Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[SignBridge]

All of the above are contributing factors. This reconstruction whenever it happens will be hugely expensive, politically unpopular, and horribly disruptive to both traffic and the local community. There is just no easy solution.

[TheDon102]

Oh No! Not those poor Brooklyn Heights Residents!!!

[mrsman]

Has anyone noticed an increase in congestion since the right lane on the BQE has been converted into a shoulder lane? I would expect a freeway being narrowed from six to four lanes would see a significant increase in congestion, especially in a place like New York City.

From what I've heard, that area is quite congested, and Google Maps certainly shows this.  Stop and go at all hours of the day.  I went through there at 9 AM on a Sunday morning (on a holiday weekend, so probably even less traffic than normal) and it was already stop and go, just from congestion.  It's basically an area to avoid at all times, even when the rest of the city (yes, including the Cross-Bronx) is at free flow.

Honestly, as much as I don't want to see the freeway removed, it might actually move better if it were, if only because that might convince people to not go there.

Remove an already super congested freeway? I’ll counter that nonsense with the same saying we should widen the thing to ten lanes each way.

Realistically, that corridor isn't going to be solved without convincing at least half the cars on it to either shift to other modes, drive to different destinations or via a significantly different route, or to stay home entirely, especially given the NIMBYs and BANANAs in the area.  I think the only option retaining anything resembling a freeway that the locals and the Vision Zero/climate activists were happy with was the one where it would be a four-lane (total), truck-only tunnel with passenger cars forced on a boulevard.

I don't support a removal of the BQE myself, but clearly what's there is horrifically congested, and I put the chances of a new or expanded facility as iffy at best.  It would be very expensive and it the political support would seem to not be there.

I wonder to what extent congestion pricing will have on some of this.

A good percentage of the traffic on the BQE is headed to Manhattan. Yes, this is north of the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel, but there is a significant amount of traffic that would be headed to Manhattan via the currently free bridges that are on this stretch.  If the congestion pricing comes in to effectively charge drivers the same to reach Manhattan if they take the Battery Tunnel or if they take the bridges, then I can assume that some of that traffic will head for the Battery Tunnel, leaving more room for the rest of traffic.

I do understand that most of the traffic here is not going to Manhattan but probably just heading to northern Brooklyn or Queens or towards the I-87 and I-95 corridors to Upstate and New England, but perhaps enough of the Manhattan traffic can be diverted to make the BQE tolerable for the rest of the traffic.

[cl94]

Has anyone noticed an increase in congestion since the right lane on the BQE has been converted into a shoulder lane? I would expect a freeway being narrowed from six to four lanes would see a significant increase in congestion, especially in a place like New York City.

From what I've heard, that area is quite congested, and Google Maps certainly shows this.  Stop and go at all hours of the day.  I went through there at 9 AM on a Sunday morning (on a holiday weekend, so probably even less traffic than normal) and it was already stop and go, just from congestion.  It's basically an area to avoid at all times, even when the rest of the city (yes, including the Cross-Bronx) is at free flow.

Honestly, as much as I don't want to see the freeway removed, it might actually move better if it were, if only because that might convince people to not go there.

Remove an already super congested freeway? I’ll counter that nonsense with the same saying we should widen the thing to ten lanes each way.

Realistically, that corridor isn't going to be solved without convincing at least half the cars on it to either shift to other modes, drive to different destinations or via a significantly different route, or to stay home entirely, especially given the NIMBYs and BANANAs in the area.  I think the only option retaining anything resembling a freeway that the locals and the Vision Zero/climate activists were happy with was the one where it would be a four-lane (total), truck-only tunnel with passenger cars forced on a boulevard.

I don't support a removal of the BQE myself, but clearly what's there is horrifically congested, and I put the chances of a new or expanded facility as iffy at best.  It would be very expensive and it the political support would seem to not be there.

I wonder to what extent congestion pricing will have on some of this.

A good percentage of the traffic on the BQE is headed to Manhattan. Yes, this is north of the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel, but there is a significant amount of traffic that would be headed to Manhattan via the currently free bridges that are on this stretch.  If the congestion pricing comes in to effectively charge drivers the same to reach Manhattan if they take the Battery Tunnel or if they take the bridges, then I can assume that some of that traffic will head for the Battery Tunnel, leaving more room for the rest of traffic.

I do understand that most of the traffic here is not going to Manhattan but probably just heading to northern Brooklyn or Queens or towards the I-87 and I-95 corridors to Upstate and New England, but perhaps enough of the Manhattan traffic can be diverted to make the BQE tolerable for the rest of the traffic.

Not enough. As it is, an absurdly high percentage of traffic on the road is commercial, whether it be trucks/busses or smaller vehicles (vans, taxis, etc.). You might get some rerouting, but the bridges will remain a better option for east side traffic.

[vdeane]

It's worth noting that FDR Drive and I believe NY 9A as well will both be exempt from congestion pricing, so the free bridges will still be free for all trips that don't have an destination in Manhattan below 59th Street.  That will further limit the impact congestion pricing has on the BQE.

[The Ghostbuster]

I wonder if congestion pricing will later expand to the other four boroughs if it is successful in Manhattan? I know Manhattan is the densest, but I would imagine the rest of the city might benefit from congestion pricing as well.

[Plutonic Panda]

I keep a small glimmer of hope the congestion pricing crap will be canceled at the last minute. Really stupid idea.

[vdeane]

I wonder if congestion pricing will later expand to the other four boroughs if it is successful in Manhattan? I know Manhattan is the densest, but I would imagine the rest of the city might benefit from congestion pricing as well.

Wouldn't that make things worse?  Unless you assume all the traffic comes for Long Island or New Jersey?  If the zone covered all of NYC, intra-NYC trips wouldn't be tolled, and trips passing through NYC to get to/from Long Island from elsewhere (or between NJ and CT, for those crazy enough to take I-95 straight through) would (on top of the tolls such trips already pay).  The whole thing would fall apart.

[ixnay]

It's worth noting that FDR Drive and I believe NY 9A as well will both be exempt from congestion pricing,

Per https://www.thecity.nyc/2021/9/15/22674371/how-does-congestion-pricing-work-toll-system-in-manhattan , you're right.  So will the tunnel under Battery Park be exempt.

[bluecountry]

 The HRD at 95 is a pothole mess that needs a complete repaving.  Any plans?

[cockroachking]

The HRD at 95 is a pothole mess that needs a complete repaving.  Any plans?

A search on the NYSDOT projects page only shows some generic paving contracts, nothing specific to the HRD.

[SignBridge]

The HRD at 95 is a pothole mess that needs a complete repaving.  Any plans?

Are you taking about that long ancient ramp from the HRD up to the GW Bridge approach? If so yeah, that roadway is a mess, an absolute disgrace.

[storm2k]

The HRD at 95 is a pothole mess that needs a complete repaving.  Any plans?

Are you taking about that long ancient ramp from the HRD up to the GW Bridge approach? If so yeah, that roadway is a mess, an absolute disgrace.

I believe those ramps are actually under Port Authority jurisdiction so it would be up to them to repave them. Probably need deeper repairs and that project is going to be a traffic nightmare when it happens.

[bluecountry]

The HRD at 95 is a pothole mess that needs a complete repaving.  Any plans?

Are you taking about that long ancient ramp from the HRD up to the GW Bridge approach? If so yeah, that roadway is a mess, an absolute disgrace.

Yes, it’s awful.  I drive super slow before speeding up off the ramp and drivers get mad but I am tired of those potholes messing with my steering.

[Dannny]

I believe those ramps are actually under Port Authority jurisdiction so it would be up to them to repave them. Probably need deeper repairs and that project is going to be a traffic nightmare when it happens.

As is, when ISN'T it traffic nightmare?

[SignBridge]

That entire structure probably should be closed and torn down and replaced with a new one. I assume it was built circa 1930 with the construction of the GW Bridge. The lanes are too narrow and they'd have to close it down to repave or rebuild it anyway. Given the condition it's in, I'm surprised it hasn't already fallen down on its own.

[Dannny]

That entire structure probably should be closed and torn down and replaced with a new one. I assume it was built circa 1930 with the construction of the GW Bridge. The lanes are too narrow and they'd have to close it down to repave or rebuild it anyway. Given the condition it's in, I'm surprised it hasn't already fallen down on its own.

They should redesign the whole thing, approaches, exits, and on-ramps honestly. A lot of the traffic is because the left lane gets blocked by people getting off at Amsterdam Ave (W179th St), which backs up easily because of how short it is. Then everyone gets into the right lane, which is not any better since 2 seconds later you have people merging making a right turn from the Washington Bridge, (and Amsterdam Ave). And lets not forget the people who still can't decide whether it's upper or lower until the last second. I have a feeling if anything is ever done, they'll just redo the road bed like the Hamilton bridge.

[RobbieL2415]

That entire structure probably should be closed and torn down and replaced with a new one. I assume it was built circa 1930 with the construction of the GW Bridge. The lanes are too narrow and they'd have to close it down to repave or rebuild it anyway. Given the condition it's in, I'm surprised it hasn't already fallen down on its own.

They should redesign the whole thing, approaches, exits, and on-ramps honestly. A lot of the traffic is because the left lane gets blocked by people getting off at Amsterdam Ave (W179th St), which backs up easily because of how short it is. Then everyone gets into the right lane, which is not any better since 2 seconds later you have people merging making a right turn from the Washington Bridge, (and Amsterdam Ave). And lets not forget the people who still can't decide whether it's upper or lower until the last second. I have a feeling if anything is ever done, they'll just redo the road bed like the Hamilton bridge.

They shouldn't have given every street in the vicinity access to the GWB.

[Rothman]

That entire structure probably should be closed and torn down and replaced with a new one. I assume it was built circa 1930 with the construction of the GW Bridge. The lanes are too narrow and they'd have to close it down to repave or rebuild it anyway. Given the condition it's in, I'm surprised it hasn't already fallen down on its own.

They should redesign the whole thing, approaches, exits, and on-ramps honestly. A lot of the traffic is because the left lane gets blocked by people getting off at Amsterdam Ave (W179th St), which backs up easily because of how short it is. Then everyone gets into the right lane, which is not any better since 2 seconds later you have people merging making a right turn from the Washington Bridge, (and Amsterdam Ave). And lets not forget the people who still can't decide whether it's upper or lower until the last second. I have a feeling if anything is ever done, they'll just redo the road bed like the Hamilton bridge.

They shouldn't have given every street in the vicinity access to the GWB.

But, all the traffic wants to get onto the GWB from those streets.

[storm2k]

That entire structure probably should be closed and torn down and replaced with a new one. I assume it was built circa 1930 with the construction of the GW Bridge. The lanes are too narrow and they'd have to close it down to repave or rebuild it anyway. Given the condition it's in, I'm surprised it hasn't already fallen down on its own.

It's from an era where things were so over-engineered that they can stand up to being in this kind of terrible condition and still be safe. This is how the Pulaski Skyway in NJ was still standing when they started rebuilding it and found that in some areas, the iron was literally crumbling.

[RobbieL2415]

That entire structure probably should be closed and torn down and replaced with a new one. I assume it was built circa 1930 with the construction of the GW Bridge. The lanes are too narrow and they'd have to close it down to repave or rebuild it anyway. Given the condition it's in, I'm surprised it hasn't already fallen down on its own.

They should redesign the whole thing, approaches, exits, and on-ramps honestly. A lot of the traffic is because the left lane gets blocked by people getting off at Amsterdam Ave (W179th St), which backs up easily because of how short it is. Then everyone gets into the right lane, which is not any better since 2 seconds later you have people merging making a right turn from the Washington Bridge, (and Amsterdam Ave). And lets not forget the people who still can't decide whether it's upper or lower until the last second. I have a feeling if anything is ever done, they'll just redo the road bed like the Hamilton bridge.

They shouldn't have given every street in the vicinity access to the GWB.

But, all the traffic wants to get onto the GWB from those streets.

My problem is that they put the access right at the start of the crossing. I would close the ramps to/from the west ends 178/179th Sts. and have everyone enter from Amsterdam Ave.

[Dannny]

My problem is that they put the access right at the start of the crossing. I would close the ramps to/from the west ends 178/179th Sts. and have everyone enter from Amsterdam Ave.

I hope exiting is included as well. The problem is that, the exit before on northbound HRD is Exit 23 (W155th), and the next one (where HRD officially ends), is Dyckman St. By getting rid the the 179th ramps, there's no real way to get the the center of the heights, or say GWB bus terminal, if arriving by Taxi/Uber. They'd have to get off early, (or stay on, go past 179th, then come back), and navigate the local streets to get to such place. This way seems less direct and more complicated. 

[bluecountry]

I'm not familiar with the Hamilton Bridge redo, I guess any type of redo is a pipe dream?

[Ted$8roadFan]

Interesting article In the NY Times today about the disappearance of bilingual street signs in Manhattan’s Chinatown due to inevitable change. There’s even a mention about the MUTCD.

[bluecountry]

The HRD at 95 is a pothole mess that needs a complete repaving.  Any plans?

Are you taking about that long ancient ramp from the HRD up to the GW Bridge approach? If so yeah, that roadway is a mess, an absolute disgrace.

I believe those ramps are actually under Port Authority jurisdiction so it would be up to them to repave them. Probably need deeper repairs and that project is going to be a traffic nightmare when it happens.

And there's NO plans to fix this?