Connecticut News

[shadyjay]

What does CT 184 get?

The CT 12 exit becomes Exit 1.

That's awfully shortsighted of them... what are then gonna do when I-95 goes mile-based, replace the signs again?

Perhaps there is mention somewhere in the plans of the tabs being wide enough to support 3 digits, though after a second glance, I didn't see mention of it in the specs or the sign plans themselves.  Guess if worse came to worse, just the tabs could be replaced.  I'd think this would be a perfect time to start converting I-95 to mile-based exits.  It's at the end of the state so even if there was a "disconnect" in exits it wouldn't be too confusing. 

One thing, though that makes me think mileage-based exits won't be coming soon is the wording on the town line signs.  Rather than saying "STONINGTON/NEXT 3 EXITS/TOWN LINE", they chose "STONINGTON/EXITS 90-92/TOWN LINE".  And even North Stonington, with a single exit, will become "NORTH/STONINGTON/EXIT 93/TOWN LINE". 

Perhaps people thought that Stonington didn't have a Main St and then got confused when there was one?

I'm guessing it has something to do with the new MUTCD guidelines that a town and street can't be on the same sign, nor can a highway name be used as a destination.  That's why "Clarence B. Sharp Highway" gets axed.  I'm honestly surprised "US Sub Base" is allowed to stay.  I'm not surprised Mystic Aquarium and Mystic Seaport get thrown off Exit 90 guide signs.

The situation at Exit 91 on the existing signs could be confusing to some, however.  As the wording/layout presently in place implies, one would think CT 234 is North Main St, leading to Stonington Borough.  However, CT 234 is Pequot Trail and runs roughly parallel to I-95 in the area.  North Main St takes you to Stonington Borough.  I think it's a "secret" state route.   

[Duke87]

I'm guessing it has something to do with the new MUTCD guidelines that a town and street can't be on the same sign, nor can a highway name be used as a destination.  That's why "Clarence B. Sharp Highway" gets axed.

I believe the specific prohibition is against a street name sharing a guide sign with a place name or a route shield. You can have a route shield, a place name, or a street name on the sign, but you're only allowed to have two if it's a route shield and a place name.

So, this sort of change follows the same logic as changes made in recent years elsewhere, such as exit 3 going from "Arch St/Gteenwich" to simply "Arch St". Of course "Indian Field Rd/Cos Cob" remains at exit 4 despite the signs being replaced, so they're not being terribly consistent.

"Mystic Aquarium" and "Mystic Seaport" also had to go because putting the names of private businesses on guide signs is prohibited.

[PHLBOS]

I'm guessing it has something to do with the new MUTCD guidelines that a town and street can't be on the same sign, nor can a highway name be used as a destination.  That's why "Clarence B. Sharp Highway" gets axed.

I believe the specific prohibition is against a street name sharing a guide sign with a place name or a route shield. You can have a route shield, a place name, or a street name on the sign, but you're only allowed to have two if it's a route shield and a place name.

IIRC, the actual restriction is either:

a. Route shield(s) & destination(s); maximum of 2 listings for the latter.

b. Route shield(s) & street name(s); maximum of 2 listings for the latter (several exits in PA have such).

c. Street name(s); maximum of 2 listings.

Personally, MUTCD's discouragement/prohibition of not listing street names w/destinations on primary signs is a bit anal.  Thus far, recent sign installations in MA have (thankfully, IMHO) ignored such.

[dgolub]

Contract plans now on the ConnDOT web site for the replacement of signs on I-95 from vic. Exit 85 to Exit 93 in southeastern Connecticut.  After browsing the plans, here's a synopsis:

1.  Project begins at the eastern approach to the Gold Star bridge.  Only signs for Exit 85 replaced include the offramp overhead.
2.  Project will also replace signs along CT 349 and CT 184 in the area of I-95
3.  Exit numbers stay status-quo on the new signs on I-95, however exit numbers are added to CT 184 and CT 349.  CT 349 gets mile-based.
4.  No evidence of the new exit tabs supporting 3-digit exit numbers
5.  All overhead supports get replaced, except the recently-replaced Exit 87 monotube bridge, which gets just new signs
6.  Project plans show 4-chord cantilevers, 4-chord trusses, and monotube bridges. 
7.  All pullthroughs are gone, except the one NB at Exit 86
8.  Exit 87 gets changed from "Clarence B. Sharp Highway" to "Groton City"
9.  Exit 88 signs get mounted overhead.  "Noank/Groton Long Point" replace "Downtown Groton" on SB signs
10.  Exit 90 gets changed from "27/Mystic Aquarium/Mystic Seaport" to just "27/Mystic"
11.  Exit 91 gets changed from "234/No Main St/Stonington Borough" to just "234/Stonington"
12.  Blue attraction logo signs to be added to all exits, 86-93
13.  Two mileage distance signs will remain, one for "RI State Line/Providence" and one for "New London/New Haven". 
14.  Enhanced mile markers to be added

Plans are available in a ZIP file, accessible from:  http://www.biznet.ct.gov/scp_search/BidDetail.aspx?CID=40931

Any idea when it's supposed to actually happen?

[shadyjay]

If I had to guess, now that the project is out to bid, the contract will be awarded in the next few months, and work will most likely take place 2017-2018. 

In other upcoming projects going out to bid this fall, the rehab of the SB Gold Star Bridge (I-95) is coming up on 9/21 (which may or may not include sign replacement over the span), and on 12/6, the next sign replacement project is I-84 - Exits 30-39A.  Originally, the I-84 project was supposed to go up to Exit 52 and go out to bid on the same day as I-95 Exits 85-93.  But ConnDOT pushed it back and shrank that particular project's scope.

[jp the roadgeek]

The CT 349 numbers will probably be Exit 3 for US 1 and Exits 4 A-B for I-95 since it officially "begins" at Shennecossett Rd.  My guess is I-95 and I-84 get renumbered when New Haven and Waterbury get cleaned up. 

Wonder how many other unnumbered interchanges get numbered:

The Foxwoods exits on CT 2 (47 and 48)
The CT 20  Bradley Connector exits (28A, 28B, 29, 30, and 31 A/B)
The SR 571 exit for CT 71 (1 or CT 9 Exit 34A),
The exits for US 5 and I-91 on CT 190 (3 and 4 A/B)
The exits on US 6 in Willimantic for CT 32 and CT 195 (90 and 92)
The CT 175 exit on the Berlin Turnpike (76)
The Exits on CT 17 in Middletown and South Glastonbury (22, 35, 36 A/B)
The CT 187/189 exit for Tariffville Rd ((8)
The mutual exits for US 1 and CT 100 (52/1)
The southern termini of I-91, US 7, CT 8/25, CT 9, and CT 40 (0 A/B [C on 40])
The western terminus of I-384 (0 A/B, since Spencer St would be Exit 1)
The eastern termini of I-291 (6 A/B) and CT 72 (20 A/B).

[Alps]

The CT 349 numbers will probably be Exit 3 for US 1 and Exits 4 A-B for I-95 since it officially "begins" at Shennecossett Rd.  My guess is I-95 and I-84 get renumbered when New Haven and Waterbury get cleaned up. 

Wonder how many other unnumbered interchanges get numbered:

The Foxwoods exits on CT 2 (47 and 48)
The CT 20  Bradley Connector exits (28A, 28B, 29, 30, and 31 A/B)
The SR 571 exit for CT 71 (1 or CT 9 Exit 34A),
The exits for US 5 and I-91 on CT 190 (3 and 4 A/B)
The exits on US 6 in Willimantic for CT 32 and CT 195 (90 and 92)
The CT 175 exit on the Berlin Turnpike (76)
The Exits on CT 17 in Middletown and South Glastonbury (22, 35, 36 A/B)
The CT 187/189 exit for Tariffville Rd ((8)
The mutual exits for US 1 and CT 100 (52/1)
The southern termini of I-91, US 7, CT 8/25, CT 9, and CT 40 (0 A/B [C on 40])
The western terminus of I-384 (0 A/B, since Spencer St would be Exit 1)
The eastern termini of I-291 (6 A/B) and CT 72 (20 A/B).

100 and 1 don't have exits...

[shadyjay]

The CT 349 numbers will probably be Exit 3 for US 1 and Exits 4 A-B for I-95 since it officially "begins" at Shennecossett Rd. 

The plans show the US 1 exit becoming Exit 3 and the I-95 South exit becoming Exit 3A.  No number for the I-95 North exit, which is being considered the thru route.

[jp the roadgeek]

The CT 349 numbers will probably be Exit 3 for US 1 and Exits 4 A-B for I-95 since it officially "begins" at Shennecossett Rd.  My guess is I-95 and I-84 get renumbered when New Haven and Waterbury get cleaned up. 

Wonder how many other unnumbered interchanges get numbered:

The Foxwoods exits on CT 2 (47 and 48)
The CT 20  Bradley Connector exits (28A, 28B, 29, 30, and 31 A/B)
The SR 571 exit for CT 71 (1 or CT 9 Exit 34A),
The exits for US 5 and I-91 on CT 190 (3 and 4 A/B)
The exits on US 6 in Willimantic for CT 32 and CT 195 (90 and 92)
The CT 175 exit on the Berlin Turnpike (76)
The Exits on CT 17 in Middletown and South Glastonbury (22, 35, 36 A/B)
The CT 187/189 exit for Tariffville Rd ((8)
The mutual exits for US 1 and CT 100 (52/1)
The southern termini of I-91, US 7, CT 8/25, CT 9, and CT 40 (0 A/B [C on 40])
The western terminus of I-384 (0 A/B, since Spencer St would be Exit 1)
The eastern termini of I-291 (6 A/B) and CT 72 (20 A/B).

100 and 1 don't have exits...

The southern intersection just south of I-95 Exit 52 is a grade separated intersection.  Probably not, but just a thought.  But if we used that standard, would CT 10's junctions with CT 322 and US 6 would get numbers?

[KEVIN_224]

Approaching the West Rock Tunnel along CT Route 15 South at the Hamden/New Haven, CT town line. The small green sign says "HEROES TUNNEL":


Saw this atrocity near the baseball stadium in Bridgeport, CT on August 31, 2016. An old, faded and ugly 3DI sign for I-95:

[jp the roadgeek]

I remember when the tunnel was first named, ConnDOT misspelled "Heroes" as "Heros".  Maybe in Greece it would fly.

[kurumi]

The CT 349 numbers will probably be Exit 3 for US 1 and Exits 4 A-B for I-95 since it officially "begins" at Shennecossett Rd.  My guess is I-95 and I-84 get renumbered when New Haven and Waterbury get cleaned up. 

Wonder how many other unnumbered interchanges get numbered:

The Foxwoods exits on CT 2 (47 and 48)
The CT 20  Bradley Connector exits (28A, 28B, 29, 30, and 31 A/B)
The SR 571 exit for CT 71 (1 or CT 9 Exit 34A),
The exits for US 5 and I-91 on CT 190 (3 and 4 A/B)
The exits on US 6 in Willimantic for CT 32 and CT 195 (90 and 92)
The CT 175 exit on the Berlin Turnpike (76)
The Exits on CT 17 in Middletown and South Glastonbury (22, 35, 36 A/B)
The CT 187/189 exit for Tariffville Rd ((8)
The mutual exits for US 1 and CT 100 (52/1)
The southern termini of I-91, US 7, CT 8/25, CT 9, and CT 40 (0 A/B [C on 40])
The western terminus of I-384 (0 A/B, since Spencer St would be Exit 1)
The eastern termini of I-291 (6 A/B) and CT 72 (20 A/B).

A couple others:
Exit 113 for SR 607 on US 6 in Killingly (an obscure "Super 2" interchange; signing currently almost nothing)
Exit 71 on US 5 for CT 372 (NB only)

And a few grade separations (not really interchanges, but at least one rampish connection is involved):
Exit 53 on US 6 for CT 10
Exit 21 on CT 10 for CT 322... not really, all connections are 2-way
Exit 1 on CT 222 for Naugatuck River industrial area (SB only)
Exit 1 on SR 712 for Canal St (SB only)

[mariethefoxy]

I remember when the tunnel was first named, ConnDOT misspelled "Heroes" as "Heros".  Maybe in Greece it would fly.

Route 8 in Bridgeport is named after my friend's great uncle

[Rothman]

I remember when the tunnel was first named, ConnDOT misspelled "Heroes" as "Heros".  Maybe in Greece it would fly.

Route 8 in Bridgeport is named after my friend's great uncle

Did you call him Uncle Routey?

[AMLNet49]

3.  Exit numbers stay status-quo on the new signs on I-95, however exit numbers are added to CT 184 and CT 349.  CT 349 gets mile-based.

CT 184 and 349 each have only one exit located immediately after each road leaves I-95. So how is it possible for one to have mileage-based numbers and the other to not? And wouldn't they just both be exit 1 (or 0?)

[jp the roadgeek]

3.  Exit numbers stay status-quo on the new signs on I-95, however exit numbers are added to CT 184 and CT 349.  CT 349 gets mile-based.

CT 184 and 349 each have only one exit located immediately after each road leaves I-95. So how is it possible for one to have mileage-based numbers and the other to not? And wouldn't they just both be exit 1 (or 0?)

Really doesn't matter on CT 184.  The exit would be Exit 1 whether you went sequential or mileage based, since it is an east/west route.  CT 349 is officially a north/south route, so its mileposts go up as you go north to I-95, which means US 1 would be Exit 3, not Exit 1, and I-95, if it does get a number, would be Exits 4 A/B.

What could be interesting is the mileage based exits on I-691 and CT 72.  ConnDOT logs both of those routes as north/south, although they are signed (and exits sequentially numbered) east/west.  Mileposts begin in Meriden and New Britain, respectively, and work westward.  CT 67 and CT 31, while they have no exits, are the opposite (signed north/south, logged east/west).

[shadyjay]

The thing about I-691 though is that there are no mileposts in place.  The mileage is an internal state log and it indeed begins in Middlefield/Meriden and goes west.  That must date to when the expressway first opened (first to Exit 7, then to Exit 4, then to I-84).  Logic makes me think that when they convert to mile-based exits, ConnDOT will make MP 0 be at I-84.  But I've been wrong before. 

Come to think of it, I think I-395 is the only 3DI in CT with posted mile markers. 

The Bradley Airport Connector should really be a 3DI with MP 0 at I-91 and exits count up from there.  I-191 would work nicely.  I-391 would be acceptable. 

As for the other routes listed above which have random exits here n' there, I wouldn't bother numbering any exits EXCEPT those on the Berlin Turnpike.  Surface roads in CT don't have mile markers posted (the Berlin Tpke doesn't either, but should, to keep it contiguous with the northern expressway section), so in a case like the CT 17 expressway sections in Middletown and Portland, it would seem odd to number those exits.  I have to wonder how much longer the CT 17 expressway in Middletown will have that designation.  If the latest plans for removing the lights on Route 9 in Middletown leave the drawing board, it wouldn't make much sense to have CT 17 jump on CT 9 for such a short distance and then to cut over in 1/4 mile to the left to exit again.  It would seem more logical to have it stay on South Main St to Main St, adding < 2 miles to the state highway system. 

[vdeane]

I've heard of a rule that says that 3dis are supposed to have their mileposts and exit numbers start at their parent regardless of direction; an example of this would be I-581.  NY and CT seem content to ignore this.

[cl94]

I've heard of a rule that says that 3dis are supposed to have their mileposts and exit numbers start at their parent regardless of direction; an example of this would be I-581.  NY and CT seem content to ignore this.

If such a rule does exist, far more states break it than those two. As in almost every state in the Northeast and Midwest.

[Alps]

I've heard of a rule that says that 3dis are supposed to have their mileposts and exit numbers start at their parent regardless of direction; an example of this would be I-581.  NY and CT seem content to ignore this.

I've heard of the MUTCD, which provides guidelines for exit numbering.

[cl94]

I've heard of a rule that says that 3dis are supposed to have their mileposts and exit numbers start at their parent regardless of direction; an example of this would be I-581.  NY and CT seem content to ignore this.

I've heard of the MUTCD, which provides guidelines for exit numbering.

Everything I can find in the MUTCD or on the FHWA website specifies "westernmost or southernmost point".

[MikeTheActuary]

The Bradley Airport Connector should really be a 3DI with MP 0 at I-91 and exits count up from there.  I-191 would work nicely.  I-391 would be acceptable. 

...except that I don't believe the connector is Interstate standard.  (There are standards about the length of acceleration lanes, right?)

That aside, I doubt that I-191 would be pursued due to the proximity to CT 191.  If it went I-391, I wonder if that would change the record on closest two interstates with the same number.  Locals would keep calling it "Route 20", however.

Oh...one more unnumbered interchange:  CT401 and Hamilton Road North.

[cl94]

The Bradley Airport Connector should really be a 3DI with MP 0 at I-91 and exits count up from there.  I-191 would work nicely.  I-391 would be acceptable. 

...except that I don't believe the connector is Interstate standard.  (There are standards about the length of acceleration lanes, right?)

That aside, I doubt that I-191 would be pursued due to the proximity to CT 191.  If it went I-391, I wonder if that would change the record on closest two interstates with the same number.  Locals would keep calling it "Route 20", however.

Tapered acceleration lanes are allowed and without doing detailed measurements, those look fine. Bigger issue is WB ramp spacing. That's likely the biggest issue.

[MikeTheActuary]

Tapered acceleration lanes are allowed and without doing detailed measurements, those look fine. Bigger issue is WB ramp spacing. That's likely the biggest issue.

I'll admit that I'm not certain what acceptable measurements consist of, but my northern residence is very close to the Hamilton Road South interchange.   Getting onto the Connector eastbound involves prayer and gunning of the engine if there is traffic on Route 20, thanks to the tight curve, the change in elevation, and the relative lack of an acceleration lane.

The entrance from Route 75 is normally somewhat better; most passenger vehicles' acceleration rates will permit reaching 50 or so before having to merge (speed limit is 65)....but construction currently complicates the situation.

[jp the roadgeek]

The Bradley Airport Connector should really be a 3DI with MP 0 at I-91 and exits count up from there.  I-191 would work nicely.  I-391 would be acceptable. 

...except that I don't believe the connector is Interstate standard.  (There are standards about the length of acceleration lanes, right?)

That aside, I doubt that I-191 would be pursued due to the proximity to CT 191.  If it went I-391, I wonder if that would change the record on closest two interstates with the same number.  Locals would keep calling it "Route 20", however.

Oh...one more unnumbered interchange:  CT401 and Hamilton Road North.

ConnDOT would probably renumber CT 191 if I-191 were used (I-591 would be the another less confusing option).  Easiest way to renumber CT 191 would be to renumber it as an extended CT 192 (which requires a 1.2 mile duplex with CT 190). Exits would be: 0 A/B (I-91 N/S); 1 (Old County Rd); 2 (CT 75): 3A (Hamilton Rd South); 3B (CT 20 West), and 4 (Hamilton Rd N)