New York

[SignBridge]

I never liked those boxed street names either. I'm glad Region 10 doesn't do any of that stuff. They just print the street and city names in mixed case, very plain and simple.

[Roadgeek Adam]

I liked the boxed street names. I think using FHWA normal fonts looked weird for street names. The boxed names was/is a good alternative.

That said, I tend to agree that exit 27 in CT will likely cease to be.

[RestrictOnTheHanger]

Notwithstanding the arrow layout, which I'll forgive you since this is a mockup, "NYC Airports" is not a destination. Just use New York City.

Tell that to the MTA (I think they are responsible for crossing signs). Found on the Whitestone Bridge. This is a relatively recent installation that incorporates the left exit signage found elsewhere in R10

https://maps.app.goo.gl/oXdyQ1EUiyUbqBry9

[machias]

I liked the boxed street names. I think using FHWA normal fonts looked weird for street names. The boxed names was/is a good alternative.

R2 did the boxed street name thing for years as well and I complained about it every time they did it. The box obscures the legibility of the legend inside the box at night. The road name would end up being just one big blob of white.  It looked particularly bad on signs where there was just a road name and action message. It'd be a box within a box and an arrow. Awful.

[jp the roadgeek]

Notwithstanding the arrow layout, which I'll forgive you since this is a mockup, "NYC Airports" is not a destination. Just use New York City.

Tell that to the MTA (I think they are responsible for crossing signs). Found on the Whitestone Bridge. This is a relatively recent installation that incorporates the left exit signage found elsewhere in R10

https://maps.app.goo.gl/oXdyQ1EUiyUbqBry9

Reason why I used NYC airports here is that NYC is too vague because either option will get you to NYC.  Most people get to the Bronx (including Yankee Stadium), and the West Side of Manhattan via the Cross County and either 87 or the Sawmill/Henry Hudson.  The Hutch is a better option if you're going to Queens (LaGuardia and JFK included) or the east side of the Bronx or lower Manhattan (via 278 and the RFK).  The Hutch turns into 678, which takes you right in to JFK, but with it being the preferred route to LaGuardia as well, I used "NYC Airports"

[SignBridge]

Notwithstanding the arrow layout, which I'll forgive you since this is a mockup, "NYC Airports" is not a destination. Just use New York City.

Tell that to the MTA (I think they are responsible for crossing signs). Found on the Whitestone Bridge. This is a relatively recent installation that incorporates the left exit signage found elsewhere in R10

https://maps.app.goo.gl/oXdyQ1EUiyUbqBry9

Reason why I used NYC airports here is that NYC is too vague because either option will get you to NYC.  Most people get to the Bronx (including Yankee Stadium), and the West Side of Manhattan via the Cross County and either 87 or the Sawmill/Henry Hudson.  The Hutch is a better option if you're going to Queens (LaGuardia and JFK included) or the east side of the Bronx or lower Manhattan (via 278 and the RFK).  The Hutch turns into 678, which takes you right in to JFK, but with it being the preferred route to LaGuardia as well, I used "NYC Airports"

Once again we have collision between MUTCD requirements and what makes sense locally. It's worth noting that within the Borough of Queens NY Airports was used back in the 1960's as a southbound destination on entrance ramps to I-678, the Whitestone Expwy. There really was no place or city name to use at that point as the road terminated at JFK Airport.

[Alps]

Notwithstanding the arrow layout, which I'll forgive you since this is a mockup, "NYC Airports" is not a destination. Just use New York City.

Tell that to the MTA (I think they are responsible for crossing signs). Found on the Whitestone Bridge. This is a relatively recent installation that incorporates the left exit signage found elsewhere in R10

https://maps.app.goo.gl/oXdyQ1EUiyUbqBry9

Reason why I used NYC airports here is that NYC is too vague because either option will get you to NYC.  Most people get to the Bronx (including Yankee Stadium), and the West Side of Manhattan via the Cross County and either 87 or the Sawmill/Henry Hudson.  The Hutch is a better option if you're going to Queens (LaGuardia and JFK included) or the east side of the Bronx or lower Manhattan (via 278 and the RFK).  The Hutch turns into 678, which takes you right in to JFK, but with it being the preferred route to LaGuardia as well, I used "NYC Airports"

Once again we have collision between MUTCD requirements and what makes sense locally. It's worth noting that within the Borough of Queens NY Airports was used back in the 1960's as a southbound destination on entrance ramps to I-678, the Whitestone Expwy. There really was no place or city name to use at that point as the road terminated at JFK Airport.

Then name the airports. In this case there is no such issue. Sign NYC or at least Queens ahead.

[Rothman]

Yeah, I'd go with a borough.

[D-Dey65]

Anyone notice the sign replacement project for the Hutchinson River Parkway from the Bruckner interchange to the Connecticut Line is next for the mileage-based exit numbers?  D263231

link: https://www.dot.ny.gov/doing-business/opportunities/const-contract-docs?p_d_id=D264231

Wow, so many Exit 1's in The Bronx. It kind of makes me regret advocating mileage based exit numbers for the Hutch.


Merritt and Wilbur Cross Parkways on the other hand is a totally different story. Maybe I'll look for a thread on that on the Connecticut board.

[jp the roadgeek]

CTDOT has plans to eventually renumber CT 15, but probably not until at least 2026.

But just for fun, here is what the Merritt/Wilbur Cross would look like with mileage-based numbers

Exit 1: NY 120A NORTH (unless NYSDOT and CTDOT finally come to a mutual agreement to number it 19B)
Exit 3: Round Hill Rd
Exit 4: Lake Ave
Exit 5: North St
Exit 8: Den Rd
Exit 9: CT 104
Exit 10: CT 137
Exit 13: CT 106
Exit 14: CT 124
Exit 15: CT 123
Exit 16 A/B (NB ONLY): US 7
Exit 17 A/B: Main Ave (TO US 7 SB)
Exit 20: CT 33
Exit 21: CT 57
THE NO EXIT ZONE
Exit 27: CT 58
Exit 28: CT 59
Exit 29: Park Ave
Exit 30: CT 111
Exit 32A: CT 25 SOUTH (NB); CT 25 NORTH (SB)
Exit 32B: CT 25 NORTH (NB); CT 127 (SB)
Exit 33 (NB ONLY): CT 108
Exit 34: CT 8 NORTH (NB); CT 8/CT 108 (SB)
Exit 36: CT 110
Exit 37: SR 796 (Milford Connector TO I-95/US 1)
Exit 38A (38 SB): Wheelers Farms Rd
Exit 38B (NB ONLY) Wolf Harbor Rd
Exit 41: CT 121
Exit 42 A/B: CT 34
Exit 46: CT 63/CT 69
Exit 50: CT 10
Exit 51 (A/B SB): Whitney Ave
Exit 52 (NB ONLY): Dixwell Ave
Exit 53: CT 22
Exit 58: Quinnipiac St/Wallingford Ctr (NB); South Turnpike Rd/Quinnipiac St (SB)
Exit 59: CT 150
Exit 61: US 5
Exit 64A (SB ONLY): I-91 SOUTH
Exit 64 (64B SB): East Main St
Exit 65A (NB ONLY): I-91 NORTH/CT 66 EAST
Exit 65B (NB ONLY): I-691 WEST

And the Hartford portion
Exit 79: CT 99 SOUTH
Exit 80A: I-91 SOUTH
Exit 80B: Brainard Rd/Airport Rd
Exit 81 (NB ONLY): I-91 NORTH
Exit 82: US 5 NORTH/CT 2 (NB ONLY)/East River Dr
Exit 83 (NB ONLY): Silver Lane

[crispy93]

Anyone notice the sign replacement project for the Hutchinson River Parkway from the Bruckner interchange to the Connecticut Line is next for the mileage-based exit numbers?  D263231

link: https://www.dot.ny.gov/doing-business/opportunities/const-contract-docs?p_d_id=D264231

I was looking forward to seeing the signage plans but I don't like these. Looks like they're identical replacements for the ones already in place, which were probably installed piecemeal over the years.

   
• Some street names have the line between street and town.
• The 684 sign only has an exit tab in the sign at the gore (advance sign still says NEXT LEFT), and no LEFT tab. Same for the CCP exit southbound.
• Merritt is misspelled as "Merrit"
• No indication that the northbound exit for the CCP is two lanes.
• I don't like that the northbound exit for the CCP says RIGHT LANE instead of 1/4 MILE or just an arrow, and that "To Sprain Pkwy" says NEXT RIGHT instead of EXIT 6 B
• Only one of the signs for 287 west mentions Westchester Ave.
• The EXIT ## gore signs look like the weird scrunched up ones posted on the Taconic in Putnam and southern Dutchess. On the map plans, they look correct. But the index of signs at the bottom shows the weird ones.
• At the end of the document, where it shows how certain signs should be mounted, it shows Exit 9A with a left-justified tab but it's a normal right-hand exit. The actual map plans are correct, though.
  

Are these finalized? Any point in telling Region 8 now? I assume a plan from Region 11 will be forthcoming for the Bronx section? Will that section (finally) have mile markers, too?

[dgolub]

Will the new CT 15 exit numbers start at the state line or continue the numbering from New York?

[shadyjay]

Will the new CT 15 exit numbers start at the state line or continue the numbering from New York?

No plans are up yet, and probably won't be for a while, for a ConnDOT CT 15 renumbering.  But to make them part of a distance-based system, they would most likely start at the NY state line (with #1) and count up.  I can't imagine they'd continue the NY numbering again!

IMO, they should have renumbered the exits when signs were replaced a couple years ago. 

[crispy93]

I-84 was opened in segments in the pre-NSML era. Does anyone know what the speed limit on 84 was when it first opened? The section east of the river was mostly raised to 65 MPH around the same time in late 2008/early 2009 when the highway was transferred from NYSTA back to NYSDOT. Which agency raised the limit? I wonder why it was 55 for so long after NSML's repeal and the 2003 law that let NYSDOT/TA set 65 zones on their own without the legislature's approval.

[vdeane]

Will the new CT 15 exit numbers start at the state line or continue the numbering from New York?

No plans are up yet, and probably won't be for a while, for a ConnDOT CT 15 renumbering.  But to make them part of a distance-based system, they would most likely start at the NY state line (with #1) and count up.  I can't imagine they'd continue the NY numbering again!

IMO, they should have renumbered the exits when signs were replaced a couple years ago. 

It's worth noting that the mileposts start at 0 at the NY line, so if the exit numbers were to match they would need to reset.  Maybe CT knew NY would be converting the Hutch soon and wanted to wait until that was done before changing CT 15?

[SignBridge]

It doesn't much matter. As per the MUTCD, the exit numbers for the Merritt Pkwy. must start at zero at the state line, so anything New York does on the Hutch is irrelevant to Connecticut. 

[vdeane]

It doesn't much matter. As per the MUTCD, the exit numbers for the Merritt Pkwy. must start at zero at the state line, so anything New York does on the Hutch is irrelevant to Connecticut. 

Exit 30/27 (future exit 19) straddles the state border.  CT would not be able to change the numbers is one fell swoop without the NY side changing first, or else the exit numbers would be made even worse than they already are.  ALL southbound signage (with the exception of one gore sign), as well as one of the northbound gore signs, is in CT.

Also, last time I checked, exit numbers/mileage starting at 0 is not actually mandated by the MUTCD.  In fact, there a a ton of examples around the country where they don't.  Just look at the entire state of Arizona (minus most interstates), for example.

[SignBridge]

Vdeane, are you saying that the numbering can start with 1 instead of 0 (zero)? No argument there. But what I was saying was that the exit numbering is required to start at the state line as per Sec.2E-31-11. The southern/western terminus within that state. So Connecticut could not just continue New York's numbering. Though yes, I see that this interchange is a special case right at the state border so some tailoring for that specific location might be needed.

[vdeane]

Vdeane, are you saying that the numbering can start with 1 instead of 0 (zero)? No argument there. But what I was saying was that the exit numbering is required to start at the state line as per Sec.2E-31-11. The southern/western terminus within that state. So Connecticut could not just continue New York's numbering. Though yes, I see that this interchange is a special case right at the state border so some tailoring for that specific location might be needed.

Here's the actual text you just cited:

Regardless of whether a mainline route originates within a State or crosses into a State from another State, the southernmost or westernmost terminus within that State shall be the beginning point for interchange numbering.

It says "the southernmost or westernmost terminus within that State shall be the beginning point"... it does not say what it should begin at.  I-17 in Arizona begins at 194, for example.  In any case, the mileage for CT 15 starts at 0 at the border, and I already noted that they would have to reset the numbering to match the mileage before you decided to chime in.  As such, I have no idea why you decided to argue the point, especially since I was never arguing that CT should continue continuing NY's numbering in the first place - it was that signs like this one could not have their numbers changed without NY changing first, and since NY's previous renumbering of the Hutch broke the sequence, they couldn't just leave that at exit 27 and change everything else.  IMO the correct solution is for that interchange to be numbered exit 19 and only exit 19 and for CT to renumber everything else off CT 15's mileage.

[RobbieL2415]

I have long been an advocate for starting the milage and exit numbers for the Hutch/Merritt/Wilbur Cross Pkwy/Berlin Tpke/Wilbur Cross Hwy at the Whitestone Bridge with no reset at the CT border.

That road network is so historic that I think it might be cool to do the milage and numbering this way.

[Alps]

I have long been an advocate for starting the milage and exit numbers for the Hutch/Merritt/Wilbur Cross Pkwy/Berlin Tpke/Wilbur Cross Hwy at the Whitestone Bridge with no reset at the CT border.

That road network is so historic that I think it might be cool to do the milage and numbering this way.

It's supported by the MUTCD, but only as long as CT re-mileposts the highway to match.

[jp the roadgeek]

I have long been an advocate for starting the milage and exit numbers for the Hutch/Merritt/Wilbur Cross Pkwy/Berlin Tpke/Wilbur Cross Hwy at the Whitestone Bridge with no reset at the CT border.

That road network is so historic that I think it might be cool to do the milage and numbering this way.

It's supported by the MUTCD, but only as long as CT re-mileposts the highway to match.

And it is currently mileposted from the NY border, so they won't.  And no, they won't reset the mileposts at the Sikorsky Bridge either to give separate mileage for the Merritt and Wilbur Cross.  Question is: Will CTDOT install mileposts along the entire length of CT 15, including the Berlin Turnpike and the Hartford expressway portion? 

[D-Dey65]

Old News 12 Long Island about a vacant lot in Coram which didn't mention the fact that this was the ROW for the formerly proposed realignment and widening of NY 25:
https://web.archive.org/web/20150712230705/http://longisland.news12.com/news/neighbors-businesses-complain-of-vacant-coram-lot-1.10629981

Just something I thought I'd bring up.

[D-Dey65]

Hey, I just discovered an old road in Millwood in Westchester County.

It begins somewhere around NY 133 just across from the power lines where it runs parallel to the Old Put (North County) Trailway. Then it crosses NY 120 diagonally just before that left turn where it ends at NY 100.
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.1914203,-73.7975064,3a,75y,253.4h,96.11t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s1JWswx81AB8Nv7mzKD6Fdw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en


https://www.google.com/maps/@41.1916021,-73.7974817,3a,75y,358.43h,97.16t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sk1Urq6bVwWegloO9wvfO9w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

From there it crosses NY 100 and runs along the east side of Shingle House Road, but I'm not 100% sure of how far north it goes from there:
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.1925226,-73.7974672,3a,75y,349.71h,96.58t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1seZs736fBSzmCdTa3o7hOwA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en

I checked to see if it was a spur from the Old Put, but no such luck.

[empirestate]

Hey, I just discovered an old road in Millwood in Westchester County.

Looks like aqueduct to me; pretty common sight around these here parts. :-)

(Yep, the Catskill Aqueduct does indeed run right through there.)