page_title: Connecticut Route 11
section_title: History
hierarchical_section_title: Connecticut Route 11 / History
caption_attribution_description: English: Aerial view of the split between Route 2 and Route 11 in Connecticut in September 2015
context_page_description: Route 11 is a state highway in east-central Connecticut, serving traffic between the Hartford and New London areas. Route 11 originally was planned to be a freeway/expressway, running northwest-to-southeast, from Colchester to Waterford. However, only about half of the freeway was constructed; one end is in Salem. As a result, many people in New London County, who would have benefitted most from the original project, derisively refer to the highway as Route 5½.
  The delays, and eventual effective cancellation of the project in 2009, were due to funding and environmental issues. However, more recently, there has been a push to complete the expressway. This would be done by installing tolls on Route 11 to make up for the expenses.
context_section_description: An expressway connecting Route 2 in Colchester and the Connecticut Turnpike in New London had been planned as far back as the 1950s. It was originally designated the Route 85 Expressway. Construction began in 1966 but was halted due to lack of funding. The half-finished expressway opened in 1972 as Route 11.
  Plans to finish Route 11 were revived in the late 1990s due to increased traffic in the area (primarily due to Foxwoods Resort Casino and Mohegan Sun). Contrary to local opposition to new highways, most of the residents of the area were in favor of completing the highway. Subsequently, Route 11 was submitted to the U.S. Department of Transportation for inclusion on the federal government's "fast-track" streamlining process, designed for federal agencies to quickly complete necessary steps on stalled projects, and was approved in August 2004. Funding for Route 11 has also been included in the proposed 2006 Connecticut state transportation bill. The State of Connecticut purchased, and still owns, the right-of-way for the project in Salem.
  The Final Environmental Impact Statement for extending Route 11 was issued on October 26, 2007.  The EIS was published three months behind schedule due to a dispute between ConnDOT and the consulting firm that prepared the EIS—the Macguire Group—over payment for services rendered.
  A Record of Decision from federal officials was expected by the end of 2007, but the Environmental Protection Agency had expressed concern over the environmental mitigation plan for Route 11, and expressed it still favored the Route 82/85 upgrade over extending Route 11. Because the EPA has veto power over Army Corps of Engineers permits, EPA opposition could have forced the delay or cancellation of the Route 11 extension. In December 2007, Federal Highway Administration extended the FEIS review period through the end of January 2008 to provide the EPA with a detailed environmental mitigation plan. Additionally state and federal elected officials requested the FHWA and ConnDOT present a detailed financial management plan for activities related to the extension. In September 2009, ConnDOT indicated that due to funding constraints, it will indefinitely suspend further work on Route 11.
  In 2011, Governor Dan Malloy indicated that completing Route 11 to the I-95/I-395 interchange was a high priority for the state and ordered ConnDOT to resume environmental and funding studies.  In August 2011, ConnDOT initiated a financial study that focused on building the Route 11 extension as a toll road, which could potentially accelerate construction of the extension by using a combination of funds from tolls and traditional state and federal highway funds.
  The final section of Route 11 was proposed to be built not to Interstate highway standards. While it would have been built as a fully controlled-access freeway, it would not have met Interstate standards due to two key design features: First, opposing lanes of traffic would have been separated by a concrete Jersey barrier versus the wide median on the existing Route 11 section. Secondly, the greenway was being planned to have curve radii that would have been tighter than what is allowed by Interstate standards, although it would have still had a design speed of 70 mph (110 km/h).  With these two features, Route 11 would have been built using a footprint that was less than half the size required for an expressway built to Interstate standards.
  The Route 11 Greenway Authority was created by the state legislature in 2000 as a committee designated with the responsibility of purchasing land on either side of the completed Route 11 to be preserved as hiking and biking trails and open space. As of 2010, the Authority still held monthly meetings and the funds from the State of Connecticut still existed to purchase land for the Greenway, despite the near certainty the expressway itself would never be completed. The Authority did not have the power of eminent domain. The cross-section profile for the Route 11 Greenway would have been similar to that of the Route 8 expressway throu
caption: Aerial view of the split between Route 11 (bottom left) and Route 2
exif: {"Image ImageDescription": "", "Image Make": "Canon", "Image Model": "Canon PowerShot SX150 IS", "Image XResolution": "180", "Image YResolution": "180", "Image ResolutionUnit": "Pixels/Inch", "Image Software": "Picasa", "Image DateTime": "2019:01:10 20:29:55", "Image Artist": "Picasa", "Image YCbCrPositioning": "Co-sited", "Image ExifOffset": "260", "Thumbnail Compression": "JPEG (old-style)", "Thumbnail XResolution": "72", "Thumbnail YResolution": "72", "Thumbnail ResolutionUnit": "Pixels/Inch", "Thumbnail JPEGInterchangeFormat": "4996", "Thumbnail JPEGInterchangeFormatLength": "8400", "EXIF ExposureTime": "1/160", "EXIF FNumber": "5", "EXIF ISOSpeedRatings": "80", "EXIF SensitivityType": "Standard Output Sensitivity and Recommended Exposure Index", "EXIF ExifVersion": "0230", "EXIF DateTimeOriginal": "2015:09:20 12:33:29", "EXIF DateTimeDigitized": "2015:09:20 12:33:29", "EXIF ComponentsConfiguration": "YCbCr", "EXIF CompressedBitsPerPixel": "3", "EXIF ShutterSpeedValue": "117/16", "EXIF ApertureValue": "149/32", "EXIF ExposureBiasValue": "0", "EXIF MaxApertureValue": "149/32", "EXIF MeteringMode": "Pattern", "EXIF Flash": "Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode", "EXIF FocalLength": "19327/500", "EXIF FlashPixVersion": "0100", "EXIF ColorSpace": "sRGB", "EXIF ExifImageWidth": "3555", "EXIF ExifImageLength": "2667", "Interoperability InteroperabilityIndex": "R98", "Interoperability InteroperabilityVersion": "[48, 49, 48, 48]", "Interoperability RelatedImageWidth": "4320", "Interoperability RelatedImageLength": "3240", "EXIF InteroperabilityOffset": "4848", "EXIF FocalPlaneXResolution": "160000/9", "EXIF FocalPlaneYResolution": "1620000/91", "EXIF FocalPlaneResolutionUnit": "2", "EXIF SensingMethod": "One-chip color area", "EXIF FileSource": "Digital Camera", "EXIF CustomRendered": "Normal", "EXIF ExposureMode": "Auto Exposure", "EXIF WhiteBalance": "Auto", "EXIF DigitalZoomRatio": "1", "EXIF SceneCaptureType": "Standard", "EXIF ImageUniqueID": "772f475582c8d19967bf0522f12c2dab", "EXIF CameraOwnerName": ""}