New York State Thruway

[Buffaboy]

Here's something I noticed on the Thruway headed east, just past the Lackawanna booths: the Welcome to NY sign. Must've been put up today.

[machias]

I dropped a line to the Thruway Authority about marking county borders since I hadn't asked them about it in a couple of years. I based my question around the fact that they're marking watersheds, why can't they mark county borders, especially since the National Weather Service issues watches and warnings based on counties. I received a response today indicating that there were no plans to mark county borders, as they had worked with the NWS and determined that since the NWS is going to change their way of identifying watch/warning areas, there was no reason to mark county lines at this time.

[Snappyjack]

They make a new excuse every time it seems. I've gotten everything from "they're not needed" to "they're a distraction to drivers". That last one always makes me laugh, considering we need a sign every time we cross into the Erie Canal Heritage Corridor.

[cl94]

They make a new excuse every time it seems. I've gotten everything from "they're not needed" to "they're a distraction to drivers". That last one always makes me laugh, considering we need a sign every time we cross into the Erie Canal Heritage Corridor.

There might be more of those signs than there would be county line signs. Seriously.

[cl94]

Tappan Zee update (source):

The Thruway Authority today announced that phase one of the deck repair operations on the Tappan Zee Bridge (I-87/I-287) will require the southbound Tappan Zee Bridge to be reduced to one lane beginning tonight, July 21. Three northbound lanes will remain open to traffic during the work. This repair operation is part of the Thruway Authority's rapid response to the damage caused by the crane collapse earlier this week. At the Governor's direction, these expedited overnight repairs will minimize impacts to motorists during peak travel periods.

Beginning at 8 p.m. tonight, southbound traffic at exit 11 (Nyack - South Nyack - US Route 9W) will be reduced to one lane until the completion of the work at approximately 5 a.m. tomorrow morning. At least one southbound lane will remain open at all times during the operation, with the exception of an approximately 20-minute period expected to begin at 9:30 p.m. During that time, State Police will stop and hold all traffic approaching the bridge beginning from exit 10 (Nyack - South Nyack - US Route 9W).

Three northbound lanes will remain open through the entire operation. Following the completion of the overnight repair work, traffic will resume on three northbound and three southbound lanes of the bridge in time for the Friday morning commute. Phase two of the work to repair the far right lane will be announced in the coming days.
Motorists traveling southbound on the New York State Thruway in the vicinity of the Tappan Zee Bridge during the closure times should expect delays and are advised to seek alternate routes.

TL;DR: Don't try and cross tonight

[jeffandnicole]

They make a new excuse every time it seems. I've gotten everything from "they're not needed" to "they're a distraction to drivers". That last one always makes me laugh, considering we need a sign every time we cross into the Erie Canal Heritage Corridor.

Why are they needed?

[empirestate]

I dropped a line to the Thruway Authority about marking county borders since I hadn't asked them about it in a couple of years. I based my question around the fact that they're marking watersheds, why can't they mark county borders, especially since the National Weather Service issues watches and warnings based on counties. I received a response today indicating that there were no plans to mark county borders, as they had worked with the NWS and determined that since the NWS is going to change their way of identifying watch/warning areas, there was no reason to mark county lines at this time.

Did you follow up ther response by asking why, then, they have they gone ahead and signed a few? What's different about Bronx, Westchester and Rockland Counties that makes them sign-worthy (not to mention Ramapo and Suffern)?

[74/171FAN]

I dropped a line to the Thruway Authority about marking county borders since I hadn't asked them about it in a couple of years. I based my question around the fact that they're marking watersheds, why can't they mark county borders, especially since the National Weather Service issues watches and warnings based on counties. I received a response today indicating that there were no plans to mark county borders, as they had worked with the NWS and determined that since the NWS is going to change their way of identifying watch/warning areas, there was no reason to mark county lines at this time.

Did you follow up ther response by asking why, then, they have they gone ahead and signed a few? What's different about Bronx, Westchester and Rockland Counties that makes them sign-worthy (not to mention Ramapo and Suffern)?

As someone who has only been on a significant portion of the Thruway on a trip to Schroon Lake back in 2009, if I remember correctly, I basically forgot where I was between I-84 and I-90 near Albany.  (based partly on the lack of county lines, if my parents needed to ask me where I was all I could really say is between Albany and I-287 to make any sense IMO.)

[kalvado]

I dropped a line to the Thruway Authority about marking county borders since I hadn't asked them about it in a couple of years. I based my question around the fact that they're marking watersheds, why can't they mark county borders, especially since the National Weather Service issues watches and warnings based on counties. I received a response today indicating that there were no plans to mark county borders, as they had worked with the NWS and determined that since the NWS is going to change their way of identifying watch/warning areas, there was no reason to mark county lines at this time.

Did you follow up ther response by asking why, then, they have they gone ahead and signed a few? What's different about Bronx, Westchester and Rockland Counties that makes them sign-worthy (not to mention Ramapo and Suffern)?

As someone who has only been on a significant portion of the Thruway on a trip to Schroon Lake back in 2009, if I remember correctly, I basically forgot where I was between I-84 and I-90 near Albany.  (based partly on the lack of county lines, if my parents needed to ask me where I was all I could really say is between Albany and I-287 to make any sense IMO.)

Why do you think that county names would make more sense than exit numbers or service plazas names? Both exits and plazas are well signed, and can also be used as references.

[roadman]

The common rationale given to justify enhanced mileposts, overpass street name signs, and the like is to provide greater orientation for drivers, for both better navigation and more accurate location reporting of incidents and crashes for relaying to emergency responders.  As upstatenyroads noted above, National Weather Service alerts and advisories are identified by the counties they cover.  This is key for people both inside and outside of the specific area.   Anybody who has monitored NOAA weather radio while traveling, especially in rural areas, can attest to the fact that it is easily possible to pick up signals from one or more NOAA stations not covering the area you're driving through at the time.  Having counties identified on the highway can help people determine the applicability of the weather information to their location. 

As for the "distraction" excuse, county lines correlate with city/town boundaries, which are consistently signed on nearly all Interstates and freeways.  The potential distraction by adding county information to these signs at county boundaries (to use a MassDOT example, Entering Andover/Essex County) is negligible.

IMO, these reasons are sufficient justification for identifying county lines with signing on Interstate and freeways.

as they had worked with the NWS and determined that since the NWS is going to change their way of identifying watch/warning areas, there was no reason to mark county lines at this time

What changes?  While the NWS has been making revisions to how the weather alerts and other information are presented, I have not heard anything (official or otherwise) suggesting that NWS watch/warning areas were no longer going to be identified by county or sub-county (i.e. Northern XX County).  For one thing, the whole SAME system that NOAA and others have been implementing and promoting is entirely county and sub-county based, and would effectively have to be scrapped if they wholesale changed their reporting system.

[empirestate]

As for the "distraction" excuse, county lines correlate with city/town boundaries, which are consistently signed.  The potential distraction by adding county information to these signs (to use a MassDOT example, Entering Andover/Essex County) is negligible.

No, the Thruway doesn't sign any city/town/village lines, as a rule. In fact, the only ones I can think of at all are the aforementioned Ramapo and Suffern on I-287, which are signed along with the state and county line at that location. There is a "welcome"-type sign just before the NYC line (and the Bronx County markers of course coincide with the city line, despite not mentioning it), and there are a couple others as you enter the general region of a city. But no other actual markings of municipal limits.

[roadman]

As for the "distraction" excuse, county lines correlate with city/town boundaries, which are consistently signed.  The potential distraction by adding county information to these signs (to use a MassDOT example, Entering Andover/Essex County) is negligible.

No, the Thruway doesn't sign any city/town/village lines, as a rule. In fact, the only ones I can think of at all are the aforementioned Ramapo and Suffern on I-287, which are signed along with the state and county line at that location. There is a "welcome"-type sign just before the NYC line (and the Bronx County markers of course coincide with the city line, despite not mentioning it), and there are a couple others as you enter the general region of a city. But no other actual markings of municipal limits.

Don't drive the Thruway often, but now that I think about it, you are correct.  And the lack of boundary signs only makes the idiotic "watershed", "Erie Canal district", and other politically motivated signs even more unjustified.

[machias]

I dropped a line to the Thruway Authority about marking county borders since I hadn't asked them about it in a couple of years. I based my question around the fact that they're marking watersheds, why can't they mark county borders, especially since the National Weather Service issues watches and warnings based on counties. I received a response today indicating that there were no plans to mark county borders, as they had worked with the NWS and determined that since the NWS is going to change their way of identifying watch/warning areas, there was no reason to mark county lines at this time.

Did you follow up ther response by asking why, then, they have they gone ahead and signed a few? What's different about Bronx, Westchester and Rockland Counties that makes them sign-worthy (not to mention Ramapo and Suffern)?

I did, but I didn't get a response. IMHO, I believe Westchester, Rockland and those signs were up before the Thruway took over that particular stretch of roadway, or there may have been an enthusiastic contractor in the mix.

They did send me a list of the counties and the milepost location where the Thruway crosses a county line. They have that inventoried down to the hundredth of a mile. Just no signs.

The NWS changes mentioned were changing coverage areas from full political boundaries to a "polygon warning system" which won't necessarily correlate with political boundaries, so there's no reason to sign them.

[roadman]

The NWS changes mentioned were changing coverage areas from full political boundaries to a "polygon warning system" which won't necessarily correlate with political boundaries, so there's no reason to sign them.

Weak argument, IMO.  What NYSTA fails to recognize is that NOAA alerts under the current polygon system still reference sections of counties.  Therefore, having county boundary information on signs is still beneficial - even if the area of an alert doesn't exactly line up with the larger jurisdictional (not political) boundaries.

[jeffandnicole]

I've yet to see anyone post why county signs would be beneficial, in such a way where other signs would not be beneficial.

[vdeane]

It's worth noting that NY is a home rule state with powerful counties.  Laws change based on county boundary, such as the age to buy cigarettes or whether fireworks are legal.

And, of course, NOAA.  Polygons are great for websites and the TV.  Not so much for radio.

It's silly that the Thruway has all the useless political signs but doesn't want to sign counties.  It feels weird to cross into another county without a sign.

[empirestate]

Did you follow up ther response by asking why, then, they have they gone ahead and signed a few? What's different about Bronx, Westchester and Rockland Counties that makes them sign-worthy (not to mention Ramapo and Suffern)?

I did, but I didn't get a response. IMHO, I believe Westchester, Rockland and those signs were up before the Thruway took over that particular stretch of roadway, or there may have been an enthusiastic contractor in the mix.

That may explain Rockland, but it doesn't explain the Bronx/Westchester marking. The Thruway has maintained its mainline and the New England section since the beginning. (There is also a matching state line marker on the Garden State connector, which also has been in the system forever).

I've yet to see anyone post why county signs would be beneficial, in such a way where other signs would not be beneficial.

I'm pretty sure I've seen that answer posted a few times. But speaking for myself, I'm only interested in whether it's being done, not whether it's beneficial.

[cl94]

Did you follow up ther response by asking why, then, they have they gone ahead and signed a few? What's different about Bronx, Westchester and Rockland Counties that makes them sign-worthy (not to mention Ramapo and Suffern)?

I did, but I didn't get a response. IMHO, I believe Westchester, Rockland and those signs were up before the Thruway took over that particular stretch of roadway, or there may have been an enthusiastic contractor in the mix.

That may explain Rockland, but it doesn't explain the Bronx/Westchester marking. The Thruway has maintained its mainline and the New England section since the beginning. (There is also a matching state line marker on the Garden State connector, which also has been in the system forever).

I've yet to see anyone post why county signs would be beneficial, in such a way where other signs would not be beneficial.

I'm pretty sure I've seen that answer posted a few times. But speaking for myself, I'm only interested in whether it's being done, not whether it's beneficial.

At least one sign on I-287 in Rockland is in Clearview. Nobody but NYSTA would have put that up.

[thenetwork]

The Thruway IDs damn near every overpass and underpass by name already. So what's another pair of signs every 20-30 miles?  If they didn't tell us every road/route/river was passing over or under the roadway, then I might side with them. 

[cl94]

The Thruway IDs damn near every overpass and underpass by name already. So what's another pair of signs every 20-30 miles?  If they didn't tell us every road/route/river was passing over or under the roadway, then I might side with them.

Most waterways are not signed. Only the Buffalo River, Genesee River, Niagara River, Mohawk River, canals, and stuff draining into the Hudson River south of Albany.

[74/171FAN]

I dropped a line to the Thruway Authority about marking county borders since I hadn't asked them about it in a couple of years. I based my question around the fact that they're marking watersheds, why can't they mark county borders, especially since the National Weather Service issues watches and warnings based on counties. I received a response today indicating that there were no plans to mark county borders, as they had worked with the NWS and determined that since the NWS is going to change their way of identifying watch/warning areas, there was no reason to mark county lines at this time.

Did you follow up ther response by asking why, then, they have they gone ahead and signed a few? What's different about Bronx, Westchester and Rockland Counties that makes them sign-worthy (not to mention Ramapo and Suffern)?

As someone who has only been on a significant portion of the Thruway on a trip to Schroon Lake back in 2009, if I remember correctly, I basically forgot where I was between I-84 and I-90 near Albany.  (based partly on the lack of county lines, if my parents needed to ask me where I was all I could really say is between Albany and I-287 to make any sense IMO.)

Why do you think that county names would make more sense than exit numbers or service plazas names? Both exits and plazas are well signed, and can also be used as references.

It's worth noting that NY is a home rule state with powerful counties.  Laws change based on county boundary, such as the age to buy cigarettes or whether fireworks are legal.

And, of course, NOAA.  Polygons are great for websites and the TV.  Not so much for radio.

It's silly that the Thruway has all the useless political signs but doesn't want to sign counties.  It feels weird to cross into another county without a sign.

Honestly mileage based exit numbers would be more beneficial than both.  (and maybe interchange names similar to the PA Turnpike)  I will admit that I was freaked out by not seeing county lines for 100+ miles.

(Normally this would seem to be a stupid question.)  How long at this point have mile markers been on the Thruway?

[SignBridge]

Since it was built in the 1950's.

[machias]

Since it was built in the 1950's.

The normal style of mile markers you see now are relatively new to the Thruway (since the mid 1980s). Before then there were smaller, border less mile markers. Unfortunately I can't remember if they were green or blue.

[SignBridge]

(Chuckle) They were probably blue, as pretty much all signs on the "original" Thruway were that color including regulatory signs, which now are black-on-white.

[cpzilliacus]

It's silly that the Thruway has all the useless political signs but doesn't want to sign counties.  It feels weird to cross into another county without a sign.

I don't believe that the New Jersey Turnpike has a single county  line sign posted on the Turnpike either.

Though NJTA does post them on its other toll road, the Garden State Parkway, perhaps because the previous agency that ran the Parkway, NJHA did post them (though the county line signs are not exactly what the MUTCD specifies).

For good reasons cited above about weather, I think county line signs should be mandatory on all freeway-class roads, including the N.Y.S. Thruway and the N.J. Turnpike.