Connecticut News

[jp the roadgeek]

Frankly am of the opinion that the best course of action with 84 in Hartford,  is complete reconstruction and partial / full depression.  Basically on or near current alignment.   Have seen some bizarre scenarios where it is tunneled to the S, or routed far to the N, making it even more indirect.   
Construct new alignment S of current in town aetna viaduct, provide for a ten lane cross - section with express lanes, full inner and outer shoulders.   Depress in trench, or "cut and cover" so it could be decked over.  Would clean up downtown quite a bit.   
Straighten and lower alignment within Hartford city limits.  Elimination of the remaining left exits and easing of multiple curves where possible.  Have not been on corridor in over fifteen years, perhaps some of the never built parkway and planned expressway stubs (Sisson Ave for example) are now Gone.  Not sure how "busway" could fit into this, perhaps as the far right lane, in each direction.

I think they should revive the old 284 scheme by extending the Whitehead Highway to 84, after widening it to 4 lanes and giving it sufficient clearance for trucks.

It would be a detour route while 84 is rebuilt and once finished, it would serve traffic going to Downtown from the West while 84 would serve through traffic.

That would have been a great idea, I wish it was built. However, it would have been signed as I-484 as I-284 was to be used from I-84/CT 2 to I-291. It would have to be tunneled though to avoid Bushnell Park.

It was originally supposed to be the connection from I-84 East to I-91 North until it was cancelled.  Evidence of this is at 3:37 in this video.

[abqtraveler]

Frankly am of the opinion that the best course of action with 84 in Hartford,  is complete reconstruction and partial / full depression.  Basically on or near current alignment.   Have seen some bizarre scenarios where it is tunneled to the S, or routed far to the N, making it even more indirect.   
Construct new alignment S of current in town aetna viaduct, provide for a ten lane cross - section with express lanes, full inner and outer shoulders.   Depress in trench, or "cut and cover" so it could be decked over.  Would clean up downtown quite a bit.   
Straighten and lower alignment within Hartford city limits.  Elimination of the remaining left exits and easing of multiple curves where possible.  Have not been on corridor in over fifteen years, perhaps some of the never built parkway and planned expressway stubs (Sisson Ave for example) are now Gone.  Not sure how "busway" could fit into this, perhaps as the far right lane, in each direction.

I think they should revive the old 284 scheme by extending the Whitehead Highway to 84, after widening it to 4 lanes and giving it sufficient clearance for trucks.

It would be a detour route while 84 is rebuilt and once finished, it would serve traffic going to Downtown from the West while 84 would serve through traffic.

That would have been a great idea, I wish it was built. However, it would have been signed as I-484 as I-284 was to be used from I-84/CT 2 to I-291. It would have to be tunneled though to avoid Bushnell Park.

It was originally supposed to be the connection from I-84 East to I-91 North until it was cancelled.  Evidence of this is at 3:37 in this video.

The long set of ramps from I-84 to Governor Street are the only part of I-284 that was ever built. Hopefully when they reconstruct I-84 through Hartford, they somehow figure out a way to clean up the mess of freeways and ramps in East Hartford between the Charter Oak Bridge and I-84.

[MikeCL]

Saw the first flashing yellow arrow in CT at the new set of adaptive signals that have just been turned on around the exit 3 area of Arch St in Greenwich.

Damn I kept forgetting to post this.. finally!!! I hope it spreads to other towns.. makes no sense to wait another cycle.. and more so if you don't roll up to the loop sensor in time when the cross traffic changes to yellow.

It seems so far it's been working out really well I haven't seen it back up the roadway anymore.

[kurumi]

ConnDOT has a functional classification GIS app online: https://connecticut-ctdot.opendata.arcgis.com/apps/functional-classification-interactive-app/explore

It looks like most or all local roads (not in state highway system) are assigned 7-digit numbers based on a 3-digit town ID and 4-digit "within town scope" ID.

[mariethefoxy]

I noticed something interesting on US 1 in Darien, I was coming back to Long Island and happened to go off the highway at Exit 14 and ended up going thru Darien to Stamford in search of a night food place that was open and somewhere around 11ish at night the traffic lights on US 1 went from Green to a Blinky Yellow on what im guessing is for the night. It was nice since you dont have to worry about some random side street turning red with nobody there. Its something I wish was done more on Long Island with some of the lightly used lights at night.

Also the signs for the service plaza on 95 advertise the Subway as being 24 Hours but it closes at like 10pm, which is false advertising.

[jp the roadgeek]

I noticed something interesting on US 1 in Darien, I was coming back to Long Island and happened to go off the highway at Exit 14 and ended up going thru Darien to Stamford in search of a night food place that was open and somewhere around 11ish at night the traffic lights on US 1 went from Green to a Blinky Yellow on what im guessing is for the night. It was nice since you dont have to worry about some random side street turning red with nobody there. Its something I wish was done more on Long Island with some of the lightly used lights at night.

Also the signs for the service plaza on 95 advertise the Subway as being 24 Hours but it closes at like 10pm, which is false advertising.

A bunch of lights on the main road in my town blink yellow from 10 PM - 6 AM.  I've been caught several times by a random red light with no one around at exactly 10 pm, only to have it start flashing yellow when it would usually turn green. 

[storm2k]

I noticed something interesting on US 1 in Darien, I was coming back to Long Island and happened to go off the highway at Exit 14 and ended up going thru Darien to Stamford in search of a night food place that was open and somewhere around 11ish at night the traffic lights on US 1 went from Green to a Blinky Yellow on what im guessing is for the night. It was nice since you dont have to worry about some random side street turning red with nobody there. Its something I wish was done more on Long Island with some of the lightly used lights at night.

Also the signs for the service plaza on 95 advertise the Subway as being 24 Hours but it closes at like 10pm, which is false advertising.

Is that something that was probably true before the pandemic but they changed it during the pandemic and the signs never got updated?

[abqtraveler]

Any new updates (pics?) for exit renumbering on Routes 9 and 72?

[shadyjay]

There's been nothing new.  I got a few recent shots of new signs on the middle and northern contracts, but no new exit numbers on the primary guide signs... just those ridiculous "NEW EXIT ##" signs.  A few exit gore signs have been replaced on the southern contract for SB exits in Middletown.  Crews have been working on the southern contract in Old Saybrook, installing foundations for the new gantries for the I-95 split.  Still no new extruded signs on the southern contract, and no sheet aluminums on the middle or northern contracts.  My FLICKR page on the 9/72 resigning has the latest photos, as of a week ago:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/albums/72157719337442409/page1
I expect more work to start ramping up soon, definitely after April 1 (when construction projects kick into high gear for the season).  Haven't seen any extruded aluminums in the staging lot for the southern contract.  The northern contract staging lot (upper level of the Stack) at last check had several supports, most likely for the New Britain canyon.  Foundations are in there, but nothing else.

Meanwhile, the statewide sheet aluminum contract is working on I-95.... there are some new signs NB out to East Lyme and sporadically, some new enhanced mile markers and single-posted neutered "route confirmation shields".  I-91 still hadn't gotten the treatment from New Haven up to Meriden, but has it full north of there.  When all is said-and-done, it'll be tougher to find a state-named interstate shield as a "route confirmation". 

[MATraveler128]

Meanwhile, the statewide sheet aluminum contract is working on I-95.... there are some new signs NB out to East Lyme and sporadically, some new enhanced mile markers and single-posted neutered "route confirmation shields".  I-91 still hadn't gotten the treatment from New Haven up to Meriden, but has it full north of there.  When all is said-and-done, it'll be tougher to find a state-named interstate shield as a "route confirmation".

So Connecticut is doing away with state named Interstate shields?

[shadyjay]

So Connecticut is doing away with state named Interstate shields?

Yup.  Within a year, the only state-named reassurance shield you may see on the mainlines will be those button copy ones...(click to zoom in to see the state name.  Only found in New London and on the Charter Oak Bridge, perhaps another spot or two)

95SB-Exit82 by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

CT32NB-@95NB by Jay Hogan, on Flickr

[abqtraveler]

Meanwhile, the statewide sheet aluminum contract is working on I-95.... there are some new signs NB out to East Lyme and sporadically, some new enhanced mile markers and single-posted neutered "route confirmation shields".  I-91 still hadn't gotten the treatment from New Haven up to Meriden, but has it full north of there.  When all is said-and-done, it'll be tougher to find a state-named interstate shield as a "route confirmation".

So Connecticut is doing away with state named Interstate shields?

CTDOT's standard highway sign drawings still depict the interstate shield including the state name. From what's been taking place recently, it sounds like individual CTDOT engineers are approving plans specifying "stateless" interstate shields.

[Ted$8roadFan]

Frankly am of the opinion that the best course of action with 84 in Hartford,  is complete reconstruction and partial / full depression.  Basically on or near current alignment.   Have seen some bizarre scenarios where it is tunneled to the S, or routed far to the N, making it even more indirect.   
Construct new alignment S of current in town aetna viaduct, provide for a ten lane cross - section with express lanes, full inner and outer shoulders.   Depress in trench, or "cut and cover" so it could be decked over.  Would clean up downtown quite a bit.   
Straighten and lower alignment within Hartford city limits.  Elimination of the remaining left exits and easing of multiple curves where possible.  Have not been on corridor in over fifteen years, perhaps some of the never built parkway and planned expressway stubs (Sisson Ave for example) are now Gone.  Not sure how "busway" could fit into this, perhaps as the far right lane, in each direction.

I think they should revive the old 284 scheme by extending the Whitehead Highway to 84, after widening it to 4 lanes and giving it sufficient clearance for trucks.

It would be a detour route while 84 is rebuilt and once finished, it would serve traffic going to Downtown from the West while 84 would serve through traffic.

That would have been a great idea, I wish it was built. However, it would have been signed as I-484 as I-284 was to be used from I-84/CT 2 to I-291. It would have to be tunneled though to avoid Bushnell Park.

It was originally supposed to be the connection from I-84 East to I-91 North until it was cancelled.  Evidence of this is at 3:37 in this video.

Loved the old signage, especially the "To 91"  sign on I-84 eastbound.

[RobbieL2415]

Meanwhile, the statewide sheet aluminum contract is working on I-95.... there are some new signs NB out to East Lyme and sporadically, some new enhanced mile markers and single-posted neutered "route confirmation shields".  I-91 still hadn't gotten the treatment from New Haven up to Meriden, but has it full north of there.  When all is said-and-done, it'll be tougher to find a state-named interstate shield as a "route confirmation".

So Connecticut is doing away with state named Interstate shields?

CTDOT's standard highway sign drawings still depict the interstate shield including the state name. From what's been taking place recently, it sounds like individual CTDOT engineers are approving plans specifying "stateless" interstate shields.

At the very least, District 1 is using generic Interstate shields, going by the latest replacement projects on I's 84, 91, 291 and 384.
Still don't know why is isn't a complete replacement project. Warning and advisory signs don't appear to be included.

[shadyjay]

Stateless/neutered/generic I-shields are now going up on I-95 as well.  I really like them, especially being mounted on a single post.  FWIW, the contract plans show the CT 2/3/11/17N sign replacement project as using single posted "route identification signs" as well.  That'll leave the new ones on CT 9 & 8 & 25 as dual-posted. 
More speed limit signs are going up, and each has a "WRONG WAY" on the back.  Maybe this is how they're justifying putting so many up.  Most states just put them up after a merge.  In states like VT, you may not see a speed limit sign for 15 miles.  For some reason, ConnDOT seems to think we need a reminder every mile, even when the speed limit is a consistent 65 MPH.

[RobbieL2415]

Stateless/neutered/generic I-shields are now going up on I-95 as well.  I really like them, especially being mounted on a single post.  FWIW, the contract plans show the CT 2/3/11/17N sign replacement project as using single posted "route identification signs" as well.  That'll leave the new ones on CT 9 & 8 & 25 as dual-posted. 
More speed limit signs are going up, and each has a "WRONG WAY" on the back.  Maybe this is how they're justifying putting so many up.  Most states just put them up after a merge.  In states like VT, you may not see a speed limit sign for 15 miles.  For some reason, ConnDOT seems to think we need a reminder every mile, even when the speed limit is a consistent 65 MPH.

Well we've had a lot of really bad wrong-way crashes over the past couple years.

[The Ghostbuster]

I've noticed something strange on the "Interstate 95 in Connecticut" page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_95_in_Connecticut. The exits for Route 9 North, US 1/ Route 156 — Old Lyme, Four Mile River Road, Rocky Neck State Park, Society Road, Route 161 — Flanders, Niantic, and Interstate 395 North — Norwich, Plainfield have all had their exit numbers changed to correspond with what the exits would be numbered under a mileage-based exit sequence instead of the present sequential exit sequence. I assume this is a case of Wikipedia jumping the gun, and the exits mentioned have not been renumbered, at least not yet.

[Great Lakes Roads]

I've noticed something strange on the "Interstate 95 in Connecticut" page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_95_in_Connecticut. The exits for Route 9 North, US 1/ Route 156 — Old Lyme, Four Mile River Road, Rocky Neck State Park, Society Road, Route 161 — Flanders, Niantic, and Interstate 395 North — Norwich, Plainfield have all had their exit numbers changed to correspond with what the exits would be numbered under a mileage-based exit sequence instead of the present sequential exit sequence. I assume this is a case of Wikipedia jumping the gun, and the exits mentioned have not been renumbered, at least not yet.

I also saw this happen on either I-91 or I-84, but that has since been fixed back to the sequential exit numbers.

[Alps]

I've noticed something strange on the "Interstate 95 in Connecticut" page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_95_in_Connecticut. The exits for Route 9 North, US 1/ Route 156 — Old Lyme, Four Mile River Road, Rocky Neck State Park, Society Road, Route 161 — Flanders, Niantic, and Interstate 395 North — Norwich, Plainfield have all had their exit numbers changed to correspond with what the exits would be numbered under a mileage-based exit sequence instead of the present sequential exit sequence. I assume this is a case of Wikipedia jumping the gun, and the exits mentioned have not been renumbered, at least not yet.

Fixed.

[shadyjay]

So... I managed to find the contract plans for the "statewide sheet aluminum" project currently going on.  It turns out that the wholesale replacement of all sheet aluminum signs on the mainlines is only happening on select portions of the routes in the project.  These areas are:

*  I-84 from vic. Exit 58 in East Hartford to the Mass state line at Union
*  I-91 from the Wallingford/Meriden town line to the Mass state line at Enfield
*  I-95 from the Clinton/Madison town line to the west end of the Gold Star Bridge in New London
*  I-291 and I-384, entire length
*  US 6 from Columbia to Windham

In regards to I-84 west of Southington, I-95 west of Madison, US 7, and the Wilbur Cross, only speed limit signs are being replaced (and in some cases, "Slower Traffic Keep Right" signs added.  Enhanced mile markers, gore signs, reassurance shields, etc are not part of these sections.  In regards to I-91 south of Wallingford, only enhanced mile markers are being replaced, with the remaining sheets down to the New Haven line being replaced as part of a separate project.

So, my statement about it being tough to find a state-named interstate shield on the mainline isn't entirely accurate.  They will still exist on I-95 west of Madison to the NY state line and on I-84 west of the Waterbury area.  It'll be tougher to find them, but it won't be impossible.  I have no idea why they are not taking the time to standardize on enhanced mile markers statewide (on I-84 west and I-95 west sections). 

[sharkyfour]

So... I managed to find the contract plans for the "statewide sheet aluminum" project currently going on.  It turns out that the wholesale replacement of all sheet aluminum signs on the mainlines is only happening on select portions of the routes in the project.  These areas are:

*  I-84 from vic. Exit 58 in East Hartford to the Mass state line at Union
*  I-91 from the Wallingford/Meriden town line to the Mass state line at Enfield
*  I-95 from the Clinton/Madison town line to the west end of the Gold Star Bridge in New London
*  I-291 and I-384, entire length
*  US 6 from Columbia to Windham

In regards to I-84 west of Southington, I-95 west of Madison, US 7, and the Wilbur Cross, only speed limit signs are being replaced (and in some cases, "Slower Traffic Keep Right" signs added.  Enhanced mile markers, gore signs, reassurance shields, etc are not part of these sections.  In regards to I-91 south of Wallingford, only enhanced mile markers are being replaced, with the remaining sheets down to the New Haven line being replaced as part of a separate project.

So, my statement about it being tough to find a state-named interstate shield on the mainline isn't entirely accurate.  They will still exist on I-95 west of Madison to the NY state line and on I-84 west of the Waterbury area.  It'll be tougher to find them, but it won't be impossible.  I have no idea why they are not taking the time to standardize on enhanced mile markers statewide (on I-84 west and I-95 west sections).

Are these available online somewhere?

[shadyjay]

Why yes... yes they are... though the contract plans are purely a "textual" document.  There are no maps or actual signs shown... just a table listing of route, direction, what the sign says in text ("NORTH/95" etc...)
https://biznet.ct.gov/scp_search/BidDetail.aspx?CID=55737

For other projects, you can use the search function found on top of the CT.GOV/DOT web page to search for a particular project, then within that page, get the project number, then go back to the main search page and enter the project number.  Then you can back-track for other contract plans.  Sometimes all that comes up are bid results... I got "hits" for the I-84 NY state line to Newtown resigning project in 2007, but all that came back were bid documents/summaries, and not contract plans.  If doing a search and "SCP Solicitation Details" pops up, that's the link to view the contract plans. 

[Mergingtraffic]

The southern CT-9 signing contract is a joke of a contract.  So many signs are sheet metal that should be extruded aluminum. 
-Town line signs
-Park & Ride Exit XX signs
-Generic services Exit XX signs
-Expressway Ends warning signs (yes they put those up going SB near the I-95 juction.  Long sheet metal signs with 3 poles.

Half of the signs up are already tilted.

Then, NB between the Middletown 10 Miles BGS and the traffic lights there are 14 Speed Limit signs.  14!  However, only one signal ahead sign.  It's old and in the middle and not reflective b/c it's so old.  That's right for stoplights in the middle of a freeway there is only one signal ahead warning sign in the median, a slippery when wet sign (which you're supposed to infer there's a stoplight ahead, and a congested area warning sign. 

The only saving grace of this post is this sign that is still up SB:

[shadyjay]

The southern CT-9 signing contract is a joke of a contract.  So many signs are sheet metal that should be extruded aluminum. 

Oh, you're preaching to the choir! 

Okay, the town line signs, I can kind of see them being sheet aluminum.  Yes, it is a major shift in ConnDOT signing practices, as for years, we have been known to have our town lines signed very well.  But now you're replacing simple, readable town line signs with ones found on backwoods 2-lane roads.  Their font is such that you can't read them at high speed.  If they left out the middle "INCORPORATED ####" line and enlarged the rest, it would've been at least readable. 

But the rest really should be extruded aluminum.  Service symbols should be built into either the 1 mile or 1/2 mile advance on the primary guide signs (the so-called "service bar").  I was told by ConnDOT that the extra space would have required the signs to be redesigned to handle the extra load.  Well, considering the replacement sheet aluminums have already gotten severely bent or torn off in the last wind storm, I think they should've gone with the redesign on the extruded signs.  Otherwise, they're going to be replacing a lot of sheets over the next 20 years or so. 

Park & Ride signs should be extruded as well.... combine them with whatever secondary signs you have.  Instead of one sign for "Chester Airport", add "Chester Airport/Park & Ride". 

According to the sign plans, only existing Exit 3 and Exit 7 are getting "ATTRACTIONS" logo signs.  So what does this mean for the attractions in Middletown?  New Britain?  No signage whatsoever going up for CCSU.  And some attractions are keeping sheet aluminum signs.  Apparently "playhouses" and "cultural arts centers" aren't considered worthy of being on a logo sign. 

The excess speed limit signs really irks me.  Some of the older ones have not yet been removed (the ones with the larger "65" numerals).  Regardless, in my opinion, you only need 1 per exit, usually occuring after the merge point.  But for some reason, ConnDOT feels like we need one every mile.  In other states, one suffices, even when exits are 5, 10, 15 miles apart.  And the fact that there's a pair of "MINIMUM 45" signs put up in Chester (NB and SB).  The minimum speed in CT is 40, not 45.  The likewise new minimum signs up in Middletown say "MINIMUM 40".  No, this is not a contractor error... its what the plans said.  Again, we wait and see.

The NEW EXIT/OLD EXIT is just so wrong.... just put up the signs with the new numbers and then add "OLD EXIT #" signs.  Or just leave the exits numbered as it is, then when you're ready, change out the whole road and then add the "OLD EXIT #" panels. 

If the world hadn't gone all 2020 a couple years ago, this project should have been done by now.... the original completion date was "MARCH 2022".  We still have yet to see a single extruded sign south of Middletown... not a single sheet sign north of Middletown... and throughout, a hodgepodge of unanswered questions.  Will they figure out the mile markers are a mile off southbound?  Maybe when they put up the fractional mile signs.  How many times will they replace the exit gore signs before they realize they forgot to put the new exit number on them?  And what will those exit numbers be?

And is this all a glimpse of future sign projects?  We've got I-84's W Hartford-E Hartford project stalled.  And we've got CT 2/3/11/17 underway as well. 

Stay tuned!

[Mergingtraffic]

Shadyjay, the CT-8 ones have extruded aluminum park and ride signs and on the on-ramps too. So maybe CT-9 is an anomaly