New York

[Duke87]

Though there is some right-of-way that NYSDOT still owns along the north side of 202/35, it appears they're more interested in improving 202/35 instead, like they did with part of the stretch a few years ago.

Which, realistically, is the more sensible option. If you're going to built two parallel two-lane road ways, you might as well make each of them one way and create a twinned expressway (by technical definition, not downstate NY parlance) out of it. Having two lanes of BMP seperated by a double yellow line parallel to two lanes of 202/35 also separated by a double yellow line is just silly.

[roadman65]

I think that is sillier is the fact that BMP does not have access to the Taconic NB.  You would still have to use US 202 and NY 35 to complete that missing movement.

[dgolub]

I think that is sillier is the fact that BMP does not have access to the Taconic NB.  You would still have to use US 202 and NY 35 to complete that missing movement.

Also, where would the trucks go at the end if they allowed trucks?  I'm assuming they're not allowed on the Taconic.

[Alps]

I think that is sillier is the fact that BMP does not have access to the Taconic NB.  You would still have to use US 202 and NY 35 to complete that missing movement.

Also, where would the trucks go at the end if they allowed trucks?  I'm assuming they're not allowed on the Taconic.

I'm assuming trucks would not be allowed on the BMP.

[froggie]

Whether or not to allow trucks on the BMP is one of the stumbling blocks that stopped the proposed extension 15 years ago.  The region and the parties involved could not come to a consensus.

[D-Dey65]

Whether or not to allow trucks on the BMP is one of the stumbling blocks that stopped the proposed extension 15 years ago.  The region and the parties involved could not come to a consensus.

I personally would've said no. And I'm usually the type who considers the needs of other types of vehicles besides cars when it comes to road improvements.

[roadman65]

What should be considered is how much truck traffic uses the existing US 202/NY 35 to determine that factor.

It could be changed from Parkway to Expressway, but is it written into NYS Law that Parkways have to be exclusive to passenger cars and motorcycles?

[vdeane]

I don't think so.  The Lake Ontario State Parkway used to allow trucks in Orleans County; I assume the reason they were since banned is due at least in part to the pavement condition.

[D-Dey65]

I don't think so.  The Lake Ontario State Parkway used to allow trucks in Orleans County; I assume the reason they were since banned is due at least in part to the pavement condition.

Ahh, yes. Lake Ontario State Parkway. Another parkway with a shitty gap that ought to be merged.

[froggie]

Why?  There's literally nothing up there.

[jemacedo9]

I don't think so.  The Lake Ontario State Parkway used to allow trucks in Orleans County; I assume the reason they were since banned is due at least in part to the pavement condition.

One of the bridges (over Oak Orchard Creek) had been reduced to one lane w/ barrels as well.  And yes, the pavement condition was (is still?) brutal.

[D-Dey65]

Why?  There's literally nothing up there.

You mean Lake Ontario scenery, and direct connections between state parks are considered "nothing?"

[empirestate]

There *WAS* talk of completing the parkway about 15 years ago (see http://web.archive.org/web/20041204040643/www.202and6.com/home.html), but more recent articles suggest it didn't have much support, and there was the sticking point of whether or not to allow trucks on the revamped BMP.

Though there is some right-of-way that NYSDOT still owns along the north side of 202/35, it appears they're more interested in improving 202/35 instead, like they did with part of the stretch a few years ago.

That does make more sense in my mind. Those sections of 202, as well as US 6 to the north, that are already upgraded serve the area perfectly well. Filling in the non-upgraded gaps through Crompond (202) and Mohegan Lake (6) would probably be much more welcome than building a new route. The BMP, as it is, does serve fairly well as a Peekskill bypass, along with a direct route to the station area. In fact, the bypass is so heavily used that it makes the local streets of Peekskill serve as an attractive "anti-bypass": I will often choose a route through that city than mingle with the rest of the rat-racers on US 9 or the BMP.

[seicer]

Why?  There's literally nothing up there.

You mean Lake Ontario scenery, and direct connections between state parks are considered "nothing?"

For the cost? You can just drive NY 18. It is a very sparsely populated area, and NY 18 is more than able to handle the low traffic volumes, even during mid-summer. Those state parks don't get a lot of traffic to even remotely warrant a two-lane limited-access parkway.

[roadman65]

In the case of the BMP it is IFFY to whether or not to finish it or not.  I would say being its only a couple of miles they might as well fill it in, but I am not sure of the traffic situation either.  Plus the section of US 6 & 202 between US 9 and the Bear Mtn. Bridge is so windy it really can't become a major linking corridor between the TSP and the bridge. 

Another question is to be asked what will that and the Bear Mountain Bridge together link?  The PIP on the other side does not really have people wanting to cross the Hudson to get to the TSP.  Most traffic heading north on the PIP continue their journey on US 9W hence why north of the Bear Mountain Circle the US route is four lanes all the way up to Newburgh.  Hardly any traffic goes onto the bridge and treks to the TSP for further northward advancement.  If they did NY 9D up to I-84 or NY 52 would most likely be the way to go anyway.

[cl94]

Another question is to be asked what will that and the Bear Mountain Bridge together link?  The PIP on the other side does not really have people wanting to cross the Hudson to get to the TSP.  Most traffic heading north on the PIP continue their journey on US 9W hence why north of the Bear Mountain Circle the US route is four lanes all the way up to Newburgh.  Hardly any traffic goes onto the bridge and treks to the TSP for further northward advancement.  If they did NY 9D up to I-84 or NY 52 would most likely be the way to go anyway.

A large amount of the traffic is east-west from the NY 17 corridor. Cheaper than the Thruway (and occasionally faster) if traveling between there and the immediate NYC area. Hence why it really doesn't matter if there's no EB-NB ramp at the Taconic - anyone who would do that would cut the corner using US 6.

[froggie]

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.

[vdeane]

Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if Region 4 was actually considering truncating the LOSP to NY 237.  That's the westernmost extent of current pavement/bridge maintenance.

(personal opinion emphasized)

[empirestate]

Hence why it really doesn't matter if there's no EB-NB ramp at the Taconic - anyone who would do that would cut the corner using US 6.

And anyone who knows better than that would skip much of 6 using local roads in Cortlandt and Yorktown, or even Peekskill Hollow.

[cl94]

Hence why it really doesn't matter if there's no EB-NB ramp at the Taconic - anyone who would do that would cut the corner using US 6.

And anyone who knows better than that would skip much of 6 using local roads in Cortlandt and Yorktown, or even Peekskill Hollow.

Shhh...don't give away my shortcuts 

[D-Dey65]

This is really bad news for the road networks of New York. I suspect they'd never do something smart like eliminate the grade crossing for Saw Mill River Parkway at Grant Street in Pleasantville add a new interchange at Exit 27 in Thornwood.

[roadman65]

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.

[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.

[seicer]

Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if Region 4 was actually considering truncating the LOSP to NY 237.  That's the westernmost extent of current pavement/bridge maintenance.

https://goo.gl/maps/WQNtBnGQMLF2



"Maintenance"

[vdeane]

The section of LOSP from NY 237 to NY 19 will be paved next year.  The part between NY 18 and NY 237 may as well not exist as far as the capital program is concerned.

Another reason to close in winter is because road salt causes deterioration.  I'm pretty sure that is the reason why the LOSP is closed west of NY 98 in winter - the salt was destroying the bridges over Oak Orchard Creek.

(personal opinion emphasized)