News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Massachusetts

Started by hotdogPi, October 12, 2013, 04:50:12 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

spooky

Quote from: Beeper1 on April 14, 2016, 12:21:21 AM
There should be a new sign at the state line:

"Welcome to Massachusetts: Into the Future Kicking and Screaming"

"Welcome To Massachusetts: Don't Even Think About Changing Anything"


machias

Quote from: PHLBOS on April 13, 2016, 03:29:15 PM
A better, compromise solution would be to save the conversion of the US 6 Mid-Cape Highway interchange numbers for last; after all the other Bay State highway interchange numbers are converted.

I say cancel all sign replacement projects involving an exit number until those kicking and screaming die off.

RobbieL2415

Quote from: spooky on April 14, 2016, 09:27:35 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on April 14, 2016, 12:21:21 AM
There should be a new sign at the state line:

"Welcome to Massachusetts: Into the Future Kicking and Screaming"

"Welcome To Massachusetts: Don't Even Think About Changing Anything"

And then don't offer up an alternative solution or be open to the idea of positive change in general.  That's the New England way.

Beeper1

Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if even on the new MassPike signs, they didn't put overlays with the existing exit numbers up "temporarily" until they decide to make the actual conversion.  Especially if they end up chickening out on doing the rest of the state.

PHLBOS

Quote from: RobbieL2415 on April 14, 2016, 12:11:41 PM
Quote from: spooky on April 14, 2016, 09:27:35 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on April 14, 2016, 12:21:21 AM
There should be a new sign at the state line:

"Welcome to Massachusetts: Into the Future Kicking and Screaming"

"Welcome To Massachusetts: Don't Even Think About Changing Anything"

And then don't offer up an alternative solution or be open to the idea of positive change in general.  That's the New England way.
How many of them whined when the 617 area code was split in two circa 1988 (the 508 code was introduced)?

How many of them whined when both the 508 & 617 regions were split again about 10 years later (781 & 978 coded were introduced)?

How many of them whined when 10-digit dialing was made mandatory when overlay codes (774 in the 508 region being one of them)?

How many of them whined when the original exit numbers along 128 changed (to Exit 9 = MA 127A) in the early 60s?

How many of them whined when the exit numbers along I-93 (north of Boston), I-95 (RI to Canton), MA 3 (Braintree to Plymouth) and MA 24 ditched their Exit 25 = MA 128 numbers to more MUTCD-compliant ones (though still sequential) during the 1970s?

How many of them whined when the exit numbers along most of 128 (the I-93 & 95 sections) and the rest of I-93 were changed to reflect their respective Interstate route numbers and lengths (I-93 north of Boston and I-95 north of 128) during the late 1980s?

Long story short, this current flap about pending mile-marker based exit number conversion is mostly a bunch of hot air IMHO.

Where MassDOT dropped the ball (sorry Roadman) was not adequately informing & educating the public about the upcoming change earlier.  In retrospect, MassDOT (or its predecessors) should have selected one highway to try such a conversion first and see what happens.  Then the public, would at least see a nearby example of such, and realize that such a change is not the end of the world as we know it (apologies to R.E.M.). 

IMHO and I've stated such before, I-93 should've been converted to mile-marker based exit numbers immediately following the Big Dig construction (mainly the change from the Central Artery to the O'Neill Tunnel).  The reduced number of exit ramps in the tunnel (vs. the old elevated artery) leaves some gaps in the sequential numbering.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

RobbieL2415

Quote from: PHLBOS on April 14, 2016, 01:14:19 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on April 14, 2016, 12:11:41 PM
Quote from: spooky on April 14, 2016, 09:27:35 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on April 14, 2016, 12:21:21 AM
There should be a new sign at the state line:

"Welcome to Massachusetts: Into the Future Kicking and Screaming"

"Welcome To Massachusetts: Don't Even Think About Changing Anything"

And then don't offer up an alternative solution or be open to the idea of positive change in general.  That's the New England way.
How many of them whined when the 617 area code was split in two circa 1988 (the 508 code was introduced)?

How many of them whined when both the 508 & 617 regions were split again about 10 years later (781 & 978 coded were introduced)?

How many of them whined when 10-digit dialing was made mandatory when overlay codes (774 in the 508 region being one of them)?

How many of them whined when the original exit numbers along 128 changed (to Exit 9 = MA 127A) in the early 60s?

How many of them whined when the exit numbers along I-93 (north of Boston), I-95 (RI to Canton), MA 3 (Braintree to Plymouth) and MA 24 ditched their Exit 25 = MA 128 numbers to more MUTCD-compliant ones (though still sequential) during the 1970s?

How many of them whined when the exit numbers along most of 128 (the I-93 & 95 sections) and the rest of I-93 were changed to reflect their respective Interstate route numbers and lengths (I-93 north of Boston and I-95 north of 128) during the late 1980s?

Long story short, this current flap about pending mile-marker based exit number conversion is mostly a bunch of hot air IMHO.

Where MassDOT dropped the ball (sorry Roadman) was not adequately informing & educating the public about the upcoming change earlier.  In retrospect, MassDOT (or its predecessors) should have selected one highway to try such a conversion first and see what happens.  Then the public, would at least see a nearby example of such, and realize that such a change is not the end of the world as we know it (apologies to R.E.M.). 

IMHO and I've stated such before, I-93 should've been converted to mile-marker based exit numbers immediately following the Big Dig construction (mainly the change from the Central Artery to the O'Neill Tunnel).  The reduced number of exit ramps in the tunnel (vs. the old elevated artery) leaves some gaps in the sequential numbering.
I agree.  Shoulda taken a page out of ConnDOTs book.  I haven't heard a single peep from anybody or from the local news about I-395s conversion.

The Ghostbuster

Maybe they would like some cheese with their whine.

bob7374

Quote from: PHLBOS on April 14, 2016, 01:14:19 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on April 14, 2016, 12:11:41 PM
Quote from: spooky on April 14, 2016, 09:27:35 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on April 14, 2016, 12:21:21 AM
There should be a new sign at the state line:

"Welcome to Massachusetts: Into the Future Kicking and Screaming"

"Welcome To Massachusetts: Don't Even Think About Changing Anything"

And then don't offer up an alternative solution or be open to the idea of positive change in general.  That's the New England way.
How many of them whined when the 617 area code was split in two circa 1988 (the 508 code was introduced)?

How many of them whined when both the 508 & 617 regions were split again about 10 years later (781 & 978 coded were introduced)?

How many of them whined when 10-digit dialing was made mandatory when overlay codes (774 in the 508 region being one of them)?

How many of them whined when the original exit numbers along 128 changed (to Exit 9 = MA 127A) in the early 60s?

How many of them whined when the exit numbers along I-93 (north of Boston), I-95 (RI to Canton), MA 3 (Braintree to Plymouth) and MA 24 ditched their Exit 25 = MA 128 numbers to more MUTCD-compliant ones (though still sequential) during the 1970s?

How many of them whined when the exit numbers along most of 128 (the I-93 & 95 sections) and the rest of I-93 were changed to reflect their respective Interstate route numbers and lengths (I-93 north of Boston and I-95 north of 128) during the late 1980s?

Long story short, this current flap about pending mile-marker based exit number conversion is mostly a bunch of hot air IMHO.

Where MassDOT dropped the ball (sorry Roadman) was not adequately informing & educating the public about the upcoming change earlier.  In retrospect, MassDOT (or its predecessors) should have selected one highway to try such a conversion first and see what happens.  Then the public, would at least see a nearby example of such, and realize that such a change is not the end of the world as we know it (apologies to R.E.M.). 
Maybe that will end up being the case with the Mass Pike given that the 2 signing contracts have been awarded and they are separate from the blanket conversion contract. Say to the public you're using the Pike as an "experiment" and see what happens. When the world doesn't end proceed with changing all the other exits a year or two later.

roadman

No need for MassDOT to call proceeding with the exit number conversions on I-90/MassPike an "experiment".  Most of the road has infrequent exits spaced a considerable distance apart.  Plus, even though the MassPike is now controlled by MassDOT and maintained by the applicable District each section of the road runs through, there has been no real effort to remove the Massachusetts Turnpike branding.

IMO, these factors - plus the fact the signs are being replaced anyway - should be sufficient to continue with the I-90 conversion, and to explain to the public why the road is being converted.

"And ninety-five is the route you were on.  It was not the speed limit sign."  - Jim Croce (from Speedball Tucker)

"My life has been a tapestry
Of years of roads and highway signs" (with apologies to Carole King and Tom Rush)

jp the roadgeek

Quote from: RobbieL2415 on April 14, 2016, 03:04:12 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 14, 2016, 01:14:19 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on April 14, 2016, 12:11:41 PM
Quote from: spooky on April 14, 2016, 09:27:35 AM
Quote from: Beeper1 on April 14, 2016, 12:21:21 AM
There should be a new sign at the state line:

"Welcome to Massachusetts: Into the Future Kicking and Screaming"

"Welcome To Massachusetts: Don't Even Think About Changing Anything"

And then don't offer up an alternative solution or be open to the idea of positive change in general.  That's the New England way.
How many of them whined when the 617 area code was split in two circa 1988 (the 508 code was introduced)?

How many of them whined when both the 508 & 617 regions were split again about 10 years later (781 & 978 coded were introduced)?

How many of them whined when 10-digit dialing was made mandatory when overlay codes (774 in the 508 region being one of them)?

How many of them whined when the original exit numbers along 128 changed (to Exit 9 = MA 127A) in the early 60s?

How many of them whined when the exit numbers along I-93 (north of Boston), I-95 (RI to Canton), MA 3 (Braintree to Plymouth) and MA 24 ditched their Exit 25 = MA 128 numbers to more MUTCD-compliant ones (though still sequential) during the 1970s?

How many of them whined when the exit numbers along most of 128 (the I-93 & 95 sections) and the rest of I-93 were changed to reflect their respective Interstate route numbers and lengths (I-93 north of Boston and I-95 north of 128) during the late 1980s?

Long story short, this current flap about pending mile-marker based exit number conversion is mostly a bunch of hot air IMHO.

Where MassDOT dropped the ball (sorry Roadman) was not adequately informing & educating the public about the upcoming change earlier.  In retrospect, MassDOT (or its predecessors) should have selected one highway to try such a conversion first and see what happens.  Then the public, would at least see a nearby example of such, and realize that such a change is not the end of the world as we know it (apologies to R.E.M.). 

IMHO and I've stated such before, I-93 should've been converted to mile-marker based exit numbers immediately following the Big Dig construction (mainly the change from the Central Artery to the O'Neill Tunnel).  The reduced number of exit ramps in the tunnel (vs. the old elevated artery) leaves some gaps in the sequential numbering.
I agree.  Shoulda taken a page out of ConnDOTs book.  I haven't heard a single peep from anybody or from the local news about I-395s conversion.

That's because hardly anyone uses I-395, especially north of the CT 2A exit for Mohegan.  When the 2di's are up for conversion in CT, the people of MA will seem to be space age dwellers by comparison.  Lest we forget, CT was the last state in the contiguous US to raise their speed limit to 65 post-national speed limit law.  They were one of the last states to allow Sunday liquor sales.  Wait until the exit numbers in The Land of Steady Habits are changed. 
Interstates I've clinched: 97, 290 (MA), 291 (CT), 291 (MA), 293, 295 (DE-NJ-PA), 295 (RI-MA), 384, 391, 395 (CT-MA), 395 (MD), 495 (DE), 610 (LA), 684, 691, 695 (MD), 695 (NY), 795 (MD)

cl94

I have a question about the Rourke Bridge over the Merrimack in Lowell. I drove over it today and noticed it is a "temporary" Bailey bridge. With further research, I discovered that it was installed in 1983. Was there previously a "normal" bridge at this location? Also, will the "temporary structure" ever be replaced?
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

deathtopumpkins

Quote from: cl94 on April 24, 2016, 10:49:00 PM
I have a question about the Rourke Bridge over the Merrimack in Lowell. I drove over it today and noticed it is a "temporary" Bailey bridge. With further research, I discovered that it was installed in 1983. Was there previously a "normal" bridge at this location? Also, will the "temporary structure" ever be replaced?

Historic Aerials says no, there was not previously a bridge there, at least not according to imagery from 1938 to 1978:
Disclaimer: All posts represent my personal opinions and not those of my employer.

Clinched Highways | Counties Visited

SectorZ

Quote from: cl94 on April 24, 2016, 10:49:00 PM
I have a question about the Rourke Bridge over the Merrimack in Lowell. I drove over it today and noticed it is a "temporary" Bailey bridge. With further research, I discovered that it was installed in 1983. Was there previously a "normal" bridge at this location? Also, will the "temporary structure" ever be replaced?

Used to be a ferry to the west, I think. There is an Old Ferry Rd on the north bank that ends at MA 113 just west of the bridge. There have been endless talks of replacing the bridge with a permanent and much better design than what is already there, but they frequently go nowhere.

This Lowell Sun story from 2 years ago does a good job going into the discussion of the potential replacement, http://www.lowellsun.com/news/ci_26678398/lowell-gridlock-and-bear-it-rourke-bridge-work

SectorZ

Quote from: SectorZ on April 28, 2016, 11:29:06 AM
Quote from: cl94 on April 24, 2016, 10:49:00 PM
I have a question about the Rourke Bridge over the Merrimack in Lowell. I drove over it today and noticed it is a "temporary" Bailey bridge. With further research, I discovered that it was installed in 1983. Was there previously a "normal" bridge at this location? Also, will the "temporary structure" ever be replaced?

Used to be a ferry to the west, I think. There is an Old Ferry Rd on the north bank that ends at MA 113 just west of the bridge. There have been endless talks of replacing the bridge with a permanent and much better design than what is already there, but they frequently go nowhere.

This Lowell Sun story from 2 years ago does a good job going into the discussion of the potential replacement, http://www.lowellsun.com/news/ci_26678398/lowell-gridlock-and-bear-it-rourke-bridge-work

Upon looking at historical maps, I think there was nothing at all there. The Old Ferry Rd name may be a coincidence as I can't find anything showing what could've been a ferry at or near that crossing.

hotdogPi

There's an Old Ferry Rd. in Methuen, MA, also off of MA 113. It's nowhere near water. "Old Ferry Rd." must refer to something else.
Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, plus US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

I will be in Burlington VT for the eclipse.

NE2

pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

SectorZ

#541
Quote from: 1 on April 28, 2016, 11:49:42 AM
There's an Old Ferry Rd. in Methuen, MA, also off of MA 113. It's nowhere near water. "Old Ferry Rd." must refer to something else.

http://docs.unh.edu/MA/lwrc93ne.jpg

It's a little hard to see at the top left of this, but Old Ferry Rd used to go southeast along what's now 113 and right down to the river to an old ferry. The eastern part of that old road, east of 110/113, is called 'Ferry Rd' now. At one time, I believe the entire 2 mile long road was just called Ferry Rd. Also, on the other side of the river in Haverhill, is a Ferry Rd that follows the same line from the Methuen side and across to Ward Hill.

SectorZ

Quote from: NE2 on April 28, 2016, 01:16:32 PM
It was "Old Ferry Road" even back in 1891: http://www.davidrumsey.com/luna/servlet/detail/RUMSEY~8~1~254355~5519320:City-of-Lowell,-Massachusetts-? I'd bet there was a ferry a long time ago.

I wonder if it pre-dated the rail line that follows the river, given that would've likely been in the way of the southern approach. Also love the old Lowell maps, before a 2 sq. mile chunk of my town was stolen away by Lowell a few years after this.

bob7374

MassDOT announces activation of 'Go Time' Real Time Traffic signs along MA 140 in the Taunton area. Signs on I-95 and I-495 to be activated this summer:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/massdot-launches-go-time-real-time-traffic-information/

J Route Z

Quote from: bob7374 on May 03, 2016, 11:13:53 AM
MassDOT announces activation of 'Go Time' Real Time Traffic signs along MA 140 in the Taunton area. Signs on I-95 and I-495 to be activated this summer:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/massdot-launches-go-time-real-time-traffic-information/
Wow, this is what NYC highways have leading to bridges and tunnels.

AMLNet49

These MA 140 signs are very good looking (shields well in proportion) and are very useful too. The ones on the interstates and MA 25 are going to be even more useful to many more people. This was one of the better projects MassDOT taken on.

RobbieL2415

Quote from: AMLNet49 on May 03, 2016, 04:47:05 PM
These MA 140 signs are very good looking (shields well in proportion) and are very useful too. The ones on the interstates and MA 25 are going to be even more useful to many more people. This was one of the better projects MassDOT taken on.

Personally, I prefer full-blown VMSs telling trip times (a la ConnDOT) but this works just as well, I suppose.

PHLBOS

Quote from: AMLNet49 on May 03, 2016, 04:47:05 PMThis was one of the better projects MassDOT taken on.
IMHO, this should be a standard for all states to follow.  Such would free up VMS' for their originally intended purpose of reporting unusual or extraordinary situations/circumstances.  Drive/travel times are now more of a common entity.

Quote from: RobbieL2415 on May 03, 2016, 04:55:50 PMPersonally, I prefer full-blown VMSs telling trip times (a la ConnDOT) but this works just as well, I suppose.
PennDOT (& PTC) uses similar; however, some of the black sheeting has faded (along the Schuylkill Expressway portion of I-76 for example) on some of the older VMS' to a point where one can't even read the lighted message during daytime hours.  Given that these VMS' in the Keystone State show travel times for the majority of the time they're on/illuminated; I would prefer the hybrid BGS/VMS that MassDOT is now using for such.
GPS does NOT equal GOD

cl94

Quote from: PHLBOS on May 03, 2016, 05:02:09 PM
Quote from: AMLNet49 on May 03, 2016, 04:47:05 PMThis was one of the better projects MassDOT taken on.
IMHO, this should be a standard for all states to follow.  Such would free up VMS' for their originally intended purpose of reporting unusual or extraordinary situations/circumstances.  Drive/travel times are now more of a common entity.

I agree. Ohio did this in several places and it is quite nice to know of an incident far enough in advance to take an alternate route. Ditto for NYSDOT Region 10.
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

Pete from Boston

Quote from: bob7374 on May 03, 2016, 11:13:53 AM
MassDOT announces activation of 'Go Time' Real Time Traffic signs along MA 140 in the Taunton area. Signs on I-95 and I-495 to be activated this summer:
http://blog.mass.gov/transportation/massdot-highway/massdot-launches-go-time-real-time-traffic-information/

I have seen these now on 95/128 in Waltham, 95 between Canton and Mansfield, 495 around 95 and 24, 140 between Taunton and New Bedford... none of them on yet. 

I like that they use "RI State Line" on some.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.