Connecticut News

[Mergingtraffic]

Noticed on I-84 EB in Waterbury the BGS:

               84           EAST
        v              v                v

which has been signed this way since the late 1970s has now been patched to include this overlay:

          84 EAST        RIGHT LANE
                              ENDS 1/2 MILE
      V                 V                    V

So,they spent $$ on a "right lane ends" overlay but they will be widening the highway to 3-lanes east of here and in 3 years the overlay will be removed. 

So, there's been no overlay for 30 years why fix it for the last 3 years before the lane drop is gone?!  $ coulda been spent better.

[shadyjay]

I believe it has to do with the elimination of the overhead assembly just east of that pullthrough which was a 1 mile advance for Exit 25 and a Lane Ends / XXXX Feet / Merge Left".  That assembly is being eliminated, and the Exit 25 sign being moved to the ground. 

All part of a statewide "spot sign replacement" project, which is replacing some gantries with new ones, or moving formerly overhead signs (on bridges or gantries) down to the ground. 

Look for the 2014-issued contract to include the replacement of the I-91 SB Exit 40 gantry (which no longer exists), and two gantries being combined into one for Exit 41/SB - Exit 42/NB.  Also in the contract:  removing two perfectly fine signs off an overpass and to ground level on the turnpike at Exit 66.

[Mergingtraffic]

I believe it has to do with the elimination of the overhead assembly just east of that pullthrough which was a 1 mile advance for Exit 25 and a Lane Ends / XXXX Feet / Merge Left".  That assembly is being eliminated, and the Exit 25 sign being moved to the ground. 

All part of a statewide "spot sign replacement" project, which is replacing some gantries with new ones, or moving formerly overhead signs (on bridges or gantries) down to the ground. 

Look for the 2014-issued contract to include the replacement of the I-91 SB Exit 40 gantry (which no longer exists), and two gantries being combined into one for Exit 41/SB - Exit 42/NB.  Also in the contract:  removing two perfectly fine signs off an overpass and to ground level on the turnpike at Exit 66.

Oh crap.....I didn't even notice the 1 MILE advance gantry was gone.  Still waiting for the CT-8 SB Left exit sign to be put up going  WB on I-84.
and
I guess that's why the WB version of 'RIGHT LANE ENDS" was taken down by Exit 25A

[shadyjay]

The I-91 SB gantry missing is the "exit now" gantry for Exit 40.   It's replacement for the past year or so has been a small temp sign just with a CT 20 shield and a Bradley Airport shield, saying "RIGHT 2 LANES".  Ironic, since a few years back, the NB "exit now" sign got taken out as well, but the gantry was still in tact.  That sign was replaced with Phase IV center tab but retaining the Phase III pullthrough.

I still have to wonder when ConnDOT will start replacing some older signage in the state.  I still see no signing contracts being announced for the oldest of interstate signage on I-84 in East Hartford/Manchester.  After that, the next oldest would be I-95 east of New London and I-91 from East Windsor up to Mass (all from the late 1980s-vintage).  Only 2015 contracts I see are I-84 to the Bulkley Bridge and CT 8 up to Torrington.  Those on I-91 from East Windsor northward were put up when that portion was widened in the late 1980s.  The SB Exit 47E 1/4 mile got wacked and is half its normal size.

[Mergingtraffic]

The I-91 SB gantry missing is the "exit now" gantry for Exit 40.   It's replacement for the past year or so has been a small temp sign just with a CT 20 shield and a Bradley Airport shield, saying "RIGHT 2 LANES".  Ironic, since a few years back, the NB "exit now" sign got taken out as well, but the gantry was still in tact.  That sign was replaced with Phase IV center tab but retaining the Phase III pullthrough.

I still have to wonder when ConnDOT will start replacing some older signage in the state.  I still see no signing contracts being announced for the oldest of interstate signage on I-84 in East Hartford/Manchester.  After that, the next oldest would be I-95 east of New London and I-91 from East Windsor up to Mass (all from the late 1980s-vintage).  Only 2015 contracts I see are I-84 to the Bulkley Bridge and CT 8 up to Torrington.  Those on I-91 from East Windsor northward were put up when that portion was widened in the late 1980s.  The SB Exit 47E 1/4 mile got wacked and is half its normal size.

I thought it was weird CTDOT is choosing to replace CT-8 signage from Waterbury on north rather than Waterbury on south.  The signs north of Waterbury were partially replaced anyway, I think up to exit 36 or 38 are new signs (past 10 years or so) meanwhile southern parts of CT-8 still have non-reflective button copy.

[shadyjay]

That is bizarre.... but from Waterbury-Thomaston probably won't be replaced.  There may be spot changes in that section, such as new mile markers, but I doubt you'll see brand new BGSs through there. 

It's kind of like the present contract to replace signs on the turnpike from Fairfield to West Haven.... signs replaced east of the Housatonic River in recent years won't be replaced, except for some spot changes, such as mile markers, new "attractions" blue signs, etc.  The only major new signs east of Milford as part of that project will be for Exit 43. 

Guess we'll know for sure when the contract plans appear online.

[bob7374]

I don't think CT wants to convert anything to mileage-based.  They might have been planning to replace the signs anyways and had the FHWA force their hand.  I recall some sign plans posted here for I-84 that had room to add extra digits in the number.

WTIC-DT news is teasing a feature story for Monday (24 November) morning about a "change coming to Connecticut highways" and "what will be done to avoid confusing drivers".

Considering that the teaser tape featured pictures of exit signs....

The link to the news report is below. It says I-95 will be one of the next routes to change, and that the total process may take 20-30(?) years (can you spot (hear) the error in the discussion on which direction numbers increase?):
http://foxct.com/2014/11/24/interstate-exit-numbers-in-connecticut-changing-over-next-few-years/

[PHLBOS]

It says I-95 will be one of the next routes to change, and that the total process may take 20-30(?) years (can you spot (hear) the error in the discussion on which direction numbers increase?):
http://foxct.com/2014/11/24/interstate-exit-numbers-in-connecticut-changing-over-next-few-years/

I spotted the error when I first heard it (via your Facebook link).

I have to ask why ConnDOT believes that changing all its exit number signs will take 20-30 years?  When PA, a much larger state than CT, converted; such took only about a year or two.  Most of the changes only involved either changing the exit tab (but not the main sign) or just masking the new number over the old number on the existing exit tab as opposed to replacing entire BGS'.

[roadman]

It says I-95 will be one of the next routes to change, and that the total process may take 20-30(?) years (can you spot (hear) the error in the discussion on which direction numbers increase?):
http://foxct.com/2014/11/24/interstate-exit-numbers-in-connecticut-changing-over-next-few-years/

I spotted the error when I first heard it (via your Facebook link).

I have to ask why ConnDOT believes that changing all its exit number signs will take 20-30 years?  When PA, a much larger state than CT, converted; such took only about a year or two.  Most of the changes only involved either changing the exit tab (but not the main sign) or just masking the new number over the old number on the existing exit tab as opposed to replacing entire BGS'.

If I interpert the news story correctly, it appears that ConnDOT's plan for conversion is to incorporate the new exit numbers when BGSes are replaced as part of the normal updating cycle - hense the 20 to 30 year time frame.

Absolute stupid way to do the project, if you ask me.  And you can blame the Feds in part for not sticking to their guns and insisting on a compliance date for the conversion.  There was a compliance date for exit number conversion in the 2007 Federal Register NPA for the 2009 MUTCD, but it was removed from the final version of the MUTCD that was adopted.

[Zeffy]

Absolute stupid way to do the project, if you ask me.  And you can blame the Feds in part for not sticking to their guns and insisting on a compliance date for the conversion.  There was a compliance date for exit number conversion in the 2007 Federal Register NPA for the 2009 MUTCD, but it was removed from the final version of the MUTCD that was adopted.

Agreed wholeheartedly. At this rate, ConnDOT might as well as just not convert at all, especially if it is going to take more than a decade to switch everything over. It isn't rocket science either - it's literally just the masking of the old numbers and installation of newer ones that correspond to the mileage. Of course, this is the state that is so underfunded that simple roadway widenings can't even be completed, so I guess it's not all that shocking.

[JakeFromNewEngland]

Why can't we use the money to fund other road projects such as widening or constructing new freeways? Sure, some signs are in bad shape and we can replace those, but there are several that are perfectly fine! What an absolute waste. This is why I really hate this state. 

[NE2]

It's the California exit number installation method.

New York, too, actually (on I-95 and I-278).

[PHLBOS]

If I interpert the news story correctly, it appears that ConnDOT's plan for conversion is to incorporate the new exit numbers when BGSes are replaced as part of the normal updating cycle - hense the 20 to 30 year time frame.

The only problem with that approach is that one could conceivably have one highway that has at least two separate strings of exit/interchange numbers.  Not every highway (especially the longer ones) has all of its signs replaced at the same time. 

Absolute stupid way to do the project, if you ask me.  And you can blame the Feds in part for not sticking to their guns and insisting on a compliance date for the conversion.  There was a compliance date for exit number conversion in the 2007 Federal Register NPA for the 2009 MUTCD, but it was removed from the final version of the MUTCD that was adopted.

Here's the thing, this is not the first time that ConnDOT had to change exit numbers on (one of) its highways.  Originally, the eastern stretch of I-84 (that was once I-86 and orginally CT/MA 15) had exit numbers that followed the numbers along CT 15/Wilbur Cross Highway south of I-84.  IIRC, all ConnDOT did then (to change the numbers to follow those of I-84) was either mask the old number or (when it was still available) replace the button-copy numerals on the exit tabs and gore signs.

I believe there's still one old exit gore sign along I-84 that still features a masked exit number (I forget where exactly it is).

Why not just mask over the existing exit tabs like other states (including MA for its I-95 & 93 exit numbering back in the 80s) have done?  It's certainly a lot cheaper.

[Pete from Boston]

Why can't we use the money to fund other road projects such as widening or constructing new freeways? Sure, some signs are in bad shape and we can replace those, but there are several that are perfectly fine! What an absolute waste. This is why I really hate this state. 

This is pennies compared to the kinds of projects you mention.

[JakeFromNewEngland]

Why can't we use the money to fund other road projects such as widening or constructing new freeways? Sure, some signs are in bad shape and we can replace those, but there are several that are perfectly fine! What an absolute waste. This is why I really hate this state. 

This is pennies compared to the kinds of projects you mention.

Good point. On the subject of sign replacement, I noticed ConnDOT has replaced the signs at the off/on ramps to I-95 in West Haven at Exit 43 and in Stratford at Exit 32. The font sizes and shields seem to a bit bigger than the old ones.

[vdeane]

Massachusetts is also doing it this way.  I suspect the reason is because none of these states actually want to convert and have no desire to dedicate time/money to it.  Piecemeal is an excellent way of diluting costs when there's no money/willpower to do something.

If/when NY converts it will probably be this way as well.

[shadyjay]

Regarding I-95, I wouldn't touch the exit numbers west of New Haven.... those signs are all new/soon to be new and the exits are pretty close to the mileage anyway.  I'd only change from Branford, east.  And it's from Branford, east, which needs new signs anyway.  Specifically, between Exits 54-59 (installed c 1992-93), Exits 68-70 (installed 1993), and Exits 85-93 (installed late 1980s).  As for I-91, I see no resigning projects on the horizon for that stretch so I can see that taking some time, if the "overlay" method isn't used before the signs get replaced. 

As for state routes, CT 2 and 9 signs date to the late 1980s, so I can see those taking awhile to replace.  CT 15 signs were replaced in the 2000-2003 timeframe, and unless the MUTCD forces ConnDOT's hand at making Merritt Parkway signage standard, I can't see those signs being replaced anytime in the next 10-20 years.

[southshore720]

I don't understand how the sign replacements for CT 2 and CT 9 aren't a high priority.  Those are some of the WORST in the entire state.  Especially on CT 2, where the Exit 5, 5A, 5B, 5C, and 5D disaster needs to be rectified.

[southshore720]

Are there exit numbers on the CT 2 mini-freeway @ Foxwoods?  I seem to recall an exit tab for "Exit ___" for CT 214.  If they do add exit numbers, how would that work in comparison to what currently exists on the mainline CT 2 freeway?

[kurumi]

Are there exit numbers on the CT 2 mini-freeway @ Foxwoods?  I seem to recall an exit tab for "Exit ___" for CT 214.  If they do add exit numbers, how would that work in comparison to what currently exists on the mainline CT 2 freeway?

Just a plain EXIT tab, with no blank for a number: https://www.flickr.com/photos/therealkurumi/sets/72157623309817615/

[connroadgeek]

It says I-95 will be one of the next routes to change, and that the total process may take 20-30(?) years (can you spot (hear) the error in the discussion on which direction numbers increase?):
http://foxct.com/2014/11/24/interstate-exit-numbers-in-connecticut-changing-over-next-few-years/

I spotted the error when I first heard it (via your Facebook link).

I have to ask why ConnDOT believes that changing all its exit number signs will take 20-30 years?  When PA, a much larger state than CT, converted; such took only about a year or two.  Most of the changes only involved either changing the exit tab (but not the main sign) or just masking the new number over the old number on the existing exit tab as opposed to replacing entire BGS'.

PA also added signs that said "OLD EXIT XX". They should also get rid of the "NEXT EXIT XX MILES" signs. It's redundant if the exit numbers are based on mileage.

[connroadgeek]

Regarding I-95, I wouldn't touch the exit numbers west of New Haven.... those signs are all new/soon to be new and the exits are pretty close to the mileage anyway.  I'd only change from Branford, east.  And it's from Branford, east, which needs new signs anyway.  Specifically, between Exits 54-59 (installed c 1992-93), Exits 68-70 (installed 1993), and Exits 85-93 (installed late 1980s).  As for I-91, I see no resigning projects on the horizon for that stretch so I can see that taking some time, if the "overlay" method isn't used before the signs get replaced. 

As for state routes, CT 2 and 9 signs date to the late 1980s, so I can see those taking awhile to replace.  CT 15 signs were replaced in the 2000-2003 timeframe, and unless the MUTCD forces ConnDOT's hand at making Merritt Parkway signage standard, I can't see those signs being replaced anytime in the next 10-20 years.

Exit 56 in Branford is right at mile marker 56. Exit 70 is right at mile marker 79. The exit numbers aren't going to change much, and quite frankly for the ones that do it's going to add confusion because for the most part they will just go up or down a number or two that already exists. In other states that have done the conversion it's not so bad when exit 53 becomes exit 310 because there never was an exit 310. When exit 24 becomes exit 25 or 26 in Bridgeport or something silly like that, it's going to be confusing and people will just have to refer to the exit by the street or route it services to avoid ambiguity.

It's a small state. One where there is rarely more than a mile between exits, and one that will likely never add new highway mileage or exit ramps in my life time. There's very little benefit to doing this conversion. Enjoy the new exit numbers while you sit in hours of traffic.

[connroadgeek]

Speaking of exit numbers, having just drove 95 for the holiday, exits 27A-B-C are alive and well in Bridgeport. I think most of the signs have been replaced and have new exit tabs (with borders) and the new suffixes except for right at the exit itself.

[Mergingtraffic]

Regarding I-95, I wouldn't touch the exit numbers west of New Haven.... those signs are all new/soon to be new and the exits are pretty close to the mileage anyway.  I'd only change from Branford, east.
As for state routes, CT 2 and 9 signs date to the late 1980s, so I can see those taking awhile to replace.  CT 15 signs were replaced in the 2000-2003 timeframe, and unless the MUTCD forces ConnDOT's hand at making Merritt Parkway signage standard, I can't see those signs being replaced anytime in the next 10-20 years.

Here's the story from FOXCT. (we've talked about it but I dont think anyone posted a link yet..so here goes...)So based on this Shadyjay....looks like when the new BGS signs go up on CT-8, does that mean new numbers as well? 

**Also,remember when I pointed out, a few months ago in this thread, the soon to be new I-84 WB Exit 19 Left Exit advance sign that had an exit tab with a space for a letter??  That could be for the new numbering scheme sooner rather than later.


http://foxct.com/2014/11/24/interstate-exit-numbers-in-connecticut-changing-over-next-few-years/


HARTFORD – Keep an eye on those exit signs because the numbers are changing.

Connecticut is now among the growing number of states that are moving to a mileage-based system when it comes to exit numbering. The numbers originally went sequentially.

"We're not going around and removing perfectly good exit signs and replacing them and spending money just to re-number them,"  said Kevin Nursick, the spokesman for the Connecticut Department of Transportation. "We're doing it because all of those signs are at the end of their useful life. They're no longer reflective, we can't see them well at night, and the lettering is very faded. So we're replacing them out of necessity, and when we do that, we bring them up to the newest standards."

The standards are set by the U.S. Department of Transportation and the National Highway Administration, and as Connecticut interstates undergo road construction, they will be updated to the new exit numbers. The entire state is expected to convert to the new system over the next 20 years.

I-395 from East Lyme to Wilsonville is the first Connecticut interstate to get the new system based on mileage. For example, exit 77 (Route 85) would change to Exit 2 since it is located approximately 2 miles away from the start of I-395 in East Lyme. The number scheme varies by direction. For roads that run east to west, numbers begin low from their origin point in the east and increase the further west you go. North and south roads begin low in the south and go up the further north you go.

There will be a roughly two-year grace period before the old exit numbers are fully phased out, giving ample time for publications and businesses to update anything.

"This underscores the importance of having an up to date map whether it's a paper map, or digital map, and updating your GPS device with the latest map available from the manufacturer., "  said Aaron Kupec, a spokesman for AAA.

The next roads to get updated exit numbers will be I-95 and Route 8. Construction is scheduled to begin at some time in 2015.

[02 Park Ave]

Don't the exit numbers increase as one travels west to east?