Connecticut News

[shadyjay]

Passed through the [Waterbury] Mixmaster today... the u-turn from CT 8 NB Exit 35 is gone and the former 2-lane ramp is reduced to 1 lane while the u-turn is removed.  The double-wide Exit 35 "exit now" sign is still up, but with just an overlay for the Exit 35 route & destinations over the middle of the sign.  Its due to be replaced anyway as part of the CT 8 resigning/new exit numbers project.  Lots of excavation in the area for new overhead supports.

On I-84 West, they have still yet to restore the "NORTH" directional to most of the CT 8 North ramp signage.  Now that the u-turn is gone, now would be a good time to do that!

[RobbieL2415]

So... for some reason, ConnDOT seems to think that "Merging Traffic (symbol)" signs are no longer necessary and has omitted them from recent sign replacement projects and replacement of "sheet aluminum" signs.  We now have large sections of I-91 and most of CT 2 and CT 9 without any merging traffic signs.  The only ones that were kept were those where there's a short acceleration lane. 

This afternoon, I spotted where some of them may have gone to... the "merging traffic" graveyard      where there's not 1, not 2, but 3, yup 3 merging traffic signs, of varying sizes, on I-95 NB in West Haven:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2827128,-72.9528576,3a,31.3y,75.26h,85.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sMLoh_i2EVXMJEea8jev3IQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

So, does the MUTCD require a sign where a ramp merges onto the mainline, or is it mearly a suggestion?  Relying solely on pavement markings seems short-sighted (no pun intended).

I mean, if they invested into sturdier aluminum signage and went to I-beams for support (as MassDOT has started to do here ), maybe they wouldn't have to replace them as often.

[Ted$8roadFan]

(The latest) meeting to discuss removing the Tracie signals on CT-9 in Middletown.

https://www.wfsb.com/video/2024/05/01/plan-remove-traffic-lights-along-route-9-middletown/

[The Ghostbuster]

Are they actually going to do it? Or are they just going to talk about it for all eternity?

[shadyjay]

I'm not a fan at all of the plan as proposed.  Making the only option to get to Portland from the south be via exiting at a roundabout and navigating 2 miles of city streets seems quite assine, honestly.  An original proposal had an access road and ramps that curved north from the Arrigoni Bridge to Route 9.  This traverses a mostly vacant and industrial area.  That would have taken cars away from the congestion of St John Square and eliminate having to elevate Route 9 South at Hartford Ave.  Elevating Route 9 South there is going to be quite the roller coaster, as it would bridge over the ramp from Hartford Ave to Route 9 North, then quickly has to duck under the railroad bridge. 

A SPUI at the Route 17 South connector combined with the street improvements on River Rd near the Harbor Area, and a looping access north of the Arrigoni to/from Route 9 would be the best bet, in my opinion.  But what do I know... I'm just someone who's been passing/driving through the nightmare for the past 40 years.

[Ted$8roadFan]

I wonder if flooding from the Connecticut River has been taken into account. The area of the roundabout on River Road is where Sumner Brook empties into the river and is subject to flooding. Given the potential of thousands of vehicles using that area to cross the river that would be a problem.

[RobbieL2415]

Said it before and I'll say it again, the better long-term plan would have been to relocate CT 9 around the center of Portland. That gives Middletown back 100% of its waterfront access and eliminates all choke points.

[SectorZ]

Said it before and I'll say it again, the better long-term plan would have been to relocate CT 9 around the center of Portland. That gives Middletown back 100% of its waterfront access and eliminates all choke points.

It's an interesting idea. The two bridges would be so expensive but you could get away with knocking down the Arrigoni Bridge once it has hit end of life.

[The Ghostbuster]

Since Connecticut doesn't want to build anything (or just do the bare minimum), I doubt RobbieL2415's idea would ever come into fruition, even if it was an improvement over the status quo.

[MikeCL]

So since no one else said anything yet I wonder how long the Fairfield ave bridge in Norwalk is going to be out for since the tanker fire this morning?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJUY06XII-Q

[74/171FAN]

So since no one else said anything yet I wonder how long the Fairfield ave bridge in Norwalk is going to be out for since the tanker fire this morning?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJUY06XII-Q

It is in this thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=34789.0).