Text only | Text with Images

AARoads Forum

Regional Boards => Northeast => Topic started by: kurumi on November 01, 2023, 05:48:55 PM

Title: Mass DPW December 1969 report to Gov. Sargent: status, maps of MA interstates
Post by: kurumi on November 01, 2023, 05:48:55 PM
https://archive.org/details/semiannualreport00mass/page/n31/mode/2up

Nice maps of actual and proposed routes including 91, 391, 95, 695, 895, and MA 52.
Title: Re: Mass DPW December 1969 report to Gov. Sargent: status, maps of MA interstates
Post by: Alps on November 01, 2023, 06:05:02 PM
There are so many wonderful things in there. A must read.
Title: Re: Mass DPW December 1969 report to Gov. Sargent: status, maps of MA interstates
Post by: bjcolby50 on November 03, 2023, 06:48:24 PM
That was an interesting read...the things that could have been (I-895, I-695), plus the things that were but later changed (I-93, I-95, I-495)...
Title: Re: Mass DPW December 1969 report to Gov. Sargent: status, maps of MA interstates
Post by: pderocco on November 05, 2023, 06:25:41 PM
Since I-895 was intended to lengthen the I-295 loop, why wouldn't they have just called it I-295?

Also, the document has reasonably nice graphics, but it's amusing that all the text was typed on an ordinary typewriter.
Title: Re: Mass DPW December 1969 report to Gov. Sargent: status, maps of MA interstates
Post by: Alps on November 06, 2023, 06:53:42 PM
Quote from: pderocco on November 05, 2023, 06:25:41 PM
Since I-895 was intended to lengthen the I-295 loop, why wouldn't they have just called it I-295?

Also, the document has reasonably nice graphics, but it's amusing that all the text was typed on an ordinary typewriter.

My guess is because I-895's routing had a few different options and didn't necessary connect in a full loop, and RI probably was looking to avoid having two different sections of I-295 with the same mileposting (or figuring out how to milepost the second part).
Title: Re: Mass DPW December 1969 report to Gov. Sargent: status, maps of MA interstates
Post by: SectorZ on November 07, 2023, 09:26:52 AM
Quote from: Alps on November 06, 2023, 06:53:42 PM
Quote from: pderocco on November 05, 2023, 06:25:41 PM
Since I-895 was intended to lengthen the I-295 loop, why wouldn't they have just called it I-295?

Also, the document has reasonably nice graphics, but it's amusing that all the text was typed on an ordinary typewriter.

My guess is because I-895's routing had a few different options and didn't necessary connect in a full loop, and RI probably was looking to avoid having two different sections of I-295 with the same mileposting (or figuring out how to milepost the second part).

I've seen multiple different plans for 895 that came and went at different times, all the same general idea but with a different routing. I imagine this, coupled with the planned 895 using the Jamestown Bridge which would have it ending much farther south than the 95/295 junction in RI, are reasons why it was given a different number from the planning stages.
Text only | Text with Images