Connecticut News

[agentsteel53]

freeway-to-freeway left exits aren't generally all that problematic.  it's the surface street ones, which require traffic to slow significantly, which should be eliminated.

the only freeway-to-freeway "left exits" that are problematic are when the mainline through lanes change number, and the previous number continues as a right exit of one's self - but this can be adequately dealt with using ample signage.  

[Duke87]

Yeah the whole "we need to get rid of every left exit" mentality is annoying. Highways that begin at the shore like I-91 and CT-34, should begin as a left exit northbound. It just makes sense. It keeps the ramp short, and the curve radius negligible meaning vehicles can maintain high speeds. Now we have a flyover that requires a much sharper curve radius (read: lower speed meaning less cars/hour) and needs to pass over I-95 N/B and S/B instead of just the S/B lanes.

The old ramp to 34 featured a couple of tight curves and was more medium speed than high speed. I haven't driven the new ramp yet, but it looks to be much higher speed. And being a more minor exit, it makes sense on the right. 91, meanwhile, could easily remain a left exit but it doesn't really make a difference.

What I'm really wondering is how traffic entering from Long Wharf Drive is going to handle after all this.

[Mergingtraffic]

Here we go again, another group complaining about the DOT I-95 widening in New Haven/West Haven.
Of course, they wait and come out now.  


http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2011/06/18/news/new_haven/doc4dfbaafe9c8e9172207978.txt

[connroadgeek]

Yeah the whole "we need to get rid of every left exit" mentality is annoying. Highways that begin at the shore like I-91 and CT-34, should begin as a left exit northbound. It just makes sense. It keeps the ramp short, and the curve radius negligible meaning vehicles can maintain high speeds. Now we have a flyover that requires a much sharper curve radius (read: lower speed meaning less cars/hour) and needs to pass over I-95 N/B and S/B instead of just the S/B lanes.

The old ramp to 34 featured a couple of tight curves and was more medium speed than high speed. I haven't driven the new ramp yet, but it looks to be much higher speed. And being a more minor exit, it makes sense on the right. 91, meanwhile, could easily remain a left exit but it doesn't really make a difference.

What I'm really wondering is how traffic entering from Long Wharf Drive is going to handle after all this.

You are probably right with regards to exit 47 being left or right not making a whole lot of difference. Why bother then? I'm not a fan of reconstruction type projects unless it adds capacity in some way. CT seems notorious for undertaking these big projects of realigning, reducing curves, moving an exit 100 feet, etc. but yet afterwards the number of lanes remains the same and the same old traffic hot spots remain. The only thing we seem to gain is a big bill to taxpayers and traffic jams from 8 PM-6 AM M-F through the construction pattern for a few years. If traffic backups at exit 47 and 48 are because of the left handedness of the ramps, then better signage would be a start. Try the $2 solution before the $2 million solution. Diagram signs like they use for 47 and 48 suck anyway for quickly discerning lane assignments. I'd rather pull through type signs that show each lane where they're gonna go if they stay there. And I'd start those signs back at Kim Ave instead of closer to Long Wharf.

[connroadgeek]

By the way, it seems New Haven is no longer a big enough control city to not be listed without its state abbreviation. NYC-area signage is using "New Haven CT" from now on and many of these signs are already up especially in the Bronx.

[shadyjay]

By the way, it seems New Haven is no longer a big enough control city to not be listed without its state abbreviation. NYC-area signage is using "New Haven CT" from now on and many of these signs are already up especially in the Bronx.

I'm still mourning the loss of "NEW ENGLAND" as a control point on I-95 and "UPSTATE" on the Deegan. 

[shadyjay]

Here we go again, another group complaining about the DOT I-95 widening in New Haven/West Haven.
Of course, they wait and come out now. 


http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2011/06/18/news/new_haven/doc4dfbaafe9c8e9172207978.txt

Wait a minute... I thought the Exit 46 ramps were already moved from previous locations?  Now they want to move them AGAIN?  Sounds like a typical ConnDOT move - not thinking ahead.  If there is a weaving issue, then ConnDOT should have been prepared for this and put the ramps further south. 

[iwishiwascanadian]

It looks like ConnDOT is continuing it's sign replacement on I-84, they're re-doing the whole sign bridge on the Bulkeley Bridge on the Hartford side.  They're replacing the I-84 West sign, the sign for Exit 50 (US-44 East) and Exit 51 (I-91 North).

[Duke87]

By the way, it seems New Haven is no longer a big enough control city to not be listed without its state abbreviation. NYC-area signage is using "New Haven CT" from now on and many of these signs are already up especially in the Bronx.

At least for NYSDOT. The Thruway Authority thinks differently, and is still using "Connecticut" or "Conn" as a control point. See hideous piece of work exhibit A:

[shadyjay]

Oh my god that sign is just downright horrendous... I'd rather have it say New Haven if they could at least get the layout correct.  I've seen that sign from Amtrak/Metro North as well and the phrase "WTF" comes to mind.

[Mergingtraffic]

Here we go again, another group complaining about the DOT I-95 widening in New Haven/West Haven.
Of course, they wait and come out now. 


http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2011/06/18/news/new_haven/doc4dfbaafe9c8e9172207978.txt

Wait a minute... I thought the Exit 46 ramps were already moved from previous locations?  Now they want to move them AGAIN?  Sounds like a typical ConnDOT move - not thinking ahead.  If there is a weaving issue, then ConnDOT should have been prepared for this and put the ramps further south. 

YES, they will be moved a 2nd time!  I'm glad Exit 46 is moving b/c the current weave is unacceptable for a new layout, but shouldn't CTDOT have moved Exit 46 to it's final place the first time?  Seems wasteful to have the whole temp ramps etc.

[newyorker478]

I'm still mourning the loss of "NEW ENGLAND" as a control point on I-95 and "UPSTATE" on the Deegan.  

You can still find these controls on the Triboro Bridge as well as Upstate/Albany on signs from the Bruckner WB to the Deegan NB.

quOte

[relaxok]

At least for NYSDOT. The Thruway Authority thinks differently, and is still using "Connecticut" or "Conn" as a control point. See hideous piece of work exhibit A:

That is truly, truly ugly. 

[Mergingtraffic]

I drove the new CT-34 flyover bridge today....an awesome job!  Idk why all the people in the article above were so negative about it.  Flyovers are nothing new.

Although Exit 46 should be moved back so allow for more merging time.  I think they should get rid of the Exit 46 on ramp all together.  There are other ways to get around and it isn't used that much. 

Plus, this:
http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2011/06/20/news/doc4dff980aaee7b348871450.txt

[newyorker478]

I drove the new CT-34 flyover bridge today....an awesome job!  Idk why all the people in the article above were so negative about it.  Flyovers are nothing new.

Although Exit 46 should be moved back so allow for more merging time.  I think they should get rid of the Exit 46 on ramp all together.  There are other ways to get around and it isn't used that much.  
Plus, this:
http://www.nhregister.com/articles/2011/06/20/news/doc4dff980aaee7b348871450.txt

New Englanders and CTers do not have many flyovers to use, so it does take some geting used to
your text goes AFTER the quote, not INSIDE it

[Mergingtraffic]

http://www.ctpost.com/default/article/Norwalk-I-95-bottleneck-a-priority-for-Malloy-1461671.php

I-95 widening (sort of) in Norwalk.  However, no news on the CT-15/US 7 interchange. 

[Duke87]

Oh great, another auxiliary lane.

The Rampart Road overpass has been out for at least a few weeks now, so something is already going on in that area... but that's west of exit 14, so it might not be related.

[Mergingtraffic]

Oh great, another auxiliary lane.

The Rampart Road overpass has been out for at least a few weeks now, so something is already going on in that area... but that's west of exit 14, so it might not be related.

I think that is something else. My theory is crappy improvements are better than nothing. 

However, I want to see how long these lanes will be?  Will it be like I-95 SB between exits 10 and 8 where you have 4-lanes and other exits and entrances during the 4-lanes? , where it's actually long and could be considered 4-lanes SB?  OR will be like the other areas just between the on and off ramps for 1000 feet?

Also of note:  new signage, part of the new signage project, spotted on I-84 just west of Exit 13. Including new mileage markers complete with small interstate shields in them.  It looks like this:

   East
  (I-84
 shield)

   Mile

   18

[kurumi]

Connecticut Ferries to Close

More fallout from the economy: by August 25, 2011, both the Chester-Hadlyme (CT 148) and Glastonbury - Rocky Hill (CT 160) ferries will close indefinitely. Some fear this is permanent.

So CT 148 and CT 160, the only highways in CT to have seasonal closures, will have gaps year-round. To get rid of those gaps, there would be a small chance that the state would redesignate CT 160 east of CT 99 as two new unsigned "secret" routes; and do the same for CT 148 east of CT 154. The state has a couple maintenance gaps in its systems, though the highways are still signed through (83, 136), but all other highways are continuous end to end.

Closing the ferries will save about $400K a year or so (costs minus fares). Hopefully someone on Wall Street is a ferry fan and can run them as a philanthropy. Not sure if you could run those at a profit.

[shadyjay]

How does the new gantry make the sign assembly less confusing?

the new final 22S gantry has new signs as well, a left exit CT-9 NOW sign,  and 91 pullthrough with no arrows and an extra advance warning sign for CT-9 NB which emphasizes to stay to the right hand side andit says "FIRST RIGHT" with blackon yellow letters at the bottom. I don't remember the extra CT-9 NB advance signing there, just the CT-9 SB final left exit now signage.

I finally got a shot of the new assembly this afternoon on my first trip to CT since December 2010.  The sign looks pretty good, though FIRST RIGHT for Exit 22N would not have been my first choice.  NEXT RIGHT just sounds better, and I would have had that text be in traditional white on green, instead of a black on yellow bar.  I see "black on yellow" on a BGS and think EXIT ONLY or LEFT EXIT.


(not the best quality - taken at speed so I had to snap it pretty quick, while driving)

[shadyjay]

Connecticut Ferries to Close

More fallout from the economy: by August 25, 2011, both the Chester-Hadlyme (CT 148) and Glastonbury - Rocky Hill (CT 160) ferries will close indefinitely. Some fear this is permanent.

So CT 148 and CT 160, the only highways in CT to have seasonal closures, will have gaps year-round. To get rid of those gaps, there would be a small chance that the state would redesignate CT 160 east of CT 99 as two new unsigned "secret" routes; and do the same for CT 148 east of CT 154. The state has a couple maintenance gaps in its systems, though the highways are still signed through (83, 136), but all other highways are continuous end to end.

Closing the ferries will save about $400K a year or so (costs minus fares). Hopefully someone on Wall Street is a ferry fan and can run them as a philanthropy. Not sure if you could run those at a profit.

It's a shame, since those are the two oldest continously operated ferries in the country... Chester-Hadlyme to ~ 1769 and Rocky Hill-Glastonbury c 1655.

In addition to the routes being isolated, I'm guessing the HADLYME control city will come off Route 9 Exit 6 (presently "148 / Chester / Hadlyme") and NB Gillette Castle signage will be advised to use Exit 7. 


Also, word has it that the non-commercial rest areas along I-84, I-91, and I-95 are back on the closed list.  The buildings will be closed but the parking areas will remain open.   So at least parking will be available, but no facilities.  I guess that's a compromise.

[wytout]

Connecticut Ferries to Close

More fallout from the economy: by August 25, 2011, both the Chester-Hadlyme (CT 148) and Glastonbury - Rocky Hill (CT 160) ferries will close indefinitely. Some fear this is permanent.

So CT 148 and CT 160, the only highways in CT to have seasonal closures, will have gaps year-round. To get rid of those gaps, there would be a small chance that the state would redesignate CT 160 east of CT 99 as two new unsigned "secret" routes; and do the same for CT 148 east of CT 154. The state has a couple maintenance gaps in its systems, though the highways are still signed through (83, 136), but all other highways are continuous end to end.

Closing the ferries will save about $400K a year or so (costs minus fares). Hopefully someone on Wall Street is a ferry fan and can run them as a philanthropy. Not sure if you could run those at a profit.

It's a shame, since those are the two oldest continously operated ferries in the country... Chester-Hadlyme to ~ 1769 and Rocky Hill-Glastonbury c 1655.

In addition to the routes being isolated, I'm guessing the HADLYME control city will come off Route 9 Exit 6 (presently "148 / Chester / Hadlyme") and NB Gillette Castle signage will be advised to use Exit 7.  


Also, word has it that the non-commercial rest areas along I-84, I-91, and I-95 are back on the closed list.  The buildings will be closed but the parking areas will remain open.   So at least parking will be available, but no facilities.  I guess that's a compromise.

It's the price we pay in progressive CT.  Screw the infrastructure. This state has just seen it's single biggest group of tax and fee hikes ever take place over the past month, and we can't even keep a shitter open at a rest stop.  Really?!?!  I Wonder if the "CONN WELCOME CENTER" sign WB on 84 in Willington will be changed to say, "Ok to PARK AND REST, but if you need to shit, don't wipe with the shiny leaves"

If CT ever had any glory days they are over, All I can do as I sit in traffic in greater Hartford is lament about the great network of expressways that were once planned, as I travel back and forth to and from work, watching my paycheck get smaller, and being jealous of the fact that those ever-increasing tax dollars don't seem to support any cool new road projects like those going on in neighboring states (well unless you call that stupid busway a "road").

[wytout]

Some new signage on a new pipe gantry that went up around the eastern terminus for I-384 in Bolton, CT, near interchange/jct w/ US 6 and 44 in conjunction with a general improvement project that has been going on out there.

EB:






WB:

[hbelkins]

I guess those replaced this?



(Taken last November...)

[wytout]

No those are still there (swastika and all on the US6 BGS). The new gantry E of that overpass and is the final guide assembly for the split, where 384 terminates and splits to 44E and 6E. It replaces one of the old truss gantries that you can find on the entire length of i384