Connecticut News

[shadyjay]

Yes, some of those are quite old as are the signs attached to them.  What I would've liked to have seen is the soon-to-start Exits 40-56 sign replacement project extended to Exits 40-65 (that would cover the worst of the old signage) and let Exits 46-52 be for now.  Part of that stretch includes the Aetna viaduct that is scheduled for some sort of modification, replacement, etc.  Gantries Exits 46-52 are not being replaced as part of the upcoming project... just the signs.  Still, it seems like a waste if in a few years they're going to get replaced again anyway.  But thats ConnDOT for ya.  (At least they did convert to aligned exit tabs and slowly converting to mile-based exits)

[abqtraveler]

CT-8 at CT-34 there's a truck detour for trucks over 7 tons over the Stevenson Dam Bridge.  Not really signed that well except for small warning signs saying to use Exit 14 CT-110.  You'd think those signs would be bigger or maybe extruded aluminum considering the importance.

The Route 34 truck detour around Stevenson Dam is a byproduct of 40+ years of Monroe and Oxford residents fighting against a new bridge to replace the existing span that runs over the dam.  Now with the official detour rerouting truck traffic up 110 from Shelton to 111, right through the middle of Monroe, maybe the residents of Monroe will re-think their long-standing opposition to a new bridge slightly upstream from the Stevenson Dam to replace the current span that runs atop the dam, is 100 years old, and is in an advanced state of deterioration.

Up until now, Shelton never really had a dog in the fight over a replacement bridge for the Stevenson Dam crossing, since the Stevenson Dam is miles upstream from Shelton, with the main source of opposition being from residents of Monroe and Oxford.  But now, Shelton has been thrown right into the middle of that food fight with the official detour sending trucks right through that town's central business district, not to mention the steep hill and sharp curve on Route 110 near Indian Well State Park having been the site of numerous fatal wrecks in the past.  I don't think it'll be long until the pain factor drives Shelton officials to press the state and the towns of Oxford and Monroe to come up with a solution, and fast.

[shadyjay]

Back when I started land surveying, the Stevenson Dam replacement project was the first job they sent me on.  That was in 1999.  Twenty years later and not a shovel has been thrown for that project.  My first time over that dam was in the mid 80s and it seemed sketchy back then. 

[Mergingtraffic]

CT-8 at CT-34 there's a truck detour for trucks over 7 tons over the Stevenson Dam Bridge.  Not really signed that well except for small warning signs saying to use Exit 14 CT-110.  You'd think those signs would be bigger or maybe extruded aluminum considering the importance.

The Route 34 truck detour around Stevenson Dam is a byproduct of 40+ years of Monroe and Oxford residents fighting against a new bridge to replace the existing span that runs over the dam.  Now with the official detour rerouting truck traffic up 110 from Shelton to 111, right through the middle of Monroe, maybe the residents of Monroe will re-think their long-standing opposition to a new bridge slightly upstream from the Stevenson Dam to replace the current span that runs atop the dam, is 100 years old, and is in an advanced state of deterioration.

Up until now, Shelton never really had a dog in the fight over a replacement bridge for the Stevenson Dam crossing, since the Stevenson Dam is miles upstream from Shelton, with the main source of opposition being from residents of Monroe and Oxford.  But now, Shelton has been thrown right into the middle of that food fight with the official detour sending trucks right through that town's central business district, not to mention the steep hill and sharp curve on Route 110 near Indian Well State Park having been the site of numerous fatal wrecks in the past.  I don't think it'll be long until the pain factor drives Shelton officials to press the state and the towns of Oxford and Monroe to come up with a solution, and fast.

I drove up there and signage on CT-34 isn't well marked pertaining to the weight limit.  (It's 15 tons, not 7 like I erroneously stated before) Only a 2 mile ahead sign heading NB and I think a small one right at the bridge. 

[Mergingtraffic]

  However, some of the gantries that are being replaced, surprisingly, are the tube gantries that date back to the early 2000's. 

I noticed that too...I wonder why but CT keeps the ugly 1980's gantries up.  The "newer" monotube gantries look ugly and the signs don't even look straight whenever the newer monotubes are installed.

The "Utah tube" gantries I liked.  The ones that you mentioned that were installed in the early-mid-2000s.  They look sleek and sturdy.

[ipeters61]

  However, some of the gantries that are being replaced, surprisingly, are the tube gantries that date back to the early 2000's. 

I noticed that too...I wonder why but CT keeps the ugly 1980's gantries up.  The "newer" monotube gantries look ugly and the signs don't even look straight whenever the newer monotubes are installed.

The "Utah tube" gantries I liked.  The ones that you mentioned that were installed in the early-mid-2000s.  They look sleek and sturdy.

I feel the exact opposite.  I always thought the one at I-84 EB Exit 35 looked ugly, it just looked oversized/way too big.

[jp the roadgeek]

I-91 southbound to be closed tonight from 1 AM to 5 AM  between Exit 23 (West St) and Exit 24 (CT 99) to install the new CT 160 bridge over the highway.

https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/I-91-South-in-Rocky-Hill-to-Shut-Down-for-Hours-Sunday-Morning-512990441.html?abc=233&_osource=SocialFlowFB_CTBrand

[DJStephens]

in a state with such high costs, and a budget shortfall, why replace the overhead gantries at all?

I'm guessing the gantries are being replaced since they are at the end of their usable life, don't meet current standards for wind/weather/etc, etc.  You don't want a poorly maintained gantry crashing down on some unsuspecting motorist(s).  Many of the gantries date back to the 1980s.  Some gantries are even being replaced with ground-mounted signage.

Guess have to say can't really buy that argument.  Haven't these gantry structures been galvanized steel for at least forty years?   Galvanized steel has a greater resistance to de-icing chemicals than plain mild steel tube.   Do the bases or the mounting bolts rot out??   

[DrSmith]

A lot of salt/de-icing and cycling through wet/dry cycles can accelerate corrosion and at a structure that has been exposed to New England winters for 30-40 years. These structures are also expected to last another 20-40 years before the next replacement, which makes it necessary to ensure the life. 

It's possible that the bolts and support corrode because different alloys are used between the bolts and structure from galvanic corrosion. More likely, I would suspect though that the base is the issue. Water seeps into the structure and corrosion of the steel used for reinforcement that weakens the base.

[RobbieL2415]

The re-bar on the median barrier on I-84 from East Hartford to Manchester is starting to show.  Maybe when they do the signs there they can rebuild the median.

[Mergingtraffic]

This sign above on the SB side of CT-8 in Naugatuck, which has just been replaced.  The new sign says "Exit 25, TO CT-63, Cross St" even though the ramp on the right of this photo is for Exit 26, CT-63.  It doesn't make sense because local drivers would have to go farther out of their way to get to 63 by using Exit 25.  However, NB drivers DO use Cross Street to get to CT-63 a lot.  But the newly installed signs in the NB direction just say "Cross St." I did point it out in my comments to the DOT but nothing was done.

[Mergingtraffic]

I've also noticed the metal CT uses for larger two-pole signs, like warning or regulatory, don't last that long.  The signs themselves start to curve or the poles they're on tend to lean after awhile.  I was thinking even though wood rots it does seem more sturdy for signs.  Maybe CT should apply Z-bars behind the signs or start using wooden poles?

[shadyjay]

Whoops!

https://www.ct.gov/dot/cwp/view.asp?A=2135&Q=609528

Nighttime Bridge Maintenance on Merritt Parkway in New Haven, Hamden, and North Haven

Of course, the Merritt ends at Exit 54/Milford Parkway.  Its amazed how many people think the Merritt goes up to Meriden.  The straight-thru route does (15), but the name change is in Milford.  Southbound in Meriden from I-91 and I-691, its proudly listed as "15 South/W Cross Pkwy". 

[roadman]

I've also noticed the metal CT uses for larger two-pole signs, like warning or regulatory, don't last that long.  The signs themselves start to curve or the poles they're on tend to lean after awhile.  I was thinking even though wood rots it does seem more sturdy for signs.  Maybe CT should apply Z-bars behind the signs or start using wooden poles?

Sounds like the sheet aluminum used for the sign panels isn't thick enough, causing the panels to eventually distort in the wind.  Mounting larger signs on twin telescopic posts doesn't help matters either.  MassDOT has been slowly phasing in the use of single steel beam posts for larger regulatory, warning, and route marker signs to minimize this problem.

[RobbieL2415]

Whoops!

https://www.ct.gov/dot/cwp/view.asp?A=2135&Q=609528

Nighttime Bridge Maintenance on Merritt Parkway in New Haven, Hamden, and North Haven

Of course, the Merritt ends at Exit 54/Milford Parkway.  Its amazed how many people think the Merritt goes up to Meriden.  The straight-thru route does (15), but the name change is in Milford.  Southbound in Meriden from I-91 and I-691, its proudly listed as "15 South/W Cross Pkwy".

The WCP isn't well signed from on-ramps, that's why.

[DrSmith]

I think snow plowing is a big impact on signage and there isn't sufficient support from U-channel posts to take the blasts from snow plows, particularly on the highways where more passes are made and potentially at a decent speed.

[shadyjay]

So, I was driving back from the Berkshires and then... pow... this came out of left field:
CT8SB-Exit32 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

CT8SB-Exit31 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

It appears the former single lane ramp from 8SB to 84EB has been restriped for 2 lanes, perhaps to accomodate this ramp now serving 8NB traffic as well (via a reverse direction u-turn on the 8NB to 73 offramp).

And then, having the camera ready in case there were any chances to the pull-through at Exit 23....

84EB-Exit23-2 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

POW... the pull-through is gone.

[Mergingtraffic]

So, I was driving back from the Berkshires and then... pow... this came out of left field:
CT8SB-Exit32 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

CT8SB-Exit31 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

It appears the former single lane ramp from 8SB to 84EB has been restriped for 2 lanes, perhaps to accomodate this ramp now serving 8NB traffic as well (via a reverse direction u-turn on the 8NB to 73 offramp).

Yes that's temp for construction.  It just goes to show ya that the ramp was really built for two-lanes originally. I think they should keep it two lanes permanently.  Also, if you drive the U-turn temp ramp for CT-8 NB to I-84 EB via CT-73, it is a really big set up.  Flashing lights on warning signs, VMSs that show your speed leading up to the hairpin turn, chevrons with lights on it, a huge jersey barrier.  It all looks permanent but it's just for the detour.  No expense was spared it seemed. 

As for the Exit 25 BGS in your pic, IDK why they took down the 3-lane pull thru.  Or that they attached a new different BGS to an overpass when the DOT is taking down signs from overpasses.

[KEVIN_224]

They've now got the newer LED streetlight poles up in Berlin, CT. They're mostly along CT Route 9 north from before Exit 23 in Berlin up to Exit 24 (To CT Route 71 and 372). There's also a couple going up on the Willow Brook Connector itself to it's lone exit (for CT Route 71 - New Britain Road in Berlin/South Main Street in New Britain).

The CT Route 9 button copy sign has likely been there since the road was changed from 72 to 9 around 1990.

[shadyjay]

The onramp sign (right) most likely dates back way before CT 9 was routed that way (1990).  The "9 NORTH" portion is button copy, but the rest is not, so there was most likely a "72 WEST" in that portion.  There's a few signs throughout this portion of CT 9 (Berlin/New Britain) which date back to the CT 72 days.  I'd say they date back to the early 1980s time frame. 

I remember the opening of CT 9 between I-91 and the Berlin Turnpike, in December 1989.  There was a brief period ( a couple months ) where CT 9 ended/CT 72 began at the Berlin Tpke overpass (there was even a sign saying just that).  It wasn't until the spring of 1990 when CT 9 was extended and replaced CT 72 up to New Britain, thence on the Shevchenko to CT 175 in Newington. 
If that left sign (Exit 24 1 mile) was installed at that time, I'm not sure why the route markers weren't outline shields.  This exit did exist prior to CT 9 being signed this way (and in fact even the exit carried the "72" designation before the curve into New Britain proper was built).  Exit numbers weren't added until CT 9 was signed past the Berlin Tpke, again, around the spring of 1990.

[RobbieL2415]

If it's button-copy, its from ~1986-~1997.  Signs that I know to exist before 1986 are all non-reflective.

From 1997 to today everything's been reflective non-button copy.

[Mergingtraffic]

If it's button-copy, its from ~1986-~1997.  Signs that I know to exist before 1986 are all non-reflective.

From 1997 to today everything's been reflective non-button copy.

I'd say 1984 to 1996-97 is reflective button copy.  The I-78 BGS on CT-2 has a 1984 date on it and this one had a 1985 date. It's gone now.



CT did use reflective demountable copy from around 1981-1984. The CT-25 Expwy had it and those signs had a 1981 date on the back I remember.
Before that they used non-reflective button copy.

This one is from around 1980 or so. It was original to the CT-8 Expwy conversion.  It was JUST replaced this week on CT-8 for the current signing contract.

[Rothman]

I-78 on CT-2?

[Mergingtraffic]

I-78 on CT-2?

DOH!  CT-78 LOL

[shadyjay]

Demountable copy, what I call Phase II, still exists on I-84 from Exits 57-64 and most likely dates back to the completion of I-384 to I-84 and the subsequent widening and complete reconstruction of the Wilbur Cross Highway in that area.  It also still exists on the mid 80s extension of I-691 from Exit 4 in Southington to I-84 in Cheshire/Southington. 

Still hard to believe how much of those old signs still exist.  And that's not to mention all the Phase III reflective button copy that exists in large portions on CT 2, CT 9, CT 11, and I-91 north of Hartford. 

IIRC, the signs that were replaced on I-395 (the original Conn Tpke portion) in the Norwich area were reflective button copy with a "born on date" of 1985.  They most likely replaced the original 1959-vintage all text blue signs.  Some of those survived on the I-95 portion, Branford-Guilford, until 1993.