Roads and Highways General Development Thread

That will be a non-starter for the stretch between Crosby’s Corner and the rotary. It has been litigated and relitigated multiple times. The superhighway plan of the 60s went down in flames when folks realized how much of the battle road would get impacted. The Walden Woods Project catalyzed attention towards the proximity to Walden Pond in the 80s/90s.

Fetch ain’t happening.
 
RandomWalk said:
That will be a non-starter for the stretch between Crosby’s Corner and the rotary. It has been litigated and relitigated multiple times. The superhighway plan of the 60s went down in flames when folks realized how much of the battle road would get impacted. The Walden Woods Project catalyzed attention towards the proximity to Walden Pond in the 80s/90s.

Fetch ain’t happening.
Click to expand...
I generally think this is true, but there also seems to be a shift in sentiment in Concord over the past few years as a result of Waze-directed cut-through traffic. And while MassDOT is clear that they're not interested in building infrastructure against the wishes of the community in which its located, they also are clearly viewing Route 2 traffic in Concord as a regional problem that impacts economic development in the corridor west of Concord. Trying to build Arlington's 8-lane version of Route 2 would terrible, but keeping it four lane and grade separating an intersection or 3 could have a big impact.
 
chumbolly said:
I generally think this is true, but there also seems to be a shift in sentiment in Concord over the past few years as a result of Waze-directed cut-through traffic. And while MassDOT is clear that they're not interested in building infrastructure against the wishes of the community in which its located, they also are clearly viewing Route 2 traffic in Concord as a regional problem that impacts economic development in the corridor west of Concord. Trying to build Arlington's 8-lane version of Route 2 would terrible, but keeping it four lane and grade separating an intersection or 3 could have a big impact.
Click to expand...
Yea it doesn't need to be an 8-lane highway. A grade separated 4-lane highway similar to the stretch of 495S before the Cape would be perfect.

Route 2 is really important for Worcester and Leominster access to areas north of Boston.
 
I think there might need to be a technical/regulatory solution to the gig app traffic problem, but that’s another thread.
 
JeffDowntown said:
The third option, the diverging diamond interchange, would probably have the best traffic flow and non-vehicle experience. But I don't know whether Massachusetts drivers could wrap their head around the DDI.
Click to expand...
No data to back this thought up, but I'm wondering if snowy climates like Massachusetts are not a good fit for diverging diamond interchanges. Especially when snow stuck on the roadways and poor visibility obscures pavement arrows and markings so that an unfamiliar driver doesn't see the reversed traffic direction in this type of interchange.
 
Charlie_mta said:
No data to back this thought up, but I'm wondering if snowy climates like Massachusetts are not a good fit for diverging diamond interchanges. Especially when snow stuck on the roadways and poor visibility obscures pavement arrows and markings so that an unfamiliar driver doesn't see the reversed traffic direction in this type of interchange.
Click to expand...
There is online chatter that some drivers find the shifts disconcerting in snowy and other visibility limited conditions, particularly when the on pavement markings are obscured.
 
No idea how excited Acton would be about this, but they could close off Route 2 where the Rotary is and add a bridge or tunnel at School Street/Wetherbee.
 
That crossing has been closed for decades. I suspect most traffic diverts through the rotary or Piper Rd.
 
This may belong more in the "Crazy" thread than anything, but why not consider a subterranean option? Provide eastern portals just west of the State Police barracks and western portal just east of the Rail Trail access road. Provide collector/distributor roads (to avoid tunnel on/off ramps) that tie into a double rotary configuration. This would mean no traffic signals, easy pass-through traffic flow and realistically take up less land than what is currently being proposed.
1778856520416.png

It would ±2,500 foot long tunnel, which I know doesn't make the best financial sense in this part of the state, but with the redevelopment plans of MCI Concord coming along, I feel like going up, vertically, is the least desirable option. Not to mention every plan the state is proposing renders the land directly west of Commonwealth (old MCI Parking area) undevelopable for something like a trail-oriented development down the road. All those options feel very uninspired.

If we wanted to make a really chaotic rotary configuration, do another single rotary setup but for surface streets only 😅. That gives me anxiety just looking at haha.
1778857278048.png
 
I think the main point is to get away from rotaries, not add more.

I do like the tunnel idea but would be much messier than the other options.
 
That’s not too far from the crayon ideas I had years ago. I think I settled on a roundabout for surface streets only. One idea had no access to or from 2. The other had westbound 2 accessible from 2A by the DPW and eastbound 2 accessible from Comm Ave by the prison lot.
 
1778867477165.png


For reference, here's the Rt. 16/Rt. 146 interchange I helped design and oversaw construction of in Uxbridge three years ago.

Not saying this is a definitive solution, but shows that you can construct back to back roundabouts as a potential means of addressing the intersections.
 
North Shore said:
View attachment 72669

For reference, here's the Rt. 16/Rt. 146 interchange I helped design and oversaw construction of in Uxbridge three years ago.

Not saying this is a definitive solution, but shows that you can construct back to back roundabouts as a potential means of addressing the intersections.
Click to expand...
This is a really intriguing implementation. Is there a traffic volume where this ceases to work well?
 
CBCArch61 said:
This may belong more in the "Crazy" thread than anything, but why not consider a subterranean option? Provide eastern portals just west of the State Police barracks and western portal just east of the Rail Trail access road. Provide collector/distributor roads (to avoid tunnel on/off ramps) that tie into a double rotary configuration. This would mean no traffic signals, easy pass-through traffic flow and realistically take up less land than what is currently being proposed.
View attachment 72667
It would ±2,500 foot long tunnel, which I know doesn't make the best financial sense in this part of the state, but with the redevelopment plans of MCI Concord coming along, I feel like going up, vertically, is the least desirable option. Not to mention every plan the state is proposing renders the land directly west of Commonwealth (old MCI Parking area) undevelopable for something like a trail-oriented development down the road. All those options feel very uninspired.

If we wanted to make a really chaotic rotary configuration, do another single rotary setup but for surface streets only 😅. That gives me anxiety just looking at haha.
View attachment 72668
Click to expand...
When I lived in Italy, I found a good number of these round about intersections - but - through an area like Concord it would be a single small overpass bridge carrying a two-lane carriage way (1x1) maybe a three-lane carriage way (2x1). That would seem sufficient, with long enough ramps to deal with local traffic at the surface traffic circle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top