Connecticut News

[Mergingtraffic]

This project seems to be moving quickly.  A couple of years ago there was no public documents or anything related to this project, just an unfunded pipe dream.

However, I'm not a fan of Exit 29 being a new left exit.  The two-lane I-84 via CT-15 should be a right two-lane exit.  But I guess land constraints prohibit that. I can see traffic still backing up with people for I-84 moving over to the left of I-91 ahead of time.

Public Information Meeting Regarding the Proposed Relocation of Interstate 91 Northbound Interchange 29 and Widening of Interstate 91 Northbound and Route 15 Northbound to Interstate 84 East in Hartford and East Hartford




The Connecticut Department of Transportation (Department) will conduct two public information meetings concerning the proposed relocation of I-91 northbound Interchange 29 and widening of I-91 northbound & Route 15 northbound to I-84 east.  The first will be held on Tuesday, April 26, 2016, in the Hartford Public Works Department, Keith Chapman Conference Room (2nd Floor) located at 50 Jennings Road, Hartford, CT 06120.  The second (a repeat of the first meeting), will be held on Thursday, April 28, 2016, in the Raymond Library, 840 Main Street, East Hartford, CT.  An open forum for individual discussions with Department officials will begin at 6:30 p.m., followed by a formal presentation at 7:00 p.m.


The project is identified as State Project No. 63-703.


The purpose of the project is to address safety concerns associated with congestion and operational deficiencies at the I-91 northbound Interchange 29, which routinely experiences significant traffic delays and above average crash frequency.  Much of this can be attributed to the steep vertical grade and single-lane configuration of the ramp, the heavy traffic weave on the Charter Oak Bridge, and the near-capacity traffic volumes on I-91.


The proposed improvements include widening I-91 northbound to extend the four-lane travel section from Interchange 27 to Interchange 29 to relieve congestion, address significant safety concerns, and provide an efficient I-91 to I-84 connection.  It is also proposed to remove the existing ramp at I-91 northbound Interchange 29 and provide a major diverge south of the I-91 bridge over Route 15 to address the existing adverse vertical grade and limited capacity of the existing ramp.  The new I-91 diverge will consist of three lanes to the right, maintaining I-91 traffic (existing condition), and two lanes to the left, conveying traffic to Route 15 northbound via a new structure over Route 15 southbound.  The existing pavement markings on the Charter Oak Bridge will be modified to accommodate the additional northbound lane from I-91.  Additional improvements include widening of Route 15 northbound to three travel lanes, from the Charter Oak Bridge to the Silver Lane underpass to address congestion concerns on Route 15 and allow a more desirable distance from Interchange 29 on I-91 to merge from three travel lanes to two prior to its merge with I-84 East.  The existing noise barrier walls on Route 15 northbound will need to be relocated to account for the road widening.  Noise barrier walls could potentially be added to Route 15 southbound from the Silver Lane on-ramp to the bridge over Main Street.


There are right-of-way impacts associated with the proposed improvements to allow for drainage easements and temporary construction easements.


Construction is anticipated to begin in spring 2018, based on the availability of funding.  The estimated construction cost for this project is approximately $287 million.  This project is anticipated to be undertaken with 80-percent federal funds and 20-percent state funds.


The public information meetings are being held to afford a full opportunity for public participation and to allow open discussion of any views and comments the community may have concerning this proposed project.


The meeting facilities are ADA accessible.  Language assistance may be requested by contacting the Department's Office of Communications (voice only) at (860) 594-3062 at least five (5) business days prior to the meeting.  Language assistance is provided at no cost to the public, and efforts will be made to respond to requests for assistance.


Plans of the proposed project will be on display for public review.  Department personnel will be available during the meetings to discuss this project.  More detailed information is available at the Department's Office of Engineering, 2800 Berlin Turnpike, Newington, Connecticut, Monday through Friday between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., excluding holidays.  Anyone wishing to discuss the project may contact Susan M. Libatique at (860) 594-3179 or by e-mail at susan.libatique@ct.gov.  Plans are also available for review at the Permitting Office in the Hartford Department of Public Works and at the Engineering Department at the East Hartford Town Hall.

[RobbieL2415]

I think a better long-term solution for the traffic issues at I-91, exit 29 would be a new bridge across the river at the end of the Whitehead Highway, then re-aligning CT 15 further north and west to meet it.  A simple reconfiguration of an interchange won't increase capacity.

[shadyjay]

It is amazing how quick this went from a "pie in the sky" idea to something that may happen.  But a left exit?  Hmmm....My idea for the Exit 29 solution would be to move the ramp to where Exit 27 presently departs 91NB.  As shown in this street view from the present Exit 27-NB ramp, it wouldn't take much to send it to 15NB instead of Brainard/Airport Rd.  The ramp is already provided with a 1 1/4 mile long "operational" lane between Exit 26 and 27, and the ramp profile is downgrade, vs upgrade.  You could then probably widen the ramp to 2 lanes or give it an "option" lane.  You could then construct a new 91NB to Brainard Rd ramp to empty onto Airport Rd directly.  Not sure how to get 15NB traffic to that area, as my new 91NB-15NB ramp would interfere with present 15NB-Brainard ramp.  Finally, the new ramp could be renumbered Exit 27.  Brainard/Airport Rd can become Exit 29.  Then, you won't have the present 29A-27-28-26 situation, SB.  But it'll all be moot whenever the exit numbers change to mileage.

On a side note, back in the day, motorists had two ways to get from I-91 NB to I-84 EB:  Exit 29 (via 15/Charter Oak Bridge) and Exit 30 (via 2/Founders Bridge).  Today, you still have two:  present Exit 29 and Exit 35A (via 291/Bissell).

[RobbieL2415]

Hartford Viaduct update.  Now they're talking about needing to raze buildings.  Eminent domain, anyone?
[url]http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-hartford-viaduct-update-0425-20160425-story.html/url]

[PHLBOS]

Hartford Viaduct update.  Now they're talking about needing to raze buildings.  Eminent domain, anyone?
http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-hartford-viaduct-update-0425-20160425-story.html

Link fixed.

[abqtraveler]

Hartford Viaduct update.  Now they're talking about needing to raze buildings.  Eminent domain, anyone?
http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-hartford-viaduct-update-0425-20160425-story.html

Link fixed.

We knew that was going to happen, especially to consolidate interchanges, eliminate all of the left-hand exits and straighten the mainline.  The ROW that the viaduct currently occupies is pretty tight, so some eminent domain is to be expected.

[The Ghostbuster]

Have the NIMBYs shown up yet? Considering what I've read about Connecticut road construction, if this gets built as currently proposed, it will be a miracle!

[RobbieL2415]

Have the NIMBYs shown up yet? Considering what I've read about Connecticut road construction, if this gets built as currently proposed, it will be a miracle!

The NIMBYS need to understand that eminent domain is legal if the land is being taken for a project that benefits the public at-large.   At least, once the EIS is approved.

[cl94]

Have the NIMBYs shown up yet? Considering what I've read about Connecticut road construction, if this gets built as currently proposed, it will be a miracle!

The NIMBYS need to understand that eminent domain is legal if the land is being taken for a project that benefits the public at-large.   At least, once the EIS is approved.

That's the problem.

[RobbieL2415]

Have the NIMBYs shown up yet? Considering what I've read about Connecticut road construction, if this gets built as currently proposed, it will be a miracle!

The NIMBYS need to understand that eminent domain is legal if the land is being taken for a project that benefits the public at-large.   At least, once the EIS is approved.

That's the problem.

I'm sure the public is allowed to comment on the EIS in front of EPA officials but I'm not sure how much that factors into their decisions.

ConnDOT has done a lot in terms of outreach, though.  They have open forums practically every week asking for citizens' input.

[Mergingtraffic]

Have the NIMBYs shown up yet? Considering what I've read about Connecticut road construction, if this gets built as currently proposed, it will be a miracle!

The NIMBYS need to understand that eminent domain is legal if the land is being taken for a project that benefits the public at-large.   At least, once the EIS is approved.

That's the problem.

I'm sure the public is allowed to comment on the EIS in front of EPA officials but I'm not sure how much that factors into their decisions.

ConnDOT has done a lot in terms of outreach, though.  They have open forums practically every week asking for citizens' input.

And somebody (including a politician) will come out and say they weren't notified or there wasn't enough notice.

It happened with the 7/15 interchange, Q-Bridge and the I-95 Exit 44 project.  It angers me b/c I follow these and I've seen the DOT bend over backwards for these people and they STILL say no notice was given.

I remember when I-84 was widened in Cheshire, some complained the footprint was too big/wide.  But, then you look at the aerial view and compared to all the woods around, it's not big at all.  IDK why people freak out so muc.  Nobody complains when a super Walmart is built destroying woods.

[vdeane]

Perhaps ConnDOT could send notice via certified mail so they can shoot people down when the claim there was no notice?

[tckma]

Perhaps ConnDOT could send notice via certified mail so they can shoot people down when the claim there was no notice?

Nah, that costs money which they'd likely need approval to spend from the same politicians who complain there was no notice.   

[RobbieL2415]

Have the NIMBYs shown up yet? Considering what I've read about Connecticut road construction, if this gets built as currently proposed, it will be a miracle!

The NIMBYS need to understand that eminent domain is legal if the land is being taken for a project that benefits the public at-large.   At least, once the EIS is approved.

That's the problem.

I'm sure the public is allowed to comment on the EIS in front of EPA officials but I'm not sure how much that factors into their decisions.

ConnDOT has done a lot in terms of outreach, though.  They have open forums practically every week asking for citizens' input.

And somebody (including a politician) will come out and say they weren't notified or there wasn't enough notice.

It happened with the 7/15 interchange, Q-Bridge and the I-95 Exit 44 project.  It angers me b/c I follow these and I've seen the DOT bend over backwards for these people and they STILL say no notice was given.

I remember when I-84 was widened in Cheshire, some complained the footprint was too big/wide.  But, then you look at the aerial view and compared to all the woods around, it's not big at all.  IDK why people freak out so muc.  Nobody complains when a super Walmart is built destroying woods.

Are there people opposing the Waterbury widening project?

[jp the roadgeek]

Perhaps ConnDOT could send notice via certified mail so they can shoot people down when the claim there was no notice?

Nah, that costs money which they'd likely need approval to spend from the same politicians who complain there was no notice.   

But if there's anything the majority of CT politicians love, it's wasting taxpayer money.

[shadyjay]

Well, well, well... here's typical Connecticut/ConnDOT practices:

http://www.myrecordjournal.com/news/southington/8396951-154/plan-to-close-southington-rest-area-draws-criticism.html

The state is planning to close I-84 rest areas in Southington (EB) and Willington (EB) and reduce the hours of the Willington (WB) facility.  Also planning to close is the I-95 welcome center in Westbrook (NB).  No decision yet on whether the buildings would be closed or the whole facility would be closed.  Honestly, the Westbrook-NB facility is no loss and would most likely be a victim of future widening in the area.  There's very little parking space for cars.  Even less for trucks.  Willington-EB honestly wouldn't be a big loss, especially with the truck stop a few miles up the road.... EXCEPT....

...... why, ConnDOT, why did you JUST renovate the Willington rest area EB (it reopened 12/2015) and now you're going to close it?  That's $$$ well spent.  They should've spent the money to renovate Danbury-EB or I-91's two rest areas.  I do have to admit, they did a really nice job with the renovation.  The bathrooms were the cleanest I've seen in a CT non-commercial rest area. 

On my recent trip last weekend, I also stopped at the North Stonington welcome center on I-95 SB.  I walked in and saw a sign on the door to the "welcome center portion" that said "CLOSED DUE TO BUDGET CUTS". 

[Beeper1]

They tried this 3-4 years ago and the plan was scuttled by local state reps pressuring the DOT.  Hopefully they will keep the I-84 areas open, as these areas are always busy. 
Agreed that the Westbrook area would not be a big loss, its very close to the Madison Service Area.

[RobbieL2415]

Well, well, well... here's typical Connecticut/ConnDOT practices:

http://www.myrecordjournal.com/news/southington/8396951-154/plan-to-close-southington-rest-area-draws-criticism.html

The state is planning to close I-84 rest areas in Southington (EB) and Willington (EB) and reduce the hours of the Willington (WB) facility.  Also planning to close is the I-95 welcome center in Westbrook (NB).  No decision yet on whether the buildings would be closed or the whole facility would be closed.  Honestly, the Westbrook-NB facility is no loss and would most likely be a victim of future widening in the area.  There's very little parking space for cars.  Even less for trucks.  Willington-EB honestly wouldn't be a big loss, especially with the truck stop a few miles up the road.... EXCEPT....

...... why, ConnDOT, why did you JUST renovate the Willington rest area EB (it reopened 12/2015) and now you're going to close it?  That's $$$ well spent.  They should've spent the money to renovate Danbury-EB or I-91's two rest areas.  I do have to admit, they did a really nice job with the renovation.  The bathrooms were the cleanest I've seen in a CT non-commercial rest area. 

On my recent trip last weekend, I also stopped at the North Stonington welcome center on I-95 SB.  I walked in and saw a sign on the door to the "welcome center portion" that said "CLOSED DUE TO BUDGET CUTS".

Why is the rest stop, the ONLY rest stop on I-395 not being considered for closure?  It didn't get renovated with the rest of the CT Turnpike plazas so it seems like the writing is already on the wall.

[Beeper1]

What are you talking about?  All 3 of the service plazas on I-395 were renovated as part of the service plaza revamp.   They came out nice and now actually have food available.

[KEVIN_224]

The Willington rest areas on I-84 are being threatened? Really? After all the work they just did with them (both sides) in the last 2 years or so? Really?

[RobbieL2415]

What are you talking about?  All 3 of the service plazas on I-395 were renovated as part of the service plaza revamp.   They came out nice and now actually have food available.

I don't know lol.  I drove by the southbound Plainfield stop over the weekend and I was expecting the exterior to look like the new I-95 ones and just assumed they hadn't been touched.

[shadyjay]

The fuel pumps and the buildings were renovated.  Inside used to just be a MobilMart.  Now it's a MobilMart with Subway and Dunkin' Donuts.  Not a giant food court like those on I-95 but an improvement nevertheless.  I still think Montville-NB should've been reinstated, but can't win 'em all.  At least they're still open and have "fresh food" options now.

[cl94]

Would have been nice if ConnDOT did what New Hampshire did to what was once a run-down liquor store rest area on I-93 south of Concord.

[Mergingtraffic]

A new gantry on I-84 is up in Waterbury.  Seemingly overnight. A new sign for Exit 19, A LEFT EXIT for CT-8 South 1/2 Mile.  Complete with a Left Exit tab with a yellow LEFT and extra space for a suffix.   I remember that being in the contract plans saying the extra space was for a future suffix.

I'm glad the sign is up because there isn't sufficient signage saying that CT-8 SB from I-84 WB is a left exit.

You have two recently ground mounted LGS saying "Exit 19 CT-8 South Left Exit" but they are small.  A BGS saying CT-8 in general is 3/4 mile ahead and a CT-8 South KEEP LEFT sign and now the new one that just went up.  I wonder why no "1 MILE" sign was added?

[JJBers]

I wonder if there going to do anything north of Route 83 and 30 on I-84