Since no one else has initiated a "Connecticut milepost exit numbering conversion" thread, I thought I would be the one to take a stab at doing so. Have at it!
State & US Route Expressways:
CT 2 Sign replacement underway, conversion to mile-based exits sometime in 2023-2024
US 6 Willimantic section: Sign replacement contract in design, to go out to bid 2024. Most likely won't see mile-based numbers until 2025 at the earliest.
US 7 TBD
CT 8 Sign modification, conversion to mile-based exits, 2023-2024
CT 9 Converted to mile-based exits, January 2023. All signs replaced.
CT 11 Sign replacement underway, conversion to mile-based exits sometime in 2023
CT 15 TBD
CT 17 Middletown area: Mile-based exits added Jan 2023; Glastonbury: Sign replacement underway, conversion to mile-based exits sometime in 2023-2024
CT 20 TBD
CT 25 TBD
CT 40 Sign replacement underway, conversion to mile-based exits sometime in 2023-2024
CT 72 Converted to mile-based exits Spring 2023; Signs replaced
Any word on the interstates?
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on April 21, 2023, 05:37:53 PM
Any word on the interstates?
Interstates:
I-84 TBD
I-91 TBD
I-95 TBD
I-384 Contract to be let for sign replacement & mile based exits in 2024. Most likely no new exit #s until 2025 at the earliest.
I-291 TBD
I-691 Exit numbers slated for conversion to mile-based, late April 2023. Complete sign replacement also forthcoming during 2023.
I-395 Already converted to mile-based exits.
(SSR 695) Already converted to mile-based exits.
Quote from: shadyjay on April 21, 2023, 04:59:24 PM
State & US Route Expressways:
CT 2 Sign replacement underway, conversion to mile-based exits sometime in 2023-2024
US 6 Willimantic section: Sign replacement contract in design, to go out to bid 2024. Most likely won't see mile-based numbers until 2025 at the earliest.
US 7 TBD
CT 8 Sign modification, conversion to mile-based exits, 2023-2024
CT 9 Converted to mile-based exits, January 2023. All signs replaced.
CT 11 Sign replacement underway, conversion to mile-based exits sometime in 2023
CT 15 TBD
CT 17 Middletown area: Mile-based exits added Jan 2023; Glastonbury: Sign replacement underway, conversion to mile-based exits sometime in 2023-2024
CT 20 TBD
CT 25 TBD
CT 40 Sign replacement underway, conversion to mile-based exits sometime in 2023-2024
CT 72 Converted to mile-based exits Spring 2023; Signs replaced
My guess is they will do the Danbury/Brookfield section of US-7 when they renumber exits on I-84. Similarly, if I were a betting man, I would think they would renumber exits on the Norwalk segment of US-7 when I-95 exit numbers are changed.
For Route 25, I think everyone was thinking they would be renumbered with Route 8, but apparently that's not happening per the plans included in the Route 8 exit renumbering contract. Perhaps CTDOT might issue a contract modification to include renumbering Route 25 north of the Route 8 split, but I haven't seen anything to this effect as of yet.
Quote from: shadyjay on April 21, 2023, 04:59:24 PM
State & US Route Expressways:
You missed one: CT 2A has already converted
Other minor routes with added numbers that are mileage based:
CT 82
CT 349
SR 571
SR 796 (Milford Connector) had numbers added a few years ago, but I don't see them changing for such a short stretch.
Don't know if the couple of exits on 187/189 will get numbers.
From CONNDOT:
QuoteFrequently Asked Questions
Q: Why are the exits being renumbered?
A: The exits are being renumbered to conform to Federal standards. Reference location (mileage) based exit numbering is a requirement of the MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices), Section 2E.31, published by the Federal Highway Administration. The MUTCD is the national standard and is adopted by reference in the Federal Code of Regulations Title 23: Highways Part 655.603.
Q: What are the benefits to a mileage-based exit numbering system?
A: - National Uniformity Same exit numbering system as almost every other state. - Driver friendly navigation Allows drivers to quickly determine distances to destinations Easier to calculate miles traveled - More accurate emergency response Improves reporting of highway incidents, resulting in better navigation of emergency services - Easier to add future exits without renumbering entire corridor
Q: Which highways will get new exit numbers?
A: All limited access roadways within the State will be renumbered to mileage-based numbering as required by the Federal Highway Administration.
Q: When will new signs be installed on my route?
A: New exit numbers will be provided when signs are replaced in corridor sign projects. Projects are programmed based on need when signs reach or exceed their useful service life. The list below includes major routes only and the year is the approximate construction completion year. Please note that the schedule is subject to change.
- CT-2: 2024 (Currently in Construction — State Project 0172-0490)
- CT-8: 2025
- CT-9: 2022 (Currently in Construction — State Projects 0007-0189/0171-0425 & 0172-0473)
- CT-15: 2025
- I-84: 2028
- I-91: 2027
- I-95: 2029
- I-291: 2025
- I-384: 2026
- I-395: Completed 2015
- I-691: 2023 (Currently in Construction — State Project 0079-0244)
Q: Will there be an Exit 0?
A: No. The Federal Highway Administration allows Exit 0 but does not require its use. CTDOT
has decided not to use Exit 0 to reduce potential confusion.
Q: How are the new exit numbers determined?
A: Exit numbers will be determined based on the mileage contained in the CTDOT Linear
Referencing System. Mileage typically runs from south to north and west to east.
- No Exit 0
- Mileage 0.00 — 1.49 = Exit 1
- Mileage 1.50 — 2.99 = Exit 2
- Mileage 3.00 — 3.99 and beyond.
+ Round down to the nearest whole mile
- In some cases, the CTDOT may round up or down to the next nearest whole mile to reduce
suffix letters or utilize the existing exit number.
- Splits on off-ramps will not be designated as separate numbers/suffix letters.
Q: Will there be any traffic impacts?
A: We anticipate minimal impact to traffic during construction. The public will be notified in
advance of construction start and CTDOT will use electronic changeable message signs to alert
motorists of lane closures during construction.
Q: How will the program be paid for?
A: The exit numbers will be revised as a component of corridor sign replacement projects.
Renumbering will be implemented over the course of the next 10 years and be paid for by a
mixture of State and Federal funds.
Q: What is CTDOT doing to notify the public of this conversion?
A: The Department issues a press release during the design of the corridor sign replacement
project and at the beginning of the construction phase of the project. The Department also
reaches out to the municipalities directly impacted by the numbering change during the design
process. This communication is to allow the municipality to inform local business and
emergency services of the upcoming change.
Q: How will this impact businesses?
A: "Old Exit #" signs will be installed and remain in place for a minimum of 2 years, providing
businesses with time to adjust to the new exit numbers and update advertising materials.
Q: What will the new exit signs look like?
A: Exit sign panels will look the same, just the numbers themselves will change. "Old Exit #"
signs, which will have a green background with white lettering, will be installed at key locations
for a minimum of 2 years.
Q: How can I submit my questions?
A: All inquiries relating to exit numbering should be sent to DOT.TrafficEngineering@ct.gov with
the subject line Exit Numbering.
https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/Traffic-Engineering/Exit-Renumbering (https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/Traffic-Engineering/Exit-Renumbering)
Looks like CTDOT finally updated the map for exits, adding I-691, along with the recently announced I-384 and US 6. But wait, there's more: I-291, and the whole CT 2/3/11/Glastonbury 17 exits project.
I-691 looks like this (the 66 Exits are both Exit 1)
Exit 11 > Exit 1A
Exit 10 > Exit 1B
Exit 9 > Exit 1C
Exit 8 > Exit 2A
Exit 7 > Exit 2B
Exits 6 + 5 > Exit 3
Exit 4 > Exit 5
Exit 3 > Exit 7
Exit 2 > Exit 8A
Exit 1 > Exit 8B
UPDATE: 691 East is done already. Got on at old Exit 4 and this was the next sign I saw:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/52840938794_0036e95935.jpg)
They'll probably do westbound tonight, as a backward glance saw the old numbers still up
I-691 West is done... drove it today.
Since I-691 was done in 2 nights and done with overlays (since the signs are getting replaced this year anyway), there's no reason why ConnDOT couldn't do what Mass did and overlay new exit numbers on each of the state's highways and get the whole state converted in a year (or less). Granted there's a lot of overheads to change, but when Mass changed, all of their primary guide signs are all overhead. And there's only one road where 3-digit numbers would be used, but that would only require replacing exit tabs for 3 or 4 exits.
I bet if they really wanted to, they could get I-84, I-91, and I-95 fully converted over in a month each. And maybe even less time for I-95 if they don't mess with the numbers west of New Haven.
Quote from: shadyjay on April 24, 2023, 05:37:51 PM
I-691 West is done... drove it today.
Since I-691 was done in 2 nights and done with overlays (since the signs are getting replaced this year anyway), there's no reason why ConnDOT couldn't do what Mass did and overlay new exit numbers on each of the state's highways and get the whole state converted in a year (or less). Granted there's a lot of overheads to change, but when Mass changed, all of their primary guide signs are all overhead. And there's only one road where 3-digit numbers would be used, but that would only require replacing exit tabs for 3 or 4 exits.
I bet if they really wanted to, they could get I-84, I-91, and I-95 fully converted over in a month each. And maybe even less time for I-95 if they don't mess with the numbers west of New Haven.
And despite everything, they're still on track to finish before Vermont even begins (not going to comment on NH because they're dependent on how long the exit 3 kid remains governor).
Or New Hampshire. Or Delaware.
Quote from: vdeane on April 24, 2023, 08:35:18 PM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 24, 2023, 05:37:51 PM
I-691 West is done... drove it today.
Since I-691 was done in 2 nights and done with overlays (since the signs are getting replaced this year anyway), there's no reason why ConnDOT couldn't do what Mass did and overlay new exit numbers on each of the state's highways and get the whole state converted in a year (or less). Granted there's a lot of overheads to change, but when Mass changed, all of their primary guide signs are all overhead. And there's only one road where 3-digit numbers would be used, but that would only require replacing exit tabs for 3 or 4 exits.
I bet if they really wanted to, they could get I-84, I-91, and I-95 fully converted over in a month each. And maybe even less time for I-95 if they don't mess with the numbers west of New Haven.
And despite everything, they're still on track to finish before Vermont even begins (not going to comment on NH because they're dependent on how long the exit 3 kid remains governor).
VT skillfully delayed things with the mileage banners they added to their advance guide signs.
Quote from: shadyjay on April 24, 2023, 05:37:51 PM
I-691 West is done... drove it today.
Since I-691 was done in 2 nights and done with overlays (since the signs are getting replaced this year anyway), there's no reason why ConnDOT couldn't do what Mass did and overlay new exit numbers on each of the state's highways and get the whole state converted in a year (or less). Granted there's a lot of overheads to change, but when Mass changed, all of their primary guide signs are all overhead. And there's only one road where 3-digit numbers would be used, but that would only require replacing exit tabs for 3 or 4 exits.
I bet if they really wanted to, they could get I-84, I-91, and I-95 fully converted over in a month each. And maybe even less time for I-95 if they don't mess with the numbers west of New Haven.
95 west of New Haven will need some adjustments, the major ones being between Westport and the Milford Connector (won't even need to touch 5-16, 38-41, or 46-48). The minor ones: In Greenwich, Exits 2-4 each get lowered by 1. Between the Milford Connector and I-91, 42-44 each get adjusted up by 1 (in the case of 44, it would be fudged down from 46 to 45 so that 46-48 could remain unchanged). Between Westport and Milford:
17 becomes 18
18 becomes 20
19 becomes 22
20 (SB ONLY) becomes 23
21 becomes 24
22 becomes 25A
23 becomes 25B
24 becomes 26
25 becomes 27
26 becomes 28
27 (NB) and 27B (SB) become 29A
27A becomes 29B (and puts 8 before 25 on the signage)
28 (NB) and 27C (SB) become 29C
29-36: Each get adjusted up by 1. NB 36 becomes 37A to accommodate current 37 as 37B.
The real meat of the 95 renumbering begins north of Exit 56, but current 50-54 would each need to be lowered by 1 (current 52, which is SB only, is fudged up to 51 to use the number)
Quote from: shadyjay on April 24, 2023, 05:37:51 PM
I-691 West is done... drove it today.
Since I-691 was done in 2 nights and done with overlays (since the signs are getting replaced this year anyway), there's no reason why ConnDOT couldn't do what Mass did and overlay new exit numbers on each of the state's highways and get the whole state converted in a year (or less). Granted there's a lot of overheads to change, but when Mass changed, all of their primary guide signs are all overhead. And there's only one road where 3-digit numbers would be used, but that would only require replacing exit tabs for 3 or 4 exits.
I bet if they really wanted to, they could get I-84, I-91, and I-95 fully converted over in a month each. And maybe even less time for I-95 if they don't mess with the numbers west of New Haven.
Remember that Connecticut is converting their exit numbers reluctantly, so they're looking for any opportunity to slow-roll their conversion. The FHWA is allowing CTDOT to push off exit renumbering until signs need replacing, and CTDOT is taking full advantage of that.
New enhanced mileposts were completed over the weekend on CT 72. Saw a new enhanced MP 3 EB by the Exit 2 sign as I drove by on 84 East. I'll have to check out the rest west of 84.
UPDATE: All done. No MP between MP 3 and MP 4 for the 84 overlap. WB's last marker is MP 6, while there's a 6.2 on the EB side.
QuoteFrequently Asked Questions
Q: How are the new exit numbers determined?
A: Exit numbers will be determined based on the mileage contained in the CTDOT Linear
Referencing System. Mileage typically runs from south to north and west to east.
- No Exit 0
- Mileage 0.00 — 1.49 = Exit 1
- Mileage 1.50 — 2.99 = Exit 2
- Mileage 3.00 — 3.99 and beyond.
+ Round down to the nearest whole mile
This seems like a weird system to me. I know that when California did its exit numbers, it also avoided Exit 0, but rounds at the .5 mark throughout and not just between miles 1 and 2.
Quote from: Henry on April 25, 2023, 10:02:28 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 24, 2023, 08:36:13 PM
Or New Hampshire. Or Delaware.
Or NY.
NY has converted a few roads (I-84, the Hutch, I-99), roads newly getting exit numbers are mile-based (the Taconic, I-781), there's the old experiments (I-890/NY 890, the NYSDOT portion of I-95), and the roads affected by the I-81 removal are going mile-based (I-690/presumably NY 690 as well, I-81, BL 81, NY 481). I presume more will happen as signs are replaced, but much of the state isn't doing corridor-based sign rehabs like CT is right now, so it could be a while (although Region 8 seems to do them more than most... that's how I-84, the Hutch, and the Taconic all went mile-based).
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 25, 2023, 09:48:39 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 24, 2023, 05:37:51 PM
I-691 West is done... drove it today.
Since I-691 was done in 2 nights and done with overlays (since the signs are getting replaced this year anyway), there's no reason why ConnDOT couldn't do what Mass did and overlay new exit numbers on each of the state's highways and get the whole state converted in a year (or less). Granted there's a lot of overheads to change, but when Mass changed, all of their primary guide signs are all overhead. And there's only one road where 3-digit numbers would be used, but that would only require replacing exit tabs for 3 or 4 exits.
I bet if they really wanted to, they could get I-84, I-91, and I-95 fully converted over in a month each. And maybe even less time for I-95 if they don't mess with the numbers west of New Haven.
Remember that Connecticut is converting their exit numbers reluctantly, so they're looking for any opportunity to slow-roll their conversion. The FHWA is allowing CTDOT to push off exit renumbering until signs need replacing, and CTDOT is taking full advantage of that.
Button copy is a historic resource so it does not need to ever be replaced
please back me up on this
Quote from: Alps on April 25, 2023, 04:36:12 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on April 25, 2023, 09:48:39 AM
Quote from: shadyjay on April 24, 2023, 05:37:51 PM
I-691 West is done... drove it today.
Since I-691 was done in 2 nights and done with overlays (since the signs are getting replaced this year anyway), there's no reason why ConnDOT couldn't do what Mass did and overlay new exit numbers on each of the state's highways and get the whole state converted in a year (or less). Granted there's a lot of overheads to change, but when Mass changed, all of their primary guide signs are all overhead. And there's only one road where 3-digit numbers would be used, but that would only require replacing exit tabs for 3 or 4 exits.
I bet if they really wanted to, they could get I-84, I-91, and I-95 fully converted over in a month each. And maybe even less time for I-95 if they don't mess with the numbers west of New Haven.
Remember that Connecticut is converting their exit numbers reluctantly, so they're looking for any opportunity to slow-roll their conversion. The FHWA is allowing CTDOT to push off exit renumbering until signs need replacing, and CTDOT is taking full advantage of that.
Button copy is a historic resource so it does not need to ever be replaced
please back me up on this
Especially if it's on the Merritt Parkway. The Merritt Parkway Conservancy will have its best and brightest trial lawyers lined up to fight the replacement of any highway signs it deems historical. :)
How hard do any of you think they will fight to keep the exits from being renumbered? Will it be like US 6 on Cape Cod all over again?
Just checked Google Maps this morning, and it appears they have updated interchange numbers on Routes 9 and 72 to reflect the recent changeover to mile-based exit numbers on those routes.
I've noticed that too!
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on April 25, 2023, 06:54:58 PM
How hard do any of you think they will fight to keep the exits from being renumbered? Will it be like US 6 on Cape Cod all over again?
I wouldn't be surprised at all if they did fight the renumbering like Cape Codders have done.
Those who have checked out the updated CTDOT Exit Renumbering project page may have noticed they added future exit numbers for CT 25 as well as I-691. Though it did not appear with the CT 8 sign replacement project plans, since it is noted CT 25 exit numbers will change by 2025, the same as CT 8, I am assuming it will be done as part of the same contract. Since there are no sign plans for CT 25, nor for I-691, here's a traffic camera image of one of the pair of I-84 advance signs,:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i691tci84exitnums42423.jpg)
I created my own using Sign Maker, the plans are on my New England Exit Renumbering Central website:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#futnum (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#futnum)
Quote from: bob7374 on April 29, 2023, 10:50:20 PM
Those who have checked out the updated CTDOT Exit Renumbering project page may have noticed they added future exit numbers for CT 25 as well as I-691. Though it did not appear with the CT 8 sign replacement project plans, since it is noted CT 25 exit numbers will change by 2025, the same as CT 8, I am assuming it will be done as part of the same contract. Since there are no sign plans for CT 25, nor for I-691, here's a traffic camera image of one of the pair of I-84 advance signs,:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i691tci84exitnums42423.jpg)
I created my own using Sign Maker, the plans are on my New England Exit Renumbering Central website:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#futnum (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#futnum)
The Route 25 freeway is relatively short with only three interchanges. If CTDOT doesn't issue a modification for the Route 8 exit renumbering contract to include Route 25, then I would suspect that CTDOT might just renumber Route 25 in-house and just overlay existing signage with new exit numbers. The signs on Route 25 north of Route 8 were replaced about 5 years ago, so I think an overlay would make sense.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 23, 2023, 01:08:17 PM
I-691 looks like this (the 66 Exits are both Exit 1)
Exit 11 > Exit 1A
Exit 10 > Exit 1B
Exit 9 > Exit 1C
Exit 8 > Exit 2A
Exit 7 > Exit 2B
Exits 6 + 5 > Exit 3
Exit 4 > Exit 5
Exit 3 > Exit 7
Exit 2 > Exit 8A
Exit 1 > Exit 8B
Can anyone give the reasoning behind why I-691, in the eyes of CT, is viewed as an east-west highway rather than the standard west-east with respect to the mile markers & now interchange numbers?
I did a quick search & didn't find too much info.
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 02, 2023, 09:46:03 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 23, 2023, 01:08:17 PM
I-691 looks like this (the 66 Exits are both Exit 1)
Exit 11 > Exit 1A
Exit 10 > Exit 1B
Exit 9 > Exit 1C
Exit 8 > Exit 2A
Exit 7 > Exit 2B
Exits 6 + 5 > Exit 3
Exit 4 > Exit 5
Exit 3 > Exit 7
Exit 2 > Exit 8A
Exit 1 > Exit 8B
Can anyone give the reasoning behind why I-691, in the eyes of CT, is viewed as an east-west highway rather than the standard west-east with respect to the mile markers & now interchange numbers?
I did a quick search & didn't find too much info.
Per MUTCD 2009, Section 2E.31 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2e.htm)
14 Spur route interchanges shall be numbered in ascending order starting at the interchange where the spur leaves the mainline route (see Figure 2E-20).
In this case, I-691 leaves it parent and heads west. For it to have remained a west-east routing, it would have to be an I-x84. For some reason, I-684 seems to be exempted from this provision, as its mileposts go from White Plains to its parent in Brewster.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 02, 2023, 11:10:56 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 02, 2023, 09:46:03 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 23, 2023, 01:08:17 PM
I-691 looks like this (the 66 Exits are both Exit 1)
Exit 11 > Exit 1A
Exit 10 > Exit 1B
Exit 9 > Exit 1C
Exit 8 > Exit 2A
Exit 7 > Exit 2B
Exits 6 + 5 > Exit 3
Exit 4 > Exit 5
Exit 3 > Exit 7
Exit 2 > Exit 8A
Exit 1 > Exit 8B
Can anyone give the reasoning behind why I-691, in the eyes of CT, is viewed as an east-west highway rather than the standard west-east with respect to the mile markers & now interchange numbers?
I did a quick search & didn't find too much info.
Per MUTCD 2009, Section 2E.31 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2e.htm)
14 Spur route interchanges shall be numbered in ascending order starting at the interchange where the spur leaves the mainline route (see Figure 2E-20).
In this case, I-691 leaves it parent and heads west. For it to have remained a west-east routing, it would have to be an I-x84. For some reason, I-684 seems to be exempted from this provision, as its mileposts go from White Plains to its parent in Brewster.
That may be because I-684 was originally designated as I-87, which followed the I-684 and I-84 alignment south of Newburgh until 1971, at which point it was shifted to follow the Thruway south of I-84, over the Tappan Zee Bridge, and into New York City.
But now I have an understanding as to why I-691's exit numbers now increase from east to west. That must have been a recent change to the MUTCD, since there are a lot of 3-digit spur routes around the country whose exit numbering follows the traditional pattern of starting at the south/west end and increasing heading north/east, regardless of where it connects to its parent route.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 02, 2023, 11:10:56 PMPer MUTCD 2009, Section 2E.31 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2e.htm)
14 Spur route interchanges shall be numbered in ascending order starting at the interchange where the spur leaves the mainline route (see Figure 2E-20).
In this case, I-691 leaves it parent and heads west. For it to have remained a west-east routing, it would have to be an I-x84. For some reason, I-684 seems to be exempted from this provision, as its mileposts go from White Plains to its parent in Brewster.
691 and 684 aren't considered spur routes, as evidenced by their even first digits.
The MUTCD could avoid ambiguity by tweaking 2E.31.13 to read "loop or other auxiliary connector routes".
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on May 03, 2023, 08:53:15 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 02, 2023, 11:10:56 PMPer MUTCD 2009, Section 2E.31 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2e.htm)
14 Spur route interchanges shall be numbered in ascending order starting at the interchange where the spur leaves the mainline route (see Figure 2E-20).
In this case, I-691 leaves it parent and heads west. For it to have remained a west-east routing, it would have to be an I-x84. For some reason, I-684 seems to be exempted from this provision, as its mileposts go from White Plains to its parent in Brewster.
691 and 684 aren't considered spur routes, as evidenced by their even first digits.
In terms of I-684: If it walks like a duck and talks like duck, its first digit doesn't mean jack.
Quote from: Rothman on May 03, 2023, 09:04:56 AM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on May 03, 2023, 08:53:15 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 02, 2023, 11:10:56 PMPer MUTCD 2009, Section 2E.31 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2e.htm)
14 Spur route interchanges shall be numbered in ascending order starting at the interchange where the spur leaves the mainline route (see Figure 2E-20).
In this case, I-691 leaves it parent and heads west. For it to have remained a west-east routing, it would have to be an I-x84. For some reason, I-684 seems to be exempted from this provision, as its mileposts go from White Plains to its parent in Brewster.
691 and 684 aren't considered spur routes, as evidenced by their even first digits.
In terms of I-684: If it walks like a duck and talks like duck, its first digit doesn't mean jack.
It's an auxiliary interstate that connects I-287 and I-84, and therefore exit numbering should begin from the south/west end, just as any other auxiliary interstate that connects other interstates does/should.
Arguably, it could be said to be part of a loop around southwestern Connecticut or southern New England....a bypass of the former Fairfield County.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on May 03, 2023, 09:38:38 AM
Arguably, it could be said to be part of a loop around southwestern Connecticut or southern New England....a bypass of the former Fairfield County.
I'm definitely not seeing I-684 as a loop. It heads straight toward New York City.
Quote from: 1 on May 03, 2023, 11:36:01 AM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on May 03, 2023, 09:38:38 AM
Arguably, it could be said to be part of a loop around southwestern Connecticut or southern New England....a bypass of the former Fairfield County.
I'm definitely not seeing I-684 as a loop. It heads straight toward New York City.
But it does connect two interstates, so either is allowed. But as others have said, there's nothing wrong with I-684 as it stands.
I guess we'll have to wait until/if the exit numbers on Interstate 684 are renumbered. I think mileage-based numbers on 684 should increase from south-to-north, just like the existing sequential numbers.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 03, 2023, 11:52:23 AM
I guess we'll have to wait until/if the exit numbers on Interstate 684 are renumbered. I think mileage-based numbers on 684 should increase from south-to-north, just like the existing sequential numbers.
I'm sure they will go south-north, as NYSDOT has maintained the mile markers on 684 for years. OTOH, 691 has never had mile markers (and still doesn't yet), so 99.8% of people (except DOT workers and roadgeeks in the know) assumed mileage went west to east when in reality it's been the opposite since sometime between the switch from CT 66 and a few years ago.
UPDATE: Looks like Google Maps has updated I-691 exit numbers except that they left the old number for New 1B/Old 10 WB and new 1A/Old 11 in both directions. Neither of the 66 exits were updated.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 03, 2023, 04:53:18 PM
OTOH, 691 has never had mile markers (and still doesn't yet), so 99.8% of people (except DOT workers and roadgeeks in the know) assumed mileage went west to east when in reality it's been the opposite since sometime between the switch from CT 66 and a few years ago.
UPDATE: Looks like Google Maps has updated I-691 exit numbers except that they left the old number for New 1B/Old 10 WB and new 1A/Old 11 in both directions. Neither of the 66 exits were updated.
Keeping in mind that I-691 was previously designated as Route 66 (and before that, US-6A). It only became I-691 when the final connection to I-84 was completed around 1990, and the Route 66 designation was truncated to its present western terminus at the I-91/I-691/Route-15 interchange. Prior to the completion of the I-691 freeway to I-84, the freeway section of Route 66 ended at Exit 5 (former Exit 4), and then continued west on its former two-lane alignment toward Waterbury, which is now Route 322.
My suspicion is that CTDOT intentionally excluded mileposts on I-691 to prevent confusion with mileposts increasing heading east, while exit numbers increased heading in the opposite direction, and then having an abrupt reset at the I-91/Route 15 interchange where the freeway continues east as Route 66.
I took my wife to dinner at Mohegan Sun this evening.
We drove Route 2 between Hartford and Norwich, and I noticed that there are a couple of "old exit / new exit" signs posted, one at old Exit 13 eastbound, and one at old Exit 8 westbound, with the latter having the new exit number 6 blacked out on one of the signs posted.
As of this morning the little CT 3 freeway has mileposts and blacked out numbered exit signs at the exits - but no tabs yet on the old button copy
Route 17 in Glastonbury does as well, but the new exit signs list the New London Turnpike ("Glastonbury Center" northbound toward Route 2) exit as Exit 34, so we know what that number is at least.
I drove I-691 West last weekend to document the new exit numbers, such as for the CT 15 North and US 5 exits:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i691exits523f.jpg)
The rest of the photos are at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i691exits (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i691exits)
Also took photos of new exit numbers along CT 72, such as this sign for the former Exits 3-4:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ct72exits523o.jpg)
The rest of the photos at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#ct72exits (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#ct72exits)
I've posted photos taken of CT 9 exit renumbering southbound from CT 72 to I-95, including the exits with I-91:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ct9exits523n.jpg)
to my New England Exit Renumbering Central website: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#ct9photos (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#ct9photos)
New article today in the Hartford Courant regarding exit renumbering (though doesn't mention the latest exit renumbering on CT 9 and 72, despite showing photos):
https://www.courant.com/2023/05/21/ct-highway-changes-7-things-you-need-to-know-about-all-our-new-exit-numbers/ (https://www.courant.com/2023/05/21/ct-highway-changes-7-things-you-need-to-know-about-all-our-new-exit-numbers/)
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on May 03, 2023, 08:53:15 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 02, 2023, 11:10:56 PMPer MUTCD 2009, Section 2E.31 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2e.htm)
14 Spur route interchanges shall be numbered in ascending order starting at the interchange where the spur leaves the mainline route (see Figure 2E-20).
In this case, I-691 leaves it parent and heads west. For it to have remained a west-east routing, it would have to be an I-x84. For some reason, I-684 seems to be exempted from this provision, as its mileposts go from White Plains to its parent in Brewster.
691 and 684 aren't considered spur routes, as evidenced by their even first digits.
The MUTCD could avoid ambiguity by tweaking 2E.31.13 to read "loop or other auxiliary connector routes".
They could also add something for the 2-way spur routes such as I-526 in South Carolina, etc (which are indeed spurs, but go in both directions from their parent)
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 03, 2023, 08:42:56 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 02, 2023, 11:10:56 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 02, 2023, 09:46:03 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 23, 2023, 01:08:17 PM
I-691 looks like this (the 66 Exits are both Exit 1)
Exit 11 > Exit 1A
Exit 10 > Exit 1B
Exit 9 > Exit 1C
Exit 8 > Exit 2A
Exit 7 > Exit 2B
Exits 6 + 5 > Exit 3
Exit 4 > Exit 5
Exit 3 > Exit 7
Exit 2 > Exit 8A
Exit 1 > Exit 8B
Can anyone give the reasoning behind why I-691, in the eyes of CT, is viewed as an east-west highway rather than the standard west-east with respect to the mile markers & now interchange numbers?
I did a quick search & didn't find too much info.
Per MUTCD 2009, Section 2E.31 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2e.htm)
14 Spur route interchanges shall be numbered in ascending order starting at the interchange where the spur leaves the mainline route (see Figure 2E-20).
In this case, I-691 leaves it parent and heads west. For it to have remained a west-east routing, it would have to be an I-x84. For some reason, I-684 seems to be exempted from this provision, as its mileposts go from White Plains to its parent in Brewster.
That may be because I-684 was originally designated as I-87, which followed the I-684 and I-84 alignment south of Newburgh until 1971, at which point it was shifted to follow the Thruway south of I-84, over the Tappan Zee Bridge, and into New York City.
But now I have an understanding as to why I-691's exit numbers now increase from east to west. That must have been a recent change to the MUTCD, since there are a lot of 3-digit spur routes around the country whose exit numbering follows the traditional pattern of starting at the south/west end and increasing heading north/east, regardless of where it connects to its parent route.
It actually is not a recent change but rather states simply not following the MUTCD (similar to how they don't follow the MUTCD regarding using sequential exit numbers, leaving some freeways without exit numbers, etc)
The rule for numbering and mileposting spur routes has been the same since 2000 and probably before then (the 1988 MUTCD isn't available at the MUTCD web site). "Spur route interchanges shall be numbered in ascending order starting at the interchange where the spur leaves the mainline of the principal route" (from the 2000 edition)
[never mind the fact that 691 is not a spur route]
Quote from: ran4sh on May 21, 2023, 11:57:41 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 03, 2023, 08:42:56 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 02, 2023, 11:10:56 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 02, 2023, 09:46:03 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 23, 2023, 01:08:17 PM
I-691 looks like this (the 66 Exits are both Exit 1)
Exit 11 > Exit 1A
Exit 10 > Exit 1B
Exit 9 > Exit 1C
Exit 8 > Exit 2A
Exit 7 > Exit 2B
Exits 6 + 5 > Exit 3
Exit 4 > Exit 5
Exit 3 > Exit 7
Exit 2 > Exit 8A
Exit 1 > Exit 8B
Can anyone give the reasoning behind why I-691, in the eyes of CT, is viewed as an east-west highway rather than the standard west-east with respect to the mile markers & now interchange numbers?
I did a quick search & didn't find too much info.
Per MUTCD 2009, Section 2E.31 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2e.htm)
14 Spur route interchanges shall be numbered in ascending order starting at the interchange where the spur leaves the mainline route (see Figure 2E-20).
In this case, I-691 leaves it parent and heads west. For it to have remained a west-east routing, it would have to be an I-x84. For some reason, I-684 seems to be exempted from this provision, as its mileposts go from White Plains to its parent in Brewster.
That may be because I-684 was originally designated as I-87, which followed the I-684 and I-84 alignment south of Newburgh until 1971, at which point it was shifted to follow the Thruway south of I-84, over the Tappan Zee Bridge, and into New York City.
But now I have an understanding as to why I-691's exit numbers now increase from east to west. That must have been a recent change to the MUTCD, since there are a lot of 3-digit spur routes around the country whose exit numbering follows the traditional pattern of starting at the south/west end and increasing heading north/east, regardless of where it connects to its parent route.
It actually is not a recent change but rather states simply not following the MUTCD (similar to how they don't follow the MUTCD regarding using sequential exit numbers, leaving some freeways without exit numbers, etc)
The rule for numbering and mileposting spur routes has been the same since 2000 and probably before then (the 1988 MUTCD isn't available at the MUTCD web site). "Spur route interchanges shall be numbered in ascending order starting at the interchange where the spur leaves the mainline of the principal route" (from the 2000 edition)
[never mind the fact that 691 is not a spur route]
The MUTCD itself is not a hard-and-fast directive, as a number of states have their own supplements to the MUTCD, and some have developed a state manual for traffic control devices in lieu of using the federal MUTCD. As a result, you still have some degree of variation in signage and pavement markings across state lines. A few examples of the variations I've seen traveling across the country:
- New Hampshire refusing to adopt mileage-based exit numbering; Vermont adopting supplemental "Milepoint Exit" numbers in addition to sequential exit numbers
- Kilometer-based exit numbering on certain highways in Arizona and Delaware
- ROAD CONSTRUCTION AHEAD signs in Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, and WORK ZONE AHEAD in North Carolina versus ROAD WORK AHEAD specified in the MUTCD
- Non-standard signage on the New Jersey Turnpike and across California
- States that stripe ramp gore areas with chevrons or transverse lines versus those that don't (MUTCD currently allows both)
- Standard mileposts as specified by the MUTCD versus California's postmile system used on freeways
The map below illustrates the states that have adopted the federal MUTCD as written (red); adopted the MUTCD and have a state supplement (blue); and have published a State MUTCD in lieu of the federal MUTCD (green).
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/images/states/statesmutcdmap.gif)
As I've said numerous times before, it's not because the MUTCD or the federal government *wants* there to be such variation. It's because of how state governments are allowed to do their own thing and they only care about federal standards if funding is at stake.
Quote from: ran4sh on May 22, 2023, 02:41:09 PM
As I've said numerous times before, it's not because the MUTCD or the federal government *wants* there to be such variation. It's because of how state governments are allowed to do their own thing and they only care about federal standards if funding is at stake.
And that may be true, but to my knowledge, there is no congressional mandate for states to adopt the federal MUTCD as a precondition for federal funding. For anyone who knows whether Congress has enacted such a mandate, please state what section of federal law that falls under.
In any case, your original point of "that must have been a recent change" is defeated
Edit - Apparently this is my 1000th post :sombrero:
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 22, 2023, 08:35:55 AM
The map below illustrates the states that have adopted the federal MUTCD as written (red); adopted the MUTCD and have a state supplement (blue); and have published a State MUTCD in lieu of the federal MUTCD (green).
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/images/states/statesmutcdmap.gif)
But understand that all language in a supplement or State MUTCD
shall be in substantial conformance with the MUTCD. The FHWA can review and reject your state's supplement if that is not accomplished.
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 22, 2023, 08:35:55 AM
- Non-standard signage on the New Jersey Turnpike and across California
The Turnpike's signs were replaced with standard exit signs/tabs a few years ago
Quote from: crispy93 on May 23, 2023, 09:06:05 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 22, 2023, 08:35:55 AM
- Non-standard signage on the New Jersey Turnpike and across California
The Turnpike's signs were replaced with standard exit signs/tabs a few years ago
Interesting. It's been about 10 years since I last drove on the New Jersey Turnpike. Nice to see they finally adopted standard signage.
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 03, 2023, 08:59:10 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 03, 2023, 04:53:18 PM
OTOH, 691 has never had mile markers (and still doesn't yet), so 99.8% of people (except DOT workers and roadgeeks in the know) assumed mileage went west to east when in reality it's been the opposite since sometime between the switch from CT 66 and a few years ago.
UPDATE: Looks like Google Maps has updated I-691 exit numbers except that they left the old number for New 1B/Old 10 WB and new 1A/Old 11 in both directions. Neither of the 66 exits were updated.
Keeping in mind that I-691 was previously designated as Route 66 (and before that, US-6A). It only became I-691 when the final connection to I-84 was completed around 1990, and the Route 66 designation was truncated to its present western terminus at the I-91/I-691/Route-15 interchange. Prior to the completion of the I-691 freeway to I-84, the freeway section of Route 66 ended at Exit 5 (former Exit 4), and then continued west on its former two-lane alignment toward Waterbury, which is now Route 322.
My suspicion is that CTDOT intentionally excluded mileposts on I-691 to prevent confusion with mileposts increasing heading east, while exit numbers increased heading in the opposite direction, and then having an abrupt reset at the I-91/Route 15 interchange where the freeway continues east as Route 66.
Since I-691 was previously CT 66 and, before that US 6A, (both of which are/were east-west routes); why did the mile markers increase westward rather than eastward from the get-go?
I'm not aware of how mile markers are posted in Connecticut, but there is no national standard for how mile markers should be numbered for routes that are not Interstate routes (there are MUTCD standards for how to post the signs, but not how to actually number them). On non-Interstates (e.g. US routes and state routes) some states don't post mile markers, some states reset by county, some states use a different origin point, etc
Quote from: ran4sh on May 23, 2023, 10:29:52 PM
I'm not aware of how mile markers are posted in Connecticut, but there is no national standard for how mile markers should be numbered for routes that are not Interstate routes (there are MUTCD standards for how to post the signs, but not how to actually number them). On non-Interstates (e.g. US routes and state routes) some states don't post mile markers, some states reset by county, some states use a different origin point, etc
Up until now, CT always did the bare minimum for mile markers on all limited access state highways: they put mile markers on highways typically longer than 10 miles (2di's, I-395, CT 2, CT 8, CT 9, CT 11 (because it includes the unbuilt mileage), and the parkways portion of CT 15. With highways becoming mileage based, they're adding enhanced markers and 0.2 markers to the limited access portions (eg: CT 72 for the limited access portion, but not the portions through Bristol and Terryville; CT 17 for the Middletown and South Glastonbury portions only). MA tends to put them on all many state maintained highways both arterial and limited access (just not through towns where the town maintains the road).
From all the lists of when Connecticut's exits will be converted to mileage-based, one highway I've noticed that has been left off of those lists is US 7. I imagine that is because US 7 might be the last one to convert to mileage-based exits. When it does, I expect the numbers on the Interstate 95-to-Grist Mill Road segment will not change. Only the segments south and north of Interstate 84 will get new numbers. Existing Exits 7-9 will likely become Exits 21A, B, and C, 10 will become 25, 11 will become 27, and 12 will become 30.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 25, 2023, 12:29:39 PM
From all the lists of when Connecticut's exits will be converted to mileage-based, one highway I've noticed that has been left off of those lists is US 7. I imagine that is because US 7 might be the last one to convert to mileage-based exits. When it does, I expect the numbers on the Interstate 95-to-Grist Mill Road segment will not change. Only the segments south and north of Interstate 84 will get new numbers. Existing Exits 7-9 will likely become Exits 21A, B, and C, 10 will become 25, 11 will become 27, and 12 will become 30.
I would wager a guess that the Danbury-Brookfield section of US-7 will be converted when exits on I-84 are changed. Similarly for the Norwalk section, those would be done (if necessary) when the renumbering of I-95 exits occurs.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 25, 2023, 12:10:10 PM
Quote from: ran4sh on May 23, 2023, 10:29:52 PM
I'm not aware of how mile markers are posted in Connecticut, but there is no national standard for how mile markers should be numbered for routes that are not Interstate routes (there are MUTCD standards for how to post the signs, but not how to actually number them). On non-Interstates (e.g. US routes and state routes) some states don't post mile markers, some states reset by county, some states use a different origin point, etc
Up until now, CT always did the bare minimum for mile markers on all limited access state highways: they put mile markers on highways typically longer than 10 miles (2di's, I-395, CT 2, CT 8, CT 9, CT 11 (because it includes the unbuilt mileage), and the parkways portion of CT 15. With highways becoming mileage based, they're adding enhanced markers and 0.2 markers to the limited access portions (eg: CT 72 for the limited access portion, but not the portions through Bristol and Terryville; CT 17 for the Middletown and South Glastonbury portions only). MA tends to put them on all many state maintained highways both arterial and limited access (just not through towns where the town maintains the road).
Interesting. I like that CT non-interstates are also being given mile-based exit numbers, I know that didn't happen in GA when that state had its conversion in 1999-2000 (exit numbers on non-Interstates in GA are still a mess to this day). I'm also used to how NC numbers non-interstate exits with mile-based numbers that include the non-freeway parts of the route, but doesn't necessarily post mileposts.
It also didn't happen in Pennsylvania's 2001 conversion. I don't like the fact that some of the conversions left certain highways' exits unchanged (or unnumbered altogether), although there were likely rational reasons for doing so. Alas, it is what it is.
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 25, 2023, 01:27:37 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 25, 2023, 12:29:39 PM
From all the lists of when Connecticut's exits will be converted to mileage-based, one highway I've noticed that has been left off of those lists is US 7. I imagine that is because US 7 might be the last one to convert to mileage-based exits. When it does, I expect the numbers on the Interstate 95-to-Grist Mill Road segment will not change. Only the segments south and north of Interstate 84 will get new numbers. Existing Exits 7-9 will likely become Exits 21A, B, and C, 10 will become 25, 11 will become 27, and 12 will become 30.
I would wager a guess that the Danbury-Brookfield section of US-7 will be converted when exits on I-84 are changed. Similarly for the Norwalk section, those would be done (if necessary) when the renumbering of I-95 exits occurs.
The only changes needed on the southern portion would be adding numbers to the 95 and South Norwalk ramps (1 A-C) and making current Exit 1 SB Exit 1D.
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 22, 2023, 08:35:55 AM
Quote from: ran4sh on May 21, 2023, 11:57:41 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 03, 2023, 08:42:56 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 02, 2023, 11:10:56 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 02, 2023, 09:46:03 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 23, 2023, 01:08:17 PM
I-691 looks like this (the 66 Exits are both Exit 1)
Exit 11 > Exit 1A
Exit 10 > Exit 1B
Exit 9 > Exit 1C
Exit 8 > Exit 2A
Exit 7 > Exit 2B
Exits 6 + 5 > Exit 3
Exit 4 > Exit 5
Exit 3 > Exit 7
Exit 2 > Exit 8A
Exit 1 > Exit 8B
Can anyone give the reasoning behind why I-691, in the eyes of CT, is viewed as an east-west highway rather than the standard west-east with respect to the mile markers & now interchange numbers?
I did a quick search & didn't find too much info.
Per MUTCD 2009, Section 2E.31 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2e.htm)
14 Spur route interchanges shall be numbered in ascending order starting at the interchange where the spur leaves the mainline route (see Figure 2E-20).
In this case, I-691 leaves it parent and heads west. For it to have remained a west-east routing, it would have to be an I-x84. For some reason, I-684 seems to be exempted from this provision, as its mileposts go from White Plains to its parent in Brewster.
That may be because I-684 was originally designated as I-87, which followed the I-684 and I-84 alignment south of Newburgh until 1971, at which point it was shifted to follow the Thruway south of I-84, over the Tappan Zee Bridge, and into New York City.
But now I have an understanding as to why I-691's exit numbers now increase from east to west. That must have been a recent change to the MUTCD, since there are a lot of 3-digit spur routes around the country whose exit numbering follows the traditional pattern of starting at the south/west end and increasing heading north/east, regardless of where it connects to its parent route.
It actually is not a recent change but rather states simply not following the MUTCD (similar to how they don't follow the MUTCD regarding using sequential exit numbers, leaving some freeways without exit numbers, etc)
The rule for numbering and mileposting spur routes has been the same since 2000 and probably before then (the 1988 MUTCD isn't available at the MUTCD web site). "Spur route interchanges shall be numbered in ascending order starting at the interchange where the spur leaves the mainline of the principal route" (from the 2000 edition)
[never mind the fact that 691 is not a spur route]
The MUTCD itself is not a hard-and-fast directive, as a number of states have their own supplements to the MUTCD, and some have developed a state manual for traffic control devices in lieu of using the federal MUTCD. As a result, you still have some degree of variation in signage and pavement markings across state lines. A few examples of the variations I've seen traveling across the country:
- New Hampshire refusing to adopt mileage-based exit numbering; Vermont adopting supplemental "Milepoint Exit" numbers in addition to sequential exit numbers
- Kilometer-based exit numbering on certain highways in Arizona and Delaware
- ROAD CONSTRUCTION AHEAD signs in Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, and WORK ZONE AHEAD in North Carolina versus ROAD WORK AHEAD specified in the MUTCD
- Non-standard signage on the New Jersey Turnpike and across California
- States that stripe ramp gore areas with chevrons or transverse lines versus those that don't (MUTCD currently allows both)
- Standard mileposts as specified by the MUTCD versus California's postmile system used on freeways
The map below illustrates the states that have adopted the federal MUTCD as written (red); adopted the MUTCD and have a state supplement (blue); and have published a State MUTCD in lieu of the federal MUTCD (green).
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/images/states/statesmutcdmap.gif)
Did Connecticut ever have their own MUTCD? Since they had a lot of unique things in their signage such as the exit tabs without the borders, the square shaped No Turn on Red signs, and using the supplemental word signs under the No Left and No Right Turn signs.
Quote from: mariethefoxy on May 26, 2023, 01:27:50 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 22, 2023, 08:35:55 AM
Quote from: ran4sh on May 21, 2023, 11:57:41 PM
Quote from: abqtraveler on May 03, 2023, 08:42:56 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 02, 2023, 11:10:56 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on May 02, 2023, 09:46:03 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 23, 2023, 01:08:17 PM
I-691 looks like this (the 66 Exits are both Exit 1)
Exit 11 > Exit 1A
Exit 10 > Exit 1B
Exit 9 > Exit 1C
Exit 8 > Exit 2A
Exit 7 > Exit 2B
Exits 6 + 5 > Exit 3
Exit 4 > Exit 5
Exit 3 > Exit 7
Exit 2 > Exit 8A
Exit 1 > Exit 8B
Can anyone give the reasoning behind why I-691, in the eyes of CT, is viewed as an east-west highway rather than the standard west-east with respect to the mile markers & now interchange numbers?
I did a quick search & didn't find too much info.
Per MUTCD 2009, Section 2E.31 (https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/part2e.htm)
14 Spur route interchanges shall be numbered in ascending order starting at the interchange where the spur leaves the mainline route (see Figure 2E-20).
In this case, I-691 leaves it parent and heads west. For it to have remained a west-east routing, it would have to be an I-x84. For some reason, I-684 seems to be exempted from this provision, as its mileposts go from White Plains to its parent in Brewster.
That may be because I-684 was originally designated as I-87, which followed the I-684 and I-84 alignment south of Newburgh until 1971, at which point it was shifted to follow the Thruway south of I-84, over the Tappan Zee Bridge, and into New York City.
But now I have an understanding as to why I-691's exit numbers now increase from east to west. That must have been a recent change to the MUTCD, since there are a lot of 3-digit spur routes around the country whose exit numbering follows the traditional pattern of starting at the south/west end and increasing heading north/east, regardless of where it connects to its parent route.
It actually is not a recent change but rather states simply not following the MUTCD (similar to how they don't follow the MUTCD regarding using sequential exit numbers, leaving some freeways without exit numbers, etc)
The rule for numbering and mileposting spur routes has been the same since 2000 and probably before then (the 1988 MUTCD isn't available at the MUTCD web site). "Spur route interchanges shall be numbered in ascending order starting at the interchange where the spur leaves the mainline of the principal route" (from the 2000 edition)
[never mind the fact that 691 is not a spur route]
The MUTCD itself is not a hard-and-fast directive, as a number of states have their own supplements to the MUTCD, and some have developed a state manual for traffic control devices in lieu of using the federal MUTCD. As a result, you still have some degree of variation in signage and pavement markings across state lines. A few examples of the variations I've seen traveling across the country:
- New Hampshire refusing to adopt mileage-based exit numbering; Vermont adopting supplemental "Milepoint Exit" numbers in addition to sequential exit numbers
- Kilometer-based exit numbering on certain highways in Arizona and Delaware
- ROAD CONSTRUCTION AHEAD signs in Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, and WORK ZONE AHEAD in North Carolina versus ROAD WORK AHEAD specified in the MUTCD
- Non-standard signage on the New Jersey Turnpike and across California
- States that stripe ramp gore areas with chevrons or transverse lines versus those that don't (MUTCD currently allows both)
- Standard mileposts as specified by the MUTCD versus California's postmile system used on freeways
The map below illustrates the states that have adopted the federal MUTCD as written (red); adopted the MUTCD and have a state supplement (blue); and have published a State MUTCD in lieu of the federal MUTCD (green).
(https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/images/states/statesmutcdmap.gif)
Did Connecticut ever have their own MUTCD? Since they had a lot of unique things in their signage such as the exit tabs without the borders, the square shaped No Turn on Red signs, and using the supplemental word signs under the No Left and No Right Turn signs.
I think Connecticut may have had their own State MUTCD many years ago, but Connecticut has since adopted the Federal MUTCD. Not sure when that change happened, but I'm thinking it's been close to 20 years now since that took place. There's still plenty of old non-standard signage that still exists in Connecticut, which will likely remain until those signs are due for replacement.
Some of the locally-maintained roads in Connecticut still have some very old signage, and some municipalities continue to use the single solid yellow stripe to mark the road's centerline, which is no longer allowed per the MUTCD.
Another one that is unique to CT: The Yellow SPEED LIMIT AHEAD XX M.P.H signs. Most states just use the picture of a speed limit with a number and the up arrow. CT uses it as well, but they use the much larger signs like this (https://maps.app.goo.gl/QmQki2vNKAbbDsN3A?g_st=ic):
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on May 26, 2023, 04:40:37 PM
Another one that is unique to CT: The Yellow SPEED LIMIT AHEAD XX M.P.H signs. Most states just use the picture of a speed limit with a number and the up arrow. CT uses it as well, but they use the much larger signs like this (https://maps.app.goo.gl/QmQki2vNKAbbDsN3A?g_st=ic):
Yeah, it irks me I'm still seeing those around, though the diamond "speed limit ahead" version is gaining popularity.
What irks me even more is that ConnDOT seems to be doing away with the "Merging Traffic" sign, replacing it with... nothing.
I drove I-691 this evening, for the first time since exits were renumbered. Why are there leading zeros on the decimal milepost signs? Instead of 0.2 or 1.2, they read 00.2 or 01.2.
I've never seen this anywhere else that I can remember. I also drove the recently-renumbered CT 72 and didn't see any extra zeros on the signs there. It has been too long since I've been in single-digit mileage on CT 9 or I-395, so I'm not sure if it's done anywhere else in CT.
Quote from: dantheman on May 31, 2023, 11:16:29 PM
I drove I-691 this evening, for the first time since exits were renumbered. Why are there leading zeros on the decimal milepost signs? Instead of 0.2 or 1.2, they read 00.2 or 01.2.
I've never seen this anywhere else that I can remember. I also drove the recently-renumbered CT 72 and didn't see any extra zeros on the signs there. It has been too long since I've been in single-digit mileage on CT 9 or I-395, so I'm not sure if it's done anywhere else in CT.
The ones on Rt 9 say 0.2, 0.4, etc. For a route that doesn't even get into double digit mileposts, having a double leading zero makes zero sense. Then again, the I-691 project is/was a design-build project, vs a project designed by ConnDOT and put out to bid. That's why we never saw any new sign plans made public (outside of spot replacements). According to I-691 traffic cams, looks like we have some new signage. There are new 4-chord cantilever gantries for former Exit 6 1/2 mile WB/Exit 8 1/2 mile EB.
So I did take a ride on 691 East today from new Exit 5 to CT 15. Did indeed notice the mile markers with the leading zeros, even on the ones inside the 1 MP. Many new sign posts going up, but the wording on some of the new exit signing is changing. There was a new ground mount for Exit 2B (former Exit 7/Downtown Meriden) that now says just "Meriden" . Meanwhile, the new 4 chord truss overhead signage for Exit 2A (former Exit 8) now says US 5/Downtown Meriden (no mention of Broad St or TO CT 15 North). So apparently, CTDOT now prefers that you use the Broad Street ramp to get downtown instead of using Columbia St to Colony St.
How long will it take them to do Fairfield county?
Quote from: MikeCL on August 05, 2023, 11:01:31 AM
How long will it take them to do Fairfield county?
Considering that they're slow-rolling it by route and I-95 is near the end of the list? A long time.
Quote from: vdeane on August 05, 2023, 04:09:48 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on August 05, 2023, 11:01:31 AM
How long will it take them to do Fairfield county?
Considering that they're slow-rolling it by route and I-95 is near the end of the list? A long time.
It will be a while since I-95 is not to start until 2029. Other highways will start sooner. CTDOT's exit renumbering page lists the conversion of CT 15 to be completed in 2025. Supposedly it will take placed after signage between Milford and Meriden is updated. That contract is currently scheduled to be advertised next May 8. The Merritt signage has already been updated and is ready for exit number changes, presuming there is no public outcry due to its historic status.
Quote from: bob7374 on August 05, 2023, 08:35:06 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 05, 2023, 04:09:48 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on August 05, 2023, 11:01:31 AM
How long will it take them to do Fairfield county?
Considering that they're slow-rolling it by route and I-95 is near the end of the list? A long time.
CTDOT's exit renumbering page lists the conversion of CT 15 to be completed in 2025. Supposedly it will take placed after signage between Milford and Meriden is updated. That contract is currently scheduled to be advertised next May 8. The Merritt signage has already been updated and is ready for exit number changes, presuming there is no public outcry due to its historic status.
Good to know, but that doesn't negate that I-84 and I-95 would also need to switch to count as "making Fairfield County mileage based". US 7 too.
Quote from: vdeane on August 05, 2023, 09:17:29 PM
Quote from: bob7374 on August 05, 2023, 08:35:06 PM
Quote from: vdeane on August 05, 2023, 04:09:48 PM
Quote from: MikeCL on August 05, 2023, 11:01:31 AM
How long will it take them to do Fairfield county?
Considering that they're slow-rolling it by route and I-95 is near the end of the list? A long time.
CTDOT's exit renumbering page lists the conversion of CT 15 to be completed in 2025. Supposedly it will take placed after signage between Milford and Meriden is updated. That contract is currently scheduled to be advertised next May 8. The Merritt signage has already been updated and is ready for exit number changes, presuming there is no public outcry due to its historic status.
Good to know, but that doesn't negate that I-84 and I-95 would also need to switch to count as "making Fairfield County mileage based". US 7 too.
What is Fairfield County? YMM Western CT. https://images.federalregister.gov/EN06JN22.001/original.png?1654173307
For those that did not see the post under Connecticut News or downloaded the sign plans. I have posted some of the plan images from I-384:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i384exit7.jpg)
and for US 6:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/us6ctexit89oma.jpg)
on my New England Exit Renumbering Central site: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i384signs (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i384signs)
I traveled CT 2 West from Norwich to the CT 66 exit a week ago. Most of the new signs are up, with the future exit numbers and Old Exit # signs (where placed) covered up, such as with the CT 149 exit:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ct2signs1023w.JPG)
Examples of other signage (included new reassurance markers and mile markers) can be found at:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#ct2signs (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#ct2signs)
Have now added photos taken in October of new signage with the new milepost exit numbers along I-691 in both directions between I-91 and I-84, such as:
(https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/i691signs1023k.JPG)
Complete set at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i691exits (https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i691exits)
I checked on the CTDOT exit renumbering project page for any updates. There are several on the FAQ page. It appears that completion dates for several routes have been moved up. CT 8 is now listed with a 2024 completion date. I-84 was moved up from 2028 to 2026 and I-95 from 2029 to 2028. Meanwhile, the sign replacement/exit renumbering project for CT 15 is still scheduled to be advertised a month from today, May 8.
The CTDOT site: https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/Traffic-Engineering/Exit-Renumbering
https://maps.app.goo.gl/huBvdAdV2heWieYh8
Old Exit listed, but new number covered up.
Obvviously an older image, as CT 9 has had new exit numbers for over a year now. Are we going on 2 years this summer? Then that means the "OLD"s come down soon.
The same style is up on CT 2 as well, but more is tarped... in fact, everything is tarped except, on the "OLD EXIT #" panel, only "OLD" is tarped. Some gores only have the "OLD EXIT #" portion up so far. There's still a fair amount of button copy signage on CT 2 not yet replaced, such as the Norwich area and in Glastonbury. Haven't heard a definitive exit number change date for CT 2/CT 3/CT 11 yet, but I'd assume it would be this summer.
That's good that conversion on the 2DIs has moved up... leads me to believe that overlays may actually come to light, vs outright replacement. For I-95, Clinton-New London comes up to bid later this spring. Figure at least 2 years lead time. So that's 2026. No sign of any Branford-Guilford project to notch out the rest of the button copy. Nothing for I-91 yet north of Hartford. And the oldest of the old continues to get even older on I-84 in E Hartford and Manchester.
I guess it's Connecticut being Connecticut, but it's kind of crazy that they're taking such a long time to make the changeover when its neighbors (RI and MA) did it much quicker, relatively speaking.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on April 11, 2024, 05:15:49 AMI guess it's Connecticut being Connecticut, but it's kind of crazy that they're taking such a long time to make the changeover when its neighbors (RI and MA) did it much quicker, relatively speaking.
MA was willing to overlay new numbers on existing signs and RI is smaller. At least CT will still beat even the most optimistic projections for VT and NH.
Not to mention that New York is going to be the slowest one of all in conversions to mileage-based exit numbers. I'd also like Delaware to convert Interstate 95, Interstate 495, and DE 1 to mileage-based exit numbers, but that seems unlikely.
For those who don't want to hunt through the CTDOT documents for the new CT 15 sign plans for the Wilbur Cross Parkway, I have posted examples on my New England Exit Renumbering Central page, along with the latest exit list from CTDOT and their examples on how to place the old exit signs:
https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#i384signs
Quote from: bob7374 on April 08, 2024, 11:51:07 PMI checked on the CTDOT exit renumbering project page for any updates. There are several on the FAQ page. It appears that completion dates for several routes have been moved up. CT 8 is now listed with a 2024 completion date. I-84 was moved up from 2028 to 2026 and I-95 from 2029 to 2028. Meanwhile, the sign replacement/exit renumbering project for CT 15 is still scheduled to be advertised a month from today, May 8.
The CTDOT site: https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/Traffic-Engineering/Exit-Renumbering (https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/Traffic-Engineering/Exit-Renumbering)
I just found out that the 1st exit on Merritt Parkway is supposed to be Exit 19B. Thanks for doing something right, CDOT.
Quote from: D-Dey65 on May 15, 2024, 12:21:09 AMQuote from: bob7374 on April 08, 2024, 11:51:07 PMI checked on the CTDOT exit renumbering project page for any updates. There are several on the FAQ page. It appears that completion dates for several routes have been moved up. CT 8 is now listed with a 2024 completion date. I-84 was moved up from 2028 to 2026 and I-95 from 2029 to 2028. Meanwhile, the sign replacement/exit renumbering project for CT 15 is still scheduled to be advertised a month from today, May 8.
The CTDOT site: https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/Traffic-Engineering/Exit-Renumbering (https://portal.ct.gov/DOT/Traffic-Engineering/Exit-Renumbering)
I just found out that the 1st exit on Merritt Parkway is supposed to be Exit 19B. Thanks for doing something right, CDOT.
They're deferring to New York - listed as NY-Exit 19.
Is the Berlin Turnpike-to-Interstate 84 segment of CT 15 going to have its exit numbers removed, instead of converted to mileage-based with the rest of 15? I would imagine that if exits numbers are retained, and converted to mileage-based, they would be something like this: Exit 80A (old 85), Exit 80B (old 86), Exit 80C (old 87), Exit 81A (old 89), Exit 81B (old 90), and Exit 82 (old 91). I'd also number the US 5 South Broad St. interchange as Exit 67, the CT 372 interchange as Exit 71B (with the CT 9 jct. being 71A), the CT 175 interchange being Exit 77, and the CT 314 continuation of the Berlin Turnpike being Exit 78.
I was wondering about the numbered CT-15 exits north of the Parkway. For consistency, they should continue the mileage-based exit numbers.
When you dig in the Wilbur Cross Parkway sign replacement project, you find the sheet aluminum listing and the renumbering of exits up to present Exit 67-W (I-691 West). The signs north of the maintenance facility aren't being replaced in this project, as they're going to get replaced as part of the "Meriden Mix" projects. There's no mention in the contract of the renumbering of the exits from Wethersfield, over the COB, to East Hartford. Honestly, they probably should've done that as part of the Exit 29 relocation project, as well as replaced the rest of the signs on CT 15 in the area. But they didn't.
So until that happens, CT 15 will have two different exit numbering sequences. Since there's no mile markers posted north of Meriden, the average person won't even notice the difference.
From the CTDOT Traffic advisory page dated June 24:
"CT DOT PROJECT ALERT: The CT DOT will be renumbering the exits on Route 8. The project will begin on Monday, July 8th, and is expected to be completed by Tuesday, November 26th."
Full press release can be found at: https://portal.ct.gov/dot/ctdot-construction-advisories/2024/traffic-highway-signing-replacement-exit-renumbering-on-route-8-in-litchfield-and-fairfield-county
Just in time for Thanksgiving...
Local TV news has picked up the Route 8 exit renumbering.
E.g. https://www.wtnh.com/news/connecticut/ctdot-renaming-route-8-exits/
I'm sure I've mentioned this before, but there still don't seem to be any plans to give the US 7 corridor new exit numbers. I think that is a major oversight on Connecticut's part. The Interstate 95-to-Grist Mill Rd. segment probably doesn't need new numbers, but the portion between existing Exits 7 and 12 definitely will need new numbers. I wonder why US 7 was and continues to be left out of the exit renumbering plans? Maybe the exits aren't going to be renumbered like the rest of the state's numbers will.
If I had to guess, maybe they'll do it when they do I-84. There are definitely mile markers on US 7 north of I-84, though they are not MUTCD-compliant. I'm not positive of US 7 south of I-84.
A related sign goof, part of the CT 8 project, made it to Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Connecticut/comments/1eg5lmg/error_mile_marker_at_not_interstate_highway_route/
(https://preview.redd.it/error-mile-marker-at-not-interstate-highway-route-8-on-ramp-v0-ynrolz027qfd1.jpeg?width=1080&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=f8a7350ae233bf095292f937feecb0507f74f7ea)
Route 8 looks good in red white and blue. Just need a more appropriate number :-)
Quote from: kurumi on July 31, 2024, 03:41:38 PMA related sign goof, part of the CT 8 project, made it to Reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/Connecticut/comments/1eg5lmg/error_mile_marker_at_not_interstate_highway_route/
(https://preview.redd.it/error-mile-marker-at-not-interstate-highway-route-8-on-ramp-v0-ynrolz027qfd1.jpeg?width=1080&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=f8a7350ae233bf095292f937feecb0507f74f7ea)
Route 8 looks good in red white and blue. Just need a more appropriate number :-)
Is Bridgeport really the new San Diego, Waterbury the new El Centro and Torrington the new Yuma?
Has anyone driven up Route 8 recently to see progress on exit renumbering?
Quote from: abqtraveler on August 09, 2024, 01:56:42 PMHas anyone driven up Route 8 recently to see progress on exit renumbering?
I drove it from Thomaston to Waterbury a couple days ago. Still some center tab 2000 era signage in Waterbury and the mileposts are spotty through there as well. Nary an OLD EXIT gore sign to be seen.
CTDOT has announced the project that will replace signage and change exit numbers along CT 15/Wilbur Cross and Merritt Parkways will start on Monday, Sept. 9:
https://www.ctinsider.com/news/article/ct-dot-begins-work-monday-renumber-merritt-19745336.php
How about the segment of CT 15 from CT 314-to-Interstate 84? Will it get new exit numbers as well (I know I've asked this question before, but now that the renumbering is finally occurring, it needs to be asked again). Wikipedia's Connecticut Route 15 page says the new exits on that segment will be numbered 68-75, as if it were a direct continuation of the Merritt/Wilbur Cross Parkways, which everyone knows it is not. If it was going by CT 15's actual mileage, the exits would be numbered 78-83.
Busy day for CT exit renumbering news. Two CTDOT press releases. First, exits on CT 8/25 will be renumbered over 2 weeks starting Sunday (9/8):
https://portal.ct.gov/dot/ctdot-construction-advisories/2024/highway-sign-replacement-and-renumbering-on-route-8-and-route-25-in-trumbull?language=en_US
Second, exit renumbering will start in I-384 and US 6 on September 22:
https://portal.ct.gov/dot/ctdot-construction-advisories/2024/exit-number-revisions-on-i384-from-manchester-to-bolton?language=en_US
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on September 06, 2024, 01:11:16 PMWikipedia's Connecticut Route 15 page says the new exits on that segment will be numbered 68-75, as if it were a direct continuation of the Merritt/Wilbur Cross Parkways, which everyone knows it is not. If it was going by CT 15's actual mileage, the exits would be numbered 78-83.
I'm not sure Wikipedia can be considered an authoritative source of road knowledge since the roadgeek editors all left in favor of the AARoads Wiki.
Why not do I-291 along with I-384? It only has 3 interchanges in each direction and is connected to 384 through the Manchester interchange complex. Last time I drove 384 in June, there was still some button copy signage.
CTDOT has posted working hours for the CT 15 project. It is included in the news article below. Work will apparently be done at night and on weekends. The work schedule is broken up into 4-5 exit segments. Given this, presuming work is not going on everywhere at the same time, would it have been helpful to add dates to each of the segments, especially on the Merritt Parkway where only the exit numbers are to be changed?
https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/new-exit-numbers-route-15/3381322/
Meanwhile, exit renumbering was to start on CT 8 and 25 last night, however looking at the CTDOT traffic site, I saw no evidence of any work going on or planned (they did list each of the segments for the CT 15 exit renumbering in both directions on their traffic incident map].
UPDATE-Looks like they may have started CT 8 tonight (9/9), this is a traffic advisory for Bridgeport - Road Work on RT 8 Northbound between Exits 2 and 4 (0.5 miles) in effect today until Tuesday, September 10 at 6:00 am. The right lane is closed. Reported Monday, September 9 at 7:26 pm.
I look forward to your pictures being posted once the signs are converted to mileage-based exits!
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on September 09, 2024, 12:24:35 AMWhy not do I-291 along with I-384? It only has 3 interchanges in each direction and is connected to 384 through the Manchester interchange complex. Last time I drove 384 in June, there was still some button copy signage.
That makes too much sense, which is why ConnDOT won't do it.
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on September 12, 2024, 05:41:15 AMQuote from: jp the roadgeek on September 09, 2024, 12:24:35 AMWhy not do I-291 along with I-384? It only has 3 interchanges in each direction and is connected to 384 through the Manchester interchange complex. Last time I drove 384 in June, there was still some button copy signage.
That makes too much sense, which is why ConnDOT won't do it.
Isn't I-291 already in progress or something? Its numbers show up on ConnDOT's site.
Quote from: vdeane on September 12, 2024, 12:43:52 PMQuote from: Ted$8roadFan on September 12, 2024, 05:41:15 AMQuote from: jp the roadgeek on September 09, 2024, 12:24:35 AMWhy not do I-291 along with I-384? It only has 3 interchanges in each direction and is connected to 384 through the Manchester interchange complex. Last time I drove 384 in June, there was still some button copy signage.
That makes too much sense, which is why ConnDOT won't do it.
Isn't I-291 already in progress or something? Its numbers show up on ConnDOT's site.
They've done the supplemental signage (enhanced mileposts, reassurance shields) but much of the signage is still button copy like its parent in that area. They have posted the exit numbers on the CTDOT site, but none of the OLD EXIT signage has been posted.
Have they announced the new exit numbers for each I-84 exit yet?
If that's happening in 2026 I'd like to visit my old hometown (Southbury, exits 13-16) one more time next year before it changes. I just can't accept those numbers changing, it makes me ill.
Quote from: relaxok on September 13, 2024, 05:55:48 AMHave they announced the new exit numbers for each I-84 exit yet?
If that's happening in 2026 I'd like to visit my old hometown (Southbury, exits 13-16) one more time next year before it changes. I just can't accept those numbers changing, it makes me ill.
They usually announce them when the conversion for each route begins, so I-84's new numbers won't be revealed for a while.
Quote from: vdeane on September 13, 2024, 08:03:11 PMQuote from: relaxok on September 13, 2024, 05:55:48 AMHave they announced the new exit numbers for each I-84 exit yet?
If that's happening in 2026 I'd like to visit my old hometown (Southbury, exits 13-16) one more time next year before it changes. I just can't accept those numbers changing, it makes me ill.
They usually announce them when the conversion for each route begins, so I-84's new numbers won't be revealed for a while.
The mileposts for the exits are, according to Wikipedia anyway, 18.7 for Exit 13, 20.2 for Exit 14, 22.0 for Exit 15 and 24.8 for Exit 16. Since CTDOT in their Exit Renumbering FAQ indicates that they determine the exit number by rounding down to the nearest whole number then the numbers would be 18, 20, 22 and 24.
Quote from: bob7374 on September 13, 2024, 10:05:11 PMQuote from: vdeane on September 13, 2024, 08:03:11 PMQuote from: relaxok on September 13, 2024, 05:55:48 AMHave they announced the new exit numbers for each I-84 exit yet?
If that's happening in 2026 I'd like to visit my old hometown (Southbury, exits 13-16) one more time next year before it changes. I just can't accept those numbers changing, it makes me ill.
They usually announce them when the conversion for each route begins, so I-84's new numbers won't be revealed for a while.
The mileposts for the exits are, according to Wikipedia anyway, 18.7 for Exit 13, 20.2 for Exit 14, 22.0 for Exit 15 and 24.8 for Exit 16. Since CTDOT in their Exit Renumbering FAQ indicates that they determine the exit number by rounding down to the nearest whole number then the numbers would be 18, 20, 22 and 24.
That's
usually what they do, but it seems they rounded up on a couple of the 691 exits, and not because of avoiding alphabet cities. Current Exit 5 (old 4) falls before MP 5, and Exit 7 (old 3) falls before MP 7.
Was on Route 8 for a couple miles today in Bridgeport. The new exit numbers are up in both directions, except on signs where no exit numbers previously existed. This includes the ramp to CT 25 Northbound (which really shouldn't have a number since its part of CT 25 already), and the ramps to I-95 North and South. Presumably exit tabs will be added at some point, since the last signed exit SB right now is Exit 1-C (with I-95 to become Exits 1B & 1A). I have to admit, the "OLD EXIT #" signs are very inconspicuous, compared to those on CT 2 and CT 9. They're much smaller, and yellow.
Google Maps shows new exit numbers on Route 25, despite its absence from the CT 8 project (unless it was hidden somewhere in the actual contract document and not the plans).
Looks like the new numbers for CT 8 have reached the Waterbury area. Was driving through The Mixmaster on 84 West and saw that the gore sign for the exit from 8 to 84 West had been changed to 30C. Google Maps shows the updated numbers as far north as 84 (CT 73 is still shown as 35)
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on September 19, 2024, 01:55:00 PMLooks like the new numbers for CT 8 have reached the Waterbury area. Was driving through The Mixmaster on 84 West and saw that the gore sign for the exit from 8 to 84 West had been changed to 30C. Google Maps shows the updated numbers as far north as 84 (CT 73 is still shown as 35)
Anyone got pictures of the exit renumbering so far?
CT25 has the new exit numbers up in both directions.
CT8 has the new numbers up NB at least. SB, I can only attest to CT34 to CT15, Harwinton Ave, the CT25 overlap of course, and one other random spot I looked over my shoulder.
Edit: Specifically,
exit numbers are still up.Not all signs are replaced yet.
There's still some button copy & outline shields left. See`em while you still can.
Schmedit:Quote from: shadyjay on September 18, 2024, 04:45:27 PMWas on Route 8 for a couple miles today in Bridgeport. The new exit numbers are up in both directions, except on signs where no exit numbers previously existed. This includes the ramp to CT 25 Northbound (which really shouldn't have a number since its part of CT 25 already), and the ramps to I-95 North and South. Presumably exit tabs will be added at some point, since the last signed exit SB right now is Exit 1-C (with I-95 to become Exits 1B & 1A). I have to admit, the "OLD EXIT #" signs are very inconspicuous,
Still the case. No exit numbers NB @ the 8/25 split.
NB, I did notice supports extending above the left side of the leftmost BGS that could hold an exit tab in the future.
None SB @ 95 either. Didn't notice any supports for future tabs.
Farther north (Waterbury area? South of it? North?) some exits didn't have the old exit numbers posted (Maybe the signs
are very inconspicuous?) but mile markers matched up, so they look like the new numbers.
Maybe I'm thinking of exits 38-40, which stayed the same.
News article from last week about exit renumbering starting on I-384 (with photos to confirm), it also has status of the other CT sign replacement/exit renumbering projects:
https://www.ctinsider.com/journalinquirer/article/ct-interstate-384-exit-number-revision-19786899.php
Covered Route 8 south from Winsted to Naugatuck today and all the exit numbers have been changed. Quite a bit of overlay on the signage through Waterbury and Naugatuck. The OLD EXIT signage is much like the signage pictured on I-384: yellow and black and much more conspicuous than the CT 9 signage.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54040635948_eb931f3e30.jpg)
I find it interesting that Exits 38, 39, and 40 did not have to change numbers on CT 8.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 03, 2024, 03:44:23 PMI find it interesting that Exits 38, 39, and 40 did not have to change numbers on CT 8.
They just happened to fall within the correct mile markers. Just like Exits 1-8 on I-84 in Danbury (mostly) do.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on October 03, 2024, 02:25:24 PMCovered Route 8 south from Winsted to Naugatuck today and all the exit numbers have been changed. Quite a bit of overlay on the signage through Waterbury and Naugatuck. The OLD EXIT signage is much like the signage pictured on I-384: yellow and black and much more conspicuous than the CT 9 signage.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54040635948_eb931f3e30.jpg)
The "Old Exit" placards in yellow do look a lot better IMHO. They stand out more, compared to the green placards they used on I-395, Route 9, and Route 72.
I wish every state changing their exit numbers would use yellow Old Exit" signs so drivers will actually see them.
Drove the length of CT 8, CT 25, and I-384 today in quite the cross-CT odyssey... once I process through the 170 photos, they will be on my FLICKR page, most likely at some point tomorrow afternoon.
Also drove the WCP... no new exit numbers yet. Hit up I-291 earlier in the week, also no numbers yet.
Quote from: shadyjay on October 12, 2024, 07:05:04 PMDrove the length of CT 8, CT 25, and I-384 today in quite the cross-CT odyssey... once I process through the 170 photos, they will be on my FLICKR page, most likely at some point tomorrow afternoon.
Also drove the WCP... no new exit numbers yet. Hit up I-291 earlier in the week, also no numbers yet.
Look forward to the photos. I will plan to post some on my Exit Renumbering site, if you don't mind, with a link to the rest on your Flickr site.
A new video, link below, made Sept. 27 driving I-691 East then CT 66 through Middletown, then up CT 17 to CT 2 West to I-84 also shows no changes to the exit numbers on the last 2 routes. The new numbers are still covered up. Why the delay? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6OX7Cv6ITY
Quote from: bob7374 on October 12, 2024, 08:49:28 PMLook forward to the photos. I will plan to post some on my Exit Renumbering site, if you don't mind, with a link to the rest on your Flickr site.
A new video, link below, made Sept. 27 driving I-691 East then CT 66 through Middletown, then up CT 17 to CT 2 West to I-84 also shows no changes to the exit numbers on the last 2 routes. The new numbers are still covered up. Why the delay? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6OX7Cv6ITY
Sure, you can use the photos. They are live... now just working on the captions.
I'm not sure the delay in CT 2/3/11/17 renumbering... most of the signs are up and the routes could be changed, while modifying the signs not yet replaced. It just seems like they're going through so much extra work when they renumber the exits in the middle of the replacement project, even so far as moving the exit tabs from the old signs to the new signs. What they did on I-384 makes a lot more sense... renumber the exits, THEN replace the signs. If CTDOT did it this way, they could have the whole state renumbered in less than a year... just like Mass did.
UPDATE: Drove I-384 West yesterday and have those sign photos on my FLICKR as well.
Some of the exit numbers on CT 3 and 17 have been revealed, especially on the gore signs, since they were never numbered to begin with. There is still old button copy on CT 2, especially in the Glastonbury area. But it's CT so they'll drag everything out as long as they can.
UPDATE: Drove the CT 3 section yesterday. Most signage on the Glastonbury side is new and the numbers uncovered save for the old unnumbered exit now signage for the Glastonbury (13A/13) exit; new signage only says Glastonbury, omitting the street name. The only ones uncovered on the Wethersfield side are the exit now and gore sign for 91 South (11A). The rest are either old w/o tabs or have the numbers blacked over.
The latest Street View (July 2024) shows the new signage on CT 3: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7115504,-72.6432422,3a,75y,210.28h,96.95t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1stbM50ISwG7eMiSyfcddDww!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D-6.9454535448349475%26panoid%3DtbM50ISwG7eMiSyfcddDww%26yaw%3D210.28462532242645!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MTAyMC4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D. And here is a shot of a September 2024 Street View drive-through on CT 17: https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5530975,-72.6472792,3a,75y,67.6h,87.82t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1snffp346V1O_phQGFCnw6cA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D2.18199579160553%26panoid%3Dnffp346V1O_phQGFCnw6cA%26yaw%3D67.60320205278106!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MTAyMC4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D. This one is near the northern terminus of CT 17 (the advance sign does not have an exit tab): https://www.google.com/maps/@41.7083266,-72.599648,3a,75y,53.6h,90.81t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sAr0m8zkNpoqruW2hqlGtEA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D-0.813392240399736%26panoid%3DAr0m8zkNpoqruW2hqlGtEA%26yaw%3D53.6028733348533!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI0MTAyMC4xIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D.
That shot of Exit 21-A/Main St Extension in Middletown may not be a numbered exit as such for much longer. CTDOT plans for Middletown have the exit to Portland occurring BEFORE the merge from existing Rt 17 (the onramp they're currently widening). If this plan does pan out, then Route 17 is going to have to be rerouted onto South Main St & Main St, at least going north. Already, the onramp signage from Main St Ext references only Route 9 and not Route 17 North.
Of course we're still only in the planning stages (STILL!) for the removal of the Middletown lights on Route 9. The state's plans for funneling all that traffic on local roads to get to Portland from Route 9 North is an abomination, and the locals agree. Now its "wait and see".
I have pictures of new signage on RT 17 South in Glastonbury over on my FLICKR page. "New London Turnpike" exit signage, which is visible in the contract plans, has been left out of what's been put up. I believe there's a project afoot to remove that left exit to New London Turnpike (and the overpass over NLTpke) and modify the "Glastonbury Center" ramp. There's not even enough room on the new 4-chord cantilever to support the New London Turnpike exit signage. So that's got to be the eventual goal there. That left exit to NLTpke was a remnant from when the Glastonbury Expressway was constructed, but Route 2 (east of the present Rt 17 exit) wasn't, so NLTpke was Route 2.
According to WFSB, mileage-based exit numbers on CT 2 and CT 11 will "go live" this week:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vv_Mo3j5nI
Looking on Google Street view, it appears new highway signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5616636,-72.1635812,3a,40.3y,126.46h,87.16t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sSszvNqw6ZuperSKjXnGWtA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D2.83583437567502%26panoid%3DSszvNqw6ZuperSKjXnGWtA%26yaw%3D126.45852932391102!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDEwMS4wIKXMDSoJLDEwMjExMjMzSAFQAw%3D%3D) (with the new exit numbers covered) have been up since at least August - not sure why it's taken 5 months to pull the trigger.
Google Maps still lists the sequential numbers on both highways - hope drivers don't get confused.
This is good news!
Quote from: kramie13 on January 07, 2025, 08:47:10 AMAccording to WFSB, mileage-based exit numbers on CT 2 and CT 11 will "go live" this week:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vv_Mo3j5nI
Looking on Google Street view, it appears new highway signs (https://www.google.com/maps/@41.5616636,-72.1635812,3a,40.3y,126.46h,87.16t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sSszvNqw6ZuperSKjXnGWtA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D2.83583437567502%26panoid%3DSszvNqw6ZuperSKjXnGWtA%26yaw%3D126.45852932391102!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDEwMS4wIKXMDSoJLDEwMjExMjMzSAFQAw%3D%3D) (with the new exit numbers covered) have been up since at least August - not sure why it's taken 5 months to pull the trigger.
Google Maps still lists the sequential numbers on both highways - hope drivers don't get confused.
Even weirder than the gore signs are the BGSs (https://maps.app.goo.gl/fdndWZWjCxvm83Y39).
Yes, they took the exit tabs off the old signs and stuck them on top of the new signs. So there's button copy exit tabs temporarily mounted on top of the new signs. For the next couple weeks anyway. Go here and you can see all the examples:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/albums/72157672122426080/
This is different than how Route 9 was converted a couple years ago. And different than how I-384 and Routes 8/25 were converted...
Route 9 was divided into 2 contracts... the southern half had the new signs erected with the new numbers and were covered up until the reveal, without the old #s displayed. The northern half had new signs erected with the old numbers overlayed over the new numbers, until the revealing.
I-384 is getting all new signs and new exit numbers. However, the contractor/state decided to renumber the exits first, using overlays on the existing signs, then will replace the signs which will be fabricated with the new numbers. Routes 8/25 had mostly already new signs, so the exit number change involved overlays on the existing signs. With a sign replacement project taking place in Waterbury and Watertown, those signs are now being replaced and will be fabricated with the new numbers. These routes also have the much smaller "OLD EXIT #" yellow banners (similar to Mass). Routes 2/9/11 have the larger sheet aluminum green "OLD EXIT #" signs. The yellow ones stick out more, even though they're smaller.
I-291 is also getting new exit numbers/signs. Exit numbers have not yet been changed, so I'm not sure if they're going to renumber first, then replace the signs, or change over as they go. I-291 is mostly overhead and those take longer to install than ground mounts (what with more elaborate foundations and such.
Drove CT 2 in East Hartford today between I-84 and CT 3. Exit numbers have not yet been changed in either direction in this section. Most of this section had its signs replaced not as part of the CT 2 resigning, but as part of a safety improvement project, so the signs here were fabricated with the old numbers and do not have any tarped tabs. This section also does not have any "OLD EXIT #" signs posted yet.
Also with all signs in this section being overhead, and given high winds that have been in CT all week, I have to wonder if the conversion has started further east (on the other side of Glastonbury). I did hear of a lane closure the other morning on CT 2 out by old Exit 9.
Drove part of CT 2 and CT 11 today... new mileage-based exit numbers have been revealed on 98% of the signs*, from Norwich to Colchester. I didn't venture north of CT 149/new Exit 20, so I'm not sure how far they've made it with the change. I'll know more hopefully in a week.
* There's 1 sign EB and 2 signs WB not yet changed out, still sporting the old #s. Two of them are "spot replacements" that just haven't had the #s changed.
Here's a sample of some new numbers:
CT 2 East, Colchester:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54274371002_bf6ccafe0b_3k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2qG3kBh)DSC06895 (https://flic.kr/p/2qG3kBh) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr
CT 11 South, Salem:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54275498369_59222f7128_3k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2qG97JD)DSC06901 (https://flic.kr/p/2qG97JD) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr
CT West, Norwich:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54275499009_f8f00e7eb5_4k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2qG97VF)CT2WB-Exit38-2 (https://flic.kr/p/2qG97VF) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr
CT West, Norwich:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54275498874_0352a5f631_3k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2qG97Tm)CT2WB-Exit35-3 (https://flic.kr/p/2qG97Tm) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr
CT West, Westchester:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54275250141_2ae7fb4ed3_3k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2qG7QWR)CT2WB-Exit20-1 (https://flic.kr/p/2qG7QWR) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr
Want more? Hit the link below.
Quote from: shadyjay on January 19, 2025, 01:14:14 PMCT West, Norwich:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54275499009_f8f00e7eb5_4k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2qG97VF)CT2WB-Exit38-2 (https://flic.kr/p/2qG97VF) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr
Did they just use the old/new exit sign in place of a gore sign?
Quote from: vdeane on January 19, 2025, 03:11:14 PMQuote from: shadyjay on January 19, 2025, 01:14:14 PMCT West, Norwich:
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/54275499009_f8f00e7eb5_4k.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/2qG97VF)CT2WB-Exit38-2 (https://flic.kr/p/2qG97VF) by Jay Hogan (https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/), on Flickr
Did they just use the old/new exit sign in place of a gore sign?
They did in a few locations... I'm guessing just temporarily. Still a work in progress.
UPDATE 1/20/2025:
Exit numbering has reached up to former Exit 9/new Exit 7 / Neipsic Road in Glastonbury. No exits have been renumbered yet west of there, to East Hartford and Hartford. All exits have been renumbered east of there, including new Exit 7, to the end of the expressway in Norwich. Still awaiting installation of 2 gantries, EB, at Exit 7 and at Exit 8, and the replacement of signs on a gantry to remain at EB Exit 5-D. On CT 3, one gantry just north/east of the Putnam Bridge is still awaiting installation.
A few more photos added to my CT 2 gallery showing this in fresh snowfall, though I still have some gaps due to some pretty intense AM sun glare.
So they've gone back to the green sheet metal old exit signs rather than the small yellow ones. Google Maps is updated with new numbers up to CT 66 (new 15 old 13) in Marlborough, plus for all of CT 11. No numbers posted yet for CT 3 or CT 17.
East Haddam as a control for CT 16 :banghead:
The CT 2/3/11/17 project was developed BEFORE the use of the small yellow ones, hence why it has the larger green signs. I like the small yellow ones myself.
And yes.... why, oh why East Haddam? I wonder if it was supposed to say "East Hampton"? No, the project plans said "East Haddam", but still, why? Why?
The world may never know.
I am most looking forward to CT 15's exit numbers being renumbered. I always believed that the exit sequence should have started at 1 from the get-go, not 27.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 21, 2025, 11:32:18 AMI am most looking forward to CT 15's exit numbers being renumbered. I always believed that the exit sequence should have started at 1 from the get-go, not 27.
The NY 120A exit will match NY's numbering, which is as it should be. Why should the exit have two different numbers?
Converting the parkways is LONG overdue. I just wonder when the rest of CT 15 will be converted (from Wethersfield to East Hartford). Wonder if it will be snuck into a sign replacement contract for I-84 (East Hartford to Vernon).
UPDATE 1/25:
Conversion of all exit #s on CT 2, from Hartford to Norwich, is essentially complete. I have observed new exit numbers on the entire stretch, with some spot gore signs either not yet installed or still have the new numbers tarped.
I have created a new page devoted to the CT 2 exit renumbering, for now consisting of photos from Shady Jay's Flickr site at: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/ct2photos.html
I have also posted some of his photos of new exit numbers on CT 3, 11 and 17 on the New England Exit Renumbering Central site, feel free to jump to: https://malmeroads.net/mass21c/neexitrenumbering.html#ct3signs
I hope to take a road trip soon to add some of my own photos.
Starting to see some signs of life in the CT 15 re-signing/exit renumbering project. New gore sign supports are now up in Meriden and Wallingford, as well as a covered small Wallingford town line sign southbound. Also saw a pier for a chorded truss exit now sign before the US 5 exit. Looks like they're doing the secondary signage before the BGS's and gantries
Sorry for the double post. Just saw a portable VMB on I-291 announcing that new exit numbers are coming 3/30. So that'll leave the 2di's, US 7, and CT 15 as the current holdouts.
Encouraging to see Connecticut making progress on this.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on March 17, 2025, 05:21:37 PMSorry for the double post. Just saw a portable VMB on I-291 announcing that new exit numbers are coming 3/30. So that'll leave the 2di's, US 7, and CT 15 as the current holdouts.
Here's the official CTDOT press release about I-291:
https://portal.ct.gov/dot/ctdot-construction-advisories/2025/exit-number-revisions-i291-windsor-to-manchester-and-route-187-and-189-ibloomfield?language=en_US
What would the new mileage-based exit numbers have been if Interstate 291 had been completed as originally proposed, assuming Mile 0 would have been at its junction with Interstate 91 between Exits 23 and 24?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 19, 2025, 02:09:17 PMWhat would the new mileage-based exit numbers have been if Interstate 291 had been completed as originally proposed, assuming Mile 0 would have been at its junction with Interstate 91 between Exits 23 and 24?
Based on interstate trade-in records (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/highwayhistory/data/page05.cfm), the unbuilt section of I-291 is about 20.2 miles. Adding 20 to the present-day numbers results in Exit 25C as the alternate-history terminus at I-84 in Manchester.
Here's some signage for a complete I-291.(https://live.staticflickr.com/927/29229188768_6702901144_k.jpg)
UPDATE: I-291 signage has been changed, except there are still no exit numbers or gore signs for the eastern terminus. Old exit signage are the yellow tabs much like I-384
I-291 exits have been renumbered. Drove it this morning WB and this afternoon EB. Only got photos EB due to some pretty dense fog in the AM. Same format of "OLD EXIT #" in yellow/black as I-384 and Rt 8.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/shadyjay/with/54422898829/
The I-84 jct did not get exit numbers yet, but will when the new signs go up sometime later this year. Existing signs for the I-84 jct do not have exit tabs.
When CT 15 gets its exits renumbered, be sure to get some pictures (if you have time to do so). It would be much appreciated by me.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 31, 2025, 06:55:47 PMWhen CT 15 gets its exits renumbered, be sure to get some pictures (if you have time to do so). It would be much appreciated by me.
It's on the list... not sure if there's been any progress made yet on that. Hope to check the WCP in a couple weeks. Tried getting on SB in Meriden the other day but traffic was quite backed up and didn't feel like dealing with it.
Quote from: shadyjay on April 01, 2025, 04:43:42 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on March 31, 2025, 06:55:47 PMWhen CT 15 gets its exits renumbered, be sure to get some pictures (if you have time to do so). It would be much appreciated by me.
[/quotQuote from: shadyjay on April 01, 2025, 04:43:42 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on March 31, 2025, 06:55:47 PMWhen CT 15 gets its exits renumbered, be sure to get some pictures (if you have time to do so). It would be much appreciated by me.
It's on the list... not sure if there's been any progress made yet on that. Hope to check the WCP in a couple weeks. Tried getting on SB in Meriden the other day but traffic was quite backed up and didn't feel like dealing with it.
It's on the list... not sure if there's been any progress made yet on that. Hope to check the WCP in a couple weeks. Tried getting on SB in Meriden the other day but traffic was quite backed up and didn't feel like dealing with it.
I drive it SB pretty much every day between Meriden and Wallingford. There are some new gore sign supports behind many of the current gore signs, but no new signage or enhanced mile markers other than the secondary signage posted last year.
Drove the Willimantic Bypass today... next to nothing in terms of progress being made on sign replacement/ exit renumbering. There's really no point to add exit tabs to the existing signage, as its getting replaced anyway. US 6 is in the same contract as the I-384 project, and contractors have been out installing foundations there. Exit numbers have been changed already to mileage-based on I-384, occuring in 2024.
Let us know when they do add exit numbers to the Willimantic Bypass.
Quote from: shadyjay on April 03, 2025, 03:51:24 PMDrove the Willimantic Bypass today... next to nothing in terms of progress being made on sign replacement/ exit renumbering. There's really no point to add exit tabs to the existing signage, as its getting replaced anyway. US 6 is in the same contract as the I-384 project, and contractors have been out installing foundations there. Exit numbers have been changed already to mileage-based on I-384, occuring in 2024.
In the last 2 weeks or so there's been some fresh CBYD markings in the areas that I think the signs supports may be going. Haven't checked it against the plans but they're all about where I'd expect. No actual work yet, though. Meanwhile, the foundations along I-384 have been going in fast and furious the last week or so.
Quote from: sharkyfour on April 03, 2025, 08:37:00 PMQuote from: shadyjay on April 03, 2025, 03:51:24 PMDrove the Willimantic Bypass today... next to nothing in terms of progress being made on sign replacement/ exit renumbering. There's really no point to add exit tabs to the existing signage, as its getting replaced anyway. US 6 is in the same contract as the I-384 project, and contractors have been out installing foundations there. Exit numbers have been changed already to mileage-based on I-384, occuring in 2024.
In the last 2 weeks or so there's been some fresh CBYD markings in the areas that I think the signs supports may be going. Haven't checked it against the plans but they're all about where I'd expect. No actual work yet, though. Meanwhile, the foundations along I-384 have been going in fast and furious the last week or so.
Saw the first new foundation for a ground-mount sign on the Willimantic Bypass for the CT-195 exit on the eastbound side earlier today.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on April 01, 2025, 08:21:44 PMQuote from: shadyjay on April 01, 2025, 04:43:42 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on March 31, 2025, 06:55:47 PMWhen CT 15 gets its exits renumbered, be sure to get some pictures (if you have time to do so). It would be much appreciated by me.
[/quotQuote from: shadyjay on April 01, 2025, 04:43:42 PMQuote from: The Ghostbuster on March 31, 2025, 06:55:47 PMWhen CT 15 gets its exits renumbered, be sure to get some pictures (if you have time to do so). It would be much appreciated by me.
It's on the list... not sure if there's been any progress made yet on that. Hope to check the WCP in a couple weeks. Tried getting on SB in Meriden the other day but traffic was quite backed up and didn't feel like dealing with it.
It's on the list... not sure if there's been any progress made yet on that. Hope to check the WCP in a couple weeks. Tried getting on SB in Meriden the other day but traffic was quite backed up and didn't feel like dealing with it.
I drive it SB pretty much every day between Meriden and Wallingford. There are some new gore sign supports behind many of the current gore signs, but no new signage or enhanced mile markers other than the secondary signage posted last year.
Drove CT 15 from Meriden to NY in both directions last weekend. Nothing much noted on the WCP. There were many covered over gore signs behind the current ones along the Merritt in both directions, mostly closer to the NY border after the US 7 exits, but noticed a few northbound closer to the northern end such as at the first CT 25 exit (drove that direction at night so may have missed some). Were 2 significant delays heading south. The first when a not so swift driver of a Swift truck fortunately stopped before hitting a bridge on the WCP near Hamden, then the seemingly usual 2 mile delay approaching US 7.
Quote from: sharkyfour on May 08, 2025, 09:49:45 PMQuote from: sharkyfour on April 03, 2025, 08:37:00 PMQuote from: shadyjay on April 03, 2025, 03:51:24 PMDrove the Willimantic Bypass today... next to nothing in terms of progress being made on sign replacement/ exit renumbering. There's really no point to add exit tabs to the existing signage, as its getting replaced anyway. US 6 is in the same contract as the I-384 project, and contractors have been out installing foundations there. Exit numbers have been changed already to mileage-based on I-384, occuring in 2024.
In the last 2 weeks or so there's been some fresh CBYD markings in the areas that I think the signs supports may be going. Haven't checked it against the plans but they're all about where I'd expect. No actual work yet, though. Meanwhile, the foundations along I-384 have been going in fast and furious the last week or so.
Saw the first new foundation for a ground-mount sign on the Willimantic Bypass for the CT-195 exit on the eastbound side earlier today.
Most of the new foundations on the US-6 Willimantic Bypass have been placed, but no new large signs yet. In the last week a lot if not all of the new sheetmetal signs have gone up. So many large signs are being replaced with sheetmetal along here.
Also, I noticed at both the end of I-384 and US-6, all of the directional signage for the splits at the ends of the expressways is being changed from large signs to small sheetmetal. Looks like maybe one LGS at the 1/2 mile mark on 384. I really have my doubts on how effective that signage will be.
News article indicates exit renumbering of CT 15 along the Merritt and Cross Parkways could be completed by early August:
https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/ct-merritt-wilbur-cross-parkway-new-exit-numbers-20414108.php
Quote from: bob7374 on July 04, 2025, 06:28:48 PMNews article indicates exit renumbering of CT 15 along the Merritt and Cross Parkways could be completed by early August:
https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/ct-merritt-wilbur-cross-parkway-new-exit-numbers-20414108.php
I drive some of the Wilbur Cross almost daily. If they're making the changes in August, it'll be overlays on old signage because no new BGS's have been added, nor have the supports. New enhanced mile markers have yet to be added, and only a couple new tarped services/attractions signs have been added. Only the new gore signs are up and tarped, along with the newer, smaller town line signage.