"I-86 is Now I-84" and Other Interesting Facts

[Mergingtraffic]

Mergingtraffic...
The problem with the I-84/I-691 interchange is on I-84 EB approaching I-691 EB.  The decelleration lane really is non-existant.  What would be ideal is the merge from Exit 26 becoming an "operational lane" and that transitions to a 2-lane off-ramp with APLs.  The offramp is more than suitable to be widened, and really, you could widen I-691 to the CT 10 exit as well.  Again, a short, quick project for some good results.  Another one that would be good to see is operational lanes between Exits 21 & 22 on I-91 in Cromwell. 


Kurumi...
I remember the onramps which were marked "91/Hartford/->" and "91/Springfield->".  Not sure why there was no direction.  Probably from the same era as the Bloomfield Ave mockup sign you posted.  When I started traveling that part of I-91, it was all construction signage up to Exit 38, but Exits 39, 40, 41, & 42 still had the old signage as widening hadn't made it up that far yet. 

I can see that with I-691. However, I don't see CTDOT prioritizing it, I think there's no decel lane bc you don't really have to slow down to use the ramp. You just get off onto the ramp. It's long and straight.  The grade uphill isn't until it meets the I-691 mainline.  I do notice motorists jump in at last minute so that could be a cause.

I'd throw in the CT-8/Merritt interchange. Even tho it's incomplete, what was built is high speed and quite up to standards.

I guess overall, the state highway system is the bests it's ever been with constant improvements going on.

Btw: the CT-8 NB > I-84 EB ramp STILL isn't open. 
They're fixing the I-84 mainline before the open it. Even tho the ramp itself is fine. What was supposed to be 6 week closure starting in August (and then an announcement it'll be open by December 1) it's STILL closed.
Why not just close the ramp when work is being done?!

[RobbieL2415]

The only thing that was a little perplexing with that project is why does the HOV lane end just shy of Hartford and just shy of the exit for the airport?  Seems like it could have been extended another 3/4 mile south to dump into Trumbull St (instead of the Leibert Rd exit) and extended another mile at the north end to feed directly into the flyover to the airport at Exit 40. 

By the time we started traveling north of Hartford, the road was already widened north of East Windsor to its present configuration (having been done sometime in the late 1980s, but it was done by 1989).  Most of the signage along that stretch dates back to that project's completion, so that's some of the oldest button copy signage in the state that has yet to have a blanket sign replacement contract assigned to it.

There just seems to be a lot missing from CT's HOV lanes.

Why is it only one lane each direction?

Why do they end before important exits? (I would argue that I-84s HOV lanes should start/end at Exit 67 as its the primary exit for folks commuting from Tolland/Willington/Coventry)

Why are the medians not seperated? (Seriously, wtf is the point if people in single-occupant vehicles are just going to cut across the no-man's-land whenever they feel like it)

[shadyjay]

HOV lanes, yeah, getting stuck behind someone going the speed limit can be a pain, but I don't think I've ever seen an HOV lane that was more than 1 lane wide.  The lack of a barrier is probably so that emergency vehicles can get in/out easily, though there is, in most cases, plenty of room to slap in a jersey barrier and still maintain a shoulder.  Perhaps you could have large gaps every so often for emergency vehicle access.  I know during the winter the divider isn't usually plowed.
As far as why they end before important exits... I can see I-84 WB as there are many left exits so chaulk that up to just poor geometry/design of the roadway before the HOV lane was put in.  I-91 on the other hand, again, ending at the "great merge" at Jennings Rd SB and NB ending just before the Airport irks me.  Slap in a flyover for Bradley and a flyunder directly to the Moody overpass directly into downtown and you'd be all set. 

[Rothman]

You see all the crap in the area between the GP lanes and HOV lane on I-91?  Goodbye tires...

[froggie]

HOV lanes, yeah, getting stuck behind someone going the speed limit can be a pain, but I don't think I've ever seen an HOV lane that was more than 1 lane wide.

Outside of reversible lane setups (which Minneapolis and the NoVA side of DC have had for decades), none really existed until NoVA built out its Ho/T lane network on the DC Beltway and more recently I-66.

You see all the crap in the area between the GP lanes and HOV lane on I-91?  Goodbye tires...

Even within ConnDOT, someone may actually have the bright idea to clean up the space before restriping it as a lane...

[Rothman]

HOV lanes, yeah, getting stuck behind someone going the speed limit can be a pain, but I don't think I've ever seen an HOV lane that was more than 1 lane wide.

Outside of reversible lane setups (which Minneapolis and the NoVA side of DC have had for decades), none really existed until NoVA built out its Ho/T lane network on the DC Beltway and more recently I-66.

You see all the crap in the area between the GP lanes and HOV lane on I-91?  Goodbye tires...

Even within ConnDOT, someone may actually have the bright idea to clean up the space before restriping it as a lane...

Heh, I thought someone up above mentioned emergency vehicles and others crossing through that junkyard. Can't say I haven't thought about it, but I typically find the GP lanes travel faster than the HOV lane due to slowpokes blocking the single lane (outside of any jams coming into Hartford, of course).

[kurumi]

I'm not a civil engineer, but I wonder if:
* shoulders are paved to different standards than standard lanes (roadbed, pavement thickness, etc.)
* the DMZ between HOV and GP lanes is paved as a shoulder (I think there are drains there as well)

[Mergingtraffic]

There are drains, so the grading is depressed so water trickles in.
The I-84 HOV Lanes actually end in downtown and get off via Route 2 I believe.

I-91s don't make as much since but Lambert Rd is an exit before downtown

[Alps]

I'm not a civil engineer, but I wonder if:
* shoulders are paved to different standards than standard lanes (roadbed, pavement thickness, etc.)
* the DMZ between HOV and GP lanes is paved as a shoulder (I think there are drains there as well)

Both valid questions.

[CapeCodder]

Any photos of when CT 52 became I-395?

[shadyjay]

Not per say, but this sign on I-95 NB at Exit 75, which I took in 2000, was around back when I-395 was CT 52.  I remember the changeover at this interchange.  Basically, the "52" square was replaced with an I-395 shield, and where it said "CONN/TPKE" was replaced with the "NORTH" button copy from the I-95 pull-through.  There was also a ground-mounted diagrammatic by the DOT salt shed at the Exit 74 merge (where they're widening right now) that had the same CONN/TPKE -> NORTH treatment.  The I-395 exit was also given the # 76 at the same time... I don't recall the I-95 exit ever having a number (since I-95 exited from itself to leave the turnpike).  But predating the turnpike in this area was a sort of Super 2 from today's Exit 70 out to the Gold Star Bridge in New London/Groton, so that was the "thru route" even back then, pre-Conn Tpke.

95NB-Exit75-3 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

Tough to make out, but at the bottom of the overhead are small "TO MASS PIKE" signs.  The overhead mounted on the overpass ahead stated "MASS PIKE/Worcester/KEEP LEFT".  There was also a mileage sign just past the Exit 75 sign that said

WATERFORD        2
  GROTON             #
  MYSTIC              ##
        KEEP RIGHT

[SectorZ]

Not per say, but this sign on I-95 NB at Exit 75, which I took in 2000, was around back when I-395 was CT 52.  I remember the changeover at this interchange.  Basically, the "52" square was replaced with an I-395 shield, and where it said "CONN/TPKE" was replaced with the "NORTH" button copy from the I-95 pull-through.  There was also a ground-mounted diagrammatic by the DOT salt shed at the Exit 74 merge (where they're widening right now) that had the same CONN/TPKE -> NORTH treatment.  The I-395 exit was also given the # 76 at the same time... I don't recall the I-95 exit ever having a number (since I-95 exited from itself to leave the turnpike).  But predating the turnpike in this area was a sort of Super 2 from today's Exit 70 out to the Gold Star Bridge in New London/Groton, so that was the "thru route" even back then, pre-Conn Tpke.

95NB-Exit75-3 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

Tough to make out, but at the bottom of the overhead are small "TO MASS PIKE" signs.  The overhead mounted on the overpass ahead stated "MASS PIKE/Worcester/KEEP LEFT".  There was also a mileage sign just past the Exit 75 sign that said

WATERFORD        2
  GROTON             #
  MYSTIC              ##
        KEEP RIGHT

52 became 395 well before 2000. More like the mid-1980's.

[kurumi]

There's an assertion from Webster, MA residents (https://websteroralhistory.wordpress.com/carla-manzi/, and a page that's no longer up) that I-395/SR52 was originally supposed to go to Sturbridge. I haven't seen good sources for this, and still consider it an urban legend. Also, that routing doesn't make the most sense (defies the gravitational pull of Worcester and Boston).

[The Ghostbuster]

Is Massachusetts still planning on renumbering Interstate 290 as an extension of Interstate 395? I always thought that was a stupid idea as it would "orphan" Interstate 190. Also, why would CT/MA 52/Interstate 395 go to Sturbridge when it is already served by Interstate 84 and Interstate 90?

[shadyjay]

52 became 395 well before 2000. More like the mid-1980's.

Well aware, perhaps my wording was off.

The signs in the gantry were around in existence when I-395 was still signed CT 52.  The outline of the CT 52 shield could still be seen, along with "CONN TPKE" even when the I-395 shield was put on.  The signs were replaced in 2000/2001.


And if you don't want to "orphan" I-190, then send I-395 in CT due east to follow the Conn Turnpike stub to end at the RI state line, and sign I-395 from Danielson, north to Mass, as I-290.  With how sharp of a turn I-395 makes at that point, its basically "exiting from itself" already.  Looks like ConnDOT is going to install an overhead again here, as the ground-mount signage just isn't enough to denote the sharp left turn thru traffic makes.

[SectorZ]

52 became 395 well before 2000. More like the mid-1980's.

Well aware, perhaps my wording was off.

The signs in the gantry were around in existence when I-395 was still signed CT 52.  The outline of the CT 52 shield could still be seen, along with "CONN TPKE" even when the I-395 shield was put on.  The signs were replaced in 2000/2001.


And if you don't want to "orphan" I-190, then send I-395 in CT due east to follow the Conn Turnpike stub to end at the RI state line, and sign I-395 from Danielson, north to Mass, as I-290.  With how sharp of a turn I-395 makes at that point, its basically "exiting from itself" already.  Looks like ConnDOT is going to install an overhead again here, as the ground-mount signage just isn't enough to denote the sharp left turn thru traffic makes.

Gotcha. I've been sick all week and my ability to comprehend much of anything has been off.

[DJStephens]

Since we are reminiscing, I will say that this was a fascinating transformation to watch evolve as a kid in many car rides along this route (especially with a civil engineer father happy to have someone to listen to his commentary about it). Mostly responsible for me even being here, as my avatar probably gives away.
The 86/15/Wilbur Cross section of 84 had a distinctly different feel then, narrower and to much less forgiving standards, a slightly beefier version of the Wilbur Cross Parkway as it is today. The first expansion I remember being particularly cognizant of was in the Tolland area, where I remember seeing new signs erected and possibly far from the existing roadway, easily doubling the width of the ROW. This had to be at the very beginning of the 80s.
However, this was nothing compared to the scope of the Vernon to East Hartford expansion in the early 80s. At the point of the current 384/291 interchanges, the right-of-way easily tripled in size from the old tight, steep climb up that last hill before descending into Hartford. I'm still amazed at the amount of land they were able to consume there compared to what existed before.

Believe the reconstruction of the old Wilbur Cross Highway or 86 (formerly Rte 15) began earlier, possibly in Union, CT in 1976.    This was likely at the same time as the reconstruction of the Massachusetts section of 86, which was a short segment connecting to the Mass. Turnpike.  The Connecticut reconstruction started at the Mass. border, and slowly moving towards Hartford.  That's what personally remember as a kid in New England.   There used to be smelly pit latrines on the Wilbur Cross, that I do remember.   Yes am older than what avatar says.   

[bluecountry]

If I-84 went to Providence, then why was the portion of current I-84 from East Hartford to Sturbridge named I-86 vs say I-284?

[The Ghostbuster]

There was already going to be an Interstate 284 heading north from the existing Interstate 84/CT 2 freeway interchange northward to Interstate 291 just east of the Captain Bissell Memorial Bridge. That was cancelled in 1983, and all that exists of 284 is the short connector road to Governor St. Personally, the 84-to-86-back-to-84 corridor from East Hartford, CT to Sturbridge, MA should have stayed 84, and the unbuilt Hartford-to-Providence freeway should have been numbered Interstate 82 (as it was proposed to become prior to 1968).

[kurumi]

There was already going to be an Interstate 284 heading north from the existing Interstate 84/CT 2 freeway interchange northward to Interstate 291 just east of the Captain Bissell Memorial Bridge. That was cancelled in 1983, and all that exists of 284 is the short connector road to Governor St. Personally, the 84-to-86-back-to-84 corridor from East Hartford, CT to Sturbridge, MA should have stayed 84, and the unbuilt Hartford-to-Providence freeway should have been numbered Interstate 82 (as it was proposed to become prior to 1968).

I-82 has an interesting history on the drawing board:
* (possibly) the first primary, non-letter-suffixed interstate to have 2 planned instances. The Aug 14 1957 map has two I-82s: one from I-5 in Portland, OR to I-15 in Utah (this is I-84 now; there would have been I-82N and I-82S in Idaho); and the other from Scranton to New York along today's I-380 and I-80
* the proposed I-82 in CT and RI makes 3 instances of I-82 that were abandoned or renumbered entirely
* In Aug 1957, today's I-82 was not on the map yet

[Alps]

If I-84 went to Providence, then why was the portion of current I-84 from East Hartford to Sturbridge named I-86 vs say I-284?

Back then, there was a lot less driving the ability to create 2di. Just look at today's I-86 and I-88 in a single state - at least I-86 would have been in two states, even though incredibly tiny. It was planned to end at I-91 after crossing the CT 15 bridge, sorta like today's NY I-86, but yeah by today's standards this would absolutely be a 3di.