News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

Staten Island Expwy. (I-278) Widening

Started by SignBridge, May 14, 2012, 11:21:36 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

SignBridge

Well, after years and years NYSDOT is finally doing what I always said needed to be done with this road! They are converting the wide median into 2 extra lanes and then some for most of this road's length. But for better or worse the new lane in each direction will only be a westward extension of the HOV/Bus lane that already existed at the east end of the route; not a general purpose lane. In addition, they are also building about a mile of auxiliary lane in each direction in the mid-section of the route.

It's great to see this progress finally being made! Also, you can Google Staten Island Expwy. and find NYS DOT's full report on the project for some interesting reading.    


Mergingtraffic

Is it politically incorrect to add a lane for general use nowadays?  It seems the only way lanes get added is if it is HOV or some other restricted use.
I only take pics of good looking signs. Long live non-reflective button copy!
MergingTraffic https://www.flickr.com/photos/98731835@N05/

ARMOURERERIC

It's worse than that, we now have some enviro groups in San Diego threatening a lawsuit complaining that SanDag should not be allowed to add HOV or Lexus lanes, only to convert over existing lanes.

SignBridge

The current thinking among highway authorities is that if you're going to build more lanes, they should be designed to move more people, not just more vehicles, in order to get maximum use from the additional roadway. That building a general purpose lane will not move as many people. Not sure if this is political correctness, or just trying to get maximum use from the money spent and road that's created.

Alps

These HOV lanes have been planned for some time as an extension of the ones already out there. There are conceptual ideas to have the new Goethals Bridge(s) designed so as to accommodate a future HOV lane in case the system is extended into NJ - the other use of that space, if the HOV is cut off at a particular point (perhaps 440 either South or North), could be some other form of transit. (Not heavy rail - that would use the next bridge north.) So in this particular case, there's no point in debating "why can't this project add a general use lane" because this is not a brand-new planning level project, but a resumption/completion of an already-planned project.

Duke87

This is a good application for HOV lanes. Consider the large number of express buses which make good use of them.

Of course, the concept is perhaps worthy of a little tweaking. Most HOV lanes become general use lanes nights and weekends or outside of rush hour. The ones on the SIX become bus only lanes outside of rush hour. Seems a little silly to me. At 3 AM Sunday morning, does the bus really have enough competition for space that it needs its own lane?

There is also the matter that there really isn't an effective enforcement mechanism in place to ensure that cars using the lane during rush hour are carpools. As such, abuse is common. The lane moves while the others are backed up, but you will see single-occupant vehicles blatantly using it because they can get away with doing so.

It would have course be helpful if the HOV lanes also continued all the way up the Gowanus to the BBT, but I don't think that's physically possible. Which is a shame because Brooklyn is more the rate-limiting step than Staten Island with I-278.
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

SignBridge

Duke, interesting point about those lanes being for busses only during the off hours. A few years ago, the posted signs at the lane entrance didn't point that out until the bottom line of the sign, something like Busses only-all other times. And I didn't see it until I was already sailing under it into the lane. Luckily I was not observed by any police and got away with it that one time. It really was inadvertant on my part. But I wonder how many other drivers made the same honest mistake. Especially those of us from Long Island, where the LIE's HOV lanes are only restricted during rush-hours......

Re: your second point about the lack of enforcement, I'm surprised. Doesn't the NYPD's highway patrol division operate on the SIE? I'm sure I've seen them in past. And don't they make HOV lane enforcement a priority? Again on the LIE, Suffolk County's Highway Patrol used to do it.


Duke87

NYPD tends not to venture onto the highway... certainly not to intentionally set up any sort of enforcement trap. And then on the streets they're far more concerned with enforcing parking regulations than with ticketing any moving violations, although they have been known to nab people for running red lights or making illegal U-turns (not speeding, since it's physically impossible to speed).
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

agentsteel53

Quote from: Duke87 on May 14, 2012, 10:50:19 PM
NYPD tends not to venture onto the highway... certainly not to intentionally set up any sort of enforcement trap. And then on the streets they're far more concerned with enforcing parking regulations than with ticketing any moving violations, although they have been known to nab people for running red lights or making illegal U-turns (not speeding, since it's physically impossible to speed).

I remember as far back as 2003, a NYPD officer in a car getting on the megaphone with a "put the cell phone away!" to another driver. 
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

mgk920

Quote from: Steve on May 14, 2012, 07:07:37 PM
These HOV lanes have been planned for some time as an extension of the ones already out there. There are conceptual ideas to have the new Goethals Bridge(s) designed so as to accommodate a future HOV lane in case the system is extended into NJ - the other use of that space, if the HOV is cut off at a particular point (perhaps 440 either South or North), could be some other form of transit. (Not heavy rail - that would use the next bridge north.) So in this particular case, there's no point in debating "why can't this project add a general use lane" because this is not a brand-new planning level project, but a resumption/completion of an already-planned project.

Weren't the express lanes on I-287 in New Jersey originally HOV laves, but converted to general use after overwhelming public demand?

Mike

mgk920

Quote from: Duke87 on May 14, 2012, 10:50:19 PM
NYPD tends not to venture onto the highway... certainly not to intentionally set up any sort of enforcement trap. And then on the streets they're far more concerned with enforcing parking regulations than with ticketing any moving violations, although they have been known to nab people for running red lights or making illegal U-turns (not speeding, since it's physically impossible to speed).

Also the 'Don't Block the 'Box'' rule.

Mike

NE2

Quote from: mgk920 on May 15, 2012, 01:20:25 PM
Weren't the express lanes on I-287 in New Jersey originally HOV laves, but converted to general use after overwhelming public demand?
What express lanes on I-287?
pre-1945 Florida route log

I accept and respect your identity as long as it's not dumb shit like "identifying as a vaccinated attack helicopter".

SignBridge

I think he meant on I-80. I remember those HOV lanes being converted back to G/P lanes.

Duke and mgk, you guys are talking about NYPD regular precinct cars. I asked about the Highway Patrol cars. Each borough has a highway patrol division that operates on the expressways and parkways.  On Staten Island it used to say "SI HWY" on the side of the cars. Not sure if they ever changed it to HWY 5 or not. Brooklyn is Hwy-2. Queens is Hwy-3, etc. 

Alps

Quote from: mgk920 on May 15, 2012, 01:20:25 PM
Quote from: Steve on May 14, 2012, 07:07:37 PM
These HOV lanes have been planned for some time as an extension of the ones already out there. There are conceptual ideas to have the new Goethals Bridge(s) designed so as to accommodate a future HOV lane in case the system is extended into NJ - the other use of that space, if the HOV is cut off at a particular point (perhaps 440 either South or North), could be some other form of transit. (Not heavy rail - that would use the next bridge north.) So in this particular case, there's no point in debating "why can't this project add a general use lane" because this is not a brand-new planning level project, but a resumption/completion of an already-planned project.

Weren't the express lanes on I-287 in New Jersey originally HOV laves, but converted to general use after overwhelming public demand?

Mike
There were never express lanes on I-287 (or I-80), just the left lane was added and designated with a diamond that was later scraped off. The lanes were always contiguous with the rest of the roadway, which made it easy to convert them to general use after the fact.

As for the SIE, just note that NYSDOT intends to convert the HOV lanes to 24/7 operation for all, not just for buses.

SignBridge

The S.I.E. widening is finally more or less finished. It now extends as far west as Victory Blvd. But I'm puzzled as to why it wasn't extended all the way to the 440/West Shore Expwy. Now the section from Victory Blvd. to the W.S. Expwy. will be a congestion point with still only 3 lanes each way. It would have made sense to go all the way to the W.S.E. interchange as this is where probably half the westbound traffic splits off, and merges on going eastbound.

I assume one or more of several reasons it wasn't done. (A) Only enough funding to go as far west as they did, and/or (B) NYSDOT plans to extend it further west in the future when more funding becomes available, and/or (C) the lane primarily exists for Staten Island residents taking express busses to Manhattan and Victory Blvd. was far enough west to handle most of that bus traffic.

But regardless of the reason(s) it was foolish not extend the 4th lane all the way to the West Shore Expwy. and I'm sure that inadequacy will be felt in traffic jams this summer. 

Alps

Quote from: SignBridge on February 21, 2016, 08:09:11 PM
The S.I.E. widening is finally more or less finished. It now extends as far west as Victory Blvd. But I'm puzzled as to why it wasn't extended all the way to the 440/West Shore Expwy. Now the section from Victory Blvd. to the W.S. Expwy. will be a congestion point with still only 3 lanes each way. It would have made sense to go all the way to the W.S.E. interchange as this is where probably half the westbound traffic splits off, and merges on going eastbound.

I assume one or more of several reasons it wasn't done. (A) Only enough funding to go as far west as they did, and/or (B) NYSDOT plans to extend it further west in the future when more funding becomes available, and/or (C) the lane primarily exists for Staten Island residents taking express busses to Manhattan and Victory Blvd. was far enough west to handle most of that bus traffic.

But regardless of the reason(s) it was foolish not extend the 4th lane all the way to the West Shore Expwy. and I'm sure that inadequacy will be felt in traffic jams this summer. 
Projects have limits. You fund one section and build it, then fund the next.

SignBridge

#16
True but it takes forever that way. The way to get things done is how the NJ Turnpike and GS Parkway were built. Sell bonds to support the construction and charge tolls on the road to repay the bonds. With today's all-electronic tolling, it wouldn't be that hard to do.

Belt Parkway in Brooklyn should be done that way too, instead of the way they are doing it, a short section at a time. Charge tolls if necessary, but just get the friggin' lanes built the entire length of the road in one project.

Re-reading the NYSDOT report on the Staten Island project, it appears that reason (C) that I suggested, was their thinking. They found that congestion was most serious in the area where the new lanes were built (central and easternmost sections) and that express busses for Staten Island commuters to Manhattan was the primary motivating factor in the project.

Rothman

Quote from: SignBridge on February 21, 2016, 09:42:26 PM
True but it takes forever that way. The way to get things done is how the NJ Turnpike and GS Parkway were built. Sell bonds to support the construction and charge tolls on the road to repay the bonds.


NYSDOT is already utilizing all the bond funding authorized by DOB; NYSDOT has received bond funding for capital use in the last few fiscal years (especially since SFY 13-14; of course, there were much earlier bond rounds than that).  The fact of the matter is that there is still a dearth of funding, restricting NYSDOT's construction program to a mainly maintenance-focused program rather than expansion, which includes adding lanes.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

mariethefoxy

they stuck it as a HOV 3+ instead of a HOV 2+ and the lane sits empty most of the times I have been on the Staten Island Expressway on various times of the day. Every now and then you'll get someone randomly going into there without the required amount of people.

They should have made it HOV 2 and only during rush hour times, similar to the Long Island Expressway lanes.

As for why it stops before the 440 exit? people need time from the HOV lane to then move over to the right lane to exit. I don't think there is a need or room for direct ramps from the HOV lane to 440 South. Plus regardless its all going to merge down into two lanes once you hit the Goethals bridge anyway.

bzakharin

Quote from: Alps on May 15, 2012, 08:25:40 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on May 15, 2012, 01:20:25 PM
Quote from: Steve on May 14, 2012, 07:07:37 PM
These HOV lanes have been planned for some time as an extension of the ones already out there. There are conceptual ideas to have the new Goethals Bridge(s) designed so as to accommodate a future HOV lane in case the system is extended into NJ - the other use of that space, if the HOV is cut off at a particular point (perhaps 440 either South or North), could be some other form of transit. (Not heavy rail - that would use the next bridge north.) So in this particular case, there's no point in debating "why can't this project add a general use lane" because this is not a brand-new planning level project, but a resumption/completion of an already-planned project.

Weren't the express lanes on I-287 in New Jersey originally HOV laves, but converted to general use after overwhelming public demand?

Mike
There were never express lanes on I-287 (or I-80), just the left lane was added and designated with a diamond that was later scraped off. The lanes were always contiguous with the rest of the roadway, which made it easy to convert them to general use after the fact.

As for the SIE, just note that NYSDOT intends to convert the HOV lanes to 24/7 operation for all, not just for buses.

While 287 doesn't have real express lanes, there is a segment where there are two roadways, one that has access to I-78 East and one that has access to I-78 West. I-80 does have an express/local setup (though it's signed as if the local portion is a 4 mile long 2-3 lane CD roadway) between I-287 and I-280. Not sure which part of that was the HOV lane.

Pete from Boston


Quote from: bzakharin on February 22, 2016, 09:37:54 AM
Quote from: Alps on May 15, 2012, 08:25:40 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on May 15, 2012, 01:20:25 PM
Quote from: Steve on May 14, 2012, 07:07:37 PM
These HOV lanes have been planned for some time as an extension of the ones already out there. There are conceptual ideas to have the new Goethals Bridge(s) designed so as to accommodate a future HOV lane in case the system is extended into NJ - the other use of that space, if the HOV is cut off at a particular point (perhaps 440 either South or North), could be some other form of transit. (Not heavy rail - that would use the next bridge north.) So in this particular case, there's no point in debating "why can't this project add a general use lane" because this is not a brand-new planning level project, but a resumption/completion of an already-planned project.

Weren't the express lanes on I-287 in New Jersey originally HOV laves, but converted to general use after overwhelming public demand?

Mike
There were never express lanes on I-287 (or I-80), just the left lane was added and designated with a diamond that was later scraped off. The lanes were always contiguous with the rest of the roadway, which made it easy to convert them to general use after the fact.

As for the SIE, just note that NYSDOT intends to convert the HOV lanes to 24/7 operation for all, not just for buses.

While 287 doesn't have real express lanes, there is a segment where there are two roadways, one that has access to I-78 East and one that has access to I-78 West. I-80 does have an express/local setup (though it's signed as if the local portion is a 4 mile long 2-3 lane CD roadway) between I-287 and I-280. Not sure which part of that was the HOV lane.

The 287 HOV lanes were the left lane in the stretch between 78 and 80.  The ones on 80 were west of 287.  Opened up to all in 1998: http://www.nytimes.com/1998/12/01/nyregion/our-towns-hov-lanes-a-30-mile-test-that-failed.html




SignBridge

Mariethefoxy, you gotta think this out and follow the logic. You are correct that the Staten Island Expwy's HOV lane needs to end well before the 278/440-split, so traffic can move to the correct lanes to exit onto the West Shore Expwy. My point is that the lane should continue as a general purpose lane all the way to that split instead of narrowing to a 3-lane bottleneck from Victory Blvd. to the W.S.Expwy. which will be a congested area. If the 4-lanes continued to the split then, 2 lanes would go to 440 and 2 lanes to the Goethals Bridge. That would be a well organized traffic flow.


Alps

Quote from: SignBridge on February 22, 2016, 08:15:00 PM
Mariethefoxy, you gotta think this out and follow the logic. You are correct that the Staten Island Expwy's HOV lane needs to end well before the 278/440-split, so traffic can move to the correct lanes to exit onto the West Shore Expwy. My point is that the lane should continue as a general purpose lane all the way to that split instead of narrowing to a 3-lane bottleneck from Victory Blvd. to the W.S.Expwy. which will be a congested area. If the 4-lanes continued to the split then, 2 lanes would go to 440 and 2 lanes to the Goethals Bridge. That would be a well organized traffic flow.


There's no reason to end the HOV lanes there. HOV lanes have exit and entry points while remaining continuous. Actually drive the SIE sometime and check it out in either direction.

The Ghostbuster

If only there was a way to add toll lanes to more sections of NYC's road system. Since going outward would be impossible, one could only go up (elevated) or down (tunnel). Of course, I've never been to New York City before, so my ideas may just be fantasy. I guess we'll just have to wait for self-driving cars to improve traffic flow in New York City.

SignBridge

Alps, I drove the S.I.E. twice in the last 2 weeks and yes there are HOV Lane entrances and exits. However those might not be adequate for the volume of traffic that exits at the West Shore Expwy.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.