Connecticut News

[kurumi]

Probably a coincidence in planning and scheduling, but the southeast is rising in roadgeek interest compared to the rest of CT: super 2's, the only super 4, and the first 4 freeways with mile-based exit numbering.

Regarding interstate standards vs. the Bradley Airport Connector: the CT 20 trumpet overpass over SSR 401 seems to have a clearance of about 13 feet 6.0000001 inches. (The roadway opened 55 years ago.) Not sure what the minimum standards are in that respect.

[RobbieL2415]

Approaching the West Rock Tunnel along CT Route 15 South at the Hamden/New Haven, CT town line. The small green sign says "HEROES TUNNEL":

I noticed a while ago that they took down these yellow signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.348096,-72.9668577,3a,88.9y,221.29h,83.49t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seqG69px4N8LViS7tDgpYqw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) at both entrances to the tunnel.  I think the first line started with "Caution" but I'm not sure what the rest said.

[shadyjay]

    CAUTION
ICE CONDITIONS
   IN TUNNEL

Saw one uncovered once.

[shadyjay]

Our beloved "more overlay than natural" diagrammatic on I-95 NB in New Haven has been replaced:

IMG_2060 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

But that's not all...

All Exit 48 signage is now permanent... no more orange....

IMG_2068 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

... and the full compliment of 3 full lanes through the interchange and 5 lanes over the "Q" is open.  Sooooo much nicer!

See link in my sig for photos.   

[RobbieL2415]

    CAUTION
ICE CONDITIONS
   IN TUNNEL

Saw one uncovered once.

Awesome.  Thanks.

[Mergingtraffic]

Our beloved "more overlay than natural" diagrammatic on I-95 NB in New Haven has been replaced:

IMG_2060 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

Is the CT-34 ramp two-lanes? 

[Mergingtraffic]

For the first time in about 35 years a new ramp for the CT-8 Expressway.

[/url]A new on-ramp for the CT-8 expressway is about to open. Ansonia, CT. (For the first time in about 35 years) by mergingtraffic, on Flickr



[/url]A new on-ramp for the CT-8 expressway is about to open. Ansonia, CT. (For the first time in about 35 years) by mergingtraffic, on Flickr

[Mergingtraffic]

The CT 349 numbers will probably be Exit 3 for US 1 and Exits 4 A-B for I-95 since it officially "begins" at Shennecossett Rd.  My guess is I-95 and I-84 get renumbered when New Haven and Waterbury get cleaned up. 

Wonder how many other unnumbered interchanges get numbered:

The Foxwoods exits on CT 2 (47 and 48)
The CT 20  Bradley Connector exits (28A, 28B, 29, 30, and 31 A/B)
The SR 571 exit for CT 71 (1 or CT 9 Exit 34A),
The exits for US 5 and I-91 on CT 190 (3 and 4 A/B)
The exits on US 6 in Willimantic for CT 32 and CT 195 (90 and 92)
The CT 175 exit on the Berlin Turnpike (76)
The Exits on CT 17 in Middletown and South Glastonbury (22, 35, 36 A/B)
The CT 187/189 exit for Tariffville Rd ((8)
The mutual exits for US 1 and CT 100 (52/1)
The southern termini of I-91, US 7, CT 8/25, CT 9, and CT 40 (0 A/B [C on 40])
The western terminus of I-384 (0 A/B, since Spencer St would be Exit 1)
The eastern termini of I-291 (6 A/B) and CT 72 (20 A/B).

100 and 1 don't have exits...

anybody notice the font for some of the exit tab numbers?   and anybody notice the "Welcome to CT ...still revolutionary" sign in the plans?

based on the contract, these signs look like they will remain:

[shadyjay]

Each contract for sign replacements in CT seems to be different as to what information is displayed via the ConnDOT web site.  Some projects show each individual sign, existing and proposed.  This one just showed the new signs.  I'd say the above photos on the CT 349 ramp to US 1 will, in fact, be removed, to be replaced by smaller individual shields/town signs, etc. 

The font will most likely be the traditional font used on past sign replacement projects (except the Merritt Pkwy).  The plans take some liberties and aren't exactly a carbon copy of what the signs will look like.  The exact font to be used on the signs most likely isn't shown on the plans.

[jp the roadgeek]

I would hope as part of the project the Exit 92 signage pays a little more homage to Route 78 and Westerly for those traveling northbound on I-95, and for casino traffic southbound.   Northbound signage should read: CT 2/CT 49 TO CT 78 Pawcatuck, Westerly RI.  Southbound signage would say CT 2/ CT 49 Ledyard, Voluntown.

[shadyjay]

Contract plans for the rehabilitation of the SB Gold Star Bridge on I-95 have been released.  And with it comes the replacement of signs on the bridge itself.  Looks like the new-ish Exit 84 signs will get replaced and Exit 83 will be "simplified".  I isolated the sign plans into an image in my I-95 CT album on FLICKR:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/29816950481/in/album-72157659006078550/

No more references to "Shopping Malls" for Exit 83, and "Hodges Square" gets mentioned on the I-95 mainline BGS for the first time.  No more brown "New London Waterfront Dist" and no more pull-thrus for I-95 SB.  The 3 gantries will be mounted on 4-chord trusses, replacing the existing older truss supports. 

[OracleUsr]

Wait, did I read that right?  They're using S-N-E lettering for Exit 84?  Um, I thought that wasn't allowed.

[jp the roadgeek]

Wait, did I read that right?  They're using S-N-E lettering for Exit 84?  Um, I thought that wasn't allowed.

That'll change when all the exit numbers change to mileage based.  This is laying the foundation for the changeover; the number change is the top coat, and why change them twice?  First they'd change to 84 A-B-C, then most likely to 93 B-C-D (current Exit 83 would be 93A) .  I'm wondering why they are allowed to use US 1 with Frontage Roads (a street name) going where a control city would go; I thought that was a no-no by MUTCD standards.

[Beeper1]

Are they intending to change the numbers on 95 to mile-based?  Since they are replacing signs on the bridge and the section of 95 from there east to the RI line, I'd think they would be making the switch as part of that contract the way they did on 395.

[jp the roadgeek]

Are they intending to change the numbers on 95 to mile-based?  Since they are replacing signs on the bridge and the section of 95 from there east to the RI line, I'd think they would be making the switch as part of that contract the way they did on 395.

According to the plans Jay posted, no change in exit numbers will take place with this sign replacement project other than CT 349 and CT 184 getting their first set of (mileage based) exit numbers.  It wouldn't be that hard to renumber the exits east of I-395, since there is already a jump in numbers from 76 to 80.  The jump would just be a little bigger from 76 to 89, but they may just wait until any major widening projects on the highway are done before doing the whole thing at once.

[shadyjay]

Any widening project on I-95 east of New Haven is still many years off.  I, too, wonder why mileage-based numbers aren't appearing in these projects.  It would make a lot more sense.  And as jp stated, starting the mileage system off at Exit 80/81 would be logical.  Just put up a sign... "Next Exit 89".  Oh wait, there's not a sign there saying "Next Exit 81" or "No Exits 77-79".  That's not a CT thing. 

Regarding Exit 83's new signage of US 1/Frontage Road, I believe its okay to have either a route number and a street OR a route number and a control city, but not both a street and city.  Eventually, Exit 82, currently signed as CT 85/Broad St/Waterford, will have to pick either Broad St or Waterford. 

A question.... is a street name and a village okay?  For instance, Exit 3 on I-95 used to be signed "Arch St/Greenwich".  When signs were replaced a few years ago, it was changed to just "Arch St".  But Exit 2, for "Delavan Ave/Byram" was retained".  So was Exit 4, "Indian Field Road/Cos Cob", with Byram and Cos Cob both being villages of Greenwich. 

One point the Groton-North Stonington resigning project brings up is the addition of "Groton City" / "Downtown Groton" / "Groton Waterfront".  That seems a lot more confusing to me than what currently exists on signage.  "Groton Waterfront" is okay, but "New London Waterfront District" is not? 

[kurumi]

In Colebrook, water levels are low enough to reveal an old Route 8 iron bridge across the Farmington River. Remnants of an old ghost town as well: http://www.courant.com/community/colebrook/hc-marteka-colebrook-river-ghost-town-0911-20160910-story.html

There's also more old pavement along former Route 8 that's accessible by foot.

[Alps]

In Colebrook, water levels are low enough to reveal an old Route 8 iron bridge across the Farmington River. Remnants of an old ghost town as well: http://www.courant.com/community/colebrook/hc-marteka-colebrook-river-ghost-town-0911-20160910-story.html

There's also more old pavement along former Route 8 that's accessible by foot.

TIL there is an old alignment of 8 there at all. The northern end is still a road, including the through truss. The southern section surfaces at a couple of places on the west shore of the lake even when full. Looks worthy of checking out anytime.

[jp the roadgeek]

New plans for a $10 billion possible toll tunnel through Hartford on I-84 that would run from near Flatbush Avenue (Exit 45) to Roberts Street (Exit 58) in East Hartford and replace the Aetna viaduct.  Notice one of the names working with Congressman Larson: the son of Mr. I-99.

http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-larson-tunnel-i84-20161001-story.html

[bob7374]

New plans for a $10 billion possible toll tunnel through Hartford on I-84 that would run from near Flatbush Avenue (Exit 45) to Roberts Street (Exit 58) in East Hartford and replace the Aetna viaduct.  Notice one of the names working with Congressman Larson: the son of Mr. I-99.

http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-larson-tunnel-i84-20161001-story.html

"In the reverse direction, motorists would enter the [I-84] tunnel near Roberts Street, drive through the Connecticut River, and eventually come out near Flatbush Avenue in Hartford, which is exit 45 on I-84."

Sounds like this route would be a little too damp for me.

[PHLBOS]

"I've been to China and to Korea — Korea just in August,'' Larson said. "We look like a Third World country compared to them in what they've invested in their infrastructure, including their airports, their trains, their buses, and their highway system. In China, driving from Beijing out almost to Mongolia, we went through almost 20 different tunnels, where they went through mountains.''

I'm sure projects in those nations go through a lot less red tape & NIMBY BS than such would here.

Do projects built in China or Korea even require EIS' for example?

[The Ghostbuster]

What is the likelihood that an Interstate 84 tunnel might be built? Although, personally, I imagine it may be the only option the locals might approve of. Correct me if I'm wrong, since I've never been to Hartford.

[jp the roadgeek]

What is the likelihood that an Interstate 84 tunnel might be built? Although, personally, I imagine it may be the only option the locals might approve of. Correct me if I'm wrong, since I've never been to Hartford.

MY 1000th POST


This would take a lot of urban engineering.  The stretch it bypasses is about a 5 mile stretch of highway, but it's about 3.6 miles miles as the crow flies from the Flatbush Avenue curve to near Roberts St (which is also where the CT 15 expressway merges in from the Charter Oak Bridge. It would also have to pass under places like Trinity College and Hartford Hospital, but the direct line looks like it would pass south of downtown.  The other question is how traffic would access downtown, I-91, and CT 2.  Would there be exits from the tunnel?  Would traffic have to exit onto city streets once again?  Would existing I-84 from East Hartford over the Bulkeley Bridge become a 3DI (I-184?) to provide access to and from I-91 to the north and CT 2 for westbound traffic (obviously, the Charter Oak Bridge will still be used for access to and from I-91 to the south)?  Many questions would have to be answered.

[shadyjay]

Wow... interesting idea to be presented, but in all honesty, I can't see it coming to fruition.  Tunneling under a river is one thing, but a whole urban area is another.  Can anyone imagine just how long it would take to construct?  And how much more $$$ would have to be sunk into the present Aetna viaduct to keep it safe while the tunnel is built? 

But let's do a what-if, just for fun:

I-84 East would still need some sort of access into Hartford.  The viaduct could be rebuilt at ground level, perhaps terminating somewhere near Bushnell Park.  The "canyon" (High St to I-91) could be filled in and built up.  From the west side, I-84 could have access to downtown Hartford as it does now, via the Founders Bridge.  The "mixmaster" could be (mostly) removed or significantly reduced.  Take that opportunity to remove the Governor Street ramps, which were, of course, meant for I-284.  The Bulkley Bridge would be retained but created into more of an "urban boulevard", a surface road gateway into Hartford.  Keep US 6 & 44 on this routing. 

The new tunnel would have to have some sort of interchange with I-91, most likely in the South Meadows area.  Otherwise, eastbound would also need an interchange with CT 2, which could also serve access to East Hartford.  Westbound, only the I-91 interchange would be required.  Where the tunnel pops out near Flatbush in Hartford, put in a ramp to present I-84, which would lead to the converted viaduct to ground level, as an alternative to downtown from the west.  Where the tunnel pops out near Roberts St, keep existing I-84 WB in tact up to the mixmaster, with access to Founders Bridge and CT 2 maintained as is. 

If I had to put money on it, I'd wager the grade level/slightly below grade option for the viaduct gets built.  A tunnel would be a good idea in the perfect economy, but the state is already practically broke and this would just add fuel to the fire. 

[Beeper1]

Smart money says they keep patching the existing viaduct for at least another 20 years before a shovel hits dirt on any sort of replacement.  And that replacement will most likely be some form of sub-standard 6 lane highway along the existing routing. 

It took the state how long just to plan and build the Brookfield bypass?  A project of this magnitude is just not something ConnDOT has the ability (money or certainly politically) to do.