New York

[abqtraveler]

I picked up the 2020 Rand McNally Road Atlas last week.  It has the new mile-based exit numbers listed for I-84 through New York, but it doesn't list exit numbers for the Taconic Parkway even though the Taconic received mile-based exit numbers a year or two ago.  It still lists I-95 through Rhode Island as a "free" limited access highway, even though Rhode Island started collecting tolls on trucks last summer.

[PHLBOS]

It still lists I-95 through Rhode Island as a "free" limited access highway, even though Rhode Island started collecting tolls on trucks last summer.

Given that those tolls only applies towards trucks and not passenger cars/vehicles; Rand McNally probably felt justified in not showing the truck-tolled stretches as a full-blown toll facilities since the majority of their customers are in passenger vehicles.

If truck-only tolls becomes more prevalent elsewhere; Rand McNally, AAA, et al will have to assign a new color for such on their maps & atlases.

[vdeane]

General road atlases are aimed at passenger cars.  I believe there are special truck atlases where showing I-95 as tolled would be appropriate.

[abqtraveler]

General road atlases are aimed at passenger cars.  I believe there are special truck atlases where showing I-95 as tolled would be appropriate.

Even on routes with tolled lanes (HOT, express, etc.) Rand McNally depicts them with a blue line, which corresponds to the route being "free" according to their map legend, so I agree they need to come up with another color to indicate a "mixed" route that coule either be free or tolled under certain conditions.

On a related note, it'll be interesting to see how Rand McNally and other mapmakers handle the tolling of all vehicles going into parts of Manhattan. To me, it looks lime they'll need to come up with another color legend to depict tolled streets.

[Rothman]

I miss the old days where Rand McNally distinguished by color between the "free" and tolled sections of highways with barriers (e.g., Garden State).

Rand McNally has used text boxes in the past for special cases; they could indicate congestion priced Manhattan that way.

[PHLBOS]

General road atlases are aimed at passenger cars.  I believe there are special truck atlases where showing I-95 as tolled would be appropriate.

Even on routes with tolled lanes (HOT, express, etc.) Rand McNally depicts them with a blue line, which corresponds to the route being "free" according to their map legend, so I agree they need to come up with another color to indicate a "mixed" route that coule either be free or tolled under certain conditions.

Current and past Rand McNally (RMN) editions would show the single-corridored VA 267 & the Dulles (Airport) Access Road in dual colored free/toll line (such was usually shown wider.  I believe RMN shows I-95 north of Baltimore, where the centered Express-Toll lanes are located, as dual-colored as well. 

On a related note, it'll be interesting to see how Rand McNally and other mapmakers handle the tolling of all vehicles going into parts of Manhattan. To me, it looks lime they'll need to come up with another color legend to depict tolled streets.

Is that actually going to take place?

[hotdogPi]

On a related note, it'll be interesting to see how Rand McNally and other mapmakers handle the tolling of all vehicles going into parts of Manhattan. To me, it looks lime they'll need to come up with another color legend to depict tolled streets.

Is that a hint for which color to use?

[NoGoodNamesAvailable]

Some awful new roundabout guide signage posted by NYSDOT on their twitter page. Black arrows? Seriously?

[Verlanka]

On a related note, it'll be interesting to see how Rand McNally and other mapmakers handle the tolling of all vehicles going into parts of Manhattan. To me, it looks lime they'll need to come up with another color legend to depict tolled streets.

Is that a hint for which color to use?

Probably.

[Alps]

Some awful new roundabout guide signage posted by NYSDOT on their twitter page. Black arrows? Seriously?

While we're at it, the last arrow shouldn't be there. The roundabout should end in a stub since there's no destination associated with the U-turn.

[Roadgeek Adam]

That's an incredibly silly replacement. The former signs were only a few years old. They hadn't faded, peeled or been damaged.

[Michael]

I was on I-690 westbound earlier today, and I saw that the median work, signs, and final striping has been completed on the Teall Ave bridge project.  It seemed to take quite a long time to do the work.  The markings finally look like they'll be visible at night.  This diagrammatic sign has been replaced with what looked like a carbon copy.  I was driving and actually paying attention to the road, so I didn't pay that much attention to the sign.  I was beginning to think it wasn't going to be replaced since there hasn't been a sign there for so long.  I was also surprised it wasn't replaced with an APL because of the option lane for I-81 south, but maybe it's OK since there's a deceleration lane for the ramp that isn't shown on the sign.  The sign on the left in this Street View image has been replaced with one that has a yellow "LEFT" banner above it and "EXIT 2000 FEET instead of "NEXT LEFT".  I think the sign on the right was a carbon copy, but I was paying more attention to the new sign on the left.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that on this past Wednesday, I saw Carrier Circle the busiest I've ever seen it.  The circle was full of cars, and I had to wait in a line that stretched from the yield sign at the circle to the median turn ramp at Old Court St on the left side of this image.  I saw a line of cars waiting at Thompson Rd too.  I was driving through during rush hour, which I've never done before.  This was the first time I've ever seen a line of cars waiting at the circle.

[vdeane]

Maybe they didn't want to design a whole new sign when it won't be around for long.

[machias]

I see NYSDOT region 2 (Utica) is getting rid of quite a few overhead sign gantries and replacing them with ground mounted signs. They're also adding control cities for NY 49 and I-790/NY 5 as appropriate.

https://www.dot.ny.gov/portal/pls/portal/MEXIS_APP.BC_CONST_NOTICE_ADMIN.VIEWFILE?p_file_id=25984&p_is_digital=Y

[TonyTrafficLight]

I see NYSDOT region 2 (Utica) is getting rid of quite a few overhead sign gantries and replacing them with ground mounted signs. They're also adding control cities for NY 49 and I-790/NY 5 as appropriate.

https://www.dot.ny.gov/portal/pls/portal/MEXIS_APP.BC_CONST_NOTICE_ADMIN.VIEWFILE?p_file_id=25984&p_is_digital=Y

Thats a lot of signs getting replaced there. It is quite the confusing area to drive through if you're unfamiliar with it..
Looks like quite a lot of paving there too. I didn't think it was that bad last time I drove it but I'm no engineer.

My main drive Rt. 233 was totally reconstructed in 1999 (during Woodstock) and I'm still waiting for it to be repaved.
It chunks up during the winter and get patched each spring.

[D-Dey65]

I picked up the 2020 Rand McNally Road Atlas last week.  It has the new mile-based exit numbers listed for I-84 through New York, but it doesn't list exit numbers for the Taconic Parkway even though the Taconic received mile-based exit numbers a year or two ago.

Anything else mile-based in New York, beside I-84 and I-95?

[PHLBOS]

Anything else mile-based in New York, beside I-84 and I-95?

When did I-95 in NY convert?  To my knowledge, the only recent change there was the AET conversion along the New England Thruway portion.

[cl94]

Anything else mile-based in New York, beside I-84 and I-95?

When did I-95 in NY convert?  To my knowledge, the only recent change there was the AET conversion along the New England Thruway portion.

The NYSDOT portion of I-95 went distance when the New England Thruway was renumbered at least a couple decades ago.

[abqtraveler]

I picked up the 2020 Rand McNally Road Atlas last week.  It has the new mile-based exit numbers listed for I-84 through New York, but it doesn't list exit numbers for the Taconic Parkway even though the Taconic received mile-based exit numbers a year or two ago.

Anything else mile-based in New York, beside I-84 and I-95?

I-99/US-15, I-781 and the Taconic Parkway are mile-based. The Hutch is slated to convert to mile-based exits next year.

[vdeane]

Don't forget I-890/NY 890.

[D-Dey65]

I picked up the 2020 Rand McNally Road Atlas last week.  It has the new mile-based exit numbers listed for I-84 through New York, but it doesn't list exit numbers for the Taconic Parkway even though the Taconic received mile-based exit numbers a year or two ago.

Anything else mile-based in New York, beside I-84 and I-95?

I-99/US-15, I-781 and the Taconic Parkway are mile-based. The Hutch is slated to convert to mile-based exits next year.

Yes, but you said they didn't show it on the Road Atlas.

[D-Dey65]

Exit 20: NY 120A SOUTH Rye Brook/Greenwich (Merritt Exit 27 will be CT Exit 1.  GET ON THE BALL CTDOT)

Honestly, I'd rather the interchange just settle on one number.  If that means NY converts and CT just uses the NY number if/when they convert, so be it.

Can't we just use I-95 at South of the Border as an example?

[baugh17]

Maybe they get the color scheme right on the new Paris Hill pulloff signs this time.

I see NYSDOT region 2 (Utica) is getting rid of quite a few overhead sign gantries and replacing them with ground mounted signs. They're also adding control cities for NY 49 and I-790/NY 5 as appropriate.

https://www.dot.ny.gov/portal/pls/portal/MEXIS_APP.BC_CONST_NOTICE_ADMIN.VIEWFILE?p_file_id=25984&p_is_digital=Y

[astralentity]

So much low hanging fruit for exit number conversions: all the I-x90s (890 is already), I-787, I-495, I-86, I-88, I-81...

I did see y'all thinking out loud about I-81 going once they figure out the viaduct boondoggle.  Personally, I'd love to see them keep the viaduct rather than pushing all the traffic to I-481.

[vdeane]

Exit 20: NY 120A SOUTH Rye Brook/Greenwich (Merritt Exit 27 will be CT Exit 1.  GET ON THE BALL CTDOT)

Honestly, I'd rather the interchange just settle on one number.  If that means NY converts and CT just uses the NY number if/when they convert, so be it.

Can't we just use I-95 at South of the Border as an example?

Well, that interchange is mostly in NC, and the roadway continues into both states.  NY 120A, though it dips into CT, is a NY state touring route and both directions ultimately head to NY.

So much low hanging fruit for exit number conversions: all the I-x90s (890 is already), I-787, I-495, I-86, I-88, I-81...

I did see y'all thinking out loud about I-81 going once they figure out the viaduct boondoggle.  Personally, I'd love to see them keep the viaduct rather than pushing all the traffic to I-481.

I-787 is interesting because it averages one exit per mile.  Might even be easier to just leave them as-is.  If it were to convert, it would likely look like this:
1->1A
2->1B
3B (SB)->1C
3 (NB)/3A (SB)->1D
4 (NB)->1E
4B (SB)->2A
4A (SB)->2B
5->3
6->4
7E/W->6A/B
8 (no change)
9E/W->9A/B

I-590 is an interesting case that is effectively mile-based already by coincidence... or it would be, if it didn't have a shared mileage/exit numbering system with NY 590, which is most definitely sequential.

(personal opinion)