Connecticut News

[NE2]

I-95 exits 2-56 are mostly within a mile of their corresponding milepost, and should be kept as-is with minor changes (e.g. 2 becomes 1, 27-27A becomes 27A-B). There's no benefit to changing these and much potential confusion. Beyond Branford is where renumbering might be useful.

[kurumi]

Almost all political cartoons are inane, including this one, but it is road-related:

http://www.courant.com/opinion/cartoons/hc-malloy-budget-20150219-story.html

[Mergingtraffic]

so if CT is going to stop making state route signs with the thick border b/c of the feds doesn't that mean West Virginia is too?  They also had thick black borders.

PS, an old 3-digit route gem.

[J Route Z]

so if CT is going to stop making state route signs with the thick border b/c of the feds doesn't that mean West Virginia is too?  They also had thick black borders.

PS, an old 3-digit route gem.

Geez that "west" sign plate is much newer compared to the "east" one!

[KEVIN_224]

Plus the sign for "Marion" (a section of Southington) is even screwed onto the pole wrong!

[Pete from Boston]

Plus the sign for "Marion" (a section of Southington) is even screwed onto the pole wrong!

It's an afterthought installation.

[jp the roadgeek]

I-95 exits 2-56 are mostly within a mile of their corresponding milepost, and should be kept as-is with minor changes (e.g. 2 becomes 1, 27-27A becomes 27A-B). There's no benefit to changing these and much potential confusion. Beyond Branford is where renumbering might be useful.

2-56 would look like this if changed:

2 -> 1
3-16 as is
17 -> 18
18-> 20
19 ->23
20 (SB) & 21-> 24 (A&B SB)
22-24: +3 to all
25-26 -> 28 A&B
27A/ 27/28  -> 29 A&B&C
29-36: +1 (36-37 NB become 37 A&B)
38-40: as is
41->42
42->44
43->45
44 & 45->46 (A&B SB)
46 & 47->47 A&B
48: as is
50-54: -1
55-56: as is

Most of the heavy hitters (Stamford exits, US 7, Milford Parkway, US 1 by CT Post Mall, CT 34, I-91) stay the same number.  CT 8/25 is the only major change.

[ctsignguy]

I-95 exits 2-56 are mostly within a mile of their corresponding milepost, and should be kept as-is with minor changes (e.g. 2 becomes 1, 27-27A becomes 27A-B). There's no benefit to changing these and much potential confusion. Beyond Branford is where renumbering might be useful.

2-56 would look like this if changed:

2 -> 1
3-16 as is
17 -> 18
18-> 20
19 ->23
20 (SB) & 21-> 24 (A&B SB)
22-24: +3 to all
25-26 -> 28 A&B
27A/ 27/28  -> 29 A&B&C
29-36: +1 (36-37 NB become 37 A&B)
38-40: as is
41->42
42->44
43->45
44 & 45->46 (A&B SB)
46 & 47->47 A&B
48: as is
50-54: -1
55-56: as is

Most of the heavy hitters (Stamford exits, US 7, Milford Parkway, US 1 by CT Post Mall, CT 34, I-91) stay the same number.  CT 8/25 is the only major change.

All the more reason to leave them alone...FHWA be damned, what is the possible benefit of messing around with all this? 

[02 Park Ave]

Mileage-based exit numbering is the norm in every state south and west of New York.  It has proven to be beneficial motorists.  What makes Connecticut so unique that it has to be exempted from using this system? 🎆

[cl94]

Mileage-based exit numbering is the norm in every state south and west of New York.  It has proven to be beneficial motorists.  What makes Connecticut so unique that it has to be exempted from using this system? 🎆

The point was that all but 6 exits in the first 56 miles of the Connecticut Turnpike are within 2 miles of the respective mile marker, so renumbering these exits produce little benefit with a high cost, in addition to creating confusion during the changeover period.

[MikeTheActuary]

Mileage-based exit numbering is the norm in every state south and west of New York.  It has proven to be beneficial motorists.  What makes Connecticut so unique that it has to be exempted from using this system? 🎆

While I am glad that Connecticut is getting with the mileage-based program, I do have to say that for that section of I-95, if the feds force renumbering, I'll be writing my congresscritters to have them push to make Tennessee redo I-40's exit numbers.

Actually, if the feds say that exit numbers and mileposts must be in sync, I wonder if it would be less disruptive on that section of 95 to simply tweak the mileposts. Skip a mile here or there; maybe have a suffixed mile, etc.   It would drive folks like us crazy, but average 4-wheel drivers in that section of the state only pay attention to the mile markers for things like requesting assistance in the event of accident or breakdown.

Edit:  Example of a suffixed mile marker

[AMLNet49]

The numbers from NY to Exit 56 are so close they need to stay the same. Maybe what you could do is rework the end of the milepost system to represent Exit 56 as Mile 56, and then start the renumbering from where 56 leaves off. And then 395/695 would get their own mileage based numbers separate from the Turnpike numbers.

Edit: it actually already is matched up, so basically don't change anything below 56 and then just start the renumbering from there.

[ctsignguy]

Mileage-based exit numbering is the norm in every state south and west of New York.  It has proven to be beneficial motorists.  What makes Connecticut so unique that it has to be exempted from using this system? 🎆

I am not saying that Connecticut needs to necessarily be exempt, but when the Turnpike was constructed in the mid-50s, the major users then as now, are the locals...and i would say that the majority of users are still teh lcoals who hop[ on 95 at say Exit 23 and get off at Exit 26, and that is how they know the exits.

While i understand the need for some kind of uniformity (although i think for a place like Connecticut, with its closely jammed exits, it is a waste of time and scarce money/resources that need to be put to better use, like basic road and bridge maintenance), some concession by the Feds needs to be made for the locals who really constitute the largest number of users of the roads there....

and i still hold that mileage based exits make sense in states like PA and Ohio where there are many miles between exits, but not Connecticut where other than I-395, there seldom is more than 2 miles between interchanges...such a system is seen by the  ConnDot folks i have spoken to as silly and somewhat idiotic...

[Mergingtraffic]

Mileage-based exit numbering is the norm in every state south and west of New York.  It has proven to be beneficial motorists.  What makes Connecticut so unique that it has to be exempted from using this system? 🎆

The point was that all but 6 exits in the first 56 miles of the Connecticut Turnpike are within 2 miles of the respective mile marker, so renumbering these exits produce little benefit with a high cost, in addition to creating confusion during the changeover period.

In this case it's not that CT is too good or that CT just doesn't want to change....I believe in this case, it's more trouble than what it's worth.  If you want to know mileage look at the mileage marker signs.

What is point of changing Exit 2 to Exit 1 because of a mileage?!  It's one number.  Big deal.

On a side note: CT-2A is mileage based too.  Exit 5A or Exit 6?!  It really isn't useful since CT-2A overlaps with I-395 but the average driver doesn't know it.  In this case I'd make CT-2A's exits unumbered.

I'd say that for any state that has exits almost every mile or so.

[vdeane]

What is point of changing Exit 2 to Exit 1 because of a mileage?!  It's one number.  Big deal.

Because anything worth doing is worth doing right?

[OracleUsr]

Mileage-based exit numbering is the norm in every state south and west of New York.  It has proven to be beneficial motorists.  What makes Connecticut so unique that it has to be exempted from using this system? 🎆

While I am glad that Connecticut is getting with the mileage-based program, I do have to say that for that section of I-95, if the feds force renumbering, I'll be writing my congresscritters to have them push to make Tennessee redo I-40's exit numbers.

Actually, if the feds say that exit numbers and mileposts must be in sync, I wonder if it would be less disruptive on that section of 95 to simply tweak the mileposts. Skip a mile here or there; maybe have a suffixed mile, etc.   It would drive folks like us crazy, but average 4-wheel drivers in that section of the state only pay attention to the mile markers for things like requesting assistance in the event of accident or breakdown.

Edit:  Example of a suffixed mile marker

How would they redo I-40's exit #'s in TN?

[KEVIN_224]

The only highway which should get renumbered in this state is Route 15, especially from the NY border to Meriden.

[cl94]

The only highway which should get renumbered in this state is Route 15, especially from the NY border to Meriden.

Eh, I'd personally do everything except I-95 south of Exit 56 and all 3DIs (I-395 should get renumbered). While I-84 has a bunch of exits, it's 15-20 miles off by the time you get to Hartford and if anything should be an Exit 0, it's the interchange practically at the state line.

[Pete from Boston]

What is point of changing Exit 2 to Exit 1 because of a mileage?!  It's one number.  Big deal.

Because anything worth doing is worth doing right?

"Right" is also spending tax dollars the most wisely.

[cpzilliacus]

[WSJ.com is a paywalled site.  If you cannot read this in full, leave me a PM with a real e-mail address and I will send you a link.]

Wall Street Journal: Drive to Reinstate Connecticut Tolls Would Start at Border - Legislative hearing set on bill that would reinstate some tolls to raise money for highway projects

Connecticut abolished road tolls more than 30 years ago, and proposals to revive them have emerged repeatedly ever since. They go nowhere.

This year, however, the reinstatement of tolls may be gathering momentum because they are seen as an important source of funding for Gov. Dannel Malloy 's $100 billion proposal to upgrade roads, bridges and rail system.

The state phased out tolls in the 1980s after a tractor trailer collided with cars lined up at a Stratford, Conn., toll booth. Seven people died in the fiery crash.

The Legislature's transportation committee is scheduled to hold a hearing Wednesday in Hartford on a bill that proposes to reinstate tolls on major highways that cross the state's borders to raise money for highway projects.

[DrSmith]

I-91 would also not have big changes in the exits... 49 exits in 58 miles. So we switch from Bloomfield Ave Exit 37 to Bloomfield Ave Exit 45?  Up through about Meriden, everything is fairly close.  The little bit of spacing that occurs is really from Meriden up towards Hartford.

I believe the largest stretch between exits is the No Exit Zone on the Merritt Parkway  - 5.5 miles. The largest stretch without an exit is the result of not being able to decide on an exit.... Says something there.

Does it matter as much anymore anyway really?  Everybody plugs in the GPS and blindly follows what it says to do.  That thing is telling them how many more miles. 

Now time for a little more gasoline on the fire..... What are we going to do when everything eventually goes metric? (Or the flip side, should roads like DE 1 be made to switch from km-based to mile-based......we use miles here in the colonies)

[Pete from Boston]

I believe the largest stretch between exits is the No Exit Zone on the Merritt Parkway  - 5.5 miles. The largest stretch without an exit is the result of not being able to decide on an exit.... Says something there.

It was my understanding this was due to local opposition to exits there.  Could be wrong.

What are we going to do when everything eventually goes metric?

Who writes your jokes?

[Duke87]

I believe the largest stretch between exits is the No Exit Zone on the Merritt Parkway  - 5.5 miles. The largest stretch without an exit is the result of not being able to decide on an exit.... Says something there.

It was my understanding this was due to local opposition to exits there.  Could be wrong.

That would explain the lack of exits, but not why the number 43 was skipped when the exits were numbered.

I know that exit 30 was an at grade intersection with Butternut Hollow Road (long since removed) and exit 32 was planned to be built at Stanwich Road, but I can't account for exit 43 being missing. Bear in mind, the road originally had no exit numbers, they were added about a decade after it opened.

I seem to recall reading something somewhere about exit 43 being for an unbuilt extension of the Sherwood Island Connector (SR 476), but this seems extremely speculative and not quite sensical since an extension of said connector would logically aim it right at the south end of Weston Rd and thus exit 42, not a point to the east.

[MikeTheActuary]

and i still hold that mileage based exits make sense in states like PA and Ohio where there are many miles between exits, but not Connecticut where other than I-395, there seldom is more than 2 miles between interchanges...such a system is seen by the  ConnDot folks i have spoken to as silly and somewhat idiotic...

And I suspect the nonsense / perceived idiocy is not in the use of mileage-based exit numbering versus sequential; it's in changing from sequential to mileage in a geographically small state with closely-spaced exits.

They're going to spend a ton of money, generate quite a bit of confusion and public complaints...and the numbers won't change very much.

How would they redo I-40's exit #'s in TN?

The exit numbering on I-40 in Tennessee reflects the mileage of the highway as if I-40 had been built through Overton Park in Memphis.  Instead, it was realigned onto the north side of I-240 without adjusting exit numbers beyond the shift.   So, between the two I-240 interchanges, the exit numbers are 2 off from the actual mileage of I-240.  I think east of there it's either a 3 or 4 mile difference (?  -- it's been a while...)

The exit numbers and mile markers aren't that far off from the actual mileage...but in CT, the exit numbers mostly aren't that far off from the actual mileage either.

[kurumi]

I believe the largest stretch between exits is the No Exit Zone on the Merritt Parkway  - 5.5 miles. The largest stretch without an exit is the result of not being able to decide on an exit.... Says something there.

It was my understanding this was due to local opposition to exits there.  Could be wrong.

That would explain the lack of exits, but not why the number 43 was skipped when the exits were numbered.

I know that exit 30 was an at grade intersection with Butternut Hollow Road (long since removed) and exit 32 was planned to be built at Stanwich Road, but I can't account for exit 43 being missing. Bear in mind, the road originally had no exit numbers, they were added about a decade after it opened.

I seem to recall reading something somewhere about exit 43 being for an unbuilt extension of the Sherwood Island Connector (SR 476), but this seems extremely speculative and not quite sensical since an extension of said connector would logically aim it right at the south end of Weston Rd and thus exit 42, not a point to the east.

Long ago, the SSR 476 extension idea was true (see SSR 476). Into the 1980s, there were still plans to add an interchange for local use. Here are my raw notes (not yet up on the site; there's a backlog) for exit 43:

Exit 43:
"Officials oppose exit 43."  Norwalk Hour, June 6, 1984. Westport officials asked for a new exit. Bridgeport, Fairfield and Greater Bridgeport RPA cited several reasons against building one. Westport had asked for it to solve traffic problems at exit 42 and solve the 5-mile "no man's land"  between 42 and 44. GRBPA spokesman executive director says finishing 7 and 25 would solve the problem for good.

"DOT promises to keep land for Exit 43."  Hour, Dec. 11, 1984. SWRPA and MPO also oppose the sale. Exit 43 was planned but never constructed when MP was built. No details, though.

"DOT tells Fairfield officials Exit 43 land is not for sale."  Hour, Dec. 17, 1984. Fairfield opposes the exit because the access road would go thru its residential neighborhoods. DOT still owns the land (not specified where). DOT does not want to sell and then have to buy back later. Fairfield pushed for sale.

Looks like exit 43 would have been near the Greenfield Hill section of Fairfield, say between Sturges Hwy and Redding Rd. A compromise in 1938 scuttled the exit. "Greenfield Hill Residents Oppose New Highway Entrance," Fairfield News. 9 September 1938. I don't have this article.