Connecticut News

[jp the roadgeek]

I travel the portion of CT 72 through New Britain frequently, and other than the couple of piers for the new CT 9 "Exit"  now gantry (which if CTDOT wants to maintain consistency with its sudden change of heart to add numbers to termini ramps should number these, but I digress), and a replacement ground mounted BGS for the Ellis St exit on the ramp from 72 East to 9 South, I've seen no outward signs of replacement.

[SectorZ]

Got a shot of those odd looking 9s on the Exit 18 onramp to CT 9 South in Cromwell today.  I really hope these were replaced as part of a spot replacement and not part of the Exits 18-24 resigning project, cause if more of them sprout up.... ugh!

CT9SBonramp-Exit18 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

https://www.lowellsun.com/2021/02/23/lowell-city-council-hears-rourke-bridge-options/

In Massachusetts, the lazy nines are sometimes etched in concrete.

[kernals12]

Here's a shocker: The Merritt Parkway has fewer accidents per mile than Connecticut's Interstate Highways
https://www.cga.ct.gov/2002/rpt/2002-R-0501.htm

I think it's due to the lack of trucks.

[kurumi]

Noticed this in the highway log: Connecticut designated a new highway in 2018. Say hello to SSR 440, which leads from CT 155 to a DOT maintenance garage in Middletown.



Blink and you'll miss it: SSR 440 is only 0.07 miles long.

(Don't blink and you'll miss it anyway: it's not signed.)

Also, in the past few years, CT has relinquished a few SSR's: 410 (Aircraft Rd, Middletown); 430 (Eagleville Rd, Storrs), and 433 (Ft. Shantok Rd, Montville)

[abqtraveler]

Noticed this in the highway log: Connecticut designated a new highway in 2018. Say hello to SSR 440, which leads from CT 155 to a DOT maintenance garage in Middletown.



Blink and you'll miss it: SSR 440 is only 0.07 miles long.

(Don't blink and you'll miss it anyway: it's not signed.)

Also, in the past few years, CT has relinquished a few SSR's: 410 (Aircraft Rd, Middletown); 430 (Eagleville Rd, Storrs), and 433 (Ft. Shantok Rd, Montville)

That has to be the shortest state road in Connecticut. Essentially it's a long driveway to the DOT maintenance yard.

[kernals12]

Noticed this in the highway log: Connecticut designated a new highway in 2018. Say hello to SSR 440, which leads from CT 155 to a DOT maintenance garage in Middletown.



Blink and you'll miss it: SSR 440 is only 0.07 miles long.

(Don't blink and you'll miss it anyway: it's not signed.)

Also, in the past few years, CT has relinquished a few SSR's: 410 (Aircraft Rd, Middletown); 430 (Eagleville Rd, Storrs), and 433 (Ft. Shantok Rd, Montville)

That has to be the shortest state road in Connecticut. Essentially it's a long driveway to the DOT maintenance yard.

I think it's adorable.

[The Ghostbuster]

Why even give it a number? Are there any other state routes that are this short in Connecticut?

[Alps]

Why even give it a number? Are there any other state routes that are this short in Connecticut?

Some states number every road they maintain (NJ is another). It makes it easier to inventory. Difference in NJ is all the formerly secret routes have been revealed.

[shadyjay]

Its a number the regular public isn't really meant to see, and since it leads to a state garage, it only makes sense that it gets put into the state fold of maintenance.  I drive by it regularly.  Too bad the state didn't take Paddock Road, as that road is literally so bad right now (potholes and such, most have been there pre-winter).  Middletown's ability to upkeep its roads is sub-par.  Saybrook Road is still concrete and I've heard there's a battle between the state and city for that road.  The town wants to give it to the state but the state doesn't want it.  Until then, it remains concrete.  It probably lost its state maintenance in the 1950s as the portion of Rt 9 from Exit 10 to Exit 18 was opened. 

What I'd like to see happen is the state get Saybrook Rd right up to the Rt 17 connector and make it all Rt 154.  Then Rt 155 (shown in the map above) can be extended the short 1/4 mile distance from Rt 9 to Saybrook Rd. 

[SectorZ]

Its a number the regular public isn't really meant to see, and since it leads to a state garage, it only makes sense that it gets put into the state fold of maintenance.  I drive by it regularly.  Too bad the state didn't take Paddock Road, as that road is literally so bad right now (potholes and such, most have been there pre-winter).  Middletown's ability to upkeep its roads is sub-par.  Saybrook Road is still concrete and I've heard there's a battle between the state and city for that road.  The town wants to give it to the state but the state doesn't want it.  Until then, it remains concrete.  It probably lost its state maintenance in the 1950s as the portion of Rt 9 from Exit 10 to Exit 18 was opened. 

What I'd like to see happen is the state get Saybrook Rd right up to the Rt 17 connector and make it all Rt 154.  Then Rt 155 (shown in the map above) can be extended the short 1/4 mile distance from Rt 9 to Saybrook Rd.

Saybrook Rd, the concrete part, is the only thing I have cycled on that was legitimately terrifying to do so. It looks like they improved the shoulders at least recently when I was down there last autumn.

[jp the roadgeek]

Its a number the regular public isn't really meant to see, and since it leads to a state garage, it only makes sense that it gets put into the state fold of maintenance.  I drive by it regularly.  Too bad the state didn't take Paddock Road, as that road is literally so bad right now (potholes and such, most have been there pre-winter).  Middletown's ability to upkeep its roads is sub-par.  Saybrook Road is still concrete and I've heard there's a battle between the state and city for that road.  The town wants to give it to the state but the state doesn't want it.  Until then, it remains concrete.  It probably lost its state maintenance in the 1950s as the portion of Rt 9 from Exit 10 to Exit 18 was opened. 

What I'd like to see happen is the state get Saybrook Rd right up to the Rt 17 connector and make it all Rt 154.  Then Rt 155 (shown in the map above) can be extended the short 1/4 mile distance from Rt 9 to Saybrook Rd.

Saybrook Rd, the concrete part, is the only thing I have cycled on that was legitimately terrifying to do so. It looks like they improved the shoulders at least recently when I was down there last autumn.

Not to get fictional, I'd love to see CT 99 extended via a concurrency with CT 9, then use Hartford Ave to Main St and have it follow Main St Ext and Saybrook Rd and take over CT 154 north of US 1.  Also would love to see CT 17 use Main St and stay off of CT 9, and the 155 extension. 

I've noticed a few new concrete piers on CT 72 up to the Corbin Ave exit, plus a couple of vertical poles for the new gantries on CT 9 where the 2 lanes go to 5 southbound in New Britain.

[shadyjay]

I hope ConnDOT will do something with CT 17 if their latest plans for getting rid of the lights come to fruition.  Otherwise, you're going to have 1/2 mile to get over 2 lanes from the merge at Exit 13 to get to new Exit 16, which will probably have its decelleration lane begin before Exit 15.  Yes, send it South Main to Main St. 

(My CT 99 has it multiplexing with Rt 9 between today's Exits 13-18... one less route on Main St)

[abqtraveler]

Why even give it a number? Are there any other state routes that are this short in Connecticut?

Some states number every road they maintain (NJ is another). It makes it easier to inventory. Difference in NJ is all the formerly secret routes have been revealed.

New Mexico has a couple of signed state routes that are just a few hundred feet in length.

[Alps]

Why even give it a number? Are there any other state routes that are this short in Connecticut?

Some states number every road they maintain (NJ is another). It makes it easier to inventory. Difference in NJ is all the formerly secret routes have been revealed.

New Mexico has a couple of signed state routes that are just a few hundred feet in length.

Virginia does that with its institutional 3xx routes. Makes no sense to me, you're following the sign for the college or park, not the 386 or whatever shield.

[abqtraveler]

Why even give it a number? Are there any other state routes that are this short in Connecticut?

Some states number every road they maintain (NJ is another). It makes it easier to inventory. Difference in NJ is all the formerly secret routes have been revealed.

New Mexico has a couple of signed state routes that are just a few hundred feet in length.

Virginia does that with its institutional 3xx routes. Makes no sense to me, you're following the sign for the college or park, not the 386 or whatever shield.

And what's even more bizarre about New Mexico is there are a few signed state routes that are "orphaned" from the rest of the state road network. The one that comes to mind is State Highway 2001 that goes to the Space Museum in Alamogordo. It's 0.4 miles long, running from Scenic Drive to the Space Museum, yet Scenic Drive is owned and maintained by the City of Alamogordo. The nearest state-owned highway to Highway 2001 is the intersection of US-54/70 and US-82. From the end of Highway 2001 to the 54/70/82 intersection requires a 3.5 mile drive over city streets in Alamogrodo.

[Mergingtraffic]

Sign updates CT-8:
A new sign bridge is up on CT-8. 
SB has Exit 13 3/4 Mile and the NB side I haven't seen it yet but it's up.  IDK if that's part of a spor replacement project or the Exit 1-15 sign replacement project.


and I found this beauty today in Wilton.

Any idea how old it is?

[MikeTheActuary]

Latest iteration of plans to redo Hartford's interstates: https://ctmirror.org/2021/03/17/theres-a-new-plan-for-realigning-hartfords-highways-is-the-third-time-the-charm/

EDIT: Here's the source document referenced in that news article: https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/review?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3Af5bf80b9-3447-4854-b8dd-db124a843dfd#pageNum=105

The short version is:

• Realign I-84 south of downtown Hartford
• Put I-91 in a tunnel, and create an urban boulevard on top
• Replace current I-84 alignment with another boulevard
• Demolish the Mixmaster in East Hartford, and redevelop the land freed up
• Create a multi-use trail in a rail ROW leading northwest out of downtown Hartford

[kurumi]

Latest iteration of plans to redo Hartford's interstates: https://ctmirror.org/2021/03/17/theres-a-new-plan-for-realigning-hartfords-highways-is-the-third-time-the-charm/

I like this.

Improved river access; moves I-84 off the Bulkeley Bridge; makes better use of valuable, well-situated land in East Hartford across the river; even adds a NW highway bypass of Hartford!

Interesting stuff:
* new I-891 uses part of leftover I-84
* but it still uses the viaduct - same replace/depress/tunnel decisions remain. But it wouldn't be a boulevard
* they'd have to redo the I-91/COB interchange again
* and possibly add a span to the COB
* extended CT 2 uses part of the I-284 corridor
* possible to combine I-891 and CT 2 at same interchange with I-91?
* probably some type of Cthulhu interchange at CT 2 / I-84 (formerly CT 15)
* I-284 designation for CT 2 north of I-84 might make sense

I've had a plan for awhile that moves I-84 south to the COB with a straight shot across to West Hartford (or the "use 691" option). Leftover 84 is I-584 up to around SR 504, then boulevard leading to Capitol area. CT 2 goes into EH as is, then just curves onto Founders Bridge. Bulkeley Bridge is US 6/44 only; mixmaster is gone.

[RobbieL2415]

Latest iteration of plans to redo Hartford's interstates: https://ctmirror.org/2021/03/17/theres-a-new-plan-for-realigning-hartfords-highways-is-the-third-time-the-charm/

I like this.

Improved river access; moves I-84 off the Bulkeley Bridge; makes better use of valuable, well-situated land in East Hartford across the river; even adds a NW highway bypass of Hartford!

Interesting stuff:
* new I-891 uses part of leftover I-84
* but it still uses the viaduct - same replace/depress/tunnel decisions remain. But it wouldn't be a boulevard
* they'd have to redo the I-91/COB interchange again
* and possibly add a span to the COB
* extended CT 2 uses part of the I-284 corridor
* possible to combine I-891 and CT 2 at same interchange with I-91?
* probably some type of Cthulhu interchange at CT 2 / I-84 (formerly CT 15)
* I-284 designation for CT 2 north of I-84 might make sense

I've had a plan for awhile that moves I-84 south to the COB with a straight shot across to West Hartford (or the "use 691" option). Leftover 84 is I-584 up to around SR 504, then boulevard leading to Capitol area. CT 2 goes into EH as is, then just curves onto Founders Bridge. Bulkeley Bridge is US 6/44 only; mixmaster is gone.

* These maps are useless. No detail, no data, no nothing. I can't even really tell where I-891 is supposed to end at I-91 or CT 2. And why 891? Why not 491?

* Good luck getting any new ROW. That's what kills me about these kinds of plans. They have no regard for the fact that NIMBYs will block everything.

* Why not just revive I-291 minus the split off CT 9? Or I-491?

* I have long wanted a CT 2 extension to I-91 via the I-284 ROW.

* Why isn't light rail being considered? Or an E-W commuter rail?

[abqtraveler]

Latest iteration of plans to redo Hartford's interstates: https://ctmirror.org/2021/03/17/theres-a-new-plan-for-realigning-hartfords-highways-is-the-third-time-the-charm/

I like this.

Improved river access; moves I-84 off the Bulkeley Bridge; makes better use of valuable, well-situated land in East Hartford across the river; even adds a NW highway bypass of Hartford!

Interesting stuff:
* new I-891 uses part of leftover I-84
* but it still uses the viaduct - same replace/depress/tunnel decisions remain. But it wouldn't be a boulevard
* they'd have to redo the I-91/COB interchange again
* and possibly add a span to the COB
* extended CT 2 uses part of the I-284 corridor
* possible to combine I-891 and CT 2 at same interchange with I-91?
* probably some type of Cthulhu interchange at CT 2 / I-84 (formerly CT 15)
* I-284 designation for CT 2 north of I-84 might make sense

I've had a plan for awhile that moves I-84 south to the COB with a straight shot across to West Hartford (or the "use 691" option). Leftover 84 is I-584 up to around SR 504, then boulevard leading to Capitol area. CT 2 goes into EH as is, then just curves onto Founders Bridge. Bulkeley Bridge is US 6/44 only; mixmaster is gone.

* These maps are useless. No detail, no data, no nothing. I can't even really tell where I-891 is supposed to end at I-91 or CT 2. And why 891? Why not 491?

* Good luck getting any new ROW. That's what kills me about these kinds of plans. They have no regard for the fact that NIMBYs will block everything.

* Why not just revive I-291 minus the split off CT 9? Or I-491?

* I have long wanted a CT 2 extension to I-91 via the I-284 ROW.

* Why isn't light rail being considered? Or an E-W commuter rail?

To reroute I-84 from Flatbush Avenue to the COB would involve plowing through through Trinity College and miles of dense residential neighborhoods before encountering a lot of commercial/industrial properties near the I-91/US-5/CT-15 interchange at the west end of the COB. There are also a high school and an elementary school that sit directly in the path that I-84 would take under that concept.

On the east side of the Connecticut River, I would truncate CT-2 at US-5/CT-15 and reconfigure the ramps to take WB CT-2 traffic onto the COB, and then north onto I-91 to reach downtown Hartford, then convert the Founders Bridge into a boulevard to eliminate the Mixmaster. I would keep I-91 west of the Connecticut River and place it underground on its present alignment through downtown Hartford.

[Alps]

Latest iteration of plans to redo Hartford's interstates: https://ctmirror.org/2021/03/17/theres-a-new-plan-for-realigning-hartfords-highways-is-the-third-time-the-charm/

EDIT: Here's the source document referenced in that news article: https://documentcloud.adobe.com/link/review?uri=urn%3Aaaid%3Ascds%3AUS%3Af5bf80b9-3447-4854-b8dd-db124a843dfd#pageNum=105

The short version is:

• Realign I-84 south of downtown Hartford
• Put I-91 in a tunnel, and create an urban boulevard on top
• Replace current I-84 alignment with another boulevard
• Demolish the Mixmaster in East Hartford, and redevelop the land freed up
• Create a multi-use trail in a rail ROW leading northwest out of downtown Hartford

Finally got around to looking at it hahahahahahahahaneverhappening

[SectorZ]

Latest iteration of plans to redo Hartford's interstates: https://ctmirror.org/2021/03/17/theres-a-new-plan-for-realigning-hartfords-highways-is-the-third-time-the-charm/

I like this.

Improved river access; moves I-84 off the Bulkeley Bridge; makes better use of valuable, well-situated land in East Hartford across the river; even adds a NW highway bypass of Hartford!

Interesting stuff:
* new I-891 uses part of leftover I-84
* but it still uses the viaduct - same replace/depress/tunnel decisions remain. But it wouldn't be a boulevard
* they'd have to redo the I-91/COB interchange again
* and possibly add a span to the COB
* extended CT 2 uses part of the I-284 corridor
* possible to combine I-891 and CT 2 at same interchange with I-91?
* probably some type of Cthulhu interchange at CT 2 / I-84 (formerly CT 15)
* I-284 designation for CT 2 north of I-84 might make sense

I've had a plan for awhile that moves I-84 south to the COB with a straight shot across to West Hartford (or the "use 691" option). Leftover 84 is I-584 up to around SR 504, then boulevard leading to Capitol area. CT 2 goes into EH as is, then just curves onto Founders Bridge. Bulkeley Bridge is US 6/44 only; mixmaster is gone.

* These maps are useless. No detail, no data, no nothing. I can't even really tell where I-891 is supposed to end at I-91 or CT 2. And why 891? Why not 491?

* Good luck getting any new ROW. That's what kills me about these kinds of plans. They have no regard for the fact that NIMBYs will block everything.

* Why not just revive I-291 minus the split off CT 9? Or I-491?

* I have long wanted a CT 2 extension to I-91 via the I-284 ROW.

* Why isn't light rail being considered? Or an E-W commuter rail?

To reroute I-84 from Flatbush Avenue to the COB would involve plowing through through Trinity College and miles of dense residential neighborhoods before encountering a lot of commercial/industrial properties near the I-91/US-5/CT-15 interchange at the west end of the COB. There are also a high school and an elementary school that sit directly in the path that I-84 would take under that concept.

On the east side of the Connecticut River, I would truncate CT-2 at US-5/CT-15 and reconfigure the ramps to take WB CT-2 traffic onto the COB, and then north onto I-91 to reach downtown Hartford, then convert the Founders Bridge into a boulevard to eliminate the Mixmaster. I would keep I-91 west of the Connecticut River and place it underground on its present alignment through downtown Hartford.

I believe, looking at the plans, that almost all of the re-routed 84 is underground. Along with the new portion of freeway that is 891, all of 91 between 5/15 and current 84, and a chunk of 2.

[shadyjay]

Sign updates CT-8:
A new sign bridge is up on CT-8. 
SB has Exit 13 3/4 Mile and the NB side I haven't seen it yet but it's up.  IDK if that's part of a spor replacement project or the Exit 1-15 sign replacement project.

There is a spot replacement site that is 1/2 mile before Exit 14, northbound.  It is scheduled to span both directions and have an Exit 13 1/2 mile sign on the southbound side.  This is probably the sign you speak of. 

[kernals12]

$17 billion?! That's almost as much as the Big Dig. This is not going to happen.

[jp the roadgeek]

Latest iteration of plans to redo Hartford's interstates: https://ctmirror.org/2021/03/17/theres-a-new-plan-for-realigning-hartfords-highways-is-the-third-time-the-charm/

I like this.

Improved river access; moves I-84 off the Bulkeley Bridge; makes better use of valuable, well-situated land in East Hartford across the river; even adds a NW highway bypass of Hartford!

Interesting stuff:
* new I-891 uses part of leftover I-84
* but it still uses the viaduct - same replace/depress/tunnel decisions remain. But it wouldn't be a boulevard
* they'd have to redo the I-91/COB interchange again
* and possibly add a span to the COB
* extended CT 2 uses part of the I-284 corridor
* possible to combine I-891 and CT 2 at same interchange with I-91?
* probably some type of Cthulhu interchange at CT 2 / I-84 (formerly CT 15)
* I-284 designation for CT 2 north of I-84 might make sense

I've had a plan for awhile that moves I-84 south to the COB with a straight shot across to West Hartford (or the "use 691" option). Leftover 84 is I-584 up to around SR 504, then boulevard leading to Capitol area. CT 2 goes into EH as is, then just curves onto Founders Bridge. Bulkeley Bridge is US 6/44 only; mixmaster is gone.

I would keep US 6 on I-84 over the COB, but it's the perfect opportunity to reroute it onto Silver Lane/Spencer St/West Center St since there would be a direct exit onto Silver Lane and no confusing routing just east of the Bulkeley Bridge if you tried that now.