New York

[PHLBOS]

I don't see a reason such add-ons to AET system cannot be implemented, assuming powers that be are interested in that.

The key phrase/issue in your statement is shown in bold.  As mentioned earlier by vdeane; rental car agencies aren't going to willingly give up their cash cow in terms of transponder/plate-pass fees.

Moreover, I can see it as a precursor to nationwide toll interoperability, as we have tag compatibility issues

Electronic tolling of some type has been in existence for over 20 years; and while E-ZPass is the largest network (up to 16 states), there are still states/agencies to this date that use an independent/non-compatible electronic tolling system.

- but license plates are more compatible.

That could open up a whole other debate/can of worms.

[kalvado]

I don't see a reason such add-ons to AET system cannot be implemented, assuming powers that be are interested in that.

The key phrase/issue in your statement is shown in bold.  As mentioned earlier by vdeane; rental car agencies aren't going to willingly give up their cash cow in terms of transponder/plate-pass fees.

Moreover, I can see it as a precursor to nationwide toll interoperability, as we have tag compatibility issues

Electronic tolling of some type has been in existence for over 20 years; and while E-ZPass is the largest network (up to 16 states), there are still states/agencies to this date that use an independent/non-compatible electronic tolling system.

- but license plates are more compatible.

That could open up a whole other debate/can of worms.

Rental car companies have little say in how semi-government toll organization bills drivers. Admin fees those organization charge, however...
As for EZpass - as far as I understand, EZpass is old style expensive technology, hence adopting it is a step backward for many places. So if (when) unified toll system is created, it would likely be based on a different technology. As for plates.. Aren't AET in present form is working with probably 100 different standards - and actually handling with them?

[Buffaboy]

This will be a silly post, and probably wishful thinking as well. But if NYSDOT/TA wants to increase toll revenue to justify AET, building a rolled beltway around Buffalo (about 2-3 miles from NY-78 and interchange at I-90 1/2 mile east of Harris Hill) could probably raise funds because drivers will travel long distances.

[froggie]

Given New York construction prices, I doubt such a beltway would be justifiable even as a toll road.  Despite perception otherwise, most Thruway traffic in the Buffalo area is local and not long-distance through traffic.

[Rothman]

And, NYSDOT Region 5 is very open about Buffalo not having a significant traffic problem anyway.  They don't even have the usual rush hour humps on their daily traffic charts -- traffic in Buffalo actually peaks at lunch time.

[cl94]

And, NYSDOT Region 5 is very open about Buffalo not having a significant traffic problem anyway.  They don't even have the usual rush hour humps on their daily traffic charts -- traffic in Buffalo actuall peaks at lunch time.

Precisely. I laugh when people complain about Buffalo "traffic". Their worst is a typical Saturday in Albany.

[Bumppoman]

The mayor of Binghamton just announced some projects last night.  Route 363 is being torn down.  The initial plans call for it to be removed completely but there's an alternative to make it a two-lane grade level street.  Absolutely ridiculous.  The kowtowing to pedestrians in this country is sickening.

[cl94]

The mayor of Binghamton just announced some projects last night.  Route 363 is being torn down.  The initial plans call for it to be removed completely but there's an alternative to make it a two-lane grade level street.  Absolutely ridiculous.  The kowtowing to pedestrians in this country is sickening.

I'm not convinced it's necessary. The area is shrinking and the bridges need to be replaced anyway. Until I see plans, I can't make any informed comments about how it'll be. The main thing it'll do is move through traffic to NY 17 and NY 201, which isn't a bad thing.

[Buffaboy]

The state is moving forward on a $6m welcome center for Grand Island along I-190. I'm sure this will find itself in company with CuomoSigns.

[seicer]

For information regarding its removal and the plan to revitalize Binghamton's long neglected waterfront, see this study.

NY 363 does little to enhance the traffic flow for the city, other than speed it up through a residential neighborhood and downtown. It cuts off a revitalizing neighborhood and downtown from the Susquehanna River and impedes a long-proposed plan to incorporate a linear waterfront park along the Susquehanna and Chenango rivers.

The loop ramps with NY 434, each one block square, produce nothing for the city in terms of tax revenue. They are out of scale with the surrounding density and the land can be better reused for new mixed-use developments.

The removal of the NY 363 freeway only adds a few minutes to a commute out of downtown. Its transformation into a landscaped parkway with pedestrian crossings, buffered by a long needed park and new developments, will improve the aesthetics and tax base of the city.

[vdeane]

NY 363 carries about 23k vehicles there.  While it doesn't need to be a freeway, that would seem to be a bit much for a two lane road (either on the same alignment or diverting to US 11).

The state is moving forward on a $6m welcome center for Grand Island along I-190. I'm sure this will find itself in company with CuomoSigns.

The FHWA didn't complain about the Taste NY store on the Thruway near Lock 13, so we'll see.

[Rothman]

NY 363 carries about 23k vehicles there.  While it doesn't need to be a freeway, that would seem to be a bit much for a two lane road (either on the same alignment or diverting to US 11).

The state is moving forward on a $6m welcome center for Grand Island along I-190. I'm sure this will find itself in company with CuomoSigns.

The FHWA didn't complain about the Taste NY store on the Thruway near Lock 13, so we'll see.

I am not too sure that FHWA is totally accepting of the Taste of NY facilities.  I think the negotiations have just gone into the shadows.

[cl94]

NY 363 carries about 23k vehicles there.  While it doesn't need to be a freeway, that would seem to be a bit much for a two lane road (either on the same alignment or diverting to US 11).

And of that, half is through traffic. The ramps between 363 and the bridge carry about 13K both directions combined. Those users can easily move to NY 201 if they want a limited-access route.

I am not too sure that FHWA is totally accepting of the Taste of NY facilities.  I think the negotiations have just gone into the shadows.

Let's just say that I've heard similar things through the grapevine, either firsthand or secondhand. Not saying anything more than that in public.

[seicer]

There is adequate routes for NY 363 to divert to if there is that much of a need for through traffic. The proposal, at least from what I've read, does not yet call for a two-lane parkway. And it has been demonstrated that just because a freeway or a high capacity route is removed that congestion increases elsewhere; it merely disperses or gets shifted to other routes. Rush hour is not a concern for the area.

[cl94]

There is adequate routes for NY 363 to divert to if there is that much of a need for through traffic. The proposal, at least from what I've read, does not yet call for a two-lane parkway. And it has been demonstrated that just because a freeway or a high capacity route is removed that congestion increases elsewhere; it merely disperses or gets shifted to other routes. Rush hour is not a concern for the area.

I fully agree. This isn't NY 198. Studies will likely be done to determine the impact of a diet. NY 198's studies all showed LOS F if the speed limit went to 30 or lanes were removed. It's not like the alternate routes are at capacity and a good portion of the traffic is going to/from SUNY Binghamton.

[seicer]

On a similar note, is there a reason for the NY 7 freeway to exist north of I-81? Now that the cloverleaf with I-81 is being removed in favor of a more conventional interchange, and I-88 (long) complete to I-81, the NY 7 freeway stands out as an outlier. It doesn't generate nor carry a lot of traffic, and its interchanges with Bevier and Phelps streets could be intersections without any loss of capacity or slow down in times.

I think at best, it would provide additional connectivity to NY 7 but I'm sure the improvements are not as high as, say, the NY 363 freeway-to-parkway conversion. It has a railroad to the immediate east and there is limited room for redevelopment opportunities.

[cl94]

The only reason the NY 7 expressway exists is history. NY 7 was upgraded south of Exit 2 well before I-88 was even thought up and a bridge was built north of I-81. What remains as NY 7 alone is mostly at-grade, so I don't see much of a reason to get rid of it.

[kalvado]

NY 363 carries about 23k vehicles there.  While it doesn't need to be a freeway, that would seem to be a bit much for a two lane road (either on the same alignment or diverting to US 11).

The state is moving forward on a $6m welcome center for Grand Island along I-190. I'm sure this will find itself in company with CuomoSigns.

The FHWA didn't complain about the Taste NY store on the Thruway near Lock 13, so we'll see.

I am not too sure that FHWA is totally accepting of the Taste of NY facilities.  I think the negotiations have just gone into the shadows.

Last thing I've seen in press was automatic checkout on existing facilities, no human cashier, no new facilities on non-tolled roads. I thought one on Thruway is OK as it is on a toll road?
As for Grand Island - where exactly that would go?

[Alps]

NY 363 carries about 23k vehicles there.  While it doesn't need to be a freeway, that would seem to be a bit much for a two lane road (either on the same alignment or diverting to US 11).

And of that, half is through traffic. The ramps between 363 and the bridge carry about 13K both directions combined. Those users can easily move to NY 201 if they want a limited-access route.

I'd want to see an O/D study before I pronounce that they can shift corridors. Given the lights on 434 through Vestal, actual through traffic probably IS already using 201, meaning that much of the 13K is locally generated on one side of the bridge or the other. ***EDITED TO ADD: Brought to my attention that with 17/81 construction, traffic might currently be using 363-434 that would normally use 17-201 in the future. So we may not actually be able to rely on the counts.*** 23K needs at minimum a four-lane corridor, especially given how quiet nights are (meaning that a higher percentage of traffic is present at rush hours than, say, northern NJ). If this is brought to the surface, it needs to be a four lane expressway with corridor signal progression.
Let's also consider the State Street modifications that have been proposed. With State going down to a single lane, all the traffic dumping in on 434 needs to distribute. The current interchange and freeway provide that relief valve. You will - not could, will - see daily AM gridlock if both State and 363 are downgraded as proposed. Here are options:
* Rebuild Washington Street bridge (non-starter, IMO)
* Reroute 363 to the south side of the river through existing neighborhoods (non-starter, not just IMO)
* Reroute the existing 434 bridge to curve directly into 363 - no State Street interchange (doesn't free up shoreline and makes it harder to get downtown - also a non-starter)

I see only two possibilities. Convert 363 to an expressway with very favorable signal progression, squeeze it in a little and make some room against the water - or tunnel it from Exchange St. to Stuyvesant St. and build your park there. That would get my vote.

As for those loop ramps and "unused" land? Reconstruct the WB-SB loop into something tighter, then put a parking garage to its west, and put a building in the east loop, and connect them with a bridge over 434.

[Bumppoman]

For information regarding its removal and the plan to revitalize Binghamton's long neglected waterfront, see this study.

NY 363 does little to enhance the traffic flow for the city, other than speed it up through a residential neighborhood and downtown. It cuts off a revitalizing neighborhood and downtown from the Susquehanna River and impedes a long-proposed plan to incorporate a linear waterfront park along the Susquehanna and Chenango rivers.

The loop ramps with NY 434, each one block square, produce nothing for the city in terms of tax revenue. They are out of scale with the surrounding density and the land can be better reused for new mixed-use developments.

The removal of the NY 363 freeway only adds a few minutes to a commute out of downtown. Its transformation into a landscaped parkway with pedestrian crossings, buffered by a long needed park and new developments, will improve the aesthetics and tax base of the city.

How familiar are you with Binghamton?  The area surrounding NY-363 is seedy and will not be improved by the removal of the highway.  There's no need for development -- all of the development in the last 10 years has been geared toward students and there was JUST an article in the paper the other day that three new private housing facilities for students about to open are having trouble getting tenants.

The weather here is terrible for the VAST majority of the year.  This, combined with the dangerous neighborhoods surrounding the new "park," will greatly diminish any usefulness.  It's ludicrous to anyone who lives here to suggest removing a road and building a park will bring anyone downtown.  Downtown Binghamton is where you go to deal with the government.  There will never again be a true reason to go there for entertainment.  Those days are long gone.

[vdeane]

Heck, most restaurants in downtown Binghamton aren't even OPEN for much of the day.  There is virtually no housing for young professionals in the entire metro area, and most of what does exist is in the suburbs; everything else is run down or for students (the only apartment complex comparable to the stuff being built in major urban centers that doesn't have some severe problem is in Endicott, a half hour drive away).

I'm not convinced that everything could be absorbed into existing roads.  US 11 could take some of the traffic, but not all (only two lanes), or even most.  Anything going over that bridge would HAVE to use US 11; Shore Drive cannot have an at-grade intersection with NY 434, so it's that interchange or nothing.  Traffic that can use NY 201 probably already is, and that road is much like NY 85 in terms of construction, with more traffic.  It probably can't absorb much more without needing a widening.

NY 363 carries about 23k vehicles there.  While it doesn't need to be a freeway, that would seem to be a bit much for a two lane road (either on the same alignment or diverting to US 11).

The state is moving forward on a $6m welcome center for Grand Island along I-190. I'm sure this will find itself in company with CuomoSigns.

The FHWA didn't complain about the Taste NY store on the Thruway near Lock 13, so we'll see.

I am not too sure that FHWA is totally accepting of the Taste of NY facilities.  I think the negotiations have just gone into the shadows.

The news articles have mentioned complaints regarding the facility on the LIE and the one being constructed on free 90 in Schodack.  No mention of the one on at Lock 13 in any article, and that's the one to compare Grand Island to, since I-190 is part of the Thruway there.

[empirestate]

It's ludicrous to anyone who lives here to suggest removing a road and building a park will bring anyone downtown.  Downtown Binghamton is where you go to deal with the government.  There will never again be a true reason to go there for entertainment.  Those days are long gone.

Difficult to see. Always in motion is the future.

[Buffaboy]

I find it interesting that Utica decided to do a full scale upgrade for its downtown expressway instead of considering a downgrade like in the case here. Although at the same time, there's quite a bit of N/S traffic that goes through there so I don't think I know what I'm talking about.

[machias]

I find it interesting that Utica decided to do a full scale upgrade for its downtown expressway instead of considering a downgrade like in the case here. Although at the same time, there's quite a bit of N/S traffic that goes through there so I don't think I know what I'm talking about.

The original design of the N-S Arterial was to be above grade but the city fought against it in the 60s. There have been numerous pedestrian and other automobile related fatalities along the section being upgraded since that decision in the 60s was made. The city asked the state to reduce the speed limit to 25 shortly after the road was opened in the 60s and the state said no, they don't build 25 MPH four-lane roads.

The unfortunate thing about the N-S Arterial reconstruction is that they're doing only half the stretch of roadway, two traffic signals will remain for the foreseeable future (lack of funds, political clout). There has already been a fatality at one of the two lights within the past year and I can't see things getting any better since now there's basically only 1/4 mile of roadway with two lights with 55 MPH expressway on either side. Pedestrians are opting to ignore the new pedestrian bridge and are continuing to cross at the lights. I've observed many times when the crosswalk signals are ignored.

[route17fan]

D263387 - a project to improve the interchange with I-390, I-490, and Lyell Ave in the Rochester area.

Link: https://www.dot.ny.gov/doing-business/opportunities/const-contract-docs?p_d_id=D263387