CT Governor Malloy wants I-84 and I-95 widened in the state

[KEVIN_224]

http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/Governor-Said-I-95-I-84-Should-Be-Widened-212969391.html

The picture used in the article is from a DOT camera, looking westward at Exit 41 of I-84/US 6 in West Hartford. Channel 30 is off of Exit 40, about a half mile west of that picture.

As for the widening he wants, they should at least get going on I-95 east of Old Saybrook! 

[Perfxion]

I would save at least 4 lanes from NY boarder through New Haven.

[PHLBOS]

Long overdue for both roads.  Along I-84 west of Hartford, I have seen some mainline overpasses that were sized for a future widening (to 6 lanes).  In those areas, all that's needed is additional continuous pavement to match the abutments.

[dgolub]

I would save at least 4 lanes from NY boarder through New Haven.

At the very least, it should get widened from I-287 through Stamford, maybe with an HOV lane to encourage mass transit and carpooling.  That said, he's talking about widening portions that currently have two lanes to three.  I'm not sure that they have quite the same degree of traffic problems out in Middlesex, New London, and Tolland counties.

[KEVIN_224]

One small example of I-95 widening I've encountered is a stretch in Norwalk, immediately south and west of Exit 15 (US Route 7 North), close to mile marker 15. I know a fire station in the vicinity was taken out for that project.

[spmkam]

the question is where exactly and how much would it cost the state

[Alps]

I would save at least 4 lanes from NY boarder through New Haven.

At the very least, it should get widened from I-287 through Stamford, maybe with an HOV lane to encourage mass transit and carpooling.  That said, he's talking about widening portions that currently have two lanes to three.  I'm not sure that they have quite the same degree of traffic problems out in Middlesex, New London, and Tolland counties.

Oh, they need that area to be 3 lanes almost as badly as they need I-95 to be widened from 4 to 5 lanes west of New Haven.

What do you mean, it's not 4 lanes yet?

[dgolub]

What do you mean, it's not 4 lanes yet?

Unless there's been a widening project since 2010 that I don't know about, it's three lanes in most places from the New York border to a little past New Haven. I recently took a train trip up to Danbury and the parts of I-95 that the train goes by looked the same as they did three years ago.

[Duke87]

I believe the confusion stems from Perfexion saying "I would save at least 4 lanes" when he meant "I would have at least 4 lanes". I-95 south of New Haven is, indeed, for the most part only six lanes. The key exception is the section from exits 25 to 29 that was widened to eight lanes several years ago. Other than that there is an auxiliary lane here and there (such as southbound from exits 10 to 8 and northbound from exits 10 to 11), but still only six through lanes.

A wholescale widening to 8 or 10 lanes from I-287 to I-91 would be well justified for the present traffic counts but unfortunately that is neither politically viable nor within the realm of available budgets.

[Alps]

*whoosh*

[froggie]

I could see 8 lanes on 95 from 287 to 91, and 6 lanes to east of New London (say Mystic or thereabouts)...not sure it needs to go all the way to Rhode Island.  Problem is, the right-of-way is pretty tight along much of the corridor west of New Haven.  Any significant widening will require some pricey right-of-way acquisition.

As for I-84, consistent 6-lanes from Waterbury to Hartford and eliminating all the left-side entrances/exits in the Hartford area would help, but I'm not sure 6 lanes from Danbury ot Waterbury is necessary...in my experience, traffic is only a problem here if there's a crash, and widening won't help those crash-related issues.

[jp the roadgeek]

Oh, but the $1000 per inch busway from New Britain to Hartford is going to alleviate the I-84 problem west of Hartford.  It's the greatest thing since sliced bread   We should have used that $600 million and parlayed it into widening 84 from Hartford to Waterbury and 95 from the NY line to East Lyme.

[Mergingtraffic]

There is also a website www.transformct.org   They want you to share your ideas for transportation in CT.  Allegedly they will look at it.  Some people have shared their ideas such as the Hartford Bypass, US6, US7 & 11 expressways

[BamaZeus]

Not bad.  Of course, you will get some of your average "do something about crime!" posts, but many of them seem to have actual thought behind them, even if the idea itself is ridiculous.

[connroadgeek]

One small example of I-95 widening I've encountered is a stretch in Norwalk, immediately south and west of Exit 15 (US Route 7 North), close to mile marker 15. I know a fire station in the vicinity was taken out for that project.

That fire station was not taken out because of highway expansion. It's an outdated facility that Norwalk has been trying to replace or relocate for some time now. The expansion of I-95 through Norwalk is similar to the widening that occurred in Darien a few years ago in that it merely added operational lanes for exiting and entering traffic. That kind of project doesn't help. If anything it hurts because it adds to the weaving where traffic tries to spread out across all lanes only to realize that one lane way off to the right where traffic is moving along is an exit only forcing them to merge back left before the next exit ramp. I've seen this behavior many times driving through there. That highway will never be wider than 3 lanes unfortunately as there is simply no room to expand. Right of way acquisition is cost prohibitive never mind all the bridge modifications that would be required. In my opinion, it needs to have a minimum of six through lanes in both directions just to handle today's traffic. Maybe even an express/local setup from the state line through at least Norwalk due to the close spacing of ramps. If this were Texas they'd make it 10 lanes in both directions and be done with it.

[Perfxion]

If the budget allowed, they would make it 8 or 10 lanes of traffic per side. What they really need is another highway. The true Texas way, lure a corporation into town, then spend a billion on building a highway to it. Worked for Compaq/HP and Exxon.

[mc78andrew]

One small example of I-95 widening I've encountered is a stretch in Norwalk, immediately south and west of Exit 15 (US Route 7 North), close to mile marker 15. I know a fire station in the vicinity was taken out for that project.

That fire station was not taken out because of highway expansion. It's an outdated facility that Norwalk has been trying to replace or relocate for some time now. The expansion of I-95 through Norwalk is similar to the widening that occurred in Darien a few years ago in that it merely added operational lanes for exiting and entering traffic. That kind of project doesn't help. If anything it hurts because it adds to the weaving where traffic tries to spread out across all lanes only to realize that one lane way off to the right where traffic is moving along is an exit only forcing them to merge back left before the next exit ramp. I've seen this behavior many times driving through there. That highway will never be wider than 3 lanes unfortunately as there is simply no room to expand. Right of way acquisition is cost prohibitive never mind all the bridge modifications that would be required. In my opinion, it needs to have a minimum of six through lanes in both directions just to handle today's traffic. Maybe even an express/local setup from the state line through at least Norwalk due to the close spacing of ramps. If this were Texas they'd make it 10 lanes in both directions and be done with it.

From the looks of the I 95 overpasses in fairfield county they are going to need to be replaced at some point.  I hope when they do tackle that project that they allow for more lanes.

CT lured number of European banks to stamford over the past 20 years. Not sure they got much in new road support for it. 

[spmkam]

The commuter rail, metro north, was the big reason for that

[Duke87]

The reason for that had nothing to do with transportation of any sort. It was because the city of Stamford (of which Dan Malloy was the mayor at the time) offered those companies massive tax breaks to move their operations there.

[Mergingtraffic]

One small example of I-95 widening I've encountered is a stretch in Norwalk, immediately south and west of Exit 15 (US Route 7 North), close to mile marker 15. I know a fire station in the vicinity was taken out for that project.

That fire station was not taken out because of highway expansion. It's an outdated facility that Norwalk has been trying to replace or relocate for some time now. The expansion of I-95 through Norwalk is similar to the widening that occurred in Darien a few years ago in that it merely added operational lanes for exiting and entering traffic. That kind of project doesn't help. If anything it hurts because it adds to the weaving where traffic tries to spread out across all lanes only to realize that one lane way off to the right where traffic is moving along is an exit only forcing them to merge back left before the next exit ramp. I've seen this behavior many times driving through there. That highway will never be wider than 3 lanes unfortunately as there is simply no room to expand. Right of way acquisition is cost prohibitive never mind all the bridge modifications that would be required. In my opinion, it needs to have a minimum of six through lanes in both directions just to handle today's traffic. Maybe even an express/local setup from the state line through at least Norwalk due to the close spacing of ramps. If this were Texas they'd make it 10 lanes in both directions and be done with it.

From the looks of the I 95 overpasses in fairfield county they are going to need to be replaced at some point.  I hope when they do tackle that project that they allow for more lanes.

CT lured number of European banks to stamford over the past 20 years. Not sure they got much in new road support for it. 

CT doesn't think that big, look when they four lane roads.  Texas would add center turning lane, CT doesn't. 

If the I-95 Bridgeport widening was done in, let's say Texas or Deleware, the project would've removed the awful CT-25 loop ramp and replace it with a flyover. 

[Duke87]

If the I-95 Bridgeport widening was done in, let's say Texas or Deleware, the project would've removed the awful CT-25 loop ramp and replace it with a flyover.

Wouldn't have been possible to do that without taking structures. Which, if attempted, would have delayed and possibly killed the project over the inevitable NIMBY backlash and ensuing court cases. You really can't take structures in a city in the northeast unless you can argue that by doing so you are improving the quality of life in said city. And no, making an interchange flow more freely does not count as improving "quality of life" since it only benefits cars. Now, if the ramp had a bus or bike lane, then you might be in business.

[Alps]

CT doesn't think that big, look when they four lane roads.  Texas would add center turning lane, CT doesn't. 

US 7/202 begs to slam your point into a rope like Owen Hart.

[froggie]

If this were Texas they'd make it 10 lanes in both directions and be done with it.

If this were Texas, they would've had the open, unused right-of-way to build it that wide.  But Connecticut has buildings.  Could easily be a case where the right-of-way costs would be higher than the actual construction costs.

[Perfxion]

If they ever were to try and make 1-95 from New Haven or Bridgeport to Greenwich, CT to 5 lanes each way and 2 HOV lanes, it would be about a 5 billion dollar project getting the right of way. Let alone the cost to construct all the over passes, under passes, and bridges needed.

[jp the roadgeek]

If they ever were to try and make 1-95 from New Haven or Bridgeport to Greenwich, CT to 5 lanes each way and 2 HOV lanes, it would be about a 5 billion dollar project getting the right of way. Let alone the cost to construct all the over passes, under passes, and bridges needed.

Eventually, the cost of extending the LIE and building a Long Island Sound crossing could actually be less than the cost of widening I-95 in CT.  The LIE is a ghost town east of exit 65 to it's end in Riverhead.