Connecticut News

[zzyzx]

I found this on the Portland Historical Society FB page...had no idea the Arrigoni bridge replaced another one built in 1896:



iPhone

[kurumi]

That's cool; I had never seen a pic of the 1896 bridge. At the time it opened, it was the longest highway drawbridge in the world. Too bad there are no Route 14/15 markers in the pic.

[Mergingtraffic]

CT-8 signing is out for Bridgeport to Shelton.  Still NO mileage based exits.  IDK what is CT's problem with this.

https://biznet.ct.gov/SCP_Search/BidDetail.aspx?CID=47412

Still no extruded aluminum signing for the horrible loop ramps for I-95 and CT-8.  MA would be signing the heck out of that.

[kurumi]

The 25/8 split is apparently signed as exit 4, which would be mileage-based.

(All other signs retain the sequential numbering)

[yakra]

The 25/8 split is apparently signed as exit 4, which would be mileage-based.

(All other signs retain the sequential numbering)

So would the exit numbering thus be 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 4, 7, 8...?

Edit: That's not the impression I get from looking at the 2nd PDF in the .zip Mergingtraffic linked. Looks like the split will be unnumbered?

[Duke87]

Yeah the detailed plans show the split being unnumbered... same as it currently is.

Two actual changes I note:
1) the destination for exit 1 will now be "South End" instead of "Prospect St/Myrtle Ave".
2) the northbound destination for exit 2 will now be "TO CT 130" with the reference to Golden Hill St removed.

Unfortunately they have not had the wherewithal to add the missing "TO" to the reference to US 1 at exit 5 (the exit leads to Chopsey Hill Road, CT 8/25 does not have a direct interchange with US 1)

[ipeters61]

Just looked over the signage plans.  Does that mean that these diagrammatics are gone?

[jp the roadgeek]

CT-8 signing is out for Bridgeport to Shelton.  Still NO mileage based exits.  IDK what is CT's problem with this.

Because Connecticut has a spending problem.  $10 million allocated to do a study of something that has been studied numerous times.  CT is so inefficient that if they built a building and painted it the wrong color, they would take a wrecking ball to it and start from scratch rather than repaint it.

[ipeters61]

CT-8 signing is out for Bridgeport to Shelton.  Still NO mileage based exits.  IDK what is CT's problem with this.

Because Connecticut has a spending problem.  $10 million allocated to do a study of something that has been studied numerous times.  CT is so inefficient that if they built a building and painted it the wrong color, they would take a wrecking ball to it and start from scratch rather than repaint it.

Why does that sound oddly familiar?

I know I say this probably too much but I miss Connecticut, despite its inefficiency.

[jp the roadgeek]

The 25/8 split is apparently signed as exit 4, which would be mileage-based.

(All other signs retain the sequential numbering)

I'm just wondering why the split would be numbered anyway.  It's a mainline split of 2 highways at the end of a concurrency.  Only real reason it would need an exit number is if 25 were truncated to the split (I usually don't think of 25 going into Bridgeport because 8 is the longer expressway overall, and I'm personally biased because I would take 8 south from Waterbury coming from home). 

Also, ConnDOT is really dragging its feet on the Southington-West Hartford sign replacement project on I-84.  It's been two months since a few new gantries went up, but the old signage has yet to be taken down.  It's been almost a year now since the new ground mounted signage went in, plus none of the new MUTCD mileposts have been installed.  Amazing how RIDOT did 295 in a couple weeks while this has taken almost a year.

[RobbieL2415]

The 25/8 split is apparently signed as exit 4, which would be mileage-based.

(All other signs retain the sequential numbering)

I'm just wondering why the split would be numbered anyway.  It's a mainline split of 2 highways at the end of a concurrency.  Only real reason it would need an exit number is if 25 were truncated to the split (I usually don't think of 25 going into Bridgeport because 8 is the longer expressway overall, and I'm personally biased because I would take 8 south from Waterbury coming from home). 

Also, ConnDOT is really dragging its feet on the Southington-West Hartford sign replacement project on I-84.  It's been two months since a few new gantries went up, but the old signage has yet to be taken down.  It's been almost a year now since the new ground mounted signage went in, plus none of the new MUTCD mileposts have been installed.  Amazing how RIDOT did 295 in a couple weeks while this has taken almost a year.

Too busy paving CT 30 😅

[abqtraveler]

I sent an e-mail to ConnDOT asking them what their plan forward is in converting from sequential to mile-based exits. Since the plans for the last sign replacement project on Route 8 retains the existing exit numbers, I have reason to believe that ConnDOT may be scrapping its plan to convert all of the state's freeways to mile-based exits.

On a related note, the I-84 article on Wikipedia indicates that New York is converting its stretch of I-84 to mile-based exits.  That article had a reference link to the sign plans for that contract.

Anyhow, as soon as I get a reply from ConnDOT concerning its exit conversion plan, I will post it.  But I won't hold my breath...

[connroadgeek]

I sent an e-mail to ConnDOT asking them what their plan forward is in converting from sequential to mile-based exits. Since the plans for the last sign replacement project on Route 8 retains the existing exit numbers, I have reason to believe that ConnDOT may be scrapping its plan to convert all of the state's freeways to mile-based exits.

On a related note, the I-84 article on Wikipedia indicates that New York is converting its stretch of I-84 to mile-based exits.  That article had a reference link to the sign plans for that contract.

Anyhow, as soon as I get a reply from ConnDOT concerning its exit conversion plan, I will post it.  But I won't hold my breath...

They probably figure there's no benefit to doing it. There are no plans to add exits, everyone already knows how far it is to the next exit (1 mile), and at best it will just create confusion when some exits go up or down a number while many others stay the same. 395 was an easy one to try it on because the numbering didn't make sense anyway. I will probably die before the exit number conversion occurs en masse across the state.

[KEVIN_224]

I still wish CT Route 15 would get renumbered. I don't know how the numbers would be between the Berlin Turnpike in Wethersfield to I-84/US Route 6 in East Hartford.

[ipeters61]

I sent an e-mail to ConnDOT asking them what their plan forward is in converting from sequential to mile-based exits. Since the plans for the last sign replacement project on Route 8 retains the existing exit numbers, I have reason to believe that ConnDOT may be scrapping its plan to convert all of the state's freeways to mile-based exits.

On a related note, the I-84 article on Wikipedia indicates that New York is converting its stretch of I-84 to mile-based exits.  That article had a reference link to the sign plans for that contract.

Anyhow, as soon as I get a reply from ConnDOT concerning its exit conversion plan, I will post it.  But I won't hold my breath...

They probably figure there's no benefit to doing it. There are no plans to add exits, everyone already knows how far it is to the next exit (1 mile), and at best it will just create confusion when some exits go up or down a number while many others stay the same. 395 was an easy one to try it on because the numbering didn't make sense anyway. I will probably die before the exit number conversion occurs en masse across the state.

That makes a lot of sense and has been something I wondered about with the possibility of CT going to mile based exits.  If I recall correctly, I predicted that my old exit (I-84 Exit 62) would have become Exit 69, which isn't a terribly big conversion, considering that my old exit way back when I lived in PA went from 47 to 170 (I-81).

Historically, I-395's exit numbering made sense.  The PA Turnpike did the same with the Northeast Extension before it went to mile based.  Exit 30 was the highest exit on the mainline, 31 was the first on the Extension.

[jp the roadgeek]

I still wish CT Route 15 would get renumbered. I don't know how the numbers would be between the Berlin Turnpike in Wethersfield to I-84/US Route 6 in East Hartford.

Exits would go 1-65 on the Merritt/Wilbur Cross.  I wouldn't number any of the Berlin Turnpike exits, but here's what I have for CT 15 mileage based exits from the Turnpike to East Hartford, based on CT 15 mileage, since ConnDOT treats the entire 5/15 concurrency as CT 15 for logging purposes:

NORTHBOUND
79: CT 99
80A: I-91 South
80B: Brainard Rd/Airport Rd
81: I-91 North
82 A-B-C: US 5 North/CT 2 East/CT 2 West
83: Silver Lane

SOUTHBOUND
82: US 5/East River Dr
80A: I-91 South
80B: Brainard/Rd Airport Rd
79: CT 99

Parkway would look something like this.  I rounded down to the milepost unless it created an alphabet city or it was within a tenth of a mile of the next one

27: 1
28: 3
29: 4
31: 5
33: 8
34: 9
35: 10
36: 13
37: 14
38: 15
39 A/B: 16 A/B
40 A/B: 17 A/B (here, I rounded up to avoid a major alphabet city)
41: 20
42: 21
44: 27
46: 28
47: 29
48: 30
49: (N/S NB): 32 A/B NB, 32A SB
50 (SB ONLY): 32B
51: (NB ONLY): 33
52 (N/S SB): 34 (A/B SB)
53: 36 (it is close to 37, but I rounded down to avoid 37 A/B on opposite sides of the Sikorsky)
54: 37
55 A/B: 38 A/B
56: 41
57/58: 42 A/B
59: 46
60: 50
61 NB: 51
62 NB: 52
61/62 SB: 51 A/B
63: 53
64: 58
65: 59 (again, rounded up to avoid A/B suffixes)
66: 61
67 (NB): 64
67S (SB): 64A
67W (SB): 64B
68 N-E NB: 65A (is double lettering really necessary for one ramp?)
68W: 65B

[ipeters61]

I still wish CT Route 15 would get renumbered. I don't know how the numbers would be between the Berlin Turnpike in Wethersfield to I-84/US Route 6 in East Hartford.

Exits would go 1-65 on the Merritt/Wilbur Cross.  I wouldn't number any of the Berlin Turnpike exits, but here's what I have for CT 15 mileage based exits from the Turnpike to East Hartford, based on CT 15 mileage, since ConnDOT treats the entire 5/15 concurrency as CT 15 for logging purposes:

NORTHBOUND
79: CT 99
80A: I-91 South
80B: Brainard Rd/Airport Rd
81: I-91 North
82 A-B-C: US 5 North/CT 2 East/CT 2 West
83: Silver Lane

SOUTHBOUND
82: US 5/East River Dr
80A: I-91 South
80B: Brainard/Rd Airport Rd
79: CT 99

Was trying to figure out how the exit numbering dropped so dramatically when switching to mile based, then I forgot that the Merritt starts at Exit 27. 

[MikeTheActuary]

Was trying to figure out how the exit numbering dropped so dramatically when switching to mile based, then I forgot that the Merritt starts at Exit 27. 

I suppose it would be wrong of me to suggest that all of those exit numbers be increased by 18. 

[NoGoodNamesAvailable]

Was trying to figure out how the exit numbering dropped so dramatically when switching to mile based, then I forgot that the Merritt starts at Exit 27. 

Was going to comment "NY should troll them by switching to mile-based exits," making the ridiculous assumption that the last exit in NY might be 26, then I checked google maps. I... connecticut... no.

[vdeane]

As much as I'd like to see CT get moving with mile-based exit numbers, it would probably be better if NY were to renumber first here, so the 30/27 situation doesn't become 19/1 or 19/27 or 19/30 or something completely different.  Ideally the exit would be numbered based on NY since it's for NY 120A.

[RobbieL2415]

I don't believe CT 15 should be renumbered, at all, as a tribute to the parkway era of the 20th Century.  There aren't many roads that continue exit numbers between two states.  If I had it my way I would have kept the original exit numbers on I-84 from East Hartford to Union.

[Rothman]

Exit numbers are historical landmarks now?

[Alps]

As much as I'd like to see CT get moving with mile-based exit numbers, it would probably be better if NY were to renumber first here, so the 30/27 situation doesn't become 19/1 or 19/27 or 19/30 or something completely different.  Ideally the exit would be numbered based on NY since it's for NY 120A.

If CT goes to 1 - which they should - it won't matter what NY does.

[jp the roadgeek]

I don't believe CT 15 should be renumbered, at all, as a tribute to the parkway era of the 20th Century.  There aren't many roads that continue exit numbers between two states.  If I had it my way I would have kept the original exit numbers on I-84 from East Hartford to Union.

In order for that to happen, the mileposts would have to not reset at the CT line, sort of like how the Palisades Parkway doesn't reset at the NY line.  The highest number would be either 84 or 85 at I-691.  If that were to happen, I would either truncate CT 15 to Meriden at the south end of the Berlin Turnpike, or retire the number altogether.  It would make the Wethersfield-East Hartford section too confusing in that you'd either have a number in Wethersfield lower than one in Meriden if CT 15 mileage is used, or you'd have a couple of triple digit exit numbers if you used mileage from the Bruckner interchange, even though you are no longer officially on the parkway.  If CT 15 were truncated or retired, you could use US 5 mileage (the exits fall between MP's 32 and 34), and just leave Silver Lane NB unnumbered.  Or, you could start from scratch with a new state route such as CT 284 that starts at the Turnpike and connects to I-84.

[MikeTheActuary]

Exit numbers are historical landmarks now?

According to the Conservancy, everything about the Merritt is a historical landmark.