AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: New Hampshire  (Read 103281 times)

Alps

  • y u m
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15429
  • Elimitante the truck trarffic,

  • Age: 40
  • Location: New Jersey
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 01:17:35 PM
    • Alps' Roads
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #325 on: June 29, 2022, 12:28:27 AM »

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.
The one on the mast arm is unusual. I don't dislike it but it's definitely not standard practice.

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14378
  • fuck

  • Age: 15
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: May 28, 2023, 06:53:21 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #326 on: August 13, 2022, 07:18:58 PM »

The 1909 Automobile Blue Book notes that "Automobiles not allowed on the new State Road on south side of Ammonoosuc River, extending from just west of Fabyans to about one mile beyond the White Mountain House." Anyone know what this was? The current alignment around Lower Falls Road/Trail was not built until about 1980, and I'm not seeing anything else obvious. Maybe the scar here and just north of the river here?
Logged
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".

I agree to indemnify Belkin against unauthorized use of its MiniVak vacuum.

Ted$8roadFan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1133
  • Location: Massachusetts
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 06:02:25 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #327 on: December 08, 2022, 06:37:43 AM »

(Late to the topic, but………) Now that Massachusetts and Rhode Island have fully converted their highway exit numbers to from sequential to mileage-based numbers, will New Hampshire be next?
Logged

BlueOutback7

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2152
  • Pennsylvania has bad control cities.

  • Age: 21
  • Location: Massachusetts
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 10:48:21 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #328 on: December 08, 2022, 07:52:23 AM »

(Late to the topic, but………) Now that Massachusetts and Rhode Island have fully converted their highway exit numbers to from sequential to mileage-based numbers, will New Hampshire be next?

Probably not until Chris Sununu leaves the governors office as he’s been very anti-exit renumbering, using the “I grew up as an Exit 3 kid” excuse. But New Hampshire really needs to get the exits renumbered. No excuses.
Logged
Decommission 128 south of Peabody!

Lowest untraveled number: 48

SectorZ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2821
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Massachusetts
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 03:02:33 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #329 on: December 08, 2022, 09:05:24 AM »

(Late to the topic, but………) Now that Massachusetts and Rhode Island have fully converted their highway exit numbers to from sequential to mileage-based numbers, will New Hampshire be next?

Probably not until Chris Sununu leaves the governors office as he’s been very anti-exit renumbering, using the “I grew up as an Exit 3 kid” excuse. But New Hampshire really needs to get the exits renumbered. No excuses.

I was hoping he would figure it out with the plans to build exit 4A on 93, but for some reason it didn't sink in. I've been wanting them to do it so they could number exits without them as well.
Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3963
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 10:12:11 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #330 on: December 09, 2022, 06:42:46 PM »

There’s no guarantee that Governor Sequential’s (my nickname for Sununu) successor will be any less anti-exit renumbering than Sequential is. By the way, did New Hampshire request FHWA grant them a wavier to retain their sequential exit numbers, or did Sununu simply say New Hampshire will not convert to mileage-based exit numbers and leave it at that?
« Last Edit: December 09, 2022, 07:38:48 PM by The Ghostbuster »
Logged

SectorZ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2821
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Massachusetts
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 03:02:33 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #331 on: December 09, 2022, 07:34:11 PM »

There’s no guarantee that Governor Sequential’s (my nickname for Sununu) successor will be any less anti-exit renumbering than Sequential is. By the way, did New Hampshire request FHWA grant them a wavier to Reagan their sequential exit numbers, or did Sununu simply say New Hampshire will not convert to mileage-based exit numbers and leave it at that?

I haven't read anything about the matter since 2019, when Sununu was mentioning he didn't want the state to pay the $1M out of pocket for the change, among other less-tangible complaints.
Logged

roadman65

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14609
  • Location: Lakeland, Florida
  • Last Login: Today at 02:20:23 AM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #332 on: March 27, 2023, 10:01:12 PM »

Is I-93 the only freeway in the state that’s maximum speed limit is posted at 70 mph?
Logged
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

Beeper1

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 411
  • Location: Western MA
  • Last Login: May 21, 2023, 05:20:53 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #333 on: March 27, 2023, 10:05:23 PM »

I'm pretty sure there are sections of I-89 that are as well.
Logged

BlueOutback7

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2152
  • Pennsylvania has bad control cities.

  • Age: 21
  • Location: Massachusetts
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 10:48:21 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #334 on: March 27, 2023, 10:09:32 PM »

New Hampshire needs to raise its speed limits to 70 on at least I-89 and NH 101. I don’t know about I-95. Might be too busy to make that work.
Logged
Decommission 128 south of Peabody!

Lowest untraveled number: 48

Ted$8roadFan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1133
  • Location: Massachusetts
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 06:02:25 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #335 on: March 28, 2023, 05:21:49 AM »

New Hampshire is the one New England state you’d think where 70 would be the default speed limit on the rural parts of 89 and 93 and perhaps other highways.
Logged

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12668
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 10:57:39 PM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #336 on: March 28, 2023, 08:33:11 AM »

The state law that allowed 70 only allowed it on 93 north of Concord.  89 is much more hilly and curvy than 93 and that played a factor in why it wasn't included.
Logged

Roadgeekteen

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14684
  • Limon should not be a control city

  • Age: 19
  • Location: Needham/Amherst
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 10:39:57 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #337 on: March 28, 2023, 12:50:21 PM »

New Hampshire needs to raise its speed limits to 70 on at least I-89 and NH 101. I don’t know about I-95. Might be too busy to make that work.
I-95 could totally work at 70. If Utah can post 70 on urban Salt Lake City freeways, every single rural freeway should be 70 unless it is a very substandard freeway like I-70 south of Breezwood.
Logged
God-emperor of Alanland, king of all the goats and goat-like creatures

Current Interstate map I am making:

https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?hl=en&mid=1PEDVyNb1skhnkPkgXi8JMaaudM2zI-Y&ll=29.05778059819179%2C-82.48856825&z=5

SectorZ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2821
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Massachusetts
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 03:02:33 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #338 on: March 28, 2023, 01:16:03 PM »

New Hampshire needs to raise its speed limits to 70 on at least I-89 and NH 101. I don’t know about I-95. Might be too busy to make that work.
I-95 could totally work at 70. If Utah can post 70 on urban Salt Lake City freeways, every single rural freeway should be 70 unless it is a very substandard freeway like I-70 south of Breezwood.

95 and much of 101 could be bumped to 70. In fact, 95 could be 70 MPH from Peabody MA up to where it becomes 70 in Maine.

89 is probably better off staying at 65. That road is just a much different freeway than the others. The state even patrols 89 much heavier than they do 93 because of the problems speed can get the inexperienced into on it.
Logged

BlueOutback7

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2152
  • Pennsylvania has bad control cities.

  • Age: 21
  • Location: Massachusetts
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 10:48:21 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #339 on: March 28, 2023, 01:27:21 PM »

New Hampshire needs to raise its speed limits to 70 on at least I-89 and NH 101. I don’t know about I-95. Might be too busy to make that work.
I-95 could totally work at 70. If Utah can post 70 on urban Salt Lake City freeways, every single rural freeway should be 70 unless it is a very substandard freeway like I-70 south of Breezwood.

Pennsylvania even posts 70 on the 276 part of the Turnpike. I mention I-95 because it does get fairly busy on summer weekends due to Maine bound traffic, but then again, so does I-93 north of Concord.
Logged
Decommission 128 south of Peabody!

Lowest untraveled number: 48

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3963
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 10:12:11 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #340 on: March 28, 2023, 01:38:23 PM »

Maybe you should lobby the state legislature to bump the speed limit up to 70 and see if Govenor Sequential goes along with that.
Logged

shadyjay

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1700
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Lwr CT River Valley
  • Last Login: May 28, 2023, 08:11:38 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #341 on: March 28, 2023, 05:25:26 PM »

95 and much of 101 could be bumped to 70. In fact, 95 could be 70 MPH from Peabody MA up to where it becomes 70 in Maine.

I wouldn't make the section from Portsmouth to Kittery 70 MPH... there's a good deal of traffic, left exits, a pretty descent curve where I-95 NB leaves the turnpike, etc. 
Something about 70 in urban areas in southern New England and the seacoast just seems wrong to me... I bet the average speed on I-95 north of Peabody is touching 80 as it is.  I-295 from Falmouth to Brunswick ME was briefly raised to 70, then they realized it was too much and dropped it back to 65. 
Logged

SectorZ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2821
  • Age: 45
  • Location: Massachusetts
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 03:02:33 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #342 on: March 28, 2023, 07:28:16 PM »

95 and much of 101 could be bumped to 70. In fact, 95 could be 70 MPH from Peabody MA up to where it becomes 70 in Maine.

I wouldn't make the section from Portsmouth to Kittery 70 MPH... there's a good deal of traffic, left exits, a pretty descent curve where I-95 NB leaves the turnpike, etc. 
Something about 70 in urban areas in southern New England and the seacoast just seems wrong to me... I bet the average speed on I-95 north of Peabody is touching 80 as it is.  I-295 from Falmouth to Brunswick ME was briefly raised to 70, then they realized it was too much and dropped it back to 65.

I meant to exclude that stretch and neglected to bring it up. Yeah that can stay at its current 55.
Logged

fwydriver405

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 504
  • Location: Maine
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 10:34:46 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #343 on: March 28, 2023, 10:00:17 PM »

95 and much of 101 could be bumped to 70. In fact, 95 could be 70 MPH from Peabody MA up to where it becomes 70 in Maine.

I wouldn't make the section from Portsmouth to Kittery 70 MPH... there's a good deal of traffic, left exits, a pretty descent curve where I-95 NB leaves the turnpike, etc. 
Something about 70 in urban areas in southern New England and the seacoast just seems wrong to me... I bet the average speed on I-95 north of Peabody is touching 80 as it is.  I-295 from Falmouth to Brunswick ME was briefly raised to 70, then they realized it was too much and dropped it back to 65.

I meant to exclude that stretch and neglected to bring it up. Yeah that can stay at its current 55.

Unrelated, but it's also worth noting that MaineDOT (and possibly MTA as well, since part of it runs on their road past I-95 MM 0.37) scaled back the 65 MPH (105 km/h) speed limit to 55 MPH (89 km/h) from the NH/ME border to the Exit 2 on-ramp SB, and Exit 1 off-ramp NB. Only found that out en route to a game v. UNH on 22 Feb 2023 that this change was in effect.

Also just recently in the past two weeks, the foundations for breakdown lane travel (mast arms, lane use signs, sign supports, some VMS?) have also started appearing on I-95 in both states as well.
Logged

tckma

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 610
  • I only came for the Appelflappen!

  • Age: 44
  • Location: Manayunk, Philadelphia, PA
  • Last Login: May 16, 2023, 01:29:36 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #344 on: April 03, 2023, 09:54:42 AM »

The state law that allowed 70 only allowed it on 93 north of Concord.  89 is much more hilly and curvy than 93 and that played a factor in why it wasn't included.

Rural portions of I-89 in NH (and VT) could definitely handle 70 MPH.  A few hilly/curvy sections might not be able to handle it.

I'm not so sure about I-95 along the Seacoast.

tckma

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 610
  • I only came for the Appelflappen!

  • Age: 44
  • Location: Manayunk, Philadelphia, PA
  • Last Login: May 16, 2023, 01:29:36 PM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #345 on: April 03, 2023, 09:57:21 AM »

Pennsylvania even posts 70 on the 276 part of the Turnpike. I mention I-95 because it does get fairly busy on summer weekends due to Maine bound traffic, but then again, so does I-93 north of Concord.

The ENTIRE PA Turnpike system is posted at 70 except in construction zones.  There are definitely curvy/hilly parts that can't handle 70.  The I-276 portion isn't one of them.

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13757
  • Age: 32
  • Location: The 518
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 08:21:13 PM
    • New York State Roads
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #346 on: April 03, 2023, 12:56:02 PM »

^ Well, not quite the entire system.  But I don't recall any of the 70 portions feeling uncomfortable with my cruise set at 75.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

storm2k

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1306
  • Age: 42
  • Location: NJ
  • Last Login: May 26, 2023, 09:49:20 AM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #347 on: April 03, 2023, 12:59:07 PM »

Pennsylvania even posts 70 on the 276 part of the Turnpike. I mention I-95 because it does get fairly busy on summer weekends due to Maine bound traffic, but then again, so does I-93 north of Concord.

The ENTIRE PA Turnpike system is posted at 70 except in construction zones.  There are definitely curvy/hilly parts that can't handle 70.  The I-276 portion isn't one of them.

It's still 55 between the Delaware River Bridge and the Bensalem Interchange and then goes up to 70. I imagine if they ever finish all the 95 interchange upgrades it will go up to 70 in that section, but who knows when that will be.
Logged

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2524
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: Today at 12:20:35 AM
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #348 on: April 18, 2023, 11:46:31 PM »

Check out what New Hampshire wanted as part of the 1968 Interstate system extensions. And for their greed, they got nothing

Vermont OTOH was humble and requested no new interstate miles.



H/T: http://www.gribblenation.org/2023/02/1968-federal-highway-act-state.html
Logged

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12668
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: May 29, 2023, 10:57:39 PM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: New Hampshire
« Reply #349 on: April 19, 2023, 01:31:05 AM »

^ If you read more carefully, this was the Congressional testimony from meetings held in 1968, prior to passage of the legislation that expanded the Interstate system by 1500 miles.  After the legislation passed, Vermont did submit two requests in coordination with NY and NH.
Logged

 


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.