I appreciate your concern over this matter.

The signage that you are requesting is a lane reduction warning sign and this typical application would be to warn of the reduction in the number of traffic lanes in the direction of travel on a multi-lane highway.

This section of Route 30 would not be considered a multi-lane highway and thus would not meet the recommendation of the installation of this sign.

yes, I am requesting a lane reduction warning sign. Rt 30 leading up to that area is a 2 lane road. Heading West on 30 is 2 lanes, then you come to the 126 interchange with 3 lanes, 2 going straight. There are new road lines (at the Shell station) indication 2 lanes reducing to 1. So I believe a "lane merge" sign is appropriate. Especially, since the road lines are new, formally indicating the road goes from 2 lanes down to 1.

As stated before: I appreciate your concern over this matter.

The signage that you are requesting is a lane reduction warning sign and this typical application would be to warn of the reduction in the number of traffic lanes in the direction of travel on a multi-lane highway.

This section of Route 30 would not be considered a multi-lane highway and thus would not meet the recommendation of the installation of this sign.

This is a significant safety concern as it is unclear how a driver should use the apparent 2 lanes at the light heading west on route 30 passing Beacon St. There appears to be a turn lane and a straight lane but it's vague.

I echo the previous commenter that requests reconsideration of the new markings. The traffic there really needs 2 lanes - a turn lane and a straight/left lane. To merge this into 1 lane is already creating congestion and the markings are unclear.

To reply to Ali, i don't believe that is a right turn lane at the Beacon St light. That is the shoulder (solid white line)

This is the most confusing area. The issue is that the area that is not supposed to be a lane is actually big enough to be a lane. So people are still thinking that it's ok to drive there. I do believe that a sign is needed to let people know it's one lane. Otherwise it looks like it was divided into a 2 lane highway.

Adam, for the past 5+ years, the regular traffic pattern has been 2 lanes on rte. 30 approaching Beacon. With the new lines, it does appear that now there should only be one. As others have already stated, because the new shoulder is wide enough to be a travel lane most drivers are treating it as such. Other drivers who are trying to follow the new and unclear markings end up unable to turn right. If the intention is to have only one lane (which will create an unnecessary traffic problem) there absolutely needs to be a sign. Please visit the area during the evening commute to get a clearer understanding of our concerns.

This intersection has always been confusing because of the two traffic lights which suggests two lanes. Now it has been made more confusing. I agree that their needs to be a sign saying that the lane is ending if that is what is supposed to be happening. However, I also agree that this causes major back ups and it should be changed to two lanes with the right turn only which is how it has been used for at least the last 10 years.

I agree with all the concerns. There was no confusion before the new marking was put on the street - so the confusion for us drivers is what is it meant to accomplish. It doesn't look like a shoulder because it is too wide (indeed, wide enough to fit a car) where in other places along similar types of roads, the shoulder is more likely to accommodate the width of a bicycle. It also does not look like a turn lane because there is no arrow and the start of the marking begins at the curb before arching out into the middle of the lane. This marking, therefore, is confusing and seems to serve no legitimate traffic purpose. Unless it is removed, it very much needs a sign to signal to drivers what is intended.

Lane striping has been corrected.