Connecticut News

[MikeCL]

Looks like CTDOT is replacing hundreds of LED traffic signal lamps at various state road intersections.

What got my attention was this:

Where applicable, these projects will also replace circular red LED lamps with red arrow LED lamps at locations that are not currently in compliance with current design requirements, and will also replace circular green LED lamps with vertical green arrow LED lamps at applicable exit ramps to provide additional emphasis and countermeasures against wrong way driving maneuvers. Existing backplates and span-mounted signs will also be replaced.

There's no mention of replacing circular yellow lamps with FYAs.  I don't think there are any in the state right now, but don't you think this would be a good time to introduce them, given the large scale of the project?  I think this will be helpful in several towns, especially those with significantly less nighttime traffic, since the state is removing the nighttime flashing operation on future signal installations?

They did a big round of this several years back. Connecticut was late to the red arrow party, then all of a sudden one day about five years ago they were everywhere. It was around the same time yellow-bordered back plates starting becoming all the rage. Still not sure what the point of the FYA is though and why it's needed. As I understand it, the meaning is you can turn left after yielding to oncoming traffic, but how is that any different than a standard green ball? We've always had to yield to oncoming traffic when turning left. The state even has a law (14-242e) that says so, FYA or not.

Right, but I believe a new section codifying the FYA is necessary to enforce it.  Every other phase is in there.  There would also need to be a campaign to educate drivers on how the FYA works and there will probably be people who oppose it because it's another signal phase to memorize.

I hate how some of the intersections are set up if I'm driving up to a intersection and I can see the light for the traffic to the right turn to yellow but I'm not over the loop sensor to get the left arrow green I have to wait a whole cycle again just to get the green arrow.. you could put a flashing yellow to turn.. I know a few who have made left on red from that area as depending on the time of day the traffic is really light.

[MikeCL]

Good.  Maybe this is a sign of progress being made to finish the Southington-to-Farmington contract and replace the remaining overheads. 

In "spot sign replacement" news... the following has been observed this week:

I-91 NB Exit 24 1/2 mile, with the old cantilever still standing (for now) in the background:
91NB-newExit24advance by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

CT 3 SB Jct I-91 sign, viewed from CT 3 NB.  This will not be replaced... removal only:
3SB-cruciformremoval by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

I-84 WB at Exit 64:
84WB-Exit64 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

84WB-Exit64 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

While there is still several sites to have work done in the 2017 project, the 2019 project has started, with foundation work for a new overhead on I-91 SB 1 mile before Exit 22 in Rocky Hill. 

And I believe we have a name for the color-coded "angled supports" that sprung up throughout CT in the 80s and early 90s.  The 2019 spot sign replacement calls this style "cruciform cantilever" and "cruciform" for the full width spans.  The sign removed on CT 3 SB linked above would be a "cruciform cantilever".

Sorry I'm late to the party

[jp the roadgeek]

I-84 new MUTCD and enhanced mileposts are now all installed eastbound up to MP 55.2 (The Stack) with the exception of a couple through the CT 72 concurrency. 

[MikeCL]

Can someone explain why the dot has put up so many portable VMS up? And the signs which displays the time to the next state route or major junction.. it seems wasteful.

Also what's with all the signs taken down and just laying next to the posts?

[RobbieL2415]

Can someone explain why the dot has put up so many portable VMS up? And the signs which displays the time to the next state route or major junction.. it seems wasteful.

Also what's with all the signs taken down and just laying next to the posts?

Where do you see portable VMSs?  Are you talking about on I-91?  Those are there to provide trip times specific to the Charter Oak Bridge project.

There are some portable units made permanent, like the one on Avon Mountain. A majority of them are permanent.

The trip times that are displayed come from the states Traffic Information System.  It's completely automated.

[MikeCL]

Can someone explain why the dot has put up so many portable VMS up? And the signs which displays the time to the next state route or major junction.. it seems wasteful.

Also what's with all the signs taken down and just laying next to the posts?

Where do you see portable VMSs?  Are you talking about on I-91?  Those are there to provide trip times specific to the Charter Oak Bridge project.

There are some portable units made permanent, like the one on Avon Mountain. A majority of them are permanent.

The trip times that are displayed come from the states Traffic Information System.  It's completely automated.

On 95-N Norwalk area but it's really from the weigh station in Greenwich they took down the large one over the roadway about a year ago and put a small orange one made permanent which imho is stupid it's a lot less visible. The signs in Norwalk are the traffic monitors but still was that the best way to do them? Is a more permanent fixture going to be set up?

[MikeTheActuary]

Driving back to the Hartford ara from Memphis Monday night, I saw a surprising number portable VMSs set up on I-84 from the New York state line to Waterbury.  (They may have extended past there, but I was getting tired / traffic was getting dense, so they might not have stuck out in my mind.)

Of course they were all advising people to call 211 for information on the Coronazombie apocalypse....

[Mergingtraffic]

New gantry foundations going in on CT-8 between I-95 and Shelton.  IDK if they're the spot replacements or the new Bpt to Shelton signing project. 

PS. this sign still here, non-reflective.  Probably dates to the beginning of the I-91/CT-9 interchange when CT-9 ended there.  It's light green so to me that says 1968-1969 install date.

[shadyjay]

Yup, that one's been there forever, definitely since before CT 9 was extended north/west past I-91.  A contract is out for the replacement of signs on CT 9 from Exit 18 to Exit 24, then from Exit 24 to I-84, so this one is definitely on borrowed time.  It won't be replaced at this location.

May get out this week and lense a few signs statewide and in NY and MA, depending on weather.  Perfect time for a drive-around... no traffic, and I won't be getting out of the truck!

[RobbieL2415]

I believe every button copy sign up to the I-91 complex is original to when that stretch of CT 9 opened.

[shadyjay]

Negative.  Signs on CT 9 were replaced in the mid/late 1980s.  The only one original is the Junction 91 sign shown above.  The first CT 9 extension to the Berlin Tpke opened in Dec. 1989 and the original signs south of I-91 were gone by then. 

Prior to the sign replacement, the last "regular" signed exit was #12 in Middletown.  Exits 13-16 didn't have numbers and Exits 18 & 19 barely had numbers.  Exit 20 did not have a number. 

[abqtraveler]

New gantry foundations going in on CT-8 between I-95 and Shelton.  IDK if they're the spot replacements or the new Bpt to Shelton signing project. 

PS. this sign still here, non-reflective.  Probably dates to the beginning of the I-91/CT-9 interchange when CT-9 ended there.  It's light green so to me that says 1968-1969 install date.

Looking at the sign, it appears that they just slapped a 91 sticker onto the interstate shield after the sign was fabricated. 

[kurumi]

<bs type="making-stuff-up">It's been 50 years. White numerals on a blue background have low adhesion persistence and are the first to eventually slide down to the bottom of the sign. White on green, in contrast, will stay put for more than a century.</bs>

[shadyjay]

New gantry foundations going in on CT-8 between I-95 and Shelton.  IDK if they're the spot replacements or the new Bpt to Shelton signing project. 

PS. this sign still here, non-reflective.  Probably dates to the beginning of the I-91/CT-9 interchange when CT-9 ended there.  It's light green so to me that says 1968-1969 install date.

Looking at the sign, it appears that they just slapped a 91 sticker onto the interstate shield after the sign was fabricated. 

Either that, or the whole shield was replaced at some point.  That's been done throughout the region for the past several years.  Most of the signs on CT 9 NB for I-91 have had "reassurance shields" replacing the original button copy shields on the overheads.  And yes, some of them don't have centered "9" "1" numerals. 

Here's a picture that shows it, just up the road a spell...click it for full version, then click again in FLICKR to zoom:
CT9NB-Exit20 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

You can see the original (late 80s) shield on the Exit 20S sign, and a slap-on replacement shield on the Exit 20N sign.  I can almost guarantee that this is what was done to the JUNCTION 91 sign. 

[jp the roadgeek]

There's a similar looking reassurance shield on I-91 South in Hartford just between Main St and Jennings Rd.  Looks pretty pathetic

[abqtraveler]

There's a similar looking reassurance shield on I-91 South in Hartford just between Main St and Jennings Rd.  Looks pretty pathetic

That sign probably dates back to the late '80s/early '90s when I-91 was completely rebuilt and widened with HOV lanes added through that area.

[wytout]

There's a similar looking reassurance shield on I-91 South in Hartford just between Main St and Jennings Rd.  Looks pretty pathetic

That sign probably dates back to the late '80s/early '90s when I-91 was completely rebuilt and widened with HOV lanes added through that area.

The cardinal direction sign, yes. The shield, no. The shields were badly faded in the early 2000's and they went down through the upper 91 corridor slapping up those replacements off-centered, especially dark blue, wretched looking shields.

[Dougtone]

Come check out the Bulkeley Bridge, an architectural gem of a stone arch bridge that I-84 uses to cross the Connecticut River between Hartford and East Hartford, Connecticut. It's certainly worth exiting the highway to view its beauty.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2020/03/bulkeley-bridge.html

[jp the roadgeek]

Looks like the new mileposts on I-84 between Southington and Farmington (up to MP 56) are now done in both directions with the exception of those that will most likely be part of the CT 72 re-sign/exit renumbering project later this year.   New EB markers are missing from 49.8 - 50.2, and WB are missing from 50.2 - 49.0

[kurumi]

Hmmmm



To be fair, though, the 2015 "Let's Go CT" plan (https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/DOT/documents/dcommunications/CTDOT30YRpdf.pdf?la=en) does mention adding a lane in each direction between the NY state line and Waterbury, and the I-84 Danbury site does mention increasing capacity.

[Alps]

Hmmmm



To be fair, though, the 2015 "Let's Go CT" plan (https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/DOT/documents/dcommunications/CTDOT30YRpdf.pdf?la=en) does mention adding a lane in each direction between the NY state line and Waterbury, and the I-84 Danbury site does mention increasing capacity.

That site makes it seem like they're not that far along in the process yet, but if you read instead of doing a humorous search, you'll find a package of vague improvements that may and may not include widening.

[D-Dey65]

I just spotted a former turning ramp near Exit 26 on the Connecticut Turnpike in Bridgeport between Wordin and Eastbound Railroad Avenues.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/41°11'11.0%22N+73°11'44.0%22W/@41.1679407,-73.2052193,339m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d41.186389!4d-73.195556?hl=en

It looks like the kind of thing that should've been kept.

[Alps]

I just spotted a former turning ramp near Exit 26 on the Connecticut Turnpike in Bridgeport between Wordin and Eastbound Railroad Avenues.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/41°11'11.0%22N+73°11'44.0%22W/@41.1679407,-73.2052193,339m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d41.186389!4d-73.195556?hl=en

It looks like the kind of thing that should've been kept.

Scanning Historic Aerials, that looks like it was for a trolley line or other surface railroad to curve around that property.

[abqtraveler]

Hmmmm



To be fair, though, the 2015 "Let's Go CT" plan (https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/DOT/documents/dcommunications/CTDOT30YRpdf.pdf?la=en) does mention adding a lane in each direction between the NY state line and Waterbury, and the I-84 Danbury site does mention increasing capacity.

What I don't understand is how CONNDOT came up with an estimate in the billions to add a lane in each direction on I-84 between Danbury and Waterbury.  The median is wide enough along most of the route to incorporate an additional lane, which would be a relatively low-cost option (I-91 south of Hartford was widened in this fashion about 20 years ago). So what then would drive the cost north of $1 billion?

[D-Dey65]

Scanning Historic Aerials, that looks like it was for a trolley line or other surface railroad to curve around that property.

Interesting. It still looks like it could be used for a right turn ramp anyway, especially for buses.