Connecticut News

[Ted$8roadFan]

I-84 signing Vernon to Union will be advertised soon.  That leaves only I-91 left.  CT is acting like it was 1985-1990 when they replaced all their signs basically in a few years.
There seems to be quite a few signing projects currently or just finished across the state.

Good to hear; too many of their existing signs are showing their age and are an embarrassment.

[RobbieL2415]

I-84 signing Vernon to Union will be advertised soon.  That leaves only I-91 left.  CT is acting like it was 1985-1990 when they replaced all their signs basically in a few years.
There seems to be quite a few signing projects currently or just finished across the state.

I'm surprised that stretch isn't last. The signs on that stretch are still readable.

[Beeper1]

Starting in Vernon?   So the Exits 59-64 signs are getting skipped again?

[abqtraveler]

Starting in Vernon?   So the Exits 59-64 signs are getting skipped again?

If that's the case, they should be getting close to being ready to convert I-84 to mile-based numbers.

[MATraveler128]

Starting in Vernon?   So the Exits 59-64 signs are getting skipped again?

If that's the case, they should be getting close to being ready to convert I-84 to mile-based numbers.

I-84 isn’t scheduled to be renumbered to mileage based exits until towards the end of the decade. I suspect they’re saving Exits 59-64 until then as well as through downtown Hartford.

[shadyjay]

I-84 signs through downtown Hartford are in the process of being replaced as part of the Exit 40-56 project.  The gantries in downtown, however, are not being replaced.  All others are.

The fact that Exits 57-63 are being skipped again is kind of peculiar.  Maybe an I-384/I-291 sign project would include I-84 in that area (along with the c/d roads). 

There are still some first generation Phase IV signs on I-84 (among the last ones installed before aligned exit tabs became a thing in CT) from Southbury to western Waterbury.  The signs are in fine shape... maybe there, they will replace just the tabs, or just overlay the new numbers. 

[jp the roadgeek]

I-84 signs through downtown Hartford are in the process of being replaced as part of the Exit 40-56 project.  The gantries in downtown, however, are not being replaced.  All others are.

The fact that Exits 57-63 are being skipped again is kind of peculiar.  Maybe an I-384/I-291 sign project would include I-84 in that area (along with the c/d roads). 

There are still some first generation Phase IV signs on I-84 (among the last ones installed before aligned exit tabs became a thing in CT) from Southbury to western Waterbury.  The signs are in fine shape... maybe there, they will replace just the tabs, or just overlay the new numbers.

There are also a few in Cheshire and Southington.  The CT 70 and I-691/CT 322 signage is from that vintage.  Also no enhanced mile markers west of MP 42, so there has to be something in that area.

[Mergingtraffic]

Saw this beauty on the side of the road still on the gantry.  Above the highway, it was one of the smaller signs but on the ground it's huge.  Look at the guardrail for scale.
Only bad thing was it had a reflective background.

PS. anybody have plans for the I-691 signing contract?

[shadyjay]

I-691 was a design-build, so I don't think plans are out there... at least in the conventional locations (ie - ct.gov).

[Rothman]

I-691 was a design-build, so I don't think plans are out there... at least in the conventional locations (ie - ct.gov).

Why wouldn't they be? 

[jp the roadgeek]

I-691 was a design-build, so I don't think plans are out there... at least in the conventional locations (ie - ct.gov).

Why wouldn't they be?

They showed a couple of sketches of new signage in the I-691/CT 15/I-91 interchange project showing the new exit numbers on updated signage.  Hope they add a Wilbur Cross Pkwy shield instead of using it as a control.  Exits will increase in number east to west.

[shadyjay]

I-691 was a design-build, so I don't think plans are out there... at least in the conventional locations (ie - ct.gov).

Why wouldn't they be? 

A design-build project, in terms of signing, means that the sign plans are not developed by ConnDOT, but rather the contractor.  So unless the contractor puts it on their web site, most likely their intraweb to permit inter-agency viewing, then they're not going to be posted on the ct.gov Bid Board.  It's not a state signing project, but rather part of a larger project, which is not being designed by the state. 

[vdeane]

NY is the same way.  Regular D contracts can be found here, but design-build projects are here, and don't always have signing plans (Key Gardens Phase 4, for example, doesn't have them, which is annoying when you want to be able to keep exit lists up to date without waiting on street view or roadgeek photography).

[Alps]

Saw this beauty on the side of the road still on the gantry.  Above the highway, it was one of the smaller signs but on the ground it's huge.  Look at the guardrail for scale.
Only bad thing was it had a reflective background.

PS. anybody have plans for the I-691 signing contract?

P.S. anyone have a wrench and a large screwdriver and a safety vest and time to visit this location with me

[Rothman]

NY is the same way.  Regular D contracts can be found here, but design-build projects are here, and don't always have signing plans (Key Gardens Phase 4, for example, doesn't have them, which is annoying when you want to be able to keep exit lists up to date without waiting on street view or roadgeek photography).

I'd think they'd still be subject to a FOIL request.  State still paid for the development of the plans.

[Great Lakes Roads]

In terms of the CT-15 exit renumbering project, will that also include the Merritt/Wilbur Cross Parkway segment?

[jp the roadgeek]

In terms of the CT-15 exit renumbering project, will that also include the Merritt/Wilbur Cross Parkway segment?

I'd imagine it would, when it does come up (not for at least 5 years though).  If MassDOT can be forced to switch the exit numbers on the Cape, CTDOT will be forced to change them on the parkways.  After all,  NY just renumbered The Hutch, so it would only make sense.

[RobbieL2415]

I-291's signs date to 1993-1994. I would imagine they would be the last in the area to be replaced.

Exits 59-64 includes the Buckland C/D, and there are many more ancillary signs than one might find on the more traditional portions of the freeway.

Thus, I suspect that stretch will be its own contract.

It would be helpful if we got some overhead pull-through signs at the end of Exit 62 in both directions, and on Pleasant Valley Rd and Buckland St.

[connroadgeek]

Saw this beauty on the side of the road still on the gantry.  Above the highway, it was one of the smaller signs but on the ground it's huge.  Look at the guardrail for scale.
Only bad thing was it had a reflective background.

PS. anybody have plans for the I-691 signing contract?

P.S. anyone have a wrench and a large screwdriver and a safety vest and time to visit this location with me

How the hell would you get it home?

[Alps]

Saw this beauty on the side of the road still on the gantry.  Above the highway, it was one of the smaller signs but on the ground it's huge.  Look at the guardrail for scale.
Only bad thing was it had a reflective background.

PS. anybody have plans for the I-691 signing contract?

P.S. anyone have a wrench and a large screwdriver and a safety vest and time to visit this location with me

How the hell would you get it home?

one step at a time

[shadyjay]

I-291's signs date to 1993-1994. I would imagine they would be the last in the area to be replaced.

Exits 59-64 includes the Buckland C/D, and there are many more ancillary signs than one might find on the more traditional portions of the freeway.

Thus, I suspect that stretch will be its own contract.

It would be helpful if we got some overhead pull-through signs at the end of Exit 62 in both directions, and on Pleasant Valley Rd and Buckland St.

What would REALLY be helpful if "Burnside Ave" got removed from the Exit 58 signs.  I mean, why is it there to begin with?  Especially when its also on the Exit 60 signs? 

One thing I've noticed this past week in TN is that they love their option lanes in the more urban areas (and mostly without use of APLs).   In CT on I-84 East, Exit 27 (I-691) and Exit 63 come to mind as where this would be very helpful (with or without the APL).   Exit 63 would only require some pavement, whereas Exit 27, you'd want to take a 4th lane back closer to Exit 26, replace a bridge, and widen the EB to EB ramp as well. 

[Mergingtraffic]

I-291's signs date to 1993-1994. I would imagine they would be the last in the area to be replaced.

Exits 59-64 includes the Buckland C/D, and there are many more ancillary signs than one might find on the more traditional portions of the freeway.

Thus, I suspect that stretch will be its own contract.

It would be helpful if we got some overhead pull-through signs at the end of Exit 62 in both directions, and on Pleasant Valley Rd and Buckland St.

What would REALLY be helpful if "Burnside Ave" got removed from the Exit 58 signs.  I mean, why is it there to begin with?  Especially when its also on the Exit 60 signs? 

One thing I've noticed this past week in TN is that they love their option lanes in the more urban areas (and mostly without use of APLs).   In CT on I-84 East, Exit 27 (I-691) and Exit 63 come to mind as where this would be very helpful (with or without the APL).   Exit 63 would only require some pavement, whereas Exit 27, you'd want to take a 4th lane back closer to Exit 26, replace a bridge, and widen the EB to EB ramp as well. 

My biggest gripe is when they could be an option lane but CT doesn't stripe it that way. Look at I-91 SB at the I-95 split.

[Ted$8roadFan]

I-291's signs date to 1993-1994. I would imagine they would be the last in the area to be replaced.

Exits 59-64 includes the Buckland C/D, and there are many more ancillary signs than one might find on the more traditional portions of the freeway.

Thus, I suspect that stretch will be its own contract.

It would be helpful if we got some overhead pull-through signs at the end of Exit 62 in both directions, and on Pleasant Valley Rd and Buckland St.

What would REALLY be helpful if "Burnside Ave" got removed from the Exit 58 signs.  I mean, why is it there to begin with?  Especially when its also on the Exit 60 signs? 

One thing I've noticed this past week in TN is that they love their option lanes in the more urban areas (and mostly without use of APLs).   In CT on I-84 East, Exit 27 (I-691) and Exit 63 come to mind as where this would be very helpful (with or without the APL).   Exit 63 would only require some pavement, whereas Exit 27, you'd want to take a 4th lane back closer to Exit 26, replace a bridge, and widen the EB to EB ramp as well.

IIRC, there was once an exit off of I-84/former I-86 at Forbes Street that was removed when 84 was widened in the 1980s that mentioned Burnside Avenue. Exit 58 might be the continuation of that.

[shadyjay]

I drove the length of the CT 8 resigning project on Sunday from Derby to Bridgeport and then north again to the Merritt.  Looks like the project is "largely completed"... there are a few overheads that retain button copy and were not replaced as part of the project ("NIC - Parapet").  These may get replaced as part of a later bridge project, or as part of the "cleanup" project which will take care of exit renumbering, to go out to bid later this summer.  Also, a couple spot replacements have not been changed out yet with their newer "simplified" destinations. 

Here's a couple samples:

CT8SB-Exit10-3 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

CT8SB-Exit03-2 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

CT8NB-Exit05-2 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

Note how in the last one, there are supports to hold a future "LEFT EXIT #" tab. 

Rest of the photos can be found here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/with/52191034142/


Elsewhere...

The CT 9 signing project is finally starting to put up some onramp signage.  Thank god it's of the extruded variety, and it features a black border around the "9" shield.  I didn't get a picture, but it looks pretty good.  New supports are up from Middletown south to Exit 2. 

Finally....

The sheet aluminum project that added new speed limits, reassurance shields, enhanced mile markers, and other sheets statewide has added a ramp sign where there is no longer a ramp...
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3680218,-72.1565384,3a,75y,290.24h,75.07t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sPC_yR1jQ9aWy0KqhzVUZBA!2e0!5s20190801T000000!7i16384!8i8192

This is the location of the former I-95 SB weigh station near Exit 81 in Waterford.  The ramp access has been removed, as seen in the street view, yet the contractor has put up a new "WEIGH STATION ->" sign.  Its possible whoever drew up the plans for the "sheets" (or whoever imputed them into GIS or however they're doing it now) didn't know the weigh station had been abandoned.  Still, putting up a sign to nowhere seems pretty dangerous to me, especially to truckers who have to stop at weigh stations.  This is a perfect case of a contractor just going by the book, vs what there is in reality.  Next time I head out that way I'll get a photo.

[abqtraveler]

I drove the length of the CT 8 resigning project on Sunday from Derby to Bridgeport and then north again to the Merritt.  Looks like the project is "largely completed"... there are a few overheads that retain button copy and were not replaced as part of the project ("NIC - Parapet").  These may get replaced as part of a later bridge project, or as part of the "cleanup" project which will take care of exit renumbering, to go out to bid later this summer.  Also, a couple spot replacements have not been changed out yet with their newer "simplified" destinations. 

Here's a couple samples:

CT8SB-Exit10-3 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

CT8SB-Exit03-2 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

CT8NB-Exit05-2 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

Note how in the last one, there are supports to hold a future "LEFT EXIT #" tab. 

Rest of the photos can be found here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/with/52191034142/


Elsewhere...

The CT 9 signing project is finally starting to put up some onramp signage.  Thank god it's of the extruded variety, and it features a black border around the "9" shield.  I didn't get a picture, but it looks pretty good.  New supports are up from Middletown south to Exit 2. 

Finally....

The sheet aluminum project that added new speed limits, reassurance shields, enhanced mile markers, and other sheets statewide has added a ramp sign where there is no longer a ramp...
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3680218,-72.1565384,3a,75y,290.24h,75.07t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sPC_yR1jQ9aWy0KqhzVUZBA!2e0!5s20190801T000000!7i16384!8i8192

This is the location of the former I-95 SB weigh station near Exit 81 in Waterford.  The ramp access has been removed, as seen in the street view, yet the contractor has put up a new "WEIGH STATION ->" sign.  Its possible whoever drew up the plans for the "sheets" (or whoever imputed them into GIS or however they're doing it now) didn't know the weigh station had been abandoned.  Still, putting up a sign to nowhere seems pretty dangerous to me, especially to truckers who have to stop at weigh stations.  This is a perfect case of a contractor just going by the book, vs what there is in reality.  Next time I head out that way I'll get a photo.

It's hard to see in these pictures, but are they overlaying the current exit numbers over the future ones on these signs, or do they play to overlay new exit numbers on these signs once the exit renumbering contract is let?