New York

[D-Dey65]

I finally saw the new Suffolk CR 16 Bridge over Long Island Avenue and the main line of the LIRR... and it's still a crummy TWO LANES!

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.8197565,-72.9688191,3a,75y,323.92h,90.76t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sEKkvgw8j_akgOwgsm9cUlA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu

[roadman65]

https://maps.app.goo.gl/KbMLk41fjJ5hvrSF6
So this is the future for lane closed Xs and lane open down arrows as seen on the Peace Bridge?

[D-Dey65]

Some of my fellow Long Islanders may know about this. Years ago, when Commack Road (Suffolk CR 4) was realigned around the newly constructed Edgewood State Hospital, a concrete pedestrian bridge was built over the new road.
https://www.denisbyrne.com/bridge.html
Well, Edgewood State was closed in 1971, and a bunch of locals started using it to ride their bikes around the woods. In the 2000's an effort to try to save the bridge failed, which was replaced by another crusade to build a new bridge. They were saying Suffolk County DPW was going to use it to widen the road in order to deal with traffic going to Tangier Outlets in Deer Park, but that road doesn't look widened to me.

https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7901264,-73.3032484,3a,75y,20h,88.47t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sYZ9tkHaHY6jUOtGfeos2Rg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DYZ9tkHaHY6jUOtGfeos2Rg%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D194.40234%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu

They also claimed that the bridge was capable of handling the clearance of most trucks:
http://www.denisbyrne.com/images/14.jpg
But I'd say that was just barely the case. In fact, that truck looks like it was using hydraulics to lower it's suspension on both the tractor and the trailer. The way I see it, that bridge was old, deteriorating, and was deemed useless, thus the reason for the bridge's demolition.


The formerly proposed Babylon-Northport Expressway (NY 231) was also supposed to run along the western edge of the hospital grounds and should've been built, but that's another topic.

So, who else knows about that old bridge, and other road-related issues near the former funny farm?

[D-Dey65]

See this link to NY 340 and the northern ramp to and from US 9W in Sparkhill, New York?
https://www.google.com/maps/@41.0312068,-73.9272041,3a,75y,47.54h,90.96t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1srEyOc2R-FoDBQHIv8hW4qw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en&entry=ttu
The sign under the US 9W shield pointing straight ahead should really be replaced with some kind of reverse turn directional sign.

Picture this;
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MUTCD_W1-3L.svg
But with a white background and square.


If not, then at least this:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MUTCD_M6-2PL.svg

And the Joseph B. Clarke Rail-Trail should be marked and signalized there too.

[webny99]

NY 404-Empire Blvd is currently closed between Winton Rd and Plank Rd due to a serious accident:
https://www.rochesterfirst.com/news/serious-accident-closes-down-empire-boulevard/

[Rothman]

On mileage-based exit numbers:

https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/central-ny/traffic/2024/06/14/state-dot-to-change-exit-numbers-on-i-81--i-690--481-in-cny

[webny99]

^ That's great to hear. I-81 in Broome County and north of Sandy Creek must be separate projects, but I hope they materialize soon so that I-81 will be consistent throughout.

[Rothman]

^ That's great to hear. I-81 in Broome County and north of Sandy Creek must be separate projects, but I hope they materialize soon so that I-81 will be consistent throughout.

I would expect that as well.

I am hoping that NYSDOT's press release gets posted soon on this matter.

(personal opinion emphasized)

[vdeane]

Honestly, they probably should have waited until the I-81 project is further along.  These numbers jumping around all over is going to confuse people.  Let's hope there's more coordination with Regions 7 and 9 than the article implies, given that those portions of I-81 aren't mentioned at all.

I wonder when the new numbers will be released and/or the contract plans available.

The I-690 numbers will be based on the distance moving from west to east beginning at the New York state Thruway.

Did they forget about NY 690?

(personal opinion)

[The Ghostbuster]

Maybe NY 690's exits will remain unnumbered. Both NY 690's and Interstate 690's exits should be numbered from the NY 48/NY 631 intersection eastward. Wikipedia has NY 481's future exit numbers posted, but Interstate 81, Interstate/NY 690 and Interstate 481 have not been changed to reflect the new exit numbers yet.

[Rothman]

Maybe NY 690's exits will remain unnumbered. Both NY 690's and Interstate 690's exits should be numbered from the NY 48/NY 631 intersection eastward. Wikipedia has NY 481's future exit numbers posted, but Interstate 81, Interstate/NY 690 and Interstate 481 have not been changed to reflect the new exit numbers yet.

Well, duh.  The press release just came out today!

[Rothman]

Press release has been posted:

https://www.dot.ny.gov/news/press-releases/2024/2024-06-14

[vdeane]

Maybe NY 690's exits will remain unnumbered. Both NY 690's and Interstate 690's exits should be numbered from the NY 48/NY 631 intersection eastward. Wikipedia has NY 481's future exit numbers posted, but Interstate 81, Interstate/NY 690 and Interstate 481 have not been changed to reflect the new exit numbers yet.

Agreed.  It really does not make sense that NY 690 isn't numbered, especially as I-690's mileage includes NY 690's (and unless the exit numbers in one of the contract plans for the viaduct are wrong, won't be changing to reset at the Thruway).

(personal opinion)

[vdeane]

Thinking about this some more, I wouldn't be surprised if the Broome County exits wait to change until the construction in Syracuse is concluded.  Otherwise there would be conflicting numbers.  The Jefferson County exits better change this year, however, otherwise we get the same problem (in fact, they really should change first).

EDIT: On the other hand, I-690 is going to have duplicate exit numbers for years to come, so now I don't know what to think.

(personal opinion)

[machias]

Per NYSDOT D265136, the NY Route 635/Thompson Rd and Bridge Street interchange is becoming Exits 19A-B-20. I believe that lines up with the mileposts including NY 690 in the mix. Wikipedia shows Thompson Rd around actual mile 12.

D265136 plans shows Exit 13 and the unnumbered I-690 WB to I-81 SB as no change

Exit 16 - To BL 81 South / Crouse Ave / Downtown Syracuse
Exit 17 - Teall Ave
Exit 18 - NY 598 / Midler Ave (with route marker)
Exits 19A-B-20 - NY 635 Thompson Rd / Bridge St

[steviep24]

Work has begun on the repainting project of the Frederick Douglass / Susan B Anthony Memorial Bridge in downtown Rochester. This is the arch bridge that carries I490 over the Genesee River.

[vdeane]

I read another article on the new I-81 exit numbers today.  This one had an interesting bit:

The Central New York region is the first in Upstate New York to make the conversion to mile-based exits along I-81. Additionally, the DOT said it plans to eventually update all exit signs along the interstate from the Pennsylvania border to the Canadian border.

In other words, Broome and Jefferson Counties likely won't get converted this year, which will result in number duplication between Marathon and Cortland until such time that Region 7 updates their exit numbers.  The exit numbers will literally start sequential from 1-8, jump to 38* and switch to mile-based, drop from exit 73* to 16 and revert to sequential, jump from 30 to 102* and go back to mile-based, then drop from 132* to 38 and remain sequential to 52.  Yikes.  Seems to me that this will do the opposite of reduce confusion.

* All mile-based numbers listed are pure guesswork.  I can't find any source on what the new numbers will be.

(personal opinion)

[hotdogPi]

MassDOT knows how to change exit numbers, NYSDOT doesn't. Sounds exactly like what happened with AET conversion...

[webny99]

To be fair, the fact that I-81 is still on its present routing adds an unusual layer of complexity to the conversion. If anything, it should be Broome and Jefferson switching first, with Region 3 holding off until I-81 has been moved to I-481 and they can implement the new exit numbers all at once.

[vdeane]

To be fair, the fact that I-81 is still on its present routing adds an unusual layer of complexity to the conversion. If anything, it should be Broome and Jefferson switching first, with Region 3 holding off until I-81 has been moved to I-481 and they can implement the new exit numbers all at once.

That's a large part of why I'm surprised that this is happening now.  Although I can see the logic in keeping Broome sequential for now (it would also cause numbering duplication).  I would have waited to do I-81 until the I-481 projects start wrapping up next year, and I-690 (and NY 690 too) until its viaduct reconstruction project is far enough along (NY 481 can change whenever).

Given that I have yet to find any contract documents for this, I suspect it's being done via a highway work order contract.  Maybe Region 3 had money left in an old one that they needed to spend?

(personal opinion)

[roadman65]

I know what Exit 12 will become

[The Ghostbuster]

If one thought Connecticut has been slow with their conversion to mileage-based exits, New York has been even slower. It will probably take decades to convert all of New York's exits to mileage-based, if that happens at all.  It probably could have happened sooner if the numerous bills to allow a conversion to mileage-based exits didn't keep going down in flames. The only thing we can do is bid our time and be patient (I'm very good at doing the latter).

[roadman65]

Connecticut is doing it on a whenever a sign project comes up basis.  New York is another story.

For some reason a state that is against traditional values and moves with progress is being fuddy duddy and clinging on to dear life to keep sequential exit numbers.

[vdeane]

If one thought Connecticut has been slow with their conversion to mileage-based exits, New York has been even slower. It will probably take decades to convert all of New York's exits to mileage-based, if that happens at all.  It probably could have happened sooner if the numerous bills to allow a conversion to mileage-based exits didn't keep going down in flames. The only thing we can do is bid our time and be patient (I'm very good at doing the latter).

New York and Connecticut are probably more similar than not, given what we've seen in Region 8.  There is, however, one key difference: Connecticut regularly does corridor-wide sign rehabs.  New York, for the most part, does not.

[roadman65]

If one thought Connecticut has been slow with their conversion to mileage-based exits, New York has been even slower. It will probably take decades to convert all of New York's exits to mileage-based, if that happens at all.  It probably could have happened sooner if the numerous bills to allow a conversion to mileage-based exits didn't keep going down in flames. The only thing we can do is bid our time and be patient (I'm very good at doing the latter).

New York and Connecticut are probably more similar than not, given what we've seen in Region 8.  There is, however, one key difference: Connecticut regularly does corridor-wide sign rehabs.  New York, for the most part, does not.

I can contest to how long it takes in New York to do a sign rehab. It took forever to switch out older text guides.  In fact on the Cross Island in 1988, the guide signs at the LIE still read NY 495 in older style button copy. I believe the switch from NY to interstate took place in 1985 circa.