Connecticut News

[shadyjay]

Remaining guide signs (BGSs) to be installed in this project:

84EB:
Exit 35 1/2 mile
Exit 35 1/4 mile
Exit 35 "exit now"
Exit 36 "exit now" (bridge-mount?)
Exit 39 1 mile (bridge-mount?)
Exit 39A "exit now"

84WB:
Exit 39A "exit now"
Exit 39 1/2 mile / Exit 38 3/4 mile
Exit 36 1/2 mile / Exit 35 3/4 or 1 mile

[shadyjay]

And we now have all mainline overheads installed on I-95 as part of the Groton-North Stonington project.  Here are just a few:

I-95 Northbound at Exit 86:
95NB-Exit86 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

CT 349 Northbound at Exit 3A:
CT349NB-Exit03-2 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

I-95 Southbound at Exit 86:
95SB-Exit86 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

All of the signs formerly mounted on overpasses have been removed, so this project appears "essentially complete"... with the exception of the installation of logo signs on the new blue ATTRACTIONS signs. 

See all the photos I took on my FLICKR page... link in the sig. 

[Mergingtraffic]

And we now have all mainline overheads installed on I-95 as part of the Groton-North Stonington project.  Here are just a few:

All of the signs formerly mounted on overpasses have been removed, so this project appears "essentially complete"... with the exception of the installation of logo signs on the new blue ATTRACTIONS signs. 

See all the photos I took on my FLICKR page... link in the sig. 

Was this sign replaced on the ramp to US-1 from CT-349?

[Mergingtraffic]

Saw that pic yesterday on the Courant website.  Would love to see a pic of the old ramp from 91 South to the bridge NB.

Love how they spend $900k of taxpayer money on something that 90% of said taxpayers oppose

Got a shot of the new gantry I mentioned last week, along with the new EB 1/2 mile Exit 33 / 3/4 mile Exit 34 gantry.

I'm just not a fan of the monotube gantries.  To me, they look sloppy and crooked with the signs on them.  Trusses and cantilever styles seem more sturdy.  I even like the monotube curved pipe gantries that CT used in the mid 2000s. 

https://s-steel.com/overhead-sign-structures/

[shadyjay]

Was this sign replaced on the ramp to US-1 from CT-349?

As I drove by the ramp, I looked up it and didn't see the old signs in question.  I didn't take the ramp itself, having already back-tracked on Route 1, so I can't be certain, but the plans did call for their removal.

[RobbieL2415]

I-91 construction update 5/9:

-Looks like drainage work is in progress
-Trees along the I-91 NB flyover of CT 15 are all gone
-Nite work is closing the right lane past Exit 89.
-Im very surprised there isn't super advance warning signage on I-84 WB and I-91 NB. Something to the effect of "Effective 6/19, CT 15/I-91 road work. Expect delays and closures. Use I-291 or CT 3 as alternate routes.

[jp the roadgeek]

Getting back to the I-95 project, are the signs for the exit on CT 184 done (and now numbered)?

[shadyjay]

Not sure about westbound, but from what I saw on I-95 North at CT 184 EB, the first overhead is still from the project which added a signal with the merge from 12S/1S (an advance for the 12 N exit and a "STOP AHEAD" flasher).  I also glimpsed what appeared to be a temporary "exit now" sign.  So it does look like there's a couple signs still to be installed here.

[zzyzx]

CONNDOT is moving forward with their plans to widen and reconstruct the Exit 74 interchange on I-95.  Construction is scheduled to start around 2021. The plan differs slightly from the one I saw back in 2017 in that it keeps 95 as a 4 lane highway with auxiliary lanes instead of 6 + 1 aux.  It looks like only the bridge above Route 161 will be widened to accommodate an additional lane in each direction at this point.

High Res PDF

Details from CONNDOT:

"The purpose of the project is to address vehicular safety on I-95 at Interchange 74 and address traffic operational concerns between Interchanges 74 and 75 in East Lyme.  In addition, this project will address traffic operational concerns and improve safety for all roadway users (motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists) on Route 161 in the vicinity of the exit 74 interchange ramps.  It is also proposed to replace the I-95 bridge over Route 161 due to its poor condition and to accommodate the widening on Route 161.

The proposed improvements on I-95 include full reconstruction and widening to accommodate the revised ramp configurations, auxiliary lanes between exits 74 & 75 in each direction and the full replacement of the bridge over Route 161.  As a result of the I-95 widening, the bridge over Pattagansett River will be extended and retaining walls will be constructed.  At various locations within the project limits, the proposed improvements on I-95 will accommodate a future project to add a third lane. 

The proposed southbound ramps will be realigned to terminate on a new frontage road to form a signalized "T"  type intersection.  This new frontage road will form a signalized "T"  type intersection with a three-lane approach to Route 161 consisting of one left-turn lane and two right-turn lanes.  Route 161 northbound at this new intersection will have a four-lane approach consisting of two exclusive left-turn lanes and two through lanes.  The southbound Route 161 approach to this intersection will consist of two through lanes and exclusive turn lanes.

The terminus of the northbound I-95 exit 74 ramp will be relocated southerly to form a new signalized intersection with Route 161 and the Burger King Driveway.  Vehicles on southbound Route 161 will be accessing I-95 northbound on a new entrance "loop"  ramp approximately 500 feet south of its current location.  The entrance ramp to I-95 northbound for vehicles on northbound Route 161 will be realigned slightly at its present location.

To address safety and traffic operations on Route 161, improvements include full reconstruction and widening to provide turn lanes, wider shoulders, and sidewalk connectivity within the project limits.

The right-of-way impacts associated with the proposed improvements include total and partial property acquisitions, permanent easements, and temporary easements during construction.  The existing non-access lines will be revised to accommodate the new proposed ramps.

Construction is anticipated to begin in summer 2021, based on the availability of funding, acquisition of rights of way, and approval of permits.  The estimated total construction cost for this project is approximately $140 million.  This project is anticipated to be undertaken with 80 percent (80%) Federal Funds and 20 percent (20%) State funds."

[Magical Trevor]

Color me impressed that the road markings/signage diagram on page two of this update from the I-84 Waterbury widening project utilizes metric.

[Mergingtraffic]

Color me impressed that the road markings/signage diagram on page two of this update from the I-84 Waterbury widening project utilizes metric.

Speaking of I-84 Waterbury...this sign is now gone:



CT-8 sign updates:
NB:
Exit 23:
Beacon Falls (Exit 23) Town Line
Exit 23 Bethany Aux Sign


Exit 25:
All of Exit 25 signs are up. 

Exit 26:
Exit 26 Half mile,
Naugatuck Bus Dist

Exit 30:
Exit 30 "exit now" sign

[shadyjay]

The Charter Oak Bridge Project Website is live at https://i-91charteroakbridge.com/en/home

Among the alerts posted is one about the I-91 NB Exit 28 ramp closing, starting 5/29/19, until 2021.  What bugs me is the detour route that's posted... take Exit 29 to CT 15 NB Exit 90, reverse direction, etc etc.  Not that a lot of motorists use this ramp (when compared to other ramps), but this closure/detour route will throw even more traffic into the existing Exit 29 ramp headache.  Seems to make more sense to detour this traffic via Exit 27 and to the CT 15 SB ramp via Brainard and Airport Rds. 

Also, had to laugh, the tree clearing project scheduled to start next week will now take place next year (??!!). 

[KEVIN_224]

Some details of the Democrats plan for tolling have been released. It includes installing no more than 50 toll gantries on I-95, I-91, I-84 and portions of Route 15 at a peak rate of 4.4 cents per mile and an off peak rate of 3.5 cents. It also establishes a bipartisan Transportation Commission to administer the funds and set priorities much like the Transportation Strategy Commission used to do before it was eliminated. The most interesting part of their plan is to lower the gas tax. That actually could lower what some drivers in our state pay for transportation.

https://www.ctinsider.com/local/ctpo...x-13854535.php

(The article is behind a paywall though.)

[Alps]

Some details of the Democrats plan for tolling have been released. It includes installing no more than 50 toll gantries on I-95, I-91, I-84 and portions of Route 15 at a peak rate of 4.4 cents per mile and an off peak rate of 3.5 cents. It also establishes a bipartisan Transportation Commission to administer the funds and set priorities much like the Transportation Strategy Commission used to do before it was eliminated. The most interesting part of their plan is to lower the gas tax. That actually could lower what some drivers in our state pay for transportation.

https://www.ctinsider.com/local/ctpo...x-13854535.php

(The article is behind a paywall though.)

Given the length of CT, $5 or less to cross a state isn't a terrible deal.

[Mergingtraffic]

Got some pics of the new signage contract on CT-8 between Derby and Waterbury. 









and some original concrete poking thru:

[RobbieL2415]

Some details of the Democrats plan for tolling have been released. It includes installing no more than 50 toll gantries on I-95, I-91, I-84 and portions of Route 15 at a peak rate of 4.4 cents per mile and an off peak rate of 3.5 cents. It also establishes a bipartisan Transportation Commission to administer the funds and set priorities much like the Transportation Strategy Commission used to do before it was eliminated. The most interesting part of their plan is to lower the gas tax. That actually could lower what some drivers in our state pay for transportation.

https://www.ctinsider.com/local/ctpo...x-13854535.php

(The article is behind a paywall though.)

Still would prefer tolls only on secondary highways. Read: CT 2, CT 8, CT 9 and I-395.  The first three can get them without any Federal approval.

[roadman]

Got some pics of the new signage contract on CT-8 between Derby and Waterbury. 









and some original concrete poking thru:

Looks like their sign designer needs a refresher in the requirements for inter-word spacing.

[connroadgeek]

Got some pics of the new signage contract on CT-8 between Derby and Waterbury. 









and some original concrete poking thru:

Looks like their sign designer needs a refresher in the requirements for inter-word spacing.

CT always seems to have issues with sizing and spacing. It's bizarre how routinely this is screwed up on literally every sign contract. I would have thought making a sign is done with software in some automated/standard fashion instead of what appears to be a very manual process.

[KEVIN_224]

Another oddity with I-91: Who's bright idea was it to put TWO I-291 highways so close to each other? One starts in Springfield, heading east then northeast towards Exit 6 of I-90/Massachusetts Turnpike in Chicopee. The other starts in Windsor and heads southeast towards Exit 61 of I-84 in Manchester. These two roads DO NOT connect to each other. One of them should be changed to I-491. (It would make sense, since I-291 would be to the north in MA and I-691 would be to the south between Meriden and I-84 at the Southington/Cheshire town line.)

Does that actually occur anywhere? A sequence of shield numbers like that? Such as 291, 491 and 691 when traveling in the same direction?

[RobbieL2415]

Another oddity with I-91: Who's bright idea was it to put TWO I-291 highways so close to each other? One starts in Springfield, heading east then northeast towards Exit 6 of I-90/Massachusetts Turnpike in Chicopee. The other starts in Windsor and heads southeast towards Exit 61 of I-84 in Manchester. These two roads DO NOT connect to each other. One of them should be changed to I-491. (It would make sense, since I-291 would be to the north in MA and I-691 would be to the south between Meriden and I-84 at the Southington/Cheshire town line.)

Does that actually occur anywhere? A sequence of shield numbers like that? Such as 291, 491 and 691 when traveling in the same direction?

CT 291 existed before I-291 (CT) and the Bissell Bridge was built before I-91.  I-291 (MA) was pure new construction.

[jp the roadgeek]

Another oddity with I-91: Who's bright idea was it to put TWO I-291 highways so close to each other? One starts in Springfield, heading east then northeast towards Exit 6 of I-90/Massachusetts Turnpike in Chicopee. The other starts in Windsor and heads southeast towards Exit 61 of I-84 in Manchester. These two roads DO NOT connect to each other. One of them should be changed to I-491. (It would make sense, since I-291 would be to the north in MA and I-691 would be to the south between Meriden and I-84 at the Southington/Cheshire town line.)

Does that actually occur anywhere? A sequence of shield numbers like that? Such as 291, 491 and 691 when traveling in the same direction?

CT 291 existed before I-291 (CT) and the Bissell Bridge was built before I-91.  I-291 (MA) was pure new construction.

And I-491 was already proposed for the CT 3 expressway (but cancelled) prior to the proposal of I-691 for the CT 66 (formerly the US 6A expressway)in 1976.  Also makes me wonder why I-184 was never considered for I-384 (although it would have required CT 184 to be renumbered), or I-191 was never considered for I-391 in MA (there is no MA 191).  I-195 was skipped in CT because it enters MA where there is one already, so that's understandable.

[kurumi]

Does that actually occur anywhere? A sequence of shield numbers like that? Such as 291, 491 and 691 when traveling in the same direction?

Michigan I-75 northbound (275, 475, 675)

[jp the roadgeek]

Does that actually occur anywhere? A sequence of shield numbers like that? Such as 291, 491 and 691 when traveling in the same direction?

Michigan I-75 northbound (275, 475, 675)

You also have that in NY state with the I-90's except for I-990 (used by necessity).  190 and 290 in Buffalo, 390-590 in Rochester, 690 in Syracuse, 790 in Utica, and 890 in Schenectady.

[vdeane]

NY has I-990 too.  It's in Buffalo and starts at I-290.

[Alps]

Another oddity with I-91: Who's bright idea was it to put TWO I-291 highways so close to each other? One starts in Springfield, heading east then northeast towards Exit 6 of I-90/Massachusetts Turnpike in Chicopee. The other starts in Windsor and heads southeast towards Exit 61 of I-84 in Manchester. These two roads DO NOT connect to each other. One of them should be changed to I-491. (It would make sense, since I-291 would be to the north in MA and I-691 would be to the south between Meriden and I-84 at the Southington/Cheshire town line.)

Does that actually occur anywhere? A sequence of shield numbers like that? Such as 291, 491 and 691 when traveling in the same direction?

I-395 Baltimore and DC. make one 995?