Connecticut News

[abqtraveler]

I'd imagine both contracts would retain existing sequential numbers for now.  Given the plan to renumber exits to the mile-based system will be based on when the signs are replaced, I'd guess they'll hold off on renumbering until they replace signs on I-95 from Branford to New London and on I-84 from East Hartford to Manchester, if not all the way to the Mass state line.  Signs on I-95 west of Branford to NY have been replaced in the past 3-5 years or so and I really can't see the numbers on that section changing much, if they even bother.  It's only east of Branford where the exits become more than 1 mile apart.

I could see them installing new signs with sequential numbers posted on a plate that covers the future mile-based exit numbers.  That way all they'd have to do when all of the signs on I-84 and I-95 from border to border are replaced, is remove the old sequential number and uncover the new number.

[shadyjay]

Guess we'll find out in a couple of months when the I-84 and I-95 sign contract plans are released. 

[southshore720]

I could see them installing new signs with sequential numbers posted on a plate that covers the future mile-based exit numbers.  That way all they'd have to do when all of the signs on I-84 and I-95 from border to border are replaced, is remove the old sequential number and uncover the new number.

That's an EXCELLENT idea.  Unfortunately, it makes sense...and as we know with many DOTs, they like to do just the opposite.

[Mergingtraffic]

I noticed on I-84 EB in Waterbury as the lanes move over to the right in the construction area in the concrete section.....the DOT painted black lines next to the broken and solid lines. Something CT has never done at anytime anywhere.

[RobbieL2415]

http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-hartford-i-84-plans-0226-20160225-story.htmlLooks like CONNDOT is ruling out a full tunnel replace.  for the Hartford viaduct, but isn't ruling out putting a roof over a below-grade-level alignment.

Also, according to this, they're finally discussing options for replacing the Bulkley Bridge. 

[kurumi]

The DOT expects to choose a construction plan in May, but also is starting a 12- to 18-month study of how to relieve congestion at the I-84 and I-91 interchange just east of the viaduct construction zone. The interchange handles 275,000 vehicle trips a day, and backups are frequent because the stretches of I-84 and I-91 there carry only two lanes in each direction, engineers said.

The DOT emphasized that it's only in the preliminary stages of examining possible solutions, but offered three general concepts: Widening the Bulkeley Bridge and redesigning the interchange ramps; rerouting I-84 from western Hartford south toward the Charter Oak Bridge and reconnecting it in East Hartford; or rerouting it north toward Windsor and building a new bridge across the Connecticut River to link back to I-84 in East Hartford.

Widening the Bulkeley Bridge and redesigning the ramps: that's going to be a Q-Bridge sized project.

Rerouting south and using the COB to cross: looks interesting, but Trinity College and other neighborhoods are in the way. You'd want to add another span to the COB and rework the 91/15 crossovers in the area. Then the Bulkeley becomes a boulevard connecting the 2 cities, and you can build attractive residence/retail/restaurant/entertainment around the river. You can remove most of the 5-way interchange at 84/2/500 and use that space as well.

Rerouting north toward Windsor with a new CT river bridge: sounds a lot like the old I-291 (i.e. DOA). New alignment thru West Hartford, or divert it closer in (around the 503 interchange)? Windsor will flip their [pancakes] over a new freeway coming through, and successful projects in CT sometimes seem to require the unanimous assent of all 169 towns.

How about this option, and do it in this order:
* I-691 to 8 lanes, and redo the 84/691 interchange to change the mainline to E/W
* I-91 to 10 lanes from I-691 to COB approach
* new COB span for 12 total lanes
* new future-proofed 84/91 interchange at 91/COB
* I-84 replaces 691 and overlaps I-91 from 691 to COB
* old I-84 from 691 to SR 501 becomes I-584
* old I-84 from SR 501 to 84/15 is removed, or boulevardized, or narrowed and reserved for busway/train

It would be expensive, but not require a lot of new ROW, and make some people happy.

[bob7374]

Yeah.  All the exits have been changed over.

What about the old exit 100 sign north of the Massachusetts line? Is that still there?

I was through that way today and yes, the southbound sign in MA has been changed to the new exit number 53.  Looks like it was done with an overlay on the existing exit tab.

Here's a photo taken earlier today:

[KEVIN_224]

I cut a slight bit of glare to see the mile marker says "0.2". Also, Google S.V. had the time slider for roughly the point of your picture. In the 2007 picture, there was no 2/10 mile marker. Also, the Exit sign was still a BGS off to the side, with "CT" mentioned after both points in the current sign.

[JakeFromNewEngland]

http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-hartford-i-84-plans-0226-20160225-story.htmlLooks like CONNDOT is ruling out a full tunnel replace.  for the Hartford viaduct, but isn't ruling out putting a roof over a below-grade-level alignment.

Also, according to this, they're finally discussing options for replacing the Bulkley Bridge.

Very interesting. I had an idea in mind awhile back about routing I-84 over the Charter Oak, but I figured with the college and neighborhoods in the way it wouldn't be very feasible. IMO, routing I-84 out of downtown is probably a better idea because it opens up space downtown for more development. I'm positive if Hartford ever actually had their beltway built, most of these traffic problems wouldn't exist today.

[southshore720]

I cut a slight bit of glare to see the mile marker says "0.2". Also, Google S.V. had the time slider for roughly the point of your picture. In the 2007 picture, there was no 2/10 mile marker. Also, the Exit sign was still a BGS off to the side, with "CT" mentioned after both points in the current sign.

Ugh...the overlay looks terrible!  A box within a box? 

[AMLNet49]

What's up with the white border? Are the regular MassDOT ones just going to be green patches with no border (which looks much more natural).

[bob7374]

What's up with the white border? Are the regular MassDOT ones just going to be green patches with no border (which looks much more natural).

The MassDOT project will be simple overlays of the exit number only. An image of the signing plan is here: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16734.50 on page 3 of the thread.

[AMLNet49]

What's up with the white border? Are the regular MassDOT ones just going to be green patches with no border (which looks much more natural).

The MassDOT project will be simple overlays of the exit number only. An image of the signing plan is here: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=16734.50 on page 3 of the thread.

I've seen that document, but I'm assuming MassDOT did this overlay too. Unless, of course, it was just a local replacement.

[vdeane]

It looks like ConnDOT shipped a new exit tab and MassDOT just bolted it on rather than spend money on an overlay or removing the existing tab.

[bob7374]

I cut a slight bit of glare to see the mile marker says "0.2". Also, Google S.V. had the time slider for roughly the point of your picture. In the 2007 picture, there was no 2/10 mile marker. Also, the Exit sign was still a BGS off to the side, with "CT" mentioned after both points in the current sign.

Ugh...the overlay looks terrible!  A box within a box? 

I've posted additional photos I took of the new I-395 signage (and exit numbers) from the border south to the US 6 exit in this blog post (plus photos of I-95 in MA construction and Mass Pike electronic toll gantries): http://surewhynotnow.blogspot.com/2016/02/road-trip-to-future.html

[The Ghostbuster]

If Connecticut's other highways change exit numbers, will the new number be bolted on as well?

[shadyjay]

The plan is to change exit numbers as signs are replaced, that's why the timeline for full state conversion is something like 20 years.  Honestly I hope it happens sooner than that.  This particular sign got a whole new tab in place because it's a modification of a Mass. install.  When I-395 signs were replaced, overheads were last to be replaced, and the exit numbers were modified in the interim right on the existing tabs.  I've got a couple shots of former Exit 81W altered to read Exit 13B.  Strange that they went through all that trouble to make the exit numbers continuous, even if it meant modifying a sign that was just going to get replaced anyway.  Seeing that makes me think some of the newer (post-2000/non button copy) installs will get the same treatment when the time comes to convert other roads in the state.

[RobbieL2415]

The plan is to change exit numbers as signs are replaced, that's why the timeline for full state conversion is something like 20 years.  Honestly I hope it happens sooner than that.  This particular sign got a whole new tab in place because it's a modification of a Mass. install.  When I-395 signs were replaced, overheads were last to be replaced, and the exit numbers were modified in the interim right on the existing tabs.  I've got a couple shots of former Exit 81W altered to read Exit 13B.  Strange that they went through all that trouble to make the exit numbers continuous, even if it meant modifying a sign that was just going to get replaced anyway.  Seeing that makes me think some of the newer (post-2000/non button copy) installs will get the same treatment when the time comes to convert other roads in the state.

IMO they should be done in this order:

Highways with no exit numbers:  CT 3, CT 20*, CT 189 stub, SR 571 (old 72 end), Willimantic Bypass, Whitehead Highway, Milford Connector*, Clarence B. Sharp Highway

"Stub" highways: US 7, I-291, I-691/CT 66, I-384, CT 2A, CT 11, CT 25** CT 40, CT 72, Norwalk Connector

Remaining highways in this order:  CT 8, CT 9, CT 2, I-84, I-91, CT 15***, I-95

*Signs already replaced
**Signs in the process of being replaced (one or two left)

[AMLNet49]

The plan is to change exit numbers as signs are replaced, that's why the timeline for full state conversion is something like 20 years.  Honestly I hope it happens sooner than that.  This particular sign got a whole new tab in place because it's a modification of a Mass. install.  When I-395 signs were replaced, overheads were last to be replaced, and the exit numbers were modified in the interim right on the existing tabs.  I've got a couple shots of former Exit 81W altered to read Exit 13B.  Strange that they went through all that trouble to make the exit numbers continuous, even if it meant modifying a sign that was just going to get replaced anyway.  Seeing that makes me think some of the newer (post-2000/non button copy) installs will get the same treatment when the time comes to convert other roads in the state.

IMO they should be done in this order:

Highways with no exit numbers:  CT 3, CT 20*, CT 189 stub, SR 571 (old 72 end), Willimantic Bypass, Whitehead Highway, Milford Connector*, Clarence B. Sharp Highway

"Stub" highways: US 7, I-291, I-691/CT 66, I-384, CT 2A, CT 11, CT 25** CT 40, CT 72, Norwalk Connector

Remaining highways in this order:  CT 8, CT 9, CT 2, I-84, I-91, CT 15***, I-95

*Signs already replaced
**Signs in the process of being replaced (one or two left)

Yes the Milford Parkway signs were replaced, but they were given exit numbers at that time, ending its status as a road with no exit numbers. Exits are sequential 1 to 4. At the same time, entrance ramps got signs that said "Milford Parkway" for the first time, also ending its status as an unsigned designation (however it is still not signed from I-95 or the Wilbur Cross/Merritt Parkways).

[jp the roadgeek]

I just can't see CT 189, SR 571, CT 349, and the Whitehead Highway getting exit numbers, as these sections are either too short             (< 1 mi), or have only one exit.  If anything, the CT 71 exit on SR 571 would be 34A as an auxiliary to CT 9 (SR 571 itself being Exit 34)

[RobbieL2415]

I just can't see CT 189, SR 571, CT 349, and the Whitehead Highway getting exit numbers, as these sections are either too short             (< 1 mi), or have only one exit.  If anything, the CT 71 exit on SR 571 would be 34A as an auxiliary to CT 9 (SR 571 itself being Exit 34)

I was referring to just sign replacements.

[dgolub]

Yes the Milford Parkway signs were replaced, but they were given exit numbers at that time, ending its status as a road with no exit numbers. Exits are sequential 1 to 4. At the same time, entrance ramps got signs that said "Milford Parkway" for the first time, also ending its status as an unsigned designation (however it is still not signed from I-95 or the Wilbur Cross/Merritt Parkways).

It was always signed as the Milford Parkway on US 1 in Milford.  That's nothing new.  See http://www.greaternyroads.info/roads/ctstate/us1/photogal/page3 for a photo of the old button-copy sign there.

[KEVIN_224]

I just can't see CT 189, SR 571, CT 349, and the Whitehead Highway getting exit numbers, as these sections are either too short             (< 1 mi), or have only one exit.  If anything, the CT 71 exit on SR 571 would be 34A as an auxiliary to CT 9 (SR 571 itself being Exit 34)

That would be Exit 24A.

[jp the roadgeek]

I just can't see CT 189, SR 571, CT 349, and the Whitehead Highway getting exit numbers, as these sections are either too short             (< 1 mi), or have only one exit.  If anything, the CT 71 exit on SR 571 would be 34A as an auxiliary to CT 9 (SR 571 itself being Exit 34)

That would be Exit 24A.

I was going by mile based after the conversion.

[KEVIN_224]

Whoops! I am sorry for that! Yes, Exit 34A would be perfect in that case then. MM 35 is a hundred feet or so north of the Eliis Street overpass in New Britain, so Exit 35 should work fine there. I wonder if Exit 26 northbound (downtown NB - Columbus Boulevard) would be Exit 35 A, since I would make the exits for CT Route 72 West downtown as Exit 36. The last mile marker on this road now is 40, halfway between the New Britain/Farmington town line (just west of the CT Route 71 overpass) and the end at I-84.

Separately, I wonder how the exits would get numbered with CT Route 72, seeing as it doesn't have any mile markers now and that the brief overlap with I-84 in Plainville is only signed with I-84's Exit numbers.