested? Dude, it's fine. This isn't Massachusetts, and we don't need that mumbo jumbo here. Let the shoulders be shoulders.
I don't think this Transportation System can be called Intelligent.

Are you kidding? This bridge is often congested on summer weekends, especially southbound!

This post: not kidding. Traffic may be think & a bit heavy, but I've never experienced so much as a slowdown.

...and while they're at it, swap I-93 & I-293 to get rid of those TOTSOs and keep I-93 on the main thru movement at either end.
*runs*

This post: kidding. A tortuous suggestion to make NH's switcheroo a little more Maine-flavored.

Not sure what you're referring to when you say "those TOTSOs".  There's only one I know of.... I-93 South just past the Hooksett tolls.  Northbound its not an issue as I-93 North seemlessly merges onto the Everett before the tolls.  I-293, however, you have to TOTSO at NH 101's western end of concurrency.  Signing the entire Everett I-89 right down to 128 would solve this.

The other one being the NB high-speed left exit with plenty of lanes approaching the 101 overlap.

[fwydriver405]

Oh crap. Oh no. Does the bridge ever get that #$*%in' congested? Dude, it's fine. This isn't Massachusetts, and we don't need that mumbo jumbo here. Let the shoulders be shoulders.
I don't think this Transportation System can be called Intelligent.

Are you kidding? This bridge is often congested on summer weekends, especially southbound!

This post: not kidding. Traffic may be think & a bit heavy, but I've never experienced so much as a slowdown.

Coming from ME Route 236, the max I've ever had to wait was 5-10 minutes to cross the bridge, but on a really busy summer Sunday, it can take upwards 40-50 minutes starting from MM8 to NH I-95 Exit 7. I've never really experienced much of a slowdown heading north to Maine ever, even on a busy Friday or Saturday...

...and while they're at it, swap I-93 & I-293 to get rid of those TOTSOs and keep I-93 on the main thru movement at either end.
*runs*

Not sure what you're referring to when you say "those TOTSOs".  There's only one I know of.... I-93 South just past the Hooksett tolls.  Northbound its not an issue as I-93 North seemlessly merges onto the Everett before the tolls.  I-293, however, you have to TOTSO at NH 101's western end of concurrency.  Signing the entire Everett I-89 right down to 128 would solve this.

Another TOTSO exists at the Everett Turnpike / NH Route 101 / Interstate 293 interchange in southwestern Manchester... to stay on Interstate 293 in either direction, one must exit the mainline and use ramps onto another freeway. 293 north uses the ramp to the Everett Turnpike North, and 293 south uses the ramp to 101 east.

[yakra]

^ LOL this is true. Thought of that, but since I was just pooposting, I decided to only focus on the ones at the ends.

[deathtopumpkins]

This post: not kidding. Traffic may be think & a bit heavy, but I've never experienced so much as a slowdown.

You must not ever try to drive across the Piscataqua southbound on a summer Sunday then. In my experience it is quite commonly backed up as far as Exit 7 / York. Even looking at Google's typical traffic data the slowdown for much of the early afternoon on Sundays extends from the bridge to about the new toll plaza.

Last time I remembered, they were thinking about moving the Bedford tolls further south when Exit 13 opened a few years ago and they were considering converting to ORT, like you mentioned above. Might be a reality given NHDOT is going to be converting its toll facilities to AET in the next few years... but time will tell. Every time I go to Nashua from Maine via the Everett from Manchester, I always use Exit 13 to skip the Bedford tolls...

There was a study about 10 years ago that you can still find on the Turnpike website that looked at a variety of toll options, including relocating the Bedford toll down to Merrimack (along with tolling the airport connector and adding a mainline toll at Exit 1 in Nashua!), but if I recall correctly the state opted not to act on that study because every scenario resulted in a loss of system-wide revenue or an unacceptable number of vehicles diverting off the turnpike.

My commute actually takes me onto the FEET at Exit 13, and every day I'm surprised by how few people I see shunpiking there. Only takes 3 minutes, but since the toll is only $0.70 for NH tags, I guess there isn't much benefit to it.

Would this system be something similar to what NJTA did on Interstate 78 (Newark Bay-Hudson County Extension) when the Bayonne Bridge Pulaski Skyway was closed (info here), minus the onramp flashing signs? I didn't know that Exit 1's ramps would be closed when breakdown lane travel is in effect.

Yes, the signage will be very similar. Main difference is that this installation will include blank out "NO STOPPING" signs alongside the lane use arrows. And yeah, I haven't seen anything in any news coverage about the Exit 1 closure, but the plans include a gate across the southbound onramp, an "EXIT 1 CLOSED WHEN FLASHING USE EXIT 2" sign northbound, and even a whole array of "TO 95 SOUTH DETOUR WHEN FLASHING" signs on surrounding streets.

[MATraveler128]

The Piscataqua River Bridge is honestly fine the way it is. The only thing that needs to happen is to remove the York toll plaza, but that is more suited for the "Maine"  thread.

[deathtopumpkins]

The Piscataqua River Bridge is honestly fine the way it is. The only thing that needs to happen is to remove the York toll plaza, but that is more suited for the "Maine"  thread.

The bridge is definitely not fine the way it is. The bridge is already over capacity at peak times, and this is a creative way to squeeze more capacity out of the structure without replacing it. You folks also need to keep in mind that the shoulder running is being added in conjunction with a structural rehab that will extend the life of the now 50-year-old bridge, which was selected over replacing it. After this investment, it will be many years before the states consider replacement again, during which time traffic volumes will likely only continue to grow. Will you still think traffic over the bridge is fine in 10 years?

Also the new York toll plaza went live September 15th, 2021. It's been a few weeks now since I last drove through but they had been making pretty quick work of demolishing the old one.

[froggie]

The occasional summer/holiday weekend slowdown is IMO not enough to warrant capacity change or dropping a shoulder.  If there were recurring weekday congestion, that would be another matter, but it's only certain weekends in this case.

[shadyjay]

I think we'll find out next summer that the York toll plaza project will help to improve the situation on I-95 over the Pisacataqua.

Maine is in a unique position since there is essentially only one road in, one road out (being I-95).  Sure, there's Rt 1 and a whole host of other roads from Dover north that cross the border, but the main access is I-95.  At least for NH, you can come in from Mass. via the Everett, I-93, or I-95.  On summer weekends, you do have 4 lanes of I-95 backed up through the seacoast (also spilling onto US 1 causing delays there too).  Its a combination of all routes from key tourist destinations all merging into the same route (Maine Turnpike and the Spaulding from the lakes/mtns, all coming into I-95).  Luckily NH Tpkes had the foresight to 8-lane I-95 when they did. 

[Alps]

The occasional summer/holiday weekend slowdown is IMO not enough to warrant capacity change or dropping a shoulder.  If there were recurring weekday congestion, that would be another matter, but it's only certain weekends in this case.

I leave it up to Maine and NH to agree on what constitutes congestion. It's not NYC levels of congestion but that is an unfair standard to apply. If the two agencies feel relief is needed, then I trust them.

[SectorZ]

The occasional summer/holiday weekend slowdown is IMO not enough to warrant capacity change or dropping a shoulder.  If there were recurring weekday congestion, that would be another matter, but it's only certain weekends in this case.

I leave it up to Maine and NH to agree on what constitutes congestion. It's not NYC levels of congestion but that is an unfair standard to apply. If the two agencies feel relief is needed, then I trust them.

As someone who has seen it up close and personal, it can be hours of delays between the MA/NH border and southern Maine. However, I am unsure if this additional capacity is going to improve things much. I presume they've modeled the data and it shows possible improvement.

[fwydriver405]

ANOTHER new APL with only one control city, this time at the exit. Exit 4 on I-93 NB.

And why was Derry omitted from the Route 102 information, especially as Derry and Londonderry are both noted on the advance signs?  As one who's had family, friends, and business dealings in Derry for the past 45 years, I can assure you it is a more significant destination than Londonderry is.

Got an update about that sign... as I drove thru that area from Salem to Manchester last Saturday. NHDOT appears to have squeezed "Derry" under where "Londonderry" is on the APL sign heading NB. Unfortunately I was unable to grab a picture nor do I know when NHDOT finally decided to re-add "Derry" to the gore APL sign.



On an related (minor) note... I have noticed that NHDOT is moving away from using LGSes for multiplexes, like this example at the southern terminus to I-93 N/NH 101 W, to using individual standalone shields and cardinal direction banners to sign the route multiplexes on their most recent sign replacements. Interestingly, at the same time, Maine on some of their route sign replacements on the arterial and secondary roads, are doing the reverse on some sign replacements by using LGSes to replace previously standalone shield assemblies starting in 2017...

[Alps]

ANOTHER new APL with only one control city, this time at the exit. Exit 4 on I-93 NB.

And why was Derry omitted from the Route 102 information, especially as Derry and Londonderry are both noted on the advance signs?  As one who's had family, friends, and business dealings in Derry for the past 45 years, I can assure you it is a more significant destination than Londonderry is.

Got an update about that sign... as I drove thru that area from Salem to Manchester last Saturday. NHDOT appears to have squeezed "Derry" under where "Londonderry" is on the APL sign heading NB. Unfortunately I was unable to grab a picture nor do I know when NHDOT finally decided to re-add "Derry" to the gore APL sign.



On an related (minor) note... I have noticed that NHDOT is moving away from using LGSes for multiplexes, like this example at the southern terminus to I-93 N/NH 101 W, to using individual standalone shields and cardinal direction banners to sign the route multiplexes on their most recent sign replacements. Interestingly, at the same time, Maine on some of their route sign replacements on the arterial and secondary roads, are doing the reverse on some sign replacements by using LGSes to replace previously standalone shield assemblies starting in 2017...

would love to see photos of the NH standalones

[fwydriver405]

While I don't have any current new assemblies from Rockingham, Strafford or Hillsborough Counties... I do have a few in Coos County in Gorham from my last VT trip below.

South end of US 2/NH 16 multiplex reassurance (old, new)

North end of US 2/NH 16 multiplex split (old, new)

North end of US 2/NH 16 multiplex on mast arm (old, new)

If I can find anymore... I'll update this post. The ones were replaced were on Woodbury Ave when the Spaulding Turnpike got widened, a few around the Manchester area, and a few other places I'm not sure about.