Connecticut News

[jp the roadgeek]

My guess is that CT 8 and CT 25 will be done at the same time, since they share common exits up to the split.  Would look strange if the exits jumped from 6 down to 4, plus the entire highway has to be changed at the same time.   According to Shadyjay, the rest of CT 8 south of Waterbury contract will be let next year, so I'd look for a changeover then (CT 25 may have the new numbers on the sign with temporary sequential numbers overlain).

[Mergingtraffic]

Looks like CT uses:
http://www.interstatesigns.com/deliverySystems.html

Look: Exut 9 Daniels Farns are on CT-25

[abqtraveler]

Looks like CT uses:
http://www.interstatesigns.com/deliverySystems.html

Look: Exut 9 Daniels Farns are on CT-25

I think that is just a transport company that ships the signs from the manufacturer to the contractor charged with installing the signs.  Interesting to see though that they use the Daniels Farm Road sign loaded onto one of their trucks as a prop for their marketing materials.

[wytout]

They manufacture also. And on their extrududed and incremental page there is a partial extruded Merritt and Wilbur cross parkways sign.

http://www.interstatesigns.com/extrudedSigns.html

[roadman]

They manufacture also. And on their extrududed and incremental page there is a partial extruded Merritt and Wilbur cross parkways sign.

http://www.interstatesigns.com/extrudedSigns.html

They not only manufacture, they are one of the principal BGS manufacturers in the US.

[pugnamedmax]

I've been out of Connecticut for several months at school, and since being back for the holiday, I've noticed several changes that I've never seen in this state (in addition to the chevrons previously mentioned).

1. Grooved centerlines on more rural routes: Both route 77 and route 79 (north of route 80) now have grooved centerlines. I've never seen CT do this before. However, there is absolutely NO signage indicating the grooved centerline, unlike in other states that have them, and I had no idea what the rumbling was at first when I ran over the centerline. Are there any other spots where CT has implemented grooved centerlines? Is there signage indicating it?

2. Rectangular 3 digit state route shields: The current standard for CT, as far as I'm aware, is that there is no 3 digit wide standalone shield. The three digits are just condensed onto a square shield. However, in my travels, I saw several new rectangular 3 digit shields at the junction of routes 145 and 148 in Chester. Originally, I thought that this was a contractor error, until I saw another one of these new rectangular shields with the same specs on the exit 59 offramp for route 146 in Guilford. If I can, I'll try to get pictures of these in the next few days. What's interesting is that this error has occurred twice in two different districts. Are these rectangular shields the new standard?

Just curious if anyone knows anything about these new developments.

[wytout]

Wide 3 d standalone trailblazers are standard since a 2013-2014 update of the ConnDOT catalogue of signs.

There are more centerline rumble strip installation projects scheduled for advertising in all districts over the next year.

Without any fanfare, chevrons are simply popping up in the engineering project plans for our limited access roads for more consistently these days.. one true oddity being i91 between exits 33 and 36. The latest pavement preservation project there also put chevrons on the ENTRANCE gores, a-la FL and to some extent RI.

[abqtraveler]

Wide 3 d standalone trailblazers are standard since a 2013-2014 update of the ConnDOT catalogue of signs.

There are more centerline rumble strip installation projects scheduled for advertising in all districts over the next year.

Without any fanfare, chevrons are simply popping up in the engineering project plans for our limited access roads for more consistently these days.. one true oddity being i91 between exits 33 and 36. The latest pavement preservation project there also put chevrons on the ENTRANCE gores, a-la FL and to some extent RI.

ConnDOT appears to be inconsistent with marking exit gores with chevrons.  When I was looking at Street View on Google Maps, I noticed a recently resurfaced section of Route 8 near its interchange with the Merritt Parkway has no markings in the exit gores.  Same is the case for a recent resurfacing project along I-95 in Waterford.  No ramp gore striping, except for the I-95/I-395 northbound split, which is marked with chevrons.  The DOT also resurfaced I-84 near the Route 9 stack interchange in 2016.  Exits 39A and 40 eastbound used to have ramp gores marked with chevrons prior to resurfacing, but the gore areas were not striped with chevrons following resurfacing.  I'm curious as to what direction ConnDOT is headed with regard to striping its exit gores on freeways.

[RobbieL2415]

Wide 3 d standalone trailblazers are standard since a 2013-2014 update of the ConnDOT catalogue of signs.

There are more centerline rumble strip installation projects scheduled for advertising in all districts over the next year.

Without any fanfare, chevrons are simply popping up in the engineering project plans for our limited access roads for more consistently these days.. one true oddity being i91 between exits 33 and 36. The latest pavement preservation project there also put chevrons on the ENTRANCE gores, a-la FL and to some extent RI.

For some reason Buckland Hills Drive in Manchester has a center rumble strip now.  Are there other town DPWs in CT that do this?

[wytout]

For some reason Buckland Hills Drive in Manchester has a center rumble strip now.  Are there other town DPWs in CT that do this?

Old Stafford Road in Tolland, CT is a rather narrow town road with center rumble strip, and they also have signs warning of the rumble strips.

[shadyjay]

In other news....

http://www.ct.gov/dot/cwp/view.asp?A=1373&Q=588546

The Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT) has initiated the planning process for the rebuilding of an eight-mile, heavily congested stretch of I-84 between Exits 3 and 8 in Danbury — a project that will improve safety, increase capacity, and improve operations and access to the highway.

Wonder what we'll see here... elimination of left exits?  3 thru lanes of I-84 at Exit 3 and at Exit 7?  4 lanes between Exits 3-7?  I wonder if the idea to relocate Exit 4 EB to empty onto Seger St is still on the table, eliminating the present cross-US 7 NB traffic.   

To be honest, I'd like to see I-84 improved from Exit 8 to Waterbury first.  That section gets congested... 2 lanes with climbing lanes.  A lot of truck traffic.  Interchanges are spread out and there's a wide variable median, so adding an additional lane is relatively easy.  And the Rochambeau Bridge is already wide enough to accommodate 3 lanes each way.

[Beeper1]

Don't worry, it's a ConnDOT planning process.   Our great-grandkids are gonna hate sitting the work zone traffic once they actually start construction on this.

[Mergingtraffic]

In other news....

http://www.ct.gov/dot/cwp/view.asp?A=1373&Q=588546

The Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT) has initiated the planning process for the rebuilding of an eight-mile, heavily congested stretch of I-84 between Exits 3 and 8 in Danbury – a project that will improve safety, increase capacity, and improve operations and access to the highway.

Wonder what we'll see here... elimination of left exits?  3 thru lanes of I-84 at Exit 3 and at Exit 7?  4 lanes between Exits 3-7?  I wonder if the idea to relocate Exit 4 EB to empty onto Seger St is still on the table, eliminating the present cross-US 7 NB traffic.   

To be honest, I'd like to see I-84 improved from Exit 8 to Waterbury first.  That section gets congested... 2 lanes with climbing lanes.  A lot of truck traffic.  Interchanges are spread out and there's a wide variable median, so adding an additional lane is relatively easy.  And the Rochambeau Bridge is already wide enough to accommodate 3 lanes each way.

to waterbury was part of the plan but remember the DOT could never get the EIS started.  It took them 10 years to start it and then there was no money and are now just focusing on the Exit 3-8 section.  I contacted the COG about this and they said the base will be what was originally planned in 2000.

8-lanes between exits 3-7 and 6-lanes to Exit 8.  The US-7 SB ramp to I-84 EB by exit 7 would be a flyover coming in on the right and combining exit 8.  Both left exits would remain. That is what I was told a year ago, so things could change.  Of course THAT (the left exits) is the reason for the backups, not volume.  It backs up b/c people slow to merge into their correct lane and cut over. 

I-84 WB at the Exit 7 on-ramp should NOT slow down b/c US-7 gains a lane as they merge on, but it does back up b/c people have to change lanes and it slows people up.  Actually the Exit 7 on-ramp to I-84 WB should be two lanes.


I also have a gut feeling that this is going to be done on the cheap......even though you'd think it shouldn't b/c it's a scaled down project only focusing on Exits 3-8 rather then Exits 3-20.  So, I bet all they will do is add a lane, which doesn't really help anything b/c the same traffic patterns remain.

[KEVIN_224]

I recently noticed these stickers on the back of a fairly new sign in Berlin, CT:


It was close to the off-ramp of Exit 23 (Christian Lane) from CT Route 9 southbound.

Obviously it was made in April 2015 and installed in May 2015. What about the rest? "HAMMONASSET" is the Madison area on the shoreline, west of Old Saybrook.

[jp the roadgeek]

I recently noticed these stickers on the back of a fairly new sign in Berlin, CT:


It was close to the off-ramp of Exit 23 (Christian Lane) from CT Route 9 southbound.

Obviously it was made in April 2015 and installed in May 2015. What about the rest? "HAMMONASSET" is the Madison area on the shoreline, west of Old Saybrook.

Probably the name of the construction contractor that installed it.  Be like having Quinebaug on the back of a sign in Danbury.

[shadyjay]

Today, ConnDOT released its 5-year capital plan which spans from 2017-2021.  Some interesting items can be found within the link:
http://www.ct.gov/dot/cwp/view.asp?A=1373&Q=589196

Here's what we can expect this year:

Looking ahead towards 2017, major new initiatives planned for this next year include repairs to the southbound Gold Star Bridge in New London; painting and structural repairs to the Commodore Hull Bridge in Shelton; rehabilitation of eight bridges within the I-84 Viaduct and surrounding area in Hartford; and the start of the next phase of the Merritt Parkway rehabilitation program in the Westport area. The Department will continue with planning for the replacement of the I-84 Hartford Viaduct; the Relocation and Reconfiguration of the I-91/Route 15 Interchange in Hartford; and the Reconfiguration of the I-91/I-691/Route 15 Interchange in Meriden. The Department will also continue to advance the ongoing corridor study for I-95. Design will continue on the Traffic Signal Removal on Route 9 in Middletown; the last remaining segment of the Merritt Parkway Corridor Improvement Project in Norwalk; and tunnel improvements to the Heroes Tunnel, located along Route 15 in Woodbridge and New Haven.

And upcoming "big projects":

The Department's projected outlook for construction commitments in 2018 through 2021 are the Tunnel Improvements to the Heroes Tunnel on Route 15 in Woodbridge/New Haven; I-91 Resurfacing, Bridge, and Safety Improvements in Wethersfield; I-84 Resurfacing, Bridge, and Safety Improvements in Newtown; and superstructure replacement of the Rochambeau Bridge on I-84 in Newtown.

When perusing through the list of projects broken down by year, here's what I find for sign replacement:

FY2017:  CT 8, Shelton to I-84;  CT 15, Merritt Parkway
FY2018:  I-84, Exits 40-56;  CT 8, I-95 to Shelton
FY2019:  CT 9, Exits 25-31;  CT 72, Exits 1-9
FY2020:  none shown yet
FY2021:  none shown yet

Interesting to still not see any large-scale projects on I-91, CT 2, and CT 9.  (CT 9 Exits 25-31 is about 5 miles).

Unknown at this time what the present state's budget crisis will do to this list.  An article in today's Courant warned of the possible permanent closure of the state's 7 non-commercial rest areas due to the crisis.

[Beeper1]

One of those rest areas, Westbrook on I-95 NB is already permanently closed.    The others are badly needed for truck parking and as welcome centers, except maybe Southington on I-84 EB, as that area is fairly small.

[D-Dey65]

One of those rest areas, Westbrook on I-95 NB is already permanently closed.    The others are badly needed for truck parking and as welcome centers, except maybe Southington on I-84 EB, as that area is fairly small.

I just hope somebody in Connecticut takes pictures of all the ones on I-95 and posts them in the Wikimedia Commons. All the ones that are available are south of New York City.

[shadyjay]

One of those rest areas, Westbrook on I-95 NB is already permanently closed.    The others are badly needed for truck parking and as welcome centers, except maybe Southington on I-84 EB, as that area is fairly small.

Agree they are needed for truck parking and for tourism information. 

If they do get closed, I'd like to see potential private off-highway facilities developed.  One in Wallingford at Exit 15 of I-91 would replace Wallingford-SB and Middletown-NB.  Another facility in North Stonington at Exit 92 of I-95 would work.  Both sites have a good chunk of vacant land adjacent to the interstate, a perfect facility for an off-highway "service plaza", complete with truck parking.  Vermont just opened a similar facility off Exit 8 of I-89.  Southington and Willington can be sacrificed in favor of a rebuilt Danbury-EB and a new Union-WB (at that insanely large weigh station). 

Just some thoughts.

Westbrook is the 8th (there are two, one EB and one WB, in Willington).

[Beeper1]

I always forget the one in Willington is both directions.  Replacing it with one in Union isn't
necessary.  If the state want to keep a rest area on 84 west, keep the existing location. It was recently refurbished anyway, which makes closing it seem like a waste.

Agreed on the need for additional private areas.  Interstate Oasis-type programs a-la Idaho and Vermont would be a big help, but NIMBYs don't like them. 

Could the existing truck stop at Exit 93 in North Stonington be expanded?  Exit 92 is generally very congested in the summer with beach and casino traffic.

[shadyjay]

There looks to be a little wiggle room at Exit 93 for expansion, but residential homes aren't that far away.  Exit 92 seems to have much more space for a brand new facility.  See:  https://www.google.com/maps/@41.417557,-71.8509186,344m/data=!3m1!1e3
You could straighten out "SSR 617" once you tear down the old rest area on I-95 SB and have even more room. 

The idea behind relocating the I-84 WB facility to Union was this large facility:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.9880512,-72.1749446,341m/data=!3m1!1e3
I know Willington-WB (and -EB) were just rebuilt but to provide expansion of parking, you'd have to relocate.  The Willington sites are limited. 

And here's an idea for a site for an off-highway service plaza in Wallingford:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.4774465,-72.7683995,688m/data=!3m1!1e3
Maybe incorporate the hotel into part of the complex.  This section of CT 68 is well travelled and lacks any gas stations or food service, which I have always found amazing.  It's 4 lanes, undivided, from Research Parkway west to US 5. 

And finally, here's my Westbrook site, a bit more complicated:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2905404,-72.4434901,345m/data=!3m1!1e3
Get the Scion dealer to relocate to the other side of Flat Rock Place.  Get Denny's to go along with the Service Plaza.  Tear down the existing Mobil and Dunkin' Donuts and incorporate them.  In the process, we get that little park & ride upgraded and improve the ramp to I-95 NB as well. 

All of these off-highway service plazas would be open 24/7, be similar in design to the CT service plazas, and offer a variety of options.  The state gets a facility to replace existing rest areas.  There's no more bathroom issues.  An electronic CT tourism kiosk is put up inside each plaza.  The end result would be only 2 non-commercial rest areas:  Danbury-EB and Willington-WB.  Those can go back to being open 24 hours/day, or if not, then 7am-9pm (more respectable hours than the closing at 3:30PM thing).

[PHLBOS]

IIRC, all the Welcome Centers now have reduced (some would say banker's) hours.  They're only open during the morning & early afternoon.  Parking for the Rest Areas are still open & Porta-Johns have since been placed for after-hours restroom breaks.

With all this talk of refurbishing Rest Areas/Welcome Centers in this thread; is there a possibility that the Welcome Centers' be open again during the late afternoons & evenings?

[MikeTheActuary]

With all this talk of refurbishing Rest Areas/Welcome Centers in this thread; is there a possibility that the Welcome Centers' be open again during the late afternoons & evenings?

The state's projected budget deficit is $1.5 billion.

The implications are left as an exercise for the reader. 

[Beeper1]

I could possibly see the one on I-95 going back to later hours in the summer season, due to the very high tourist traffic on that route.   But the ones on I-84 and I-91 and most likely only going to edge closer to closure.

[wytout]

With so much traffic coming through the area enroute from greater Boston heading to NYC and other points southwest, along with the fact that they are always filled with cars and trucks, it seems a case could be made for continuing the life of the recently refurbished eb and wb rest areas in willington. This remains true in spite of the long-established TA travel center 2 exits east. You know that and the fact that we spent $3 million to replace septic facilities and complete pavement resurface less than 2 years ago at both facilities