Route 1 Project - Malden, Revere, Saugus

BostonUrbEx

BostonUrbEx

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2010
Messages
4,340
Reaction score
127
I've heard some estimates of construction starting next year, but it seems to be on the down low for supposedly being so soon.

6063875807_cea3a508b2_o.png


6064423778_d917c66858_o.png


6063876109_bfcfe7c846_o.png


6064424078_d9db53e17c_o.png



Note that a part of B-3 is already built. Sneaky developers built the northbound half of the Salem St Connector when the built the Overlook Apartments and quietly left room for the southbound lanes. I think B-3 is a bit excessive; a connector road is completely inappropriate.

I don't understand A-2... how would the intersection under Rt 1 look? It seems that the SB offramp and NB offramp would be going head-on into each other in the intersection. Although you can place signs, lights, etc, it could certainly prove to be an accident waiting to happen.

C-1 looks good, but I was expecting the lack of access from 1-North to 99-South to be addressed. That was the primary purpose of Project C as I understood it...
 
What is the purpose of this project? Just to reclaim developable land where the rotary is now, or something else?
 
I wonder how much this will cost vs finishing the Green Line extension through Somerville. I'm struggling to see the point.
 
Me too. My impression is that Route 1 works pretty well for what it is -- an almost-freeway that happens to have lots of abutting businesses along it. When I've had a car, I've enjoyed driving on it. It's not much fun for bikes or pedestrians, but this project wouldn't fix that and I'm not even sure that's a reasonable goal.
 
Some of the goals are to increase missing capacity and bring Salem St exits up to higher standards. You'll notice that this includes making the entire highway 6 lanes, as at present, the highway narrows from 6 north of Rt99, to 4 south of 99. TBH, I think instead, they should make the whole thing a 4 lane interstate standard north of 99, with feeder roads maintaining access to business and such. I think it would be a better investment in congestion management. Or, my personal favorite, no highway improvements ever, just do mass transit.
 
BostonUrbEx said:
6063875807_cea3a508b2_o.png


I don't understand A-2... how would the intersection under Rt 1 look? It seems that the SB offramp and NB offramp would be going head-on into each other in the intersection. Although you can place signs, lights, etc, it could certainly prove to be an accident waiting to happen.
Click to expand...

It is a Single-Point Urban Interchange (SPUI) that allows left-turning traffic to/from the freeway to flow at the same time. It is a great design that works really well. I haven't seen many (any?) applications in the Northeast of it, but they are pretty popular in West/Midwest/Florida.

A video demonstrating how it works.
 
Thanks for the visual! Thought the SPUI was something else... Is this "better" than an inverted diamond? (I think that's the name? where the roadway switches sides in between two lights)
 
In essence...nothing new here just finishing what was supposed to have been done FORTH YEARS AGO.

Ron, the project is simply improving traffic flow for Rt. 1 and Rt. 60, which is actually a problem for the area especially on weekends.

BUE take a close look at the bridges visually if you believe the project isn't worth it. They are falling apart the the point that the unused I95 bridges are barely staying together and the Rt. 1 bridges are close to requiring a massive makeover just to stay together to handle the current level of traffic. Transit improvements are a better use of money however NOT at the expense of infrestructural improvements that are desperately needed.


Oh and this entire project is DOA before it ever gets past the drawing stages- one of the candidates and the leading contender for Mayor of Revere owns a business directly affected by the project so this project is never going to get done so long as he is alive and kicking.
 
Last edited:
From my humble perspective having driven and walked through the area too many times to count..

A-2 appears to allow for redevelopement of the area of the former rotary and I95 northbound overpass. My problem with this is there needs to be consideration for pedestrian access. Either move the access to a new northern routing or make a clear crossing at or near the current crossing even if it requires the use of traffic lights.

A-3 appears to be a slightly better alignment than A-2 for Rt. 1 south to Rt. 60 and Rt. 60 to Rt. 1 south with the northbound connections appearing to be

Both A-2 and A-3 don't need the Rt. 1 to Rt. 60 east connection moved, it will be worse at the interchange than it is at the rotary where it's a gradual connection rather than a tighter turn.

The Malden/Saugus segments I have no comment on...frankly because anything they can do to improve visibility of the exits and easing connection to the highway is going to be a huge improvement over the quick and tight turning exits, blind merging, and bottleneck connection north of Rt. 60 is an improvement.
 
Looks like a pedestrian and cyclist death trap.

Woulnt a standard intersection be cheaper?
 
why is a SPUI better than the current rotary (where traffic never needs to stop in any direction)?

Neither a SPUI nor a rotary is at all good for pedestrians, but cyclists can generally handle rotaries (such as Powderhouse Circle in Somerville, or this one on Route 60) just fine.

I'm totally in favor of replacing crumbling bridges ASAP (hopefully in a quick way similar to the recent I-93 bridge replacements in Medford), but unsure why anything else is needed on this road.
 
Last edited:
Ron Newman said:
why is a SPUI better than the current rotary (where traffic never needs to stop in any direction)?

Neither a SPUI nor a rotary is at all good for pedestrians, but cyclists can generally handle rotaries (such as Powderhouse Circle in Somerville, or this one on Route 60) just fine.

I'm totally in favor of replacing crumbling bridges ASAP (hopefully in a quick way similar to the recent I-93 bridge replacements in Medford), but unsure why anything else is needed on this road.
Click to expand...

That theory might work if it was two surface level routes but with Rt. 1 elevated over the rotary it is a mute point as the merging lanes are backed up hundreds of feet both north and south to the point that you have to get on or off before Rt. 60 to get anywhere in that area. Removing it removese an unneeded problem.
 
seems to me like a stoplight would cause more backups. Traffic merging into a rotary never needs to stop at all. The rotary at Route 60 and I-93 is identical in structure to this one, and I don't know of any plans to replace it.
 
Ed, I agree the bridges need to be replaced, as someone who's in the area frequently (even just today), but I don't see much need for much of this project other than replacing the bridges, and perhaps removal of the rotary.



The rotary was built with the intent of exit/on ramps for I-95 to Lynn as well, so this whole thing is overbuilt as is, and isn't functioning at the expected level. 60 West backs up because of the rotary all the time (not that all the lights help much, either...) and the 1 South off ramp backs onto the highway as well, eliminating one of two lanes for southbound travel at some times. The rotary also seems to be a common spot for accidents, I can't comment on hard stats, but even just last week I saw someone managed to spin out and hit a guardrail underneath the abandoned I-95 bridges.

I think the Project B/Salem St section can be handled much better, without a connector road. I imagine this wide high-speed boulevard in what is supposed to be a mixed use (incredibly residential-heavy right now) development.

I can understand Project C, but don't see it being worth the money. It's one of those "I really wish they did it that way when first built, but why bother now" type of things, IMO.

I'd rather not see 3 travel lanes, unless the rightmost always ends up a forced exit/dedicated entry lane.
 
Ron Newman said:
seems to me like a stoplight would cause more backups. Traffic merging into a rotary never needs to stop at all. The rotary at Route 60 and I-93 is identical in structure to this one, and I don't know of any plans to replace it.
Click to expand...

Two different designs from the on/off ramps to the actual rotary layout itself Ron...the I93/Rt. 60 rotary doesn't handle any of the traffic from the interchange directly like the Rt. 1/Rt.60 rotary does.

If I95 had been built as it was intended to be the rotary layout may have been the same, but with an additional segment for the merging/less cluttered Rt. 1 lanes.
 
BostonUrbEx said:
Ed, I agree the bridges need to be replaced, as someone who's in the area frequently (even just today), but I don't see much need for much of this project other than replacing the bridges, and perhaps removal of the rotary.



The rotary was built with the intent of exit/on ramps for I-95 to Lynn as well, so this whole thing is overbuilt as is, and isn't functioning at the expected level. 60 West backs up because of the rotary all the time (not that all the lights help much, either...) and the 1 South off ramp backs onto the highway as well, eliminating one of two lanes for southbound travel at some times. The rotary also seems to be a common spot for accidents, I can't comment on hard stats, but even just last week I saw someone managed to spin out and hit a guardrail underneath the abandoned I-95 bridges.
Click to expand...

Better dedicated lanes can be built in conjunction with the rotary removal to allow for a better traffic flow especially since much of the vestigal Rt. 95 flyover land allows for allignment changes.

You are right about the accidents in this area(rotary and the on/off ramps), only North Shore Road has had more accidents since I have been living in the city(3+ years) with several rollovers including a fatal one.

I think the Project B/Salem St section can be handled much better, without a connector road. I imagine this wide high-speed boulevard in what is supposed to be a mixed use (incredibly residential-heavy right now) development.

I can understand Project C, but don't see it being worth the money. It's one of those "I really wish they did it that way when first built, but why bother now" type of things, IMO.

I'd rather not see 3 travel lanes, unless the rightmost always ends up a forced exit/dedicated entry lane.
Click to expand...

How old are these plans? The access road to me looks like it could be part of the Overlook Ridge developement nearby that was complete in '08. It's clearly older than Fall '09 due to the MassHighway logos.
 
I didn't even notice the MassHighway logo. I was under the impression these were from 2009 or 2010; I think it may be from a 2010 presentation. I'll see if I can find the source again.
 
By the way, you mentioned someone with a business stake having something against this project. Why would they be against it? Looks like anyone abutting the area has the potential to buy more adjacent land. I can understand being against construction, but I'd think the outcome is worth it for them.
 
It looks to me like US 1 traffic goes over the rotary while MA 60 traffic goes through it ... which is the same thing that happens at I-93 and MA 60 near Medford Square. What am I confused about here?
 
6069769190_9efa564edd_o.png


Whipped this up.

Green: 3 lanes
Yellow/Orange: 2 lanes
Red: Lesser road, off/on ramps (1 lane, not counting turning lanes)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top