Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Cotuit

PROPOSED: Route 6/10 Interchange Project

Recommended Posts

6-10MAP.jpg

6-10-002.jpg6-10-001.jpg

RIDOT has set up a website to inform the public about proposed changes/renvation of the interchange of Routes 6 and 10 and to solicit public comment on the 4 Alternatives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Extremely interesting, and I'm curious what other people think. My first-cut gut reaction is Option 2, as I think we need to properly maintain the integrity of what is there, but not spend a boatload on highway development.

Honestly, I'd rather see Route six maintained and Route 10 converted to a light-rail/boulevard corridor. But that isn't real likely.

I also don't use either road much so I've no idea how bad it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live near PC and I work near the Zoo. Rt 10 takes me practically door to door. I typically take the Harris Ave on ramp heading South each morning, and I think that ramp could use some serious improvements.

Upon entering Rt-10 S from Harris Ave, you first have to merge with another on-ramp on your left. Once you get past that merge on to Rt-10, you have to cross two lanes to the left in what feels like 100 yards to stay on Rt-10 S, otherwise you end up on Rt-6W. Clearly, there is room for improvement here.

What really puzzles me is that there are so many of these suicide ramps in the Providence area. I know they're reworking the 195 ramps, but look at the Broadway exit downtown off of 95N. Again, you have to cross 2 lanes of oncoming traffic to get off the highway.

Other examples:

Taking the 195E exit from 95S after getting on 95S from Rt-10N.

Taking 295N from 95N after getting on 95N from 117.

Taking 195W, I think its the Gano St exit (or the one before).

I don't doubt there are more...

Was there a period in RI history where road designers just didn't care about safety?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was there a period in RI history where road designers just didn't care about safety?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The 50s and 60s. The highways in Providence were not designed to current interstate highway standards. They weren't designed to carry the traffic they do, at the speed they do, they were originally concieved to be a slightly speedier way to move people about the city.

There's no doubt that the 6/10 interchange is substandard, and as such, dangerous. If they must remain highways (and I'm afraid we're not going to see them downgraded), then improvements need to be made.

I would love to see Route 10 become a boulevard with light rail running down it. It could even remain limited access to a degree, but I too don't see that happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huh,

I had heard rumblings about this, but did not realize it was this far along...from what I have heard, I think this is going to include some major traffic reconfigurations in Olneyville sq. to try and alleviate the major problems there.

Personally, I think they should just bulldoze the entire rt. 6/10 complex, but barring that unlikely scenario, I definitely go with option 4A. By doing this, it partially removes some of the physical barrier between Federal Hill and the Armory, and Olneyvill Sq. by rerouting the highway UNDER Westminster and Broadway rather than OVER. I think that this may start to reconnect these corridors with the destination at O Sq. and reknit the historic fabric, if only partially. It would certainly be a slightly better pedestrian or biking experience than going through the current tunnels at Westminster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I'd rather see Route six maintained and Route 10 converted to a light-rail/boulevard corridor.  But that isn't real likely.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm kind of surprised that people seem to think that Rt10 isnt all that important as a highway. If you live west of 95 its pretty much the only good way to get south of the city. If you use 95 you have to deal with a LOT more traffic (especially at rush hour). When I drive home from South County every night the congestion on 95 always starts just at the Rt10 north exit - I get off on 10 and bypass the Thurbers avenue curves and all of the commuter traffic - Its great! I like the idea of any light rail project, but I really think that to adequately route traffic to the west of the city we need the bandwidth that an expressway provides. My only concern with the project is that Rt10 has been inder construction for at least 2 or 3 years now, and I just dread the thought of how long this project would take. I think adding access to 6W from 10N is really key to making the whole thing worthwhile. Now if only 6W had become I84 like it was originally intended...

Liam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now if only 6W had become I84 like it was originally intended...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Usually I'm against expressway construction, but 84 to Hartford is something I could back. Suicide 6 is not adequate. I think with modern highway designs something could be built with a low impact on the communities it traverses. It might prompt more people in Eastern CT to commute to Providence too, though it would be better if we could get an Express RIPTA bus going out that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Providence, RI) -- The Department of Transportation is looking for public input on proposed changes to the Route 6/Route 10 interchange. A public hearing is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. tonight at the Textron/Chamber of Commerce Providence Public Charter School at 130 Broadway. The proposed project includes Route 6 from the Hartford Avenue interchange to north of the Tobey Street overpass, as well as Route 10 from the Cranston Viaduct to Route 6. DOT says the purpose of the project will be to address the deterioration of the existing bridges, reduce congestion, and improve travel flow from north to west on the roads in the area. Nine of the eleven bridges being looked at are over 50 years old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They really need to connect Route 10 north to Route 6 west, talk about a good way to reroute some traffic away from the 195/95/6/10 mess downtown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard that some or one of the alternatives (I'm guessing #4) would include condemning a couple of parcels of land on Westminster Street. Does anyone know if that's the case and how/what this would include?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard that some or one of the alternatives (I'm guessing #4) would include condemning a couple of parcels of land on Westminster Street.  Does anyone know if that's the case and how/what this would include?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The 6/10 interchange destroyed Onleyville center.. Rt 6 is a viable road, but 10 just isn't neccesary.. I could be wrong.. I agree with Cotuit & Soren and say boulevard it or light rail..

That whole stretch of parcels along 10 is complete useless.. Slow down the road, make street access to both West End and Silver Lake, and reconnect the city.. Boom, gold mine.. Revitalized area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Providence, RI) -- The Department of Transportation is looking for public input on proposed changes to the Route 6/Route 10 interchange. A public hearing is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. tonight at the Textron/Chamber of Commerce Providence Public Charter School at 130 Broadway. The proposed project includes Route 6 from the Hartford Avenue interchange to north of the Tobey Street overpass, as well as Route 10 from the Cranston Viaduct to Route 6. DOT says the purpose of the project will be to address the deterioration of the existing bridges, reduce congestion, and improve travel flow from north to west on the roads in the area. Nine of the eleven bridges being looked at are over 50 years old.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Did anyone attend this meeting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 6/10 interchange destroyed Onleyville center.. Rt 6 is a viable road, but 10 just isn't neccesary.. I could be wrong.. I agree with Cotuit & Soren and say boulevard it or light rail..

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Check out what S.F. is doing to downgrade the old Central Freeway:

Octavia Blvd.

SFCityscape

OctaviaCentral.org

SFgov.org

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did anyone attend this meeting?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Seems none of us attended this. I looked on the RIDoT site at the alternatives to try to figure out what might be taken. Looks like Alternative 4 would use land south of the current Route 6. I'm not super familiar with the area, but it doesn't look like there's much there of consequense.

6-10-Project-Area.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The designers of RT 10 fudgeed up huge when they dumped it in the heart of downtown. It should have been a ring road around the city. That said, I use it all the time. Traffic is usually light and gets me to Olneyville quick.

I really like the RT 10 boulevard theory. It could open up western Prov and Olney to the rest of the city, and do it w style.

Biggest prob, at first thought, is that RT 10 is isolated by a hill along the prov side and the rail on the other. Where there is no hill you have and industrial park. Not much to do w it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont understand why the people in the westend are pissed about the redesign. I think its a great idea, and anything that can alleviate congestion in Olneyville sounds good to me.

Liam

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think it probably has to do with a first proposal that involved the taking of 40 houses by the dreaded eminent domain...it was just stupid of RIDOT to even think that would fly when there were other alternatives.

Other than blowing up the whole highway, (which I have previously advocated for and won't happen), I think just making that interchange LOOK better than the crumbling mess it is now will be an improvement for the neighborhood. Right now, like most of the infrastructure in this town, it looks absolutely third world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I attended that WBNA meeting and my understanding is that a lot of people feel that the state is rebuilding the interchange to accommodate residents who live out of the city (i.e. in Foster) while causing great inconvenience for those who actually live in the west end. RIDOT reps at the meeting seemed to agree that most people who take Route 10, take it Route 95, not to Route 6, so the fear is that the improvements would increase the capacity of the roadway and make more people take it as an alternative to 95. People who live near that roadway certainly don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't there a plan to incorporate connecting the Washington Secondary Bikepath with the Woonasquatucket River Greenway included in this, using one of the service roads along Route 10? That woulda been a good sell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For now- I hope people who live in Johnston, Foster, anywhere on 6 west of the West End, are using the marked US 6 West signs when going from 10 North to 6 West. That would be taking the right on to Westminister, then cutting across to Broadway, then Tobey Street by Parenti Villa to the Route 6 Ramp.

People are clogging up Olneyville Square by using it to go from 10N to 6W

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Under the current plan, only two houses would be affected, Parker said.

The state would also need to acquire land from National Lumber and First Student bus company for the project.

Construction is not expected to begin for at least five years.

Five years? :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.