New York

[D-Dey65]

What is up with Lake Welch Drive and Lake Tiorati Road being closed during Winter?  I have always wondered since I was a kid why the placed a white cover over the former Exit 14A sign (now Exit 16, but I am sure that it may not be white) saying CLOSED FOR THE SEASON.   

My dad said its to avoid plowing snow, but back then snow was more often then it is post climate change, El nino or whatever.  However, to plow those two roads really was not that hard.  My guess is they are just too cheap and just using that to cut costs.

They close part of LOSP in the winter for the same reason. Allows them to run a couple fewer plow trucks. With fuel costs and what they make in hourly wages, it adds up.

Do you know where else they do this kind of thing? Mountain roads that go through isolated parkland, like in the Rockies and the Adirondacks. Roads like Lake Welch Parkway and Tiorati Brook Drive, and what not are the closest thing we've got to that in the suburbs of New York City.

[cl94]

What is up with Lake Welch Drive and Lake Tiorati Road being closed during Winter?  I have always wondered since I was a kid why the placed a white cover over the former Exit 14A sign (now Exit 16, but I am sure that it may not be white) saying CLOSED FOR THE SEASON.   

My dad said its to avoid plowing snow, but back then snow was more often then it is post climate change, El nino or whatever.  However, to plow those two roads really was not that hard.  My guess is they are just too cheap and just using that to cut costs.

They close part of LOSP in the winter for the same reason. Allows them to run a couple fewer plow trucks. With fuel costs and what they make in hourly wages, it adds up.

Do you know where else they do this kind of thing? Mountain roads that go through isolated parkland, like in the Rockies and the Adirondacks. Roads like Lake Welch Parkway and Tiorati Brook Drive, and what not are the closest thing we've got to that in the suburbs of New York City.

Precisely. Happens in parts of Vermont and New Hampshire as well. The Adirondacks have very few seasonal roads that aren't dead-ends or access to observation points, mainly because nothing gets to a particularly high elevation and the road network is sparse.

[Buffaboy]

What seicer said.  Despite "scenery" and "state parks", there just isn't the demand to spend 8-9 digits to connect the two segments of the Lake Ontario State Parkway.

Maybe not now, but one could imagine a full upgrade to I-98 if the Niagara Peninsula economy explodes.

Or, a Super 2 connection like the ones you see on partially completed highways would be a cheap option.

But I agree, the demand definitely isn't there at this time.

[seicer]

It looks like I-88 for the first 2.5 miles (or thereabouts) is about to be rehabilitated near Binghamton.

[kalvado]

It looks like I-88 for the first 2.5 miles (or thereabouts) is about to be rehabilitated near Binghamton.

That' a good start. At 2.5 miles/year, it would take just 50 years for a full overhaul!

[D-Dey65]

New subject; Katonah.

On I-684 at NY 35 (Exit 6), there used to be a connecting ramp to Katonah Metro-North station from the southbound on ramp. Through a little Historic Aerials research, I found out that ramp was part of Lakeside Road and not only pre-dated the interstate, but the establishment of New York's state route system. Furthermore I found out that Deer Park Road east of the interchange used to be part of that road too, which means it was not only cut off by I-684, but by the realignment of NY 35. So, does anybody know when that ramp/bridge was closed, and should it be reopened?

[Duke87]

Oh hey there are a couple abandoned signs on that ramp!
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2627143,-73.6836489,3a,15y,214.07h,88.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9VcyAw7aMwqY82gNNDPsuA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

GMSV is a bit too low res to read them but it looks like they are the same as these signs at the still open entrance to the same parking lot, albeit worse for wear:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.258942,-73.6834805,3a,15y,37.46h,86.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suQixWZZMxjfD-RG7rV2OfA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

As for the history of the closure, I have not been able to locate anything about it in the online archives of the Journal News (a local paper). Looking at this forensically, the 1974 aerial shows the ramp clearly still open, 1993 and 1994 are too low res to tell, and 2004 shows it closed but much less overgrown than it is now. I would estimate based on its appearance then that it probably was closed in the late 90s.

And while I don't know why, it's probably a good guess that the bridge was deemed structurally unfit for traffic and not worth the cost of replacing.

[empirestate]

Oh hey there are a couple abandoned signs on that ramp!
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.2627143,-73.6836489,3a,15y,214.07h,88.83t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9VcyAw7aMwqY82gNNDPsuA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

GMSV is a bit too low res to read them but it looks like they are the same as these signs at the still open entrance to the same parking lot, albeit worse for wear:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.258942,-73.6834805,3a,15y,37.46h,86.01t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1suQixWZZMxjfD-RG7rV2OfA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

As for the history of the closure, I have not been able to locate anything about it in the online archives of the Journal News (a local paper). Looking at this forensically, the 1974 aerial shows the ramp clearly still open, 1993 and 1994 are too low res to tell, and 2004 shows it closed but much less overgrown than it is now. I would estimate based on its appearance then that it probably was closed in the late 90s.

And while I don't know why, it's probably a good guess that the bridge was deemed structurally unfit for traffic and not worth the cost of replacing.

While you forensics are perfectly apt, around here I've noticed that things age much quicker than you'd expect. So if you're thinking late 90s, I'm going to guess approximately 2011.

[goldfishcrackers4]

New overhead signs are up on the Utica NS Arterial.  They look nice, but seem a littie small. There are a few peculiarities. The sign northbound for Court St seems very small with a tiny little arrow. The overhead approaching the Downtown exit northbound  is a good distance back from the exit itself. They put on a strange arrow reminiscent of the NJ Turnpike old arrows. The gantry is also a good distance from the Court St exit southbound. I feel this gap could (should) be filled with a cantilevered overhead.  New signs southbound label "Arts District" and "Brewery District." Looks awesome.

I hope to see this continued past Noyes to Burrstone in my lifetime. Would be awesome

I have some "ok" pictures, but can't figure out how to load them. advice?

[7/8]

I have some "ok" pictures, but can't figure out how to load them. advice?

Make an account on either imgur or flickr and upload your photos there. Then you can use the bbcode links given for each photo and post the links in your post on AARoads.

[machias]

New overhead signs are up on the Utica NS Arterial.  They look nice, but seem a littie small. There are a few peculiarities. The sign northbound for Court St seems very small with a tiny little arrow. The overhead approaching the Downtown exit northbound  is a good distance back from the exit itself. They put on a strange arrow reminiscent of the NJ Turnpike old arrows. The gantry is also a good distance from the Court St exit southbound. I feel this gap could (should) be filled with a cantilevered overhead.  New signs southbound label "Arts District" and "Brewery District." Looks awesome.

I hope to see this continued past Noyes to Burrstone in my lifetime. Would be awesome

I have some "ok" pictures, but can't figure out how to load them. advice?

The new overhead signs on the new bridge at Court St look good, despite the R2 peculiarities that you mentioned. The new signs along that replaced the existing button copy signs in the area this week are another matter. I like that they added the Thruway trailblazer to the "To 90" notation, however, some signs show East 790 - To 90 - To Thruway on the top line and others say To 90 - To Thruway - East 790. I've been communicating with NYSDOT on this project since it began a few years ago and have been pushing hard to get the markers in the proper order. It seems like new signs followed this guidance but "replace in kind" signs just rearranged the order of the markers to their improper locations.

There's a pair of signs from NY 5/8/12 SB to NY 5A/NY 5S that have legend that is way too small for the size of the panel. It looks like someone just didn't know how to run GuidSIGN or when EMI fed the specs into their computer system they didn't it wrong.

I'm curious to see if APLs will appear on the stretch of the North-South Arterial north of the new Court St. interchange. Technically there should be an APL in each direction as there is an option lane drop at each split. I know there's one more new overhead sign installation going up just north of the new bridge. I'm interested to see what the panels end up looking like. R2's plans for the project letting are sometimes changed before the actual installation.

I'm also hoping they'll clean up some of the extraneous ground mounted signs in the area that repeat the information or are leftovers from the old configuration in the area, especially the ones with the THIS LANE and LEFT LANE legend, which no longer applies.

[Jim]

These have appeared recently at the Thruway service areas I pass regularly.  This one's just before entering the parking area from the offramp to the Pattersonville service area WB between 26 and 27.



A lot of VMS messages recently have also had the "Move Over" messages when they have nothing else to report.

[seicer]

Nice signs, but they could be placed elsewhere. The service areas are terribly cluttered with signs - much like my disdain for cluttered exit ramps.

[machias]

These have appeared recently at the Thruway service areas I pass regularly.  This one's just before entering the parking area from the offramp to the Pattersonville service area WB between 26 and 27.



A lot of VMS messages recently have also had the "Move Over" messages when they have nothing else to report.

While the signs are quite nice I question why the Thruway Authority posted them in service plazas. Most of these signs are at the gore point where cars and buses/trucks diverge coming into the plaza and these signs look like a directional sign for the split. Some western plazas have installed them beyond the pumps as you enter back onto the Thruway, which makes a little more sense.

Maybe the Cuomo signs should be in the service plazas and the Move Over signs should be on the mainline.

[cl94]

Region 1 got rid of an illegal option lane at I-87 Exit 19. The problem? It went to the wrong direction. Now there are backups of 1/2 mile on a daily basis when there were none. If I redid this intersection, there would have been a dual left turn, being as it typically functioned as one before.

[kalvado]

Region 1 got rid of an illegal option lane at I-87 Exit 19. The problem? It went to the wrong direction. Now there are backups of 1/2 mile on a daily basis when there were none. If I redid this intersection, there would have been a dual left turn, being as it typically functioned as one before.

9.5 k traffic west of intersection, 26 k east. 2 out of 3 cars passing the intersection are going to a highway.
NYSDOT at its business as usual.

[Roadsguy]

Region 1 got rid of an illegal option lane at I-87 Exit 19. The problem? It went to the wrong direction. Now there are backups of 1/2 mile on a daily basis when there were none. If I redid this intersection, there would have been a dual left turn, being as it typically functioned as one before.

9.5 k traffic west of intersection, 26 k east. 2 out of 3 cars passing the intersection are going to a highway.
NYSDOT at its business as usual.

The perfect ratio for a left-left-through setup and they do the opposite...

But since when is there a rule against option turning lanes?

[cl94]

Region 1 got rid of an illegal option lane at I-87 Exit 19. The problem? It went to the wrong direction. Now there are backups of 1/2 mile on a daily basis when there were none. If I redid this intersection, there would have been a dual left turn, being as it typically functioned as one before.

9.5 k traffic west of intersection, 26 k east. 2 out of 3 cars passing the intersection are going to a highway.
NYSDOT at its business as usual.

The perfect ratio for a left-left-through setup and they do the opposite...

But since when is there a rule against option turning lanes?

They require split phasing. Instead of changing the timing to make it split phasing, they changed lane assignments.

[Jim]

Nice signs, but they could be placed elsewhere. The service areas are terribly cluttered with signs - much like my disdain for cluttered exit ramps.

This particular one is right in the middle of a group of 7 or 8 signs in a very short distance.

[Revive 755]

But since when is there a rule against option turning lanes?

They require split phasing. Instead of changing the timing to make it split phasing, they changed lane assignments.

Not always - it depends upon how open the agency with jurisdiction over the signal, and how open they are to effectively having a dual left with a permissive phase.

[froggie]

As I understand it, dual left with a permissive phase requires dedicated left turn lanes.  Cannot be done with an option lane.

[cl94]

As I understand it, dual left with a permissive phase requires dedicated left turn lanes.  Cannot be done with an option lane.

Don't feel like looking it up, but I think that's the case. Dual left with an option lane requires split phasing regardless.

Of course, the point of a dual permissive left at a NYSDOT signal is moot, because NYSDOT doesn't allow it.

[Buffaboy]

Nice signs, but they could be placed elsewhere. The service areas are terribly cluttered with signs - much like my disdain for cluttered exit ramps.

If they can erect Cuomo Signs on the highway, I am sure these can be right next to them.

[compdude787]

Region 1 got rid of an illegal option lane at I-87 Exit 19. The problem? It went to the wrong direction. Now there are backups of 1/2 mile on a daily basis when there were none. If I redid this intersection, there would have been a dual left turn, being as it typically functioned as one before.

Yeah, they should probably make it so that only one lane continues straight. As it currently is, the second thru lane ends shortly west of this intersection, so that shouldn't be a big issue.

[Jim]

Region 1 got rid of an illegal option lane at I-87 Exit 19. The problem? It went to the wrong direction. Now there are backups of 1/2 mile on a daily basis when there were none. If I redid this intersection, there would have been a dual left turn, being as it typically functioned as one before.

Is the former configuration at the Exit 19 location the same situation that exists on Everett Rd, where the middle lane northbound can go straight or turn left to enter I-90 West?  Or maybe the light cycles there make it a different case?