New York State Thruway

[lstone19]

One solution would be to extend I-890 east of Thruway exit 25 to also be what's now I-90 from 24 to B1. There is precedent for a 3di multiplexed with its parent 2di - I-580 which is multiplexed with I-80 between Oakland and Richmond, CA.

Or I-287, which is multiplexed with I-87 between Elmsford and Suffern, NY

Duh! Forgot about that one and it's in NYS. Even better precedent.


iPad

[Alps]

Once that bridge is upgraded to Interstate standard - I would imagine the latest would be when it's replaced in however many years - my guess is that the Berkshire spur would get a number like 887 and I-90 would stay where it is. Sure it's in NY's financial interest to keep the number on the toll road, but I don't think there's a lot of willpower to remove it from the state capital.

[vdeane]

I'm pretty sure the interstate system was modeled after Germany's highway system to go around cities not through them. But I like that they go through them personally.

What would lead you to that conclusion? Most were originally planned to go through cities although many were subsequently rerouted around after resistance to through the city routes developed. For instance, I-95 was supposed to go through Boston and through Washington; at some places, where it exits to the loop routes around those cities contain vestiges of the planned through the city route (plus there's I-95 through Philadelphia when the NJ Turnpike would have been a more logical "around the city"  routing. I-90 goes through Cleveland on a sub-standard highway and through Chicago. I-80 used to go through Sacramento on a sub-standard highway meeting I-5 downtown before being re-rerouted on what used to be bypass route I-880 (changed in the late 80s IIRC). I-55, I-70, and I-64 all used to meet to cross the Mississippi River on one bridge leading right into downtown St. Louis, I-70 even going out of its way to reach downtown.

As I mentioned above, the major exception is when interstates were routed via pre-existing toll roads that already bypassed cities. And when you look at it, the Thruway did a good job of getting near major cities without entering them so that there was little reason to leave the Thruway. But NYS decided to build I-90 to the other side of Albany, perhaps because it was the one place where the Thruway geometry made sense to do so (a separate state built I-90 around Syracuse or Rochester would make no sense - they could have routed I-90 through them but there would be much less reason to leave the Thruway at those two cities than there is at Albany).


iPad

Eisenhower wasn't interested in building roads through cities, but the Bureau of Public Roads put together the Yellow Book and put interstates through cities to get enough support in Congress to pass the Interstate Highway Act.

Once that bridge is upgraded to Interstate standard - I would imagine the latest would be when it's replaced in however many years - my guess is that the Berkshire spur would get a number like 887 and I-90 would stay where it is. Sure it's in NY's financial interest to keep the number on the toll road, but I don't think there's a lot of willpower to remove it from the state capital.

Moving I-90 would make the exit numbering work better if I-90 and I-87 were to get standards-compliant mileage-based exit numbers.

[Alps]

Once that bridge is upgraded to Interstate standard - I would imagine the latest would be when it's replaced in however many years - my guess is that the Berkshire spur would get a number like 887 and I-90 would stay where it is. Sure it's in NY's financial interest to keep the number on the toll road, but I don't think there's a lot of willpower to remove it from the state capital.

Moving I-90 would make the exit numbering work better if I-90 and I-87 were to get standards-compliant mileage-based exit numbers.

It would work the same either way? You'd have an I-90/87 concurrency where one of them would dominate by definition and the changeover would occur at that interchange, whether it's 21A or 24.

[vdeane]

Once that bridge is upgraded to Interstate standard - I would imagine the latest would be when it's replaced in however many years - my guess is that the Berkshire spur would get a number like 887 and I-90 would stay where it is. Sure it's in NY's financial interest to keep the number on the toll road, but I don't think there's a lot of willpower to remove it from the state capital.

Moving I-90 would make the exit numbering work better if I-90 and I-87 were to get standards-compliant mileage-based exit numbers.

It would work the same either way? You'd have an I-90/87 concurrency where one of them would dominate by definition and the changeover would occur at that interchange, whether it's 21A or 24.

The Berkshire Spur wouldn't have a continuous set of mile markers/exit numbers under the present designations, though.  Given that most people in NY (at least this part of the state) think of the Thruway first and the interstates second (if at all), it would feel quite odd.  And I'm pretty sure the Thruway Authority would prefer to not have two sets of mileage/exit numbers on the Berkshire Spur.

[Alps]

Once that bridge is upgraded to Interstate standard - I would imagine the latest would be when it's replaced in however many years - my guess is that the Berkshire spur would get a number like 887 and I-90 would stay where it is. Sure it's in NY's financial interest to keep the number on the toll road, but I don't think there's a lot of willpower to remove it from the state capital.

Moving I-90 would make the exit numbering work better if I-90 and I-87 were to get standards-compliant mileage-based exit numbers.

It would work the same either way? You'd have an I-90/87 concurrency where one of them would dominate by definition and the changeover would occur at that interchange, whether it's 21A or 24.

The Berkshire Spur wouldn't have a continuous set of mile markers/exit numbers under the present designations, though.  Given that most people in NY (at least this part of the state) think of the Thruway first and the interstates second (if at all), it would feel quite odd.  And I'm pretty sure the Thruway Authority would prefer to not have two sets of mileage/exit numbers on the Berkshire Spur.

Okay, I see your thinking. So from I-87, it really wouldn't matter either way. Let's start with I-87's exit numbers dominating.
* Current routing: I-90 EB: Thruway mainline exit number. Ramp onto Berkshire is I-90 so no exit number. I-90 WB: Spur mainline exit number. Ramp onto Thruway is exit from I-87.
* New routing: I-90 EB: Exit from I-87 and that's it. I-90 WB: Ramp onto Thruway is I-90 so no exit number. That's it.
Clear advantage new routing. Now if I-90's exit numbers dominated over 87, the advantage actually goes away because I-90 WB would not have an exit number onto the Thruway in the current routing, whereas the new routing would result in the Thruway mainline still being signed as an exit number.

(BTW, if I-90 dominates as it theoretically should, it's in I-87's best interest by far to keep the current arrangement so that the 87 mainline never counts backwards.)

[Buffaboy]

A thought ran across my head this evening while driving on I-190 in downtown Buffalo: why does it seem like there are NO lights on the freeway? Has NYSDOT ever considered high mast lighting? I drove to Toronto this weekend and noticed the poles, and realized you don't find these too much in the state (if at all?).

[Plutonic Panda]

Same thing in Los Angeles. Little to no lighting. If light pollution is an issue why not use this type of lighting: https://www.clantonassociates.com/our-projects/i-25-trinidad

[NoGoodNamesAvailable]

A thought ran across my head this evening while driving on I-190 in downtown Buffalo: why does it seem like there are NO lights on the freeway? Has NYSDOT ever considered high mast lighting? I drove to Toronto this weekend and noticed the poles, and realized you don't find these too much in the state (if at all?).

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe NYS is one of the only states where the municipality is almost always responsible for the energy cost of road lighting, even on freeways.

[Buffaboy]

A thought ran across my head this evening while driving on I-190 in downtown Buffalo: why does it seem like there are NO lights on the freeway? Has NYSDOT ever considered high mast lighting? I drove to Toronto this weekend and noticed the poles, and realized you don't find these too much in the state (if at all?).

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe NYS is one of the only states where the municipality is almost always responsible for the energy cost of road lighting, even on freeways.

If that's the case, given how incompetent the city of Buffalo is, I wouldn't be surprised if this were the case.

[webny99]

Most lighting on freeways in NY looks like this. The taller high mast lighting isn't common, but it can be found, usually at major interchanges. It's true that we don't have anything like this stretch of QEW/ON 403 with high mast lighting for miles and miles. But we don't have many dense suburban/urban freeways that need it for long stretches, either. And lighting on suburban/exurban and rural freeways is fairly rare, but that's the case pretty much everywhere. Rural sections of the QEW don't have lighting either.

[shadyjay]

You would think the Thruway would have some sort of lighting from Nyack out to Sloatsburg/Suffern (Exit 15A).  I've driven through that section at night in heavy traffic and its quite dark.  Its not like the Thruway is anti-lighting... I-95 on the New England section is lighted its entire length, primarily with center lighting...
https://www.google.com/maps/@40.9751678,-73.7189077,3a,75y,78.76h,103.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1snOreivM7Cgal1XBFqW4TSw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e1

The X-Westchester is another that is strangely "in the dark" as well in an urban area.

[cl94]

A thought ran across my head this evening while driving on I-190 in downtown Buffalo: why does it seem like there are NO lights on the freeway?

I-190 is normally lit, as are the freeway/expressway sections of NY 33, NY 198, and NY 5 within city limits. 190's poles had structural defects causing several to fall down during December's windstorm and all were removed as a precautionary measure. Lights will be reinstalled at a future date.

A key thing with New York is that lighting is generally the responsibility of the local municipality, even on freeways. Most municipalities do not want to pay to light freeways, hence no lights. Furthermore, several previously-lit freeways had lighting removed as an energy-saving measure in the 1970s. This is true for virtually everything in Albany and several bridges have places for light poles. The toll authorities generally maintain their own lighting and, as such, toll facilities tend to be lit better than free facilities.

[SignBridge]

There was controversy for years about the need to light the Long Island Expwy in Nassau County. The two townships and several villages involved wouldn't pay for it. It finally got done some years back and I believe the State does pay for it though this may be a rare exception to the rule. 

[Buffaboy]

A thought ran across my head this evening while driving on I-190 in downtown Buffalo: why does it seem like there are NO lights on the freeway?

I-190 is normally lit, as are the freeway/expressway sections of NY 33, NY 198, and NY 5 within city limits. 190's poles had structural defects causing several to fall down during December's windstorm and all were removed as a precautionary measure. Lights will be reinstalled at a future date.

A key thing with New York is that lighting is generally the responsibility of the local municipality, even on freeways. Most municipalities do not want to pay to light freeways, hence no lights. Furthermore, several previously-lit freeways had lighting removed as an energy-saving measure in the 1970s. This is true for virtually everything in Albany and several bridges have places for light poles. The toll authorities generally maintain their own lighting and, as such, toll facilities tend to be lit better than free facilities.

So would this include the non-tolled sections of the Thruway in West Seneca/Lackawanna/Cheektowaga? This is an urban/suburban 3-4 lane stretch of highway with no lighting

[ARMOURERERIC]

Crossed the grand island bridges last Monday northbound, Wednesday southbound, then did Lackawanna to silver creek.  No transponder, how long until I get my bill.  Just went to the website, site will not recognize the plate name/state.

[Ted$8roadFan]

Not sure if this has been discussed elsewhere, but....does anyone know why the Thruway doesn't provide sign for county names? The only one i can recall is one in Albany.

[TMETSJETSYT]

Wdym? Like "Enterning ___ County" or "Welcome to ____ County"?

[TMETSJETSYT]

And Im guessing its because the county government doesn't manage the Thruway, only the state does. And the reason they have one for Albany county is because you are entering the Capital Region.

[Ted$8roadFan]

Wdym? Like "Enterning ___ County" or "Welcome to ____ County"?

Yes. Even a simple "Erie County"  would suffice.

[TMETSJETSYT]

Also, I know other highways in NY have the County signs, and this is because the State roads and other interstates (84,86,88,81) are manged by NYSDOT, while the Thruway is managed by New York State Thruway Authority, so there is your answer.

[webny99]

Yes, the Thruway not signing county lines has been a subject of contention amongst roadgeeks and on this forum for a long time.

[vdeane]

They sign some (Bronx/Westchester on I-87, Bronx/Westchester on I-95 south, Westchester/Rockland, and Rockland on I-287 north), but not others.  The ones for the Bronx actually say "Bronx County" rather than using the NYC-standard borough signs.  It's too bad they don't sign the rest of them.

[vdeane]

The first new Thruway service area just opened - Indian Castle just east of exit 29A.  It looks like they wasted no time in closing Oneida for its reconstruction.  It also looks like the website's map is lying about the chicken "food concepts" no longer being a thing, with Chick-fil-A and Popeyes still in the rotation; they're at the service areas that appear to have nothing more than Starbucks or Dunkin on the projected restaurants.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/first-revamped-thruway-rest-area-opens-in-central-ny-which-ones-will-open-next/ar-AA11iSMv#image=AA11j681%7C7

[kalvado]

The first new Thruway service area just opened - Indian Castle just east of exit 29A.  It looks like they wasted no time in closing Oneida for its reconstruction.  It also looks like the website's map is lying about the chicken "food concepts" no longer being a thing, with Chick-fil-A and Popeyes still in the rotation; they're at the service areas that appear to have nothing more than Starbucks or Dunkin on the projected restaurants.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/first-revamped-thruway-rest-area-opens-in-central-ny-which-ones-will-open-next/ar-AA11iSMv#image=AA11j681%7C7

Are there any specific lists published?
And I wonder if Chick -filla +Starbucks plasa would bother cleaning restrooms on Sundays...