Hey, there! Log in / Register
Our exit numbers are going to change
By adamg on Thu, 04/07/2016 - 11:04pm
The Attleboro Sun Chronicle reports that MassDOT plans to change our highway exit numbers from straight numerical sequences to numbers based on their distance from a particular point.
Seems most of the rest of the country now uses this mileage-based system and the feds want us to convert.
The new exit numbers have not been finalized, and no specific timeline has been set for rolling out the new system.
And not everybody is happy with the plan.
Still, Robert Malme, who follows such things, has lists of the proposed new exit numbers and a photo of the very first mileage-based exit number in the state - on I-395 at the Mass/Conn line.
Topics:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Come on, we're Massachusetts
We should take a cue from Franz Kafka airport in Prague and go for the most alienating highway numbering system award. Remember when every highway was numbered Exit 25 at 128? Or when 128/93 was exit 37 on both highways and then they renumbered 128 to be part of 95 and it was still 37? Or how you can drive North on Route 3 and go straight on to 93 South and then straight again on to 95 North but no one would actually give you those directions because you'd "get on 128 at the Braintree Split"?
This should be our goal. Exits should be numbered something like 1, D, π, 22, F, &, ∴, 63.3, F, Z. That would be a numbering system we could be proud of.
Or we should come up with an Dunkin Donuts-based exit numbering system. (Bonus points for Adam posting in that video's comments.)
That is still to convenient
We should actually just remove all of the exit signs because, if you were from here you would know where you were going. ; )
ELIC: How are the numbers for interstate exits decided?
ELIC: How are the numbers for interstate exits decided? (self.ExplainLikeImCalvin)
https://www.reddit.com/r/ExplainLikeImCalvin/comments/4cz9r5/elic_how_ar...
reddit. com/r/ExplainLikeImCalvin/comments/4cz9r5/elic_how_are_the_numbers_for_interstate_exits/?sort=confidence
Alternate System
We could use prime numbers
Yes, just like postage stamps
Yes, just like postage stamps.
about time
I grew up using the current setup so I can navigate just fine, but as I've traveled elsewhere it is pretty obvious that we're moving towards a superior convention.
I'm all for it, although, I will pour one out for my homies. You know who you are.
RIP
Per younger brother who
Per younger brother who worked for DOT on asking him why MA does not have the same exit system as the rest of the county: b/c exits are too close together (in Boston esp) and you'd see exit numbers like 15.1, 15.3, 15.7 etc.
If we can do this in the wide open spaces of MA--great!
It would work on the Mass Pike
I can't see this working very well on I-93 or sections of I-95. Some would be numbered in groupings (a-b-c) where, say, there are north and southbound exits. The rest would be wacky.
My dad was a "highwayman" most of his career and he thought that the local system was better given the conditions.
This is already the case when
This is already the case when exits get changed around, and it can actually be worse with sequential numbers. Route 3 north at 495, you take one offramp for exits 30A and 30B, and a different one for exits 30C and 31! On 90/94 in downtown Chicago, there are exits every two blocks, and the letters go up to J or higher. It's not particularly confusing.
That won't change, actually
When exits are for the same road/road system, they continue to be A, B, C, etc. in the distance-based system.
I find it more confusing when close together exits are labeled alphabetically and do not end up going different directions on the same roadway.
Part of me
was hoping that "31!" was actually an exit number, and not the punctuation you used.
I vote for emojis instead of numbers. I suspect the delegates from Allston will cast their votes ironically for the smiling pile of poo.
Huh?
The rest of New England, with the exception of the Maine Pike, are numbered based on order, not on mileage. What am I missing here?
Not for CT at least
Pretty sure CT is converted. I was on 395 recently and saw "Exit N" with "formerly exit Y" signs everywhere.
Only I-395 has been converted
to milepost based exit numbers - the remaining routes still have sequential numbers.
Unlike Massachusetts, which is planning a 'blanket' conversion statewide with overlays (instead of totally replacing signs), Connecticut has decided to not convert all the exit numbers until the signs on a given route are due for normal replacement. From both cost and logistical perspectives, it is highly impractical to replace all the signs on a given route at the same time, so this policy could result in some interesting inconsistencies on longer routes like I-84 and I-95.
At present, only five of the 50 states
still number highway exits sequentially instead of using a reference-based (milepost) system. Most of them happen to be in New England.
And when Maine converted their exit numbers (in 2004), they did it statewide and not just on the Maine Turnpike. Pennsylvania converted their exit numbers in a similar manner - blanket contract across the state. Amazingly, once the numbers were changed, all the businesses and tourists and everyone else managed to survive and go on with their lives.
The "controversy" over the proposed conversion is just another example of our obsession with petty issues and reluctance to accept logical changes.
Pettiness is changing the
Pettiness is changing the exits in 2016. In 2004 you could make an argument for renumbering because nobody was using automotive GPS back then - it was a novelty add-on for your PDA being advertised in the Sharper Image catalog. Everyone was still using printed maps, either preprinted or printed from mapquest. Today, everyone (except maybe grandma) already depends on GPS to get anywhere. A used standalone unit costs less than a tank of gas. And another ten years from now, if you want to know how far the exit is, you'll ask the car, because the car will be doing the driving.
How does changing the signs in 2017 make any sense from a cost benefit perspective? The potential benefit is going extinct very fast.
And the counter-argument is
And the counter-argument is that in 2004 it was less convenient than nowadays to do this because back then people had to buy new maps and atlases after the changes were made, but nowadays the updated information will be pushed to your phone/Google maps for free.
That's not how exit numbers
That's not how exit numbers work. You'd have, in your example, exits 15A, 15B, and 16.
Also, Boston doesn't have more closely spaced exits than elsewhere. In fact, with the exception of maybe 93 from Columbia Rd into the O'Neill Tunnel, our exits tend to be spaced FARTHER apart than in many other cities.
If you want to see somewhere with really closely spaced exits, that uses mileage-based numbering, check out Kansas City: https://goo.gl/maps/cVPZdmSBPmn Pretty much their entire downtown is exit 2, with suffixes going up to 2Y!
Change Is Good
Using mileage to determine exit numbers is a far superior system and worth the trouble to make the change. Drivers who understand basic math can easily determine distances in their heads. I drive out of state all the time and always appreciate being able to quickly figure out how far the next stop will be.
It might have been worth the
It might have been worth the trouble ... 20 years ago.
Today when you want to determine the distance to your exit, you look at the GPS.
But when the apocalypse comes
your GPS won't tell you how far you are from the zombie hordes at exit 80, but that rusted old exit sign might.
Except that you can read highway signs
without taking your eyes off the road. And, I realize this may be a foreign concept to you, but many people still figure out where they're going without using a GPS.
you can read highway signs
Which is literally only possible if a highway sign has fallen onto the road.
And for everyone who doesn't
And for everyone who doesn't have a data plan and is using a standalone GPS (or is using a smart phone app that didn't get the memo), they're going to be confused when the GPS says take exit 7, and the sign says exit 22.
I love my localism
They are highways, not "freeways".
It's Route 128, not two different interstate highways.
Yet still, I like using mileage for exits. You get to work out distances without using a map. I say, go for it.
And while you're at it, put the 128 signs back up.
Okay, honest question, since
Okay, honest question, since you seem to know and are proud enough of it to talk about it
What constitutes 128??? The amount of totally useless directions I get from locals referring to this mythical unlabeled highway is awful. It's some patch of 95, right?
128 is the inner ring road
128 is the inner ring road around Boston. Parts of it are labeled 93, parts are labeled 95, and parts are labeled both, but the whole ring road is 128.
Actually, there is no section where
I-95 and I-93 run concurrently. They do intersect in Canton, but that's it.
As for 128, the designation was officially removed between Canton and Braintree in 1989, and the signs announcing the highly confusing "North I-93 is also South 128" designation (on a road going due east) were removed by early 1991. Too bad our crack traffic reporters apparently never got that memo.
US 3 and I-95/MA128
In Burlington, you can head south on US 3 while going north on I-95/128 (and vise-versa on the other side). There's a mile-and-a-half stretch between where the expressway portion of Route 3 ends at Route 128 and the two lane highway portion of it begins, and runs south from Burlington, through Woburn, Winchester, Arlington, and into Cambridge, where it ends at the Massachusetts Ave Bridge. MA 3 begins at that point and ends in Bourne. Per the mile marker placement, MassDOT treats it as one route, from Bourne to Tyngsborough.
Braintree to Rockport
Which means I count the section that even Mass Highway tried to get rid of along with the non-highway section up north.
Or, if you will, I-93 from Braintree to Canton, then, when the road continues and theoretically becomes I-95, I-95. Then, when I-95 leaves the highway up in Peabody and becomes 128, it keeps on going.
Question for Waquoit
Would you prefer that the state not get federal $$$ to maintain those sections that were redesignated as interstates?
Or would you have preferred that I-95 had been rammed through your neighborhood for continuity instead?
That's why they are not 128 anymore.
The Feds shouldn't be impinging on states' rights
So there is no reason why Route 128 could not still exist.
And yes, I-95 was supposed to go a quarter mile from my house, but from the time Sargent halted that until the 1980s, the idea of having Boston's ring road signed as a state highway was kosher with people. There are numerous examples of dual numbers being allowed, the most famous of which is I-80/I-90 and the closest to us being US1/I-93 and I-95, which, from Braintree to Dedham, used to also be good old Route 128.
But hey, if you don't like us locals, I-90 will get you back to the Pacific Northwest.
So there is no reason why
Except that there is no reason why Route 128 should continue to exist south of Peabody. Nostalgia, "historical signifigance (LOL)", and "but that's the way it's always been" are not legitimate reasons to continue an overlapping route designation that only serves to confuse people using the highway.
And had the politicans not stuck their noses where they don't belong forty years ago, the Route 128 designation would have been quietly removed south of Peabody. And everyone would have gotten used to the new designations, and all would have continued right with the world.
Dual numbers are generally found
where the routes in question diverge from each other at BOTH ends of the overlap (like I-80/I-90 do). And dual numbers normally involve Interstate/Interstate or Interstate/US routes, not Interstate/State routes.
Time to just suck it up - terminate 128 in Peabody where it intersects I-95, and call it a day.
Call it a day?
Never!
Just like how the feds tried and failed to ban alcohol, they will fail with their ban on Route 128! Someday it will even be restored to Braintree, it's proper end.
State's Rights?
LOL.
You are gonna love it when Waquoit Jr. hits adolescence - what are you gonna say to the kid when he says "you aren't the boss of me and WHERE IS MY ALLOWANCE".
;)
But, hey, if you are so into "state's rights" while living off the federal government, well, I hear Mississippi and Alabama are "great places to raise your kids".
You do realize that New
You do realize that New England has a far longer history of advocating for state's rights (including being the first to seriously consider secession) and local control than any other region of the country?
Yes
Your point?
Jeeze, thank you. People I
Jeeze, thank you. People I've asked are either also transplants, and can't explain it, or act like I'm a huge asshole for moving to their city.
It does make sense that that stretch of continuous road be one road, that whole loop is pretty... loopy.
You know you're on 128...
...when you're on it, regardless of whatever highway number is posted.
horrifyingly enough...
...I have no opinion on this and don't really care. Aaaa! It's the end of the intertubes!!
How much is this going to
How much is this going to cost? How about fix the pot holes instead.
It's being paid for with
It's being paid for with federal Highway Safety Improvement Program grants, thus it is coming from a completely separate funding pool than things like road repairs.
Ah, Federal money, which is
Ah, Federal money, which is free - created out of thin air by the Money Fairy - rather than state money which is taken from the taxpayers and motorists.
That's not what I said at all
That's not what I said at all, and you know it.
I said it comes from "a different funding pool"
Meaning the state CAN'T just choose to allocate it towards something else. Yes, the money ultimately comes from the taxpayers. There's no question of that. But federal money always comes with stipulations about what it can be used for, and states cannot just use it on whatever they want.
Where are maps that delineate the exit numbers' locations?
Where are maps? Maps that clearly delineate the exit numbers' locations?... current? proposed?
Google the highways ...
And chances are one of the first links for each highway will be a Wikipedia page that will describe the current exits.
It's been recommended since 1961
.... and mandatory since 1971 (here). There's been waivers for decades, primarily in the north east, but now the feds have decided not do issue waivers. This isn't a surprise to anyone involved.
Not exactly
While the 1971 MUTCD (and subsequent edtions) recommended that states use milepost-based exit numbers, the requirement wasn't actually mandated by FHWA until the 2009 MUTCD. No waivers required to continue accepted practices if the requested change isn't actually mandated
Boo
I like sequential numbering. It's deluding and soothing. It's nicer to think that I only have 2 more exits to go, and not be aware that means 45 miles.
Kilometres!
I like distance based exit numbers, but we shouldn't be perpetuating an obsolete measuring system like miles. Let's be the first start to label the exits in kilometres, then we won't have to change them when the country finally switches to the units used everywhere else.
Except that the United States has already
attempted to change to the metirc system twice. In both cases, the proposals were evenutally recinded.
As they say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. And the imperial system of measuring distances is NOT broken and doesn't need to be fixed.
But It Is Broken!
Every time NASA loses a planetary probe because some engineer decided to use medieval measurements rather than scientific units of measurement. Every time the US can't sell or repair things because they're using medieval units.
The fact that children in the US are still being taught a medieval system of measurement is a tragedy. And, yes, the US has half-heartedly tried to change before. But, as a wise commenter said up-thread:
I couldn't agree more.
Touche'
Although I seriously doubt that our failure to formally adopt the metric system is the reason so many companies are moving jobs overseas.
And while I agree that the metric system has certain advantages in scientific and technical applications, please explain how converting distance measurements from miles to kilometers provides sufficient benefits to the average person to justify the significant cost and disruption.
Take highway signs. Unless you're prepared to invest massive amounts of money to relocate sign structures so that advance signs on Interstates are at even kilometer-point locations, you are going to have to display fractional distances ion signs in the short term. Somehow, I doubt that Joe Q. Public will find "1 2/3 KM' easier to understand than '1 MILE' on a guide sign.
There is exactly one place
There is exactly one place the metric/imperial debate makes a meaningful difference, and that's with machine tools. It's irrelevant whether you say that a marathon is 26.2 miles or 42.2 kilometers, or whether you buy milk by the gallon or Pepsi by the liter. Either way you start running in Hopkinton, collapse in Boston, and puke up milk and Pepsi along the way.
What does matter is that you can't fit a 1/4-20 screw into an M6 nut. They look the same to the naked eye, but put one into the other and turn it and suddenly four letter words come out of your mouth.
We can thank the French for that headache. 200 years ago instead of pegging the meter to inch, some French dudes had the brilliant idea of defining the meter by the distance between the north and south pole, which is completely arbitrary and useless because seriously, when in your lifetime have you ever needed to know the reference the distance from the north to the south pole? If only they set the millimeter to be 1/25th or 1/24th of the English inch, then we probably would not have the mess we have today.
We wouldn't even be the first
We wouldn't even be the first to number exits by kilometers.
I-19 in Arizona (from Tucson to the Mexican border) is signed in metric (except for the speed limit signs).
particularly from businesses
With respect, this argument is such a non-starter, especially in the day and age of web sites and the Internet.
At least the US was smart enough to pick
a measuring system on a federal basis.
Unlike Canada, where the metric system is blended with standard and the things measured in each system vary by province and whether you're located in an urban or rural setting.
Anticipating comments about
Anticipating comments about businesses having to change advertising material & letterhead or people having difficulty because the old numbers will be gone (I've seen both of these complaints in other articles about the subject)...
I've seen this conversion in other states. It's not a problem.
They give lead time when they announce it, so businesses can use up old letterhead & advertising and order new.
When they change a sign (to say, for example "EXIT 104") they attach a placard to the sign that will say "OLD EXIT 29" (and leave that up for a couple of years)
Leaving the "Formerly Exit XX" signs up
for a couple of years is a minimum. Most of Pennsylvania's "Old Exit XX" plates are still in place over eleven years after the numbers were changed.
The new exit numbers have not
That is not true. They've been finalized for a while now. They've even already designed the signs and advertised contracts for the changes.
They have been a bit quiet about it, to avoid the public backlash, but that doesn't mean it's not moving forward.
90 east 11 to 11A
Thank god, now we can eliminate the whole crazy thing where it is 22.7 miles between exits 11 and 11A on the Mass Pike eastbound and forget it ever happened.
Kid:
"I have to pee!!!"
Mom/Dad/Other adult:
"We're almost there!"
(20 minutes later)
Mom/Dad/Other adult:
"Oh wait....."
It's 10 miles from exit 11
It's 10 miles from exit 11 (Millbury-Worcester) to exit 11A (I-495)...
How does renumbering the
How does renumbering the exits help this situation, unless you memorize the new sequence of mile-based numbers so you know that exit 114 comes next after exit 92?
so you know that exit 114
Mile markers are in ascending order from south to north - or east to west. If drivers don't already know that before setting out, they should be able to pick up on it pretty quickly once they are on a specific road.
If anything, conversion of exit numbers from sequential to milepost based should make things easier. No more memorization of "Exit 11A is at milepost 106" and the like.
Meet everyone halfway?
If the complaint about going from 1-12 to 66-93 (or whatever the actual numbers were listed in the article) is that they don't care that it's 66 miles to Seekonk where the highway crosses into MA, then why not meet them halfway and rename the highway number at the bridge. Then the mileage would be to the bridge. Sure, it won't be 1-12 any more if the exits weren't exactly 1 mile apart, but at least the number will have some meaning for the residents/owners. Of course, then we can argue over whether Rt. 6 is the part east of the bridge or west of it since one of them will be Rt. 6 and the other will need a new designation.
Interstates only?
Will this cover only interstates and their younger cousins (i.e., 290), or will it also cover state highways with exits like Route 2?
I don't have a big problem with it, except that now I'll have to redo a bunch of directions. And I wonder about the fractions of a mile.
It will cover all state
It will cover all state highways with exits.
Oh, there's my example
Route 2 alternates from being a limited access highway, a "dual carriage way" with signaled intersections, and a 2 way road. Exits based on mile makers totally makes sense on that road.
Kilometerpost please
Milepost? Bah. Let's rock the kilometerpost.