Connecticut News

[southshore720]

That was actually one of the proposals I saw on maps from the early 1980s.  It showed CT 11 being proposed from south of present terminus at CT 82 a mile or so curving into and ending at CT 85.  If such a situation had been built, it would be similar to the scaled-back US 7-North project that DID get built but as more of a bypass around Brookfield vs its original northern terminus in New Milford.  It makes it look like the expressway doesn't just end, but flows seemlessly into a surface road.  That would work for CT 11 into CT 85.  Thru traffic would bypass Salem Four Corners, but introduce more high speed traffic onto CT 85.

This is a really good and feasible alternative.  Why didn't they consider this?  I think CT 11 deserves to have a logical end.  I refuse to give up hope, even though I know that this project is 99% hopeless.  I'll hang onto that 1%!

[shadyjay]

I agree with eliminating Exit 71.  Exit 73 (Society Rd) also seems like it could be eliminated.  Or at least it could be improved, those ramps seem sub-standard.   

Speaking of which, I just observed an hour ago, the new Society Road overpass at Exit 73 is now open to traffic and its abutments are set way back, proabably far enough to accommodate at least one additional lane in each direction.  Too bad they weren't that forward-thinking with other recent bridge replacements on I-95 in Old Lyme and East Lyme.

[zzyzx]

I agree with eliminating Exit 71.  Exit 73 (Society Rd) also seems like it could be eliminated.  Or at least it could be improved, those ramps seem sub-standard.   

Speaking of which, I just observed an hour ago, the new Society Road overpass at Exit 73 is now open to traffic and its abutments are set way back, proabably far enough to accommodate at least one additional lane in each direction.  Too bad they weren't that forward-thinking with other recent bridge replacements on I-95 in Old Lyme and East Lyme.

I travel over Society Rd. frequently. They're still tearing down the old bridge, but the new one opened back in August.  According to CTDOT, the new span is 242 ft.

[MikeCL]

I was wondering what's going on in Stamford at exit 8 NB are they trying to widen the road or something?

[Mergingtraffic]

I was wondering what's going on in Stamford at exit 8 NB are they trying to widen the road or something?

They are fixing/widening the off ramp, it will touch down just past Atlantic Avenue.
http://www.stamfordct.gov/sites/stamfordct/files/pages/2016_06_09_135-326_atlantic_street_phase1_pim.pdf

http://atlanticstreetbridge.com/

[Duke87]

Oh hey something's happening there.

Atlantic Street south of the train tracks was widened back in 2009 in conjunction with Dock Street being extended to meet it. As things currently stand it awkwardly narrows down from 4 through lanes to 2 to go under the tracks only to widen back to 4 through lanes immediately after. With that bridge replaced the awkward neckdown will go away after being in place for a decade (i.e., it's about time).

The reconfiguration of the offramp is intriguing although it's immediately apparent (to me, as someone who grew up in Stamford) why they're doing it: that ramp, during rush hour, can sometimes back up onto the highway. By making it longer that problem will be alleviated since it will have more queue storage space. This sort of mirrors what was done with the southbound offramp to Elm St (exit 8) back in the late 90s, although that ramp was extended back to diverge from the highway sooner rather than extended forward to not meet the service road until later. This project will force traffic bound for Atlantic St to start using exit 7. But it will also improve access from the train station since left turns off of South State St onto Atlantic St will now be possible.

This project also perhaps explains why South State St was added to the state highway system a couple years ago.

[Mergingtraffic]

Oh hey something's happening there.

Atlantic Street south of the train tracks was widened back in 2009 in conjunction with Dock Street being extended to meet it. As things currently stand it awkwardly narrows down from 4 through lanes to 2 to go under the tracks only to widen back to 4 through lanes immediately after. With that bridge replaced the awkward neckdown will go away after being in place for a decade (i.e., it's about time).

The reconfiguration of the offramp is intriguing although it's immediately apparent (to me, as someone who grew up in Stamford) why they're doing it: that ramp, during rush hour, can sometimes back up onto the highway. By making it longer that problem will be alleviated since it will have more queue storage space. This sort of mirrors what was done with the southbound offramp to Elm St (exit 8) back in the late 90s, although that ramp was extended back to diverge from the highway sooner rather than extended forward to not meet the service road until later. This project will force traffic bound for Atlantic St to start using exit 7. But it will also improve access from the train station since left turns off of South State St onto Atlantic St will now be possible.

This project also perhaps explains why South State St was added to the state highway system a couple years ago.

I've always wondered about the Exit 8 SB off-ramp, as before reading this post, I suspected and it looked like the original diverge was a bit farther south.

When the 4th aux lane was built instead of having the ramp from US-1/Exit 9 on-ramp dump just before the Exit 8 off-ramp, as it currently stands, the on ramp should've come on after the Exit 8 off ramp diverges.  Like what they are doing with Exit 23 and Exit 25 on I-84 in Waterbury.

[shadyjay]

In other news, ConnDOT has issued a press release regarding next year's spot sign replacement project....

http://www.ct.gov/dot/cwp/view.asp?A=2135&Q=587522

The majority of the gantries getting replaced are older style trusses. 

What will be interesting is whether they restripe the lanes when they replace the sign at I-95 SB Exit 75, similar to what they're going to do on I-84 EB Exit 11.  The 3rd lane on I-95 presently ends just past Exit 75.  Making the 3rd lane an exit only lane for Exit 75 makes sense.

Still no sign of progress on some of the sites for last year's spot replacement project.  That one was replacing I-84 EB Exit 11 (2 sites), I-91 NB Exit 23 1 mile, I-91 NB Exit 38 1 mile, modifying the left-slip from 84EB to the HOV lane in East Hartford, among other sites. 

And in December, we can look forward to the plans for the replacement of I-84 signage from Exits 30-39A.  I'm guessing several in that area will remain as they are relatively new.  Will more signs be moved to the ground, such as Exit 32 (CT 10/Queen St), Exit 37, 38?  Some old gantries in there, and some really old signs for Exit 31 (CT 229/West St).  Or will everything go back overhead?   Time will tell.

[roadman]

In other news, ConnDOT has issued a press release regarding next year's spot sign replacement project....

http://www.ct.gov/dot/cwp/view.asp?A=2135&Q=587522

The majority of the gantries getting replaced are older style trusses. 

What will be interesting is whether they restripe the lanes when they replace the sign at I-95 SB Exit 75, similar to what they're going to do on I-84 EB Exit 11.  The 3rd lane on I-95 presently ends just past Exit 75.  Making the 3rd lane an exit only lane for Exit 75 makes sense.

Still no sign of progress on some of the sites for last year's spot replacement project.  That one was replacing I-84 EB Exit 11 (2 sites), I-91 NB Exit 23 1 mile, I-91 NB Exit 38 1 mile, modifying the left-slip from 84EB to the HOV lane in East Hartford, among other sites. 

And in December, we can look forward to the plans for the replacement of I-84 signage from Exits 30-39A.  I'm guessing several in that area will remain as they are relatively new.  Will more signs be moved to the ground, such as Exit 32 (CT 10/Queen St), Exit 37, 38?  Some old gantries in there, and some really old signs for Exit 31 (CT 229/West St).  Or will everything go back overhead?   Time will tell.

Announcing a routine maintenance project that isn't even in design yet.  Must be a slow day at the ConnDOT PR office.

[Mergingtraffic]

In other news, ConnDOT has issued a press release regarding next year's spot sign replacement project....

http://www.ct.gov/dot/cwp/view.asp?A=2135&Q=587522

The majority of the gantries getting replaced are older style trusses. 

What will be interesting is whether they restripe the lanes when they replace the sign at I-95 SB Exit 75, similar to what they're going to do on I-84 EB Exit 11.  The 3rd lane on I-95 presently ends just past Exit 75.  Making the 3rd lane an exit only lane for Exit 75 makes sense.

Still no sign of progress on some of the sites for last year's spot replacement project.  That one was replacing I-84 EB Exit 11 (2 sites), I-91 NB Exit 23 1 mile, I-91 NB Exit 38 1 mile, modifying the left-slip from 84EB to the HOV lane in East Hartford, among other sites. 

And in December, we can look forward to the plans for the replacement of I-84 signage from Exits 30-39A.  I'm guessing several in that area will remain as they are relatively new.  Will more signs be moved to the ground, such as Exit 32 (CT 10/Queen St), Exit 37, 38?  Some old gantries in there, and some really old signs for Exit 31 (CT 229/West St).  Or will everything go back overhead?   Time will tell.

Announcing a routine maintenance project that isn't even in design yet.  Must be a slow day at the ConnDOT PR office.

The new gantry on CT-25 at the split with CT-8 has finally gone up.  As of this morning, new signs and old signs were there.  The old ones will probably come down tonight.  The foundations have been there since the summer.  Signs say "25 North Danbury" and an Exit 7 advance sign.

[Mergingtraffic]

http://www.theday.com/local/20161116/state-dot-to-conduct-study-of-i-95

Points from the article:
1) Another study?,,,you don't say. 
2) they would like to decrease the footprint of the I-95/I-395 interchange.  Isn't it already small?!?
3) Plans to reduce the CT-32 interchange in New London and make CT-32 more pedestrian friendly. Oh, good let's make traffic even slower.  I don't see TX or VA downgrading roads like this. 
4) Exit 74 revamp.  I don't see projects listed anywhere.  More transparency needed.

[Beeper1]

Somewhere in ConnDOT HQ:

"Hey, we should commission a study to determine if we are doing too many studies."

Repeat studies: because actually getting things done is just a hassle.

[Beeper1]

Also,  I was on the upper end of CT-8 last weekend, from Winsted to Thomaston.  Work on the sign replacement contract is underway, with footings being excavated for some new BGS bases.   Also some new LGS and auxiliary signs were already in place, including new exit gore signs.

Major thing to note: all the new exit gore signs have the current sequential numbers.  Has CT also ditched it's plans to convert to mile-based numbering on the rest of its highways?

[Duke87]

2) they would like to decrease the footprint of the I-95/I-395 interchange.  Isn't it already small?!?

Something may have gotten lost in translation there.

But I will note that reconfiguring the interchange to eliminate the left exit would result in somewhat of a reduction to its footprint. Maybe that's what they meant and The Day latched onto the wrong detail.

3) Plans to reduce the CT-32 interchange in New London and make CT-32 more pedestrian friendly. Oh, good let's make traffic even slower.  I don't see TX or VA downgrading roads like this.

Texas and Virginia have more spare land than Connecticut does. And are more actively expanding their road networks such that if it were TX 32 or VA 32 there would likely be a freeway connecting to that interchange by now or at the very least active plans for one. But Connecticut abandoned any proposal to build a CT 32 freeway decades ago, leaving that large interchange that was built in anticipation of it overpowered for anything it currently connects to or ever will connect to. And taking up a large amount of potentially valuable real estate that I'm sure the city of New London would love to see returned to private owners so they can start
collecting taxes on it again.

I would also imagine that at least some of the bridge structures in that interchange are at the point where they are soon to be in need of a major rehab, and given CT's lack of fiscal solvency downsizing it represents a much needed opportunity to save money both in the near term on construction costs and in the long term on maintenance costs.

This could, perhaps, all be summarized as "why we can't have nice things", but it's reality.

Major thing to note: all the new exit gore signs have the current sequential numbers.  Has CT also ditched it's plans to convert to mile-based numbering on the rest of its highways?

Officially, no, but ConnDOT's interpretation seems to be they are not required to change exit numbers unless replacing every sign on a highway at once. Which means unless FHWA smacks them, don't plan on seeing any mile-based numbers on any freeways of significant length in CT anytime soon. I-395 was a bit of a fluke since despite its length it DID have a comprehensive full-length sign replacement project.

[vdeane]

Wasn't CT 8 supposed to be the next road to convert?
http://www.sheltonherald.com/55801/new-exit-numbers-coming-to-route-8/

[zzyzx]

http://www.theday.com/local/20161116/state-dot-to-conduct-study-of-i-95

4) Exit 74 revamp.  I don't see projects listed anywhere.  More transparency needed.

They're building a new Costco / shopping center by Exit 74 in East Lyme.  Supposedly the southbound ramps will be reconfigured to dump traffic on the access road instead of Route 161. The developer put up plans a couple of years ago, but I haven't seen anything official other than the state planning to widen the overpass to 6 lanes over 161 around 2018.

The image I found is a few years old, and doesn't show the widening of 95, but at least you get the idea of the new ramp configuration:

http://imgur.com/a/udtuZ

[Duke87]

Wasn't CT 8 supposed to be the next road to convert?
http://www.sheltonherald.com/55801/new-exit-numbers-coming-to-route-8/

That's a 2 year old article. Seeing as the new signs according to the plans do not in fact feature any changed numbers I would say the article's information is outdated.

Also note that the article mentions I-95 changing before route 8 does. No sign of that happening either.



It's probably not helping matters that every state which was using sequential numbers in 2009 still is mostly if not entirely doing so and FHWA has not shown any indication that they're going to set a compliance deadline or play hardball about this. When all of your peers are dragging their heels and getting away with it you have little incentive to not do so as well.

[Rothman]

When all of your peers are dragging their heels and getting away with it you have little incentive to not do so as well.

If FHWA was serious, they could actually provide a fiscal incentive to change the numbering.

[bob7374]

When all of your peers are dragging their heels and getting away with it you have little incentive to not do so as well.

If FHWA was serious, they could actually provide a fiscal incentive to change the numbering.

Well, at least for Massachusetts anyway, the feds were willing to pay for 90% of the cost. Apparently, still not enough motivation to proceed with the planned conversion project.

[wanderer2575]

Somewhere in ConnDOT HQ:

"Hey, we should commission a study to determine if we are doing too many studies."

Repeat studies: because actually getting things done is just a hassle.

"Consulting:  If you're not a part of the solution, there's good money to be made in prolonging the problem."

from Despair.com

[Mergingtraffic]

Did some digging around and snapped pics of....

CT-10 Expressway stub


and what would've been I-291

[url=https://flic.kr/p/PcddT1]The unused and never opened northbound lanes of what would've been I-291. Farmington, CT. Note: you can see the partially used 4-level stack of I-84 in the back. by mergingtraffic, on Flickr

[Rothman]

When all of your peers are dragging their heels and getting away with it you have little incentive to not do so as well.

If FHWA was serious, they could actually provide a fiscal incentive to change the numbering.

Well, at least for Massachusetts anyway, the feds were willing to pay for 90% of the cost. Apparently, still not enough motivation to proceed with the planned conversion project.

Given how that project played out, I do wonder if the whole HSIP funding was a charade.

(personal opinion emphasized)

[KEVIN_224]

I'm guessing the picture taken in Farmington, CT was taken from the South Street bridge looking north. It's a short distance west from WestFarms Mall.

[abqtraveler]

Also,  I was on the upper end of CT-8 last weekend, from Winsted to Thomaston.  Work on the sign replacement contract is underway, with footings being excavated for some new BGS bases.   Also some new LGS and auxiliary signs were already in place, including new exit gore signs.

Major thing to note: all the new exit gore signs have the current sequential numbers.  Has CT also ditched it's plans to convert to mile-based numbering on the rest of its highways?

The issue is that the entire length of Route 8 must be switch to mile-based exit numbers at the same time.  There are actually three contracts to replace highway signs on Route 8.  One from Waterbury to Winsted, which is underway, a second contract from I-95 in Bridgeport to Shelton which I think has been awarded but not started, the third contract covering the section between Shelton and Waterbury, which is schedule to go out to bid in the summer of 2017.  Possibly when all three contracts are finished the state will renumber exits by overlaying the new exit numbers over the old ones and placing "Old Exit XX' placards above the exit tabs for a couple of years, like on I-395.

[Alps]

Also,  I was on the upper end of CT-8 last weekend, from Winsted to Thomaston.  Work on the sign replacement contract is underway, with footings being excavated for some new BGS bases.   Also some new LGS and auxiliary signs were already in place, including new exit gore signs.

Major thing to note: all the new exit gore signs have the current sequential numbers.  Has CT also ditched it's plans to convert to mile-based numbering on the rest of its highways?

The issue is that the entire length of Route 8 must be switch to mile-based exit numbers at the same time.  There are actually three contracts to replace highway signs on Route 8.  One from Waterbury to Winsted, which is underway, a second contract from I-95 in Bridgeport to Shelton which I think has been awarded but not started, the third contract covering the section between Shelton and Waterbury, which is schedule to go out to bid in the summer of 2017.  Possibly when all three contracts are finished the state will renumber exits by overlaying the new exit numbers over the old ones and placing "Old Exit XX' placards above the exit tabs for a couple of years, like on I-395.

No, as long as they start renumbering from the north, they can do it in pieces.