Massachusetts milepost exit numbering conversion contract

[SkyPesos]

I'm questioning how useful the "U-turn to Boston sign" even is. At that point very close to Boston, almost all vehicles probably passed through Boston already, unless there's someone out there that didn't pay attention to anything on their surroundings at all until the U-turn sign and is like "oh no, I missed Boston's skyline".

The primary reason MassDOT cited for creating the U-Turn was to help buses, taxis and ride sharing vehicles from Logan Airport access the Copley Square/Prudential exit instead of taking local streets to get there. The alternative was to build a new interchange westbound which to them cost prohibitive.

For that purpose, I would've expected a sign stating Copley/Prudential, or Exit 133 as the U-turn destination, instead of just Boston, but I guess Boston works fine.

[deathtopumpkins]

I'm questioning how useful the "U-turn to Boston sign" even is. At that point very close to Boston, almost all vehicles probably passed through Boston already, unless there's someone out there that didn't pay attention to anything on their surroundings at all until the U-turn sign and is like "oh no, I missed Boston's skyline".

The primary reason MassDOT cited for creating the U-Turn was to help buses, taxis and ride sharing vehicles from Logan Airport access the Copley Square/Prudential exit instead of taking local streets to get there. The alternative was to build a new interchange westbound which to them cost prohibitive.

For that purpose, I would've expected a sign stating Copley/Prudential, or Exit 133 as the U-turn destination, instead of just Boston, but I guess Boston works fine.

Since there are no westbound exits or eastbound entrances between Allston/Brighton and 93, the idea was to provide the U-turn both for westbound traffic to exit at Copley/Prudential, and for eastbound traffic to enter via one of the westbound-only onramps. There are plenty of times when the fastest way from Copley to I-93 or the Ted Williams Tunnel, for example, involves using this U-turn ramp. Even right now Google says from Copley to the Zakim Bridge is 2 minutes faster this way vs via Boylston and Essex. I did this kind of thing somewhat regularly in my Uber/Lyft driving days.

I think signing it exclusively for Copley/Prudential would not cover the whole intended use of that ramp, and just "Boston" is a bit vague, but it conveys the message sufficiently well since U-turning does take you back to downtown Boston.

[roadman]

I fear they will. In the midst of the I-495 sign project around Lowell, they actually put up brand new signs a few weeks ago between exits 35 and 37, with the old number plastered over the new number underneath.

Well, that explains why I saw patches with the old exit number on some of the exit gore signs on my way back from Cape Cod earlier today via I-495 Northbound... They started somewhere after I-290 / MA 85 interchange and ended somewhere around I-93 or Lawrence, but I'm not sure 100 % about the exact start and end of those new signs. I'm not sure if the exit signs themself or any auxiliary signs got that treatment as well, as I saw a new sign for "Manchester-Boston Regional Airport via US-3 North" with a patched exit sign.

It's a good idea in general for the regular signs, but putting up a brand new "next exit XX" sign is just pissing money away.

At the time the I-495 Harvard to Lowell project was under design, it was still uncertain when the exit renumbering work would begin, which is why the plans called for replacing the Next Exit XX' signs.  However, given the subsequent overlap of the two projects, I agree with you that it probably should have been caught and the signs not fabricated.

[bob7374]

Taking 'advantage' of the cold and damp Memorial Day weekend weather, I've added photos taken by Vinh Lam of I-93 exit renumbering from the Boston area to the New Hampshire border, including new photos along the Zakim/Bunker Hill Bridge:


To my New England Exit Renumbering Central website:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i93signs

I-495 exit renumbering has made it northbound to US 3. Will post more of that route soon.

[fwydriver405]

I-495 exit renumbering has made it northbound to US 3. Will post more of that route soon.

Managed to capture the Exit 89 photos northbound from Nashua from US 3 to 495 NB. Southbound is still old exit 35 as of 2021-05-29.

At the time the I-495 Harvard to Lowell project was under design, it was still uncertain when the exit renumbering work would begin, which is why the plans called for replacing the Next Exit XX' signs.  However, given the subsequent overlay of the two projects, I agree with you that it probably should have been caught and the signs not fabricated.

One of the actual new "Next Exit" signs:
SB before Old Exit 35:


NB after Old exit 35, now 89:

[ran4sh]

Do they not realize that there's no point to a "next exit ##" sign with mile-based exit numbers?

[bob7374]

Have posted exit renumbering photos from the Chelmsford area taken by Paul Schlichtman, it appears not all the work is complete NB to US 3, for example, they forgot to change the exit number at MA 4:


Also, there do not appear to be any Old Exit signs related to the US 3/Lowell Connector interchange, as noted above, and in the other photos I've posted at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i495photos2

[roadman]

Do they not realize that there's no point to a "next exit ##" sign with mile-based exit numbers?

See my response #1152 above.

[SectorZ]

Drove on I-495 between exits 89 and 91 (old 35 and 37) today and both "next exit XX" signs were just outright taken down.

[fwydriver405]

Drove on I-495 between exits 89 and 91 (old 35 and 37) today and both "next exit XX" signs were just outright taken down.

So much for those two signs... wonder if the ones on MA 3 and I-195 still exist to this day or have also outright taken down:

Actually, some of those "Next Exit XX" signs were reused as part of MA's exit renumbering scheme.

Route 3: 1, 2

This blank "Next Exit" sign on 195

[shadyjay]

"NEXT EXIT ##" signs didn't really seem to make sense to me, even in a sequential system where a number is skipped.  Where they would have been useful would have been for significant exit jumps... like when I-95 used to use Route 128's numbering sequence, in Maine where the exits jumped all over the place before mile-based and renumbering, and today on I-95 North where it leaves the turnpike in East Lyme, CT and exits jump from 76 to 81. 

But in a typical mileage-based exit world, there's no need for them. 

[74/171FAN]

"NEXT EXIT ##" signs didn't really seem to make sense to me, even in a sequential system where a number is skipped.  Where they would have been useful would have been for significant exit jumps... like when I-95 used to use Route 128's numbering sequence, in Maine where the exits jumped all over the place before mile-based and renumbering, and today on I-95 North where it leaves the turnpike in East Lyme, CT and exits jump from 76 to 81. 

But in a typical mileage-based exit world, there's no need for them. 

I have even seen these on I-80 in northern PA though it tends to have more distance between exits than other PA interstates west of I-380.

[shadyjay]

Those i have no problem with and are very useful.  Mass reduced theirs back to 10 miles.  Most exits in VT have them posted.  Portions of the Connecticut Tuenpike had them until 1992 but they were laughable.  Next Exit 2 Miles!  Ha!

[abqtraveler]

Those i have no problem with and are very useful.  Mass reduced theirs back to 10 miles.  Most exits in VT have them posted.  Portions of the Connecticut Tuenpike had them until 1992 but they were laughable.  Next Exit 2 Miles!  Ha!

There aren't too many places on Connecticut's highways where the exits are space more than 2 miles. I think that's part of the reason why Connecticut's highways have so much congestion. Too many exits spaced too close together, especially in Fairfield and New Haven Counties.

[DrSmith]

The old "Next Exit 1" survives on 91 south, although the southbound changes stopped with old exit 6 and after that the numbers remained the same.

Back when you had to use maps, the next exit would have some use even in mileage based systems with the partial-interchanges. It might not be visible that your side of the highway was an entrance only or such with a map displaying an interchange and not indicating it as partial. It's less an issue with GPS directions now

[Great Lakes Roads]

I just read that the I-290/I-395 exit numbers will be converted to mile-based sometime in August 2021, per this link:

https://www.wwlp.com/news/massachusetts/massdot-to-continue-exit-renumbering-work-on-i-495/

I find this quote interesting in the article: "Note that the overhead guide signs and sign structures currently being installed on I-290 are a part of a separate MassDOT project. As this project was designed and begun well before the start of the Statewide Exit Renumbering Project, these signs have been fabricated with the current sequential exit numbers. Once the sign replacement work is complete, all of the exit numbers will then be overlaid with the new milepost-based numbers."

[ProfBrad]

For the renumbering on Route 2, why is I-95 (128) Exit 127?  Mile marker 128 is just before the exit if you are Rt 2 heading east.  Mile 127 is further west in Lincoln and it does not line up with the exit.  Any reason why such a glaring discrepancy?  I would think that Exit 128 lining up with route 128 would be a neat thing.

[Roadgeekteen]

For the renumbering on Route 2, why is I-95 (128) Exit 127?  Mile marker 128 is just before the exit if you are Rt 2 heading east.  Mile 127 is further west in Lincoln and it does not line up with the exit.  Any reason why such a glaring discrepancy?  I would think that Exit 128 lining up with route 128 would be a neat thing.

Maybe they think that the exit number will confuse people.

[bob7374]

For the renumbering on Route 2, why is I-95 (128) Exit 127?  Mile marker 128 is just before the exit if you are Rt 2 heading east.  Mile 127 is further west in Lincoln and it does not line up with the exit.  Any reason why such a glaring discrepancy?  I would think that Exit 128 lining up with route 128 would be a neat thing.

Maybe they think that the exit number will confuse people.

The number was set at 127, despite the nearby mile 128 marker, so that the exits through the Lexington stretch would not have to be given letters, particularly old Exits 55 and 56 which would have to be 131A and 131B. That, according to MassDOT, would be more confusing, since they think drivers would expect that separate exits have different numbers.

[bob7374]

I have started posting photos taken of I-495 North exit renumbering from a trip last Friday to my New England Exit Renumbering Central website. I have put up some additional photos of signage from MA 24 to I-95, such as this:


along with new signage photos from US 1 to MA 9, including:


The rest of the photos are at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#photos

I'll plan to post the remaining photos over the next couple days. MassDOT indicated that the I-495 work should be completed on June 12, but their exit renumbering site has not been updated to reflect this as of yet.

[roadman]

Those i have no problem with and are very useful.  Mass reduced theirs back to 10 miles.  Most exits in VT have them posted.  Portions of the Connecticut Tuenpike had them until 1992 but they were laughable.  Next Exit 2 Miles!  Ha!

Section 2E.34 Next Exit Plaques
Option:
Where the distance to the next interchange is unusually long, a Next Exit plaque (see Figure 2E-23) may be
installed to inform road users of the distance to the next interchange.
Guidance:
The Next Exit plaque should not be used unless the distance between successive interchanges is more
than 5 miles

Massachusetts standardized on ten miles as the minimum distance to post these signs back in the 1980s.

[paul02474]

For the renumbering on Route 2, why is I-95 (128) Exit 127?  Mile marker 128 is just before the exit if you are Rt 2 heading east.  Mile 127 is further west in Lincoln and it does not line up with the exit.  Any reason why such a glaring discrepancy?  I would think that Exit 128 lining up with route 128 would be a neat thing.

Maybe they think that the exit number will confuse people.

The number was set at 127, despite the nearby mile 128 marker, so that the exits through the Lexington stretch would not have to be given letters, particularly old Exits 55 and 56 which would have to be 131A and 131B. That, according to MassDOT, would be more confusing, since they think drivers would expect that separate exits have different numbers.

This bothers me every time I pass by this exit, which is often. The eastbound new Exit 128 is essentially the same as the westbound Exit 129, so they could have shared 129 with no confusion.
For many years, Exit 60 was one exit east of Route 60, which was always a source of confusion. Placing Exit 128 one exit east of Route 128 would seem to present the same problem, and should have been avoided. Besides, how cool would it be if Exit 128 put you on the circumferential highway.

(Note for historians - before the highway was built, MA 128 ran along Waltham Street in Lexington.

[The Ghostbuster]

Does anyone agree with Mass DOT that Interstate 290's new exit numbers should be a continuation of Interstate 395's exit numbers (like they are at present), instead of both highways having their own exit sequences?

[SkyPesos]

Does anyone agree with Mass DOT that Interstate 290's new exit numbers should be a continuation of Interstate 395's exit numbers (like they are at present), instead of both highways having their own exit sequences?

I do. It's a single highway in practicality (not numbers), and as they're both short in the state, and using a single set would reduce confusion. I read somewhere that there's a plan to renumber I-290 as an extension of I-395 after the mileage based exit number renumbering, does someone have more details on that?

[Alps]

Does anyone agree with Mass DOT that Interstate 290's new exit numbers should be a continuation of Interstate 395's exit numbers (like they are at present), instead of both highways having their own exit sequences?

I do. It's a single highway in practicality (not numbers), and as they're both short in the state, and using a single set would reduce confusion. I read somewhere that there's a plan to renumber I-290 as an extension of I-395 after the mileage based exit number renumbering, does someone have more details on that?

That's the only way I'd agree with it. It'll create the unique circumstance of a 3di's only connection to the Interstate system being the 3di child of a different parent.