Connecticut News

[Ted$8roadFan]

I wonder if Hartford and Connecticut still have the kind of corporate leadership and stakeholders that could help move a project like this along. Then again, it was the old business "bishops"  that led to the highway mess to begin with.

[The Ghostbuster]

Although I've never been to Connecticut, this proposal seems like a pipe dream to me. I would be very surprised if any of this is implemented.

[cstp3103]

I was on CT 9 today and discovered that the old exit numbers have been blacked out from most of the signs, but the new ones have not been added. Additionally, the "Old Exit X" signs are already up. Does anyone know how long this process usually takes?

Sorry for no pictures, I would have taken some if I wasn't driving

[jp the roadgeek]

I was on CT 9 today and discovered that the old exit numbers have been blacked out from most of the signs, but the new ones have not been added. Additionally, the "Old Exit X" signs are already up. Does anyone know how long this process usually takes?

Sorry for no pictures, I would have taken some if I wasn't driving

It's CTDOT, so the over/under is 5 years.  I drove the far northern end of it today and there is still button copy at the 84 split and no enhanced mile markers to speak of yet.  CT 72 was supposed to be converted in late 21 and there is still old signage and no mile markers to speak of.

[abqtraveler]

I was on CT 9 today and discovered that the old exit numbers have been blacked out from most of the signs, but the new ones have not been added. Additionally, the "Old Exit X" signs are already up. Does anyone know how long this process usually takes?

Sorry for no pictures, I would have taken some if I wasn't driving

It's CTDOT, so the over/under is 5 years.  I drove the far northern end of it today and there is still button copy at the 84 split and no enhanced mile markers to speak of yet.  CT 72 was supposed to be converted in late 21 and there is still old signage and no mile markers to speak of.

If the sign replacements on Route 8 are any indicator as to how long this could drag on for Routes 9 and 72, it could be a few more years until you see the new exit numbers unveiled on Routes 9 and 72.  They started sign replacements on Route 8 in 2019, and they now just let the last of 4 contracts to replace the remaining signs and renumber exits on Route 8, which is not scheduled to be completed until the end of next year.  So...for Route 8...4 contracts and 5 years to complete.  At the rate that Routes 9 and 72 are going, they might end up taking longer than Route 8. So maybe 2026 we might see the new exit numbers.

[shadyjay]

The southern contract (I-95 to Middletown) had its last button copy signs replaced two days ago, and there's only one old sign left to remove.  Some ramp signage needs replacement, but that's it.

The middle contract (Exit 18-24) had almost zero progress in the past month, though I did notice the start of replacement of sheet aluminums on off ramp signage and a couple on the mainline.  The northern contract (Exit 25-I-84) has also seen almost zero progress in the past few months.  However, there is a new sheet sign for Iwo Jima Memorial/Exit 38?, except the new number isn't covered up. 

My guess is that we won't see "the great reveal" until the primary guide signs are replaced on the middle and northern contracts, otherwise we'll see duplicate numbers.  When that will be is anyone's guess.

[connroadgeek]

Why didn't they start at the northern end at the 84 interchange and work south doing one exit fully at a time? That way you don't have half-done changes, each exit gets done fully at once, and you avoid duplicate numbers and blacked out signs.

[shadyjay]

Why didn't they start at the northern end at the 84 interchange and work south doing one exit fully at a time? That way you don't have half-done changes, each exit gets done fully at once, and you avoid duplicate numbers and blacked out signs.

Because they split the project up into 3 separate contracts.  The northern contract was awarded first, then the middle contract, then the southern contract.  The middle and northern contracts originally had sequential exits only, while the southern contract took care of the signs from Middletown, south, and changed out the exit tabs (yes, the exit tabs) for ones with mile-based numbers.  At some point, the contracts were altered, since the new signs north of Middletown were fabricated with the new numbers, but with the old numbers tacked on. 

In addition, the signs north of Middletown lack the thick black borders and cram 3 digit route numbers into a 2 digit shield. 

It appears right now the holdout is with the overheads on all 3 contracts... those in Middletown are just having panels replaced, while the others not replaced yet are all new gantries, with their foundations mostly having been installed last summer. 

[connroadgeek]

Because they split the project up into 3 separate contracts.  The northern contract was awarded first, then the middle contract, then the southern contract.  The middle and northern contracts originally had sequential exits only, while the southern contract took care of the signs from Middletown, south, and changed out the exit tabs (yes, the exit tabs) for ones with mile-based numbers.  At some point, the contracts were altered, since the new signs north of Middletown were fabricated with the new numbers, but with the old numbers tacked on. 

In addition, the signs north of Middletown lack the thick black borders and cram 3 digit route numbers into a 2 digit shield. 

It appears right now the holdout is with the overheads on all 3 contracts... those in Middletown are just having panels replaced, while the others not replaced yet are all new gantries, with their foundations mostly having been installed last summer. 

Doesn't that all seem needlessly complicated? Seems like this type of job should be pretty simple and straightforward.

[abqtraveler]

Why didn't they start at the northern end at the 84 interchange and work south doing one exit fully at a time? That way you don't have half-done changes, each exit gets done fully at once, and you avoid duplicate numbers and blacked out signs.

Because they split the project up into 3 separate contracts.  The northern contract was awarded first, then the middle contract, then the southern contract.  The middle and northern contracts originally had sequential exits only, while the southern contract took care of the signs from Middletown, south, and changed out the exit tabs (yes, the exit tabs) for ones with mile-based numbers.  At some point, the contracts were altered, since the new signs north of Middletown were fabricated with the new numbers, but with the old numbers tacked on. 

In addition, the signs north of Middletown lack the thick black borders and cram 3 digit route numbers into a 2 digit shield. 

It appears right now the holdout is with the overheads on all 3 contracts... those in Middletown are just having panels replaced, while the others not replaced yet are all new gantries, with their foundations mostly having been installed last summer.

It boggles me why in Connecticut it takes so long to complete these sign replacement projects. About 4 years ago, NYSDOT let a contract to replace all of the signs and renumber exits along the entire length (71 miles) of I-84 through the state, that the contractor completed in about 9 months...which included the replacement of ground-mounted and overhead gantries in addition to the sign panels themselves, and all of the smaller sheet metal signs.

I remember back in the late '80s when CTDOT replaced the old Turnpike-style signs on I-95 between Stratford and New Haven, and from what I recall, that took more than a year as well...for a stretch of highway that was less than 20 miles. I recall the new overhead structures being erected and then they sat there for months until they started installing the new sign panels.

[bob7374]

According to CTDOT's latest project advertising schedule (12/13/2022), we will have 4 more route specific projects to complain about how slow they are starting later this year. They are:
0171-0480               Replace Aluminum Signs on Ramps on I-84, I-91 and CT 190, March 22
0170-5026               Replace Highway Signs and Supports on I-384/US 6, June 7
0146-0203               Replace Highway Signs and Supports on I-84, Vernon to Union, June 28
0083-0271               Replace Highway Signs and Support on CT 15, Milford to Meriden, July 26

[connroadgeek]

It boggles me why in Connecticut it takes so long to complete these sign replacement projects. About 4 years ago, NYSDOT let a contract to replace all of the signs and renumber exits along the entire length (71 miles) of I-84 through the state, that the contractor completed in about 9 months...which included the replacement of ground-mounted and overhead gantries in addition to the sign panels themselves, and all of the smaller sheet metal signs.

I remember back in the late '80s when CTDOT replaced the old Turnpike-style signs on I-95 between Stratford and New Haven, and from what I recall, that took more than a year as well...for a stretch of highway that was less than 20 miles. I recall the new overhead structures being erected and then they sat there for months until they started installing the new sign panels.

Because Connecticut thinks there is no point in doing this, doesn't want to do this, thinks it's a waste of money, and will drag its feet and will probably be the last state to finish.

[abqtraveler]

It boggles me why in Connecticut it takes so long to complete these sign replacement projects. About 4 years ago, NYSDOT let a contract to replace all of the signs and renumber exits along the entire length (71 miles) of I-84 through the state, that the contractor completed in about 9 months...which included the replacement of ground-mounted and overhead gantries in addition to the sign panels themselves, and all of the smaller sheet metal signs.

I remember back in the late '80s when CTDOT replaced the old Turnpike-style signs on I-95 between Stratford and New Haven, and from what I recall, that took more than a year as well...for a stretch of highway that was less than 20 miles. I recall the new overhead structures being erected and then they sat there for months until they started installing the new sign panels.

Because Connecticut thinks there is no point in doing this, doesn't want to do this, thinks it's a waste of money, and will drag its feet and will probably be the last state to finish.

In that case, they'll have to contend with New Hampshire if they want to be last to convert to mileage-based numbers. Connecticut may be dragging their feet out of reluctance to make the conversion, but as long as Chris Sununu is governor of New Hampshire, the subject of exit renumbering if completely off the table there.

[shadyjay]

Drove CT 9 today up to Exit 22/Berlin.  Finally we're getting new sheet aluminums north of Middletown.  They've only made it up a few miles, but in that time they managed to screw up one of the new exit services sheets, with the "Lodging" symbol for Exit 19/NB being mounted 90 degrees to how it should be.  I mean, really, is there any quality control anymore?  Does someone really rivet that sheet to the sign and then someone else installs it, and noone says anything?  The "signal ahead" sign they put up SB before the Middletown lights that was upside down has been corrected, however. 

UPDATE 1/15 - new sheets now extend SB up to (former) Exit 23.

[jp the roadgeek]

I was on 9 yesterday from 23-28.  There was a newer speed limit sign by Exit 24 (the thinner 65), but the overhead exit now signage for 24 (along with the makeshift CT 9 pull thru for Newington/West Hartford) is still there, as is the bridge mount for Exit 22 southbound on the Christian Lane overpass, and the 1/2-mile signage for the 9/72 split northbound (although there are piers for the new gantry).  As for 72, there are really only three signage changes/eliminations that need to be made: removal of the old 1/4 mile advance gantry with the pull thru for 72/84 and Exit 6 signage; the eastbound bridge mounts for Exits 8 and 9 on the Curtis St overpass (piers are there), and the westbound tube gantry with the single exit now sign for Exit 2 just west of the 84/72 split.  Also: exit tabs will have to be added to the APL's for the CT 9 split on 72 east.   

[Mergingtraffic]

The "signal ahead" sign they put up SB before the Middletown lights that was upside down has been corrected,

and why the signal ahead signs aren't extruded aluminum is beyond me.  MA would've done it that way.

[Mergingtraffic]

IDK if you saw this but CT is AGAIN studying future I-84/Ct-8 Mixmaster (it was done in 2007 too) but this time the alternatives involve makingCT-8 a boulevard and making some of the ramps signalized.

Ugh

https://www.newmixwaterbury.com/project-alternatives/

[abqtraveler]

IDK if you saw this but CT is AGAIN studying future I-84/Ct-8 Mixmaster (it was done in 2007 too) but this time the alternatives involve makingCT-8 a boulevard and making some of the ramps signalized.

Ugh

https://www.newmixwaterbury.com/project-alternatives/

CTDOT is going to have to prepare an EIS/EIE for the Mixmaster reconfiguration, so they are looking at a range of alternatives that could be evaluated as part of the EIS/EIE. What you see about "bouelvardizing" Route 8 through the interchange is just presenting what the realm of the possible is. Given the amount of traffic the Mixmaster handles, I view the boulevard concept as more of a "throw away" option that is included in the analysis of alternatives for CTDOT to show in the EIS/EIE that they've done their due diligence in arriving at their preferred alternative, whatever that might be.

[SectorZ]

IDK if you saw this but CT is AGAIN studying future I-84/Ct-8 Mixmaster (it was done in 2007 too) but this time the alternatives involve makingCT-8 a boulevard and making some of the ramps signalized.

Ugh

https://www.newmixwaterbury.com/project-alternatives/

Is that 5 mile southern bypass a new idea?

[abqtraveler]

IDK if you saw this but CT is AGAIN studying future I-84/Ct-8 Mixmaster (it was done in 2007 too) but this time the alternatives involve makingCT-8 a boulevard and making some of the ramps signalized.

Ugh

https://www.newmixwaterbury.com/project-alternatives/

Is that 5 mile southern bypass a new idea?

Yes...again they are looking at the realm of the possible as part of the EIS/EIE development...including concepts that are completely pie in the sky, like a southern bypass for I-84 and "downgrading' Route 8 to a signalized boulevard through the interchange.

[shadyjay]

The Great Reveal is coming next week!  Route 9's new exit numbers...

https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/CTDOT-Construction-Advisories/2023/Exit-Numbers-Changing-on-Route-9-from-Old-Saybrook-to-Farmington

With several overheads still to go up, I wonder if there's going to be a flurry of activity this week to get them installed, or whether there will be overlays on the old signs until the new ones go up. 

[abqtraveler]

The Great Reveal is coming next week!  Route 9's new exit numbers...

https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/CTDOT-Construction-Advisories/2023/Exit-Numbers-Changing-on-Route-9-from-Old-Saybrook-to-Farmington

With several overheads still to go up, I wonder if there's going to be a flurry of activity this week to get them installed, or whether there will be overlays on the old signs until the new ones go up.

Curious as to whether they will unveil the new exit numbers on Route 72 as well.

[jp the roadgeek]

The Great Reveal is coming next week!  Route 9's new exit numbers...

https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/CTDOT-Construction-Advisories/2023/Exit-Numbers-Changing-on-Route-9-from-Old-Saybrook-to-Farmington

With several overheads still to go up, I wonder if there's going to be a flurry of activity this week to get them installed, or whether there will be overlays on the old signs until the new ones go up.

Curious as to whether they will unveil the new exit numbers on Route 72 as well.

Probably not.  None of the OLD EXIT XX signs are up.  We got the preview of coming attractions a couple years ago, but I don't see it happening. 

[shadyjay]

I bet the exit numbers on Rt 17 will also be revealed as part of the Monday project. 

[abqtraveler]

The Great Reveal is coming next week!  Route 9's new exit numbers...

https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/CTDOT-Construction-Advisories/2023/Exit-Numbers-Changing-on-Route-9-from-Old-Saybrook-to-Farmington

With several overheads still to go up, I wonder if there's going to be a flurry of activity this week to get them installed, or whether there will be overlays on the old signs until the new ones go up.

Curious as to whether they will unveil the new exit numbers on Route 72 as well.

Probably not.  None of the OLD EXIT XX signs are up.  We got the preview of coming attractions a couple years ago, but I don't see it happening.

That makes no sense because, from my understanding, the northernmost contract to replace signs on Route 9 included Route 72 as well. Just like it makes no sense that CTDOT doesn't plan to renumber exits on Route 25 north of the Route 8 split as part of the exit renumbering contract for Route 8.