AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Northeast => Topic started by: CapeCodder on November 19, 2016, 09:12:57 AM

Title: MA 128
Post by: CapeCodder on November 19, 2016, 09:12:57 AM
Was Route 128 supposed to go to Rockport? Because the last exit on the highway is exit 9 and it ends at Route 127. Was the highway supposed to follow 127 into Rockport or cut across the rugged interior of Cape Ann?
Title: Re: MA 128
Post by: bob7374 on November 19, 2016, 12:56:41 PM
Quote from: CapeCodder on November 19, 2016, 09:12:57 AM
Was Route 128 supposed to go to Rockport? Because the last exit on the highway is exit 9 and it ends at Route 127. Was the highway supposed to follow 127 into Rockport or cut across the rugged interior of Cape Ann?
See: http://www.bostonroads.com/roads/MA-128/ (http://www.bostonroads.com/roads/MA-128/)

The original plans for Route 128 called for a northern extension of the expressway north through Rockport to Pigeon Cove, at the northern tip of Cape Ann. While the extension to Pigeon Cove had been canceled by the late 1960's, the exit numbers along the Peabody-to-Gloucester section of MA 128, which begin at EXIT 9 (MA 127 / Eastern Avenue) in Gloucester, still reveal the existence of the long-abandoned proposal. An unfinished highway stub at Blackburn Circle at Gloucester also hints at the unbuilt extension to Rockport.
Title: Re: MA 128
Post by: The Ghostbuster on November 22, 2016, 03:12:36 PM
Personally, I think the exit sequence should have gone in the opposite direction, with Exit 1 being at the SR 3 interchange, and continuing upward as one went around the beltway clockwise.
Title: Re: MA 128
Post by: SectorZ on November 22, 2016, 03:45:18 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 22, 2016, 03:12:36 PM
Personally, I think the exit sequence should have gone in the opposite direction, with Exit 1 being at the SR 3 interchange, and continuing upward as one went around the beltway clockwise.

That, and I always wondered where the hell exits 1-8 were fitting in the few miles that weren't ever built.
Title: Re: MA 128
Post by: PHLBOS on November 28, 2016, 12:07:24 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 22, 2016, 03:12:36 PM
Personally, I think the exit sequence should have gone in the opposite direction, with Exit 1 being at the SR 3 interchange, and continuing upward as one went around the beltway clockwise.
It's worth noting that prior to 1967; 128 went beyond Braintree and ended in Nantasket via the Pilgrims Highway (that became MA 3 a few years after it was built) and the current MA 228.  The reasoning for that truncation to Braintree was due to Massachusetts adopting the wider use of direction cardinals (mainly on D6/D8 paddle signs).  As a result, 128 southbound between MA 3 and Nantasket was actually tracking north for its final (southerly) 9 miles and vice-versa.  Such would have made for some confusing signage & descriptions (old 128 signs in this area had no direction cardinals). 

The change of the non-freeway portion to 228 along with the associated 128 truncation solved that issue.

The likely reasoning behind having the numbers increase southward was due to the northern stretch of 128 (which is, incidentally, the stretch that's not shared w/I-95) is the oldest stretch of the Yankee Division Highway.

Quote from: SectorZ on November 22, 2016, 03:45:18 PMI always wondered where the hell exits 1-8 were fitting in the few miles that weren't ever built.
Prior to 1962, 128's original exit numbers started at Grant Circle (MA 127, current Exit 11/original Exit 1) and increased south/westward.  Cloverleaf interchanges originally carried two separate numbers for each off-ramp (no directional suffixes).

When the (ill-advised IMHO) plan for an extension into Rockport was being planned; the existing interchanges were renumbered plus-10 and the cloverleafs received directional suffixes.  Had the extension had been built; it's unknown whether or not the interchange numbers would've been reconfigured to reflect the actual number of new interchanges being built.
Title: Re: MA 128
Post by: mb2001 on August 21, 2019, 09:19:43 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on November 28, 2016, 12:07:24 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on November 22, 2016, 03:12:36 PM
Personally, I think the exit sequence should have gone in the opposite direction, with Exit 1 being at the SR 3 interchange, and continuing upward as one went around the beltway clockwise.
It's worth noting that prior to 1967; 128 went beyond Braintree and ended in Nantasket via the Pilgrims Highway (that became MA 3 a few years after it was built) and the current MA 228.  The reasoning for that truncation to Braintree was due to Massachusetts adopting the wider use of direction cardinals (mainly on D6/D8 paddle signs).  As a result, 128 southbound between MA 3 and Nantasket was actually tracking north for its final (southerly) 9 miles and vice-versa.  Such would have made for some confusing signage & descriptions (old 128 signs in this area had no direction cardinals). 

The change of the non-freeway portion to 228 along with the associated 128 truncation solved that issue.

The likely reasoning behind having the numbers increase southward was due to the northern stretch of 128 (which is, incidentally, the stretch that's not shared w/I-95) is the oldest stretch of the Yankee Division Highway.

Quote from: SectorZ on November 22, 2016, 03:45:18 PMI always wondered where the hell exits 1-8 were fitting in the few miles that weren't ever built.
Prior to 1962, 128's original exit numbers started at Grant Circle (MA 127, current Exit 11/original Exit 1) and increased south/westward.  Cloverleaf interchanges originally carried two separate numbers for each off-ramp (no directional suffixes).

When the (ill-advised IMHO) plan for an extension into Rockport was being planned; the existing interchanges were renumbered plus-10 and the cloverleafs received directional suffixes.  Had the extension had been built; it's unknown whether or not the interchange numbers would've been reconfigured to reflect the actual number of new interchanges being built.

Does anyone know where the exits on the extension would have been?