Connecticut News

[kurumi]

Despite living only about 7 miles away in New Britain, I was finally on the newer boulevard section of CT Route 72 in Bristol on August 2nd. Although it looked unsigned, I wonder about what was Route 72 in the Forestville section of Bristol. I'm guessing the state still maintains that road as a "secret route"?   

It was SR 500A (really; no relation to SR 500) for about 1-2 years, but is now locally maintained

[Alps]

Has the boulevard reduced congestion on the surrounding pre-existing streets and roads?

Oh definitely. They're still busy, but it's now normal town traffic.

[shadyjay]

Just past the Westbrook rest area on I-95 NB between Exits 65 & 66.  It is now closed (potentially permanently), blocked off with barrels and barricades.  Signage still remains but the distances are covered with an orange CLOSED placard.  The break in the shoulder line has been eradicated, with the small lane markings replaced with a solid white line. 

To be honest, the facility isn't a huge loss.  There was next to no truck parking, limited car parking, and earlier this summer the state closed the welcome center portion, leaving just restrooms and vending.  Plans published several years ago to widen I-95 through the area showed the facility being eliminated anyway.  Space constraints limit any future expansion, as the Westbrook outlets abut right up against the side opposite I-95.

[Mergingtraffic]

I read an article of truck parking or lack thereof in the northeast recently and wondered were any truck parking spots added with the rest area rehabs along I-95 or did they just rearrange everything?

[cl94]

I read an article of truck parking or lack thereof in the northeast recently and wondered were any truck parking spots added with the rest area rehabs along I-95 or did they just rearrange everything?

The lack of truck parking in the region is my main research topic. I'll likely be presenting a paper at TRB on it.

I doubt that any truck spots were added. If any were, it couldn't have been more than one or two. Likely wasn't enough room.

[64CatalinaVentura]

I-95 south will have a minor realignment this Sunday at the West River bridge (West Haven/New Haven line) as traffic is moved over to a new bridge. http://www.nhregister.com/general-news/20160814/divide-on-i-95-southbound-in-new-haven-to-be-gone-by-sunday

Also interesting is if one follows the link to the DOT site, there have been recent changes proposed to the surface streets surrounding the bridge. For those who are not familiar with the project, exit 44 was eliminated and a new bridge was built to replace the original span. This caused a major realignment of surface streets in the area (Kimberly Avenue, Sea Street, Ella T. Grasso Blvd, etc). Among the proposed changes is a rotary on Sea St. http://www.i95westriver.com/Images/Sea%20Street%20Graphic_15-1106.pdf

[Mergingtraffic]

I-95 south will have a minor realignment this Sunday at the West River bridge (West Haven/New Haven line) as traffic is moved over to a new bridge. http://www.nhregister.com/general-news/20160814/divide-on-i-95-southbound-in-new-haven-to-be-gone-by-sunday

Also interesting is if one follows the link to the DOT site, there have been recent changes proposed to the surface streets surrounding the bridge. For those who are not familiar with the project, exit 44 was eliminated and a new bridge was built to replace the original span. This caused a major realignment of surface streets in the area (Kimberly Avenue, Sea Street, Ella T. Grasso Blvd, etc). Among the proposed changes is a rotary on Sea St. http://www.i95westriver.com/Images/Sea%20Street%20Graphic_15-1106.pdf

I'm still not a fan of the side street portion.  I still think there's enough room to leave some of the formerly free flow movements that once were before the project.  I don't see why they took out the I-95 SB to Ella Grasso Boulevard NB free movement out.  Now, you have to come to a stop and make a right hand turn rather than just merging on.  The same goes for Blvd SB to I-95 SB. 

The old ramp is still there in Google maps: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Sea+St,+New+Haven,+CT+06519/@41.2838012,-72.9357093,586m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x89e7d8694fcf54c7:0xab4665a96b846077!8m2!3d41.282559!4d-72.9313377

The whole set up takes longer with the added lights to get from I-95 SB to Kimberly Ave SB.  I could see other states leaving in some free flow movements and putting in some channelized right turns etc.  but this is CT and they don't plan that way I guess.

[Mergingtraffic]

I read an article of truck parking or lack thereof in the northeast recently and wondered were any truck parking spots added with the rest area rehabs along I-95 or did they just rearrange everything?

The lack of truck parking in the region is my main research topic. I'll likely be presenting a paper at TRB on it.

I doubt that any truck spots were added. If any were, it couldn't have been more than one or two. Likely wasn't enough room.

http://patch.com/connecticut/montville-ct/bp--truck-parking-shortage-will-continue-to-plague-ea0472cb2eca

I found this and didn't realize I-95 western CT added that many more trucking spots.  The Milford Plazas exceed demand at this point.

[shadyjay]

One of the service plaza proposals was to convert many to over-the-highway facilities.  If that happened, a big increase in parking (truck and car) could have happened.  A month ago, I tried going to the Darien-NB service plaza but had to leave as the parking lot was filled - not a spot to be found. 

The Westbrook rest area which closed had no designated truck parking and about 10 spots for cars.  Trucks just parked along the ramps. 

[Beeper1]

The Westbrook rest area always seemed redundant.  Was it original to the turnpike when it first opened in the 1950s? 

Was the area on the SB side there, now a State Police facility, ever a "twin" rest area to this one?

It just seems weird to have had such a small rest area less than 10 miles after the Madison Service Plaza, which could have easily (and still could) contained an info desk. 

[Duke87]

The Westbrook rest area always seemed redundant.  Was it original to the turnpike when it first opened in the 1950s? 

Was the area on the SB side there, now a State Police facility, ever a "twin" rest area to this one?

Historic Aerials shows a parking area with no structures on both sides of the highway at this location in 1957. In 1970, the state police facility has been built on the SB side and the NB side is still just a parking area. In 1991, the current structure is in place on the NB side.

This article says the rest area was built in 1988, which jives with these observations.

[Mergingtraffic]

CTDOT Selects Firm to Recommend Options for I-84 Waterbury ‘Mixmaster’



                The Connecticut Department of Transportation has selected a design and engineering team led by HNTB Corporation to study and recommend options for replacing the Route 8 / I-84 interchange in Waterbury, popularly known as the “Mixmaster.”

                The complexities of the 50-year-old elevated, double-decked high-speed interchange, with left- and right-hand entrance and exit ramps over city streets and the Naugatuck River, make it unique in Connecticut. An estimated 150,000 vehicles travel through the interchange on an average day – triple the amount of traffic it first carried when it was constructed.

                “We have asked HNTB to take a fresh look at all options and to take fully into account how the interchange fits into the urban fabric of the city,” said CTDOT Commissioner James P. Redeker. “We want them to balance the requirements for improved traffic flow over the new structures, as well as look for enhanced economic development opportunities and a design that will be context sensitive and complement the urban landscape of our fifth-largest city.”

                “We are pleased the Department of Transportation selected HNTB as its partner for this vital project,” said Carrie Rocha, HNTB’s project manager.  “We look forward to working together with all stakeholders as we develop solutions that contribute to the improved safety and mobility of travelers through the region.”

                Construction on the I-84 Mixmaster began in 1965 and was completed in 1967. Under Governor Dannel P. Malloy’s 30-year, $100 billion “Let's Go CT” transportation initiative, preliminary replacement cost estimates for the Mixmaster range from approximately $3 billion for a partial replacement to $7 billion for a full replacement.  However, updates to these cost estimates will be re-evaluated by HNTB, taking into account all updates to the City’s and the State’s economic development plans.  The HNTB conceptual engineering study and preliminary design development will be a multi-year effort with public participation throughout the study.  Final design and construction would begin after that.

                  A new interchange will take several years to build and would support an estimated 5,000 to 11,000 construction jobs. The long-term impact of the Mixmaster replacement on jobs will be substantial.  For every year following the opening of the new interchange, the improved transportation efficiency and lower travel and shipping costs will save households time and money, and create a competitive advantage for the region’s businesses.  These transportation cost savings will support the creation of 2,000 – 3,000 jobs over the life of the new facility.

                HNTB is a 100-year-old design, engineering and construction management firm, headquartered in Kansas City, Missouri, with offices in Connecticut. HNTB will be supported in this effort by a multidisciplinary team of major sub-consultants, all with offices in Connecticut:  AECOM Technical Services and BL Companies Connecticut.



This is what I don't get, this was done 6-10 years ago in 2010. 
http://nvcogct.org/sites/default/files/COGCNV-I-84-Rt-8-Interchange-Needs-Study-Summary.pdf
I even went to one of the public hearings and submitted comments. So, now they're doing the same thing over again?!  It seems like a waste to me.  You study, do nothing and then you study the same thing again.

[jp the roadgeek]

This is what I don't get, this was done 10 years ago in 2007.  I even went to one of the public hearings and submitted comments. So, now they're doing the same thing over again?!  It seems like a waste to me.  You study, do nothing and then you study the same thing again.

Because it's par for the course for any transportation project in CT.  How many times has the CT 11 extension been studied?  How many times have there been studies to extend I-384?  If and when they ever get built, we won't need them because we'll all de driving flying cars.  Seems the only things that get fast-tracked are things that are not needed like the Hartford-New Britain busway.

[Mergingtraffic]

I noticed they are close to opening a new ramp for the CT-8 Expressway.  The first new ramp in about 30 years.  A new on-ramp for CT-8 NB in Ansonia.  I hope to get some pics this weekend when there are no workers present.

[Duke87]

The trouble with studies is they have a short shelf life. A study published six years ago is well past its expiration date - six years is enough time that some significant changes will inevitably have occurred which impact the cost, benefit, and feasibility of various alternatives.

This means the state needs to redo the study before they can actually proceed with the project. And, once the study is done, the state will have a couple years to pull the trigger on moving forward to actual design before the new study expires and it needs to be redone again if any action is to be taken.


The failing here is not that the study is pointlessly being redone (it isn't). The failing is that the state took the first study and sat on it rather than moving forward to the next step.

[Rothman]

The lack of truck parking in the region is my main research topic. I'll likely be presenting a paper at TRB on it.

A common refrain at NYSDOT is that it is expected that the private sector will provide the parking at truck stops and the like if there is demand.

(personal opinion expressed)

[Duke87]

A common refrain at NYSDOT is that it is expected that the private sector will provide the parking at truck stops and the like if there is demand.

And the private sector will... if zoning boards allow it to. Problem is that people in some communities don't want trucks parked anywhere near them, on private or public land. Enough people say "go park elsewhere" and trucks start to run out of elsewheres to park.

In New England you especially have the problem that the concept of a truck stop doesn't really mesh well with the regional character, which results in community opposition on aesthetic grounds.

There's a saying that everything is bigger in Texas, the counterpart to that is that everything is smaller in New England.

[mariethefoxy]

if they made a truck stop with a Dunkin and a CVS built in, itll match the regional character quite well lol

[Mergingtraffic]

A recent acquisition:
Wooden US-44 sign.

[Mergingtraffic]

You can watch the replacement of a bridge on the CT-8/CT-25 expressway.

[kurumi]

You can watch the replacement of a bridge on the CT-8/CT-25 expressway.

Here's where the video's chord progression came from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aENX1Sf3fgQ

[64CatalinaVentura]

A couple quick updates:

Just drove over the new south bound West River span between New Haven and West Haven. The span was opened this weekend for the first time, eliminating the confusing split that was there for months while the lanes were being shifted. It is hard to tell how this will work out on a Sunday afternoon for rush hour traffic....tomorrow will be interesting.

All lanes are now open on the Quinnipiac River (Pearl Harbor) bridge in New Haven. Traffic flow has been much better over the bridge for the last few weeks since it opened. The slow down is now at Exit 46 due to the West River bridge work.

The Ansonia exit on Route 8 is almost done. Should be open soon!

[shadyjay]

While the southbound "Q" has all of its lanes open, the northbound section is still 3 lanes, or at least it was last week.  This includes 2 lanes at the I-91/I-95 split, expanding to 3 lanes at the merge from I-91 North.  On the span itself, the northbound lanes have been shifted to where the old southbound lanes were located during the time the southbound bridge was being constructed.  I can't imagine it won't be too long before all 5 lanes are open northbound.  I'll update again in early September.

[shadyjay]

Contract plans now on the ConnDOT web site for the replacement of signs on I-95 from vic. Exit 85 to Exit 93 in southeastern Connecticut.  After browsing the plans, here's a synopsis:

1.  Project begins at the eastern approach to the Gold Star bridge.  Only signs for Exit 85 replaced include the offramp overhead.
2.  Project will also replace signs along CT 349 and CT 184 in the area of I-95
3.  Exit numbers stay status-quo on the new signs on I-95, however exit numbers are added to CT 184 and CT 349.  CT 349 gets mile-based.
4.  No evidence of the new exit tabs supporting 3-digit exit numbers
5.  All overhead supports get replaced, except the recently-replaced Exit 87 monotube bridge, which gets just new signs
6.  Project plans show 4-chord cantilevers, 4-chord trusses, and monotube bridges. 
7.  All pullthroughs are gone, except the one NB at Exit 86
8.  Exit 87 gets changed from "Clarence B. Sharp Highway" to "Groton City"
9.  Exit 88 signs get mounted overhead.  "Noank/Groton Long Point" replace "Downtown Groton" on SB signs
10.  Exit 90 gets changed from "27/Mystic Aquarium/Mystic Seaport" to just "27/Mystic"
11.  Exit 91 gets changed from "234/No Main St/Stonington Borough" to just "234/Stonington"
12.  Blue attraction logo signs to be added to all exits, 86-93
13.  Two mileage distance signs will remain, one for "RI State Line/Providence" and one for "New London/New Haven". 
14.  Enhanced mile markers to be added

Plans are available in a ZIP file, accessible from:  http://www.biznet.ct.gov/scp_search/BidDetail.aspx?CID=40931

[vdeane]

3.  Exit numbers stay status-quo on the new signs on I-95, however exit numbers are added to CT 184 and CT 349.  CT 349 gets mile-based.

What does CT 184 get?

4.  No evidence of the new exit tabs supporting 3-digit exit numbers

That's awfully shortsighted of them... what are then gonna do when I-95 goes mile-based, replace the signs again?

11.  Exit 91 gets changed from "234/No Main St/Stonington Borough" to just "234/Stonington"

Perhaps people thought that Stonington didn't have a Main St and then got confused when there was one?