[BPt111]

Why Norwalk/Stamford have all jobs why the state can’t bring jobs closer to New Haven so there less traffic.

[Stylo]

Originally Posted by BPt111

Why Norwalk/Stamford have all jobs why the state can’t bring jobs closer to New Haven so there less traffic.

The state exerting its power to expand Tweed would be a start.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by BeyondtheHorizon

So in 6 years, everyone who doesn't have a car will buy a car and start commuting on 95 because 95 added a lane? Where would the increased congestion come from without concurrent population increase? And if you have population increase then won't the road be even worse with 3 lanes instead of 4? So doing nothing would make things worse than doing something.

If what you're saying is true, why don't we decrease 95 to 2 or maybe even 1 lane? Or maybe just have all the cars go on route 1 and get rid of 95 and the merrit? If the model of induced congestion is true then there should be no increase in traffic as people will simply not drive on it if it isn't there. We'll save so much on highway maintenance and there will be no traffic and you'll be able to get around to where you want to go at the same speed as before. I guess increase the speed limit on route 1 to 55mph.

Can't you see the flawed logic in what you're saying? The math doesn't add up.

I love this. It shows the illogic arguement that naysayers hold on to when fighting the rebuilding of highways. As I said, i-95 was designed and built over 60 years ago. It was a very different world back then. Isn’t it time to bring this important highway into the 21st Century? Jay

[Henry10]

Things are never black and white — add lanes and it will relieve congestion or not. It may in some cases, it may not. CT’s transportation and this thread cannot be just about a lane on 95. I actually support spending on studies, since nobody does this work for free. Except of course us experts on City-Data, myself included.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Henry10

Things are never black and white — add lanes and it will relieve congestion or not. It may in some cases, it may not. CT’s transportation and this thread cannot be just about a lane on 95. I actually support spending on studies, since nobody does this work for free. Except of course us experts on City-Data, myself included.

It is not just adding lanes. It is providing full width shoulders on both sides of the highway; having sufficient distances between interchanges; proper grades of the roadway; and other things like that. A good example is I-95 through New Haven. It is much different than the original highway was and traffic now moves much smoother than it used to. Jay

[BPt111]

Originally Posted by JayCT

It is not just adding lanes. It is providing full width shoulders on both sides of the highway; having sufficient distances between interchanges; proper grades of the roadway; and other things like that. A good example is I-95 through New Haven. It is much different than the original highway was and traffic now moves much smoother than it used to. Jay

What state can do with Route 8/95 and Route 7/95 those areas are accident alleys

[Henry10]

Originally Posted by JayCT

It is not just adding lanes. It is providing full width shoulders on both sides of the highway; having sufficient distances between interchanges; proper grades of the roadway; and other things like that. A good example is I-95 through New Haven. It is much different than the original highway was and traffic now moves much smoother than it used to. Jay

Jay: let them study all aspects. I am sure some people will also not be happy that increased speeds will increase noise pollution, more cars and trucks, more fumes. Higher speeds also bring more fatalities, more emergency personnel, and so on. Someone wins, someone loses. Let’em figure that all out.

[Henry10]

Road designers also identify “shuttle corridors” or “scenic” or whatever. For example, going thru Norwalk, Bridgeport etc — there is nothing scenic. It’s just a matter of getting from point A to point B. So put the numbing trafffic in a trench, even bury it underground, and beautify the top, build pedestrian parks, etc or build a “Sunday stroll” drive above, no trucks, low speeds. Add train corridors, add high speed ferries Westport - Stamford - Wall Street. Private / public partnerships. Same for Waterbury 84 / 8.

[Henry10]

CT did a very poor job at NH 91/95 intersection. That is actually a beautiful natural setting at the bottom (Q river emptying into the bay) but with concrete overpasses overhead, beating like huge drums in the worst cacophony and visual pollution possible.

It’s totally upside down. That entire spider web should be buried. Just imagine how different that area would look. This is not esoteric. This has to do with Quality of Life, scenic and natural settings. In due time, humangous tanks will also disappear. That’s how you improve the environment and QOL.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Henry10

CT did a very poor job at NH 91/95 intersection. That is actually a beautiful natural setting at the bottom (Q river emptying into the bay) but with concrete overpasses overhead, beating like huge drums in the worst cacophony and visual pollution possible.

It’s totally upside down. That entire spider web should be buried. Just imagine how different that area would look. This is not esoteric. This has to do with Quality of Life, scenic and natural settings. In due time, humangous tanks will also disappear. That’s how you improve the environment and QOL.

Actually the state looked at tunneling I-95 through New Haven. It would have cost $8 to $12 billion instead of the $2 billion that the Q Bridge cost. This is because the soils are very poor and a tunnel would be below water grade. Given that the highway primarily goes through industrial area that is not all that attractive to begin with, pretty much everyone, including the city’s mayor and planning department, agreed the added expense could not be justified. Plus there was no way the state could afford that given that the Transportation Fund was drying up. Jay