Aesthetics Vs Safety—

State Completes Extensive Tree Removal Project At Exit 11 

By Andrew Gorosko

While everyone likely would agree that highway maintenance is necessary to keep roadways functioning properly, there is a divergence of opinion over whether the amount of tree and brush removal that the state Department of Transportation (DOT) has performed at the Exit 11 interchange of Interstate 84 was excessive .

DOT crews recently cut down an extensive amount of trees and brush along the mainline I-84’s road shoulders and median near Exit 11, and also along that large interchange’s on-ramps and off-ramps. The cutting that occurred during a brief period markedly changed the appearance of the area, altering it from a tightly wooded spot to a place with significantly fewer trees.

First Selectman Pat Llodra said this week that unfortunately the area looks much different than it did in the past.

“Frankly, I think it’s too severe,” she said of the extent of the DOT’s vegetation removal at Exit 11. “It will take many, many years for this area to regrow,” she said.

“I think [DOT] went way overboard,” she said, adding that she is not persuaded that the many trees that were removed posed particular hazards to motorists traveling on the highway.

 Mrs Llodra said she would have preferred that the DOT removed less vegetation.

 “I came upon it after it was already done…It was really stunning,” she said of her discovery that extensive trees had been removed. She said she then contacted the DOT to make her views known.

“There’s no way to correct what I think has been a terrible error,” Mrs Llodra said.

The DOT had not informed the town of the planned vegetation removal before it occurred, she noted.

The DOT should have contacted the town government for comments before it started the project, she stressed, adding that advance notice to the town by DOT should take place before any future such projects occur.

DOT spokesman Kevin Nursick termed the DOT’s recent vegetation removal at Exit 11 “fundamental and routine maintenance.” Mr Nursick did not have a number concerning how many trees were removed, but said that “scores” of trees were taken down.

The spokesman said that such tree removal projects by DOT serve several purposes.

The work is intended to maintain good sight lines for traveling motorists and also to create “clear zones” adjacent to the roadway, or areas where there are no trees, in the event that vehicles accidentally travel off the highway. Typically, such clear zones are about 30-feet wide, he said. Also, such tree removal is done to improve stormwater drainage patterns along the roadway, he said.

“It’s a balancing act,” Mr Nursick said of the DOT’s seeking to balance the aesthetic appeal of trees near a highway with safety considerations. However, travel safety considerations are the DOT’s prime concern in such cases, he said.

This winter’s lack of snowfall has provided DOT crews with time to pursue vegetation removal projects, Mr Nursick said.

When such work is done, DOT crews make a point of removing trees that are susceptible to tree diseases and that could pose future falling hazards to motorists, he said.

The vegetation removal at Exit 11 will not create negative environmental effects, he said.

Mr Nursick said that “it’s been a long time” since the DOT had done previous routine tree/brush removal at Exit 11.

The DOT spokesman said that he is not aware of any plans by the DOT to use the large Exit 11 interchange for any new purposes. In the past, the DOT had considered using the extensive land that it owns there to create parking facilities for long-distance truckers.