Connecticut News

[RobbieL2415]

The Bulkley Bridge isn't going anywhere because its on the NRHP. That being said, I think it's completely underpowered for the amount of traffic it serves and for the fact that it's playing double duty as both Interstate and surface street access over the river.

The highest priority should be moving I-84 over to a new bridge and restoring local access between Connecticut Blvd. and Morgan St. Then I would add in another sfc street bridge linking Jennings Rd. to US 5 in the vicinity of King St. and one in the South Meadows linking Maxim Rd. to Willow St. The lack of local access bridges in CT has always bothered me.

Also, they want to send I-84 over the COB where we're already spending north of $100M to fix I-91 N Exit 29. Why can't the tunnel stick close to the original alignment? What is the traffic flow efficiency benefit of sending it further south?

[SectorZ]

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

The Big Dig started in 1988, so $17B is really only half the cost of the Big Dig indexing to inflation. Connecticut also has less of a "don't kill the job mentality" than Massachusetts (barely though), so overruns should be a smaller problem with less corruptible people working on it.

[kernals12]

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

The Big Dig started in 1988, so $17B is really only half the cost of the Big Dig indexing to inflation. Connecticut also has less of a "don't kill the job mentality" than Massachusetts (barely though), so overruns should be a smaller problem with less corruptible people working on it.

The Big Dig's cost was $22 billion once construction ended in 2006, inflation adjusted back to 1988. And we know that megaprojects like these tend to go overbudget.

[SectorZ]

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

The Big Dig started in 1988, so $17B is really only half the cost of the Big Dig indexing to inflation. Connecticut also has less of a "don't kill the job mentality" than Massachusetts (barely though), so overruns should be a smaller problem with less corruptible people working on it.

The Big Dig's cost was $22 billion once construction ended in 2006, inflation adjusted back to 1988. And we know that megaprojects like these tend to go overbudget.

But they go overbudget more in Massachusetts because of graft, lazy politicians, and lazier voters. Not every state is the embarrassment that Massachusetts is when it comes to these matters. It's still billions less than the cost of the Big Dig. Think about it, digging a tunnel under Hartford is a buttload easier than in Boston, given Hartford doesn't have an underground transportation system. Connecticut's only malfunction is its inability to properly spend money and its belief that they think they can tax themselves into prosperity, driving a net population loss in the state.

Also, the feds may be more interested in helping because Hartford matters more to long-distance travel and transportation than Boston does. As well, Boston did OK with an elevated highway splitting it in two. Hartford has not.

[kernals12]

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

The Big Dig started in 1988, so $17B is really only half the cost of the Big Dig indexing to inflation. Connecticut also has less of a "don't kill the job mentality" than Massachusetts (barely though), so overruns should be a smaller problem with less corruptible people working on it.

The Big Dig's cost was $22 billion once construction ended in 2006, inflation adjusted back to 1988. And we know that megaprojects like these tend to go overbudget.

But they go overbudget more in Massachusetts because of graft, lazy politicians, and lazier voters. Not every state is the embarrassment that Massachusetts is when it comes to these matters. It's still billions less than the cost of the Big Dig. Think about it, digging a tunnel under Hartford is a buttload easier than in Boston, given Hartford doesn't have an underground transportation system. Connecticut's only malfunction is its inability to properly spend money and its belief that they think they can tax themselves into prosperity, driving a net population loss in the state.

Also, the feds may be more interested in helping because Hartford matters more to long-distance travel and transportation than Boston does. As well, Boston did OK with an elevated highway splitting it in two. Hartford has not.

Connecticut doesn't have any politicians comparable in clout like Massachusetts did with Tip O'Neil and Ted Kennedy in the 80s.

[abqtraveler]

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

The Big Dig started in 1988, so $17B is really only half the cost of the Big Dig indexing to inflation. Connecticut also has less of a "don't kill the job mentality" than Massachusetts (barely though), so overruns should be a smaller problem with less corruptible people working on it.

The Big Dig's cost was $22 billion once construction ended in 2006, inflation adjusted back to 1988. And we know that megaprojects like these tend to go overbudget.

But they go overbudget more in Massachusetts because of graft, lazy politicians, and lazier voters. Not every state is the embarrassment that Massachusetts is when it comes to these matters. It's still billions less than the cost of the Big Dig. Think about it, digging a tunnel under Hartford is a buttload easier than in Boston, given Hartford doesn't have an underground transportation system. Connecticut's only malfunction is its inability to properly spend money and its belief that they think they can tax themselves into prosperity, driving a net population loss in the state.

Also, the feds may be more interested in helping because Hartford matters more to long-distance travel and transportation than Boston does. As well, Boston did OK with an elevated highway splitting it in two. Hartford has not.

Connecticut doesn't have any politicians comparable in clout like Massachusetts did with Tip O'Neil and Ted Kennedy in the 80s.

And the political will is just not there. You notice that ConnDOT soends millions upon millions of dollars each year to pay consultants to perform "studies." And then those "studies" get put up on a shelf where they're forgotten. For example, how many "studies" did ConnDOT pay for about bringing back tolls to the state's highways? More than I can count.

In the end, they're just going to keep on patching up the existing roads and viaducts in and around Hartford until they either fall down, or people in power actually grow a spine and make the hard decisions to move things forward.

[kernals12]

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

The Big Dig started in 1988, so $17B is really only half the cost of the Big Dig indexing to inflation. Connecticut also has less of a "don't kill the job mentality" than Massachusetts (barely though), so overruns should be a smaller problem with less corruptible people working on it.

The Big Dig's cost was $22 billion once construction ended in 2006, inflation adjusted back to 1988. And we know that megaprojects like these tend to go overbudget.

But they go overbudget more in Massachusetts because of graft, lazy politicians, and lazier voters. Not every state is the embarrassment that Massachusetts is when it comes to these matters. It's still billions less than the cost of the Big Dig. Think about it, digging a tunnel under Hartford is a buttload easier than in Boston, given Hartford doesn't have an underground transportation system. Connecticut's only malfunction is its inability to properly spend money and its belief that they think they can tax themselves into prosperity, driving a net population loss in the state.

Also, the feds may be more interested in helping because Hartford matters more to long-distance travel and transportation than Boston does. As well, Boston did OK with an elevated highway splitting it in two. Hartford has not.

Connecticut doesn't have any politicians comparable in clout like Massachusetts did with Tip O'Neil and Ted Kennedy in the 80s.

And the political will is just not there. You notice that ConnDOT soends millions upon millions of dollars each year to pay consultants to perform "studies." And then those "studies" get put up on a shelf where they're forgotten. For example, how many "studies" did ConnDOT pay for about bringing back tolls to the state's highways? More than I can count.

In the end, they're just going to keep on patching up the existing roads and viaducts in and around Hartford until they either fall down, or people in power actually grow a spine and make the hard decisions to move things forward.

Or until someone discovers that the state's pension fund invested $10,000 in bitcoin in 2011, and it's now worth $10 billion.

[Mergingtraffic]

CT-8 Signing project....again:
Look closely at the pic, you'll see new poles.  So these signs will be gone soon.  In this project it seems the poles go up and then the signs and thennnn they'll move onto another spot.  So this non-reflective relic will be gone soon.  That will leave 5 NRBC signs left in the state. 


Also, drove on I-84 and it seems like the Farmington to Hartford signing project is going as I see the ramp BGS signs being replaced with new GOD AWFUL BGSs.  I hope it's not one of those projects where the signs look "off."  It's Highway gothic font but the control cities FONt is too thin and too closely spaced together.  Ugh. 

I believe Exit 43 or 44, Exit 48 to I-84 WB has these new ones.

[jp the roadgeek]

New signage on CT 9 South in New Britain.  Surprised the 28 tab isn't as wide as the 28A tab to accommodate the future 36B number, and no WEST above the 72.  There are also supports up for the Exit Now sign as well.

[shadyjay]

Finally the 2017 spot sign replacement contract is being pecked away at.  The above sign, and the "Exit now" are both part of that contract, as is two sites on Route 8 in Bridgeport and one on I-95 South in East Lyme.  Passed through Route 8 today and noticed active construction in the area of these spot replacements in Bridgeport.  The foundations for them, and many new overheads in the blanket sign replacement from Bridgeport to Shelton in place.   

For the Route 8 Bridgeport-Shelton project, here's the only new guide sign in place:

DSC02634 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

This is northbound for Exit 8, just past the 8/25 split.  I believe that route marker is an outline shield, similar to those put up in the 2018 spot replacement project, and similar to those found on Massachusetts guide signs. 

Project-wide, the only other new signs observed were some "extruded aluminum" town line and Park & Ride signs (which are now going sheet aluminum elsewhere), and reassurance shields and mile markers.  Some onramps observed had posts up to support new signs (also extruded aluminum).  Luckily the sheet aluminum for onramp signage was abandoned after being put up on Route 8 from Derby to Waterbury.  I understand having to cut costs on sign replacement projects, but when the predecessor signs lasted for some 30 years, I think it was worth the $$$ spent.  I doubt the sheet aluminum onramp signs will last a fraction of that time frame! 

Approaching Exit 14... this sign is new, but again, its another of the 2017 contract spot replacements:

DSC02635 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

Like the Route 9 New Britain sign that JP posted, the CT route shields are non-outline, which is how they should be.  For some reason, the 2018 project started the outline shields.  Hopefully it does not continue, as this is CT... not Mass!

[RobbieL2415]

Traditionally SR shields on non-button copy signs had been the non-outlined variety. I-395s new signs use the correct outline thickness.
Unfortunately it also looks like the I-91 Exit 26-29 and CT 15 89-91 sign replacement will use non-outlined shields.

[PHLBOS]

For the Route 8 Bridgeport-Shelton project, here's the only new guide sign in place:


DSC02634 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

I realize the image is somewhat blurred but that SR 108 shield looks more like an MA shield (is that a offset thin black outline or just a blur?) rather than a CT shield.

[shadyjay]

Yes, I stated that in my post.   

This is northbound for Exit 8, just past the 8/25 split.  I believe that route marker is an outline shield, similar to those put up in the 2018 spot replacement project, and similar to those found on Massachusetts guide signs.

[Duke87]

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

Well, when you look at the scope, it would essentially be the Hartford equivalent of the Big Dig. Arguably a larger and more complex project even.

So yeah, the proposition comes with that kind of price tag. And yeah, this is never going to be anything more than a snazzy-looking rendering in a PDF.

[kernals12]

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

Well, when you look at the scope, it would essentially be the Hartford equivalent of the Big Dig. Arguably a larger and more complex project even.

So yeah, the proposition comes with that kind of price tag. And yeah, this is never going to be anything more than a snazzy-looking rendering in a PDF.

But Hartford is a much smaller metro area, so proportionally, it's a way bigger project.

[shadyjay]

File that Hartford project in the "I Have A Dream" category.  I think they should've gone through with the lowering of the Aetna viaduct.  Sure, would be nice to do all that but I just don't see it happening, not in anyone's lifetime.   The tunneling involved with a new route of I-84 through "south of downtown" to the Charter Oak Bridge would be quite the undertaking, and then you have to have it meet the COB at a new interchange, widen the COB (again) and widen CT 15 out to present I-84 (again).  For I-91, you'd have to, what, either lower the grade or tunnel next to the river?  And do all this while there's still no means of a thru traffic bypass.  If I-291 had been built, or I-491/I-86 for that matter, that could've taken some load off while you build all this.  At least with the Big Dig, there were ways around the city on freeways if you wanted to avoid the construction.  But in Hartford, there's no Route 128 or I-291 to fall back on. 

I'd go with the "lowered" route of I-84 as a means to replace the Aetna viaduct and I would consolidate the East Hartford mixmaster (remove the ramps to/from Governor St, move I-84's westbound lanes left to eliminate the 2 left exits, etc).  That's a little more realistic than what has been proposed.

[kernals12]

File that Hartford project in the "I Have A Dream" category.  I think they should've gone through with the lowering of the Aetna viaduct.  Sure, would be nice to do all that but I just don't see it happening, not in anyone's lifetime.   The tunneling involved with a new route of I-84 through "south of downtown" to the Charter Oak Bridge would be quite the undertaking, and then you have to have it meet the COB at a new interchange, widen the COB (again) and widen CT 15 out to present I-84 (again).  For I-91, you'd have to, what, either lower the grade or tunnel next to the river?  And do all this while there's still no means of a thru traffic bypass.  If I-291 had been built, or I-491/I-86 for that matter, that could've taken some load off while you build all this.  At least with the Big Dig, there were ways around the city on freeways if you wanted to avoid the construction.  But in Hartford, there's no Route 128 or I-291 to fall back on. 

I'd go with the "lowered" route of I-84 as a means to replace the Aetna viaduct and I would consolidate the East Hartford mixmaster (remove the ramps to/from Governor St, move I-84's westbound lanes left to eliminate the 2 left exits, etc).  That's a little more realistic than what has been proposed.

If I-291 had been built, Hartford residents would be left with rusty pipes what with all the road salt running into their water supplies.

I wonder why nobody has suggested utilizing the Whitehead Highway. You'd need a very short tunnel under Bushnell Park. It would allow them to close off the I-84 viaduct during construction.

[kurumi]

File that Hartford project in the "I Have A Dream" category.  I think they should've gone through with the lowering of the Aetna viaduct.  Sure, would be nice to do all that but I just don't see it happening, not in anyone's lifetime.   The tunneling involved with a new route of I-84 through "south of downtown" to the Charter Oak Bridge would be quite the undertaking, and then you have to have it meet the COB at a new interchange, widen the COB (again) and widen CT 15 out to present I-84 (again).  For I-91, you'd have to, what, either lower the grade or tunnel next to the river?  And do all this while there's still no means of a thru traffic bypass.  If I-291 had been built, or I-491/I-86 for that matter, that could've taken some load off while you build all this.  At least with the Big Dig, there were ways around the city on freeways if you wanted to avoid the construction.  But in Hartford, there's no Route 128 or I-291 to fall back on. 

I'd go with the "lowered" route of I-84 as a means to replace the Aetna viaduct and I would consolidate the East Hartford mixmaster (remove the ramps to/from Governor St, move I-84's westbound lanes left to eliminate the 2 left exits, etc).  That's a little more realistic than what has been proposed.

If I-291 had been built, Hartford residents would be left with rusty pipes what with all the road salt running into their water supplies.

I wonder why nobody has suggested utilizing the Whitehead Highway. You'd need a very short tunnel under Bushnell Park. It would allow them to close off the I-84 viaduct during construction.

There would be more work to do on the existing part. Here's "I-484" eastbound leaving Pulaski Circle. One lane, low clearance: https://goo.gl/maps/ekxhzckuSK6c3phG9

[kernals12]

File that Hartford project in the "I Have A Dream" category.  I think they should've gone through with the lowering of the Aetna viaduct.  Sure, would be nice to do all that but I just don't see it happening, not in anyone's lifetime.   The tunneling involved with a new route of I-84 through "south of downtown" to the Charter Oak Bridge would be quite the undertaking, and then you have to have it meet the COB at a new interchange, widen the COB (again) and widen CT 15 out to present I-84 (again).  For I-91, you'd have to, what, either lower the grade or tunnel next to the river?  And do all this while there's still no means of a thru traffic bypass.  If I-291 had been built, or I-491/I-86 for that matter, that could've taken some load off while you build all this.  At least with the Big Dig, there were ways around the city on freeways if you wanted to avoid the construction.  But in Hartford, there's no Route 128 or I-291 to fall back on. 

I'd go with the "lowered" route of I-84 as a means to replace the Aetna viaduct and I would consolidate the East Hartford mixmaster (remove the ramps to/from Governor St, move I-84's westbound lanes left to eliminate the 2 left exits, etc).  That's a little more realistic than what has been proposed.

If I-291 had been built, Hartford residents would be left with rusty pipes what with all the road salt running into their water supplies.

I wonder why nobody has suggested utilizing the Whitehead Highway. You'd need a very short tunnel under Bushnell Park. It would allow them to close off the I-84 viaduct during construction.

There would be more work to do on the existing part. Here's "I-484" eastbound leaving Pulaski Circle. One lane, low clearance: https://goo.gl/maps/ekxhzckuSK6c3phG9

But surely this would be way less expensive than that $17 billion monstrosity.

[RobbieL2415]

If I-291 had been built, Hartford residents would be left with rusty pipes what with all the road salt running into their water supplies.

I wonder why nobody has suggested utilizing the Whitehead Highway. You'd need a very short tunnel under Bushnell Park. It would allow them to close off the I-84 viaduct during construction.

1. You have no way to prove that would happen

2. Bushnell Park is America's oldest public park. If they actually did construct I-484 the tunnel would have been buried with cut-and-cover, tearing up the park for months. Maybe now, they could do it with a TBM.

[RobbieL2415]

File that Hartford project in the "I Have A Dream" category.  I think they should've gone through with the lowering of the Aetna viaduct.  Sure, would be nice to do all that but I just don't see it happening, not in anyone's lifetime.   The tunneling involved with a new route of I-84 through "south of downtown" to the Charter Oak Bridge would be quite the undertaking, and then you have to have it meet the COB at a new interchange, widen the COB (again) and widen CT 15 out to present I-84 (again).  For I-91, you'd have to, what, either lower the grade or tunnel next to the river?  And do all this while there's still no means of a thru traffic bypass.  If I-291 had been built, or I-491/I-86 for that matter, that could've taken some load off while you build all this.  At least with the Big Dig, there were ways around the city on freeways if you wanted to avoid the construction.  But in Hartford, there's no Route 128 or I-291 to fall back on. 

I'd go with the "lowered" route of I-84 as a means to replace the Aetna viaduct and I would consolidate the East Hartford mixmaster (remove the ramps to/from Governor St, move I-84's westbound lanes left to eliminate the 2 left exits, etc).  That's a little more realistic than what has been proposed.

I-91 could be rerouted in this fashion:

-Temporary carriageway leading south from Exit 34, over a temporary bridge across the river, and to the East Hartford mixmaster.
-Add TEMP I-91 signs along CT 2 to CT 3 and over the Putnam Bridge

I-84 could be rerouted in this fashion:
-Add TEMP I-84 signs along CT 15, over the Charter Oak Br., and onto I-91. Signage continues onto CT 9 at Exit 22 and through New Britain.

If they can construct a temp routing for CT to fix the Waterbury mixmaster, they can do it here.

[jp the roadgeek]

File that Hartford project in the "I Have A Dream" category.  I think they should've gone through with the lowering of the Aetna viaduct.  Sure, would be nice to do all that but I just don't see it happening, not in anyone's lifetime.   The tunneling involved with a new route of I-84 through "south of downtown" to the Charter Oak Bridge would be quite the undertaking, and then you have to have it meet the COB at a new interchange, widen the COB (again) and widen CT 15 out to present I-84 (again).  For I-91, you'd have to, what, either lower the grade or tunnel next to the river?  And do all this while there's still no means of a thru traffic bypass.  If I-291 had been built, or I-491/I-86 for that matter, that could've taken some load off while you build all this.  At least with the Big Dig, there were ways around the city on freeways if you wanted to avoid the construction.  But in Hartford, there's no Route 128 or I-291 to fall back on. 

I'd go with the "lowered" route of I-84 as a means to replace the Aetna viaduct and I would consolidate the East Hartford mixmaster (remove the ramps to/from Governor St, move I-84's westbound lanes left to eliminate the 2 left exits, etc).  That's a little more realistic than what has been proposed.

I-91 could be rerouted in this fashion:

-Temporary carriageway leading south from Exit 34, over a temporary bridge across the river, and to the East Hartford mixmaster.
-Add TEMP I-91 signs along CT 2 to CT 3 and over the Putnam Bridge

I-84 could be rerouted in this fashion:
-Add TEMP I-84 signs along CT 15, over the Charter Oak Br., and onto I-91. Signage continues onto CT 9 at Exit 22 and through New Britain.

If they can construct a temp routing for CT to fix the Waterbury mixmaster, they can do it here.

Or to simplify it, use I-691.  This is when I wished they connected the southern end of the CT 15 expressway to CT 9 near CCSU

[kernals12]

If I-291 had been built, Hartford residents would be left with rusty pipes what with all the road salt running into their water supplies.

I wonder why nobody has suggested utilizing the Whitehead Highway. You'd need a very short tunnel under Bushnell Park. It would allow them to close off the I-84 viaduct during construction.

1. You have no way to prove that would happen

2. Bushnell Park is America's oldest public park. If they actually did construct I-484 the tunnel would have been buried with cut-and-cover, tearing up the park for months. Maybe now, they could do it with a TBM.

The EPA said that's what would've happened.

[shadyjay]

In regards to I-291, what's to say they couldn't do mitigation efforts to allow both I-291 and the reservoirs to coexist?  When CT 66 was widened through Middlefield, it brought the road closer to Mt Higby Reservoir, which is Middletown's water supply.  I'm sure something could've been worked out.  Extra large shoulders?  Extensive drainage so "road debris" didn't drift into the water supply?  There's got to be interstates across this country which traverse a reservoir.  If they really wanted to, I-291 could've been built somehow. 

Sure, TEMP 84 and TEMP 91 could be posted, but you're talking a lot of traffic utilizing single lane ramps and emptying into already-high trafficked arteries.  As such, look at 15 between I-91 and I-84.... its not signed as an interstate, but serves a major purpose as a connector from 91N->84E and 84W->91S.  Back in the 80s, these connections were served with both CT 15 and the Founders Bridge, with the latter connections severed when I-91 (SB) was first lowered and the pedestrian plaza built.  Throwing a TEMP 91 into the Mixmaster... okay, it could be done, but with the slew of left exits/entrances and lane drops, not to mention the poor geometry, it would be hectic. 

Ideally, I-86/I-491 would have been built and could serve as the perfect "TEMP 84".  If it had been built, the connection with I-91 and with CT 2 would've been built sooner and most likely the Putnam Bridge would've been replaced and/or widened. 

The TEMP 8 at the Mixmaster in Waterbury does seem to be working quite well and was a perfect way to divert traffic and accomplish the bridge/viaduct work in a reduced time.  Work on I-84 itself has required lane closures, including the permanent one westbound which, after a nice break due to the pandemic, is once again snarling traffic. 

[SectorZ]

If I-291 had been built, Hartford residents would be left with rusty pipes what with all the road salt running into their water supplies.

I wonder why nobody has suggested utilizing the Whitehead Highway. You'd need a very short tunnel under Bushnell Park. It would allow them to close off the I-84 viaduct during construction.

1. You have no way to prove that would happen

2. Bushnell Park is America's oldest public park. If they actually did construct I-484 the tunnel would have been buried with cut-and-cover, tearing up the park for months. Maybe now, they could do it with a TBM.

The EPA said that's what would've happened.

** I-190 (Massachusetts edition) around the salt-free Wachusett Reservoir enters the chat **