Connecticut News

[southshore720]

Some progress to report on the I-95 Signage Replacement project between Exits 85-93.  Many new BGSs have been erected Southbound and are identical to the signs used on I-395.  Most of the new signage appears between Exits 93-88 at the moment, including a very large, impressive Welcome to CT sign.  Northbound, no new signage yet, but most of the sign supports are in place.

Do the state shields have black borders on them?  If so, that seems to be a District 2 and District 4 thing.  The new ones on I-84 (mostly) in District 1 do not, but the CT 8 ones in Litchfield County and I-395 do.

Yes, the shields do have the black borders!

[KEVIN_224]

Something seems slightly off with the CT Route 372 shield here. It's at the New Britain/Berlin town line, as Corbin Avenue of New Britain ends and splits off to the right to start Farmington Avenue of Berlin.



These signs recently replaced a VERY ancient big green sign pointing to staying left to head towards CT Route 9 South. The sign was so old that you could see the sun fade for what was "TO CT 72 EAST".

[jp the roadgeek]

I've noticed that as I drove by there.  The CT 372 shield looks like it's up to MA/ME specs.  Usually don't see those kind of oversized shields anywhere in CT.  Interesting fact: the sign is actually inaccurate.  In the CT Highway Log, the sign for CT 372 East is pointing to SR 918.  To follow CT 372 East to the letter of the law, you need to keep left, turn right on CT 71A for a brief overlap, then turn left onto Farmington Ave.  Also, until 1979 or so when the expressway through downtown New Britain was completed, Corbin Ave was part of CT 72 proper and bore left to follow what is now SR 571, so the "TO" in the 72 East wasn't even needed. 

[KEVIN_224]

So that tiny piece of road to the right has an SR number? Interesting! As for heading that way, I figure they do it that way since there's enough traffic in that vicinity already!

I believe the Willow Brook Connector was opened around 1961. The parts which veers north as today's CT Route 9 was opened a year later to Exit 25 - Ellis Street in New Britain.

[jp the roadgeek]

So that tiny piece of road to the right has an SR number? Interesting! As for heading that way, I figure they do it that way since there's enough traffic in that vicinity already!

I believe the Willow Brook Connector was opened around 1961. The parts which veers north as today's CT Route 9 was opened a year later to Exit 25 - Ellis Street in New Britain.

It does. All 0.16 mi of it.  From 1978-90, CT 372 used the connector and ended at then CT 72.  Signs for Exit 24 (which was unnumbered prior to CT 9) used to say "372 TO 71"; the TO was just moved ahead of 372. Farmington Ave was an SR until 372 was rerouted off the connector.

From a story relayed to me by my mom, the portion of CT 72 from I-84 to at least Corbin Ave was opened by 1970.  She was living in New Britain at the time, and got a ticket from NBPD on Christmas Eve while borrowing my grandmother's car for having a taillight out.  I also heard from someone else that the highway had a temporary ending just beyond the Corbin Ave exit at West Main St because he used to open up his 76 Porsche on that stretch.  The portion from West Main to Ellis St (now a combo of CT 72 and CT 9) opened around 1978.  I'm a little too young to remember the expressway not being completed through New Britain, but I'm old enough to remember the portion of CT 9 north of Exit 28 being a highway to nowhere, and CT 72 on the CT 9 section from Exit 28 to where it downgraded to a 2 lane road just east of the Berlin Turnpike (now part of CT 372).  All exits were unnumbered until CT 9 arrived, and current CT 72 received exit numbers around the time of the reconstruction of the I-84/CT 72/CT 372 interchanges in Plainville around 2000.

[kurumi]

Some dates from newspapers and other sources:
Willow Brook Connector (now mostly SR 571) opened Nov. 1, 1962
Newer CT 72 (now part of CT 9) from 571 to Ellis St: Aug. 14, 1969
From I-84 to Corbin Ave: Feb. 2, 1970
CT 72 complete through New Britain: Nov. 22, 1978

From 1978 to 1989 or '90 there was a CT 372 freeway, along present-day 571 from 71A to 72.

[KEVIN_224]

Sometimes, I try to note the year stamped into the bridges. CT Route 372 over the Berlin Turnpike (US 5/CT 15) in Berlin says 1989...but that's when the bridge was reconstructed. I think it was the carriageway for the old CT Route 72 West at one time.

[jp the roadgeek]

Sometimes, I try to note the year stamped into the bridges. CT Route 372 over the Berlin Turnpike (US 5/CT 15) in Berlin says 1989...but that's when the bridge was reconstructed. I think it was the carriageway for the old CT Route 72 West at one time.

It was until CT 9 was extended.  Instead of dipping down to meet SR 572, CT 72 stayed at the same level and bent slightly left to meet the current CT 9 carriageway just before the Webster Square Rd. underpass.  The northbound ramps for Exit 22 used to hairpin around and follow the path that North Frontage Rd. follows and end at SR 572.  The portion of North Frontage between the current CT 9 ramps and Webster Square Rd was new construction.  The only way to access either direction of the Berlin Turnpike from 72 East was current Exit 22.

[KEVIN_224]

The CT 72/Berlin Turnpike interchange before 1989-90:


CT Route 72, as it looked by late 1973. I-84 Exit 35 is at the top right. View is roughly WSW:

[RobbieL2415]

Question concerning Exit 44 on I-91.  Noticed that prior to 1992 it was configured with direct ramps to US 5.  Why did they get rid of it and put a regular at-grade intersection?  Seems counter-intuitive.

[kurumi]

Re I-91 exit 44 (trumpet to US 5, East Windsor): Older aerial photos (example, 1986) show a channelized intersection there, with the ramp access acting as a mainline. Still an at-grade intersection.

I'm guessing additional traffic, development, and safety issues (bicycles and walking, etc.) led to the more conventional intersection.

[jp the roadgeek]

Question concerning Exit 44 on I-91.  Noticed that prior to 1992 it was configured with direct ramps to US 5.  Why did they get rid of it and put a regular at-grade intersection?  Seems counter-intuitive.

Exit 44 was another case of an exit ramp designed to be the start of a freeway.  When constructed, it was designed to be the original northern terminus of the proposed I-284, which was eventually truncated to end at I-291 in South Windsor, then cancelled altogether.  Once it was cancelled, the  interchange was aligned to meet US 5 at grade.  Also, the partial (NB Exit, SB Entrance) Exit 43 for Main St in Warehouse Point, was closed permanently as part of the same project.

[RobbieL2415]

Question concerning Exit 44 on I-91.  Noticed that prior to 1992 it was configured with direct ramps to US 5.  Why did they get rid of it and put a regular at-grade intersection?  Seems counter-intuitive.

Exit 44 was another case of an exit ramp designed to be the start of a freeway.  When constructed, it was designed to be the original northern terminus of the proposed I-284, which was eventually truncated to end at I-291 in South Windsor, then cancelled altogether.  Once it was cancelled, the  interchange was aligned to meet US 5 at grade.  Also, the partial (NB Exit, SB Entrance) Exit 43 for Main St in Warehouse Point, was closed permanently as part of the same project.

Right but it just seems like it didn't need to be done.  That intersection is always clogged during rush hour.  Was it worse before  it was an intersection?

[jp the roadgeek]

Question concerning Exit 44 on I-91.  Noticed that prior to 1992 it was configured with direct ramps to US 5.  Why did they get rid of it and put a regular at-grade intersection?  Seems counter-intuitive.

Exit 44 was another case of an exit ramp designed to be the start of a freeway.  When constructed, it was designed to be the original northern terminus of the proposed I-284, which was eventually truncated to end at I-291 in South Windsor, then cancelled altogether.  Once it was cancelled, the  interchange was aligned to meet US 5 at grade.  Also, the partial (NB Exit, SB Entrance) Exit 43 for Main St in Warehouse Point, was closed permanently as part of the same project.

Right but it just seems like it didn't need to be done.  That intersection is always clogged during rush hour.  Was it worse before  it was an intersection?

Looking at the pic in the link that Kurumi posted, it looks like it was more for safety purposes.  In doing so, it eliminated the left exit from 5 North to the interchange, and it eliminated a potential merge issue as exit traffic merged with thru traffic on 5 South on an overpass over the entrance ramp.  Also, the original exit ramp did not provide access to 5 North (NB traffic would have to use Exit 43, and SB traffic would have to use Exit 45), and the access from 5 south looks like it was a very short, sharp curve.  Furthermore, traffic from Newberry Rd, which leads into an industrial area, had no access to the ramp, so the redesign serves truck traffic better. 

[Beeper1]

This also explains why the all the BGS for Exit 44 only list 5 south, even though it now serves both directions of US 5 (and actually has more lanes at the stop light dedicated for turns onto 5 north and onto 5 south.

Sadly, rather then update them, new northbound BGS for this exit continue to only show 5 south.

[jp the roadgeek]

This also explains why the all the BGS for Exit 44 only list 5 south, even though it now serves both directions of US 5 (and actually has more lanes at the stop light dedicated for turns onto 5 north and onto 5 south.

Sadly, rather then update them, new northbound BGS for this exit continue to only show 5 south.

I'm assuming the last I-91 signing project pre-dated the exit reconstruction.  Looking at GSV: as of September of 2017, it looks like the reflective button copy signage is still present for Exit 44 (did see a spot replacement for the NB at-exit BGS for Exit 45, which may have been part of the enhanced milepost project), and if any spot changes have been done since then, they were done in-kind without any regard to exit reconstruction or MUTCD compliance (in this case, although semi-inaccurate, it is compliant).  Hopefully, as part of a future I-91 signage update project, the "South" after US 5 will disappear (and "South Windsor" will be added to SB signage).

[jp the roadgeek]

Apologize for the double post, but it looks like tolls are dead in CT for this legislative session.

https://patch.com/connecticut/greenwich/fate-tolls-ct-grows-clearer

[PHLBOS]

^^Good.  Approving such in an election year would've been political suicide.

[MattCollopy]

Is there any meetups coming soon in the northern ct area?

[jon daly]

Some progress to report on the I-95 Signage Replacement project between Exits 85-93.  Many new BGSs have been erected Southbound and are identical to the signs used on I-395.  Most of the new signage appears between Exits 93-88 at the moment, including a very large, impressive Welcome to CT sign.  Northbound, no new signage yet, but most of the sign supports are in place.

I live right off of Exit 90 these days and have noticed this on my evening commute from Riverside, RI. Tonight I saw a few new mile markers on the RI line, even ones 0.2 miles apart. All well and good, but aren't they renumbering the exits on I-95 soon?

[jp the roadgeek]

Some progress to report on the I-95 Signage Replacement project between Exits 85-93.  Many new BGSs have been erected Southbound and are identical to the signs used on I-395.  Most of the new signage appears between Exits 93-88 at the moment, including a very large, impressive Welcome to CT sign.  Northbound, no new signage yet, but most of the sign supports are in place.

I live right off of Exit 90 these days and have noticed this on my evening commute from Riverside, RI. Tonight I saw a few new mile markers on the RI line, even ones 0.2 miles apart. All well and good, but aren't they renumbering the exits on I-95 soon?

As we've discussed before, it could make sense to renumber them east of I-395 to the RI border since there's a 5 number gap in each direction anyway (76 to 81 NB, 80 to 75 SB).  Jumping from 76 (I-395) to 90 (Cross Rd) northbound and from 89 (Oil Mill Rd) to 75 (US 1) southbound wouldn't be that difficult.  However, ConnDOT is only doing it by full highway, so all signage projects on I-95 from Greenwich to North Stonington would have to be complete.  There are still some portions of I-95 between East Haven and East Lyme that haven't been updated yet, most notably the Branford/Guilford area and around the CT 9 interchange and Baldwin Bridge.  CT 349 and CT 184 (all 1) exits, which are unnumbered, will receive mileage-based numbers as part of this project.

[jon daly]

Some progress to report on the I-95 Signage Replacement project between Exits 85-93.  Many new BGSs have been erected Southbound and are identical to the signs used on I-395.  Most of the new signage appears between Exits 93-88 at the moment, including a very large, impressive Welcome to CT sign.  Northbound, no new signage yet, but most of the sign supports are in place.

I live right off of Exit 90 these days and have noticed this on my evening commute from Riverside, RI. Tonight I saw a few new mile markers on the RI line, even ones 0.2 miles apart. All well and good, but aren't they renumbering the exits on I-95 soon?

As we've discussed before, it could make sense to renumber them east of I-395 to the RI border since there's a 5 number gap in each direction anyway (76 to 81 NB, 80 to 75 SB).  Jumping from 76 (I-395) to 90 (Cross Rd) northbound and from 89 (Oil Mill Rd) to 75 (US 1) southbound wouldn't be that difficult.  However, ConnDOT is only doing it by full highway, so all signage projects on I-95 from Greenwich to North Stonington would have to be complete.  There are still some portions of I-95 between East Haven and East Lyme that haven't been updated yet, most notably the Branford/Guilford area and around the CT 9 interchange and Baldwin Bridge.  CT 349 and CT 184 (all 1) exits, which are unnumbered, will receive mileage-based numbers as part of this project.

Is 349 aka the Clarence B Sharp Highway? I've noticed new signs near there encouraging use of that exit for the Groton-New London airport.

As an aside, I chuckle when I see signs for Downtown Groton. The Long Hill Road-Poquonnock Road section of US-1 is nothing but a series of suburban style commerce.

[jp the roadgeek]

Yes, CT 349 is the Clarence B Sharp Highway.  It's not much of a highway, though.  It's basically an extended exit ramp with an extra exit NB to US 1/CT 12 which becomes a 4 lane arterial that serves UConn-Avery Point, Shennecossett Golf Club, and the Groton Elks Lodge before curving around the peninsula and leading into Groton City and ending near EB.  I still would think CT 117 would be easier to get to the airport from 95 South, and US 1 (Long Hill Rd) from 95 North.

[jon daly]

Thanks. I do like the new signs that I've seen from an aesthetic/readability standpoint.

[abqtraveler]

^^Good.  Approving such in an election year would've been political suicide.

The Democrats in the General Assembly know full and well that passing toll legislation in an election year would almost certainly mean the end of their 30+ year reign over state government. What political party hacks will (or will not do) to stay in office.