AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Connecticut News  (Read 1056739 times)

shadyjay

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1599
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Lwr CT River Valley
  • Last Login: June 28, 2022, 10:49:26 PM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4750 on: January 24, 2022, 06:48:29 PM »

RE:  Route 9, Middletown
I really don't personally object to Alternative 3 and I hope that one gets pushed through so that this project can finally get off the ground.  Having a left exit isn't ideal.  I still don't understand why Exit 13 can't be upgraded to a full interchange (think SPUI here), replacing Exit 14 and giving northbound motorists better access to the south end of Main St.  An original plan back in the 90s had a connector road built north of the Arrigoni, swinging around.  Not sure what happened to that idea... the north end is primarily industrial, but there is quite the grade change between the bridge and Route 9 to overcome.  Another issue is the 1/2 mile lane change from the right to the left motorists on CT 17 North are going to have to make to continue on that route, unless Middletown gives Main St over to CT 17. 

RE:  Route 15/7
I think the idea of a full 15/7 interchange is no longer necessary, given the fact that the US 7 expressway will probably never make it past Grist Mill Rd (it should go up to at least 33 South in Wilton).  However, the ramps from 15S to Main Ave North/South (old 7) need improvement.  Its a 1940s-era cloverleaf combined with 21st century traffic (and drivers)... never a good combination.  And with no connection to points north/south except through this cloverleaf, therein lies the problem of needing to do something.  If the expressway is guaranteed never to go north of Grist Mill Rd, then ok, put up the lights.  Its a mile or less to the next light anyway.  Perhaps some rumble strips across the highway would get motorists attention to slow down, like what some states used to do approaching toll plazas. 

And trying to compare 7/15 with 9 in Middletown is like comparing apples to oranges... CT 9 is a thru expressway with traffic lights in the middle and a 65 MPH freeway on either side.  US 7 is a dead end expressway with an existing light at the end <1 mile north of the lights in question. 
Logged

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 841
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: Today at 12:18:17 PM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4751 on: January 25, 2022, 03:14:44 PM »

RE:  Route 9, Middletown
I really don't personally object to Alternative 3 and I hope that one gets pushed through so that this project can finally get off the ground.  Having a left exit isn't ideal.  I still don't understand why Exit 13 can't be upgraded to a full interchange (think SPUI here), replacing Exit 14 and giving northbound motorists better access to the south end of Main St.  An original plan back in the 90s had a connector road built north of the Arrigoni, swinging around.  Not sure what happened to that idea... the north end is primarily industrial, but there is quite the grade change between the bridge and Route 9 to overcome.  Another issue is the 1/2 mile lane change from the right to the left motorists on CT 17 North are going to have to make to continue on that route, unless Middletown gives Main St over to CT 17. 

RE:  Route 15/7
I think the idea of a full 15/7 interchange is no longer necessary, given the fact that the US 7 expressway will probably never make it past Grist Mill Rd (it should go up to at least 33 South in Wilton).  However, the ramps from 15S to Main Ave North/South (old 7) need improvement.  Its a 1940s-era cloverleaf combined with 21st century traffic (and drivers)... never a good combination.  And with no connection to points north/south except through this cloverleaf, therein lies the problem of needing to do something.  If the expressway is guaranteed never to go north of Grist Mill Rd, then ok, put up the lights.  Its a mile or less to the next light anyway.  Perhaps some rumble strips across the highway would get motorists attention to slow down, like what some states used to do approaching toll plazas. 

And trying to compare 7/15 with 9 in Middletown is like comparing apples to oranges... CT 9 is a thru expressway with traffic lights in the middle and a 65 MPH freeway on either side.  US 7 is a dead end expressway with an existing light at the end <1 mile north of the lights in question.
But the bigger problem with 7/15 that you don't have with Route 9 is that with 7/15 they want to put a traffic light at what is currently a freeway-to-freeway connection, which makes absolutely no sense. In the case of Route 9, the traffic lights are at intersections with surface streets in Middletown. Again, those lights on Route 9 were there when they built the freeway to the north and south of Middletown, so it made some sense at the time just to leave that stretch as-is with the idea that they would eventually get around to converting those intersections to interchanges. They're still trying to figure out how to do that.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

cl94

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6338
  • About to make Horace Greeley proud

  • Age: 27
  • Location: Albany, New York
  • Last Login: Today at 10:58:57 AM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4752 on: January 25, 2022, 03:25:34 PM »

7/15 is a partial freeway connection, not a full connection. Going to/from the east requires a convoluted trip along surface roads and through a very substandard cloverleaf complete with ramp stops. The freeway ends a mile north of here anyway and the current northern terminus has had repeated issues through the years of people slamming into the wall at the end of the thing at high speed.
Logged
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 841
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: Today at 12:18:17 PM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4753 on: January 25, 2022, 06:20:46 PM »

7/15 is a partial freeway connection, not a full connection. Going to/from the east requires a convoluted trip along surface roads and through a very substandard cloverleaf complete with ramp stops. The freeway ends a mile north of here anyway and the current northern terminus has had repeated issues through the years of people slamming into the wall at the end of the thing at high speed.
I know at one point they had proposed a project to realign the north end of the Route 7 freeway to eliminate the T-intersections at Gristmill Road and Main Avenue. The idea was to make the transition between the freeway and Route 7/Main Avenue north of the freeway terminus the primary "straight" movement, and require motorists who wish to go south on Main Avenue to make a turn. Likewise, motorists would have to turn onto Gristmill Road.  I don't know what happened to this concept, or if it is being incorporated into the redesign of the 7/15 interchange.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

BlueOutback7

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 876
  • Rev up your engines!

  • Location: Greater Boston
  • Last Login: Today at 12:36:31 PM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4754 on: January 25, 2022, 09:35:05 PM »

One other thing I found on NYC Roads.com was that the US 7 Expressway was proposed to be built as a toll road. Under this plan, they would have put two 30 cent mainline toll plazas in Norwalk and Danbury and then 15 cent ramp tolls.
Logged
Decommission 128 south of Peabody!

My Flickr Page
https://www.flickr.com/photos/195026169@N03/

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 841
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: Today at 12:18:17 PM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4755 on: January 26, 2022, 09:32:11 AM »

One other thing I found on NYC Roads.com was that the US 7 Expressway was proposed to be built as a toll road. Under this plan, they would have put two 30 cent mainline toll plazas in Norwalk and Danbury and then 15 cent ramp tolls.
I remember that. The main reason Super 7 never got completed is because a federal judge blocked construction north of Route 123 in Norwalk in 1972. For construction to resume, the federal court required the FHWA and CTDOT prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the unfinished portion of the Super 7 freeway. The EIS and ROD were approved and the federal injunction on construction was lifted in 1983, right around the time when the Mianus River Bridge collapsed, causing the state to redirect its focus from building new freeways to fixing the roads and bridges it already had.

So now, CTDOT had an approved EIS, but no money to actually build the freeway, and the cost of completing Super 7 had grown from $100 million in the late 60s/early 70s to around $1 billion due to inflation and rising land values along the corridor (about half of the ROW had been acquired prior to the federal injunction in 1972).

The little money that wasn't diverted to an $8 billion statewide highway maintenance and overhaul program was used to extend Super 7 from Route 123 to Gristmill Road. The short extension of the freeway section in Danbury was paid for by the developers who built the Danbury Fair Mall, as a stipulation for gaining state and local approval to build the mall.  Since the money for completing Super 7 had dried up, CTDOT abandoned the 1983 EIS and ROD in 1999 and pursued the targeted widening of Route 7 in Wilton, southern Danbury, New Milford, and the Brookfield Bypass that was all completed by 2008.  And that's how we got to where we are today.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

kernals12

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2245
  • Love highways and cars. Hate public transit.

  • Location: Suburban Boston
  • Last Login: Today at 09:30:03 AM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4756 on: January 26, 2022, 07:31:07 PM »

One other thing I found on NYC Roads.com was that the US 7 Expressway was proposed to be built as a toll road. Under this plan, they would have put two 30 cent mainline toll plazas in Norwalk and Danbury and then 15 cent ramp tolls.
I remember that. The main reason Super 7 never got completed is because a federal judge blocked construction north of Route 123 in Norwalk in 1972. For construction to resume, the federal court required the FHWA and CTDOT prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the unfinished portion of the Super 7 freeway. The EIS and ROD were approved and the federal injunction on construction was lifted in 1983, right around the time when the Mianus River Bridge collapsed, causing the state to redirect its focus from building new freeways to fixing the roads and bridges it already had.

So now, CTDOT had an approved EIS, but no money to actually build the freeway, and the cost of completing Super 7 had grown from $100 million in the late 60s/early 70s to around $1 billion due to inflation and rising land values along the corridor (about half of the ROW had been acquired prior to the federal injunction in 1972).

The little money that wasn't diverted to an $8 billion statewide highway maintenance and overhaul program was used to extend Super 7 from Route 123 to Gristmill Road. The short extension of the freeway section in Danbury was paid for by the developers who built the Danbury Fair Mall, as a stipulation for gaining state and local approval to build the mall.  Since the money for completing Super 7 had dried up, CTDOT abandoned the 1983 EIS and ROD in 1999 and pursued the targeted widening of Route 7 in Wilton, southern Danbury, New Milford, and the Brookfield Bypass that was all completed by 2008.  And that's how we got to where we are today.

Connecticut is a rich state that is very bad with money
Logged

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 841
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: Today at 12:18:17 PM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4757 on: January 27, 2022, 10:30:24 AM »

One other thing I found on NYC Roads.com was that the US 7 Expressway was proposed to be built as a toll road. Under this plan, they would have put two 30 cent mainline toll plazas in Norwalk and Danbury and then 15 cent ramp tolls.
I remember that. The main reason Super 7 never got completed is because a federal judge blocked construction north of Route 123 in Norwalk in 1972. For construction to resume, the federal court required the FHWA and CTDOT prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the unfinished portion of the Super 7 freeway. The EIS and ROD were approved and the federal injunction on construction was lifted in 1983, right around the time when the Mianus River Bridge collapsed, causing the state to redirect its focus from building new freeways to fixing the roads and bridges it already had.

So now, CTDOT had an approved EIS, but no money to actually build the freeway, and the cost of completing Super 7 had grown from $100 million in the late 60s/early 70s to around $1 billion due to inflation and rising land values along the corridor (about half of the ROW had been acquired prior to the federal injunction in 1972).

The little money that wasn't diverted to an $8 billion statewide highway maintenance and overhaul program was used to extend Super 7 from Route 123 to Gristmill Road. The short extension of the freeway section in Danbury was paid for by the developers who built the Danbury Fair Mall, as a stipulation for gaining state and local approval to build the mall.  Since the money for completing Super 7 had dried up, CTDOT abandoned the 1983 EIS and ROD in 1999 and pursued the targeted widening of Route 7 in Wilton, southern Danbury, New Milford, and the Brookfield Bypass that was all completed by 2008.  And that's how we got to where we are today.

Connecticut is a rich state that is very bad with money
Very true. I would say however, that if it weren't for the Mianus River Bridge collapse, I would think there would have been a much better chance of Super 7 getting finished between Norwalk and Danbury. The legal challenge holding up construction was resolved and a federal judge had cleared the way for construction to move forward. The state had plenty of federal money earmarked for roadbuilding, and it was only after the collapse of the Mianus River Bridge did Connecticut redirect those funds to fixing its existing highways and bridges. That singular event put the kabash on not only completing Super 7, but just about every other unbuilt freeway that Connecticut had proposed at the time, save for extending Route 9 from I-91 to I-84.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

BlueOutback7

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 876
  • Rev up your engines!

  • Location: Greater Boston
  • Last Login: Today at 12:36:31 PM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4758 on: January 27, 2022, 10:37:51 AM »

Look at CT 11 for example. That project has also seen dark days. Eastern Connecticut is less NIMBY than western CT but that one went through funding issues with it occasionally coming up, but all the state did was waste time on studies and it kept failing. Connecticut is terrible at managing their existing roads as they take forever to replace signs and their budget is just a disaster.
Logged
Decommission 128 south of Peabody!

My Flickr Page
https://www.flickr.com/photos/195026169@N03/

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 841
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: Today at 12:18:17 PM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4759 on: January 27, 2022, 12:10:36 PM »

Look at CT 11 for example. That project has also seen dark days. Eastern Connecticut is less NIMBY than western CT but that one went through funding issues with it occasionally coming up, but all the state did was waste time on studies and it kept failing. Connecticut is terrible at managing their existing roads as they take forever to replace signs and their budget is just a disaster.
Even the constitutional amendment to create a transportation "lockbox" that was overwhelmingly approved by the voters is no means a guarantee that funds allocated for transportation are actually used to pay for transportation-related projects. I recall one poster on this thread previously mentioned that legislators wrote in a "backdoor' to the transportation "lockbox" that would give lawmakers a roundabout way for them to raid the "lockbox" and use those funds for non-transportation expenditures.

Yet a state that ranks among those with the highest tax burden in the nation, no one in Hartford can give you an honest answer as to where the money is going. But yet it seems like Connecticut is running huge budget deficits year after year. So I ask again...where is the money going?
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

Ted$8roadFan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 322
  • Location: Massachusetts
  • Last Login: Today at 07:21:19 AM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4760 on: January 28, 2022, 07:15:40 AM »

Per yesterdays\’s Middletown Press, the dangerous Route 17 ramp/stop sign at Route 9 will be rebuilt with federal assistance.
Logged

Mergingtraffic

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1968
  • Location: NYC-CT
  • Last Login: June 29, 2022, 02:27:05 PM
    • My Flickr alias: MergingTraffic
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4761 on: January 30, 2022, 05:06:22 PM »

RE: CT-9

Looking at the current plans for CT-9 NB, I don't see why they can't flip flop and put the though lanes on the left and ramps on the right.  It'll make the ramps not as tight and it would take up the same amount of land it'll seem.

re: CT-15/US-7
I commute from waterbury to stamford a lot and sometimes I-95 is a mess so I'd take CT-15 to US-7 down to I-95. So, having direct ramps would be ideal.  I can't fathom that Alt 26 is in the top two alts.  Amazing.
Logged
I only take pics of good looking signs. Long live non-reflective button copy!
MergingTraffic https://www.flickr.com/photos/98731835@N05/

Mergingtraffic

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1968
  • Location: NYC-CT
  • Last Login: June 29, 2022, 02:27:05 PM
    • My Flickr alias: MergingTraffic
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4762 on: January 30, 2022, 05:31:24 PM »

CT-8 signage progress:

New BGSs popping up SB.  Exit 8 "exit now" sign is up.  All the Exit 7 "series" BGS signs are up.

Logged
I only take pics of good looking signs. Long live non-reflective button copy!
MergingTraffic https://www.flickr.com/photos/98731835@N05/

BlueOutback7

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 876
  • Rev up your engines!

  • Location: Greater Boston
  • Last Login: Today at 12:36:31 PM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4763 on: January 30, 2022, 05:47:41 PM »

Why does Connecticut use the Massachusetts state route shield? Is that the new look for the state shield in Connecticut? If so, when did they switch?
« Last Edit: January 30, 2022, 05:49:57 PM by BlueOutback7 »
Logged
Decommission 128 south of Peabody!

My Flickr Page
https://www.flickr.com/photos/195026169@N03/

Ted$8roadFan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 322
  • Location: Massachusetts
  • Last Login: Today at 07:21:19 AM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4764 on: January 30, 2022, 06:46:38 PM »

Connecticut has been inconsistent with their signage in recent decades. They used to use a black border route shield, but more recently they’ve been all over the map (no pun intended).
Logged

BlueOutback7

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 876
  • Rev up your engines!

  • Location: Greater Boston
  • Last Login: Today at 12:36:31 PM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4765 on: January 30, 2022, 06:49:29 PM »

I’ve seen Rhode Island do the same thing. Their shield is the same as Massachusetts, but with R.I. at the top. Thought I thought I heard somewhere that this is the new design that Connecticut uses, but I still see mostly the thick black outline shields.
Logged
Decommission 128 south of Peabody!

My Flickr Page
https://www.flickr.com/photos/195026169@N03/

shadyjay

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1599
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Lwr CT River Valley
  • Last Login: June 28, 2022, 10:49:26 PM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4766 on: January 30, 2022, 06:53:03 PM »

Why does Connecticut use the Massachusetts state route shield? Is that the new look for the state shield in Connecticut? If so, when did they switch?

Certain projects are giving the outline shield treatment.... the 2018 spot sign replacement contract did it, and apparently this part of the CT 8 contract is as well.  CT 9 is not, however (there we're stuck with square route markers regardless of 1- 2- or 3-digit route #s).  The northern end of CT 8, plus all of I-395 got the thick black bordered shields.  Contract plans for all of these contracts only show a square outline, so I guess the contractor is taking some liberties.  The same contractor who does most of MA (Liddell?) I believe got the 2020 statewide spot, as they have put up the small orange markers where new supports will go (and I've only seen that on their contracts), so I bet'cha state routes on those signs will get outlined. 

In other news, the sheet aluminum project on I-91 North has reached the border and is working back south.  They've made it within a mile of Exit 46 in Enfield, southbound.  I really am liking the new single-pole neutered interstate shields!

There seems to be zero consistency. 
Logged

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 841
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: Today at 12:18:17 PM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4767 on: January 30, 2022, 09:48:09 PM »

Why does Connecticut use the Massachusetts state route shield? Is that the new look for the state shield in Connecticut? If so, when did they switch?
It's probably based on the engineer at CTDOT who drew up the plans for each sign project. You would think the plans would go through some sort of quality control process to ensure things like signage are standardized across the board before they are released to industry in an RFP or ITB, but I guess that doesn't happen in CT.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

Mergingtraffic

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1968
  • Location: NYC-CT
  • Last Login: June 29, 2022, 02:27:05 PM
    • My Flickr alias: MergingTraffic
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4768 on: January 31, 2022, 12:53:46 PM »

Another one I mentioned yesterday for Exit 8 on CT-8.  The CT-15 shield has yet to be added on.  It should be a full interchange but I digress. 

Logged
I only take pics of good looking signs. Long live non-reflective button copy!
MergingTraffic https://www.flickr.com/photos/98731835@N05/

Ted$8roadFan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 322
  • Location: Massachusetts
  • Last Login: Today at 07:21:19 AM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4769 on: January 31, 2022, 01:41:03 PM »

At least the state makes things a little more interesting with fonts/shields on the Merritt Parkway.



Logged

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 841
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: Today at 12:18:17 PM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4770 on: January 31, 2022, 01:51:47 PM »

Another one I mentioned yesterday for Exit 8 on CT-8.  The CT-15 shield has yet to be added on.  It should be a full interchange but I digress. 


From the pics posted here, it looks like they are replacing the old overhead signs with ground-mounted signs along Route 8. Is that the case going all the way up to Shelton?
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

jp the roadgeek

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4176
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Outside the I-291 beltway
  • Last Login: Today at 11:00:29 AM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4771 on: January 31, 2022, 02:28:02 PM »

Why does Connecticut use the Massachusetts state route shield? Is that the new look for the state shield in Connecticut? If so, when did they switch?
It's probably based on the engineer at CTDOT who drew up the plans for each sign project. You would think the plans would go through some sort of quality control process to ensure things like signage are standardized across the board before they are released to industry in an RFP or ITB, but I guess that doesn't happen in CT.
Another one I mentioned yesterday for Exit 8 on CT-8.  The CT-15 shield has yet to be added on.  It should be a full interchange but I digress. 


From the pics posted here, it looks like they are replacing the old overhead signs with ground-mounted signs along Route 8. Is that the case going all the way up to Shelton?

Would’ve rather seen them use this design:

108 TO 15 <Merritt Pkway Shield> NORTH
Stratford
New Haven
Why does Connecticut use the Massachusetts state route shield? Is that the new look for the state shield in Connecticut? If so, when did they switch?
It's probably based on the engineer at CTDOT who drew up the plans for each sign project. You would think the plans would go through some sort of quality control process to ensure things like signage are standardized across the board before they are released to industry in an RFP or ITB, but I guess that doesn't happen in CT.

I think it’s like NYS, where each DOT region has their own set of rules.  It’s even true with the whole exit renumbering.  The Hartford area rounds to the nearest mile with fudging a la MassDOT), but plans for Route 8 (in other regions) have the exits rounded down.  They’re even inconsistent with state vs neutered shields; the Southington-Farmington I-84 sign project used State shields, but the current spot replacements use neutered shields.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2022, 02:39:12 PM by jp the roadgeek »
Logged
Interstates I've clinched: 97, 290 (MA), 291 (CT), 291 (MA), 293, 295 (DE-NJ-PA), 295 (RI-MA), 384, 391, 395 (CT-MA), 395 (MD), 495 (DE), 610 (LA), 684, 691, 695 (MD), 695 (NY), 795 (MD)

SectorZ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2301
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Tewksbury, MA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:36:41 AM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4772 on: January 31, 2022, 02:39:17 PM »

Another one I mentioned yesterday for Exit 8 on CT-8.  The CT-15 shield has yet to be added on.  It should be a full interchange but I digress. 



They're even down to copying Massachusetts to the point of using the split descriptions on the signs.

Now, what's the over/under on how long the 15 shield takes to be put on the sign?
Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3494
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: June 29, 2022, 01:48:13 PM
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4773 on: January 31, 2022, 02:52:28 PM »

How soon before the exits in those two pictures are renumbered to 4 and 5? I expected the new signs to have mileage-based exit numbers, not the old sequential numbers, or are those being added later?
Logged

Mergingtraffic

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1968
  • Location: NYC-CT
  • Last Login: June 29, 2022, 02:27:05 PM
    • My Flickr alias: MergingTraffic
Re: Connecticut News
« Reply #4774 on: January 31, 2022, 03:11:21 PM »

How soon before the exits in those two pictures are renumbered to 4 and 5? I expected the new signs to have mileage-based exit numbers, not the old sequential numbers, or are those being added later?

They'll be added later under a new project and tha tproject will also replace the remaining button copy in Naugatuck and Shelton that was skipped over the last project b/c they were more involved to be replaced.  I'm hopeing the sheet metal LGS on the entrance ramps around Naugatuck will be repleced with extruded aluminum.
Logged
I only take pics of good looking signs. Long live non-reflective button copy!
MergingTraffic https://www.flickr.com/photos/98731835@N05/

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.