Interstates In Connecticut

[BamaZeus]

Does it?  Perhaps widening I-95 and building a 4-lane HOT freeway parallel would work.  Or a HOV requirement during rush hour.  I-66 within the capital beltway is actually more congested outside of rush hour due to the HOV restriction.

At one point a few years ago, there was some sort of failed proposal for a 3rd road, between the Merritt and the Turnpike, but logistically I just don't see how they could possibly afford all the land needed to accomplish that sort of road, much less the NIMBYism.

At some point, they'll be faced with the prospect of trying to figure out how to double-deck I-95 through Fairfield County.  There's some room for widening at least one extra lane in some spots, but will it ever be enough?

[Perfxion]

Only if Bill Gates has about 4 billion dollars burning a hole in his pocket can they build in the area the highway system needed to fix it. Or use said money to pay off the Merritt tree huggers to expand the road with the extra right of way to build wider.

[connroadgeek]

I-95 will never be significantly widened through Fairfield County. Never. There aren't even informal plans to do so. Everyone knows capacity is tapped out and there's nowhere to build. It's why the state is focused on busways and more rail cars, because they already know Connecticut is done with expanding its highways (save for route 11 and widening in the east). People need to get used to using mass transit or have fun sitting on the highway staring at the bumper in front of them during their ever lengthening commutes. The state is better served upgrading the parking and train stations (which they have been over the past several years) than attempting half-baked widening of highways at this point. To do it right would require 3 or 4 express lanes and 2 local lanes (maybe even a 3rd exit-only local lane in spots to allow multi-lane ramps for the busier exits where traffic frequently backs up onto the highway) in each direction from Greenwich to Bridgeport which would essentially double the footprint of the highway.

[Mergingtraffic]

I-95 was congested ALL day today (Saturday) around Exits 12-15 in both directions for about 10 hours.  I sat in it and also kept tabs on traffic cams b/c I was curious to see how long it would be.

I do not see how mass transit would help that today.  People today aren't commuting to their jobs they are doing leisure activities or going to graduations.  Mass transit can't help stuff like that.  Who is going to take mass transit when they want to see friends in Norwich or Bristol?  Especially when mass transit doesnt serve those areas.

However, if the highway was expanded to let's say 4 lanes or 5 lanes in each direction I would like to think the congestion would be 7 hours rather than 10 hours.  Is it perfect? no.  but it would help.  

Mass transit is the politically correct answer to give to shut up the vocal minority that tend to get the attention of all the press.

Also, there IS room to widen the highway.  If they can widen I-95 in East Haven, they can widen it anywhere. Btw: There was room to add in a 4th lane SB between Exits 10 and 8.  I don't see people's driveways chopped off anywhere.

[connroadgeek]

If they can widen I-95 in East Haven, they can widen it anywhere.

Why do you believe this? Land in East Haven costs about 1/4 (maybe even less, East Haven is no Greenwich) of what it does in Fairfield County.

[Mergingtraffic]

If they can widen I-95 in East Haven, they can widen it anywhere.

Why do you believe this? Land in East Haven costs about 1/4 (maybe even less, East Haven is no Greenwich) of what it does in Fairfield County.

I didn't say anything about price, I was just talking space.

[KEVIN_224]

Speaking of widening along I-95: I refer to the Quinnipiac River Bridge ("Q" Bridge) project in New Haven. Once that whole thing is finished, how far north (east?) of that bridge will the widening get?

Also, I wish they could widen sections of I-95 between Old Lyme and Waterford to at least three lanes. It's always a huge bottleneck from May to September on most weekends.

[Mergingtraffic]

Also, I wish they could widen sections of I-95 between Old Lyme and Waterford to at least three lanes. It's always a huge bottleneck from May to September on most weekends.

I think they are supposed to but not sure if they started the EIS yet.  They were supposed to start it but I think it was delayed b/c of funding.
Of course when the widening does come through they will have to tear up the new median jersey barrier they just installed b/c it's not exactly in the center, which is kind of stupid.  They also left grassy areas there too.  I have no idea why they didn't do it the same way the previous media projects were done in Fairfield County. 

[Perfxion]

There is no simple answer, but mass transit and busways are part of it. Either the Merritt or I-95 needs to be widen, no if ands or buts about it. Traffic can't use just those routes. Then you have the rail system. Its nice, but its design is to go to and from NYC. What if someone is going to Storrs? What if someone is going from New Canaan(by Talmage Hill) to Danbury? What about going from Stamford(Cove area) to East lyme? Mass transit isn't the simplest answer. The state needs to think about which one to bite the bullet on. The cheaper answer is the Merritt but that is only because they own the land. Lawsuits, that is a different story.

[Mergingtraffic]

There is no simple answer,  The cheaper answer is the Merritt but that is only because they own the land. Lawsuits, that is a different story.

Just think the Merrit/US 7 interchange actually started in 2005 and would have been complete by now if not for the Merrit Pkwy Conservancy.  They sued and stopped construction, now it's back at the beginning.  No funding, nothing.  It's totally stupid!  They single handedly stopped the project.  It would've been complete by now. In fact,the state had to spend more money to put back the road the way it was before construction started. 

[Alps]

There is no simple answer,  The cheaper answer is the Merritt but that is only because they own the land. Lawsuits, that is a different story.

Just think the Merrit/US 7 interchange actually started in 2005 and would have been complete by now if not for the Merrit Pkwy Conservancy.  They sued and stopped construction, now it's back at the beginning.  No funding, nothing.  It's totally stupid!  They single handedly stopped the project.  It would've been complete by now. In fact,the state had to spend more money to put back the road the way it was before construction started. 

The interchange would have been complete a lot sooner than 2005 if not for the Conservancy. But the state went ahead with construction without going through procedures first - so it's their own fault. There's a reason the Conservancy exists, and it's so the Merritt doesn't look like just any other road out there. There have been a lot of concerns with the US 7 interchange starting way back when the 7 freeway was first built (1960s to exit 2), and then when it finally pushed past the Merritt in the 80s. The current half-interchange was a major concession just to have any connection at all with the Merritt, and/or just to get the damn thing built at all. Personally, I'd rather they extend the 7 freeway versus completing the Merritt interchange but both seem to have an equal likelihood of happening in our lifetimes.

[Perfxion]

CT needs to pull a Texas and ask for forgiveness rather than permission. The problem is that the state is bending over backwards for this group rather than the majority of the people who actually use the road. The other major problem is I-95 would be the road the Conservancy wants expanded, but that is too expensive due to land value and everything built up to the highway. Merritt does have at least 75 feet of open paid for room to work with.

[Duke87]

CT needs to pull a Texas and ask for forgiveness rather than permission.

Last time they tried that, they got sued and the court ordered them to stop work before much had gotten done. See above discussion of Merritt/7 interchange. 

[connroadgeek]

CT needs to pull a Texas and ask for forgiveness rather than permission. The problem is that the state is bending over backwards for this group rather than the majority of the people who actually use the road. The other major problem is I-95 would be the road the Conservancy wants expanded, but that is too expensive due to land value and everything built up to the highway. Merritt does have at least 75 feet of open paid for room to work with.

Texas and Connecticut: two states that could not be more different. The land along the Merritt isn't much cheaper, and the state already knows it will never change that road anyway. I do wish they would complete that interchange with U.S. 7 though - seems like it should be easy enough - the Conservancy notwithstanding.

[NE2]

According to another thread, Texas has no way of preserving ROW from development. Insert political statement.

[shadyjay]

I do wish they would complete that interchange with U.S. 7 though - seems like it should be easy enough - the Conservancy notwithstanding.

You know, I used to think that as well, but as long as the US 7 expressway ends about 1/2 mile north of the Merritt, I really don't think it's 100% necessary.  Maybe just a loop ramp from the parkway SB to US 7 SB. 

[Mergingtraffic]

In fact, the DOT tried to push through a cloverleaf design for the interchange just to satisfy the MPC.  They even used alleged examples of where colverleafs work well.  Thank god nearby residents said no b/c the cloverleaf would have taken a larger footprint of land.  Now, the new design is similiar to the original with flyovers or flyunders.

It does seem the DOT wants to kiss **s for the MPC.  On another twist, the DOT is cutting down trees along state highways big time, but the road where people have actually died from falling trees, the Merritt, they are planting new ones!....in the median!!


The MPC wants it to be 1938 again, well it isn't.  Look at the members, I don't think any of them use the Merritt during rush hour. 

[Alps]

It does seem the DOT wants to kiss **s for the MPC.  On another twist, the DOT is cutting down trees along state highways big time, but the road where people have actually died from falling trees, the Merritt, they are planting new ones!....in the median!!

Is THAT what they're doing? All I noticed is several miles of median clearing, and I thought, "well, there goes the aesthetic neighborhood." If they're actually replanting... well, why the heck not just keep the trees that were there in the first place? 

[Perfxion]

They have to replant every tree they take out, a lot of the trees they been taken out have been dead due to the extreme about of over watering Mother Nature did last year. I read something to the tune of 90 to 110 inches of rain and snow last year. That isn't good for an area were the root system has nowhere to go. So it almost up roots from too much water. Thus falling killing people. It isn't so much the trees as they kind of help keep the lights from the other side of the median showing. Its the amount of dead wood that needs to be removed. If you cross a forest under a bunch of dead trees, that isn't the safest thing to do.

[Duke87]

Indeed. Storms are always more destructive in early spring than in summer for this reason: lots of trees in clayey, rocky soil, can't get a strong root hold. When it rains a lot before things are growing and blooming, all that water turns the ground to mud and the wind knocks trees over by ripping them out of the ground, roots and all, rather than by snapping them.

[Alps]

They have to replant every tree they take out, a lot of the trees they been taken out have been dead due to the extreme about of over watering Mother Nature did last year. I read something to the tune of 90 to 110 inches of rain and snow last year. That isn't good for an area were the root system has nowhere to go. So it almost up roots from too much water. Thus falling killing people. It isn't so much the trees as they kind of help keep the lights from the other side of the median showing. Its the amount of dead wood that needs to be removed. If you cross a forest under a bunch of dead trees, that isn't the safest thing to do.

The More I Know. Thanks.