The 2.7-mile stretch of Interstate 84 between Exit 23 and Exit 25A east of downtown Waterbury, Connecticut is considered “one of the state’s most notorious commuter bottlenecks.” I-84 narrows to four lanes in this section (two in each direction); to the east and west there are three lanes in each direction.
We don’t doubt that this temporary decrease in roadway capacity plays some role in creating a bottleneck. The question is how big of a role, and whether a $400 million widening project is the only solution. Here are five reasons why Connecticut leaders may want to reconsider the decision to widen Interstate 84:
Because average daily traffic (ADT) isn’t growing — According to the Connecticut Department of Transportation, ADT in this segment of I-84 is roughly the same as it was in 2000.
Because it’s local traffic — not through traffic — that’s causing congestion — Just a quick look at the average daily traffic by milepost shows that traffic volumes spike in Waterbury, and taper off dramatically east and west of the proposed project area. Eliminating on- and off-ramps, and re-connecting service roads parallel to I-84 could be a part of the solution.
Because merging traffic creates friction — Because this section of I-84 contains entrance ramps followed by exit ramps, drivers merging onto the highway have to jockey for position with exiting vehicles. This arrangement creates a “weave,” which contributes not only to congestion, but also rear-end and sideswipe crashes.
Because you can’t build your way out of congestion — Widening I-84 could relieve congestion for a little while, but the law of induced demand has proven time and again that you can’t eliminate congestion in the long term by increasing road supply.
Because Connecticut has more urgent transportation needs — Connecticut spends much more than neighboring states on new road capacity, and at the same time, one in every 10 bridges in the state is structurally deficient. Beyond that, Connecticut residents want a multimodal future, as well as the economic growth that comes with investments in transit, walking and bicycling.
I’ll add another reason. Just a couple of miles west of there is the I-84/Route 8 interchange, one of the ugliest interchanges ever built. This road features double-stacked bridges intersecting each other, short or non-existent merge areas, left-hand exits, aging bridges, etc. The bridges need replacement and the crashes there far, far exceed the norm. Replacing this mess would cost hundreds of millions of dollars but – unlike the widening – HAS to be done.
[…] 5 Reasons Connecticut Shouldn’t Spend $400 Million to Widen 3 Miles of I-84 (TSTC) […]
As a commuter who has driven this stretch of 84 every day for the last 15 years, I completely disagree with this assessment. Anyone who knows better will avoid this stretch of 84 during rush hour and ends up on city streets or smaller state highways, leading to congestion on those roads as well. The backups are routinely 6, 7, 8 miles EVERY day, in each direction. That should not be acceptable to anyone.
Let’s go back to the original plan to complete the widening of 84 through Waterbury instead of continuing the ridiculous habit of piecemeal construction of highways throughout our state (Rt 9, Sission Ave exit, Rt 11, etc, etc).
maybe they should build a busway instead. Malloy is good wasting that money
[…] on how Chevy Chase, Maryland, is trying to obstruct the extension of Metro’s Purple Line. Mobilizing the Region offers five reasons Connecticut should rethink its plans to spend $400 million widening I-84. And […]
Besides declines in driving on I84 a much better solution is to provide
Rail alternatives. Apparently the Connecticut DOT (CDOT) has a nascent study doing just that looking at Rail from Waterbury to Berlin in mid-Connecticut:
http://centralctrailstudy.com/
Not sure the status of this but it seems relatively recent
We have a sort of widening issue in RI on I-95 north thru downtown Providence RI. There is a viaduct that needs to be replaced, the RI DOT’s idea is apparently to at the same time, add 2 separated parallel lanes to handle the exiting/entering traffic, and presumably reduce some backups on some entering traffic ramps, reduce weaving, and speed up thru traffic thru the area. Since most RI motorists are aware of the backups, this seems to be popular with them despite costing tens of millios more than just replacing the viaduct. But it hasn’t gone thru any public review process, yet RIDOT is asking for a TIGER grant to get started. Any advice appreciated, write to bschiller@localnet.com
I fully support the DOT’s efforts to widen I-84. The only problem is that they are only widening it to 3 lanes in each direction, when 4 lanes are needed. For too long Connecticut has played small ball when it comes to highways. 30 years ago the state had the opportunity to widen I-95 from Greenwich to New Haven. At the time this would have cost 2.5 billion dollars. Spineless Connecticut politicians and the usual crowd of NIMBY obstructionists opposed the project and the highway was never widened. Since that time many billions of dollars have been lost due to traffic congestion, and every day traffic jams cause people to lose productivity. Not to mention the air pollution that is caused by cars idling in stopped traffic. Connecticut needs to get real when it comes to it’s highways. They provide overwhelming economic benefit far and above rail or any other type of mass transit.
Because TSTC opposes every widening of every roadway anywhere and ever.
Your collection of scalps is impressive. No 1990s widening of 287 in Westchester. Congrats! So I guess people in Westchester now all take public transit, and traffic moves pretty well? Anyone?
[…] since the EA was published, and it turns out that the “anticipated traffic increase” never panned out. Traffic volumes in 2012 were roughly equal to traffic volumes in 2000, and there’s […]
[…] have upheld given a EA was published, and it turns out that a “anticipated trade increase” never panned out. Traffic volumes in 2012 were roughly equal to trade volumes in 2000, and there’s no reason to […]
[…] infrastructure along the New Haven Line, is one more reason ConnDOT and Governor Malloy need to rethink this ill-advised plan, and consider less expensive proposals to mitigate congestion along the […]
[…] lanes costs “about $4 million per mile.” Tri-State appealed to ConnDOT to pursue other congestion mitigation measures before embarking on the expansion, but plans to widen the road were already in […]
[…] transportation track record is far from perfect: he approved spending $300 million to widen 2.7 miles of Interstate 84 in Waterbury, $10 million to design and engineer a widening of I-84 in Danbury, and called for […]