CT-11 Expressway to start in 2020?

Started by Mergingtraffic, June 27, 2013, 06:42:21 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

froggie

^ Nevermind that it hasn't affected ALL new-location projects in New England.  We've had both the Morrisville and (a segment of) Bennington bypasses built in Vermont in the past 10 years.  I-93 in the vicinity of NH 111/Windham was effectively a relocation as well.


Rothman

I was about to say that I think the statement that whatever EPA office is opposed to all new construction just seems false to me.  So, citation needed that it was the Region 1 EPA that killed those projects, because I highly doubt it and believe need and other fiscal priorities are more at stake (especially with Nashua's bypass).

At least here in NY, permits can be obtained if the bureaucratic processes are followed (EIS and what not).  The idea that the EPA in New England is unilaterally denying permits just doesn't ring true.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Roadgeek Adam

Quote from: Rothman on September 03, 2018, 09:09:13 AM
I was about to say that I think the statement that whatever EPA office is opposed to all new construction just seems false to me.  So, citation needed that it was the Region 1 EPA that killed those projects, because I highly doubt it and believe need and other fiscal priorities are more at stake (especially with Nashua's bypass).

At least here in NY, permits can be obtained if the bureaucratic processes are followed (EIS and what not).  The idea that the EPA in New England is unilaterally denying permits just doesn't ring true.

You ask locals, they seem convinced it's the EPA blocking the projects.
Adam Seth Moss
M.A. History, Western Illinois University 2015-17
B.A. History, Montclair State University 2013-15
A.A. History & Education - Middlesex (County) College 2009-13

froggie

Funny thing about that is that it's not the EPA that issues wetlands permits...it's the Army Corps of Engineers...

The Federal Register specifically notes that it wasn't just environmental concerns but also a "lack of financial resources" why the project was killed.

wytout

#29
The article and thread are 5 years old. As the post has suddenly been resurrected.... Has there been any indication anywhere in the interim that this proposal has moved any closer to fruition than it was in 2013? Details please. I've seen no indication that any current plans are on track for an actual start of work being imminent. 2020 is 15 months away.
-Chris

abqtraveler

Quote from: froggie on September 03, 2018, 12:29:34 PM
Funny thing about that is that it's not the EPA that issues wetlands permits...it's the Army Corps of Engineers...

The Federal Register specifically notes that it wasn't just environmental concerns but also a "lack of financial resources" why the project was killed.

True, the Corps of Engineers does issue permits, but only with EPA concurrence. If the EPA does not concur on the permit application, the COE cannot issue the permit until issues raised by the EPA have been addressed to their satisfaction.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

Duke87

Yeah I'm not seeing the broad conspiracy that the EPA is just saying no to new freeways in New England. The Bennington bypass is a good recent example of a freeway (albeit super 2) in New England being built. Even within Connecticut, the US 7 bypass of Brookfield has not had its 10th birthday yet.

As for the other projects named as supposed examples:
- US 6 between 384 and Willimantic does run parallel to the Hop River the whole way, so any freeway (or a widening of the existing road) in that corridor would inevitably have significant wetlands impacts. What killed that project though was not that the EPA flat out said no to the entire concept - it was that the state was unable to come up with an alternative which was satisfactory both to the Army Corps of Engineers (minimizing wetlands impacts) and to locals along the corridor (minimizing impacts on existing development).
- Super 7 is dead because of NIMBY opposition, not because of environmental concerns
- The Circumferential Highway in Nashua had significant wetlands impacts which resulted in the prior version of the proposal being killed. As with US 6, though, this does not mean an alternative with less impacts would not pass muster. It just hasn't been enough of a priority to figure that out.

And CT 11, of course, is dead because Connecticut is broke and can't afford to spend money on it. Because it's Connecticut, every so often they will commission a study in order to look like they're trying to do something, but nothing will ever come of it and there is never any intent for anything to come of it.

The fact of the matter is CT 85 between Salem and Waterford is not that bad and ConnDOT has far more significant problems elsewhere to address with their limited financial resources.
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

WR of USA

Yep, the state can't even maintain their current roads properly, why would they begin to think about building more roads.
Traffic? No problem, enjoy the scenery!

Long live the lovely Sagamore and Bourne bridges and their welcoming traffic bottlenecks for the tourists!

Rothman

#33
Quote from: Roadgeek Adam on September 03, 2018, 11:51:53 AM
Quote from: Rothman on September 03, 2018, 09:09:13 AM
I was about to say that I think the statement that whatever EPA office is opposed to all new construction just seems false to me.  So, citation needed that it was the Region 1 EPA that killed those projects, because I highly doubt it and believe need and other fiscal priorities are more at stake (especially with Nashua's bypass).

At least here in NY, permits can be obtained if the bureaucratic processes are followed (EIS and what not).  The idea that the EPA in New England is unilaterally denying permits just doesn't ring true.

You ask locals, they seem convinced it's the EPA blocking the projects.
Then they need to read the link.  ConnDOT got the authorization for the EIS and when FHWA followed the process by requesting needed information, ConnDOT dropped out.  This was not a matter that involved the EPA, but purely ConnDOT letting it wilt.

One bonehead selectman aside, the reality for CT 11 was lack of funding and political willpower, like the link states up front.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

jon daly

Quote from: Duke87 on September 03, 2018, 07:55:23 PM


The fact of the matter is CT 85 between Salem and Waterford is not that bad and ConnDOT has far more significant problems elsewhere to address with their limited financial resources.

Concur. Back when this thread was born, I was making that commute and it wasn't bad. There's a rotary in Salem Then there's a traffic light in the Chesterfield section of Montville and a few once you're between 395 and 95 in Waterford. I don't think that an extension would've saved much time on that commute.

RobbieL2415

Quote from: WR of USA on September 03, 2018, 08:46:53 PM
Yep, the state can't even maintain their current roads properly, why would they begin to think about building more roads.
No offense but where, currently, is the state not properly maintaining roads?

The Ghostbuster

I'd be very surprised if anything road-related is built in Connecticut ever again.

shadyjay

A dumb-down solution: 
Extend CT 11 south just enough to avoid CT 82 and the Salem Four Corners roundabout.  Have it transition right into Route 85.  Granted, its not perfect, but its a partial solution to a full-build.  And come to think of it, this "extension" did show up on some maps for a while in the 70s/80s.

Or, as I have suggested in the past, just remove the whole damn highway, from Route 2 to Route 85.  Pretend like it never even existed.  New London is already being phased out for a CT 2 EB control point in East Hartford and I bet it won't be featured on I-91 SB Exit 30 when those signs get replaced. 

abqtraveler

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 05, 2018, 04:11:04 PM
I'd be very surprised if anything road-related is built in Connecticut ever again.

Agreed. Highly doubt Connecticut will ever build another new-terrain highway. The Route 7 Brookfield Bypass and the Route 72 expressway through Bristol are perhaps the last new-terrain projects that will be done in Connecticut. The state is having enough trouble maintaing what it currently has.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

jon daly

Quote from: RobbieL2415 on September 04, 2018, 09:40:37 PM
Quote from: WR of USA on September 03, 2018, 08:46:53 PM
Yep, the state can't even maintain their current roads properly, why would they begin to think about building more roads.
No offense but where, currently, is the state not properly maintaining roads?

From the driver's seat, it seems like they're better maintained in CT than RI. RI is doing a lot of bridgework (way overdue, from what I hear, and some of it seems more cosmetic than anything else) but surface roads such as US-6 and its Bypass in the Foster area could use some TLC.

connroadgeek

Quote from: jon daly on September 05, 2018, 09:17:31 PM
Quote from: RobbieL2415 on September 04, 2018, 09:40:37 PM
Quote from: WR of USA on September 03, 2018, 08:46:53 PM
Yep, the state can't even maintain their current roads properly, why would they begin to think about building more roads.
No offense but where, currently, is the state not properly maintaining roads?

From the driver's seat, it seems like they're better maintained in CT than RI. RI is doing a lot of bridgework (way overdue, from what I hear, and some of it seems more cosmetic than anything else) but surface roads such as US-6 and its Bypass in the Foster area could use some TLC.
Also the difference when you cross into CT from NY is like night and day. CT much better.

mgk920

#41
And also don't forget that if federal issues get in the way of building something, if there is enough local and regional interest in the project Congress can certainly step in and order it built anyway.

For example, see: MN 36/WI 64 Saint Croix River bridge on the Minnesota-Wisconsin state line.

Mike

(edit - WOOHOO!  My 3000th posting in AARoads!   :cheers:  )

Buffaboy

Quote from: theroadwayone on September 03, 2018, 01:33:49 AM
Seriously, I could go up there right now armed with a pickaxe and a shovel and build it myself, and it still wouldn't take as long.

While we're at it, I'll rent a grader, paver, dump truck, excavator, bulldozer and boom lift to get the ball rolling. If there's any engineers that want to help bypsss the environmental review, let us know.

We will be done by 2030. Otherwise it will never be built.
What's not to like about highways and bridges, intersections and interchanges, rails and planes?

My Wikipedia county SVG maps: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Buffaboy

Alps

Quote from: Buffaboy on September 21, 2018, 11:06:49 PM
Quote from: theroadwayone on September 03, 2018, 01:33:49 AM
Seriously, I could go up there right now armed with a pickaxe and a shovel and build it myself, and it still wouldn't take as long.

While we're at it, I'll rent a grader, paver, dump truck, excavator, bulldozer and boom lift to get the ball rolling. If there's any engineers that want to help bypsss the environmental review, let us know.

We will be done by 2030. Otherwise it will never be built.
I'll draw up some plans, but I can't sign them.

Roadgeek Adam

I can stand there and laugh at you guys when you're arrested for vandalism.
Adam Seth Moss
M.A. History, Western Illinois University 2015-17
B.A. History, Montclair State University 2013-15
A.A. History & Education - Middlesex (County) College 2009-13



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.